Brand Communication on Facebook
Master Thesis
Faculty of Economics and Business
Student: Svenja Julia Kempener (10828036) Pythagorasstraat 137 I
1098 GA Amsterdam
Programme: MSc. in Business Administration – Track Marketing, University of Amsterdam 1st supervisor: Prof. Willemijn van Dolen
2nd assessor: Unknown
Submission Date: 29th of June, 2015
Statement of Originality
This document is written by student Svenja Julia Kempener who declares to take full responsibility for the contents of this document.
I declare that the text and the work presented in this document is original and that no sources other than those mentioned in the text and its references have been used in creating it.
The Faculty of Economics and Business is responsible solely for the supervision of completion of the work, not for the contents.
Amsterdam, 29th of June, 2015 ______________________________ Signature
Acknowledgement
Special thanks of gratitude go to my supervisor Prof. Willemijn van Dolen, who supported me patiently and insightfully during the time writing this thesis.
Writing this thesis was an intense and challenging but valuable process which learned me to take decisions independently and self-assured of my aquired knowledge.
Special thanks go to my loved family, for always believing in me and their almost inexhaustible and eternal support.
Thanks to my friend and soulmate Laura in particular, for your mental support, helpful comments and inspiring critiques.
Also a special thanks to Tim, for unintentionally learning me the hardest part at the end of wiriting this thesis – no matter what happens, never give up!
Table of Content
List of Figures ... VI List of Tables ... VII List of Abbreviations ... IX Abstract ... X 1 Introduction ... 11 1.1 Research Question ... 12 1.2 Contribution ... 13 1.2.1 Theoretical Relevance ... 14 1.2.2 Managerial Contribution ... 15 1.3 Thesis Outline ... 15
2 Literature Review and Hypotheses Development ... 17
2.1 Brand Equity And Consumer Response ... 17
2.1.1 Brand Equity ... 17
2.1.2 Brand Awareness ... 19
2.1.3 Purchase Intention ... 23
2.2 Social Media ... 24
2.2.1 Web 2.0 ... 25
2.2.2 Social Media As A Marketing Communication Tool ... 27
2.2.3 Facebook ... 28
2.2.4 Forms Of Social Media Content ... 31
3 Conceptual Framework ... 35 4 Methodology ... 36 4.1 Pretests ... 37 4.1.1 First Pretest ... 38 4.1.2 Second Pretest ... 41 4.2 Main Study ... 43 5 Results ... 48 5.1 Data Preparation ... 48 5.2 Manipulation Check ... 53
5.3 Descriptive Analysis ... 54 5.3.1 Experimental Conditions ... 58 5.4 Hypotheses Testing ... 59 5.4.1 Hypothesis one ... 59 5.4.2 Hypothesis two a ... 60 5.4.3 Hypothesis two b ... 61 5.4.4 Hypothesis three a ... 62 5.4.5 Hypothesis three b ... 64 6 Discussion ... 67
6.1 Discussions of the Results ... 67
6.1.1 The Influence of Brand Perception on Purchase Intention ... 67
6.1.2 The Differential Effect of Firm-Created Social Media Communication Content on Brand Perception ... 68
6.1.3 The Mediating Effect of Brand Perception on the Relationship of the Two Different Communication Sources on Purchase Intention ... 69
6.2 Implications ... 70
7 Conclusion ... 72
7.1 Summary ... 72
7.2 Limitations and Directions for Further Research ... 73
References ... 74
Appendix ... 83
List of Figures
Figure 1: Composition of Brand Perception measured by Brand Equity ... 19
Figure 2: Web 2.0, Social Media and Creative Consumers ... 26
Figure 3: Conceptual Framework ... 36
List of Tables
Table 1: Means and standard deviation (General condition) ... 40
Table 2: Means and standard deviation (Facebook condition) ... 40
Table 3: Means and standard deviation for FCC ... 42
Table 4: Means and standard deviation for UGC ... 42
Table 5: Overview of scenarios ... 43
Table 6: Experimental conditions ... 48
Table 7: Reliability of Scales ... 49
Table 8: Sample Distribution ... 50
Table 9: Demographics Overview ... 51
Table 10: Overview Condition Similarity ... 52
Table 11: Overview means and standard deviation of content attractiveness ... 53
Table 12: Purchase Intention and Brand Perception in the different scenarios ... 55
Table 13: Correlation matrix ... 57
Table 14: Regression analysis – Influence of control variables on brand perception ... 58
Table 15: Regression Analysis – Influence of control variables on purchase intention .. 59
Table 16: Hypothesis 1 ... 60
Table 17: Hypothesis 2a ... 61
Table 18: Hypothesis 2b ... 62
Table 19: Hypothesis 3a Direct Effect on Purchase Intention ... 63
Table 21: Hypothesis 3a Mediation Effect ... 63
Table 22: Hypothesis 3b Direct Effect on Brand Perception ... 64
Table 23: Hypothesis 3b Direct Effect on Purchase Intention ... 65
Table 24: Hypothesis 3b Mediation Effect ... 65
List of Abbreviations
OECD Organization for Economic Co-Operation and Development
eWOM Electronic Word-Of-Mouth
SNS Social Network Site
WWW World Wide Web
B2C Business-To-Consumer
FCC Firm-created (social media) content
UGC User-generated (social media) content
Abstract
Social media immensely changed the way companies and their customers communicate with each other as they enable a two-way interaction between the two parties. Firms on the one hand can create brand-related content on social networking sites as a means of marketing communication. On the other hand (prospective) consumers can respond, share or even independently generate branded content. The distinction between firm-created and user-generated social media is the focus of this thesis. The differential influence of these two communication forms is tested within a framework including consumers’ brand perception and their purchase intention on Facebook. The results of this research indicate that user-generated content positively influences the perception of a brand while no such relation was observed for firm-created content. A positive brand perception in turn was found to increase purchase intention. On the basis of this, implications are given regarding the underlying results.
1 Introduction
“A brand is no longer what we tell the consumer it is —it is what consumers tell each other it is.” (Scott Cook, co-founder, Intuit)
Social media has dramatically transformed the way consumers, brands and companies interact with each other (Hanna et al., 2011; Kietzmann et al., 2011). This is due to the unique interaction between firms and consumers occurring through social media (Berthon et al., 2008). On the one hand, companies are now able to communicate a myriad of brand-related information to their customers, everyday (Mangold & Faulds, 2009). But not only companies can actively spread branded communications for marketing purposes. Social media channels also provide consumers with the opportunity to create branded content or engage in brand-related conversations with the firm or with each other (Schivinski & Dabrowski, 2014). The engagement of the consumers is thought to induce profound relationships between the users and the brand, hence creating a loyal customer base (Laroche et al., 2013; Weinberg & Pehlivan, 2011).
It has become of the upmost importance for brands to engage in social media activities. Therefore, brand-related communication and consumers’ exposure to marketing campaigns increasingly happen within social media (Kaplan & Haehnlein, 2010). Marketers have to communicate with consumers online as a key component of the company’s marketing mix (Gensler et al., 2013; Mangold & Faulds, 2009). To this end, a deeper understanding of the impact of social media content on consumers’ perception of brands and the resulting purchase intentions is needed. Yet, there is little knowledge about how consumers’ behavioral intentions are influenced by user-generated content and firm-created content, respectively (Schivinski & Dabrowski, 2014). This master thesis hence investigates these two types of social media brand posts on Facebook with regard to their effect on consumers’ perceptions
of brands and how these perceptions ultimately influence purchase intention. To concretize, the underlying research question for the forthcoming study will be provided in the following chapter.
1.1 Research Question
With the rising amount of people following brands on Facebook, users are increasingly exposed to brand-related content the firm provides on the one hand, as well as content other consumers generate in relation with a brand on the other hand. But what does this indicate for a brand’s social media communication activities? How can companies take advantage of both communication sources in order to trigger purchase intention? Is there a recognizably different effect induced by one or the other method? The aim of this thesis is to identify the effect of both brand-related firm-created content and user-generated content on a brand’s Facebook fan page. Thereby this thesis contributes to enhancing brand communication efforts by means of consumer engagement and loyal relationships online, and attempts to add to the body of literature on brand communication on social media. The purpose of this research is to identify and assess consumer perceptions of a brand’s in the social media network Facebook. So this research contributes to closing the gaps, i.e. the lack of insights regarding the effects of firm-created and user-generated content as the underlying brand communication source for purchase intention. Hence, the following research question as well as corresponding sub-questions were developed:
To what extent does firm-created and user-generated social media communication content on Facebook influence consumers’ brand perceptions?
~
And does brand perception mediate the relationship between social media communication content and consumers’ purchase intention?
To answer these questions, the following sub-questions will be addressed in the conceptual framework (see Chapter 3):
• What is brand perception and what role does it play regarding consumers’ purchase intentions?
• Do consumers perceive brands different according to different types of social media communication content?
• What is the difference between firm-created and user-generated social media communication content?
• What are the benefits of social media as marketing communication tool?
• Through which features can companies present their brands on the social network site Facebook and how can they created a consumer-brand interaction?
• Ultimately, how does the type of communication on Facebook drive consumers purchase intention?
1.2 Contribution
Social media is thought to facilitate marketing activities and thus its popularity has dramatically increased in the last decade. However, the knowledge about the effects of both firm- and user-created content still has remained limited (Mangold & Faulds, 2009; Schivinski & Dabrovski, 2014). This research will indicate how strongly consumer’s perception is influenced by posts on a personal care brand’s Facebook fan page. Moreover, it examines how this perception impacts on the purchase intention and therefore sheds light on the usefulness of social media as a marketing tool. The presented work is thus of theoretical and managerial relevance both of whom shall be laid out in the subsequent sections.
1.2.1 Theoretical Relevance
From a theoretical perspective, marketing research on how different social media communication content influences consumers’ perception of brands and consumer response is still fragmented. Besides recent work of the Polish researchers Schivinksi and Dabrowski (2014) no other scholars tried to establish a connection of both social media content and brand equity as well as purchase intention as consumers’ response. This thesis contributes to this construct by adding concrete theoretical insights to how social media content as a marketing communication tool. It furthermore investigates a personal care brand. While Schivinski and Dabrovski (2014) did investigate beverage (non-alcoholic), fashion and mobile operators, the important personal care industry has not been examined until now. The study of this thesis furthermore was not geographically restricted due to the fact that participants were gathered online on the Facebook brand fan page of Dove.
Furthermore, the continuous importance of Facebook calls for literature on what it can actually do for a brand, especially with regard to triggering purchase intention. The aim here is to bridge literature of consumer-brand interactivity, brand equity and social media in order to find out what to expect from a brand’s presence on Facebook. Therefore, this thesis focuses on targeting a brand’s equity and consumers’ purchase intention within the social network Facebook.
Also, from a methodological point of view, there is a lack of profound causal claims in research on brand perceptions through social media and resulting purchase intentions which is due to limited experiential research. As a result, scholars still have a restricted understanding of the degree to which both forms of social media content affect consumer response. The underlying thesis therefore contributes with the results of a deductive approach
testing the effects social media brand communication has on consumers within an experimental study of high internal validity.
1.2.2 Managerial Contribution
The creation of positive brand perceptions and of strong purchase intentions are the result of effective marketing communications. To communicate effectively, marketers have to use the channels their customers use – and this increasingly is social media (Mangold & Faulds 2009). In this study a distinction has been made between firm-created social media content and user-generated social media content. Thus, this thesis shall indicate if firm-created or user-generated communication content has a more decisive influence on consumers’ brand perceptions and their purchase intentions. Therefore, this research is relevant for brand and social media managers in order to develop more effective marketing communication strategies. Depending on the results of the underlying experiment, it shall provide concrete directions for companies’ utilization of their brand fan page and brand posts on Facebook.
1.3 Thesis Outline
The thesis will be divided into seven chapters: Introduction, Conceptual Framework, Literature Review and Hypotheses, Methodology, Results, Discussion, and Conclusion. The first chapter (Introduction) reveals the background as well as the actuality and importance of the topic to the reader. Furthermore the research question is clarified and the theoretical and managerial contributions are contextualized. The second chapter (Literature Review and Hypotheses) provides a thorough review and in-depth investigation of the relevant literature and concepts used forming the basis for the hypotheses development. In the third chapter, a framework illustrates the underlying work and relations of the particular concepts of this thesis. The forth chapter (Methodology), explains the scientific approach and the research design. First, the pretests are outlined and analyzed. Second, the overall experiment design,
the manipulations used and the sampling are described. Next, the operationalization of the stimuli and measurements is discussed. Finally, the procedure of the main research is explained. The fifth chapter (Results) deals with the outcome of the main study. First, the data was prepared. Second, manipulations were checked. Finally, the hypotheses were tested. The sixth chapter (Discussion) concludes the results on basis of the existing literature as well as discusses theoretical and managerial implications. The seventh chapter closes the thesis with a summary and suggestions for further research as well as limitations.
2 Literature Review and Hypotheses Development
As an important part of this thesis is built around the assumption of brand equity, this model shall be discussed in the following chapter. Following the conceptionalization of brand equity, the purchase intentions will be addressed as a possible consequence of brand equity. To conclude, a comprehensive overview is given about social media, focusing on Facebook and the possibilities for firms to engage in marketing activities. Thereby, the necessary differentiation between firm-created content and user-generated content will be made clear. 2.1 Brand Equity And Consumer Response
Brand equity and its dimensions is a key concept in marketing (Styles & Ambler, 1995), explaining how to foster purchase behavior patterns and foster consumer-brand relationships in the long term (Keller, 2013). Brand equity will be taken as measure of consumers’ perception of brands, as the model is based on measures of subjective perception (Keller 1993). To do so, the different components will be described. Finally, the construct of purchase intention will be discussed and examined with regard to the influence of brand equity.
2.1.1 Brand Equity
To examine brand equity, a definition of the term brands shall be given. Brands are defined as "a name, term, sign, symbol, or design, or combination of them which is intended to identify the goods and services of one seller or group of sellers and to differentiate them from those of competitors" (Kotler, 1991, p. 442). However, Kotler et al. (2008) argue that the brand is viewed as the greatest asset of a firm. According to Rust et al. (2005) brands serve three significant purposes: first, they can attract new customers; second, they provide consumers with information referring to a company’s products and services. Third, brands build the basis of customer’s emotional relationship with a company.
The concept of brand equity is crucial to the understanding of the marketing of brands (Keller, 2001), and has therefore received extensive attention by scholars already (Aaker, 1991; Keller, 1993; Yoo & Donthu, 2001; Simon & Sullivan, 1993). Keller (1993) studied customer-based brand equity and stresses that it can be defined as brand awareness and the creation of favorable, strong, and unique brand associations. As a result, he identified brand equity as “the differential effect of brand knowledge on consumer response to the marketing of a brand” (Keller 1993, p. 2). Aaker (1991) provided insights on brand equity from a customer-orientated view. He describes brand equity “a set of brand assets and liabilities linked to a brand, its name and symbol, that add to [...] or subtract [...] from the value provided by the product or service provided by a firm“ (Aaker, 1991, p. 15). The author defines four major consumer-related bases of brand equity: (1) brand/name awareness, (2) brand loyalty, (3) perceived quality, and (4) brand associations (Aaker, 1991). The stronger these bases are, the higher is the resulting brand equity of a brand, a product or a service.
A number of factors are thought to influence brand equity – for example, the fundamental levers of the promotion mix (Madhavaram et al., 2005). In accordance with this assumption, Keller (2003) notes that the firm’s marketing communications contribute to brand equity. Yoo et al. (2000) suggest long-term brand equity can only be achieved with time through thoughtfully planned marketing investments.
In the following sections, an overview of the constructs used in the study will be provided. Aaker (1996) presents the concept brand equity and describes it as a set of assets linked to the brand name that contribute to added value of a product or service. According to Aaker (1996), the main assets of brand equity are brand awareness, brand loyalty, perceived quality and brand associations. For brand associations, the sub-constructs perceived quality, brand image and brand attitude were merged based on the assumptions made by Low and Lamb (2000). Brand awareness, brand associations and brand loyalty are therefore conceptualized
as brand equity in this work. The combination of these two approaches used in this master thesis is graphically represented in Figure 1. As the source of brand equity are the perceptions of the customer (Keller, 1993), it will be used as a measure for how the respondents perceive the brand. Previous studies that were conducted to explore the influence of brand equity on consumer preferences and purchase intention (i. e. Cobb-Walgren et al., 1995) and consumer perception of product quality (i.e. Dodds et al., 1991) show that brand equity can be addressed for measuring consumers’ perception of a brand.
Figure 1: Composition of Brand Perception measured by Brand Equity
Constructs based on Aaker (1996) as well as Low and Lamb (2000). 2.1.2 Brand Awareness
The construct brand awareness is a key determinant in brand equity models (Aaker, 1991; Keller, 1993). It refers to the strength to which a brand is present in the mind of consumers during different situations with view to a brand’s name, logo, symbol or characteristics (Aaker, 1991, 1996; Aaker & Joachimsthaler, 2000). More precisely, Aaker (1991) defines brand awareness as “the ability of the potential buyer to recognize and recall the brand in its product category” (p. 10). The term brand recall refers to the situation in which a brand and / or the brand’s name comes to the mind of the consumer spontaneously when being exposed to the product category. However, the term brand recognition refers to the consumer’s ability
to remember a brand correctly, if ever having seen or heard from a brands’ attributes, offerings or communications (Keller, 1993).
Consumers generally prefer familiar and well-known products over unfamiliar products (Aaker, 1991). With rising brand awareness the likelihood of intending to purchase a familiar brand increases, compared to deciding for a brand that consumers are unfamiliar with (Keller, 1993; Hoyer & Brown, 1990; Macdonald & Sharp, 2000). Buying a brand that customers are familiar with contributes to reducing the consumers’ (subjective) risk of making a purchase mistake (Fischer et al., 2010). Thus, if a brand is anchored in the consumers’ mind set consumers’ purchase intentions are positively influenced.
However, awareness often is not sufficient. Brand equity also depends on the associations linked to the brand (Aaker, 1991; Keller, 1993). In the following section, the three dimensions brand attitude, perceived quality and brand image are joined under the construct of brand associations.
2.1.2.1 Brand Associations
According to Aaker (1991) brand associations consist of a brand’s assets and liabilities that include “anything that is linked in memory to a brand” (p. 109). Keller (1993) defines brand associations as the informational meaning a consumer links to a brand in memory, including the consumer’s relevance the brand has for him / her. Brand associations have a crucial meaning to marketers: They use brand associations for positioning a brand and differentiating it from competitors’ brands. Likewise, they create perceptions about benefits of using the brand and help fostering a positive attitude towards it (Low & Lamb, 2000). From a consumer-point of view, brand associations enhance consumers’ processing, organization and information retrieval from memory (Keller, 1993). Brand associations can occur in a variety of shapes and can depict both characteristics of the product (e.g. nice smell for Dove shower
cream) and aspects independently of the product (e.g. pro-age campaign for Dove brand). The higher the exposure to brand-related communication, the higher is the level of association strength with a brand (Aaker, 1991). Brand associations also help create positive feelings towards the brand and form the basis for consumers’ brand loyalty and purchase decisions (Aaker, 1991). Following the arguments of Low and Lamb (2000), brand associations consist of brand image, perceived quality and brand attitude which will be discussed in the following:
The first dimension in the context of brand associations is brand attitude. Brand attitude can be defined as a “consumer’s overall evaluation of a brand”, which can either be positive or negative (Olson & Mitchell, 1981). Substantial empirical research indicates that brand attitude influences customers’ evaluations of brands (Aaker & Keller, 1990; Low & Lamb, 2000) and behavioral intentions such as brand consideration, purchase intention, purchase behavior and brand choice (MacKenzie et al., 1986; Priester & Nayakankuppam, 2004).
Researchers suggest that perceived quality is similar to or linked to the individual’s attitude toward a brand (Bitner 1990; Parasuraman et al., 1988). More precisely, Aaker (1991) defines perceived quality as “the consumer’s perception of the overall quality or superiority of a product or service with respect to its intended purpose, relative to alternatives” (p. 85). Consumers often rely on advertising as a help to evaluate the quality of products (Rao & Monroe, 1989). Therefore, they tend to perceive highly advertised brands as being of higher quality (Yoo et al., 2000). Chevalier and Mayzlin (2006) also showed that online product reviews by consumers significantly influence the perceived product quality of other consumers. Such reviews have proven to affect behavioral intentions (i.e. Sparks & Browning, 2011).
Brand image is considered as being a set of associations linked to a certain brand in a
meaningful way. Due to its impact on consumer decisions, several authors have argued that it should be seen as the starting point of developing coherent marketing strategies (Reynolds & Gutman, 1984). Keller (1993) defines brand image as “perceptions about a brand as reflected by the brand associations held in consumer memory” (p. 3). Brand image describes how a brand is actually perceived. It has to be differentiated from brand identity which is how marketers desire the brand to be perceived (Aaker, 1996). Biel (1993) considers three components of image related to the brand: firstly, image of the provider; secondly, image of the user and, thirdly, image of the product/service itself. Research has largely shown the influence of brand image on intentions to purchase a branded product (e.g. Batra & Homer, 2004; Esch et al., 2006).
Taken together, brand attitude, perceived quality and brand image constitute brand associations as a component of brand equity (Low & Lamb, 2000). To complete the conceptualization, of brand equity, brand loyalty will be discussed in the following chapter. 2.1.2.2 Brand Loyalty
According to Aaker (1991), brand loyalty of the customer base is the core of a brand’s equity. The construct of brand loyalty is considered as “[…] a deeply held commitment to rebuy or repatronize a preferred product or service consistently in the future, despite situational influences and marketing efforts having the potential to cause switching behavior” (Oliver, 1999, p. 392). Brand loyalty reflects how likely or unlikely the customer will switch to another brand (Aaker, 1991). Organizations are keen on making consumers brand-loyal as this has significant impact on purchase intentions in the long term (Shukla, 2009). In addition, for most companies it is expensive to win over new customers while it is relatively cost-efficient keeping existing customers satisfied (Aaker, 1991). When measuring loyalty,
marketers seek to identify the frequent or heavy purchasers (Ehrenberg, 1988) and examine when customers switch to a competitors’ brand (Tsao & Li-Wei, 2005).
To conclude this chapter, it can be stated here that all authors and researchers mention dimensions such as brand awareness, brand loyalty and brand associations with perceived quality, brand image and brand attitude (Aaker, 1991; Low & Lamb, 2000) as being essential elements of brand equity. Brand equity in turn is assumed to entail favorable behavioral consequences (Keller, 2009). In the next chapter, the consumers’ responses toward brand-related social media communication in terms of purchase intention will be examined more closely.
2.1.3 Purchase Intention
The most significant goal of the companies creating and maintaining online relationships with consumers is to motivate consumers to purchase a particular product (Yoon et al., 2008). Today more than ever, consumers are influenced by social networks when making purchase decisions. Therefore, brand-related communication in social media is relevant with regard to customer decision-making (Hutter et al., 2013). Thus, the construct of purchase intention shall be in the focus of the following section. As the term intention has wider implications (mindset) and often has a positive impact on an individual’s actions (Ajzen & Driver, 1992; Schlosser et al., 2006), the intention to obtain a brand rather than actually possessing it, is measured in the context of the present online research.
According to several authors, the term purchase intention can be defined as the consumer-sided subjective evaluation or judgement that follows after the consumer generally evaluated and weighted up on the purchase of a product or service (Blackwell et al., 2001; Dodds et al., 1991; Shao et al., 2004). Maintaining the customer's purchase intention will help companies increase profitability and maintain competitive advantage (Baldauf et al., 2003). Thereby,
marketers conclude that brand equity is often positively related to purchase intention. Keller (1993) states that consumers will prefer the products of a high-equity brand over identical non- or differently branded products. For example, Cobb-Walgren et al. (1995) found a positive impact of brand equity on purchase intentions by comparing brands of hotels and household cleaners. In their study, consumer showed higher preferences and purchase intentions for the brands with higher brand equity. Baldauf et al. (2003) also found a positive impact of brand equity on willingness to buy. Correspondingly, as mentioned in the respective chapters of the brand equity components, the constructs brand awareness, brand associations (brand image, perceived quality and brand attitude), and brand loyalty have been found to influence the purchase intention. Therefore, the following hypotheses are postulated:
H1: Brand perception has a positive influence on consumer's purchase intention
As the proposed framework also focuses on the influence of social media content an overview of the social media topic shall be given in the following.
2.2 Social Media
Social media has become highly relevant for firms that discover the increased significance of active consumers in online communities (Berthon et al., 2012; Kozinets, 2002; Muñiz & O’guinn, 2001). Blackshaw and Nazzaro (2006) define social media as “a variety of new sources of online information that are created, initiated, circulated and used by consumers intent on educating each other about products, brands, services, personalities and issues” (p. 2). The following social media types can be identified: social media networking sites (Facebook), business networking sites (e.g. LinkedIn), creativity works sharing sites (e.g. Flickr, YouTube), virtual worlds (e.g. Second Life), company-sponsored websites / blogs (e.g. Apple.com) and collaborative websites (e.g., Wikipedia) (Mangold & Faulds, 2009).
In the year 2011, over 50% of the users already follow brands on social media (Van Belleghem et al., 2011). Especially networking sites such as Facebook have become key players for branding activities (Yan, 2011). Notably, Facebook is by far the most popular and most frequented social media site worldwide (Duggan et al., 2015; Statista, 2015b)
The emergence of social media and its consequences has become possible through the technological bases of Web 2.0 (Berthon et al., 2012; Kaplan & Haenlein 2010). Thus, in the upcoming chapter an overview of Web 2.0 and its implications will be provided. A discussion then follows with regard to social media as a marketing tool for companies. Being the most important SNS Facebook will be introduced in the last section of the chapter. Lastly, firm-created content in social media will be differentiated from user-generated content.
2.2.1 Web 2.0
The way we communicate today has been revolutionized by the Internet thus enabling us to overcome limitations of place and time (Harris & Rae, 2009). The fast changing information technologies have allowed for online activities via a new form of communication technology known as Web 2.0 (Gretzel et al., 2008). Social media has evolved on the technological bases of Web 2.0 (Berthon et al., 2012; Kaplan & Haenlein 2010). According to Li and Bernhoff, (2011), Web 2.0 denotes the Internet as a platform where content and applications are created, generated and released by all users (e.g. companies or private users) of the Internet. This multi-dimensional communication was enabled through the development of new applications supporting the functioning of interactive sites and platforms – hence giving rise to the phenomenon of Social Media (Berthon et al., 2008; 2012).
Figure 2:Web 2.0, Social Media and Creative Consumers
Berthon et al. (2012).
In their contribution, Berthon et al. (2012) recognize the intertwining of Web 2.0, social media and creative consumers in a “continuum of social and technical characteristics as well as content and creator characteristics” (p. 263) (see Figure 2). According to Berthon et al. (2012), the technologies of Web 2.0 have laid the ground for the following three effects: the first effect is the “locus of activity” (Berthon et al, 2012, p. 262). This effect depicts the shift from the World Wide Web (WWW) being a static place – where users could just go online to look at pages – to a place where the vast majority of content that people are interacting with is put up by the users themselves (Berthon et al., 2012, p. 262) The second effect, the “locus of value” incorporates the fact that content is now created by both companies and consumers, evoking the creative consumer (Berthon et al., 2012, p. 262). The third effect is the “locus of power”, which owes its relevance to the shift of consumers gaining power by creating content in a social media environment (Berthon et al, 2012, p. 262). These effects altogether have made social media possible (Berthon et al., 2012).
Thus, it can be concluded that Web 2.0 has laid the technological grounds for the development of social media as it exists today. Social media will be discussed as a tool for marketing communication in the next chapter.
2.2.2 Social Media As A Marketing Communication Tool
As Keller has put it from a general point of view, “marketing communications represent the voice of a brand and the means by which companies can establish a dialogue with consumers concerning their product offerings” (2001, p. 823). Today, social media platforms truly have opened manifold possibilities for interactive communication (Berthon et al., 2008). This has tremendously changed the setting for business-to-consumer (B2C) marketing communication (Kietzmann et al., 2011). A two-sided communication process is initiated whereby the interaction with the customer is crucial (Bruhn, 2005). Thus, social media is a new source of consumer creativity, influence and empowerment (Gilin, 2008). The social media marketer must keep consumers engaged in conversations to ultimately create brand supporters through these conversations and communication processes (Weinberg & Pehlivan, 2011). By continuously engaging the consumer, the connection with the brand is strengthened (Engeseth, 2005). As a result, social media differs from traditional media such as TV, radio and print because of the unique dialogue with consumers (Chordes, 2009).
On the one hand, firms can use social media to enhance brand equity by presenting their brand and products, communicating their values, providing background information, and creating communities as well as collecting immediate feedback from customers (Breslauer & Smith, 2009; Nandan, 2005; Yan, 2011). The advantages of using social media as opposed to other media are manifold and varied. Social media i.e. allows for a more effective application of communications and information return by reducing time and efforts required in comparison to traditional media (Chordes, 2009; Kim & Ko, 2012). Also, it facilitates companies to gather information about their customers’ wishes and needs (Weinberg &
Pehlivan, 2011). Furthermore, marketers are able to react to consumers’ feedback and to adjust the individual strategy, if needed (Obal et al., 2011). This, in turn, helps the organization foster relationships with customers (Breslauer & Smith, 2009; Yan, 2011). Therefore, De Vries et al. (2012) propose that companies should make use of social media as channel to profit from the dialogue with consumers.
However, it has also to be noted that – in contrast to traditional media – brand managers have less control in terms of timing, frequency and content consumed by the target group. Customers are actively choosing which brands to engage with and when (Mangolds & Faulds 2009). Additionally, they help shape the image of the brand (Fournier & Avery, 2011). This is because, according to Mangold and Faulds (2009), social media not only allows and facilitates the communication between firm and consumer, it also enables the consumers to talk to each other, often with the focus on products used (word-of-mouth communication). This type of communication is essentially faster and more far-reaching than traditional word-of-mouth communication. Thereby, current social media allow for the co-creation of a brands value by contributions of the “creative consumers” (Berthon et al., 2012, p. 262).
To conclude, the use of social media as a marketing tool can strongly influence a brand’s attractiveness (Lin & Lu, 2011). Facebook is hereby the most important platform (Statista, 2015b) and will thus be discussed in the following chapter.
2.2.3 Facebook
Facebook is a social networking site founded by Mark Zuckerberg in 2004 (Boyd & Ellison, 2008) and run by the same-named company Facebook Inc. It was originally designed for connecting with friends and student-colleagues at university (Carlson, 2010). Since then,
Facebook has spread widely. By March 2015 the amount of monthly active users reached 1,44 billion users in total (Facebook, 2015a). If all Facebook users constituted a country, it
would be the world’s third largest one, behind China and India (Divol et al., 2012). Consequently, Facebook is referred to as one of the most popular SNSs (Statista, 2015b). From the very start, Facebook has enabled individuals to set up their profiles online that contain their personal data, interests and hobbies, educational and working information as well as other details. There are special features such as liking posts of other members and uploading (profile) pictures or finding and adding friends as well as communicating via private messages (Berthon et al., 2012). In addition, users can post content on each other’s profile, leave a comment on links or feeds as well as follow celebrities, brands and other (Smith et al., 2012).
Meanwhile, not only individuals can get active and create a profile on Facebook, but also companies increasingly use the high potential of Facebook as a marketing tool (Weinberg, 2009). Research showed that 79% of the top 100 companies in the Fortune Global 500 index are active on different social media platforms such as Facebook, Twitter, YouTube or also corporate blogs (Burson-Marsteller, 2010). Thus, consumers can follow or like companies’ brand fan pages in order to receive updates of particular companies and brands.
Due to brand fan pages (see Appendix 1) on Facebook the managers of brands were now able to leverage and optimize their marketing activities online (Edelman, 2010; Mangold & Faulds, 2009). For companies, brand fan pages on Facebook serve as a suitable instrument making consumers bond and interact with brands online when applied in an adequate way (see Section 2.2). To mention one benefit of for companies creating brand fan pages has is that as a part of the brand community, consumers are more committed as well as more loyal to the brand (Christodoulides et al., 2012). As a result, brand loyalty can result in stronger purchase intention, facilitate the consumer-brand relationship (Gensler et al., 2013).
Consumers can follow the brand by becoming fans of the respective brand page, and by publicly demonstrating that they like the brand (De Vries et al., 2012). Brand fan pages are an excellent platform to publish themed to a wide range and depth as, for example, general brand-related information, activities and updates (Lin & Lu, 2011; Weinberg & Pehlivan, 2011). This is done via brand posts. Generally, special characteristics or features are needed to make brand posts capture customer’s attention – the posts i. e. include photos, videos, quizzes or information (Fennis & Stroebe, 2010). As a result, both current customers and prospects are encouraged to experience and benefit from the information provided; however, they are expected to respond to the communication and thus to interact with the brand and the marketers. De Vries et al. (2012) explored characteristics of brand posts regarding interactivity (to-way communication between firm and consumer) and vividness (degree to which senses are stimulated). The researchers found that highly interactive and vivid posts are more popular than posts which are only little interactive and vivid (De Vries et al., 2012).
Brand fan pages can also be characterized as kind of online brand communities for consumers (Bagozzi & Dholakia, 2006). In general, consumers as members of these communities are more open to information about the particular brand (Bagozzi & Dholakia, 2006). Moreover, they tend to generate more positive word-of-mouth communication and are more emotionally attached to the brand in comparison to non-brand fans (Dholakia & Durham, 2010). To sum up, a brand’s Facebook fan page is a combination of updates, responses and experiences of both the company and users. To conclude, companies as well as individual users can create content on Facebook as a social media platform. This distinction will be explained in more detail the following chapter.
2.2.4 Forms Of Social Media Content
As mentioned above, the traditional one-way communication by firms targeting their consumers has changed into a multi-dimensional interaction (1) between companies and consumers and (2) between consumers and other consumers (Berthon et al., 2008). On the one hand, companies are using posts on brand pages as a communication tool on Facebook, as practiced by brands such as Nivea, Coca-Cola or many others. This is called firm-created content (Schivinski & Dabrowski, 2014) On the other hand, consumers can actively post content by themselves and react to posts by other users or - correspondingly - firms. This in contrast, is user-generated content (Schivinski & Dabrowski, 2014). Bruhn et al. (2012) state that brand equity results from the combination of consumers response to a firm’s brand-related activities on one hand and of the reaction to other consumers brand-brand-related contributions on the other. They hereby highlight the necessary distinction between firm-created communication and user-generated communication in social media. Before each form of communication source will be examined in further detail, the brand fan page of the personal care brand Dove will be briefly explained with view to its structure (see Appendix 1). As firm-created and use-generated content are highlighted, the focus on the brand fan page is on firm-created content (see Appendix 1, Feature 7), located in the center of the brand fan page, the timeline. Whereas user-generated content can be inserted at the top of the page (see Appendix 1, Feature 4) and is called posts to page (see Appendix 1, Feature 6b). More features for a brand on a brand fan pages on Facebook are that brands can present both a profile picture (see Appendix 1, Feature 1) as well as cover photo (see Appendix 1, Feature 2) spanning the full width of the band page (Glass, 2012; Erickson, 2012). Mostly, as in the case for Dove, too, brands use the profile picture for displaying the brands’ logo. Whereas the cover photo is similar to traditional website headers creating a first eye-catching visual impression. Right below the cover photo, the Like button can be found (see Appendix 1,
Feature 3) that first time visitors have to click in order to follow the particular brand on Facebook. Within the timeline brands can display their full autobiography as well as information including the latest news about the brand and its products that is considered as firm-created content (see Appendix 1, Feature 7). Consumers also can contribute content in response this firm-created content, this is exemplified by Feature 6a in Appendix 1. Another part of the brand fan page is the area on the left-hand side where visitors of the page can browse through all photos (see Appendix 1, Feature 5a) and videos (see Appendix 1, Feature 5b) ever uploaded by the brand.
Firm-created content is viewed as a substantial component of a company’s promotion mix
(Mangold and Faulds, 2009). Although the concept of firm-created content via social media is still a very recent one, it is increasingly used today (Nielsen, 2013). This is due to the recognition of its extensive reach (Kaplan & Haenlein, 2010). Its most important feature is that it is planned within a specific marketing strategy and fully controlled by the company. With regard to this aspect, firm-created social media communication can be compared to traditional instruments of marketing communication (Schivinski & Dabrowski, 2014). At the same time, the firms control over the communication content clearly differentiates it from user generated-social media, where the consumer has increased control (Hennig-Thurau et al., 2010; Schivinski & Dabrowski, 2014). Firm-created communication is mainly aimed at advertising the brand, which therefore should impact brand awareness and perception (Schivinski & Dabrowski, 2014). Yoo et al. (2000) state that brand equity is affected by communication due to the rising probability that a brand will be considered as a buying alternative. Accordingly, Bruhn et al. (2012) also note that consumers’ perception of a firm’s communication positively influences their brand awareness as well as their brand image. Hence, firm created communication is expected to positively impact brand equity and, therefore, the following hypothesis is provided here.
H2a: Brand-related firm-created social media communication positively influences brand
equity.
User-generated content is considered as a published content that is “created outside of
professional routines and practices” (Kaplan & Haenlein, 2010; OECD 2007, p. 61). User-generated content can be created, multiplied, changed as well as used in an individual or collaborative way and “can be seen as the sum of all ways in which people make use of social media” (Kaplan & Haenlein, 2010, p. 61). A comprehensive definition is given by the Organization for Economic Co-Operation and Development (OECD) in 2007: “(i) content that is made publicly available over the Internet, (ii) content that reflects a certain amount of creative effort, and (iii) content created outside professional routines and practices”. User-generated content can take the form of text, images, and conversations or shared documents (Shao, 2009). Content generated by users such as commenting, or comments on a brand post is similar to electronic word-of-mouth (eWOM) communication (Berthon et al., 2012). eWOM is seen as “any positive or negative statement about a product or company, which is made available to a multitude of people via the internet” (Hennig-Thurau et al., 2004, p. 39). In general, there is consensus that both user-generated and electronic-word-of-mouth (eWOM) are not of a commercial message nature and are not under the firm’s control (Berthon et al., 2012). The most important dissimilarity refers to the fact that the online content is generated by users in the context of user-generated content and is transferred by users in the context of eWOM (Smith et al., 2012).
Consumers co-create brand communication for different reasons such as self-expression, the wish to influence others and enjoyment to share information, experiences and opinions (Berthon et al, 2008; Solis, 2011). Christodoulides et al. (2012) suggests that brand-focused conversations between users are on the rise. It is therefore increasingly important for companies to know how strongly consumer brand perceptions are influenced by
user-generated content (Smith et al., 2012). Bruhn et al. (2012) believe that user-user-generated content (even when negative) is useful for raising brand awareness. With regard to user-generated content, Smith et al. (2012) suggest that firms should seek out and post relevant content to attract users. Also, they argue the firm should show appreciation for consumers’ participation by responding. Furthermore, the results of Schivinski and Dabrowski (2014) show that user-generated communication content positively influences brand awareness and associations. Correspondingly, it is empirically supported by Christodoulides et al. (2012) that user-generated communication can have a positive impact on brand equity. Therefore, the following is assumed:
H2b: Brand-related user-generated social media communication positively influences brand
equity.
Furthermore, it was hypothesized above (H1) that brand equity has an influence on purchase
intention. With view to hypotheses H2a and H2b, namely that firm created and user generated
communication influence brand equity, the following hypotheses are put forward:
H3a: Consumer's perception of a brand mediates the relationship between firm-created social
media communication and consumer's purchase intention
H3b: Consumer's perception of a brand mediates the relationship between user-generated
social media communication and consumer's purchase intention
The next chapters will describe the underlying conceptual framework based on the literature and methodology used to test the hypothesis.
3 Conceptual Framework
The underlying conceptual framework in Figure 3 shows how firm-created and user-generated social media communication (independent variable) influences purchase intention (dependent variables) and how the relationship between the forms of content is mediated by the variable brand perception. In detail: the study first examines how brand perception affects purchase intention (H1). Then, the effect firms-created social media content has on brand
perception (H2a) and the effect user-generated social media content has on brand perception
(H2b). Hereafter the research investigates the mediating effect of brand perception on the
relationship between the independent variable and dependent variable. More precisely, it is tested if brand perception has an influence on the relationship between firm-created content and purchase intention (H3a) as well as testing if brand perception has an influence on the
relationship between user-generated content and purchase intention (H3b). To sum up, the
focus is on the different form of the underlying communication source ultimately have a different influence on brand perception. The below provided conceptual framework (see Figure 3) provides a graphical illustration of the underlying concepts, variables and relationships among them.
Figure 3: Conceptual Framework
Partially based on Schivinski & Dabrowksi (2014).
4 Methodology
The purpose of this experiment is to examine the differential effect firm-created and user-generated social media communication have on consumers’ perception of brands and ultimately on the purchase intention. Furthermore, it will be elaborated how brand perception influences the relationship between either firm-created communication content or user-generated communication content as a mediator (see Figure 3). In this chapter, the pretest findings and the set-up of the main study are presented. In the set-up section, the experimental design, the sample, the measurements and stimuli regarding the dependent, independent, moderation and control variables as well as the procedure of the study are considered and examined. As an overview, Figure 4 provides the flow chart for the entire study.
Figure 4: Study Method Flow Chart
* indicates an item-scale ** indicates survey questions (see Appendix 4)
4.1 Pretests
For this research, prior to the main experiment, two pretests were conducted. The overall aim was to determine which personal care brand to use in the main experiment and to test the perception of the content stimuli. The reason for using a personal care brand was because of its relevance for users and engagement in social media. Furthermore by pretesting the fictitious content stimuli it can be ensured that the results of the main study are feasible and realistic and thus increasing the external validity of the research. Additionally, personal care brands seemed adequate, too because of the respective company’s engagement in social media: for beauty and personal care brands; the SNS Facebook is the most-used social media channel (Euromonitor International, 2013) today. In addition, the findings of the present study are supposed to complement the findings of Schivinski and Dabrowski (2014) by
differing from the study’s focus that was conducted last year (non-alcoholic beverages, clothing and mobile network providers).
As the present study was conducted in the environment of brand fan pages on Facebook, the manipulated social media communication content is expected to positively influence the validity of this research.
Due to the vast amount of personal care brands on Facebook, brands to be considered for the first pretest had to fulfill all of the following criteria in the first place:
ü The brand belongs to the personal care product category
ü The brands should not all origin from the same corporate brand1
ü The brand fan page has a minimum reach of 1,000 subscriptions ü The firm-created content on the page exceeds two posts a week
ü There are Facebook users who actively participate on the brand page contributing with user-generated content on the particular brand fan page on Facebook
Based on these criteria, a selection of five personal care brands that seemed to be appropriate and suitable for the first pretest was done: (1) Dove by Unilever, (2) Colgate by Colgate-Palmolive, (3) Nivea by Beiersdorf, (4) AXE (Unilever), (5) bebe Young Care by Johnson & Johnson.
4.1.1 First Pretest
Based on the above-mentioned criteria and as a result of the pre-selection of suitable brands, the first pretest was designed to determine two personal care brands that would be used for the second pretest (see 4.1.2). In order to identify two suitable brands, 39 participants were acquired for the second pretest. So potential participants were contacted through Facebook. A ____________
selection of 26 participants remained (dropout rate=33.0 %) and met the requirements by indicating that they liked each brand on Facebook. As a result, when connected to the brand fan page after having clicked the like-button of the brand, users see stories from the brand fan page in their own news feed and automatically appear as a Person who likes that page (Facebook, 2015b).
Next, participants were exposed to the five brand logos of each of the above mentioned personal care brands. Moreover, they were asked general questions about each brand regarding (1) their overall familiarity, experience and attitude in relation to the brand and (2) their familiarity, experience and attitude towards the brand, particularly on Facebook. All questions were anchored on a 7-point Likert scale. In order to be satisfying for the underlying study the result should have an average score between 3 and 5 f or each item as 4 is the midpoint value on the 7-point Likert scale.
The outcomes for the average familiarity, experience and attitude score per brand are presented in Table 1 and Table 2. Respondents’ familiarity scored best with Nivea (M=4.63; SD=1.588) and Dove (M=4.60; SD=1.365), their experience scored best with Dove (M=4.62; SD=1.732) and Colgate (M=4.27; SD=1.586), and attitude scored best for AXE (M=4.32; SD=1.030) and Nivea (M=4.20; SD=1.011) in the general condition.
Table 1:Means and standard deviation (General condition)
Familarity Experience Attitude Mean SD Mean SD Mean SD
Dove 4.60 1.365 4.62 1.732 4.47 1.365
Colgate 2.77 1.237 4.27 1.586 4.91 2.637
Nivea 4.63 1.588 4.89 1.588 4.20 1.011
AXE
bebe Young Care
2.90 3.24 1.988 2.007 4.88 3.53 1.988 1.007 4.32 3.53 1.030 2.776
The questions asking for the item familiarity on Facebook were best with Dove (M=4.52; SD= .896) and Nivea (M=4.17; SD=1.108). The respondents’ experience was best with Nivea (M=4.56; SD=1.588) and Dove (M=4.29; SD=.732) and attitude scored best for Nivea (M=4.40; SD=1.853) and Dove (M=4.02; SD=1.876) compared to the other brands tested (see Table 2).
Table 2:Means and standard deviation (Facebook condition)
Familarity Experience Attitude Mean SD Mean SD Mean SD
Dove 4.52 .896 4.29 .732 4.02 1.876
Colgate 3.44 1.611 3.08 2.453 3.16 2.637
Nivea 4.17 1.108 4.56 1.588 4.40 1.853
AXE
bebe Young Care
3.22 3.46 1.799 2.989 2.78 2.98 1.627 1.415 2.87 2.53 1.011 1.162
As a result of the reported average findings of familiarity, experience and attitude in both conditions (Table 1 and Table 2), finally, two brands were chosen for the second pretest. To put it differently, the computed means for all items of Nivea and Dove scored 4 the closest in the general condition. As the main experiment will deal with fictitious social media communication content assembling content that could have been taken from brand pages on Facebook (see Appendix 5), the results of this condition are considered important to a greater extent. Since in this condition, Dove and Nivea scored best, too, they are also considered highly appropriate for the second pretest.
4.1.2 Second Pretest
The second pretest was done shortly after the first pretest; its prevailing aim was to test the intended identification of the particular communication stimuli to be used for the main experiment. Therefore, fictitious firm-created and user-generated content was tested for each brand (see Appendix 5). A total of 17 participants took part in the second pretest, there were no dropouts for the second pretest.
Besides testing the perceived identification, conviction, believability, credibility (trustworthiness) and the diagnosticity of the provided communication stimuli were measured, too. Moreover, participants were asked questions about the familarity with the product category and the brand as well as to what extend the brand is favorable for them. All questions were anchored on a 7-point Likert scale. In order to be satisfying, relevant and believable, the results for at least one brand were required to have an average score significantly higher than 4.
The outcomes reveal that both brands scored higher than 4 for all items in both conditions. Except for the item diagnosticity in both conditions and the item conviction in the FCC condition, the average scores for the brand Dove were higher than the average scores for the
brand Nivea. The outcomes of the means and standard deviations for all items per brand are presented in Table 3 for firm-created social media communication content and in Table 4 for user-generated social media communication content.
Table 3:Means and standard deviation for FCC
Identification Conviction Believeability Mean SD Mean SD Mean SD
Nivea 5.93 1.982 4.87 2.176 4.47 1.773
Dove 6.07 1.223 4.50 2.111 4.67 2.100
Credibility (Trusworthiness) Diagnosticity Favourability Mean SD Mean SD Mean SD Nivea 4.80 1.772 4.87 2.035 4.13 2.039
Dove 5.00 1.816 4.20 1.975 4.79 1.962
Table 4:Means and standard deviation for UGC
Identification Conviction Believeability Mean SD Mean SD Mean SD
Nivea 4.93 1.632 4.60 2.066 4.40 2.064
Dove 5.07 1.911 5.64 2.372 5.21 2.228
Credibility (Trusworthiness) Diagnosticity Favourability Mean SD Mean SD Mean SD Nivea 4.40 2.105 4.87 2.059 4.67 2.190
Dove 4.80 2.349 4.21 2.220 4.93 2.401
Although, Dove did not score higher for all items, the requirements for most important scores (identification, believability, credibility of the communication stimuli) were fulfilled. Therefore, Dove was chosen as the underlying example brand for the main experiment.
4.2 Main Study
Design
To reveal the causal relationship between the impact the two different types of social media communication (cause) have on brand perception and ultimately the consumer’s purchase intention (effect), a controlled cross-sectional study was conducted. To test the proposed conceptual framework, a 2 (firm-created content2 versus user-generated content3) + 1 control group between subject design was developed, thus generating a total of three different scenarios, and to one of them each participant was randomly assigned. Hence, the experiment consisted of 2 manipulated groups and one control group (see Table 5). The control group was neither exposed to firm-created nor to user-generated social media communication content. As the independent variable of this study both forms of social media communication content are taken for this study. Purchase intention is the dependent variable.
Table 5:Overview of scenarios
(Control group) Scenario 1
FCC Scenario 2
UGC Scenario 3
Sample
The questionnaire was web-based and distributed throughout the SNS Facebook, particularly on the brand fan page of Dove, within a time range of seven days. The respondents were selected using purposive non-probability sampling. Due to the web-based questionnaire, ____________
2 FCC 3 UGC
exclusively people using the Internet and are assigned to Facebook and Dove’s brand fan page were part of the sample. In the study, a total of 165 participants were involved.
Stimuli and Measurements
This study entails the independent variable communication source with the two characteristics firm-created content (FCC) and user-generated content (UGC), the mediating variable of brand perception, and purchase intention as the dependent variable. Below, the operationalization of the stimuli and measurements is discussed in more detail.
Independent Variable
Communication Source. In this manipulation a fictitious picture of a Dove shower cream was embedded paired with textual content. To isolate the effect of either FCC and UGC the two were composed with The control group was not manipulated with any social media communication content but showed the brand’s logo as a visual cue instead (see Appendix 4).
Mediating Variable
Brand Perception. Brand perception was used as the mediating variable in this study. It is composed of brand awareness, brand loyalty and brand associations. Whereas brand associations incorporated perceived quality, brand image and brand attitude according to Low and Lamb’s (2000) approach. All items were asked separately and first added in the data analyses part; the respective questions asked are provided in Appendix 3).
The reasons for using a personal care brand were the respective brand’s relevance and the company’s and brand’s engagement in social media. The control group reveals how consumers perceived the brand without being confronted with any social media communication content.
Dependent Variable
Purchase Intention. In light of this construct, participants were asked to rate the purchase intention for the brand based on the social media communication they were exposed to on a 7-point Likert scale from (1) strongly disagree to (7) strongly agree. The questions asked are provided in Appendix 3. The measurements of the dimension of purchase intention were contrasted with the control group measurements to demonstrate the effect of each communication source. The control group reveals how consumers rate their purchase intentionwithout being confronted with any social media communication content.
Control Variables
For the purpose of avoiding experimental biases, several control variables were included in the survey. Next to the demographic variables of age, gender, education, and income, research results can be affected by the consumer’s perception of the attractiveness of the social media communication content. Furthermore, the fictitious content based on the Dove brand should be perceived similarly within the different experimental scenarios. Thus the participants’ satisfaction as well as the likeliness of the provided content shall be rated equally by the participants to rule out experimental bias. Hence, participants were asked about the attractiveness of the company’s social media communication (FCC) as well as of the social media communication contributed by other users (UGC) on a 7-point Likert scale from (1) strongly disagree to (7 ) strongly agree. Furthermore, they were asked to rate their satisfaction with the social media communication content they were exposed to as well as the likeliness of the content being realistic. The questions asked are provided in Appendix 3. Procedure
