The Organic Marketing Nexus: The Effect of Unpaid Marketing Practices on Consumer Engagement
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Literature Review
2.1. Consumer Engagement
2.2. S-O-R Paradigm
2.3. Organic Marketing
2.3.1. Search Engine Optimization (SEO)
2.3.2. Organic Social Media Posts
2.3.3. User-Generated Content (UGC)
2.4. Attention to Social Comparison
2.5. Hypothesis Development
2.5.1. SEO, Psychology and Behavioral Engagement
2.5.2. Social Media Posts, Psychology, and Behavioral Engagement
2.5.3. UGC, Psychology and Behavioral Engagement
2.5.4. Psychology and Behavioral Engagement
2.5.5. The Mediating Role of Psychology Engagement
2.5.6. The Moderating Role of ATSCC
3. Research Methodology
3.1. Data Collection
3.2. Measures Development
3.2.1. Independent Variable
3.2.2. Mediating Variable
3.2.3. Moderating Variable
3.2.4. Dependent Variable
4. Data Analysis and Results
4.1. Measurement Model
4.2. Hypotheses Testing
4.2.1. Direct Effects
4.2.2. Mediating Effects
4.2.3. Moderating Effects
5. Discussions
5.1. Theoretical Implications
5.2. Practical Implications
5.3. Limitations and Proposed Future Research
6. Conclusions
Author Contributions
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Informed Consent Statement
Data Availability Statement
Conflicts of Interest
Appendix A. Measurement Scales
Construct | Measurement Scales |
Search engine optimization (SEO) [33,39] | When I am on the e-commerce shopping platform: |
1. The keywords I type in the search engine produces search results that matches what I’m looking for. | |
2. I spend a lot of time surfing the online store I choose to visit from the search result. | |
3. I browse more pages within the online store I visit. | |
4. The online store I visit usually have exactly what I need. | |
Social media posts (SMP) [7,11,73] | When I am on the firm’s Facebook fan page: |
5. The e-commerce firm’s social posts are easy to understand. | |
6. The e-commerce firm’s social posts are concise and free of ambiguity. | |
7. The e-commerce firm’s social posts usually appeal to my emotions. | |
8. The e-commerce firm’s social posts convey close relationships with the brand because they are more casual and familiar. | |
9. The e-commerce firm’s social posts have features like product link, polls and questions that invite me to interact with the posts. | |
User-generated content (UGC) [8] | When I am on the firm’s Facebook fan page: |
10. I like to read the e-commerce firm-related posts from other consumers. | |
11. I find the e-commerce firm-related posts from other consumers as a credible information source. | |
12. Other consumers share knowledge of the usage efficiency of firm’s e-commerce platform on social. | |
13. Some e-commerce firm-related posts on social media are a repost of consumers consumption review. | |
Psychological engagement (PE) [90] | 14. I feel no stress when interacting with the e-commerce platform and social media contents related to the e-commerce firm. |
15. I am enthused and inspired when I am interacting with the e-commerce platform and social media contents related to the e-commerce firm. | |
16. I do not realize the passage of time as I am interacting with the e-commerce platform and social media contents related to the e-commerce firm. | |
Behavioral engagement (BE) [26,44] | 17. I share my opinions and relay information about my experience with the e-commerce firm on the social media platform. |
18. I do “like” the e-commerce firm’s social media posts. | |
19. I comment on the social media posts of the e-commerce firm on the social media platform. | |
20. I share the social media posts of the e-commerce firm on my social media platform. | |
21. I am willing to remain a follower of the e-commerce firm’s social media fan page. | |
Attention to social comparison (ATSCC) [54] | 22. It is important for me to purchase a specific brand of product that everyone is patronizing on the e-commerce platform. |
23. If everyone is purchasing a certain brand of product on the e-commerce platform, I feel it is the best to have that. | |
24. If I am unsure about what to purchase, I usually look at what people buy most. | |
25. I tend to pay attention to what most people are consuming. |
References
- Han, W. Purchasing Decision-Making Process of Online Consumers Based on the Five-Stage Model of the Consumer Buying Process. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Public Relations and Social Sciences, Kunming, China, 17–19 September 2021; Volume 586, pp. 545–548. [Google Scholar]
- What Is Organic Marketing? Available online: https://www.ondemandcmo.com/blog/what-is-organic-marketing/ (accessed on 10 August 2022).
- Vieira, V.A.; Almeida, M.I.S.; Agnihotri, R.; da Silva, N.S.D.A.C.; Arunachalam, S. In Pursuit of an Effective B2B Digital Marketing Strategy in an Emerging Market. J. Acad. Mark. Sci. 2019, 47, 1085–1108. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bai, L.; Yan, X. Impact of Firm-Generated Content on Firm Performance and Consumer Engagement: Evidence from Social Media in China. J. Electron. Commer. Res. 2020, 21, 56–74. [Google Scholar]
- Panchal, A.; Shah, A.; Kansara, K.; Bhagubhai, S.; Polytechnic, M.; Bhagubhai, S.; Polytechnic, M. Digital Marketing—Search Engine Optimization (SEO) and Search Engine Marketing (SEM). Int. Res. J. Innov. Eng. Technol. 2021, 5, 17–21. [Google Scholar]
- Mukul, E. Evaluation of Digital Marketing Technologies with MCDM Methods. In Proceedings of the International Conference on New Ideas in Management, Economics and Accounting, Paris, France, 19 April 2019. [Google Scholar]
- Gkikas, D.C.; Tzafilkou, K.; Theodoridis, P.K.; Garmpis, A.; Gkikas, M.C. How Do Text Characteristics Impact User Engagement in Social Media Posts: Modeling Content Readability, Length, and Hashtags Number in Facebook. Int. J. Inf. Manag. Data Insights 2022, 2, 100067. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Thomas, T.G. How User Generated Content Impacts Consumer Engagement. In Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Reliability, Infocom Technologies and Optimization (Trends and Future Directions); Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers Inc., Noida, India, 1 June 2020; pp. 562–568. [Google Scholar]
- D’Eletto, V. What Is Organic Marketing? (Benefits, Tips, and Strategies). Available online: https://www.wordagents.com/organic-marketing/ (accessed on 1 September 2022).
- Elrod, J.K.; Fortenberry, J.L. Public Relations in Health and Medicine: Using Publicity and Other Unpaid Promotional Methods to Engage Audiences. BMC Health Serv. Res. 2020, 20, 1–8. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Deng, Q.; Hine, M.J.; Ji, S.; Wang, Y. Understanding Consumer Engagement with Brand Posts on Social Media: The Effects of Post Linguistic Styles. Electron. Commer. Res. Appl. 2021, 48, 101068. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Malthouse, E.C.; Calder, B.J.; Kim, S.J.; Vandenbosch, M. Evidence That User-Generated Content That Produces Engagement Increases Purchase Behaviours. J. Mark. Manag. 2016, 32, 427–444. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Doorn, V.J.; Lemon, K.N.; Mittal, V.; Nass, S.; Pick, D.; Pirner, P.; Verhoef, P.C. Customer Engagement Behavior—Theoretical Foundations and Research Directions. J. Serv. Res. 2010, 13, 253–266. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jahn, B.; Kunz, W. How to Transform Consumers into Fans of Your Brand. J. Serv. Manag. 2012, 23, 344–361. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Demangeot, C.; Broderick, A.J. Engaging Customers during a Website Visit: A Model of Website Customer Engagement. Int. J. Retail Distrib. Manag. 2016, 44, 814–839. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pansari, A.; Kumar, V. Customer Engagement: The Construct, Antecedents, and Consequences. J. Acad. Mark. Sci. 2017, 45, 294–311. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lizarondo, L.; Kennedy, K.; Kay, D. Development of a Consumer Engagement Framework. Asia Pacific J. Health Manag. 2016, 11, 46–49. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tulio, Z.M.; Getulio, V.F.; Paulo, S.; Vitor, L.B.; Migueles, C.; Lourenco, F.G.V.C.; Arthur, R.I.H. Soccer and Twitter: Virtual Brand Community Engagement Practices Fábio Carbone de Moraes. Mark. Intell. Plan. 2019, 37, 791–805. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chan, T.K.H.; Cheung, C.M.K.; Lee, M.K.O.; Lee, Z.W.Y. Antecedents and Consequences of Customer Engagement in Online Brand Communities. J. Mark. Anal. 2014, 2, 81–97. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Marbach, J.; Lages, C.; Nunan, D. Consumer Engagement in Online Brand Communities: The Moderating Role of Personal Values. Eur. J. Mark. 2019, 53, 1671–1700. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sashi, C.M. Customer Engagement, Buyer-Seller Relationships, and Social Media. Manag. Decis. 2012, 50, 253–272. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Brodie, R.J.; Hollebeek, L.D.; Jurić, B.; Ilić, A. Customer Engagement: Conceptual Domain, Fundamental Propositions, and Implications for Research. J. Serv. Res. 2011, 14, 252–271. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Brandão, A.; Pinho, E.; Rodrigues, P. Antecedents and Consequences of Luxury Brand Engagement in Social Media. Spanish J. Mark.-ESIC 2019, 23, 163–183. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Ashley, C.; Tuten, T. Creative Strategies in Social Media Marketing: An Exploratory Study of Branded Social Content and Consumer Engagement. Psychol. Mark. 2015, 32, 15–27. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Patterson, P.; Yu, T.; De Ruyter, K. Understanding Customer Engagement in Services. In Advancing Theory, Maintaining Relevance, Proceedings of ANZMAC 2006 Conference, Brisbane; Queensland University of Technology (QUT) publishing: Brisbane, Australia, 2006; pp. 4–6. [Google Scholar]
- Brodie, R.J.; Ilic, A.; Juric, B.; Hollebeek, L. Consumer Engagement in a Virtual Brand Community: An Exploratory Analysis. J. Bus. Res. 2013, 66, 105–114. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bowden, J.L.-H. The Process of Customer Engagement: A Conceptual Framework. J. Mark. Theory Pract. 2009, 17, 63–74. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ma, W.; Tariq, A.; Ali, M.W.; Nawaz, M.A.; Wang, X. An Empirical Investigation of Virtual Networking Sites Discontinuance Intention: Stimuli Organism Response-Based Implication of User Negative Disconfirmation. Front. Psychol. 2022, 13, 862568. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Lee, C.H.; Chen, C.W. Impulse Buying Behaviors in Live Streaming Commerce Based on the Stimulus-Organism-Response Framework. Information 2021, 12, 241. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Javadi, M.H.M.; Dolatabadi, H.R.; Dashti, M.; Sanayei, A. Application of the Stimuli-Organism-Response Framework to Factors Influencing Social Commerce Intentions among Social Network Users. Int. J. Bus. Inf. Syst. 2019, 30, 177. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Alghizzawi, M. The Role of Digital Marketing in Consumer Behavior: A Survey. Int. J. Inf. Technol. Lang. Stud. 2019, 3, 24–31. [Google Scholar]
- Polanco-Diges, L.; Debasa, F. The Use of Digital Marketing Strategies in the Sharing Economy: A Literature Review. J. Spat. Organ. Dyn. 2020, 8, 217–229. [Google Scholar]
- Bhandari, R.S.; Bansal, A. Impact of Search Engine Optimization as a Marketing Tool. Jindal J. Bus. Res. 2018, 7, 23–36. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Shirisha, P.; Laxmiprasanna, A. Amanote. Int. J. Innov. Technol. Explor. Eng. 2019, 9, 47–52. [Google Scholar]
- Huang, J.-P.; Depari, G.S. Paid Advertisement on Facebook: An Evaluation Using a Data Mining Approach. Rev. Integr. Bus. Econ. Res. 2018, 8, 1. [Google Scholar]
- Sanne, P.N.C.; Wiese, M. The Theory of Planned Behaviour and User Engagement Applied to Facebook Advertising. SA J. Inf. Manag. 2018, 20, 1–10. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Anderl, E.; März, A.; Schumann, J.H. Nonmonetary Customer Value Contributions in Free E-Services. J. Strateg. Mark. 2015, 24, 175–189. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Luh, C.J.; Yang, S.A.; Huang, T.L.D. Estimating Google’s Search Engine Ranking Function from a Search Engine Optimization Perspective. Online Inf. Rev. 2016, 40, 239–255. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Drivas, I.C.; Sakas, D.P.; Giannakopoulos, G.A.; Kyriaki-Manessi, D. Search Engines’ Visits and Users’ Behavior in Websites: Optimization of Users Engagement with the Content. Springer Proc. Bus. Econ. 2021, 31–45. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhang, S.; Cabage, N. Search Engine Optimization: Comparison of Link Building and Social Sharing. J. Comput. Inf. Syst. 2016, 57, 148–159. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Molina, A.; Gómez, M.; Lyon, A.; Aranda, E.; Loibl, W. What Content to Post? Evaluating the Effectiveness of Facebook Communications in Destinations. J. Destin. Mark. Manag. 2020, 18, 100498. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dhaoui, C.; Webster, C.M. Brand and Consumer Engagement Behaviors on Facebook Brand Pages: Let’s Have a (Positive) Conversation. Int. J. Res. Mark. 2021, 38, 155–175. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sreejesh, S.; Paul, J.; Strong, C.; Pius, J. Consumer Response towards Social Media Advertising: Effect of Media Interactivity, Its Conditions and the Underlying Mechanism. Int. J. Inf. Manag. 2020, 54, 102155. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Eslami, S.P.; Ghasemaghaei, M.; Hassanein, K. Understanding Consumer Engagement in Social Media: The Role of Product Lifecycle. Decis. Support Syst. 2022, 162, 113707. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Davis, S.W.; Horváth, C.; Gretry, A.; Belei, N. Say What? How the Interplay of Tweet Readability and Brand Hedonism Affects Consumer Engagement. J. Bus. Res. 2019, 100, 150–164. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Naem, M.; Okafor, S. User-Generated Content and Consumer Brand Engagement. In Leveraging Computer-Mediated Marketing Environment; IG Global: Hershey, PA, USA, 2019; pp. 193–220. [Google Scholar]
- Rodgers, S.; Thorson, E. Digital Advertising: Theory and Research; Routledge: New York, NY, USA, 2017; ISBN 9781138654457. [Google Scholar]
- Willis, E.; Wang, Y. Blogging the Brand: Meaning Transfer and the Case of Weight Watchers’ Online Community. J. Brand Manag. 2016, 23, 457–471. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jiao, Y.; Ertz, M.; Jo, M.S.; Sarigollu, E. Social Value, Content Value, and Brand Equity in Social Media Brand Communities: A Comparison of Chinese and US Consumers. Int. Mark. Rev. 2018, 35, 18–41. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chari, S.; Christodoulides, G.; Presi, C.; Wenhold, J.; Casaletto, J.P. Consumer Trust in User-Generated Brand Recommendations on Facebook. Psychol. Mark. 2016, 33, 1071–1081. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Geng, R.; Chen, J. The Influencing Mechanism of Interaction Quality of UGC on Consumers’ Purchase Intention—An Empirical Analysis. Front. Psychol. 2021, 12, 697382. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Yu, J.; Ko, E. UGC Attributes and Effects: Implication for Luxury Brand Advertising. Int. J. Advert. 2021, 40, 945–967. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kim, M.; Song, D. When Brand-Related UGC Induces Effectiveness on Social Media: The Role of Content Sponsorship and Content Type. Int. J. Advert. 2017, 37, 105–124. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yoon, H.J.; La Ferle, C.; Edwards, S.M. A Normative Approach to Motivating Savings Behavior: The Moderating Effects of Attention to Social Comparison Information. Int. J. Advert. 2016, 35, 799–822. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bearden, W.O.; Rose, R.L. Attention to Social Comparison Information: An Individual Difference Factor Affecting Consumer Conformity. J. Consum. Res. 1990, 16, 461. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lennox, R.D.; Wolfe, R.N. Revision of the Self-Monitoring Scale. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 1984, 46, 1349–1364. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- McGuire, W.J. The Nature of Attitudes and Attitude Change. In The Handbook of Social Psychology; Addison-Wesley: Boston, MA, USA, 1969; Volume 3, pp. 136–314. [Google Scholar]
- Cox, D.F.; Bauer, R.A. Self-Confidence and Persuasibility in Women on JSTOR. Public Opin. Q. 1964, 28, 453–466. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Novak, K.B.; Crawford, L.A. Perceived Drinking Norms, Attention to Social Comparison Information, and Alcohol Use among College Students. J. Alcohol Drug Educ. 2001, 46, 18–33. [Google Scholar]
- Yun, D.; Silk, K.J. Social Norms, Self-Identity, and Attention to Social Comparison Information in the Context of Exercise and Healthy Diet Behavior. Health Commun. 2011, 26, 275–285. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Attiq, S.; Azam, R.I. Attention to Social Comparison Information and Compulsive Buying Behavior: An S-O-R Analysis. J. Behav. Sci. 2015, 25, 39–58. [Google Scholar]
- Phua, J.; Jin, S.V.; Kim, J. Gratifications of Using Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, or Snapchat to Follow Brands: The Moderating Effect of Social Comparison, Trust, Tie Strength, and Network Homophily on Brand Identification, Brand Engagement, Brand Commitment, and Membership Intentio. Telemat. Inform. 2017, 34, 412–424. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Asante, I.O.; Fang, J.; Darko, D.F. Consumers’ Role in the Survival of e-Commerce in Sub-Saharan Africa: Consequences of e-Service Quality on Engagement Formation. In Proceedings of the 2019 IEEE 10th Annual Information Technology, Electronics and Mobile Communication Conference (IEMCON), Vancouver, BC, Canada, 17–19 October 2019; pp. 0763–0770. [Google Scholar]
- Karisma, I.A.; Darma Putra, I.N.; Wiranatha, A.S. The Effects of “Search Engine Optimization” on Marketing of Diving Companies in Bali. E-J. Tour. 2019, 130. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Husain, T.; Sani, A.; Ardhiansyah, M.; Wiliani, N. Online Shop as an Interactive Media Information Society Based on Search Engine Optimization (SEO). Int. J. Comput. Trends Technol. 2020, 68, 53–57. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Raju, B.C. Search Engine Optimization: A Digital Marketing Giant and Need of Time. Int. J. Innov. Res. Eng. Multidiscip. Phys. Sci. 2019, 7, 92–96. [Google Scholar]
- Issá, R.; Ribeiro, M.; Marques, D.S.; Jose, P. Structuring Best Practices of Search Engine Optimization for Webpages. Smart Innov. Syst. Technol. 2022, 279, 191–209. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Erdmann, A.; Arilla, R.; Ponzoa, J.M. Search Engine Optimization: The Long-Term Strategy of Keyword Choice. J. Bus. Res. 2022, 144, 650–662. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Schultz, C.D. Proposing to Your Fans: Which Brand Post Characteristics Drive Consumer Engagement Activities on Social Media Brand Pages? Electron. Commer. Res. Appl. 2017, 26, 23–34. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lei, S.S.I.; Pratt, S.; Wang, D. Factors Influencing Customer Engagement with Branded Content in the Social Network Sites of Integrated Resorts. Asia Pacific J. Tour. Res. 2016, 22, 316–328. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wagner, T.F.; Baccarella, C.V.; Voigt, K.I. Framing Social Media Communication: Investigating the Effects of Brand Post Appeals on User Interaction. Eur. Manag. J. 2017, 35, 606–616. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Swani, K.; Milne, G.R.; Brown, B.P.; Assaf, A.G.; Donthu, N. What Messages to Post? Evaluating the Popularity of Social Media Communications in Business versus Consumer Markets. Ind. Mark. Manag. 2017, 62, 77–87. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Demmers, J.; Weltevreden, J.W.J.; van Dolen, W.M. Consumer Engagement with Brand Posts on Social Media in Consecutive Stages of the Customer Journey. Int. J. Electron. Commer. 2020, 24, 53–77. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wu, P.; Li, X.; Shen, S.; He, D. Social Media Opinion Summarization Using Emotion Cognition and Convolutional Neural Networks. Int. J. Inf. Manag. 2020, 51, 101978. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kushwaha, A.K.; Kar, A.K.; Ilavarasan, P.V. Predicting Retweet Class Using Deep Learning. In Trends in Deep Learning Methodologies: Algorithms, Applications, and Systems; Academic Press: Cambridge, MA, USA, 2021; pp. 89–112. ISBN 9780128222263. [Google Scholar]
- Calder, B.J.; Isaac, M.S.; Malthouse, E.C. How to Capture Consumer Experiences: A Context-Specific Approach To Measuring Engagement. J. Advert. Res. 2016, 56, 39–52. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hollebeek, L.D.; Glynn, M.S.; Brodie, R.J. Consumer Brand Engagement in Social Media: Conceptualization, Scale Development and Validation. J. Interact. Mark. 2014, 28, 149–165. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- O’Hern, M.S.; Kahle, L.R. The Empowered Customer: User-Generated Content and the Future of Marketing. Glob. Econ. Manag. Rev. 2013, 18, 22–30. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Goh, K.Y.; Heng, C.S.; Lin, Z. Social Media Brand Community and Consumer Behavior: Quantifying the Relative Impact of User- and Marketer-Generated Content. Inf. Syst. Res. 2013, 24, 88–107. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Oh, C.; Roumani, Y.; Nwankpa, J.K.; Hu, H.-F. Beyond Likes and Tweets: Consumer Engagement Behavior and Movie Box Office in Social Media. Inf. Manag. 2016, 54, 25–37. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhang, H.; Lu, Y.; Wang, B.; Wu, S. The Impacts of Technological Environments and Co-Creation Experiences on Customer Participation. Inf. Manag. 2015, 52, 468–482. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Peters, T.; Işık, Ö.; Tona, O.; Popovič, A.; Is, Ö. How System Quality Influences Mobile BI Use: The Mediating Role of Engagement. Int. J. Inf. Manag. 2016, 36, 773–783. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Harrigan, P.; Evers, U.; Miles, M.; Daly, T. Customer Engagement with Tourism Social Media Brands. Tour. Manag. 2017, 59, 597–609. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Merrilees, B.; Merrilees, B. Interactive Brand Experience Pathways to Customer-Brand Engagement and Value Co-Creation. J. Prod. Brand Manag. 2016, 25, 402–408. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ruiz-Fernández, A.; Junco-Guerrero, M.; Cantón-Cortés, D. Exploring the Mediating Effect of Psychological Engagement on the Relationship between Child-to-Parent Violence and Violent Video Games. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2021, 18, 2845. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Yen, C.; Teng, H.; Tzeng, J. International Journal of Hospitality Management Innovativeness and Customer Value Co-Creation Behaviors: Mediating Role of Customer Engagement. Int. J. Hosp. Manag. 2020, 88, 102514. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kim, E.; Sung, Y.; Kang, H. Brand Followers’ Retweeting Behavior on Twitter: How Brand Relationships Influence Brand Electronic Word-of-Mouth. Comput. Human Behav. 2014, 37, 18–25. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lin, H.; Fan, W.; Chau, P.Y.K. Determinants of Users’ Continuance of Social Networking Sites: A Self-Regulation Perspective. Inf. Manag. 2014, 51, 595–603. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Similarweb. Website Analysis Tools: Official Measure of the Digital World; 2022. Available online: https://www.statshow.com/ (accessed on 30 August 2022).
- Habib, S.; Hamadneh, N.N.; Hassan, A. The Relationship between Digital Marketing, Customer Engagement, and Purchase Intention via OTT Platforms. J. Math. 2022, 2022, 5327626. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Stern, Z.; Katz-Navon, T.; Naveh, E. The Influence of Situational Learning Orientation, Autonomy, and Voice on Error Making: The Case of Resident Physicians on JSTOR. Manag. Sci. 2008, 54, 1553–1564. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gefen, D.; Straub, D. A Practical Guide To Factorial Validity Using PLS-Graph: Tutorial And Annotated Example. Commun. Assoc. Inf. Syst. 2005, 16, 91–109. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Fornell, C.; Larcker, D.F. Evaluating Structural Equation Models with Unobservable Variables and Measurement Error. J. Mark. Res. 1981, 18, 39–50. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Henseler, J.; Ringle, C.M.; Sarstedt, M. A New Criterion for Assessing Discriminant Validity in Variance-Based Structural Equation Modeling. J. Acad. Mark. Sci. 2015, 43, 115–135. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Hu, L.T.; Bentler, P.M. Cutoff Criteria for Fit Indexes in Covariance Structure Analysis: Conventional Criteria versus New Alternatives, Structural Equation Modeling. Struct. Equ. Model. 1999, 6, 1–55. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hair, J.F.; Hollingsworth, C.L.; Randolph, A.B.; Chong, A.Y.L. An Updated and Expanded Assessment of PLS-SEM in Information Systems Research. Ind. Manag. Data Syst. 2017, 117, 442–458. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Iacobucci, D.; Saldanha, N.; Deng, X. A Meditation on Mediation: Evidence That Structural Equations Models Perform Better than Regressions. J. Consum. Psychol. 2007, 17, 139–153. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hayes, A.F. Introduction to Mediation, Moderation, and Conditional Process Analysis, 2nd ed.; Guilford Publication: New York, NY, USA, 2013; ISBN 9789896540821. [Google Scholar]
- Preacher, K.J.; Rucker, D.D.; Hayes, A.F. Addressing Moderated Mediation Hypotheses: Theory, Methods, and Prescriptions. Multivar. Behav. Res. 2007, 42, 185–227. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Li, C.H.; Chan, O.L.K.; Chow, Y.T.; Zhang, X.; Tong, P.S.; Li, S.P.; Ng, H.Y.; Keung, K.L. Evaluating the Effectiveness of Digital Content Marketing Under Mixed Reality Training Platform on the Online Purchase Intention. Front. Psychol. 2022, 13, 881019. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zarifis, A.; Kawalek, P.; Azadegan, A. Evaluating If Trust and Personal Information Privacy Concerns Are Barriers to Using Health Insurance That Explicitly Utilizes AI. J. Internet Commer. 2020, 20, 66–83. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cheng, X.; Su, L.; Luo, X.R.; Benitez, J.; Cai, S. The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly: Impact of Analytics and Artificial Intelligence-Enabled Personal Information Collection on Privacy and Participation in Ridesharing. Eur. J. Inf. Syst. 2021, 31, 1–25. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kim, E.A.; Ratneshwar, S.; Roesler, E.; Chowdhury, T.G. Attention to Social Comparison Information and Brand Avoidance Behaviors. Mark. Lett. 2016, 27, 259–271. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Characteristics | Category | Frequency | Percentage (%) |
---|---|---|---|
Gender | Male | 354 | 76.3 |
Female | 110 | 23.7 | |
Below 20 | 52 | 11.2 | |
20–30 | 186 | 40.1 | |
Age | 31–40 | 153 | 33.1 |
41–50 | 67 | 14.4 | |
Above 50 | 6 | 1.2 | |
High school diploma | 86 | 18.5 | |
Undergraduate | 126 | 27.1 | |
Education | Graduate | 163 | 35.1 |
Postgraduate | 74 | 16 | |
Doctorate | 11 | 2.4 | |
Other | 4 | 0.9 | |
Walmart.com | 21 | 4.5 | |
Ebay.com | 116 | 25 | |
E-commerce platforms | AliExpress | 102 | 22 |
Amazon | 192 | 41.4 | |
Etsy.com | 32 | 6.9 | |
Other | 1 | 0.2 | |
Follower on social media | Yes | 464 | 100 |
No | 0 | - |
Construct/Items | λ | t-Value | CR | AVE |
---|---|---|---|---|
Search engine optimization (SEO) | 0.944 | 0.809 | ||
SEO1 | 0.725 | 23.34 | ||
SEO2 | 0.971 | 31.94 | ||
SEO3 | 0.989 | 43.55 | ||
SEO4 | 0.889 | 60.31 | ||
Social media posts (SMP) | 0.958 | 0.820 | ||
SMP1 | 0.823 | 32.52 | ||
SMP2 | 0.941 | 101.11 | ||
SMP3 | 0.949 | 117.89 | ||
SMP4 | 0.883 | 59.34 | ||
SMP5 | 0.925 | 75.81 | ||
User-Generated content (UGC) | 0.960 | 0.855 | ||
UGC1 | 0.952 | 104.82 | ||
UGC2 | 0.926 | 82.90 | ||
UGC3 | 0.920 | 78.33 | ||
UGC4 | 0.901 | 46.45 | ||
Psychological Engagement (PE) | 0.951 | 0.867 | ||
PE1 | 0.915 | 57.74 | ||
PE2 | 0.948 | 83.06 | ||
PE3 | 0.930 | 68.71 | ||
Attention to social comparison of consumption (ATSCC) | 0.933 | 0.777 | ||
ATSCC1 | 0.797 | 32.63 | ||
ATSCC2 | 0.885 | 54.34 | ||
ATSCC3 | 0.885 | 52.34 | ||
ATSCC4 | 0.951 | 127.49 | ||
Behavioral Engagement (BE) | 0.951 | 0.796 | ||
BE1 | 0.757 | 24.41 | ||
BE2 | 0.998 | 118.69 | ||
BE3 | 0.997 | 109.29 | ||
BE4 | 0.961 | 104.06 | ||
BE5 | 0.708 | 14.83 |
SEO | SMP | UGC | PE | ATSCC | BE | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
SEO1 | 0.725 | 0.570 | 0.595 | 0.613 | 0.528 | 0.573 |
SEO2 | 0.971 | 0.525 | 0.473 | 0.407 | 0.418 | 0.666 |
SEO3 | 0.989 | 0.535 | 0.381 | 0.421 | 0.443 | 0.500 |
SEO4 | 0.889 | 0.575 | 0.599 | 0.605 | 0.535 | 0.407 |
SMP1 | 0.516 | 0.823 | 0.549 | 0.569 | 0.389 | 0.463 |
SMP2 | 0.560 | 0.941 | 0.579 | 0.533 | 0.473 | 0.439 |
SMP3 | 0.591 | 0.949 | 0.498 | 0.515 | 0.586 | 0.427 |
SMP4 | 0.471 | 0.883 | 0.508 | 0.520 | 0.548 | 0.547 |
SMP5 | 0.568 | 0.925 | 0.655 | 0.478 | 0.594 | 0.394 |
UGC1 | 0.566 | 0.410 | 0.952 | 0.577 | 0.559 | 0.503 |
UGC2 | 0.470 | 0.557 | 0.926 | 0.515 | 0.443 | 0.408 |
UGC3 | 0.538 | 0.382 | 0.920 | 0.545 | 0.431 | 0.429 |
UGC4 | 0.669 | 0.421 | 0.901 | 0.525 | 0.519 | 0.505 |
PE1 | 0.547 | 0.609 | 0.591 | 0.915 | 0.547 | 0.485 |
PE2 | 0.645 | 0.642 | 0.557 | 0.948 | 0.542 | 0.581 |
PE3 | 0.621 | 0.654 | 0.683 | 0.930 | 0.451 | 0.444 |
ATSC1 | 0.607 | 0.514 | 0.627 | 0.587 | 0.797 | 0.620 |
ATSC2 | 0.557 | 0.538 | 0.513 | 0.379 | 0.885 | 0.599 |
ATSC3 | 0.616 | 0.450 | 0.660 | 0.571 | 0.885 | 0.589 |
ATSC4 | 0.471 | 0.501 | 0.697 | 0.469 | 0.951 | 0.610 |
BE1 | 0.484 | 0.543 | 0.497 | 0.538 | 0.513 | 0.757 |
BE2 | 0.621 | 0.531 | 0.527 | 0.350 | 0.660 | 0.998 |
BE3 | 0.592 | 0.526 | 0.631 | 0.459 | 0.656 | 0.997 |
BE4 | 0.408 | 0.617 | 0.625 | 0.542 | 0.673 | 0.961 |
BE5 | 0.417 | 0.491 | 0.562 | 0.423 | 0.559 | 0.708 |
Mean | SD | BE | PE | ATSCC | SEO | SMP | UGC | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
BE | 5.766 | 1.013 | 0.892 | |||||
PE | 5.662 | 0.728 | 0.685 | 0.931 | ||||
ATSCC | 5.477 | 0.764 | 0.519 | 0.549 | 0.881 | |||
SEO | 5.106 | 0.779 | 0.586 | 0.646 | 0.697 | 0.899 | ||
SMP | 5.866 | 0.872 | 0.693 | 0.579 | 0.699 | 0.680 | 0.905 | |
UGC | 5.240 | 0.806 | 0.698 | 0.592 | 0.628 | 0.622 | 0.696 | 0.924 |
SEO | SMP | UGC | PE | ATSCC | BE | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
SEO | 1.000 | |||||
SMP | 0.615 | 1.000 | ||||
UGC | 0.721 | 0.684 | 1.000 | |||
PE | 0.645 | 0.654 | 0.659 | 1.000 | ||
ATSCC | 0.752 | 0.681 | 0.589 | 0.802 | 1.000 | |
BE | 0.634 | 0.786 | 0.674 | 0.773 | 0.760 | 1.000 |
Fit Index | Structural Model | Recommended Cutoff Value |
---|---|---|
X2(df) | 1328(729) | NA |
X2/(df) | 1.823 | <3.00 |
CFI | 0.954 | >0.90 |
TLI | 0.938 | >0.90 |
GFI | 0.951 | >0.90 |
AGFI | 0.942 | >0.90 |
NFI | 0.949 | >0.90 |
SRMR | 0.067 | <0.08 |
RMSEA | 0.031 | <0.06 |
Variable | VIF | Tolerance (1/VIF) | Collinearity Issue |
---|---|---|---|
SEO | 3.06 | 0.326 | No |
SMP | 3.95 | 0.253 | No |
UGC | 4.54 | 0.221 | No |
PE | 3.63 | 0.275 | No |
ATSC | 1.94 | 0.515 | No |
Hypothesis | Relationship | Path Coefficient (β) | z-Value | 95% (LLCI → ULCI) | Decision |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Results from the Sobel test of mediation approach | |||||
H8a | SEO→PE→BE | 0.073 | 4.904 *** | 0.044 → 0.102 | Supported |
H8b | SMP→PE→BE | 0.120 | 4.954 *** | 0.073 → 0.168 | Supported |
H8c | UGC→PE→BE | 0.122 | 5.019 *** | 0.074 → 0.170 | Supported |
Hypothesized moderating effects | |||||
Interaction effect (β) | |t-value| | 95% (BootLLCI → BootULCI) | |||
H9a | Moderated SEO→BE | −0.088 | 3.511 ** | −0.137→−0.038 | Supported |
H9b | Moderated SMP→BE | −0.058 | 0.306 (NS) | −0.429→0.313 | Not supported |
H9c | Moderated UGC→BE | −0.113 | 0.715 (NS) | −0.423→ 0.198 | Not supported |
H9d | Moderated PE → BE | −0.135 | 3.840 *** | −0.204→−0.066 | Supported |
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content. |
© 2022 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Asante, I.O.; Jiang, Y.; Luo, X.; Ankrah Twumasi, M. The Organic Marketing Nexus: The Effect of Unpaid Marketing Practices on Consumer Engagement. Sustainability 2023, 15, 148. https://doi.org/10.3390/su15010148
Asante IO, Jiang Y, Luo X, Ankrah Twumasi M. The Organic Marketing Nexus: The Effect of Unpaid Marketing Practices on Consumer Engagement. Sustainability. 2023; 15(1):148. https://doi.org/10.3390/su15010148
Chicago/Turabian StyleAsante, Isaac Owusu, Yushi Jiang, Xiao Luo, and Martinson Ankrah Twumasi. 2023. "The Organic Marketing Nexus: The Effect of Unpaid Marketing Practices on Consumer Engagement" Sustainability 15, no. 1: 148. https://doi.org/10.3390/su15010148
APA StyleAsante, I. O., Jiang, Y., Luo, X., & Ankrah Twumasi, M. (2023). The Organic Marketing Nexus: The Effect of Unpaid Marketing Practices on Consumer Engagement. Sustainability, 15(1), 148. https://doi.org/10.3390/su15010148