How Online Communities Affect Online Community Engagement and Word-of-Mouth Intention
Abstract
:1. Introduction
1.1. Literature Review
1.1.1. Motivation to Join Online Communities
1.1.2. Influential Factors behind Word-of-Mouth Intention
1.1.3. Maintaining User Participation within an Online Community
1.1.4. Theoretical Framework and Hypotheses Development
1.1.5. Utilitarian Value
1.1.6. Hedonic Value
1.1.7. Entitativity Value
1.1.8. Social Support
1.1.9. Social Presence
1.1.10. Community Identification
1.1.11. Online Community Engagement
1.1.12. Research Model
2. Materials and Methods
2.1. Survey Instrument
2.2. The Scales and Response Format
2.3. The Population of the Study
2.4. Sample of the Study
2.5. Data Collection
3. Results
3.1. Sample Characteristics
3.2. Reliability Test and Validation of Model
3.2.1. Exploratory of Factorial Analysis (EFA)
3.2.2. Reliability Analysis
3.2.3. Model Validation (Convergent and Discriminant Validity)
3.3. Testing Hypotheses
4. Discussion
Research Hypotheses
5. Conclusions
5.1. Theoretical Implications
5.2. Practical Implications
5.3. Limitations, Recommendations, and Future Research
Author Contributions
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Informed Consent Statement
Data Availability Statement
Conflicts of Interest
Appendix A
Variables | Questions | After Modifications | Reference |
---|---|---|---|
Utilitarian Value | I find the information on this brand page to be valuable | I find information on this online community to be valuable | [38] |
I think this brand page is a helpful resource | I think this online community is a helpful resource | ||
There is useful information on this brand page | There is useful information in this online community | ||
Hedonic Value | The brand page is fun | I find this online community fun | [88] |
The brand page is exciting | I find this online community exciting | ||
The brand page is entertaining | I find this online community entertaining | ||
Entitativity Value | Users of the brand page form an entity | Members of the online community form an entity | [89] |
Users of the brand page have a bond | Members of the online community have a bond | ||
Users of the brand page have many goals in common | Members of the online community have many goals in common | ||
Social Presence | I can interact easily with the brand on this brand page | I am an active member of this online community | [90] |
I can interact easily with the members of this online community | |||
I am a participating user of this Facebook brand page community | I am a participating user of this online community | ||
When surfing the community, the interaction with the other members is close. | When surfing the community, the interaction with the other members is close. | ||
When surfing the community, the interaction with the other members is warm. | When surfing the community, the interaction with the other members is warm. | ||
When surfing the community, the interaction with the other members is humanizing. | When surfing the community, the interaction with the other members is humanizing. | ||
Social Support | When faced with difficulties, some people in this community comfort and encourage me. | When faced with difficulties, some people in this community comfort and encourage me. | [91] |
When faced with difficulties, some people in this community express interest and concern in my well-being | When faced with difficulties, some people in this community express interest and concern in my well-being | ||
When faced with difficulties, some people in this community would help me discover the cause and provide me with suggestions. | When faced with difficulties, some people in this community would help me discover the cause and provide me with suggestions. | ||
Community Identification | Being a member of the brand community is very important to me. | Being a member of the Online community is very important to me. | [92] |
I will experience a loss if I have to stop being a member of the brand community. | I will experience a loss if I have to stop being a member of the Online Community. | ||
I am very attached to the brand community that I participate in. | I am very attached to the Online community that I participate in. | ||
Online Community Engagement | I actively participate online in the brand community’s activities | I actively participate in the online community’s activities | [90] |
I spend a lot of time online in participating with brand community’s activities | I spend a lot of time in participating the online community’s activities | ||
I provide feedback online related to participation in the community’s activities | I provide feedback related to participation in the online community’s activities | ||
Word of Mouth Intention | I say positive things about brands to other people. | I say positive things about this online community to other people. | [93,94] |
I often recommend brands to others | I often introduce my peers or friends to this online community. | ||
I often introduce my peers or friends to this brand community. | I recommend this online community to others | ||
I invite my close acquaintances to join this brand community. | I invite my friends on Facebook to join this online community |
References
- Beer, C. The Rise of Online Communities. Available online: https://blog.gwi.com/chart-of-the-week/online-communities/ (accessed on 11 November 2022).
- Porter, C.E. A Typology of Virtual Communities: A Multi-Disciplinary Foundation for Future Research. J. Comput. Commun. 2006, 10, JCMC1011. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lin, H.F. Predicting Consumer Intentions to Shop Online: An Empirical Test of Competing Theories. Electron. Commer. Res. Appl. 2007, 6, 433–442. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhang, W.; Watts, S. Online Communities as Communities of Practice: A Case Study. J. Knowl. Manag. 2008, 12, 55–71. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Hajli, N. A Study of the Impact of Social Media on Consumers. Int. J. Mark. Res. 2014, 56, 387–404. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Hajli, N.; Sims, J.; Zadeh, A.; Richard, A.O. A Social Commerce Investigation of the Role of Trust in a Social Networking Site on Purchase Intentions. J. Bus. Res. 2017, 71, 133–141. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Hajli, N.; Lin, X. Exploring the Security of Information Sharing on Social Networking Sites: The Role of Perceived Control of Information. J. Bus. Ethics 2016, 133, 111–123. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Coyle, D.; Meier, P. New Technologies in Emergencies and Conflicts: The Role of Information and Social Networks; Havard Humanitarian Initiative: Cambridge, MA, USA, 2009. [Google Scholar]
- Chen, C.; Du, R.; Li, J.; Fan, W. The Impacts of Knowledge Sharing-Based Value Co-Creation on User Continuance in Online Communities. Inf. Discov. Deliv. 2017, 45, 227–239. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhou, B. New Media Use and Subjective Social Status. Asian J. Commun. 2011, 21, 133–149. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ridings, C.M.; Gefen, D. Virtual Community Attraction: Why People Hangout Online. J. Comput. Commun. 2004, 10, JCMC10110. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Balakrishnan, B.K.P.D.; Dahnil, M.I.; Yi, W.J. The Impact of Social Media Marketing Medium Toward Purchase Intention and Brand Loyalty Among Generation Y. Procedia Soc. Behav. Sci. 2014, 148, 177–185. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Chang, K.C.; Hsu, C.L.; Chen, M.C.; Kuo, N. Te How a Branded Website Creates Customer Purchase Intentions. Total Qual. Manag. Bus. Excell. 2019, 30, 422–446. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sabate, F.; Berbegal-Mirabent, J.; Cañabate, A.; Lebherz, P.R. Factors Influencing Popularity of Branded Content in Facebook Fan Pages. Eur. Manag. J. 2014, 32, 2009–2011. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Luarn, P.; Lin, Y.; Chiu, Y. Influence of Facebook Brand-Page Posts on Online Engagement. Online Inf. Rev. 2015, 39, 505–519. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rheingold, H. The Virtual Community; MIT Press: Cambridge, MA, USA, 1993. [Google Scholar]
- Burnasheva, R.; Suh, Y.G.; Villalobos-moron, K. Sense of Community and Social Identity Effect on Brand Love: Based on the Online Communities of a Luxury Fashion Brands. J. Glob. Fash. Mark. 2019, 10, 50–65. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lin, H. The Role of Online and Offline Features in Sustaining Virtual Communities: An Empirical Study. Internet Res. 2007, 17, 119–138. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ismagilova, E.; Dwivedi, Y.K.; Slade, E.; Williams, M.D. Engaging in EWOM. In Electronic Word of Mouth (eWOM) in the Marketing Context; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2017; pp. 31–48. [Google Scholar]
- Brown, J.O.; Broderick, A.J.; Lee, N. Online Communities: Conceptualizing the Online Social Network. J. Interact. Mark. 2007, 21, 2–20. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Prendergast, G.; Ko, D.; Yin, V.Y.S. Online Word of Mouth and Consumer Purchase Intentions. Int. J. Advert. Rev. Mark. Commun. 2010, 29, 687–708. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chang, A.; Hsieh, S.H.; Tseng, T.H. Online Brand Community Response to Negative Brand Events: The Role of Group EWOM. Internet Res. 2013, 23, 486–506. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bataineh, A.Q.; Al-Abdallah, G.M.; Alkharabsheh, A.M. Determinants of Continuance Intention to Use Social Networking Sites SNS’s: Studying the Case of Facebook. Int. J. Mark. Stud. 2015, 7, 121–135. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kundu, S.; Rajan, C.R.S. Word of Mouth: A Literature Review. Int. J. Econ. Manag. Sci. 2017, 6, 1–9. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhang, M.; Guo, L.; Hu, M.; Liu, W. Influence of Customer Engagement with Company Social Networks on Stickiness: Mediating Effect of Customer Value Creation. Int. J. Inf. Manag. 2017, 37, 229–240. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sweeney, J.C.; Soutar, G.N.; Mazzarol, T. Word of Mouth: Measuring the Power of Individual Messages. Eur. J. Mark. 2012, 46, 237–257. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lin, C.L. The Political Economy of Entrepreneurship; The Claremont Graduate University: Claremont, CA, USA, 2008. [Google Scholar]
- Siau, K.; Shen, Z. Mobile Communications and Mobile Services. Int. J. Mob. Commun. 2003, 1, 3–14. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lin, M.-L.; Chen, C.-W.; Wang, Q.-B.; Cao, Y.; Shih, J.-Y.; Lee, Y.-T.; Chen, C.-Y.; Wang, S. Fuzzy-Model-Based Assessment and Monitoring of Desertification Using MODIS Satellite Imagery. Eng. Comput. Int. J. Comput. Eng. Softw. 2009, 26, 745–760. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Romero, J.; Ruiz-Equihua, D. Be a Part of It: Promoting WOM, EWOM, and Content Creation through Customer Identification. Spanish J. Mark. 2020, 24, 55–71. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Shen, K.N.; Yu, A.Y.; Khalifa, M. Knowledge Contribution in Virtual Communities: Accounting for Multiple Dimensions of Social Presence through Social Identity. Behav. Inf. Technol. 2010, 29, 337–348. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Lu, J.; Yang, S.; Zhang, Z.; Han, J.; Peng, H.A.O.; Hu, Z.; Wang, T. Multi-Level Two-Sided Rating Protocol Design for Service Exchange Contest Dilemma in Crowdsensing. IEEE Access 2019, 7, 78391–78405. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pang, H.; Wang, J.; Hu, X. Understanding the Potential Influence of Wechat Engagement on Bonding Capital, Bridging Capital and Electronic Word-of-Mouth Intention. Sustainability 2021, 13, 8489. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Guerreiro, J.; Pacheco, M. How Green Trust, Consumer Brand Engagement and Green Word-of-Mouth Mediate Purchasing Intentions. Sustainability 2021, 13, 7877. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wu, H. Utilitarian and Hedonic Values of Social Network Services. In Proceedings of the Americas Conference on Information Systems (AMCIS) at AIS Electronic Library (AISeL), San Francisco, CA, USA, 6–9 August 2009; Paper 289. pp. 1–9. [Google Scholar]
- Batra, R.; Ahtola, O.T. Measuring the Hedonic and Utilitarian Sources of Consumer Attitudes. Mark. Lett. 1990, 2, 159–170. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Darden, W.R.; Babin, B.J.; Griffin, M.; Coulter, R. Investigation of Products Liability Attitudes and Opinions: A Consumer Perspective. J. Consum. Aff. 1994, 28, 54–79. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Carlson, J.; Rahman, M.; Voola, R.; Vries, N. De Customer Engagement Behaviours in Social Media: Capturing Innovation Opportunities. J. Serv. Mark. 2018, 32, 83–94. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Nambisan, S.; Baron, R.A. Virtual Customer Environments: Testing a Model of Voluntary Participation in Value Co-Creation Activities. J. Prod. Innov. Manag. 2009, 26, 388–406. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- O’Cass, A.; Carlson, J. An E-Retailing Assessment of Perceived Website-Service Innovativeness: Implications for Website Quality Evaluations, Trust, Loyalty and Word of Mouth. Australas. Mark. J. 2012, 20, 28–36. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lee, J.J.; Gino, F. Poker-Faced Morality: Concealing Emotions Leads to Utilitarian Decision-Making. Organ. Behav. Hum. Decis. 2015, 126, 49–64. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lee, S.; Park, J.-G.; Lee, H.; Oh, J.; Lee, J. Hedonic or Utilitarian: Why People Keep Using Social Network Services. J. Inf. Technol. Serv. 2015, 6, 355–373. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hashim, K.F.; Tan, F.B. Examining the Determinant Factors of Perceived Online Community Usefulness Using the Expectancy-Value Model. J. Syst. Inf. Technol. 2018, 20, 152–167. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kohler, T.; Fueller, J.; Matzler, K.; Stieger, D. Co-Creation in Virtual Worlds: The Design of the User Experience. MIS Q. 2011, 35, 773–788. [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]
- Zhang, J.; Shabbir, R.; Abro, M.-R. Role of Social Media in Pre-Purchase Consumer Information Search: A Uses and Gratifications Perspective. Mediterr. J. Soc. Sci. 2015, 6, 11–22. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Shi, S.; Chen, Y.; Chow, W.S. Computers in Human Behavior Key Values Driving Continued Interaction on Brand Pages in Social Media: An Examination across Genders. Comput. Human Behav. 2016, 62, 578–589. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kang, J.M.; Mee, J.; Johnson, K.K.P. Computers in Human Behavior In-Store Mobile Usage: Downloading and Usage Intention toward Mobile Location-Based Retail Apps. Comput. Human Behav. 2015, 46, 210–217. [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]
- Xu, X.; Wu, J.; Chang, Y.; Li, Q. The Investigation of Hedonic Consumption, Impulsive Consumption and Social Sharing in E-Commerce Live-Streaming Videos. In Proceedings of the Association for Information Systems AIS Electronic Library (AISeL), Pacific Asia Conference on Information Systems (PACIS), PACIS 2019, Xi’an, China, 8–12 July 2019; pp. 1–13. [Google Scholar]
- Calder, B.J.; Malthouse, E.C.; Schaedel, U. Engagement with Online Media and Advertising Effectiveness. J. Interact. Mark. 2009, 23, 321–331. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hollebeek, L.D. The Customer Engagement/Value Interface: An Exploratory Investigation. Australas. Mark. J. 2012, 21, 17–24. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Vock, M.; Dolen, W.; Van Ruyter, K. De Understanding Willingness to Pay for Social Network Sites. J. Serv. Res. 2013, 16, 311–325. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Igarashi, T.; Kashima, Y. Perceived Entitativity of Social Networks. J. Exp. Soc. Psychol. 2011, 47, 1048–1058. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Whitham, M.M. Community Entitativity and Civic Engagement. City Community 2019, 18, 896–914. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Liang, T.; Ho, Y.; Li, Y.; Turban, E. What Drives Social Commerce: The Role of Social Support and Relationship Quality. Int. J. Electron. Commer. 2012, 16, 69–90. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Madjar, N. Emotional and Informational Support from Different Sources and Employee Creativity Copyright© The British Psychological Society. J. Occup. Organ. Psychol. 2008, 81, 83–100. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hajli, M.N. Technological Forecasting & Social Change: The Role of Social Support on Relationship Quality and Social Commerce. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Chang. 2014, 87, 17–27. [Google Scholar]
- Hajli, N. Social Commerce Constructs and Consumer’s Intention to Buy. Int. J. Inf. Manag. 2015, 35, 183–191. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Calefato, F.; Lanubile, F. Communication Media Selection for Remote Interaction of AdHoc Groups, 1st ed.; Elsevier: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2010; Volume 78, ISBN 9780123810199. [Google Scholar]
- Krish, P.; Maros, M.; Stapa, S.H. Sociocultural Factors and Social Presence in an Online Learning Environment. GEMA Online J. Lang. Stud. 2012, 12, 201–213. [Google Scholar]
- Westerman, G.; Bonnet, D.; McAfee, A. The Nine Elements of Digital Transformation: In-Depth Research with Executives at a Wide Range of Companies Shows How Managers Can Use Technology to Redefine Their Businesses; Working Paper #W29546, MIT SLOAN MANAGEMENT REVIEW: DIGITAL TRANSFORMATION; Massachusetts Institute of Technology: Cambridge, MA, USA, 2014. [Google Scholar]
- Kear, K.; Chetwynd, F.; Jefferis, H. Social Presence in Online Learning Communities: The Role of Personal Profiles. Res. Learn. Technol. 2014, 22, 19710. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Kim, J.; Kwon, Y.; Cho, D. Investigating Factors That Influence Social Presence and Learning Outcomes in Distance Higher Education. Comput. Educ. 2011, 57, 1512–1520. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kear, K. Social Presence in Online Learning Communities. In Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on Networked Learning 2010, Aalborg, Denmark, 3–4 May 2010; pp. 1–8. [Google Scholar]
- Bateman, P.J.; Gray, P.H.; Butler, B.S. The Impact of Community Commitment on Participation in Online Communities. Inf. Syst. Res. 2011, 22, 841–854. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Hsu, C.P.; Chiang, Y.F.; Huang, H.C. How Experience-Driven Community Identification Generates Trust and Engagement. Online Inf. Rev. 2012, 36, 72–88. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Ray, S.; Kim, S.S.; Morris, J.G. The Central Role of Engagement in Online Communities. Inf. Syst. Res. 2014, 25, 528–546. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Blanchard, A.L.; Markus, M.L. The Experienced “Sense” of a Virtual Community: Characteristics and Processes. Data Base Adv. Inf. Syst. 2004, 35, 64–79. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ren, Y.; Kraut, R.; Kiesler, S. Applying Common Identity and Bond Theory to Design of Online Communities. Organ. Stud. 2007, 28, 377–408. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chiang, I.P.; Tsai, K.-H.; Wong, R.; Wu, Y.-J. Exploring the Benefits of Social Media Marketing on Brands and Communities: The Case of Famous Brands. Mark. Rev. 2018, 15, 417–461. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Algesheimer, R.; Dholakia, U.M.; Herrmann, A. The Social Influence of Brand Community: Evidence from European Car Clubs. J. Mark. 2005, 69, 19–34. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Gummerus, J.; Liljander, V.; Weman, E.; Pihlström, M. Customer Engagement in a Facebook Brand Community. Manag. Res. Rev. 2012, 35, 857–877. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Biró, E.; Butler, J.; Calvo, M.; Coelho, I.B.; Keehan, A.; MacLellan, F.J.; Makki, H.; Weir, C.M.; Worsley, D. Whereabouts You Are. In Proceedings of the GSA Unveils Autumn 2016 Exhibition, Vancouver, BC, Canada, 15 October–10 November 2016; pp. 1–8. [Google Scholar]
- Dwyer, P. Measuring the Value of Electronic Word of Mouth and Its Impact in Consumer Communities. J. Interact. Mark. 2007, 21, 63–79. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Komito, L. Social Media and Migration: Virtual Community 2.0. J. Am. Soc. Inf. Sci. Technol. 2011, 62, 1075–1086. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- van Doorn, 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]
- Stephen, A.T.; Sciandra, M.; Inman, J. Is It What You Say or How You Say It? How Content Characteristics Affect Consumer Engagement with Brands on Facebook; Saïd Business School: Oxford, UK, 2015. [Google Scholar]
- Chen, M.H.; Tsai, K.M. An Empirical Study of Brand Fan Page Engagement Behaviors. Sustainability 2020, 12, 434. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Miller, B. 15 Advantages and Disadvantages of Quantitative Research. Available online: https://greengarageblog.org/15-advantages-and-disadvantages-of-quantitative-research (accessed on 7 November 2022).
- Daniel, E. The Usefulness of Qualitative and Quantitative Approaches and Methods in Researching Problem-Solving Ability in Science Education Curriculum. J. Educ. Pract. 2016, 7, 91–100. [Google Scholar]
- Dowd, M. Advantages & Disadvantages of Qualitative & Quantitative Research. Available online: https://www.theclassroom.com/advantages-disadvantages-of-qualitative-quantitative-research-12082716.html (accessed on 9 November 2022).
- DeVault, A.E. A Mixed Methods Study of Iowa World Language Teachers’ Attitudes toward the Inclusion of Students with Disabilities. Ph.D. Thesis, The University of Iowa, Iowa City, IO, USA, 2020. [Google Scholar]
- Singleton, R.A., Jr.; Straits, B.C.; Straits, M.M. Approaches to Social Research, 2nd ed.; Oxford University Press: Oxford, UK, 2009. [Google Scholar]
- Singleton, R.A., Jr.; Straits, B.C.; Straits, M.M. Approaches to Social Research, 5th ed.; Oxford University Press: Oxford, UK, 2009. [Google Scholar]
- Debois, S. Ten Advantages and Disadvantages of Questionnaires. Available online: https://pointerpro.com/blog/questionnaire-pros-and-cons/ (accessed on 29 November 2022).
- Ponto, J. Understanding and Evaluating Survey Research. J. Adv. Pract. Oncol. 2015, 6, 168–171. [Google Scholar]
- Raza, M.A.; Siddiquei, A.N.; Awan, H.M.; Bukhari, K. Relationship between Service Quality, Perceived Value, Satisfaction and Revisit Intention in Hotel Industry. Interdiscip. J. Contemp. Res. Bus. 2012, 4, 788–805. [Google Scholar]
- Kumar, P.; Ghodeswar, B.M. Factors Affecting Consumers’ Green Product Purchase Decisions. Mark. Intell. Plan. 2015, 33, 330–347. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Biswas, A.; Roy, M. Green Products: An Exploratory Study on the Consumer Behaviour in Emerging Economies of the East. J. Clean. Prod. 2015, 87, 463–468. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jalilvand, M.R.; Samiei, N. The Effect of Electronic Word of Mouth on Brand Image and Purchase Intention: An Empirical Study in the Automobile Industry in Iran. Mark. Intell. Plan. 2012, 30, 460–476. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wu, J.; Huang, L.; Zhao, J.L.; Hua, Z. The Deeper, the Better? Effect of Online Brand Community Activity on Customer Purchase Frequency. Inf. Manag. 2015, 52, 813–823. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kamboj, S.; Rahman, Z. Understanding Customer Participation in Online Brand Communities Literature Review and Future Research Agenda. Qual. Mark. Res. Int. J. 2017, 20, 306–334. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Simon, C.; Brexendorf, T.O.; Fassnacht, M. The Impact of External Social and Internal Personal Forces on Consumers’ Brand Community Engagement on Facebook. J. Prod. Brand Manag. 2016, 25, 409–423. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Taherdoost, H. Sampling Methods in Research Methodology; How to Choose a Sampling Technique for Research. Int. J. Acad. Res. Manag. 2016, 5, 18–27. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dudovskiy, J. Exploratory Research; Sage Publications: Thousands Oaks, CA, USA, 2018. [Google Scholar]
- Fleetwood, D. Judgmental Sampling: Definition, Examples, and Advantages. Available online: https://www.questionpro.com/blog/judgmental-sampling/ (accessed on 7 November 2022).
- Hair, J.F.; Black, W.C.; Babin, B.J.; Anderson, R.E. Multivariate Data Analysis, 7th ed.; Prentice-Hall: Hoboken, NJ, USA, 2010; Volume 15. [Google Scholar]
- Van Der Eijk, C.; Rose, J. Risky Business: Factor Analysis of Survey Data—Assessing the Probability of Incorrect Dimensionalisation. PLoS ONE 2015, 10, e0118900. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Marzi, G.; Balzano, M.; Egidi, L.; Magrini, A. CLC Estimator: A Tool for Latent Construct Estimation via Congeneric Approaches in Survey Research. Multivar. Behav. Res. 2023, 1–5. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- McNeish, D.; Wolf, M.G. Thinking Twice about Sum Scores. Behav. Res. Methods 2020, 52, 2287–2305. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Neill, J. Writing up a Factor Analysis. Available online: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.5/au/ (accessed on 3 December 2022).
- Sharabati, A.A.A.; Al-Atrash, S.A.; Dalbah, I.Y. The Use of Supply Chain Control-Tower in Pharmaceutical Industry to Create a Competitive Advantage. Int. J. Pharm. Healthc. Mark. 2022, 16, 354–375. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tabachnick, B.G.; Fidell, L.S. Using Multivariate Statistics, 6th ed.; Pearson: London, UK, 2013. [Google Scholar]
- Cerny, B.A.; Kaiser, H.F. A Study of a Measure of Sampling Adequacy for Factor-Analytic Correlation Matrices. Multivariate Behav. Res. 1977, 12, 43–47. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Abdelsalam, R.; Al-Haddad, S.; Sharabati, A.A. Relationship between Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs and Mumpreneurial Intentions. Probl. Perspect. Manag. 2022, 20, 387–399. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wilkinson, L. The Task Force on Statistical Inference. Statistical Methods in Psychology Journals: Guidelines and Explanations. Am. Psychol. 1999, 54, 594–604. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sekaran, U.; Bougie, R. Research Methods For Business: A Skill-Building Approach; John Willey: Hoboken, NJ, USA, 2016; ISBN 9781119942252. [Google Scholar]
- Sharabati, A.A.A. Effect of Corporate Social Responsibility on Jordan Pharmaceutical Industry’s Business Performance. Soc. Responsib. J. 2018, 14, 566–583. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wong, K.K.K.-K. Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM) Techniques Using SmartPLS. Mark. Bull. 2013, 24, 1–32. [Google Scholar]
- Hair, J.F. Multivariate Data Analysis: An Overview. In International Encyclopedia of Statistical Science; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2011. [Google Scholar]
- Hair, J.F.; Sarstedt, M.; Hopkins, L.; Kuppelwieser, V.G. Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM): An Emerging Tool in Business Research. Eur. Bus. Rev. 2014, 26, 106–121. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Couchman, P.K.; Fulop, L. Building Trust in Cross-Sector R & D Collaborations: Exploring the Role of Credible Commitments. In Proceedings of the European Group for Organizational Studies (EGOS) 22nd EGOS Colloquium, Bergen, Norway, 6–8 July 2006; pp. 1–31. [Google Scholar]
- Barclay, D.; dan Higgins, C.; Thompson, R. The Partial Least Squares (PLS) Approach to Casual Modeling: Personal Computer Adoption and Use as an Illustration. Technol. Stud. 1995, 2, 285–309. [Google Scholar]
- Ringle, C.M.; Da Silva, D.; Bido, D.D.S. Validation of Model Convergent and Discriminant Validity. Rev. Bras. Mark. 2014, 13, 56–73. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hong, P.; Doll, W.J.; Nahm, A.Y.; Li, X. Knowledge Sharing in Integrated Product Development. Eur. J. Innov. Manag. 2004, 7, 102–112. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chin, W.W. The Partial Least Squares Approach to Structural Equation Modelling. In Modern Methods for Business Research; Lawrence Erlbaum Associates: London, UK, 1998; pp. 295–336. [Google Scholar]
- Lowry, P.B.; Gaskin, J. Partial Least Squares (PLS) Structural Equation Modeling (SEM) For Building And Testing Behavioral Causal Theory: When To Choose It And How To Use It. IEEE Trans. Prof. Commun. 2014, 57, 123–146. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- 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]
- Weiger, W.H.; Wetzel, H.A.; Hammerschmidt, M. Leveraging Marketer-Generated Appeals in Online Brand Communities An Individual User-Level Analysis. J. Serv. Manag. 2017, 28, 133–156. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Ebrahimi Majdar, R. An Investigate on the Possibility of Xylanase Enzyme Use for Prebleaching of Beech Kraft Pulp. Ph.D. Dissertation, University of Tehran, Karaj, Iran, 2008. [Google Scholar]
- Abubakar, A.M.; Ilkan, M. Impact of Online WOM on Destination Trust and Intention to Travel: A Medical Tourism Perspective. J. Destin. Mark. Manag. 2016, 5, 192–201. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gross, M. What Makes People Click? Curr. Biol. 2013, 23, 255–258. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
Gender | Frequency | % | |
---|---|---|---|
Gender | Female | 215 | 63.6 |
Male | 123 | 36.4 | |
Total | 338 | 100.0 | |
Age | 15–25 | 178 | 52.7 |
26–36 | 67 | 19.8 | |
37–47 | 56 | 16.6 | |
48+ | 37 | 10.9 | |
Total | 338 | 100.0 |
1 | 2 | 2 | 3 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CI1 | 0.905 | |||||||
CI2 | 0.900 | |||||||
CI3 | 0.912 | |||||||
EV1 | 0.860 | |||||||
EV2 | 0.838 | |||||||
EV3 | 0.792 | |||||||
HV1 | 0.861 | |||||||
HV2 | 0.880 | |||||||
HV3 | 0.886 | |||||||
OCE1 | 0.890 | |||||||
OCE2 | 0.901 | |||||||
OCE3 | 0.822 | |||||||
SP1 | 0.783 | |||||||
SP2 | 0.785 | |||||||
SP3 | 0.837 | |||||||
SP4 | 0.809 | |||||||
SP5 | 0.814 | |||||||
SP6 | 0.698 | |||||||
SS1 | 0.912 | |||||||
SS2 | 0.919 | |||||||
SS3 | 0.866 | |||||||
UV1 | 0.896 | |||||||
UV2 | 0.845 | |||||||
UV3 | 0.889 | |||||||
WOM 1 | 0.848 | |||||||
M 2 | 0.894 | |||||||
WOM 3 | 0.913 | |||||||
WOM 4 | 0.845 |
Variables | Mean | AVE | CR | α | Std. Dev. |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Community Identification (CI) | 3.167 | 0.820 | 0.932 | 0.891 | 1.128 |
Entitativity Value (EV) | 2.334 | 0.690 | 0.869 | 0.775 | 0.879 |
Hedonic Value (HV) | 3.857 | 0.767 | 0.908 | 0.848 | 0.913 |
Online Community Engagement (OCE) | 3.436 | 0.760 | 0.905 | 0.841 | 1.111 |
Social Presence (SP) | 3.398 | 0.622 | 0.908 | 0.879 | 0.911 |
Social Support (SS) | 2.401 | 0.808 | 0.927 | 0.882 | 0.994 |
Utilitarian Value (UV) | 3.167 | 0.769 | 0.909 | 0.850 | 1.128 |
Word-of-mouth Intention (WOM) | 2.334 | 0.766 | 0.929 | 0.898 | 0.879 |
Index | Default Model | Rule of Value Index | Reference | Results |
---|---|---|---|---|
Minimum discrepancy (X2/df) | 3.123 (p 0.05 ≥ 0.021) | X2/df < 5 (p > 0.05) | [115] | Suitable |
Comparative fit index (CFI) | 0.872 | CFI > 80% | [116] | Suitable |
Normed fit index (NFI) | 0.937 | NFI > 90% | [117] | Suitable |
Root mean square error of approximation (RMSES) | 0.062 | RMSES < 0.10 | [118] | Suitable |
CI | EV | HV | OCE | SP | SS | UV | WO M | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CI | 0.906 | |||||||
EV | 0.522 | 0.830 | ||||||
HV | 0.504 | 0.509 | 0.876 | |||||
OCE | 0.795 | 0.459 | 0.463 | 0.872 | ||||
SP | 0.693 | 0.640 | 0.535 | 0.743 | 0.789 | |||
SS | 0.589 | 0.542 | 0.538 | 0.498 | 0.636 | 0.899 | ||
UV | 0.536 | 0.502 | 0.528 | 0.475 | 0.555 | 0.549 | 0.877 | |
WOM | 0.663 | 0.501 | 0.493 | 0.670 | 0.623 | 0.573 | 0.615 | 0.875 |
Hypotheses | Effect Size (f2) | Path Coefficients (β) | t-Value | Std. Error | p-Value p < 0.05 | R2 | Decision |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
UV…OCE | 0.000 | 0.001 | 0.031 | 0.038 | 0.975 | 0.648 | H1: Rejected |
HV…OCE | 0.000 | 0.041 | 1.257 | 0.036 | 0.209 | H2: Rejected | |
EV…OCE | 0.027 | 0.108 | 3.340 | 0.037 | 0.000 | H3:Accepted | |
SP…OCE | 0.257 | 0.481 | 14.874 | 0.037 | 0.000 | H4:Accepted | |
SS…OCE | 0.024 | 0.097 | 3.014 | 0.033 | 0.003 | H5:Accepted | |
CI…OCE | 0.523 | 0.628 | 19.438 | 0.029 | 0.000 | H6:Accepted | |
OCE…WOM | 0.386 | 0.638 | 15.218 | 0.043 | 0.000 | 0.407 | H7:Accepted |
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. |
© 2023 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
Al-Khasawneh, M.; Al-Haddad, S.; Sharabati, A.-A.A.; Al Khalili, H.H.; Azar, L.L.; Ghabayen, F.W.; Jaber, L.M.; Ali, M.H.; Masa’deh, R. How Online Communities Affect Online Community Engagement and Word-of-Mouth Intention. Sustainability 2023, 15, 11920. https://doi.org/10.3390/su151511920
Al-Khasawneh M, Al-Haddad S, Sharabati A-AA, Al Khalili HH, Azar LL, Ghabayen FW, Jaber LM, Ali MH, Masa’deh R. How Online Communities Affect Online Community Engagement and Word-of-Mouth Intention. Sustainability. 2023; 15(15):11920. https://doi.org/10.3390/su151511920
Chicago/Turabian StyleAl-Khasawneh, Mohammad, Shafig Al-Haddad, Abdel-Aziz Ahmad Sharabati, Hebatallah Hisham Al Khalili, Lana Laith Azar, Farah Waleed Ghabayen, Leen Mazen Jaber, Mariam Husam Ali, and Ra’ed Masa’deh. 2023. "How Online Communities Affect Online Community Engagement and Word-of-Mouth Intention" Sustainability 15, no. 15: 11920. https://doi.org/10.3390/su151511920
APA StyleAl-Khasawneh, M., Al-Haddad, S., Sharabati, A.-A. A., Al Khalili, H. H., Azar, L. L., Ghabayen, F. W., Jaber, L. M., Ali, M. H., & Masa’deh, R. (2023). How Online Communities Affect Online Community Engagement and Word-of-Mouth Intention. Sustainability, 15(15), 11920. https://doi.org/10.3390/su151511920