Article

Social Media Activities and its Influence on Customer‐Brand

Relationship: An Empirical Study of Apparel Retailers’
Activity in India
Sukanya Sharma 1, Saumya Singh 1,*, Fedric Kujur 1 and Gairik Das 2

1 Department of Management Studies, Indian Institute of Technology (Indian School of Mines),

Jharkhand, Dhanbad 826004, India; sukanya.2014dr1012@ms.iitism.ac.in (S.S.);
fedrickujur@ms.ism.ac.in (F.K.)
2 Department of Retail Management, Calcutta University, Indian Institute of Social Welfare and

Business Management, Kolkata 700073, India; gairikd@yahoo.com

* Correspondence: saumya@iitism.ac.in; Tel.:0326‐2235497; Fax: 0326‐2296631

Abstract: In this digital era, the internet, and Social Media (SM) has had a radical impact
on the shopping behavior of “costumers” The SM provides a platform where “costumers”
are exposed to the best product with the best price along with reviews and opinions about
the merchandise. So, we can turn our heads and look at a brand in a way as if the brand
is speaking to us. This study was an attempt to explore the Social Media Marketing Activ‐
ities (SMMA) that are being used for the marketing of fashionable products like apparel
and to what level the SMMA activities of brands truly strengthen the relationship with customers
and motivate purchase intention. Moreover, SMMA has a robust application in developing a
Citation: Sharma, S.; Singh, S.; marketing strategy for business. It has become a significant tool that collaborates with
Kujur, F.; Das, G. Social Media businesses and people. It is concluded that the “costumer”‐brand relationship does have a posi‐
Activities and its Influence on
tive and statistically significant impact on consumers’ purchase intention through SM.
Customer‐Brand Relationship: An
Empirical Study of Apparel
Keywords: social media; social media marketing; apparel industry; purchase intention;
Retailers’ Activity in India. J. Theor.
Appl. Electron. Commer. Res. 2021, 16,
brand relationship
36. https://doi.org/10.3390/
jtaer16040036

Received: 15 September 2020 1. Introduction

Accepted: 16 December 2020 To date, millions of people are using social media (SM) across the globe through
Published: 31 December 2020
website‐based network applications that help to share knowledge, information, and easy
connections with each other [1–7]. People are using SM to fulfill a variety of needs espe‐
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neu‐
cially looking for digital content and products [7–9]. It makes people feel good, gives a
tral with regard to jurisdictional
positive self‐outlook, especially with the young age groups, who get a boost in their self‐
claims in published maps and insti‐
tutional affiliations.
esteem [10].
SM has provided a new horizon in the field of marketing as e‐commerce, thereby
giving prospects to the marketers for generating consciousness of products amongst cus‐
tomers [1,11]. It is well‐established tool that increases public relations through the collab‐
Copyright: © 2020 by the authors. orating method. It is a collection of communication through networks in which individu‐
Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. als disseminate information, expectations, comments, explanations, and predictions [12].
This article is an open access article It has brought people around the world into a common interactive platform where opin‐
distributed under the terms and con‐ ion, reviews, and information are shared [13,14].
ditions of the Creative Commons At‐ Moreover, SM has largely expanded the apparel business in India [15], which is the
tribution (CC BY) license (http://cre‐ major contributor in the marketing arena and holds the second position after food and
ativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). groceries [16]. SM is influencing the apparel sector, which helps to grasp the massive
viewers in systematic manner. Interestingly, SM plays a vital role in consumer

JTAER 2021, 16, 602–618. https://doi.org/10.3390/jtaer16040036 www.mdpi.com/journal/jtaer

JTAER 2021, 16, 36 603 of 16

communication, which in turn creates cognizance, engrossment, and engagement for var‐
ious brands and obtained visibility in augmented purchase behavior [6,11,16–18]. The
“Word of Mouth” (WOM), a marketing tool that driving the apparel industry, which is
also spreading rapidly through SM platforms, which has a gradual increase user base
[11,13,14,16,19]. SM has become an information funnel which millions of eyes pass
through every minute, thereby SM can be an effective tool for apparel retailers [15].
The twenty‐first century has witnessed fashion and apparel designers using social
networking sites (SNS), which have become prioritized [15]. “Costumers” view the prod‐
ucts as if they are talking to them, and the reviewing of brands make a lot of fans. The
fashion designers and their different brandings can only comprehend the factual value of
SM, which is having enormous supporters or fans [15].
Digital or SM lays an imprint on the behavior of people. Interestingly, various infor‐
mation and social elements received through SM in the form of reviews or comments work
magic in the mind of consumers. Lamberton et al. [20] and Norton et al. [21] mentioned
the importance of information derived from others in digital atmospheres. They found
that in SM, there is an interpersonal exchange of opinions from various “costumers”. A
lot of dissimilarity arises, and consequently, instead of enhancing confidence level, it re‐
duces the same if the opinion of others is not similar and while they have made the same
choice. Adopting a different perspective, Wilcox and Stephen [22] opined that when peo‐
ple use Facebook and the suggestion is from a very close friend circle, it lowers self‐control
in choosing a product with lesser benefits.
As stated by Pham and Gammoh [23], currently the most extensively accepted SM
platforms are “Facebook”, “Twitter”, and “YouTube” for sharing fashion contents. Own‐
ers of many luxury brands have made personal Twitter accounts, or they uploaded on
Facebook [24]. Communication in the modern day is not one way, rather “costumers” and
brands are interacting with one another irrespective of time, place, or any other medium.
This helps to strengthen relations with clientele. It is an established approach for collabo‐
rating between brands and customers, ultimately producing novel products, services, in‐
novative business model, and standards [25].
The brands of apparel products are reinforcing association with “costumers”, and
since the major portion of SM users are youngsters, social media marketing activity
(SMMA) is instigating the accustomed emotions linked with current luxury brands to
those who belong to a younger age group. Besides, the various happenings of SM of
brands offer a chance to diminish misinterpretation and preconception toward brands,
and to raise brand worth based on the interchange of information and ideas amongst the
online publics [6,15,17,26–28].
SM is spreading its’ petals in the business domain and has become an effective tool
for marketing activities. It also encompasses customer relations and gives a boost for pur‐
chasing. The social network platform gives a value‐added track to the possible customers
and targeted merchandise. The SM makes a connecting link between the brand and prob‐
able customers [15,26]. Hence, the present stud attempted to measure how the SMMA and
brands relationship with customers that motivate the purchase intention of the apparel as
per retailers’ activity in the context of the eastern India.

2. Literature Review
Relevant literature related to marketing activities through SM including SMMA and
customer‐brand relationships related to purchasing intentions in the case of apparel prod‐
ucts are compiled and presented as follows:
2.1. Social Media Marketing Activities
The functioning of SMMA is based on marketing activities within SM platform. As
pointed by Pham and Gammoh [23], currently the most extensively accepted SM plat‐
forms are mainly “Facebook”, “Twitter”, and “YouTube”, websites designed to share dif‐
ferent content. As opined by Stephenson [24], Twitter is the human accent for publicity,
JTAER 2021, 16, 36 604 of 16

and fashion designers use Twitter and blogs (SM platforms) to shape their brand person‐
ality, and use them as sources of advertising. Olivier [29] mentioned that SM has contrib‐
uted to innovative elements into online shopping and acts as a vehicle for extra profit,
thereby giving retailers a chance to display their products to thousands of probable cus‐
tomers. Moreover, SM is an online application which enables communications, collabora‐
tions, and the distribution of content [30]. As mentioned by Kim and Ko [25], the impact
of SM on a specific brand is marvelous and imprints a vivid picture in the mind of cus‐
tomers. The relationship between the firm, brand, and social media is interdependent, in‐
terwoven, and interlinked.
The mechanism of SM has been previously discussed by various authors in different
contexts and environments. A study by Kim and Ko [27] carried out research to determine
enhanced customer equity through SMMA in the context of premium brands. They clas‐
sified SMMA into five categories, namely “entertainment”, “interaction”, “trendiness”,
“customization”, and “word‐of‐mouth (WOM)” to explore their impact on customer eq‐
uity in Facebook brand pages. Later, Yadav and Rahman [28] developed scales for SMMA
and validated them based on consumer perceptions in the context of the e‐commerce in‐
dustry, and also checked the influence of SMMA within the e‐commerce activities con‐
cerning “brand equity” and “purchase intention”. The SMMA considered followed the
above‐mentioned categories. Further, Bilgin [26] conducted a study on SMMA by consid‐
ering five components to explore their impact on brand awareness, brand image, and
brand loyalty in the SM environment. Yadav and Rahman [28] studied the apparel re‐
tailer’s activities in relation to SMMA components as interactivity, informativeness, per‐
sonalization, trendiness, and WOM communication, and they mentioned these compo‐
nents are the best fit for the e‐commerce brands of the apparel industry. According to
Kamboj et al. [31], the definition of life is changing due to the contribution of digital tech‐
nologies. The application of artificial intelligence has gained momentum in the retail arena
currently.
2.2. Social Media Marketing Activities in the Apparel Retailers
The advent of SM has brought about serious changes in the apparel sector, which has
revolutionized communication and information sharing. As mentioned by Smith et al.
[32], usage of SM, especially for marketing, advertising, generation of an innovative idea,
etc. by companies is increasing, and from 2008 to 2012, it has grown from 42% to 88%. In
this volatile business environment, interacting and engaging with customers is especially
important, and SM helps to create brand loyalty.
Burmann [33] and Rialti et al. [34] explained that in the era of SM, loyal consumers
become the brand ambassador for others who are influenced by the reviews. Reviews and
information act as a recommendation, which consequently enhances purchase intentions
and persuades them to buy. In an earlier study, Ahmad et al. [13] reported that SM is a
suitable and cheap communication platform in which the sustainability of the fashion in‐
dustry is observed. Sarkar et al. [15] established that marketing of apparel products
through SM achieved consumer preferences.
2.3. Customer‐Brand Relationship
As an established fact, customer is the king, and the origin of the sustainability of any
business is the customer. Ujur and Singh [17] mentioned for the past few decades, cus‐
tomer relationship management has gained momentum, which is evident from many the‐
ories designed to build customer relationships.
Interpersonal relationship theories were being used by Hon and Grunig [35], and
they thereby recognized six relationship parameters, which are extensively accepted.
These are known as “trust”, “satisfaction”, “commitment”, “control mutuality”, “ex‐
change relationship”, and “communal relationship” [36,37]. It has been established that
the former three parameters have already been well‐thought‐out as a degree of a suitable
relationship. Therefore, in this context, these three above‐mentioned parameters have
been selected to determine the quality of the relationship between customers and brands.
JTAER 2021, 16, 36 605 of 16

Trust discusses both parties’ desire and confidence in a relationship that opens to one
another [17]. From a past study, Hon and Grunig [35] reported that trust contains three
distinct attributes viz. “integrity”, “dependability”, and “competence”. If the one candi‐
date shows dependability and competence, then it specifies that the candidate is “willing
and able to do what it says it will” [38]. Hung [39] stated that satisfaction can be an opti‐
mistic emotion regarding the other candidate, which they may cherish from positive an‐
ticipation of associations.
The commitment refers to the craving of both candidates to fortify an association [40].
Previous research has recognized two types of commitment viz. “continuance commit‐
ment” and “affective commitment”. The former is defined as commitment proceeding to
a specific line of activity on affective commitment, and the second one is referred as the
emotional relationship to an organization [40].
On the other hand, Kujur and Singh [41] reported that YouTube is the most innova‐
tive SNS, where consumers are allowed to post, view, comment, and link to videos on the
site regarding brand activities. They investigated that emotional appeals are being used
in SNS like YouTube advertisements for promotion of their products through big brands
of different sectors in an emerging market like India. Further, Kujur and Singh [17] pro‐
posed a theoretical model based on the consumer‐brand relationship through visual com‐
munications of consumers on corporate Social Networking Sites. According to them, SEM
validated the effect of visuals with the content of information, entertainment, and remu‐
neration for consumer engagement to determine the consumer–brand relationship.

3. Conceptual Framework and Hypotheses Testing

3.1. SMMA and Customer‐Brand Relationship
To create a “consumer–brand relationship”, the “social exchange theory” acts an im‐
portant role, which comprises two‐way communications. Bortree [42] explained that a
higher degree of interactivities or relationships with an institution may be strongly related
to the clienteles. SMM activities (SMMA) with a brand on its pages of SNS attract the
recognition of users of SM and initiates a recurrent and healthy exchange with their con‐
tent, which provides a long‐lasting affiliation to that nurture customers. Whereas Nammir
et al. [43] explained that SMMA meaningfully bestows a productive association. Moreo‐
ver, SM is considered as a wider basement for the suitable system of development of the
relationship, and rare studies have found the impact of SMMA on developing customer–
brand attachment. Hence, the present work was engrossed to know the degree of SMMA
impacts on the customer–brand relationship followed by purchase intention. The cus‐
tomer‐brand relationship is a mediating variable between SMMA and purchase intention.
3.2. Purchase Intention
The intention to buy is a mixture of the interests of customers and the opportunity to
buy a product. Intention to buy is generally connected to “costumer” behavior, percep‐
tions, and attitudes which help in accessing and evaluating the products [18,44]. As a con‐
sequence of many reports, the attitudes and preferences for a brand or product are closely
linked so that measurement of purchase intention takes the future conduct of customers
into account based on their attitudes [28,45]. The intention to purchase is a behavioral
variable to assess prospective buyers who can contribute to a brand, while the behavioral
variable accounting for real buying records is customer equity. Since forecasting the future
conduct of customers becomes an imperative problem for an organization, future conduct
should be more reliably evaluated [27].
As coined by Diallo [46], the consumer purchase intention for a product or service
identifies the purchase effort. An optimistic and good feeling attitude for a product or
service stimulates one’s purchase intention [47]. According to Das [47], several aspects
contribute to the purchase intention from an apparel retail store like the site of the store,
variety or brands sold, and also fulfilling some basic needs as per the demand of custom‐
ers in an improved way [48]. Therefore, the proposed hypothesis is developed as follows:
JTAER 2021, 16, 36 606 of 16

Hypothesis 1: Perceived SMMA has a positive impact on the “costumer”–brand relationship followed by purchase intention.

3.3. Perceived SMMA and Purchase Intention

Brands’ SMMA provides an avenue to lower misunderstandings and biases towards
brands and an increasing value‐added brand by establishing a principle for online users
to interact with their opinions and information [27]. Companies embrace SM for multiple
operations such as brand development, research in marketing, relationship management
on the customer, provision for service, and promotion for sales in markets in conjunction
with numerous studies showing the beneficial impact of SM deployment on marketing
strategies [49].
With the help of SM channels, business organizations are communicating with new
and existing consumers by conveying brand‐related information at low cost and less work
than before by using various types of SM platforms like social blogs, weblogs, images,
ratings, Wikis, and podcasts. SM messages lead to higher brand attitudes, enhanced word
of mouth, and brand equity [50,51]. Social networks and blogs such as “Twitter” and “Fa‐
cebook” are the best ways for businesses to enhance their attitude towards the brand [52].
Besides, SM could be used to produce enhanced revenues, “Return on Investment (ROI)”,
“Word‐of‐Mouth (WOM)” and communication related to the brand [53]. As customers
receive data and communicate on SM with the brand, they create a connection with the
brand that would contribute to brand loyalty and impact their buying intentions with a
powerful positive attitude towards advertising and promotions. Therefore, the proposed
hypothesis is developed as follows:
Hypothesis 2: Perceived SMMA has a positive effect on purchase intention.
3.4. Customer–Brand Relationship and Purchase Intention
Relationship quality plays a significant part in the study of customer–brand relations.
For instance, trust, satisfaction, and commitment all have a significant impact on con‐
sumer buying behavior. The impact of satisfaction on readiness to pay was investigated
by Homburg et al. [54], and also in a previous study by Verhoef et al. [55], where it was
found that the relational dimensions like loyalty, satisfaction, and trust were associated
with customer references and the number of services purchased. The study of Verhoef et
al. [55] resulted to have significant influence on all three elements of the relationship on
customer referrals and the only commitment dimension that was found to have a consid‐
erable impact on the number of services purchased. Cronin and Taylor [56] established
that consumer buying behavior is highly influenced by customer satisfaction. Bloemer et
al. [57] found that in different sectors, different elements of relationship quality were es‐
sential. Generally, the common belief is that the high quality of the relationship (or its
elements) results in a correspondingly high level of intention to buy [17,38,58]. The con‐
ception is at par concerning the “general models of consumer behavior” resembling “The‐
ory of Reasoned Action” as well as the “Theory of Planned Behavior” [59]. As per the
above‐mentioned models, the viewpoints can be assumed to know the behavioral inten‐
tions, which further leads to an exact behavioral response. From the metanalysis,
Armitage and Connor [60] have concluded that this method is valid and suitable through
a wider range of situations. Furthermore, the application of these models is restricted to a
recently presented behavior, but their application is also fruitful in related customer–firm
research [61]. In this context, the hypothesis is as follows:
Hypothesis 3: A perceived “costumer”–brand relationship has a positive impact on purchase
intention.
Everchanging lifestyles, the rising economic situation, and the availability of various
multi‐branded apparel have necessitated that retailers know the factors that influence the
purchase intention of branded garments. Purchase intention portrays the imprint of a
loyal purchaser. Brands have got various facets that impact the purchase behavior of con‐
sumers. As highlighted by Motameni and Shahrokhi [62], the branding of apparel is a way
to communicate with buyers. Kotler et al. [63] studied that brands regulate the buying
JTAER 2021, 16, 36 607 of 16

patterns of goods. Branding facilitates competitive gain. Narang [64] and Kamalaveni et
al. [65] stated that purchasing of branded clothes as well as garments is not impulsive.
Consumer sensitivity regarding the value of a product is based on three factors, quality,
cost, and the degree of risk associated with it, which immediately impact willingness to
buy [66]. In research carried out by Granot et al. [67], three concepts were identified that
stimulate purchase decisions for (especially female) customers, which are “brand, service
and experimental shopping”. Out of these, the image on the brand has been appraised as
a precursor of buying purpose for customers [68,69]. The image on the brand carries info
regarding the superiority of products and their service quality. According to Erdil and
Uzun [69], customer insight and marketing policies together make the brand image and
gives sentinel satisfaction [70]. The image of any brand divulges worth and uniqueness
shaped for buyers [71]. The conceptual model of the hypothesis testing is exhibited in
Figure 1.

Figure 1. Conceptual model of the hypotheses testing.

4. Material and Methods

4.1. Sampling Methods
For the selection of the target sample, the residents of capital cities and metro city of
eastern India were considered. Appropriate samples were collected from the three differ‐
ent cities located in the eastern part of India via the mall intercept method, since customers
living there will in general be increasingly aware of buying fashion brands (Apparel
brands) and equivalently high buying power for design brands. The respondents “≥18
years of age as minimum age limit were selected for the study. For the survey, respond‐
ents were firstly interrogated about the exposure of the fashion industry over SM plat‐
forms, mainly “Facebook”, “Twitter”, “YouTube”, and “Instagram”. Secondly, they were
evaluated regarding their interest or preference for fashion brands, especially apparel
brands in the present case. The participants who answered ‘yes’ were further considered
for the full structured questionnaire‐based survey. The present survey was conducted us‐
ing offline mode, and the incentive was not issued to the participants due to the academic
research. The questionnaire for this research has been drawn from prior literature and has
been moderately altered to suit the objective of this research. The categorized question‐
naire items are on a five‐point Likert scale, varying from “strong disagreement” to “strong
agreement” used in the present study.
4.2. Data Collection Methods
In this study, the samples were selected for about 305 participants. The data indicated
that 38.2% of participants were males and 61.8% were females. About 56.1% of the partic‐
ipants ranged between the age group 18–25 years, 34.4% belonged to 26–35 years, 8.3%
belonged to 36–45 years, and 1.2% belonged to the age group above 45 years. Most of the
participants, i.e., 61.3%, were found to be unmarried, whereas 37.9% were married, and
JTAER 2021, 16, 36 608 of 16

the rest were either separated or divorced. Many of the respondents had a graduation
degree, i.e., 40.4%, followed by post‐graduation 22.0%, higher secondary 20.5%, and the
rest were either below 10th pass or professionals. 31.7% of respondents said they visit
malls once in a month for shopping, followed by 23.9% once in a week, 19.7% only on
occasions, and 15.0% more than once in a week. About 74.6% of respondents agreed to
visiting malls during offers and happy hour sales.
4.3. Measures
For measuring SMMA, a total of 15 items were taken from earlier reports with some
modification [26–28,72,73]. The scales of SMMA have already been validated in the previ‐
ous studies, which represented “5‐dimensions of perceived SMMA” of fashion brands
(“Interactivity”, “Informativeness”, “Word‐of‐Mouth (WOM)”, “Personalization”, and
“Trendiness”, with 3‐types in individual aspect). Similarly, 10 items for measuring con‐
sumer–brand relationships were taken from this study, as per Grunig and Huang [40],
which represented three relationship dimensions, namely trust, satisfaction, and commit‐
ment. Lastly, four items were for measuring purchase intention, as per Hung et al. [74]
and Park et al. [75]. In the present investigation, all the studied items were adopted from
the above‐mentioned published articles. “Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA)” was per‐
formed to find representative factors. Table 1 shows the selected item summary of EFA,
which were analyzed with 29 variables by dividing nine latent variables or factors.

Table 1. Definitions of items summary.

First Order Indicator
Second‐Order Construct Definition of Items Summary
Construct Code
Inter1 Facebook fashion brand pages enable me to share information with others
Discussion or exchange of opinion with others is possible through Facebook
Interactivity Inter2
fashion brand pages
Inter3 Easy delivery of my opinion through Facebook fashion brand pages
Info1 Facebook fashion brand pages offer accurate information on products
Info2 Facebook fashion brand pages offer useful information
Informativeness
The information provided by Facebook fashion brand pages are compre‐
Info3
hensive
Pers1 Facebook fashion brand pages offer customized information search
Pers2 Facebook fashion brand pages provide customized service
Social Media Marketing Activ‐ Personalization
Facebook fashion brand pages give me recommendations as per my re‐
ities (SMMA) Pers3
quirements
Trend1 Contents shown in Facebook fashion brand pages is the newest information
Trendiness Trend2 Using Facebook fashion brand pages is very trendy
Trend3 Anything trendy is available on Facebook fashion brand pages
Sharing by me for information on the brand, product, or services from Face‐
WOM1
book fashion brand pages to my friends
Recommendations by me to my friends to visit Facebook fashion brand
Word‐of‐Mouth WOM2
pages
Encouragment by me to my friends and aware to use Facebook fashion
WOM3
brand pages
TR1 A particular brand treats me fairly and justly
Trust TR2 A particular brand can be relied up to keep its promises
TR3 It is my belief that this brand takes opinions into account to make decisions
Sat1 A brand and I benefitted from the relationship
Sat2 Most people like me are happy in their interactions with this brand
Costumer–Brand Relationship Satisfaction
Through speaking, I am pleased with the relationship this brand has estab‐
(CBR) Sat3
lished with me
Com1 I feel that this brand is trying to support a long‐term commitment for me
Com2 I can see that this brand wants to keep a relationship with me
Commitment
Com3 There is a permanent bond between this brand and me
Com4 I would rather work together with this brand than not
Purchase Inten‐ I will purchase the brands recommended by my friends on social media
PI1
tion (SM) sites.
JTAER 2021, 16, 36 609 of 16

I will purchase the brands as marketed on social media sites the next time I
PI2
need a product
PI3 I will try the brand as marketing on social media sites
PI4 I will recommend the brand on social media sites to my friends

5. Results
5.1. Confirmatory Factor Analysis
Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) was done for testing the stability of construct
measurement as per the researcher’s understanding to know the nature of that constructs
or factors.
CFA First Order analysis was evaluated to confirming each indicator variable, as per
the theory from earlier findings or related to the present study. The combination was done
for all variables like exogenous and endogenous in the CFA analysis as “pooled CFA”. As
per Chong et al. [76], the results of “pooled CFA” are easily known compared to the “in‐
dividual CFA”, which is based on a shorter duration “measurement model”. Table 1 tab‐
ulates on 29 anlayzed “observed variables”, which further divided into 9 “latent varia‐
bles”. The “observed variables” are also termed as the “variables of the indicator”. Out of
9 factors, 5 factors are related to SMMA, and 3 factors are related to the consumer–brand
relationship, and one factor is about purchase intention. The present study has applied
the “measurement model” to use First Order Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) and to
determine the validity and reliability of the construct, and all item indicators were devel‐
oped. The latent variables were also analyzed in a “pooled CFA First Order Analysis”.
The “second‐order CFA” is another statistical method to establish the “theorized con‐
struct loads” followed by a study with a definite quantity of “underlying sub‐constructs”.
The present study indicates SMMA and “Consumer–Brand Relationship” are the main
constructs. The sub‐constructs of SMMA are “Interactivity”, “Informativeness”, “Person‐
alization”, “Trendiness”, and “Word‐of‐Mouth”, and the sub‐constructs of “Consumer–
Brand Relationship” are “Trust”, “Satisfaction”, and “Commitment”. Thus, the section
CFA has been divided into two sub‐sections, which are “CFA First Order” and “CFA Sec‐
ond Order”.
In the present study, there were 29 “observed variables” as designated the “latent
variables” as per specific categories found as per established theories, models, and earlier
studies. All the “observed variables” were estimated for the factor structures. The associ‐
ation between the “latent variables” and the “indicator variables” were estimated by the
factor loadings. Several researchers explained that the factor loading value should be ≥
0.70 [77–80]. However, as per earlier findings, ≥ 0.50 can still be accepted when other as‐
sumptions in the model fitness such as “root mean square error of approximation
(RMSEA)”, “comparative fit index (CFI)”, “goodness of fit index (GFI)”, and “Tucker–
Lewis index (TLI)” were achieved [78,81,82].
5.1.1. CFA First Order
The results of the CFA First Order indicate a good measurement model fit of the pro‐
posed factor structure (CMIN/DF = 1.476, GFI = 0.905, NFI = 0.884, IFI = 0.959, TLI = 0. 951,
CFI = 0. 959, PCFI = 0.805, RMSEA = 0.039, RMR = 0.038). Thus, the measurement model
fitness was achieved in the pooled CFA First Order. To check multicollinearity data (high
correlation), the convergent and discriminant analysis was conducted using stat tools
package software. For measuring convergent validity, AVE value as ≥ 0.50 was considered
whereas, for discriminant validity, AVE ≥ MSV was considered. From Tables 2 and 3, the
result finds no serious issues in the validity and reliability of each data. All findings con‐
cerning the “factor loadings”, “construct validity”, “reliability”, and “model fit indices”
represented that the data fulfilled all the prerequisites for the “CFA First Order” tests. The
model measurement could have proceeded to the next level of test viz. the “CFA Second
Order” as required in this study.
JTAER 2021, 16, 36 610 of 16

Table 2. Loadings of Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) First Order.

First Order Constructs Code CFA Loadings C.R. AVE MSV
Inter1 0.774
Interactivity Inter2 0.806 0.796 0.567 0.123
Inter3 0.673
Info1 0.866
Informativeness Info2 0.817 0.862 0.676 0.094
Info3 0.781
Pers1 0.759
Personalization Pers2 0.577 0.794 0.563 0.187
Pers3 0.691
Trend1 0.543
Trendiness Trend2 0.703 0.745 0.500 0.324
Trend3 0.844
WOM1 0.698
Word‐Of‐Mouth
WOM2 0.853 0.802 0.577 0.123
(WOM)
WOM3 0.718
TR1 0.915
Trust TR2 0.854 0.876 0.703 0.075
TR3 0.737
Sat1 0.881
Satisfaction Sat2 0.876 0.878 0.708 0.071
Sat3 0.761
Com1 0.854
Com2 0.854
Commitment 0.903 0.699 0.324
Com3 0.835
Com4 0.799
PI1 0.786
PI2 0.809
Purchase Intention 0.827 0.546 0.103
PI3 0.690
PI4 0.659

Table 3. Construct validity and inter‐construct correlations.

Pers Com PI Sat Info TR Inter WOM Trend
Pers 0.750
Com 0.367 0.836
PI 0.312 0.321 0.739
Sat 0.084 0.267 0.156 0.841
Info ‐0.031 0.151 ‐0.074 0.114 0.822
TR 0.046 0.158 0.029 0.138 0.100 0.839
Inter 0.031 0.059 0.058 0.079 0.273 0.081 0.753
WOM 0.093 0.255 0.160 0.140 0.306 0.273 0.351 0.759
Trend 0.271 0.569 0.281 0.095 0.089 ‐0.018 0.068 0.105 0.707

5.1.2. CFA Second Order

The results of CFA Second Order indicate a good measurement model fit of the pro‐
posed factor structure (CMIN/DF = 1.610, GFI = 0.887, NFI = 0.864, IFI = 0. 944, TLI = 0. 937,
CFI = 0. 943, PCFI = 0.850, RMSEA = 0.045, RMR = 0.056). Thus, the measurement model
fitness was achieved in the pooled CFA Second Order. From Tables 4 and 5, the results
find no serious issues in the validity and reliability of each data. All findings concerning
the “factor loadings”, “construct validity”, “reliability”, and the model fit indices ob‐
served that the findings fulfilled all the prerequisites for the “CFA Second Order” tests.
The model measurement could have proceeded to the next level of test viz. the Structural
Equation Modelling (SEM) as required in this study.
JTAER 2021, 16, 36 611 of 16

Table 4. Loadings of CFA Second Order.

Constructs Code CFA Loadings C.R. AVE MSV
Inter 0.577
Info 0.485
SMMA Pers 0.567 0.783 0.551 0.148
Trend 0.626
WOM 0.689
TR 0.679
CBR Sat 0.581 0.736 0.588 0.222
Com 0.557
PI1 0.746
Purchase Inten‐ PI2 0.759
0.827 0.546 0.264
tion PI3 0.640
PI4 0.619
Inter1 0.735
Interactivity Inter2 0.781
Inter3 0.633
Info1 0.826
Informativeness Info2 0.717
Info3 0.741
Pers1 0.719
Personalization Pers2 0.527
Pers3 0.641
Trend1 0.513
Trendiness Trend2 0.663
Trend3 0.784
WOM1 0.658
WOM WOM2 0.793
WOM3 0.678
TR1 0.885
Trust TR2 0.814
TR3 0.387
Sat1 0.761
Satisfaction Sat2 0.836
Sat3 0.721
Com1 0.814
Com2 0.818
Commitment
Com3 0.775
Com4 0.759

Table 5. Construct validity and inter‐construct correlations.

. PI SMMA CBR
PI 0.739
SMMA 0.514 0.742
CBR 0.339 0.956 0.767

5.1.3. Structural Model

To determine the most responsive factor influencing costumer–brand relationship
and further on purchase intention, three factors were subjected to path analysis. For hy‐
pothesis testing, “Structural Equation Modeling (SEM)” was studied as per the “two‐step
latent variable modeling” method. Prior to examining the test results for the proposed
research model, the summary notes were first reviewed. The model‐fit indices for the
structural model provided evidence of comparatively good model fit (CMIN/DF = 2.115,
GFI = 0.880, NFI = 0.896, IFI = 0. 942, TLI = 0. 938, CFI = 0. 942, PCFI = 0.877, RMSEA =
0.043, RMR = 0.096).
The findings of the present study observed that SMMA has a strong impact on
strengthening the costumer–brand relationship with a value of 0.315 (p < 0.001) in the SM
environment. This leads to the acceptance of Hypothesis 1 and it was observed that the
JTAER 2021, 16, 36 612 of 16

customer‐brand relationship is a mediating variable between SMMA and purchase inten‐

tion. To measure the “costumer”–brand relationship, three relationship dimensions were
considered, namely trust, satisfaction, and commitment. From the result dimension, trust
(β = 0.656, p < 0.001) was found to have significant contribution towards relationship build‐
ing, followed by satisfaction (β = 0.570, p < 0.001) and commitment (β = 0.549, p < 0.001).
Meanwhile, the precise result also shows a significant influence of SMMA on the purchase
intention of “costumers” with 0.389 (p < 0.001). Thus, the present study also accepts Hy‐
pothesis 2. Further, the study also measures the influence of “costumer”–brand relation‐
ships on “costumers’” purchase intentions. The results show a significant relationship, i.e.,
0.204 (0.005), which leads us to accept Hypothesis 3. An outline of the hypotheses is pre‐
sented in Table 6, which includes standardized as well as unstandardized estimates, t‐
value, and statistical significance level 3.15(α). Figure 2 is exhibits the schematic represen‐
tation of the results of the “structural model”, along with significantly found standardized
path coefficients level. Herein, all the structural paths are represented at significant levels
(p < 0.001 and p < 0.005).
The study also examines the impact of five constructs such as “Interactivity”, “In‐
formativeness”, “Personalization”, “Trendiness”, and “Word‐of‐Mouth” on SMMA of a
fashion brand on Facebook. The results revealed all five constructs to be significantly con‐
tributing to the SMM activities of fashion brands on Facebook pages. Word‐of‐Mouth (β
= 0.667, p < 0.001) was found to have been highly influential in contributing to SMM activ‐
ities, followed by trendiness (β = 0.631, p < 0.001), interactivity (β = 0.544, p < 0.001), per‐
sonalization (β = 0.545, p < 0.001), and informativeness (β = 0.472, p < 0.001). Though the
construct informativeness was found to have a low impact, it still plays a significant role
in conveying the brand‐related messages to the large audience.

Table 6. Result of the SEM model.

Standardized Unstandardized
Hypotheses S.E. C.R. p
Estimate Estimate
H1 SMMA  CBR 0.315 0.312 0.056 5.547 0.001
H2 SMMA  PI 0.389 0.543 0.076 7.117 0.001
H3 CBR  PI 0.145 0.204 0.072 2.839 0.005

Figure 2. Flow diagram of results obtained on SEM (*** p < 0.001; ** p < 0.005).

6. Discussion
SM has now become an essential component as a communication channel in daily
life, in which customers represent their consumer behavior, preferences, views, likes, and
affairs, and communicate with others [5]. In this wide‐ranging area of communications,
customers can communicate easily with each other and other users, products, and com‐
munication activities such as price, time, and easy reach, and large consumer groups are
given important opportunities [17,83–85]. Many companies are creating their own SM
JTAER 2021, 16, 36 613 of 16

communication channel to show brand profiles and are developing operations that en‐
gage customers to share content such as online products, discounts, advertising, and pro‐
motions. The present study attempted to study the impact of SMMA of fashion branding
on “consumer–brand relationship” and “purchase intention”. Further, the study also
measures the impact of relationship quality on “consumers’ purchase intentions”. The re‐
sult of the study is supported by the proposed hypothesis.
The present study is related to the SMMA of fashion brands on Facebook pages com‐
prised of five components, out of which WOM activities were found to have a high impact
in terms of involving users in SM platforms like Facebook [83]. It has been observed that
SM users mostly involved themselves with activities like sharing and recommending fash‐
ion‐related brands or products with their friends and colleagues, that seems to be are im‐
portant, useful, and fashionable for them. Similarly, trendiness has also a significant im‐
pact on the SMMA of fashion brands. SM users enjoy learning about new trends in the
present scenario. Tastes and preferences in the fashion industry keep on changing, there‐
fore the SM users involve themselves more in SMMA to gain knowledge on the recent
trends in the market [6,17]. Herein, personalization and interactivity activities also play
an essential role in contributing to SMMA, as the users receive only customized infor‐
mation that directly corresponds to the taste and preferences of the “costumers”. Moreo‐
ver, “costumers” also experience Facebook in a user‐friendly manner with various fea‐
tures, which enables them to interact and share their opinions about fashion brands with
other communities. The informativeness activities were found to have a low impact on
the SMMA of fashion brands. This implies that informative posts on the fashion brand
pages do not attract the attention of “costumers”. Many studies acknowledge that once
the brand or product becomes known to everyone, they do not take much interest in the
brand or product. However, when this information relates to some entertaining elements,
the informative posts become amazingly effective and attract more views [17,83]. The re‐
sults obtained from this study conform with the previous study of Kim and Ko [44], and
Yadav and Rahman [28]. The present study validates the measurement items of five di‐
mensions of SMMA such as “Interactivity”, “Informativeness”, “Personalization”,
“Trendiness”, and “WOM”, which were considered to measure the level of involvement
with different SM related activities with the fashion brands [17,27,51,83].
For the first time, the present study has measured the impact of SMMA on a con‐
sumer–brand relationship. To measure the quality of relationships, three dimensions were
considered from the literature, namely trust, satisfaction, and commitment. From the re‐
sults, it is evident that the SMMA of fashion brands on Facebook have a significant impact
on the costumer–brand relationship, which is supported by another investigator [83]. This
implies that when “costumers” involve themselves with the activities of WOM, trendi‐
ness, personalization, interactions, and informativeness in SM platforms like Facebook,
the consumers gradually develop trust towards the fashion brands, experience more sat‐
isfaction with the fashion brands, and feel more committed towards that particular fash‐
ion brand. Further, when examining the dimensions of the relationship, the trust element
was found to have a high impact on the relationship‐building, followed by satisfaction
and commitment. The present study has validated the measurement items of three dimen‐
sions based on “trust, satisfaction, and commitment”, which were considered to measure
the level of customers’ relationship concerning the brand [17]. For the practical implica‐
tions, the marketing managers should focus on engaging “costumers” with various brand‐
related activities on various social media platforms so that they can create a strong and
permanent relationship with “costumers”.
Further, the present study examined the association of SMMA on customers’ inten‐
tion to purchase. The findings showed a positive relationship between both the constructs.
This implies that when “costumers” involve themselves with the activities of fashion
brands in SM platforms like Facebook, their intention of purchasing that specific brand or
product grows stronger, and they feel the readiness to pay for that fashion brand. The
current study is also supported by the earlier findings of Yadav and Rahman [28], who
JTAER 2021, 16, 36 614 of 16

also found a positive impact of SMMA on “costumers’” purchasing intention. For the
practical implications, the companies should include SM in a manner that provides max‐
imum interaction, precise details on goods, personalized product suggestions, and trendy
items to encourage consumers to share favorable WOM [17,83], because these activities
will further affect consumers’ purchase intentions, and then will generate leads by con‐
verting them into actual purchases.

7. Conclusions
It is concluded that the “costumer”–brand relationship does have a positive impact
on “costumers’” purchase intention through SM. This implies that when the “costumers”
develop trust towards the fashion brands, they more satisfaction and commitment is ob‐
served towards specific brands, which indicates strong purchase intension among cus‐
tomers. As per practical implications, the marketing managers should focus on creating
trust, satisfaction, and commitment through various brand‐related activities so that cus‐
tomers’ purchase intension may be induced. Finally, this investigation may help cus‐
tomer‐brand relationship on perceived SMMA based e‐commerce technology that would
help retailers to understand the customers and streamline their business strategy.

8. Limitations and Future Research Directions

No research is completely flawless, and all come with certain limitations. This study
also possesses some limitations, as the study has been carried out considering only one
aspect of SMM, i.e., Facebook. However, as we are living in the 21st century, the digital
era, the organizations of the present day are innovative, and the work process has
changed. Quick output is expected everywhere. On the other hand, several organizations
are using “Twitter”, “Instagram”, “Blogs”, “Wikis”, etc. It is emphasized that further stud‐
ies should cover some more dimensions of SMMA to understand how organizations are
using SM under varied circumstances. Secondly, the sample size considered was only 305,
which brings some limitations. If the work was with a larger sample size, like 800 or 1000,
then it may have found a wider conception regarding SMMA. The study was comprised
of respondents from capital cities and metro city of eastern India. However, it can be ex‐
tended to some smaller states that would help to get some more inputs about how people
perceive SMMA. In future, a comparative study between India and other developed coun‐
tries might be an informative research. It is also under a new research goal that socioeco‐
nomic and demographic variables of participants may enhance the SMMA.

Author Contributions: Conceptualization, S.S. (Soumya Singh) and G.D.; Methodology, S.S.
(Soumya Singh) and G.D.; Statistical Software analysis, S.S. (Sukanya Sharma); Validation, S.S.
(Soumya Singh) and G.D., F.K. and S.S. (Sukanya Sharma); Formal Analysis, S.S. (Sukanya
Sharma) and F.D.; Investigation, S.S. (Sukanya Sharma) and F.D.; Resources, S.S. (Sukanya
Sharma); Data Curation, S.S. (Sukanya Sharma) and F.K.; Writing – S.S. (Sukanya Sharma), X.X.;
Writing – Review & Editing, S.S. (Sukanya Sharma), S.S. (Soumya Singh); Visualization, S.S.
(Soumya Singh); Supervision, S.S. (Soumya Singh) and G.D. All authors have read and agreed to
the published version of the manuscript.
Funding: This research received no external funding.
Acknowledgments: All authors convey thanks to all participants for their support during survey.
We are privileged to provide an opportunity for carrying out the present investigation with the
help of the Head of the Institute, Prof. (Dr.) Rajiv Shekhar, Director, Indian Institute of Technology
(Indian School of Mines), Jharkhand, India.
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest.
JTAER 2021, 16, 36 615 of 16

References
1. Ellison, N.B.; Gibbs, J.L.; Weber, M.S. The Use of Enterprise Social Network Sites for Knowledge Sharing in Distributed
Organizations. Am. Behav. Sci. 2014, 59, 103–123.
2. Utz, S.; Breuer, J. Informational benefits from social media use for professional purposes: Results from a longitudinal study.
Cyberpsychology: J. Psychosoc. Res. Cyberspace 2016, 10, doi:10.5817/cp2016‐4‐3.
3. Jaring, P.; Bäck, A. How researchers use social media to promote their research and network with industry. Technol. Innov.
Manag. Rev. 2017, 7, 32–39.
4. Tenhunen, A. Digital Marketing Plan for VTT’s Conventional and Renewable Energy Solutions. Master’s thesis, University
of Oulu: Oulu, Finland, 2017.
5. Kapoor, K.K.; Tamilmani, K.; Rana, N.P.; Patil, P.P.; Dwivedi, Y.K.; Nerur, S. Advances in Social Media Research: Past,
Present and Future. Inf. Syst. Front. 2018, 20, 531–558.
6. Appel, G.; Grewal, L.; Hadi, R.; Stephen, A.T. The future of social media in marketing. J. Acad. Mark. Sci. 2020, 48, 79–95.
7. Back, M.D.; Stopfer, J.M.; Vazire, S.; Gaddis, S.; Schmukle, S.C.; Egloff, B.; Gosling, S.D. Facebook Profiles Reflect Actual
Personality, Not Self‐Idealization. Psychol. Sci. 2010, 21, 372–374.
8. Gosling, S.D.; Gaddis, S.; Vazire, S. Personality impressions based on Facebook profiles. Presented at the International
Conference on Weblogs and Social Media, Boulder, CO, USA, 26–28 March 2007.
9. Gosling, S.D.; Augustine, A.; Vazire, S.; Holtzman, N.; Gaddis, S. Manifestations of Personality in Online Social Networks:
Self‐Reported Facebook‐Related Behaviors and Observable Profile Information. Cyberpsychology, Behav. Soc. Netw. 2011, 14,
483–488.
10. Valkenburg, P.M.; Peter, J.; Schouten, A.P. Friend Networking Sites and Their Relationship to Adolescents’ Well‐Being and
Social Self‐Esteem. Cyber Psychol. Behav. 2006, 9, 584–590.
11. Singh, M.; Singh, G. Impact of social media on e‐commerce. Int. J. Eng. Technol. 2018, 7, 21–26.
12. Hwang, I.J.; Lee, B.G.; Kim, K.Y. Information Asymmetry, Social Networking Site Word of Mouth, and Mobility Effects on
Social Commerce in Korea. Cyberpsychology, Behav. Soc. Netw. 2014, 17, 117–124.
13. Ahmad, N.; Salman, A.; Ashiq, R. The impact of social media on fashion industry: Empirical investigation from Karachiites.
J. Resour. Dev. Manag. 2015, 7, 1‐7.
14. Moran, N. Social marketing meets interactive media: lessons for the advertising community. Strat. Dir. 2012, 28,
doi:10.1108/sd.2012.05628faa.004.
15. Sarkar, A. The Impact of Social Media Marketing on Customers Preferences in Fashion Industry. Master’s Thesis,
Department of Management Studies, Sri Venkateshwara College of Engineering and Technology: Tamil Nadu, India, 2019.
16. Naqvi, B.; Soni, S.; Naqvi, B.; Soni, S. The Rise and Growth of the Indian Retail Industry. Indiaretailing, 29 August 2019.
Available online: https://www.indiaretailing.com/2019/08/29/retail/the‐rise‐and‐growth‐of‐the‐indian‐retail‐industry/ (ac‐
cessed on 10 March 2020).
17. Kujur, F.; Singh, S. Visual Communication and Consumer‐Brand Relationship on Social Networking Sites ‐ Uses & Gratifi‐
cations Theory Perspective. J. Theor. Appl. Electron. Commer. Res. 2020, 15, 30–47, doi:10.4067/s0718‐18762020000100104.
18. Mirabi, V.; Akbariyeh, H.; Tahmasebifard, H. A study of factors affecting on customers purchase intention. J. Multidiscip.
Eng. Sci. Technol. 2015, 2, 267–273.
19. Hajli, M.N. A study of the impact of social media on consumers. Int. J. Mark. Res. 2014, 56, 387–404.
20. Lamberton, C.P.; Naylor, R.W.; Haws, K.L.; Reczek, R.W. Same destination, different paths: When and how does observing
others’ choices and reasoning alter confidence in our own choices? J. Consum. Psychol. 2013, 23, 74–89.
21. Norton, D.A.; Lamberton, C.P.; Naylor, R.W.; Reczek, R.W. The Devil You (Don’t) Know: Interpersonal Ambiguity and
Inference Making in Competitive Contexts. J. Consum. Res. 2013, 40, 239–254.
22. Wilcox, K.; Stephen, A.T. Are Close Friends the Enemy? Online Social Networks, Self‐Esteem, and Self‐Control. J. Consum.
Res. 2013, 40, 90–103.
23. Pham, P.H.; Gammoh, B.S. Characteristics of social‐media marketing strategy and customer‐based brand equity outcomes:
a conceptual model. Int. J. Internet Mark. Advert. 2015, 9, 321.
24. Stephenson, L. From Blogs to Twitter, Fashion World Rushes to Tap into Social media. WWD: Women’s Wear Dly. 2009, 197,
131.
25. Kim, A.J.; Ko, E. Impacts of Luxury Fashion Brand’s Social Media Marketing on Customer Relationship and Purchase In‐
tention. J. Glob. Fash. Mark. 2010, 1, 164–171.
26. Bilgin, Y. The effect of social media marketing activities on brand awareness, brand image and brand loyalty. Bus. Manag.
Stud. Int. J. 2018, 6, 128–148,, doi:10.15295/v6i1.229.
27. Kim, A.J.; Ko, E. Do social media marketing activities enhance customer equity? An empirical study of luxury fashion brand.
J. Bus. Res. 2012, 65, 1480–1486.
28. Yadav, M.; Rahman, Z. Measuring consumer perception of social media marketing activities in e‐commerce industry: Scale
development & validation. Telemat. Inform. 2017, 34, 1294–1307.
29. Oliver, C. Social Networks Change the Online Retail Game. Available online:: http://www.itworld.com/internet/59323/so‐
cial‐networks‐changeonline‐ retail‐game. (accessed on 11 February 2011)
30. Richter, A.; Koch, M. Social Software‐Status quo und Zukunft; Technischer Bericht, Fakultatfür Informatik, Universitat der
Bundeswehr München: Munchen, Germany, 2007.
JTAER 2021, 16, 36 616 of 16

31. Kamboj, S.; Sarmah, B.; Gupta, S.; Dwivedi, Y. Examining branding co‐creation in brand communities on social media:
Applying the paradigm of Stimulus‐Organism‐Response. Int. J. Inf. Manag. 2018, 39, 169–185.
32. Smith, H.J.; Pettigrew, T.F.; Pippin, G.M.; Bialosiewicz, S. Relative Deprivation. Pers. Soc. Psychol. Rev. 2011, 16, 203–232,
doi:10.1177/1088868311430825.
33. Burmann, C. A call for ‘User‐Generated Branding’. J. Brand Manag. 2010, 18, 1–4.
34. Rialti, R.; Zollo, L.; Pellegrini, M.M.; Ciappei, C. Exploring the Antecedents of Brand Loyalty and Electronic Word of Mouth
in Social‐Media‐Based Brand Communities: Do Gender Differences Matter? J. Glob. Mark. 2017, 30, 147–160.
35. Hon, L.C.; Grunig, J.E. Guidelines for Measuring Relationships in Public Relations. Gold Standard Paper of the Commission
on Public Relations Measurement & Evaluation; Institute for Public Relations, University of Florida: Gainesville, FL, USA,
1999.
36. Men, L.R.; Tsai, W.‐H.S. Perceptual, Attitudinal, and Behavioral Outcomes of Organization–Public Engagement on Corpo‐
rate Social Networking Sites. J. Public Relations Res. 2014, 26, 417–435.
37. Ulaga, W.; Eggert, A. Value‐Based Differentiation in Business Relationships: Gaining and Sustaining Key Supplier Status. J.
Mark. 2006, 70, 119–136.
38. McKnight, D.H.; Chervany, N.L. Trust and Distrust Definitions: One Bite at a Time. In Computer Vision – ECCV 2020, Falcone,
R., Singh, M., Tan, Y.H., Eds.; Springer Science and Business Media LLC: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2001; pp. 27–54.,
2001.
39. Hung, W. The 3C3R Model: A Conceptual Framework for Designing Problems in PBL. Interdiscip. J. Probl. Learn. 2006, 1, 55–
77.
40. Grunig, J.E.; Huang, Y.H.. From organizational effectiveness to relationship indicators: Antecedents of relationships, public
relations strategies, and relationship outcomes. In Relationship Management: A Relation Approach to the Study and Practice of
Public Relations; Ledingham, J.A., Bruning, S.D., Eds.; Lawrence Elbaum Associates: Mahwah, NJ, USA, 2000, pp. 25–33.
41. Kujur, F.; Singh, S. Emotions as predictor for consumer engagement in YouTube advertisement. J. Adv. Manag. Res. 2018, 15,
184–197.
42. Bortree, D.S. Mediating the power of antecedents in public relationships: A pilot study. Public Relations Rev. 2011, 37, 44–49.
43. Nammir, D.S.S.; Marane, B.M.; Ali, A.M. Determine the role of customer engagement on relationship quality and relation‐
ship performance. European Journal of Business and Management 2012, 4, no. 11, 27–36.
44. Younus, S.; Rasheed, F.; Zia, A. Identifying the factors affecting customer purchase intention. Glob. J. Manag. Bus. Res. Adm.
Manag. 2015, 15, 9–13.
45. Kim, A.J.; Johnson, K.K.P. Power of consumers using social media: Examining the influences of brand‐related user‐gener‐
ated content on Facebook. Comput. Hum. Behav. 2016, 58, 98–108.
46. Diallo, M.F. Effects of store image and store brand price‐image on store brand purchase intention: Application to an emerg‐
ing market. J. Retail. Consum. Serv. 2012, 19, 360–367.
47. Das, G. Linkages of retailer personality, perceived quality and purchase intention with retailer loyalty: A study of Indian
non‐food retailing. J. Retail. Consum. Serv. 2014, 21, 407–414.
48. Luo, M.M.; Chen, J.‐S.; Ching, R.K.; Liu, C.‐C. An examination of the effects of virtual experiential marketing on online
customer intentions and loyalty. Serv. Ind. J. 2010, 31, 2163–2191.
49. Leitão, J.; Fernandes, C.; Raposo, M. Social Media Marketing: A Literature Review and Implications. Psychol. Mark. 2016, 33,
1029–1038.
50. Cambria, E.; Grassi, M.; Hussain, A.; Havasi, C. Sentic Computing for social media marketing. Multimedia Tools Appl. 2012,
59, 557–577.
51. Ismail, A.R.; Nguyen, B.; Melewar, T. Impact of perceived social media marketing activities on brand and value conscious‐
ness: roles of usage, materialism and conspicuous consumption. Int. J. Internet Mark. Advert. 2018, 12, 233.
52. Leung, X.Y.; Bai, B.; Stahura, K.A. The Marketing Effectiveness of Social Media in the Hotel Industry. J. Hosp. Tour. Res. 2013,
39, 147–169.
53. Yu, Y.; Duan, W.; Cao, Q. The impact of social and conventional media on firm equity value: A sentiment analysis approach.
Decis. Support Syst. 2013, 55, 919–926.
54. Homburg, C.; Koschate, N.; Hoyer, W.D. The Role of Cognition and Affect in the Formation of Customer Satisfaction: A
Dynamic Perspective. J. Mark. 2006, 70, 21–31.
55. Verhoef, P. (Peter); Franses, P. (Philip H.; Hoekstra, J. (Janny) The Effect of Relational Constructs on Customer Referrals and
Number of Services Purchased from a Multiservice Provider: Does Age of Relationship Matter? J. Acad. Mark. Sci. 2002, 30,
202–216.
56. Cronin, J.J.; Taylor, S.A. Measuring Service Quality: A Reexamination and Extension. J. Mark. 1992, 56, 55.
57. Bloemer, J.; de Ruyter, K.; Peeters, P. Investigating derivers of bank loyalty: the complex relationship between image, service
quality and satisfaction. Int. J. Bank Mark. 1998, 16, 276–286.
58. Kuo, Y.‐F.; Wu, C.‐M.; Deng, W.‐J. The relationships among service quality, perceived value, customer satisfaction, and
post‐purchase intention in mobile value‐added services. Comput. Hum. Behav. 2009, 25, 887–896.
59. Ajzen, I. The theory of planned behavior. Organ. Behav. Hum. Decis. Process. 1991, 50, no. 2, 179‐211.
60. Armitage, C.J.; Conner, M. Efficacy of the theory of planned behavior: A meta‐analytic review. Br. J. Soc. Psychol. 2001, 40,
471–499.
JTAER 2021, 16, 36 617 of 16

61. Bennett, R.; Rundle‐Thiele, S. A comparison of attitudinal loyalty measurement approaches. J. Brand Manag. 2002, 9, 193–
209.
62. Motameni, R.; Shahrokhi, M. Brand equity valuation: a global perspective. J. Prod. Brand Manag. 1998, 7, 275–290.
63. Kotler, P.; MichaelAllen, H.; Rein, I.; Donald, H. Marketing Asian Places; John Wiley & Sons: Hoboken, NJ, USA, 2001.
64. Narang, R. A study on branded men’s wear. Indian J. Mark. 2006, 36, 39.
65. Kamalaveni, D.K.; Rajalakshmi, S.; Kalaiselvi, S. Brand loyalty of women consumers with respect to FMCGs. Indian J. Mark.
2008, 38, 9.
66. Beneke, J.; Carter, S.R. The development of a consumer value proposition of private label brands and the application thereof
in a South African retail context. J. Retail. Consum. Serv. 2015, 25, 22–35.
67. Granot, E.; Greene, H.; Brashear, T.G. Female consumers: Decision‐making in brand‐driven retail. J. Bus. Res. 2010, 63, 801–
808.
68. Beristain, J.J.; Zorrilla, P. The relationship between store image and store brand equity: A conceptual framework and evi‐
dence from hypermarkets. J. Retail. Consum. Serv. 2011, 18, 562–574.
69. Erdil, T.S.; Uzun, Y. Marka Olmak, 2nd ed.; Beta Publishing: Istanbul, Turkey, 2010.
70. Kumar, A.; Kim, Y.‐K. The store‐as‐a‐brand strategy: The effect of store environment on customer responses. J. Retail. Con‐
sum. Serv. 2014, 21, 685–695.
71. Rayburn, S.W.; Voss, K.E. A model of consumer’s retail atmosphere perceptions. J. Retail. Consum. Serv. 2013, 20, 400–407.
72. Koivulehto, E.I. Do Social Media Marketing Activities Enhance Customer Equity? A Case Study of Fast Fashion Brand Zara;
Aalto University: Helsinki, Finland, 2017.
73. Seo, E.‐J.; Park, J.‐W. A study on the effects of social media marketing activities on brand equity and customer response in
the airline industry. J. Air Transp. Manag. 2018, 66, 36–41.
74. Hung, K.; Chen, A.H.; Peng, N.; Hackley, C.; Tiwsakul, R.A.; Chou, C. Antecedents of luxury brand purchase intention. J.
Prod. Brand Manag. 2011, 20, 457–467.
75. Park, D.‐H.; Lee, J.; Han, I. The Effect of On‐Line Consumer Reviews on Consumer Purchasing Intention: The Moderating
Role of Involvement. Int. J. Electron. Commer. 2007, 11, 125–148.
76. EChong, E.; Nazim, A.; Ahmad, S.B. A comparison between individual confirmatory factor analysis and pooled confirma‐
tory factor analysis: An analysis of library service quality, a case study at a public university in Terengganu. Int. J. Eng. Sci.
Innov. Technol. 2014, 3, 110–116.
77. Byrne, B.M. Multivariate Applications Series. Structural Equation Modeling with AMOS: Basic Concepts, Applications, And
Programming, 2nd ed.; Routledge: London, UK; Taylor & Francis Group: Abingdon, UK 2010.
78. Hair, J.F.; Black, W.C.; Babin, B.J.; Anderson, R.E. Multivariate Data Analysis, 7th ed.; Prentice Hall: Upper Saddle River, New
Jersey, USA, 2010.
79. Kenny, D.A.; Kashy, D.A. Analysis of the multitrait‐multimethod matrix by confirmatory factor analysis. Psychol. Bull. 1992,
112, 165–172.
80. Kline, R.B. Methodology in the Social Sciences. Principles and Practice of Structural Equation Modeling, 3rd ed.; Guilford
Press: New York, NY, USA, 2011.
81. Chua, Y.P. Asas statistik Penyelidikan: Analisis Data Skala Ordinal Dan Skala Nominal; McGraw‐Hill: Noida, India, 2009.
82. Rosseni, D. Pembinaan & Permodelan Sistem Pengajaran; Penerbit Universiti Kebangsaan: Bangi, Malaysia, 2014.
83. Ismagilova, E.; Slade, E.L.; Rana, N.P.; Dwivedi, Y.K. The effect of characteristics of source credibility on consumer behav‐
iour: A meta‐analysis. J. Retail. Consum. Serv. 2020, 53, doi:10.1016/j.jretconser.2019.01.005.
84. Shareef, M.A.; Mukerji, B.; Dwivedi, Y.K.; Rana, N.P.; Islam, R. Social media marketing: Comparative effect of advertisement
sources. J. Retail. Consum. Serv. 2018, 46, 58–69.
85. Shiau, W.‐L.; Dwivedi, Y.K.; Lai, H.‐H. Examining the core knowledge on facebook. Int. J. Inf. Manag. 2018, 43, 52–63.