Antecedents and consequences of attitude

contagion processes: the example of apparel

brand fan pages
Li-Chun Hsu
Department of Cultural Resources and Leisure Industries, National Taitung University, Taitung, Taiwan

Abstract
Purpose – This study aims to investigate the social, utilitarian and hedonic benefits associated with a brand behavioral performance from an
attitude contagion theory perspective. An integrated empirical model was constructed to identify the antecedents and consequences of consumer
attitude contagion.
Design/methodology/approach – Data were obtained from 609 members of Facebook apparel brand fan pages using purposive sampling.
Structural equation modeling was used to validate the proposed theoretical model.
Findings – Social, utilitarian and hedonic benefits could be used to explain the effects of attitude contagion on various relationships. Attitude
contagion factors partially mediate exogenous factors and the behavior of brand fans. Regarding the attitude contagion effect, perceived community
attitude and attitude toward fans’ sponsored recommendation posts have stronger explanatory powers for attitude toward products than for
attitude toward brands. Specifically, attitude toward brands can indirectly influence members’ purchase intention through brand recall. The
proposed model exhibited desirable goodness-of-fit.
Practical implications – The findings can give brand community managers insight into the development of consumer attitude contagion and assist
companies to improve their community management.
Originality/value – This study contributes to multiple perspectives in the literature regarding social, utilitarian and hedonic benefits and adopted an
extension viewpoint to explain that the formation of consumer attitude is a complex process.
Keywords Social media, Purchase intention, Perceived benefits, Facebook brand fan pages, Attitude contagion theory,
Brand behavioural performance, Brand recall
Paper type Research paper

1. Introduction (Statista, 2018). Facebook brand fan pages have resulted in

Because of their rapid development, social networking sites
(SNSs) have surpassed email, news media and television
shopping channels to become the most popular online
activity (Varnali and Toker, 2015). In addition, social media
has changed the way people communicate and interact
(Tuškej and Podnar, 2018). According to the Social Media
Examiner’s (2015) Social Media Marketing Industry Report,
the three largest benefits of a brand establishing a relationship
with its customers through social media are: higher exposure
(90 per cent); more traffic to the brand’s fan page (77 per
cent); and a loyal fan base (69 per cent). The report also
suggests that 96 per cent of marketers use social media for
business marketing management and 92 per cent of
marketers recognize the importance to their business of social
media.
Regarding the worldwide usage of different SNSs, Facebook
is the most commonly used and has an overwhelming number
of users compared with other platforms as of October 2018
The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available on
Emerald Insight at: https://www.emerald.com/insight/1061-0421.htm
Journal of Product & Brand Management
29/1 (2020) 31–51
© Emerald Publishing Limited [ISSN 1061-0421]
[DOI 10.1108/JPBM-07-2018-1930]
e-commerce entering a new stage (Hu et al., 2014). More than
half of internet users interact with other fans on brand fan
pages; thus, fan pages have become channels in which brands
can be further understood (Belleghem et al., 2011; de Vries
et al., 2012). Company-run Facebook pages, in particular, have
become a new focus of research, with only a limited number of
studies have examined brand communities on social media
platforms (Pongpaew et al., 2017). Brand pages are an efficient
and effective way for companies to improve their marketing
reach (Jeon et al., 2016).
The manner in which consumers receive product
information has evolved from the one-way vertical
communication of brand enterprises to consumers (business-
to-consumer) to a horizontal consumer-to-consumer
interaction network (Weisfeld-Spolter et al., 2014). Through
social networking, users are connected to subjects of their
concern or interest (Wallace et al., 2014) and develop bonds
with brands (Veloutsou and Guzmán, 2017).
Thus, the online community has become a critical marketing
channel, in which brands develop their online markets.
Received 5 July 2018
Revised 21 August 2018
9 December 2018
6 March 2019
29 April 2019
Accepted 7 May 2019

31
 Example of apparel brand fan pages
Li-Chun Hsu
Emerging topics of discussion are how businesses can
disseminate product information in the virtual world and create
resonance among consumers; use the power of social
communication by harnessing social contagion; and translate
favorable consumer impressions into actual purchases.
The research context expounding the integration of
consumers’ relationships with communities, fan page
members, products and brand attitudes is yet, however, to be
holistically understood. The main reason is that a social
psychological theory that explains the consumer–community
relationship paradigm is lacking. Scholars have asserted that
the concept of social contagion can be extensively used to
further discussion and exploration of the problems in online
environments (Hoffman and Novak, 2011). Subsequently,
the concept of social attitude contagion has been proposed
(Bartikowski and Walsh, 2014; Howard and Gengler, 2001),
which explains the influence process of an individual’s
attitude. Under this concept, the contagion process enables
influential and rapid interpersonal information
communication (Guadagno et al., 2013). Understanding of
this social contagion issue is mature (Peters et al., 2017).
This empirical study aimed to construct a holistic and
complete research model and to clarify the cause-and-effect
relationship present in the formation of consumer attitudes.
The three major contributions are as follows:
First, the formation of a member’s attitude in a brand
community and the contagion process are complex and involve
diverse concepts. Contagion theories can be used to explain the
attitude of online members (Lewis, 2014). In the initial phases
of research on customer attitudes, qualitative approaches are
necessary to develop a thorough understanding and explore
how certain concepts can possibly influence consumers
(Pongpaew et al., 2017). With regard to quantitative research,
using consumer attitudes as variables has gradually been
conceptualized as a multi-dimensional approach in the past
decade. The correlated variables considered in past studies on
consumer attitude factors have included attitude toward
community (Bartikowski and Walsh, 2014); toward a website
(Hwang et al., 2011); toward a product (Bartikowski and
Walsh, 2014; Im et al., 2015); toward a company (Nambisan
and Watt, 2011); and toward a brand (Abzari et al., 2014;
Amaro and Duarte, 2015; Ho et al., 2017; Vogel and
Watchravesringkan, 2017; Yu et al., 2018). Most relevant
studies have used only a unidimensional attitude construct in
their investigation (Im et al., 2015; Hwang et al., 2011; Wang
et al., 2012). Only a few studies have subdivided the effect of
contagion of consumer attitude on consumers’ purchase
intention (Bartikowski and Walsh, 2014).
However, the aforementioned studies adopted a one-sided
understanding of the consumer attitude contagion process.
Specifically, with regard to interactions with a brand and its
extensions, consumers have developed expectations of a seamless
experience (Veloutsou and Guzmán, 2017). This work builds
upon studies that have examined community relationships by
using perceived community attitude and attitude toward fans’
sponsored recommendation posts (AFSRPs) and linking
consumer–product and consumer–brand relationships (i.e.
attitudes toward product and brand) as mediators between
perceived benefits and brand behavioral performance. In modern
society, consumers’ use of certain brands often carries over
32
Journal of Product & Brand Management
Volume 29 · Number 1 · 2020 · 31–51
between the real and virtual worlds (Ramanathan and Purani,
2014). This study sought a comprehensive understanding of the
transfer process of consumers’ “online” attitudes to “offline”
attitudes through the consumer attitude contagion process.
Understanding the integration between online and offline
attitudes is an essential element that previous studies have
neglected. Adopting such a multi-dimensional view of the
attitude contagion process can avoid the misunderstanding of
consumer cognition that is caused by single-dimension views of
consumer attitudes.
To obtain a clearer understanding of the relevant theoretical
applications and gaps in past research on consumer attitudes,
this study reviewed the literature on the development of
contagion theories. For example, Langley et al. (2012)
attempted to determine the process with which new product
information is communicated and summarized the antecedents
that can influence social contagion into two major categories,
namely: product attributes and consumer characteristics.
Muter et al. (2013) investigated environmental risk perceptions
from a lesser-studied negative viewpoint; how community
members form risk perceptions in an online community
environment through social contagion mechanisms. Herrera
et al. (2015) proposed that social contagion influences the
information adoption process. During information
dissemination, members of a social network can be influenced
differently as time passes. The same study posited that variation
in social interaction is a problem that must be considered.
Bilgicer et al. (2015) used the concept of social contagion to
explore the influence of choice in sales channels for new
products.
Peters et al. (2017) applied contagion theories in a business-
to-business scenario to explore how interfirm networks can
increase the learning interest, knowledge dissemination and
willingness to share resources of members of an organization
through contagion mechanisms. Fox et al. (2018) tested the
effect of emotional contagion in an online consumer reviews
(OCRs) context, finding that OCRs influence the emotional
responses of readers. Finally, an integrative model was
proposed by Chaouali and Hedhli (2019); this model was used
to simultaneously investigate the contagion effects of social
pressures and transference effects of attitude and trust on the
intention to use mobile banking. This review of the literature
reveals the lack of a comprehensive study that provides insights
into the relationships among attitude types in the attitude
process.
Second, the antecedents of the formation of consumer
attitude have been elucidated in recent years, and the
correlation between relationship benefits and consumer
attitude has been expounded (Jung et al., 2014; Choi and
Choo, 2016). The aforementioned studies (Jung et al., 2014;
Choi and Choo, 2016) have constructed the antecedents of
brand influence solely from the perspective of the brand or
product attributes, failing to holistically capture and
deconstruct the various lines of thinking on the influence of
online users’ attitude formation. The present study attempted
to integrate the social benefit of the interpersonal perspective
(Jung et al., 2014; Li, 2011), the informational benefits of the
utilitarian perspective (Dholakia and Bagozzi, 2004; Jung et al.,
2014; Wang and Fesenmaier, 2004) and the hedonic benefits
of the empirical perspective (Kang et al., 2014; Wang and
 Example of apparel brand fan pages
Li-Chun Hsu
Fesenmaier, 2004). This integration of the three major
perspectives enabled understanding of which factors are crucial
antecedents and which are holistically connected to attitude
formation.
Third, Scholars have recently begun to emphasize the
importance of brand recall. A brand more easily recalled has a
stronger position in a consumer’s purchase list (Erfgen et al.,
2015). Therefore, Braun to emphasize the importance of brand
recall (Baumann et al., 2015; Keller, 2009). A brand or product
is subject to search and filter in a consumer’s brain before being
considered for purchase. This is critical to the development of
consumers’ brand recall was included in the present study as a
mediating variable in the relationship between the formation of
consumer attitude and purchase intention.
On the basis of the aforementioned research motivations and
intended contributions, the present work examined the
following research questions:
RQ1. What are the relationships between consumer perception
of three benefits (social, utilitarian and hedonic) and
attitude contagion factors and the effects of these factors
on brand recall and purchase intentions?
RQ2. Do attitude contagion factors play a mediating role in
the proposed model?
This study had the following objectives:

to determine whether the three major types of consumer
perception benefit (social, informational and hedonic) are
crucial antecedents among community members of
attitude contagion factors (perceived community attitude
and AFSRP);

to validate the influence of attitude contagion on brand
behavioral performance factors (brand recall and purchase
intention); and

to confirm the mediating mechanism of the four major
constructs of the attitude contagion effect (perceived
community attitude, AFSRP, attitude toward a product
and attitude toward a brand) and brand recall.
The remainder of this paper is structured as follows. Section 2
presents the theoretical basis of the research model, a literature
review and the hypotheses of the study. Section 3 details the
research methods. Section 4 presents the data analysis. Finally,
Section 5 provides research and managerial implications,
outlines the contributions and limitations of the study and
indicates potential directions for further research.
2. Literature review and hypotheses
This study used attitude contagion theory to extend the research
on consumer perception of three benefits beyond the external
perspective and to explore community members’ attitude
transfer processes and how they affect subsequent variables,
brand recall and purchase intention. Figure 1 illustrates the
proposed model, which comprises several hypotheses.
2.1 Theoretical perspective of attitude contagion
Social contagion is mainly thought communication and
implementation through interactive social relationships among
network actors (i.e. individuals, groups, organizations or
institutions). This type of interactive relationship aids the flow
33
Journal of Product & Brand Management
Volume 29 · Number 1 · 2020 · 31–51
of information, thereby influencing the decisions of individuals
and communities (Muter et al., 2013). In social relationship
management, the optimal theoretical perspective for explaining
social contagion is attitude contagion theory. This theory
details the influence of the psychological process of attitude
formation on purchasing decisions regarding brands; the
theory, thus, has high business value and can be used as a vital
reference for management applications (Bartikowski and
Walsh, 2014; Howard and Gengler, 2001). In the field of
marketing research, much importance is placed on the
emotional connection of consumers with brands (Hwang and
Kandampully, 2012); this viewpoint can help researchers
speculate how a corporate brand might create a lasting and
stable relationship with consumers.
After brand fans have published brand critiques and
preferences, social contagion occurs. Social contagion may also
play a role in the fans’ decisions on which brand posts to believe
(de Vries et al., 2012). In terms of meaning, during a person’s
belief, hypothesis and attitude development, a phenomenon
exists wherein people gravitate toward peers with similar beliefs,
ideas and attitudes; this is known as “attitude contagion”
(Bartikowski and Walsh, 2014; Olson and Fazio, 2004). Aral and
Walker (2011) and de Vries et al. (2012) asserted that in a social
network, the notification of a fan liking a brand or recommending
a post from the brand may prompt the fan’s circle of friends to
also become brand fans. Thus, contact between people may
mold behavior, whereas the effect generated by attitude
contagion can aid consumers in making final behavioral
decisions.
2.2 Attitude contagion processes
Bartikowski and Walsh (2014) discussed the formation of
online consumer attitudes and their influence on purchasing
behavior. Attitude is divided into three major constructs in their
study:
1 perceived community attitude;
2 attitude toward products; and
3 attitude toward brands.
Lu et al. (2014) discussed the influence of consumer attitude
toward blog posts on consumer purchase intention. The present
study adopted the viewpoints of the two aforementioned
studies. Relevant attitudes were expanded and used as variables
of the inadequacies of online brand communities. The variables
are classified into four major subconstructs, namely:
1 perceived community attitude;
2 AFSRP;
3 attitude toward product; and
4 attitude toward brands.
2.2.1 Perceived community attitude.
Studies have shown that an individual’s attitude and behavior
are influenced by those of others (Griskevicius et al., 2008).
When consumers share their brand experience and values on
the brand platform, consumers’ brand recognition and attitude
may be strengthened by the brand community, thereby
increasing their identification with the brand (Stokburger-
Sauer, 2010; Zhou et al., 2012). Platform members either
automatically mimic or attempt to behave similarly to other
members (Hatfield et al., 1994); for example, in a community,
 Example of apparel brand fan pages
Li-Chun Hsu
Figure 1 Proposed model
Social-focused factor
Social
benefit H3a
H3b
Utilitarian-focused factor
H4a
Informational
benefit
H4b
Hedonic-focused factor
H5a
Hedonic H5b
benefit
peers’ musical preferences and attitudes (i.e. the number of
times a song is downloaded) affect the personal musical
preferences of other members through contagion (Salganik
et al., 2006).
2.2.2 Attitude toward fan’s sponsored recommendation posts
Social media is an excellent tool for fostering customer
relationships, and a crucial strategy is to create a brand fan
group on an SNS. Companies can post messages to these fan
groups that include videos, quizzes, information and other
materials (de Vries et al., 2012). Consumers become members
of these brand fan groups and subsequently show a preference
for the brands’ posts and comments. AFSRP influences brand
awareness. Brand posts are different from advertisements
because “likes” and other critiquing actions are visible to all.
Therefore, liking and critiquing a brand has a similar effect to
word-of-mouth communication (de Vries et al., 2012). This
exchange of information and experience among consumers has
a positive influence on consumers’ understanding of a
product’s value, the frequency of product recommendation
(Gruen et al., 2006) and sales (Chintagunta et al., 2010; de
Vries et al., 2012). Web 2.0 tools can be used by consumers for
the sharing on various platforms of information regarding their
purchases and experiences; these platforms include individual
blogs, online communities, independent websites and retailer
websites (Lee and Youn, 2009). When product information is
provided by online consumers through a recommendation
post, other consumers can assess a product or service before
purchasing. Therefore, posts and critiques by online consumers
are effective and influential media (Lu et al., 2014).
2.2.3 Attitude toward products
Attitude is a psychological tendency accumulated by learning
and continually evaluating subjects (Lin and Shang, 2010;
Schiffman and Kanuk, 2007). This indicates that attitude is an
intention obtained from learning and has continuity and
consistency. This type of consumer evaluation of products or
services, when explained according to marketing concepts, is
the attitude toward the object, which can also be called attitude
toward products (Lin and Shang, 2010). When consumers
encounter a product, they receive a series of related pieces of
information; the overall impression from this information gives
Journal of Product & Brand Management
Volume 29 · Number 1 · 2020 · 31–51
Attitude contagion effects
Perceived H1a Attitude H6 Purchase
community toward
intentions
attitude product
H1b
H7 H9
H2a
Attitude toward
fan’s sponsored H2b Attitude H8
recommendation toward brand %UDQG
UHFDOO
post
rise to ideas regarding the product, thereby developing a
positive or negative attitude toward the product (Becker et al.,
2011). Peter et al. (1999) defined attitude toward products as
an individual’s evaluation of the total product concept. This
overall evaluation can be viewed as a type of psychological
tendency – a certain degree of expression toward the product
object (Brijs et al., 2006). Therefore, the beliefs of consumers
regarding product attributes and the information they receive
are thought to be the main factors determining the attitude
toward products they form (Brijs et al., 2006).
2.2.4 Attitude toward brands
Consumers develop a preference for a certain brand based on
their own brand recognition and awareness (Shah et al., 2012).
Previously, predicting attitude toward brands was a topic of
extreme interest for businesses because this attitude can reflect
consumers’ consideration for a brand and their purchase
intention and brand choice (Park et al., 2010). Specifically,
when encountering brands, consumers may consider and assess
the functionality of a product of interest. When consumers find
a suitable brand that agrees with their emotions or values, they
may develop a preference for that brand and view the brand as
highly friendly or reliable (Huang et al., 2010).
Haung et al. (2008) believed that attitude toward brands
reflects the tendencies in consumers’ general consumption
habits. In the consumption process, consumers develop either a
favorable or unfavorable assessment of a brand, which forms
their overall assessment of that particular brand. Attitude
toward brands is a key component of brand equity. This
signifies that attitude toward brands mainly depends on the
opinion of consumers themselves toward a brand; attitude
toward brands is viewed as a crucial predictive indicator of
whether a brand is reliable (Liu et al., 2012; Shimp, 2010).
2.3 Relationships between the intrinsic influences of
attitude contagion
2.3.1 Influence of perceived community attitude on attitude toward
products and brands
Studies have indicated that personal attitudes and behaviors are
often influenced by socialization (Bartikowski and Walsh,
2014). Because individuals are easily influenced by others in
34
 Example of apparel brand fan pages
Li-Chun Hsu
their thoughts, feelings and actions and subsequently imitate
others, they develop similar attitudes or behaviors (Liu and
Sutanato, 2012). Research on this subject has emphasized the
critical effects of peer interaction. People attempt to
automatically imitate and produce behaviors similar to those of
others. Similarly, attitude contagion is individuals developing
similar thought patterns to their peers in terms of developing
beliefs, hypotheses and attitudes when exposed to information
provided by peers (Bartikowski and Walsh, 2014). Therefore,
the more the community members like the brand community
they have joined, the higher their positive evaluation of the
brand’s product and the brand itself are. By contrast, when
community members do not like the brand community they
have joined, the percentage of users who identify with the
product or brand is lower. Specifically, a favorable positive
attitude toward a brand community can result in a more
positive consumer attitude toward the brand or its products
(Hwang et al., 2011). Thus, this study proposed the following
hypotheses:
H1a. The perceived community attitude of community
members has a significant positive effect on attitude
toward products.
H1b. The perceived community attitude of community
members has a significant positive effect on attitude
toward brands.
2.3.2 Influence of attitude toward fan’s sponsored recommendation
posts on attitude toward products and brands
Once consumers have become brand fan-group members, they
can learn other members’ preference levels for or critiques of brand
posts – such as the number of likes and positive and negative
comments – through the platform. This type of AFSRP can
influence brand awareness, and the effects of this type of
communication are similar to word-of-mouth communication
(de Vries et al., 2012). Studies have indicated that regardless of
whether a post to a brand fan group is positive, neutral or negative,
discussing experiences with the products or brand evokes positive
emotions and empathy among group members (de Vries et al.,
2012). The exchange of information and experience among fan-
group members positively affects attitude toward understanding a
product’s value, product recommendations (Gruen et al., 2006)
and sales (Chevalier and Mayzlin, 2006; Chintagunta et al., 2010).
Consumers who choose to follow a brand on social media and to
actively interact with its activities and promotions are also more
likely to share any content published by the brand, more likely to
carry a positive brand attitude and more likely to check social
media platforms to see what other people think about the brand
(Tuškej and Podnar, 2018). Additionally, positive evaluations by
fans can increase a brand’s value and induce emotions toward a
brand in the brand’s fans. Thus, a higher percentage of positive
evaluations and posts regarding a brand result in a more positive
attitude of brand community members toward the brand and its
products. Therefore, this study proposed the following hypotheses:
H2a. The AFSRP of community members has a significant
positive effect on attitude toward products.
H2b. The AFSRP of community members has a significant
positive effect on attitude toward brands.
35
Journal of Product & Brand Management
Volume 29 · Number 1 · 2020 · 31–51
2.4 Antecedents of consumer attitude formation
This section details the findings on the formation of consumer
attitude that were obtained in previous studies. Hsu et al.
(2015) divided consumer perception benefits into two aspects,
namely: news entertainment and news informativeness. Jung
et al. (2014) discovered that with regard to research on attitudes
specific to online brand communities, numerous studies have
been conducted from the perspectives of consumer psychology
and social factors. Jung et al. (2014) discovered that the attitude
of consumers toward brand community participation is
affected by the informational benefit needs of its consumers.
From another perspective, an online brand community is a
platform for social exchange among consumers and largely
satisfies their social benefit requirements (Jung et al., 2014;
Shang et al., 2006). Kuo and Feng (2013) investigated the
needs of brand community members in two aspects (the
members’ needs and their degree of participation) and
determined that in addition to functional and social benefits,
other factors must be considered, such as the hedonic element.
Therefore, through reviewing the relevant literature, the factors
that influence the attitude contagion effect were categorized
into the following three dimensions:
1 the social benefits of the interpersonal perspective;
2 the informational benefits of the utilitarian perspective;
and
3 the hedonic benefits of the empirical perspective.
2.4.1 Social benefits
Social benefits are a subject of great concern to consumers.
These benefits indicate the strength of personal associations
between consumers and service providers. In the social media
context, online interaction within the consumer–brand
relationship can enhance intercommunication on the Facebook
fan page (Halaszovich and Nel, 2017). This interaction involves
belonging, empathy, understanding, a degree of familiarity and
even friendship (Vázquez-Carrasco and Foxall, 2006). Social
benefits denote conducting assessments of the benefits of
communication and social networking (Zhou et al., 2014). Jung
et al. (2014) asserted that social benefits are the perception of
consumers toward other brand community members. This
includes degrees of social identity, friendship- and relationship-
building, emotional support and self-expression among
members. People join online virtual communities for reasons
such as seeking an identity and social integration through, which
are viewed as parts of social benefits (Hennig-Thurau et al.,
2004). Furthermore, online communities facilitate relationship-
building among a group of strangers (Jung et al., 2014). Some
studies have discovered that a brand is the main medium of
societal communication and cultural significance (Stokburger-
Sauer et al., 2012). Additionally, an increasing number of
studies on brand community have portrayed brands as crucial to
the interpersonal connection (Stokburger-Sauer et al., 2012).
Thus, in a brand community, consumers have a stratified social
structure, a set of shared beliefs and values and a series of
unique rituals and dialogues.
2.4.2 Informational benefits
Digital communication has fundamentally altered the interaction
between marketing and attitude formation, with the internet-
enabling marketing communications to become more
 Example of apparel brand fan pages
Li-Chun Hsu
informative; for example, marketers are now able to inundate
users with timely information that is customized to their interests
(Gvili and Levy, 2016; Tucker, 2012). Informativeness is a
utilitarian community characteristic that indicates the degree of
usefulness of the information provided by a community, as
perceived by the community’s members (Pavlou et al., 2007).
This concept can reflect whether members consider information
accurate, relevant and credible (Tsai and Pai, 2013). A virtual
community integrates an exchange platform with social
networking and is a place where people share resources and
information and gather because of common interests, values,
goals and visions (Hsu et al., 2015; Lin and Lu, 2011). However,
scholars have proposed that with regard to informational benefits,
the underlying objective of people joining an online brand
community is obtaining information on a brand’s products or
services (Jung et al., 2014). People in online brand communities
exchange information on subjects of interest with other members,
such as work, technology, expertise or hobbies (Galegher et al.,
1998; Jung et al., 2014). Studies have confirmed that consumers
use media principally to obtain information (Hsu et al., 2015).
This is in agreement with the hypothesis of uses and gratifications
theory, which states that the active use of media by consumers is
goal driven (Hsu et al., 2015).
2.4.3 Hedonic benefits
Hedonic consumption provides consumers with sensory
experience and pleasure when using products; this is critical for
consumers (Pezoldt et al., 2014). Driven by intrinsic motivation,
users give importance to entertainment and emotional
perception, continually engage in network behavior, and do not
consider accomplishing tasks as their main objective. Hedonic
benefits, more often than not, cause consumers to have strong
emotional reactions (Bauer et al., 2007) and can satisfy their
needs for sensory pleasure and emotional experiences (Cervellon
and Carey, 2014). Therefore, in studies on hedonic benefits,
scholars have agreed that consumers attribute great importance
to the consumption mode and products that allow them to
pursue experience, entertainment and pleasure (Pezoldt et al.,
2014). Hedonic benefits place importance on sensory appeal and
products that are pleasurable and interesting to consumers.
Those valuing hedonic benefits value sensory pleasure,
imagination and gaiety; specifically, these attributes provide
consumers with experiential consumption, pleasure and
excitement (Khan et al., 2004).
2.5 Relationships between perceived benefits and
attitude contagion
2.5.1 Effects of social benefits on perceived community attitude and
attitude toward fan’s sponsored recommendation posts
Chen et al. (2013) asserted that the social needs of consumers
are the motivation of consumers to participate in online virtual
communities. Consumers obtain experience through using
online virtual communities; the social benefits in this process
have a strong positive influence on consumers’ attitude toward
the community (Jung et al., 2014). Casal
o et al. (2010)
discovered that the social benefits obtained by consumers from
online communities substantially influence the consumers’
positive attitudes toward using the communities and their level
of community contribution. Online communities are places
where individuals can obtain emotional support, a sense of
36
Journal of Product & Brand Management
Volume 29 · Number 1 · 2020 · 31–51
belonging and encouragement (Jung et al., 2014), including
obtaining emotional support from members, developing
friendships and relationships, obtaining social identity and
having the potential for self-expression (Chen et al., 2013).
Consumers who recognize these social benefits share posts and
interact with other platform members more frequently (Burke
et al., 2011; Shi et al., 2010). Thus, not only can socioemotional
benefits such as trust, self-expression among members and the
sharing inner thoughts be obtained but also fan members can
also be encouraged to share other community members’ posts.
Thus, the following hypotheses were proposed:
H3a. The social benefits of community members have a
significant positive effect on perceived community
attitude.
H3b. The social benefits of community members have a
significant positive effect on AFSRP.
2.5.2 Effects of informational benefits on perceived community atti-
tude and attitude toward fan’s sponsored recommendation posts
Studies have demonstrated that knowledge and information are
critical assets of online communities in providing value (Jung et al.,
2014; Hiltz and Wellman, 1997). Rodgers and Chen (2005)
proposed that community members obtaining informational
benefits can facilitate the emotional response of members toward
the community (Jung et al., 2014). Information from online
communities can strengthen consumers’ confidence and beliefs
and affect consumers’ attitudes toward a platform. Therefore,
studies have concluded that the more abundant the opinions and
information obtained by consumers online, the more this
information causes them to develop a positive attitude toward the
online community (Lee et al., 2011). Joining an online brand
community is a result of people wanting to obtain information on
relevant products or services (Dholakia and Bagozzi, 2004; Jung
et al., 2014). People gather to share resources and information and
because of common interests, values, goals and visions (Hsu et al.,
2015; Lin and Lu, 2011). Consumers join an online brand
community to exchange information with members or post
relevant information concerning, for example, work, expertise,
hobbies or subjects of interest; the attitude of these consumers
toward sharing other members’ recommended posts is more
positive if they obtain relevant information. Thus, the following
hypotheses were proposed:
H4a. The informational benefits of community members
have a significant positive effect on perceived
community attitude.
H4b. The informational benefits of community members
have a significant positive effect on AFSRP.
2.5.3 Effects of hedonic benefits on perceived community attitude
and attitude toward fan’s sponsored recommendation posts
Voss et al. (2003) stated that individuals consume to satisfy two
major needs. The first are hedonic needs, which are satisfied
through purchasing, using and experiencing a product (Grewal
et al., 1998). Hedonic consumption provides consumers with
sensory experience and pleasure while using products (Pezoldt
et al., 2014); hedonic benefits can satisfy consumers’ needs for
 Example of apparel brand fan pages
Li-Chun Hsu
sensory pleasure and emotional experience and often cause
them to have strong emotional reactions (Bauer et al., 2007).
With regard to hedonic goods, importance is attributed to the
joy and happiness the product will evoke at the time it is used
and at the time of purchase; therefore, when evaluating their
degree of satisfaction, consumers lean toward emotional
perceptions (Wirtz and Lee, 2003). Chen and Lee (2008)
asserted that hedonic elements influence consumer attitudes
toward using a website. Consumers evaluate products based on
their own experience and style preferences. Moreover, the
evaluation basis of a consumer is usually their own purchase
and product use experiences. Individuals enjoy sharing product
or brand information in their community; their attitude toward
the community and their AFSRP increase upon sharing.
Similarly, in social networking, hedonism positively affects
consumer attitude toward social network use (Anderson et al.,
2014). Thus, the following hypotheses were proposed:
H5a. The hedonic benefits of community members have a
significant positive effect on perceived community
attitude.
H5b. The hedonic benefits of community members have a
significant positive effect on AFSRP.
2.6 Relationships among attitude contagion, brand
recall and purchase intention
2.6.1 Effects of attitude toward products and brands on purchase
intention
Purchase intention is the likelihood that a consumer is planning
or willing to purchase a particular product (Schiffman and
Kanuk, 2007). When consumers have an intention to purchase,
it may drive them to actual make a purchase (Schiffman and
Kanuk, 2007). Purchase intention is the output of the process
in which consumers assess information on and evaluations of a
product or service to satisfy their needs-based decision-making
(Lin and Shang, 2010). Consumer purchase intention is the
most useful indicator for assessing future sales (Biscaia et al.,
2013).
According to Ajzen (1985), if a consumer has a positive
attitude toward a certain behavior they are considering
performing, this behavior is more likely to be performed.
Several studies have demonstrated that consumer attitudes are
positively correlated with behavioral intention (Tarkiainen and
Sundqvist, 2005; Kim and Chung, 2011). When consumers
encounter new product information, the information affects
their involvement toward a product and may ultimately
influence their purchase intention or decision-making (Lueg
et al., 2006; Wang et al., 2012). When consumers obtain
additional information relevant to a product from an
information platform, if they can arrive at a purchasing decision
through mental processing of all the relevant information, the
probability of their purchasing a certain product is substantially
higher (Adis and Jun, 2013). Therefore, if community
members form a strong and positive evaluation of a product,
the evaluation increases the possibility of the individuals buying
the product. Thus, the following hypothesis was proposed:
H6. The attitude toward products of community members
has a significant positive effect on purchase intention.
37
Journal of Product & Brand Management
Volume 29 · Number 1 · 2020 · 31–51
Studies have stated that attitude toward brands can represent
consumers’ brand consideration and choice of the brand (Park
et al., 2010). The behavioral intentions model is widely used to
measure consumers’ attitudes and behaviors; it states that a
strong correlation exists between attitude and behavioral
intention; therefore, attitude is considered crucial for predicting
behavioral intention (Gustin and Ha, 2014). Assael (2004) and
Haung et al. (2008) reported that a consumer’s attitude toward
brands reflects their general consumption habit and preference.
During consumption, consumers develop either a favorable or
unfavorable assessment of a brand. Attitude toward brands is a
critical determining factor of purchase intention (Abzari et al.,
2014; Amaro and Duarte, 2015); it also directly influences
purchase intention (Adis and Jun, 2013; Hwang et al., 2011).
When consumers respond emotionally to an advertised brand,
a positive attitude toward the brand results in higher purchase
intention than a negative attitude (Adis and Jun, 2013). A study
by Yu et al. (2018) examined the effect that brand attitude has
on purchase intention after exposure to negative publicity,
finding that purchase intention is determined from consumers’
positive or negative evaluations of the brand. Therefore, the
following hypothesis was proposed:
H7. The attitude toward brands of community members has
a significant positive effect on purchase intention.
2.6.2 Effects of attitude toward brands on brand recall and purchase
intention
Consumers’ brand encounters and brand experiences form
their attitude toward a brand (Shah et al., 2012). Brand recall
must be induced through brand encounters and experiences
(Baumann et al., 2015; Warlop et al., 2005). Thus, a correlation
exists between attitude toward a brand and recall of that brand.
Scholars have suggested that consumers with a higher
preference level toward brands will have stronger brand recall
(Adis et al., 2015). Furthermore, if consumers have a more
positive attitude toward a target brand, they find it easier to
spontaneously or nonspontaneously recall the brand (Adis
et al., 2015; Mackay et al., 2009). If a brand wants to induce
consumers to form an association or impression of a brand,
they must prioritize providing consumers with an initial
encounter and a chance to learn about the brand; consumers’
formation of brand experience can aid the formation of brand
recall. Thus, this study proposed the following hypothesis:
H8. The attitude toward brands of community members has
a significant positive effect on brand recall.
Brands invest a large amount of money in advertising to create
brand awareness and brand recall, thereby aiding consumers in
making a purchase decision. The objective is not only that
consumers should purchase products and keep making
purchases but also that they develop brand loyalty (Lim and
O’Cass, 2001). Consumers have higher purchase intention
toward brands with which they are more familiar (Chi et al.,
2009; Kamins and Marks, 1991). If a brand can be easily
recalled by consumers, that brand will have a higher market
share and be more favored by consumers, thereby increasing
consumers’ purchase intention (Chang and Chang, 2014; Chi
et al., 2009). Brand recall is known to be a crucial stimulus of
 Example of apparel brand fan pages Journal of Product & Brand Management
Li-Chun Hsu Volume 29 · Number 1 · 2020 · 31–51

purchase decisions. Thus, the following hypothesis was Table I Demographics of respondents
proposed:
Variable Frequency (%)
H9. The brand recall of community members has a Gender
significant positive effect on purchase intention. Male 231 37.90
Female 378 62.10

3. Methodology Age
<19 57 9.40
3.1 Sample and data collection 20-24 97 15.90
In consideration of the research target, the SNS in Taiwan with 25-29 94 15.40
the most users is Facebook; thus, Facebook was used as the 30-34 129 21.20
target SNS in this study. “Clothing,” listed as a hedonic 35-39 107 17.60
product type by Dhar and Wertenbroch (2000), was used as the >40 125 20.50
type of product. This incorporated a hedonic element into the
framework of the study, in addition to the products on SNSs Education
generally always having hedonic benefits. This study calculated <High school 127 20.90
the three most valuable brands according to the annual report College 384 63.10
on the world’s most valuable apparel brands for 2017, which >Graduate 98 15.00
was released by Brand Finance, a British institution that Living area
valuates brands. The three brands in question were Nike, Northern 331 32.00
H&M and Zara (TOMTX, 2018). The brand fan groups for Central 92 40.60
these three brands were selected as the research framework. Southern 156 19.70
The respondents in this study were those who were community East 30 7.70
members of the brands’ fan groups. Brand fan groups involve
two-way interaction and cause social network attitude Average spent online of daily time
contagion, which helped the researchers of this study to <1 h 256 42.00
understand the attitude contagion process and the behavioral 2-4 h 158 25.90
performance related to the brands (brand recall and purchase 5-7 h 101 16.60
intention) of the community members of the brands’ Facebook >8 h 94 15.50
fan pages. The study population was community members who Contact Facebook fan pages time
continually use brand fan pages established by the brands in <1 year 255 41.90
Taiwan. The main reason for the adoption of purposive >1 year 354 58.10
sampling was because, in addition to meeting the sampling
conditions, the participants also had experience in using the Average spent Facebook fan page of daily time
brand community, enabling them to provide sufficient and <1 h 450 73.90
detailed information for the research question in this study. To 1-2 h 135 22.10
ensure the validity of returned questionnaires, respondents >2 h 24 4.00
were asked whether they had been visiting the corresponding
Facebook fan page for a period of more than six months. If they
responded “Yes,” they were instructed to complete all of the
questionnaire; otherwise, they were instructed that their further respondents as comparable to nonrespondents. To do so, we
participation was not required. A questionnaire was formally compared the first 10 per cent of respondents against the last 10
distributed over approximately four months from October 15, per cent of respondents, revealing the lack of any significant
2017 to February 20, 2018. A total of 741 questionnaires were nonresponse bias in our work.
retrieved. After 132 invalid questionnaires were disregarded,
609 were determined as valid, a response rate of 82.22 per cent. 3.2 Measures
The demographic information of the respondents is presented Each construct was measured using a seven-point Likert scale
in Table I. from strongly disagree (1) to strongly agree (7), with the exception
To determine whether any response bias was present in our of attitude toward brands, for which a semantic differential seven-
sample, ANOVA and chi-square analysis were used to examine point scale was used to quantify the information provided by the
the key demographic variables relevant to the 609 valid respondents. To prevent respondents from giving consistent
responses. The ANOVAs found no significant differences in answers resulting in systemic bias, ex ante common method
the three groups (Nike, H&M and Zara). Moreover, chi-square variance (CMV) remedies were applied. In addition, the
testing determined no significant differences in the percentages questionnaire items were randomly arranged. This prevented
of respondents who had been following the Facebook fan pages those completing the questionnaire from giving consistent
for less than one year versus those who had been following for responses for the measurement items.
more than one year (p = 0.989). Therefore, no response bias As previously described, perceived benefits were divided into
was present in our sample. Potential nonresponse bias was three major integrated constructs. Five items – proposed by
evaluated using the extrapolation method devised by Jung et al. (2014) – were used for measuring social benefits. For
Armstrong and Overton (1977), a concept that considers late measuring informational benefits, the questionnaire adopted

38
 Example of apparel brand fan pages
Li-Chun Hsu
five measurement items proposed by Jung et al. (2014). Finally,
hedonic benefits were measured using six items by Carroll and
Ahuvia (2006). The attitude contagion effect was divided into
four constructs. For the first, perceived community attitude
was adopted three items by Bartikowski and Walsh (2014). The
second, AFSRP, was measured using four items proposed by
Lu et al. (2014). For the third, attitude toward products used
three measurement items proposed by Bartikowski and Walsh
(2014) to conduct verification. The fourth, attitude toward
brands, was measured using three items proposed by Abzari
et al. (2014). Brand behavioral performance was divided into
two constructs:
1 brand recall, which was measured using three items
proposed by Baumann et al. (2015); and
2 purchase intention, which was assessed using five items
proposed by Lu et al. (2014).
3.3 Common method variance
This study applied prevention and post detection procedures
to avoid CMV. This study anonymized the respondents,
randomly arranged the measurement items and hid the
construct names for measurement items to reduce
respondents’ concerns as they completed the questionnaire
(Podsakoff et al., 2003). Harman’s single-factor test was used
(Harman, 1967; Podsakoff and Organ, 1986) with
confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) and exploratory factor
analysis (EFA) to detect CMV. Six factors were extracted
from EFA, with 45.801 per cent of the variance in the first
factor explained. This indicated no severe CMV because the
explained variance was less than 50.00 per cent. Hence, there
was no severe CMV in this study.
4. Results
Statistical application techniques based on structural
equation modeling were adopted; AMOS was used to analyze
the correlated variables. According to Anderson and Gerbing
(1988), structural equation modeling should be conducted in
two stages, namely: measurement model analysis, which
inspects whether the measured variable in the research model
can measure the latent variables accurately and structural
model analysis. After the measurement model was verified,
the structural model was used to analyze the strength of the
causal relationships between variables and their explanatory
power. Finally, the Sobel test, bootstrapping and regression
analysis were used to separately test the mediating factors for
each of the four major constructs of the attitude contagion
mechanism.
4.1 Measurement model
In CFA, the considerations of this study were based on the
convergent validity analysis standard suggested by Anderson
and Gerbing (1988), the CFA assessment standard proposed
by Bagozzi and Yi (1988) and the GFI suggested by Gefen
et al. (2000). For each construct, the measurement model
had satisfactory goodness-of-fit: x 2/df = 3.231; GFI = 0.875;
AGFI = 0.849; CFI = 0.938; and RMSEA = 0.057. The
present study evaluated the GFI and AGFI on the basis of the
standard of Hu and Bentler (1999); that GFI and AGFI are
acceptable if they are higher than 0.8. As for composite
39
Journal of Product & Brand Management
Volume 29 · Number 1 · 2020 · 31–51
reliability and average variance extracted (AVE) tests, this
study used the standards suggested by Gaski and Nevin
(1985). In this study, these measures for each construct were
mostly higher than 0.7 and 0.5, respectively. Therefore, the
data analysis indicated that the convergent validity of each
subconstruct was acceptable. The analysis results for the
measurement model are presented in Table II.
Table III details the results of discriminant validity tests
(Fornell and Larcker, 1981). If the square root of the AVE of
the latent variables is greater than any of the correlation
coefficients among the latent constructs, the construct has
satisfactory discriminant validity. The square roots of the AVEs
in each construct were all higher than the correlation
coefficients in each construct in this study, indicating that the
model had satisfactory discriminant validity.
4.2 Structural model
The goodness-of-fit of the research model was as follows: x 2/df =
2.675; GFI = 0.867; AGFI = 0.845; NFI = 0.911; CFI = 0.942;
IFI = 0.943; and RMSEA = 0.052. According to Hu and Bentler
(1999), the structural model and observed data of the present
study had satisfactory goodness-of-fit because the GFI and AGFI
were higher than 0.8.
The standardized path coefficients of the research
hypotheses were then obtained, with g and b indicating the
relationships between exogenous and endogenous variables
and those among endogenous variables. In the hypothesized
model, social benefits had significant, positive and direct effects
on perceived community attitude ( g 11 = 0.112, p < 0.05) and
AFSRP ( g 21 = 0.288, p < 0.001). Informational benefits
similarly had significant, positive and direct effects on perceived
community attitude ( g 12 = 0.641, p < 0.001) and AFSRP
( g 22 = 0.551, p < 0.001). Finally, hedonic benefits had
significant, positive and direct effects on perceived community
attitude ( g 13 = 0.097, p < 0.01) and AFSRP ( g 23 = 0.141,
p < 0.001). Subsequently, this study evaluated the internal
mediating effects. Perceived community attitude and AFSRP
both had significant positive influences on attitude toward
products ( b 31 = 0.715, p < 0.001 and b 32 = 0.244, p < 0.001,
respectively) and attitude toward brands ( b 41 = 0.239,
p < 0.001 and b 42 = 0.285, p < 0.001, respectively). Attitude
toward products had a significant positive effect on purchase
intention ( b 63 = 0.427, p < 0.001), but the attitude toward
brands did not ( b 64 = 0.006, p > 0.05). Attitude toward brands
significantly and positively affected brand recall ( b 54 = 0.372,
p < 0.001). Finally, regarding brand behavior, brand recall
significantly and positively affected purchase intention ( b 54 =
0.372, p < 0.001). Thus, H7 was rejected, whereas the rest of
the hypotheses were accepted, as illustrated in Figure 2.
4.3 Post analysis: mediating effect test
Whether there were mediating effects on attitude contagion
was explored in the present study. This study referenced
Preacher and Hayes (2008), who suggested the bootstrapping
method. The mediating effect of AFSRP was absent only
between hedonic benefits and attitude toward brands. The
test results of bootstrapping indicated that adopting a
bootstrap simulation of 2,000 samples more accurately tested
the indirect effects in the overall model (Table IV). Under a
95 per cent confidence level (CI), neither percentile CI nor
 Example of apparel brand fan pages Journal of Product & Brand Management
Li-Chun Hsu Volume 29 · Number 1 · 2020 · 31–51

Table II Measurement model

Scale/Item Factor loading SMC CR AVE Cronbach’s a
Social benefit 0.936 0.746 0.935
SB1: I can find emotional support by participating in this brand fan pages 0.812 0.660
SB2: I can find friends by participating in this brand fan pages 0.889 0.790
SB3: I can build relationships with other members by participating in this brand fan 0.910 0.829
pages
SB4: I feel connected to a group by participating in this brand fan pages 0.890 0. 792
SB5: I can express my identity by participating in this brand fan pages 0.811 0.658
Informational benefit 0.913 0.676 0.915
IB1: I can quickly and easily gain access to large amounts of information from this brand 0.770 0.592
fan pages
IB2: I can obtain useful information from this brand fan pages 0.840 0.706
IB3: I can learn a lot from using this brand fan pages 0.837 0.701
IB4: I can access helpful information by using this brand fan pages 0.874 0.764
IB5: I think a benefit of this brand fan pages is the ability to acquire information 0.785 0.616
inexpensively
Hedonic benefit 0.888 0.576 0.888
HB1: Is functional/Is pleasurable 0.623 0.381
HB2: Affords enjoyment/Performs a task 0.608 0.362
HB3: Is useful/Is fun 0.806 0.642
HB4: Is a sensory experience/Does a job 0.872 0.767
HB5: Is a necessity/Is an indulgence 0.882 0.788
HB6: Is a “must” in life/Is one of life’s “rewards” 0.723 0.515
Perceived community attitude 0.815 0.595 0.816
PCA1: Overall, I think the members of this brand fan pages like this product 0.779 0.606
PCA2 The comments I read about this product were globally very positive 0.770 0.593
PCA3: My impression is that the brand fan pages members appreciate this product 0.767 0.589
AFSRP 0.894 0.678 0.892
AFSRP1: I think this article tells the truth 0.806 0.657
AFSRP2: I don’t believe in what the social media manager wrote in this article 0.763 0.579
AFSRP3: I can learn the real product information from this article 0.873 0.759
AFSRP4: After reading this article, I have been accurately informed about the product 0.846 0.715
information
Attitude toward product 0.820 0.603 0.821
AP1: I find this product useful 0.813 0.659
AP2: I think this a performance product 0.750 0.564
AP3: I find this product interesting 0.766 0.587
Attitude toward brand 0.870 0.692 0.863
AB1: This brand is pleasant 0.746 0.556
AB2: This brand is famous and credible 0.893 0.798
AB3: This brand has positive attributes 0.850 0.722
Brand recall 0.894 0.737 0.892
BR1: I think of this brand frequently 0.827 0.708
BR2: I can quickly recall the symbol or logo of this brand 0.874 0.744
BR3: Some characteristics of this brand come quickly to my mind 0.875 0.759
Purchase intentions 0.928 0.721 0.924
PI1: I would consider buying this product 0.858 0.736
PI2: I have no intention to buy this product 0.689 0.474
PI3: It is possible that I would buy this product 0.857 0.734
PI4: I will purchase (brand) the next time I need a (product) 0.886 0.853
PI5: If I am in need, I would buy this (product) 0.899 0.808
Note: *Reverse item

bias CI included zero. Therefore, a significant indirect effect 4.4 Alternative model
was confirmed; the four major constructs were confirmed as The proposed model clarified the causal relationships of
mediators between each exogenous and outcome variable “attitudes toward product” and “attitude toward brand” with
(Efron and Tibshirani, 1993). “perceived community attitude,” “antecedents of AFSRP” and

40
 Example of apparel brand fan pages Journal of Product & Brand Management
Li-Chun Hsu Volume 29 · Number 1 · 2020 · 31–51

Table III Correlation matrix

Variable Mean SD 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
1 Social benefit 4.945 1.072 0.864
2 Informational benefit 5.502 0.808 0.568*** 0.822
3 Hedonic benefit 5.319 0.845 0.077 0.140*** 0.759
4 Perceived community attitude 3.927 0.525 0.447*** 0.614*** 0.141*** 0.771
5 AFSRP 5.459 0.761 0.585*** 0.668*** 0.205*** 0.636*** 0.823
6 Attitude toward product 3.913 0.512 0.431*** 0.575*** 0.197*** 0.714*** 0.646*** 0.777
7 Attitude toward brand 5.484 1.092 0.353*** 0.411*** 0.083* 0.389*** 0.408*** 0.421*** 0.832
8 Brand recall 5.526 0.840 0.452*** 0.631*** 0.289*** 0.579*** 0.641*** 0.650*** 0.427*** 0.858
9 Purchase intentions 5.602 0.764 0.463*** 0.684*** 0.233*** 0.647*** 0.681*** 0.697*** 0.424*** 0.759*** 0.849
Notes: ***p < 0.001; and diagonal elements are the square root of the AVE for all constructs

Figure 2 Results of the structural analysis

R 2 = 0.537 R 2 = 0.831 R 2 = 0.779

Social
γ 11 = 0.112*
benefit
β31 =0.715*** β63 = 0.427***
γ = 0.288*** Perceived Attitude
21 Purchase
community toward
intentions
attitude product
γ = 0.641***
12

β41 = 0.239***
Informational β64 = 0.006
β65 = 0.527***
benefit
β32 = 0.244***
γ = 0.551***
22

Attitude toward
γ = 0.097**
13 fan’s sponsored Attitude
recommendation toward brand %UDQG
post β54 = 0.372*** UHFDOO
Hedonic γ 23 = 0.141*** β42 = 0.285***
benefit
R 2 = 0.240 R 2 = 0.763
R 2 = 0.628

Significant Non-significant

Notes: χ2 =1,623.715, df = 607, χ2/df = 2.675, GFI = 0.867, AGFI = 0.845, RMSR = 0.050,
RMSEA = 0.052. *; p < 0.05; **; p < 0.01; ***: p < 0.001. R2: perceived community
attitude = 0.537; attitude toward fan’s sponsored recommendation post = 0.628;
attitude toward product = 0.831; attitude toward brand = 0.240; brand recall = 0.763;
purchase intentions = 0.779

“purchase intention.” Some studies have discovered that hypothesized model was larger than that of the alternative model.
perceived community attitude (Jung et al., 2014) and AFSRP Overall, no difference was found between the fit of the
affect purchase intentions (Lu et al., 2014). Therefore, to hypothesized and alternative models. Therefore, the hypothesized
determine whether unspecified new paths in the hypothesis model was stable and parsimonious.
model are critical, this study added two new paths, namely,
perceived community attitude ! purchase intentions and 5. Discussion
AFSRP ! purchase intentions. These were compared with the
hypothesis model to determine, which had a favorable path This study used attitude contagion theory, and the cause-and-
coefficient, explanatory power and overall model fit. effect factors that influence the attitude contagion process were
Table V presents the results obtained using one alternative successfully integrated. These were the antecedent factors of
model. The first path, that between perceived community the integrated social contact, utilitarian and hedonic
attitude and purchase intention, was not supported (path perspectives and confirmed the crucial mediating role of the
coefficient: 0.049), but that between AFSRP and purchase following five major constructs – perceived community
intention was supported (path coefficient: 0.160). Therefore, attitude, AFSRP, attitude toward products, attitude toward
the fit of this alternative model was not better than that of the brands and brand recall – and the process through which they
structural model. affect brand fan community members’ purchasing decisions.
This study used the following to indicate the fit and simplicity of
the model: for the PNFI, a greater value indicates the same 5.1 Research implications
(Jöreskog and Sörbom, 2001). Table VI details the fit results for In terms of the intrinsic influence mechanism of attitude
the hypothesized and alternative models. The PNFI of the contagion, perceived community attitude and AFSRP have

41
 Example of apparel brand fan pages Journal of Product & Brand Management
Li-Chun Hsu Volume 29 · Number 1 · 2020 · 31–51

Table IV Bootstrapping analysis for the mediating effects of attitude contagion

Bootstrapping 95% CI
Percentile method Bias-corrected
IV M DV Indirect effect Mean S.E. Lower Upper Lower Upper
SB PCA AP 0.139 0.139 0.015 0.109 0.169 0.110 0.171
AB 0.131 0.132 0.026 0.085 0.187 0.085 0.186
IB PCA AP 0.225 0.225 0.021 0.185 0.268 0.187 0.270
AB 0.181 0.180 0.043 0.094 0.264 0.093 0.264
HB PCA AP 0.059 0.600 0.020 0.109 0.101 0.019 0.101
AB 0.070 0. 071 0.025 0.024 0.123 0.023 0.122
SB AFSRP AP 0.138 0.137 0.016 0.106 0.168 0.107 0.170
AB 0.131 0.132 0.025 0.083 0.184 0.084 0.184
IB AFSRP AP 0.225 0.226 0.021 0.186 0.269 0.186 0.269
AB 0.181 0.181 0.042 0.095 0.266 0.097 0.268
HB AFSRP AP 0.059 0.060 0.019 0.022 0.100 0.020 0.098
AB 0.070 0.071 0.024 0.025 0.122 0.025 0.123
PCA AP PI 0.114 0.117 0.028 0.067 0.176 0.067 0.176
PCA AB PI 0.114 0.116 0.029 0.689 0.184 0.064 0.186
BR 0.148 0.148 0.031 0.091 0.216 0.093 0.219
AFSRP AP PI 0.286 0.286 0.027 0.230 0.341 0.230 0.341
AFSRP AB PI 0.071 0.073 0.018 0.041 0.114 0.041 0.113
BR 0.089 0.091 0.020 0.055 0.137 0.055 0.137
AB BR PI 0.047 0.048 0.015 0.019 0.082 0.019 0.082
Notes: IV = independent variable; M = mediation variable; DV = dependent variable; SB = social benefit; IB = informational benefit; HB = hedonic benefit;
PCA = perceived community attitude; AFSRP = attitude toward fan’s sponsored recommendation post; AP = attitude toward product; AB = attitude toward
brand; BR = brand recall; PI = purchase intention

Table V Path estimates for hypothesized and alternative models

Hypothesis relationship Hypothesized model Alternative model
H1a Perceived community attitude ! Attitude toward product 0.715*** 0.739***
H1b Perceived community attitude ! Attitude toward brand 0.239*** 0.258***
H2a AFSRP ! Attitude toward product 0.244*** 0.208***
H2b AFSRP ! Attitude toward brand 0.285*** 0.268***
H3a Social benefit ! Perceived community attitude 0.112* 0.112*
H3b Social benefit ! AFSRP 0.288*** 0.284***
H4a Informational benefit ! Perceived community attitude 0.641*** 0.641***
H4b Informational benefit ! AFSRP 0.551*** 0.556***
H5a Hedonic benefit ! Perceived community attitude 0.097** 0.099**
H5b Hedonic benefit ! AFSRP 0.141*** 0.140***
H6 Attitude toward product ! Purchase intentions 0.427*** 0.290***
H7 Attitude toward brand ! Purchase intentions 0.006 0.002
H8 Attitude toward brand ! Purchase recall 0.372*** 0.447***
H9 Brand recall ! Purchase intentions 0.527*** 0.473***
Perceived community attitude ! Purchase intentions 7 0.049
AFSRP ! Purchase intentions 7 0.160***
Notes: *p < 0.05; **p < 0.01; ***p < 0.001

significant positive effects on both attitude toward products and
attitude toward brands; this is consistent with the conclusions
of relevant studies (Chintagunta et al., 2010; de Vries et al.,
2012; Hwang et al., 2011). These findings indicate that after
consumers join a community, they feel social pressure from
other members; this type of normative social pressure
influences the thinking and behavior of every community
member (Algesheimer et al., 2005; Bartikowski and Walsh,
2014). The attitude of community members affects the attitude
of individuals toward brands and products through the
contagion effect. Similarly, the favorable positive attitudes that
consumers develop toward a brand community can increase
their positive attitude toward the brand or its products (Hwang
et al., 2011).

42
 Example of apparel brand fan pages
Li-Chun Hsu
Table VI Fit statistics for hypothesized and alternative models
Model x2
Null model (independence model) 18,339.649
Saturated model 0.000
Hypothesized model 1,623.715
Alternative models
add two direct link the PCA, AFSRP on PI 1,613.074
Notes: We compare alternative models with the hypothesized model. df = degree of freedom; GFI = goodness-of-fit index; CFI = comparative fit index;
RMSEA = root mean square error of approximation; PNFI = parsimonious normed fit index. For GFI, CFI and PNFI, the greater value indicates a better fit and a
more parsimonious model. For RMSEA, a lower value indicates a better fit and a more parsimonious model
The results of this study demonstrate that the division of the
attitude contagion process in the online community context
into the constructs of perceived community attitude, attitude
toward products and attitude toward brands is feasible. In
addition, we considered previous studies to have used
insufficient variables representing attitude toward online brand
communities; therefore, we empirically examined and
expanded the variables for the brand community scenario,
reconceptualized the variables and added AFSRP (de Vries
et al., 2012; Lu et al., 2014) as a crucial construct of the attitude
contagion process. This enabled the construction of a novel
relationship model of the attitude contagion effect. Notably,
most customers shopping for clothes use digital channels at
some point in the process, be that before, during or after
making a purchase (Lay, 2018). Therefore, continuous
exposure to related brands or products on SNSs can reduce the
search and information costs, thereby increasing purchase
possibility (Zhang et al., 2017).
Consumer perception benefits (social, informational and
hedonic) exhibited significant positive effects on the attitude of
online community members (perceived community attitude and
AFSRP); this finding is in agreement with those of other relevant
studies (Jung et al., 2014; Anderson et al., 2014). These findings
support that consumers who use clothing brands’ SNS pages are
looking for information about the brand and for social interaction
(Pujadas-Hostench et al., 2019). Fans, thus, recognize the
various levels of benefits provided by the fan group to which they
belong. By encouraging self-expression among members, sharing
inner thoughts and exchanging information, consumers receive
sensory pleasure, activate their imagination and gain happiness.
These feelings induce an obsessive passion for the brand in
consumers, increase their degree of active participation in the
brand community and cause them to interact with other
members, thereby positively influencing the attitudes and levels
of contribution of members to the community.
In terms of the relationship between purchase intention and
attitude toward brands and products, the empirical results
indicated that attitude toward products significantly and
positively affected purchase intention, which echoes relevant
studies (Kim and Chung, 2011); attitude toward brands,
however, did not, signifying that when consumers are making a
purchase decision, they base it only on their own intrinsic
preferences, maximizing their benefits through their perceived
product attribute benefits (Haung et al., 2008). Studies have
discovered that a consumer’s main objective in joining a brand
fan page is strongly controlled by their own preference. If a
product does not match an individual’s needs, even if it was a
Journal of Product & Brand Management
Volume 29 · Number 1 · 2020 · 31–51
df Dx 2 Ddf GFI CFI RMSEA PNFI
666 – – 0.140 0.000 0.209 0.000
0 – – 1.000 1.000 – 0.000
607 16,715.934 59 0.867 0.942 0.052 0.831
605 10.641 2 0.867 0.943 0.052 0.829
product of the relevant brand, it may fail to obtain consumers’
favor. Moreover, we discovered that even if attitude toward
brands does not have a significant effect on purchase intention, it
does have an indirect effect, mediated by the brand recall.
Therefore, brand recall plays a crucial mediating role. Obviously,
solely relying on attitude toward brands to increase consumers’
purchase intention is insufficient; a stimulus is required for brand
recall. Sometimes, when consumers encounter a product, they
can only recall the brand name or logo; this information, if
combined with external information that can be used to form a
judgment, can possibly generate purchase intention.
In the alternative model, when the online consumer attitudes
of the two new paths were compared with AFSRP for the effect
on purchase intention, personal purchasing behavior was
discovered to be affected by the posts of fans, but the personal
subjective attitude toward the fan community was not as
notably affected. This observation proved that social messages
on Facebook brand pages can encourage members to interact
on these pages; therefore, people may engage more with social
posts than other post types, and thus, add value to the brand.
This constitutes a vantage point to clarify the critical factors
mediating between online attitude change and the purchase
intentions of community members.
5.2 Managerial implications
Regarding consumer perception benefits (social, informational
and hedonic), managers of brand pages can attempt to increase
the number of stories that fan members share to enrich the brand
fan group pages. This could be implemented through sharing a
successful case, consumers’ feelings when using the products or
fans’ questions. If a page manager can respond promptly, provide
necessary information, use their ingenuity to increase the visual
experience, increase consumption and enjoyable brand
experiences and update the page cover and theme occasionally to
maintain a fresh experience and connect the page with the
brand’s spirit, they can positive affect the perception benefits of
fan community members. An example of a brand that does this
well is IKEA, whose page manager has frequent with fans on its
fan page. Fans’ questions, complaints and suggestions are
generally responded to. Furthermore, IKEA is skilled at using its
Facebook fan group to organize activities; when the “I wanna
have a sleepover in IKEA” campaign was launched in the UK,
IKEA invited fans to share their thoughts and received almost
100,000 responses from the network community, with 100
people actually participating by sleeping at an IKEA warehouse
for one night. This strategy primes attitude contagion among the
members of the online community. Through this mode of
43
 Example of apparel brand fan pages
Li-Chun Hsu
operation, people have expectations of fans interacting online and
tend to continually exchange messages; this creates positive social
benefits. As time passes, the emotion and attitude of fans toward
the community are both strengthened.
In addition, we discovered that even though SNSs have the
crucial concept of entertainment as a goal, particularly through a
management strategy that promotes social, informational and
hedonic benefits (Brecht and Eckhardt, 2012), fans’ usage of
SNSs for information communication and message functionality
is not inferior to the pursuit of social and hedonic benefits. Thus,
in terms of the attitude of fans toward online information rather
than entertainment, high message usefulness is more likely to
manipulate the attitude of fans toward the community. A
business’s fan group engaging in network sales should regularly
update and communicate the online brand and product
information and clearly introduce a brand or product as core
content because more benefit may be gained than if traditional
advertising was used.
In terms of the influence of the attitude contagion mechanism
on purchase intention, consumers’ attitude must be viewed as the
key component. To successfully promote road running among
women, Nike used a masterful strategy on its fan pages. The
company emphasized women’s fashion trends and used pictures
to portray women looking fashionable during exercise. Nike has
also established the Nike Running Club, a page that fans can join
on Facebook. Furthermore, Nike provides foot type assessments,
running consultations and professional support (Motive Business
and Creative, 2014). In summary, brand page managers can
communicate the value of products and their brand by posting on
their fan pages; doing so increases the cognition of fan-group
members toward products and brands and effectively exerts a
social community contagion effect.
Brand recall can be used to trigger heuristic purchase decisions
because consumers have a higher purchase intention toward
more familiar brands. Therefore, social network fan page
managers can attempt to increase the degree of member
participation and induce members to connect their memories
and sentiments with the pages; thus, fans can see the value of
their participation. For example, page managers can post videos
that are only accessible by the fans, hold online forums for topics
of concern to the public or use physical activities or forums to
enable experience sharing or further entrust the development of
new products to the fans, who are the consumers. When fans’
own opinions are evaluated by other consumers and can affect
new product development, the fans adopt the perspective of it
being their duty to participate, thereby instilling brand loyalty.
Consumers should be encouraged to form a connection with
brand fan pages through their memories and emotions of brand
experiences, strengthening their brand recall ability (Baumann
et al., 2015). Once consumers have been successfully added to
the fan base, brand managers must continue to improve their
management so that fan members continue to recall the brand
despite a plethora of competing products. Repeated brand
exposure can increase brand recall and help consumers make
purchasing decisions. In addition, consumers in online
communities trust their friends on social platforms and rely on
the information that their friends provide, including product or
retailer information and product reviews. Such information has
become the primary source of reference for consumer purchase
intentions. Therefore, the ability to gain AFSRP has become a
44
Journal of Product & Brand Management
Volume 29 · Number 1 · 2020 · 31–51
critical factor in determining the success or failure of online
community management.
5.3 Limitations and future directions
The present study was limited in some respects. First, a
nonrandom sampling questionnaire was used to survey brand fan
groups of three apparel brands. The statistical results may be
nongeneralizable to other populations. Future studies are advised
to collaborate with online community administrators who possess
a customer list, which will enable them to circumvent this
limitation. In terms of online community selection, this study only
investigated online users of the Facebook fan page of an apparel
brand. Because the differences among product attributes were not
considered, other influential factors may have been overlooked.
Further research can target other product types; for example,
search (e.g. magazine, book, etc.) or experiential products (e.g.
video, game, etc.) (Lu et al., 2014). Second, on the topic of brand
relationships, certain critical variables were not considered in this
study; therefore, subsequent researchers are suggested to consider
other variables, for example, brand attachment (Shah et al., 2012;
Zhou et al., 2012), brand identification (Stokburger-Sauer et al.,
2012) and brand love (Coelho et al., 2019). The main reason these
variables should be considered is that if consumers perceive
similarity and an emotional link between them and a brand, they
may feel an affinity for that brand and assess themselves positively
because of their relationship with that brand. Third, not all the
respondents were involved to the same degree in the brand
communities, and they had various usage behaviors. Future
research consider which participants are proactive “posters” or
reactive “lurkers” to conduct group comparisons, which will be
helpful for understanding the network participation behavior of
consumers (Bartikowski and Walsh, 2014). Finally, the intrinsic
effect of attitude contagion explored in this study was limited to a
cross-sectional composition of attitude; a longitudinal perspective
on the process of consumer attitude transformation was not
adopted. For consumers to be acquainted with a product or brand,
they must first undergo cognition in attitude and form a favorable
emotional connection with the product or brand; thus, future
studies can explore cognitive and affective attitude transfer from a
longitudinal perspective, which enable researchers to obtain more
holistic results (Schoen et al., 2013).
5.4 Conclusion
Beginning to use subcultural social media platforms, developing
targeted products and constructing effective communication
strategies are already crucial channels for brands wishing to
strengthen their corporate branding and consumer relationships.
However, a comprehensive understanding has yet to be attained
regarding how to transform the interaction between consumers
and online communities to positive personal attitudes toward a
product or a brand, even to help consumers make purchasing
decisions. The present study makes a contribution to the body of
research on online community context. This empirical study
aimed to construct a holistic and complete research model and to
clarify the research value of the cause-and-effect relationship in
consumer attitude formation. This study is expected to provide
researchers and managers with a firm grasp on the attitude
contagion mechanisms of social media consumers.
 Example of apparel brand fan pages
Li-Chun Hsu
References
Abzari, M., Ghassemi, R.A. and Vosta, L.N. (2014), “Analysing
the effect of social media on Brand attitude and purchase
intention: the case of Iran Khodro company”, Procedia-Social
and Behavioral Sciences, Vol. 143, pp. 822-826.
Adis, A.A.A. and Jun, K.H. (2013), “Antecedents of brand
recall and brand attitude towards purchase intention in
advergames”, European Journal of Business and Management,
Vol. 5 No. 18, pp. 58-67.
Adis, A.A.A., Kim, H.J., Ing, G.P., Majid, M.R.A., Osman, Z.
and Raz, A.I. (2015), “The impact of character presence and
entertainment value on brand recall and brand attitude in
advergame”, Australian Journal of Basic and Applied Sciences,
Vol. 9 No. 7, pp. 486-492.
Ajzen, I. (1985), “From intentions to actions: a theory of
planned behavior”, in Kuhl, J. and Beckmann, J. (Eds), From
Cognition to Behavior, Springer. New York, NY, pp. 11-39.
Algesheimer, R., Dholakia, U.M. and Herrmann, A. (2005),
“The social influence of brand community: evidence from
European car clubs”, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 69 No. 3,
pp. 19-34.
Amaro, S. and Duarte, P. (2015), “An integrative model of
consumers’ intentions to purchase travel online”, Tourism
Management, Vol. 46, pp. 64-79.
Anderson, J.C. and Gerbing, D.W. (1988), “Structural
equation modeling in practice: a review and recommended
two-step approach”, Psychological Bulletin, Vol. 103 No. 3,
pp. 411-425.
Anderson, K.C., Knight, D.K., Pookulangara, S. and Josiam,
B. (2014), “Influence of hedonic and utilitarian motivations
on retailer loyalty and purchase intention: a Facebook
perspective”, Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services,
Vol. 21 No. 5, pp. 773-779.
Aral, S. and Walker, D. (2011), “Creating social contagion
through viral product design: a randomized trial of peer
influence in networks”, Management Science, Vol. 57 No. 9,
pp. 1623-1639.
Armstrong, J.S. and Overton, T.S. (1977), “Estimating
nonresponse bias in mail surveys”, Journal of Marketing
Research, Vol. 14 No. 3, pp. 396-402.
Assael, H. (2004), Consumer Behavior: A Strategic Approach,
Houghton Mifflin Company, Boston; New York, NY.
Bagozzi, R.P. and Yi, Y. (1988), “On the evaluation of
structural equation models”, Journal of the Academy of
Marketing Science, Vol. 16 No. 1, pp. 74-94.
Bartikowski, B. and Walsh, G. (2014), “Attitude contagion in
consumer opinion platforms: posters and lurkers”, Electronic
Markets, Vol. 24 No. 3, pp. 207-217.
Bauer, H.H., Heinrich, D. and Martin, I. (2007), “How to create
high emotional consumer-Brand relationships? The causalities
of Brand passion”, Australian & New Zealand Marketing
Academy Conference Proceedings, pp. 2189-2198.
Baumann, C., Hamin, H. and Chong, A. (2015), “The role of
Brand exposure and experience on brand recall-product
durables vis-à-vis FMCG”, Journal of Retailing and Consumer
Services, Vol. 23, pp. 21-31.
Becker, L., van Rompay, T.J., Schifferstein, H.N. and Galetzka,
M. (2011), “Tough package, strong taste: the influence of
packaging design on taste impressions and product
45
Journal of Product & Brand Management
Volume 29 · Number 1 · 2020 · 31–51
evaluations”, Food Quality and Preference, Vol. 22 No. 1,
pp. 17-23.
Belleghem, V.S. Eenhuizen, M. and Veris, E. (2011), “Social
media around the world 2011”, available at: www.slideshare.
net/stevenvanbelleghem/social-media-aroundthe-world-2011/
download?lead=394fd930572c9b62fb082021af5a6d0922046
ec4 (accessed 12 November 2016).
Bilgicer, T., Jedidi, K., Lehmann, D.R. and Neslin, S.A.
(2015), “Social contagion and customer adoption of new
sales channels”, Journal of Retailing, Vol. 91 No. 2,
pp. 254-271.
Biscaia, R., Correia, A., Rosado, A.F., Ross, S.D. and Maroco,
J. (2013), “Sport sponsorship: the relationship between team
loyalty, sponsorship awareness, attitude toward the sponsor,
and purchase intentions”, Journal of Sport Management,
Vol. 27 No. 4, pp. 288-302.
Brecht, F. and Eckhardt, A. (2012), “Employer branding via
social network sites: a silver bullet to attract it professionals?”,
Proceedings of the 20th European Conference on
Information System (ECIS), Barcelona.
Brijs, K., Vanhoof, K., Brijs, T. and Karlis, D. (2006), “Using
fuzzy set theory to assess country-of-origin effects on the
formation of product attitude”, in Torra, V., Narukawa, Y.
and Miyamoto, S. (Eds), Modelling Decisions in Artificial
Intelligence, Lecture Notes in Computer Science (Artifical
Intelligence), Vol. 3558, Springer-Verlag, Berlin-Heidelberg,
pp 138-149.
Burke, M., Kraut, R. and Marlow, C. (2011), “Social capital
on Facebook: differentiating uses and users”, Proceedings of
the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing
Systems, pp. 571-580.
Carroll, B.A. and Ahuvia, A.C. (2006), “Some antecedents
and outcomes of brand love”, Marketing Letters, Vol. 17
No. 2, pp. 79-89.
Casal
o, L.V., Flavián, C. and Guinalíu, M. (2010),
“Determinants of the intention to participate in firm-hosted
online travel communities and effects on consumer
behavioral intentions”, Tourism Management, Vol. 31 No. 6,
pp. 898-911.
Cervellon, M.C. and Carey, L.I. (2014), “Sustainable, hedonic
and efficient: interaction effects between product properties and
consumer reviews on post-experience responses”, European
Journal of Marketing, Vol. 31 Nos 7/8, pp. 1375-1394.
Chang, W.Y. and Chang, I.Y. (2014), “The influences of
humorous advertising on brand popularity and advertising
effects in the tourism industry”, Sustainability, Vol. 6 No. 12,
pp. 9205-9217.
Chaouali, W. and Hedhli, K.E. (2019), “Toward a contagion-
based model of mobile banking adoption”, International
Journal of Bank Marketing, Vol. 37 No. 1, pp. 69-96.
Chen, G.L., Yang, S.C. and Tang, S.M. (2013), “Sense of
virtual community and knowledge contribution in a P3
virtual community: motivation and experience”, Internet
Research, Vol. 23 No. 1, pp. 4-26.
Chen, S. and Lee, K. (2008), “The role of personality traits and
perceived values in persuasion: an elaboration likelihood
model perspective on online shopping”, Social Behavior and
Personality: An International Journal, Vol. 36 No. 10,
pp. 1379-1400.
 Example of apparel brand fan pages
Li-Chun Hsu
Chevalier, J.A. and Mayzlin, D. (2006), “The effect of word of
mouth on sales: online book reviews”, Journal of Marketing
Research, Vol. 43 No. 3, pp. 345-354.
Chi, H.K., Yeh, H.R. and Yang, Y.T. (2009), “The impact of
brand awareness on consumer purchase intention: the
mediating effect of perceived quality and brand loyalty”,
Journal of International Management Studies, Vol. 4 No. 1,
pp. 135-144.
Chintagunta, P.K., Gopinath, S. and Venkataraman, S.
(2010), “The effects of online user reviews on movie box
office performance: accounting for sequential rollout and
aggregation across local markets”, Marketing Science, Vol. 29
No. 5, pp. 944-957.
Choi, Y.H. and Choo, H.J. (2016), “Effects of Chinese
consumers’ relationship benefits and satisfaction on attitudes
toward foreign fashion brands: the moderating role of
country of salesperson”, Journal of Retailing and Consumer
Services, Vol. 28, pp. 99-106.
Coelho, A., Bairrada, C. and Peres, F. (2019), “Brand
communities’ relational outcomes, through brand love”,
Journal of Product & Brand Management, Vol. 28 No. 2,
pp. 154-165.
De Vries, L., Gensler, S. and Leeflang, P.S. (2012),
“Popularity of brand posts on brand fan pages: an
investigation of the effects of social media marketing”,
Journal of Interactive Marketing, Vol. 26 No. 2, pp. 83-91.
Dhar, R. and Wertenbroch, K. (2000), “Consumer choice
between hedonic and utilitarian goods”, Journal of Marketing
Research, Vol. 37 No. 1, pp. 60-71.
Dholakia, U.M. and Bagozzi, R.P. (2004), “Motivational
antecedents, constituents and consequents of virtual
community identity”, in Godar, S. and Pixie-Ferris, S. (Eds),
Virtual and Collaborative Teams: Process, Technologies, and
Practice, IDEA Group, London, pp. 252-267.
Efron, B. and Tibshirani, R. (1993), An Introduction to the
Bootstrap, Chapman and Hall, London.
Erfgen, C., Zenker, S. and Sattler, H. (2015), “The vampire
effect: when do celebrity endorsers harm brand recall?”,
International Journal of Research in Marketing, Vol. 32 No. 2,
pp. 155-163.
Fornell, C. and Larcker, D.F. (1981), “Evaluating structural
equation models with unobservable variables and measurement
error”, Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 18 No. 1, pp. 39-50.
Fox, A.K., Deitz, G.D., Royne, M.B. and Fox, J.D. (2018),
“The face of contagion: consumer response to service failure
depiction in online reviews”, European Journal of Marketing,
Vol. 52 Nos 1/2, pp. 39-65.
Galegher, J., Sproull, L. and Kiesler, S. (1998), “Legitimacy,
authority, and community in electronic support groups”,
Written Communication, Vol. 15 No. 4, pp. 493-530.
Gaski, J.F. and Nevin, J.R. (1985), “The differential effects of
exercised and unexercised power sources in a marketing
channel”, Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 22 No. 2,
pp. 130-142.
Gefen, D., Straub, D.W. and Boudreau, M.C. (2000),
“Structural equation modeling and regression: guidelines for
research practice”, Communications of AIS 2000, Vol. 4
No. 7, pp. 1-80.
Grewal, D., Krishnan, R., Baker, J. and Borin, N. (1998), “The
effect of store name, brand name, and price discounts on
46
Journal of Product & Brand Management
Volume 29 · Number 1 · 2020 · 31–51
consumer’s evaluations and purchase intentions”, Journal of
Retailing, Vol. 74 No. 3, pp. 331-352.
Griskevicius, V., Cialdini, R.B. and Goldstein, N.J. (2008),
“Applying (and resisting) peer influence”, MIT Sloan
Management Review, Vol. 49 No. 2, pp. 84-88.
Gruen, T.W., Osmonbekov, T. and Czaplewski, A.J. (2006),
“eWOM: the impact of customer-to-customer online know-
how exchange on customer value and loyalty”, Journal of
Business Research, Vol. 59 No. 4, pp. 449-456.
Guadagno, R.E., Rempala, D.M., Murphy, S. and Okdie, B.
M. (2013), “What makes a video go viral? An analysis of
emotional contagion and internet memes”, Computers in
Human Behavior, Vol. 29 No. 6, pp. 2312-2319.
Gustin, L. and Ha, Y. (2014), “Effect of environmental
product information and ethnicity on millennials’ brand
attitude and purchase intention”, International Journal of
Science Commerce and Humanities, Vol. 2 No. 6,
pp. 77-88.
Gvili, Y. and Levy, S. (2016), “Antecedents of attitudes toward
eWOM communication: differences across channels”,
Internet Research, Vol. 26 No. 5, pp. 1030-1051.
Halaszovich, T. and Nel, J. (2017), “Customer–brand
engagement and Facebook fan-page ‘like’-intention”,
Journal of Product & Brand Management, Vol. 26 No. 2,
pp. 120-134.
Harman, H.H. (1967), Modern Factor Analysis, University of
Chicago Press, Chicago, IL.
Hatfield, E., Cacioppo, J. and Rapson, R.L. (1994), Emotional
Contagion, Cambridge University Press, New York, NY.
Haung, Y.C., Pan, L.J. and Lin, Y.F. (2008), “The empirical
study of the relationship between green brand positioning
and green purchase intension: by green brand attitude as
mediating variable”, Marketing Review, Vol. 5 No. No. 3,
pp. 371-408.
Hennig-Thurau, T., Gwinner, K.P., Walsh, G. and Gremler,
D.D. (2004), “Electronic word-of-mouth via consumer-
opinion platforms: what motivates consumers to articulate
themselves on the internet?”, Journal of Interactive Marketing,
Vol. 18 No. 1, pp. 38-52.
Herrera, M., Armelini, G. and Salvaj, E. (2015),
“Understanding social contagion in adoption processes using
dynamic social networks”, Plos One, Vol. 10 No. 10, pp. 1-25.
Hiltz, S.R. and Wellman, B. (1997), “Asynchronous learning
networks as a virtual classroom”, Communications of the
ACM, Vol. 40 No. 9, pp. 44-49.
Ho, H.C., Lado, N. and Rivera-Torres, P. (2017), “Detangling
consumer attitudes to better explain co-branding success”,
Journal of Product & Brand Management, Vol. 26 No. 7,
pp. 704-721.
Hoffman, D.L. and Novak, T.P. (2011), “Are brand attitudes
contagious? Consumer response to organic search trends”,
Working Paper, UCR Sloan Center, August.
Howard, D.J. and Gengler, C. (2001), “Emotional contagion
effects on product attitudes”, Journal of Consumer Research,
Vol. 28 No. 2, pp. 189-201.
Hsu, L.C., Wang, K.Y., Chih, W.H. and Lin, K.Y. (2015),
“Investigating the ripple effect in virtual communities: an
example of Facebook fan pages”, Computers in Human
Behavior, Vol. 51, pp. 483-494.
 Example of apparel brand fan pages
Li-Chun Hsu
Hu, L. and Bentler, P.M. (1999), “Cutoff criteria for fit indexes
in covariance”, Structural Equation Modeling, Vol. 6 No. 1,
pp. 1-55.
Hu, X., Ha, L., Mo, S. and Xu, Y. (2014), “Who are fans of
Facebook fan pages? An electronic word-of-mouth
communication perspective”, International Journal of Cyber
Society and Education, Vol. 7 No. 2, pp. 125-146.
Huang, C.Y., Chou, C.J. and Lin, P.C. (2010), “Involvement
theory in constructing bloggers’ intention to purchase travel
products”, Tourism Management, Vol. 31 No. 4,
pp. 513-526.
Hwang, J. and Kandampully, J. (2012), “The role of emotional
aspects in younger consumer-brand relationships”, Journal of
Product & Brand Management, Vol. 21 No. 2, pp. 98-108.
Hwang, J., Yoon, Y.S. and Park, N.H. (2011), “Structural
effects of cognitive and affective responses to web
advertisements, website and brand attitudes, and purchase
intentions: the case of casual-dining restaurants”,
International Journal of Hospitality Management, Vol. 30
No. 4, pp. 897-907.
Im, S., Bhat, S. and Lee, Y. (2015), “Consumer perceptions of
product creativity, coolness, value and attitude”, Journal of
Business Research, Vol. 68 No. 1, pp. 166-172.
Jeon, H., Ahn, H.J. and Yu, G.J. (2016), “What makes people
react to the posts on the brand pages of mobile social network
games?”, Online Information Review, Vol. 40 No. 3,
pp. 435-448.
Jöreskog, K.G. and Sörbom, I. (2001), LISREL (Version 8.51),
Scientific Software International, Lincolnwood.
Jung, N.Y., Kim, S. and Kim, S. (2014), “Influence of
consumer attitude toward online brand community on revisit
intention and brand trust”, Journal of Retailing and Consumer
Services, Vol. 21 No. 4, pp. 581-589.
Kamins, M.A. and Marks, L.J. (1991), “The perception of
kosher as a third party certification claim in advertising for
familiar and unfamiliar brands”, Journal of the Academy of
Marketing Science, Vol. 19 No. 3, pp. 177-185.
Kang, J., Tang, L. and Fiore, A.M. (2014), “Enhancing
consumer–brand relationships on restaurant Facebook fan
pages: maximizing consumer benefits and increasing active
participation”, International Journal of Hospitality
Management, Vol. 36, pp. 145-155.
Keller, K.L. (2009), “Building strong brands in a modern
marketing communications environment”, Journal of
Marketing Communications, Vol. 15 Nos 2/3, pp. 139-155.
Khan, U., Dhar, R. and Wertenbroch, K. (2004), A Behavioral
Decision Theoretic Perspective on Hedonic and Utilitarian
Choice, Unpublished Manuscript, Yale University,
New Haven.
Kim, H.Y. and Chung, J.E. (2011), “Consumer purchase
intention for organic personal care products”, Journal of
Consumer Marketing, Vol. 28 No. 1, pp. 40-47.
Kuo, Y.F. and Feng, L.H. (2013), “Relationships among
community interaction characteristics, perceived benefits,
community commitment, and oppositional brand loyalty in
online brand communities”, International Journal of
Information Management, Vol. 33 No. 6, pp. 948-962.
Langley, D.J., Bijmolt, T.H.A., Ortt, J.R. and Pals, N. (2012),
“Determinants of social contagion during new product
47
Journal of Product & Brand Management
Volume 29 · Number 1 · 2020 · 31–51
adoption”, Journal of Product Innovation Management, Vol. 29
No. 4, pp. 623-638.
Lay, R. (2018), “Digital transformation – the ultimate
challenge for the fashion industry”, available at: www2.
deloitte.com/ch/en/pages/consumer-industrial-products/
articles/ultimate-challengefashion-industry-digital-age.html
(accessed 2 February 2018).
Lee, M. and Youn, S. (2009), “Electronic word of mouth: how
eWOM platforms influence consumer product judgment”,
International Journal of Advertising, Vol. 28 No. 3,
pp. 473-499.
Lee, M.K., Shi, N., Cheung, C.M., Lim, K.H. and Sia, C.L.
(2011), “Consumer’s decision to shop online: the
moderating role of positive informational social influence”,
Information & Management, Vol. 48 No. 6, pp. 185-191.
Lewis, T. (2014), “Emotions can be contagious on online social
networks”, available at: www.scientificamerican.com/article/
facebook-emotions-are-contagious/ (accessed 20 November
2017).
Li, L. (2011), “Assessing the relational benefits of logistics
services perceived by manufacturers in supply chain”,
International Journal of Production Economics, Vol. 132 No. 1,
pp. 58-67.
Lim, K. and O’Cass, A. (2001), “Consumer brand classifications:
an assessment of culture-of-origin versus country-of-origin”,
Journal of Product & Brand Management, Vol. 10 No. 2,
pp. 120-136.
Lin, K.Y. and Lu, H.P. (2011), “Why people use social
networking sites: an empirical study integrating network
externalities and motivation theory”, Computers in Human
Behavior, Vol. 27 No. 3, pp. 1152-1161.
Lin, L.Y. and Shang, Y.Y. (2010), “The influence of the
country-of-origin image, advertising appeal, and product
attitude on purchase intention: the moderating effects of
product involvement”, Journal of National United University,
Vol. 7 No. 2, pp. 233-264.
Liu, F., Li, J., Mizerski, D. and Soh, H. (2012), “Self-
congruity, brand attitude, and brand loyalty: a study on
luxury brands”, European Journal of Marketing, Vol. 46
Nos 7/8, pp. 922-937.
Liu, Y. and Sutanato, J. (2012), “Buyers’ purchasing time and
herd behavior on deal-of-the-day group-buying websites”,
Electronic Markets, Vol. 22 No. 2, pp. 83-93.
Lu, L.C., Chang, W.P. and Chang, H.H. (2014), “Consumer
attitudes toward blogger’s sponsored recommendations and
purchase intention: the effect of sponsorship type, product
type, and brand awareness”, Computers in Human Behavior,
Vol. 34, pp. 258-266.
Lueg, J.E., Ponder, N., Beatty, S.E. and Capella, M.L. (2006),
“Teenagers’ use of alternative shopping channels: a
consumer socialization perspective”, Journal of Retailing,
Vol. 82 No. 2, pp. 137-153.
Mackay, T., Ewing, M., Newton, F. and Windisch, L. (2009),
“The effect of product placement in computer games on
brand attitude and recall”, International Journal of
Advertising, Vol. 28 No. 3, pp. 423-438.
Motive Business and Creative (2014), “Nike successfully built
a road running trend for women, with these four tricks to
make girls willing to move!”, available at: www.motive.com.
tw/?p=5244 (accessed 25 December 2017).
 Example of apparel brand fan pages
Li-Chun Hsu
Muter, B.A., Gore, M.L. and Riley, S.J. (2013), “Social
contagion of risk perceptions in environmental management
networks”, Risk Analysis, Vol. 33 No. 8, pp. 1489-1499.
Nambisan, P. and Watt, J.H. (2011), “Managing customer
experiences in online product communities”, Journal of
Business Research, Vol. 64 No. 8, pp. 889-895.
Olson, M.A. and Fazio, R.H. (2004), “Trait inferences as a
function of automatically activated racial attitudes and
motivation to control prejudiced reactions”, Basic & Applied
Social Psychology, Vol. 26 No. 1, pp. 1-11.
Park, W.C., MacInnis, D.J., Priester, J., Eisingerich, A.B. and
Iacobucci, D. (2010), “Brand attachment and brand attitude
strength: conceptual and empirical differentiation of two
critical brand equity drivers”, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 74
No. 6, pp. 1-17.
Pavlou, P.A., Liang, H.G. and Xue, Y.J. (2007),
“Understanding and mitigating uncertainty in online exchange
relationships: a principal-agent perspective”, MIS Quarterly,
Vol. 31 No. 1, pp. 105-136.
Peter, J.P., Olson, J.C. and Grunert, K.G. (1999), Consumer
Behaviour and Marketing Strategy (European Edition),
McGraw-Hills, Berkshire.
Peters, L.D., Pressey, A.D. and Johnston, W.J. (2017),
“Contagion and learning in business networks”, Industrial
Marketing Management, Vol. 61, pp. 43-54.
Pezoldt, K., Michaelis, A., Roschk, H. and Geigenmueller, A.
(2014), “The differential effects of extrinsic and intrinsic
cue-utilization in hedonic product consumption- an
empirical investigation”, Journal of Business and Economics,
Vol. 5 No. 8, pp. 1282-1293.
Podsakoff, P.M. and Organ, D.W. (1986), “Self-reports in
organizational research: problems and prospects”, Journal of
Management, Vol. 12 No. 4, pp. 531-544.
Podsakoff, P.M., MacKenzie, S.B. and Lee, J.Y. (2003),
“Common method biases in behavioral research: a critical
review of the literature and recommended remedies”, Journal
of Applied Psychology, Vol. 88 No. 5, pp. 579-903.
Pongpaew, W., Speece, M. and Tiangsoongnern, L. (2017),
“Social presence and customer brand engagement on
Facebook brand pages”, Journal of Product & Brand
Management, Vol. 26 No. 3, pp. 262-281.
Preacher, K.J. and Hayes, A.F. (2008), “Asymptotic and
resampling strategies for assessing and comparing indirect
effects in multiple mediator models”, Behavior Research
Methods, Vol. 40 No. 3, pp. 879-891.
Pujadas-Hostench, J., Palau-Saumell, R., Forgas-Coll, S. and
Sánchez-García, J. (2019), “Clothing brand purchase
intention through SNS”, Online Information Review, available
at: https://doi.org/10.1108/OIR-02-2017-0042
Ramanathan, J. and Purani, K. (2014), “Brand extension
evaluation: real world and virtual world”, Journal of Product
& Brand Management, Vol. 23 No. 7, pp. 504-515.
Rodgers, S. and Chen, Q. (2005), “Internet community group
participation: psychosocial benefits for women with breast
cancer”, Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication,
Vol. 10 No. 4, pp. 1-27.
Salganik, M.J., Dodds, P.J. and Watts, D.J. (2006),
“Experimental study of inequality and unpredictability in an
artificial cultural market”, Science, Vol. 311 No. 5762,
pp. 854-856.
48
Journal of Product & Brand Management
Volume 29 · Number 1 · 2020 · 31–51
Schiffman, L.G. and Kanuk, L.L. (2007), Consumer Behavior,
Pearson Education International, New York, NY.
Schoen, H., Gayo-Avello, D., Metaxas, P.T., Mustafaraj, E.,
Strohmaier, M. and Gloor, P. (2013), “The power of
prediction with social media”, Internet Research, Vol. 23
No. 5, pp. 528-543.
Shah, S.S.H., Aziz, J., Jaffari, A.R., Waris, S., Ejaz, W., Fatima,
M. and Sherazi, S.K. (2012), “The impact of brands on
consumer purchase intentions”, Asian Journal of Business
Management, Vol. 4 No. 2, pp. 105-110.
Shang, R.A., Chen, Y.C. and Liao, H.J. (2006), “The value of
participation in virtual consumer communities on Brand
loyalty”, Internet Research, Vol. 16 No. 4, pp. 398-418.
Shi, N., Lee, M.K., Cheung, C.M. and Chen, H. (2010), “The
continuance of online social networks: how to keep people
using Facebook?”, Proceedings of the 43rd HI International
Conference on System Sciences, IEEE, pp. 1-10.
Shimp, T.A. (2010), Advertising, Promotion, and Other Aspects of
Integrated Marketing Communications, 8th Ed., South-
Western, Boston, MA.
Social Media Examiner (2015), “2015 Social media marketing
industry report”, available at: www.socialmediaexaminer.com/
social-media-marketing-industry-report-2015/ (accessed 8
November 2018).
Statista (2018), “Global social networks ranked by number of
users 2018”, available at: www.statista.com/statistics/
272014/global-social-networks-ranked-by-number-of-users/
(accessed 12 November 2018).
Stokburger-Sauer, N. (2010), “Brand community: drivers and
outcomes”, Psychology and Marketing, Vol. 27 No. 4,
pp. 347-368.
Stokburger-Sauer, N., Ratneshwar, S. and Sen, S. (2012),
“Drivers of consumer-brand identification”, International
Journal of Research in Marketing, Vol. 29 No. 4, pp. 406-418.
Tarkiainen, A. and Sundqvist, S. (2005), “Subjective norms,
attitudes and intentions of Finnish consumers in buying
organic food”, British Food Journal, Vol. 107 No. 11,
pp. 808-822.
TOMTX (2018), “The world’s most valuable apparel brands 2017”,
available at: www.tomoiii.com/news/2017%E5%85%A8%E7%
90%83%E6%9C%80%E6%9C%89%E5%83%B9%E5%80%
BC%E6%9C%8D%E9%A3%BE%E5 %93%81%E7%89%
8C50%E5%BC%B7%E6%8E%92%E8%A1%8C%E6%
A6%9C/ (accessed 12 June 2018).
Tsai, H.T. and Pai, P.Y. (2013), “Explaining members’
proactive participation in virtual communities”, International
Journal of Human-Computer Studies, Vol. 71 No. 4,
pp. 475-491.
Tucker, C.E. (2012), “The economics of advertising and
privacy”, International Journal of Industrial Organization,
Vol. 30 No. 3, pp. 326-329.
Tuškej, U. and Podnar, K. (2018), “Consumers’ identification
with corporate brands: brand prestige, anthropomorphism
and engagement in social media”, Journal of Product & Brand
Management, Vol. 27 No. 1, pp. 3-17.
Varnali, K. and Toker, A. (2015), “Self-disclosure on social
networking sites”, Social Behavior and Personality: An
International Journal, Vol. 43 No. 1, pp. 1-13.
Vázquez-Carrasco, R. and Foxall, G.R. (2006), “Influence of
personality traits on satisfaction, perception of relational
 Example of apparel brand fan pages
Li-Chun Hsu
benefits, and loyalty in a personal service context”, Journal of
Retailing and Consumer Services, Vol. 13 No. 3, pp. 205-219.
Veloutsou, C. and Guzmán, F. (2017), “The evolution of
brand management thinking over the last 25 years as
recorded in the journal of product and brand management”,
Journal of Product & Brand Management, Vol. 26 No. 1,
pp. 2-12.
Vogel, A.T. and Watchravesringkan, K. (2017), “Consumer
evaluations of trend imitation: brand equity, consumer
attitudes and preference”, Journal of Product & Brand
Management, Vol. 26 No. 5, pp. 516-527.
Voss, K.E., Spangenberg, E.R. and Grohmann, B. (2003),
“Measuring the hedonic and utilitarian dimensions of
consumer attitude”, Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 40
No. 3, pp. 310-320.
Wallace, E., Buil, I., de Chernatony, L., Hogan, M.J. (2014),
“Who ‘likes’ you . . . and why? A typology of Facebook fans:
from ‘fan’-atics and self-expressives to utilitarians and
authentics”, Journal of Advertising Research, Vol. 54 No. 1,
pp. 92-109.
Wang, X., Yu, C. and Wei, Y. (2012), “Social media peer
communication and impacts on purchase intentions: a
consumer socialization framework”, Journal of Interactive
Marketing, Vol. 26 No. 4, pp. 198-208.
Wang, Y.C. and Fesenmaier, D.R. (2004), “Modeling
participation in an online travel community”, Journal of
Travel Research, Vol. 42 No. 3, pp. 261-270.
Warlop, L., Ratneshwar, S. and Van Osselaer, S.M. (2005),
“Distinctive brand cues and memory for product consumption
experiences”, International Journal of Research in Marketing,
Vol. 22 No. 1, pp. 27-44.
Weisfeld-Spolter, S., Sussan, F. and Gould, S. (2014), “An
integrative approach to eWOM and marketing
communications”, Corporate Communications: An
International Journal, Vol. 19 No. 3, pp. 260-274.
Wirtz, J. and Lee, M.C. (2003), “An examination of the quality
and context-specific applicability of commonly used
customer satisfaction measures”, Journal of Service Research,
Vol. 5 No. 4, pp. 345-355.
Yu, M., Liu, F., Lee, J. and Soutar, G. (2018), “The influence
of negative publicity on brand equity: attribution, image,
attitude and purchase intention”, Journal of Product & Brand
Management, Vol. 27 No. 4, pp. 440-451.
Zhang, Y., Trusov, A., Stephen, A.T. and Jamal, Z. (2017),
“Online shopping and social media: friends and foes”,
Journal of Marketing, Vol. 81 No. 6, pp. 24-41.
Zhou, Z., Jin, X.L. and Fang, Y. (2014), “Moderating role of
gender in the relationships between perceived benefits and
satisfaction in social virtual world continuance”, Decision
Support Systems, Vol. 65, pp. 69-79.
Zhou, Z., Zhang, Q., Su, C. and Zhou, N. (2012), “How do
brand communities generate Brand relationships? Intermediate
mechanisms”, Journal of Business Research, Vol. 65 No. 7,
pp. 890-895.
Further reading
Anderson, P.H. (2005), “Relationship marketing and brand
involvement of professionals through web-enhanced brand
49
Journal of Product & Brand Management
Volume 29 · Number 1 · 2020 · 31–51
communities: the case of Coloplast”, Industrial Marketing
Management, Vol. 34 No. 3, pp. 285-297.
Armitage, C.J. and Conner, M. (2001), “Efficacy of the theory
of planned behavior: a meta-analytic review”, British Journal
of Social Psychology, Vol. 40 No. 4, pp. 471-499.
Bagozzi, R.P., Bergami, M., Marzocchi, G. and Morandin, G.
(2012), “Customer-organization relationships: development
and test of a theory of extended identities”, Journal of Applied
Psychology, Vol. 97 No. 1, pp. 63-76.
Balakrishnan, B.K., Dahnil, M.I. and Yi, W.J. (2014), “The
impact of social media marketing medium toward purchase
intention and brand loyalty among generation Y”, Procedia-
Social and Behavioral Sciences, Vol. 148, pp. 177-185.
Baron, R.M. and Kenny, D.A. (1986), “The moderator–
mediator variable distinction in social psychological research:
conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations”, Journal
of Personality and Social Psychology, Vol. 51 No. 6,
pp. 1173-1182.
Batra, R. and Ahtola, O.T. (1991), “Measuring the hedonic
and utilitarian sources of consumer attitudes”, Marketing
Letters, Vol. 2 No. 2, pp. 159-170.
Bearden, W.O., Netemeyer, R.G. and Teel, J.E. (1989),
“Measurement of consumer susceptibility to interpersonal
influence”, Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 15 No. 4,
pp. 473-481.
Bickart, B. and Schindler, R.M. (2001), “Internet forums as
influential sources of consumer information”, Journal of
Interactive Marketing, Vol. 15 No. 3, pp. 31-40.
Binik, Y.M., Cantor, J., Ochs, E. and Meana, M. (1997),
“From the couch to the keyboard: psychotherapy in
cyberspace”, in Kiesler, S. (Eds), Culture of the Internet,
Lawrence Erlbaum, Mahwah, NJ, pp. 71-100.
Bronner, F. and de Hoog, R. (2010), “Consumer-generated
versus marketer-generated websites in consumer decision
making”, International Journal of Market Research, Vol. 52
No. 2, pp. 231-248.
Brown, J.J. and Reingen, P.H. (1987), “Social ties and word-
of-mouth referral behavior”, Journal of Consumer Research,
Vol. 14 No. 3, pp. 350-362.
Burkhardt, M.E. (1994), “Social interaction effects following a
technological change: a longitudinal investigation”, Academy
of Management Journal, Vol. 37 No. 4, pp. 868-896.
Chandon, P., Wansink, B. and Laurent, G. (2000), “A benefit
congruency framework of sales promotion effectiveness”,
Journal of Marketing, Vol. 64 No. 4, pp. 65-81.
Childers, T.L., Carr, C.C., Peck, J. and Carson, S. (2001),
“Hedonic and utilitarian motivations for online retail
shopping behavior”, Journal of Retailing, Vol. 77 No. 4,
pp. 511-535.
Cialdini, R.B. and Goldstein, N.J. (2004), “Social influence:
compliance and conformity”, Annual Review of Psychology,
Vol. 55 No. 1, pp. 591-621.
Constant, D., Sproull, L. and Kiesler, S. (1996), “The
kindness of strangers: the usefulness of electronic weak ties
for technical advice”, Organization Science, Vol. 7 No. 2,
pp. 119-135.
Contractor, N.S. and Eisenberg, E.M. (1990),
“Communication networks and new media in organizations”,
in Fulk, J. and Steinfield, C. (Eds), Organizations and
 Example of apparel brand fan pages
Li-Chun Hsu
Communication Technology, Sage, Newbury Park,
pp. 143-172.
Crowley, A.E., Spangenberg, E.R. and Hughes, K.R. (1992),
“Measuring the hedonic and utilitarian dimensions of
attitudes toward product categories”, Marketing Letters,
Vol. 3 No. 3, pp. 239-249.
Dodds, W.B., Monroe, K.B. and Grewal, D. (1991), “Effects
of price, brand, and store information on buyers’ product
evaluations”, Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 28 No. 3,
pp. 307-319.
Etkin, J. and Sela, A. (2015), “How experience variety shapes
post-purchase product evaluation”, Journal of Marketing
Research, Vol. 53 No. 1, pp. 77-90, available at: http://bear.
warrington.ufl.edu/sela/Etkin_Sela_2015_Experience_Variety.
pdf (accessed 2 July 2018).
Fazio, R.H. and Petty, R.E. (2007), Attitudes: Their Structure,
Function, and Consequences, Psychology Press, New York,
NY.
Fetscherin, M. and Heinrich, D. (2015), “Consumer brand
relationships research: a bibliometric citation meta-analysis”,
Journal of Business Research, Vol. 68 No. 2, pp. 380-390.
Fishbein, M. and Ajzen, I. (1975), Belief, Attitude, Intention,
and Behavior: An Introduction to Theory and Research,
Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA.
Hartmann, P., Apaolaza Ibáñez, V. and Forcada Sainz, F.J.
(2005), “Green branding effects on attitude: functional
versus emotional positioning strategies”, Marketing
Intelligence & Planning, Vol. 23 No. 1, pp. 9-29.
Heller, K. (1989), “The return to community”, American
Journal of Community Psychology, Vol. 17 No. 1, pp. 1-15.
Hirschman, E.C. and Holbrook, M.B. (1982), “Hedonic
consumption: emerging concepts, methods and
propositions”, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 46 No. 3,
pp. 92-101.
Holahan, C. (2007), “Facebook: marketers are your ‘friends’
Bloomberg”, available at: www.businessweek.com/stories/
2007-11-07/facebook-marketers-are (accessed 8 July 2016).
Hollenbeck, C.R. and Kaikati, A.M. (2012), “Consumers’ use
of brands to reflect their actual and ideal selves on
Facebook”, International Journal of Research in Marketing,
Vol. 29 No. 4, pp. 395-405.
Homburg, C., Klarmann, M. and Schmitt, J. (2010), “Brand
awareness in business markets: when is it related to firm
performance?”, International Journal of Research in Marketing,
Vol. 27 No. 3, pp. 201-212.
Jalilvand, M.R. and Samiei, N. (2012), “The effect of
electronic word of mouth on brand image and purchase
intention: an empirical study in the automobile industry in
Iran”, Marketing Intelligence & Planning, Vol. 30 No. 4,
pp. 460-476.
Kalafatis, S.P., Pollard, M., East, R. and Tsogas, M.H. (1999),
“Green marketing and Ajzen’s theory of planned behaviour:
a cross-market examination”, Journal of Consumer Marketing,
Vol. 16 No. 5, pp. 441-460.
Kushwaha, T. (2014), “An exploratory study of consumer’s
perception about relational benefits in retailing”, Procedia-
Social and Behavioral Sciences, Vol. 133, pp. 438-446.
Laroche, M., Habibi, M.R., Richard, M.O. and
Sankaranarayanan, R. (2012), “The effects of social media
based brand communities on brand community markers, value
50
Journal of Product & Brand Management
Volume 29 · Number 1 · 2020 · 31–51
creation practices, brand trust and brand loyalty”, Computers in
Human Behavior, Vol. 28 No. 5, pp. 1755-1767.
Lee, K.T. and Koo, D.M. (2012), “Effects of attribute and
valence of e-WOM on message adoption: moderating
roles of subjective knowledge and regulatory focus”,
Computers in Human Behavior, Vol. 28 No. 5,
pp. 1974-1984.
Leenders, R.T.A.J. (2002), “Modeling social influence through
network autocorrelation: constructing the weight matrix”,
Social Networks, Vol. 24 No. 1, pp. 21-47.
Lord, K.R., Lee, M.S. and Choong, P. (2001), “Differences in
normative and informational social influence”, Advances in
Consumer Research, Vol. 28 No. 1, pp. 280-285.
Luo, N., Zhang, M. and Liu, W. (2015), “The effects of
value co-creation practices on building harmonious
brand community and achieving brand loyalty on social
media in China”, Computers in Human Behavior, Vol. 48,
pp. 492-499.
McMillan, D.W. and Chavis, D.M. (1986), “Sense of
community: a definition and theory”, Journal of Community
Psychology, Vol. 14 No. 1, pp. 6-23.
Mitchell, A.A. and Olson, J.C. (1981), “Are product attribute
beliefs the only mediator of advertising effects on brand
attitude?”, Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 18 No. 3,
pp. 318-332.
Monge, P.R. and Contractor, N.S. (2003), Theories of
Communication Networks, Oxford University, New York, NY.
Muñiz, A.M., Jr. and O’Guinn, T.C. (2001), “Brand
community”, Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 27 No. 4,
pp. 412-432.
Munoz, T. and Kumar, S. (2004), “Brand metrics: gauging
and linking brands with business performance”, Journal of
Brand Management, Vol. 11 No. 5, pp. 381-387.
Nambisan, S. and Baron, R.A. (2009), “Virtual customer
environments: testing a model of voluntary participation in
value co-creation activities”, Journal of Product Innovation
Management, Vol. 26 No. 4, pp. 388-406.
Neal, W.D. (2000), “For most consumers, loyalty isn’t an
attitude”, Marketing News, Vol. 10, pp. 7-9.
Nedungadi, P., Chattopadhyay, A. and Muthukrishnan, A.V.
(2001), “Category structure, brand recall, and choice”,
International Journal of Research in Marketing, Vol. 18 No. 3,
pp. 191-202.
O’Guinn, T.C. and Muniz, A.M. Jr. (2009), “Collective brand
relationships”, in MacInnis, D.J., Park, C.W. and Priester, J.
R. (Eds), Handbook of Brand Relationships, M.E. Sharpe,
Armonk, New York, NY, pp. 173-194.
Parts, O. (2013), “The effects of cosmopolitanism on consumer
ethnocentrism, Brand origin identification and foreign
product purchases”, International Journal of Business and
Social Research, Vol. 3 No. 11, pp. 30-44.
Sabate, F., Berbegal-Mirabent, J., Cañabate, A. and Lebherz,
P.R. (2014), “Factors influencing popularity of branded
content in Facebook fan pages”, European Management
Journal, Vol. 32 No. 6, pp. 1001-1011.
Sánchez-Franco, M.J. and Roldán, J.L. (2005), “Web
acceptance and usage model: a comparison between goal-
directed and experiential web users”, Internet Research,
Vol. 15 No. 1, pp. 21-48.
 Example of apparel brand fan pages
Li-Chun Hsu
Shapiro, S. and Krishnan, H.S. (2001), “Memory-based
measures for assessing advertising effects: a comparison of
explicit and implicit memory effects”, Journal of Advertising,
Vol. 30 No. 3, pp. 1-13.
Tsai, H. and Bagozzi, R. (2014), “Contribution behavior in
virtual communities: cognitive, emotional, and social
influences”, MIS Quarterly, Vol. 38 No. 1, pp. 143-164.
University of Twente (2010), “Contagion theories”, available at:
www.utwente.nl/cw/theorieenoverzicht/Theory%20Clusters/
Interpersonal%20Communication%20and%20Relations/
Contagion_theories/ (accessed 9 July 2010).
Valls, J.F., Andrade, M.J. and Arribas, R. (2011), “Consumer
attitudes towards brands in times of great price sensitivity:
four case studies”, Innovative Marketing, Vol. 7 No. 2,
pp. 60-70.
For instructions on how to order reprints of this article, please visit our website:
www.emeraldgrouppublishing.com/licensing/reprints.htm
Or contact us for further details: permissions@emeraldinsight.com
51
Journal of Product & Brand Management
Volume 29 · Number 1 · 2020 · 31–51
About the author
Li-Chun Hsu is an Associate Professor of Department of
Cultural Resources and Leisure Industries at National
Taitung University. His research interests include brand-
community relationship, social media, e-commerce and
tourist behaviour research. He has published more than 80
papers in journals and conferences. His work has appeared in
Cyberpsychology, Behavior and Social Networking, Computers in
Human Behavior, Industrial Marketing Management, Journal of
Service Theory and Practice, Industrial Management & Data
Systems, Online information Review, Information Systems and e-
Business Management, Journal of Theoretical and Applied
Electronic Commerce Research, International Journal of Mobile
Communications and Service Industries Journal, etc. Li-Chun
Hsu can be contacted at: lchsu@nttu.edu.tw