Customer Engagement and Sharing Behaviors–Model Inventory

Abstract

The Customer Engagement and Sharing Behaviors–Model (Taylor et al., 2023) was developed to explore a negative quadratic nonlinear relationship among consumers within online brand communities (OBCs) on Facebook brand pages in the United States. This study specifically investigated how higher customer engagement (CE) levels could adversely affect sharing behavior intention (SBI). The proposed items for this measurement model were adapted from existing research by Carlson et al. (2019), Jahn and Kunz (2012), So et al. (2016), and Labrecque (2014). The resulting measure was administered to a sample of Facebook OBC users, and the study reported findings related to its factor structure, reliability, and validity.

Keywords

Customer Engagement; Online Brand Communities; Perceived Innovativeness; Perceived Interactivity; Sharing Behavior Intention; Social Media; Brand Names; Consumer Attitudes; Consumer Behavior; Creativity; Digital Marketing; Consumer Measures; Behavioral Intention; Online Community.

Authors

Taylor, Alex; Carlson, Jamie; Liao, Yi-Chuan; Rahman, Mohammad M.

---

Purpose

The primary purpose of this measurement model is to assess the effects of customer engagement and sharing behaviors, specifically investigating a potential negative quadratic nonlinear relationship between customer engagement (CE) levels and sharing behavior intention (SBI) within online brand communities (OBCs).

Validity

Content Validity: The findings indicated that one item had a value (0.66) below the threshold of 0.70. To ensure a more robust measurement, this item was deleted, and the hierarchical regression model was re-run to validate the hypotheses. The results remained unchanged. Despite this, the item was retained to ensure content validity.

Convergent and Discriminant Validity: All average variances extracted were greater than 0.50, suggesting appropriate convergent validity (Bagozzi & Yi, 1988; Fornell & Larcker, 1981). Additionally, the HTMT values were below the 0.90 benchmark (Henseler et al., 2015), providing evidence of discriminant validity.

Reliability

Internal Consistency: The reliability of the scale was supported by Cronbach’s alpha and Composite Reliability (CR) values, both of which exceeded the threshold of 0.70 (Fornell & Larcker, 1981; Hair et al., 2006; Netemeyer et al., 2003).

Factor Analysis

Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA): The CFA of the four-construct Customer Engagement (CE) model indicated a good overall fit with the data (χ2/d.f. = 1,292.46/224, RMSEA = 0.10, CFI = 0.98, IFI = 0.98, RFI = 0.98). All but one item loaded significantly on its corresponding latent construct, with satisfactory lambda values above 0.70.

Common Method Variance: Harman’s single-factor test results indicated a less optimal fit with the data (χ2 = 2009.49 with 230 degrees of freedom) compared to the assigned four-construct model (McFarlin and Sweeney, 1992). Collectively, these results suggested no evidence of common method variance.

Instrument: Customer Engagement and Sharing Behaviors–Model

Test Type: Original
Format: All items are rated on a 7-point Likert scale.
Language Available: English
Population Group: Human; Male; Female
Age Group: Adulthood (18 yrs & older)
Population Details:

• Location: United States

• Respondents: Social Media Users

• Mean Age: 39.34 Years
  Test Methodology: Test Validity; Content Validity; Convergent Validity; Discriminant Validity; Test Reliability; Internal Consistency; Factor Analysis; Confirmatory Factor Analysis; Measurement Model

Keywords

Customer Engagement; Online Brand Communities; Perceived Innovativeness; Perceived Interactivity; Sharing Behavior Intention; Social Media.

Authors

Author ORCID Identifier: No data is Available

Affiliation and Email Addresses:

• Taylor, Alex

  • Affiliation: University of Newcastle, Newcastle Business School

  • Email: [email protected]

• Carlson, Jamie

  • Affiliation: University of Newcastle, Newcastle Business School

  • Email: [email protected]

• Liao, Yi-Chuan

  • Affiliation: National Dong Hwa University in Hualien, Department of Business Administration

  • Email: [email protected]

• Rahman, Mohammad M.

  • Affiliation: Shippensburg University, John L. Grove College of Business, Department of Management/Marketing/Entrepreneurship

  • Email: No data is Available

Correspondence Address:

Liao, Yi-Chuan: National Dong Hwa University in Hualien, Department of Business Administration, Hualien, Taiwan, Province of China, [email protected]

Permissions & Fee and Test Year

Permissions: May use for Research/Teaching
Fee: No
Test Year: 2023

References

Taylor, A., Carlson, J., Liao, Y.-C., & Rahman, M. M. (2023). Customer engagement and sharing behaviors: Toward a contingent curvilinear perspective. Journal of Business Research, 154, Article 113284. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2022.08.048

Items of the Customer Engagement and Sharing Behaviors–Model

This measure includes 23 items.
Constructs: Perceived Innovativeness; Perceived Interactivity; Customer Engagement (Enthusiasm; Attention; Absorption; Interaction; Identification); Sharing behavior intention.

Perceived Innovativeness (Carlson, et al., 2019)

• The online brand community (OBC) content is highly innovative compared with others that I have seen.

• The OBC delivers an innovative experience.

• The OBC offered a unique experience for customers that is different from those that other OBCs offer.

Perceived Interactivity (Jahn and Kunz, 2012)

• I can get answers from the brand on this OBC.

• I can interact easily with the brand on this OBC.

• I can communicate effectively with the brand on this OBC.

Customer Engagement (So et al., 2016)
Enthusiasm

• I love this OBC.

• I am enthusiastic about this OBC.

• I am passionate about this OBC.
  Attention

• I pay a lot of attention to anything on this OBC.

• Anything related to this brand on the OBC grabs my attention.

• I like to learn more about this brand through the OBC.
  Absorption

• When interacting with the OBC intensely, I feel happy.

• When interacting with the OBC, it is difficult to detach myself.

• When I am interacting with the OBC, I forget everything else around me.
  Interaction

• I am an interacting member of this OBC community.

• I am an active member of this OBC community.

• I am a participating user of this OBC community.
  Identification

• When someone criticizes this brand on the OBC, it feels like a personal insult.

• I am very interested in what others think about this OBC.

SBI (Labrecque, 2014)

• I will share this brand’s OBC content in the future.

• I intend to “like” this brand’s OBC content.

• I will comment on this brand’s OBC content in the future.

Note. All items are rated on a 7-point Likert scale (ranging from 1 “strongly disagree” to 7 “strongly agree”). Sharing Behavior Intention = SBI