Are you engaged? The influence of brand schematicity on online brand engagement and brand purchase

Abstract

Purpose Consumers’ engagement with brands online is increasingly important for marketers for both promotion of their brand’s message and sales. The purpose of this paper is to examine if consumers’ brand schematicity, a generalized consumer disposition to process information using brand schema, influenced their proclivity to engage with brands online through consuming and co-creating brand-related content, and the influence of online brand engagement on actual purchase of brands. Design/methodology/approach Two experiments were conducted to test the hypotheses. Findings Study 1 shows that brand schematicity increases online brand consumption and online brand co-creation and Study 2 shows that this online brand engagement is not always beneficial to brands in terms of sales. Specifically, because of resource depletion, consumers who co-create brand content online may purchase brands less while those that consume online brand content purchase more brands. Originality/value There is a lack of previous research addressing individual differences in consumers’ online brand engagement that this paper investigates. Further, a generalized, dispositional variable such as brand schematicity has not been hitherto investigated in the context of consumers’ online behavior. Finally, this paper shows counter-intuitive effects of online brand engagement on brand purchase.

Why do consumers prefer a hometown geographical indication brand? Exploring the role of consumer identification with the brand and psychological ownership

“…Consumer‐brand interaction and engagement through participation and connection in engagement in the brand community will increase brand purchasing and brand sharing behavior (Qin, 2020). Eventually, brand consumption becomes a way of identifying their social group and brand community (Dessart & Veloutsou, 2021; Liao & Wang, 2020; Puligadda et al., 2021) through consumer‐brand interaction and engagement in choice of hometown brand over non‐hometown brand.…”

Like it or not! Brand communication on social networking sites triggers consumer‐based brand equity

“…There is a variation in the derived dimensions of consumers’ online engagement with the brand (Choudrie et al., 2020; Hao et al., 2021; Puligadda et al., 2021). Marketing communications are progressively associated with social media, which develop and sustain consumer‐BEQ (Algharabat et al., 2020).…”

Fans behave as buyers? Assimilate fan-based and team-based drivers of fan engagement

“…Several authors indicate that customer engagement studies should be extended across different contexts (e.g. Hollebeek et al , 2016; Puligadda et al , 2021; Santos et al , 2019).…”

“…Several authors indicate that customer engagement studies should be extended across different contexts (e.g. Hollebeek et al, 2016;Puligadda et al, 2021;Santos et al, 2019). Accordingly, the primary aims of this study include providing a clear conceptualisation of FE, understanding the key motivates for fans to engage with their favourite teams, and recognising the impact of FE behaviours on fans' purchase intentions.…”