Motivations to Use Different Social Media Types and Their Impact on Consumers’ Online Brand-Related Activities (COBRAs)

Abstract

Using a six-dimension uses and gratifications (U&G) framework, we explore how social media use motivations drive consumers’ online brand-related activities (COBRAs: consumption, contribution, and creation of brand-related content). We examine these relationships for different social media types by drawing on two previously suggested dimensions, namely their nature of connections and level of customization of messages. Using a US-based sample ( n = 939), findings of a PLS-SEM procedure show that “traditional” U&G hardly explain social media COBRAs. In contrast, Empowerment and Remuneration motives—two U&G specifically relevant for social media use—are the most critical COBRAs drivers. Multigroup analyses suggest that the relation between U&G and COBRAs differs between social media platforms classified either as: (a) profile- or content-based; or as employing (b) customized or broadcast messages. We argue for a specific design of brand-related activities on different social media in order to incentivize users’ engagement with brand-related content.

It takes two to tango: the interplay between decision logics, communication strategies and social media engagement in start-ups

“…We find in the data that information strategy is typically implemented on Twitter, while involvement (and response) are rather used to communicate on Facebook. This finding is in line with the assumption that different social media channels not only come with different technical capabilities and features but also that they are associated with characteristic engagement experiences and expectations (Buzeta et al 2020). Voorveld et al (2018) found that Facebook is strongly associated with engagement expectations related to social interaction.…”

To post or not to post? Exploring the motivations behind brand-related engagement types on social networking sites

“…It is established as a factor in eWOM studies (e.g., Hennig-Thurau et al, 2004) and a motive of consumers' brand-related engagement on social media (Buzeta et al, 2020;Muntinga et al, 2011).…”

“…Social media gives empowerment to consumers to speak about brands and organisations (Bertot et al, 2010) It has been employed as a motive to understand consumers' engagement with brand-related content on social media (Buzeta et al, 2020;Muntinga et al, 2011).…”

“…It refers to economic incentives (Buzeta et al, 2020;Wang and Fesenmaier, 2003), job-related benefits (Nov, 2007) and personal wants (Hars and Ou, 2001). It is associated with extrinsic motivation (Deci and Ryan, 2000) Established as a motivation to understand consumers' brandrelated engagement on social media (Muntinga et al, 2011).…”

How a Smart Technology Imposed by an Organization Can Arouse Ambivalent Psychological Empowerment: An Approach Leveraging the Theory of Social Representations

“…Finally, the last dimension of psychological empowerment, impact, refers to the degree to which an individual believes he or she can influence or provoke changes in the outcomes of the organization (Seligman, 1975). The concept of psychological empowerment has also recently been used in the marketing literature to study consumer behavior and relationships with brands, specifically in the contexts of cocreation of innovation (Auh et al, 2019;Fuchs, Prandelli & Schreier, 2010;Füller et al, 2009), health (Prigge, 2015), participation in social media activities (Buzeta, De Pelsmacker & Dens, 2020;Saridakis et al, 2016), and, lately, self-service technologies (Schweitzer & Simon, 2021).…”