2017
DOI: 10.18533/ijbsr.v7i8.1055
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

The Impact of Brand Personality and Students’ Self-Concept on Brand Engagement

Abstract: The objective of this study is to investigate how brand personality and customers' 'self' affects brand engagement. This has become necessary because the focus of most research into brands has often neglected how brand personality and customers' 'self' can be harnessed to achieve brand engagement. This study used Aaker's brand personality, Keller's brand engagement, and Sprott et. al. self-concept measurement scales. The research methodology includes the following steps: adaptation of the measurement scales to… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

1
7
0

Year Published

2017
2017
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
8

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 11 publications
(8 citation statements)
references
References 18 publications
1
7
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Therefore, the statistics support the hypothesis that brand personality has a positive effect on customer brand engagement. This concords with the general findings of Andonova (2016), Banahene (2017), Cruz and Lee (2014), Goldsmith and Goldsmith (2012), Jain and Yadav (2019), Lee et al (2018b) and Tamhankar and Pandit (2018).…”
Section: Resultssupporting
confidence: 88%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Therefore, the statistics support the hypothesis that brand personality has a positive effect on customer brand engagement. This concords with the general findings of Andonova (2016), Banahene (2017), Cruz and Lee (2014), Goldsmith and Goldsmith (2012), Jain and Yadav (2019), Lee et al (2018b) and Tamhankar and Pandit (2018).…”
Section: Resultssupporting
confidence: 88%
“…Previous studies on this question have stressed the need of examining the effect of brand personality on customer brand engagement (Leckie et al, 2016). The analyzes carried out by Andonova (2016), Banahene (2017), Cruz and Lee (2014), Goldsmith and Goldsmith (2012), Lee et al (2018b) and Tamhankar and Pandit (2018) have in fact established its influence on customer engagement.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…For all constructs, we used the same question (“Please select the option that applies to each of the statements below”) and a seven-point scale has been adopted (ranging from 1 = “Not likely at all” to 7 = “Extremely likely” for support, from 1 = “Strongly disagree” to 7 = “Strongly agree” for engagement, trust, and commitment and from 1 = “Do not agree” to 7 = “Completely agree” for attitude/intention toward donations). More specifically, the statements concerning engagement were formulated through a revision of the scale proposed by Banahene ( 2017 ), while those related to trust were developed and validated by Jillapalli and Jillapalli ( 2014 ). The alumni support items were extracted and adapted starting from the study of Bellezza and Keinan ( 2014 ), while the scale proposed by Jillapalli and Jillapalli ( 2014 ) has been adapted to measure the concept of commitment.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Indeed, previous research suggests that if managers were able to enhance the sales experience by reducing perceptions of opportunism among the salesforce, the customer's engagement with the retailer would increase (e.g., Keller, 2001;Banahene, 2017), thereby increasing the likelihood that they are a repeat purchaser and share their experience with others (e.g., Riivits-Arkonsuo & Leppman, 2015).…”
Section: Conclusion Limitations and Future Researchmentioning
confidence: 99%