The Antecedents and Consequences of Consumers’ Participations in Social Media Marketing Activities

Öz

Learning the antecedents and consequences of consumers’ participations in social media marketing activities is very important for the firms. The aims of this study are to investigate (1) the reasons consumers participate in social media activities (2) factors affecting this participation (3) consequences of this participation that the firms get. After a comprehensive literature review, a research model was developed and hypotheses based on literature reviewed were developed and tested following quantitative method. Two brands in two different product categories were selected and quantitative data was collected from 344 participants via a questionnaire. Exploratory and confirmatory analyses were conducted using SPSS and LISREL and a structural equation modelling was run. The findings showed that consumers participate firms’ social media marketing activities because of the entertainment, interaction, customization and keeping up with the fashion. Brand trust and memorable experiences affect consumers’ participation on social media marketing activities. Finally this study revealed that the more participations on social media marketing activities are the more consumers’ re-purchase intention and word-of-mouth communication

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Social media marketing activities, memorable experiences, brand trust, product involvement, re-purchase intention and word-ofmouth communication

Tüketicilerin Sosyal Medya Pazarlama Aktivitelerine Katılımlarının Etkileyicileri ve Sonuçları

Öz

İşletmeler açısından tüketicilerin sosyal medya pazarlama aktivitelerine katılımlarını etkileyen faktörler ve katılımlarının sonuçlarının bilinmesi oldukça önemlidir. Bu çalışmanın amacı; (1) tüketicilerin sosyal medya aktivitelerine katılımlarının nedenleri, (2) katılımlarının etkileyicileri ve (3) sonuçları araştırılmasıdır. Literatür taraması sonucunda ortaya çıkan modelin ve hipotezlerin sınanması için nicel bir araştırma yöntemi seçilmiştir. Anket yöntemi ile iki farklı ürün grubundan ikişer marka seçilerek uygulama yapılmış ve 344 katılımcıdan veriler toplanmıştır. Analiz için SPSS ve Lisrel paket programları aracılığıyla açıklayıcı ve doğrulayıcı faktör analizleri ile yapısal eşitlik analizi kullanılmıştır. Çalışma sonuçlarında eğlence, etkileşim, modayı takip ve kişiselleştirme nedenleri ile tüketicilerin sosyal medya pazarlama aktivitelerine katılım gösterdikleri bulunmuştur. Katılımı olumlu etkileyen faktörler ise tüketicilerin marka güveni ve hatırlamaya değer tecrübeleridir. Tüketicilerin katılımları ne kadar artar ise ise satın alma niyeti ve kulaktan kulağa iletişim eğilimleri de o derece de artmaktadır

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Sosyal medya pazarlama aktiviteleri, hatırlamaya değer tecrübeler, marka güveni, ürün ilgilenimi, tekrar satın alma niyeti ve kulaktan kulağa iletişim

Kaynakça

1. Agapito, D., Mendes, J., ve Valle, P. (2013) “Exploring the Conceptualization of the Sensory Dimension of
2. Tourist Experiences”. Journal of Destination Marketing and Management, 2(2), 62-73. Allsop, D. T., Bassett, B. R., ve Hoskins, J. A. (2007) “Word- of-mouth Research: Principles and Applications”. Journal of Advertising Research, 47(4), 398-411.
3. Braunsberger, K. ve Munch, J. M. (1998) “Source Expertise
4. Versus Experience Effects in Hospital Advertising”, Journal of Services Marketing, 12(1), 23–38. Carroll, B.A. ve Ahuvia, A.C. (2006) “Some Antecedents and Outcomes of Brand Love”, Marketing Letters, 17(2), ‐89.
5. Celsi, R. ve Olson, J. (1988) “The Role of Involvement in
6. Attention and Comprehension Processes”, Journal of Consumer Research, 15, 210–224. Chaudhuri, A. ve Holbrook, M. B. (2001) “The Chain of Effects from Brand Trust and Brand Affect to Brand
7. Performance: The Role of Brand Loyalty”, Journal of Marketing, 65(2), 81-93. Chiu, C. M., Huang, H. Y., ve Yen, C. H. (2010) “Antecedents of Online Trust in Online Auctions”, “Electronic Commerce
8. Research and Application”, 9, 148–159. Delgado-Ballester, E. ve Luis Munuera-Alemán, J. (2005)

9. “Does Brand Trust Matter to Brand Equity?”, Journal of Product and Brand Management, 14(3), 187-196. Dholakia, U. M. (1998) “Involvement-response Models of
10. Joint Effects: An Empirical Test and Extension”, Advances in Consumer Research, 25(1), 499-506. Ha, H. Y. ve Perks, H. (2005) “Effects of Consumer
11. Perceptions of Brand Experience on the Web: Brand Familiarity, Satisfaction and Brand Trust”. Journal of Consumer Behaviour, 4(6), 438-452. Habibi, M. R., Laroche, M., ve Richard, M. O. (2014)
12. “The Roles of Brand Community and Community Engagement in Building Brand Trust on Social Media”. Computers in Human Behavior, 37, 152-161. Harris, R. (2009) “Social Media Ecosystem Mapped as a Wiring Diagram”, http://www.twitterthoughts. com/social-media-newsanalyses/2009/9/3/social- mediaecosystem-mapped-as-a-wiringdiagram.html? printerFriendly=true.
13. Harvin, R. (2000) “In Internet Branding: The Off-Lines
14. Have It”, Brandweek, 41(4), 30-31. Hellier, P. K., Geursen, G. M., Carr, Rodney A. ve Rickard, J. A. 2003” “Customer Repurchase Intention: A General
15. Structural Equation Model”, European Journal of Marketing, 37(11), 1762-1800.
16. Helmig, B., Huber, J. A., ve Leeflang, P. (2007) “Explaining
17. Behavioural Intentions toward Co-Branded Products”. Journal of Marketing Management, 23(3-4), 285-304. Hennig‐Thurau, T., Gwinner, K. P., Walsh, G., ve Gremler, D. D. (2004) “Electronic Word‐of‐mouth via Consumer‐
18. Opinion Platforms: What Motivates Consumers to Articulate Themselves on the Internet?”. Journal of Interactive Marketing, 18(1), 38-52. Kaplan, A. M., ve Haenlein, M. (2010) “Users of the World,
19. Unite The Challenges and Opportunities of Social Media”, Business Horizons, 53(1), 59–68. Kim, A. J. ve Ko, E. (2012) “Do Social Media Marketing
20. Activities Enhance Customer Equiy? An Empirical Study of Luxury Fashion Brand”, Journal of Business Research, , 1480-1486.
21. Williams, L. ve Cothrell, J. (2000) “Four Smart Ways to
22. Run Online Communities”, Sloan Management Review, , 81-91
23. Lang, B. (2010) “Ipsos OTX Study: People Spend More
24. Than Half Their Day Consuming Media”, http://www. thewrap.com/node/21005.
25. Mangold, W. G. ve Faulds, D. J. (2009) “Social media: The New Hybrid Element of the Promotion Mix”. Business Horizons, 52(4), 357-365.
26. Norback, M. (2005) “Cross-promoting and branding of media product portfolios”, in Picard, R.G. (Ed.), Media
27. Portfolios, Issues in Management of Multiple Products and Services, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah, NJ, 139-166. Powers, T., Advincula, D., Austin, M. S., Graiko, S., ve Snyder, J. (2012) “Digital and Social Media in the Purchase Decision Process: A Special Report from the Advertising Research Foundation”, Journal of Advertising Research, 52(4), 479-489.
28. Sarason, S. B. (1974) The Psychological Sense of
29. Community: Prospects for the Community Psychology, Jossey-Bass, San Francisco. Stokburger-Sauer, N., Ratneshwar, S., ve Sen, S. (2012)
30. “Drivers of Consumer-Brand Identification”, International Journal of Research in Marketing, 29(4), 406-418. Trusov, M., Bucklin, R. E., ve Pauwels, K. (2009) “Effects of
31. Word-of-mouth versus Traditional Marketing: Findings from an Internet Social Networking Site”, Journal of Marketing, 73(5), 90-102. Vollmer, C. ve Precourt, G. (2008) Always on: Advertising,
32. Marketing, and Media in an Era of Consumer Control. New York: McGraw-Hill. Warrington, P., ve Shim, S. (2000) “An Empirical
33. Investigation of the Relationship between Product Involvement and Brand Commitment”, Psychology and Marketing, 17(9), 761-782. Williams, R. L. ve Cothrel, J. (2000) “Four Smart Ways to Run Online Communities”, MIT Sloan Management Review, 41(4), 81.
34. Zeithaml, V.A., Berry, L., ve Parasuraman, A. (1996) “The
35. Behavioral Consequences of Service Quality”, Journal of Marketing, 60(2), 31-46.