The role of advertising through social networks to promote brand equity
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Social networks are online gathering places for people who would like to share their interests and activities. In this context, advertising through social networks is one of the most important topics in the field of marketing and brand that has been considered only in few studies. This study examines the impact of advertising on brand equity through social networks in the beverage industry (PepsiCo). This research study was to survey and collect data from the a standard questionnaire. PepsiCo brand, which is a well known beverage industry worldwide is selected for the proposed study of this paper. Thus, all customers of Pepsi products in city of Tehran are considered as statistical research community and a sample size of 385 people is selected for the proposed study. In order to analyze the data, we use structural equations method and certified factor analysis. The results of our survey indicate that advertisement on social networks has a positive impact in this industry. Based on the results of our survey, we realize that there are some positive relationship between social network advertisement and quality perception, brand loyalty, brand awareness and brand association when the level of significance is one percent.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".