Does social currency matter in creation of enhanced brand experience?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose – This study aims to demonstrate the importance of the newly developed concept of social currency as an antecedent of brand experience in the context of cosmetics consumption. In other words, the authors suggest that social currency could act as a brand experience provider. Design/methodology/approach – Data collection was made through a paper and pencil survey. The sample consisted mostly of undergraduate and graduate students recruited on a voluntary basis at a large northeastern university. Self-administered questionnaires were filled by 373 participants, who were instructed to think about their favourite brand when it comes to buying cosmetic products for themselves. Findings – Results showed that social currency positively impacts all four dimensions of brand experience, i.e. sensory, affective, behavioural and intellectual experiences. The findings also suggest that conversation, advocacy and affiliation are the three significant dimensions of social currency when it comes to the consumption of cosmetics. Originality/value – This study reveals, for the first time, how the concept of social currency could enhance a fundamental component of brand equity, i.e. brand experience. Another important contribution of this research is the establishment of higher levels of validity for the newly developed concept of social currency. This study would also contribute to the investigation of brand experience antecedents, which have been little addressed in the literature on the emerging paradigm of experiential marketing.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".