Brand community motives and their impact on brand community engagement: variations between diverse audiences
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose The purpose of this research is to compare two different sample populations (student and general) to determine the impact of brand community motives on brand community engagement. Design/methodology/approach Two samples were drawn for the purpose of the current research. The first sample was drawn among the members of various brand communities from a general North American population sample ( N = 503). The second sample was drawn purely from students, belonging to a variety of brand communities, from a middle-sized Canadian university ( N = 195). Partial least squares structural equation modelling was used to analyse the strength, significance and effect sizes of the relationships between brand community motive and engagement constructs. Findings The findings indicate that the impact of brand community motives varied by sample population. The information and entertainment motives were significantly related to brand community engagement in both sample populations with roughly equal effect sizes. The social integration motive was again significantly related to the brand community engagement construct in the student sample population – but not for the general North American general population sample. Further, the self-discovery motive and status enhancement motives were significantly related to brand community engagement in the North American sample, but not for the student sample. This indicates significant differences between the two sample populations. Originality/value The results of the current research demonstrate that student populations are significantly different from the general population regarding their motives towards brand communities. This indicates that brand community managers need to be aware of the motives of different brand community members and also that they need to exercise caution about utilizing purely student data to make decisions about brand community management.
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.
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 | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 it