Exploring the Influential Factors of Personal Media Bloggers on Followers’ Continuous Following Intention Based on Relationship Marketing Theory
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Theoretical Background
2.1. Personal Media Blogger
2.2. Relationship Mediator Meta-Analytic Framework
2.3. Communication
2.4. Attractiveness and Expertise
2.5. Social Presence and Fanship
2.6. Continued Usage Intention and Word of Mouth
3. Research Model and Research Hypothesis
3.1. Research Hypothesis
3.1.1. The Effect of Personal Media Blogger Attributes on Social Presence and Fanship
3.1.2. The Effect of Communication on Social Presence and Fanship
3.1.3. The Effect of Social Presence on Word of Mouth and Usage Intention
3.1.4. The Effect of Fanship on Word-of-Mouth Spread and Willingness to Continue Using
3.2. Research Model
4. Research Methodology
4.1. Definitions of Variables and Instruments
- Expertise (E): Expertise is defined as the professional knowledge and skills of a blogger and is measured using a scale of four items. The measurement dimensions of expertise were adapted from Gilmore and Pine’s study (2007) [63] and were appropriately modified and adjusted based on the characteristics of personal media bloggers, resulting in a final set of 7 items.
- Attractiveness (A): Attractiveness is defined as the beauty and appeal of a blogger’s image and appearance and is measured using a scale of two items. The dimension of attractiveness was measured by adapting and adjusting the measurement items from the study by Kim and Jun (2016) [64], and we included 2 items that were specific to personal media bloggers.
- Communication (C): Communication is defined as the level of interaction and emotional connection between a blogger and their fans and is adapted from two items from the study by Cho and Lim [65].
- Social presence (SP): Social presence is defined as the feeling of closeness between a blogger and their fans when using their personal media platform and is measured with four items from the study by Cho and Lim [65].
- Fanship (F): Fanship is defined as the degree of fanaticism of followers toward bloggers and is measured using a scale of seven items proposed by Lee [66].
- Usage intention (UI): Usage intention is defined as the satisfaction experienced by personal media followers after following bloggers and their desire to continue following them. The measurement dimension of usage intention is based on the questionnaire developed by Kim et al. [67] and was modified to include two items.
- Word of mouth (WOM): Word of mouth is defined as the tendency of personal media followers to recommend the bloggers that they follow to others, thereby generating word-of-mouth effects. The measurement dimension of word of mouth is based on the questionnaire developed by Zeithaml et al. [68] and was adjusted to consist of two items.
4.2. Samples and Data Collection
4.3. Methodology
4.4. Research Results
4.4.1. Descriptive Statistics
4.4.2. Reliability and Validity Analysis
CFA of Latent Variables
Discriminant Validity of Latent Variables
4.5. Hypothesis Testing
4.6. Mediation Effect Test
5. Discussion
5.1. Key Findings
5.2. Theoretical Contributions
5.3. Implications for Practice
5.4. Limitations and Future Research Suggestions
Author Contributions
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Informed Consent Statement
Data Availability Statement
Conflicts of Interest
References
- China Internet Network Information Center. The 49th Statistical Report on Internet Development in China; China Internet Network Information Center: Beijing, China, 2022. [Google Scholar]
- Harrigan, P.; Daly, T.M.; Coussement, K.; Lee, J.A.; Soutar, G.N.; Evers, U. Identifying Influencers on Social Media. Int. J. Inf. Manag. 2021, 56, 102246. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Schouten, A.P.; Janssen, L.; Verspaget, M. Celebrity vs. Influencer Endorsements in Advertising: The Role of Identification, Credibility, and Product-Endorser Fit. Int. J. Advert. 2019, 39, 258–281. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kim, J.; Kim, M. Rise of Social Media Influencers as a New Marketing Channel: Focusing on the Roles of Psychological Well-Being and Perceived Social Responsibility among Consumers. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2022, 19, 2362. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Sokolova, K.; Kefi, H. Instagram and YouTube Bloggers Promote It, Why Should I Buy? How Credibility and Parasocial Interaction Influence Purchase Intentions. J. Retail. Consum. Serv. 2020, 53, 101742. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Belanche, D.; Flavián, M.; Sánchez, S.I. Followers’ Reactions to Influencers’ Instagram Posts. Span. J. Mark. ESIC, 2020; ahead-of-print. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Alfarraj, O.; Alalwan, A.A.; Obeidat, Z.M.; Baabdullah, A.; Aldmour, R.; Al-Haddad, S. Examining the Impact of Influencers’ Credibility Dimensions: Attractiveness, Trustworthiness and Expertise on the Purchase Intention in the Aesthetic Dermatology Industry. Int. J. Commer. Manag. 2021, 31, 355–374. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Masuda, H.; Han, S.H.; Lee, J. Impacts of Influencer Attributes on Purchase Intentions in Social Media Influencer Marketing: Mediating Roles of Characterizations. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Chang. 2022, 174, 121246. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kim, M. How Can I Be as Attractive as a Fitness YouTuber in the Era of COVID-19? The Impact of Digital Attributes on Flow Experience, Satisfaction, and Behavioral Intention. J. Retail. Consum. Serv. 2022, 64, 102778. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ladhari, R.; Massa, E.; Skandrani, H. YouTube Vloggers’ Popularity and Influence: The Roles of Homophily, Emotional Attachment, and Expertise. J. Retail. Consum. Serv. 2020, 54, 102027. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Belanche, D.; Casaló, L.V.; Flavián, M.; Ibáez-Sánchez, S. Building Influencers’ Credibility on Instagram: Effects on Followers’ Attitudes and Behavioral Responses toward the Influencer. J. Retail. Consum. Serv. 2021, 61, 102585. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tmt, A.; Msb, B.; Elo, A.; Sa, D.; Js, E. Recover from a Service Failure: The Differential Effects of Brand Betrayal and Brand Disappointment on an Exclusive Brand Offering—ScienceDirect. J. Bus. Res. 2021, 123, 126–139. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhang, Y.; Sun, Y.; Chen, J.; Wang, N. Complementary or Supplementary? Understanding Users’ Unfollowing Behavior from the Perspective of Person-Environment Fit. Inf. Process. Manag. 2022, 59, 103035. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zt, A.; Lc, B. An Empirical Study of Brand Microblog Users’ Unfollowing Motivations: The Perspective of Push-Pull-Mooring Model—ScienceDirect. Int. J. Inf. Manag. 2020, 52, 102066. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Vrontis, D.; Makrides, A.; Christofi, M.; Thrassou, A. Social Media Influencer Marketing: A Systematic Review, Integrative Framework and Future Research Agenda. Int. J. Consum. Stud. 2021, 45, 617–644. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kim, D.Y.; Kim, H.-Y. Trust Me, Trust Me Not: A Nuanced View of Influencer Marketing on Social Media. J. Bus. Res. 2021, 134, 223–232. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Shanahan, T.; Tran, T.P.; Taylor, E.C. Getting to Know You: Social Media Personalization as a Means of Enhancing Brand Loyalty and Perceived Quality. J. Retail. Consum. Serv. 2019, 47, 57–65. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ohanian, R. Construction and Validation of a Scale to Measure Celebrity Endorsers’ Perceived Expertise, Trustworthiness, and Attractiveness. J. Advert. 1990, 19, 39–52. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wasike, B. The Influencer Sent Me! Examining How Social Media Influencers Affect Social Media Engagement, Social Self-Efficacy, Knowledge Acquisition, and Interpersonal Interaction. Telemat. Inform. Rep. 2023, 10, 100056. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Arora, A.; Bansal, S.; Kandpal, C.; Aswani, R.; Dwivedi, Y. Measuring Social Media Influencer Index- Insights from Facebook, Twitter and Instagram. J. Retail. Consum. Serv. 2019, 49, 86–101. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Reinikainen, H.; Tan, T.M.; Luoma-aho, V.; Salo, J. Making and Breaking Relationships on Social Media: The Impacts of Brand and Influencer Betrayals. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Chang. 2021, 171, 120990. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Palmatier, R.W.; Dant, R.P.; Grewal, D.; Evans, K.R. Factors Influencing the Effectiveness of Relationship Marketing: A Meta-Analysis. J. Mark. 2006, 70, 136–153. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gantz, W.; Lewis, N. Sports Fanship Changes Across the Lifespan. Commun. Sport 2021, 11, 8–27. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ki, C.-W.; Cho, E.; Lee, J.-E. Can an Intelligent Personal Assistant (IPA) Be Your Friend? Para-Friendship Development Mechanism between IPAs and Their Users. Comput. Hum. Behav. 2020, 111, 106412. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Stubb, C.; Colliander, J. “This Is Not Sponsored Content”—The Effects of Impartiality Disclosure and e-Commerce Landing Pages on Consumer Responses to Social Media Influencer Posts. Comput. Hum. Behav. 2019, 98, 210–222. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kay, S.; Mulcahy, R.; Parkinson, J. When Less Is More: The Impact of Macro and Micro Social Media Influencers’ Disclosure. J. Mark. Manag. 2020, 36, 248–278. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ren, S.; Karimi, S.; Bravo Velázquez, A.; Cai, J. Endorsement Effectiveness of Different Social Media Influencers: The Moderating Effect of Brand Competence and Warmth. J. Bus. Res. 2023, 156, 113476. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhou, S.; Blazquez, M.; McCormick, H.; Barnes, L. How Social Media Influencers’ Narrative Strategies Benefit Cultivating Influencer Marketing: Tackling Issues of Cultural Barriers, Commercialised Content, and Sponsorship Disclosure. J. Bus. Res. 2021, 134, 122–142. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ooi, K.-B.; Lee, V.-H.; Hew, J.-J.; Leong, L.-Y.; Tan, G.W.-H.; Lim, A.-F. Social Media Influencers: An Effective Marketing Approach? J. Bus. Res. 2023, 160, 113773. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Leite, F.P.; Pontes, N.; Baptista, P.d.P. Oops, I’ve Overshared! When Social Media Influencers’ Self-Disclosure Damage Per-ceptions of Source Credibility. Comput. Hum. Behav. 2022, 133, 107274. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hudders, L.; Jans, S.D.; Veirman, M.D. The Commercialization of Social Media Stars: A Literature Review and Conceptual Framework on the Strategic Use of Social Media Influencers. Int. J. Advert. 2020, 40, 327–375. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Morgan, R.M.; Hunt, S.D. Theory of Relationship Marketing. J. Mark. 1994, 58, 20–38. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Grönroos, C. Relationship Marketing: Strategic and Tactical Implications. Manag. Decis. 1996, 34, 5–14. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Berry; Leonard, L. Relationship Marketing of Services Perspectives from 1983 and 2000. J. Relatsh. Mark. 2002, 1, 59–77. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Brown, J.R.; Crosno, J.L.; Tong, P.Y. Is the Theory of Trust and Commitment in Marketing Relationships Incomplete? Ind. Mark. Manag. 2019, 77, 155–169. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lou, C.; Yuan, S. Influencer marketing: How message value and credibility affect consumer trust of branded content on social media. J. Interact. Advert. 2019, 19, 1–16. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Oztok, M.; Brett, C. Social Presence and Online Learning: A Review of Research. J. Distance Educ. 2011, 25, 1–10. [Google Scholar]
- Rice, R.E. Media Appropriateness Using Social Presence Theory to Compare Traditional and New Organizational Media. Hum. Commun. Res. 2010, 19, 451–484. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hsieh, J.-K.; Kumar, S.; Tang, Y.-C.; Huang, G.-Z. Investigating the Relationships between Influencers and Their Followers: Moderator of Human Brand of Influencer (HBI) Phase. Electron. Commer. Res. Appl. 2023, 58, 101252. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Stehr, P. The Benefits of Supporting Others Online—How Online Communication Shapes the Provision of Support and Its Relationship with Wellbeing. Comput. Hum. Behav. 2023, 140, 107568. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Fang, S.; Zhang, C.; Li, Y. Physical Attractiveness of Service Employees and Customer Engagement in Tourism Industry. Ann. Tour. Res. 2020, 80, 102756. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- He, Y.; Li, W.; Xue, J. What and How Driving Consumer Engagement and Purchase Intention in Officer Live Streaming? A Two-Factor Theory Perspective. Electron. Commer. Res. Appl. 2022, 56, 101223. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Parker, E.B.; Short, J.; Williams, E.; Christie, B. The Social Psychology of Telecommunication. Contemp. Sociol. 1978, 7, 32. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pentecost, R.; Andrews, L. Fashion Retailing and the Bottom Line: The Effects of Generational Cohorts, Gender, Fashion Fanship, Attitudes and Impulse Buying on Fashion Expenditure. J. Retail. Consum. Serv. 2010, 17, 43–52. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Grossberg, L. Is There a Fan in the House? The Affective Sensibiblity of fandom. In Adoring Audience; Lewis, L., Ed.; Routledge: London, UK, 1992; pp. 50–65. [Google Scholar]
- Pereira, R.; Tam, C. Impact of Enjoyment on the Usage Continuance Intention of Video-on-Demand Services. Inf. Manag. 2021, 58, 103501. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Muhammad, S.S.; Dey, B.L.; Kamal, M.M.; Syed Alwi, S.F. Consumer Engagement with social media Platforms: A Study of the Influence of Attitudinal Components on Cutting Edge Technology Adaptation Behaviour. Comput. Hum. Behav. 2021, 121, 106802. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Parthasarathy, M.; Bhattacherjee, A. Understanding Post-Adoption Behavior in the Context of Online Services. Inf. Syst. Res. 1998, 9, 362–379. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Li, H.; Chen, Q.; Zhong, Z.; Gong, R.; Han, G. E-Word of Mouth Sentiment Analysis for User Behavior Studies. Inf. Process. Manag. 2022, 59, 102784. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chueh, H.-E.; Huang, D.-H. Usage Intention Model of Digital Assessment Systems. J. Bus. Res. 2023, 156, 113469. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kelman, H.C. Processes of Opinion Change. Public Opin. Q. 1961, 25, 57–78. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Grant, M.C. Who Is the Celebrity Endorser? Cultural Foundations of the Endorsement Process. J. Consum. Res. 1989, 16, 310–321. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kamins, M.A. Celebrity and Noncelebrity Advertising in a Two-Sided Context. J. Advert. Res. 1989, 29, 34–42. [Google Scholar]
- Kang, H.; Kim, K.J. Does Humanization or Machinization Make the IoT Persuasive? The Effects of Source Orientation and Social Presence. Comput. Hum. Behav. 2022, 129, 107152. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Laffan, D. Positive Psychosocial Outcomes and Fanship in K-Pop Fans: A Social Identity Theory Perspective. Psychol. Rep. 2020, 124, 2272–2285. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Taylor, S.H.; Zhao, P.; Bazarova, N.N. Social media and Close Relationships: A Puzzle of Connection and Disconnection. Curr. Opin. Psychol. 2022, 45, 101292. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Jin, S.V.; Muqaddam, A.; Ryu, E. Instafamous and Social Media Influencer Marketing. Mark. Intell. Plan. 2019, 37, 567–579. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wang, H.; Lee, K. Getting in the Flow Together: The Role of Social Presence, Perceived Enjoyment and Concentration on Sustainable Use Intention of Mobile Social Network Game. Sustainability 2020, 12, 6853. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Qing, T.; Haiying, D. How to Achieve Consumer Continuance Intention toward Branded Apps—From the Consumer–Brand Engagement Perspective. J. Retail. Consum. Serv. 2021, 60, 102486. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kim, W.B.; Choo, H.J. The Effects of SNS Fashion Influencer Authenticity on Follower Behavior Intention -Focused on the Mediation Effect of Fanship. Korean Soc. Cloth. Text. 2019, 43, 17–32. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Nian, T.; Hu, Y.; Chen, C. Examining the Impact of Television-Program-Induced Emotions on Online Word-of-Mouth Toward Television Advertising. Inf. Syst. Res. 2021, 32, 605–632. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chen, Y.; Wang, H.; Wang, L.; Ding, J. Consumer Identity and Loyalty in Electronic Product Offline Brand Operation: The Moderator Effect of Fanship. Information 2021, 12, 282. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gilmore, J.H.; Pine, B.J. Authenticity: What Consumers Really Want; Harvard Business School Press: Boston, MA, USA, 2007. [Google Scholar]
- Jun, J.W.; Kim, J. Measuring Attractiveness of Celebrities. Soc. Sci. Electron. Public 2016, 32, 73–112. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cho, Y.; Lim, S. Psychological Effects of Interactivity for Internet Live Broadcasting Viewers: Moderating Role of User Motivations on Parasocial Interaction, Social Presence, and Flow. J. Broadcast. Telecommun. Res. 2019, 1, 82–117. [Google Scholar]
- Lee, S.H.; Han, S.L.; Jung, K.S. Analysis of the Structural Relationship Between Antecedents and Outcomes of Brand Fanship. J. Mark. Manag. Res. 2015, 20, 133–153. [Google Scholar]
- Kim, S.; Yu, E.; Jung, J. The Impact of Viewing Motivation and Social Viewing on Continued Use and Willingness to Pay in the Personal Broadcasting Service: Focused on AfreecaTV. Rev. Cult. Econ. 2016, 19, 57–84. [Google Scholar]
- Zeithaml, V.A.; Berry, L.L.; Parasuraman, A. The Behavioral Consequences of Service Quality. J. Mark. 1996, 60, 31–46. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Möller, K. Theory Map of Business Marketing: Relationships and Networks Perspectives. Ind. Mark. Manag. 2013, 42, 324–335. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Milazzo, L.; Santos, C.A. Fanship and Imagination: The Transformation of Everyday Spaces into Lieux D’Imagination. Ann. Tour. Res. 2022, 94, 103399. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kim, J.; Kim, Y.; Kim, D. Improving Well-Being through Hedonic, Eudaimonic, and Social Needs Fulfillment in Sport Media Consumption. Sport Manag. Rev. 2017, 20, 309–321. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Miao, F.; Kozlenkova, I.V.; Wang, H.; Xie, T.; Palmatier, R.W. An Emerging Theory of Avatar Marketing. J. Mark. 2022, 86, 67–90. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cartwright, S.; Liu, H.; Raddats, C. Strategic Use of social media within Business-to-Business (B2B) Marketing: A Systematic Literature Review. Ind. Mark. Manag. 2021, 97, 35–58. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhuang, W.; Zeng, Q.; Zhang, Y.; Liu, C.; Fan, W. What Makes User-Generated Content More Helpful on social media Platforms? Insights from Creator Interactivity Perspective. Inf. Process. Manag. 2023, 60, 103201. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Source | Focus of Content | Method | Main Variables | Key Findings |
---|---|---|---|---|
Stubb et al. (2019) [25] | To investigate the effects of stressing objectivity in influencer product posts on consumer reactions. | Experiment | Landing page, disclosure type, and purchase intention | When participants are exposed to an impartiality declaration and then sent to a product page rather than a start page, their brand attitudes and purchase intentions are less likely to change. Whether or not consumers view the information as advertising will determine whether or not an impartiality disclosure is successful. |
Kay et al. (2020) [26] | The effect of small- and large-scale influencers, as well as the disclosure of sponsored native advertising, on consumer opinions of goods. | Experimental method with a 2 × 2 factorial design | Micro-influencers, macro-influencers, sponsorship disclosure, and purchase behavior | In comparison with macro-influencers (those with more followers), micro-influencers (those with fewer followers) are more effective at endorsing goods. Disclosure of sponsored content can improve results for brands. |
Zhou et al. (2021) [28] | To investigate the value of social media influencers’ (SMIs) narrative techniques in resolving potential influencer marketing problems such cultural differences, conflicts between work and personal life, and unfavorable views of sponsorship disclosure. | Focus group interviews | - | The narrative strategies used by social media influencers (SMIs), such as brand attribute analysis, brand love inspiration, and self-identity construction, can be useful in resolving these problems. |
Leite et al. (2022) [30] | To investigate the impact of social media influencers’ personal disclosure on their credibility. | Experiment | Excessive intimate self-disclosure by social media influencers may harm their credibility; however, if the disclosure is appropriate, it can boost their credibility by satisfying their followers’ need for connection. | |
Ooi et al. (2023) [29] | The aim was to examine the elements that influence consumers’ perceptions of social media influencers and the products or services that they promote, and to determine how these perceptions translate into actual purchasing decisions. | Survey | Influencer credibility, interactivity, and purchase behavior | Factors such as mobile convenience, influencer credibility, and interactivity play a significant role in shaping consumers’ attitudes toward social media influencers and advertised products or services, ultimately leading to purchase behavior. The impact of the attitudes toward social media influencers on purchase behavior is fully mediated by the attitude toward the products or services. The relationship between influencer credibility and attitude towards a product or service is significantly moderated by gender. |
Research Model | Specific Factors | Description | Construct in the Relationship Marketing Framework | Supporting Rationale |
---|---|---|---|---|
Antecedents | Expertise | The blogger demonstrates superior knowledge or experience in a specific field. | Seller expertise | The ability and experience of salespeople have a beneficial effect on attracting customers. |
Attractiveness | The blogger’s physical appearance. | - | ||
Communication | The blogger’s interactions with fans through real-time chat, replies, comments, and likes. | Communication | The quantity, quality, and frequency of information transmission influence the formation of valuable relationships. | |
Mediators | Social Presence | The positive and warm subjective feelings that fans have towards the blogger. | Relationship satisfaction Relationship quality | The key factor in the relational mediator meta-analytic framework for the formation of long-term and stable relationships. |
Fanship | The admiration, worship, and even belief in the blogger by fans. | Commitment | ||
Performance Outcomes | Word of Mouth | Fans actively recommend and share the blogger’s content with others. | Word of mouth | Customers actively and positively promote potential customers to salespeople. |
Usage Intention | Fans’ willingness to continue following the blogger. | Customer loyalty | Customers’ long-term purchase and use of a company’s products or services promoted by salespeople. |
Variable | Category | Frequency | Percentage |
---|---|---|---|
Gender | Male | 73 | 47.10 |
Female | 82 | 52.90 | |
Age | Below 20 | 28 | 18.06 |
20–29 | 124 | 80 | |
30–39 | 3 | 1.94 | |
Education | Diploma | 2 | 1.29 |
Bachelor’s | 116 | 74.84 | |
Master’s | 37 | 23.87 | |
Geography | First- and second-tier cities | 36 | 23.22 |
Third- and fourth-tier cities | 61 | 39.35 | |
Small cities below the fourth tier | 58 | 37.41 | |
Weekly frequency of use of personal media | Less than once a week | 13 | 8.39 |
1–2 times a week | 6 | 3.87 | |
3–4 times a week | 7 | 4.52 | |
5–6 times a week | 10 | 6.45 | |
7 or more times a week | 119 | 76.77 | |
Average duration of each personal media use | Less than 30 min | 25 | 16.13 |
30 min to 1 h | 32 | 20.65 | |
1–2 h | 33 | 21.29 | |
2–3 h | 15 | 9.68 | |
3 h or more | 50 | 32.26 |
Statement | Standardized Estimate | C.R. | CR | AVE | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Expertise | The bloggers I follow have strong expression ability. | 0.875 | 13.777 | 0.940 | 0.693 |
The bloggers I follow are articulate speakers. | 0.886 | 13.935 | |||
The bloggers I follow are likeable. | 0.927 | 15.149 | |||
The bloggers I follow have clear content. | 0.887 | 14.143 | |||
The bloggers I follow have professional content. | 0.768 | 11.402 | |||
The bloggers I follow are trustworthy. | 0.751 | 11.482 | |||
The bloggers I follow are very real. | 0.705 | 10.229 | |||
Attractiveness | The bloggers I follow have a good sense of style. | 0.888 | 14.112 | 0.890 | 0.801 |
The bloggers I follow are attractive. | 0.902 | 13.772 | |||
Communication | The bloggers I follow frequently reply to comments (including messages). | 0.701 | 8.942 | 0.675 | 0.509 |
The bloggers I follow often show their private lives to the audience. | 0.727 | 9.247 | |||
Social Presence | I feel like I’m having face-to-face communication with my blogger. | 0.740 | 8.088 | 0.814 | 0.530 |
I feel like I am in the same space as the bloggers I follow. | 0.500 | 7.902 | |||
I feel happy when I think of the bloggers I follow. | 0.770 | 13.376 | |||
I feel a sense of belonging to the platform where the bloggers I follow are located. | 0.812 | 12.448 | |||
Fanship | I often check to see if the bloggers I follow have updated their content. | 0.673 | 9.160 | 0.880 | 0.515 |
I am interested in the information from the bloggers I follow. | 0.824 | 12.219 | |||
Sometimes, I talk to my friends about the bloggers I follow. | 0.787 | 11.617 | |||
Even if the bloggers I follow switch to another personal media platform, I will still search or follow them on other platforms. | 0.569 | 7.616 | |||
Sometimes, I want to like or comment on the opinions of the bloggers I follow. | 0.723 | 10.032 | |||
The content of the bloggers I follow influences me more or less. | 0.726 | 10.184 | |||
I would recommend the bloggers I follow to my friends. | 0.693 | 9.759 | |||
Word of Mouth | I share with my friends the content shared by the bloggers I follow. | 0.904 | 14.753 | 0.904 | 0.825 |
I share with my friends the content of the bloggers I follow. | 0.912 | 14.320 | |||
Usage Intention | I am willing to pay to follow the information of the bloggers I follow. | 0.799 | 11.037 | 0.707 | 0.549 |
I am willing to watch the advertisements that appear in the content shared by the bloggers I follow. | 0.677 | 9.266 | |||
X2 = 282.375 (df = 239), CFI = 0.985, RMSEA = 0.035, TLI = 0.979, SRMR = 0.059. |
Variable | A | E | C | SP | F | UI | WOM |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
A | 0.895 | ||||||
E | 0.411 | 0.837 | |||||
C | 0.404 | 0.600 | 0.713 | ||||
SP | 0.234 | 0.407 | 0.379 | 0.728 | |||
F | 0.152 | 0.381 | 0.457 | 0.713 | 0.718 | ||
UI | 0.148 | 0.363 | 0.442 | 0.641 | 0.690 | 0.741 | |
WOM | 0.117 | 0.259 | 0.330 | 0.530 | 0.625 | 0.521 | 0.908 |
SD | 0.757 | 0.601 | 0.716 | 0.450 | 0.602 | 0.579 | 0.565 |
M | 3.910 | 4.025 | 3.603 | 3.732 | 3.623 | 3.527 | 3.850 |
Hypothesis | Path | Standardized Estimate | S.E. | C.R. | p | Hypothesis Supported |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
H1-1 | Expertise → social presence | 0.270 | 0.069 | 2.912 | 0.004 | Yes |
H1-2 | Attractiveness → social presence | 0.042 | 0.048 | 0.517 | 0.605 | No |
H2 | Communication → social presence | 0.200 | 0.058 | 2.161 | 0.031 | Yes |
H3-1 | Expertise → fanship | 0.187 | 0.091 | 2.067 | 0.039 | Yes |
H3-2 | Attractiveness → fanship | −0.077 | 0.063 | −0.969 | 0.332 | No |
H4 | Communication → fanship | 0.376 | 0.076 | 4.157 | *** | Yes |
H5-1 | Social presence → WOM | 0.172 | 0.111 | 1.946 | 0.050 | Yes |
H5-2 | Fanship → WOM | 0.502 | 0.083 | 5.669 | *** | Yes |
H6-1 | Social presence → usage intention | 0.261 | 0.099 | 3.394 | *** | Yes |
H6-2 | Fanship → usage intention | 0.533 | 0.074 | 6.925 | *** | Yes |
X2 = 6.709 (df = 7; X2/df = 0.958), CFI = 1.000, RMSEA = 0.000, TLI = 1.000, SRMR = 0.024. |
Path | Standardized Estimate (β) | Boot SE | 95% Confidence Interval (LLCI, ULCI) | Result |
---|---|---|---|---|
Expertise → social presence → usage intention | 0.071 * | 0.039 | (0.012, 0.172) | Pass |
Communication → social presence → usage intention | 0.052 * | 0.035 | (0.007, 0.162) | Pass |
Expertise → social presence→ WOM | 0.047 * | 0.032 | (0.001, 0.125) | Pass |
Communication → social presence→ WOM | 0.034 * | 0.025 | (0.002, 0.104) | Pass |
Expertise → fanship → usage intention | 0.100 * | 0.042 | (0.030, 0.239) | Pass |
Communication → fanship→ usage intention | 0.200 ** | 0.059 | (0.099, 0.333) | Pass |
Expertise → fanship → WOM | 0.094 * | 0.066 | (0.030, 0.222) | Pass |
Communication → fanship → WOM | 0.189 * | 0.063 | (0.082, 0.331) | Pass |
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content. |
© 2023 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Qian, W.; Mao, J. Exploring the Influential Factors of Personal Media Bloggers on Followers’ Continuous Following Intention Based on Relationship Marketing Theory. Behav. Sci. 2023, 13, 416. https://doi.org/10.3390/bs13050416
Qian W, Mao J. Exploring the Influential Factors of Personal Media Bloggers on Followers’ Continuous Following Intention Based on Relationship Marketing Theory. Behavioral Sciences. 2023; 13(5):416. https://doi.org/10.3390/bs13050416
Chicago/Turabian StyleQian, Wenjie, and Jianhua Mao. 2023. "Exploring the Influential Factors of Personal Media Bloggers on Followers’ Continuous Following Intention Based on Relationship Marketing Theory" Behavioral Sciences 13, no. 5: 416. https://doi.org/10.3390/bs13050416
APA StyleQian, W., & Mao, J. (2023). Exploring the Influential Factors of Personal Media Bloggers on Followers’ Continuous Following Intention Based on Relationship Marketing Theory. Behavioral Sciences, 13(5), 416. https://doi.org/10.3390/bs13050416