Digital Influence: Examining Social Media Marketing Dynamics and
How They Affect Consumer Brand Loyalty
MUHAMMAD ADNAN BASHIR1, UMMI NAIEMAH BINTI SARAIH2,3,
RAGHAVA GUNDALA4, JUNAID ANSARI5, MUHAMMAD AZEEM QURESHI5,
SHIRAZ AHMED5
1Faculty of Business and Communication,
Universiti Malaysia Perlis,
MALAYSIA
2Faculty of Business and Communication,
Universiti Malaysia Perlis,
MALAYSIA
3Department of Business Administration,
Daffodil International University (DIU),
Dhaka,
BANGLADESH
4Business Department,
University of Wisconsin Parkside,
USA
5Department of Management and HRM,
Institute of Business Management,
Karachi,
PAKISTAN
Abstract: - Social media is becoming a medium of choice for businesses to interact with their potential and
current customers to establish brand loyalty and grow customer trust in the digital age. This study investigates
the complex relationship between social media marketing and its impact on consumer trust and loyalty to
brands. A conceptual framework is developed based on the past literature to quantitatively measure the impact
of social media marketing on brand trust and customer loyalty (cognitive, affective, conative, and action
loyalty). Data was collected from 315 users of a fashion brand that they like and follow on social media. PLS-
SEM was used to assess the proposed relationships. The findings of the study reveal that social media
marketing significantly impacts brand trust and brand loyalty and its dimensions such as cognitive, affective,
conative, and action loyalty. The findings of this study offer insightful information for marketers looking to use
the power of social media marketing to increase customer trust and loyalty. The results highlight the necessity
for a comprehensive strategy that goes beyond simple promotional content and emphasizes developing deep
connections with customers to build trust and shaping loyalty in the digital environment.
Key-Words: - Social Media Marketing; Brand Trust; Cognitive Loyalty; Affective Loyalty; Conative Loyalty;
Action Loyalty.
Received: October 25, 2023. Revised: May 15, 2024. Accepted: June 16, 2024. Published: July 12, 2024.
1 Introduction
The concepts of marketing have changed with the
advancements in technology in this digital era, [1].
Now different social media platforms are available
where mass audience spend their time. Brands
develop and design their campaigns targeting these
social media platforms that further give them the
leverage to select the target audience of their desired
brand, particularly focusing on demographics such
WSEAS TRANSACTIONS on BUSINESS and ECONOMICS
DOI: 10.37394/23207.2024.21.128
Muhammad Adnan Bashir, Ummi Naiemah Binti Saraih,
Raghava Gundala, Junaid Ansari,
Muhammad Azeem Qureshi, Shiraz Ahmed
E-ISSN: 2224-2899
1571
Volume 21, 2024
as age, gender, and location, [2], [3]. Due to the
mass audience reach different social media
platforms, brands prefer to communicate with their
consumers on social media, [4]. Whether a large-
scale enterprise or a small-medium enterprise, all
types of organizations consider the importance of
their presence of social media platforms for their
strategic marketing campaigns, [5].
In the past, it was difficult for brands to meet
their customers at touchpoints. This problem has
been solved by social media platforms where brands
can easily communicate with their customers, [6],
[7]. This communication helps the brand to build
brand trust and establish the customer’s loyalty to
their brand, [6], [8]. A brand marketing plan
ultimately targets customer loyalty for building a
successful relationship between the brand and
customers, [9]. Social media marketing efforts
easily help the brand to build such relationships with
customers, this is the reason behind brands investing
much in social media marketing activities in this
digital age, [8], [9].
Although several brands succeeded through
social media marketing activities, it is not necessary
that investing in social media marketing campaigns
can lead to success. Several researches in the past
conducted to understand this complex relationship
between brand trust and loyalty, [10], [11], [12].
The previous research missed the theoretical
foundations and methodological contributions.
Brand loyalty is a multidimensional concept that is
measured based on cognitive, affective, conative,
and action loyalty. However, often this
multidimensional concept is not measured
considering its relationship with other behavioral
constructs.
In this study, the four core components of brand
loyalty are used to assess their relationship with
antecedents like social media marketing customer
loyalty, and brand trust. The primary aims of this
study are (i) to investigate the influence of Social
Media Marketing on Brand Trust, (ii) to investigate
the influence of social Media Marketing on on
Cognitive, Affective, Conative, and Action Loyalty,
and (iii) to investigate the influence of Brand Trust
on Cognitive, Affective, Conative, and Action
Loyalty.
2 Literature Review
2.1 Social Media Marketing
The web-based platforms on which people interact
with each other are referred to as “social media”.
The term is also being used interchangeably with
social networking sites, [13]. The social media
platforms allow users to build their profiles and
share the content with their friends, family, and
acquaintances, [13]. According to the social network
theory [14], human behaviors are integrated with
these online interpersonal relationships.
Social media provides companies with an
improved communication platform to efficiently and
effectively promote and establish brand loyalty,
surpassing conventional methods, [15]. Henceforth,
companies can use social media platforms as a
financially efficient method to generate brand
recognition, which can foster customer loyalty, [16].
As a result of the expeditious pace of
communication and the profusion of information
outlets, marketers are to endeavor to shift their focus
from conventional media to social media, [17].
According to studies, social media marketing
initiatives, including customization, word-of-mouth,
entertainment, interactivity, and trendiness, can
positively affect consumers' intention to buy and
their company awareness, [13], [18], [19].
Additionally, it has been discovered by
researchers that customer relationship only
significantly affects both brand image and brand
loyalty, [13]. While SMM actions can increase
consumer loyalty to the brand, more than they might
be required to foster a favorable brand perception
among consumers, [20]. Several researchers
attempted to observe the effects of social media on
brand trust and brand loyalty, [9], [11], [12], [13],
[20]. Based on the above discussion, the following
hypothesis is proposed.
H1: Social Media Marketing positively affects brand
trust.
2.2 Brand Loyalty
The concept of brand loyalty is characterized by a
solid and enduring dedication to repurchasing a
particular brand in the future, irrespective of
situational variables, [12]. Numerous scholarly
investigations have examined the factors that
motivate and result in brand loyalty within the
digital realm, [21], [22], [23], [24]. These factors
include ease of use, customization, connectivity,
interactivity, convenience, cultivation, the relevance
of online information, and community, [13].
Consumer loyalty is significantly influenced by
social factors such as family, friends, and cultural
norms, [25]. Oliver elucidates the impact of
situational variables, such as accessibility, cost, and
availability, on consumer allegiance in the
immediate time frame while cautioning that such
factors may not necessarily translate into enduring
WSEAS TRANSACTIONS on BUSINESS and ECONOMICS
DOI: 10.37394/23207.2024.21.128
Muhammad Adnan Bashir, Ummi Naiemah Binti Saraih,
Raghava Gundala, Junaid Ansari,
Muhammad Azeem Qureshi, Shiraz Ahmed
E-ISSN: 2224-2899
1572
Volume 21, 2024
loyalty. Table 1 (Appendix) depicts the phases of
loyalty concerning vulnerabilities.
2.2.1 Cognitive Brand Loyalty
The concept of cognitive brand loyalty, which refers
to the psychological attachment and commitment
that consumers form towards a brand based on their
cognitive processes, has garnered significant
attention in consumer behavior research, [25]. The
manifestation of loyalty in consumers can be
observed through their cognitive assessments and
evaluations of the brand, encompassing their
attitudes, beliefs, and perceptions toward the brand,
[26]. Brand cognition model posits that cognitive
brand loyalty encompasses three distinct
dimensions: brand awareness, brand associations,
and brand attitude, [27]. On the other hand, brand
associations refer to consumers' convictions and
attitudes regarding the brand. Brand attitude pertains
to consumers' general assessment and disposition
towards a particular brand, [26]. The formation of
cognitive brand loyalty is frequently influenced by
consumers' cognitive assessments regarding a
brand's characteristics, advantages, and general
brand perception, [25]. Brands that possess a robust
brand presence in the minds of consumers are more
likely to cultivate cognitive brand loyalty, [28].
H2a: Social Media Marketing positively affects
cognitive loyalty.
2.2.2 Affective Brand Loyalty
Affective brand loyalty pertains to the emotional
connection and allegiance consumers establish with
a brand, which stems from their affective or
emotional reactions, [25]. The phenomenon under
consideration pertains to consumers' emotional
bonds, fondness, and commitment toward a brand,
which can significantly impact their propensity to
make recurring purchases and offer favorable
referrals through informal communication channels,
[29].
When the personality of a consumer matches with
the brand, affection is developed which leads to
positive emotional association and positively
establishes brand loyalty, [30]. The emotional
association of consumers with the brand is also
based on the trust that also contributes towards
brand loyalty, [25].
H2b: Social Media Marketing positively affects
Affective Loyalty.
2.2.3 Conative Brand Loyalty
Conative brand loyalty is one of the dimensions of
brand loyalty, [25]. This dimension of brand loyalty
refers to the willingness of consumers to use the
brand again and again. When consumers purchase
the product again, this is tangible evidence that
depicts their association with the brand, [31].
Brands establishing a good value in comparison to
their competitors are re-purchased by the consumers
because of their value and this phenomenon is
covered by conative brand loyalty.
H2c: Social Media Marketing positively affects
conative loyalty.
2.2.4 Action Brand Loyalty
Auction loyalty is considered to be at the superior
level of brand loyalty that expresses the
phenomenon of customers purchasing the brand
repeatedly and this repeated purchase has become
their habit, [25]. Although customers may have a
choice to purchase another brand, the preference of
purchasing one brand shows the loyalty of the
consumers towards that brand, [31].
Brands focus on maintaining action loyalty as
this establishes an association between the customer
and the brand through which they can retain their
customers, [32]. Considering the alternative to any
brand, customers may switch but their repeated
purchase behaviour shows that these customers are
loyal to the brand and reluctant to switch to another
brand despite having different offers that
specifically exhibit the actions loyalty, [33].
H2d: Social Media Marketing positively affects
action loyalty.
2.3 Brand Trust
This concept of Brant Trust has been targeted by
several researchers in the past and it refers to the
confidence of customers on any brand, [34]. The
antecedents of brand trust have been used
differently particularly corresponding to the nature
of the study, such as a research investigating the
association of trust between social commerce
attributes and behavioral intentions, [35].
The factor of trust has also been studied with
Social Media Marketing but this study particularly
focuses on the association of trust with each sub-
dimension of loyalty, [36]. The features related to
social media have been considered in this study.
Literature also suggests the influence of social
media marketing within the tourism industry
considering brand trust and brand loyalty, [11], [25].
Brand Trust has been studied by targeting different
WSEAS TRANSACTIONS on BUSINESS and ECONOMICS
DOI: 10.37394/23207.2024.21.128
Muhammad Adnan Bashir, Ummi Naiemah Binti Saraih,
Raghava Gundala, Junaid Ansari,
Muhammad Azeem Qureshi, Shiraz Ahmed
E-ISSN: 2224-2899
1573
Volume 21, 2024
types of relationships including the mediating
relationship with other variables, [37]. Based on the
literature review, trust is proved to be a significant
factor in developing and shaping the customer’s
loyalty, [13].
H3: Brand trust positively affects (a) cognitive
loyalty, (b) affective loyalty, (c) conative loyalty,
and (d) Action loyalty.
Based on the hypotheses derived from literature
variables selected in this study, the conceptual
framework was developed that is depicted in Figure
1 (Appendix).
3 Methodology
We gathered information through an online survey
that was directed at consumers who used social
media to test hypotheses. At the beginning of the
survey, respondents were asked to mention which
social media they used and how much time they
spent with social media in a day. Respondents were
also asked to mention the name of the brand they
like/follow on social media and directed to respond
to the question statement keeping that brand in their
minds. The top of each set of questions reminded
respondents to take into account the social
networking site and fashion brand they selected at
the beginning of the survey while answering the
questions. Foreshadowing our findings, Instagram is
the social media site that most users are using and
outfitters are the most likely brands to be followed.
Five educational institutes were selected to
gather the information. We gathered the information
both from male and female students. Students were
selected based on the fact that the majority of the
social media fall under the age of 18 and 35 years.
Students shared have shared the survey link who
follow fashion brands on social media and who are
at least 18 years old. Because it is challenging to
acquire a sufficient response by probabilistic
sampling, we chose to employ a convenience
sampling strategy, [38].
A total of 400 respondents were approached. 84
responses were nonetheless disregarded since they
didn't adhere to the study's guidelines. The
questionnaires were not filled out (n = 51), and
respondents who took unreasonable or unrealistic
time to complete i.e. too quick or too long to fill the
form, were also eliminated (n = 33). Due to the
nature of this study, which requires participants to
reply to questions while taking their chosen social
networking platform and fashion brand into account,
we discarded surveys that took too long to complete.
So, after removing surveys that didn't fit the criteria,
we were left with 315 surveys to analyze.
Seven point Likert scale was used to measure
the responses (1 for strongly disagree and 7 for
strongly agree). We used a multidimensional scale
to measure SMMA (a second-order construct), [39].
The dimensions i.e. entertainment, customization,
trendiness, and word of mouth were measured
through two items each, and the interaction was
measured through three items. Brand trust was
measured through four items adopted from another
study, [40]. Four phases of loyalty i.e. cognitive
(four items), affective (three items), conative (four
items), and action loyalty (three items) were
measured by adopting the scale, [25]. Table 2
(Appendix) depicts the profile of the sample.
4 Data Analysis
To test research hypotheses partial least square
technique was employed through SMART PLS,
[38], [41]. PLS is appropriate for investigating
causal effects resulting from theories using
hypotheses and empirical data. Another approach
that could be used was the CB SEM approach
(citation). However, this study aims to predict the
relationship of SMMA with brand trust and brand
loyalty, hence, the use of PLS is justified, [38].
4.1 Measurement Model
While conducting Structural Equation modelling
(SEM), measurement and structural models are
tested to confirm the constructs and relationship
between them, [42]. All the constructs were
reflective, hence we reported internal consistency
i.e. reliability through Cronbach Alpha (α) and
Composite Reliability (CR), convergent validity
through Average Variance Extracted (AVE) [43],
and Discriminant Validity [44] and HTMT ratio
[38]. Table 3 (Appendix) shows the results of the
measurement model.
Table 3 (Appendix) shows that the values of α
and CR exceed the threshold value i.e. 0.70
confirming the internal consistency [38], [45].
Convergent validity was established by observing
outer leadings and AVE. All the outer loadings were
above 0.7 confirming the suitability of constructs,
[46]. AVE values for all the constructs were above
0.5, hence confirming the convergent validity, [38].
Discriminant validity was established through
two criteria i.e. Comparison between Square Root of
AVE and Correlation [44] and HTMT ratio. The
square root of VAE was greater than the correlation
values of all constructs and confirmed the
WSEAS TRANSACTIONS on BUSINESS and ECONOMICS
DOI: 10.37394/23207.2024.21.128
Muhammad Adnan Bashir, Ummi Naiemah Binti Saraih,
Raghava Gundala, Junaid Ansari,
Muhammad Azeem Qureshi, Shiraz Ahmed
E-ISSN: 2224-2899
1574
Volume 21, 2024
discriminant validity i.e. all constructs are unique
and distinct from each other [44]. HTMT ratio
values were less than 0.90, [47], hence, we safely
conclude that constructs have no issue of
discriminant validity, [38]. Table 4 (Appendix)
shows the correlation and discriminant validity.
4.2 Common Method Bias
To assess common method bias, we applied
Harman's single-factor technique. All of the
research items were combined for the Harman
single-factor test and exploratory factor analysis was
run. Statistical analysis showed that the first factor
accounted for 47% of the variance i.e. less than 50%
and it is acceptable, [48].
4.3 Structural Model
To test the proposed hypotheses, we proceed with
the structural model. In the structural model, we
observe the coefficient of determination i.e. R2, and
path coefficient values i.e. β. Figure 2 (Appendix)
shows the R2 and coefficient values. Results showed
that R2 values for brand trust (0.514), Cognitive
loyalty (0.541), affective loyalty (0.631), conative
loyalty (0.651), and action loyalty (0.679) are
considered good, [38] [47]. For hypotheses testing
we used PLS bootstrapping with 5000 iterations,
[38]. Results showed that all the proposed
hypotheses were accepted based on the significant
values. We find that SMMA significantly influences
the brand trust (H1, β = 0.717, P<0.05).
Furthermore, SMMA significantly influences the
four types of loyalty i.e. cognitive loyalty (H2a,
0.434, p<0.05), affective loyalty (H2b, 0.431,
p<0.05), conative loyalty (H2c, 0.476, p<0.05), and
action loyalty (H2d, 0.548, p<0.05). Similarly, BT
significantly influences the four types of loyalty i.e.
cognitive loyalty (H3a, 0.359, p<0.05), affective
loyalty (H3b, 0.355, p<0.05), conative loyalty (H3c,
0.394, p<0.05), and action loyalty (H3d, 0.337,
p<0.05). Table 5 (Appendix) shows the results of
the structural model and the decision of the
hypotheses.
5 Discussion
The current research aims to observe the influence
of social media marketing on brand trust and four
aspects of loyalty in luxury fashion brands using
SNSs. SMMA is a order second-order construct. We
observe that SMMA for luxury brands consists of
five sub-dimensions i.e. interaction, customization,
trendiness, entertainment, and word of mouth.
Our results showed that social media marketing
has a significant effect on brand trust (H1, β =
0.717, P<0.05). The findings are aligned with the
previous work done, [11], [12], [13], [49]. On social
media, consumers are involved in different types of
activities. They discuss products, brands, people,
and organizations with each other, [50]. This social
media communication creates a level of
understanding that ultimately leads to trust between
consumers. Customers trust more on the content
generated by the users than the content generated by
the users, [51]. When consumers hear about a
product from other consumers, there is a 15% more
probability that they will become the user of that
product than any other source of product
information, [52]. Hence this finding is of key
importance to marketers.
The second dimension of the study was to
observe the impact of social media marketing on
brand loyalty. Our findings reveal that social media
marketing significantly impacts the different forms
of brand loyalty i.e. cognitive loyalty (0.434,
p<0.05), affective loyalty (0.431, p<0.05), conative
loyalty (0.476, p<0.05), and action loyalty (0.548,
p<0.05). The findings are in line with the previous
work, [6], [12], [13], [53], [54]. Most of the
previous studies looked at loyalty as a single
construct. In this, we aimed to provide a more
holistic view of loyalty by looking at the micro
perspective of loyalty. Loyalty can be seen from the
perspective of cognitive loyalty, affective loyalty,
conative loyalty, and action loyalty, [55]. Our
findings revealed that social media marketing
significantly influences all aspects of customer
loyalty.
Thirdly, we observe the impact of brand trust on
customer loyalty. Our findings reveal that brand
trust significantly influences the four types of
loyalty i.e. cognitive loyalty (0.359, p<0.05),
affective loyalty (0.355, p<0.05), conative loyalty
(0.394, p<0.05), and action loyalty (0.337, p<0.05).
The findings of the current study are supporting the
findings of the previous, [8], [8], [20], [56], [57].
Among the four types, brand trust has the
strongest effect on the conative loyalty of the
customers towards the brand. Conative loyalty
refers to the customer's willingness to purchase a
brand. It is evident from this relationship that the
effect being produced by Brand Trust on Conative
Loyalty is good and it is justified that once trust is
developed with the brand, consumers are willing to
continue business with the same brand again.
WSEAS TRANSACTIONS on BUSINESS and ECONOMICS
DOI: 10.37394/23207.2024.21.128
Muhammad Adnan Bashir, Ummi Naiemah Binti Saraih,
Raghava Gundala, Junaid Ansari,
Muhammad Azeem Qureshi, Shiraz Ahmed
E-ISSN: 2224-2899
1575
Volume 21, 2024
5.1 Theoretical Implication
This study tested the association between Brand
Trust, Social Media Marketing, and different
dimensions of Brand Loyalty. First, the selection of
variables together depicts the conceptual
connectivity between our tested components that we
established in the current research has not been
proposed or connected in the extant literature. Our
research model linked social media marketing with
brand trust and the four dimensions of brand loyalty
i.e. cognitive, affective, conative, and action loyalty.
Some of the links of our suggested constructs have
been empirically evaluated in the body of existing
literature, but not all of them. Social media
marketing with attitudinal loyalty for luxury brands
but not with cognitive, affective, conative, and
action loyalty, [7]. The impact of brand trust on
attitudinal loyalty was measured [58] but not on
cognitive, affective, conative, and action loyalty.
Similarly [59] linked attitudinal loyalty and
behavioral loyalty with social media, but the loyalty
concept concerning cognitive, affective, conative,
and action loyalty is missing. This study provides a
holistic view of the effect of social media marketing
on the different forms of brand loyalty that previous
research lacks. The conceptual framework of the
study is based on the stimulus-organism-response
model. This study also extends the theory of S-O-R
in the luxury fashion brand context. Past research
measured the effect of social media on brand loyalty
in the hotel industry [11], another study observed
the effect of social media marketing on university
students’ loyalty [60], in the travel industry [61],
and the fast food industry, [49].
This study contributes to the literature by
providing empirical evidence related to the effect
being created by Social Media Marketing on Brand
Trust and Brand Loyalty. Particularly, the four
dimensions of brand loyalty have been individually
considered in this study contributing to the
theoretical underpinnings of Brand Loyalty.
5.2 Managerial Implication
This is established that social media marketing has a
significant effect on brand trust and brand loyalty.
This study presents several insights to managers. To
build trust and loyalty among their audience,
managers should take a proactive approach, place a
high value on authenticity and openness, and use
social media-based consumers’ insights to
continuously enhance trust and loyalty. Managers
should consider social media marketing as a tool for
establishing long-term relationships with
consumers. Through proper and efficient use of
social media, organizations can create trust with
brands that ultimately can be converted into loyalty,
but developing trust and loyalty takes time.
Managers can use social media to engage and
reward devoted customers. Effective social media
marketing should be used by managers to create
different marketing programs e.g. exclusive deals,
competitions, or loyalty programs to promote
customer loyalty and a sense of community.
5.3 Limitations & Future Research Direction
This study has some limitations. The first limitation
is the sample, as the data was collected from a
single city, hence the generalizability of the study is
limited. In future research, more cities can be
included to observe the findings with a cross-
cultural perspective. Brand trust was added in the
model, but not tested for mediating effect. Future
research can be designed to see the mediating role
of brand trust in between social media marketing
and different forms of brand loyalty. We developed
the conceptual model based on the S-O-R model,
but did not observe the consequence. Future
research can be designed with this aspect based on
the stimulus-organism-behavior-consequence
model, [62].
References:
[1] F. Li, J. Larimo, and L. C. Leonidou, “Social
media in marketing research: Theoretical
bases, methodological aspects, and thematic
focus,” Psychology & Marketing, vol. 40, no.
1, pp. 124–145, 2023. doi:
10.1002/mar.21746.
[2] I. C. C. Chan, Z. Chen, and D. Leung, “The
more the better? Strategizing visual elements
in social media marketing,” Journal of
Hospitality and Tourism Management, vol.
54, pp. 268–289, 2023. doi:
10.1016/j.jhtm.2022.11.007.
[3] I. Khan, “Do brands’ social media marketing
activities matter? A moderation analysis,”
Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services,
vol. 64, p. 102794, 2022.
doi:10.1016/j.jretconser.2021.102794.
[4] A. T. Rosário and J. C. Dias, “Marketing
Strategies on Social Media Platforms,”
International Journal of E-Business
Research (IJEBR), vol. 19, no. 1, pp. 1–25,
2023. doi: 10.4018/IJEBR.316969.
[5] B. Rishi, A. Anand, and T. Sharma, “An
unexpected journey: designing a social media
marketing framework for small and medium
enterprises (SMEs),” in Strengthening SME
Performance Through Social Media
WSEAS TRANSACTIONS on BUSINESS and ECONOMICS
DOI: 10.37394/23207.2024.21.128
Muhammad Adnan Bashir, Ummi Naiemah Binti Saraih,
Raghava Gundala, Junaid Ansari,
Muhammad Azeem Qureshi, Shiraz Ahmed
E-ISSN: 2224-2899
1576
Volume 21, 2024
Adoption and Usage, IGI Global, 2023, pp.
1–20. doi: 10.4018/978-1-6684-5770-
2.ch001.
[6] H. Y. Aljuhmani, H. Elrehail, P. Bayram,
and T. Samarah, “Linking social media
marketing efforts with customer brand
engagement in driving brand loyalty,” Asia
Pacific Journal of Marketing and Logistics,
vol. 35, no. 7, pp. 1719–1738, 2023. doi;
10.1108/APJML-08-2021-0627.
[7] S. Song and H.-Y. Kim, “Is social media
marketing worth it for luxury brands? The
dual impact of brand page satisfaction and
brand love on word-of-mouth and attitudinal
loyalty intentions,” Journal of Product &
Brand Management, vol. 31, no. 7, pp. 1033–
1046, 2022. doi: 10.1108/JPBM-06-2020-
2936.
[8] M. Sohaib and H. Han, “Building value co-
creation with social media marketing, brand
trust, and brand loyalty,” Journal of
Retailing and Consumer Services, vol. 74, p.
103442, 2023. doi:
10.1016/j.jretconser.2023.103442.
[9] M. S. Sohail, M. Hasan, and A. F. Sohail,
“The impact of social media marketing on
brand trust and brand loyalty: An Arab
perspective,” International Journal of Online
Marketing (IJOM), vol. 10, no. 1, pp. 15–31,
2020. doi: 10.4018/IJOM.2020010102.
[10] S. Berraies and W. Ben Rejeb, “Effect of
social media fashion influencers’ authenticity
on brand loyalty: mediating role of brand
trust,” In Proceedings of International
Marketing Trends Conference. Paris, 2023.
[11] Ş. B. Tatar and İ. Eren-Erdoğmuş, “The
effect of social media marketing on brand
trust and brand loyalty for hotels,”
Information Technology & Tourism, vol. 16,
pp. 249–263, 2016. doi: 10.1007/s40558-
015-0048-6.
[12] H. Haudi, W. Handayani, M. Musnaini, Y.
Suyoto, T. Prasetio, E. Pitaloka, H. Wijoyo,
H. Yonata, I. Koho, & Y. Cahyon, “The
effect of social media marketing on brand
trust, brand equity and brand loyalty,”
International Journal of Data and Network
Science, vol. 6, no. 3, pp. 961–972, 2022.
doi: 10.5267/j.ijdns.2022.1.015.
[13] R. S. Ebrahim, “The role of trust in
understanding the impact of social media
marketing on brand equity and brand
loyalty,” Journal of Relationship Marketing,
vol. 19, no. 4, pp. 287–308, 2020. doi:
10.1080/15332667.2019.1705742.
[14] A. A. Alalwan, N. P. Rana, Y. K. Dwivedi,
and R. Algharabat, “Social media in
marketing: A review and analysis of the
existing literature,” Telematics and
informatics, vol. 34, no. 7, pp. 1177–1190,
2017. doi: 10.1016/j.tele.2017.05.008.
[15] K. O. Kayumovich, “Particular qualities use
of social media in digital tourism,” Gwalior
Management Academy, vol. 28, no. 1, pp.
21–28, 2020.
[16] A. N. Mason, J. Narcum, and K. Mason,
“Social media marketing gains importance
after Covid-19,” Cogent Business &
Management, vol. 8, no. 1, p. 1870797, 2021.
doi: 10.1080/23311975.2020.1870797.
[17] S. Malesev and M. Cherry, “Digital and
social media marketing-growing market
share for construction SMEs,” Construction
Economics and Building, vol. 21, no. 1, pp.
65–82, 2021. doi:
10.5130/AJCEB.v21i1.7521.
[18] M. Moslehpour, T. Ismail, B. Purba, and W.-
K. Wong, “What makes GO-JEK go in
Indonesia? The influences of social media
marketing activities on purchase intention,”
Journal of Theoretical and Applied
Electronic Commerce Research, vol. 17, no.
1, pp. 89–103, 2021. doi:
10.3390/jtaer17010005.
[19] A. P. Oscarius Yudhi Ari Wijaya, S.
Sulistiyani, J. Pudjowati, T. S. Kartikawati,
N. Kurniasih, and A. Purwanto, “The role of
social media marketing, entertainment,
customization, trendiness, interaction and
word-of-mouth on purchase intention: An
empirical study from Indonesian smartphone
consum e,” International Journal of Data
and Network Science, vol. 5, no. 3, pp. 231–
238, 2021. doi: 10.5267/j.ijdns.2021.6.011.
[20] S. Althuwaini, “The effect of social media
activities on brand loyalty for banks: The
role of brand trust,” Administrative Sciences,
vol. 12, no. 4, p. 148, 2022. doi:
10.3390/admsci12040148.
[21] A. Mekuriaw, “The Effect of Digital
Marketing on Brand Loyalty: The Case of St.
George Beer SC,” PhD Thesis, st. Mary’s
University, 2022.
[22] D. L. Parris and F. Guzmán, “Evolving brand
boundaries and expectations: looking back
on brand equity, brand loyalty, and brand
image research to move forward,” Journal of
Product & Brand Management, vol. 32, no.
2, pp. 191–234, 2023. doi: 10.1108/JPBM-
06-2021-3528.
WSEAS TRANSACTIONS on BUSINESS and ECONOMICS
DOI: 10.37394/23207.2024.21.128
Muhammad Adnan Bashir, Ummi Naiemah Binti Saraih,
Raghava Gundala, Junaid Ansari,
Muhammad Azeem Qureshi, Shiraz Ahmed
E-ISSN: 2224-2899
1577
Volume 21, 2024
[23] M. Diky Rifaldi, Vanessa Gaffar, “Effect of
Content Marketing, Customer Engagement,
and Brand Trust on Brand Loyalty (Survey
on users of the ‘Bareksa’ Digital Investment
Platform),” Budapest International Research
and Critics Institute-Journal (BIRCI-
Journal), vol. 5, no. 4, pp. 30904–30917,
2022.
[24] J. Wongsansukcharoen, “Effect of
community relationship management,
relationship marketing orientation, customer
engagement, and brand trust on brand
loyalty: The case of a commercial bank in
Thailand,” Journal of Retailing and
Consumer Services, vol. 64, p. 102826, 2022.
doi: 10.1016/j.jretconser.2021.102826.
[25] R. L. Oliver, “Whence consumer loyalty?,”
The Journal of Marketing, vol. 63, pp. 33–
44, 1999, doi: 10.2307/1252099.
[26] P. M. Torres, M. G. Augusto, and J. V.
Lisboa, “Determining the causal
relationships that affect consumer-based
brand equity: The mediating effect of brand
loyalty,” Marketing Intelligence & Planning,
vol. 33, no. 6, pp. 944–956, 2015. doi:
10.1108/MIP-11-2014-0211.
[27] G.-Y. Song, Y. Cheon, K. Lee, H. Lim, K.-
Y. Chung, and H.-C. Rim, “Multiple
categorizations of products: cognitive
modeling of customers through social media
data mining,” Pers Ubiquit Comput, vol. 18,
no. 6, pp. 1387–1403, Aug. 2014, doi:
10.1007/s00779-013-0740-5.
[28] K. L. Keller, “Conceptualizing, Measuring,
and Managing Customer-Based Brand
Equity,” Journal of Marketing, vol. 57, no. 1,
pp. 1–22, 1993, doi:
10.1177/002224299305700101.
[29] K.-J. Back and S. C. Parks, “A Brand
Loyalty Model Involving Cognitive,
Affective, and Conative Brand Loyalty and
Customer Satisfaction,” Journal of
Hospitality & Tourism Research, vol. 27, no.
4, pp. 419–435, Nov. 2003, doi:
10.1177/10963480030274003.
[30] J. Ferreira, A. Coelho, and L. Moutinho,
“Dynamic capabilities, creativity and
innovation capability and their impact on
competitive advantage and firm
performance: The moderating role of
entrepreneurial orientation,” Technovation,
vol. 92, p. 102061, 2020. doi:
10.1016/j.technovation.2018.11.004.
[31] M.-W. Li, H.-Y. Teng, and C.-Y. Chen,
“Unlocking the customer engagement-brand
loyalty relationship in tourism social media:
The roles of brand attachment and customer
trust,” Journal of Hospitality and Tourism
Management, vol. 44, pp. 184–192, 2020.
doi: 10.1016/j.jhtm.2020.06.015.
[32] A. H. Massoudi, “The vital role of pink
marketing in the creation of women loyalty,”
International Journal of Social Sciences and
Economic Review, vol. 2, no. 3, pp. 28–37,
2020. doi: 10.36923/ijsser.v2i3.74.
[33] M. Dapena-Baron, T. W. Gruen, and L. Guo,
“Heart, head, and hand: a tripartite
conceptualization, operationalization, and
examination of brand loyalty,” J Brand
Manag, vol. 27, no. 3, pp. 355–375, May
2020, doi: 10.1057/s41262-019-00185-3.
[34] S. Heim, S. Chan-Olmsted, C. F. Altobelli,
M. Fretschner, and L.-C. Wolter, “Exploring
Trust in Media Brands today: Definition,
Dimensions and cross-national Differences,”
2022.
[35] S. Molinillo, R. Aguilar-Illescas, R. Anaya-
Sánchez, and F. Liébana-Cabanillas, “Social
commerce website design, perceived value
and loyalty behavior intentions: The
moderating roles of gender, age and
frequency of use,” Journal of Retailing and
Consumer Services, vol. 63, p. 102404, 2021.
doi: 10.1016/j.jretconser.2020.102404.
[36] B. Ibrahim, A. Aljarah, and D. Sawaftah,
“Linking social media marketing activities to
revisit intention through brand trust and
brand loyalty on the coffee shop facebook
pages: Exploring sequential mediation
mechanism,” Sustainability, vol. 13, no. 4, p.
2277, 2021. doi:10.3390/su13042277.
[37] M. A. S. Goraya, Z. Jing, M. A. Shareef, M.
Imran, A. Malik, and M. S. Akram, “An
investigation of the drivers of social
commerce and e-word-of-mouth intentions:
Elucidating the role of social commerce in E-
business,” Electronic Markets, vol. 31, pp.
181–195, 2021. doi: 10.1007/s12525-019-
00347-w.
[38] J. F. Hair, W. C. Black, B. J. Babin, and R.
E. Anderson, “Multivariate data analysis:
Pearson new international edition,” Essex:
Pearson Education Limited, vol. 1, no. 2,
2014.
[39] A. J. Kim and E. Ko, “Do social media
marketing activities enhance customer
equity? An empirical study of luxury fashion
brand,” Journal of Business research, vol.
65, no. 10, pp. 1480–1486, 2012.
doi:10.1016/j.jbusres.2011.10.014.
WSEAS TRANSACTIONS on BUSINESS and ECONOMICS
DOI: 10.37394/23207.2024.21.128
Muhammad Adnan Bashir, Ummi Naiemah Binti Saraih,
Raghava Gundala, Junaid Ansari,
Muhammad Azeem Qureshi, Shiraz Ahmed
E-ISSN: 2224-2899
1578
Volume 21, 2024
[40] R. K. Chahal, N. Kumar, and S. Batra, “Trust
management in social Internet of Things: A
taxonomy, open issues, and challenges,”
Computer Communications, vol. 150, pp.
13–46, 2020. doi:
10.1016/j.comcom.2019.10.034.
[41] C. M. Ringle, M. Sarstedt, and D. W. Straub,
“A critical look at the use of PLS-SEM in
MIS quarterly,” MIS Quarterly: Management
Information Systems, vol. 36, no. 1, 2012,
doi: 10.2307/41410402.
[42] J. F. J. Hair, M. Sarstedt, C. M. Ringle, and
S. P. Gudergan, Advanced Issues in Partial
Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling.
2017.
[43] J. F. K. H. Jr, G. T. M. H. Hult, C. M.
Ringle, and M. Sarsedt, A Primer on Partial
Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling
(PLS-SEM), 2nd ed. SAGE Publications Ltd.,
2017.
[44] C. Fornell and D. F. Larcker, “Structural
equation models with unobservable variables
and measurement error: Algebra and
statistics.” Sage Publications Sage CA: Los
Angeles, CA, 1981.
[45] S. B. MacKenzie, P. M. Podsakoff, and N. P.
Podsakoff, “Construct measurement and
validation procedures in MIS and behavioral
research: Integrating new and existing
techniques,” MIS quarterly, pp. 293–334,
2011. doi: 10.2307/23044045.
[46] J. Henseler, C. M. Ringle, and M. Sarstedt,
“Testing measurement invariance of
composites using partial least squares,”
International Marketing Review, vol. 33, no.
3, pp. 405–431, May 2016, doi:
10.1108/IMR-09-2014-0304.
[47] J. Henseler, C. M. Ringle, and M. Sarstedt,
“A new criterion for assessing discriminant
validity in variance-based structural equation
modeling,” Journal of the Academy of
Marketing Science, vol. 43, no. 1, pp. 115–
135, 2014, doi: 10.1007/s11747-014-0403-8.
[48] P. M. Podsakoff, S. B. MacKenzie, J.-Y.
Lee, and N. P. Podsakoff, “Common method
biases in behavioral research: a critical
review of the literature and recommended
remedies,” Journal of applied psychology,
vol. 88, no. 5, p. 879, 2003. doi:
10.1037/0021-9010.88.5.879.
[49] J. R. Hanaysha, “Impact of social media
marketing features on consumer’s purchase
decision in the fast-food industry: Brand trust
as a mediator,” International Journal of
Information Management Data Insights, vol.
2, no. 2, p. 100102, 2022. doi:
10.1016/j.jjimei.2022.100102.
[50] A. Bashir and N. A. Ali, “Impact of customer
brand relationship through Facebook on the
level of customer engagement,” Pakistan
Business Review, vol. 18, no. 1, pp. 159–178,
2016.
[51] M. A. Bashir, N. Ayub, and T. Jalees, “The
impact of the firm generated contents and the
user generated contents through social media
on brand equity elements,” Pakistan
Business Review, vol. 19, no. 3, pp. 744–760,
2017.
[52] S. Hudson, L. Huang, M. S. Roth, and T. J.
Madden, “The influence of social media
interactions on consumer–brand
relationships: A three-country study of brand
perceptions and marketing behaviors,”
International Journal of Research in
Marketing, vol. 33, no. 1, pp. 27–41, 2016.
doi: 10.1016/j.ijresmar.2015.06.004.
[53] A. H. Fetais, R. S. Algharabat, A. Aljafari,
and N. P. Rana, “Do Social Media Marketing
Activities Improve Brand Loyalty? An
Empirical Study on Luxury Fashion Brands,”
Inf Syst Front, Mar. 2022, doi:
10.1007/s10796-022-10264-7.
[54] T. Samarah, P. Bayram, H. Y. Aljuhmani,
and H. Elrehail, “The role of brand
interactivity and involvement in driving
social media consumer brand engagement
and brand loyalty: the mediating effect of
brand trust,” Journal of Research in
Interactive Marketing, vol. 16, no. 4, pp.
648–664, 2022. doi: 10.1108/JRIM-03-2021-
0072.
[55] C. Bobâlcă, C. Gătej, and O. Ciobanu,
“Developing a scale to measure customer
loyalty,” Procedia Economics and Finance,
vol. 3, pp. 623–628, 2012. doi:
10.1016/s2212-5671(12)00205-5.
[56] S. Atulkar, “Brand trust and brand loyalty in
mall shoppers,” Marketing Intelligence &
Planning, vol. 38, no. 5, pp. 559–572,
2020.doi: 10.1108/MIP-02-2019-0095.
[57] I. Bernarto, M. P. Berlianto, Y. F. C. P.
Meilani, R. R. Masman, and I. N. Suryawan,
“The influence of brand awareness, brand
image, and brand trust on brand loyalty,”
Jurnal Manajemen, vol. 24, no. 3, pp. 412–
426, 2020. doi:10.24912/jm.v24i3.676.
[58] I. B. Hong and H. Cho, “The impact of
consumer trust on attitudinal loyalty and
purchase intentions in B2C e-marketplaces:
Intermediary trust vs. seller trust,”
WSEAS TRANSACTIONS on BUSINESS and ECONOMICS
DOI: 10.37394/23207.2024.21.128
Muhammad Adnan Bashir, Ummi Naiemah Binti Saraih,
Raghava Gundala, Junaid Ansari,
Muhammad Azeem Qureshi, Shiraz Ahmed
E-ISSN: 2224-2899
1579
Volume 21, 2024
International journal of information
management, vol. 31, no. 5, pp. 469–479,
2011. doi:10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2011.02.001.
[59] K. Hawkins and P. Vel, “Attitudinal loyalty,
behavioural loyalty and social media: An
introspection,” The Marketing Review, vol.
13, no. 2, pp. 125–141, 2013. doi:
10.1362/146934713X13699019904605.
[60] S. Hossain and M. N. Sakib, “The impact of
social media marketing on university
students’ brand loyalty,” International
Journal of Marketing and Business
Communication, vol. 5, no. 3, pp. 1–7, 2016.
[61] M. Van Asperen, P. De Rooij, and C.
Dijkmans, “Engagement-Based Loyalty: The
Effects of Social Media Engagement on
Customer Loyalty in the Travel Industry,”
International Journal of Hospitality &
Tourism Administration, vol. 19, no. 1, pp.
78–94, Jan. 2018, doi:
10.1080/15256480.2017.1305313.
[62] T. R. V. Davis and F. Luthans, “A Social
Learning Approach to Organizational
Behavior,” The Academy of Management
Review, vol. 5, no. 2, p. 281, Apr. 1980, doi:
10.2307/257438.
Contribution of Individual Authors to the
Creation of a Scientific Article (Ghostwriting
Policy)
The authors equally contributed in the present
research, at all stages from the formulation of the
problem to the final findings and solution.
Sources of Funding for Research Presented in a
Scientific Article or Scientific Article Itself
No funding was received for conducting this study.
Conflict of Interest
The authors have no conflicts of interest to declare
that are relevant to the content of this article.
Creative Commons Attribution License 4.0
(Attribution 4.0 International, CC BY 4.0)
This article is published under the terms of the
Creative Commons Attribution License 4.0
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/deed.en
_US
WSEAS TRANSACTIONS on BUSINESS and ECONOMICS
DOI: 10.37394/23207.2024.21.128
Muhammad Adnan Bashir, Ummi Naiemah Binti Saraih,
Raghava Gundala, Junaid Ansari,
Muhammad Azeem Qureshi, Shiraz Ahmed
E-ISSN: 2224-2899
1580
Volume 21, 2024
APPENDIX
Table 1. Phases of Loyalty concerning Vulnerabilities
Source: [25]
Table 2. Sample Profile
Variable
Frequency
%
Frequency
%
Gender
Social Media Use
Male
176
55.8
175
55.6
Feale
139
44.1
99
31.4
Education
19
6
Bachelors
281
89.2
13
4.1
Masters
31
9.8
9
2.9
Doctorate
3
1.0
Social Media use Tenure
Income
28
8.9
< 50K
62
19.7
83
26.3
50k-100K
67
21.3
124
39.4
100-200K
82
26
80
25.4
> 200K
104
33
Time Spent on Social Media
27
8.6
119
37.8
104
33
65
20.6
Table 3. Summary of Measurement Scale
Variable
Ld
CR
AVE
Variable
Ld
CR
AVE
Entertainment
0.93
0.86
Cognitive Loyalty
0.92
0.75
EN1
0.93
CogL1
0.87
EN2
0.92
CogL2
0.89
Interaction
0.94
0.84
CogL3
0.87
INT1
0.91
CogL4
0.83
INT2
0.92
Affective Loyalty
0.92
0.79
INT3
0.91
AffL1
0.89
Trendiness
0.91
0.83
AffL2
0.91
TR1
0.92
AffL3
0.88
TR2
0.90
Conative Loyalty
0.89
0.68
Customization
0.86
0.76
ConL1
0.77
CUST1
0.87
ConL2
0.75
CUST2
0.87
ConL3
0.89
Word of Mouth
0.90
0.82
Action Loyalty
0.93
0.82
WOM1
0.93
ActL1
0.92
WOM2
0.89
ActL2
0.94
Brand Trust
0.92
0.74
ActL3
0.85
BT1
0.83
BT2
0.89
BT3
0.83
BT4
0.89
Note: Ld = Loadings, CR = Composite Reliability, AVE = Average Variance Extracted
WSEAS TRANSACTIONS on BUSINESS and ECONOMICS
DOI: 10.37394/23207.2024.21.128
Muhammad Adnan Bashir, Ummi Naiemah Binti Saraih,
Raghava Gundala, Junaid Ansari,
Muhammad Azeem Qureshi, Shiraz Ahmed
E-ISSN: 2224-2899
1581
Volume 21, 2024
Table 4. Correlation and Discriminant Validity
Variable
α
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
ActL
0.89
0.90
AffL
0.87
0.68
0.89
BT
0.88
0.73
0.66
0.86
CUST
0.68
0.54
0.59
0.51
0.87
CogL
0.88
0.68
0.98
0.67
0.59
0.86
ConL
0.84
0.78
0.63
0.73
0.53
0.65
0.87
ENT
0.84
0.64
0.49
0.51
0.49
0.51
0.62
0.93
EWOM
0.79
0.41
0.44
0.39
0.42
0.47
0.37
0.33
0.91
INT
0.90
0.64
0.48
0.56
0.34
0.48
0.58
0.46
0.24
0.91
TR
0.80
0.46
0.39
0.51
0.32
0.38
0.47
0.34
0.21
0.38
0.91
Note: α = Cronbach Alpha, CR = Composite Reliability, AVE = Average Variance Extracted; Bold & Italic values are the square root
of the AVE. ActL = Action Loyalty, AffL = Affective Loyalty, BT = Brand Trust, CUST = Customization, CogL = Cognitive Loyalty,
ConL = Conative Loyalty, ENT = Entertainment, EWOM = Electronic Word of Mouth, INT = Interaction, TR = Trendiness
Table 5. PLS results for Structural Model
Relationship
Coefficient
t-vale
p-value
H1: SMMA BT
0.72
25.91
0.001
H2a: SMMA CogL
0.43
7.92
0.001
H2b: SMMA AffL
0.43
7.91
0.001
H2c: SMMA ConL
0.48
9.59
0.001
H2d: SMMA ActL
0.55
11.87
0.001
H3a: BT CogL
0.36
5.87
0.001
H3b: BT AffL
0.35
5.88
0.001
H3c: BT ConBL
0.39
7.44
0.001
H3d: BT ActBL
0.34
6.71
0.001
Note: ActL = Action Loyalty, AffL = Affective Loyalty, BT = Brand Trust, CUST = Customization, CogL = Cognitive Loyalty, ConL =
Conative Loyalty, ENT = Entertainment, EWOM = Electronic Word of Mouth, INT = Interaction, TR = Trendiness
Fig. 1: Conceptual Framework
WSEAS TRANSACTIONS on BUSINESS and ECONOMICS
DOI: 10.37394/23207.2024.21.128
Muhammad Adnan Bashir, Ummi Naiemah Binti Saraih,
Raghava Gundala, Junaid Ansari,
Muhammad Azeem Qureshi, Shiraz Ahmed
E-ISSN: 2224-2899
1582
Volume 21, 2024
Fig. 2: Structural Model
WSEAS TRANSACTIONS on BUSINESS and ECONOMICS
DOI: 10.37394/23207.2024.21.128
Muhammad Adnan Bashir, Ummi Naiemah Binti Saraih,
Raghava Gundala, Junaid Ansari,
Muhammad Azeem Qureshi, Shiraz Ahmed
E-ISSN: 2224-2899
1583
Volume 21, 2024