Hallmarks and potential pitfalls of customer‐ and consumer engagement scales: A systematic review

Author:

Hollebeek Linda D.12345ORCID,Sarstedt Marko67ORCID,Menidjel Choukri8ORCID,Sprott David E.9,Urbonavicius Sigitas1

Affiliation:

1. Department of Marketing Vilnius University Vilnius Lithuania

2. Department of Business Administration Tallinn University of Technology Tallinn Estonia

3. Department of Business Administration Umeå University Umeå Sweden

4. Department of Business Administration Lund University Lund Sweden

5. Department of Marketing Management University of Johannesburg Johannesburg South Africa

6. LMU Munich School of Management Ludwig‐Maximilian‐University Munich Munich Germany

7. Faculty of Economics and Business Administration Babeș‐Bolyai University Cluj‐Napoca Romania

8. Faculty of Economics, Business and Management Echahid Cheikh Larbi Tebessi University Tebessa Algeria

9. Drucker School of Management Claremont Graduate University Claremont California USA

Abstract

AbstractMultiple scales measuring a customer's, or consumer's, engagement (CE) with a brand or specific brand elements (e.g., advertising/social media content) have been proposed in the literature, offering researchers different options to gauge CE. However, the myriad proposed operationalizations can yield confusion among scholars regarding how to best capture CE, exposing a growing issue for CE research. Addressing this issue, we take stock of major scales measuring a CE with a brand or specific brand elements. To achieve this objective, we performed a systematic review of major CE scale development articles (2005 to January 2023) using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta‐Analyses (PRISMA) approach. We systematically evaluated these scales in terms of their respective CE conceptualization, dimensionality, itemization, and underlying theoretical perspective. We also identify potential scale‐related risks, or pitfalls, exposing important insight for CE researchers. Overall, the results suggest the existence of theoretical contamination in specific CE measures (e.g., through the inclusion of related concepts in the proposed CE definition), compromising their theoretical rigor and raising a need for scholars to verify the theoretical underpinnings of their adopted CE scales.

Publisher

Wiley

Subject

Marketing,Applied Psychology

Cited by 20 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3