The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available on Emerald Insight at:

https://www.emerald.com/insight/1355-5855.htm

Linking social media marketing Linking

SMMEs with
efforts with customer brand CBE

engagement in driving
brand loyalty
Hasan Yousef Aljuhmani Received 30 August 2021
Revised 29 June 2022
Faculty of Business and Economics, Center for Management Research, 1 September 2022
Girne American University, Kyrenia, Turkey Accepted 10 September 2022

Hamzah Elrehail
Leadership and Organizational Development Department,
Abu Dhabi School of Management, Abu Dhabi,
United Arab Emirates
Pelin Bayram
Faculty of Economics and Administrative Sciences, European University of Lefke,
Lefke, Turkey, and
Tariq Samarah
Business Management Department, Girne American University, Kyrenia, Turkey

Abstract
Purpose – This study explores some central questions related to the connections between social media
marketing efforts (SMMEs) and brand loyalty by seeking to understand the mediating role of social media
customer brand engagement (CBE) in the airline context.
Design/methodology/approach – The research model was examined empirically by targeting 360
consumers who follow Royal Jordanian Airlines on Facebook pages. Structural equation modeling (SEM) was
used to analyze the data collected.
Findings – Using the Stimulus–Organism–Response (S–O–R) theory and customer engagement model as the
theoretical foundations, this study confirms that SMMEs are a strong predictor and play a vital role in
developing and building social media customer engagement and brand loyalty. This study also found that the
cognitive aspect of CBE is a key driver in enhancing brand loyalty. Furthermore, cognitive social media CBE
positively mediated the relationship between SMMEs and brand loyalty. Contrary to expectations, emotional
CBE had no mediating effect on the relationship between SMMEs and brand loyalty.
Originality/value – This study contributes to CBE literature by adding SMMEs as antecedents. In addition,
the findings of this study add the mediation effect of the cognitive component of customer engagement,
through which SMMEs influence brand loyalty.
Keywords Social media marketing, Customer brand engagement, Brand loyalty, Facebook
Paper type Research paper

1. Introduction
Because of its increasing utility and significance, social media is being adopted by an
increasing number of businesses for purposes such as customer relationship management,
marketing and promotion, in addition to serving as an internal communication channel for
employees (Hanaysha and Al-Shaikh, 2022). By the end of 2021, the number of social media
users is expected to reach more than three billion active users per month, accounting for over
a third of the world’s population (Shawky et al., 2020). Thus, the advanced development of
social media platforms has a significant influence on society. For instance, the emergent use Asia Pacific Journal of Marketing
and Logistics
of social media platforms such as Facebook has prompted scholarly interest in the process of © Emerald Publishing Limited
1355-5855
driving value co-creation and customer engagement through consumer–brand interactions DOI 10.1108/APJML-08-2021-0627
APJML (Cheung et al., 2021). For this reason, an examination of customer brand engagement (CBE) on
social media platforms is crucial, and more research is still underway (Lim and Rasul, 2022).
CBE through social media has attracted increasing attention in the last few decades
(Samarah et al., 2021). CBE is defined as “consumers’ brand-related cognitive, emotional and
behavioral activity related to focal brand interactions” (Hollebeek et al., 2014, p. 149).
However, despite the agreement that the area of customer engagement in the marketing field
has always been the attention and consideration of scholars (Leckie et al., 2016), the manner in
which CBE is utilized within social media platforms requires more in-depth investigation and
empirical evidence is needed to verify its ultimate role in the marketing field (Islam and
Rahman, 2016). Nevertheless, it is crucial to conduct further research to understand the
relationship between the drivers of CBE and brand loyalty on social media platforms (Kwon
et al., 2020). Thus, the main argument of this study is that brand managers need to create
customer brand experiences by using different forms of social media marketing efforts
(SMMEs) to build CBE (Liu et al., 2021).
Accordingly, the concept of social media in the marketing domain refers to as “online
applications, platforms and media that aim to facilitate interactions, collaborations and the
sharing of content’’ (Kim and Ko, 2012, p. 1481) and to manage customer interaction in
sharing brand-related information on social media platforms (Cheung et al., 2020). SMMEs
were found to have a beneficial influence on both the brand equity of the airline and consumer
responses (Seo and Park, 2018). However, previous research shows that SMMEs play a vital
role in enhancing customer–brand relationships (Ibrahim, 2022; Hafez, 2021; Ebrahim, 2020;
Koay et al., 2020), while customers spend more time searching for extra information related to
their favorite brands on social media pages (Mangold and Faulds, 2009). Consistent with this
view, prior studies found that SMMEs increase customers’ brand knowledge more than
traditional marketing conversation activities (Bruhn et al., 2012).
This study conducts a comprehensive examination of the antecedents and consequences
of CBE within the airline industry. To date, several studies have investigated the relationship
between SMMEs and the behavioral aspects of customer engagement (Liu et al., 2021);
however, they have failed to investigate the psychological state (cognitive processing and
emotional aspects) of customer engagement on social media platforms. For example, Chmait
et al. (2020) have examined the impact of SMMEs on the behavioral aspects of customer
engagement (e.g. consumption, contribution and creation behaviors). While in the airline
industry, Menon et al. (2019) have investigated the behavioral manifestations of customer
engagement (e.g. likes, comments and shares) with airline social media marketing on
Facebook and Twitter pages. Building on these studies, we investigated the impact of
SMMEs on the psychological aspects of customer engagement. Thus, it could be noticed that
previous research did not investigate the impact of SMMEs on nonbehavioral customer
engagement alongside brand-related outcomes, such as brand loyalty over the social media
platforms (G
omez et al., 2019). This allows us to examine whether SMMEs have an impact on
social media CBE and brand-related outcomes. Similarly, the mediating role of CBE, through
which SMMEs influence brand loyalty, remains under-explored. In doing so, the research
reported here stipulates a more holistic approach by integrating the unexplored drivers of
CBE in the social media pages of brands (i.e. SMMEs) that are responsible for the
development of brand-related outcomes, such as brand loyalty, through understanding the
role played by CBE in social media on Facebook.

2. Theoretical background and hypotheses

2.1 Stimulus–organism–response model
The theoretical model underpinning the research model proposed in the current study is the
stimulus–organism–response (S-O-R) model. The model was initially developed by
Mehrabian and Russell (1974) and then modified by Jacoby (2002). This model proposes that Linking
different stimuli (environmental stimuli) affect a customer’s cognitive and emotional SMMEs with
processes (organism), thereby impacting specific behavioral responses (Donovan and
Rossiter, 1982). The model has been extended to include consumer behavior (Donovan et al.,
CBE
1994), online store (Eroglu et al., 2003) and website experience (Mollen and Wilson, 2010).
Thus, stimuli are external factors that encourage or discourage customers (Xu et al., 2014).
Stimuli may show themselves in multiple ways; for instance, as a product billboard or shop
environment (Jacoby, 2002). In the online shopping context, stimuli are viewed as an
e-commerce website design where consumers can interact with brands (Eroglu et al., 2003),
such as interactivity (Mollen and Wilson, 2010). An organism refers to the intervening
mechanisms (e.g. affective and cognitive processes) through which the stimuli influence
specific consumer reactions (Xu et al., 2014). Finally, response refers to nonverbal, verbal and
behavioral responses that may be expressed, such as word-of-mouth communication (Jacoby,
2002). This study adopts three aspects of the S-O-R model for consumer behavior.
Recent social media marketing literature (Koay et al., 2020; Kwon et al., 2020) has adopted
the S-O-R model to investigate the impact of external environmental stimuli (S) (i.e. SMMEs)
on the internal process (O) (i.e. CBE), which in turn affects specific consumer behavioral
responses (R) (i.e. brand loyalty). Hence, based on this theoretical model and the recent studies
reviewed earlier, this study aims to address a gap in the literature by developing the
conceptual research model depicted in Figure 1 to uncover the relationship between SMMEs
and brand loyalty by understanding the role played by CBE in social media.

2.2 Social media marketing efforts

Social media is a “group of Internet-based applications that build on the ideological and
technological foundations of Web 2.0, which allow the creation and exchange of user-
generated content” (Kaplan and Haenlein, 2010, p. 61). The most dominant social media
platforms are WhatsApp, Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, SnapChat and YouTube, which are
more important for organizations, managers and academics. As a result, social media’s role as
a social network facilitator has used traditional media to create connections, engage
customers and build ongoing relationships between the customer and the brand

Figure 1.
Research model based
on the S-O-R theory
APJML (Shawky et al., 2020). Thus, it is a great opportunity for marketers to promote their brands on
social media platforms and allows them to reach final users in a timely manner at a low cost
(Kaplan and Haenlein, 2010). In addition, social media has an effect on consumer behavior and
perception (Mangold and Faulds, 2009) and which has attracted researchers to approach
social media as a distinct research area (Bruhn et al., 2012).
In this regard, SMMEs is conceptualized as the adoption of marketing tactics to
communicate brand-related information using social media platforms and to build more
personal relationships with customers over social media platforms (Godey et al., 2016).
However, there is a lack of consensus on what SMMEs are (Ebrahim, 2020). In general,
SMMEs can be defined as a process that uses social media platforms to communicate and
create brand information that strengthens customer–brand relationships (Hafez, 2021; Koay
et al., 2020; Yadav and Rahman, 2017).
Marketing scholars use a variety of methods to measure SMMEs, and the general
agreement is that SMMEs is a multidimensional construct (Godey et al., 2016). For instance,
Kim and Ko (2012) suggested a multidimensional structure of SMMEs and recommended five
constructs of perceived SMMEs for luxury fashion brands: entertainment, interaction,
trendiness, customization, and word of mouth (WOM). This study examines SMMEs in the
airline industry from the perspectives of Kim and Ko (2012) as entertainment, interaction,
trendiness, customization and EWOM (Seo and Park, 2018).

2.3 Customer brand engagement

Research interest arises from the recognition of the importance of CBE for marketing
strategy, encompassing the creation and enhancement of consumer–brand relationships
(Samarah et al., 2021). Prior studies by Brodie et al. (2011) and Hollebeek (2011) have
considered the main contributors to measuring and conceptualizing customer engagement.
Recently, the term “customer–brand engagement in social media” has emerged (Hollebeek
et al., 2014). More specifically, Hollebeek et al. (2014) defined CBE on social media as “a
consumer’s positively valanced brand-related cognitive, emotional and behavioral activity
during or related to focal consumer/brand interactions” (p. 154).
Previous studies examine three primary conceptualizations of engagement. These
conceptualizations are based on quite a comprehensive literature review in marketing, as well
as in associated domains of psychology. These works reflect three main conceptualizations of
engagement: a psychological state (Mollen and Wilson, 2010; Vivek et al., 2012); behavioral
(van Doorn et al., 2010); and a combination of psychological and behavioral dimensions
(Brodie et al., 2011; Hollebeek, 2011; Hollebeek et al., 2014). Researchers looked at CBE from
both unidimensional (i.e. cognitive, emotional) and multidimensional (i.e. cognitive, emotional
and behavioral) constructs in order to address engagement from the perspective of the brand
(Ndhlovu and Maree, 2022). For instance, France et al. (2016) measured the concept of CBE by
adopting the conceptualization of Hollebeek et al. (2014), who eliminated the behavioral
dimension of the construct. They argue that the elimination of the behavioral aspect is
important for investigating the psychological aspects of CBE, which consists of cognitive and
emotional dimensions (France et al., 2016). Building on the aforementioned studies, this study
examines the influence of SMMEs on the psychological state of CBE and their role in
predicting customer brand loyalty.

2.4 SMMEs and CBE

Social media CBE is a construct that has been thoroughly examined in marketing research,
but to a limited extent (Lim and Rasul, 2022) and more research is warranted. The concept
refers to “consumers’ specific level of cognitive, emotional and behavioral activity in brand
interactions” (Hollebeek, 2011, p. 790). To date, a number of the antecedents of customer
engagement have been identified (Gligor et al., 2019), including, but limited to, perceived Linking
interactivity (France et al., 2016), brand involvement (Hollebeek et al., 2014) and satisfaction SMMEs with
with the brand (Kumar and Pansari, 2016). The emerging picture of CBE in the social media
marketing domain argues for the interactive nature between social media platforms and
CBE
customers, which is responsible for the development of customer–brand relationships in
building CBE (Hollebeek, 2011). In doing so, marketers are encouraged to develop
customer–brand relationships by utilizing multiple forms of SMMEs (Mishra, 2019).
SMMEs has attracted increasing attention in marketing research (Dwivedi et al., 2021), but
to a limited extent, which in turn leads to enhanced customer engagement (Liu et al., 2021).
Businesses can use different methods to apply SMMEs to strengthen their relationships with
customers, resulting in a higher level of CBE (Cheung et al., 2020). Ebrahim (2020, p. 290)
described SMMEs as “effective marketing communication methods that capture engaged
consumers’ perceptions and understanding of activities on social media marketing in five
dimensions: entertainment, interaction, trendiness, customization, and word-of-mouth.” For
example, examining the impact of SMMEs is an important but relatively new marketing
strategy area, and the understanding of how it affects CBE is still limited (Liu et al., 2021;
Cheung et al., 2020). Empirical research shows that customers engage with brands when
companies maintain and build strong relationships with customers through social media
platforms (Hafez, 2022; Mishra, 2019), and the way in which SMMEs influence customer
engagement has been limited in the literature. Most research has been conceptual in nature
and has still not provided empirical evidence regarding how these variables relate to each
other (Liu et al., 2021).
‘How does social media marketing impact consumer engagement?’ (Schultz et al., 2013,
p. v94). This is the first reported speculation on whether SMMEs play a role in CBE. The
authors make an argument for the existence of such a relationship that businesses can
enhance customer engagement and strengthen consumer–brand relationships by using
social media platforms (Cheung et al., 2020). More recently, G
omez et al. (2019) argued that
SMMEs encourage consumers to engage with brands via liking, sharing, posting and
creating content.
Thus, the primary feature of social media is the ability to create and perceive the desired
content at any time and location. Cognitive brand-related activities are related to customer
concentration or engagement with a brand (Ahn and Back, 2018). In addition, customers’
degree of excitement and satisfaction in their relationship with the brand are linked to
emotional CBE. Consumer brand engagement is influenced by perceived information through
digital and non-digital platforms (Leckie et al., 2016). For instance, the information is seen
through advertisements on social media platforms (e.g. Facebook and Twitter) plays a crucial
role in the interaction between customers and companies, leading to an increase in brand
awareness and engagement, which in turn increases cognitive and emotional CBE.
Customers are exposed to many brand-related stimuli, which influence their future views
and actions toward different companies; therefore, providing a unique and memorable brand
experience is vital for the airline industry by establishing appropriate SMMEs on different
social media platforms. Based on the above discussion, the following hypotheses were
developed:
H1a. SMMEs have a positive effect on cognitive CBE.
H1b. SMMEs have a positive effect on emotional CBE.

2.5 SMMEs and brand loyalty

Brand loyalty has been recognized as one of the most important factors in measuring the
strength of customer–brand relationships (Hollebeek, 2011). Brand loyalty can be broadly
APJML defined as “a deeply held commitment to re-buy or re-patronize preferred product/services
consistently in the future” (Oliver, 1999, p. 34). However, “most researchers do not only face
problems in trying to describe loyalty, but they also seem to be keen on understanding the
method of development of loyalty” (Jamshidi and Rousta, 2021, p. 151). This concept
possesses both behavioral and attitudinal intentions of brand loyalty (Samarah et al., 2021).
Thus, behavioral loyalty refers to brand recommendation behavior and repeated brand
purchases (Johnson et al., 2006). Attitudinal loyalty focuses on customer commitment and
attachment to repurchasing the same brand (Russell-Bennett et al., 2007). In this study, we
based our conceptualization on the behavioral intentions of brand loyalty (Harrigan et al.,
2017). In the social media marketing literature, loyalty is frequently measured in behavioral
terms (Yoshida et al., 2018).
SMMEs are considered an effective strategy for building mutual relationships with
customers (Ismail, 2017). Thus, businesses use different forms of social media platforms to
deal, interact, engage and communicate with customers by developing customer brand
experience and delivering brand-related value, which, in turn, improves their behavioral
responses toward the brand over social media pages (Ebrahim, 2020). However, a great deal
of research supports the positive effect of SMMEs on brand loyalty (Ibrahim, 2022); while, in
the social media marketing literature there is little emphasis on this relationship, so we
posit that:
H2. SMMEs have a positive effect on brand loyalty.

2.6 CBE and brand loyalty

CBE has different outcomes, such as building brand relationship quality (G
omez et al., 2019),
customer satisfaction (Islam and Rahman, 2016), brand loyalty, trust and commitment
(Hollebeek, 2011) as well and consumer co-creation of brand and sales value and repurchase
intention (Dijkmans et al., 2015). CBE is essential for improving overall business performance
(Kumar and Pansari, 2016). Accordingly, relationship research highlights the importance of
examining loyalty when attempting to understand the process of customer engagement
(Hollebeek, 2011). For example, prior studies have found that customer engagement is
positively related to brand loyalty (Algharabat et al., 2020; Leckie et al., 2016). Engaged
consumers exhibit more behavioral responses and loyalty to a brand or organization (Kwon
et al., 2020). Nevertheless, it is essential to further study and understand the relationship
between CBE and its linkage with comprehensive measures of brand-related outcomes such
as brand loyalty over social media platforms (Gligor et al., 2019).
The literature on CBE offers some insight into the possible link between the two
constructs, even though research on the conceptual relationship between CBE and brand
loyalty is currently lacking (So et al., 2016). However, in recent literature, scholars appear to
support the contrary prediction of the relationship between CBE and brand loyalty (Li et al.,
2020). On the one hand, cognitive and emotional CBE with adequate SMMEs has been
described as influencing brand loyalty. Therefore, active SMMEs may induce brand loyalty
in a unidirectional manner, cognitive CBE or emotional CBE. However, to our knowledge, no
quantitative study has examined the customer engagement–brand loyalty relationship in the
airline context within the social media domain (G
omez et al., 2019), suggesting that future
studies can explore such a relationship. This research aims to comprehend the impact of the
dominant role of CBE dimensions in building brand loyalty through a holistic perspective
that has been overlooked in previous literature. Therefore, to address this void in airline social
media marketing literature, the current study proposes the following hypotheses:
H3a. Cognitive CBE has a positive effect on brand loyalty.
H3b. Emotional CBE has a positive effect on brand loyalty.
 H4a. Cognitive CBE mediates the positive association between SMMEs and brand Linking
loyalty. SMMEs with
H4b. Emotional CBE mediates the positive association between SMMEs and brand CBE
loyalty.

3. Methodology
3.1 Study site and data collection
To ensure a relevant level of CBE on social media platforms, we targeted Royal Jordanian
Airlines (RJ) to collect data for this study. The sample frame for this study was drawn from
RJ’s Facebook page (http://www.facebook.com/RoyalJordanian/). RJ is one of the oldest and
most respected airlines in the Middle East, with daily services within the region and to the
US, Europe and the Far East (Jahmani, 2017). It is one of the most important industries in
Jordan, and is an intensely competitive and highly efficient sector. As one of the main pillars
of the national economy, it is a good contributor to the gross domestic product (RJ, 2019). RJs
are considered leaders in the commercial use of social media (RJ, 2017), with more than
615,000 Facebook followers in 2020. To obtain the sampling frame for this study, we
selected from the RJ’s Facebook page, 1,000 active followers by using the non-probability
convenience sampling technique. For this research, an active social media user was defined
as followers of how to interact (e.g. like, comment and share) with the RJ’s Facebook page at
least once every 30 days. Followers with zero interaction within 30 days were defined as
inactive followers. Only active followers of the RJ’s Facebook page were invited to
participate in the online survey. Therefore, inactive followers were excluded from the
sample frame. After two waves of data collection and reminders, 384 questionnaires were
returned. We rejected 24 surveys due to unengaged respondents. We used the remaining
360 responses (resulting response rate of 36.0 percent) in our analysis to test the study
hypothesis.

3.2 Measurement of variables

All constructs were measured using scales from prior studies with minor changes to fit the
purposes of this study. The scales were translated into Arabic and then back into English
using a translation and back-translation procedure. This procedure was used to ensure that
the items in Arabic communicated similar information to those in English (Brislin, 1986),
meaning that conceptual equivalence was assured.
All research units were measured on a seven-point Likert scale (1 5 “strongly disagree,”
7 5 “strongly agree”), and the online survey for all variables consisted of 22 items (Table 3).
SMMEs (entertainment, interaction, trendiness, customization and EWOM) were measured
using 11-items, which were based on Kim and Ko (2012) and Godey et al. (2016) and were
modified to fit the purposes of this study. Customer engagement (cognitive processing and
emotional aspects) was measured using seven items, which were based on the items used by
Hollebeek et al. (2014), France et al. (2016) and Gligor et al. (2019), and were modified to fit the
purposes of this study. Finally, brand loyalty was measured using four items, which were
based on Harrigan et al. (2017) and modified to fit the purposes of this study.

4. Data analysis
Table 1 presents the demographic information of the final valid sample. Our sample was
heterogeneous in terms of the duration of the respondent’s relationship with the RJ’s
Facebook page and consisted mainly of men (60.8%). The majority of respondents were
APJML Measures Item Frequency Percentage (%)

Gender Male 219 60.8%

Female 141 39.2%
Age <18 8 2.2%
18–25 187 51.9%
26–30 113 31.4%
31–40 42 11.7%
>40 10 2.8%
Education High school or diploma 51 14.2%
Undergraduate 221 61.4%
Master 72 20.0%
Doctorate 16 4.4%
Length of relationship with RJ’s Facebook page Less than 1 year 87 24.2%
1–2 years 127 35.3%
3–4 years 78 21.7%
Table 1. 5–6 years 32 8.9%
Demographics of the More than 6 years 36 10.0%
research sample Total 360 100%

under 29 years of age (85.6%). Among the respondents, 85.8% had an educational level of
college or above.

4.1 Assessment of the measurement model

This study applied structural equation modeling (SEM) using AMOS 24.0 software, to test
the measurement and structural models using a bootstrapping approach with 5,000
bootstrap resamples and bias-corrected confidence estimates (95% CI). A confirmatory
factor was used for the analysis; hence, a chi-square (X2) value of 301.404 with 181 degrees
of freedom (df) was obtained; thus, the X2/df ratio was 1.66, which is lower than the
recommended value of 3 (Bagozzi and Yi, 1988). In addition, the comparative fit index (CFI),
root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA) and normed fit index (NFI) were used to
evaluate the model fit. The fit indices of the measurement model (Table 2) suggest that the
model fit the data well. All indices were acceptable according to Hu and Bentler’s (1999)
model evaluation criteria.
However, this study used confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) to examine the validity
and acceptance of scale items for the study constructs. All eight constructs with measuring
items showed an over-identified model; they satisfied the requirements of the CFA and
loaded on the respective constructs with a causal effect greater than 0.60. This loading

Measures Recommended criteria Measurement model Structural model References

CMIN 301.404 328.405 Bagozzi and Yi (1988)

DF 181 196 Hu and Bentler (1999)
X2/d.f <3 1.66 1.67
CFI >0.9 0.97 0.96
NFI >0.8 0.94 0.92
IFI >0.8 0.97 0.96
TLI >0.8 0.96 0.95
Table 2. SRMR <0.08 0.033 0.053
Model fit measures RMSEA <0.06 0.043 0.042
 Outer Cronbach’s
Linking
Construct/Indicators loadings α CR AVE SMMEs with
CBE
Entertainment (ENT) 0.799 0.800 0.666
ENT1: Using X brand’s social media is fun 0.798
ENT2: Content of X brand’s social media seems interesting 0.834
Interaction (INT) 0.855 0.856 0.667
INT3: X brand’s social media enable information-sharing with 0.773
others
INT4: Conversation or opinion exchange with others is 0.838
possible through X brand’s social media
INT5: It is easy to provide my opinion through X brand’s 0.835
social media
Trendiness (TRE) 0.804 0.805 0.674
TRE6: Content of X brand’s social media is the newest 0.824
information
TRE7: Using X brand’s social media is very trendy 0.818
Customization (CUS) 0.852 0.854 0.746
CUS8: X brand’s social media offer a customized information 0.898
search
CUS9: X brand’s social media provide customized service 0.827
Electronic word of mouth (EWOM) 0.797 0.799 0.665
EWOM10: I would like to pass information on brand, product, 0.774
or services from X brand’s social media to my friends
EWOM11: I would like to upload content from X brand’s 0.856
social media on my blog or micro blog
Cognitive CBE (COG) 0.801 0.802 0.576
COG1: Using this brand gets me to think about it 0.683
COG2: I think about this brand a lot when I’m using it 0.758
COG3: Using this brand stimulates my interest to learn more 0.830
about it
Emotional CBE (EMO) 0.879 0.880 0.647
EMO4: I feel very positive when I use this brand 0.799
EMO5: Using this brand makes me happy 0.819
EMO6: I feel good when I use this brand 0.804
EMO7: I am proud to use this brand 0.795
Brand loyalty (BL) 0.891 0.890 0.672
BL1: I would say positive things about this brand to other 0.737
people
BL2: I would recommend this brand to someone who seeks my 0.748
advice
BL3: I would encourage friends and relatives to do business 0.913
with this brand
BL4: I would do more business with this brand in the next few 0.866 Table 3.
years Scale’s measurement,
Note(s): Composite reliability (CR), average variance extracted (AVE), customer brand engagement (CBE) reliability, and validity

value satisfied the minimum cutoff point requirements (Fornell and Larcker, 1981). In this
way, convergent validity was satisfied (Table 3) as the factor loadings for all items were
above 0.683 and significant at the 0.001 level (Hair et al., 1998). Additionally, the five higher-
order SMMEs loadings (Figure 2) were >0.50, which was highly significant (p < 0.001).
Furthermore, the average variance extracted (AVE) values of all constructs ranged from
0.576 to 0.746, which was higher than the threshold value of 0.50 (Fornell and Larcker,
1981). This indicates sufficient convergent validity of the measurement items.
This study also verified internal construct consistency and validity using composite
reliability (CR) and Cronbach’s alpha. As presented in Table 3, Cronbach’s alpha values of the
APJML

Figure 2.
Results of
structural model

constructs ranged from 0.797 to 0.891, all above the threshold of 0.70 (Nunnally, 1978).
Additionally, the composite reliability (CR) of the constructs ranged from 0.799 to 0.890, all
higher than the threshold value of 0.60 (Bagozzi and Yi, 1988). This demonstrates the adequate
internal consistency of multiple items for measuring each construct (Hair et al., 1998).
The results for discriminant validity are presented in Table 4. According to Fornell and
Larcker (1981), if the square roots of AVEs are greater than the correlations between any pair
of constructs, the discriminant validity is satisfied. As indicated in Table 4, the square roots of
the AVEs were greater than the correlation coefficients, indicating the satisfactory
discriminant validity of the measurements.

4.2 Common method bias check

As all our data were generated from the same respondents, a common method bias may exist
(Podsakoff et al., 2003). To test for common method bias, we used Harman’s (1976) single-
factor test as an exploratory approach. To do so, we forced all the items used in this study to
load on a single factor. This test resulted in 38.44% of variance explained, which was less

Factors 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

1. Entertainment 0.816
2. Interaction 0.397*** 0.816
3. Trendiness 0.535*** 0.412*** 0.821
4. Customization 0.476*** 0.288*** 0.385*** 0.863
5. Electronic word of mouth 0.521*** 0.421*** 0.567*** 0.417*** 0.816
6. Cognitive CBE 0.629*** 0.279*** 0.470*** 0.564*** 0.511*** 0.759
7. Emotional CBE 0.498*** 0.239*** 0.488*** 0.614*** 0.562*** 0.755*** 0.805
8. Brand loyalty 0.557*** 0.264*** 0.303*** 0.582*** 0.365*** 0.660*** 0.565*** 0.819
Table 4. Note(s): Customer brand engagement (CBE), square root of average variance extracted (AVE) is shown on the
Discriminant validity diagonal (in italics) of the matrix; inter-construct correlations are shown off the diagonal; *** 5 significant at
of measures level of 0.001
than the recommended threshold criterion of 50%. As this factor did not account for the Linking
majority of the covariance between the measures, we assume that common method bias is not SMMEs with
a pervasive issue in this study (Chang et al., 2010). An extraction with eigenvalues above 1
with varimax rotation confirmed this interpretation, as all items loaded highly on their
CBE
respective scales.

4.3 Assessment of the structural model

In the structural model, the X2/df ratio is 1.67. The structural model testing results (Table 2)
showed fit values of NFI (0.92), IFI (0.96), TLI (0.95), CFI (0.96), RMSEA (0.042) and SRMR
(0.053) coefficients, which were all higher than the commonly accepted standards, and the
model fit the data well (Hu and Bentler, 1999). Table 5 lists the results of the structural model
tests. As expected, SMMEs had a significant positive impact on the social media CBE
dimensions (path coefficient for cognitive 5 0.441, p < 0.001; path coefficient for
emotional 5 0.745, p < 0.001). Therefore, the impact of SMMEs on social media CBE is
fully supported, as both H1a and H1b are supported. The results also show that SMMEs had a
significant direct impact on brand loyalty (path coefficient 5 0.306, p 5 0.006). Therefore, H2
is also supported.
With respect to the impact of social media CBE dimensions on brand loyalty, this
hypothesis was partially supported, as only the cognitive aspect of CBE had a positive and
significant direct impact on brand loyalty (path coefficient 5 0.407, p < 0.001), while the
emotional aspect did not reach a statistically significant level (path coefficient 5 0.031,
p 5 0.745), thus supporting H3a but not H3b.
Using AMOS 24.0, we examined structural paths and R2 scores. SMMEs explained 66% of
the variance in cognitive and 56% in emotional aspects of CBE, while SMMEs and CBE
dimensions explained 48% of the variance in brand loyalty (Figure 2). R2 values achieved an
acceptable level of explanatory power, as recommended by Cohen (1988), indicating a
substantial model.

4.4 Mediation analysis

To test for mediating effects and assess the specific indirect effects of CBE, we used the
bootstrapping method (5,000 iterations) with 95% bias-corrected confidence intervals
(Preacher and Hayes, 2008). This approach is recommended by some researchers, as it is
based on a non-parametric resampling approach (Hayes, 2009; Preacher and Hayes, 2004). An
indirect effect was considered significant if the 95% bootstrapped confidence intervals did
not include zero. To obtain indirect effect values, a simple mediation analysis was employed
using the bootstrapping percentile method available in AMOS. Thus, we examined the
specified indirect effect to distinguish multiple mediation variables, and Table 6 presents the
results.

Standardized
Direct effect coefficients Standard errors t-values p-values Decision

H1a: SMMEs → cognitive CBE 0.441*** 0.116 4.419 0.001 Supported

H1b: SMMEs → emotional CBE 0.745*** 0.110 9.024 0.001 Supported
H2: SMMEs → brand loyalty 0.306** 0.137 2.739 0.006 Supported
H3a: Cognitive CBE → brand loyalty 0.407*** 0.117 3.677 0.001 Supported Table 5.
H3b: Emotional CBE → brand loyalty 0.031 0.088 0.326 0.745 Not supported Hypotheses testing
Note(s): Social media marketing efforts (SMMEs), customer brand engagement (CBE); ** statistically result of the
significant at p < 0.010, *** statistically significant at p < 0.001 direct effect
APJML The results indicate a partial mediation of the social media CBE dimensions and confirm that
SMMEs indeed influence brand loyalty through cognitive processing (path coefficient 5 180,
p < 0.001). The indirect impact of SMMEs on brand loyalty through the emotional aspect of
CBE was not statistically significant (path coefficient 5 0.023, p 5 0.749), leading us to accept
H4a and reject H4b.

4.5 Serial mediation analysis

To increase the robustness of results and due to the insignificant relationship between the
emotional aspect of CBE and brand loyalty, a serial mediation model was also analyzed,
whereby the emotional element of CBE acted as a predictor for the cognitive processing of
CBE as shown in Figure 2. The test results indicate that the emotional aspect of CBE is
positively associated with cognitive processing (path coefficient 5 0.431; p < 0.001).
To verify the serial mediation effect, the specific indirect effect was used on AMOS 24.0
software (Collier, 2020). Table 6 demonstrates the fact that the specific indirect effect of the
serial mediation was significant, with the confidence interval of 95% bootstrap ranging from
0.071 to 0.285 (path coefficient 5 0.160, p 5 0.001), not including 0, which indicated that there
were serial mediation effects of emotional and cognitive CBE through which SMMEs
influence brand loyalty.

5. Discussion and implication

5.1 Discussion
Based on the above empirical analysis, this study developed and tested an integrated model
to explore how SMMEs contribute to brand loyalty by understanding the role of social media
CBE. Using the S-O-R theory and customer engagement model as the theoretical foundations,
the current study confirmed that SMMEs play a vital role in developing and building social
media customer engagement dimensions (cognitive and emotional) and brand loyalty. This
study also found that only the cognitive aspect of CBE was a key driver in enhancing brand
loyalty. Moreover, the findings confirm the mediating effect of CBE dimensions (i.e. cognitive
processing) through which SMMEs influence brand loyalty, shedding light on the
significance of different dimensions of customer engagement that are largely
underexplored in the literature. The substantial theoretical and managerial implications of
the findings are discussed below.

5.2 Theoretical implications

This study was designed to examine the impact of SMMEs on brand loyalty and the
mediating role of cognitive and emotional CBE in the airline context. By doing so, this study
fills critical gaps in the literature. This study delved deep into the specific relationships

Indirect effect Lower Upper

Hypothesized path path coefficients bound bound p-values Results

Ind 1: SMMEs → cognitive CBE → brand loyalty 0.180*** 0.100 0.418 0.001 Supported
Ind 2: SMMEs → emotional CBE → brand 0.023 0.189 0.227 0.749 Not supported
loyalty
Ind 3: SMMEs → emotional CBE → cognitive 0.160*** 0.071 0.285 0.001 Supported
CBE → brand loyalty
Table 6. Note(s): Social media marketing efforts (SMMEs), customer brand engagement (CBE); *** statistically
Indirect effect results significant at p < 0.001
between the cognitive and emotional dimensions of social media CBE, which has not been Linking
explored in earlier studies. First, the SMMEs model (Seo and Park, 2018; Godey et al., 2016; SMMEs with
Kim and Ko, 2012) was expanded by adding a unidimensional CBE construct (Gligor et al.,
2019; France et al., 2016; Hollebeek et al., 2014). This extension enabled researchers to examine
CBE
the unidimensional aspects of customer–brand relationships in the social media setting.
Previous studies empirically tested some of the study constructs in isolation from one
another. For example, Ismail (2017) investigated the relationship between SMMEs and brand
loyalty but not with CBE. In addition, within the context of linking CBE with brand loyalty,
prior studies (Hafez, 2022; Cheung et al., 2020) have linked CBE with brand equity and brand
awareness, but not CBE with brand loyalty. Within the context of SMMEs, no study has
investigated the relationship between SMMEs and unidimensional CBE (cognitive and
emotional). Furthermore, some airline social media studies have used the Kim and Ko (2012)
SMMEs model (Seo and Park, 2018), and no research on airline customers’ behaviors has been
conducted by adding social media CBE as a consequence (Samarah et al., 2021; G
omez et al.,
2019). The findings highlight the importance of a more sophisticated approach to examining
customer–brand relationships in the social media setting. When customers have a positive
use of SMMEs with an airline Facebook page, they tend to engage with the brand
psychologically, which consists of consumers’ cognitive and affective states (France et al.,
2016). Few studies have examined the relationship between SMMEs and customer
engagement.
Instead, attempts have been made to empirically link SMMEs with the behavioral
aspects of CBE (Liu et al., 2021; Chmait et al., 2020), making it difficult to generalize the
findings to a more comprehensive way to include the psychological state (cognitive and
emotional) of CBE in social media (Gligor et al., 2019; France et al., 2016). In addition, linking
SMMEs with a multidimensional construct of CBE comprises cognitive processing and
emotional and behavioral aspects (Hafez, 2022; Cheung et al., 2020). This study contributes
to the current literature by empirically testing a conceptual model that has not been tested
before. Therefore, the findings of this study suggest that developing and building
consumer–brand relationships by employing different forms of social media marketing will
positively and significantly influence cognitive and emotional customer–brand
engagement on social media platforms. SMMEs must be made for non-behavioral
customer engagement in social media.
Second, the findings of this study add a new mediation effect of customer engagement to
the airline social media marketing literature (G
omez et al., 2019; Seo and Park, 2018; Dijkmans
et al., 2015). This new insight substantially improves the extent of research that aims to
uncover the mediation effect of CBE (i.e. cognitive processing) through which SMMEs
influence brand loyalty in social media research. Extant empirical research (Ibrahim, 2022;
Ebrahim, 2020; Ismail, 2017) has consistently confirmed a significant relationship between
different forms of SMMEs and brand loyalty across a variety of research contexts, such that
more entertainment, interaction, trendiness, customization and EWOM elicit higher brand
loyalty. The findings of this research advance prior work by showing a partial mediation
effect of SMMEs on brand loyalty through the cognitive processing of CBE, which explains
48% of the total variance of brand loyalty. Hence, this study contributes to a better theoretical
understanding of the impact of SMMEs on brand loyalty, which adds more insights to the
social media marketing literature (Liu et al., 2021). This result explains the underlying process
of the development of brand loyalty on social media platforms. This significant mediating
effect is logical since SMMEs (eWOM, customization, trendiness, entertainment and
interaction) are not enough to enhance customer loyalty in the absence of cognitive CBE.
Third, another theoretical contribution is the significant and positive relationship between
cognitive CBE and brand loyalty. This finding further contributes to the CBE literature
(Hollebeek et al., 2014; Gligor et al., 2019) in the context of social media, contradicting previous
APJML research (e.g. Algharabat et al., 2020; Leckie et al., 2016). For example, while Leckie et al. (2016)
found that cognitive consumer brand engagement is negatively related to brand loyalty, we
found that cognitive CBE has a positive impact on brand loyalty. This result enhances the
perspective of the extant literature by addressing the diverse impacts of different
engagement dimensions on brand loyalty.
Our findings also showed a direct link between the emotional and the cognitive aspect of
CBE. We did not hypothesize this link, but we nevertheless find the support for it to be
intriguing. This finding further contributes to the CBE literature in the context of social
media, “constructing CBE dimensions as a process, rather than an entity” (Qing and
Haiying, 2021, p. 7). It suggests that, in addition to the customer–brand interaction, other
salient intervening mechanisms may be operating. For example, we did not find evidence to
support a direct link between the emotional aspect of CBE and brand loyalty, but in our
post hoc analysis, we did find an intriguing discovery regarding the serial mediation
offered by emotional and cognitive aspects of CBE through which SMMEs influence brand
loyalty. These findings imply that developing and building consumer–brand relationships
by employing different forms of SMMEs will create an emotional bond between a consumer
and a brand, which will then build a cognitive connection, which will eventually result in
customer brand loyalty. This serial mediation analysis illuminated the process through
which SMMEs influence brand loyalty. Although this finding is exploratory, it does raise
the broader issue for future research as an attempt to elaborate more fully on how the
different forms of SMMEs shape influence brand loyalty through the emotional and
cognitive aspects of CBE. Research in this vein could address such intriguing questions.
Finally, this study extends the literature on CBE by empirically testing this theoretical
argument in the Jordanian airline industry, which supports the generalizability of the social
media CBE model developed in previous studies by providing evidence from the contexts of
different cultural backgrounds. Thus, conducting our research in a non-Western context
and focusing on customers who follow Royal Jordanian Airlines on Facebook pages adds
new insights to the literature that could be reflected in developing countries. We believe that
the aforementioned contributions can add insights to the current social media marketing
research within the area of customer engagement. Using the S-O-R model to link SMMEs
with CBE and brand loyalty would contribute to the current social media marketing
literature by investigating the missing links of emotional and cognitive aspects of CBE
through which SMMEs influence brand loyalty, which has been overlooked in previous
studies.

5.3 Managerial implications

From a practical perspective, the empirical findings of this study offer valuable insights
regarding SMMEs and brand loyalty by understanding the role played by customer
engagement in social media, which has several managerial implications for airline marketing
managers. First, the findings of this study can be used as a guideline for marketers and brand
managers to consider SMMEs (i.e. entertainment, interaction, trendiness, customization and
EWOM) as social media marketing tools to develop and build customer–brand relationships,
resulting in a higher level of customer engagement on social media platforms. Therefore, the
findings of this study suggest that developing and building consumer–brand relationships
by employing different forms of SMMEs will positively and significantly influence cognitive
and emotional engagement. Thus, the main practical implication of this study is that brand
managers need to create a customer brand experience using different forms of SMMEs to
build social media customer engagement (Liu et al., 2021; Cheung et al., 2020). In doing so,
airline marketers are encouraged to develop customer–brand relationships by developing
more interesting and interactive airline SMMEs (Seo and Park, 2018) that will encourage
customers to post positive comments about and recommend airline brands on social media
(Menon et al., 2019). The interactive nature of social media not only allows customers to share Linking
and create content about their favorite brands but also allows customers to engage with their SMMEs with
brands on social media platforms (Mishra, 2019).
Second, the results of this study suggest that if marketers of airline social media
CBE
marketing wish to increase and improve their brand loyalty on Facebook pages, they should
pay off in terms of using multiple ways of SMMEs with brand-related social media content.
Brand managers should use different forms of social media to keep customers up-to-date with
brand-related information. This information can motivate and inspire customers to make
brand decisions (Yadav and Rahman, 2017). Social media platforms allow customers to share
relevant information about products, brands and services (Ismail, 2017). This may encourage
customers to share their latest experience and exchange brand-related recommendations and
opinions to simulate WOM among customers (Ebrahim, 2020), which in turn enhances
customer–brand relationships, thus increasing brand loyalty (Ibrahim, 2022). Hence, brand
managers in the airline industry should use different forms of SMMEs to enhance brand
loyalty by delivering brand-promised values to customers, which in turn improves their
behavioral responses toward the brand over social media pages.
Finally, this study demonstrates that the mediation effect of cognitive CBE, through
which SMMEs influence brand loyalty, is important. To improve customer engagement,
marketers should continuously check customer engagement levels to build brand loyalty
when employing different forms of SMMEs. Thus, marketers in the airline industry should
promote customer–brand relationships by developing interactive SMMEs programs and
encourage customers to engage with airline brands on social media platforms, which lead
customers to be loyal to the airline brands on Facebook pages.

5.4 Limitations and directions for future research

This study has several limitations. First, this study focused on customers who have already
followed Royal Jordanian Airlines on Facebook by using a convenience sampling technique.
Therefore, longitudinal studies are required to improve the generalization of the results.
Second, the respondents were surveyed by focusing on one airline’s social media platform
(Facebook), thus limiting the generalizability of the findings. Accordingly, further studies are
encouraged to validate the proposed research model on other social media platforms, such as
Instagram and Twitter. Third, while previous studies have not investigated the impact of
SMMEs on CBE dimensions, the present study proposes a model that more accurately
describes the effects of social media CBE by introducing airline SMMEs into the
model. Hence, further research should consider other antecedents of customer engagement
(e.g. brand identity, brand image and brand credibility) or brand-related outcomes (e.g.
relationship quality, purchase intention, and consumer–based brand equity). Finally, this
study used an online survey to collect data from potential participants; thus, other data
collection tools, such as a self-administrated questionnaire or interview, could be employed to
support the research findings.

References
Ahn, J. and Back, K.-J. (2018), “Antecedents and consequences of customer brand engagement in
integrated resorts”, International Journal of Hospitality Management, Vol. 75, pp. 144-152.
Algharabat, R., Rana, N.P., Alalwan, A.A., Baabdullah, A. and Gupta, A. (2020), “Investigating the
antecedents of customer brand engagement and consumer-based brand equity in social media”,
Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Vol. 53, p. 101767.
Bagozzi, R.P. and Yi, Y. (1988), “On the evaluation of structural equation models”, Journal of the
Academy of Marketing Science, Vol. 16 No. 1, pp. 74-94.
APJML Brislin, R.W. (1986), “The wording and translation of research instruments”, in Lonner, W. and Berry,
J. (Eds), Field Methods in Cross-Cultural Research, Sage, Beverly Hills.
Brodie, R.J., Hollebeek, L.D., Juri
c, B. and Ili
c, A. (2011), “Customer engagement: conceptual domain,
fundamental propositions, and implications for research”, Journal of Service Research, Vol. 14
No. 3, pp. 252-271.
Bruhn, M., Schoenmueller, V. and Sch€afer, D.B. (2012), “Are social media replacing traditional media in
terms of brand equity creation?”, Management Research Review, Vol. 35 No. 9, pp. 770-790.
Chang, S.-J., van Witteloostuijn, A. and Eden, L. (2010), “From the Editors: common method variance
in international business research”, Journal of International Business Studies, Vol. 41 No. 2,
pp. 178-184.
Cheung, M.L., Pires, G. and Rosenberger, P.J. (2020), “The influence of perceived social media
marketing elements on consumer–brand engagement and brand knowledge”, Asia Pacific
Journal of Marketing and Logistics, Vol. 32 No. 3, pp. 695-720.
Cheung, M.L., Pires, G.D., Rosenberger, P.J., Leung, W.K.S. and Ting, H. (2021), “Investigating the role
of social media marketing on value co-creation and engagement: an empirical study in China
and Hong Kong”, Australasian Marketing Journal, Vol. 29 No. 2, pp. 118-131.
Chmait, N., Westerbeek, H., Eime, R., Robertson, S., Sellitto, C. and Reid, M. (2020), “Tennis influencers:
the player effect on social media engagement and demand for tournament attendance”,
Telematics and Informatics, Vol. 50, p. 101381.
Cohen, J. (1988), Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences, 2nd ed., L. Erlbaum Associates,
Hillsdale, NJ.
Collier, J.E. (2020), Applied Structural Equation Modeling Using AMOS: Basic to Advanced Techniques,
1st ed., Routledge, New York.
Dijkmans, C., Kerkhof, P. and Beukeboom, C.J. (2015), “A stage to engage: social media use and
corporate reputation”, Tourism Management, Vol. 47, pp. 58-67.
Donovan, R.J. and Rossiter, J.R. (1982), “Store atmosphere: an environmental psychology approach”,
Journal of Retailing, Vol. 58 No. 1, pp. 34-57.
Donovan, R.J., Rossiter, J.R., Marcoolyn, G. and Nesdale, A. (1994), “Store atmosphere and purchasing
behavior”, Journal of Retailing, Vol. 70 No. 3, pp. 283-294.
Dwivedi, Y.K., Ismagilova, E., Hughes, D.L., Carlson, J., Filieri, R., Jacobson, J., Jain, V., Karjaluoto, H.,
Kefi, H., Krishen, A.S., Kumar, V., Rahman, M.M., Raman, R., Rauschnabel, P.A., Rowley, J.,
Salo, J., Tran, G.A. and Wang, Y. (2021), “Setting the future of digital and social media
marketing research: perspectives and research propositions”, International Journal of
Information Management, Vol. 59, 102168.
Ebrahim, R.S. (2020), “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.
Eroglu, S.A., Machleit, K.A. and Davis, L.M. (2003), “Empirical testing of a model of online store
atmospherics and shopper responses”, Psychology and Marketing, Vol. 20 No. 2, pp. 139-150.
Fornell, C. and Larcker, D.F. (1981), “Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable
variables and measurement error”, Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 18 No. 1, pp. 39-50.
France, C., Merrilees, B. and Miller, D. (2016), “An integrated model of customer-brand engagement:
drivers and consequences”, Journal of Brand Management, Vol. 23 No. 2, pp. 119-136.
Gligor, D., Bozkurt, S. and Russo, I. (2019), “Achieving customer engagement with social media:
a qualitative comparative analysis approach”, Journal of Business Research, Vol. 101,
pp. 59-69.
G
omez, M., Lopez, C. and Molina, A. (2019), “An integrated model of social media brand engagement”,
Computers in Human Behavior, Vol. 96, pp. 196-206.
Godey, B., Manthiou, A., Pederzoli, D., Rokka, J., Aiello, G., Donvito, R. and Singh, R. (2016), “Social Linking
media marketing efforts of luxury brands: influence on brand equity and consumer behavior”,
Journal of Business Research, Vol. 69 No. 12, pp. 5833-5841. SMMEs with
Hafez, Md. (2021), “The impact of social media marketing activities on brand equity in the banking
CBE
sector in Bangladesh: the mediating role of brand love and brand trust”, International Journal of
Bank Marketing, Vol. 39 No. 7, pp. 1353-1376.
Hafez, Md. (2022), “The nexus between social media marketing efforts and overall brand equity in the
banking sector in Bangladesh: testing a moderated mediation model”, Journal of Internet
Commerce, pp. 1-28 (in press).
Hair, J.F., Black, W.C., Babin, B.J., Anderson, R.E. and Tatham, R.L. (1998), Multivariate Data Analysis,
5th ed., Prentice Hall College Division, Upper Saddle River, NJ.
Hanaysha, J.R. and Al-Shaikh, M.E. (2022), “An examination of customer relationship management
dimensions and employee-based brand equity: a study on ride-hailing industry in Saudi
Arabia”, Research in Transportation Business and Management, Vol. 43, 100719.
Harman, H.H. (1976), Modern Factor Analysis, 3rd ed., University of Chicago Press, Chicago, Revised.
Harrigan, P., Evers, U., Miles, M. and Daly, T. (2017), “Customer engagement with tourism social
media brands”, Tourism Management, Vol. 59, pp. 597-609.
Hayes, A.F. (2009), “Beyond Baron and Kenny: statistical mediation analysis in the new millennium”,
Communication Monographs, Vol. 76 No. 4, pp. 408-420.
Hollebeek, L.D. (2011), “Demystifying customer brand engagement: exploring the loyalty nexus”,
Journal of Marketing Management, Vol. 27 Nos 7-8, pp. 785-807.
Hollebeek, L.D., Glynn, M.S. and Brodie, R.J. (2014), “Consumer brand engagement in social media:
conceptualization, scale development and validation”, Journal of Interactive Marketing, Vol. 28
No. 2, pp. 149-165.
Hu, L. and Bentler, P.M. (1999), “Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis:
conventional criteria versus new alternatives”, Structural Equation Modeling:
A Multidisciplinary Journal, Vol. 6 No. 1, pp. 1-55.
Ibrahim, B. (2022), “Social media marketing activities and brand loyalty: a meta-analysis
examination”, Journal of Promotion Management, Vol. 28 No. 1, pp. 60-90.
Islam, J.U. and Rahman, Z. (2016), “The transpiring journey of customer engagement research in marketing:
a systematic review of the past decade”, Management Decision, Vol. 54 No. 8, pp. 2008-2034.
Ismail, A.R. (2017), “The influence of perceived social media marketing activities on brand loyalty: the
mediation effect of brand and value consciousness”, Asia Pacific Journal of Marketing and
Logistics, Vol. 29 No. 1, pp. 129-144.
Jacoby, J. (2002), “Stimulus-organism-response reconsidered: an evolutionary step in modeling
(consumer) behavior”, Journal of Consumer Psychology, Vol. 12 No. 1, pp. 51-57.
Jahmani, A. (2017), “The effect of royal Jordanian airline service quality on passengers’ satisfaction”,
International Journal of Business and Society, Vol. 18 S3, p. 519.
Jamshidi, D. and Rousta, A. (2021), “Brand commitment role in the relationship between brand loyalty
and brand satisfaction: phone industry in Malaysia”, Journal of Promotion Management,
Vol. 27 No. 1, pp. 151-176.
Johnson, M.D., Herrmann, A. and Huber, F. (2006), “The evolution of loyalty intentions”, Journal of
Marketing, Vol. 70 No. 2, pp. 122-132.
Kaplan, A.M. and Haenlein, M. (2010), “Users of the world, unite! The challenges and opportunities of
social media”, Business Horizons, Vol. 53 No. 1, pp. 59-68.
Kim, A.J. and Ko, E. (2012), “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.
APJML Koay, K.Y., Ong, D.L.T., Khoo, K.L. and Yeoh, H.J. (2020), “Perceived social media marketing activities
and consumer-based brand equity : testing a moderated mediation model”, Asia Pacific Journal
of Marketing and Logistics, Vol. 33 No. 1, pp. 53-72.
Kumar, V. and Pansari, A. (2016), “Competitive advantage through engagement”, Journal of Marketing
Research, Vol. 53 No. 4, pp. 497-514.
Kwon, J.-H., Jung, S.-H., Choi, H.-J. and Kim, J. (2020), “Antecedent factors that affect restaurant brand
trust and brand loyalty: focusing on US and Korean consumers”, Journal of Product and Brand
Management, Vol. 30 No. 7, pp. 990-1015.
Leckie, C., Nyadzayo, M.W. and Johnson, L.W. (2016), “Antecedents of consumer brand engagement
and brand loyalty”, Journal of Marketing Management, Vol. 32 Nos 5-6, pp. 558-578.
Li, M.-W., Teng, H.-Y. and Chen, C.-Y. (2020), “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.
Lim, W.M. and Rasul, T. (2022), “Customer engagement and social media: revisiting the past to inform
the future”, Journal of Business Research, Vol. 148, pp. 325-342.
Liu, X., Shin, H. and Burns, A.C. (2021), “Examining the impact of luxury brand’s social media
marketing on customer engagement: using big data analytics and natural language
processing”, Journal of Business Research, Vol. 125, pp. 815-826.
Mangold, W.G. and Faulds, D.J. (2009), “Social media: the new hybrid element of the promotion mix”,
Business Horizons, Vol. 52 No. 4, pp. 357-365.
Mehrabian, A. and Russell, J.A. (1974), An Approach to Environmental Psychology, MIT Press,
Cambridge, MA.
Menon, R.G.V., Sigurdsson, V., Larsen, N.M., Fagerstrøm, A., Sørensen, H., Marteinsdottir, H.G. and
Foxall, G.R. (2019), “How to grow brand post engagement on Facebook and Twitter for airlines?
An empirical investigation of design and content factors”, Journal of Air Transport
Management, Vol. 79, p. 101678.
Mishra, A.S. (2019), “Antecedents of consumers’ engagement with brand-related content on social
media”, Marketing Intelligence and Planning, Vol. 37 No. 4, pp. 386-400.
Mollen, A. and Wilson, H. (2010), “Engagement, telepresence and interactivity in online consumer
experience: reconciling scholastic and managerial perspectives”, Journal of Business Research,
Vol. 63 Nos 9-10, pp. 919-925.
Ndhlovu, T. and Maree, T. (2022), “Consumer brand engagement: refined measurement scales for
product and service contexts”, Journal of Business Research, Vol. 146, pp. 228-240.
Nunnally, J.C. (1978), “An overview of psychological measurement”, in Wolman, B.B. (Ed.), Clinical
Diagnosis of Mental Disorders, Springer US, Boston, MA, pp. 97-146.
Oliver, R.L. (1999), “Whence consumer loyalty?”, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 63 4_suppl1, pp. 33-44.
Podsakoff, P.M., MacKenzie, S.B., Lee, J.-Y. and Podsakoff, N.P. (2003), “Common method biases in
behavioral research: a critical review of the literature and recommended remedies”, Journal of
Applied Psychology, Vol. 88 No. 5, pp. 879-903.
Preacher, K.J. and Hayes, A.F. (2004), “SPSS and SAS procedures for estimating indirect effects in
simple mediation models”, Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, and Computers, Vol. 36
No. 4, pp. 717-731.
Preacher, K.J. and Hayes, A.F. (2008), “Asymptotic and resampling strategies for assessing and
comparing indirect effects in multiple mediator models”, Behavior Research Methods, Vol. 40
No. 3, pp. 879-891.
Qing, T. and Haiying, D. (2021), “How to achieve consumer continuance intention toward branded
apps—from the consumer–brand engagement perspective”, Journal of Retailing and Consumer
Services, Vol. 60, pp. 1-8.
Royal Jordanian (2017), “Royal Jordanian wins prestigious awards for social media campaign - Royal Linking
Jordanian”, available at: Rj.Comhttps://rj.com/de/meet-rj/our-media-center/news/2017/06/07/
prestigious-awards-for-social-media (accessed 28 March 2020). SMMEs with
Royal Jordanian (2019), “Annual report financial statement - royal Jordanian”, available at: Rj.
CBE
Comhttps://rj.com/en/meet-rj/investors-relations/annual-report-financial-statement (accessed 28
March 2020).
Russell-Bennett, R., McColl-Kennedy, J.R. and Coote, L.V. (2007), “Involvement, satisfaction, and brand
loyalty in a small business services setting”, Journal of Business Research, Vol. 60 No. 12,
pp. 1253-1260.
Samarah, T., Bayram, P., Aljuhmani, H.Y. and Elrehail, H. (2021), “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. No. ahead-
of-print, doi: 10.1108/JRIM-03-2021-0072.
Schultz, D.E., Peltier, J. and Jimmy (2013), “Social media’s slippery slope: challenges, opportunities and
future research directions”, Journal of Research in Interactive Marketing, Vol. 7 No. 2, pp. 86-99.
Seo, E.-J. and Park, J.-W. (2018), “A study on the effects of social media marketing activities on brand
equity and customer response in the airline industry”, Journal of Air Transport Management,
Vol. 66, pp. 36-41.
Shawky, S., Kubacki, K., Dietrich, T. and Weaven, S. (2020), “A dynamic framework for managing
customer engagement on social media”, Journal of Business Research, Vol. 121, pp. 567-577.
So, K.K.F., King, C., Sparks, B.A. and Wang, Y. (2016), “The role of customer engagement in building
consumer loyalty to tourism brands”, Journal of Travel Research, Vol. 55 No. 1, pp. 64-78.
van Doorn, J., Lemon, K.N., Mittal, V., Nass, S., Pick, D., Pirner, P. and Verhoef, P.C. (2010), “Customer
engagement behavior: theoretical foundations and research directions”, Journal of Service
Research, Vol. 13 No. 3, pp. 253-266.
Vivek, S.D., Beatty, S.E. and Morgan, R.M. (2012), “Customer engagement: exploring customer
relationships beyond purchase”, Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice, Vol. 20 No. 2,
pp. 122-146.
Xu, J.D., Benbasat, I. and Cenfetelli, R.T. (2014), “The nature and consequences of trade-off transparency
in the context of recommendation agents”, MIS Quarterly, Vol. 38 No. 2, pp. 379-406.
Yadav, M. and Rahman, Z. (2017), “Measuring consumer perception of social media marketing
activities in e-commerce industry: scale development & validation”, Telematics and Informatics,
Vol. 34 No. 7, pp. 1294-1307.
Yoshida, M., Gordon, B.S., Nakazawa, M., Shibuya, S. and Fujiwara, N. (2018), “Bridging the gap
between social media and behavioral brand loyalty”, Electronic Commerce Research and
Applications, Vol. 28, pp. 208-218.

About the authors

Dr. Hasan Yousef Aljuhmani acts as an Assistant Professor of Strategic Management and research
assistant at the centre for management research (CMR) at Girne American University, Kyrenia, Northern
Cyprus, via Mersin 10, 99320, Turkey. His research interests are in strategic management, public
administration, strategic HRM, and marketing strategy in general; upper echelons theory (UET),
organizational behavior, and strategic leadership in particular. He published several papers in ISI and
Scopus-indexed journals such as the Journal of Research in Interactive Marketing, International Review
of Public Administration, Asia-Pacific Journal of Business Administration, and International Journal of
Organization Theory and Behavior. Hasan Yousef Aljuhmani is the corresponding author and can be
contacted at: Jahmani_hassan@yahoo.com
Hamzah Elrehail serves as an assistant professor of management at Abu Dhabi School of
Management, Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates. His research spans into leadership, HRM, innovation
management, knowledge management and strategy. He has published several papers in ISI and Scopus
indexed journals such as European Journal of International Management, Computers in Human
APJML Behavior, Telematics and Informatics, Journal of Workplace Learning, Journal of Information
Technology, Journal of Innovation and Knowledge and Journal of Intellectual Capital.
Pelin Bayram is an assistant professor at European University of Lefke. She holds a BA degree in
Faculty of Communication and Media Studies from Eastern Mediterranean University, an MBA degree
in Business Administration from Istanbul Bilgi University and a Ph.D. degree in Marketing from Girne
American University. She was the Head of Business Management and IACBE and ECBE Accreditation
Coordinator for the Faculty of Business and Economics in Girne American University since 2008.
Tariq Samarah is a PhD candidate at Girne American University. His current areas of research are in
digital marketing and e-commerce in general and consumer behavior in particular.

For instructions on how to order reprints of this article, please visit our website:
www.emeraldgrouppublishing.com/licensing/reprints.htm
Or contact us for further details: permissions@emeraldinsight.com