Journal of Business Research 66 (2013) 216223

Contents lists available at SciVerse ScienceDirect

Journal of Business Research

Brand communities embedded in social networks

Melanie E. Zaglia
University of Innsbruck, School of Management, Department of Strategic Management, Marketing and Tourism, Universitaetsstrasse 15, 6020 Innsbruck, Austria
University of Michigan, Stephen M. Ross School of Business, Visiting Scholar, 701 Tappan Street, Ann Arbor, MI 48109, USA

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: Brand communities represent highly valuable marketing, innovation management, and customer relation-
Received 1 May 2011 ship management tools. However, applying successful marketing strategies today, and in the future, also
Received in revised form 1 December 2011 means exploring and seizing the unprecedented opportunities of social network environments. This study
Accepted 1 December 2011
combines these two social phenomena which have largely been researched separately, and aims to investi-
Available online 21 August 2012
gate the existence, functionality and different types of brand communities within social networks. The
Keywords:
netnographic approach yields strong evidence of this existence; leading to a better understanding of such
Brand community embedded brand communities, their peculiarities, and motivational drivers for participation; therefore the
Brand-related community ndings contribute to theory by combining two separate research streams. Due to the advantages of social
Social network networks, brand management is now able to implement brand communities with less time and nancial ef-
Social identity fort; however, choosing the appropriate brand community type, cultivating consumers interaction, and
Netnography staying tuned to this social engagement are critical factors to gain anticipated brand outcomes.
2012 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction Brand communities are a special form of consumer communities

(Muniz & O'Guinn, 2001), and have become a major current issue in
Community activity is the biggest change in business in 100 years the study of brands, since they bind brand and community together.
(Ahonen & Moore, 2005). Community research has been an important Social interactions between community members profoundly inu-
topic in different areas over time. However, since the mid-nineties ence customers relationship with, and attitude towards, the brand
communities have experienced a renaissance, and have since risen in (McAlexander, Schouten, & Koenig, 2002). These social formations
quantity and relevance; from the point of view of the consumers, the offer many advantages (e.g., Brown, Kozinets, & Sherry, 2003), and
extensive and still growing accessibility of the internet boosts the serve as a tool to build strong and lasting relationships with cus-
participation in virtual communities worldwide; corporations, on the tomers (e.g., Algesheimer, Dholakia, & Herrmann, 2005).
other hand, invest increasingly in their installation and maintenance. In addition to the rise and the high value of brand communities,
Forward-looking, communities will be important for consumers, as saying that networks are important is stating the obvious (Cross,
well as for marketers, as they represent a reaction to the lack of tra- Liedtka, & Weiss, 2005). The actual numbers of selected online social net-
ditional forms of collectivization (Schouten & McAlexander, 1995): works are impressive. Facebook, for instance, reaches more than 500 mil-
consumers gather, interact, and participate based on the norm of reci- lion active users around the world in April 2011 (Facebook.com, 2011a),
procity (Chan & Li, 2010); without companies concerns that con- LinkedIn represents over 100 million members in over 200 countries
sumers might avoid relational devices (Ashley, Noble, Donthu, & and territories around the world (LinkedIn.com, 2011), and Twitter
Lemon, 2011). The recent development and success of such consumer counts 106 million people in April 2010, growing by a rate of 300,000
communities, especially in virtual environments, show that this form members a day (Hufngtonpost, 04/30/2010). Along with other forms
of online organization is creating a large impact in the business commu- of computer mediated communication, they [social networking sites]
nity (Ganley & Lampe, 2009). have transformed consumers from silent, isolated and invisible in-
dividuals, into a noisy, public, and even more unmanageable than
usual, collective (Patterson, 2012). Consequently, successful con-
The author thanks Stefan Maier for his support in conducting the empirical study temporary brand strategies also entail exploring and seizing social
and Richard P. Bagozzi for his thoughtful and valuable comments. During part of the network environments.
development of this paper, the author was funded by the Austrian Science Fund In such virtual environments users often gather together in sub-
(FWF): J3056-G11. groups with a specic brand in its center (Woisetschlger, Hartleb, &
University of Innsbruck, School of Management, Department of Strategic
Management, Marketing and Tourism, Universitaetsstrasse 15, 6020 Innsbruck,
Blut, 2008), a brand-related community; consumers sharing their in-
Austria. Tel.: + 43 512 507 7181; fax: + 43 512 507 2968. terest for a brand, exchange information and knowledge, or they sim-
E-mail addresses: [email protected], [email protected]. ply express their affection for this specic brand. Muniz and O'Guinn

0148-2963/$ see front matter 2012 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2012.07.015
 M.E. Zaglia / Journal of Business Research 66 (2013) 216223 217

(2001) introduce the concept of a network based brand community Social network theory postulates that human behavior is embedded
which they dene as a specialized, non-geographically bound com- in a network of interpersonal relations (e.g., Granovetter, 1985), and
munity, based on a structured set of social relationships among prior research demonstrates that social networks inuence their mem-
admirers of a brand. Hence, a brand community can exist every- bers behavior (de Valck, van Bruggen, & Wierenga, 2009). This insight
where, also virtually (Thompson & Sinha, 2008). This characteristic in- becomes even more crucial as the number of social network members
dicates that brand-related communities such as the Apple group with and the amount of time spent in these networks will continue to rise;
110,015 members (Facebook.com, 2011b) or the Starbucks fan page in other words, the western world is increasingly developing into a so-
with 21,238,192 members (Facebook.com, 2011c) potentially offer a ciety of networks (Raab & Kenis, 2009), and the strong growth of social
multitude of benets to marketers. networks in developing countries (Checkfacebook.com, 2011) indi-
Research during the last decade has investigated the existence cates the global effect of this trend.
of, and primarily social processes within, brand communities. From The number of connected and interacting people or groups of peo-
various studies, one can derive that social exchanges in brand commu- ple, with patterns of connections and relations describe the character-
nities exist throughout different product categories and branches, cul- istics of a social network (e.g., Doyle, 2007). Social networks exist, for
tures, and different types of communities. The latter includes ofine example, as friendships between individuals, relationships between
and online brand communities (Muniz & O'Guinn, 2001; Muniz & groups, and business relations between corporations (Mizruchi &
Schau, 2005), small-group brand communities (Bagozzi & Dholakia, Galaskiewicz, 1993; Raacke & Bonds-Raacke, 2008; Rapoport &
2006a), virtual large network brand communities (Adjei, Noble, & Horvath, 1961). Online social networks are virtual places that cater
Noble, 2010), and brandfests (Schouten, McAlexander, & Koenig, for a specic population; on such platforms people with similar inter-
2007). ests gather to communicate, exchange contact details, build relations,
Consumers and companies connect in distinct and extended ways. and share and discuss ideas (Raacke & Bonds-Raacke, 2008). In the
Brand acionados perceive social identities with small-group friend- consumer-to-consumer area de Valck et al. (2009) describe social
ships groups, with virtual brand communities, with the brand, and networks also as virtual communities of consumption, which feature
with the company, all in a system of interconnected relationships characteristics like high consumer knowledge and companionship,
(Bagozzi, Morandin, Bergami, & Marzocchi, 2012). Similarly, literature and therefore inuence consumer behavior. Among other activities,
offers a range of studies in the elds of common virtual consumer users can interact, share stories in written form, or visually, in the
communities (e.g., Algesheimer, Borle, Dholakia, & Singh, 2010; form of pictures and videos (Cheung & Lee, 2010).
Dwyer, 2007), and online social networks (e.g., Cheung & Lee, 2010; From the perspective of information technology, online social net-
Raacke & Bonds-Raacke, 2008). However, to date, the existence, func- works are web-based services that allow individuals to (1) construct
tionality and inuences of brand communities and social networks a public or semi-public prole within a bounded system, (2) articulate
have mainly been investigated separately. In fact, one of the few a list of other users with whom they share a connection, and (3) view
existing studies in this area researches the inuence of customer- and traverse their list of connections and those made by others with-
based brand equity on brand community dynamics and represent so- in the system (Boyd & Ellison, 2007). In social networks members
cial networks as a well applicable environment for generating new often use their real identities to create a prole. This characteristic is
brand community members; applying a quantitative research ap- opposed to the classical use of pseudonyms and enhances the au-
proach (Schfer et al., 2011). A related study investigates the differ- thenticity of interaction. Furthermore, along with text based informa-
ences of consumer- versus marketer-generated brand communities tion, proles in social networks often incorporate visual information,
(Sung, Kim, Kwon, & Moon, 2010), but does not focus on the distinct audio and video content. Finally, blogging, instant messaging, chatting,
setting of a brand community within a social network. Thus, the com- update notications for the proles of one's connections (friends),
bination of both venue and their coalesced meaning for marketing and planning meetings are only some of the common features found
management and research still remain to be explored. Consequently, in such social networks; recent developments offer additional features
this paper aims to contribute to research by investigating the exis- like conducting and participating in polls, or checking-in to places
tence of brand communities embedded in a social network environ- (e.g., restaurants, public locations, or private addresses). Most of the lat-
ment, and gaining further insights into the interplay of these related ter elements describe web 2.0 elements and members use them to
social concepts. Furthermore, building on recent identity research pursue their objectives of socializing, content sharing, and having a
(Bagozzi et al., 2012), embedded brand communities allow their good time (Messinger et al., 2009).
members to perceive multiple social identities: with the brand com-
munity, the brand, the company, and with the social network. Togeth- 2.2. Brand community
er with an analysis of the social and psychological processes of their
members, this research seeks to contribute to marketing research Brand communities are specialized consumer communities; they
and to help marketers understand how to best utilize such communi- differ from traditional communities due to their commercial charac-
ties in social networks. The author therefore scrutinizes motivational ter, and members common interest in and enthusiasm, or even love
drivers for participation, and differences between diverse types of (Albert, Merunka, & Valette-Florence, 2008), for a brand. However,
sub-groups embedded in a social network. each of these communities contains three common markers: con-
First, this article provides an overview of the literature on social sciousness of kind, shared rituals and tradition, and moral responsi-
network and brand community research, on which this research bility (Muniz & O'Guinn, 2001).
builds upon. The study then explains the design of the empirical The primary community marker is consciousness of kind, which
study, the netnography approach. Finally, the discussion of the nd- describes the perceived membership of participants and intersects
ings highlights contributions to marketing theory and practice, and with social identity theory (Bagozzi & Dholakia, 2006a). Members
lays down a number of implications for future research. feel connected with other members, and separate themselves from
outsiders (Bagozzi & Dholakia, 2006b); literature also explains this so-
2. Theoretical framework cial categorization as in-group and out-group comparison (Bagozzi,
Dholakia, & Klein Pearo, 2007). Members therefore, often derive a feel-
2.1. Social network ing of belonging from their membership to the brand community
(Algesheimer et al., 2005).
One of the main questions of social theory is how social relations The second community marker compromises of shared rituals and
affect behavior, organizations, and institutions (Granovetter, 1985). traditions. Through these social processes members create their own
218 M.E. Zaglia / Journal of Business Research 66 (2013) 216223

meaning of the community experience; in turn, they also communi- brand, and with the company, all in a system of interconnected rela-
cate these meanings within and over the borders of the community tionships. Such multiple group afliations represent common bonds
(Casal, Flavin, & Guinalu, 2008). The celebrations of brand history, or common identities, and they can be rather network-based, or sim-
or the exchange of brand related stories, are indicators for this marker ilar to a friendship group, where both are linked in a chain of relation-
(Muniz & O'Guinn, 2001). In addition, members often share a com- ships (Bagozzi et al., 2012). Hence, brand enthusiasts perceive a social
mon set of values and behaviors; for example a specic form of lan- identity with the brand community and with its social network envi-
guage or signs which are used within the community (Casal et al., ronment separately, but simultaneously. Similarly, theory leads to the
2008). assumption that social networks do not, or at least only to a certain
Ultimately, moral responsibility completes the three community extent, feature brand community attributes such as; community
markers and makes members of a community feel morally committed markers, social identity, salient brand emotions, and commercial
to other community members and the community as a whole (Casal characteristic (Muniz & O'Guinn, 2001). Anyhow, much of social net-
et al., 2008). Moral responsibility appears, for example, in the form of work theory and research has focused mainly on the links, but not on
supporting members with the proper use of the brand, or integrating their nature and meaning; hence, a clear distinction of the two phe-
new members into the community (Muniz & O'Guinn, 2001). nomena cannot be determined. Instead, both embody social phenom-
In addition to the three brand community markers, consumers per- ena and overlap in some respects; mainly, social networks and brand
ceptions, especially their social identity, determine membership with- communities share the basic property of their members interacting
in a brand community. Social identity is the part of the individuals with each other. These ongoing interactions are critical for the surviv-
self-concept which derives from their knowledge of their membership al and success of social networks; similarly, social relationships are
of a social group (or groups) together with the value and emotional crucial in brand communities; the latter is built around a brand, its
signicance attached to that membership (Tajfel, 1982); further, this core asset, but ultimately grows and persists due to the relationships
social-psychological construct comprises three components: cognitive, among its members (Jang, Olfman, Ko, Koh, & Kim, 2008).
evaluative and affective (Ellemers, Kortekaas, & Ouwerkerk, 1999).
First, the cognitive component entails self-categorization of commu-
nity membership through individuals; they identify similarities with 2.3.1. Embedded brand community
other members of the same group and differences to members of Studying and using social networks, one notices that within this
other groups (Bagozzi & Dholakia, 2006b); therefore, this component phenomenon additional sub-groups develop. Such sub-groups focus
relates closely to the community marker consciousness of kind. Second, on a specic topic (e.g., interest, concern, or project), and are there-
the evaluative component refers to the assessment of the community fore narrow in scope compared to the diversity of social networks.
and one's membership (i.e., group self-esteem) (Ellemers et al., 1999). In the professional social network LinkedIn, for instance, users join
Third, the affective component encompasses the positive emotions groups which focus on business events or shared interests. Similarly,
experienced by individuals on the basis of their perceived belonging they adhere to the alumni group of a certain university. In Facebook,
to the group, and positive emotions towards other group members the private social network under study, people choose to become fans
(Bergami & Bagozzi, 2000). To characterize membership, including all of certain pages or members of sub-groups.
three components of social identity is essential. To get an idea of a Facebook fan page, one can picture a website for
Concluding, if individuals feel a sense of belonging for, and also a certain activity, brand, or interest within Facebook; such a page usu-
identify with the brand community and the other community mem- ally entails interactive applications. Facebook members become fans
bers, they can be classied as brand community members. In online of a page's subject by clicking on the button I am a fan of (After
brand communities, for example, the interaction of members is often the data collection of the empirical study presented in this paper
computer-mediated, members meet rarely face-to-face but still was completed, Facebook has changed the naming of this button to
share a social identity and consciousness of kind (Sicilia & Palazn, I like). The company's aim of a Facebook fan page is to broadcast
2008). great information in an ofcial, public manner to people who choose
to connect with them (Facebook.com, 2011d). A Facebook group is
2.3. Distinctions and conjunctions: social network and brand community a space for people to share their opinions and interest in that sub-
ject (Facebook.com, 2011d). Groups can be open, closed or secret,
Due to the characteristic of the personal interaction of its members, whereas pages are always public. In general, groups tend to be small-
brand communities display another special form of consumer com- er than fan pages; however, users also create and participate in
munities (e.g., de Valck et al., 2009), as their focus regarding to the groups around a certain topic, for example a brand.
content is tight. Consumer communities, in turn, represent substan- Although prior research investigates social networks and brand
tial social networks of consumer knowledge and companionship that communities separately, the conjunction of both social phenomena
affect consumer behavior (de Valck et al., 2009), leading to the ambi- requires additional analyses, as well as conceptualization and theo-
guity of consumer communitiesin particular brand communities ries. On the one hand, the size, superciality, and the wide scope of
and social networks being uniform concepts. social networks might affect embedded sub-groups; furthermore,
Nevertheless, the author classies and interprets social networks individuals join a brand-related sub-group within a social network
and brand communities rather as distinct but overlapping concepts. with less effort; they are already signed up and to register only
Main differences include the thematic orientation (i.e., wide and gen- one click is needed; hence, such sub-groups might not require high
eral in a social network, compared to relatively narrow and focused in brand involvement and do not embody brand community character-
a brand community), the strength of the ties between members, and istics. On the other hand, these characteristics might be advantages
their personal involvement with the community or social network. Fi- for the evolution of brand communities; in this respect, social
nally, in contrast to brand communities, online social networks are networks might present another platform on which brand aciona-
usually widely accessible (Boyd & Ellison, 2007). However, the reec- dos meet and interact, namely in embedded brand communities.
tion of these differences demonstrates that social networks and brand The author of this study follows the latter perspective as social net-
communities do not necessarily differ in kind, but show a difference works have become a new world of screen-based communication
in degree. Furthermore, a recent study shows that consumers and on computers, and increasingly, mobile phones; furthermore,
companies are connected in distinct and extended ways. social networkers of the world have become lifecasters who are
Brand acionados perceive social identities with small friendships happy to share the previously private and deeply personal detritus
groups, with virtual network-based brand communities, with the of their lives (Patterson, 2012).
 M.E. Zaglia / Journal of Business Research 66 (2013) 216223 219

2.3.2. Heterogeneity of embedded communities appropriate fan pages for all brands exist on Facebook, expect for
In addition to investigating whether sub-groups within social net- two (Allianz and Axa). In contrast, no tting groups (brand-related
works represent embedded brand communities, understanding and groups with a minimum of 500 members) are available for 11 brands
comparing possibly different sub-groups (e.g., fan page and group) (e.g., Colgate).
and their main characteristics, also appear to be important. Prior re- To assess how appropriate a community is for netnographic re-
search illustrates that such special consumer communities differ re- search, one compares the sub-groups according to questions proposed
garding the strength of their members relationships and either by Kozinets (2002) (e.g., Is the segment focused and relevant to the re-
emphasize the network of members relations within the community search question? Is the activity within the community high? Is the
(e.g., Adjei et al., 2010), corresponding to fan pages; or, in contrast, data detailed and descriptively rich?). Following this approach, the
pay particular attention to the relations between individual members Canon Digital Photography group embodies the most tting group.
(Dholakia, Bagozzi, & Klein Pearo, 2004), like in a group setting. Sim- Reasons for this decision are the salient popularity (108,259 mem-
ilarly, research on attachment differentiates consumer communities bers) and the highest degree of activity on the discussion board of all
in common identity and common bond groups (Prentice, Miller, & 100 scanned groups, resulting in a descriptively rich body of data
Lightdale, 1994). In this regard, identity and bond illustrate two di- (3,046 discussion threads) (Facebook.com, 2010). In terms of an ac-
mensions of members attachment to corresponding communities cordant Facebook fan page, the Canon Camera Malaysia fan page
(Ren, Kraut, & Kiesler, 2007). with 151,380 enthusiasts (Facebook.com, 2011e) qualies best for
Thus, depending on the intensity and form of interaction and the netnographic investigation. The fan page is company-hosted,
brand affection of the members, brand community characteristics which was found to be typical for fan pages of large organizations. Fur-
(e.g., community markers and social identity) abound to different ex- thermore, one of the author's personal interests is photography. Due
tents. Different types of communities stemming from the intensity of to the perennial use of Canon cameras, the author is familiar with
these characteristics have not been discussed in brand community the brand and its product. This familiarity is crucial for applying
research yet. Subsequently, the question arises whether such types netnography, and therefore also corroborates the choice of Canon
of brand communities exist, and if they differ regarding their func- fan page and group and their members as applicable sample for this
tionality, antecedents and consequences. A better grasp on those study.
sub-groups demands an understanding of antecedents to participa-
tion, such as motivational drivers. Recognizing that brand communi-
ties can become important marketing instruments and understanding 3.2. Data collection and analysis
who joins a community for what reasons may have potentially pow-
erful managerial implications (Ouwersloot & Odekerken-Schrder, Applying the netnography approach, the author followed the steps
2008). suggested by Kozinets (2010). Therefore, participant-observation
In conclusion, this paper investigates empirically whether brand characterizes the data collection, which included a high knowledge
communities embedded in social network environments exist; a of and getting familiar with the brand and the product, joining the
deeper goal is to explore how they exist, on what rationale they community, lurking and observing, as well as actively participating
build on, and what forms with what functions they embody. Building in the accordant group and fan page. The presented ndings build
on these results, the author also examines the differences of poten- on included observed data and data collected during interaction
tially diverse brand community types within social networks, as with community members, as well as general impressions that were
well as the motives for participating in such sub-groups. sketched as led notes. The netnographic study incorporates more
than 2000 discussion threads within the group, each consisting of
3. Research methodology multiple posts, during 15 months. The analysis of the fan page in-
cludes 128 discussion threads during a 10-month time period; some
To investigate the research questions a netnographic research ap- of the discussion threads show extraordinary interactivity with up
proach seems to be most appropriate because of its unobtrusive and to 494 messages. In addition, an exceptionally high interactivity on
naturalistic attributes (Kozinets, 2002). The access to spontaneous the fan page wall allows a thorough netnography.
consumer talk that is more natural and more real; heartfelt data To investigate if brand-related communities in social networks
that is more vivid and textured (Puri, 2007) makes this qualitative ap- correspond to the concept of brand communities as dened by
proach ideal for scrutinizing the existence of brand communities within Muniz and O'Guinn (2001)), the introduced brand community char-
social networks. Further, previous research presents netnography as acteristics appear to be appropriate measures. Therefore, the author
an eligible approach to investigate virtual consumer communities develops and employs structured categories which act as a point of
(e.g., Cova & Pace, 2006). reference for the netnographic research. Categories on the communi-
ty markers, as well as on brand emotions and the commercial charac-
3.1. Sample ter, determine whether the group and the fan page correspond to
the idea of a brand community. Moreover, categories on the different
The social network Facebook is highly eligible for this empirical components of social identity (Ellemers et al., 1999) allow one to in-
study; this platform is very popular, internationally available, and vestigate the existence of social identity in the community under
provides numerous and diverse examples of brand-related communi- study, and thereby the perceived membership of the participants. Fi-
ties in the form of Facebook groups and fan pages. To being able to se- nally, categories for possible participation motives build on prior re-
lect an appropriate brand and its corresponding group and fan pages, search on motivations for participation in brand communities, or
the author rst aimed to narrow the comprehensive variety of brands social networks (e.g., Dholakia et al., 2004).
that are present on Facebook. For this purpose, the author considered To check for and verify the different types of brand (related) com-
that global brands, which have accordant resources to conduct a suc- munities embedded in the social network under study, the author
cessful media strategy available, would be of interest for this study. conducted an additional descriptive analysis of their characteristics,
Thus, the choice of the sample within Facebook builds on a scan of including number of members, as well as number and nature of appli-
the 100 leading global brands based on the Interbrand Best Global cations. To this purpose, the author reports community attributes of
Brands Rating 2009; the search application in Facebook enables one the pre-selected 98 brand fan pages and 89 groups based on the
to nd the largest groups and fan pages (amount of members) of Interbrand ranking, and subsequently compares these attributes by
each brand. Of the 100 given brands based on the Interbrand rating, utilizing an independent T-test.
220 M.E. Zaglia / Journal of Business Research 66 (2013) 216223

4. Results solving of occurring problems, etc. Respondents usually refer to their

own experience and knowledge when answering posts, or by giving ref-
4.1. Embedded brand community erences to different sources. An example of a grateful member: [] Let
me tell youthe people in this group are an AMAZING resource. The
Referring to the characteristics of brand communities, all three suggestions above are great. [] If I ever have a questionI post it
community markers (Muniz & O'Guinn, 2001) are present in the here!
group and on the fan page. Starting with consciousness of kind, partic- The commercial character of the community experience (Muniz &
ipants use notions like we or us to describe the community which O'Guinn, 2001) and a high interest in and affection to the brand (Jang
indicates the feeling of belonging and also the existence of the cogni- et al., 2008) indicate that the fan page and the group distinguish
tive component of social identity (Ellemers et al., 1999). For example, themselves from other types of consumer communities; both charac-
one member states: I am loyal to canon though. They have been the teristics are present in both sub-groups; the latter manifests itself in
leader for a very long time. Plus, if I switched to Nikon, I would have to discussions such as: Tell us what camera you have and your favorite
leave this group: -(. Additionally, the data shows a high familiarity thing that it does or can do.I love my 40D like a puppy.The thing I
between regular members who are often very knowledgeable about like most is the fact that it is simply "Canon".The Canon 600 mm f4L
what equipment other members possess; furthermore, they are IS USM prime lens :) The love of my life but don't tell my wife that
aware of other members attitudes and opinions, and expect them to please.; the awareness of the commercial character of the communi-
behave accordingly in discussions. Another expression of conscious- ty, in turn, leads to posts requesting other members to Please, be
ness of kind is oppositional brand loyalty. In numerous situations in SMART CONSUMERS [], don't just rush go out buy 550D []. You
the group and on the fan page members present oppositional brand own it today or you own it next week, it'll still be around.
loyalty, mainly as the classical opposition to Nikon cameras. In this Finally, the Canon group and the fan page offer many cues which
context a member states, If you could choose [one Nikon and one indicate the existence of all three components of social identity
Canon product] which would you go forThe 7d, because the other (Ellemers et al., 1999); they highlight that individuals perceive them-
one is NikonThere's a lot of feel like involved here, and we are selves as members of the brand community. Examples for the cogni-
at opposite ends of that one for sure ;0). This social categorization re- tive component and the special importance members attach to their
fers to how individuals classify themselves and others into different community experience are: [] Thank you all so much for this in-
social groups, based on similar actions, intentions, values and traits valuable advice!! It is so nice to have a helpful group to pose ques-
(Tajfel, 1982); thereby members create a differentiation between tions to []This forum has been amazingly helpful-worth being
in-group and out-group (e.g., Carlson, Suter, & Brown, 2008). on Facebook for it. In addition, individuals derive self-esteem from
Common threads help to unite community members. An example their community membership in different ways, proong the exis-
is a discussion which develops based on a Nokia Sales Executive; he tence of evaluative social identity. For example, users often express
claims that SLR cameras will become obsolete because of the advance- how valuable the contributions of other, knowledgeable members
ment of cameras in cell phones, which results in an enraged discussion are and receive recognition of peers: I know it's asked over and
of community members. Legitimacy, the nal aspect of consciousness over, but I would like some advice from real people not the stuff
of kind distinguishes between real photographers and wannabe I've been reading on review websites for months. [question and an-
photographers in the communities: These are usually very rich peo- swer] Thanks User A, that was a very well thought-out answer. I ap-
ple that go to the camera store and say gimme the best camera you preciate you taking the time to really read my question and answer
got They think since they bought the best camera in the store they it thoroughly. I like this group, all you guys are awesome! :). Ulti-
don't need a manual, the camera will automatically take amazing pic- mately, members feel emotionally connected to their communities
tures. Concluding, all different aspects of the key community marker and accordant peers: I LOVE this facebook group, everyone has
are common in the embedded sub-groups. been so helpful and willing to give me instruction. I LOVE IT!.
Second, rituals and traditions also exist in the observed communi-
ties. Brand related stories are widespread discussion topics among 4.2. Motives for participation
group and fan page members. However, discussions about brand his-
tory are not as common. Maybe, this nding is partially due to the rel- Referring to the individuals drives which lead them to partici-
atively novelty of digital photography. The most apparent indicator pate in the communities; members frequently seek help from the
for the existence of rituals and traditions is the observation of a com- community to receive information which is specically tailored to
mon set of values and behaviors; for example, the use of jargon. This their needs (see Dholakia et al., 2004); this rst-hand advice of ex-
specialist language often leads new members to ask questions to get perienced peers serves later as a base for intended buying decisions.
clarication of technical terms: What is SS?Shutter Speed. Sorry Users perceive such advice as highly valuable; they see peers as an
about that. [followed by an explanation of what this means] Further- objective source of information, as they tend to trust other like-
more, members enforce rules; they show others who misbehave what minded members with whom they share similar values (Wu, Chen, &
is deemed to be appropriate behavior in the community: In all the Chung, 2010). These peers, in turn, aid to reduce their perceived risk
time, I have never seen anyone in here displaying the attitude and before they make investments (Goldsmith & Horowitz, 2006). I really
ill manners that you have displayed in this series of posts. In spite want a canon digital SLR camera [] But it's a big investment so any
of this, everyone has treated you with dignity and respect and done help would be great! Another key reason for users to join groups
their best to answer your question. Please mend your way. To create and fan pages is to learn and improve their skills (e.g., Dholakia et al.,
meaning for the brand, experience discussions about advertisements, 2004); common examples are question and answer based learning,
product placements, and the use of canon products for special occa- commenting and criticizing the work of others, taking part in compe-
sions are common in both sub-groups. titions, etc. Additionally, social network environments pave new
Lastly, sense of moral responsibility (Muniz & O'Guinn, 2001) rep- ways for consumer learning; members can simply upload their work
resents an important ingredient of the community experience in in the form of videos or photos, and provide or receive feedback from
both, group and fan page. Integration and retention of members, sup- other knowledgeable and experienced users: I was wondering if you
port in the use of products, and general assistance are regular behav- guys could check out some of my pictures, and was wondering on
iors in the sub-groups. Thereby, threads include many discussions how to improve. I [] would like to get better. On the fan page, mem-
about buying decisions; however, members also talk frequently bers often proclaim that companies do not do enough to contribute to
about commercial issues of photography, legal aspects, photo editing, their progress through their learning curve. Why don't Canon give
 M.E. Zaglia / Journal of Business Research 66 (2013) 216223 221

some tips on photography???sent you the user guide book al- information) motives (Dholakia et al., 2004). Likewise, common iden-
ready =)Not enough! give tips on how to make a great picture tity implies that members perceive a commitment to the community's
[].! purpose or topic (Prentice et al., 1994), and members feel more at-
However, the company enhances the learning experience by pro- tached to the community as a whole than to specic group members.
viding, for example, fan page members with a daily challenge, in Therefore, main causes of commitment to the group as a whole are
which they can compete for the best pictures. Another strong ante- social categorization, interdependence, and intergroup comparisons
cedent of participation in sub-groups is the sharing of members pas- (Ren et al., 2007), which also correspond to social identity theory
sion (Thomson, MacInnis, & Park, 2005) for the brand and for the (Tajfel, 1982). In contrast, an increasing amount of consumers experi-
hobby: For me, I think it is fun and interesting to see people get in- ence their beloved brands and products by using them with a group of
volved and get concern which means love towards Canon. Further- brand community members who share close friendships and engage
more, many discussions also show members seeking an opportunity in regular social interactions. For such communities, the demarcation
to dream and fantasize (Denegri-Knott & Molesworth, 2010) about blurs in that brand-related activities intermingle with the group's so-
possessing expensive equipment, being a professional photographer, cial activities (Bagozzi & Dholakia, 2006a). Such groups are strongly
or about new camera solutions, etc: Your Dream Kit. If money were socio-centric, and their members often have known each other for a
not an object, what products from Canon would you have in your longer time period. Furthermore, members may display higher levels
kit?Hope one day I be as good as you. :) its my passion, shall of brand involvement and a stronger social identity than in network-
make a dream become reality.. :D wish me the best.. :). Next, social based communities.
enhancement, entertainment and enjoyment, as well as forming and Regarding the motivational drivers for the community participa-
retaining relationships (Dholakia et al., 2004) are important reasons tion, additional differences exist. Individuals, who join the community
for many members to get involved in the community; these drivers to seek information, nd posts of remarkably higher value in the
are frequent topics in the many hours during which members engage group; they offer a wider array of knowledgeable message posters
in discussions. Ultimately, members also join brand-related online who frequently answer discussion threads. In contrast, a lot of posting
communities to give voice to their concerns. This nding corresponds takes place on the wall of the fan page, where requests easily get lost
to the work of Bhattacharya and Sen (2003), who argue that identi- without being answered. Social enhancement, however, is more im-
cation with a brand leads to an enforced motivation for stronger claim portant to fan page members, as they nd more possibilities to serve
on this brand. their needs on fan pages; for example, a daily photo competition. Fi-
nally, discussions about company management are of minor impor-
4.3. Heterogeneity of embedded communities tance in the Canon group; however, on the fan page criticism and
discussions about brand management are frequent, pointing to stron-
Although both sub-groups, Facebook fan page and group, show ger claim on the brand. Moreover, on the company initiated Canon fan
brand community characteristics, they differ in certain regards. First page members are aware of the presence of Canon management:
distinctions already appear based on the descriptive analyses. An in- Think logicallydo you think Canon would've not corrected me al-
dependent T-test shows a signicant difference between the number ready if I'm wrong? They know what I post. Therefore, they see the
of members within the investigated fan pages (m = 543,932; SD = fan page as a channel to convey their concerns and opinions to the
1,047,545.51), and those adhering to groups (m = 10,133, SD = management of their brand, and expect to receive company recogni-
14,576.65; T(4.94) = 97.04, p = 0.000). Furthermore, a comparison tion and acknowledgment in return.
of the number of applications (various tools, activities or information) To conclude, individuals behavior differs regarding the frequen-
indicates that companies commonly utilize fan pages for promotional cy, subject matter, and intensity of social interaction and discussion
and informational purposes, as fan pages (m = 7.63, SD = 3.70) host threads on the fan page and group sites under study. These sub-group
signicantly more applications than groups do (m = 4.95, SD = characteristics also result into different motivational drivers for partici-
10.00, T(2.48) = 187, p = 0.014). Applications on fan pages often em- pation in the accordant embedded community.
ploy innovative marketing tools dedicated to contents such as social
corporate responsibility, celebrity endorsement, user competitions, 5. Discussion
and others. In contrast, only 50% of fan pages comprise an application
for discussions, while almost twice as many of the groups (95.6%) This paper aims to investigate the existence of brand communities
host such an application. Applications allowing users to share photos embedded in a social network environment. Brand communities with-
and videos are popular on both fan pages and groups. in social networks do exist and they classify into different sub-groups
In relation to the brand community characteristics, the main differ- based on dissimilarities. Contrary to generic virtual brand communi-
ences refer to the perceived membership of the participants. Individ- ties, members of embedded brand communities take two conscious
uals discuss and mention the key community marker, consciousness decisions when joining the corresponding community: rst, they
of kind, more frequently and much more in the group than on the join the social network, which is, in turn, the requirement to subse-
fan page. Similarly, social identity, especially its cognitive and affective quently being able to participate in the embedded brand community.
component, is also of higher relevance in the group. In the Canon The key motivational antecedents for participation in the latter are:
group users form strong relationships; therefore, the degree of social passion for the brand and the eld of interest, willingness to learn
relatedness is much higher than on the fan page. However, due to and improve skills, social relation to others, and reception of informa-
the organization of events by the Canon marketing department, and tion tailored to specic members needs (which individuals perceive
promotion of those events, taking part in activities outside the online as more objective and useful than information from other sources),
community is more common on the fan page. entertainment, and enhancement of one's social position.
Finally, individuals help each other to a greater extent in the group, Overall, both of the explored sub-groups show brand community
pointing to a higher moral responsibility; the Facebook group is a dis- characteristics. However, the strengths of these peculiarities differ.
tinctly more efcient source of advice than the fan-page, as individuals Specically, the perceived membership due to consciousness of kind
respond faster, more thoroughly and fewer questions remain unan- and social identity is more distinct in the group than on the fan
swered. These differences of fan pages and groups also correspond to page; in addition group members feel a higher moral responsibility
prior research on strengths of relationships in consumer communities. and nd better fulllment of their need for information. The fan
In fan pages, activities related to the community's purpose are cen- page, however, serves as a platform to convey concerns and sugges-
tral, and consumers participate mainly due to utilitarian (e.g., getting tions to brand management and to receive social enhancement.
222 M.E. Zaglia / Journal of Business Research 66 (2013) 216223

Based on this results, the Facebook group, certainly states a clear etc. Instead, using social networks offers brand management benets:
brand community, showing strong value of all community markers, the access to unbelievable numbers of consumers, at low costs, high
social identity, brand emotions, and the commercial character. The speed and ease of applicability. In addition, the ndings help mar-
fan page, on the other hand, seems to embody a weaker form of a keters choose which tools are more suitable to build brand com-
brand community; in general, brand community characteristics are munities within social network environments, and under which
present but the perceived membership in form of consciousness of circumstances these tools should be used. As groups state true brand
kind and social identity are less salient; in addition social relations communities, they are more appropriate to build long-term relation-
and the support of peers are of less importance. However, indepen- ships between and with groups of members. Furthermore, they ap-
dent of the type of the sub-group, social networks offers spaces pear to be more efcient in customer-to-customer based information
where brand communities may evolve. exchange and learning. In contrast, fan pages offer enormous commu-
nicational means and the possibility to reach a large audience fast.
5.1. Theoretical implications Finally, being aware of the reasons for participation, marketers have
the possibility to directly correspond to the social network and enable
By demonstrating the existence of brand communities in a social customer to satisfy their need by the means of brand community
network environment, this study contributes to brand community, membership.
identity, and social network research. Individuals interact with In accordance to the ndings of this study, Facebook independently
many social network members characterized by different interests, further highlighted the differences of group and fan pages. The com-
purposes and social identities. At the same time, they perceive shared pany changed the name of the latter into Facebook page, which
consciousness of kind and a distinct social identity with certain peers; they now dene as a public prole that enables you to share your
sub-group members share their enthusiasm for the same brand and business and products with Facebook users. Create one in a few min-
interact regarding their object of interest. utes with our simple interface (Facebook.com, 2011f). In contrast,
Consequently, consumers are members of both wider ranging and Facebook groups offer users to share things privately or publicly
closer knit communities at the same time; they hold multiple mem- with a certain group of people (Facebook.com, 2011g). Consequently,
berships. These ndings are in accordance with recent research that Facebook pages and groups are comparable to marketer-generated
illustrates complex connections of consumer to organizations, includ- and consumer-generated brand communities (Sung et al., 2010).
ing relations to the rm and the physical branded product, as well as
to a small friendship group and virtual community, where both con-
nect to the organization in a chain of relationships (Bagozzi et al., 5.3. Limitations and future research
2012). Similarly in the context of embedded brand communities, in-
dividuals social exchanges with other social network members, and One possible topic of sub-groups embedded in a social network, is
certainly also group membership and participation in the correspond- a certain brand. People declare themselves as a member or devotee of
ing brand community inuence members identity. Thus, the investi- such a sub-group by joining. This study presents individuals who con-
gation of members multiple social identities in embedded consumer duct a social categorization and become a member of a brand-related
communities and their multilevel interactions represent interesting group or a fan page, being brand devotees. However, probably also
elds for future research. other sub-groups within Facebook exist that are brand-related but
Furthermore, these ndings represent a contribution to brand not true brand communities; their participants lack in, for example,
community research as different types of brand communities have brand emotions and affective social identity; instead, they might
thus far only been considered based on the size of the group or the only be supercially interested in the branded products, and conse-
initiation (e.g., Bagozzi & Dholakia, 2006a). The ndings of this quently do not embody real brand community members.
study present the strengths of main brand community characteristics The community under study has the highest degree of interactivity
as distinctive criteria, instead. Furthermore, the characteristic of of all compared groups based on the Interbrand ranking. Although this
embeddedness describes a new form of brand community. Finally, study demonstrates the existence of brand communities embedded in
this study validates the Muniz and O'Guinn (2001)) brand communi- social networks, future research should conduct additional studies in
ty conceptualization in a completely different setting, namely in a so- order to allow generalization statements; further studies should also
cial network environment. investigate the impact of such brand communities on social network
With regard to social network research, this study demonstrates members behavior, as well as explore the reciprocal inuence of
the partitioning of social networks users into further sub-groups. the social network and the community. Finally, the processes of build-
This nding also adds to prior research, which showed that many ing a brand community within a social network represent an interesting
networks feature the property of community structure, in which net- eld for future research, and could be approached by conducting a long
work nodes are joined together in tightly knit groups, between which term empirical study including different stages of such a community.
there are only looser connections (Girvan & Newman, 2002). Indi-
viduals satisfy several needs by participating in specialized, embed- References
ded communities; thereby, the social network offers its members
additional benets and consequently, users loyalty towards the social Adjei, Mavis, Noble, Stephanie, & Noble, Charles (2010). The inuence of C2C commu-
nications in online brand communities on customer purchase behavior. Journal of
network rises. Furthermore, brand communities embedded in social the Academy of Marketing Science, 38(5), 634653.
networks also represent an environment in which marketers can le- Ahonen, Tomi T., & Moore, Alan (2005). Communities dominate brand: Business and
verage identity synergy. Consumers involvement with a community marketing challenges for the 21st century. London: Futuretext.
Albert, Nol, Merunka, Dwight, & Valette-Florence, Pierre (2008). When consumers
facilitates their pursuit of other important social identities. To the ex- love their brands: Exploring the concept and its dimensions. Journal of Business Re-
tent that individuals perceive identity synergy they, in turn, identify search, 61(10), 10621075.
with the enabling entity (Fombelle, Jarvis, Ward, & Ostrom, 2012). Algesheimer, Ren, Borle, Sharad, Dholakia, Utpal M., & Singh, Siddharth S. (2010). The
impact of customer community participation on customer behaviors: An empirical
investigation. Marketing Science, 29(4), 756769.
5.2. Managerial implications Algesheimer, Ren, Dholakia, Utpal M., & Herrmann, Andreas (2005). The social inu-
ence of brand community: Evidence from European car clubs. Journal of Marketing,
For marketers the results of this research demonstrate the possibil- 69(4), 1934.
Ashley, Christy, Noble, Stephanie M., Donthu, Naveen, & Lemon, Katherine N. (2011).
ity to create brand communities without the enormous effort of build- Why customers won't relate: Obstacles to relationship marketing engagement.
ing and owning online platforms, or promoting independent websites, Journal of Business Research, 64(7), 749756.
 M.E. Zaglia / Journal of Business Research 66 (2013) 216223 223

Bagozzi, Richard P., Bergami, Massimo, Marzocchi, Gian Luca, & Morandin, Gabriele Granovetter, Mark (1985). Economic action and social structure: The problem of
(2012). Customer-organization relationships: Development and test of a theory embeddedness. The American Journal of Sociology, 91(3), 481510.
of extended identities. Journal of Applied Psychology, 97(1), 6376. Hufngtonpost (04/30/2010). Twitter user statistics revealed. accessed 06/21/2010, URL:
Bagozzi, Richard P., & Dholakia, Utpal M. (2006a). Antecedents and purchase conse- http://www.hufngtonpost.com/2010/04/14/twitter-user-statistics-r_n_537992.html
quences of customer participation in small group brand communities. International Jang, Heehyoung, Olfman, Lorne, Ko, Islang, Koh, Joon, & Kim, Kyungtae (2008). The in-
Journal of Research in Marketing, 23(1), 4561. uence of on-line brand community characteristics on community commitment
Bagozzi, Richard P., & Dholakia, Utpal M. (2006b). Open source software user commu- and brand loyalty. International Journal of Electronic Commerce, 12(3), 5780.
nities: A study of participation in Linux user groups. Managament Science, 52(7), Kozinets, Robert V. (2002). The eld behind the screen: Using netnography for market-
10991115. ing research in online communities. Journal of Marketing Research, 39(1), 6172.
Bagozzi, Richard P., Dholakia, Utpal M., & Klein Pearo, Lisa R. (2007). Antecendents and Kozinets, Robert V. (2010). Netnography: Doing ethnographic research online. Los Angeles:
consequences of online social interactions. Media Psychology, 9(1), 77114. Sage Publications Ltd.
Bergami, Massimo, & Bagozzi, Richard P. (2000). Self-categorization, affective commit- LinkedIn.com (2011). Press Center. accessed 04/12/2011, URL: http://press.linkedin.
ment and group self-esteem as distinct aspects of social identity in the organiza- com/
tion. The British Journal of Social Psychology, 39(4), 555577. McAlexander, James H., Schouten, John W., & Koenig, Harold F. (2002). Building brand
Bhattacharya, C. B., & Sen, Sankar (2003). Consumer-company identication: a frame- community. Journal of Marketing, 66(1), 3854.
work for understanding consumers' relationships with companies. Journal of Mar- Messinger, Paul R., Stroulia, Eleni, Lyons, Kelly, Bone, Michael, Niu, Run, Smirnov,
keting, 67(2), 7688. Kristen, et al. (2009). Virtual worldsPast, present, and future: New directions in
Boyd, Danah M., & Ellison, Nicole B. (2007). Social network sites: denition, history, social computing. Decision Support Systems, 47(3), 204228.
and scholarship. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 13(1), 210230. Mizruchi, Mark S., & Galaskiewicz, Joseph (1993). Networks of interorganizational re-
Brown, Stephen, Kozinets, Robert V., & Sherry, John F. (2003). Teaching old brands new lations. Sociological Methods & Research, 22(1), 4670.
tricks: retro branding and the revival of brand meaning. Journal of Marketing, Muniz, Albert M., & O'Guinn, Thomas C. (2001). Brand community. Journal of Consumer
67(3), 1933. Research, 27(4), 412432.
Carlson, Brad D., Suter, Tracy A., & Brown, Tom J. (2008). Social versus psychological Muniz, Albert M., & Schau, Hope Jensen (2005). Religiosity in the abandoned Apple
brand community: the role of psychological sense of brand community. Journal Newton brand community. Journal of Consumer Research, 31(4), 737747.
of Business Research, 61(4), 284291. Ouwersloot, Hans, & Odekerken-Schrder, Gaby (2008). Who's who in brand
Casal, Luis V., Flavin, Carlos, & Guinalu, Miguel (2008). Promoting consumer's par- communitiesAnd why? European Journal of Marketing, 42(5/6), 571585.
ticipation in virtual brand communities: a new paradigm in branding strategy. Fombelle, Paul, Jarvis, Cheryl B., Ward, James, & Ostrom, Lonnie (2012). Leveraging cus-
Journal of Marketing Communications, 14(1), 1936. tomers' multiple identities: Identity synergy as a driver of organizational identi-
Chan, Kimmy Wa, & Li, Stella Yiyan (2010). Understanding consumer-to-consumer in- cation. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 40(4), 587604.
teractions in virtual communities: The salience of reciprocity. Journal of Business Patterson, Anthony (2012). Social-networkers of the world, unite and take over: A
Research, 63(910), 10331040. meta-introspective perspective on the Facebook brand. Journal of Business Re-
Checkfacebook.com (2011). Facebook: Global audience. accessed 11/25/2011, URL: search, 65(4), 527534.
http://www.checkfacebook.com/ Prentice, Deborah, Miller, Dale T., & Lightdale, Jenifer R. (1994). Asymmetries in attach-
Cheung, Christy M. K., & Lee, Matthew K. O. (2010). A theoretical model of intentional ments to groups and to their members: Distinguishing between common-identity
social action in online social networks. Decision Support Systems, 49(1), 2430. and common-bond groups. Personality & Social Psychology Bulletin, 20(5), 484493.
Cova, Bernard, & Pace, Stefano (2006). Brand community of convenience products: Puri, Anjali (2007). The web of insights: The art and practice of webnography. Interna-
New forms of customer empowermentThe case "my Nutella The Community". tional Journal of Market Research, 49(3), 387408.
European Journal of Marketing, 40(9/10), 10871105. Raab, Jorg, & Kenis, Patrick (2009). Heading toward a society of networks: Empirical
Cross, Rob, Liedtka, Jeanne, & Weiss, Leigh (2005). A practical guide to social networks. developments and theoretical challenges. Journal of Management Inquiry, 18(3),
Harvard Business Review, 83(3), 124132. 198210.
de Valck, Kristine, van Bruggen, Gerrit H., & Wierenga, Berend (2009). Virtual commu- Raacke, John, & Bonds-Raacke, Jennifer (2008). MySpace and Facebook: Applying the uses
nities: A marketing perspective. Decision Support Systems, 47(3), 185203. and gratications theory to exploring friend-networking sites. Cyberpsychology & Be-
Denegri-Knott, Janice, & Molesworth, Mike (2010). Concepts and practices of digital havior, 11(2), 169174.
virtual consumption. Consumption, Markets and Culture, 13(2), 109132. Rapoport, Anatol, & Horvath, William J. (1961). A study of a large sociogram. Behavioral
Dholakia, Utpal M., Bagozzi, Richard P., & Klein Pearo, Lisa R. (2004). A social inuence Science, 6(4), 279291.
model of consumer participation in network- and small-group-based virtual com- Ren, Yuqing, Kraut, Robert, & Kiesler, Sara (2007). Applying common identity and bond
munities. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 21(3), 241263. theory to design of online communities. Organization Studies, 28(3), 377408.
Doyle, Shaun (2007). The role of social networks in marketing. Journal of Database Schfer, Daniela, B., Stahl, Florian, & Bruhn, Manfred (2011). Brand Communities on
Marketing & Customer Strategy Management, 15(1), 6064. Online Social Networks: Impact of Brand Perception on Communities' Network
Dwyer, Paul (2007). Measuring the value of electronic word of mouth and its impact in Structures. 8th Global Marketing Dynamics Conference Jaipur, India.
consumer communities. Journal of Interactive Marketing, 21(2), 6379. Schouten, John W., & McAlexander, James H. (1995). Subcultures of consumption: An
Ellemers, Naomi, Kortekaas, Paulien, & Ouwerkerk, Jaap W. (1999). Self-categorisation, ethnography of the new bikers. Journal of Consumer Research, 22(1), 4361.
commitment to the group and group self-esteem as related but distinct aspects of Schouten, John W., McAlexander, James H., & Koenig, Harold F. (2007). Transcendent
social identity. European Journal of Social Psychology, 29(2/3), 371389. customer experience and brand community. Journal of the Academy of Marketing
Facebook.com (2010). Groups. accessed 04/25/2011, URL: http://www.facebook.com/ Science, 35(3), 357368.
#!/search/?init=srp&sfxp=&q=canon%20digital Sicilia, Maria, & Palazn, Mariola (2008). Brand communities on the Internet: A case
Facebook.com (2011a). Statistics. accessed 04/25/2011, URL: https://www.facebook. study of Coca-Cola's Spanish virtual community. Corporate Communications: An In-
com/press/info.php?statistics ternational Journal, 13(3), 255270.
Facebook.com (2011b). Apple group. accessed 04/25/2011, URL: https://www.facebook. Sung, Yongjun, Kim, Yoojung, Kwon, Ohyoon, & Moon, Jangho (2010). An explorative
com/group.php?gid=2204622626&ref=search&sid=1189815571.2838417488.1 study of Korean consumer participation in virtual brand communities in social net-
Facebook.com (2011c). Starbucks Fan Page. accessed 04/25/2011, URL: https://www. work sites. Journal of Global Marketing, 23(5), 430445.
facebook.com/Starbucks Tajfel, Henri (1982). Social psychology of intergroup relations. Annual Review of Psy-
Facebook.com (2011d). Help Center. accessed 04/20/2011, URL: https://www.facebook. chology, 33(1), 139.
com/help/ Thompson, Scott A., & Sinha, Rajiv K. (2008). Brand communities and new product
Facebook.com (2011e). Canon Camera Malaysia. accessed 04/25/2011, URL: https:// adoption: The inuence and limits of oppositional loyalty. Journal of Marketing,
www.facebook.com/canoncameramsia 72(6), 6580.
Facebook.com (2011f). Facebook Pages. accessed 11/20/2011, URL: https://www. Thomson, M., MacInnis, D. J., & Park, C. W. (2005). The ties that bind: Measuring the
facebook.com/pages/learn.php?campaign_id=149637918387469&placement= strength of consumers emotional attachments to brands. Journal of Consumer Psy-
exact&creative=7106996672&keyword=facebook+page chology, 15(1), 7791.
Facebook.com (2011g). Groups. accessed 11/20/2011, URL: https://www.facebook. Woisetschlger, David M., Hartleb, Vivian, & Blut, Markus (2008). How to make brand
com/groups communities work: Antecedents and consequences of consumer participation.
Ganley, Dale, & Lampe, Cliff (2009). The ties that bind: Social network principles in on- Journal of Relationship Marketing, 7(3), 237256.
line communities. Decision Support Systems, 47(3), 266274. Wu, Jyh-Jeng, Chen, Ying-Hueih, & Chung, Yu-Shuo (2010). Trust factors inuencing
Girvan, M., & Newman, M. E. J. (2002). Community structure in social and biological virtual community members: A study of transaction communities. Journal of Busi-
networks. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 99(12), 78217826. ness Research, 63(910), 10251032.
Goldsmith, Ronald E., & Horowitz, David (2006). Measuring motivations for online
opinion seeking. Journal of Interactive Advertising, 6(2), 116.