"What if my mum sees it?": Examination of visible brand interaction in the presence of a wider network

Purpose It is known that to encourage people to interact (e.g. sharing) with brands through social media, businesses create content in line with the expectations of their target audience. On these sites, however, such interaction by consumers is visible, contributing to their self-presentation, which can be seen by their wider network; some of whom will find it appropriate, others may not. Currently, little is known about the effects of consumers’ own diverse set of audiences on behavioral intention toward brand interaction and emotional effect. The paper aims to discuss these issues. Design/methodology/approach Survey methodology (n=386) was adopted to examine intention to interact with real brand posts. Findings Results show that the brand interaction is associated with social anxiety when it is felt that visible evidence of such actions is discrepant from the audience expectations. This, then, constrains the behavioral intention to interact with brands online. Practical implications For businesses to maximize brand interactions and minimize social anxiety, they must be mindful of not just the expectations of their target but also consider their target’s own network. For site designers, this research urges for greater refining of privacy tools and suggests the addition of a “Secret Like” option. Originality/value Encouraging visible brand interaction through social media is paramount for businesses. Managers focus only on their target audience when designing content but neglect to consider the self-presentational implications of interacting with branded content to wider networks. This paper shows that this must be considered to increase success and maintain ethical practice. This is of value for multiple-stakeholders, managers, users, site designers and academics.

[1]  Candice R. Hollenbeck,et al.  Consumers' use of brands to reflect their actual and ideal selves on Facebook , 2012 .

[2]  Charles F. Hofacker,et al.  The Influence of Personality on Active and Passive Use of Social Networking Sites , 2011 .

[3]  Ben L. Marder,et al.  Every Post You Make, Every Pic You Take, I'll Be Watching You: Behind Social Spheres on Facebook , 2012, 2012 45th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences.

[4]  D. G. Gardner,et al.  Single-Item Versus Multiple-Item Measurement Scales: An Empirical Comparison , 1998 .

[5]  A. Kaplan,et al.  Users of the world, unite! The challenges and opportunities of Social Media , 2010 .

[6]  Heng-Li Yang,et al.  Why do people stick to Facebook web site? A value theory-based view , 2014, Inf. Technol. People.

[7]  Geoff Simmons,et al.  Marketing to postmodern consumers: introducing the internet chameleon , 2008 .

[8]  D. A. Kenny,et al.  The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. , 1986, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[9]  James E. Bartlett,et al.  Organizational research: Determining appropriate sample size in survey research , 2001 .

[10]  B. R. Schlenker,et al.  Social anxiety and self-presentation: a conceptualization and model. , 1982, Psychological bulletin.

[11]  Anne Helmond,et al.  The like economy: Social buttons and the data-intensive web , 2013, New Media Soc..

[12]  Ben Light,et al.  Ethics and social networking sites: a disclosive analysis of Facebook , 2010, Inf. Technol. People.

[13]  Airi Lampinen,et al.  We're in it together: interpersonal management of disclosure in social network services , 2011, CHI.

[14]  Evmorfia N. Argyriou,et al.  Cross-national differences in e-WOM influence , 2012 .

[15]  A. Alexandrov Characteristics of Single-Item Measures in Likert Scale Format , 2010 .

[16]  Kristopher J Preacher,et al.  Asymptotic and resampling strategies for assessing and comparing indirect effects in multiple mediator models , 2008, Behavior research methods.

[17]  John G. Lynch,et al.  Reconsidering Baron and Kenny: Myths and Truths about Mediation Analysis , 2010 .

[18]  J. Darley,et al.  Multiple audience problem: a strategic communication perspective on social perception. , 1990, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[19]  James Hawdon,et al.  Exposure to online hate material and social trust among Finnish youth , 2015, Inf. Technol. People.

[20]  Bendik Bygstad,et al.  Why I act differently: studying patterns of legitimation among CIOs through motive talk , 2013, Inf. Technol. People.

[21]  Song Su,et al.  Attitude Toward the Viral Ad: Expanding Traditional Advertising Models to Interactive Advertising , 2013 .

[22]  Mihail Cocosila,et al.  How important is the "social" in social networking? A perceived value empirical investigation , 2015, Inf. Technol. People.

[23]  N. Howe,et al.  Millennials Rising: The Next Great Generation , 2000 .

[24]  Kristopher J Preacher,et al.  SPSS and SAS procedures for estimating indirect effects in simple mediation models , 2004, Behavior research methods, instruments, & computers : a journal of the Psychonomic Society, Inc.

[25]  Matthew K. O. Lee,et al.  Building brand loyalty through user engagement in online brand communities in social networking sites , 2015, Inf. Technol. People.

[26]  C. Carver,et al.  On the Self-Regulation of Behavior , 1998 .

[27]  Angella J. Kim,et al.  Do social media marketing activities enhance customer equity? An empirical study of luxury fashion brand , 2012 .

[28]  John R. Venable,et al.  Understanding information disclosure behaviour in Australian Facebook users , 2010, J. Inf. Technol..

[29]  Soraya Mehdizadeh,et al.  Self-Presentation 2.0: Narcissism and Self-Esteem on Facebook , 2010, Cyberpsychology Behav. Soc. Netw..

[30]  Sangeeta Singh,et al.  Brand Performances in Social Media , 2012 .

[31]  Jessica Vitak,et al.  Norm evolution and violation on Facebook , 2012, New Media Soc..

[32]  M. L. Levin,et al.  Teenage partners' communication about sexual risk and condom use: the importance of parent-teenager discussions. , 1999, Family planning perspectives.

[33]  M. Scheier,et al.  Public and private self-consciousness: Assessment and theory. , 1975 .

[34]  John R. Rossiter,et al.  Content Validity of Measures of Abstract Constructs in Management and Organizational Research , 2008 .

[35]  Lauren I. Labrecque,et al.  Online Personal Branding: Processes, Challenges, and Implications , 2011 .

[36]  Margaret K. Hogg,et al.  The impact of self‐monitoring on image congruence and product/brand evaluation , 2000 .

[37]  Kevin J. Trainor,et al.  Social media technology usage and customer relationship performance: A capabilities-based examination of social CRM , 2014 .

[38]  M. Gilly,et al.  We Are What We Post? Self‐Presentation in Personal Web Space , 2003 .

[39]  Erin E. Hollenbaugh,et al.  Facebook self-disclosure: Examining the role of traits, social cohesion, and motives , 2014, Comput. Hum. Behav..

[40]  C. Mirabel-Sarron [Social anxiety]. , 2010, La Revue du praticien.

[41]  Danah Boyd,et al.  I tweet honestly, I tweet passionately: Twitter users, context collapse, and the imagined audience , 2011, New Media Soc..

[42]  Andrew N. Smith,et al.  How Does Brand-related User-generated Content Differ across YouTube, Facebook, and Twitter? , 2012 .

[43]  C. M. Sashi Customer engagement, buyer‐seller relationships, and social media , 2012 .

[44]  R. Belk Extended Self in a Digital World , 2013 .

[45]  Eva A van Reijmersdal,et al.  Interactivity in Brand Web Sites: Cognitive, Affective, and Behavioral Responses Explained by Consumers’ Online Flow Experience , 2012 .

[46]  M. McPherson,et al.  Birds of a Feather: Homophily in Social Networks , 2001 .

[47]  Y. Benjamini,et al.  More powerful procedures for multiple significance testing. , 1990, Statistics in medicine.

[48]  Barbara L. Gross,et al.  What consumers know and what they do: An investigation of consumer knowledge, awareness, and use of privacy protection strategies , 2003 .

[49]  Cliff Lampe,et al.  The Benefits of Facebook "Friends: " Social Capital and College Students' Use of Online Social Network Sites , 2007, J. Comput. Mediat. Commun..

[50]  W. Swann,et al.  From self-conceptions to self-worth: on the sources and structure of global self-esteem. , 1989, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[51]  Robin M. Kowalski,et al.  Impression management: A literature review and two-component model. , 1990 .

[52]  Nilly Mor,et al.  Self-focused attention and negative affect: a meta-analysis. , 2002, Psychological bulletin.

[53]  Paul A. Kirschner,et al.  Facebook® and academic performance , 2010, Comput. Hum. Behav..

[54]  Catherine Tucker,et al.  Social Networks, Personalized Advertising, and Privacy Controls , 2013 .

[55]  Antti Oulasvirta,et al.  All My People Right Here, Right Now: management of group co-presence on a social networking site , 2009, GROUP.

[56]  K. Curran,et al.  Advertising on Facebook , 2011 .

[57]  E. Goffman The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life , 1959 .

[58]  E.,et al.  Self-Discrepancy : A Theory Relating Self and Affect , 2022 .

[59]  Andrew Howes,et al.  The problem of conflicting social spheres: effects of network structure on experienced tension in social network sites , 2009, CHI.

[60]  M. Leary Self-Presentation , 2019 .

[61]  Lynda Andrews,et al.  Investigating marketing managers' perspectives on social media in Chile , 2015 .

[62]  Niki Panteli,et al.  Trust and temporary virtual teams: alternative explanations and dramaturgical relationships , 2004, Inf. Technol. People.