International Journal of Online Marketing

Volume 12 • Issue 1

Effect of Social Media Personalization

on Brand Strength:
A Study of the Brand Advertised on Facebook
Mahima Shukla, Amity University, Noida, India*
https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0916-9964

Rahul Gupta, Amity University, Noida, India

https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2328-0119

ABSTRACT

Personalization is now used at every corner and position of social media sites. Using personalization
in marketing communication is an effective communication strategy for many businesses to improve
customer satisfaction and increase sales in a reduced advertising budget. This research is an attempt
to measure the impact of personalized advertisement on customers’ social media account. This
empirical research develops and tests a conceptual model using the structural modeling technique of
the data collected from Facebook users, who have seen personalized advertisements of the preferred
brand on their Facebook account. Results suggest that personalized advertisement of the brand in
customers’ social media accounts is positively related to brand experience. Brand experience is also
positively related to brand equity and mediates the relationship between perceived personalization
and customer-based brand equity. Both brand experience and brand equity collectively enhance the
brand strength of the brand advertised on Facebook.

Keywords
Brand Equity, Brand Experience, Facebook Advertisement, Personalization, Social Media Advertisement

INTRODUCTION

The progressive growth of technology, digital devices, and communication channels has provided
businesses so many opportunities. By the strategical utilization of changing, technology firms can
provide more value to their customers, increase experiences, satisfaction, and loyalty (Villarejo-
Ramos & Sanchez-Franco, 2005). Many businesses use social media sites for personalized marketing
to create a more tailored customer brand experience and encourage impulse buying by offering
products for individual needs aligned with their tastes and preferences. Personalized advertisement
is a technique to provide endless customer experience and an effective way to strengthen brand trust
(Chinomona, 2013).
Social media has revolutionized marketing communication; it is a significant and rising area
of research that attracts both practitioners and academicians. Personalized advertisements on social
media sites with Facebook have gotten much consideration over the previous studies. Despite broad
exploration on the use of individual personal information in online marketing activities (Tran et

DOI: 10.4018/IJOM.299401 *Corresponding Author

This article published as an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License
(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and production in any medium,
provided the author of the original work and original publication source are properly credited.

1
International Journal of Online Marketing
Volume 12 • Issue 1

al., 2020), recent studies show that more understanding is required to know how personalized
advertisements are well aligned with customer interest. This includes enhance customer experience
and limit advertisement evasion (Tran et al., 2020), (Boerman et al., 2017), (Stojanovic & Andrreu,
2017). There is also an absence of studies in the Indian context which investigates the outcome of
social media personalization (Yadav and Rahman, 2018). Providing personalization in e-shopping is
the most popular marketing trend, and social media consistently stays in vogue because of its highly
interactive nature (Shanahan, Tran, & Taylor, 2018), (Blasco-Lorena et al., 2016). So, it is necessary to
study personalization in the social media context (Growth from Knowledge, 2019), (Khan et al.,2017).
Customers in social media no longer behave as passive recipients of entire marketing activities
like conventional media; instead, they assume an active user in creating and sharing brand-related
content. This content-sharing opportunity motivates social media users to share information online to
get the word out about the characteristics, experiences, and reasons they support the brand (Schivinski
and Dabrowski,2015). Facebook advertising is being used in this work since it is a popular social
media advertising channel. Facebook surpassed 1 billion registered accounts and currently has 2.45
billion monthly and 1.49 billion daily active users (Aboulhosn,2020). Facebook gives a chance to
users to make their accounts where they can post their personal information like pictures, educational
& job history, interests, and hobbies. Each user spends nearly 20 mins per visit, making Facebook
quite popular among users and companies uses social media for communication purposes (Dehghani
and Tumer,2015), (Yadav et al. 2017b). According to the survey results, millions of retail websites
have integrated with Facebook, spending on digital marketing tools and platforms has increased
approximately two and half times compared to the last decade (Survey CMO, 2019, (Aboulhosn,2020).
Social media increases the visibility of the brand through its high accessibility and reachability as
compared to traditional media like television, indoor, and outdoor display (Romaniuk, 2013)
Using personalization in marketing communication is an effective communication strategy
for many firms to increase customer interest and sales in a reduced advertising budget (Ansari &
Mela, 2003). Previous studies on personalization have shown that addressing people by their names
increases response rate and helping behaviour both in an online and offline environment (Maslowska
et al., 2016), (Fatkin,2017). (Heerwegh, 2005) confirmed that personalizing messages in traditional
media, for example, e-mails make individuals more special, unique, and valued; consequently,
they are bound to conform to the request. Personalization effects are defined in two ways., first,
is perceived personalization which occurs when a sender of a message intentionally modifies and
delivers the message to recipients that were design based on previously collected data from them.
Moreover, the recipient perceives that a particular message fits their need, whereas the second is actual
personalization. The recipients receive the messages from the sender looks very general common for
all, and the customers may or may not show interest in that message (Li, 2016). Today, the firms use
personalized advertisements in social media based on consumer online behaviour, recent searches,
and purchase histories on the internet (Li, 2016). These advertisements on social media account create
interest and curiosity in consumers. The attractive images and video of the brand are advertised in
consumer’s social media account to increase their experiences and interest in shopping online (Ho
& Bodoff, 2014). Some research work on personalization also says that personalized advertisement
reduces customers, ad avoidance raises brand awareness, increases brand credibility and sales (Baek
and Morimoto, 2012), (Oberoi, Patel, & Haon, 2017).
Several researchers have given their views on the effectiveness of personalized advertisements on
traditional media are well documented such as direct mail (Baek & Morimoto, 2012), telemarketing
(Yu & Cude, 2009), mobile messaging (Xu, 2006), and website ad personalization. However, the effect
of personalization (Awad & Krishnan, 2010) on social media accounts like Facebook and Twitter is
very few may be due to its recent disruptiveness, and emergence is still under observation (Tran et
al., 2020), (Khan et al.,2017), (Shanahan, Tran, & Taylor, 2018). This research attempts to measure
the outcome of a personalized advertisement on a customer’s social media account (Oberoi, Patel,
& Haon, 2017). In this study, the researcher tries to develop and test a conceptual model measuring

2
 International Journal of Online Marketing
Volume 12 • Issue 1

the effect of the personalized ad on consumer-based brand equity, which further develops the brand
strength of the band advertised on customer social media account (Facebook). This study also
examines the mediation effect of consumer brand experience, which has not been discussed in previous
studies. The study considers the three forces of brand equity: brand awareness, perceived quality, and
perceived value, which play a major role in developing brand strength. The model proposed in the
study will be helpful for the firms dealing with online business using social media environment and
want to strengthen their brands with having resource constraints. This analysis will guide to find out
the differences in the use of personalization in social media. In this study, Facebook is being used
as a social media platform because it provides the most economical and targeted form of advertising
to small businesses.
The rest of the paper discussed the theoretical background of the research followed by hypotheses
development, methodology verifies both measurement and structural model and at the end, the study
concluded with theoretical and managerial implications.

THEORETICAL BACKGROUND

Perceived Personalization
Personalization considers as a very important psychological component in developing social media
marketing strategies. Personalized advertisement delivered to customers depends on their individual
preferences. That exclusive preference is captured by many firms to create personalized offers and to
retain their customers (Montgomery & Smith, 2009). Personalization is an effective marketing strategy
in terms of identity and delivering marketing mix to the individual based on their preferences (Khan,
Lewis, & Singh, 2009). Previous studies on personalization (Li, 2016) suggested that personalization
is of two types: pull personalization generally deliver personalized service when customer request
it and can customize in terms of pre-determined or pre-specified product/service characteristics,
on the contrary, push personalization provide all the information to the customer of their preferred
based on their past activities, past preferences, and purchases and recommend the product of services
related to their past searches (Maslowska et al., 2016). Perceived personalization has persuasive
power. It increases the user’s attention and motivates them towards the content of the message; it
exerts persuasive effects by being recognized as “for me” and evoking the feeling of “me-ness”
(Kalyanaraman & Sundar, 2006), (De Keyzer et al., 2015).
Personalization is the opportunity for firms to lead in the current competitive online environment.
Businesses have acquired a massive amount of data related to consumer shopping behaviour, web
browsing, consumer preferences, consumer buying habits, etc (Lavie, Sela, Oppenheim, Inbar, &
Meyer, 2010). Personalized advertisement based on customer demographic data, search patterns, and
past online buying helps customers get products they may need. Hence, personalized advertisement
is perceived as very significant and trustworthy positively influences customer interest for the brand
(Baek and Morimoto, 2012). The potency of personalized content depends on its ability to influence
consumer behaviour, such as attention, intelligence, attitude towards the advertisement, and behavioral
intention. Personalized advertising is a powerful tool that improves advertising relevance for users and
increases ROI for advertisers. It provides an improved experience for users and advertisers. However,
the firm should comply with the ethical guidelines as per the culture and the country. When dealing
with personal information firms have to be clear about the sensitivity of the information and the
ethical issues. In Asian culture, people are especially sensitive about sharing data on sex, health, and
finances. People are less comfortable with other people knowing it. In India collecting information
from people under 13 is not considered ethical. Indian is a culturally diversified country and the
advertiser has to respect religious sentiments as people are very sensitive about it. Some content
is legally restricted in the country it should not be a part of customized advertising. In the country
relation hardships like divorce and the customized ads targeted to that are also discouraged. Thereby

3
International Journal of Online Marketing
Volume 12 • Issue 1

personalized advertisement should follow the personal, religious and cultural boundaries to provide
a satisfying customer experience.
In their research (Dehghani & Tumer, 2015) suggested that advertising on social media, especially
on Facebook, set a new platform for advertising and promotion; it provides a more personal and
intimate connection with users, which ultimately enhances the brand image and brand equity. This
study well defined personalized ads posted by Online retailers on Facebook based on customer
previous activities and search behaviour on the internet. Personalization benefits both the firm and
the customer as both can directly interact with each other and share plenty of personal information.
Marketers effectively utilize those details to create customized offers for them and advertising to a
great extent that increases brand awareness, customer satisfaction, and loyalty (Logan, Bright, &
Gangradharbatla, 2012). (Stojanovic, Andreu, & Curras, 2017) Used multidimensional brand equity
approach to analyze social media communication influences on brand image and loyalty. Previous
Personalization studies generally show both positive and negative outcomes, adverse in terms because
some users did not respond to the advertisement or avoid the same responses. Some Facebook users
perceive the ad as credible and personally made for them and have a positive thought and favorable
attitude towards it. However, some Facebook users negatively respond to advertising they see and fail
to care for their personal preferences (White, Zahay, Thorjorson, & Shavitt, 2008). Marketers need to
understand what personalized means for a customer and perceive the personalization process (Tran
& Trang, 2017). Here, one challenge for marketers always comes to an understanding of what an
individual perceives as personalized (Tam & Ho, 2006). In the study of (Shanahan, Tran, & Taylor,
2018), we have seen the impact of social media personalization on enhancing brand engagement
and loyalty. Recent advances in technology personalization practices implemented in the online
environment allow the marketer to extend their customer services. It is integrated and pops up to
every corner of the website. Finding a relevant Place for personalized advertisement on the website
where it creates maximum visibility and attracts customer attention is also the biggest challenge for
the marketers (Van den Broeck et al., 2020), (Tran, 2017)

The S–O–R Model

The S–O–R model (Mehrabian and Russell, 1974) is used as a theoretical framework to justify
the conceptual framework developed in the present research study. The S-O-R model follows that
specific stimuli or environment cues (personalized advertisement) create consumers’ experiential
states both affective and cognitive (brand experience). These emotional experiential states produce
behavioral responses (brand equity and brand strength) (Donovanand Rossiter, 1982). In the online
retailing context, the stimuli relate to the characteristics of the online retail environment (Eroglu et
al., 2003). The customer’s emotional and cognitive process determines the inner states, bounding
their experiences, knowledge, and evaluations (Iglesia et al.,2011), (Jiang et al., 2011). The behavioral
responses or consequences in the model represent customer buying behavior and customer loyalty
(Sautter et al., 2004). Many previous studies adopted this S–O–R model (Roy, et al.,2016), (Koo
and Ju,2010), (Shim et al. 2001) to know the influence of atmospheric cues on customer’s internal
affective and cognitive experiential states and subsequent online purchase intention. Our conceptual
model consists of three types of variable behavior antecedent variables, OCE component, and outcome
variables. Furthermore, the structured technique adopted by the S–O–R model to test the effect
of personalized ads as environmental stimuli on customer brand experience to measure consumer
behavior (brand equity and brand strength) as a response.

CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK AND HYPOTHESES DEVELOPMENT

The Relationship Between Perceived Personalization and Brand Experience

The marketer uses Personalized ads as an effective marketing communication tool to reach their
customers and provide them positive brand experience. Every interaction between the customer and

4
 International Journal of Online Marketing
Volume 12 • Issue 1

the brand leaves some impression, either positive or negative (Brakus, Schmitt, & Zarantonello,
2009). Customers experience the brand at every moment of contact they have with the brand. A firm
should provide a seamless experience across the customer’s entire journey of brand touchpoints
along with pre, during, and post-purchase situations (Homburg, Danijel, & Kuehnl, 2015). Marketing
Communication is pre-purchase brand stimuli anticipated through advertising and the level of value
they receive from individual treatment (Alloza, 2008). Consumer experience with the brand is
subjective, internal consumer responses by brand-related stimuli such as product design, identity,
packaging, marketing communication, distribution, environment, etc. (Ramaseshan & Stein, 2014).
(Brakus, Schmitt, and Zarantonello, 2009) conceptualized and empirically established that brand
experience is a multidimensional construct consisting of four dimensions— sensory, affective,
behavioral, and cognitive.
Sensory brand experience appeals to all the five senses (sight, touch, sound, smell, and taste),
affective experience appeals to the sentiments and innermost feelings of a consumer, and Intellectual
experience stimulates consumers analytical and imaginative thought that engage consumers creatively
(Brakus, Schmitt, & Zarantonello, 2009). Companies use personalized advertising by using age,
gender, location, past search behaviour, and buying history of consumers to create their interest in a
brand and provide them positive brand experience (Baek and Morimoto, 2012). The customer feels
happy to see the personalized advertisement of the brand they love and searches a lot on the internet.
Social media provides a unique and focused environment for marketers to perform various marketing
activities. Online marketers can more effectively approach and attract their target audience by using
personalization activities on social media. An online marketer can give value to their customers by
treating personally individual users and their requirements, reducing their efforts to search for products,
and feeling them a special and valued customer. Companies are now boosting their advertising budget
to customize the offer to their customers and give them a good brand experience. The personalized ad
should be interesting and beautifully designed; it also considers customers’ personal preferences. The
more personalized consumers perceive an ad, the more they feel a good experience with the brand.

H1: Consumer Perceived Personalized ad has a positive impact on their brand experience.

The Relationship Between Brand Experience and Consumer Based Brand Equity
Experiential communication is a medium to pass a brand value to their target customers. It delivers
required and relevant information and gives effective pleasure and attachment of a brand to consumers
(Schmitt B., 2003). Research on experience suggested that good experience always determines brand
choices and can create brand Equity (Blasco & Velazquez, 2017). (Keller K., 1993) defines brand equity
as consumer reaction to the brand’s marketing, focusing on the two components of brand knowledge:
brand awareness and image. The study of (Aaker D., 1996) provides the most accepted brand equity or
brand value phenomena. A set of assets and liabilities linked to the brand. It provides an opportunity
for online marketers to directly interact with their customers, strengthen their communication, and
provide extreme values to their customers. Social media provide prompt and regular, instant value
and increase brand equity (Yadav and Rahman, 2018). Three forces of brand equity brand awareness,
value, and quality are used to determine the effectiveness of personalization on social media.
The construct of brand awareness comes from a consumer’s knowledge about the brand and “the
ability to recognize/identify or recall a brand to its product category” (Yoo, Donthu, & N, 2000).
(Aaker D., 1996) describe “brand awareness as the strength of brand presence in the consumer minds”.
Personalization is helpful for the firm if it successfully provides knowledge to customers about all the
customized offers related to their preferred brand. Social media provides a rich platform for advertisers
and customers to make a direct personal connection. Both can share a vast amount of information to
enhance knowledge. The marketer uses this knowledge to make a more personalized marketing mix
for customers, and customers receive this knowledge to more study the brand. Customers having a

5
International Journal of Online Marketing
Volume 12 • Issue 1

good experience with a brand can easily identify and become more familiar (Iglesia, Singh, & Batista-
Foguet, 2011). Personalization increases customer’s brand experience if the brand delivers the right
message to the right customers at the right time. Experience leaves an impression in consumers’
minds, which helps them in taking further brand-related decisions (Iglesia et al.,2011). Brands
provide personalized services to their customers, increase their experiences, and leaves an impression,
which keeps reminding them about the brand (Hutter, Hautz, et al., 2013). Brands post personalized
Advertisements on social media with colorful images, well-designed videos, meaningful content
that creates a sensory impression and develops a positive brand image. These visual stimuli create
brand identity increases customer awareness and knowledge about the brand. The more memorable
experiences provided by the brand, the more customers get aware of the brand.

H2a. Customer Brand Experience has a positive impact on brand awareness.

The researcher also reported that there is a relationship between advertising spend and perceived
quality. Consumers generally use different communication tools like advertising to judge or measure
the quality of the product. They perceived the brand which has high investment should be high in
quality. Therefore, the consumer perceives the highly advertised brands should be high in Quality
(Villarejo-Ramos & Sanchez-Franco, 2005).
Similarly, consumers judge the brand’s quality (Shanahan et al.,2018) through the effectiveness
and efficiency of the personalized ad. Customers generally think that advertisements in social media
quickly develop a strong connection with consumers (Baird & Parasnis, 2011). It creates a positive
image that provides a good experience and engages the customer’s mind. User-generated content
in social media like a product review, comments, suggestions, and feedback is also an important
information source, enhancing consumer attraction and interest towards the brand (Stojanovic,
Andreu, & Curras, 2017). The brands are trying to associate with their customers through personalized
advertisement. The amount of personalization increases customer’s involvement and attachment with
the brand, which helps determine the quality and reliability of the brand (Shanahan, Tran, & Taylor,
2018). Personalized advertisement on users Facebook account always try to increase the customer
brand experience, customer highly connected and engaged with the brand and perceived it as a quality
brand (Shanahan, Tran, & Taylor, 2018).

H2b. Customer Brand Experience has a positive and impact on Perceived Quality.

In general, the term consumer perceived value (CPV) is the trade-off between the benefits
consumer have from the product or services and the sacrifice made in terms of cost, effort, time
paid, etc. (Zeithamal, 1988), (Dodds & Monroe, 1985). It assumes that consumers got the benefit
when personalized advertisements treated them as unique and special customers (Brakus, Schmitt,
& Zarantonello, 2009). Brands look valuable for customers if it provides customized offers that fit
their needs, reduces efforts to search relevant offers, and saves time making a purchase decision.
The researcher suggests that customer perceived value can be conceptualized along four dimensions:
financial aspects such as price, discount, and value for money) (Holbrook, 2006). Functional value
(quality and uniqueness) means that offers should provide functional benefits like high performance,
social value (such as social recognition, status, and prestige), finally the individual value (self-
assessment and self-recognition/identity). The consumer should be treated with respect and feel
valuable (Verhoef et al., 2009). Brands advertised on social media try to make a personal connection
with the brand by providing customize offers that increase customer experience with a brand which
helps to measure the value brand provides.

H2c.The Customer Brand Experience has a positive impact on Perceived Brand Value.

6
 International Journal of Online Marketing
Volume 12 • Issue 1

The relationship Between Brand Experience And Brand Strength.

The most acceptable customer value is positively related to customer satisfaction, trust, and commitment
to the brand (Bakanauskas & Jakutis, 2010). Individual commitment, trust, and satisfaction towards
the brand are responsible for strengthening consumers’ relationship with the brand, which further
increases brand loyalty. The set of associations, affection, and love of consumers for a brand are obvious
to build the strength of the brands (Srivastava & Shocker, 1991). Brand strength can be calculated by
how many consumers will buy the brand after seeing the personal advertisement of the brand on their
social media account and recommend it to their friends. Firms use advertisements of their brands on
consumer’s social media accounts by using data analytics. Companies easily get all the information
about customers, their preferred brand, previous purchase, and past search results. After getting all
the track records of customer internet activities, they promote their brand on their personal social
media account. Seeing the advertisement of their most search brand on the internet in their social
media account will give the customer pleasure and produce a good experience with a brand. Maximum
people have their accounts on social media, so personalized advertisement on a customer’s social
media account is a good branding strategy to promote the product and develop a strong connection
between the customer and the brand. Firms now using modern marketing communication methods and
techniques for building strong brands (Keller, 2009). Brand strength can include affective, cognitive,
and behavioral components. In detail cognitive component addresses individual attention towards the
evaluation of the brand; the affective component measures the personal feelings and sentiment towards
the brand (Wiedmann, Hennings, Schmidt, & Wijstefeld, 2011), while the behavior component refers
to the satisfaction, loyalty, repurchase intention towards the brand. A customer’s positive experience
with a brand creates a good impression on their sight and helps in building brand strength.

H3: The Customer Brand experience has a positive impact on brand strength.

The Relationship Between Customer-Based Brand Equity And Brand Strength:

Brand equity is always considered an important tool to measure brand value. Ideally, as the relationship
between the customer and the brand increases, consumer experience and satisfaction with the brand
also increase, ultimately driving consumer purchase intention (Beig & Khan, 2018). Band equity
can be evaluated in two different ways; firm-based focuses on the value brand provided to the firm
and customer-based brand equity is considered the valued customer receives from the brand (Simon
& Sullivan, 1993). Firms use social media communication tools to get deeper interaction with
their customers. Now in the modern communication environment, firms get opportunities to easily
connect with loyal customers, share knowledge and influence their perception about products and
services provided. So, the intensity of brand interaction on social media influences the customer-
brand relationship, which helps consumers make brand strength (Wiedmann et al.,2017). Advertising
encourages customers to become more familiar and loyal to the brand (Dehghani & Tumer, 2015).
Previous studies found that the amount of spending on advertising positively related to brand loyalty
with moderating role play by brand image, perceived quality, and customer satisfaction (Ha, Swinder
Janda, & Muthaly, 2011). Customers perceive advertising as a standard tool to judge the quality of the
product. A customer’s positive evaluation of the brand’s quality influences their purchase intention
(Stojanovic, Andreu, & Curras, 2017). A customer generally makes the purchase decision based on
what they received and what is given (Zeithamal, 1988), and why do they select to purchase and reject
the particular product? Consumers choose those products from which they receive certain benefits
and have some value (Dodds & Monroe, 1985).

H4a: Brand awareness has a positive impact on brand strength

H4b: Perceived brand quality has a positive impact on brand strength
H4c: Brand value has a positive impact on brand strength

7
International Journal of Online Marketing
Volume 12 • Issue 1

The Relationship Between the CBBE Dimension:

This research represents the standard hierarchy of model to find the effective order among the
dimension of consumer-based brand equity. In this research, three practical components of brand equity
are used brand awareness, perceived quality, and value (Aaker D., 1991). Brand equity is developed
by increasing brand awareness in the consumer’s mind. Such memories, retained in the consumer’s
mind, help to determine the quality of the brand. Social media provides the direct interaction of the
consumer with a firm which helps to increase the knowledge and determine the quality of the brand
(Aakar, Yoo, Donthu, & Lee, 2000). The brand is perceived as high quality, high performance at
minimum cost gives some value to the customer. Thus, the following hypothesis is designed:

H5a: Brand Awareness Positively Influences the Perceived Quality

H5b: Perceived Quality Positively Influences the Perceived Value

Based on the above relationships between constructs identified in the present study, the conceptual
model is presented in figure 1.

Figure 1. Conceptual model

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

Data Collection and Procedure

This study aims to measure the outcome of a personalized advertisement on a customer’s social
media account. Facebook was chosen for this study because many reports indicated that India has
a great number of Facebook users and has effectively adopted online searching and buying. This
makes Facebook users a perfect target sample for the study (Yadav and Rahman, 2018). Also, there
is a lack of studies in the Indian context which examine the outcome of social media personalization
(Yadav and Rahman, 2017a). Here participant was selected who had a Facebook account could
proceed here, asked a question to the respondent do you have an account on Facebook? Suppose the
respondent has their accounts on Facebook. In that case, they can answer the question have you see
any personalization advertisement of the brand (product and service) of your choice on your Facebook
account? Only those who answered yes are eligible for the survey. Here respondents can randomly

8
 International Journal of Online Marketing
Volume 12 • Issue 1

select the brand (products and services) of their choice and then answer the questions; all the responses
are collected for further study. An online survey was conducted, the questionnaire was distributed
through an invitation link. The link was forwarded to respondents on their E-mail -Id, social media
accounts and through text messaging. The convenience sampling technique was employed to collect
data. In this study, university students were selected as target respondents, because they are proficient
in technology and have sufficient exposure to the internet medium (Islam and Rahman, 2017), Also,
students are frequent users and active contributors of social media (Kim and Ko, 2012), (Bolton et al.,
2013). The questionnaire has two sections. The first section asked about the respondents’ demographic
details and the second section was designed to be set up on the “five-point Likert scale started from
“strongly disagree, neutral, to agree strongly”.

Sample Demographic Characteristics:

Data collection was performed from the different age groups, qualifications, and gender; the
characteristics of the sample are presented in table 1. The participants are generally young, and the
gender distribution is almost equal.

Table 1 Demographic profile of the sample

Table 1 Demographic profile of the sample

Variable characteristics percent%
Age below 18 1.49
18-25 48.25
26-35 39.3
36-47 6.96
46 above 3.98
Gender Female 52.73%
Male 47.26%
Respondent type student 54.72
Non-Student 45.28
Time accessing Facebook per day less than 1 hour 45.77
1-3 hour 39.3
3-5 hour 10.94
5-7 hour 3.98
Highest qualification Higher Secondary 0.99
Senior Secondary 2.48
Graduation 35.82
Post-graduation 58.7
Doctorate 1.99

Measurement Scale:
The factors identified in this study and factor loading mention in table 2. Mostly Scales used in the
present study are reflective and taken from prior studies. The 4-item measured in a scale of perceived
personalization has been taken from (Shanahan et al.,2018), (Srinivasan, Anderson, & Pannavolu,

9
International Journal of Online Marketing
Volume 12 • Issue 1

2002). To measure the item of four constructs used to create a brand experience sensory, emotional,
intellectual, and behavioral, adapted the scales created by (Brakus, Schmitt, & Zarantonello, 2009)).
The 4-item scale of brand strength is adapted from (Hieke, 2010). Brand awareness measured by the
4-item scale slightly updated the scale given by (Aakar, Yoo, Donthu, & Lee, 2000). Brand value
measure with 5-item scale adapted from (Boo, Busser, & Baloglu, 2009), and for perceived quality
adapted 4-item scale given by (Yoo & Donthu, 2001). Here, consumer brand experience is a second-
order construct consisting of three zero-order constructs: sensory, emotional, and intellectual (Brakus,
Schmitt, & Zarantonello, 2009). Other constructs, brand awareness, perceived quality, perceived
value, and brand strength, are zero-order constructs. All factor loadings mentioned in the table are
in the range of .548 to .879 level, as given by (Costello & Osborne, 2005). Here, the range of alpha
lies between .89 to .95, all the results shown in table 2.

Table 2 Constructs, Items and Factor loading

Brand Experience
Images and videos of personalized ad make a strong impression on my sense 0.836
Personalized ad appeals very attractive in a sensory way 0.830
Personalized ad creates interest to my senses 0.715
Personalized ad engages me to think about the brand 0.688
Personalized ad generates curiosity on me 0.585
Personalized ad induces feelings and sentiments towards the brand 0.656
Creates personal connection and interaction with brand 0.551
Perceived Value
It shows that brand high in performance 0.869
It treats me as special and valued customer 0.857
Personalized offers provide functional benefits to me 0.823
It provides good value for money 0.764
Personalized offers are worth for their price 0.762
Brand Awareness
It made me to think first about the brand 0.801
It provides more knowledge about the band 0.785
It helps me to easily identify the brand 0.780
It makes me more familiar with brand 0.692
Perceived Personalization
It provides me purchase recommendation 0.825
Personalized advertisement appeal like it is customize fit with my needs 0.800
It treats me like I am unique customer 0.776
It informs me regularly about the offers as per my preferences 0.691
Perceived Quality
Information receive is transparent I can trust on that 0.760
It gives me detailed and quality information 0.697

Table 2 continued on next page

10
 International Journal of Online Marketing
Volume 12 • Issue 1

Table 2 continued

Brand Experience
Get effective response of all queries and doubts about the brand 0.623
It provides reliable and clear information 0.579
Brand Strength
It impulse me to purchase the brand 0.750
It invokes me to recommend this brand to my friends 0.744
It creates positive attitude towards the brand 0.689
Personalized offers give me pleasure 0.636
Personalized ad save time to take purchase decision 0.426

Measurement Model
To test the conceptual model first measurement model and then the structural model was tested
(Anderson & Gerbing, 1988). To check the reliability and validity of the construct used in the study
confirmatory factor analysis with the maximum likelihood method was performed.
To test the measurement model, measure all the latent variables to validate the scales used in
this research. For this, draw the all dependent and independent latent variable in the CFA Model
Next checked the validity (both convergent & discriminant) of the constructs used in the model so
for this, need to measure the following: Composite reliability (C.R.), Here C.R. value Range from
.780 to .960 which should be greater than .70 (Bagozzi & Yi, 1988), the average variance extracted
(AVE) ranging from .510 to .832 which should be greater than the recommended value .50, results
showed that the value of C.R. and AVE values of all construct is satisfactory (Fornell & Larcker,
1981). All the values of constructs reliability and validity mention in table no.3. So, the requirement
of convergent validity has been completed; Discriminant validity of the construct was validated if the
value of AVE were higher than the value of ASV and MSV (Hair, Black, Babin, & Anderson, 2010),
which is also satisfactory. The result of reliability and validity (both convergent & discriminant) are
represented in table 3.

Table 3. Constructs Reliability and Validity

Constructs Alpha CR AVE ASV MSV Mean S.D.

Perceived Personalisation 0.82 0.849 0.7726 0.584 0.5266 3.4 0.67
Customer Brand Experience 0.93 3.29 0.75
Average score of items of sensory factor 0.924 0.804 0.6642 0.369
Average score of items of emotional factor 0.8574 0.6674 0.565 0.433
Average score of items of intellectual factor 0.78 0.51 0.4 0.32
Brand Awareness 0.96 0.906 0.73 0.4788 0.348 3.6 0.65
Perceived Quality 0.92 0.845 0.578 0.4019 0.396 3.36 0.76
Brand Value 0.86 0.96 0.832 0.564 0.25 3.24 0.65
Brand Strength 0.94 0.905 0.7626 0.659 0.5 3.6 0.71

11
International Journal of Online Marketing
Volume 12 • Issue 1

Now to verify measurement model fitness, check the (Cmin/df); if its value is less than 3, then
the model is fit. Here (Cmin/pdf) value 1.51, comparative index .959 value is Tucker-Lewis’s index
is .952 AGFI .809 means the model yields a good result. The root means square (RMSEA) .051
value shows that the model is a good fit; all the values come within the defined range (Hair, Black,
Babin, & Anderson, 2010).

Structure Model
To test all the relationships defined in the conceptual model, check the fitness of the structural model.
The value of Cmin/df was 1.524, CFI .957, TFI and AGFI .810 was the root mean square value RMSEA
.051, and the RMR value is .060. All measured values come under the threshold value. It shows that
the model is a good fit. The assessment of the model measures the R square value of brand experience
(.421), quality (.593), awareness (.441), value (.344), and brand strength (.680), which represent
that the perceived personalization is the good predictor. The result of hypothesis testing is shown in
table 4. The findings of the research indicate that perceived personalization is positively related to
consumer brand experience (B=0.61, p< .01) and brand experience mediate the relationship between
personalized advertisement and the three-component of the brand equity Brand Awareness (B=.564,
p<.01), perceived Quality (B=.331, p<.01) and value (B=.490, p<.01). Consumer brand experience
has a significant effect on brand strength (B=.524, p<.01). Brand Awareness (B= .013, P>.05) has
not any significant impact on brand strength but the perceived value (b=.172 p<.01) and perceived
Quality positively (B=.14, p <.01) impact on brand strength. Finally, brand awareness is positively
related to Perceived Quality (B=.483, p<.01), and perceived quality positively influences brand
value (B=.205, p<.05). Brand awareness has an indirect effect on brand strength through perceived
quality and perceived value. Table 4 presents to show the parameter estimates of the structural model.

Table 4. Testing of hypothesis

12
 International Journal of Online Marketing
Volume 12 • Issue 1

Figure 2. Structural model

Mediation Analysis

Mediation analysis was performed using direct, indirect, and total effects of the variable analysis. All
three effects are statistically tested by performing a bootstrap at 2000 and a 95% significance level.
Here brand experience mediates the relationship between personalized ads and the three elements
of brand equity brand awareness, perceived value, and quality. Brand experience also mediates the
relationship between perceived personalization and brand strength. Although no hypothesis was
developed to check this relationship. The results exhibit that brand experience fully mediated the
relationship between personalization ad and brand awareness but partially mediated with perceived
quality, value, and brand strength. The result shows in table 5.

Table 5. Mediation Analysis Using Direct & Indirect Method

Direct effect Indirect effect Total effect

Loadings
PP->BE 0.61***
BE->BAW 0.629***
PP->BE->BAW 0.056 n.s. 0.408* 0.464***
BE->PQ 0.29**
PP->BE->PQ 0.204** 0.375* 0.579***
BE->PV 0.369***
PP->BE->PV 0.15** 0.321** 0.475***
PP->BS 0.39***
PP->BE->BS 0.61** 0.52*** 0.748***

13
International Journal of Online Marketing
Volume 12 • Issue 1

DISCUSSION

This work is considered concerning the recent calls for further research to find the effect of personalized
advertisements on social media. This study finds that personalized advertisement positively impacts
brand-related outcomes such as brand experience, brand equity, and brand strength. Data were collected
from the customers who have Facebook accounts and have seen the personalized advertisement of
the brand advertised on their Facebook account. Customers prefer all these brands that they already
searched for or buy online. The study provides important implications for academics and practitioners
discussed below:

Figure 3. Structural model

Theoretical Implications

The results of the present study considerably contribute to the marketing literature in various manners.
First, even though the study has found different effects of personalization, the outcomes stay uncertain.
Some studies described positive effects that include increased customer satisfaction, purchase intention,
engagement, brand loyalty, brand awareness, and customer retention (Blasco-Arcas et al., 2016)
;(Shanahan, Tran, and Taylor, 2018). Although negative effects are also reported in some studies
covering customer avoidance, reactance for a personalized ad, and discuss privacy issues (Aguirre et
al., 2016), (Chen et al., 2019). So, it is very much needed to know why these irregularities of thoughts
exist. Even though various types of personalization have been defined in various studies, this research
focuses on a particular kind made after a customer saw the advertisement of the brand in their social
media account, which they searched on the internet. In country like India people are very sensitive
about sharing personal details, so marketer should follow the cultural and religious boundaries to
provide customers satisfying experiences. The outcome of this research proves that its effects are
positive and supported the hypothesis. This paper reveals insight into the process of defining the
role of a personalized advertisement on Facebook. If online marketers efficiently implemented this

14
 International Journal of Online Marketing
Volume 12 • Issue 1

communication strategy, it can become a powerful tool for their businesses. Personalization, created
through matching message content with customers’ needs, makes the message relevant and improves
customer experiences.
Second, buyers looking for a brand on the internet with which they want to use and have the
good past experience itself is appropriate to conduct the research. (Tran et al.,2020). When buyers
feel an association between their needs and the characteristics of the brand, a positive experience is
established. This impact improves customer experience with the brands and creates brand awareness
and provides brand value. Consumers find personalized messages to be more pertinent, more
persuasive, better remembered, which improves brand familiarity; thus, consumers spend more time
processing these messages. The outcome of this study confirms the finding of the previous studies
that prove a positive relationship between brand experience and brand equity (Khan and Fatima 2017)
(Lee and Jeong 2014), Expanding on personalization and brand equity literature, the present research
established the connection between the customer experience with a personalized advertisement of the
brand advertised on Facebook and customer-based brand equity after searching that brand online. To
sustain in today’s highly competitive market, firms need to develop up-to-date advertising strategies
to always be informed and aware of their customers about the brand. The study already confirms
that personalization is part of successful advertising and marketing tactics. The positive attitude of
consumers towards personalized communication is because it provides several benefits to customers,
creates values, and improves customer connection with brands.
Third, brands provide benefits to customers and try to create long-running good relations with
them (Shanahan et al., 2019). (Tho, Trang, and Olsen, 2016). Companies have invested a lot of time
and energy to investigate the principal brand equity (Kim and Ko,2012). Brand equity is driven by
brand image, awareness, brand value, quality, and experience (Being and Nika,2019), (Khan and
Fatima,2017). It leads to a greater probability of repurchase and a less inclination to switch brands
(Shanahan et al., 2019). The finding of this research goes above and beyond by identifying the effect
of brand equity on brand strength in the social media context. This study tried to explain the missing
link between how perceived personalization in social media affects brand strength. Here study proved
that personalization is a critical driver of brand equity, which increases the strength of the brand
advertised on social media. To gain and sustain brand strength depends on the consumer attachment
with a brand, experience provided by the brand, and the management of brand value and benefits
individuals receive (Wiedmann et al.,2017). This analysis will guide us to find out the differences in
the use of personalization in social media and how it helps develop brand strength.
Fourth, in the present research, we did not develop any hypothesis to explain the mediation effect.
The paper proposes the drivers of brand experience (perceived personalized ad) and outcomes (brand
equity and brand strength). However, it also shows a mediation process that improves the impact of
perceived personalization on brand equity. Mediation analysis reveals that brand experience positively
mediates the relationship between the three elements of consumer-based brand equity (BA, PQ, BV)
and perceived personalization. Brand experience also positively mediates the between personalization
ad and brand strength. Results show that personalized advertisements on social media positively affect
brand equity and strength if it successfully increases consumer experience. Therefore, firms should
focus on the practical implementation of personalization content to provide a good brand experience.
Lastly, this research also provides the interconnection between the various components of brand
equity. The three components of CBBE used in this research are brand awareness, value, and quality.
The study’s outcome shows that brand awareness impacts the brand’s perceived quality, and perceived
quality further impacts brand value. Previous studies also developed and confirmed the same results
in the social media context (Aaker et al.,2000), (Keller & Lehmann, 2003).

15
International Journal of Online Marketing
Volume 12 • Issue 1

Managerial Implications

This work provides significant implications for firms using Facebook advertising as a critical
advertising strategy. As discussed, the social media platform is highly interactive than other traditional
media. Personalization is more effective in social media than in other media environments. Firms
should keep a bird’s eye on customer preferences and provide more customized offers that fit their
needs. Social media marketers acknowledge the massive amount of information customers share on
different social media platforms and communities and personalize their marketing practices. For the
marketer, creating a personalized offer is the biggest challenge, but the effective implementation of
personalization will help increase their profit margin. IBM took the first initiative to make the team
with Facebook and fuel the advertising technology. The attractive advertisement, eye-catching Images,
Meaningful videos attract customer attention and give them an excellent sensory impression. A firm
should be honest with all advertisements published on their account so the customer can rely on them
and easily access their quality and value. This study might guide well to the firm dealing with online
business and using social media environment. Brand managers can use social media personalization
as the most vital communication tool to engage their customers. Customers’ engagement with the
brand increases their familiarity and results in sustainable relationships.
Although the study shows the positive results of personalized advertising, some studies criticize
the effect of personalization. (Tucker, 2014), (Chen et al., 2019). Especially, (Hoffman et al.,2010)
contended that social media revalorized the entire communication system by transfer the power and
control of brands from the companies to the customers, who are more actively engaged in brand
communication through interactions, comments, and recommendations. This study exhorted that
online marketer are cautious while picking social networking sites to advertise their brands. The
adequacy of a personalized advertisement on social media is problematic because the number of fake
Facebook accounts is increasing very fast (Krombholz et al., 2012). This incredulity can be managed
if firms understand how to customize their social media advertisements. The right implementation
of personalization could improve customer attitude or brand image promoted online, as confirmed
by the outcomes of the present study.
Social media should provide customers with complete control of the entire online activities,
like what they want to see or not on their personal social media account. Companies can also benefit
from this policy because companies will not waste their budget and time promoting ads to customers
who do not want to. These resources can be further utilized efficiently to enhance the quality of
personalization activities.
To take advantage of the benefits of social media, companies invested billions of dollars on
social media to do social commerce (Liang et al., 2011), (Rudolph, 2015). that encourage customers
to buy and sell products and services on a social media platform. The study results also support that
social commerce company can use personalized advertisements to reach their marketing goals. This
communication strategy can improve customer perception about the brand, improves the customer-
brand relationship, and develop positive brand strength. This is a more cost-effective communication
strategy than other communication tools (Comscore, 2019).
New advanced technology provided many conveniences for online shopping and brought them
closer to the companies. Presently customers can purchase any product from any brand available online
after just a few clicks. These conveniences can create huge competition and critical problems for the
marketers, for example, customer retaliation. How can companies create a strong bond with their
customers to prevent customers from switching to other brands? This is the big question for online
marketers. This research can provide a possible solution to the online marketers – if the company
develops their personalization communication strategy that encourages a customer to consistently
associated with a brand can retain their most profitable customers. Previous advertising literature
confirmed that personalization improved customer perception about the brand and reduced consumer
ad avoidance behavior (Shanahan, Tran, & Taylor, 2018), (Tran, 2017). Also, these results are

16
 International Journal of Online Marketing
Volume 12 • Issue 1

limited only to a specific social networking site, Facebook. The marketer should also implement this
personalization approach to other social networking sites like Instagram, Twitter, etc. If the outcome
of personalization acts in the same way as it on Facebook, companies have the chance of creating
this personalization advertising strategy on those media also.
Brand managers need to build brand communities on social media to strengthen their brand and
have a better conversation with their customers. The brand communities reassemble the most loyal
customers in one place, which is a massive win for any brand. This community should have to give
personal attention to their customers and serve them in a better way. Companies can also strengthen
their brand through posts brand content, videos, and images on the brand fan page. The number of
likes, shares, and comments on these posts helps managers of brands that operate brand fan pages
to collect their customer’s requirements. In this research, we explained personalized advertisement
development based on past search behaviour and online activities. They can also check how many
customers switch to a website from clicking advertisement in their Facebook account. Brand managers
need to closely monitor all these observations to create a personalized advertisement and develop
high customers responses to the brand.

LIMITATIONS AND FUTURE RESEARCH

Although our research is empirically tested, it has a specific limitation. The first and essential limitation
is the people gap in understanding the advertisement as personalized or general. Here the method
chooses to explain the personalization is not ideal. Future studies should use different techniques like
experimental design by giving respondents different conditions and randomly selecting the particular
condition. The comparison between different conditions should develop for the best outcome. This
can also set a good explanation of the effect of the perceived personalization of the brand advertised
on social media.
The effect of personalization in traditional media we already tested and in the given research
model is given to measure the effect of personalization on social media. As we know, the social media
environment is highly distinct, unique, and interactive as we already discussed, there is a difference
in perception between the social media context with opposed to another context. For future research,
there should be a difference between the perception of social media and the other context in a single
study. Finally, in this study, we using data collected from Facebook users in a future study; we can
collect the data from other social media platforms like Instagram and Twitter to compare the result,
test the model and check the validity of the construct used.

FUNDING AGENCY

Publisher has waived the Open Access publishing fee.

17
International Journal of Online Marketing
Volume 12 • Issue 1

REFERENCES

Aakar, Y. (2000). An Examination of selected marketing mix elements and brand equity. Journal of the Academy
of Marketing Science, 28(2), 195–211. doi:10.1177/0092070300282002
Aaker, D. (1996). Measuring Brand Equity across products and markets. Management Review, 102–120.
Aboulhosn, S. (2020). 18 Facebook statistics every marketer should know in 2020. Sproutsocial. https://
sproutsocial.com/insights/facebook-stats-for-marketers/
Aguirre, , Roggeveen, Grewal, & Wetzels. (2016). The personalization–privacy paradox: Implications for new
media. Journal of Consumer Marketing, 33(2).
Alloza, A. (2008). Brand Engagement and Brand Experience at BBVA the transformation of a 150 years old
company. Corporation Reputation Review, (11), 371-379.
Anderson, J., & Gerbing, D. (1988). Structural Equation modeling in practices: A review and recommended
Two-Step approach. Psychological Bulletin, 103(3), 114. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.103.3.411
Ansari, A., & Mela, C. (2003). E-Customization. JMR, Journal of Marketing Research, 2(40), 131–145.
doi:10.1509/jmkr.40.2.131.19224
Awad, N., & Krishnan, M. (2010). The personalization privacy paradox an empirical evaluation of information
transparency and the willingness to be profiled online for personalization. Management Information System, 13-28.
Baek, T., & Morimoto, M. (2012). Stay Away from me. Journal of Advertising, 41(1), 59–76. doi:10.2753/
JOA0091-3367410105
Bagozzi, R., & Yi, Y. (1988). On the evaluation of structure Structural equation model. Journal of the Academy
of Marketing Science, 16(1), 74–94. doi:10.1007/BF02723327
Bakanauskas, & Jakutis, A. (2010). Customer value: determination in the undefined environment. Management
of Environment Research, 53, 7-18.
Beig, F., & Khan, M. (2018). Impact of Social Media Marketing on Brand Experience: A Study of Select Apparel
Brands on Facebook. SAGE Journal, 22(3), 1–12. doi:10.1177/0972262918785962
Beig, F., & Nika, F. (2019, June). Impact of brand experience on Brand Equity of Online Shopping Portals: A
Study of Select E-Commerce Sites in the State of Jammu and Kashmir. Global Business Review. Advance online
publication. doi:10.1177/0972150919836041
Blasco, M., & Velazquez, B. (2017). Impact of Marketing and Technological Innovation on Store Experience:
Word-of-Mouth in Retailing. Journal of Product and Brand Management.
Blasco-Arcas, L., Hernandez-Ortega, B. I., & Jimenez-Martinez, J. (2016). Engagement platforms: The role of
emotions in fostering customer engagement and brand image in interactive media. Journal of Service Theory
and Practice, 26(5), 559–589. doi:10.1108/JSTP-12-2014-0286
Boerman, S. C., Kruikemeier, S., & Zuiderveen Borgesius, F. J. (2017). Online behavioral advertising: A literature
review and research agenda. Journal of Advertising, 46(3), 363–376. doi:10.1080/00913367.2017.1339368
Brakus, J., Schmitt, B., & Zarantonello, L. (2009). Brand Experience: What is it? how is it measured? Does it
affect loyalty. Journal of Marketing, 73(3), 52–68. doi:10.1509/jmkg.73.3.052
Chinomona, R. (2013). The influence of Brand Experience on brand Satisfaction, Trust and Attachment in South
Africa. International Journal of Economics and Business Research, 12(10).
Choi, E. K., Fowler, D., Goh, B., & Yuan, J. (2016). Social media marketing: Applying the uses and gratifications
theory in the hotel industry. Journal of Hospitality Marketing & Management, 25(7), 771–796. doi:10.1080/1
9368623.2016.1100102
Costello, A., & Osborne, J. (2005). Best practices in exploratory factor analysis: four recommendations for
getting the most from your analysis. Practice Assessment, Research and Evaluation, 10, 1-9.

18
 International Journal of Online Marketing
Volume 12 • Issue 1

De Keyzer, F., Dens, N., & De Pelsmacker, P. (2015). Is this for me? How consumers respond to personalized
advertising on social network sites. Journal of Interactive Advertising, 15(2), 124-134.
Dehghani, M., & Tumer, M. (2015). A Research on the effectiveness of Facebook advertising on enhancing
purchase intention of consumers. Computers in Human Behavior, 49, 597–600. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2015.03.051
Dodds, B. W., & Monroe, B. K. (1985). The effect of brand and price information on subjective product evaluation.
Advances in Consumer Research. Association for Consumer Research (U. S.), 12, 85–90.
Donovan, R. J., & Rossiter, J. R. (1982). Store atmosphere: An environmental psychology approach. Journal
of Retailing, 58(1), 34–57.
Eroglu, S. A., Machleit, K. A., & Davis, L. M. (2003). Empirical testing of a model of online store atmospherics
and shopper responses. Psychology and Marketing, 20(2), 139–150. doi:10.1002/mar.10064
Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. (1981). Evaluating Structure Equation models with unobservable variables and
measurement error. JMR, Journal of Marketing Research, 18(1), 39–50. doi:10.1177/002224378101800104
Growth from Knowledge. (2019). Personalization [blog post]. Available at: www.gfk.com/landing-pages/
landingpages-us/the-future-of-financial-services/ personalization/f
Gurau, C., Ranchhod, A., & Guazente, C. (2003). “To Legislate or not to legislate”: A comparative exploratory
study of privacy/personalization factors affecting French, Unsaid U.K. websites. Journal of Consumer Marketing,
20(7), 652-664.
Ha, H.-Y., Swinder Janda, J., & Muthaly, S. (2011). The effects of advertising spending on brand loyalty in
services. European Journal of Marketing, 45(4), 673–691. doi:10.1108/03090561111111389
Hair, J., Black, W., Babin, B., & Anderson, R. (2010). Multivariate data analysis. Retrieved from https://works.
bepress.com/joe_hair/2
Heerwegh, D. (2005). Effects of personal salutations in e-mail invitations to anticipate in a web survey. Public
Opinion Quarterly, 69(4), 588–598. doi:10.1093/poq/nfi053
Hieke, S. (2010). Effects of counterfeits on the image of luxury brands: An empirically study from the customer
perspective. Journal of Brand Management, 2(18), 159–173. doi:10.1057/bm.2010.28
Ho, S., & Bodoff, D. (2014). The effect of Web Personalization on user attitude and behavior: An integration of
the elaboration likelihood model and consumer search theory. Management Information System, 38(2).
Hoffman, D.L., & Fodor, M. (2010). Can you measure the ROI of your social media marketing? MIT Sloan
Management Review, 52(1), 41.
Holbrook, M. (2006). Consumption experience, customer value, and subjective personal introspection: An
illustrative photographic essay. Journal of Business Research, 59, 714-725.
Homburg, C., Danijel, J., & Kuehnl, C. (2015). Customer Experience introspection: An implementing an evolving
marketing concept. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science.
Hutchinson, A. (2018). The 2018 small business social media confidence survey. Retrieved from www.
socialmediatoday.com
Hutter, K., Hautz, J., Dennhardt, S., & Fuller, J. (2013). The impact of user interaction on social media on brand
awareness and purchase intention: The case of MINI on Facebook. Journal of Product and Brand Management,
22(5), 342–351. doi:10.1108/JPBM-05-2013-0299
Iglesia, O., Singh, J., & Batista-Foguet, J. (2011). The role of Brand Experience and affective commitment in
determining brand loyalty. Journal of Brand Management, 18(8), 570-582.
Jane-Marie Fatkin Terry, C. L. (2017). [Insert name here]: Group size and personalization’s effect on Facebook
message response rates. Information Technology & People, 30(1), 2–21.
Jiang, Z., Chan, J., Tan, B. C.-Y., & Chua, W. S. (2011). Effects of interactivity on website involvement and
purchase intention. Journal of the Association for Information Systems, 11(1), 34–59. doi:10.17705/1jais.00218

19
International Journal of Online Marketing
Volume 12 • Issue 1

Kalyanaraman, S., & Sundar, S. (2006). The psychological appeal of personalized content in web portals: Does
customization affect attitudes and behavior? Journal of Communication, 1(56), 110–132. doi:10.1111/j.1460-
2466.2006.00006.x
Keller, K. (2009). Building strong brands in a modern marketing communications environment. Journal of
Marketing Communications, 15(2-3), 139–156. doi:10.1080/13527260902757530
Khan, I., & Fatma, M. (2017). Antecedents and outcome of brand experience: An empirical study. Journal of
Brand Management, 3(5), 1–14. doi:10.1057/s41262-017-0040-x
Kim, A., & Ko, E. (2012). Do Social Media Marketing activities enhance customer equity? An empirical study
of luxury fashion brand. Journal of Business Research, 65(10), 1480–1486. doi:10.1016/j.jbusres.2011.10.014
Koo, D. M., & Ju, S. H. (2010). The interactional effects of atmospherics and perceptual curiosity on emotions
and online shopping intention. Computers in Human Behavior, 26(3), 377–388. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2009.11.009
Krombholz, K., Merkl, D., & Weippl, E. (2012). Fake identities in social media: A case study on the sustainability
of the Facebook business model. Journal of Service Science Research, 4(2), 175–212. doi:10.1007/s12927-
012-0008-z
Lavie, T., Sela, M., Oppenheim, I., Inbar, O., & Meyer, J. (2010). User attitudes towards news content
personalization. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 8(68), 483–495. doi:10.1016/j.
ijhcs.2009.09.011
Li. (2016). When does web-based personalization work? The distinction between actual personalization and
perceived personalization. Computers in Human Behavior, 4(C), s25-S33.
Logan, K., Bright, I., & Gangradharbatla, H. (2012). Facebook versus Television Advertising value perception
among females. Journal of Research in Interactive Marketing, 3(6), 164–179. doi:10.1108/17505931211274651
Maslowska, E., Smith, E., Putte, B., & Van den. (2016). It is all in the name: a study of consumer responses to
personalized communication. Journal of Interactive Advertising, 16(1), 74-85.
Mehrabian, A., & Russell, J. A. (1974). An Approach to Environmental Psychology. MIT Press.
Montgomery, A., & Smith, M. (2009). Prospects for personalization on the internet. Journal of Interactive
Marketing, 2(23), 130–137. doi:10.1016/j.intmar.2009.02.001
Moreira, A., Fortes, N., & Santiago, R. (2017). Influence of sensory stimuli on brand experience brand equity
and purchase intention. Journal of Business Economics and Management, 18(1), 68–83. doi:10.3846/161116
99.2016.1252793
Nikhashemi, S., Valaei, N., & Tarofder, A. (2017). Do brand personality and perceived product quality play
a major role in mobile phone consumers switching behavior? Global Business Review, 3(18), 108–127.
doi:10.1177/0972150917693155
Oberoi, P., Patel, C., & Haon, C. (2017). Technology sourcing for website personalization and a social media
marketing a study of the e-retailing industry. Journal of Business Resources, 10-13.
Oh, H. (1999). Service Quality, Customer Satisfaction, and Customer Value: A holistic perspective. International
Journal of Hospitality Management, 24(2), 67–82. doi:10.1016/S0278-4319(98)00047-4
Pine, B., & Gilmore, J. (1999). The Experience Economy. Harvard Business Review, 76(6), 176–188.
PMID:10181589
Ramaseshan, B., & Stein, A. (2014). Connecting the dots between brand experience and brand loyalty: The
mediating role of brand personality and brand relationship. Journal of Brand Management, 21(7-8), 664–683.
doi:10.1057/bm.2014.23
Romaniuk, J. (2013). Viewpoint: What’s (Brand) Love Got to do with it? International Journal of Market
Research, 55(2), 185–186. doi:10.2501/IJMR-2013-018
Roswinanto, W., & Strutton, D. (2014). Investigating the Advertising Antecedents to and Consequences of
Brand Experience. Journal of Promotion Management, 20(5), 607–627. doi:10.1080/10496491.2014.946206

20
 International Journal of Online Marketing
Volume 12 • Issue 1

Rudolph, S. (2015). Facebook Advertising Statistics and trends. https://www.business2community.com/

infographics/facebook-advertising-statistics-trends-infographic-01238796
Sahni, N., Wheeler, S., & Chintagunta, P. (2018). Personalization in E-mail marketing: The role of non-informative
advertising content. Marketing Science, 37(2), 236–258. doi:10.1287/mksc.2017.1066
Schivinski, B., & Dabrowski, D. (2015). The impact of brand communication on brand equity Through Facebook.
Journal of Research in Interactive Marketing, 9(1), 31–53. doi:10.1108/JRIM-02-2014-0007
Schmitt. (1999a). Experiential marketing: how to get customers to sense, feel, think, act to relate your company
and brand. The Free Press.
Shanahan, T., Tran, T., & Taylor, E. (2018). Getting to know you: Social media personalization as a man
of enhancing brand loyalty and perceived quality. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 47, 57–65.
doi:10.1016/j.jretconser.2018.10.007
Srinivasan, S., Anderson, R., & Pannavolu, K. (2002). Customer loyalty in e-commerce: An exploration of its
antecedent and consequences. Journal of Retailing, 1(78), 41–50. doi:10.1016/S0022-4359(01)00065-3
Srivastava, R., & Shocker, A. (1991). Brand Equity: A perspective on its meaning and measurement. Marketing
Science Institute, 91-124.
Stojanovic, I., Andreu, L., & Curras, R. (2017). Effects of the intensity of the intensity of use of social media
on brand equity. European Journal of Management and Business Economics, 27(1), 83-100.
Survey, C. M. O. (2019). Highlight and insight report on social media. https://www2.deloitte.com/content/dam/
Deloitte/us/Documents/CMO/us-cmo-highlights-and-insights-report.pdf
Tam, K., & Ho, S. (2006). Understanding the impact of web personalization on user information processing and
decision outcomes. MIS, 4(30), 865–890. doi:10.2307/25148757
Tho, N. D., Trang, N. T. M., & Olsen, S. O. (2016). Brand personality appeal, brand relationship quality, and
WOM transmission: A study of consumer markets in Vietnam. Asia Pacific Business Review, 22(2), 307–324.
doi:10.1080/13602381.2015.1076655
Tran, T. P., van Solt, M., & Zemanek, J. E. Jr. (2020). How does personalization affect a brand relationship in
social commerce? A mediation perspective. Journal of Consumer Marketing, 37(5), 473–486. doi:10.1108/
JCM-12-2017-2499
Tran, & Trang, P. (2017). Personalized ads on Facebook: an effective marketing tool for an online marketer.
Journal of Retailing Consumer Services, (39), 230-242.
Van den Broeck, E., Poels, K., & Walrave, M. (2020). How do users evaluate personalized Facebook advertising?
An analysis of consumer- and advertiser-controlled factors. Qualitative Market Research, 23(2), 309–327.
doi:10.1108/QMR-10-2018-0125
Verhoef, P., Lemon, K., Parasuraman, A., Roggeveen, A., Tsiros, M., & Schlesinger, L. (2009). Customer
experience services and management strategies. Journal of Retailing, 85, 31-41.
Villarejo-Ramos, A., & Sanchez-Franco, M. (2005). The impact of marketing communication and price promotion
on brand equity. Journal of Brand Management, 12(6), 431–444. doi:10.1057/palgrave.bm.2540238
Wiedmann, K., & Hennings, N. (2011). Drivers and outcome of brand heritage, consumer perception of heritage
brand in the automotive industry. Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice, 19(2), 205–220. doi:10.2753/
MTP1069-6679190206
Xu, D. (2006). The influence of personalization in affecting consumer attitudes toward mobile advertising in
China. Journal of Computer Information Systems, 9–19.
Yadav, M., & Rahman, Z. (2017b). Measuring consumer perception of social media marketing activities
in e-commerce industry: Scale development & validation. Telematics and Informatics, 34(7), 1294–1307.
doi:10.1016/j.tele.2017.06.001
Yoo, B., & Donthu, N. (2001). Developing a Scale to Measure the perceived quality of an internet shopping site
(SITEQUAL). Quarterly Journal of Electronic Commerce, 2(1), 31-46.

21
International Journal of Online Marketing
Volume 12 • Issue 1

Yoo & Donthu. (2000). An Examination of Selected Marketing Mix elements and brand equity. Journal of the
Academy of Marketing Science, 195-211.

Mahima Shukla is a Research Scholar, pursuing a Ph.D. from Amity Business School, Amity University Noida.
She is a B. Tech. in Computer science and M.B.A in Marketing and IT from Uttar Pradesh Technical University,
Lucknow, India. She has also qualified NET (National Eligibility Test) Examination conducted by UGC, Government
of India. Her current area of research is on measurements of brand experience and the customer experience in
online scenarios. She tends to research subjects where marketing and technology come together to create an
impact on business.

Rahul Gupta is an Associate professor of Marketing at Amity University. He is Ph.D. and fellow from IIM Ahemdabad.
He has more than 14 years of teaching experience in the field of Marketing and Consumer Behaviour. His research
papers and cases have been published in reputed refereed national and international journals. His research projects
include servitization, online shopping, consumer engagement, and trust in the online shopping environment.

22