Building Brand Equity Through Facebook Influencing Cosmetics Purchase Intention in Thailand

1st National and International Conference on Humanities and Social Sciences
October 31, 2014, KU Home, Bangkok, THAILAND
Building Brand Equity through Facebook Influencing

Cosmetics Purchase Intention in Thailand
*
**
.
Watcharaphorn Tungpradit and Dr.Wichian Premchaisawad
1)
2)

3)

3
1130 SPSS LISREL

LISREL
(Chi-square = 4.94, df = 14, p = 0.98666 , GFI = 1.00) 1
0.86 2 0.64
3
0.64 0.55 4
5

*
**
; Email: yok_tungpradit@yahoo.com


: , , , ,
Abstract
The research is a mixed approach research that aims to (1) synthesizes a causal relationship
model of the implementation of integrated marketing communication through Facebook, perceived brand
equity, and purchasing intention of the leading cosmetic companies Facebook fan page. (2) Test the
compatibility between the synthesized model and the model derived from empirical data. 3) study the
relationship between compositions of Facebook function (as a tool of integrated marketing
communication) and brand equity. The population of quantitative research are Facebooks fan page of
three cosmetic leading brands which are; Loreal, Ponds, and Olay. The researcher used onlinequestionnaires to collect data from 1,030 Facebooks fan pages and analysed the data via computer
program; SPSS and LISREL. As for qualitative research, researcher conducted in-depth interview with the
key informants such as, Facebook master, Facebook fanpage of studied cosmetic brands, and experts in
e-commerce. The content analysis technique was employed in qualitative data analysis. Outcome of
quantitative research yields that theoretical model is compatible with Empirical model. (Chi-square =
4.94, df = 14, p = 0.09866, GFI = 1.00). This also provides finding for the following hypotheses: Hypothesis
1: Integrated marketing communication through Facebook had direct effect on brand equity with the
influential coefficient of 0.86; Hypothesis 2: Brand equity had a direct influence on purchasing intention
with influential coefficient of 0.64. Hypothesis 3: Integrated marketing communication through Facebook
had direct effect on purchasing intention with influential coefficient of 0.64. Moreover, indirect influence
was obtained between those two variables with influential coefficient of 0.55. Hypothesis 4; Result of
multiple regression analysis yielded that all components of Facebooks function had positive relationship
with brand equity. Qualitative research analysis result can be concluded that integrated marketing
communication through can be used in brand equity creation and that brand equity has influence on
purchasing intention toward cosmetic products of consumer, especially, brand awareness and brand
loyalty.
Key Word: Brand Equity, Communication, Facebook, Purchasing Intention, Cosmetic

..2555 4 10 (
, 2555) 1.75 3%
2 2017
[315]

56 12.5
16 15.5 3
25 18.5 13.5 (ACNielsen
Global Online Consumer Survey, 2013)

(integrate marketing communication: IMC)

(Moradi & Zarei, 2011: 395-396)
(Internet)
(Carmichael, 2011: 20-21)

(social network)
(content)
(Kaplan & Haenlein, 2010:
59) (brand awareness) (brand image)
(brand association) (brand equity) (Mickle,
2009: 34) (Andersen,
2011: 157)
1.

2.

3. (facebook functions)
(brand equity)
Kohli & Leuthesser (2001)

Aaker (1996) 5 (1) (brand
[316]

loyalty)
(2) (brand awareness)
(recognition) (recall) (3) (perceived quality)

(4) (brand associations)

(5) (other assets)

Vitak et al. (2011) ( online social network)
(community online)
(virtual community)

50
22.19 88.4
(, 2556)
Nissen (2011)
(facebook function)
(1) (advertising)
(2)
(sponsorship) (3)
(corporate communication)

(4) (public relation)
(good will) (5) (sales promotion)
Schiffman & Kanuk (2009)

Blackwell, et al. (2001)
" (Blackwell, Miniard, & Engel, 2001: 176-181)
5 (1) (purchase intentions)
(2) (repurchase intentions)
(3) (shopping intentions)
(4) (spending intentions)
(5)
(consumption intentions)

[317]

H1
H3
H2
H1:
H2:
H3:
H4:

1,030
[318]

3
(content validity) (IOC)
30
SPSS (reliability)
0.874
87.40 (descriptive statistics)
(frequencies) (percentages) (SD) (Inferential statistics)
(factor analysis) (path analysis) Z-test
95 SPSS/PC Version 18.0 LISREL
version 8.72 P-Value
> 0.05, GFI 0.9, AGFI 0.9, CFI 0.94, RMR < 0.1 RMSEA < 0.07,Chi Square < 3

3
( 85.5) 20-30 ( 57.8)

( 61.1) ( 43.9) 30,000
20 20 ( 45.9)
16.01 - 21.00 . ( 48.2) ( 51.7)
3.50
3.72 3.60
3.16 3.58
3.97 3.80
3.27
5.88
6.04 6.02
5.47
(confirmatory factor analysis)
5
0.77, 0.70, 0.60, 0.60 0.58
5
0.89, 0.64,
0.59, 0.58, 0.52 5

0.83, 0.73, 0.71, 0.69 0.67

[319]


completely standardized
solution 0.50

( path analysis) LISREL (linear structure relationship)

df/2 1.466 2.00 p-value 0.11452
0.05 goodness of fit index (GFI) 1.00 .90
adjusted goodness of fit index (AGFI) 0.98 .90
root mean squared residuals (RMR) .0091 .05 root mean
squared error of approximation (RMSEA) .0021 0.05
normed fit index (NFI) 1.00 .90 ; incremental fit index (IFI)
1.00 0.90 comparative fit index (CFI) 1.00
.90 critical n(CN) 1437.00 200
(adjust model)
Joreskog, & Sorbom (1996: 121-122)
2
2 Path analysis
1

0.86 2
0.64
3
[320]

0.64
0.55 4
(facebook functions) (brand equity)
(multiple regression analysis) (stepwise)
.05

5
38.1
.05

3
3

Manfred, et al. (2012)

Nazia, et
[321]

al. (2011)

. 2556. . 20 2556
www.thanonline.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=section&layout=blog&id=19&Itemid=
456.
. 2556.
. 15 2556
www.nstda.or.th/knowledge-analytic/9076-10-science-and-technology-stories.
Aaker, D. 1996. Building strong brand. New York: Free press.
ACNielsen Global Online Consumer Survey. 2013. Retrieved May 14, 2014 from acnielsen.com/press/
data.shtml.cosmeticmarketing.thailand.
Andersen, K. 2011. How do you measure a like? Journal of consumer research 2 (7): 157-164.
Blackwell, R., Miniard, P. & Engel, J. 2001. Consumer behavior. Australia: South-western thomson learning.
Carmichael, P. 2011. Networking research. London: Continuum.
Kaplan, A. & Haenlein, M. 2010. Users of the world, unite! The challenges and opportunities of Social
Media. Business Horizons 53 (1): 59-68.
Kohli, C. & Leuthesser, L. 2001. Brand equity: Capitalizing on intellectual capital. Ivey business journal
65 (4): 74-81.
Mickle, T. 2009. USOC gets help with social-media project. Street & Smiths Sports business journal
12 (6): 32-56.
[322]

Moradi, H. & Zarei, A. 2011. The impact of brand equity on purchase intention and brand preference-the
moderating effects of country of origin image. Australian journal of basic & applied sciences 4
(3): 539-545.
Manfred, B., Verena, S. & Daniela B. 2012. Are social media replacing traditional media in terms of brand
equity creation. Management Research Review 35 (9): 770 -790.
Nazia,Y., Mariam, T., Amir, G. & Ayesha, A. 2011. Impact of brand awareness, perceived quality and
customer loyalty on brand Profitability and purchase intention: a resellers view.
Interdisciplinary journal of contemporary research in business 3 (8): 833-837.
Nissen, S. 2011. Brand building through social media How can Pepsi Max leverage the new
opportunities. Master dissertation marketing communication management, Copenhagen business
school, Frederiksberg, Denmark.
Schiffman, L. & Kanuk, L. 2009. Consumer behavior. 10th ed. Upper Saddle: Prentice Hall.
Vitak, J., Zube, P., Andrew, C., Ellison, N. & Lampe, C. 2011. It's complicated: facebook users' political
participation in the 2008 election. Journal of cyber psychology, behavior and social
networking 3 (14): 107-124.
[323]

Building Brand Equity Through Facebook Influencing Cosmetics Purchase Intention in Thailand

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Building Brand Equity Through Facebook Influencing Cosmetics Purchase Intention in Thailand

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

1st National and International Conference on Humanities and Social Sciences

October 31, 2014, KU Home, Bangkok, THAILAND