Antecedents of Consumer Brand Engagement and Brand Equity of Apps–Measurement Model

Abstract

The Antecedents of Consumer Brand Engagement and Brand Equity of Apps—Measurement Model (Tran et al., 2024) is a comprehensive 44-item psychometric instrument designed to evaluate how specific user motives influence consumer behavior within the context of branded applications. The model systematically distinguishes between hedonic and utilitarian motivations, and assesses how these factors subsequently predict Consumer Brand Engagement (CBE) and Brand Equity. The scale was constructed by adapting items from established prior research, notably works by Stocchi et al. (2018), Yoo, Donthi, & Lee (2000), and Hollebeek, Glynn, & Brodie (2014). This measure was administered to US mobile app users via an electronic survey, and extensive results regarding its reliability and validity were reported in the foundational study.

Keywords

Consumer Brand Engagement, Brand Equity, Branded Applications, Hedonic Motivations, Utilitarian Motivations, Measurement Model, Psychometrics, Digital Marketing

Authors

Tran, Trang P., Gugenishvili, Ilia, Muldrow, Adrienne F.

Purpose

The central purpose of this measurement model is to systematically quantify the relationship between core user motivations and their resultant impact on Consumer Brand Engagement and Brand Equity within the mobile app environment. It specifically aims to assess how two distinct categories of user motives—hedonic motivations (driven by pleasure and enjoyment) and utilitarian motivations (driven by functionality and task efficiency)—translate into positive consumer outcomes for the brand.

The scale provides researchers and marketing practitioners with a structured tool to diagnose which motivational drivers are most effective in fostering strong emotional and behavioral connections between consumers and brand-specific applications, thereby contributing to the overall perceived value of the brand.

Construct

The scale measures a complex set of constructs centered around mobile consumer behavior and brand relationship management. The key dependent constructs assessed are Consumer Brand Engagement (CBE) and Brand Equity. CBE is operationalized as a multi-dimensional factor encompassing cognitive, affective (Affection), and behavioral (Activation) components of a consumer’s interaction with the brand via the app.

The independent constructs include the primary motivational antecedents: Utilitarian Motivations (Security, Usefulness, Ease of use) and Hedonic Motivations (Interpersonal utility, Entertainment). Additionally, the model incorporates Brand Equity dimensions (Perceived quality, Brand loyalty, Brand associations with brand awareness) and the contextual factor of Task-Service Fit, which assesses the appropriateness of the app for specific user tasks.

Validity

The validation process provided strong evidence for both convergent validity and discriminant validity of the measurement model.

Convergent validity was robustly established, as indicated by the finding that all Average Variance Extracted (AVE) values across the different dimensions were greater than the recommended threshold of 0.5. This confirms that the items loading onto each factor successfully measure the intended underlying construct. Discriminant validity was assessed using the Heterotrait-Monotrait Ratio (HTMT) criterion. Generally, discriminant validity was confirmed, as the HTMT value was smaller than 1 for most construct pairs, signifying that the constructs are conceptually distinct. The authors noted an understandable exception between “interpersonal utility” and “hedonic benefits,” resulting from theoretical overlap and shared indicators in the measurement models (Hair et al., 2017).

Reliability

The internal consistency and reliability of the scale were confirmed through standard psychometric analyses. The researchers reported that both Cronbach’s alpha coefficients and the Composite Reliability (CR) coefficients for all measured dimensions within the model were consistently above the acceptable benchmark of 0.7.

These high coefficients provide assurance that the 44 items consistently and accurately measure the intended underlying factors—consumer motives, engagement, and brand equity—thereby confirming the stability and precision of the scale for research in the branded app context.

Factor Analysis

The measurement model is based on a factor structure comprising multiple dimensions and subscales, derived primarily from existing, validated scales in consumer behavior and marketing literature. The resulting structure includes:

• Utilitarian Motivations: Measured across three subscales: Security, Usefulness, and Ease of use.
• Hedonic Motivations: Measured across two subscales: Interpersonal utility and Entertainment.
• Brand Equity: Measured through three components: Perceived quality, Brand loyalty, and Brand associations with brand awareness.
• Consumer Brand Engagement: Assessed via three core factors: Cognitive processing, Affection, and Activation.
• Task-Service Fit: Measured as a distinct contextual factor assessing the congruence between the app’s service capabilities and the user’s specific task requirements.

Instrument

Test Type: Inventory/Questionnaire

Format: 44-item scale administered electronically.

Language Available: English

Population Group: Mobile app users

Age Group: Not explicitly specified, but focused on the general population of mobile application users.

Population Details: The measure was validated using a specific sample of US mobile app users, collected via an online survey method.

Test Methodology: The scale development utilized rigorous procedures including Test Validity, Construct Validity, Convergent Validity, Discriminant Validity, Test Reliability, Internal Consistency, and the testing of a structural Measurement Model.

Keywords

AVE, HTMT, Cronbach’s Alpha, Perceived Quality, Brand Loyalty, Utilitarian Benefits, Hedonic Benefits, Mobile Apps, Marketing Communications

Authors

Author ORCID Identifier: Tran, Trang P. (0000-0001-9000-044X); Gugenishvili, Ilia (0000-0002-7657-9149); Muldrow, Adrienne F. (0000-0003-3519-3343)

Affiliation Email addresses: Not provided in source content.

Correspondence Address: Not provided in source content.

Permissions & Fee and Test Year

The scale is designated as Non-Commercial. There is No Fee associated with its use for academic purposes, as per the source information.

The development and primary publication year for this measurement model is 2024. The specific test location for the items is referenced as 2024-67328-003, Table 1, Pages 331–332 of the source journal article.

Reference’s

Tran, T. P., Gugenishvili, I., & Muldrow, A. F. (2024). Enhancing brand equity in branded apps: A hedonic and utilitarian motivation’s perspective. Journal of Marketing Communications, 30(3), 318–343. https://doi.org/10.1080/13527266.2022.2113909

The scale items were adapted from the following foundational works:

• Hollebeek, L. D., Glynn, M. S., & Brodie, R. J. (2014). Consumer brand engagement in social media: Conceptualization, scale development and validation. Journal of Interactive Marketing, 28(2), 149–165.
• Stocchi, L., Michaelidou, N., & Saren, M. (2018). The effect of brand apps on consumer satisfaction and loyalty: A multi-channel perspective. Journal of Interactive Marketing, 41, 62–77.
• Yoo, B., Donthu, N., & Lee, S. (2000). An examination of selected marketing mix elements and brand equity. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 28(2), 195–211.

Items of the Antecedents of Consumer Brand Engagement and Brand Equity of Apps–Measurement Model

IMPORTANT: The following scale items must be preserved in their original language and must not be changed in any way.

Utilitarian Motivations (Stocchi et al. 2018)

Security

• My private information is managed securely when using this app.

• I am sure that payment information will be protected when using this app.

Usefulness

• Using this app improves my performance in my daily life.

• Using this app increases my productivity in my daily life.

• Using this app enhances my effectiveness in my daily life.

Ease of Use

• Learning to operate this app is easy for me.

• I would find it easy to get this app to do what I want it to do.

• It would be easy for me to become skillful at using this app.

Hedonic Motivations (Stocchi et al. 2018)

Interpersonal Utility

• I use this app to participate in discussions.

• I use this app to show others encouragement.

• I use this app to belong to a group.

• I use this app to express myself freely.

Brand Equity (Yoo, Donthu, and Lee 2000)

Perceived Quality

• This brand is of high quality.

• The likely quality of this brand is extremely high.

• The likelihood that this brand would be functional is very high.

• The likelihood that this brand is reliable is very high.

• This brand must be of very good quality.

Brand Loyalty

• I know what this brand looks like.

• I can recognize this brand among other competing brands.

• I am aware of this brand.

• Some characteristics of this brand come to my mind quickly.

• I can quickly recall the symbol or logo of this brand.

Consumer Brand Engagement (Hollebeek, Glynn, and Brodie 2014)

Cognitive Processing

• Using this app gets me to think about the brand.

• I think about the brand a lot when I’m using this app.

• Using this app stimulates my interest to learn more about the brand.

Affection Factor

• I feel very positive when I use this app.

• Using this app makes me happy.

• I feel good when I use this app.

• I’m proud to use this app.

Activation Factor

• I spend a lot of time using this app, compared to other apps.

• Whenever I’m finding something with mobile apps, I usually use this app.

• This app is one of the apps I usually use when I use to find something with mobile apps.

Task-Service Fit (Lin and Huang 2008)

In helping me perform my shopping task(s), …

• Use of the branded app service is adequate

• Use of the branded app service is appropriate

• Use of the branded app service is compatible with my task

• Use of the branded app service is helpful

• Use of the branded app service is sufficient

• In general, the service of the branded app best fits the task