See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/273514154

Young consumers’ insights on brand equity

Article  in  International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management · March 2015

DOI: 10.1108/IJRDM-02-2014-0024

CITATIONS READS
145 26,510

2 authors, including:

Norazah Mohd Suki

Universiti Utara Malaysia
234 PUBLICATIONS   5,074 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Internal Marketing View project

Customer Experience on Customer Care Service of Telecom Industry in Kota Kinabalu, Sabah View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Norazah Mohd Suki on 24 May 2016.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management
Young consumers’ insights on brand equity: Effects of brand association, brand
loyalty, brand awareness, and brand image
Jumiati Sasmita Norazah Mohd Suki
Article information:
To cite this document:
Jumiati Sasmita Norazah Mohd Suki , (2015),"Young consumers’ insights on brand equity",
International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management, Vol. 43 Iss 3 pp. 276 - 292
Permanent link to this document:
Downloaded by UNIVERSITI MALAYSIA SABAH At 00:26 23 February 2015 (PT)

http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/IJRDM-02-2014-0024
Downloaded on: 23 February 2015, At: 00:26 (PT)
References: this document contains references to 57 other documents.
To copy this document: permissions@emeraldinsight.com
The fulltext of this document has been downloaded 149 times since 2015*
Users who downloaded this article also downloaded:
Xiabing Zheng, Christy M. K. Cheung, Matthew K.O. Lee, Liang Liang, (2015),"Building brand loyalty
through user engagement in online brand communities in social networking sites", Information
Technology & People, Vol. 28 Iss 1 pp. 90-106 http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/ITP-08-2013-0144
Bruno Schivinski, Dariusz Dabrowski, Debra Zahay, (2015),"The impact of brand communication on
brand equity through Facebook", Journal of Research in Interactive Marketing, Vol. 9 Iss 1 pp. -
Csilla Horváth, Marcel van Birgelen, (2015),"The role of brands in the behavior and purchase
decisions of compulsive versus noncompulsive buyers", European Journal of Marketing, Vol. 49 Iss
1/2 pp. 2-21 http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/EJM-10-2012-0627

Access to this document was granted through an Emerald subscription provided by 313615 []
For Authors
If you would like to write for this, or any other Emerald publication, then please use our Emerald
for Authors service information about how to choose which publication to write for and submission
guidelines are available for all. Please visit www.emeraldinsight.com/authors for more information.
About Emerald www.emeraldinsight.com
Emerald is a global publisher linking research and practice to the benefit of society. The company
manages a portfolio of more than 290 journals and over 2,350 books and book series volumes, as
well as providing an extensive range of online products and additional customer resources and
services.
Emerald is both COUNTER 4 and TRANSFER compliant. The organization is a partner of the
Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and also works with Portico and the LOCKSS initiative for
digital archive preservation.

*Related content and download information correct at time of

download.
 The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available on Emerald Insight at:
www.emeraldinsight.com/0959-0552.htm

IJRDM
43,3
Young consumers’ insights on
brand equity
Effects of brand association, brand loyalty,
276 brand awareness, and brand image
Received 21 February 2014 Jumiati Sasmita
Revised 6 March 2014 Faculty of Economics, Universitas Riau, Riau, Indonesia, and
13 May 2014
22 May 2014 Norazah Mohd Suki
Downloaded by UNIVERSITI MALAYSIA SABAH At 00:26 23 February 2015 (PT)

7 July 2014
Accepted 27 September 2014 Labuan School of International Business and Finance,
Universiti Malaysia Sabah, Labuan, Malaysia

Abstract
Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to examine the effects of brand association, brand loyalty,
brand awareness, and brand image on brand equity among young consumers.
Design/methodology/approach – Data from 200 young consumers were analysed using descriptive,
correlation and multiple regression analysis via the Statistical Package for Social Sciences computer
programme version 21.
Findings – Empirical results via multiple regressions authenticated that brand awareness
predominantly affects brand equity among young consumers. These young consumers get input
and awareness of the particular product or brand from the social media. They can clearly recognize
the particular product or brand in comparison to competing products or brands and know how it
looks and its characteristics from the social media.
Research limitations/implications – Respondents were randomly drawn from the population of
the full time students in a public university in Malaysia. Consequently, they may not represent the
entire population of Malaysia.
Practical implications – Input regarding the effects of brand association, brand loyalty, brand
awareness, and brand image on brand equity among young consumers would help marketers and
practitioners to formulate strategies to enhance their brand equity in order to obtain competitive
advantage and business sustainability, particularly among young consumer markets.
Originality/value – Empirical findings offer academic contributions to the existing body of
knowledge of consumer behaviour as the sophisticated quantitative data analyses used will
eventually allow future researchers to explicate the contribution of the current study to understand
the importance of brand equity among young consumers in Malaysia.
Keywords Malaysia, Brand image, Brand awareness, Brand loyalty, Brand equity,
Brand association
Paper type Research paper

1. Introduction
Brand is the most valuable asset for any company and has been widely recognized as
an essential reason for consumer choice which serve as a tool for consumers to check
the differentiation of the products and their uniqueness whereby it enrich consumers
trust and confidence in facilitating their decision-making process which alleviate some
of the problems associated with their experience and credence qualities (Aaker, 1991;
International Journal of Retail &
Distribution Management Chung et al., 2013; Emari et al., 2012; Huang and Sarigollu, 2011; Kremer and Viot,
Vol. 43 No. 3, 2015
pp. 276-292
2012). Brand equity is related to consumers place greater confidence in a particular
© Emerald Group Publishing Limited brand than competitors’ brands which enhances consumers’ loyalty and willingness
0959-0552
DOI 10.1108/IJRDM-02-2014-0024 to pay a premium price for the brand (Lassar et al., 1995). In essence, firms with high
 brand equity gain more competitive advantage and enjoy the opportunity for successful Young
extensions, resilience against competitors’ promotional pressures, and creation of barriers consumers’
to competitive entry (Ling, 2013).
Earlier research on brands by Chan et al. (2013), Fleck et al. (2012), Luijten and
insights on
Reijnders (2009), Tantiseneepong et al. (2012), and Thwaites et al. (2012) were conducted brand equity
in non-Asian countries whereby results generated are less likely to be comparable
to Asian countries like Malaysia. Further, little attention has been dedicated to 277
understanding factors such as brand association, brand loyalty, brand awareness,
and brand image that influence brand equity in Malaysia, particularly among young
consumers. Jacob and Isaac (2008) stated that university students, i.e. young consumers,
are among the highest contributors to the increasing number of smartphone sales, the
Downloaded by UNIVERSITI MALAYSIA SABAH At 00:26 23 February 2015 (PT)

main users of social media, and highly expose to wide array of product brands. They often
look at web sites, check e-mail and spend much of their time on social networking sites
such as Facebook, MySpace, Twitter and LinkedIn most often via their smartphones
(Norazah and Norbayah, 2013; Peterson and Low, 2011). Thus, this study aims to examine
the effects of brand association, brand loyalty, brand awareness, and brand image on
brand equity among young consumers. The idiosyncratic contribution of this research
arises from integration of the effects of these factors on brand equity which the study
enhanced with additional information to narrow the research gap. The research makes
a novel empirical contribution and provides useful insights by testing the proposed
theoretical framework on young consumers in Malaysia.
The paper is organized as follows: the next section presents an overview of relevant
literature and then proceeds to outline the proposed model. The ensuing section
describes the methodology used to conduct the research and answer research
objectives. Then, data analysis and discussion of findings are detailed. The final section
concludes on the research findings and summarizes the implications of the study with
directions for future research.

2. Literature review and research hypotheses

Factors such as brand association, brand loyalty, brand awareness, brand image,
and brand equity are further elaborated in this section, which are based on guiding
principle of Aaker (1991) Model (see Figure 1). Foregoing research by Chan et al. (2013),
Fleck et al. (2012), Luijten and Reijnders (2009), Tantiseneepong et al. (2012), and
Thwaites et al. (2012) found that a consumer who has a positive perception of the brand,
will be inclined to develop a greater willingness to purchase the product and subsequently
actively seek out the product in a store. Undeniably, attitudes positively affect customers’
intention to spread positive word-of-mouth commendation and willingly pay more for the
products (Choi et al., 2009; Han et al., 2009, 2011; Han and Kim, 2010).

2.1 Brand association

Brand association is related to information on what is in the customer’s mind about the
brand, either positive or negative, connected to the node of the brain memory (Emari

Brand Equity

Figure 1.
Brand Awareness Perceived Quality of Brand Brand Association Brand Loyalty Aaker (1991) model
 IJRDM et al., 2012). Brand association acts as an information collecting tool to execute brand
43,3 differentiation and brand extension (Osselaer and Janiszewski, 2001). Principally, any
information come across in brand association is connected to the brand name in
consumer recall, and reflect the brand’s image (Keller, 1993; Romaniuk and Sharp,
2003). The higher the brand associations in the product, the more it will be remembered
by the consumer and be loyal towards the brand. Previous research by Pouromid and
278 Iranzadeh (2012) shows that the relationship between brand association and brand
equity is positive and significant. Based on the above, the following hypothesis is
developed:
H1. Brand association has a positive impact on brand equity.
2.2 Brand loyalty
Downloaded by UNIVERSITI MALAYSIA SABAH At 00:26 23 February 2015 (PT)

Brand loyalty is related to the users’ repetitive buying behaviour over time with a
positively biased emotive, evaluative and/or behavioural tendency towards a branded,
labelled or graded alternative or product choice ( Jagdish and Sheth, 1974). Integrated
marketing communications plays indispensable role in convincing consumers’ brand
loyalty (Šerić and Gil-Saura, 2012). Consumers rebuying or repatronizing a preferred
product consistently has initiated repetitive purchasing of the same-brand or same
brand-set (Luarn and Lin, 2003). Likewise, brand loyalty influences their purchasing
decisions to the same product (Ahmed, 2011; Huang and Huddleston, 2009; Lam, 2007;
Martenson, 2007). In other words, they become loyal with their preferred product
brands and stick to well-known brand names (Sun et al., 2004), as well as used it for
social recognition (Manrai et al., 2001). Consumers developed brand loyalty by creating
a positive output of brand equity which positively engenders brand preference over
other brands (Atilgan et al., 2005; Binninger, 2008; Ling, 2013; Vogel et al., 2008; Zhang
et al., 2014). Hence, the following hypothesis is posited:
H2. Brand loyalty has a positive impact on brand equity.
2.3 Brand awareness
Brand awareness is how consumers associate the brand with the particular product
that they aim to own. Brand awareness is indispensable for the communications
process to emerge i.e., a top-of-the-mind awareness (Macdonald and Sharp, 2003;
Netemeyer et al., 2004). Consumer receives brand awareness via effective marketing
communication channel such as television, hand phone and online advertising as it give
assurance of product quality and its credibility which helps to reduce risk in product
evaluation and selection while buying a product (Aaker, 1996; Buil et al., 2013; Keller
and Lehmann, 2003; Rubio et al., 2014). Brand awareness significantly impacts
consumer decision making where consumers generally use it as a decision heuristic
which benefits the management of customer-based brand equity (Chung et al., 2013;
Huang and Sarigollu, 2011; Norazah, 2013a). Indeed, brand awareness has direct effects
on brand’s equity (Pouromid and Iranzadeh, 2012). Thus, the following hypothesis is
postulated:
H3. Brand awareness has a positive impact on brand equity.
2.4 Brand image
Brand image is related to the consumers’ use of the brand to reflect their symbolic
meaning of consumption and identity in self-expression (Lau and Phau, 2007).
Consumers ascribe high quality to esteemed brands (Rubio et al., 2014). Brand image
that is familiar to consumer eye can help the companies to host new brands and pick up
 the sales of current brands (Burt and Davies, 2010; Diallo et al., 2013; Martenson, 2007; Young
Wu et al., 2011). Consumer’s awareness of brand image with green marketing elements consumers’
influences consumer’s purchasing decision of green product where they used the
product brand image with green elements as the primary sources of information about
insights on
green products (Norazah, 2013a). They are unlikely to purchase green products if they brand equity
unfamiliar with the brand image (Norazah, 2013b). Consumers also regularly associate
the brands with celebrities or famous historical figures (Lau and Phau, 2007). Besides, 279
integrated marketing communications and word of mouth strongly influence brand
image (Romaniuk and Sharp, 2003; Šerić and Gil-Saura, 2012). In another study,
researchers like Faircloth et al. (2001), Rubio et al. (2014), and Vahie and Paswan (2006)
affirmed that brand image has a positive effect on brand equity. Hence, this study
Downloaded by UNIVERSITI MALAYSIA SABAH At 00:26 23 February 2015 (PT)

proposes:
H4. Brand image has a positive impact on brand equity.
The proposed theoretical framework is illustrated in Figure 2.

3. Research methodology
Data for this study were collected via a self-administered questionnaire. Out of 250
questionnaires distributed and restrained among full time students in a public
university in Penang, Malaysia within a two week period (from 16 July 2013 to 30 July
2013), 200 questionnaires were gathered with 80 per cent response rate utilizing the
convenience sampling technique. This sample size is reasonable as Roscoe (1975) stated
that the sample size between 30-500 samples is considered satisfactory. The study sample
included those who were young consumers among full time students, were holding
smartphone and were considered as members of a digital generation who actively
involved in online social networking and had experience purchasing products on types of
favourite brands either Adidas, Nike, Puma, or Levi’s in the past one year. The brands’
selection must be founded based on specific criteria like casual wear or sport attires and
belonging to a single sector of analysis. Their participation is purely voluntary.
The structured close-ended questionnaire comprises three sections. Section A consisted
of demographic profile, gender, age, race and school. Section B required the respondents to

Brand
Association
H1

Brand H2
Loyalty
Brand Equity

H3

Brand
Awareness
H4

Figure 2.
Brand Proposed
Image
theoretical
framework
 IJRDM provide responses on their personal experiences with the brand product itself. Section C
43,3 examined the factors affecting the brand equity, which were adapted from Ling (2013) and
all the items were modified according to the domain of the study by including aspects of
social media rather than traditional media in the question items. The questionnaire items,
as shown in Appendix, were measured on a five-point Likert Scale ranging from 1
(strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree).
280 Data were analysed using descriptive statistics, factor analysis, correlation
analysis, and multiple regression analysis via the computer programme known as
Statistical Package for Social Sciences version 21. Factor analysis is set out to
categorize and summarize the related information to a smaller set of underlying
factors, while Pearson correlations are executed to check the correlations between
Downloaded by UNIVERSITI MALAYSIA SABAH At 00:26 23 February 2015 (PT)

the variables. Further, multiple regression analysis is performed to examine the

effects of independent variables (i.e. brand association, brand loyalty, brand
awareness, and brand image) on dependent variable (i.e. brand equity among young
consumers).

4. Analysis and results

Table I presents the distribution of respondents’ demographic characteristics. Out of
200 respondents, 60 per cent were female and 40 per cent were male. Respondents
were mainly Chinese. All of the respondents were young consumers where more than
three-quarters of them (83 per cent) were 21-25 years old, and 17 per cent were 18-20 years
old. This means that the survey was conducted on a population of scholarly young
consumers who were very open and literate to information technology and more likely to
purchase newly introduced product.
4.1 Consumer experience of brand product
Table II displays respondents’ experiences with brand product. More than half of the
respondents (66 per cent) have spent between RM100 and RM400 to buy a brand
product in a year. In terms of frequency of purchasing brand product, about
three-quarters of the respondents (72 per cent) have purchased brand products two to
six times in a year and these young consumers more preferred Adidas to Nike, Puma,
and Levi’s in product selection, of which these brand are referred on as types of
favourite brands preferred by youngsters worldwide, including Malaysians and
belonging to a single sector of analysis.

Frequency %
Gender
Male 81 40.5
Female 119 59.5
Age
18-20 years old 33 16.5
21-25 years old 167 83.5
Race
Malay 59 29.5
India 22 11.0
Table I. Chinese 56 28.0
Demographic profile Bumiputra 49 24.5
of respondent Others 14 7.0
 Frequency %
Young
consumers’
Money spent for buying brand product in one year
Less than RM50 26 13.0 insights on
RM100-RM200 72 36.0 brand equity
RM300-RM400 60 30.0
RM500 and above 42 21.0
281
Frequency of buying product in one year
2-3 times 100 50.0
4-6 times 43 21.5
7 and above times 57 28.5
Downloaded by UNIVERSITI MALAYSIA SABAH At 00:26 23 February 2015 (PT)

Type of favourite brand

Nike 52 26.0 Table II.
Puma 13 6.5 Consumer prior
Adidas 109 54.5 experience on
Levi’s 26 13.0 brand product

4.2 Construct validity

The construct validity was evaluated via factor analysis using principal component
analysis with varimax rotations. Factor analysis, a data reduction technique, is
deployed to reduce a large number of variables to a smaller set of underlying factors,
which categorize and summarize the needed particulars contained in the variables.
Principal component analysis with varimax rotation was chosen as the extraction method
to the test the validity of the constructs for the 20 items. The Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin (KMO)
measure of sampling adequacy was used to confirming the appropriateness of proceeding
with the analysis to reduce the number of items, and identify the dimensions of latent
variables. Any item that failed to load on a single factor at 0.50 or less will be dropped but
there was none of items were dropped in this analysis. The factor analysis process of
dropping an item was repeated until all items loaded at 0.50 or greater on one and only one
factor (Hair et al., 2010). Results of factor analysis for brand association, brand loyalty,
brand awareness, brand image, and brand equity are shown below.z
4.3 Brand association
The KMO measure of the sampling adequacy for the brand association factor was 0.735
and none of five statements were dropped from the analysis since the factor loadings
W0.50 (see Table III). The Bartlett test of sphericity was significant ( χ2 ¼ 183.049, po0.01).
Inspection of the anti-image of the correlation matrix was well beyond the acceptable level
of 0.50. There was only single factor was extracted with the eigenvalue ¼ 2.358, which was
larger than 1, and 47.150 per cent of the variance has been explained. Rotation was not
necessary for this case, as only a single factor extracted. This single factor was used for
further analysis. All five brand association statements which were rated positively includes
“I trust the company who owns the particular product/brand that appeared in the social
media” (0.771), “This particular product/brand that appeared in the social media is familiar to
me” (0.689), “There are reasons to buy this particular product/brand over the competing
product/brand that appeared in the social media” (0.678), “This particular product/
brand that appeared in the social media has its own personality” (0.665), and “This particular
product/brand is different in comparison with the other competing product/brand that
appeared in the social media” (0.622). The first emerged as the most domineering item in
this factor as compared to the four remaining items.
 IJRDM Measure Loadings
43,3
I trust the company who owns the particular product/brand that appeared in
the social media 0.771
This particular product/brand that appeared in the social media is familiar to me 0.689
There are reasons to buy this particular product/brand over the competing
product/brand that appeared in the social media 0.678
282 This particular product/brand that appeared in the social media has its own personality 0.665
This particular product/brand is different in comparison with the other competing
Table III. product/brand that appeared in the social media 0.622
Factor loading for Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin measure of the sampling adequacy 0.735
brand association Percentage of variance explained 47.150
Downloaded by UNIVERSITI MALAYSIA SABAH At 00:26 23 February 2015 (PT)

4.4 Brand loyalty

There were five items contained in the brand loyalty factor. Principal component
analysis was used in this factor analysis with 48.737 per cent of variance and an
eigenvalue of 2.437. As illustrated in Table IV, KMO measure of the sampling adequacy
for this factor was 0.759 and all five statements had factor loading larger than 0.50
without any exception. The Bartlett test of sphericity was significant ( χ2 ¼ 191.787,
p o 0.01). Inspection of the anti-image of the correlation matrix was also well above the
acceptable level of 0.50. There was only single factor with the eigenvalue W 1 was
extracted. Rotation was not necessary for this case, as only a single factor extracted.
This single factor was used for further analysis. Specifically, the factor loadings for all
items range from 0.659 to 0.728 exceeded 0.50, a threshold suggested by Hair et al.
(2010). The most important statements claimed by the respondents was “I am satisfied
with product/brand that appeared in the social media” (0.728), followed by “I would
recommend this particular product/brand to others through the social media” (0.711)
and “I will not switch to another product/brand that appeared in the social media next
time” (0.711). The least important statements was “I regularly refer this particular
product/brand through the social media.” (0.659).

4.5 Brand awareness

There were five statements loaded in brand awareness factor. Table V depicts that all
items loadings range between 0.660 and 0.740, which was above the benchmark value of
0.50. The first refers to statement “I know how this particular product/brand looks
like” and the latter refers to statement “I can quickly recall symbol or logo of the
particular product/brand that appeared in the social media”. The ensuing vital item is
“I aware this particular product/brand that appeared in the social media”

Measure Loadings
I am satisfied with product/brand that appeared in the social media 0.728
I would recommend this particular product/brand to others through the social media 0.711
I will not switch to another product/brand that appeared in the social media next time 0.711
I usually use this particular product/brand as my first choice in comparison with the
other product/brand 0.680
Table IV. I regularly refer this particular product/brand through the social media 0.659
Factor loading for Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin measure of the sampling adequacy 0.759
brand loyalty Percentage of variance explained 48.737
 Young
Measure Loadings
consumers’
I can quickly recall symbol or logo of the particular product/brand that appeared in the insights on
social media 0.740
Some characteristics of the particular product/brand that appeared in the social media come brand equity
to my mind quickly 0.710
I aware this particular product/brand that appeared in the social media 0.700
I can recognize this particular product/brand in comparison with the other competing 283
product/brand that appeared in the social media 0.682
I know how this particular product/brand looks like 0.660 Table V.
Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin measure of the sampling adequacy 0.766 Factor loading for
Percentage of variance explained 48.864 brand awareness
Downloaded by UNIVERSITI MALAYSIA SABAH At 00:26 23 February 2015 (PT)

(loadings ¼ 0.700), followed by “I can recognize this particular product/brand

in comparison with the other competing product/brand that appeared in the social
media.” (loadings ¼ 0.682). The Bartlett test of sphericity was significant
( χ2 ¼ 190.043, p o 0.01) and the KMO measure of the sampling adequacy was
greater than 0.50, which was 0.766. Inspection of the anti-image of the correlation
matrix was also well above the acceptable level of 0.50. There was only single factor
with the eigenvalue W 1 was extracted, and 48.864 per cent of the variance has been
explained. Rotation was not necessary for this case, as only a single factor extracted.
This single factor was used for further analysis.

4.6 Brand image

The brand image factor comprised three items and no items were deleted as all loadings
exceed the threshold value of 0.50, suggested by Hair et al. (2010) (see Table VI).
The Bartlett test of sphericity was significant ( χ2 ¼ 207.240, p o 0.01). Inspection of the
anti-image of the correlation matrix was also well exceeding the acceptable level of
0.50. There was only single factor with the eigenvalue bigger than 1 was extracted,
and 72.663 per cent of the variance has been explained. The Kaiser-Mayer-Olkin
measure of sampling adequacy ¼ 0.691 which exceeds 0.50 with total explained
variance 2.180, hence apposite to perform factor analysis. Rotation was not necessary
for this case, as only a single factor extracted. This single factor was used for further
analysis. Three item measurement ranges from 0.830 to 0.892 and all items have
loadings more than 0.50, thus corroborating that the constructs are one-dimensional
and factorially idiosyncratic. The first refers to statement “This particular
product/brand has a differentiated image in comparison with the other product/brand”
and the latter refers to statement “This particular product/brand is well established”
which was the most vital item in this factor.

Measure Loadings
This particular product/brand is well established 0.892
This particular product/brand has a clean image 0.834
This particular product/brand has a differentiated image in comparison with the other
product/brand 0.830 Table VI.
Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin measure of the sampling adequacy 0.691 Factor loading for
Percentage of variance explained 72.663 brand image
 IJRDM 4.7 Brand equity
43,3 Table VII indicates that the Bartlett test of sphericity was significant ( χ2 ¼ 120.168,
p o 0.01) and the Kaiser-Meyer Olkin measures of the sampling adequacy was far
superior to 0.50, which was 0.796 signifying sufficient inter-correlations. Igbaria et al.
(1995) noted that only variables with the item loading more than 0.50 and cross loading
less than 0.35 were concluded to have a unique relationship with the factor. Inspection
284 of the anti-image of the correlation matrix was also well exceeding the acceptable level
of 0.50. There was only single factor was extracted with the eigenvalue ¼ 1.244 due to
meeting the benchmark value of above 1. Further, there was 62.222 per cent of the
variance has been explained. Rotation was not necessary for this case, as only a single
factor extracted. This single factor was used for further analysis. Results revealed that
Downloaded by UNIVERSITI MALAYSIA SABAH At 00:26 23 February 2015 (PT)

brand equity factor consisted of two items. All items had factor loading greater than
0.50, with none of the items was dropped from the analysis. Both items, i.e. “It makes
sense to buy this purchased brand instead of any other brand, even if they are the
same”, and “Even if another brand has the same features as this purchased brand,
I would prefer to buy this brand” had factor loadings 0.789.

4.8 Reliability analysis

Reliability analysis is used to measure the internal consistency of the scales via
Cronbach’s α. All constructs had no problems in reliabilities if the Cronbach’s α values
exceeded the criterion of 0.700 (Hair et al., 2010). Table VIII depicts that all variables’
Cronbach’s α range between 0.703 to 0.812 which is above the cut-off value of 0.70,
implying the survey instrument is reliable to measure all constructs consistently and
free from random error.

4.9 Correlation analysis

Pearson correlations are performed to check the correlation between the five variables
(i.e. brand association, brand loyalty, brand awareness, brand image, and brand
equity). The average score of the multi-items for a construct was computed and the
score was used in correlation analysis and multiple regressions. Lind et al. (2010) stated

Measure Loadings
It makes sense to buy this purchased brand instead of any other brand, even if they are
the same 0.789
Even if another brand has the same features as this purchased brand, I would prefer to
Table VII. buy this brand 0.789
Factor loading for Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin measure of the sampling adequacy 0.796
brand equity Percentage of variance explained 62.222

Variable No. of item Cronbach’s α

Brand association 5 0.719
Brand loyalty 5 0.735
Brand awareness 5 0.738
Table VIII. Brand image 3 0.812
Reliability analysis Brand equity 2 0.703
 that the correlations is strong when the value is r ¼ 0.50 to 1.0 or r ¼ −0.50 to −1.0, Young
indicate a highly dependable relationships. Table IX detailed that the inter-correlations consumers’
between brand association, brand loyalty, brand awareness, and brand image with the
brand equity were significant at the 0.01 level and were positively correlated, ranging
insights on
0.343 to 0.772. Brand awareness having the strongest correlation with brand equity brand equity
(i.e. r ¼ 0.772, p o 0.01), followed by brand image (r ¼ 0.731, p o 0.01), brand
association (r ¼ 0.619, p o 0.01), and brand loyalty (r ¼ 0.343, p o 0.01). Hence, there 285
is no multicollinearity problem detected in this research. Further, the means for all
constructs range from 3.538 to 3.775 on a five-point Likert scale of 1 ¼ strongly
disagree to 5 ¼ strongly agree.
Downloaded by UNIVERSITI MALAYSIA SABAH At 00:26 23 February 2015 (PT)

4.10 Effects of brand association, brand loyalty, brand awareness, and brand image
on brand equity
Multiple regressions were performed with brand equity entered as the dependent
variable, and brand association, brand loyalty, brand awareness, and brand image as
independent variables. The regression output is shown in Table X. The adjusted R2 of
0.48 indicated that the independent variables explained 48 per cent of the variance
of the dependent variable. The F value of 72.553 is significant at the level of 0.001, which
indicates that the model is appropriate and fits the collected data. The collinearity
statistics showing each of the variance inflation factor (VIF) values below ten and
tolerance values above 0.10, validated that there were no multicollinearity issues among
independent variables. Thus, the model fit the collected data.
A closer examination of the standardized β coefficients of the multiple regressions
revealed that all posited hypotheses were supported at p o 0.05. More specifically, H1
posited that brand association has a positive impact on brand equity. Table X
demonstrated that the results were significant ( β1 ¼ 0.240, t-value ¼ 3.302, p o 0.05).
Thus, H1 was sustained and brand association does have an impact on brand equity

1 2 3 4 5 Mean SD Skewness Kurtosis

(1) Brand awareness 1 3.773 0.546 0.166 0.293
(2) Brand loyalty 0.471** 1 3.573 0.599 0.182 0.348
(3) Brand association 0.544** 0.592** 1 3.683 0.538 0.084 0.075
(4) Brand image 0.564** 0.485** 0.569** 1 3.775 0.68 0.223 0.628
(5) Brand equity 0.772** 0.343** 0.619** 0.731** 1 3.538 0.551 0.036 0.404 Table IX.
Note: **Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (two-tailed) Correlation analysis

Collinearity statistics
Standardized β coefficients t Sig. Tolerance VIF
Brand association 0.240* 3.302 0.021 0.514 1.944 Table X.
Brand loyalty 0.231* 3.436 0.043 0.603 1.659 Effects of brand
Brand awareness 0.424* 3.905 0.017 0.594 1.684 association, brand
Brand image 0.369* 3.890 0.036 0.570 1.755 loyalty, brand
Adjusted R2 0.48 awareness, and
F value 72.553* brand image on
Notes: VIF, variance inflation factor; constant, 0.627 with p ¼ 0.015. *p o 0.05 brand equity
 IJRDM among young consumers. H2 proposed that brand loyalty had a positive impact on
43,3 brand equity. Results were also significant ( β2 ¼ 0.231, t-value ¼ 3.436, p o 0.05),
implying H2 was maintained. Next, H3 hypothesized that brand awareness had
a positive impact on brand equity. A significant result was also found ( β3 ¼ 0.424,
t-value ¼ 3.905, p o 0.05). Its p-value was o 0.05, implying H3 was supported by the
data. Further, H4 posited that brand image had a positive impact on brand equity.
286 Results were β4 ¼ 0.369, t-value ¼ 3.890. Its p o 0.05, hence, H4 was significant and
secured. Based on these figures, the highest standardised β coefficient appeared for
brand awareness, followed by brand image, brand association, and brand loyalty,
respectively. That is, if young consumers attach higher brand association, brand
loyalty, brand awareness, or brand image to a product, the possibility that they will
Downloaded by UNIVERSITI MALAYSIA SABAH At 00:26 23 February 2015 (PT)

choose the product brand is higher, supporting H1-H4.

5. Discussion
This study examined the effects of brand association, brand loyalty, brand awareness, and
brand image on brand equity among young consumers in Malaysia. Empirical results via
multiple regressions confirmed that brand association, brand loyalty, brand awareness,
and brand image jointly influence brand equity among young consumers in Malaysia.
More specifically, results demonstrated that the relationship between brand association
and brand equity as hypothesized in H1 is positive and significant which supports the
results of Pouromid and Iranzadeh (2012). Young consumers trust the company that owns
a particular product or brand that appears in the social media and is familiar to them.
While browsing the social media using smartphones, they notice that a particular product
or brand has its own personality and differs from other competing products or brands.
Further investigation of the study discovered that brand equity is also affected by
brand loyalty, which sustained H2 (see Table X). Results are in tandem with prior
research findings (Atilgan et al., 2005; Binninger, 2008; Ling, 2013; Vogel et al., 2008;
Zhang et al., 2014). Young consumers usually put the familiar and product or brand as
their first choice for evaluation and selection in comparison with other products or
brands to minimize the perceived risks. Based on positive product usage experience,
they would recommend this product or brand to others through the social media via
private message. Encouragingly, when they are satisfied with a product or brand that
appears in the social media, they will not switch to another product or brand next time.
Social influences such as pressure from friends and family also influence students’ use
of social media via smartphones (Norazah and Norbayah, 2013).
Next, hypothesis three postulates that brand awareness significantly influences
brand equity among young consumers. The results showed that brand awareness
predominantly affects brand equity in the sense that young customers’ decisions to buy
a product or brand depends on their awareness of the product or brand knowledge.
These young consumers get input and awareness of the particular product or brand
from the social media. They can clearly recognize the particular product or brand in
comparison to competing products or brands and know how it looks and its
characteristics from the social media. Indeed, they can quickly recall the symbol or logo
of the particular product or brand as seen in the advertisements available in the social
media. The findings are consistent with preceding research (i.e. Chung et al., 2013;
Huang and Sarigollu, 2011; Pouromid and Iranzadeh, 2012) where brands are more
likely to be considered or chosen based on the consumers’ brand awareness.
Likewise, the results of multiple regression analysis for H4 as presented in Table X
also has significant impact on brand equity, and in the anticipated direction, which is
 brand image ( p o 0.05). Results confirmed that young consumers who had some Young
concern about brand image exhibited positive brand equity. The results are consistent consumers’
with Faircloth et al. (2001), Rubio et al. (2014), and Vahie and Paswan (2006) who
indicated that brand image has a positive effect on brand equity. When the product has
insights on
positive brand image, young consumers are aware that the particular product or brand brand equity
is well established and has a unique, differentiated image in comparison with other
products or brands. Further, an intention to buy a brand is based on a consumer’s 287
attitude towards the brand image as well as the influence of social norms and other
people’s expectations (Jamil and Wong, 2010).

6. Conclusion and recommendations

Downloaded by UNIVERSITI MALAYSIA SABAH At 00:26 23 February 2015 (PT)

Results have shed some light on which factors strongly influence brand equity among
young consumers, which is not much covered in the literature within the Malaysian
context. Findings would help marketers and practitioners to formulate strategies to
enhance their brand equity in order to obtain competitive advantage and business
sustainability, particularly among young consumer markets. Results of multiple
regressions concluded that all postulated hypotheses were supported of which brand
awareness has the strongest effect on brand equity among young consumers, followed
by brand image.
Empirically, marketers and practitioners should put more emphasis on brand
awareness in inducing brand equity among young consumers and should make use of
technology in the social networking media such as Facebook, Twitter, etc. in order to
improve the brand awareness of young consumers of through the presentation of
creative and informative product advertisements that could stimulate their purchase
intention based on the effective message content. It is also noted that a company with a
favourable brand image gains a better position in the market and can sustain
competitive advantage and enlarge its market share (Park et al., 1986). Further, earlier
research by Chung et al. (2013), Huang and Sarigollu (2011), Norazah (2013a) found that
consumer awareness of brand image with green marketing elements affects consumers’
purchasing decisions of green products when the product brand image with green
elements was used as the primary source of information about green products.
Next, it is worthy to note that young consumers’ brand equity is also affected by
factors such as brand association and brand loyalty. Hence, brand association and
brand loyalty are the other vital factors for consideration by marketers and
practitioners in gaining young customer positive acceptance of the product or brand.
Prior research by Norazah and Norbayah (2013) noted that students are concerned
whether their friends like the brand of smartphone they are currently using and would
buy a smartphone if it helped them to fit in with their social group in the social media.
Hence, marketers and practitioners may need to give emphasis to loyalty programmes
in the social media in an attempt to retain customers and foster business sustainability.
Moser and Uzzell (2003) stated that the media play a major role in educating consumers
on the seriousness of environmental problems. Young consumers strongly and actively
use knowledge in evaluating products during purchasing decisions (Norazah, 2013b).
Results are helpful for better market segmentation, targeting and positioning of
product or brand and could promote consumer demand.
Importantly, the empirical findings offer academic contributions to the existing
body of knowledge of consumer behaviour. First, the sophisticated quantitative data
analyses used will eventually allow future researchers to explicate the contribution of
the current study to understand the importance of brand equity among young
 IJRDM consumers in Malaysia. However, the size of the sample coverage is too small.
43,3 Thus, careful attention should be paid in generalizing the implications, findings and the
discussion to other studies. Second, the results of this study add a new forward motion
to the findings of prior studies on the effects of brand association, brand loyalty, brand
awareness, and brand image on brand equity among young consumers in Malaysian
context. Finally, further research could replicate the current framework to input
288 additional variables like mediating variables and moderating variables.
This empirical study has several limitations. First, research was conducted among
200 full time students who study in a public university in Penang, Malaysia which
infers the sample used is very narrow to generalize the whole population in Malaysia.
Further research is deemed desirable to expand the sample size to improve the
Downloaded by UNIVERSITI MALAYSIA SABAH At 00:26 23 February 2015 (PT)

generalizability issue. Finally, the findings of this study depend largely on the honesty
of the respondents to provide answers to the questionnaire that covered brand association,
brand loyalty, brand awareness, brand image and brand equity, besides questions on
demographic characteristics and experience of purchasing brand products.
Future research can be carried out to advance the analysis by using multivariate
data analysis such as structural equation modelling technique in order to investigate
the hypothesized relationships simultaneously with confirming the factor via confirmatory
factor analysis, check the model fitness via goodness of fit indices, and examine the
discriminant and convergent validity at first hand.

References
Aaker, D.A. (1991), Managing Brand Equity: Capitalizing on the Value of Brand Name, The Free
Press, New York, NY.
Aaker, D.A. (1996), “Measuring brand equity across products and markets”, California
Management Review, Vol. 38 No. 3, pp. 102-120.
Ahmed, H.T. (2011), “The impact of distribution intensity on brand preference and brand
loyalty”, International Journal of Marketing Studies, Vol. 3 No. 3, pp. 56-66.
Atilgan, E., Aksoy, S. and Akinci, S. (2005), “Determinants of the brand equity: a verification
approach in the beverage industry in Turkey”, Marketing Intelligence & Planning, Vol. 23
No. 3, pp. 237-248.
Binninger, A.S. (2008), “Exploring the relationships between retail brands and consumer
store loyalty”, International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management, Vol. 36 No. 2,
pp. 94-110.
Buil, I., de Chernatony, L. and Martínez, E. (2013), “Examining the role of advertising and
sales promotions in brand equity creation”, Journal of Business Research, Vol. 66 No. 1,
pp. 115-122.
Burt, S.L. and Davies, K. (2010), “From the retail brand to the retailer as a brand: themes and
issues in retail branding research”, International Journal of Retail & Distribution
Management, Vol. 38 Nos 11/12, pp. 865-878.
Chan, K., Ng, Y.L. and Luk, E.K. (2013), “Impact of celebrity endorsement in advertising on brand
image among Chinese adolescents”, Young Consumers, Vol. 14 No. 2, pp. 167-179.
Choi, G., Parsa, H.G., Sigala, M. and Putrevu, S. (2009), “Consumers’ environmental concerns and
behaviours in the lodging industry: a comparison between Greece and the United States”,
Journal of Quality Assurance in Hospitality & Tourism, Vol. 10 No. 2, pp. 93-112.
Chung, Y.J., Lee, J. and Heath, L.R. (2013), “Public relations aspects of brand attitudes and
customer activity”, Public Relations Review, Vol. 39 No. 5, pp. 432-439.
 Diallo, F.M., Chandon, J.L., Cliquet, G. and Philippe, J. (2013), “Factors influencing consumer Young
behaviour towards store brands: evidence from the French market”, International Journal
of Retail & Distribution Management, Vol. 41 No. 6, pp. 422-441.
consumers’
Emari, H., Jafari, A. and Mogaddam, M. (2012), “The mediatory impact of brand loyalty and
insights on
brand image on brand equity”, African Journal of Business Management, Vol. 6 No. 17, brand equity
pp. 5692-5701.
Faircloth, J.B., Capella, L.M. and Alford, B. (2001), “The effect of brand attitude and brand image 289
on brand equity”, Journal of Marketing Theory & Practice, Vol. 9 No. 3, pp. P61-P76.
Fleck, N., Korchia, M. and Roy, I.L. (2012), “Celebrities in advertising: looking for congruence or
likability?”, Psychology and Marketing, Vol. 29 No. 9, pp. 651-662.
Hair, J.F., Black, B., Babin, B., Anderson, R.E. and Tatham, R.L. (2010), Multivariate Data
Downloaded by UNIVERSITI MALAYSIA SABAH At 00:26 23 February 2015 (PT)

Analysis: A Global Perspective, Pearson Education Inc., Upper Saddle River, NJ.
Han, H., Hsu, L.T. and Lee, J.S. (2009), “Empirical investigation of the roles of attitudes
toward green behaviours, overall image, gender, and in hotel customers’ eco-friendly
decision making process”, International Journal of Hospitality Management, Vol. 28 No. 4,
pp. 519-528.
Han, H., Hsu, L.T., Lee, J.S. and Sheu, C. (2011), “Are lodging customers ready to go green? An
examination of attitudes, demographics, and eco-friendly intentions”, International Journal
of Contemporary Hospitality Management, Vol. 30 No. 2, pp. 345-355.
Han, H. and Kim, Y. (2010), “An investigation of green hotel customers’ decision formation:
developing an extended model of the theory of planned behaviour”, International Journal of
Hospitality Management, Vol. 29 No. 4, pp. 659-668.
Huang, Y. and Huddleston, P. (2009), “Retailer premium own-brands: creating customer loyalty
through own-brand products advantage”, International Journal of Retail & Distribution
Management, Vol. 37 No. 11, pp. 975-992.
Huang, R. and Sarigollu, E. (2011), “How brand awareness relates to market outcome, brand
equity, and the marketing mix”, Journal of Business Research, Vol. 65 No. 1, pp. 92-99.
Igbaria, M., Livari, J. and Maragahh, H. (1995), “Why do individuals use computer technology?
A finnish case study”, Information and Management, Vol. 29 No. 5, pp. 227-238.
Jacob, S.M. and Isaac, B. (2008), “The mobile devices and itsmobile learning usage analysis”,
Proceedings of the International Multiconference of Engineers and Computer Scientists,
Vol. 1, pp. 19-21.
Jagdish, N. and Sheth, C.W. (1974), “A theory of multidimensional brand loyalty”, Advances in
Consumer Research, Vol. 1 No. 1, pp. 449-459.
Jamil, B. and Wong, C.H. (2010), “Factors influencing repurchase intention of smartphones”,
Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 4 No. 12, pp. 289-294.
Keller, K.L. (1993), “Conceptualizing, measuring, and managing customer-based brand equity”,
Journal of Marketing, Vol. 57 No. 1, pp. 1-22.
Keller, K.L. and Lehmann, D.R. (2003), “How do brands create value?”, Marketing Management,
Vol. 12 No. 3, pp. 27-31.
Kremer, F. and Viot, C. (2012), “How store brands build retailer brand image”, International
Journal of Retail & Distribution Management, Vol. 40 No. 7, pp. 528-543.
Lam, D. (2007), “Cultural influence on proneness to brand loyalty”, Journal of International
Consumer Marketing, Vol. 19 No. 3, pp. 7-21.
Lau, K.C. and Phau, I. (2007), “Extending symbolic brands using their personality: examining
antecedents and implications towards brand image fit and brand dilution”, Psychology and
Marketing, Vol. 24 No. 5, pp. 421-444.
 IJRDM Lassar, W., Mittal, B. and Arun, S. (1995), “Measuring consumer based brand equity”,
Journal of Consumer Marketing, Vol. 12 No. 4, pp. 11-19.
43,3
Lind, D.A., Marchal, W.G. and Wathen, S.A. (2010), Basic Statistics for Business and Economics,
7th ed., McGraw-Hill, Illinois.
Ling, E.S. (2013), “The mediating effects of brand association, brand loyalty, brand image and
perceived quality on brand equity”, Asian Social Science, Vol. 9 No. 3, pp. 125-134.
290 Luarn, P. and Lin, H.H. (2003), “A customer loyalty model for e-service context”, Journal of
Electronic Commerce Research, Vol. 4 No. 4, pp. 157-167.
Luijten, T. and Reijnders, W. (2009), “The development of store brands and the store as a brand in
supermarkets in The Netherlands”, International Review of Retail, Distribution & Consumer
Research, Vol. 19 No. 1, pp. 45-58.
Downloaded by UNIVERSITI MALAYSIA SABAH At 00:26 23 February 2015 (PT)

Macdonald, E. and Sharp, B. (2003), “Management perceptions of the importance of brand

awareness as an indication of advertising effectiveness”, Marketing Bulletin, Vol. 14 No. 2,
pp. 1-11.
Manrai, L.A., Lascu, D.N., Manrai, A.K. and Babb, H.W. (2001), “A cross-cultural comparison of
style in Eastern European emerging markets”, International Marketing Review, Vol. 18
No. 3, pp. 270-285.
Martenson, R. (2007), “Corporate brand image, satisfaction and store loyalty: a study of the store
as a brand, store brands and manufacturer brands”, International Journal of Retail &
Distribution Management, Vol. 35 No. 7, pp. 544-555.
Moser, G. and Uzzell, D.L. (2003), “Environmental psychology”, in Millon, T., Lerner, M.J. and
Weiner, I.B. (Eds), Handbook of Psychology: Personality and Social Psychology, John Wiley
and Sons Inc., New York, NY.
Netemeyer, R.G., Krishan, B., Chris, P., Wang, G., Yagci, M., Dean, D., Ricks, J. and Wirdh, F.
(2004), “Developing and validating measure of facets of customer-based brand equity”,
Journal of Business Research, Vol. 57 No. 1, pp. 209-224.
Norazah, M.S. (2013a), “Green awareness effects on consumer’s purchasing decision:
some insights from Malaysia”, International Journal of Asia Pacific Studies, Vol. 9 No. 2,
pp. 49-63.
Norazah, M.S. (2013b), “Young consumer ecological behaviour: the effects of environmental
knowledge, healthy food, and healthy way of life with the moderation of gender and
age”, Management of Environmental Quality: An International Journal, Vol. 24 No. 6,
pp. 726-737.
Norazah, M.S. and Norbayah, M.S. (2013), “Dependency on smartphones: an analysis of structural
equation modelling”, Jurnal Teknologi (Social Sciences), Vol. 62 No. 1, pp. 49-55.
Osselaer, V. and Janiszewski, C. (2001), “Two ways of learning brand association”, Journal of
Consumer Research, Vol. 28 No. 2, pp. 202-223.
Park, C.W., Jaworski, B.J. and MacInnis, D.J. (1986), “Strategic brand concept-image
management”, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 50 No. 4, pp. 135-145.
Peterson, L. and Low, B. (2011), “Student attitudes towards mobile library services for
smartphone”, Journal of Library Hi Tech, Vol. 29 No. 3, pp. 412-423.
Pouromid, B. and Iranzadeh, S. (2012), “The evaluation of the factors affects on the brand equity
of Pars Khazar household appliances based on the vision of female consumer”, Middle-East
Journal of Scientific Research, Vol. 12 No. 8, pp. 1050-1055.
Rubio, N., Oubiña, J. and Villaseñor, N. (2014), “Brand awareness–brand quality inference and
consumer’s risk perception in store brands of food products”, Food Quality and Preference,
Vol. 32 No. 2014, pp. 289-298.
 Romaniuk, J. and Sharp, B. (2003), “Measuring brand perceptions: testing quantity and quality”, Young
Journal of Targeting, Measurement and Analysis for Marketing, Vol. 11 No. 3, pp. 218-229.
consumers’
Roscoe, J.T. (1975), Fundamental Research Statistics for the Behavioural Sciences, 2nd ed., Holt, insights on
Rinehart and Winston, New York, NY.
brand equity
Šerić, M. and Gil-Saura, I. (2012), “ICT, IMC, and brand equity in high-quality hotels of Dalmatia:
an analysis from guest perceptions”, Journal of Hospitality Marketing & Management,
Vol. 21 No. 8, pp. 821-851. 291
Sun, T., Horn, M. and Merritt, D. (2004), “Values and lifestyles of individualists and collectivists:
a study on Chinese, Japanese, British and US consumers”, Journal of Consumer Marketing,
Vol. 21 No. 5, pp. 318-331.
Tantiseneepong, N., Gorton, M. and White, J. (2012), “Evaluating responses to celebrity
Downloaded by UNIVERSITI MALAYSIA SABAH At 00:26 23 February 2015 (PT)

endorsements using projective techniques”, Qualitative Market Research: An International

Journal, Vol. 15 No. 1, pp. 57-69.
Thwaites, D., Lowe, B., Monkhouse, L.L. and Barnes, B.R. (2012), “The impact of negative
publicity on celebrity ad endorsements”, Psychology and Marketing, Vol. 29 No. 9,
pp. 663-673.
Vahie, A. and Paswan, A. (2006), “Private label brand image: its relationship with store image and
national brand”, International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management, Vol. 34 No. 1,
pp. 67-84.
Vogel, V., Evanschitzky, H. and Ramaseshan, B. (2008), “Customer equity drivers and future
sales”, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 72 No. 6, pp. 98-108.
Wu, C.S., Yeh, G.Y.Y. and Hsiao, C.R. (2011), “The effect of store image and service quality on
brand image and purchase intention for private label brands”, Australasian Marketing
Journal, Vol. 19 No. 1, pp. 30-39.
Zhang, S.S., van Doorn, J. and Leeflang, P.S.H. (2014), “Does the importance of value, brand and
relationship equity for customer loyalty differ between Eastern and Western cultures?”,
International Business Review, Vol. 23 No. 2014, pp. 284-292.

Appendix. Measurement of instruments

Brand association
This particular product/brand that appeared in the social media has its own personality.
This particular product/brand is different in comparison with the other competing
product/brand that appeared in the social media.
I trust the company who owns the particular product/brand that appeared in the social media.
This particular product/brand that appeared in the social media is familiar to me.
There are reasons to buy this particular product/brand over the competing product/brand that
appeared in the social media.
Brand loyalty
I regularly refer this particular product/brand through the social media.
I usually use this product/brand as my first choice in comparison with the other product/brand.
I would recommend this product/brand to others through the social media.
I will not switch to another product/brand that appeared in the social media next time.
I am satisfied with product/brand that appeared in the social media.
Brand awareness
I aware this particular product/brand that appeared in the social media.
I can recognize this particular product/brand in comparison with the other competing product/
brand that appeared in the social media.
I know how this particular product/brand looks like.
 IJRDM Some characteristics of the particular product/brand that appeared in the social media come to
my mind quickly.
43,3 I can quickly recall symbol or logo of the particular product/brand that appeared in the social media.
Brand image
This particular product/brand has a differentiated image in comparison with the other product/brand.
This particular product/brand has a clean image.
292 This particular product/brand is well established.
Brand equity
This particular product/brand is well established.
Even if another brand has the same features as this purchased brand, I would prefer to buy
this brand.
Downloaded by UNIVERSITI MALAYSIA SABAH At 00:26 23 February 2015 (PT)

About the authors

Dr Jumiati Sasmita is a Senior Lecturer at the Faculty of Economics, Universitas Riau. She has
successfully supervised several postgraduate students at MBA and PhD level. Her research interests
include Strategic Management, Consumer Behaviour, Marketing Management and areas related to
Marketing, and Management. She actively publishes articles in international journals.
Norazah Mohd Suki, Major (PA), is an Associate Professor at the Labuan School of
International Business & Finance, Universiti Malaysia Sabah, Labuan International Campus.
She has successfully supervised several postgraduate students at MBA and PhD level. Her research
interests include Electronic Marketing, E-Commerce, M-Commerce, Consumer Behaviour, Mobile
Learning and areas related to Marketing. She actively publishes articles in international journals.
She is the Editor-in-Chief to Labuan e-Journal of Muamalat & Society, a member in advisory board
for several outstanding journals. She has sound experiences as speaker to public and private
universities, government bodies on courses related to Structural Equation Modelling (SEM),
Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS), Research Methodology. Norazah Mohd Suki is the
corresponding author and can be contacted at: azahsuki@yahoo.com

For instructions on how to order reprints of this article, please visit our website:
www.emeraldgrouppublishing.com/licensing/reprints.htm
Or contact us for further details: permissions@emeraldinsight.com

View publication stats