Enhancing Relationships Through Online Brand Communities: Comparing Posters and Lurkers

ABSTRACT

This study establishes the importance of considering both posters (interactive members) and lurkers (non-interactive members) for a clearer understanding of online brand communities. Based on organizational support theory and social identity theory, this study proposes a model a model that illustrates the impacts of perceived brand support in brands’ online communities upon members’ community identity and brand trust, leading to their positive behaviors toward the brand (i.e., purchase intention, resistance to negative information, and positive word of mouth) and how these effects differ between posters and lurkers. Using structural equation modeling, results reveal that in firm-hosted online brand communities, perceived brand support (i.e., recognizing contributions, encouraging interactions, and providing quality information) relates to members’ satisfaction by fulfilling their socioemotional needs (community identity) and increases their brand trust. Furthermore, multigroup analyses indicate significant differences in the paths to brand trust between posters and lurkers. Brand knowledge, providing quality information, and encouraging members to interact drive brand trust for lurkers. For posters, trust is driven by their sense of community identity and encouraging members to interact. This research advances the literature on online brand communities by shedding light on the scant knowledge of lurkers in online communities. It demonstrates how perceived support from brands can improve both posters’ and lurkers’ relationships with the community and the brand itself. The findings provide actionable managerial recommendations regarding how brands can manage their relationships with all members (both posters and lurkers) in their online communities.

KEY WORDS AND PHRASES:

• Online lurkers
• online posters
• online brand communities
• organizational support theory
• community identity
• online trust
• brand management

Firms’ interactions with and influence on their customers have become ever more virtual. An online brand community (OBC) is a group of individuals who interact online, focusing on a particular brand as their shared interest [108]. Many companies develop and host OBCs, referred to as firm-hosted OBCs [122], which enable interactions between customers and the brand [34]. Social networking services on a company’s webpage such as Dell community or Apple community or official brands’ pages on Facebook and Instagram can be examples of these OBCs. OBCs provide the firm with the opportunity to create and disseminate brand-related content to their customers and so develop their brand engagement and trust at a reduced marketing cost [74]. The active nature of the interaction within OBCs (unlike passively receiving advertising) leads to building a stronger bond between customers and the brand and so an atmosphere of trust [10]. Trust is built by the customer believing the word of the brand (credibility) and believing that the brand is acting in their best interest (benevolence). A key goal of brands is to establish brand trust as engendering trust is likely to lead to positive behaviors toward the brand. Positive cognitive beliefs will lead customers to believe the brand is reliable, competent, and consistent [33, 110], and this, in turn, will strengthen their affective and emotional beliefs [54], leading them to believe that the brand will act on their best behalf [e.g., 19, 110]. The customer will then continue to purchase the brand and pass on positive information to others about it. Our article demonstrates that the OBC can help here.

Firm-hosted OBCs are rapidly growing in importance, volume, and size. Therefore, continued research into the nature of these and their effect on customers’ relationships with brands has become an important area for research [34, 56]. Although previous research signifies the value that firm-hosted online communities can provide for brands [e.g., 1, 65, 167], important gaps remain in this area. First, there is a major gap in determining the actual value of OBCs, as the impact of passive or non-interactive members, “lurkers,” has been largely neglected in previous research. Lurkers who make up the majority of members (~90%) of online communities observe the contributions made by active members, including heavy (~1%) and intermittent (~9%) contributors [90, 94]. This mirrors the general participation rates on social media, where the 1% (content creators), 9% (engagers), 90% (passive consumers) rule applies [95]. Most existing research investigating OBCs typically focuses on active members, popularly known as “posters.” As the idea of interaction is implicit in relationship-building theories, “lurkers,” who do not interact, are often dismissed as not being as valuable as posters. However, although lurkers do not visibly interact, they are the main audience of the community and might spend many hours in the community [90, 94]. Therefore, they are familiar and well informed, although they may never visibly post, interact, or reply directly [47]. Arguably, they still experience the interactions within the community, which affect their sense of social identity [108], and so their relationships with the brand. This means the perceived power of OBCs is built on a minority view (only active members) and so an unrepresentative sample of OBC members [145]. Thus, understanding and catering to the needs of lurkers is an increasingly important activity for firms [111]. Scholars and managers should understand how an OBC impacts its members’ (both posters and lurkers) trust and their behaviors toward the brand. What are the significant differences between lurkers and posters in their relationships with brands within OBCs? Do we need to “activate” lurkers to have positive outcomes from their memberships in OBCs? So far, very few studies have offered empirical insights into a better understanding of lurkers in OBCs [e.g., 92, 108]. Consequently, the nature and implications of how brands can improve both posters’ and lurkers’ trust remain unclear.

Second, considerable research on firm-hosted OBCs has focused on the drivers and consequences of members’ participation and interaction in such communities [e.g., 17, 23, 166]. However, less is known about the role of firms’ own efforts in their online communities and there is a limited understanding of online brand-enabled relationships in virtual contexts [153]. Since firm-hosted online communities offer brands the opportunity to create direct bonds and relationships with their customers [122], it is vital to investigate the possible impacts of brands’ support for their OBCs, on members’ trust in the brand.

Drawing on organizational support theory (OST) [49] and social identity theory (SIT) [142], this study responds to these limitations. According to OST, employees’ perception that the organization supports them, values their contributions, and cares about them is positively related to their trust in the organization [113] and sense of commitment and identification with the organization [48]. Moreover, according to SIT, group membership contributes to members’ self-definition, which has been counted as one of the main reasons for the existence of online communities and their members’ contributions [7, 12, 75, 108]. Following these theoretical foundations, this article explores whether, and under what conditions, the support provided by the firm/brand in its online community results in stronger members’ (both posters and lurkers) community identity and brand trust, two of the most consistent indicators of the presence of a community [109] and a strong, sustainable customer–brand relationship [6], respectively, which leads to positive behaviors toward the brand. We propose and empirically evaluate a comprehensive model of cultivating customers’ brand trust in OBCs by integrating elements of OST and SIT. Moreover, by conducting multiple-sample analyses and investigating the differences between posters and lurkers, our research sheds light on the significant differences between the drivers of posters and lurkers’ community identity and their brand trust in OBCs. This study responds to calls for research on investigating drivers of lurkers’ sense of identification in OBCs and the impact of their membership on their relationship with the brand [92, 108]. Our findings signify that lurkers do not need to be “activated” to have a strong relationship with the community and positive responses toward the brand. As opposed to previous research, our study reveals that receiving brand support in its online community and seeing the brand interactions with active members lead to lurkers’ strong sense of community identity and trust in the brand, which can then lead to their positive word of mouth (WOM), purchase intention, and resistance to negative information about the brand. Finally, this study is the first to demonstrate the suitability of adapting OST as a theoretical lens in explaining customers’ responses to perceived brand support in the specific context of OBCs and so extends the research in both OBCs and OST.

Theoretical Background and Model Development

Organizational Support Theory

Rooted in social exchange theory, organizational support theory (OST) proposes that employees’ contributions, commitment to their organization, and intentions to stay depend on their perceptions of how the organization treats them [48, 128]. This is because of the psychological mechanism of the formation of employees’ perceived organizational support, that is, employees’ general perception of the degree to which the organization values their contributions, cares for them, and can be trusted to provide essential resources [139].

According to OST, employees’ general belief that their work organization values their contributions and provides them with support is related to favorable outcomes for both employees and organizations. A highly perceived organizational support would meet employees’ needs for esteem, approval, and social identity and so strengthen their affective commitment to the organization and improve their job performance [48]. Former studies propose that dyadic interaction and communal exchange motivate organizational citizenship behavior [51]. In addition to organizational studies, OST has been applied to online communities, while members’ voluntary participation has been considered a typical form of organizational citizenship behavior [160, 161]. Yang et al. [160] applied OST to a typical education online community in Mainland China, while Ye et al. [161] used the theory in online knowledge communities. According to the best of our knowledge, OST has not been applied to the OBC context as yet.

Similarly, the firm-hosted OBC functions like a virtual form of organization [3, 57, 100] with its protocols and norms [123]. Just as employees form perceptions concerning their valuation by the organization [128], OBC members develop general views concerning the degree to which brands value their contributions to their online communities and support them. Thus, it is expected that OST could be applied to the OBC context as well.

Social Identity Theory

The research on online communities and specifically OBCs has grown over the last few years, and a social identity perspective has played a vital role in this development. Communities are identified based on identification among their members [106]. According to social identity theory (SIT), individuals endeavor for positive self-esteem and try to accomplish this by enriching their social identity and belonging to social groups [76, 158]. The underlying assumption of the theory is that group membership promotes self-definition, where people define themselves through both individual attributes and the collective attributes of the groups to which they belong [76].

Social identity can be defined as “that part of an individual’s self-concept which derives from his knowledge of his membership of a social group (or groups) together with the value and emotional significance attached to that membership,” according to Tajfel [143, p. 63]. This definition proposes a three-dimensional conceptualization of social identity, comprising a cognitive component (knowledge of group membership), an evaluative component (value of group membership), and an affective component (emotional significance attached to group membership) [20, 81]. This multidimensional conceptualization of social identity has been adapted in many studies [e.g., 12, 62, 79, 108, 147] and so in this study as well.

Individuals often choose brands based on the symbolic meaning associated with them. Being a member of a brand community provides an added channel of self-expression for its followers [38]. SIT has been applied in many studies of brand communities and has been considered one of the main reasons for the presence of these communities and their members’ participation [e.g., 7, 12, 30, 108, 154, 159, 163].

According to SIT, individuals will socially identify with communities and groups despite having no contact or interaction with specific members of the community [150]. The consumption of or preference toward a particular brand might demonstrate a common social identification or social category with which customers may associate themselves. Therefore, we expect that because lurkers consider themselves members of the admirers/consumers group of a brand, they will be attentive to signals that their group is treated well and receives support from the brand operating the online community. This will enhance their sense of belonging to the community and their relationship with the brand itself.

Role of Perceived Brand Support in OBCs

Within firm-hosted OBCs, trust, relationship building, and knowledge generation can be built by effective managerial support [132]. In line with reciprocal action theory, in an exchange relationship, actions taken by one party will be similarly reciprocated by the other party [48]. OST maintains that perceived organizational support meets employees’ need for affiliation, emotional support, esteem, and approval [128]. Built on the norm of reciprocity [63], this socioemotional needs fulfillment increases employees’ desire to help the organization succeed and so results in greater employee identification and commitment to the organization [104, 129]. Since perceived organizational support improves employees’ esteem and self-worth, including a social identity perspective is required to better understand the social exchange perspective of OST and its impact [104, 129]. SIT [73] suggests that individuals define themselves by self-categorizing into different groups [75]. By identifying with groups that are perceived positively, individuals maintain or enhance their self-esteem [144, 149]. Consequently, perceived organizational support improves the attractiveness of the organization by satisfying socioemotional needs, and so enhances the probability of employees’ identification with the organization [50, 104]. In addition, trust is the basis of social exchange relationships [22]; thus, activities implying trust in employees are associated with perceived organizational support [156], so in return employees trust their organization.

Similarly, in firm-hosted OBCs, when a brand makes the effort to provide high-quality information and encourage members to interact, it fulfills members’ intrinsic needs, such as their need for information, social interaction, and belongingness [122]. Therefore, perceiving brand support in its online community increases members’ sense of identification with the community and strengthens the relational bonds between them and the brand [96], so enhancing their trust in the brand [122, 146]. It is expected that when a brand is responsive to and considerate of its customers in its online community, this leads to a more positive evaluation of the brand by its customers and so increases their brand trust. When members of an OBC perceive brand support, they reciprocate those efforts by creating positive attitudes towars the community, hence identifying themselves with the community and reaffirming the brand’s trustworthiness. Specifically, our model (Figure 1) represents the premises of this research. First, it illustrates that perceived brand support enhances members’ community identity and brand trust. Second, our model presents the impact of community identity (direct and indirect through brand knowledge) on members’ brand trust, which impacts their behavioral outcomes toward the brand. Third, the model represents the moderating effects of members’ participation type (being lurkers or posters) on the illustrated relationships in the framework.

Figure 1. Research Model

We start our model with the three constructs of recognizing members’ contributions, encouraging interaction, and providing quality information, indicated most frequently in the literature for conceptualizing and measuring members’ perception of a firm’s/brand’s support in its online community (see Appendix 1). Moreover, these constructs are in line with OST as they can reflect members’ general perception of the degree to which the brand values their contributions (recognizing contributions), cares for them (encouraging interaction), and can be trusted to provide essential resources (providing quality information). Recognizing contributions refers to the extent that the brand recognizes members’ contributions to the community [85, 89]. Encouraging interaction refers to the extent members believe that the brand promotes and facilitates interaction and information sharing among its community members [123]. Providing quality information refers to OBC members’ belief that the brand is making great efforts to offer its community members access to quality information about the brand [123].

We propose the three constructs of purchase intention, resistance to negative information, and providing positive word of mouth as the outcome of our model. According to the theory of planned behavior, behavioral intention is the main driver of actual behavior [4]. Therefore, customers’ purchase intention of a brand’s products will have a significant impact on their real purchase behavior, which makes this construct of great interest for brand managers. Members’ resistance to negative information about the brand indicates their strong relationship with the brand [53]. With the presence of the online environment and social media platforms, spreading negative information about brands has been much easier, so it is in brands’ interest to build a strong relationship with their customers. In the OBC context, customers can be considered semi-employees since they may actively engage in promoting the brand through WOM recommendations outside of the community [77, 133]. Our framework suggests that for both posters and lurkers, perceived support from the brand in its online community can lead to their community identity and brand trust, which can then lead to their positive behaviors toward the brand.

Recognizing Contributions to OBCs

Recognizing and rewarding employees’ contributions conveys that the organization values their contributions and cares about them, resulting in employees’ greater affective commitment and identification with the organization [8, 104]. Following OST, in a firm-hosted OBC, recognizing members’ contributions and providing rewards convey the brand’s positive valuation of members’ contributions and reflect the brand’s commitment to, and trust in, its contributing members [64, 156]. However, if members do not perceive value in their interaction, they will no longer continue to contribute [21, 26]. Recognizing members’ contributions by the brand within its online community can improve members’ self-esteem and increase their positive feelings and commitment to the community [64, 82]. Perceiving support from the brand in its online community that meets members’ need for approval and praise would facilitate members to incorporate community membership into their self-identity [49]. According to OST, perceived organizational support increases employees’ positive orientation toward the organization through social exchange by provoking increased trust toward the organization and the expectation that their effort will be rewarded [96]. Likewise, in OBCs, in response to their contribution being recognized and receiving positive feedback, members of OBCs would indicate a positive attitude toward the brand [89], and so strengthen their trust in the brand. Thus, it is expected that:

The perceived brand support of recognizing members’ contributions within OBCs has a positive impact on members’ (H1a) community identity and (H2a) brand trust.

Encouraging Interaction in OBCs

A crucial component of online communities in satisfying the needs of their members is interactivity [152]. The success of these online communities depends on the members’ willingness to commit their effort and time to reply to each other’s comments and requests [157]. Interactivity positively affects members’ social ties [103] and plays a crucial role in building customer relationships [155]. Therefore, to successfully build OBCs it is necessary to encourage and facilitate interactions among members [15].

By assisting and motivating members’ interactions in its online community, a brand encourages members’ participation and enhances their engagement and social influence experience [43, 78] and their sense of connection with others [44], and thus their sense of belonging to the community [85]. Easy communication between members is expected to increase bonds between them and positively impact their identification with the community [45]. Valuable and information-rich interactions lead to trust [61]. Encouraging conversations and interactions among members allows them to discover shared connections and exchange knowledge. Such conversations and knowledge sharing create trust among members, leading to a “consciousness of kind” [24]. The trust generated among members in OBCs builds into trust in the community and ultimately in the brand itself [80]. Moreover, when a brand makes efforts to encourage interaction among members of its online community, members benefit from these efforts by fulfilling their needs, such as the need for social interaction and for the feeling of belongingness [44]. This support and efforts provided by the brand state the brand’s sense of shared values with its community members and imply its respect for the members of its community by considering and supporting their desire to interact [123]. This reinforces the members’ belief that the brand cares about them and so increases their trust in the brand [122]. Thus, the following hypotheses are presented:

The perceived brand support of encouraging interaction within OBCs has a positive impact on members’ (H1b) community identity and (H2b) brand trust.

Providing Quality Information in OBCs

Access to information and fulfilling informational needs are the most frequent reasons for individuals to become members of an online community [e.g., 44, 131]. Access to high-quality, accurate information provided by the firm/brand combined with the ability to exchange ideas means online communities offer opportunities to their members to build relationships between themselves, as well as with the host firm [69]. This has a major influence on members’ satisfaction with, their intention to use [101, 102], and so their sense of belonging to the online community.

Based on OST, when brands fulfill their online communities’ members’ needs for information or knowledge, their members will perceive this as a favorable treatment received from the brand in its online community and so perceive the brand as being supportive [157, 161]. Offering high-quality, up-to-date information leads to repeat visits to online communities [162] and reinforces the shared values of members [16, 131], and so improves their identification with the community. Members of brand communities respond favorably to high-quality content provided by the brand, and these positive perceptions generate positive attitudes toward the brand [151]. Members’ perception that the brand is providing them with quality content in its community strengthens their beliefs about the brand’s sense of shared values with them and shows its respect for community members, which increases their trust in the brand [123]. Moreover, decreasing information asymmetry leads to increased trust [68]. Therefore, by providing customers with quality information in their online communities, brands will increase their customers’ trust:

The perceived brand support of providing quality information within OBCs has a positive impact on members’ (H1c) community identity and (H2c) brand trust.

Role of Members’ Community Identity in OBCs

Individuals participate in OBCs since these offer them the opportunity to create shared meaning and socialize [80] through interactions with each other and with the brand itself, which develops their identification with the community [106]. These communications improve members’ brand experience and knowledge, which then strengthen their trust in the brand [60, 67]. Identification with the community reinforces the perceived reliability of the brand as a consequence of the customer bonding effect in the brand community [141] and so increases members’ brand trust [105]. Moreover, a feeling of belonging to the community and identifying with it can have a positive impact on members’ attitudes toward the community, which has a significant influence on their brand trust [84]:

H3: Members’ community identity within OBCs has a positive impact on their brand trust.

Brand Knowledge in OBCs

Brand knowledge is one of the main cognitive components of customer-based brand equity [125] and thus is a key concept in evaluating the overall brand value [88]. Customers’ brand knowledge relates to the cognitive representation of the brand [117]. It is defined in terms of the personal meaning of a brand stored in customers’ memory. By creating differential customer responses and affecting the success of brand-building marketing programs, brand knowledge is the source of brand equity [87].

OBCs can increase the brand knowledge of their members [25] through their sense of identification with the community [18, 60]. Previous research suggests a direct relationship between social identity and social media usage [116], members’ participation, and engagement in online communities [13, 71]. A higher level of engagement with and participation in the community would provide members with the opportunity to learn [59], and make them more familiar with the brand itself, its products/services [42], and other members’ experiences with the brand. Therefore, we hypothesize:

H4: Members’ community identity within OBCs has a positive impact on their brand knowledge.

If the brand keeps its promise to the consumer in delivering performance, then it can be trusted [32]. Brand trust is made up of cognitive beliefs, including consistency, competence, reliability, and predictability of performance [32, 41], and also affective or emotional beliefs, which may be related to honesty, integrity, and benevolence [19]. Brand knowledge represents customers’ experience level with the brand and their interest in it [7]. Therefore, it is expected that more knowledgeable customers are more engaged with the brand [60] and trust it more [55]. Familiarity is the prerequisite for trust [86, 135]. Being knowledgeable about the brand and so being familiar with it reduces uncertainty about it, and therefore it is expected to increase members’ trust in the brand:

H5: Members’ brand knowledge within OBCs has a positive impact on their brand trust.

Trust has a key role in building and maintaining strong relationships [5, 107]. Brand trust can be defined as “the willingness of average consumers to rely on the ability of the brand to perform its stated function” [32, p. 82]. Brand trust is associated with the reduction of uncertainty and an increase in commitment and loyalty [39, 98], indicating a strong customer–brand relationship. Thus, it can be expected that customers’ brand trust is associated with the subsequent rejection of negative information that might be circulated about the brand [105]. Such resistance to negative information, defined as the extent to which customers do not allow negative information to decrease their general view of the brand, indicates the strength of a consumer–brand relationship [52]. Therefore, we expect that customers who trust a brand are more likely to defend the brand when exposed to negative information.

Sichtmann [136] specified that trusting a brand decreased the social risk linked to a recommendation or promotion of the brand since there will be a lesser chance of disappointing the individual/group to whom the recommendation is given. Moreover, previous research indicates the contribution of brand trust to purchase loyalty [32]. Consequently, it can be hypothesized that:

H6: Members’ brand trust in OBCs has a positive impact on their (a) purchase intention, (b) resistance to negative information, and (c) positive word of mouth.

Moderating Effects of Members’ Participation Type

Online community members can be classified into two groups, posters and lurkers [97]. Even though lurkers form the majority of OBC members, they have been overlooked in previous research [145]. Their reluctance to actively participate may have wrongly led to reduced interest in their membership in online communities. Participation in OBCs is essential for the success of the community [40, 91, 94], so lurking has been seen as a negative behavior that can threaten the existence of communities [126]. Previous studies signify the drivers of members’ participation in OBCs, such as individual and collective sense of psychological ownership experienced in the community [92], informational and perceived social value [166], psychological empowerment [77], satisfaction with the community, perceived degree of influence, and identification with the brand community [31, 159]. While members’ active participation in OBCs is essential, most community members are lurkers who do not actively participate in the community. It is necessary to consider all members (both posters and lurkers) to achieve a full understanding of the impact of these communities. Although lurkers do not actively participate in the brand community, they identify with it and experience social identity [108]. However, it is expected that lurkers have a weaker sense of community compared to posters [92]. Posters have a higher level of involvement in the community due to their active participation and interactions within the community [31]. They believe that their needs are being better met by the community, so they receive more benefits from it compared to lurkers [124].

According to OST, it is expected that perceiving a higher level of firm support in its online community would lead to a higher level of members’ contribution to the community as a reciprocity effect toward the community’s well-being [128]. It would enhance members’ efforts to meet the community’s goals via greater activity and performance [49]. Gouldner [63] suggests that the greater the benefit’s value, relevant to the recipient’s particular needs, the higher the obligation would be to reciprocate the favorable treatment. Thus, the obligation to repay perceived organizational support should be stronger among employees with high socioemotional needs [128]. Individuals go online to satisfy their social and emotional needs [127], the depth of which could be reflected in their online behavior and in the degree to which they post and interact with others [9]. For lurkers, who are not active in the community, brand actions and their support are still important and can have an impact on their sense of community identity and trust in the brand. However, since posters are interactive in OBCs and so are more engaged with the community, we hypothesize that the impacts of perceived brand support in its OBC are stronger for them compared to lurkers:

H7: The positive relationship between recognizing contributions and members’ (a) community identity and (b) brand trust is stronger for posters than for lurkers.

H8: The positive relationship between encouraging interaction and members’ (a) community identity, and (b) brand trust is stronger for posters than for lurkers.

H9: The positive relationship between providing quality information and members’ (a) community identity, and (b) brand trust is stronger for posters than for lurkers.

Knowledge exchange is one of the key reasons for becoming a member of an OBC [44]. Frequent contributions and active social interactions within OBCs can provide members with opportunities to exchange knowledge and discover more about the brand [59]. Some of the reasons that lurkers do not post are that they experience a lack of expertise [115], they don’t feel confident to post [99], and they are afraid that what they post might not be accurate [11]. This indicates that members with a higher level of activity are more engaged with the community, have a higher level of brand knowledge, community identification, and brand relationship quality [7], and hence have a higher level of brand trust [60]. Generally, the expectation is that the OBC influence on posters is greater than lurkers, implying that interactive members (posters) are more engaged with and so identify more with the community and so with the brand itself. Thus, we introduce the following hypotheses:

H10: The positive relationship between community identity and (a) brand trust and (b) brand knowledge is stronger for posters than for lurkers.

H11: The positive relationship between brand knowledge and brand trust is stronger for posters than for lurkers.

H12: The positive relationship between brand trust and (a) purchase intention (b) resistance to negative information (c) positive word of mouth is stronger for posters than for lurkers.

Method

Sample and Procedure

Members of an online consumer panel served as respondents to our online survey. Respondents were sourced from a market research panel of consumers managed by a professional marketing research firm, Qualtrics (qualtrics.com). Respondents were given tangible rewards for their participation, which in turn improved the response rate and the quality of the data [37, 46]. Using panels such as Qualtrics poses specific advantages regarding the information that can be collected [36]. Using an online panel, rather than focusing on a specific OBC, to gather the data provided the opportunity to gain access to lurkers, who are mainly ignored in other research due to their nonparticipatory nature.

The respondents were United States residents who self-identified themselves as current members of real, firm-hosted OBCs that they had visited in the last three months. At the beginning of the survey, a description and several examples of real firm-hosted online brand communities were provided to the respondents. Respondents provided the name and URL address of the OBC they would refer to during the survey. After this, they were asked whether their chosen online community centered around one specific brand. These questions help us to screen respondents for eligibility to ensure they were members of firm-hosted OBCs.

Within three weeks of the launch of the survey, 1000 respondents completed the survey. After screening the data, 742 usable responses remained that passed all the screening questions. Respondents include 405 lurkers (55% of respondents) and 337 posters (45%) (see Appendix 2 for respondents’ profile). Coinciding with previous research, in this study lurkers are defined as members who have not posted any messages/comments on their chosen online community, or posted very infrequently (i.e., less than once a month) over the last three months [108, 130]. We asked respondents whether they have ever posted a comment and/or a question on their chosen community’s website within the last three months. The ones who responded “yes” then were asked how often they usually post messages on the community. The respondents that chose “no” to the first question or selected “less than once a month” as their response to the second question were considered lurkers for this study.

Measures

We adopted all measures from previous studies. Nine-point, Likert-type scales (1 = strongly disagree, 9 = strongly agree) items were used to measure the constructs in the proposed model unless it is mentioned otherwise (see Table 1).

Table 1. Measures and Validation.

Items	Loading^b
Encouraging interaction (Cronbach’s alpha = 0.95, CR = 0.95, AVE = 0.82) ^a
This community encourages interaction among members	0.89
This community encourages information sharing among members	0.93
This community encourages different members to share information	0.91
Overall, this community facilitates interaction among members	0.90
Providing quality information (Cronbach’s alpha = 0.93, CR = 0.93, AVE= 0.72)
The information provided by this online community is accurate	0.83
This online community provides me with a complete set of information	0.89
The information from this online community is up to date	0.86
This online community provides me with all the information I need	0.81
The information provided by this online community is well formatted	0.86
Recognizing contributions (Cronbach’s alpha = 0.91, CR = 0.92, AVE = 0.73)
The community provides support for various active member	0.71
The community shows gratitude to actively participating members	0.89
The community shows its appreciation to those who contribute information	0.93
The community recognizes members’ contribution	0.87
Cognitive community identity (Cronbach’s alpha = 0.91, CR =0.92, AVE = 0.85) (1 = not at all, 9 = very much)
8-Point visual and verbal presentation	0.89
Please indicate to what degree your self-image overlaps with the identity of this community as you perceive it	0.95
Affective community identity (Cronbach’s Alpha = 0.93, CR = 0.94, AVE = 0.88) (1 = not at all, 9 = very much)
How attached are you to this community?	0.91
How strong would you say your feelings of belongingness are toward this community?	0.96
Evaluative community identity (Cronbach’s alpha = 0.96, CR = 0.96, AVE=0.92)
I am a valuable member of this community	0.96
I am an important member of this community	0.96
Brand trust (Cronbach’s alpha = 0.95, CR = 0.95, AVE = 0.84)
I trust this brand	0.93
I rely on this brand	0.90
This is an honest brand	0.94
This brand is safe	0.89
Brand knowledge (Cronbach’s alpha = 0.89, CR = 0.89, AVE = 0.73)
When compared to other people, I know a lot about this brand	0.87
My friends consider me an expert regarding this brand	0.85
I consider myself very experienced with this brand	0.85
Purchase intention (Cronbach’s alpha = 0.99, CR = 0.99, AVE = 0.98)
What is the probability that you will purchase this brand in the future?
Unlikely–likely	0.98
Improbable–probable	0.99
Impossible–possible	0.99
Resistance to negative information (Cronbach’s alpha = 0.90, CR = 0.90, AVE = 0.69)
Negative information about this brand does not change my general view of the brand	0.91
I hardly change my view of this brand based on negative information about it	0.89
Negative information about this brand has no effect on me	0.79
Negative information about this brand changes the way I think of the brand (R)	0.76
Word of mouth (Cronbach’s alpha = 0.93, CR = 0.93, AVE = 0.82)
I say positive things about this brand to other people	0.91
I recommend this brand to someone who seeks my advice	0.94
I encourage friends and relatives to do business with this brand	0.86

^aNumbers in parentheses represent the following list of reliability measures, respectively: Cronbach’s alpha, composite reliability, and average variance extracted.

^bAll loadings are standardized and significant at p < 0.001 levels.

Encouraging interaction refers to the degree of members’ belief that the brand promotes interaction among members of its online community. This construct was measured using five items adapted from Porter and Donthu [123]. Providing quality information refers to the degree of members’ belief about the brand providing the members with access to quality information. Quality information refers to information accuracy, completeness, currency, customization, and the format of the information presented and was measured using five items adapted from Lin [101]. Recognizing contributions refers to the extent that a brand recognizes members’ contributions to its online community. This construct was measured using four items from Kim et al. [89] and Tsai and Pai [148].

Community identity was conceptualized as a second-order reflective construct, described by cognitive, affective, and evaluative components of social identity adapted from Bagozzi and Dholakia [13]. Cognitive community identity was measured by two items. The first item is a visual report of community identification, wherein respondents were asked to express the perceived overlap between their own self-definition and the identity of their chosen community (see Appendix 3). The second item asks respondents to indicate to what degree their self-image overlaps with the identity of their chosen OBC, again using a 9-point Likert scale (1 = not at all, 9 = very much). Two items were used to measure the affective community identity, the emotional component of members’ community identity, using a 9-point Likert scale (1 = not at all, 9 = very much). The evaluative component of community identity was measured by two items, measuring members’ evaluation of self-worth based on belonging to the specific community.

Brand trust refers to the willingness of consumers to rely on the ability of a brand to perform its stated function. It was measured by four items adapted from Chaudhuri and Holbrook [32]. Brand knowledge was measured with three items adapted from Algesheimer et al. [7] capturing members’ interest in the brand and their experience level with it.

Purchase intention refers to the probability that members of the brand community will purchase the brand in the future and was measured using three items adapted from Smith et al. [138]. Resistance to negative information refers to the extent to which members do not change their general view of the brand despite considering negative information about it. It was measured by four items adapted from Eisingerich et al. [53]. Word of mouth was measured using three items adapted from Zeithaml et al. [164].

Measurement Model Validation

Standardized factor loadings of all items were significant, and their estimates were all higher than 0.71. All constructs’ Cronbach’s alpha values were above 0.89. Their values of average variance extracted (AVEs) were higher than 0.69 [58] and their construct reliability were considerably higher than 0.80 [70]. Therefore, internal consistency exists, and so does composite reliability and convergent validity (see Table 2).

Table 2. Descriptive Statistics.

Constructs	1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9	10	11
1. Encouraging interaction	0.82
2. Providing quality information	0.15	0.72
3. Recognizing contributions	0.09	0.27	0.73
4. Cognitive community identity	0.09	0.12	0.15	0.85
5. Affective community identity	0.13	0.18	0.28	0.53	0.88
6. Evaluative community identity	0.08	0.17	0.27	0.38	0.62	0.92
7. Brand trust	0.45	0.22	0.15	0.18	0.23	0.18	0.84
8. Brand knowledge	0.16	0.10	0.14	0.27	0.40	0.34	0.29	0.73
9. Purchase intention	0.23	0.05	0.03	0.03	0.05	0.04	0.18	0.09	0.98
10. Resistance to negative information	0.29	0.12	0.12	0.10	0.14	0.12	0.29	0.15	0.08	0.69
11. Word of mouth	0.45	0.20	0.10	0.20	0.26	0.19	0.58	0.39	0.25	0.32	0.82

Notes: Bold figures on the diagonal are the AVE for the constructs. Lower diagonal represents squared correlations.

All correlations are significant at p < 0.001.

To examine the discriminant validity of the constructs two tests have been conducted. First, as seen in Table 2, AVEs were higher than squared correlations for all constructs, so they do support the discriminant validity of the constructs [58]. Second, discriminant validity was reexamined following the approach suggested by Bagozzi and Philips [14]. Applying this approach, we performed a two-factor confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) model two times (unconstrained and constrained models) for each pair of constructs. The chi-squared difference test on the paired models indicates that the χ² value for the model in which the correlation was free was significantly lower than the model in which the correlation was fixed to unity. This result supports the discriminant validity of our constructs in the model.

A confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) using AMOS 25 [27, 28] was conducted to further validate the measures. The measurement model demonstrates good fit (χ² = 1235.929, degrees of freedom (df) = 538, p < 0.001, χ²/df = 2.297), with comparative fit index (CFI) = 0.98, root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA) = 0.042, with the 90% confidence interval of RMSEA (LO = 0.039, HI = 0.045), normed fit index (NFI) = 0.96, and Tucker−Lewis index (TLI) = 0.97 [70].

Following the lead of Podsakoff et al. [119, 121], both procedural and statistical remedies were considered when designing this study to control for common method biases (CMB). Regarding procedural remedies, on the introduction page, we stressed the importance of accuracy and conscientiousness of respondents’ answers, guaranteed their anonymity, and assured them that there were no “right” or “wrong” answers; double-barreled, complex, and vague questions were avoided in the questionnaire; and to decrease the likelihood of respondents having an implicit theory that the two constructs were related, they were prevented from going back to change their previous answers, varying scale types and anchor labels were used when appropriate, and demographic questions were asked in the middle of the survey (between the constructs related to the community and the ones related to the brand) as a cognitive break. Regarding statistical remedies, in addition to Harman’s single-factor test [10], we conducted a comparison CFA test [120] and did not find support for a single general factor. In the CFA test all 36 items were loaded into one confirmatory factor with fit statistics of χ²_(df=594) = 19049.048 (n = 742), p < 0.001, χ²/df = 32.069, RMSEA = 0.205, CFI = 0.38, TLI = 0.34. Comparing these results with the measurement model fit statistics, it can be concluded that the assumption that CMB was not a problematical issue in this study was supported.

Results

Hypothesized Model

The goodness-of-fit statistics for the structural model were satisfactory: χ²_(df=575) = 1641.625 (n = 742), p value< 0.001, χ²/df = 2.855, CFI = 0.96, RMSEA = 0.050 with a 90% confidence interval of RMSEA (LO = 0.047, HI = 0.053), NFI = 0.95, TLI = 0.96.

According to the results (standardized), the impacts of recognizing members’ contributions, encouraging interaction, and providing quality information on community identity are all significant at p < 0.001 and positive, in support of H1a (β = 0.42), H1b (β = 0.20), and H1c (β = 0.17). Encouraging interaction, providing quality information, and community identity do have significant positive effects on brand trust, thus supporting H2b (β = 0.51, p < 0.001), H2c (β = 0.16, p < 0.001), and H3 (β = 0.11, p < 0.05). However, the effect of the recognition for contributions on brand trust was not statistically significant, so H2a was not supported.

Furthermore, as hypothesized, community identity influences brand knowledge positively (β = 0.68, p < 0.001). Thus, H4 is supported. For H5, support was found since the effect of brand knowledge on brand trust (β = 0.23) is positive and significant at p < 0.001. The effect of brand trust on all members’ behavioral consequences—purchase intention (β = 0.45), resistance to negative information (β = 0.56), and word of mouth (β = 0.79)—is positive and significant. Therefore, all parts of H6 are supported.

Moderating Effects of Members’ Participation Type

Multiple-sample analyses [83] were conducted for the lurker and poster subsamples to test the hypotheses for the moderating effects of members’ participation type. Before running multigroup structural models, we assessed measurement invariance by using multisample CFA [29, 35]. The result demonstrated that all variables in the model met the criteria for configural invariance and partial metric invariance (see Appendix 4 and Appendix 5 for detailed analyses and results). To run multigroup structural equation modeling (SEM) analyses, two multiple-sample models were created. In the first baseline model, all paths were unconstrained between the two groups of posters and lurkers. In the second model, the equal path model, the relevant path for each hypothesis was constrained to be equal for both groups. The difference in chi-squared values between the two models presents the test of the equality of the chosen path for the two subsamples [7]. Table 3 summarizes the multigroup SEM analyses.

Table 3. Multigroup SEM Analyses.

Hypothesis	Path coefficients in unconstrained model	χ^2 Test results
Baseline model		No constraints model: χ^2(1150) = 2368.347
H7a Recognizing contributions → Community identity	β (L) = 0.36^a p < 0.001 β (P) = 0.40 p < 0.001 This path is significant for both posters and lurkers	Equal paths model: χ^2 (1151) = 2369.641 χd^2 (1) = 1.294 p > 0.25
H7b Recognizing contributions → Brand trust	β (L) = 0.01 p > 0.80 β (P) = 0.03 p > 0.80 This path is not significant for both posters and lurkers	—
H8a Encouraging interaction → Community identity	β (L) = 0.21 p < 0.001 β (P) = 0.27 p < 0.001 This path is significant for both posters and lurkers	Equal paths model: χ^2 (1151) = 2368.482 χd^2 (1) = 0.135 p > 0.70
H8b Encouraging interaction → Brand trust	β (L) = 0.52 p < 0.001 β (P) = 0.50 p < 0.001 This path is significant for both posters and lurkers	Equal paths model: χ^2 (1151) = 2369.343 χd^2 (1) = 0.996 p > 0.30
H9a Providing quality information → Community identity	β (L) = 0.18 p < 0.001 β (P) = 0.17 p < 0.010 This path is significant for both posters and lurkers	Equal paths model: χ^2 (1151) = 2369.009 χd^2 (1) = 0.662 p > 0.40
H9b Providing quality information → Brand trust	β (L) = 0.23 p < 0.001 β (P) = 0.03 p > 0.70 This path is significant only for lurkers	Equal paths model: χ^2 (1151) = 2381.363 χd^2 (1) = 13.016 p < 0.001
H10a Community identity → Brand trust	β (L) = 0.051 p > 0.90 β (P) = 0.33 p < 0.001 This path is significant only for posters	Equal paths model: χ^2 (1151) = 2380.223 χd^2 (1) = 11.876 p < 0.005
H10b Community identity → Brand knowledge	β (L) = 0.62 p < 0.001 β (P) = 0.65 p < 0.001 This path is significant for both posters and lurkers	Equal paths model: χ^2 (1151) = 2368.995 χd^2 (1) = 0.648 p > 0.40
H11 Brand knowledge → Brand trust	β (L) = 0.28 p < 0.001 β (P) = 0.07 p > 0.20 This path is significant only for lurkers	Equal paths model: χ^2 (1151) = 2372.723 χd^2 (1) = 4.376 p < 0.04
H12a Brand trust → Purchase intention	β (L) = 0.45 p < 0.001 β (P) = 0.43 p < 0.001 This path is significant for both posters and lurkers	Equal paths model: χ^2 (1151) = 2369.212 χd^2 (1) = 0.865 p > 0.35
H12b Brand trust → Resistance to negative information	β (L) = 0.57 p < 0.001 β (P) = 0.54 p < 0.001 This path is significant for both posters and lurkers	Equal paths model: χ^2 (1151) = 2369.128 χd^2 (1) = 0.781 p > 0.37
H12c Brand trust → Positive word of mouth	β (L) = 0.77 p < 0.001 β (P) = 0.80 p < 0.001 This path is significant for both posters and lurkers	Equal paths model: χ^2 (1151) = 2368.362 χd^2 (1) = 0.015 p > 0.90

Note: The subscript “L” refers to the lurkers and “P” refers to the posters sub sample.

^aStandardized coefficient.

The results indicate that the paths from perceived brand support constructs (i.e., perceptions of recognizing contributions, encouraging interaction, and providing quality information) to community identity are not different for posters and lurkers and are significant for both groups. Therefore, H7a, H8a, and H9a were not supported. The path from recognizing contribution to brand trust was not significant for any of the groups, while the path from encouraging interaction to brand trust was significant for both groups. Therefore, there were no significant differences between posters and lurkers in these paths, so H7b and H8b were not supported.

However, the path from providing quality information to brand trust was stronger for lurkers (β = .23, p < .001) than for posters, while this path was not even significant for posters.

In H10a, a stronger path from community identity to brand trust was predicted for posters compared to lurkers. This hypothesis was supported, while the path was not even significant for lurkers. There was no statistically significant difference between posters and lurkers in the path from community identity to brand knowledge, hence H10b was not supported. Contrary to our prediction, the path from brand knowledge to brand trust, H11, was only significant for lurkers (β = .28, p < .001).

Concerning the remaining hypotheses, the paths from brand trust to the behavioral constructs (i.e., purchase intention, WOM, and resistance to negative information) are not different for posters and lurkers. Thus, H12a, H12b, and H12c were not supported. Figures 2 and 3 illustrate the results for posters and lurkers separately.

Figure 2. Research Model for Lurkers

Notes: ***p < 0.001, **p < 0.01, R² are in parentheses; insignificant paths are omitted for ease of exposition. Only significant for lurkers

Figure 3. Research Model for Posters

Notes: ***p < 0.001, *p < 0.05, R² are in parentheses; insignificant paths are omitted for ease of exposition. Only significant for posters

Discussion

Using organizational support theory (OST) and social identity theory (SIT), this study empirically investigated the impacts of perceived brand support in its online community on members’ relationship with the community and with the brand itself and examined the possible differences in these effects between posters and lurkers. Our article extends and contributes to the literature on posters and lurkers in OBCs. In previous research [92, 93], passive members (lurkers) have been considered a problem that needs to be overcome for the community to succeed, recommending the instilling of their sense of psychological ownership to encourage their participation. Kumar [92] studies both posters and lurkers, looking to encourage active participation, as he states that it is participation intention that drives purchase intention and positive WOM. However, we demonstrate that it is important to support lurkers as well, because there is no significant difference between posters and lurkers in the outcomes of purchase intention, positive WOM, and the additional outcome that we report, resistance to negative information. Yang et al. [160], in common with our article, used OST and investigated both posters’ and lurkers’ community commitment in a single large education website in China. We extend their findings by investigating the impact of brand support at both the community level (i.e., community identity) and the brand level (members’ trust toward the brand itself) in the OBC context. It should be noted that the brand’s actions and communications in its online community, in addition to having impacts on members’ community identity and brand trust, might have possible impacts on members’ level of activity and contributions to the community. This has not been considered in this research, as the reasons for members’ posting and lurking behavior were not within the remit of this article.

Theoretical Implications

Our findings signify several theoretical contributions. First, although previous research adapted OST in organizations, investigating the impact of perceived organizational support on its employees (internal stakeholders), this research extends the theory by investigating the impact of perceived support from the firm on its customers (external stakeholders) in the context of OBCs. We extend the literature on OST to argue that apart from applying OST internally (the effect of employees’ perception of organizational support), other relevant external stakeholders’ (e.g., customers/members of OBCs) perception of the brand support received in its online community also has a significant effect on important outcomes, that is, customers’ community identity and their trust in the brand. Thus, this study confirms the suitability of adapting OST in the OBC context and certifies that the perception of the brand being supportive in its online community has a positive effect on members (fulfilling their socioemotional needs) and the brand itself (improved customer–-brand relationship and so positive behaviors toward the brand).

Second, empirical research investigating the participation of lurkers in OBCs is very limited in the literature, and this study contributes to filling this gap and extends the work of previous authors. We respond to Mousavi et al. [108] who call for further studies into the feelings of social identity for lurkers. Our article demonstrates that brand support strengthens lurkers’ community identity and brand trust. Our findings signify that lurkers do not need to be “activated” in order to have a sense of community identity and positive responses toward the brand in OBCs. As opposed to previous research, our study reveals that the more support is perceived from the brand in its online community, the stronger will be lurkers’ community identity. This signifies that although lurkers are not overtly active in the community, perceiving that the brand encourages its community members to interact, recognizes their contributions, and provides high-quality information in the community increases lurkers’ sense of belonging and affective commitment to the community (i.e., community identity) and their trust toward the brand, which can then lead to their positive WOM, purchase intention, and resistance to negative information about the brand.

Third, our findings confirm the importance of delineating the members’ participation type when investigating OBCs to have a full understanding of the impact of members’ participation in these communities. The results of this study indicate that all structural paths in the model, except for the impact of recognizing contributions on brand trust, were significant when we ran the model for the whole sample, including both posters and lurkers. However, multigroup SEM analyses reveal interesting differences in the structural paths between posters and lurkers, as some paths were only significant for one subsample group. Community members are at different stages in their relationship with brands and have differing needs in their journey with a brand. Our research demonstrates the importance of recognizing these differences and nurturing the majority of the members, “lurkers.”

Fourth, the main drivers for lurkers’ trust in the brand in its online community are their brand knowledge and perceived brand support, specifically, recognizing members’ contributions and providing quality information in the community. Figures 2 and 3 illustrate the differences in the research model between posters and lurkers. The impact of providing quality information and brand knowledge on brand trust are only significant for lurkers, while both relationships were not significant for posters. Regarding posters, the drivers of their trust in the brand are their sense of community identity and perception that the brand encourages interactions in the community. While there is a direct path from community identity to brand trust for posters, this path does not exist for lurkers; instead, there is an indirect path from community identity to brand trust, through brand knowledge, for lurkers. These results, on one hand, indicate the important role of brand knowledge for lurkers in OBCs that fully mediates the relationship between their community identity and brand trust. This might be due to the main goal of lurkers joining an OBC, which is to seek information that can be met by lurking [140]. On the other hand, our findings indicate the role of SIT in OBCs, especially for posters compared to lurkers, as there is a direct path from community identity to brand trust only for posters. This shows that while SIT plays an important role in building posters’ brand trust, its role is not as effective as an underlying mechanism in building lurkers’ trust. Our research signifies that according to OST, when the brand is responsive to and considerate of its customers, lurkers would have more positive evaluations of the brand. In addition to gaining information, which is the most frequent reason for both posters and lurkers to join an OBC, posters have other motivations that make them interact and contribute to these communities. These motivations can include a desire for social interaction, enhancing self-worth [72], entertainment and hedonic values, personal and social integrative benefits [112, 137], enjoyment in helping others, and knowledge of self-efficacy [97], as well as feeling interactional empowerment [118]. Compared to lurkers, posters are more psychologically and socially connected to the online community.

In sum, these findings respond to an earlier call for investigating the impact of lurkers’ membership in OBCs on their relationship with the brand [92]. Our study indicates that OST opens a lens to have a better understanding of the impact of OBCs on lurkers’ relationships with and behaviors toward the brands. This study reveals the impact of perceived brand support in OBCs and emphasizes that both members’ participation, posting and lurking, should be considered and encouraged. Recognizing and understanding lurking is essential and beneficial to customer–brand relationship development in OBCs.

Managerial Implications

This research assists managers to execute a successful branding strategy in their online communities by revealing how they can utilize these communities to build up trust with their customers, both interactive (posters) and non-interactive (lurkers) members within their online communities. It also makes a key contribution to our knowledge of lurkers in OBCs and suggests that brand managers not be deflected by the views of the minority, posters, but also consider and value lurkers and target them with information and offerings appropriate to their experience and status in the brand community. Though lurkers do not interact or actively participate in the community, their membership in OBCs does influence their relationship with the community and the brand itself. Therefore, lurkers’ memberships are beneficial for brands. To exploit the powerful potential of lurkers, it is vital that managers understand how lurkers vary from posters and specifically seek to manage them within the community. Specifically, the results propose that by focusing on factors that cultivate members’ sense of community identity and improving their brand knowledge, managers can achieve desired and competitive consequences such as increasing trust toward the brand and positive behavioral consequences for both posters and lurkers. Here are some specific tactics suggested to managers to achieve these desired outcomes from their OBCs.

First, it is suggested that brands provide reliable, accurate, up-to-date information that is easy to access and read. One of the common reasons lurkers join OBCs is to have access to high-quality information regarding the brand and its products/services. In addition, active members are looking to share their brand experiences and knowledge and build relationships with other members; they enjoy demonstrating their knowledge of brands and assisting less informed members, leading to a virtuous circle. Low-quality information and outdated posts increase members’ search and information-processing costs by wasting their time and efforts [66]. Therefore, brand managers should provide members with quality information, which is well formatted and easy to find in their online communities [165]. They can use videos and pictures in the content they provide to promote members’ engagement behavior [134]. This would not only increase both posters’ and lurkers’ community identity, but also directly increase lurkers’ brand trust, leading to their increased purchase intention, resistance to negative information about the brand they may hear, and providing positive WOM.

Second, members’ contributions to OBCs should be recognized and rewarded by managers. For example, tangible rewards such as discounts or privileged access to new product launches or intangible rewards such as giving them badges, having affiliate programs that allow members to be rewarded for introducing new members, and VIP invitations to special events either online or in person can boost the member’s self-esteem and so satisfy their social and psychological needs. Our study shows that although lurkers do not participate actively in the community, seeing the brand recognizing posters’ contributions will increase their sense of community identity. This recognition and appreciation of active members’ contribution by the brand enhance both lurkers’ and posters’ sense of belonging to the community, which can then directly (for posters) and indirectly (for lurkers through brand knowledge) increase their brand trust.

Third, managers should promote and facilitate interactions among different members in their online communities and increase their brand knowledge. Not only does this has a positive impact on posters’ relationship with the community and the brand itself, but also our study signifies that though lurkers do not interact, perceiving that the brand encourages members to interact in the community has a direct positive impact on their brand trust and community identity. Moreover, increasing lurkers’ brand knowledge will directly increase their brand trust. To do this, it is suggested to present a strong, clear brand voice. Digital content marketing is important here for brand community managers within the firm [2]. Providing short educational videos and tutorials and demonstrations, for example, showing the brand in use and how to enhance the use of the brand, will improve members’ brand knowledge. Feedback from customers to this information should be encouraged, including sharing of pictures, videos, and messages. Unlike passively received advertising, the opportunity for interaction should be actively planned for by management. The use of forums within the community can encourage members to “ask the community,” increasing knowledge and interaction. Brand managers should make such interactions easier and more convenient for members, for example, providing them access through mobile devices or apps. Members can be made to feel important by being presented with new concepts, product prototypes, and future ideas and asked to comment on them. Encouraging free and open interactions within the OBC will enable marketers and product development to seek members’ real-time sentiment toward the brand and suggestions for product/service enhancement, bringing commercial benefit to the brand. Managers should provide support in their communities and ensure that members have a reason to stay involved.

Finally, although our model demonstrates that “recognizing contributions” and “encouraging interaction” have similar positive effects on posters and lurkers, brand managers should resist the temptation to try to turn lurkers into posters. For posters, such recognition and interactions provide validation of and perceived status within the OBC and a direct influence on brand trust. Lurkers, on the other hand, perceive recognition and interaction differently, seeing the way a brand both recognizes contributions (e.g., welcoming, receiving all feedback positively) and encourages interactions (with openness and fairness) perhaps as a reflection of their own worldview and aspirations, which in turn builds trust in the brand and make their further participation in the OBC worthwhile.

Therefore, we would encourage the appointment of dedicated staff who appreciate this difference to manage and develop the firm’s online community. Managing the OBC is an underdeveloped field within the management of the organization. This study identifies the impact of these members within the OBCs and thus the importance of their successful management.

Limitations and Directions for Future Research

Although this study enhances our knowledge about OBCs in several significant ways, it has some limitations that can be considered as avenues for future research. According to OST, employees’ personality can affect their interpretation of organizational treatment and thus their perceived organizational support [128]. Future research can consider the possible impact of members’ personalities on their perception of support received from the brand in its online community. Brand community managers will be interested in the steps necessary to obtain and retain members in OBCs. Further work on understanding the status of members within OBCs, how this develops, and the possible differences between different levels of activities will assist our understanding and management of the OBC. Following the common definition of lurkers, this study operationalized lurkers as members who have not posted a comment and/or a question on their chosen community website within the last three months or have posted less than once a month, and the study thus considered members who posted more than once in a month as posters. Future research can consider the different levels of posters’ activities, and/or consider lurking in its most extreme form (members who have never posted) [114, p. 9], and investigate possible impacts of their membership length in OBCs. In addition, studying OBCs from differing market sectors could prove enlightening, and an investigation of OBCs within business-to-business brands and a comparison with business-to-consumer brands will extend our knowledge. This article surveys OBC members from the United States; different markets are at differing levels of development regarding their relationships with brands, and therefore OBCs and our results should be read in this context.

Disclosure Statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Supplementary material

Supplemental data for this article can be accessed online at https://doi.org/10.1080/10864415.2022.2158596

Additional information

Notes on contributors

Sahar Mousavi

SAHAR MOUSAVI ([email protected]; corresponding author) is a lecturer (assistant professor) of marketing at the School of Business and Economics, Loughborough University, UK. She gained her Ph.D. from Alliance Manchester Business School, UK. Dr. Mousavi’s research interests include customer engagement in social media and online platforms, customer experience, and brand management. Her research has been published in leading international journals, including Journal of Business Research, Psychology and Marketing, and European Journal of Marketing, among others.

Stuart Roper

STUART ROPER ([email protected]) is a professor of marketing and Associate Dean (Research) at Huddersfield Business School, University of Huddersfield, UK. As well as considering the strategic importance of brands, his research also studies the problems caused to society by brands, including brands as litter and the impact brands have upon adolescent self-esteem. Dr. Roper’s work has been published in Journal of Business Research, Psychology and Marketing, California Management Review, European Management Review, British Education Research Journal, Journal of Marketing Management, European Journal of Marketing, and Qualitative Marketing Research, among others.

Appendix

Appendix 1. Selected empirical studies on perceived support in OBCs

Construct	Source	Conceptualization / Context	Consequences
Recognizing Contributions	Kang et al. [75]	‘Recognition for contribution’ / An online community with a focus on healthy living and herbal products	Community commitment
			Loyalty (to the online community)
	Kim et al. [74]	‘Recognition for member contribution’ / An online community operated by a major cosmetics company with a focus on better health through herbal products.	Online community commitment
	Yang et al. [42]	‘Perceived recognition for contribution’ / An online community in Mainland China, pinggu.org, one of the largest education websites in China	Commitment (to the online community)
Encouraging interaction	Kang et al. [75]	‘Support for member communication’ / An online community with a focus on healthy living and herbal products	Community commitment
			Loyalty (to the online community)
	Kim et al. [74]	‘Support for member communication’ / An online community operated by a major cosmetics company with a focus on better health through herbal products	Online community commitment
	Porter and Donthu [46]	‘Perceived effort to encourage interaction’/ Virtual communities that are sponsored by consumer marketers	None of the hypotheses were significant
	Porter, Devaraj, and Sun [14]	‘Encouraging interaction’ / Virtual communities that are sponsored by consumer marketers	Belief about firm’s
			benevolence
			Belief about firm’s integrity
			Belief about firm’s judgement
			Member-generated information consistency
			Member-generated information distinctiveness
	Yang et al. [42]	‘Perceived support for member communication’ / An online community in Mainland China, pinggu.org, one of the largest education websites in China	Commitment (to the online community)
Providing quality information	Lin [76]	‘Information quality’ / 236 students who participated in virtual communities	Member satisfaction
	Lin [175]	‘Information quality’ / Members of highest-ranking virtual communities in Taiwan	Usefulness of the virtual community
	Porter and Donthu [46]	‘Effort to provide quality content’ / Virtual communities that are sponsored by consumer marketers	Belief about a sponsor’s sense of shared values (+)
			Belief about a sponsor’s sense of respect (+)
			Belief about sponsor opportunism (-)
	Porter, Devaraj, and Sun [14]	Providing quality content / Virtual communities that are sponsored by consumer marketers	Belief about firm’s benevolence
			Belief about firm’s integrity
			Belief about firm’s judgement
			Member-generated information consistency
			Member-generated information distinctiveness

Appendix 2. Respondents’ profile

Demographic Profile	Frequency (%)
Gender
Male	356 (48%)
Female	386 (52%)
Age
18_20	5 (.7%)
21_30	137 (18.5%)
31_40	197 (26.5%)
41_50	151 (20.4%)
51_65	196 (26.4%)
Over 65	56 (7.5%)
Education
Did not complete high school	7 (.9%)
High School / GED	213 (28.7%)
2-Years College Degree (AS)	194 (26.1%)
4-Years College Degree (BA, BS)	223 (30.1%)
Master’s Degree (MS, MA, MBA)	88 (11.9%)
Doctoral Degree (PhD, DBA)	7 (.9%)
Professional Degree (MD, JD, DVM)	10 (1.3)
Income
Less than $20,000	61 (8.2%)
$20,000-$39,999	184 (24.8%)
$40,000-$59,999	159 (21.7%)
$60,000-$79,999	123 (16.6%)
$80,000-$99,999	86 (11.6%)
$100,000 or over	95 (12.8%)
Prefer not to say	34 (4.6%)
Tenure
Less than 3 months	39 (5.3%)
3 months < 6 months	51 (6.9%)
6 months < 1 year	107 (14.4%)
l year < 2 years	180 (24.3%)
2 years < 3 years	156 (21%)
3 years < 4 years	89 (12%)
4 years < 5 years	33 (4.4%)
5 years and more	87 (11.7%)

Appendix 4. First and Second-order Configural Invariance

Model	χ^2	df	CFI	TLI	RMSEA
CFA model for lurkers (first-order model)	847.759	538	0.98	0.98	0.038
CFA model for lurkers (second-order model)^a	869.630	554	0.98	0.98	0.038
CFA model for posters (first-order model)	1032.461	538	0.96	0.95	0.052
CFA model for posters (second-order model)	1070.657	554	0.96	0.95	0.053
Totally free multiple group model (first-order model)	1880.309	1076	0.97	0.97	0.032
Totally free multiple group model (second-order model)	1940.482	1108	0.97	0.97	0.032

^aHaving the ‘Community Identity’ construct as a second order construct in the CFA model

Appendix 5. Summary-of-Fit Statistics for Testing Mestric Invariance of the Model

Model	χ2	df	RMSEA	CFI	Model Comparison	Δχ2	Δdf	P
Model 1 Configural Invariance	1940.382	1108	0.032	0.97	____	___	___
Model 2 All First-order factor loadings constrained equal	2021.049	1133	0.033	0.97	2 vs. 1	80.667	25	0.001
Model 3 All First-order factor loadings constrained equal except for EI1, RC2, BK1, PI1	1969.726	1129	0.032	0.97	3 vs. 1	29.345	21	0.106
Model 4 (partial metric invariance) First- and second-order factor loadings constrained equal	1972.069	1131	0.032	0.97	4 vs. 3	2.343	2	0.310

Note: RMSEA = Root mean squared error of approximation; CFI = Comparative fit index; Δχ² = Difference in chi-square values between models; Δdf = Difference in number of degrees of freedom between models; EI1 = Encouraging Interaction; RC = Recognizing Contributions; BK = Brand Knowledge; PI = Purchase Intention

Appendix 3. Appendix 3. Direct Measure of Cognitive Community Identity Based on an Aided Visual Diagram of Degree of Overlap between Self-Definition and Community Identity