03-Raies(GB) 4/02/13 7:39 Page 23

Recherche et Applications en Marketing, vol. 26, n° 3/2011

Brand Loyalty Intention Among Members of a Virtual Brand

Community: the Dual Role of Commitment

Karine Raïes
Professor of Marketing ESC Saint Etienne
Associate Researcher
CERAG – UMR5820, University Pierre Mendès France
Grenoble 2

Marie-Laure Gavard-Perret
Professor
CERAG – UMR5820, University Pierre Mendès France
Grenoble 2

ABSTRACT

As the use of social media continues to grow, it is important to understand the effect of consumer participation in commu-
nities organized around brands on the relationship between the former and the brands concerned. This research examines,
through a quantitative study of 1,605 members of a virtual community dedicated to the Nikon brand, the effect of intensity of par-
ticipation on brand loyalty intention as well as the mediating effect of community commitment within this relationship.
Moreover, the bidirectional relationship between community commitment and brand commitment are studied and confirmed.
Finally, the moderating role of membership length is emphasized.

Keywords: Social media, discussion forums, virtual brand community, brand loyalty intention, community commitment, brand
commitment, non-recursive bidirectional model.

The authors would like to thank the three reviewers and the editors in chief, Michael Haenlein and Andreas M. Kaplan, for their advice and the
richness of their suggestions for improving this article.
They would also like to thank Pierre Valette-Florence and Alain Jolibert for their recommendations regarding specification of non-recursive
models.
The authors can be contacted at the following e-mail addresses: karine_raies@esc-saint-etienne.fr; marie-laure.gavard-perret@upmf-gre-
noble.fr
03-Raies(GB) 4/02/13 7:39 Page 24
24 Karine Raïes, Marie-Laure Gavard-Perret
INTRODUCTION
As early as 1999, Levine et al. put forward the
rather avant-garde idea that “companies that don’t
realize their markets are now networked person-to-
person, getting smarter as a result, and deeply joined in
conversation, are missing their best opportunity”.
Since then, consumer networks sharing information
on products and services have developed exponen-
tially with the spread of social media. Thus, a study
conducted in France by the CREDOC in 20091
reveals that 57% of web users consult customer
reviews of products and services they intend to pur-
chase. Similarly, a Harris Interactive poll2 shows that
64% of Americans who have purchased a product
online have submitted a user review.
These observations have captured the attention of
firms, many of which have understood the power
social media can exert in publicizing their image.
The success of certain brand blogs and fan pages on
Facebook (among which Ferrero is one of the leaders
with 4,147 followers)3 offers a prime example. The
inclusion of social media in marketing plans and stra-
tegies has become a key question for businesses. In
the light of these developments, it is important to
understand the impact that participation in these
online relationships and discussions between consu-
mers can have on intentions regarding the brands
concerned. This general objective is the basis of this
research.
Since community is an essential component in the
development of social networks, virtual brand com-
munities, whether initiated by the brand itself or by
consumers, are of particular interest. In this study the
focus is on the latter, i.e., a group created by consumers
who share their interest in a brand (more specifically
Nikon) via online discussions (forums). This type of
group can be considered a collaborative project4
according to the classification of social media groups
suggested by Kaplan and Haenlein (2010).
1. http://www.journaldunet.com/cc/01_internautes/inter_usage_fr.shtml
2. http://www.deiworldwide.com/files/DEIStudy-Engaging%20-
ConsumersOnline-Summary.pdf
3. http://fr-fr.facebook.com/Nutella?ref=ts en septembre 2010.
4. Collaborative projects are defined by Kaplan and Haenlein
(2010) as projects that “enable the joint and simultaneous creation of
content by many end-users”.
Yet, while the first ground-breaking research
dedicated to the members of these online communities
clearly supports the idea that these groups are worthy
of the managers’ and researchers’ attention (Amine
and Sitz, 2004; De Valck, 2004; Bagozzi and
Dholakia, 2006b; Cova and Pace, 2006; etc.), very
few studies have, on the other hand, empirically
demonstrated the effect of participation in a virtual
brand community (VBC) on attitudes and/or beha-
viors regarding the brand concerned. Only a few stu-
dies have examined the role of this participation in
brand loyalty, via a direct effect (Shang, Chen and
Liao, 2006; Li and Hung, 2006) or through the
mediating role of confidence (Casalo, Flavian and
Guinaliu, 2007; Ellonen, Tarkiainen and Kuivalainen,
2010).
Moreover, while investments and/or partnerships
created by certain leading brands in the context of
these communities are explicitly motivated by the
hope of establishing closer ties with consumers, ear-
ning their confidence and with it their commitment
and loyalty (Armstrong and Hagel, 1996), the “com-
mitment” variable – which is recognized in the litera-
ture as being closely tied to loyalty (Dholakia, 1997;
Amine, 1998; Pritchard, Havitz and Howard, 1999;
Fullerton, 2005) – has yet to find its place in the
research regarding VBC. It is therefore particularly
relevant to measure and understand the effect of
consumer participation in a VBC on brand loyalty
from the standpoint of the dual form of commitment
implied in this case:community commitment, on the
one hand, and brand commitment on the other.
Instead of comparing the effects of membership of a
VBC with non-membership or different forms of par-
ticipation, research questions that have already been
explored by other authors (for example, Butler et al.,
2002; McAlexander, Kim and Roberts, 2003; Shang,
Chen and Liao, 2006; Casalo, Flavian and Guinaliu,
2007), it is more interesting to check the influence of
intensity of participation on the relationship mem-
bers maintain with the brand. Prolonged and intense
participation should inherently reinforce a member’s
commitment for several reasons: through affective
and/or social ties he is likely to establish by interacting
with other members of the community; through uti-
lity related considerations he may have regarding the
community (a response to a need for information, for
example); through a feeling of usefulness (through
his relations with other members); etc. Furthermore,
03-Raies(GB) 4/02/13 7:39 Page 25
Brand Loyalty Intention Among Members of a Virtual Brand Community: the Dual Role of Commitment
authors who defend the interest in virtual brand com-
munities and their impact on reinforcing the relation-
ship with the brand support the idea of a positive
effect of community commitment on brand loyalty
intention (Algesheimer, Dholakia and Herrmann,
2005; Heeyoung et al., 2008). The primary objective of
this study is therefore to test the incidence of intensity
of participation in a VBC – a variable the brand can try
to influence directly by contributing content, organi-
zing contests and events, etc. – on community com-
mitment, on the one hand, and the effect of this com-
mitment on brand loyalty intention on the other.
Commitment, considered here as the member’s
desire to pursue his relationship with the partner
according to the definition of Moorman, Deshpande
and Zaltman (1993), concerns the very nature of the
link between the member and the organization
concerned (Allen and Meyer, 1990), in this case a
VBC.
Moreover, as we pointed out earlier, firms that set
up or are partners in communities dedicated to their
brands are often guided by the desire to increase
consumer loyalty through the satisfaction and bene-
fits the community offers its members. By increasing
commitment to the VBC through these initiatives,
they hope to exert a favorable influence on brand
commitment. Yet, while intensity of member partici-
pation seems to exert a positive influence on commu-
nity commitment (as mentioned earlier) and while
we no longer need to demonstrate that brand commit-
ment can be considered an antecedent to brand
loyalty intention, the relationship between commu-
nity commitment and brand commitment is worth
examining more closely. This is the second objective
of this study.
To answer these questions, a study was conducted
with 1,065 members of a French virtual community
organized by a consumer around the Nikon brand
called the Pixelistes. Members interact via a very
lively discussion forum and a wide range of activities
(they can answer questions, help beginners, post pho-
tos, vote for favorites, share information about the
brand and its products, organize outings, etc.). The
results of this study will be presented after outlining, in
an initial section, its underlying conceptual frame-
work and hypotheses and, in a second section, pre-
senting the methodology used to test the proposed
conceptual model. After analyzing the results, the
contributions of this research, as well as its limita-
25
tions, will be developed before suggesting possible
avenues for future research.
CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK AND HYPOTHESES
From membership in a VBC to brand loyalty:
the role of community commitment
Many authors have defended the interest of vir-
tual brand communities for businesses (Aubert-
Gamet and Cova, 1999; Arnould and Price, 2000;
Muniz and O’Guinn, 2001; Gupta and Kim, 2004),
yet this research often remains theoretical. The need,
which is comprehensible, to more clearly understand
and master this relatively new subject has led, until
now, to mostly exploratory approaches. Qualitative
studies, in particular ethnographic research, have
been frequent in the field since the 1990s (Schouten
and McAlexander, 1995; Cova, 1997; Schau and
Muniz, 2002; Amine and Sitz, 2004). However, several
empirical studies regarding VBC have emerged with
the ground-breaking work of McAlexander, Kim and
Roberts (2003). These researchers demonstrate a
positive relationship between membership in a com-
munity and satisfaction as well as loyalty to the service
offered by the firm. Similarly, Shang, Chen and Liao
(2006), as well as Li and Hung (2006), have tested
the effect of consumer participation in a VBC on
brand loyalty and confirm the findings of previous
studies. Finally, a study conducted by Casalo,
Flavian and Guinaliu (2007) shows the positive effect
of participation in a VBC dedicated to computer soft-
ware on confidence and loyalty to the brand.
However, these initial studies asserting the exis-
tence of a positive effect of participation in a VBC on
relations with the brand have never been conducted
in a French context and rarely in a European one.
Moreover, most of this research is limited to mem-
bership versus non-membership (Dutta-Bergman,
2006; Algesheimer and Dholokia, 2006) or participa-
tion in terms of frequency and/or duration
(Algesheimer, Dholakia and Herrmann, 2005;
Langerak et al., 2003). The aim of this study is to go
03-Raies(GB) 4/02/13 7:39 Page 26
26 Karine Raïes, Marie-Laure Gavard-Perret
beyond simple participation by considering the effect
of intensity. Indeed, it is plausible that the more the
consumer contributes to discussions, sharing and
other activities within a VBC, the more likely mem-
bership will have a positive influence on brand
loyalty intention. It is therefore wise to approach, as is
the case in this study, intensity of participation
through two different facets, as in Wang and
Fesenmaier (2004): (1) the level of participation in
terms of average frequency and duration, which only
reflects presence and (2) the level of contribution,
according to the number of community activities in
which the member participates.
At the same time, in addition to studying the
impact of intensity of participation on brand loyalty
intention, it is essential to understand how participation
influences brand loyalty by revealing the mediating
role of community commitment. Community com-
mitment, identified as the desire to maintain relations
with the group, was introduced for the first time in
the field of VBC by Gupta and Kim (2007). The
authors consider that commitment to a community
has intense member participation as an antecedent.
On the other hand, Algesheimer, Dholakia and
Herrmann (2005) defend the idea that intention to
remain a community member (community commit-
ment) leads to behavioral intentions toward the
brand. These results are confirmed by the work of
Heehyoung et al. (2008), who demonstrate a positive
relationship between community commitment and
brand loyalty, with commitment itself being influenced
by participation.
It is therefore possible to put forward an initial
hypothesis stipulating that the more intense VBC
member participation is, the stronger the link with
the community and the desire to maintain relations
with it (community commitment) will be and the
stronger loyalty to the brand, the center of interest of
the VBC, will be, hence, the hypothesis that commu-
nity commitment plays a mediating role:
H1: Community commitment is a mediating
variable in the relationship between intensity of
participation in a VBC and brand loyalty inten-
tion.
In order to specify this mediating relationship,
and in keeping with the recommendations of Baron
and Kenny (1986), hypothesis H1 is broken down as
follows:
• H1 a: Intensity of participation has a positive
impact on brand loyalty intention.
• H1 b: Intensity of participation has a positive
impact on community commitment.
• H1 c: Community commitment has a positive
impact on brand loyalty intention.
A dual commitment to both the community and the
brand
Relational commitment has been identified by
Moorman, Deshpande and Zaltman (1993) as the
“enduring desire to maintain a valued relationship”.
Hence, in a VBC, commitment concerns a psycholo-
gical and emotional facet of the relationship
constructed by the consumer with the community.
However, if we refer to the work of Kozinets (1999),
the relationship between the individual and a com-
munity is based on two dimensions: his relationship
with the community and his relationship with its center
of interest (in this case the brand). Since the aim of this
study is to understand how brand loyalty is constructed
within the special context of a VBC, it seems relevant
not to limit our research to a single form of commit-
ment, but to take into consideration the links that
may exist between commitment to the community
and to the brand.
A bidirectional relationship between community
commitment and brand commitment
In the specific context at the heart of this
research, the relationship the consumer creates with
other members of the VBC is likely to affect his rela-
tionship with the object of the community. This rela-
tionship has in fact been highlighted by Bagozzi et
al. (2006b), who show that the consumer’s relation-
ship with the brand community has a positive impact
on his relationship with the brand. At the same time, it
seems equally obvious that strong brand commitment
will fuel a member’s commitment to a community
built around it. Pursuing this idea, De Almeida,
Mazzon and Dholakia (2008) conclude that attach-
ment to the brand has a positive effect on relations
with the community.
The literature does not precisely confirm the
direction of the relationship between the link establi-
03-Raies(GB) 4/02/13 7:39 Page 27
Brand Loyalty Intention Among Members of a Virtual Brand Community: the Dual Role of Commitment
shed by the member of a VBC and the link he esta-
blishes with the brand. This observation is based on the
writings of Kozinets (1999), who cites two
“non-independent” and “interrelated” variables.
Consequently, it appears that this relationship is bidi-
rectional: strong brand commitment would fuel com-
munity commitment, just as strong community com-
mitment would exert a positive influence on brand
commitment. This observation leads us to put for-
ward a second hypothesis:
H2: Community commitment and brand commit-
ment exert a reciprocal influence.
This type of relationship, identified as a conti-
nuous loop, can be represented using non-recursive
bidirectional models, introduced by Duncan, Haller
and Portes (1968) in the social sciences and by
Bagozzi (1980) in marketing. On this basis, hypothesis
H2 can be broken down as follows:
• H2 a: Brand commitment exerts a positive
influence on community commitment.
• H2 b: Community commitment exerts a positive
influence on brand commitment.
The relationship between brand commitment
and loyalty intention
Two approaches to loyalty can be identified in the
literature. The first is purely behavioral, defining and
measuring loyalty by repeat purchases of the brand
(Cunnigham, 1961; Odin, 1998; Johnson, Herrmann
and Huber, 2006). The second, more relationalist,
approach examines the relationship constructed bet-
ween the consumer and the brand, introducing the
idea that loyalty cannot exist without commitment
(Morgan and Hunt, 1994; Oliver, 1999; Pritchard,
Havitz and Howard, 1999; Garbarino and Johnson,
1999). Several studies referring to attitudinal loyalty
identify commitment as a means of differentiating
between “true” and “false” loyalty (for a complete
review see Garnier, 2006). Brand commitment there-
fore represents the subject’s desire to remain a custo-
mer based on attachment to and identification with
the brand (Moorman, Deshpande and Zaltman, 1993)
and, for this reason, it is considered a key mediating
variable in the construction of loyalty (Morgan and
Hunt, 1994; Garbarino and Johnson, 1999; Pritchard,
27
Havitz and Howard, 1999). On the basis of this
research, brand commitment is considered as an
antecedent of loyalty intention.
This leads us to our third hypothesis:
H3: Brand commitment has a positive impact on
brand loyalty intention.
The moderating effect of membership length
The role of membership length has been recogni-
zed by different researchers as important in predic-
ting attitudes and behaviors (De Valck, 2004;
Langerak et al., 2003; Rothaermel and Sugiyama,
2001). Furthermore, Alon and Brunel (2007) detail
the different phases through which a member passes
inside a virtual community after joining. They sug-
gest that the relationship a member develops shifts
from a rational one based on sharing information
(task-oriented) to a socio-emotional one based on
intimate conversations, development of affinities and
shared experiences, thus influencing the creation of
an affective community commitment. Similarly, the
role of a “long-time” member of the community, a
role that is recognized and respected by other mem-
bers, can create a feeling of obligation and influence
normative community commitment. Finally, mem-
bership length can positively moderate the link bet-
ween community commitment and the member’s
relationship with the brand. Thus, the longer the
consumer has been a member, the more community
commitment will have a positive impact on brand
commitment and brand loyalty intention. It is therefore
reasonable to believe that membership length would
play a favorable role, according to the following
hypothesis:
H4: Membership length has a positive modera-
ting effect on all relationships between level of
participation in a VBC and brand loyalty inten-
tion.
Figure 1 recaps these hypotheses and formalizes
the research model that we will test.
03-Raies(GB) 4/02/13 7:39 Page 28

28 Karine Raïes, Marie-Laure Gavard-Perret

Membership
length

H4

Participation Community Brand loyalty

Intensity H1a Commitement H1b Intention

H2a H2b H3

Affective
Brand
Commitment

Figure 1. – Research model

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY new products or offers and even organizes photogra-

Field study: a discussion forum organized around
the Nikon brand
In order to test the research model that has emerged
from the conceptual framework presented above
(Figure 1) a field study was set up in 2008 in partner-
ship with an existing virtual community, the
Pixelistes, started by a consumer after purchasing a
Nikon camera and organized around this famous
brand. Presented on the web as “the leading French-
speaking community of Nikon users”, it had nearly
30,000 registered members at the time of the study
and Nikon was its main partner. The Pixelistes com-
munity allows consumers to interact via the web (and
more specifically via a discussion forum) and share
their interest in the Nikon brand by exchanging infor-
mation, experiences, reviews and impressions of the
brand and more generally their passion for photogra-
phy. This community, which is run by an indepen-
dent moderator, is nevertheless in contact with
Nikon’s marketing department, which informs it of
phic contests. Indeed, a logo and a link to Nikon’s
commercial site are present on the community website.
A quantitative study was conducted with support
from Nikon France, which, at the time, did not have a
discussion forum on its own website and was curious
as to whether it was worth providing consumers with
this type of tool. Since the study was conducted, a
virtual community called My N’Club has been added
to the Nikon School program (a training scheme for
Nikon users offering tips and courses) and the Nikon
Club (a real-world community that organizes outings
for photography enthusiasts).
A questionnaire was posted on the forum along
with a brief presentation of the study by the moderator.
1,065 usable responses were collected (after elimina-
ting aberrant responses and incomplete question-
naires). The choice of scales used in the question-
naire is outlined in the following section.
Choice of measurement scales
In order to measure community commitment, the
most appropriate means of rendering the desire to
03-Raies(GB) 4/02/13 7:39 Page 29
Brand Loyalty Intention Among Members of a Virtual Brand Community: the Dual Role of Commitment
maintain ties with the group as well as all the compo-
nents of this link, appears to be the multidimensional
scale developed by Allen and Meyer (1990) in the
context of organizational commitment. Within this
measure, we can find the dimensions generally cited in
the literature on brand communities, but also those
observed in our initial qualitative investigations: (a)
an emotional dimension or affective commitment
(mentioned specifically by Kanga et al., 2007, which
emphasizes the feeling of belonging and psychological
attachment), an interest in remaining a member that is
recognized as a calculated commitment (cited in the
context of VBC by Casalo, Flavian and Guinalliu
(2008) and which has emerged during observations
of the community’s discourse before our investiga-
tion in verbatims such as: Thank goodness you’re
here; I couldn’t manage without your advice”) and
(b) a feeling of obligation toward other members
(related to the “moral obligation” identified by
Muniz and O’Guinn (2001)). To confirm the adaptabi-
lity of a measure created in the context of organizatio-
nal commitment, a pre-test was conducted with 150
participants in a virtual common interest community,
(Chatmania), which allowed us to purify the scale
and adapt certain items.
The measurement of participation intensity is ins-
pired by the work of Langerack et al. (2004), who
measure the participation level using visit duration
(How long, on average, does each visit last?) and fre-
quency (How often, on average, do you visit the
VBC?) and the work of Shang, Chen and Liao (2006)
and Wang and Fesenmaier (2004), who complete
these components with contribution to community
activities.5 Taking into account the work of Jarvis,
Mackenzie and Podsakoff (2003), who warn against
the poor specification of models that fail to distin-
guish formative latent variables from reflective
5. The “level of contribution” variable was measured using a four-
point scale: 1- for people who ticked “read messages and find
information only”, 2- for participants who ticked one or two activi-
ties, 3- for participants who ticked three to four activities, 4- for
those who ticked more than four different activities. The different
activities observed among the participants were: ask other mem-
bers questions, answer questions from other members, take part in a
Pixelistes contest, post/answer a sales announcement, take part in a
Pixelistes outing, comment on photos by Pixelistes members and
post messages about the Nikon brand.
29
variables,6 it is important to specify that the variable
“intensity of participation”, measured in this study
and made up of three items (participation frequency
and duration as well as contribution level) is a forma-
tive variable.
Then, to measure loyalty to the Nikon brand, a
measurement focused on the behavioral dimension
was selected: repeat purchase intention and inclina-
tion to recommend the brand, to the extent that the
model already includes the “brand commitment”
variable, considered from a relational standpoint and
often viewed as an affective facet of loyalty.
Consequently, for behavioral loyalty intention we
borrowed the items suggested by Johnson, Herrmann
and Huber (2006) covering repeat purchase intention
(three items) and positive word of mouth (two items).
Finally, for affective commitment, which is likely
to express the relational aspect of brand loyalty and
recognized as the desire of an individual to remain a
customer based on attachment and identification with
brand, we selected the measure of affective commit-
ment proposed by Fullerton (2005). All the scales
used in this research were the objects of pre-tests and
factor analyses (principal components) in order to
confirm their psychometric qualities.
Confirming the measurement scales
Principal components analysis allowed us to
refine the scales used in this study. We obtained a
three-dimensional scale to measure community com-
mitment capable of rendering more than 75% of the
variance and with a Cronbach’s alpha for each
dimension greater than 0.8 (See Appendix A1).
Using structural equations (with AMOS software) it is
possible to confirm the good psychometric quality of
this scale, with a RMSEA of 0.059, an AGFI of 0.958
and a CFI of 0.983. Reliability of the scale’s dimen-
sions was established with a Jöreskog’s rho greater
than 0.6 (except for the normative commitment
dimension which is equal to 0.598). Finally, conver-
gent validity was confirmed with an index greater
than 0.5, which means that the variance of each
6. For more details on the rules for distinguishing formative from
reflective variables, see Jarvis, Mackenzie and Podsakoff (2003).
03-Raies(GB) 4/02/13 7:39 Page 30

30 Karine Raïes, Marie-Laure Gavard-Perret

construct is explained more by its measures than by ANALYSIS OF THE RESULTS

error (Fornell and Larcker, 1981). The results of the
confirmatory factor analysis of the scale used to mea-
sure community commitment are summarized in
Table 1.
This initial phase, dedicated to confirming the
Measures of brand commitment and brand loyalty
scales, allowed us to move on and test our hypo-
intention were also tested by PCA followed by a
theses.
confirmatory factor analysis. Overall indices of fit
are satisfactory. The same can be said for the indices of
reliability and convergent validity. The results of
these analyses are presented in Appendix A2. The Test of hypothesis H1: Community commitment
details of the items selected after refining and confir- is a mediating variable in the relationship between
ming the scales are presented in Appendix A3. intensity of participation and brand loyalty intention

Here, we want to test the hypothesis that the

impact of participation intensity on brand loyalty
intention will be exerted via community commit-
ment. In other words, intensity of participation in the
community would have a positive impact on commit-
ment to the said community, the latter influencing, in
turn, brand loyalty intention.

Table 1. – Results of the confirmatory factor analysis: the scale for community commitment

Item λ λ bootstrap Standard deviation t value

Affective community commitment
COM_AFF1 0.845 0.846 0.013 65.075
COM_AFF2 0.825 0.824 0.015 54.933
COM_AFF3 0.775 0.777 0.017 45.705
COM_AFF4 0.765 0.767 0.021 36.523
Jöreskog’s rho 0.878
Convergent validity 0.860
Calculated community commitment
COM_CAL1 0.596 0.595 0.028 21.25
COM_CAL2 0.963 0.962 0.024 40.083
Jöreskog’s rho 0.772
Convergent validity 0.641
Normative community commitment
COM_OBL1 0.579 0.577 0.030 12.233
COM_OBL2 0.725 0.725 0.035 21.428
Jöreskog’s rho 0.598
Convergent validity 0.530
RMSEA 0.059
AGFI 0.958
GFI 0.980
CFI 0.983
Chi-square/df/ sig 80.648/17/ .000
03-Raies(GB) 4/02/13 7:39 Page 31

Brand Loyalty Intention Among Members of a Virtual Brand Community: the Dual Role of Commitment 31

In order to test the mediating effect of community
commitment, two structural equation models were
built. We used the same approach as Lam et al.
(2004), who adapt the mediation test used by Baron
and Kenny (1986) to data analysis with structural
equations. This approach consists in specifying two
models: a first model that plots the direct link bet-
ween the explanatory variable (in this case participa-
tion intensity) and the variable to be explained (brand
loyalty intention) and a second model plotting the
relationship of mediation (community commitment).
The results obtained ensure that all the conditions
required to confirm the existence of a mediating
effect are present. It is therefore possible to conclude
that there is total mediation of community commit-
ment in the link between intensity of participation
and brand loyalty intention because, as we can see in
Figure 2, the estimated parameter for the link bet-
ween intensity of participation and brand loyalty
intention is significant in the first model, but
becomes insignificant in the second one when com-
munity commitment is introduced as a mediator.
Tests of hypotheses H2 and H3 using a structural
equations model
In order to test hypothesis H2 regarding the exis-
tence of a bidirectional and reciprocal link between
community commitment and brand commitment, as
well as hypothesis H3 regarding the impact of brand
commitment on brand loyalty intention, an integra-
ting model, including all the links in the theoretical
model, was created using a global structural equation
model under AMOS software. This test allows us to
confirm the good psychometric qualities of the
model according to the criteria suggested by Hu and
Bentler (1999): a RMSEA equal to 0.047, an AGFI
equal to 0.935 and a CFI equal to 0.966. The multi-
normality condition is bypassed thanks to the use of a
bootstrap procedure carried out on the sample.
Verification of the significance of the estimated para-
meters leads us to conclude that all the structural
links tested are significant (See Figure 3).

Model A

0,210**
PARTICIPATION INT_FID

Model A:
RMSEA= 0,034
AGFI = 0,981
CFI = 0,994
Chi-square/ df = 2,239

Model B

0,005 (N.S.)
PARTICIPATION INT_FID

0,458** 0,422**

Model B:
RMSEA= 0,045
AGFI = 0,949 ENG_COM
CFI = 0,973
Chi-square/ df = 3,137

Figure 2. – Test of community commitment as a mediating variable in the relationship between intensity
of participation and brand loyalty intention
03-Raies(GB) 4/02/13 7:39 Page 32
32 Karine Raïes, Marie-Laure Gavard-Perret
Participation 0,434**
Intensity
0,179**
RMSEA = 0,047
AGFI = 0,935
CFI = 0,966
Chi-square/ df = 3,320
Figure 3. – Test of the global model
Test of hypothesis H4: the moderating effect
of membership length
To test the moderating effect of membership
length, a multi-group analysis was conducted accor-
ding to the recommendations of Sauer and Dick
(1993) with an AMOS software module. Thus, after
initially testing the difference of the model (testing
the significance of the Chi-square between the free
and the constrained model), which led us to conclude
that there is indeed moderation (See Appendix A4),
the direction of moderation is assessed by analyzing
the structural parameters of the model for each group
(new vs. long-time members) as outlined in Table 2.
The results show a positive moderating effect for
all structural links in the model except for the link
between brand commitment and community commit-
ment. Indeed, while for all other relationships the
estimated parameter is higher for long-time members
than for newcomers, thus converging with the hypo-
thesis of a positive moderating effect for membership
length, the direction of moderation is reversed for the
link between brand commitment/community com-
mitment, which is stronger for new members.
Discussion
The first hypothesis tested suggests the existence of
a mediating effect of community commitment on the
Community 0,159* Brand loyalty
Commitment Intention
0,350**
0,556**
Affective
Brand
Commitment
link between participationintensity and brand loyalty
intention. This hypothesis, which defends the idea
that the impact of participation on loyalty behaviors
regarding the brand must involve community com-
mitment, has been confirmed. This result converges, on
the one hand, with those cited by Shang, Chen and
Liao (2006), for whom active participation can be
considered an involving activity for the consumer
and one that results in strong commitment to the
VBC. On the other hand, the positive link discovered
between community commitment and brand loyalty
intention converges with the results of Algesheimer,
Dholakia and Herrmann (2005), for whom intention to
remain a member, or community commitment,
results in behavioral intentions toward the brand.
Moreover, the test of the first hypothesis allows
us to conclude that there is “total” mediation by com-
munity commitment for the link examined. More
precisely, this confirms that the effect of participatio-
nintensity on brand loyalty intention must involve an
increase in community commitment. Community
commitment is therefore an essential variable in the
link established between community participation
and brand loyalty intention. The managerial implica-
tions of this observation are highlighted in the next
section.
The test of the second hypothesis, which claims
that there is a bidirectional and reciprocal link bet-
ween community commitment and brand commit-
ment also reveals the significance of this dual rela-
03-Raies(GB) 4/02/13 7:39 Page 33

Brand Loyalty Intention Among Members of a Virtual Brand Community: the Dual Role of Commitment 33

Table 2. – Estimated parameters of the moderating effect of membership lenght

Link examined New members Long-time members

Parameter7 t value8 Parameter t value
Participation in the VBC -> Community
commitment 0.375 10.71 0.569 14.58
Community commitment -> Loyalty
intention 0.160 2.71 0.164 2.02
Brand commitment -> Loyalty
intention 0.551 10.80 0.558 7.64
Community commitment ->
Brand commitment 0.151 1.99 0.176 2.02
Brand commitment -> Community
commitment 0.398 4.23 0.309 3.76

tionship. Thus, while stronger brand commitment
results in stronger community commitment
(β = 0.350; p < 0.05), community commitment positi-
vely influences, in turn, brand commitment
(β = 0.179; p < 0.05). Therefore, these two types of
commitment mutually fuel and influence each other.
Furthermore, this idea converges with the notion put
forward by Kozinets as early as 1999 that the rela-
tionship the member develops with the consumer
community is built around two dimensions that are
“non-independent” and “interrelated”: the relation-
ship with the object of the group (in this case a
brand) and the relationship with the community.9
Finally, regarding the value of the estimated parame-
ters, it would seem that brand commitment plays a
major role in shaping this dual relationship.
The third hypothesis, which postulated a positive
impact of brand commitment on brand loyalty inten-
tion was, unsurprisingly, confirmed. Thus, a consu-
mer who is committed to the brand is more likely to
want to purchase it again and spread positive word of
mouth about it. This result, while it converges with
observations already cited in the literature, confirms
the important predictive role played by brand com-
mitment regarding loyalty in the context of VBCs.
Finally, the positive moderating role of member-
ship length, observed for most links in the model, is
worth emphasizing. Indeed, it shows that moderation
plays a positive role for the most long-time members
and that it amplifies the effect of participation in the
community on brand loyalty intention. However, it is
important to note that this moderating effect is reversed
for a specific link: the one between brand commit-
ment and community commitment. Indeed, this rela-
tionship is stronger for new members than it is for
more senior ones. Thus, we can observe that, while
the impact of participation on community commit-
ment, as well as the impact of community commit-
ment on brand commitment, is particularly strong for
long-time members (respectively, ∆β = +0.19 and
+0.03), the impact of brand commitment on commu-
nity commitment is stronger for new members
(∆β = – 0.09). This leads us to the following conclu-
sion: while for long-time members community com-
mitment is a fundamental component in explaining
the impact of participation in a VBC on brand loyalty
intention, for new members, brand commitment
seems to be the factor that triggers the chain reaction,
probably because their community commitment is
still nascent. This conclusion tends to reinforce the

7. Standard and “bootstrapped” parameter.

8. Obtained by dividing the “bootstrapped” parameter by the standard deviation. For the parameter to be significant, the T-value must be greater
than |1.96|.
9. ”The formation of lasting identification as a member of a virtual community of consumption depends largely on two non-independent factors.
The first factor is the relationship that the person has with the consumption activity... The second factor is the intensity of the social relationships
the person possesses with other members of the virtual community. The two factors will often be interrelated” (Kozinets, 1999, p. 254).
03-Raies(GB) 4/02/13 7:39 Page 34
34 Karine Raïes, Marie-Laure Gavard-Perret
interest of examining the dual relationship of com-
munity commitment and brand commitment.
These results and discussion points lead us, in the
following conclusion, to emphasize the contributions
of this study and the managerial implications they
suggest.
CONCLUSION
This study aims to highlight the interest of studying
consumer groups organized around a brand by focu-
sing on the impact of these organizations on attitudes
and behaviors. It has allowed us, therefore, to demons-
trate the positive effect of intensity of consumer partici-
pation in a VBC on brand loyalty intention, first
through an increase in community commitment due to
intense participation and activity and, second, through
the dual relationship that is established between com-
munity commitment and brand commitment.
Contributions
The global model presented above, whose indices
of fit have allowed us to confirm the hypotheses put
forward regarding the links between intensity of parti-
cipation, community commitment, affective brand
commitment and brand loyalty intention, offers a
clearer understanding, on a theoretical level, of how
links are established between participation and brand
loyalty intention.
Moreover, the mediating role of commitment,
which is perceived as the desire to maintain relations
with the partner and is considered from a dual pers-
pective, toward the community at first and then the
brand, has not, to our knowledge, been demonstrated
in the context of a VBC.
Furthermore, this study has allowed us to
confirm, empirically, using quantitative data, the
existence and effect of a link established by the
consumer with the VBC in a context where most
research so far has been limited to conceptual propo-
sals and/or qualitative investigations.
Finally, the study of a reciprocal relationship bet-
ween community commitment and brand commit-
ment, through a bidirectional non-recursive model, is a
rare case in marketing research10. Yet, this relation-
ship is particularly interesting and clearly indicates,
in the context of a VBC, that the two variables
influence each other. It would therefore be wise to
use this model more often in the social sciences (this
relationship could exist between perceived quality
and satisfaction or satisfaction and loyalty and is
worth exploring further).
From a managerial standpoint, observation of the
influence of participation intensity in a VBC on the
consumer’s relationship with the brand and particu-
larly brand loyalty intention – as we have demonstra-
ted previously – leads us to the following proposal: a
firm or website moderator who wants to involve
members in community life must make sure to stimu-
late their level of participation by encouraging fre-
quent and longer visits, but also by diversifying the
type of activities in which members can participate.
This can be achieved, for example, by organizing
special events, “real” or virtual encounters, or propo-
sing various tasks around consumption of the brand,
like contests or opinion polls.
On the other hand, any business concerned by the
development of a VBC should be careful to maintain
the dual relationship that exists between community
commitment and brand commitment. Because these
two types of commitment fuel each other, it is impor-
tant to make sure the link is never broken by promo-
ting one form of commitment over the other. This can
be achieved by proposing activities that encourage
group cohesion and sharing around consumption of
the members’ favorite brand. As an example, we can
cite the Pixelistes community, which organizes photo
outings, thus allowing members to meet and share
their enthusiasm for their common hobby during a
day together.
Similarly, the moderating role of membership
length underlines the importance of community com-
mitment for long-standing members. From this pers-
pective, systems highlighting the status of long-time
members within the community should be encoura-
ged such as loyalty points designed to recognize their
10. We can cite two articles published in leading international
journals using non-recursive models with a reciprocal bidirectional
relationship: Beerli, Martin and Quintana, 2004; Bagozzi, 1980.
03-Raies(GB) 4/02/13 7:39 Page 35
Brand Loyalty Intention Among Members of a Virtual Brand Community: the Dual Role of Commitment
position within the group. On the other hand, exami-
ning the moderating mechanism of this variable has
demonstrated that community commitment involves
strong brand commitment among new members. It is
therefore important to launch initiatives that can
generate interest among new members and include
them as early as possible in group activities in order to
increase their commitment to the VBC. The group
moderator plays a vital role in guiding new members,
explaining the community’s “codes” and recognizing
each of their contributions to group activities.
Furthermore, this study is of interest because it
was conducted in a real-life situation, with a commu-
nity organized by consumers around a brand. It there-
fore allowed us to highlight the mechanism of the
community’s influence through the essential role of
commitment for “real” consumers of a “real” brand
(Nikon) within a “real” community they had created
(the Pixelistes). This study also offers some explana-
tions and insights regarding the questions many firms
are asking today about how to deal with these com-
munities11. Indeed, it is increasingly complicated and
difficult for firms to communicate effectively with
these consumer groups, who disregard purely com-
mercial communications and even reject traditional
formats (Bagozzi and Dholokia, 2006a). They need
to integrate these communities as a source of infor-
mation on consumer expectations, but also as a
means of interacting with the latter in the context of a
balance of powers between firms and consumers
(Cova and Carrère, 2002).
A range of options is available to firms, from
adopting a passive position and observing these
groups from a distance to a more proactive strategy
that consists in offering consumers a dedicated space
to exchange their views. Whatever the method, firms
need to remain transparent in order to maintain the
consumer’s trust and, consequently, his commitment to
the community and the brand (Casalo, Flavian and
Guinaliu, 2007; Shang, Chen and Liao, 2006).
Indeed, a firm that underestimated the importance of
an ethical approach to these communities (by pos-
ting, for example, fake messages from fictional mem-
11. We can cite the example of an unfortunate experience for GAP in
October 2010 when it decided to change its logo, a decision that
riled hundreds of “fans” who reacted accordingly. After several
weeks of protests on the web, the consumer community succeeded
in forcing the firm to backpedal and abandon the new logo.
35
bers), would run the risk of a backlash when these
activities are discovered. Today, consumers are
highly sensitive to corporate ethics (Canel Depitre,
2000) and they have, moreover, the technical means of
damaging a brand’s image by generating negative
buzz on the web (Roux, 2007).
However, despite its theoretical and managerial
interest, this study has a certain number of limita-
tions, including some that point to avenues for fur-
ther research.
Limitations and avenues for future research
First, the model was only tested with a single
brand and a single community. It is necessary to
confirm its initial results with other brands and types of
communities (for example, those initiated by a
brand), as well as with different product and service
categories, in order to improve their external validity.
However, initial analyses of data from a second com-
munity of photography enthusiasts called “Nikon
Passion” (which was the object of another study we
conducted and is still being finalized) confirm those
obtained in the course of this study.
Second, the variables selected only correspond to a
small share of the research questions that could be
studied in the context of a VBC. For example, the
mediating effects of consumer trust in the commu-
nity and satisfaction with it, as well as the modera-
ting effects of the type of community (initiated by the
firm or initiated by consumers), of the type of benefit
sought after and of member expertise in the product
category could be relevant topics for future studies.
It might also have been preferable to develop a
scale for community commitment specifically with
virtual brand communities in mind, which could have
produced different results. It would be interesting in
the future for researchers to consider this question of
specific scales in the special contexts of both the
Internet and virtual communities.
It would have indeed been preferable to pre-test
the scale for community commitment in the context of a
VBC rather than in a virtual common interest commu-
nity. It is possible that the difference in type of commu-
nity influenced the results of the pre-test. We could
confirm this in a future study, which would have to
take into account the real behavior of web users in
terms of participation as well as loyalty to the brand.
03-Raies(GB) 4/02/13 7:39 Page 36
36 Karine Raïes, Marie-Laure Gavard-Perret
BIBLIOGRAPHICAL REFERENCES
Algesheimer R., Dholakia M. and Herrmann A. (2005),
The social influence of brand community: evidence
from European car clubs, Journal of Marketing, 69, 3,
19-34.
Algesheimer R. and Dholakia M. (2006), Do customer
communities pay off?, Harvard Business Review, 84,
11, 26-30.
Allen N. and Meyer J. (1990), The measurement and ante-
cedents of affective continuance and normative com-
mitment to the organization, Journal of Occupational
Psychology, 63, 1, 1-18.
Alon A.T. and Brunel F. (2007), Dynamics of community
engagement: the role of interpersonal communicative
genres in online community evolutions, Research in
Consumer Behavior, 11, 371-400.
Amine A. (1998), Consumers’ true brand loyalty: the central
role of commitment, Journal of Strategic Marketing, 6,
4, 305-319.
Amine A. and Sitz L. (2004), How does a virtual brand
community emerge? Some implications for marketing
research, Cahiers de Recherche de l’IRG, Institut de
Recherche en Gestion, Université Paris XII.
Armstrong A. and Hagel J. (1996), The real value of on-
line communities, Harvard Business Review, 74, 3,
134-141.
Arnould E.J. and Price L.L. (2000), Authenticating acts
and authoritative performances, in S. Ratneshwar, D.G.
Mick and C. Huffman (coord.), The why of consump-
tion, contemporary perspectives on consumer motives,
goals, and desires, London, Routledge, 140-163.
Aubert-Gamet V. and Cova B. (1999), Servicescapes: from
modern non-places to postmodern common places,
Journal of Business Research, 44, 1, 37-45.
Bagozzi R. (1980), Performance and satisfaction in an
industrial sales force: an examination of their antece-
dents and simultaneity, Journal of Marketing, 44, 2,
65-78.
Bagozzi R.P. and Dholakia U.M. (2006a), Open source
software user communities: a study of participation in
Linux user groups, Management Science, 52, 7, 1099-
1115.
Bagozzi R.P. and Dholakia U.M. (2006b), Antecedents and
purchase consequences of customer participation in
small group brand communities, International Journal of
Research in Marketing, 23, 1, 45-61.
Baron R.M. and Kenny D.A. (1986), The moderator-
mediator variable distinction in social psychological
research: conceptual, strategic, and statistical considera-
tions, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,
51, 6, 1173-1182.
Beerli A., Martin J. and Quintana A. (2004), A model of
customer loyalty in the retail banking market,
European Journal of Marketing, 38, 1/2, 253-275.
Bhattacharya C.B. and Sen S. (2003), Consumer-company
identification: a framework for understanding consu-
mers’ relationships with companies, Journal of
Marketing, 67, 2, 76-88.
Butler B., Sproull L., Kiesler S. and Kraut R. (2002),
Community effort in online groups: Who does the
work and why?, in S. Weisband and L. Atwater
(coord.), Leadership at a distance, Erlbaum, Mahwah,
NJ.
Canel Depitre B. (2000), Développement durable et com-
portement citoyen du consommateur, 1st International
Congess of Marketing Tendencies in Europe.
Casalo L., Flavian C. and Guinaliu M. (2007), The impact of
participation in virtual brand communities on consu-
mer trust and loyalty: the case of free software, Online
Information Review, 31, 6, 775-792.
Casalo L., Flavian C. and Guinalliu M. (2008), Promoting
consumers’ participation in virtual brand communities: a
new paradigm in branding strategy, Journal of
Marketing Communications, 14, 1, 19-36.
Cova B. (1997), Community and consumption towards a
definition of the “linking value” of product or services,
European Journal of Marketing, 31, 3, 297-316.
Cova B. and Carrère V. (2002), Gare à vos marques. Du
contre-pouvoir tribal sur le Net, 2nd Congress on
Marketing Tendencies, Paris-Venice.
Cova B. and Pace S. (2006), Brand community of conve-
nience products, new forms of customer empower-
ment: the case “My Nutella The Community”,
European Journal of Marketing, 40, 9, 1087-1105.
Cunnigham S.M. (1961), Customer loyalty to store and
brand, Harvard Business Review, 39, 127-137.
De Almeida S.O., Mazzon J.A. and Dholakia U. (2008),
The effects of belonging to consumer-managed and
firm-managed virtual brand communities: the case of
Microsoft X-Box, Latin American Advances in
Consumer Research, 2, 203-204.
De Valck K. (2004), Virtual community of consumption:
networks of consumer knowledge and companionship,
Doctoral dissertation, Erasmus University, Rotterdam.
De Valck K., Langerak F., Verhoef P. and Verlegh P. (2007),
Satisfaction with virtual communities of interest: effect
on members’ visit frequency, British Journal of
Management, 18, 3, 241-256.
Dholakia U.M. (1997), An investigation of some determi-
nants of brand commitment, Advances in Consumer
Research, 24, 381-387.
Duncan O., Haller O. and Portes A. (1968), Peer influences
on aspirations: a reinterpretation, American Journal of
Sociology, 74, 2, 189-237.
Dutta-Bergman M.J. (2005), The antecedents of commu-
nity-oriented Internet use: Community participation
and community satisfaction, Journal of computer-
Mediated Communication, 11, 1, 97-113.
Ellonen H.K., Tarkiainen A. and Kuivalainen O. (2010),
The effect of website usage and virtual community par-
ticipation on brand relationships, International Journal
of Internet Marketing and Advertising, 6, 1, 85-105.
03-Raies(GB) 4/02/13 7:39 Page 37
Brand Loyalty Intention Among Members of a Virtual Brand Community: the Dual Role of Commitment
Fornell C. and Larcker D. (1981), Structural equation
models with unobservable variables and measurement
error, Journal of Marketing Research, 18, 1, 39-50.
Fullerton G. (2005), The impact of brand commitment on
loyalty to retail service brands, Revue Canadienne des
Sciences de l’Administration, 22, 2, 97-110.
Garbarino E. and Johnson M.S. (1999), The different roles of
satisfaction, trust, and commitment in customer rela-
tionships, Journal of Marketing, 63, 2, 70-87.
Garnier M. (2006), Fidélité à un site Internet : influence
des dimensions de l’engagement et rôle modérateur de
variables individuelles liées à Internet. Application à un
moteur de recherche, Doctoral Dissertation, Université
Pierre-Mendès-France, Grenoble.
Gupta S. and Kim H.W. (2004), Virtual community:
concepts, implications, and future research directions,
Proceedings of the Tenth Americas Conference on
Information Systems, New York.
Gupta S. and Kim H. (2007), Developing the commitment to
virtual community: the balanced effects of cognition
and affect, Information Resources Management
Journal, 20, 1, 28-43.
Heehyoung J., Olfman L., Islang K., Joon K. and Kyungtae
K. (2008), The influence of on-line brand community
characteristics on community commitment and brand
loyalty, International Journal of Electronic Commerce,
12, 3, 57-80.
Hu L. and Bentler P.M. (1999), Cutoff criteria for fit
indexes in covariance structure analysis: conventional
criteria versus new alternatives, Structural Equation
Modeling, 6, 1, 1-55.
Iwasaki Y. and Havitz M.E. (1998), A path analytic model of
the relationships between involvement, psychological
commitment, and loyalty, Journal of Leisure Research,
30, 2, 256-280.
Jarvis C., Mackenzie S. and Podsakoff P. (2003), A critical
review of construct indicators and measurement model
misspecification in marketing and consumer research,
Journal of Consumer Research, 30, 2, 199-218.
Johnson M.D., Herrmann A. and Huber F. (2006), The evo-
lution of loyalty intentions, Journal of Marketing, 70,
2, 122-132.
Kang I., Lee K.C., Lee S. and Choi J. (2007), Investigation
of online community voluntary behavior using cogni-
tive map, Computers in Human Behavior, 23, 1, 111-
126.
Kaplan A.M. and Haenlein M. (2010), Users of the world,
unite! The challenges and opportunities of social
media, Business Horizons, 53, 1, 59-68.
Kozinets R.V. (1999), E-tribalized marketing? The strate-
gic implications of virtual communities of consump-
tion, European Management Journal, 17, 3, 252-264.
Lam S.Y., Shankar V., Erramilli M.K. and Murthy B.
(2004), Customer value, satisfaction, loyalty, and swit-
ching costs: an illustration from a business-to-business
service context, Academy of Marketing Science
Journal, 32, 3, 293-311.
Langerak F., Verhoef P., Verlegh P. and De Valck K. (2003),
The effect of members’ satisfaction with a virtual com-
37
munity on member participation, ERIM Report Series
Research in Management.
Langerak F., Verhoef P., Verlegh P. and de Valck K. (2004),
Satisfaction and participation in virtual communities,
Advances in Consumer Research, 31, 56-57.
Levine R., Locke C., Searls D. and Weinberger D. (1999),
The cluetrain manifesto: the end of business as usual,
Perseus Books Group, Cambridge, Massachusetts.
Li S.Y. and Hung K. (2006), Impacts of virtual community
participation on consideration set size, brand switching
intention, and brand loyalty, American Marketing
Association, 17, 161-163.
McAlexander J.H., Kim S.K. and Roberts S.D. (2003),
Loyalty: the influences of satisfaction and brand com-
munity integration, Journal of Marketing Theory and
Practice, 11, 4, 1-11.
Moorman C., Deshpande R. and Zaltman G. (1993),
Factors affecting trust in market research relationships,
Journal of Marketing, 57, 1, 81-101.
Morgan R.M. and Hunt S.D. (1994), The commitment-trust
theory of relationship marketing, Journal of Marketing,
58, 3, 20-38.
Muniz A.M. and O’Guinn T.C. (2001), Brand community,
Journal of Consumer Research, 27, 4, 412-432.
Odin Y. (1998), Fidélité et inertie : clarification concep-
tuelle et test empirique, Université Pierre-Mendès-
France, IAE Grenoble.
Oliver R.L. (1999), Whence consumer loyalty?, Journal of
Marketing, 63, 4, 33-44.
Pritchard M.P., Havitz M.E. and Howard D.R. (1999),
Analyzing the commitment-loyalty link in service
contexts, Journal of the Academy of Marketing
Science, 27, 3, 333-348.
Rothaermel F.T. and Sugiyama S. (2001), Virtual Internet
communities and commercial success: individual and
community-level theory grounded in the atypical case
of TimeZone.com, Journal of Management, 27, 3, 297-
312.
Roux D. (2007), Ordinary resistance as a parasitic form of
action: a dialogical analysis of consumer/firm rela-
tions, Advances in Consumer Research, 34, 1-8.
Sauer P.L. and Dick A. (1993), Using moderator variables in
structural equation models, Advances in Consumer
Research, 20, 1, 637-640.
Schau H.J. and Muniz A.M. (2002), Brand communities
and personal identities: negotiations in cyberspace,
Advances in Consumer Research, 29, 344-349.
Schouten J.W. and McAlexander J.H. (1995), Subcultures of
consumption – an ethnography of the new bikers,
Journal of Consumer Research, 22, 1, 43-61.
Shang R.A., Chen Y.C. and Liao H.J. (2006), The value of
participation in virtual communities on brand loyalty,
Internet Research, 16, 4, 398-418.
Wang Y.C. and Fesenmaier D.R. (2004), Towards unders-
tanding members’ general participation in and active
contribution to an online travel community, Tourism
Management, 25, 6, 709-722.
03-Raies(GB) 4/02/13 7:39 Page 38

38 Karine Raïes, Marie-Laure Gavard-Perret

Appendix A1. – Results of the principal component analysis: the scale for community commitment

Item name Community Factor Dimension Reliability:

loading Cronbach’s
alpha
I feel like “part of the family”
in the Pixelistes community 0.781 0.852
(COM_AFF1).
I feel a bond with the members
0.751 0.830 0.813
of the Pixelistes community (COM_AFF2). Affective
I have a strong feeling of belonging commitment
0.697 0.792
to the Pixelistes community (COM_AFF3).
The Pixelistes community means
a lot to me personally (COM_AFF4). 0.673 0.763
I would have a hard time finding
the same information elsewhere 0.884 0.924
than on the Pixelistes forum (COM_CAL1).
Calculated
The support I receive from other members commitment
of the Pixelistes community is very important
to me and I would have a hard time finding 0.751 0.702 0.875
such support in another community (COM_CAL2).
Everyone who owns a Nikon camera
should take part in the Pixelistes forum 0.842 0.878
(COM_OBL1).
Normative
In order to keep the community alive, commitment
I feel I should continue taking part in chats 0.648 0.655 0.916
on the Pixelistes forum
(COM_OBL2).
Variance explained 75.338 %
KMO Incex 0.885
Bartlett’s test sphericity Chi-square = 3823.936 / df = 28 / Sig = .000
03-Raies(GB) 4/02/13 7:39 Page 39

Brand Loyalty Intention Among Members of a Virtual Brand Community: the Dual Role of Commitment 39

Appendix A2. – Results of the confirmatory factor analysis: the scale for brand loyalty intention

Item λ λ bootstrap Standard deviation Valeur t

Repeat purchase intention
FID_RACH1 0.892 0.891 0.014 63.642
FID_RACH2 0.945 0.944 0.012 78.666
FID_RACH3 0.708 0.712 0.024 29.666
Jöreskog’s rho 0.888
Convergent validity 0.729
Intention to recommend the brand
FID_RECOM1 0.752 0.752 0.038 19.789
FID_RECOM2 0.841 0.841 0.023 36.565
Jöreskog’s rho 0.777
Convergent validity 0.636
RMSEA 0.047
AGFI 0.982
GFI 0.995
CFI 0.997
Chi-square/df/ Sig 13.373/ 4/ .010

Appendix A3. – Measure used for the final study

Variable Dimensions Scale Items selected

• Several times a day

Frequency • Several times a week
of participation • Several times a month • How often, on average, do you visit the VBC?
in a VBC • Less than once a
month

• Less than 5 minutes

• From 5 to 15 minutes
Duration • From 15 to 30 minutes
• Approximately how long does each visit last?
of participation • From 30 minutes
Intensity
to 1 hour
of participation
• More than 1 hour
in a VBC
• Which Pixelistes community activities do you take part in:
• Read messages and
o Read messages and consult information
find information only
o Ask other members questions on the forum
• Take part in 1 or 2
o Answer questions from other members
Level activities
o Pixelistes contests
of contribution • Take part in 3 or 4
o Post/reply to “for sale” ads
activities
o Outings with other Pixelistes members
• Take part in more than
o Comment on photos by other Pixelistes members
4 activities
o Post messages about the Nikon brand
03-Raies(GB) 4/02/13 7:39 Page 40

40 Karine Raïes, Marie-Laure Gavard-Perret

Appendix A3. – Measure used for the final study (continued)

Variable Dimensions Scale Items selected

• The next time I buy a camera, it will certainly be a

5-point Likert scale
Nikon.
Repeat purchase with neutral position:
• If I lost my camera, I would certainly buy another Nikon.
intention Completely disagree –
• If I were entitled to a free camera, I would choose a
Completely agree
Nikon.
Brand loyalty
intention
5-point Likert scale
• I would probably recommend my camera to others.
Positive with neutral position:
• I sometimes give other people positive feedback about
word-of-mouth Completely disagree –
my camera.
Completely agree

• I have a strong feeling of identification with the Nikon

5-point Likert scale
brand.
Affective brand Affective brand with neutral position:
• The Nikon brand means a lot to me personally.
commitment commitment Completely disagree –
• I feel an emotional bond with the Nikon brand.
Completely agree
• I would be affected by a change of camera brand.

• I feel like “part of the family” in the Pixelistes

community.
5-point Likert scale
• I feel a bond with the members of the Pixelistes
Affective with neutral position:
community.
commitment Completely disagree –
• I have a strong feeling of belonging to the Pixelistes
Completely agree
community.
• The Pixelistes community means a lot to me personally.

• I would have a hard time finding the same information

Commitment 5-point Likert scale elsewhere than on the Pixelistes forum.
to the VBC Calculated with neutral position: • The support I receive from other members of the
commitment Completely disagree – Pixelistes community is very important to me and I
Completely agree would have a hard time finding such support in another
community.

5-point Likert scale • Everyone who owns a Nikon camera should take part in
Normative with neutral position: the Pixelistes forum.
commitment Completely disagree – • In order to keep the community alive, I feel I should
Completely agree continue taking part in chats on the Pixelistes forum.

• Less than 3 months

ago
VBC
• From 3 months to 1
membership — • When did you join the Pixelistes forum?
year ago
length
• From 1 to 2 years ago
• More than 2 years ago
03-Raies(GB) 4/02/13 7:39 Page 41

Brand Loyalty Intention Among Members of a Virtual Brand Community: the Dual Role of Commitment 41

Appendix A4. – Comparison of the models – the moderating effect of membership length

Chi-square Df p
Free model 744.190 316 0.000
Constrained model 845.627 368 0.000
Difference 101.437 52 0.000