The impact of brand-related user-generated content

on social media on online purchase intentions

Pham Thi Yen Vi, Ngo Pham Thanh Thien, Nguyen Nhat Linh, Le Long Khanh, Nguyen
Quoc Duy, Nguyen Gia Hao

Abstract

This study aims to study and evaluate the characteristics of user-generated content that
have an impact on consumer purchase intention. Research design, data, and methodology:
Quantitative research was carried out on 265 Vietnamese people aged from 18, who have
created and are frequently exposed to user-generated content on social networking
platforms. Descriptive statistics, Cronbach's alpha, Exploratory Factor Analysis,
multivariate regression analysis and Pearson correlation were among the data analysis
techniques employed. Results: The research findings have identified three characteristics
of user-generated content (UGC) that have an impact on consumer purchase intention,
including emotional perception, perceived credibility and the usefulness it provides.
Conclusion: To promote consumer purchase intent through their exposure to user-
generated content on social media platforms, the following characteristics should be kept
in mind: (1) User-generated content needs to arouse interest and satisfaction in the
product in question; (2) User-generated content needs to be verified through various types
of content such as images and videos to increase credibility, thereby enhancing purchase
intention; (3) The usefulness of information that user-generated content will be the first
factor that users care about when reading or viewing them, thereby making a purchase
decision.

Keywords: user-generated content (UGC), purchase intention, social media

I. Introduction

In recent years, the revolution of technology offers people a chance to obtain what they want
in a more accurate way. Just a click of the mouse almost every user's queries are solved
properly on the internet. Social media is a milestone of technological advancement in the 21st
century. Social media no longer serves the need of finding friends, connecting with people
over the word or online discussing of users. It is nowadays a place where people can make
purchase decisions, join in groups, interact with other consumers or create content about
products. According to a forecast about worldwide social network users conducted by E-
marketer in 2017, the number of social media users accounted for a third of the world's
population. Nowadays, consumers have a great bond with social media in their buying
activities. Review, feedback, and product experiences from other consumers play a role in
purchasing decisions of consumers.

In the past, consumers were offered advertisements and promotional materials by the brands
to make purchases. However, the rise of social media and user-generated content (UGC) has
changed the way consumers seek information about products and services. UGC refers to any
content created by users of a particular platform, such as product reviews, ratings, comments,
and social media posts. It has become a powerful tool for consumers to make informed
decisions about their purchases. According to Brown et al. (2003), Horst et al. (2007), Harris
(2012), and Racherla & Friske (2012), consumers today are more likely to log on to social
media to seek product information and previous customers' feedback before making a
purchase.

Consumers are also more likely to trust UGC over traditional advertising. This is because
UGC is perceived as more authentic and unbiased, as it is generated by real users with no
commercial interest. As a result, consumers feel more confident in their purchasing decisions
after reading through the personal information generated by other users on the platform
(Horst et al., 2007).

Furthermore, UGC has the potential to influence consumers' purchasing behavior. When
consumers create UGC, it promotes them to elaborate or think about their needs related to the
brand. This could lead to a stronger connection between the consumer and the brand,
ultimately influencing the purchase decision. Morra, Gelosa, Ceruti, & Mazzucchelli (2021)
suggested that UCG could predict not only how dependent consumers are on a brand, but also
their potential buying behavior. UGC has become a critical factor in the modern consumer
decision-making process. Brands that encourage UGC and engage with their customers on
social media platforms could gain a competitive advantage over those that rely solely on
traditional advertising methods. Consumers today seek authenticity and transparency, and
UGC provides just that, making it an essential tool for brands to connect with their audience
and drive sales.

UGC is a type of content related to a brand which is generated by the brand's users. UGC can
contribute to the brand’s revenue due to the authenticity, reliability, and subjectivity. Brand’s
users tend to believe in UGC rather than believing in content advertised by brand because
UGC shows them both the negative and positive side of products. Realizing that UGC is a
crucial part of brand marketing, however, the correlation between UGC and purchase
intention remains unclear. How much UGC on social media influences purchase intention?
How much does UGC contribute to brand success? Those questions are also the main
purposes of this research. Thus, the aim of this study is to investigate the relationship
between UGC on social media and online purchase intention, analyze the correlation between
two research objectives and propose the recommendation to enhance the quality of brand
marketing. As such, it is based on The Interaction of the content (Ma YH (2017), Liang,
Turban (2011), Haji, Sims (2015), Keenan & Shiri, (2019), Ansari, Ghori, and Kazi (2019)),
Emotion (Somerfield et al., 2018, Phillips and McQuarrie (2011), Yoo et al., 2000, Wang et
al., 2012, Habibi et al., 2014, Zaglia, 2013, Stavros et al., 2013, Kim & Johnson (2016),
Fischer & Reuber (2011), Lin & Lu (2011), Floh & Madlberger (2013)), Perceived
Credibility ((Jonas, 2010), Ohanian (1990), (Racherla & Friske, 2012), Hansen, Jin and Lee
(2014), Manap and Adzharudin (2013), O`Conner (2008), Dennhardt (2014), MacKinnon
(2012)), Perceived Risk (Featherman & Pavlou, 2002, Dai, Forsythe, & Kwon, 2014
Gemünden, 1985, Brown, Pope, & Voges, 2003, Gefen & Straub, 2004, Shergill & Chen,
2005, Lee & Moon, 2015, Featherman & Pavlou (2002), Horst, Kuttschreuter, & Gutteling
(2007), Gefen & Straub, 2004)), Perceived Usefulness (Davis, 1989, Karahanna & Straub,
1999, Muslim et al., 2014, van der Heijden, Verhagen, & Creemers, 2003, Kim & Song,
2010, Muslim et al., 2014, Racherla & Friske, 2012, Horst et al., 2007 Featherman & Pavlou,
2002 Wong (2018)) trust other user-generated content related to brands and products because
they assume that users do not have any commercial interest (Mir & Rehman, 2013). As a
result, online consumers have always relied on other user-generated content to assist them
with their purchases decision (Bae & Lee, 2011).

II. Research Methodology

1. Measurement scales

The study on how customers' interactions on social media platforms influence their
purchasing decisions was built upon various research works such as Ma YH (2017), Liang
and Turban (2011), Haji and Sims (2015), Keenan & Shiri (2019), and Ansari, Ghori, and
Kazi (2019). To ensure the validity of the research, a mixed research method utilizing both
qualitative and quantitative approaches was employed. The research findings were derived
from the analysis of the collected data.

2. Research sample and data collection method

To adapt the research context of the topic, the observed variables were referred to and
adjusted accordingly. Various data processing techniques were utilized to ensure the precise
testing and measurement of the observed variables. These variables were measured on a 1-5
Likert scale, ranging from strongly disagree (1) to strongly agree (5). The observed variables
were identified as indicators of expertise in social media marketing.

3. Analytical methods

The collected data was analyzed using the Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS) software,
which employed various methods including Cronbach's alpha to assess the scale reliability of
the theoretical model. The correlation between the dependent variables such as problem-
solving, consultation, product knowledge, and online purchase intention (OPI) was also
examined. The model components were evaluated using the Analysis of Variance (ANOVA)
method, and the results were subsequently discussed.
The study involved 265 Vietnamese individuals, out of which 36.6% were men aged 18-22,
15.5% were men aged 22-30, and 0.6% were men aged 30-40. Similarly, 35.8% were women
aged 18-22, 7% were women aged 22-30, and 0.37% were women aged 30-40. Among these,
3% of men and 1.13% of women were aged 18-22, and 3% of men and 1.13% of women
were aged 22-30.

Furthermore, the study revealed that 21% of individuals had an income of less than 5 million
VND from agriculture, while 76% lived in urban areas, and 3% in other areas. For those
earning between 5 million to 10 million VND, 20.5% were from rural areas, and 79.5% were
from urban areas. In the income bracket of 10 million to 20 million VND, 31.2% were from
rural areas, and 68.8% were from urban areas.

III. Literature review

1. Online purchase intention

In today's digital age, social media has become a crucial platform for consumers seeking
information and feedback on products before making a purchase decision. As the abundance
of information available on the internet continues to grow, consumers are relying more on
content generated by other users to aid in their decision-making process. This shift in
consumer behavior has been well-documented by various studies (Brown et al., 2003, Horst
et al., 2007; Harris, 2012; Racherla & Friske, 2012).

One key aspect that has emerged in recent years is the importance of user-generated content
(UCG) in influencing consumer behavior. UCG refers to any content created by consumers
about a particular brand or product, including reviews, ratings, and social media posts.
Research has shown that UCG can play a significant role in shaping a consumer's perception
of a brand and their eventual purchase decision (Morra, Gelosa, Ceruti, & Mazzucchelli).

When consumers create UCG, they often share personal information about their experience
with the brand, such as the quality of the product, customer service, or delivery time. This
information can be valuable to other consumers who are seeking similar products, as it
provides a real-life perspective on the brand. Moreover, the act of creating UCG can prompt
consumers to reflect on their own needs and desires related to the brand, potentially
influencing their purchasing behavior.

In light of these findings, it is evident that UCG is a powerful tool for brands to engage with
consumers and drive sales. By encouraging users to create and share content about their
products, brands can not only gain valuable insights into consumer behavior but also foster a
sense of community and loyalty among their customers. Ultimately, the impact of UCG on
consumer behavior underscores the need for brands to prioritize their online presence and
engage with their customers in meaningful ways on social media platforms
2. User-generated content (UGC)

According to Moens et al (2014), user-generated content (UGC) is defined as “any form of

content that has been created online by users on the platform”. Karahasanovic et al have
determined that although user-generated content (UGC) has become one of the main drivers
of control of social media sites (SMW), it has also become one of the valuable resources that
are very important in people's minds. As there is a risk involved in online shopping,
consumers mostly depend on the experiences of others by visiting the social media pages of
the brands using different devices, such as mobiles, computers and tablets, (Hsu et al., 2013;
Wagner et al., 2013). On social networking sites, user-generated content (UGC) can share
their own ideas or views through a variety of online platforms due to faster information
transmission and greater ability to receive information. when responses from other users are
also faster (Bahtara AZ, Muda M (2016) and Williams R, Wiele T, Iwaarden J, Eldridge S
(2010)). Chen FL (2017) mentions that user-generated content (UGC) orientation will mainly
focus on displaying product functions or designing or conveying a lot of brand information as
the main guide.

User-generated content (UGC) is a convenient tool established by the general public to

interact with others. Because of the diversity characteristic of UGC, it has not only made the
information richer and more reliable but also became an important source for big data
analysis. (Bashir AM, Ayub N, Jalees T (2017), Rachna Dr, Khajuria L (2017) and Liu X,
Burns CA, Hou Y (2017)). User–generated content (UGC) refers to any own created material
uploaded to the Internet by non–media and it has a greater influence on people’s consumption
(Cheong & Morrison, 2008; Dijck, 2009; Jonas, 2010; Krishnamurthy & Dou,2010; Presi,
Saridakis, & Hartmans, 2014) where the contents are generally be shared on social media
such as on YouTube, Facebook, Instagram, and Twitter.

Compared to producer-generated content (PGC) that often hires endorsers and celebrities to
talk about the advantages and benefits of a product (Verhellen, Dens, & Pelsmacker, 2013),
today consumers have turned away from conventional advertising practices (Hassan, Nadzim,
& Shiratuddin, 2015) as they have gradually found user-generated content (UGC) more
trustworthy than producer-generated content (PGC). The content shared in user-generated
content (UGC) is based on the consumer's own experience. As such, it is proven that the
source of information is more reliable, unbiased, and useful (Buttle, 1998; Mir & Rehman,
2013; Jonas, 2010; Verhellen, Dens, & Pelsmacker, 2013). Potential consumers are also
trusting other user-generated content to be related to brands and products but mainly because
they perceive users as not having any commercial interest in writing commercial content.
brand (Mir & Rehman, 2013).

2.1. The Interaction of the content

The interaction presents the correlation between content generated on social media and
platforms' users. Interactive functions such as like, share, and comment provides like-minded
netizens a chance to communicate information sharing and ideas exchanging. According to
Ma YH (2017), the interaction of content is categorized into 2 types which are Instrumental
interaction (information searching, problem-solving, required material seeking) and User
interaction (experience sharing, recommending, commenting by word of mouth, etc.).
Moreover, Ma supposed that “Interaction” refers to how UGC and communication processes
on social media affect purchase intention through consuming advice, and product reviews.

Previous studies from Liang, Turban (2011); and Haji, Sims (2015) mentioned that user
buying intention could be impacted by user interaction and word of mouth on network
platforms. When a product is seen as a topic to discuss on social media, users will start
product experience sharing, product recommendations, and community discussion. As a
result, product names that appear on UGC are closer to the consumer's mind and they can
have more product facts via digital interaction.

Due to the development of social media people have various tool options to serve their social
demands. Users usually use social networking sites for many purposes such as maintaining
relationships, connecting with people around the world, chatting, sharing, and expressing
thoughts and feelings. Besides that, social media also helps people decline some mental
problems such as stress, anxiety, and depression. Thus, the content generated on social media
platforms can be seen as a way of social interaction (Keenan & Shiri, 2019). According to
Ansari, Ghori, and Kazi (2019), content marketing plays a crucial role in consumers’
interactive engagement and participation in response in the online space. People can respond,
interact or even share the opinion of others who have the same perspective as theirs.

2.2. Emotion

According to Somerfield et al., 2018, UGC is considered as the primary means that helps
users perform two main actions: communication and personal identity. In addition,
Krishnamurthy and Dou assumed that UGC meets two common user purposes: rational
( informational and transactional) and emotional (relationships, fantasy and likeness). Phillips
and McQuarrie (2011) believe that there is a link between UGC and positive emotions, for
example, happiness, satisfaction, amusement. Thereby, it can be seen that UGC and
emotional factors have a relationship with each other, it can be said that it is a more positive
connection than a negative one. To reinforce this point, Kim & Johnson, 2016 stated that
certain types of positive emotions such as happiness or pleasure show positive effects on
future purchasing behavior.

Not only that, emotional factors are also considered as a catalyst affecting purchase intention.
According to research conducted by Wang et al., 2012, purchasing decisions are made based
on exposure to emotional content and make readers feel a connection between them and the
brand. Emotional factors not only have a positive effect on purchase intention, but also
strongly promote buying behavior. It can be seen that, besides common factors when it comes
to purchase intention such as loyalty, or brand popularity, emotion is an equally important
factor.

In 2011, Fischer & Reuber found that social satisfaction and pleasure from UGC is likely to
influence behavioral responses. A specific example from (Habibi et al., 2014; Zaglia, 2013)
said that positive content on the Facebook platform stimulates customers to share concerns
about the brands they love. Having more people share their feelings towards the brand will
create a stronger relationship between them for the brand and recommend that brand to their
online friends. Therefore, the emotional factor, more specifically the emotional factor of
UGC, should be included in this study.

2.3. Perceived Credibility

Today's online consumers perceived and believed that contents generated by other users as
more credible than the content provided by the sellers (Jonas, 2010). The users participating
in the UGC trust each other and view the information shared with each other more reliably
than the providers. Ohanian (1990) defined credibility as communicator’s positive
characteristics that are able to influence receiver acceptance of certain information, and able
to provide correct information to other users (Racherla & Friske, 2012). Reputation mainly
consists of expertise and reliability. Therefore, it can be assumed that reliability can influence
internet users' attitudes towards content created by others. There have been debates regarding
the reliability of unknown sources when their qualifications are in doubt. It was proven in the
study conducted by Hansen, Jin and Lee (2014) that consumers prefer UGC rather than the
traditional promotional methods due to the users’ honest opinion. This statement can also be
supported by another study conducted by Manap and Adzharudin (2013).

UGC is rapidly gaining power as a part of purchasing decision O`Conner (2008). Dennhardt
(2014) pointed out that the UGC offers a rich new storytelling opportunity for marketers to
tell their brand story and build a trusted relationship with customers. The impact of UGC on
customers‟ trust was examined in several studies, for instance MacKinnon (2012) revealed
that customers rely heavily on and trust the contents generated by users on the internet. The
impact of UGC on customers is vital as consumers trust content from their peers more than
they do any other form of marketing communication ( Dennhardt (2014 ). From these studies,
it is shown that users today have more trust in user-generated information (UGC). Since
previous studies show that today's users trust more user-generated information (UGC), UGC
is gaining great trust from customers.

2.4. Perceived Risk

When reading or viewing user-generated content on social networking platforms, users will
have perceptions of many different aspects, including perceived risk. Perceived risk is
defined as a consumer's degree of uncertainty about the outcome of their own online
purchasing decisions (Featherman & Pavlou, 2002). Risk is uncertainty that is often
unwanted unless online consumers have acquired prior knowledge and experience to help
them make informed decisions (Dai et al., 2014). The consumer buying decision process
consists of several steps, in which the process by which a person perceives the risk or safety
of a product or service also contributes to the purchase decision. A person who perceives high
risk will always conduct a search by accessing social media platforms to search for UGC as is
common practice, especially when purchasing a new or a product due to concerns associated
with a particular brand's product or service (Gemünden, 1985) .
User-generated content (UGC) will be the content that users frequently seek to read, view and
evaluate because it is content that can help them reduce the risk when making a decision to
consume a product. products or services that they have never used. UGC will make the
audience aware of risk reduction, whereby the information generated will assist potential
customers to lead them to the right decision (Featherman & Pavlou, 2002). Risks can be
reduced if online consumers can perceive and understand information about the product they
intend to buy through various forms before making a purchase decision (Gefen & Straub,
2004). There are different types of perceived risk and are evaluated by users through
activities of receiving information from various sources such as financial risk, time risk,
psychological risk, social risk, privacy risk, source risk and overall risk.

2.5. Perceived Usefulness

Perceived usefulness has been defined by various authors as the extent to which an individual
believes that the use of a system will enhance their performance (Davis, 1989; Karahanna &
Straub, 1999; Muslim et al., 2014). It is also regarded as a key factor influencing online
consumers' responses to the information provided by others, their attitudes, and their
purchasing decisions (van der Heijden, Verhagen, & Creemers, 2003; Horst, Kuttschreuter, &
Gutteling, 2007; Kim & Song, 2010; Muslim et al., 2014).

In the context of this study, usefulness is associated with attributes such as quickness,
efficiency, and ease of use (Racherla & Friske, 2012). User-generated content (UGC) posted
on social media platforms is often based on users' personal experiences, and can serve as a
means of reducing consumers' perceived risks when making decisions (Horst et al., 2007;
Racherla & Friske, 2012; Muslim et al., 2014). Additionally, UGC enables online consumers
to access information quickly and obtain prompt feedback directly from sources (Davis,
1989; Featherman & Pavlou, 2002; Racherla & Friske, 2012).

According to Wong (2018), consumers use online platforms to review recommendations and
comments from post-purchase consumers, a type of user-generated product information. This
information supports consumers' purchasing decisions and is also regarded as a form of
perceived usefulness in the context of online shopping.
Research models

H1: User-generated content has an impact on User Interaction.

H2: User-generated content has an impact on Emotion.

H3: User-generated content has an impact on Perceived Credibility.

H4: User-generated content has an impact on Perceived Risk.

H5: User-generated content has an impact on Perceived Usefulness.

H6: User Interaction has an impact on Online purchase intention.

3. Scale of components

Variables Code

User Interaction (UI)

User-generated content on platform X of brand Y helps me answer UI1

product questions

User-generated content on platform X of brand Y gives me sources of UI2

advice

User-generated content on platform X of brand Y gives me product UI3

knowledge

Emotion (E)

User-generated content on platform X of brand Y is interesting E1

User-generated content on platform X of brand Y is stratified E2

User-generated content on platform X of brand Y is exciting E3

User-generated content on platform X of brand Y makes me want to E4

buy product

Perceived Credibility (PC)

User-generated content on platform X of brand Y is accurate PC1

User-generated content on platform X of brand Y is trustworthy PC2

User-generated content on platform X of brand Y is honest PC3

Perceived Risk (PR)

User-generated content on platform X of brand Y helps me reduce my PR1

financial risk

User-generated content on platform X of brand Y helps me reduce the PR2

risk of the product's provenance

User-generated content on platform X of brand Y helps me reduce the PR3

risk of service/product experience

User-generated content on platform X of brand Y eases my anxiety PR4

with brands I don't know yet

Perceived Usefulness (PU)

 User-generated content on platform X of brand Y helps me understand PU1
SP information quickly

User-generated content on platform X of brand Y helps me understand PU2

SP information effectively

User-generated content on platform X of brand Y helps me understand PU3

SP information easily

Online Purchase Intent (OPI)

After searching and going through UGC, made me more certain of my OPI1
intention to purchase the recommended products

I am willing to buy products recommended in UGC OPI2

I will recommend to others the products recommended in UGC OPI3

IV. Result and discussion

1. Frequency

The study attracted the participation of 265 Vietnamese people, in the sample response
structure is male accounting for 52.8%, and female is 43% Among them, 75.5% people aged
from 18 to 22 years old, 23.4% people aged from 23 to 30 years old, 1.1% people aged
between 31 and 40. Statistics on participants’ academic levels showed the majority of
informants (84.5%) hold a university degree, followed by State officials with 6%, worker -
employee 6%, Business 1.5% and other 1.9%. In terms of living places, urban areas account
for 76.6%, rural areas 21.1% and other 2.3%. Finally, income below 5 million VND is 63%,
from 5 to 10 million VND is 29.4%, from 10 to 20 million is 6%, and from 20 million VND
or more is 1.5%.

2. Cronbach alpha
 Variables Code Correlated Item -
Total Correlation

User Interaction (UI), Cronbach’s Alpha = 0.852

User-generated content on platform X of brand Y helps me UI1 0.69

answer product questions

User-generated content on platform X of brand Y gives me UI2 0.781

sources of advice

User-generated content on platform X of brand Y gives me UI3 0.702

product knowledge

Emotion (E), Cronbach’s Alpha = 0.872

User-generated content on platform X of brand Y is E1 0.693

interesting

User-generated content on platform X of brand Y is E2 0.739

stratified

User-generated content on platform X of brand Y is exciting E3 0.761

User-generated content on platform X of brand Y makes me E4 0.72

want to buy product

Perceived Credibility (PC), Cronbach’s Alpha = 0.907

User-generated content on platform X of brand Y is accurate PC1 0.811

User-generated content on platform X of brand Y is PC2 0.824

trustworthy

User-generated content on platform X of brand Y is honest PC3 0.815

Perceived Risk (PR), Cronbach’s Alpha = 0.857

User-generated content on platform X of brand Y helps me PR1 0.696

reduce my financial risk

User-generated content on platform X of brand Y helps me PR2 0.763

reduce the risk of the product's provenance

User-generated content on platform X of brand Y helps me PR3 0.722

reduce the risk of service/product experience

User-generated content on platform X of brand Y eases my PR4 0.625

anxiety with brands I don't know yet

Perceived Usefulness (PU), Cronbach’s Alpha = 0.887

User-generated content on platform X of brand Y helps me PU1 0.771

understand SP information quickly

User-generated content on platform X of brand Y helps me PU2 0.813

understand SP information effectively
User-generated content on platform X of brand Y helps me PU3 0.757
understand SP information easily

Online Purchase Intent (OPI), Cronbach’s Alpha = 0.83

After searching and going through UGC, made me more OPI1 0.564
certain of my intention to purchase the recommended
products

I am willing to buy products recommended in UGC OPI2 0.747

I will recommend to others the products recommended in OPI3 0.77

UGC

Table 2: Variables reliability test

Cronbach’s Alpha method was being used to test the reliability of components in the
theoretical model. Independent variables include User interaction (UI), Emotion (E),
Perceived Credibility (PC), Perceived Risk (PR), Perceived Usefulness (PU); and dependent
variable is Online purchase intention (OPI). The results show that the coefficient values of all
independent variables is very high (greater than 0.60). In detail, UI (α=0.852), E (α=0.872),
PC (α=0.907), PR (α=0.857), PU (α=0.887), and dependent variable OPI (α=0.83). In
addition, the Correlated Item - Total Correlation of observed components are all greater than
0.30 (Table 2). Thus we can draw a conclusion that the scales of components in the
theoretical model have high reliability.

3. EFA

EFA analysis to reduce observed variables to a set of meaningful good multipliers.

Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin Sig Bartlett’s Test

Measure of Sampling
Adequacy

Independent variable 0.931 0.000

 Dependent variable 0.668 0.000

Table 4: KMO and Bartlett's Test (Independent and Dependent Variables)

In the table, the KMO index for the dependent variable is 0.931 and the KMO for the
independent variable is 0.668. Both indices are >0.5, which is sufficient for factor analysis to
be appropriate for the research data.

After analyzing the KMO coefficient, the next step is Bartlett's test of sphericity, abbreviated
as Sig Bartlett’s Test. Both coefficients have a significance level of 0.000<0.05, indicating
that the observed variables are correlated with each other within the factor.

Regarding the Extraction coefficients of the variables in the Communalities table, all
variables are in a good state with coefficients >0.5 and are kept for further analysis.

In the Total Variance Explained table, only 3 factors are extracted with a value of 1, and the
4th factor is 0.663. Therefore, only 3 factors are able to represent the best data characteristics
compared to extracting the 4th factor. In this dataset, the variance value extracted is 72.046%,
which is >50%. The factor table extracted in EFA reflects 72.046% of the variation of all
observed variables and also represents the characteristics of the observed variables.

Component

1 2 3

E3
.760

E4
.746

E1
.738

E2
.737
 UI3
.679

UI2
.625

PU2
.812

PU1
.788

PU3
.771

PR4
.710

PR3
.659

PC2
.860

PC1
.860

PC3
.851

Extraction Method: Principal Component

Analysis.
Rotation Method: Varimax with Kaiser
Normalization.
 a. Rotation converged in 5 iterations.

In the rotation matrix table, we can see that there are three main factors, 1, 2, 3, and all Factor
Loadings >0.5 indicate that all observed variables have good quality.

Factor 1:

In the table above, we have 6 Factor Loading values including: E1, E2, E3, E4, UI2, UI3, in
which the Factor Loading value of E3 is the largest at 0.760, so we can conclude that E3
contributes more than the other 5 variables to the formation of factor 1.

Factor 2:

In factor 2, we observe that there are 5 Factor Loading values: PU1, PU2, PU3, PR3, PR4, in
which the Factor Loading value of PU2 is the largest at 0.812 and contributes the most
compared to the other 4 variables in forming factor 2.

Factor 3:

In factor 3, we can see that there are only 3 Factor Loading values including: PC1, PC2, PC3,
in which PC has a Factor Loading value of 0.860 and is also the largest value contributing the
most to forming factor 3.

Regarding the dependent variable in the rotation matrix table, it only shows that "only one
component was extracted. The solution cannot be rotated". This is the expectation that when
we set the dependent variable OPI, we only expect to extract one factor through EFA because
this is a dependent variable. If there are other dependent factors appearing, our model will not
achieve good results and needs to be reconsidered.

4. Pearson Correlation

D_E D_PU D_PC D_OPI

D_E Pearson 1 ,731** ,563** ,716**

Correlation

Sig. (2-tailed) ,000 ,000 ,000

N 265 265 265 265

 D_PU Pearson ,731** 1 ,537** ,641**
Correlation

Sig. (2-tailed) ,000 ,000 ,000

N 265 265 265 265

D_PC Pearson ,563** ,537** 1 ,709**

Correlation

Sig. (2-tailed) ,000 ,000 ,000

N 265 265 265 265

D_OPI Pearson ,716** ,641** ,709** 1

Correlation

Sig. (2-tailed) ,000 ,000 ,000

N 265 265 265 265

Table 5: Correlations

In the correlation table, Sig tested Pearson correlation between three independent variables
D_E, D_PU, D_PC with dependent variable D_OPI all less than 0.05. Thus, there is a linear
relationship between these independent variables and the dependent variable.
Looking at pearson in the correlation table, the pearson coefficient of D_E is 0.716** the
highest, followed by D_PC with 0.709** and the last one is D_PU with 0.641**. Shows that
the correlation of the independent variable D_E with the dependent variable D_OPI is the
highest, the independent variable D_PC ranks second and the variable D_PU is the
independent variable with the lowest correlation with the dependent variable D_OPI among
the three variables independence.

5. Influence of user-generated content on social media platforms on user purchase

intention

This study used a multivariable regression analysis method to test the correlation of
independent variables belongs to user-generated content on social media platforms including
D_E (Emotion); D_PC (Perceived Credibility); D_PU (Perceived Risk) to the dependent
variable (online purchase intention). As can be seen in Table 3, R = 0.65 > 0.50, the
multivariable regression analysis shows that the fit of the model is at a relative level.

Model Summary

R R Square Adjusted R Square Durbin-Watson

Std. Error of the
Estimate

.811a .658 .654 53.144 1.818

a. Predictors: (Constant), D_PC, D_PU, D_E

b. Dependent Variable: D_OPI

Table 3: Results of multivariable regression analysis

ANOVAa

Model Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig.

1 Regression 141.731 3 47.244 167.279 .000b

Residual 73.713 261 .282

Total 215.444 264

a. Dependent Variable: D_OPI

 b. Predictors: (Constant), D_PC, D_PU, D_E

The ANOVA table shows that the Sig index is 0.000, below 0.05 is consistent with the data

set.

Coefficientsa

Unstandardized Standardized
Coefficients Coefficients Collinearity Statistics

Model B Std. Error Beta t Sig. Tolerance VIF

1 (Constant) .105 .159 .660 .510

D_E .407 .060 .377 6.780 .000 .425 2.356

D_PU .144 .057 .138 2.541 .012 .442 2.262

D_PC .392 .042 .423 9.409 .000 .650 1.539

a. Dependent Variable: D_OPI

The Coefficients table shows that:

All three independent variables have Sig below 0.5 - all three independent variables have an
impact on the dependent variable.
The variance inflation factor (VIF) of the three variables ranges from 1.5 to 2.5. The
independent variable D_PC has a VIF score below 2. Therefore, it is better than the other
independent variables.
We have the regression equation:
Y = 0.377*D_E + 0.138*D_PU + 0.423*D_PC + ε
Commentary:
- If D_E increases by 1 standard deviation unit and other factors remain constant, the
variable D_OPI will increase by 0.377 standard deviation units.
- If D_PU increases by 1 standard deviation unit and other factors remain constant, the
variable D_OPI will increase by 0.138 standard deviation units.
- If D_PC increases by 1 standard deviation unit and other factors remain constant, the
variable D_OPI will increase by 0.423 standard deviation units.
The Beta coefficient of the D_PC variable is the largest, indicating the strongest impact on
the dependent variable D_OPI.
Therefore, based on the standardized regression coefficient (Beta), the factor Perceived
Credibility (D_PC) has the greatest influence on Online purchase intention.

6. Conclusion

After many steps of data analysis, three properties of UGC on social networks, namely
Emotion, Perceived usefulness, and Perceived credibility, show a positive influence on the
dependent variable Online purchase intention. The analysis results show that, in order to
stimulate the purchase intention of customers in many different industries, it is necessary to
pay attention to the above three factors in order to increase marketing efficiency and sales.
The focus on these three factors also contributes to changing the user's UGC production
behavior. This result makes a positive contribution to the brand's social media marketing
strategy and sales promotion strategy. In particular, based on the results of regression analysis
the independent variable Perceived usefulness is the variable that has the strongest effect on
the dependent variable Online purchase intention. Therefore, to increase the effectiveness of
sales, businesses need to focus on investing in this factor. Exploiting UGC effectively shows
product characteristics in a specific and easy to understand way. From there, help customers
easily grasp product information, make the product image in their mind become clearer and
stimulate their purchase behavior. More importantly, the value of correlation, Emotion is
considered to be most correlated with purchase intention. A wide number of decisions are
made based on emotions. Besides, the results of regression analysis illustrate that Emotion
and Perceived credibility are second and third strongest influential factors towards Online
purchase intention respectively. Therefore, besides promoting usefulness, brands need to pay
attention to the emotional and credibility factor in the UGC about the brand. Emotional
characteristics such as excitement, satisfaction, excitement and arousal to buy are
indispensable in a successful UGC template, capable of bringing a lot of value to the
business. In addition, brands also need to promote UGC with a high level of trust, providing
accurate information, and an indispensable thing is honesty.

V. References
Alalwan, A. (2018). Investigating the impact of social media advertising features on customer
purchase intention. International Journal of Information Management, 42, 65–77.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2018.06.001

Ansari, S., Ansari, G., Ghori, M. U., Kazi, A. G. (2019), “Impact of brand awareness and
social media content marketing on consumer purchase decision”, Journal of Public Value and
Administrative Insight, Vol. 2 No. 2, pp. 5-10. https://doi.org/10.54820/FDOR9238

Azlin Zanariah Bahtar and Mazzini Muda / Procedia Economics and Finance 37 ( 2016 ) 337
– 342.https://doi.org/10.1016/S2212-5671(16)30134-4

Bae, S., & Lee, T. 2011. Product Type and Consumers’ Perception of Online Consumer
Reviews. Electronic Markets, 21(4), 255–266. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2212-5671(16)30134-
4

Bahtara AZ, Muda M (2016) The Impact of User – Generated Content (UGC) on Product
Reviews towards Online Purchasing – A Conceptual Framework. Procedia Economics and
Finance 37: 337-342.https://doi.org/10.33552/JTSFT.2022.09.000725

Bashir AM, Ayub N, Jalees T (2017) The impact of the firm-generated content and the user-
generated content through social media on brand equity elements. Pakistan business review:
744-760.https://doi.org/10.33552/JTSFT.2022.09.000725

Buttle, F. A. 1998. Word of Mouth: Understanding and Managing Referral Marketing.

Journal of Strategic Marketing, 6(3), 241–254.https://doi.org/10.1080/096525498346658

Cheong, H. J., & Morrison, M. A. 2008. Consumers’ Reliance on Product Information and
Recommendations found in UGC. Journal of Interactive Advertising, 8(2),
1–30.https://doi.org/10.1016/S2212-5671(16)30134-4

Chua, Tat-Seng; Juanzi, Li; Moens, Marie-Francine (2014). Mining user-generated content.
Chapman and Hall/CRC. p. 7. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/343079.

Dai, B, Forsythe, S., & Kwon, W. S. 2014. Impact of Online Shopping Experience on Risk
Perceptions and Online Purchase Intentions: Does Product Category Matter? Journal of
Electronic Commerce Research, 15(1), 13–24.
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/301296426

Dallas. Gefen, D., & Straub, D. W. 2004. Consumer Trust in B2C e-Commerce and the
Importance of Social Presence: Experiments in eProducts and e-Services. Omega, 32(6),
407–424.https://doi.org/10.1016/S2212-5671(16)30134-4

Davis, F. D. 1989. Perceived Usefulness, Perceived Ease of Use, and User Acceptance of
Information Technology. MIS Quality, 13(3), 319–340. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2212-
5671(16)30134-4
Dijck, J. Van. (2009). Users Like You? Theorizing Agency in User-Generated Content.
Media, Culture & Society, 31(1), 41–58.https://doi.org/10.1016/S2212-5671(16)30134-4

E-Marketer (2017). Worldwide social network users: E-marketer’s estimates and forecast for
2016–2021.https://doi.org/10.1080/23311975.2022.2095950.

Featherman, M. S., & Pavlou, P. A. (2002). Predicting e-Services Adoption: A Perceived

Risk Facets Perspective. In Eighth American Conference on Information System (Vol. 9, pp.
1034–1046). Dallas.https://doi.org/10.1016/S2212-5671(16)30134-4

Fischer, E., & Reuber, A. R. (2011). Social interaction via new social media: (How) can
interactions on Twitter affect effectual thinking and behavior? Journal of Business Venturing,
26, 1-18. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJEB.2020.106502

Floh, A., & Madlberger, M. (2013). The role of atmospheric cues in online impulse-buying
behavior. Electronic Commerce Research and Applications, 12,
425-439.https://doi.org/10.1504/IJEB.2020.106502

Gemünden, 1985; Brown, Pope, & Voges, 2003; Gefen & Straub, 2004; Shergill & Chen,
2005; Lee & Moon, 2015

Gemünden, H. G. 1985. Perceived Risk and Information Search. A Systematic Meta-Analysis

of the Empirical Evidence. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 2(2), 79–
100.https://doi.org/10.1016/S2212-5671(16)30134-4

Habibi, M. R., Laroche, M., & Richard, M. O. (2014). The roles of brand community and
community engagement in building brand trust on social media. Computers in Human
Behavior, 37, 152-161.https://doi.org/10.1504/IJEB.2020.106502

Hajli, N.; Sims, J. Social commerce: The power transfer from sellers to buyers. Technol.
Forecast. Soc. Chang. 2015, 94, 350–358.

Harris, C. G. 2012. An Evaluation of Search Strategies for User-Generated Video Content. In

Proceedings of First International WWW Workshop on Crowdsourcing Web Search (Vol.
842, pp. 31–35).https://doi.org/10.1016/S2212-5671(16)30134-4

Hassan, S., Nadzim, S. Z. A., & Shiratuddin, N. 2015. Strategic Use of Social Media for
Small Business Based on the AIDA Model. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 172,
262–269.https://doi.org/10.1016/S2212-5671(16)30134-4

Horst, M., Kuttschreuter, M., & Gutteling, J. M. 2007. Perceived Usefulness, Personal
Experiences, Risk Perception and Trust as Determinants of Adoption of eGovernment
Services in The Netherlands. Computers in Human Behavior, 23(4),
1838–1852.https://doi.org/10.1016/S2212-5671(16)30134-4
Hsu, C., Lin, J. C., & Chiang, H. (2013). The effects of blogger recommendations on
customers' online shopping intentions. International Research, 23 (1), 69-
88.https://doi.org/10.1504/IJEB.2020.106502

Jonas, J. R. O. 2010. Source Credibility of Company - Produced and User-Generated Content

on the Internet: An Exploratory Study on the Filipino Youth. Philippine Management
Review, 17, 121–132.https://doi.org/10.1016/S2212-5671(16)30134-4

Keenan, A., & Shiri, A. (2019). Sociability and social interaction on social networking
websites. Library Review, 58(6), 438-450.

Kim, A. J., & Johnson, K. K. (2016). Power of consumers using social media: Examining the
influences of brand-related user-generated content on Facebook. Computers in Human
Behavior, 58, 98-108.https://doi.org/10.1504/IJEB.2020.10650

Kim, Y., Sohn, D., and Choi, S.M. (2011), Cultural difference in motivations for using social
network sites: a comparative study of American and Korean college students‟, Computers in
Human Behavior, Vol. 27, No. 1, pp. 365-372

Krishnamurthy, S., & Dou, W. 2010. Note from Special Issue Editors: Advertising with User-
Generated Content: A Framework and Research Agenda. Journal of Interactive Advertising,
8(2 (Spring)), 1–4. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2212-5671(16)30134-4.

Lee, H.-H., & Moon, H. 2015. Perceived Risk of Online Apparel Mass Customization: Scale
Development and Validation. Clothing and Textiles Research Journal, 33(2), 115–128.
https://doi.org/10.1016/S2212-5671(16)30134-4

Liang, T.P.; Turban, E. Introduction to the special issue social commerce: A research
framework for social commerce. Int. J. Electron. Commer. 2011, 1616, 5–14.

Lin, C., Wu, Y., & Chen, J. (2013). Electronic Word-Of-Mouth: The Moderating Roles Of
Product Involvement And Brand Image. Proceedings of 2013 international conference on
technology innovation and industrial management, Phuket, Thailand.
https://doi.org/10.1080/23311975.2022.2095950

Lin, K. Y., & Lu, H. P. (2011). Why people use social networking sites: An empirical study
integrating network externalities and motivation theory. Computers in Human Behavior, 27,
1152-1161.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.im.2021.103509

Ma YH (2017) How can the characteristics of UGC influence customer purchase intention
from the perspective of social Influence? 1-49.). DOI: 10.33552/JTSFT.2022.09.000725

Manap, K. H. A., & Adzharudin, N. A. 2013. The Role of User Generated Content (UGC) in
Social Media for the Tourism Sector. In West East Institute International Academic
Conference Proceedings (pp. 52–58). Istanbul, Turkey. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2212-
5671(16)30134-4

Mir, I. A., & Rehman, K. U. (2013). Factors Affecting Consumer Attitudes and Intentions
toward User-Generated Product Content on YouTube. Management & Marketing Challenges
for the Knowledge Society, 8(4), 637–654.https://doi.org/10.1016/S2212-5671(16)30134-4

Morra MC, Gelosa V, Ceruti F, Mazzucchelli A (2017) Original or counterfeit luxury fashion
brands? The effect of social media on purchase intention. Journal of Global Fashion
Marketing 9(1): 1-16.DOI: 10.33552/JTSFT.2022.09.000725

Ohanian, R. 1990. Construction and Validation of a Scale to Measure Celebrity Endorsers’

Perceived Expertise, Trustworthiness, and Attractiveness. Journal of Advertising, 19(3), 39–
52.https://doi.org/10.1016/S2212-5671(16)30134-4

Phillips, B. J., & McQuarrie, E. F. (2011). Contesting the social impact of marketing: A re-
characterization of women's fashion advertising. Marketing Theory, 11 (2),
99-126.https://doi.org/10.1504/IJEB.2020.106502

Presi, C., Saridakis, C., & Hartmans, S. 2014. User-Generated Content Behaviour of the
Dissatisfied Service Customer. European Journal of Marketing, 48(9/10),
1600–1625.https://doi.org/10.1016/S2212-5671(16)30134-4

Racherla, P., & Friske, W. 2012. Perceived “Usefulness” of Online Consumer Reviews: An
Exploratory Investigation Across Three Services Categories. Electronic Commerce Research
and Applications, 11(6), 548–559.https://doi.org/10.1016/S2212-5671(16)30134-4

Shergill, G. S., & Chen, Z. 2005. Web-Based Shopping: Consumers ’ Attitudes Towards
Online Shopping in New Zealand. Journal of Electronic Commerce Research, 6(2), 79–
94.https://doi.org/10.1016/S2212-5671(16)30134-4

Somerfield, K., Mortimer, K., & Evans, G. (2018). The relevance of images in user-generated
content. A mixed method study of when and why major brands retweet. International Journal
of Internet Marketing and Advertising (IJIMA). DOI:10.1504/IJEB.2020.10028062

Van der Heijden, H., Verhagen, T., & Creemers, M. 2003. Understanding Online Purchase
Intentions: Contributions from Technology and Trust Perspectives. European Journal of
Information Systems, 12(1), 41–48.https://doi.org/10.1057/palgrave.ejis.3000445

van der Heijden, Verhagen, & Creemers, 2003; Horst, Kuttschreuter, & Gutteling, 2007; Kim
& Song, 2010; Muslim et al., 2014). doi: 10.1016/S2212-5671(16)30134-4

Verhellen, Y., Dens, N., & Pelsmacker, P. De. 2013. Consumer responses to Brands Placed in
YouTube Movies: The Effect of Prominence and Endorsers Expertise. Journal of Electronic
Commerce Research, 14(4), 287–303. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2212-5671(16)30134-
Wang, X., Yu, C., & Wei, Y. (2012). Social media peer communication and impacts on
purchase intentions: A consumer socialization framework. Journal of Interactive Marketing,
26, 198-208. DOI: 10.33552/JTSFT.2022.09.000725

Wiese, M., Martínez-Climent, C., & Botella-Carrubi, D. (2020). A framework for Facebook
advertising effectiveness: A behavioral perspective. Journal of Business Research, 109, 76–
87. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2019.11.041

Williams R, Wiele T, Iwaarden J, Eldridge S (2010) The importance of user-generated

content: the case of hotels. The TQM Journal 22(2): 117- 128.). DOI:
10.33552/JTSFT.2022.09.000725

Wong, A. T. T. (2018). A TAM Approach of Studying the Factors in Social Media and
Consumer Purchase Intention in Hong Kong. Journal of Economics, Management and Trade,
1-17.http://icmie.nilai.edu.my/icmie/images/eProceedings%20of%20ICMIE%202021/ICMIE
%202021_ID17.pdf

Yoo, B., Donthu, N., & Lee, S. (2000). An examination of selected marketing mix elements
and brand equity. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 28 (2), 195-211.

Zaglia, M. E. (2013). Brand communities embedded in social networks. Journal of Business

Research, 66, 216-223.DOI:10.1504/IJEB.2020.10028062

Thoumrungroje, A. (2014). The Influence of Social Media Intensity and EWOM on

Conspicuous Consumption. Procedia—Social and Behavioral Sciences, 148,
7-15.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.07.009

Wagner et al. (2013) Self-esteem across adulthood: The role of resources.

https://doi.org/10.1007/s10433-013-0299-z

Chen, F.L. and Chen, F.G. (2017) The Modern Propulsion of the Ordering of Public
Participation: Logical Response Based on Chinese Context. Theory and Reform, 3, 42-50.

Iesha Khajuria, & Dr. Rachna. (2017). A Study of User-Generated Content on Social
Networking Sites and its Impact on Consumer-Based Brand Equity Constructs. Global
Journal of Management and Business Research, 17(E1), 1– Retrieved.
https://journalofbusiness.org/index.php/GJMBR/article/view/2241

Liu X, Burns CA, Hou Y (2017) User-Generated Content and Consumer Brand Engagement.
DOI: 10.4018/978-1-5225-7344-9.ch009