The data collected from the brand measurements were analyzed using SPSS. This study first analyzed the influence of Instagram on the overall brand experience of the four brands. Then each of the four dimensions of brand experience were also analyzed. Lastly, the effect of Instagram on each of the three dimensions of advertisement effectiveness was analyzed.
In the analysis, there was one independent variable with two levels. It was the experimental treatment, with experiment condition (With Instagram stimulation) and controlled condition (Without Instagram stimulation) as levels of independent variable. There were several dependent variables in this analysis, including the four dimensions of brand experience (sensory experience, affective experience, intellectual experience, and behavioral experience), and the three dimensions of advertisement effectiveness (brand attitude, brand satisfaction, and purchase intention). In the brand experience analysis, a one-factor, between subjects Multivariate Analysis of Variance (MANOVA) was used to compare the difference of overall brand experience before and after Instagram stimulation. Four dimensions of brand experience were also analyzed using a follow-up Analysis of Variance (ANOVA). For advertisement effectiveness, a MANOVA analysis and a follow-up Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) were conducted to see how Instagram influenced participants’ brand attitude, brand satisfaction, and purchase intention.
4.1 Brand Experience 4.1.1 Overall Brand Experience
Instagram’s influence on participants’ overall brand experience toward the four brands was analyzed using a one-factor, between subjects Multivariate Analysis of Variance (MANOVA). The dependent variable was the four dimensions of brand experience. The results showed a significant difference between experimental condition and controlled condition in Nike (Wilks’ Λ = .852, F (107,107) = 4.65, p = .002, partial η2 = .15), and Starbucks (Wilks’ Λ = .861, F (107,107) = 4.30, p = .003, partial η2 = .14). However, significance was not found in Hollister and BMW.
‧
brands, the mean of all four brand experience dimensions were summed up as the mean for overall brand experience (Table 9).Table 9
Results of Mean for Overall Brand Experience Experimental Condition experience towards Nike and Starbucks before the Instagram stimulation. Moreover, their brand experience towards Nike and Starbucks further increased after receiving the Instagram stimulation. In the MANOVA result, the brand experience of Nike and Starbucks was also significantly increased after experimental treatment.
For Hollister, although the MANOVA result did not show significant increase in its overall brand experience, their mean brand experience scores did increase after the experimental treatment. On the other hand, BMW had high overall brand experience scores before experimental treatment. However, the overall brand experience did not increase after experimental condition. The mean was even slightly lower after receiving experimental treatement.
In hypothesis 1, we assumed that with Instagram stimulation, participants would have a more positive overall brand experience when examining all four dimensions (sensory, affective, intellectual, and behavioral). This hypothesis was partially supported. Participants had a more positive brand experience after receiving the Instagram stimulation of Nike, and Starbucks. These brands’ Instagram contents significantly enhanced participants’ brand experience. Although Hollister did not have significant result in overall brand experience, participants’ evaluation of overall brand experience did increase after experimental treatment.
On the other hand, BMW’s Instagram contents did not enhance participants’ brand experience. The brand experience of BMW remained constant before and after Instagram stimulation.
‧
experience had significant difference from experimental treatment. However, this study seeks to identify which dimensions caused the difference of overall brand experience result.Therefore, a follow-up ANOVA analysis was also conducted to see how individual brand experience dimension influenced the MANOVA results.
4.1.2 Sensory Experience
For sensory dimension, the mean increased for Nike (M = 16.91, SD = 2.64), Starbucks (M = 17.18, SD = 2.49), and Hollister (M = 14.23, SD = 4.11) after Instagram stimulation (Table 10). However, in the follow-up ANOVA analysis, only Starbucks had significant mean difference (F (1,110) = 14.476, p < .001). On the other hand, the mean of sensory dimension for BMW did not increase after Instagram stimulation. BMW’s mean rather decreased from 15.28(SD = 3.54) to 14.39(SD = 4.16) (Table 10).
Table 10
Results of Follow-up ANOVA and Mean Difference for Sensory Experience Sensory
Experience
Experimental Condition Controlled Condition
F p had strong sensory experience towards these brands even before experimental treatment. The result showed only Starbucks had a significant increase in participants’ sensory experience after Instagram stimulation. The Instagram contents of Starbucks gave participants the most positive influence in sensory experience. The Instagram contents of Nike and Hollister also influenced participants’ sensory experience positively, but the level of increase was not as much as the increase for Starbucks.
In hypothesis 1a, it was assumed that with Instagram stimulation, participants would have a more positive sensory experience. This hypothesis was partially supported.
Participants only had significant increase in their sensory experience with Starbucks.
‧
For affective dimension, the mean of all brands increased after receiving Instagram
stimulation (Table 11). Three of the brands had significant mean increase. They were Nike (F (1,110) = 12.453, p = .001), Starbucks (F (1,110) = 12.847, p = .001), and Hollister (F (1,110)
= 4.474, p < .037).
Table 11
Results of Follow-up ANOVA and Mean Difference for Affective Experience Affective
Experience
Experimental Condition Controlled Condition
F p significant increase. The three brands’ Instagram contents induced participants’ affective emotions, and connected with them emotionally. They had more positive feeling towards Nike, Starbucks, and Hollister after the Instagram stimulation. The Instagram contents of BMW did increase participants’ affective experience with the brands. However the increase was not as dramatic compared to the other three brands. BMW’s Instagram contents had less affective influence with senior high school students.
In hypothesis 1b, it was assumed that with Instagram stimulation, participants would have a more positive affective experience. This hypothesis was partially supported.
Participants had significant increase in their affective experience with Nike, Starbucks, and Hollister, except for BMW.
‧
For intellectual dimension, the mean increase for Nike, Starbucks, and BMW (Table 12). The mean of BMW only had a very subtle increase. The results showed a significant increase for Nike (F (1,110) = 13.320, p < .001), and Starbucks (F (1,110) = 8.307, p = .005).
Table 12
Results of Follow-up ANOVA and Mean Difference for Intellectual Experience Intellectual
Experience
Experimental Condition Controlled Condition
F p
For intellectual experience, although all brands had different level of increase after Instagram stimulation, only Nike and Starbucks showed significant difference. This result showed that Nike and Starbucks’ Instagram content intrigued participants’ curiosity. Nike and Starbucks’ Instagram contents engaged with them intellectually. Participants wanted to know more about the brand, and the brands encouraged their creative thinking as well. On the other hand, the Instagram contents of Hollister and BMW did not have such strong intellectual influence on participants compared with Nike and Starbucks. Especially BMW, their Instagram contents almost had no influence on participants’ intellectual experience.
In hypothesis 1c, it was assumed that with Instagram stimulation, participants would have a more positive intellectual experience. This hypothesis was partially supported.
Participants only had significant increase in their intellectual experience with Nike, and Starbucks.
‧
BMW only had a very slight increase in mean. In the follow-up ANOVA analysis, all brands except BMW had significant increase in mean (Table 13). They were Nike (F (1,110) = 9.252, p = .003), Starbucks (F (1,110) = 7.676, p = .007), and Hollister (F (1,110) = 5.880, p= .017).
Table 13
Results of Follow-up ANOVA and Mean Difference for Behavioral Experience Behavioral
Experience
Experimental Condition Controlled Condition
F p
For behavioral experience, the Instagram contents of Nike, Starbucks, and Hollister increased participants’ behavioral experience. These brands’ Instagram contents encouraged participants to engage in activities, and influenced their behaviors. BMW’s Instagram contents, on the other hand, did not have much influence on participants’ behavioral experience.
In hypothesis 1d, it was assumed that with Instagram stimulation, participants would have a more positive behavioral experience. This hypothesis was partially supported.
Participants had significant increase in their behavioral experience with Nike, Starbucks, and Hollister.
From the ANOVA analysis of each brand experience dimension, it was shown that Hollister did have influence on affective and behavioral dimension of brand experience.
However, the overall brand experience of Hollister was not significantly increased in MANOVA analysis. This showed that Hollister did have influence over participants’ brand experience, but the influence was not comprehensive enough to enhance its overall brand experience.
‧
In this study, three concepts were used to measure the influence of Instagram’s contents on advertisement effectiveness, the brand attitude, brand satisfaction, and purchase intention.
These three concepts were inter-related and thus grouped into a larger concept of advertisement effectiveness. In the analysis, a one-factor, between-subjects MANOVA was conducted to analyze Instagram’s influence on participants’ brand attitude, brand satisfaction, and purchase intention.
In MANOVA analysis, two brands were found to have significant difference in advertisement effectiveness before and after experimental treatment. The significant difference was found in Starbucks (Wilks’ Λ = .859, F (108,108) = 5.93, p = .001, partial η2
= .14) and Hollister (Wilks’ Λ = .889, F (108,108) = 4.50, p = .005, partial η2 = .11).
In hypothesis 2, it was assumed that there would be a significant increase in advertisement effectiveness after receiving Instagram stimulation. This hypothesis was partially supported. Only Instagram contents of Starbucks and Hollister had significant influence on advertisement effectiveness. A follow-up ANOVA analysis was conducted to explore which dimension contributed to the difference.
4.2.1 Brand Attitude
For brand attitude dimension, the mean increased for Nike, Starbucks, and Hollister (Table 14). BMW barely had any increase in the mean of brand attitude. Significant difference was found in Nike (F (1,110) = 7.067, p = .009), Starbucks (F (1,110) = 15.683, p < .001), and Hollister (F (1,110) = 4.861, p = .030).
Table 14
Results of Follow-up ANOVA and Mean Difference for Brand Attitude Brand
Attitude
Experimental Condition Controlled Condition
F p
The Instagram contents of Nike, Starbucks, and Hollister greatly influenced participants’ brand attitude positively. Participants had positive attitude towards these three
‧
brands. These brands’ Instagram contents enhanced their brand attitude. They considered the brand to be good, pleasant, and attractive. In hypothesis 2a, it was assumed that with Instagram stimulation, participants would have a more positive brand attitude. This hypothesis was partially supported. Participants had significant increase in their brand attitude with Nike, Starbucks, and Hollister.
4.2.2 Brand Satisfaction
For brand satisfaction, significant difference was found in Starbucks (F (1,110) = 9.674, p
= .002), and Hollister (F (1,110) = 5.179, p = .025). Their mean had significant increase after Instagram stimulation (Table 15).
Table 15
Results of Follow-up ANOVA and Mean Difference for Brand Satisfaction Brand
Satisfaction
Experimental Condition Controlled Condition
F p
The Instagram contents of Starbucks and Hollister enhanced participants’ overall satisfaction toward the brands. They were more satisfied with the brands after receiving Instagram stimulation. However, the Instagram contents of Nike and BMW did not have much influence on participants’ brand satisfaction. In hypothesis 2b, it was assumed that with Instagram stimulation, participants would have a more positive brand satisfaction. This hypothesis was partially supported. Participants had significant increase in their brand satisfaction with only Starbucks and Hollister.
‧
For purchase intention, there were no significant differences found in all four brands (Table 16). Instagram stimulation did not influence participants’ purchase intention towards these brands. Their purchase intention was influenced by other factors. Instagram had very small influence in these senior high school students’ purchase intention.
Table 16
Results of Follow-up ANOVA and Mean Difference for Purchase Intention Purchase
Intention
Experimental Condition Controlled Condition
F p
In hypothesis 2c, it was assumed that with Instagram stimulation, participants would have a more positive purchase intention. This hypothesis was not supported. There was no significant increase in purchase intention after receiving Instagram stimulation. Participants’
purchase intention towards the brand did not change after viewing these brands’ Instagram contents. There are other factors that influence these senior high school students’ purchase intention. From the ANOVA analysis of each dimension in advertisement effectiveness, Nike was found to have influence on brand attitude. However, the overall advertisement effectiveness of Nike was not significantly increased in MANOVA analysis. This showed that Nike did increase participants’ brand attitude, however, the overall advertisement effectiveness was not affected. Nike’s Instagram contents did not enhance its overall advertisement effectiveness.
‧
From the result of this study, Instagram does have partial influence on brand experience and advertisement effectiveness. Instagram stimulation significantly increased participants’ brand experience for Nike and Starbucks. It also significantly increased the advertisement effectiveness for Starbucks and Hollister. When examining different aspects of influence on the result, several insights have emerged as the findings of this study. This study discovered that brand types, strength of brands, and familiarity with brands affected participants’ brand experience and brands’ advertisement effectiveness on Instagram.
Among the four brands chosen in this study, Starbucks was the only brand that belongs to food & beverage category. Moreover, Starbucks was also the only brand that significantly increased participants’ sensory experience via its Instagram contents. The brand type itself has more sensory stimulation compared to other brands. The visual, smell, and taste of the brand’s sensory experience made Starbucks stand out from other brands.
Starbucks’ Instagram contents had successfully induced and enhanced participants’ sensory experience. The other three brands were apparel and vehicle brands. These brands did not have such strong influence on participants’ sensory experience compared to Starbucks.
However, in terms of the influence of Instagram contents on overall brand experience and advertisement effectiveness, Nike and Hollister also had some significant result.
Nike, Starbucks, and Hollister are apparel and food & beverage brands. These brand types are popular among young Instagram users in the States (Peterson, 2014). The majority of brands on Instagram were also among these brand categories. When the participants were asked to answer brands they had followed on Instagram, their answers are Calvin Klein, Adidas, H&M, Forever 21, Dr. Martens… and so on. All of the brands they mentioned were apparel or luxurious fashion brands. When it comes to brand and consumer relationship on Instagram, these types of brand are more popular among senior high school students in Taiwan. The result of this study also showed similar propensity. Instagram contents of Nike and Starbucks significantly increased participants’ brand experience, and the Instagram contents of Starbucks and Hollister also enhanced its advertisement effectiveness among these participants. Therefore, when targeting at different consumer groups, marketing strategies should be adjusted according to brand types to create desired brand experience on social media such as Instagram.
From the result of this study, it was discovered that the strength of brand could be enhanced with the help of Instagram. In the brands chosen in this study, Nike, Starbucks, and