Impact of engagement motives toward loyalty among agri-food consumers: The mediating roles of educational benefits, economic benefits, trust, and commitment

  • 19 Views
  • 2 Downloads

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License

Type of the article: Research Article

Abstract
Brand communities can significantly enhance customer loyalty among agri-food customers; however, the factors driving their formation in agri-food retailers, which are often characterized by transactional relationships, remain poorly understood. This study examines how engagement motives affect loyalty, highlighting what motives influence customer engagement and how educational benefits, economic benefits, trust, and commitment mediate the relationship between customer engagement and loyalty. A cross-sectional survey was conducted between October 2024 and January 2025, involving 247 agri-food customers who followed social media brand communities, made in-store purchases in the past three months, and were over 18 years old. The findings reveal that information (β = 0.366, p = 0.000) and entertainment motives (β = 0.356, p = 0.000) have a significant positive impact on customer engagement, whereas social relationships do not significantly affect engagement. Customer engagement positively influences educational benefits (β = 0.679, p = 0.000), economic benefits (β = 0.539, p = 0.000), and trust (β = 0.379, p = 0.000), but does not directly affect loyalty. Notably, trust significantly mediates the relationship between customer engagement and loyalty through commitment (β = 0.076, p = 0.000), and in the absence of commitment (β = 0.099, p = 0.002). In contrast, economic benefits (β = 0.053, p = 0.005) and educational benefits (β = 0.070, p = 0.003) significantly mediate this relationship only when commitment is present. These findings emphasize the importance of personalized content, meaningful benefits, and trust-building activities in fostering loyalty among agri-food retailers.

view full abstract hide full abstract
    • Figure 1. Conceptual framework
    • Table 1. Respondent profiles
    • Table 2. Measurement model evaluation
    • Table 3. HTMT criterion
    • Table 4. R2 and Q2 prediction
    • Table 5. Direct effect analysis
    • Table 6. Mediation analysis
    • Table A1. Measurement items
    • Conceptualization
      Tri Hanifawati, Jangkung Mulyo, Any Suryantini, Lestari Waluyati
    • Data curation
      Tri Hanifawati
    • Formal Analysis
      Tri Hanifawati
    • Funding acquisition
      Tri Hanifawati
    • Investigation
      Tri Hanifawati
    • Methodology
      Tri Hanifawati, Jangkung Mulyo, Any Suryantini, Lestari Waluyati
    • Validation
      Tri Hanifawati, Jangkung Mulyo
    • Writing – original draft
      Tri Hanifawati
    • Supervision
      Jangkung Mulyo, Any Suryantini, Lestari Waluyati
    • Writing – review & editing
      Jangkung Mulyo, Any Suryantini, Lestari Waluyati