DSpace Repository

Millennials versus non-millennials the context of engagement levels on Instagram stories

Show simple item record

dc.contributor.author Israfilzade, Khalil
dc.contributor.author Babayev, Najaf
dc.date.accessioned 2019-11-20T07:32:23Z
dc.date.available 2019-11-20T07:32:23Z
dc.date.issued 2019
dc.identifier.citation The 4th International Scientific Conference: "Challenges of Globalization in Economics and Business", Tbilisi, 2019, pp. 163-170
dc.identifier.isbn 978-9941-13-890-4
dc.identifier.uri http://dspace.tsu.ge/xmlui/handle/123456789/511
dc.description 1. Alter, J. (2018), „Instagram engagement rate data: average seconds on site”, available at: www.yotpo.com/blog/instagram-engagement-rate/ (accessed 11 July 2018). 2. Barry, A.E., Bates, A.M., Olusanya, O., Vinal, C.E., Martin, E., Peoples, J.E., Jackson, Z.A., Billinger, S.A., Yusuf, A., Cauley, D.A. and Montano, J.R. (2016), „Alcohol marketing on twitter and instagram: evidence of directly advertising to youth/adolescents”, Alcohol and Alcoholism, Vol. 51 No. 4, pp. 487-492. 3. Bayer, J. B., Ellison, N. B., Schoenebeck, S. Y., & Falk, E. B. (2016). Sharing the small moments: ephemeral social interaction on Snapchat. Information, Communication & Society, 19(7), 956–977. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118X.2015.1084349 4. Belanche, D., Cenjor, I., & Pérez-Rueda, A. (2019). Instagram Stories versus Facebook Wall: an advertising effectiveness analysis. Spanish Journal of Marketing – ESIC, 23(1), 69–94. https://doi.org/10.1108/SJME-09-2018-0042 5. Bennett, S., Maton, K. and Kervin, L. (2008), „The ‘digital natives’ debate: a critical review of the evidence”, British Journal of Educational Technology, Vol. 39 No. 5, pp. 775-786. 6. Billings, A. C., Qiao, F., Conlin, L., & Nie, T. (2017). Permanently desiring the temporary? Snapchat, social media, and the shifting motivations of sports fans. Communication & Sport, 5, 10–26. 7. Casalo, L.V., Flavián, C. and Ibáñez-Sánchez, S. (2017), „Antecedents of consumer intention to follow and recommend an instagram account”, Online Information Review, Vol. 41 No. 7, pp. 1046-1063. 8. Chen, K.-J., & Cheung, H. L. (2019). Unlocking the power of ephemeral content: The roles of motivations, gratification, need for closure, and engagement. Computers in Human Behavior, 97, 67–74. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2019.03.007 9. Chu, S. C., & Kim, Y. (2011). Determinants of consumer engagement in electronic word of-mouth (eWoM) in social networking sites. International Journal of Advertising, 30(1), 47–75. 10. Constine, J. (2018), „Instagram hits 1 billionmonthly users, up from 800M in September”, available at: https://techcrunch.com/2018/06/20/instagram-1-billion-users/?guccounter=1 (accessed 08 July 2019). 11. Cooper, P. (2018), „Social media advertising stats that matter to marketers in 2018”, available at: https://blog.hootsuite.com/social-media-advertising-stats/ (accessed 6 May 2019). 12. Finstad, K. (2010). Response interpolation and scale sensitivity: Evidence against 5-point scales. Journal of Usability Studies, 5(3), 104-110. 13. Fornell, C. and Larcker, D.F. (1981), „Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error”, Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 18 No. 1, pp. 39-50. 14. Fuchs, C., Boersma, K., Albrechtslund, A., & Sandoval, M. (Eds.). (2013). Internet and surveillance: The challenges of Web 2.0 and social media (Vol. 16). Routledge. 15. Garson, G.D. (2012), Testing Statistical Assumptions, Statistical Associates Publishing, Asheboro, NC. 16. GlobalIndex (2018), „The latest social media trends to know in 2018”, available at: www.globalwebindex.com/reports/social (accessed 16 May 2019). 17. Hair, J.F., Anderson, R.E., Tatham, R.L. and Black, W.C. (1998), Multivariate Analysis, Prentice Hall. Englewood Cliffs, NJ. 18. Instagram Blog. (2017). Introducing Instagram Stories. [Blog] Instagram Blog. Available at: http://blog.instagram.com/post/148348940287/160802-stories. (accessed 08 July 2019). 19. Israfilzade, K. (2017). „Y” Generation Engagement on Consumer-Generated Media: Differences between Lithuania and Azerbaijan. International Journal of Management, accounting and Economics, 4(9), 962-979. 20. Jansz, J., Slot, M., Tol, S., & Verstraeten, R. (2015). Everyday creativity: Consumption, participation, production, and communication by teenagers in the Netherlands. Journal of Children and Media, 9(2), 143-159. 21. Kaplan, A. M., & Haenlein, M. (2010). Users of the world, unite! The challenges and opportunities of Social Media. Business horizons, 53(1), 59-68. 22. Kline, R.B. (2011), Principles and Practice of Structural Equation Modeling, 3rd ed, The Guildford Press, New York, NY. 23. Marcus, S.R. (2015), „Picturing ourselves into being: assessing identity, sociality and visuality on Instagram”,in International Communication Association Conference, San Juan, Puerto Rico. 24. MONTEIRO, R., & Mazzilli, P. (2016). LIVE STORIES O Snapchat como uma pasta compartilhada de registros da vida. Intercom. Sociedade Brasileira de Estudos Interdisciplinares da Comunicação, Salto, 1-15. 25. OECD. (2007). Participative web and user-created content: Web 2.0, wikis, and social networking. Paris: Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. 26. Palmer, A., & Koenig-Lewis, N. (2009). An experiential, social network-based approach to direct marketing. Direct Marketing: An International Journal, 3(3), 162-176. 27. Parment, A. (2013). Generation Y vs. Baby Boomers: Shopping behavior, buyer involvement and implications for retailing. Journal of retailing and consumer services, 20(2), 189-199. 28. Piwek, L., & Joinson, A. (2016). What do they snapchat about? Patterns of use in time-limited instant messaging service. Computers in Human Behavior, 54, 358–367. 29. Sashittal, H. C., DeMar, M., & Jassawalla, A. R. (2016). Building acquaintance brands via Snapchat for the college student market. Business Horizons, 59(2), 193–204. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bushor.2015.11.004 30. Schrock, A. R. (2015). Communicative affordances of mobile media: portability, availability, locatability, and multimediality. International Journal of Communication, 9, 1229–1246. 31. Sheldon, P. and Bryant, K. (2016), „Instagram: motives for its use and relationship to narcissism and contextual age”, Computers in Human Behavior, Vol. 58, pp. 89-97. 32. Statista. (2018). Instagram: active users 2018. Retrieved from https://www.statista.com/statistics/253577/number-of-monthly-active-instagram-users/ (accessed 03 May 2019). 33. Statista. (2019a). Global Instagram user age & gender distribution 2019. Retrieved from https://www.statista.com/statistics/248769/age-distribution-of-worldwide-instagram-users/ (accessed 7 July 2019). 34. Statista. (2019b). Instagram Stories daily active users 2019. Retrieved from https://www.statista.com/statistics/730315/instagram-stories-dau/ (accessed 11 July 2019). 35. Steenkamp, J.B. and Geyskens, I. (2006), „How country characteristics affect the perceived value of a Website”, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 70 No. 3, pp. 136-150. 36. VanDerslice, H. N. (2016). How Female Online Businesses and Brands are Using Instagram Stories. 37. VidMob. (2018). State of Social Video • VidMob. Retrieved from https://www.vidmob.com/state-of-social-video/ 38. Wakefield, L. T., & Bennett, G. (2018). Sports fan experience: Electronic word-of-mouth in ephemeral social media. Sport Management Review, 21(2), 147–159. doi: 10.1016/j.smr.2017.06.003 39. Wesner, M.S. and Miller, T. (2008), „Boomers and Millenials have much in common”, Organizational Development, Vol. 26 No. 3, pp. 89-96. 40. Xu, B., Chang, P., Welker, C. L., Bazarova, N. N., & Cosley, D. (2016). Automatic Archiving versus Default Deletion: What Snapchat Tells Us About Ephemerality in Design. CSCW : Proceedings of the Conference on Computer-Supported Cooperative Work. Conference on Computer-Supported Cooperative Work, 2016, 1662–1675. https://doi.org/10.1145/2818048.2819948 41. Yoo, K., & Gretzel, U. (2011). Influence of personality on travel-related consumergenerated media creation. Computers in Human Behavior, 27(2), 609-621. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2010.05.002. en_US
dc.description.abstract Ephemeral social media platforms, which displays rich media, primarily images and videos, are only accessible for a short-term period. It has lately got the attention of researchers in order to understand better, how ephemeral social media platforms are affecting social media users. We design quantitative survey study that sampling data collected over two weeks (N= 149) to understand engagement differences (consuming, participating, producing) between Millennials and Non-millennials, on one of the leading ephemeral mobile platforms – on Instagram Stories. Our quantitative data demonstrated that Millennials show statistically significant differences by engaging Instagram Stories than Non-millennials. However, results unexpectedly demonstrate that non-millennials show the same engagement level in watching and reading ephemeral content as Millennials. en_US
dc.language.iso en en_US
dc.publisher Ivane Javakhishvili Tbilisi State University Press en_US
dc.subject Instagram Stories, Customer Engagement, Ephemeral Social Media, User-generated content, Millennials en_US
dc.title Millennials versus non-millennials the context of engagement levels on Instagram stories en_US
dc.type Article en_US


Files in this item

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

  • Article
    An article in a journal, magazine, newspaper. Not necessarily peer-reviewed. May be an electronic-only medium, such as an online journal or news website.

Show simple item record

Search DSpace


Advanced Search

Browse

My Account