Article Sidebar

Download
Full text PDF
Statistic
Read Counter : 239 Download : 193

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Main Article Content

Abstract

Purpose – This study examines how the credibility and usefulness of social media electronic word of mouth (eWOM) affects information adoption and how it subsequently influences donor engagement, donation intention, and donation decisions among urban Muslims in Indonesia. It also explores differences in donation behavior based on the motivation type.
Methodology – This study employed a quantitative approach using survey data from 230 Muslim respondents in Greater Jakarta. The analysis utilized descriptive statistics and Structural Equation Modeling with Partial Least Squares (SEM-PLS), including outer model evaluation (validity and reliability) and inner model analysis (hypothesis testing).
Findings – All proposed hypotheses are supported. eWOM credibility is the strongest predictor of information adoption, significantly enhancing donor engagement, donation intention, and actual donation decisions. Donor engagement further increases intention, which strongly predicts decisions. The descriptive results show that humanitarian donations are the most dominant, particularly among young Muslim women aged 20–24, driven by empathy and social media engagement. Instagram is the primary reference source and Kitabisa.com is the most frequently used donation platform.
Implications – This research is useful for digital fundraising platforms and NGOs that aim to improve engagement by focusing on emotionally credible content, platform usability, and micro-donation options, especially for humanitarian and crowdfunding campaigns targeting younger Muslim donors.
Originality – This study contributes to the literature by integrating descriptive donation motivation typologies with SEM-PLS analysis to provide a comprehensive understanding of digital Islamic philanthropic behavior among urban Muslim communities.

Keywords

digital donation donation motivation donor behavior eWOM urban Muslim society

Article Details

License

Copyright (c) 2025 Muhamad Rafi Anggara, Jono Mintarto Munandar, Irfan Syauqi Beik

Creative Commons License

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

Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:

  1. Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution ShareAlike License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
  2. Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
  3. Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).

How to Cite
Anggara, M. R., Jono Mintarto Munandar, & Irfan Syauqi Beik. (2025). The role of social media eWOM and motivation typology in urban Islamic digital donations. Asian Journal of Islamic Management (AJIM), 7(1), 71–90. https://doi.org/10.20885/AJIM.vol7.iss1.art5
Download Citation
Endnote/Zotero/Mendeley (RIS)
BibTeX

References

  1. Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 50(2), 179–211. https://doi.org/10.1016/0749-5978(91)90020-t
  2. Al Nawas, I., Altarifi, S., & Ghantous, N. (2021). E-retailer cognitive and emotional relationship quality: Their experiential antecedents and differential impact on brand evangelism. International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management, 49(9), 1249–1270. https://doi.org/10.1108/ijrdm-07-2020-0239
  3. Annur, C. M. (2022, Januari 20). Survei KIC: Mayoritas masyarakat Indonesia mengakses informasi di media sosial. Databoks. Katadata.co.id. https://databoks.katadata.co.id/datapublish/2022/01/20/survei-kic-mayoritas-masyarakat-indonesia-mengakses-informasi-di-media-sosial
  4. Awang, S. A., Borhan, J. T., Mohamad, M. T., & Muhammad, F. (2015). Exploring the patterns and antecedents of charitable giving among Muslim community in Malaysia. Online Journal of Research in Islamic Studies, 2(2), 46–58. https://doi.org/10.15364/ris15-0202-04
  5. Bekkers, R., & Wiepking, P. (2011). A literature review of empirical studies of philanthropy: Eight mechanisms that drive charitable giving. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 40(5), 924–973. https://doi.org/10.1177/0899764010380927
  6. Bialkova, S., & Te Paske, S. (2021). Campaign participation, spreading electronic word of mouth, purchase: How to optimise corporate social responsibility, CSR, effectiveness via social media? European Journal of Management and Business Economics, 30(1), 108–126. https://doi.org/10.1108/ejmbe-08-2020-0244
  7. Brosnan, K., Grün, B., & Dolnicar, S. (2018). Identifying superfluous survey items. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 43, 39–45. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretconser.2018.02.007
  8. Brunette, C., Vo, N., & Watanabe, N. M. (2017). Donation intention in current students: An analysis of university engagement and sense of place in future athletic, academic, and split donors. Journal of Issues in Intercollegiate Athletics, 10(1), 10. https://scholarcommons.sc.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1206&context=jiia
  9. Chen, Y., Dai, R., Yao, J., & Li, Y. (2019). Donate time or money? The determinants of donation intention in online crowdfunding. Sustainability, 11(16), 4269. https://doi.org/10.3390/su11164269
  10. Cheung, C. M. K., Lee, M. K. O., & Rabjohn, N. (2008). The impact of electronic word‐of‐mouth: The adoption of online opinions in online customer communities. Internet Research, 18(3), 229–247. https://doi.org/10.1108/10662240810883290
  11. Cheung, C. M. K., & Thadani, D. R. (2012). The impact of electronic word-of-mouth communication: A literature analysis and integrative model. Decision Support Systems, 54(1), 461–470. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dss.2012.06.008
  12. Cheung, M. Y., Luo, C., Sia, C. L., & Chen, H. (2009). Credibility of electronic word-of-mouth: Informational and normative determinants of on-line consumer recommendations. International Journal of Electronic Commerce, 13(4), 9–38. https://doi.org/10.2753/jec1086-4415130402
  13. Cooley, D., & Parks-Yancy, R. (2019). The effect of social media on perceived information credibility and decision making. Journal of Internet Commerce, 18(3), 249–269. https://doi.org/10.1080/15332861.2019.1595362
  14. Cordourier-Real, C. R. (2023). Charities aid foundation. In International Encyclopedia of Civil Society (pp. 1–2). Springer. http://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-93996-4_324
  15. Duong, V., Bennell, K. L., Deveza, L. A., Eyles, J. P., Hodges, P. W., Holden, M. A., Hunter, D. J., Jongs, R., Knapp, D., & Mei, Y. (2018). Attitudes, beliefs and common practices of hand therapists for base of thumb osteoarthritis in Australia (The ABC Thumb Study). Hand Therapy, 23(1), 19–27. https://doi.org/10.1177/1758998317731437
  16. Erkan, I., & Evans, C. (2016). The influence of eWOM in social media on consumers’ purchase intentions: An extended approach to information adoption. Computers in Human Behavior, 61, 47–55. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2016.03.003
  17. Erkan, I., & Evans, C. (2018). Social media or shopping websites? The influence of eWOM on consumers’ online purchase intentions. Journal of Marketing Communications, 24(6), 617–632. https://doi.org/10.1080/13527266.2016.1184706
  18. Fan, Y.-W., & Miao, Y.-F. (2012). Effect of electronic word-of-mouth on consumer purchase intention: The perspective of gender differences. International Journal of Electronic Business Management, 10(3), 175. https://www.scribd.com/document/463808293/10-1-1-688-5221-pdf
  19. Filieri, R., Alguezaui, S., & McLeay, F. (2015). Why do travelers trust TripAdvisor? Antecedents of trust towards consumer-generated media and its influence on recommendation adoption and word of mouth. Tourism Management, 51, 174–185. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tourman.2015.05.007
  20. Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981). Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of Marketing Research, 18(1), 39–50. https://doi.org/10.2307/3151312
  21. Hair, J. F., Hult. G. T. M., Ringle, C. M., & Sarstedt, M. (2014). A primer on partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM). Sage. https://eli.johogo.com/Class/CCU/SEM/_A%20Primer%20on%20Partial%20Least%20Squares%20Structural%20Equation%20Modeling_Hair.pdf
  22. Hair, J. F., Astrachan, C. B., Moisescu, O. I., Radomir, L., Sarstedt, M., Vaithilingam, S., & Ringle, C. M. (2021). Executing and interpreting applications of PLS-SEM: Updates for family business researchers. Journal of Family Business Strategy, 12(3), 100392. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jfbs.2020.100392
  23. Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., Anderson, R. E., & Tatham, R. L. (2006). Multivariate data analysis (6th ed.). Pearson Prentice Hall. https://eli.johogo.com/Class/CCU/SEM/_Multivariate%20Data%20Analysis_Hair.pdf
  24. Hasan, S. (2024). Philanthropy and social justice in Islam: Principles, prospects, and practices. Prospects, and Practices (January 30, 2024).
  25. Hennig-Thurau, T., Gwinner, K. P., Walsh, G., & Gremler, D. D. (2004). Electronic word-of-mouth via consumer-opinion platforms: What motivates consumers to articulate themselves on the internet? Journal of Interactive Marketing, 18(1), 38–52. http://doi.org/10.1002/dir.10073
  26. Hollebeek, L. D., Glynn, M. S., & Brodie, R. J. (2014). Consumer brand engagement in social media: Conceptualization, scale development and validation. Journal of Interactive Marketing, 28(2), 149–165. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intmar.2013.12.002
  27. Hou, J.-R., Zhang, J., & Zhang, K. (2023). Pictures that are worth a thousand donations: How emotions in project images drive the success of online charity fundraising campaigns? An image design perspective. Management Information Systems Quarterly, 47(2), 535–584. https://doi.org/10.25300/misq/2022/17164
  28. Hovland, C. I., Janis, I. L., & Kelley, H. H. (1953). Communication and persuasion. The MIT Press. http://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-45292-6_33
  29. Hussain, S., Ahmed, W., Jafar, R. M. S., Rabnawaz, A., & Jianzhou, Y. (2017). eWOM source credibility, perceived risk and food product customer’s information adoption. Computers in Human Behavior, 66, 96–102. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2016.09.034
  30. Insani, N. F. (2024). Optimalisasi pendistribusian dana zakat dalam program beasiswa BSI scholarship inspirasi di BSI Maslahat. https://repository.iiq.ac.id/bitstream/123456789/4164/2/09-20120043_publik.pdf
  31. Ismagilova, E., Rana, N. P., Slade, E. L., & Dwivedi, Y. K. (2021). A meta-analysis of the factors affecting eWOM providing behaviour. European Journal of Marketing, 55(4), 1067–1102. https://doi.org/10.1108/EJM-07-2018-0472
  32. Karakulah, M., & Muneeza, A. (2024). Exploring the role of donation-based crowdfunding in Islamic social finance. International Journal of Islamic Economics and Finance Research, 7(1 July), 42–58. https://doi.org/10.53840/ijiefer147
  33. Kotler, P., Armstrong, G., & Armstrong, G. M. (2010). Principles of marketing. Pearson Education India. https://opac.atmaluhur.ac.id/uploaded_files/temporary/DigitalCollection/ODljY2E4ODIyODViZjFkODgzNDUxYWZlNWFhZmY2MGE5MDc0ZDVmYw==.pdf
  34. Kotler, P., & Keller, K. L. (2016). A framework for marketing management (6th ed.). Pearson Education Limited. https://eprints.upjb.ac.id/id/eprint/167/1/A%20Framework%20for%20Marketing%20Management%20by%20Philip%20T%20Kotler,%20Kevin%20Lane%20Keller%20(z-lib.org).pdf
  35. Kunhibava, S., Muneeza, A., Khalid, M. B., Mustapha, Z., & Sen, T. M. (2024). Islamic social finance from the Quran and sunnah. In Islamic Social Finance: Law and Practice in Malaysia (pp. 1–21). Springer. http://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-97-1410-0
  36. Latief, H., & Anwar, S. (2022). Technologizing Islamic philanthropy during the Covid-19 pandemic in Indonesia. Journal of Muslim Philanthropy & Civil Society, 6(2). https://scholarworks.iu.edu/iupjournals/index.php/muslimphilanthropy/article/view/4911
  37. Maisaroh, N., Habibi, A., & Iqbal, M. (2024). Growth trends of internet users and e-commerce in increasing economic growth in Indonesia. Jurnal Ekonomi Pembangunan, 13(3), 41–50. https://doi.org/10.23960/jep.v13i3.3868
  38. Mehrabian, A., & Russell, J. A. (1974). An approach to environmental psychology. The MIT Press.
  39. Mohamed, A. A., & Abdulrohim, E. (2025). Zakat as a legal obligation in Sharia within the context of contemporary taxation systems. Demak Universal Journal of Islam and Sharia, 3(02), 229–244. https://doi.org/10.61455/deujis.v3i02.345
  40. Nageswarakurukkal, K., Gonçalves, P., & Moshtari, M. (2020). Improving fundraising efficiency in small and medium sized non-profit organizations using online solutions. Journal of Nonprofit & Public Sector Marketing, 32(3), 286–311. https://doi.org/10.1080/10495142.2019.1589627
  41. Naujoks, A., & Benkenstein, M. (2020). Who is behind the message? The power of expert reviews on eWOM platforms. Electronic Commerce Research and Applications, 44, 101015. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.elerap.2020.101015
  42. Ngo, T. T. A., Bui, C. T., Chau, H. K. L., & Tran, N. P. N. (2024). Electronic word-of-mouth (eWOM) on social networking sites (SNS): Roles of information credibility in shaping online purchase intention. Heliyon, 10(11). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e32168
  43. Ngo, T. T. A., Vuong, B. L., Le, M. D., Nguyen, T. T., Tran, M. M., & Nguyen, Q. K. (2024). The impact of eWOM information in social media on the online purchase intention of Generation Z. Cogent Business & Management, 11(1), 2316933. https://doi.org/10.1080/23311975.2024.2316933
  44. Nor, S. M., Yaacob, S. E., Rahman, A. A., & Zainal, H. (2024). Digitizing zakat distribution in Malaysia: A case study on application process at Kedah State Zakat Board. Samarah: Jurnal Hukum Keluarga dan Hukum Islam, 8(3), 1901–1927. https://doi.org/10.22373/sjhk.v8i3.24158
  45. Nuraeni, N., Mahri, A. J. W., Rosida, R., & Anggara, M. R. (2024). Optimization of agricultural zakat: Study on implementation of zakat core principles in BAZNAS Majalengka regency. Al-Risalah: Jurnal Studi Agama dan Pemikiran Islam, 15(1), 175–196. https://doi.org/10.34005/alrisalah.v15i1.3471
  46. Nuseir, M. T. (2019). The impact of electronic word of mouth (eWOM) on the online purchase intention of consumers in the Islamic countries–a case of (UAE). Journal of Islamic Marketing, 10(3), 759–767. https://doi.org/10.1108/jima-03-2018-0059
  47. Nyagadza, B., Mazuruse, G., Simango, K., Chikazhe, L., Tsokota, T., & Macheka, L. (2023). Examining the influence of social media eWOM on consumers’ purchase intentions of commercialised indigenous fruits (IFs) products in FMCGs retailers. Sustainable Technology and Entrepreneurship, 2(3), 100040. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.stae.2023.100040
  48. Pandjaitan, R. H. (2024). The social media marketing mix trends in Indonesia for 2024: Communication perspective. Jurnal Komunikasi Ikatan Sarjana Komunikasi Indonesia, 9(1), 251–269. https://doi.org/10.25008/jkiski.v9i1.1005
  49. Petty, R. E., & Cacioppo, J. T. (1986). The elaboration likelihood model of persuasion. In Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 19, pp. 123–205). Elsevier. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0065-2601(08)60214-2
  50. Pride, W. M., & Ferrell, O. C. (2015). Marketing 2016. Cengage Learning.
  51. Shah, Z., & Wei, L. (2022). Source credibility and the information quality matter in public engagement on social networking sites during the COVID-19 crisis. Frontiers in Psychology, 13, 882705. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.882705
  52. Shi, R., Wang, M., Liu, C., & Gull, N. (2023). The influence of short video platform characteristics on users’ willingness to share marketing information: Based on the SOR model. Sustainability, 15(3), 2448. https://doi.org/10.3390/su15032448
  53. Shier, M. L., & Handy, F. (2012). Understanding online donor behavior: The role of donor characteristics, perceptions of the internet, website and program, and influence from social networks. International Journal of Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Marketing, 17(3), 219–230. https://doi.org/10.1002/nvsm.1425
  54. Slikkerveer, L. J. (2019). Gotong royong: An indigenous institution of communality and mutual assistance in Indonesia. In Integrated community-managed development: Strategizing indigenous knowledge and institutions for poverty reduction and sustainable community development in Indonesia (pp. 307–320). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-05423-6_14
  55. So, K. K. F., King, C., Sparks, B. A., & Wang, Y. (2016). The role of customer engagement in building consumer loyalty to tourism brands. Journal of Travel Research, 55(1), 64–78. https://doi.org/10.1177/0047287514541008
  56. Srivastava, M., & Sivaramakrishnan, S. (2021). The impact of eWOM on consumer brand engagement. Marketing Intelligence & Planning, 39(3), 469–484. https://doi.org/10.1108/mip-06-2020-0263
  57. Sussman, S. W., & Siegal, W. S. (2003). Informational influence in organizations: An integrated approach to knowledge adoption. Information Systems Research, 14(1), 47–65. https://doi.org/10.1287/isre.14.1.47.14767
  58. Verma, D., Dewani, P. P., Behl, A., & Dwivedi, Y. K. (2023). Understanding the impact of eWOM communication through the lens of information adoption model: A meta-analytic structural equation modeling perspective. Computers in Human Behavior, 143, 107710. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2023.107710
  59. Vieira, V. A. (2013). Stimuli–organism-response framework: A meta-analytic review in the store environment. Journal of Business Research, 66(9), 1420–1426. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2012.05.009
  60. Yang, F., Shinkle, G. A., & Goudsmit, M. (2022). The efficacy of organizational control interactions: External environmental uncertainty as a critical contingency. Journal of Business Research, 139, 855–868. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2021.10.026
  61. Yones, P. C. P., & Muthaiyah, S. (2023). eWOM via the TikTok application and its influence on the purchase intention of somethinc products. Asia Pacific Management Review, 28(2), 174–184. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apmrv.2022.07.007
  62. Zhang, K. Z. K., Zhao, S. J., Cheung, C. M. K., & Lee, M. K. O. (2014). Examining the influence of online reviews on consumers’ decision-making: A heuristic–systematic model. Decision Support Systems, 67, 78–89. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dss.2014.08.005
  63. Zogaj, A. (2023). Nonprofit organizations, social media, and trust: How self-congruence can help organizations choose the right social media endorsers. Journal of Nonprofit & Public Sector Marketing, 35(5), 568–588. https://doi.org/10.1080/10495142.2022.2130496