<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<!DOCTYPE article PUBLIC "-//NLM//DTD JATS (Z39.96) Journal Publishing DTD v1.3 20210610//EN" "https://jats.nlm.nih.gov/publishing/1.3/JATS-journalpublishing1-3.dtd">
<article xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:ali="http://www.niso.org/schemas/ali/1.0/" article-type="research-article" dtd-version="1.3" xml:lang="en">
  <front>
    <journal-meta>
      <journal-id journal-id-type="publisher-id">aja</journal-id>
      <journal-id journal-id-type="nlm-ta">Arab J Adm</journal-id>
      <journal-title-group>
        <journal-title>The Arab Journal of Administration</journal-title>
        <journal-title xml:lang="ar">المجلة العربية للإدارة</journal-title>
      </journal-title-group>
      <issn pub-type="ppub">1110-5453</issn>
      <issn pub-type="epub">2663-4473</issn>
      <publisher>
        <publisher-name>League of Arab States, Arab Organization for Administrative Development</publisher-name>
        <publisher-loc>Cairo, Egypt</publisher-loc>
      </publisher>
    </journal-meta>
    
    <article-meta>
      <article-id pub-id-type="publisher-id">887</article-id>
      <article-id pub-id-type="doi">10.21608/aja.2024.315397.1699</article-id>
      
      <article-categories>
        <subj-group subj-group-type="heading">
          <subject>Marketing</subject>
          <subject>Nonprofit Management</subject>
          <subject>Social Media</subject>
        </subj-group>
      </article-categories>
      
      <title-group>
        <article-title>The Impact of Electronic Word of Mouth on Social Media on Nonprofit Brand Image: An Application to Donors of Nonprofit Organizations in the Arab Republic of Egypt</article-title>
        <trans-title-group xml:lang="ar">
          <trans-title>تأثير الكلمة المنطوقة إلكترونيا عبر مواقع التواصل الاجتماعي على صورة العلامة التجارية غير الربحية بالتطبيق على المتبرعين للمنظمات غير الربحية في جمهورية مصر العربية</trans-title>
        </trans-title-group>
      </title-group>
      
      <contrib-group>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="yes">
          <name>
            <surname>Badr</surname>
            <given-names>Fatma El-Zahraa Ibrahim</given-names>
          </name>
          <string-name>Fatma El-Zahraa Ibrahim Badr</string-name>
          <degrees>Ph.D.</degrees>
          <role>Assistant Professor of Business Administration</role>
          <aff>
            <institution>Arab Institute for Research and Studies</institution>
            <institution>Arab League Educational, Cultural and Scientific Organization (ALECSO)</institution>
            <institution>League of Arab States</institution>
            <country country="EG">Egypt</country>
          </aff>
          <email>dr.fatma.badr@iarsedu.net</email>
        </contrib>
      </contrib-group>
      
      <author-notes>
        <corresp id="cor1">Corresponding author: Dr. Fatma El-Zahraa Ibrahim Badr, Assistant Professor of Business Administration, Arab Institute for Research and Studies affiliated with ALECSO - League of Arab States, Egypt. E-mail: <email>dr.fatma.badr@iarsedu.net</email></corresp>
      </author-notes>
      
      <pub-date pub-type="epub" date-type="pub" iso-8601-date="2026-04-01">
        <day>01</day>
        <month>04</month>
        <year>2026</year>
      </pub-date>
      <pub-date pub-type="collection" date-type="collection" iso-8601-date="2026-04">
        <month>04</month>
        <year>2026</year>
      </pub-date>
      
      <volume>46</volume>
      <issue>2</issue>
      <fpage>115</fpage>
      <lpage>136</lpage>
      <elocation-id>e1699</elocation-id>
      
      <history>
        <date date-type="received" iso-8601-date="2024-08-15">
          <day>15</day>
          <month>08</month>
          <year>2024</year>
        </date>
        <date date-type="accepted" iso-8601-date="2024-10-15">
          <day>15</day>
          <month>10</month>
          <year>2024</year>
        </date>
        <date date-type="published" iso-8601-date="2026-04-01">
          <day>01</day>
          <month>04</month>
          <year>2026</year>
        </date>
      </history>
      
      <permissions>
        <copyright-statement>Copyright (c) 2026 The Arab Journal of Administration</copyright-statement>
        <copyright-year>2026</copyright-year>
        <copyright-holder>The Arab Journal of Administration</copyright-holder>
        <license license-type="open-access">
          <ali:license_ref>https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/</ali:license_ref>
          <license-p>This work is licensed under a <ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/">Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License</ext-link>.</license-p>
        </license>
      </permissions>
      
      <abstract>
        <sec>
          <title>Purpose</title>
          <p>This research aims to study the impact of Electronic Word of Mouth on social media on nonprofit brand image, with an application to donors in the Arab Republic of Egypt.</p>
        </sec>
        <sec>
          <title>Methodology</title>
          <p>A proposed model was designed for the study to serve as a guide for testing the impact of electronic Word of Mouth on social media on nonprofit brand image. Additionally, a survey was designed using Google Drive and was directed to donors of nonprofit organizations in the Arab Republic of Egypt via an online survey. To analyze the primary data for the study, the SPSS statistical software was used for data entry. The sample size was 388 individuals, with 374 valid responses representing the study sample, consisting of donors to nonprofit organizations in Egypt, and 14 individuals who had not donated before. The WarpPLS 7 statistical software was also utilized to obtain the study results.</p>
        </sec>
        <sec>
          <title>Findings</title>
          <p>The statistical analysis results demonstrated a significant positive impact of Electronic Word of Mouth on social media on nonprofit brand image.</p>
        </sec>
      </abstract>
      
      <trans-abstract xml:lang="ar">
        <p>تهدف هذه الدراسة إلى دراسة تأثير الكلمة المنطوقة إلكترونيا عبر مواقع التواصل الاجتماعي على صورة العلامة التجارية غير الربحية، وذلك بالتطبيق على المتبرعين للمنظمات غير الربحية في جمهورية مصر العربية، وتم تصميم نموذج مقترح للدراسة لكي يستخدم كدليل لاختبار تأثير الكلمة المنطوقة إلكترونيا عبر مواقع التواصل الاجتماعي على صورة العلامة التجارية غير الربحية. كما تم تصميم قائمة الاستقصاء باستخدام محرك البحث Google Drive، وتم توجيهها إلى المتبرعين للمنظمات غير الربحية بجمهورية مصر العربية عبر الإنترنت Online Survey. ولتحليل البيانات الأولية للدراسة، تم استخدام البرنامج الإحصائي SPSS لإدخال البيانات الأولية. وقد بلغ حجم العينة 388 مفردة، وبلغ عدد القوائم الصحيحة والتي تمثل عينة الدراسة 374 قائمة، وهم الذين قاموا بالتبرع للمنظمات غير الربحية بجمهورية مصر العربية، وبلغ عدد من لم يتبرع من قبل 14 مفردة. كما تم الاعتماد على البرنامج الإحصائي WarpPLS 7 وذلك للوصول لنتائج الدراسة. وقد أوضحت نتائج التحليل الإحصائي وجود تأثير معنوي إيجابي للكلمة المنطوقة إلكترونيا عبر مواقع التواصل الاجتماعي على صورة العلامة التجارية غير الربحية.</p>
      </trans-abstract>
      
      <kwd-group>
        <title>Keywords</title>
        <kwd>Electronic Word of Mouth</kwd>
        <kwd>Nonprofit Brand Image</kwd>
        <kwd>Nonprofit Organizations</kwd>
        <kwd>Social Media</kwd>
        <kwd>eWOM</kwd>
        <kwd>Donors</kwd>
      </kwd-group>
      
      <kwd-group xml:lang="ar">
        <title>الكلمات المفتاحية</title>
        <kwd>الكلمة المنطوقة إلكترونيا</kwd>
        <kwd>العلامة التجارية غير الربحية</kwd>
        <kwd>المنظمات غير الربحية</kwd>
        <kwd>مواقع التواصل الاجتماعي</kwd>
      </kwd-group>
      
      <counts>
        <fig-count count="3"/>
        <table-count count="17"/>
        <ref-count count="32"/>
        <page-count count="22"/>
      </counts>
    </article-meta>
  </front>
  
  <body>
    <sec id="sec1" sec-type="intro">
      <title>Introduction</title>
      <p>With the advancement of technology and the spread of the Internet, communication between individuals has become faster and more influential than ever before. With this progress, Electronic Word of Mouth (eWOM) has emerged and evolved to become one of the decision-making components used by consumers. Consumers communicate with their peers to endorse or condemn products or services they have experienced, and usually eWOM provides honest and balanced evaluations of brands from the perspectives of their users (<xref rid="ref8" ref-type="bibr">Cheung et al., 2009</xref>).</p>
      
      <p>On the other hand, nonprofit brand image is considered a vital and decisive element in promoting charity programs, whether these donations were monetary or in-kind (<xref rid="ref6" ref-type="bibr">Bendapudi et al., 1996</xref>). This image plays a fundamental role in stimulating donations amid intense competition. <xref rid="ref23" ref-type="bibr">Michaelidou et al. (2019)</xref> pointed out that nonprofit brand image is one of the important factors in the success of nonprofit organizations because it affects support and funding decisions by donors and stakeholders. Therefore, it was necessary to shed light on a number of important topics, namely electronic word of mouth on social media and nonprofit brand image.</p>
      
      <p>This study is divided into two parts: the first is the theoretical framework and previous studies. The second addresses the applied study, as follows:</p>
      
      <list list-type="bullet">
        <list-item>
          <p>Received: August 2024; Accepted for publication: October 2024; Published electronically: October 2024</p>
        </list-item>
        <list-item>
          <p>DOI: 10.21608/aja.2024.315397.1699</p>
        </list-item>
      </list>
      
      <p>The aim of this study is to study the effect of electronic word of mouth on social media on nonprofit brand image, with an application to donors of nonprofit organizations in the Arab Republic of Egypt. A proposed model was designed for the study to serve as a guide for testing the effect of electronic word of mouth on social media on nonprofit brand image. A questionnaire was also designed using Google Drive, and directed to donors of nonprofit organizations in the Arab Republic of Egypt via the Internet Online Survey. The statistical analysis results showed a significant positive effect of electronic word of mouth on social media on nonprofit brand image.</p>
    </sec>
    
    <sec id="sec2" sec-type="materials|methods">
      <title>Theoretical Framework and Previous Studies</title>
      <p>This section addresses the study variables: electronic word of mouth on social media, and nonprofit brand image, as follows:</p>
      
      <sec id="sec2-1">
        <title>Electronic Word of Mouth on Social Media</title>
        <p><xref rid="ref30" ref-type="bibr">Sharma et al. (2024)</xref> defined electronic word of mouth as "an informal method that includes the electronic transfer of information from one source to another." <xref rid="ref15" ref-type="bibr">Ismagilova et al. (2017)</xref> defined electronic word of mouth as "a dynamic and continuous process of information exchange between potential, actual, and former consumers regarding a product, service, brand, or company, and is available to a large number of individuals and institutions via the Internet."</p>
        
        <p><xref rid="ref10" ref-type="bibr">Hennig-Thurau and Walsh (2003)</xref> and <xref rid="ref18" ref-type="bibr">King et al. (2014)</xref> agreed that electronic word of mouth is "any positive or negative statement made by potential, actual, or former customers about a company and made available to a large number of individuals and institutions via the Internet." <xref rid="ref21" ref-type="bibr">Litvin et al. (2008)</xref> also defined electronic word of mouth as "all informal communications directed at consumers through Internet-based technology related to the use or characteristics of goods or services or their sellers."</p>
        
        <p>Therefore, it can be said that electronic word of mouth on social media is "any positive or negative statement issued by potential, actual, or former customers regarding a product, service, brand, or company, and made available to a large number of individuals and institutions through social media sites."</p>
        
        <p>Based on the studies reviewed by the researcher, studies that addressed electronic word of mouth as a three-dimensional concept were found, such as the studies of <xref rid="ref2" ref-type="bibr">Abouzeid et al. (2023)</xref>, <xref rid="ref12" ref-type="bibr">Hua et al. (2024)</xref>, <xref rid="ref3" ref-type="bibr">Al-Agha (2026)</xref>, <xref rid="ref14" ref-type="bibr">Hung et al. (2023)</xref>, <xref rid="ref22" ref-type="bibr">Liu et al. (2019)</xref>, <xref rid="ref32" ref-type="bibr">Wang et al. (2015)</xref>, and <xref rid="ref11" ref-type="bibr">Kim and Chu (2011)</xref>. The study of <xref rid="ref12" ref-type="bibr">Hua et al. (2024)</xref> and <xref rid="ref2" ref-type="bibr">Abouzeid et al. (2023)</xref> concluded that the dimensions of electronic word of mouth are (quality of electronic word of mouth, quantity of electronic word of mouth, and credibility of electronic word of mouth).</p>
        
        <p>The researcher adopted the opinion of <xref rid="ref2" ref-type="bibr">Abouzeid et al. (2023)</xref> and <xref rid="ref12" ref-type="bibr">Hua et al. (2024)</xref> that electronic word of mouth is a mixture of three dimensions: quality of electronic word of mouth, quantity of electronic word of mouth, and credibility of electronic word of mouth, which are presented as follows:</p>
        
        <sec id="sec2-1-1">
          <title>Quality of Electronic Word of Mouth</title>
          <p>Electronic word of mouth of high quality is characterized by features such as modernity, comprehensibility, importance, and credibility (<xref rid="ref20" ref-type="bibr">Lim et al., 2023</xref>).</p>
        </sec>
        
        <sec id="sec2-1-2">
          <title>Quantity of Electronic Word of Mouth</title>
          <p>The quantity of electronic word of mouth refers to the volume of comments and reviews on the Internet related to a product or service (<xref rid="ref14" ref-type="bibr">Hung et al., 2023</xref>). <xref rid="ref28" ref-type="bibr">Reichelt et al. (2014)</xref> pointed out that consumers are increasingly turning to the Internet to search for product information and share it, and these practices lead to the availability of large quantities of consumer opinions on the Internet.</p>
        </sec>
        
        <sec id="sec2-1-3">
          <title>Credibility of Electronic Word of Mouth</title>
          <p>The credibility of electronic word of mouth refers to the extent to which consumers perceive recommendations as trustworthy (<xref rid="ref11" ref-type="bibr">Hong and Pittman, 2020</xref>). <xref rid="ref16" ref-type="bibr">Ismagilova et al. (2020)</xref> pointed out that the credibility of electronic word of mouth is the degree to which an individual perceives that recommendations from others are believable, correct, or realistic.</p>
        </sec>
      </sec>
      
      <sec id="sec2-2">
        <title>Nonprofit Brand Image</title>
        <p>There is no consensus on the definition of nonprofit brand image in the literature. <xref rid="ref4" ref-type="bibr">Andreasen (2002)</xref> defined nonprofit brand image as "the impression formed by the public about the nonprofit organization based on all aspects of its communication and activities. This includes its reputation, values, messages it conveys, and how it interacts with society." <xref rid="ref23" ref-type="bibr">Michaelidou et al. (2019)</xref> defined it as "the overall perception or impression that individuals form about the nonprofit organization based on their experiences, attitudes, and interactions with the organization."</p>
        
        <p>Based on the studies reviewed by the researcher, studies that addressed nonprofit brand image as a four-dimensional concept were found, such as the studies of <xref rid="ref23" ref-type="bibr">Michaelidou et al. (2019)</xref>, <xref rid="ref13" ref-type="bibr">Huang and Ku (2016)</xref>, and <xref rid="ref25" ref-type="bibr">Michel and Rieunier (2012)</xref>, while other studies addressed it as a five-dimensional concept such as <xref rid="ref5" ref-type="bibr">Bennett and Gabriel (2003)</xref>, and other studies addressed it through six dimensions such as <xref rid="ref24" ref-type="bibr">Michaelidou et al. (2015)</xref>.</p>
        
        <p>The studies of <xref rid="ref13" ref-type="bibr">Huang and Ku (2016)</xref>, <xref rid="ref25" ref-type="bibr">Michel and Rieunier (2012)</xref>, and <xref rid="ref23" ref-type="bibr">Michaelidou et al. (2019)</xref> concluded that the dimensions of nonprofit brand image are (dynamism, usefulness, efficiency, and impact), while <xref rid="ref5" ref-type="bibr">Bennett and Gabriel (2003)</xref> concluded that these dimensions are (compassion, dynamism, idealism, focus on beneficiaries, and non-political). <xref rid="ref24" ref-type="bibr">Michaelidou et al. (2015)</xref> concluded that the dimensions of nonprofit brand image are (dynamism, usefulness, efficiency, impact, ethics, and reliability).</p>
        
        <p>The researcher adopted the findings of the most recent study, <xref rid="ref23" ref-type="bibr">Michaelidou et al. (2019)</xref>, that nonprofit brand image is a mixture of four dimensions: dynamism, usefulness, efficiency, and impact, which are presented as follows:</p>
        
        <sec id="sec2-2-1">
          <title>Dynamism</title>
          <p><xref rid="ref23" ref-type="bibr">Michaelidou et al. (2019)</xref> defined dynamism as "the ability to innovate and adapt to environmental and societal changes." <xref rid="ref25" ref-type="bibr">Michel and Rieunier (2012)</xref> defined dynamism as "the organization's ability to adapt to changes and innovate in its strategies and programs." The study of <xref rid="ref24" ref-type="bibr">Michaelidou et al. (2015)</xref> emphasized the importance of dynamism in nonprofit organizations' response to challenges and new opportunities in a flexible manner.</p>
        </sec>
        
        <sec id="sec2-2-2">
          <title>Usefulness</title>
          <p>Usefulness refers to the extent of the value and impact of the services or products provided by nonprofit organizations on society (<xref rid="ref23" ref-type="bibr">Michaelidou et al., 2019</xref>). <xref rid="ref25" ref-type="bibr">Michel and Rieunier (2012)</xref> pointed out that usefulness means the extent of the organization's effectiveness in providing valuable services that lead to improving the lives of beneficiaries. <xref rid="ref24" ref-type="bibr">Michaelidou et al. (2015)</xref> pointed out that usefulness relates to the actual results achieved by the nonprofit organization and its impact on individuals and society.</p>
        </sec>
        
        <sec id="sec2-2-3">
          <title>Efficiency</title>
          <p><xref rid="ref23" ref-type="bibr">Michaelidou et al. (2019)</xref> pointed out that efficiency reflects how resources are used effectively to achieve desired goals. That is, efficiency measures the extent of the organization's ability to use its resources effectively to achieve its goals. <xref rid="ref25" ref-type="bibr">Michel and Rieunier (2012)</xref> pointed out that efficiency is an essential part of nonprofit brand image. <xref rid="ref24" ref-type="bibr">Michaelidou et al. (2015)</xref> discussed how nonprofit organizations can improve their efficiency to ensure achieving their goals more effectively.</p>
        </sec>
        
        <sec id="sec2-2-4">
          <title>Impact</title>
          <p><xref rid="ref23" ref-type="bibr">Michaelidou et al. (2019)</xref> defined impact as "the effect that the nonprofit organization has on beneficiaries and society as a whole." <xref rid="ref25" ref-type="bibr">Michel and Rieunier (2012)</xref> explained that impact focuses on the positive changes that the nonprofit organization makes in society. <xref rid="ref24" ref-type="bibr">Michaelidou et al. (2015)</xref> pointed out that impact reflects the long-term success of the nonprofit organization in achieving its social and environmental goals.</p>
        </sec>
      </sec>
    </sec>
    
    <sec id="sec3" sec-type="materials|methods">
      <title>Applied Study</title>
      <p>This part includes several elements: importance of the study, problem and questions of the study, objectives of the study, hypotheses of the study, limits of the study, study methodology, analysis and discussion of study results and testing of hypotheses, and finally summary of results and recommendations.</p>
      
      <sec id="sec3-1">
        <title>Importance of the Study</title>
        <p>The scientific importance of the study stems from the importance of the topic of electronic word of mouth on social media and nonprofit brand image, as there is a need for more studies related to charitable work in the Arab Republic of Egypt. <xref rid="ref27" ref-type="bibr">Reed (2020)</xref> pointed out that charitable work with its institutions is a fundamental pillar for community development by serving vulnerable groups and meeting the needs of beneficiaries from the projects provided by nonprofit organizations.</p>
        
        <p>The applied importance of the study stems from the vital role of nonprofit organizations in promoting community development, which necessitates maximizing the impact of electronic word of mouth in supporting their mental image. In this context, the necessity of strategic alignment between published activities and declared orientations to enhance the credibility of these organizations before stakeholders emerges, which was emphasized by the study of <xref rid="ref3" ref-type="bibr">Al-Agha (2026)</xref>; this contributes to providing applied insights to enable nonprofit institutions to invest in social media platforms in building a strong and reliable brand.</p>
      </sec>
      
      <sec id="sec3-2">
        <title>Problem and Questions of the Study</title>
        <p>The researcher formulated the problem of the study in the following questions:</p>
        
        <list list-type="order">
          <list-item>
            <p>Is there an effect of electronic word of mouth on social media on nonprofit brand image for donors of nonprofit organizations in the Arab Republic of Egypt?</p>
          </list-item>
          <list-item>
            <p>Are there differences in the perception of donors of nonprofit organizations in the Arab Republic of Egypt regarding the study variables (electronic word of mouth on social media, nonprofit brand image) according to demographic variables (gender, age, educational level, income, marital status, urban/rural residence)?</p>
          </list-item>
        </list>
      </sec>
      
      <sec id="sec3-3">
        <title>Objectives of the Study</title>
        <p>This study seeks to achieve the following objectives:</p>
        
        <list list-type="order">
          <list-item>
            <p>To identify the effect of electronic word of mouth on social media on nonprofit brand image for donors of nonprofit organizations in the Arab Republic of Egypt.</p>
          </list-item>
          <list-item>
            <p>To measure the differences in the perception of donors of nonprofit organizations in the Arab Republic of Egypt regarding the study variables (electronic word of mouth on social media, nonprofit brand image) according to demographic variables (gender, age, educational level, income, marital status, urban/rural residence).</p>
          </list-item>
        </list>
      </sec>
      
      <sec id="sec3-4">
        <title>Hypotheses of the Study</title>
        <p>This study seeks to test the validity or invalidity of the following two hypotheses:</p>
        
        <list list-type="order">
          <list-item>
            <p>There is no effect of electronic word of mouth on social media on nonprofit brand image for donors of nonprofit organizations in the Arab Republic of Egypt.</p>
          </list-item>
          <list-item>
            <p>There are no significant differences in the perception of donors of nonprofit organizations in the Arab Republic of Egypt regarding the study variables (electronic word of mouth on social media, nonprofit brand image) according to demographic variables (gender, age, educational level, income, marital status, urban/rural residence).</p>
          </list-item>
        </list>
      </sec>
      
      <sec id="sec3-5">
        <title>Limits of the Study</title>
        <p>The study limits focus on the conceptual and practical framework related to the study topic, which includes the basic variables, challenges, and scientific and practical constraints faced by the researcher during the implementation of the study, as follows:</p>
        
        <sec id="sec3-5-1">
          <title>Conceptual Limits</title>
          <p>The study focuses on the effect of electronic word of mouth on social media (eWOM) on the brand image of nonprofit organizations. These variables were determined based on previous literature and related field research, which may exclude other potential variables that affect brand image.</p>
        </sec>
        
        <sec id="sec3-5-2">
          <title>Practical Constraints</title>
          <p>The study faces challenges related to collecting and analyzing data about electronic word of mouth on social media in the context of nonprofit organizations, and these challenges are as follows:</p>
          
          <list list-type="bullet">
            <list-item>
              <p>Diversity of social media platforms: The characteristics of social media platforms vary and differ in the type of interaction they allow, where <xref rid="ref17" ref-type="bibr">Jwayyed (2026)</xref> pointed to the specificity of the Facebook platform in enhancing social accountability. Based on this, measuring the effect of eWOM uniformly becomes difficult, which emphasizes the necessity of analyzing each platform according to its own context.</p>
            </list-item>
            <list-item>
              <p>Speed of content spread: Content on social media is characterized by the speed of its spread and the changing dynamics of interaction, which makes it difficult to accurately track and understand effects in the long term.</p>
            </list-item>
            <list-item>
              <p>Measuring sentiments and emotions: Analyzing the sentiments and emotions associated with eWOM interactions is difficult, as these emotions play an important role in shaping brand image but are complex to measure.</p>
            </list-item>
            <list-item>
              <p>Resources of nonprofit organizations: Nonprofit organizations may face limitations in the resources allocated to managing and analyzing their presence on social media, which affects the quantity and quality of eWOM available for analysis.</p>
            </list-item>
            <list-item>
              <p>Availability of data: There may be difficulties in accessing eWOM data related to nonprofit organizations due to privacy policies or lack of activity on some platforms.</p>
            </list-item>
          </list>
        </sec>
        
        <sec id="sec3-5-3">
          <title>Scientific Constraints</title>
          <p>The study relies on a quantitative methodology using online questionnaires, which may affect the accuracy and validity of responses due to participants' self-bias or their incomplete understanding of the questions. The study is also limited to specific variables without taking into account other external factors that may affect the relationship between electronic word of mouth on social media (eWOM) and brand image.</p>
        </sec>
        
        <sec id="sec3-5-4">
          <title>Temporal Constraints</title>
          <p>The study was limited to a specific time period for data collection from May 15, 2024 to July 1, 2024, which may affect the ability to analyze the long-term effects of electronic word of mouth on social media (eWOM) on nonprofit brand image. Rapid changes in social media trends may also make the results limited for other time periods.</p>
        </sec>
        
        <sec id="sec3-5-5">
          <title>Spatial Constraints</title>
          <p>The study is limited to the governorates of the Arab Republic of Egypt, which may affect the generalization of results to other regions with different social and economic characteristics.</p>
        </sec>
      </sec>
      
      <sec id="sec3-6">
        <title>Study Methodology</title>
        <p>This includes the data required for the study and its sources, the study population and sample, the research tool and data collection method, measurement of study variables, and statistical analysis methods, as follows:</p>
        
        <sec id="sec3-6-1">
          <title>Data Required for the Study and Its Sources</title>
          <p>The researcher relied on two types of data in this study:</p>
          
          <p><bold>Secondary data:</bold> These are data obtained by reviewing Arabic and foreign books, studies, and research that addressed the study variables and related topics in a way that enables the researcher to establish concepts and prepare the theoretical framework for the study. This also includes reviewing the Ministry of Solidarity, the Central Agency for Public Mobilization and Statistics, as well as reviewing nonprofit organization websites and specialized websites in analyzing websites and counting visitor traffic on the Internet and specialized websites in analyzing and monitoring social media statistics by country and sector type.</p>
          
          <p><bold>Primary data:</bold> These are data collected through a questionnaire (related to the study variables) from individual donors to nonprofit organizations under study, and coding and analyzing them, enabling the researcher to test the extent of validity or invalidity of the study hypotheses and reach results.</p>
        </sec>
        
        <sec id="sec3-6-2">
          <title>Study Population and Sample</title>
          <p>The study population of the current study consists of all individual donors to nonprofit organizations in the Arab Republic of Egypt. <xref ref-type="table" rid="table3">Table 3</xref> and <xref ref-type="table" rid="table4">Table 4</xref> show the population census of the Arab Republic of Egypt by thousands. <xref ref-type="table" rid="table5">Table 5</xref> also shows the number of Internet users and the number of social media users in the Arab Republic of Egypt by millions.</p>
          
          <table-wrap id="table3" position="float">
            <label>Table 3</label>
            <caption>
              <title>Population Census of the Arab Republic of Egypt by Gender (2023)</title>
            </caption>
            <table>
              <thead>
                <tr>
                  <th>State</th>
                  <th>Male</th>
                  <th>Female</th>
                  <th>Total</th>
                </tr>
              </thead>
              <tbody>
                <tr>
                  <td>Arab Republic of Egypt</td>
                  <td>53,721,266</td>
                  <td>50,741,279</td>
                  <td>104,462,545</td>
                </tr>
              </tbody>
            </table>
            <table-wrap-foot>
              <fn><p>Source: Prepared by the researcher based on Egypt in Numbers 2023, issued by the Central Agency for Public Mobilization and Statistics (Appendix No. 1).</p></fn>
            </table-wrap-foot>
          </table-wrap>
          
          <table-wrap id="table4" position="float">
            <label>Table 4</label>
            <caption>
              <title>Population Census of the Arab Republic of Egypt by Place of Residence (Urban and Rural) (2023)</title>
            </caption>
            <table>
              <thead>
                <tr>
                  <th>Governorate</th>
                  <th>Urban</th>
                  <th>Rural</th>
                  <th>Total</th>
                </tr>
              </thead>
              <tbody>
                <tr>
                  <td>Arab Republic of Egypt</td>
                  <td>44,825,058</td>
                  <td>59,637,487</td>
                  <td>104,462,545</td>
                </tr>
              </tbody>
            </table>
            <table-wrap-foot>
              <fn><p>Source: Prepared by the researcher based on Egypt in Numbers 2023, issued by the Central Agency for Public Mobilization and Statistics (Appendix No. 1).</p></fn>
            </table-wrap-foot>
          </table-wrap>
          
          <table-wrap id="table5" position="float">
            <label>Table 5</label>
            <caption>
              <title>Internet Users and Social Media Users in the Arab Republic of Egypt (2024)</title>
            </caption>
            <table>
              <thead>
                <tr>
                  <th>Internet Users</th>
                  <th>Social Media Users</th>
                </tr>
              </thead>
              <tbody>
                <tr>
                  <td>82.01 million</td>
                  <td>45.40 million</td>
                </tr>
              </tbody>
            </table>
            <table-wrap-foot>
              <fn><p>Source: Prepared by the researcher based on the Egypt 2024 Digital Report issued by Hootsuite (Appendix No. 2).</p></fn>
            </table-wrap-foot>
          </table-wrap>
          
          <p><bold>Study Sample:</bold> Due to the absence of a framework for the study population and the difficulty of determining the population size and the spread of its individuals, and based on the numbers in <xref ref-type="table" rid="table3">Table 3</xref> and <xref ref-type="table" rid="table4">Table 4</xref>, the study population exceeds 100,000 individuals, and therefore the minimum sample size is 383 individuals (<xref rid="ref31" ref-type="bibr">Thompson, 2012</xref>).</p>
          
          <p>The researcher used Internet-mediated questionnaires (Online Survey), making it available to a wide audience of potential participants, which was designed using Google Drive. The researcher distributed the questionnaire through social media sites, from May 15, 2024 to May 25, 2024, to collect a small preliminary sample to ensure that the respondents understood the questionnaire phrases. The response rate was 70 individuals, with 45 valid questionnaires from those who had actually donated to nonprofit organizations, and 25 individuals who had not donated. Then the researcher distributed the questionnaire through social media sites from June 1, 2024 to July 1, 2024.</p>
          
          <p>The researcher relied on the online questionnaire because it matches the conditions for applying it to the current study, where <xref rid="ref29" ref-type="bibr">Saunders et al. (2012)</xref> believe that certain conditions must be met for applying an online questionnaire, including that the individuals of the study population can deal with the Internet, that the questionnaire questions directed to the targets are closed and as short as possible, and that the questionnaire is placed on the Internet for a period of two to six weeks. Accordingly, the response rate was 388 individuals, with 374 valid questionnaires representing the study sample, consisting of those who had actually donated to nonprofit organizations in Egypt, and 14 individuals who had not donated before. It is preferable that the sample size be larger than the previously determined minimum.</p>
        </sec>
        
        <sec id="sec3-6-3">
          <title>Research Tool and Data Collection Method</title>
          <p>The research tool is the questionnaire. For the purposes of this study, a questionnaire was prepared to be answered by the respondent himself. The questionnaire included four questions: the first: the respondent is asked whether he has donated before to nonprofit organizations or not. The second: the respondent is asked to mark the nonprofit organization to which he donated. The third: contains 23 phrases expressing the study variables (please refer to the questionnaire in the study appendix) measured using a five-point Likert scale, ranging from "strongly agree" (5) to "strongly disagree" (1). The fourth: relates to demographic variables, and these phrases were developed and adopted from previous studies closely related to the topic as shown in <xref ref-type="table" rid="table6">Table 6</xref>.</p>
          
          <table-wrap id="table6" position="float">
            <label>Table 6</label>
            <caption>
              <title>Previous Studies Used in Measuring Study Variables</title>
            </caption>
            <table>
              <thead>
                <tr>
                  <th>Study Variables</th>
                  <th>Previous Studies</th>
                  <th>Number of Phrases</th>
                </tr>
              </thead>
              <tbody>
                <tr>
                  <td>Electronic Word of Mouth</td>
                  <td>Haq et al. (2024); Hoang-Le (2020)</td>
                  <td>1-11</td>
                </tr>
                <tr>
                  <td>Nonprofit Brand Image</td>
                  <td>Huang and Ku (2016)</td>
                  <td>12-23</td>
                </tr>
              </tbody>
            </table>
            <table-wrap-foot>
              <fn><p>Source: Prepared by the researcher in light of previous studies.</p></fn>
            </table-wrap-foot>
          </table-wrap>
        </sec>
        
        <sec id="sec3-6-4">
          <title>Validity and Reliability Tests for Study Variables</title>
          
          <sec id="sec3-6-4-1">
            <title>Validity Test</title>
            <p>To verify the validity of the questionnaire in achieving the purpose for which it was designed, the researcher relied on phrases whose validity and reliability were proven by previous studies. The researcher also presented the questionnaire to a group of experts and specialists in marketing professors before presenting it to the study sample, and their observations were taken and some modifications were made until it appeared in its final form in the study appendix.</p>
          </sec>
          
          <sec id="sec3-6-4-2">
            <title>Reliability Test</title>
            <p>This test is used to know the extent to which the questionnaire can be relied upon in data characterized by consistency. Due to the clear variance between the two study variables, the researcher relied on Cronbach's alpha reliability coefficient, which enables measuring the consistency of the scale through internal consistency (<xref rid="ref7" ref-type="bibr">Colton and Covert, 2007</xref>). The researcher conducted a pilot test on a small sample of individual donors to nonprofit organizations in the Arab Republic of Egypt amounting to 45 individuals to identify the extent of the respondents' understanding of the questionnaire phrases and that the answers express the study variables and dimensions.</p>
            
            <p>The analysis results for the independent variable (electronic word of mouth on social media) shown in <xref ref-type="table" rid="table7">Table 7</xref> indicate the following:</p>
            
            <list list-type="bullet">
              <list-item>
                <p>Cronbach's alpha value for the independent variable electronic word of mouth was 0.915, containing 11 phrases, indicating a high level of reliability for the dimension elements.</p>
              </list-item>
              <list-item>
                <p>The overall correlation relationship between the elements was greater than 0.3 for all phrases, indicating a high internal consistency between the variable phrases.</p>
              </list-item>
            </list>
            
            <p>The analysis results for the dependent variable (nonprofit brand image) shown in <xref ref-type="table" rid="table8">Table 8</xref> indicate the following:</p>
            
            <list list-type="bullet">
              <list-item>
                <p>Cronbach's alpha value for the dependent variable nonprofit brand image was 0.934, containing 12 phrases, indicating a high level of reliability for the dimension elements.</p>
              </list-item>
              <list-item>
                <p>The overall correlation relationship between the elements was greater than 0.3 for all phrases, indicating a high internal consistency between the variable phrases.</p>
              </list-item>
            </list>
            
            <table-wrap id="table7" position="float">
              <label>Table 7</label>
              <caption>
                <title>Overall Correlation Coefficients and Reliability Coefficients for Electronic Word of Mouth on Social Media</title>
              </caption>
              <table>
                <thead>
                  <tr>
                    <th>Code</th>
                    <th>Phrases</th>
                    <th>Overall Correlation Coefficient</th>
                    <th>Reliability Coefficient if Item Deleted</th>
                  </tr>
                </thead>
                <tbody>
                  <tr>
                    <td>1Ewom</td>
                    <td>Most comments on social media about the nonprofit organization I donate to are true.</td>
                    <td>0.667</td>
                    <td>0.907</td>
                  </tr>
                  <tr>
                    <td>2Ewom</td>
                    <td>Most comments on social media about the nonprofit organization I donate to are accurate.</td>
                    <td>0.568</td>
                    <td>0.912</td>
                  </tr>
                  <tr>
                    <td>3Ewom</td>
                    <td>Most comments on social media about the nonprofit organization I donate to are credible.</td>
                    <td>0.705</td>
                    <td>0.905</td>
                  </tr>
                  <tr>
                    <td>4Ewom</td>
                    <td>Individuals' opinions on social media about the nonprofit organization I donate to are reliable.</td>
                    <td>0.748</td>
                    <td>0.903</td>
                  </tr>
                  <tr>
                    <td>5Ewom</td>
                    <td>Individuals' opinions on social media about the nonprofit organization I donate to are clearly presented.</td>
                    <td>0.638</td>
                    <td>0.909</td>
                  </tr>
                  <tr>
                    <td>6Ewom</td>
                    <td>People who provide their opinions on social media about the nonprofit organization I donate to do so objectively.</td>
                    <td>0.766</td>
                    <td>0.904</td>
                  </tr>
                  <tr>
                    <td>7Ewom</td>
                    <td>The opinions I obtained through social media about the nonprofit organization I donate to are based on real experience.</td>
                    <td>0.679</td>
                    <td>0.907</td>
                  </tr>
                  <tr>
                    <td>8Ewom</td>
                    <td>The purpose of the opinions published on social media about the nonprofit organization I donate to is to share experiences honestly with others.</td>
                    <td>0.576</td>
                    <td>0.912</td>
                  </tr>
                  <tr>
                    <td>9Ewom</td>
                    <td>Increasing the number of opinions about the nonprofit organization on the same site enhances its credibility.</td>
                    <td>0.649</td>
                    <td>0.908</td>
                  </tr>
                  <tr>
                    <td>10Ewom</td>
                    <td>I trust opinions that receive a large number of comments.</td>
                    <td>0.715</td>
                    <td>0.905</td>
                  </tr>
                  <tr>
                    <td>11Ewom</td>
                    <td>The nonprofit organization about which opinions are written on multiple sites is more reliable.</td>
                    <td>0.718</td>
                    <td>0.904</td>
                  </tr>
                </tbody>
              </table>
              <table-wrap-foot>
                <fn><p>Number of phrases: 11; Alpha = 0.915. Source: Prepared by the researcher based on statistical analysis results.</p></fn>
              </table-wrap-foot>
            </table-wrap>
            
            <table-wrap id="table8" position="float">
              <label>Table 8</label>
              <caption>
                <title>Overall Correlation Coefficients and Reliability Coefficients for Nonprofit Brand Image</title>
              </caption>
              <table>
                <thead>
                  <tr>
                    <th>Code</th>
                    <th>Phrases</th>
                    <th>Overall Correlation Coefficient</th>
                    <th>Reliability Coefficient if Item Deleted</th>
                  </tr>
                </thead>
                <tbody>
                  <tr>
                    <td>1U</td>
                    <td>The nonprofit organization I donate to is absolutely necessary for society.</td>
                    <td>0.658</td>
                    <td>0.931</td>
                  </tr>
                  <tr>
                    <td>2U</td>
                    <td>The nonprofit organization I donate to serves the public interest of society.</td>
                    <td>0.658</td>
                    <td>0.931</td>
                  </tr>
                  <tr>
                    <td>3U</td>
                    <td>The nonprofit organization I donate to cares about the welfare of society.</td>
                    <td>0.590</td>
                    <td>0.936</td>
                  </tr>
                  <tr>
                    <td>1E</td>
                    <td>The nonprofit organization I donate to works in the best possible way.</td>
                    <td>0.730</td>
                    <td>0.928</td>
                  </tr>
                  <tr>
                    <td>2E</td>
                    <td>The nonprofit organization I donate to is serious about helping people.</td>
                    <td>0.769</td>
                    <td>0.927</td>
                  </tr>
                  <tr>
                    <td>3E</td>
                    <td>The nonprofit organization I donate to is able to succeed in achieving its goals.</td>
                    <td>0.761</td>
                    <td>0.927</td>
                  </tr>
                  <tr>
                    <td>4E</td>
                    <td>The nonprofit organization I donate to provides excellent service to beneficiaries.</td>
                    <td>0.791</td>
                    <td>0.926</td>
                  </tr>
                  <tr>
                    <td>1A</td>
                    <td>The nonprofit organization I deal with is friendly.</td>
                    <td>0.730</td>
                    <td>0.928</td>
                  </tr>
                  <tr>
                    <td>2A</td>
                    <td>The nonprofit organization I deal with is generous in giving.</td>
                    <td>0.776</td>
                    <td>0.926</td>
                  </tr>
                  <tr>
                    <td>3A</td>
                    <td>The nonprofit organization I deal with is welcoming.</td>
                    <td>0.787</td>
                    <td>0.927</td>
                  </tr>
                  <tr>
                    <td>1D</td>
                    <td>The nonprofit organization I deal with adopts new methods for operation (management and implementation of daily activities and operations).</td>
                    <td>0.764</td>
                    <td>0.926</td>
                  </tr>
                  <tr>
                    <td>2D</td>
                    <td>The nonprofit organization I deal with adopts innovative methods for operation (management and implementation of daily activities and operations).</td>
                    <td>0.638</td>
                    <td>0.931</td>
                  </tr>
                </tbody>
              </table>
              <table-wrap-foot>
                <fn><p>Number of phrases: 12; Alpha = 0.934. Source: Prepared by the researcher based on statistical analysis results.</p></fn>
              </table-wrap-foot>
            </table-wrap>
          </sec>
        </sec>
        
        <sec id="sec3-6-5">
          <title>Statistical Analysis Methods</title>
          <p>The researcher relied on the following statistical analysis methods:</p>
          
          <list list-type="bullet">
            <list-item>
              <p><bold>Simple Linear Regression Analysis:</bold> To measure the effect of one independent variable on the dependent variable. It was used to test the first hypothesis.</p>
            </list-item>
            <list-item>
              <p><bold>Mann-Whitney Test:</bold> To measure the significance of differences between two groups. It was used to measure the difference according to gender and place of residence in the second hypothesis of the study hypotheses.</p>
            </list-item>
            <list-item>
              <p><bold>Kruskal-Wallis Test:</bold> To measure the significance of differences between more than two groups. It was used to measure the differences according to age group, educational level, marital status, and net income in the second hypothesis of the study hypotheses.</p>
            </list-item>
          </list>
        </sec>
      </sec>
      
      <sec id="sec3-7">
        <title>Study Approach</title>
        <p>The researcher used the deductive approach in analyzing the relationship between the study variables, which is suitable for quantitative research methods.</p>
      </sec>
    </sec>
    
    <sec id="sec4" sec-type="results">
      <title>Analysis and Discussion of Study Results and Hypothesis Testing</title>
      
      <sec id="sec4-1">
        <title>Descriptive Statistics for Study Variables</title>
        <p>After conducting the reliability test, the researcher calculated the arithmetic mean and standard deviation for each of the study variables, as shown in <xref ref-type="table" rid="table9">Table 9</xref>, from which the following is clear:</p>
        
        <p>The study sample tends, according to the general arithmetic mean for the first variable electronic word of mouth on social media, towards positivity, where the value of the general arithmetic mean was 4.32, indicating a general awareness among the study sample individuals of the importance of electronic word of mouth on social media. The dimension "quantity of electronic word of mouth" ranked first with an arithmetic mean of 4.35, indicating that most of the respondents' opinions range between strongly agree and agree, and tend to strongly agree. The dimension "credibility of electronic word of mouth" ranked second with an arithmetic mean of 4.33, which indicates that most of the respondents' opinions also range between strongly agree and agree, and tend to strongly agree. Finally, the dimension "quality of electronic word of mouth" ranked third with an arithmetic mean of 4.29, meaning that most of the respondents' opinions range between strongly agree and agree, and tend to strongly agree. These results reflect the participants' appreciation of the importance of quantity, credibility, and quality of electronic word of mouth.</p>
        
        <p>The study sample tends, according to the general arithmetic mean for the second variable nonprofit brand image, towards positivity to a greater degree, where the value of the general arithmetic mean was 4.41, indicating a strong and positive awareness among the study sample individuals of nonprofit brand image. The dimension "efficiency" ranked first with an arithmetic mean of 4.45, indicating that most of the respondents' opinions range between strongly agree and agree, and tend to strongly agree. The dimension "impact" ranked second with an arithmetic mean of 4.41, indicating that most of the respondents' opinions range between strongly agree and agree, and tend to strongly agree. The dimension "dynamism" ranked third with an arithmetic mean of 4.386, indicating agreement of opinions about this dimension with a tendency towards full agreement. Finally, the dimension "usefulness" ranked fourth with an arithmetic mean of 4.385, which reflects a positive evaluation, where most of the respondents' opinions range between strongly agree and agree, and tend to strongly agree. These results reflect the participants' awareness of the importance of efficiency, impact, dynamism, and usefulness in shaping nonprofit brand image.</p>
        
        <table-wrap id="table9" position="float">
          <label>Table 9</label>
          <caption>
            <title>Descriptive Analysis of Study Variables</title>
          </caption>
          <table>
            <thead>
              <tr>
                <th>Variable</th>
                <th>Dimension</th>
                <th>Arithmetic Mean</th>
                <th>Standard Deviation</th>
                <th>Rank</th>
              </tr>
            </thead>
            <tbody>
              <tr>
                <td rowspan="4">Electronic Word of Mouth on Social Media</td>
                <td>Credibility of Electronic Word of Mouth</td>
                <td>4.33</td>
                <td>0.583</td>
                <td>2</td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>Quality of Electronic Word of Mouth</td>
                <td>4.29</td>
                <td>0.483</td>
                <td>3</td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>Quantity of Electronic Word of Mouth</td>
                <td>4.35</td>
                <td>0.487</td>
                <td>1</td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>General Arithmetic Mean for Electronic Word of Mouth on Social Media</td>
                <td>4.32</td>
                <td>0.417</td>
                <td>—</td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td rowspan="5">Nonprofit Brand Image</td>
                <td>Usefulness</td>
                <td>4.385</td>
                <td>0.473</td>
                <td>4</td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>Efficiency</td>
                <td>4.45</td>
                <td>0.342</td>
                <td>1</td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>Impact</td>
                <td>4.41</td>
                <td>0.402</td>
                <td>2</td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>Dynamism</td>
                <td>4.386</td>
                <td>0.445</td>
                <td>3</td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>General Arithmetic Mean for Nonprofit Brand Image</td>
                <td>4.41</td>
                <td>0.276</td>
                <td>—</td>
              </tr>
            </tbody>
          </table>
          <table-wrap-foot>
            <fn><p>Source: Prepared by the researcher from statistical analysis results.</p></fn>
          </table-wrap-foot>
        </table-wrap>
      </sec>
      
      <sec id="sec4-2">
        <title>Hypothesis Testing</title>
        
        <sec id="sec4-2-1">
          <title>First Hypothesis: Effect of Electronic Word of Mouth on Social Media on Nonprofit Brand Image</title>
          <p>To identify the effect of electronic word of mouth on social media on nonprofit brand image, the researcher formulated the first hypothesis from the study hypotheses which states that: "There is no significant effect of electronic word of mouth on social media on nonprofit brand image for donors of nonprofit organizations in the Arab Republic of Egypt."</p>
          
          <p>Simple regression analysis was used to study the effect of electronic word of mouth on social media on nonprofit brand image, and <xref ref-type="table" rid="table10">Table 10</xref> shows the results of the statistical analysis of the data:</p>
          
          <list list-type="bullet">
            <list-item>
              <p>There is a positive relationship between electronic word of mouth on social media and nonprofit brand image, where the value of beta equals 0.2261.</p>
            </list-item>
            <list-item>
              <p>There is a significant effect of electronic word of mouth on social media on nonprofit brand image, where the T value equals 7.019.</p>
            </list-item>
            <list-item>
              <p>Electronic word of mouth on social media explains approximately 11.7% of the change occurring in nonprofit brand image, where the coefficient of determination R squared equals 0.117. The rest is due to other factors not included in the model.</p>
            </list-item>
            <list-item>
              <p>From the above, it is clear that there is a significant positive effect of electronic word of mouth on social media on nonprofit brand image for donors of nonprofit organizations in the Arab Republic of Egypt, which means that the first hypothesis is completely invalid.</p>
            </list-item>
          </list>
          
          <table-wrap id="table10" position="float">
            <label>Table 10</label>
            <caption>
              <title>Effect of Electronic Word of Mouth on Social Media on Nonprofit Brand Image</title>
            </caption>
            <table>
              <thead>
                <tr>
                  <th>Independent Variable</th>
                  <th>Dependent Variable</th>
                  <th>Beta</th>
                  <th>R Squared</th>
                  <th>T</th>
                  <th>Sig.</th>
                </tr>
              </thead>
              <tbody>
                <tr>
                  <td>Electronic Word of Mouth on Social Media</td>
                  <td>Nonprofit Brand Image</td>
                  <td>0.2261</td>
                  <td>0.117</td>
                  <td>7.019</td>
                  <td>0.000**</td>
                </tr>
              </tbody>
            </table>
            <table-wrap-foot>
              <fn><p>** Significant at 0.001 level. Source: Prepared by the researcher based on statistical analysis results.</p></fn>
            </table-wrap-foot>
          </table-wrap>
          
          <fig id="fig1" orientation="portrait" position="float">
            <label>Figure 1</label>
            <caption>
              <title>Conceptual Framework for the Relationship Between Study Variables</title>
              <p>Source: Prepared by the researcher.</p>
            </caption>
            <alt-text>Conceptual framework diagram showing the relationship between electronic word of mouth on social media (independent variable with three dimensions: quality, quantity, credibility) and nonprofit brand image (dependent variable with four dimensions: dynamism, usefulness, efficiency, impact)</alt-text>
            <graphic xlink:href="https://aradorganization-my.sharepoint.com/:i:/g/personal/rsamir_arado_org/IQDSaWfxZ_4eRqKPx9ZoPINlAdgUQbFC1H0RBDyjvUWnqoo?e=8Plfex"/>
          </fig>
          
          <fig id="fig2" orientation="portrait" position="float">
            <label>Figure 2</label>
            <caption>
              <title>Electronic Word of Mouth on Social Media and Nonprofit Brand Image</title>
              <p>Source: Prepared by the researcher based on statistical analysis results.</p>
            </caption>
            <alt-text>Scatter plot showing the positive relationship between electronic word of mouth on social media and nonprofit brand image with regression line</alt-text>
            <graphic xlink:href="https://aradorganization-my.sharepoint.com/:i:/g/personal/rsamir_arado_org/IQCRuO9zGZ5GSLM8CwkZfGjKARzEHKyXtKe8m5xk_z0Wq6A?e=Tg6kSc"/>
          </fig>
          
          <p>The researcher also tested the effect of electronic word of mouth on social media on each dimension of nonprofit brand image separately, through testing the sub-hypotheses of the following hypothesis: "There is no significant effect of electronic word of mouth on social media on nonprofit brand image for donors of nonprofit organizations in the Arab Republic of Egypt." This hypothesis is divided into the following sub-hypotheses:</p>
          
          <list list-type="order">
            <list-item>
              <p>There is no significant effect of electronic word of mouth on social media on usefulness for donors of nonprofit organizations in the Arab Republic of Egypt.</p>
            </list-item>
            <list-item>
              <p>There is no significant effect of electronic word of mouth on social media on efficiency for donors of nonprofit organizations in the Arab Republic of Egypt.</p>
            </list-item>
            <list-item>
              <p>There is no significant effect of electronic word of mouth on social media on impact for donors of nonprofit organizations in the Arab Republic of Egypt.</p>
            </list-item>
            <list-item>
              <p>There is no significant effect of electronic word of mouth on social media on dynamism for donors of nonprofit organizations in the Arab Republic of Egypt.</p>
            </list-item>
          </list>
          
          <p>Simple regression analysis was used to study the effect of electronic word of mouth on social media on each dimension of nonprofit brand image separately, and <xref ref-type="table" rid="table11">Table 11</xref> shows the results of the statistical analysis of the data, from which the following is clear:</p>
          
          <p><bold>Regarding the dimension "Usefulness":</bold></p>
          <list list-type="bullet">
            <list-item>
              <p>There is a positive relationship between electronic word of mouth on social media and the usefulness dimension, where the beta value equals 0.2806.</p>
            </list-item>
            <list-item>
              <p>There is a significant effect of electronic word of mouth on social media on the usefulness dimension, where the T value equals 4.9267.</p>
            </list-item>
            <list-item>
              <p>Electronic word of mouth on social media explains approximately 6.13% of the change occurring in the usefulness dimension, where the coefficient of determination R squared equals 0.0613. The rest is due to other factors not included in the model.</p>
            </list-item>
          </list>
          
          <p><bold>Regarding the dimension "Efficiency":</bold></p>
          <list list-type="bullet">
            <list-item>
              <p>There is a positive relationship between electronic word of mouth on social media and the efficiency dimension, where the beta value equals 0.1126.</p>
            </list-item>
            <list-item>
              <p>There is a significant effect of electronic word of mouth on social media on the efficiency dimension, where the T value equals 2.6725.</p>
            </list-item>
            <list-item>
              <p>Electronic word of mouth on social media explains approximately 1.88% of the change occurring in the efficiency dimension, where the coefficient of determination R squared equals 0.0188. The rest is due to other factors not included in the model.</p>
            </list-item>
          </list>
          
          <p><bold>Regarding the dimension "Impact":</bold></p>
          <list list-type="bullet">
            <list-item>
              <p>There is a positive relationship between electronic word of mouth on social media and the impact dimension, where the beta value equals 0.2548.</p>
            </list-item>
            <list-item>
              <p>There is a significant effect of electronic word of mouth on social media on the impact dimension, where the T value equals 5.2846.</p>
            </list-item>
            <list-item>
              <p>Electronic word of mouth on social media explains approximately 6.98% of the change occurring in the impact dimension, where the coefficient of determination R squared equals 0.0698. The rest is due to other factors not included in the model.</p>
            </list-item>
          </list>
          
          <p><bold>Regarding the dimension "Dynamism":</bold></p>
          <list list-type="bullet">
            <list-item>
              <p>There is a positive relationship between electronic word of mouth on social media and the dynamism dimension, where the beta value equals 0.3284.</p>
            </list-item>
            <list-item>
              <p>There is a significant effect of electronic word of mouth on social media on the dynamism dimension, where the T value equals 6.2478.</p>
            </list-item>
            <list-item>
              <p>Electronic word of mouth on social media explains approximately 9.50% of the change occurring in the dynamism dimension, where the coefficient of determination R squared equals 0.0950. The rest is due to other factors not included in the model.</p>
            </list-item>
          </list>
          
          <table-wrap id="table11" position="float">
            <label>Table 11</label>
            <caption>
              <title>Effect of Electronic Word of Mouth on Social Media on Dimensions of Nonprofit Brand Image</title>
            </caption>
            <table>
              <thead>
                <tr>
                  <th>Independent Variable</th>
                  <th>Dependent Variable</th>
                  <th>Dimension</th>
                  <th>Beta</th>
                  <th>R Squared</th>
                  <th>T</th>
                  <th>Sig.</th>
                </tr>
              </thead>
              <tbody>
                <tr>
                  <td rowspan="4">Electronic Word of Mouth on Social Media</td>
                  <td rowspan="4">Nonprofit Brand Image</td>
                  <td>Usefulness</td>
                  <td>0.2806</td>
                  <td>0.0613</td>
                  <td>4.9267</td>
                  <td>0.000**</td>
                </tr>
                <tr>
                  <td>Efficiency</td>
                  <td>0.1126</td>
                  <td>0.0188</td>
                  <td>2.6725</td>
                  <td>0.007**</td>
                </tr>
                <tr>
                  <td>Impact</td>
                  <td>0.2548</td>
                  <td>0.0698</td>
                  <td>5.2846</td>
                  <td>0.000**</td>
                </tr>
                <tr>
                  <td>Dynamism</td>
                  <td>0.3284</td>
                  <td>0.0950</td>
                  <td>6.2478</td>
                  <td>0.000**</td>
                </tr>
              </tbody>
            </table>
            <table-wrap-foot>
              <fn><p>** Significant at 0.01 level. Source: Prepared by the researcher based on statistical analysis results.</p></fn>
            </table-wrap-foot>
          </table-wrap>
          
          <fig id="fig3" orientation="portrait" position="float">
            <label>Figure 3</label>
            <caption>
              <title>Relationship Between Electronic Word of Mouth on Social Media and Dimensions of Nonprofit Brand Image</title>
              <p>Source: Prepared by the researcher based on statistical analysis results.</p>
            </caption>
            <alt-text>Bar chart comparing the effect of electronic word of mouth on four dimensions of nonprofit brand image: usefulness (beta=0.2806), efficiency (beta=0.1126), impact (beta=0.2548), and dynamism (beta=0.3284)</alt-text>
            <graphic xlink:href="https://aradorganization-my.sharepoint.com/:i:/g/personal/rsamir_arado_org/IQCe3YahoJYORJ9p4eB1dfgeATGldoBXIy0ttjCxhc6rnEo?e=FMW9f4"/>
          </fig>
          
          <p>From the above, it is clear that there is a significant positive effect of electronic word of mouth on social media on the dimensions of nonprofit brand image. It is also clear that the dynamism dimension ranks first in terms of the strength of its effect by electronic word of mouth, while the efficiency dimension ranks last in terms of the strength of its effect, which means that the first hypothesis is completely invalid.</p>
        </sec>
        
        <sec id="sec4-2-2">
          <title>Second Hypothesis: Significant Differences in Donors' Perception</title>
          <p>To identify the significant differences in the perception of donors of nonprofit organizations in the Arab Republic of Egypt regarding the study variables (electronic word of mouth on social media, nonprofit brand image) according to demographic variables (gender, age, educational level, income, marital status, urban/rural residence), the researcher formulated the second hypothesis of the study which states that: "There are no significant differences in the perception of donors of nonprofit organizations in the Arab Republic of Egypt regarding the study variables (electronic word of mouth on social media, nonprofit brand image) according to demographic variables (gender, age, educational level, income, marital status, urban/rural residence)."</p>
          
          <p>This hypothesis is divided into the following sub-hypotheses:</p>
          
          <sec id="sec4-2-2-1">
            <title>First Sub-Hypothesis of the Second Hypothesis</title>
            <p>States that: "There are no significant differences in the perception of donors of nonprofit organizations in the Arab Republic of Egypt regarding the study variables (electronic word of mouth on social media, nonprofit brand image) according to gender (male - female)." To test this hypothesis, the researcher relied on the Mann-Whitney test to verify the validity or invalidity of this hypothesis. <xref ref-type="table" rid="table12">Table 12</xref> shows the test results.</p>
            
            <p>From <xref ref-type="table" rid="table12">Table 12</xref>, it is clear that:</p>
            <list list-type="bullet">
              <list-item>
                <p>The Z value for the variable electronic word of mouth on social media equals -0.562 with a significance level of 0.574, which means that there are no significant differences in the perception of donors of electronic word of mouth on social media according to gender (male - female).</p>
              </list-item>
              <list-item>
                <p>The Z value for the variable nonprofit brand image equals -0.785 with a significance level of 0.432, which means that there are no significant differences in the perception of donors of nonprofit brand image according to gender (male - female).</p>
              </list-item>
              <list-item>
                <p>This indicates the complete validity of the first sub-hypothesis.</p>
              </list-item>
            </list>
            
            <table-wrap id="table12" position="float">
              <label>Table 12</label>
              <caption>
                <title>Significant Differences in the Perception of Donors of Nonprofit Organizations in the Arab Republic of Egypt Regarding Study Variables According to Gender</title>
              </caption>
              <table>
                <thead>
                  <tr>
                    <th>Variable</th>
                    <th>Gender</th>
                    <th>Mean Rank</th>
                    <th>U</th>
                    <th>Z</th>
                    <th>Sig.</th>
                  </tr>
                </thead>
                <tbody>
                  <tr>
                    <td rowspan="2">Electronic Word of Mouth on Social Media</td>
                    <td>Male</td>
                    <td>190.17</td>
                    <td rowspan="2">16487.500</td>
                    <td rowspan="2">-0.562</td>
                    <td rowspan="2">0.574</td>
                  </tr>
                  <tr>
                    <td>Female</td>
                    <td>183.85</td>
                  </tr>
                  <tr>
                    <td rowspan="2">Nonprofit Brand Image</td>
                    <td>Male</td>
                    <td>191.22</td>
                    <td rowspan="2">16260.500</td>
                    <td rowspan="2">-0.785</td>
                    <td rowspan="2">0.432</td>
                  </tr>
                  <tr>
                    <td>Female</td>
                    <td>182.41</td>
                  </tr>
                </tbody>
              </table>
              <table-wrap-foot>
                <fn><p>Source: Prepared by the researcher based on statistical analysis results.</p></fn>
              </table-wrap-foot>
            </table-wrap>
          </sec>
          
          <sec id="sec4-2-2-2">
            <title>Second Sub-Hypothesis of the Second Hypothesis</title>
            <p>States that: "There are no significant differences in the perception of donors of nonprofit organizations in the Arab Republic of Egypt regarding the study variables (electronic word of mouth on social media, nonprofit brand image) according to age." To test this hypothesis, the researcher relied on the Kruskal-Wallis test to verify the validity or invalidity of this hypothesis. <xref ref-type="table" rid="table13">Table 13</xref> shows the test results.</p>
            
            <p>From <xref ref-type="table" rid="table13">Table 13</xref>, it is clear that:</p>
            <list list-type="bullet">
              <list-item>
                <p>The Chi-square value for the variable electronic word of mouth on social media equals 2.860 with a significance level of 0.239, which means that there are no significant differences in the perception of donors of electronic word of mouth on social media according to age.</p>
              </list-item>
              <list-item>
                <p>The Chi-square value for the variable nonprofit brand image equals 1.813 with a significance level of 0.404, which means that there are no significant differences in the perception of donors of nonprofit brand image according to age.</p>
              </list-item>
              <list-item>
                <p>This indicates the complete validity of the second sub-hypothesis.</p>
              </list-item>
            </list>
            
            <table-wrap id="table13" position="float">
              <label>Table 13</label>
              <caption>
                <title>Significant Differences in the Perception of Donors of Nonprofit Organizations in the Arab Republic of Egypt Regarding Study Variables According to Age</title>
              </caption>
              <table>
                <thead>
                  <tr>
                    <th>Variable</th>
                    <th>Age Group</th>
                    <th>Mean Rank</th>
                    <th>Chi-square</th>
                    <th>Sig.</th>
                  </tr>
                </thead>
                <tbody>
                  <tr>
                    <td rowspan="3">Electronic Word of Mouth on Social Media</td>
                    <td>Less than 25 years</td>
                    <td>188.65</td>
                    <td rowspan="3">2.860</td>
                    <td rowspan="3">0.239</td>
                  </tr>
                  <tr>
                    <td>From 25 to less than 50 years</td>
                    <td>192.66</td>
                  </tr>
                  <tr>
                    <td>More than 50 years</td>
                    <td>167.81</td>
                  </tr>
                  <tr>
                    <td rowspan="3">Nonprofit Brand Image</td>
                    <td>Less than 25 years</td>
                    <td>197.77</td>
                    <td rowspan="3">1.813</td>
                    <td rowspan="3">0.404</td>
                  </tr>
                  <tr>
                    <td>From 25 to less than 50 years</td>
                    <td>182.12</td>
                  </tr>
                  <tr>
                    <td>More than 50 years</td>
                    <td>197.91</td>
                  </tr>
                </tbody>
              </table>
              <table-wrap-foot>
                <fn><p>Source: Prepared by the researcher based on statistical analysis results.</p></fn>
              </table-wrap-foot>
            </table-wrap>
          </sec>
          
          <sec id="sec4-2-2-3">
            <title>Third Sub-Hypothesis of the Second Hypothesis</title>
            <p>States that: "There are no significant differences in the perception of donors of nonprofit organizations in the Arab Republic of Egypt regarding the study variables (electronic word of mouth on social media, nonprofit brand image) according to educational level." To test this hypothesis, the researcher relied on the Kruskal-Wallis test. <xref ref-type="table" rid="table14">Table 14</xref> shows the test results.</p>
            
            <p>From <xref ref-type="table" rid="table14">Table 14</xref>, it is clear that:</p>
            <list list-type="bullet">
              <list-item>
                <p>The Chi-square value for the variable electronic word of mouth on social media equals 2.782 with a significance level of 0.734, which means that there are no significant differences in the perception of donors of electronic word of mouth on social media according to educational level. This indicates that educational level does not greatly affect how donors perceive this variable.</p>
              </list-item>
              <list-item>
                <p>The Chi-square value for the variable nonprofit brand image equals 4.925 with a significance level of 0.425, which means that there are no significant differences in the perception of donors of nonprofit brand image according to educational level.</p>
              </list-item>
              <list-item>
                <p>This indicates the complete validity of the third sub-hypothesis.</p>
              </list-item>
            </list>
            
            <table-wrap id="table14" position="float">
              <label>Table 14</label>
              <caption>
                <title>Significant Differences in the Perception of Donors of Nonprofit Organizations in the Arab Republic of Egypt Regarding Study Variables According to Educational Level</title>
              </caption>
              <table>
                <thead>
                  <tr>
                    <th>Variable</th>
                    <th>Educational Level</th>
                    <th>Mean Rank</th>
                    <th>Chi-square</th>
                    <th>Sig.</th>
                  </tr>
                </thead>
                <tbody>
                  <tr>
                    <td rowspan="6">Electronic Word of Mouth on Social Media</td>
                    <td>Without qualification</td>
                    <td>234.38</td>
                    <td rowspan="6">2.782</td>
                    <td rowspan="6">0.734</td>
                  </tr>
                  <tr>
                    <td>Below intermediate qualification</td>
                    <td>200.56</td>
                  </tr>
                  <tr>
                    <td>Intermediate qualification</td>
                    <td>202.32</td>
                  </tr>
                  <tr>
                    <td>Above intermediate and below university</td>
                    <td>183.63</td>
                  </tr>
                  <tr>
                    <td>University qualification</td>
                    <td>190.57</td>
                  </tr>
                  <tr>
                    <td>Postgraduate studies</td>
                    <td>175.08</td>
                  </tr>
                  <tr>
                    <td rowspan="6">Nonprofit Brand Image</td>
                    <td>Without qualification</td>
                    <td>117.00</td>
                    <td rowspan="6">4.925</td>
                    <td rowspan="6">0.425</td>
                  </tr>
                  <tr>
                    <td>Below intermediate qualification</td>
                    <td>186.06</td>
                  </tr>
                  <tr>
                    <td>Intermediate qualification</td>
                    <td>188.77</td>
                  </tr>
                  <tr>
                    <td>Above intermediate and below university</td>
                    <td>182.63</td>
                  </tr>
                  <tr>
                    <td>University qualification</td>
                    <td>197.67</td>
                  </tr>
                  <tr>
                    <td>Postgraduate studies</td>
                    <td>173.05</td>
                  </tr>
                </tbody>
              </table>
              <table-wrap-foot>
                <fn><p>Source: Prepared by the researcher based on statistical analysis results.</p></fn>
              </table-wrap-foot>
            </table-wrap>
          </sec>
          
          <sec id="sec4-2-2-4">
            <title>Fourth Sub-Hypothesis of the Second Hypothesis</title>
            <p>States that: "There are no significant differences in the perception of donors of nonprofit organizations in the Arab Republic of Egypt regarding the study variables (electronic word of mouth on social media, nonprofit brand image) according to income." To test this hypothesis, the researcher relied on the Kruskal-Wallis test. <xref ref-type="table" rid="table15">Table 15</xref> shows the test results.</p>
            
            <p>From <xref ref-type="table" rid="table15">Table 15</xref>, it is clear that:</p>
            <list list-type="bullet">
              <list-item>
                <p>The Chi-square value for the variable electronic word of mouth on social media equals 5.166 with a significance level of 0.160, which means that there are no significant differences in the perception of donors of electronic word of mouth on social media according to income.</p>
              </list-item>
              <list-item>
                <p>The Chi-square value for the variable nonprofit brand image equals 2.843 with a significance level of 0.417, which means that there are no significant differences in the perception of donors of nonprofit brand image according to income.</p>
              </list-item>
              <list-item>
                <p>This indicates the complete validity of the fourth sub-hypothesis.</p>
              </list-item>
            </list>
            
            <table-wrap id="table15" position="float">
              <label>Table 15</label>
              <caption>
                <title>Significant Differences in the Perception of Donors of Nonprofit Organizations in the Arab Republic of Egypt Regarding Study Variables According to Income</title>
              </caption>
              <table>
                <thead>
                  <tr>
                    <th>Variable</th>
                    <th>Income</th>
                    <th>Mean Rank</th>
                    <th>Chi-square</th>
                    <th>Sig.</th>
                  </tr>
                </thead>
                <tbody>
                  <tr>
                    <td rowspan="4">Electronic Word of Mouth on Social Media</td>
                    <td>Less than 6,000 pounds monthly</td>
                    <td>182.34</td>
                    <td rowspan="4">5.166</td>
                    <td rowspan="4">0.160</td>
                  </tr>
                  <tr>
                    <td>From 6,000 to less than 12,000 pounds monthly</td>
                    <td>191.42</td>
                  </tr>
                  <tr>
                    <td>From 12,000 to less than 18,000 pounds monthly</td>
                    <td>200.44</td>
                  </tr>
                  <tr>
                    <td>More than 18,000 pounds monthly</td>
                    <td>155.88</td>
                  </tr>
                  <tr>
                    <td rowspan="4">Nonprofit Brand Image</td>
                    <td>Less than 6,000 pounds monthly</td>
                    <td>183.07</td>
                    <td rowspan="4">2.843</td>
                    <td rowspan="4">0.417</td>
                  </tr>
                  <tr>
                    <td>From 6,000 to less than 12,000 pounds monthly</td>
                    <td>187.15</td>
                  </tr>
                  <tr>
                    <td>From 12,000 to less than 18,000 pounds monthly</td>
                    <td>200.24</td>
                  </tr>
                  <tr>
                    <td>More than 18,000 pounds monthly</td>
                    <td>168.17</td>
                  </tr>
                </tbody>
              </table>
              <table-wrap-foot>
                <fn><p>Source: Prepared by the researcher based on statistical analysis results.</p></fn>
              </table-wrap-foot>
            </table-wrap>
          </sec>
          
          <sec id="sec4-2-2-5">
            <title>Fifth Sub-Hypothesis of the Second Hypothesis</title>
            <p>States that: "There are no significant differences in the perception of donors of nonprofit organizations in the Arab Republic of Egypt regarding the study variables (electronic word of mouth on social media, nonprofit brand image) according to marital status." To test this hypothesis, the researcher relied on the Kruskal-Wallis test. <xref ref-type="table" rid="table16">Table 16</xref> shows the test results.</p>
            
            <p>From <xref ref-type="table" rid="table16">Table 16</xref>, it is clear that:</p>
            <list list-type="bullet">
              <list-item>
                <p>The Chi-square value for the variable electronic word of mouth on social media equals 6.767 with a significance level of 0.149, which means that there are no significant differences in the perception of donors of electronic word of mouth on social media according to marital status.</p>
              </list-item>
              <list-item>
                <p>The Chi-square value for the variable nonprofit brand image equals 5.313 with a significance level of 0.257, which means that there are no significant differences in the perception of donors of nonprofit brand image according to marital status.</p>
              </list-item>
              <list-item>
                <p>This indicates the complete validity of the fifth sub-hypothesis.</p>
              </list-item>
            </list>
            
            <table-wrap id="table16" position="float">
              <label>Table 16</label>
              <caption>
                <title>Significant Differences in the Perception of Donors of Nonprofit Organizations in the Arab Republic of Egypt Regarding Study Variables According to Marital Status</title>
              </caption>
              <table>
                <thead>
                  <tr>
                    <th>Variable</th>
                    <th>Marital Status</th>
                    <th>Mean Rank</th>
                    <th>Chi-square</th>
                    <th>Sig.</th>
                  </tr>
                </thead>
                <tbody>
                  <tr>
                    <td rowspan="5">Electronic Word of Mouth on Social Media</td>
                    <td>Single</td>
                    <td>206.54</td>
                    <td rowspan="5">6.767</td>
                    <td rowspan="5">0.149</td>
                  </tr>
                  <tr>
                    <td>Married</td>
                    <td>184.49</td>
                  </tr>
                  <tr>
                    <td>Married with children</td>
                    <td>173.94</td>
                  </tr>
                  <tr>
                    <td>Divorced</td>
                    <td>164.67</td>
                  </tr>
                  <tr>
                    <td>Widowed</td>
                    <td>93.00</td>
                  </tr>
                  <tr>
                    <td rowspan="5">Nonprofit Brand Image</td>
                    <td>Single</td>
                    <td>183.96</td>
                    <td rowspan="5">5.313</td>
                    <td rowspan="5">0.257</td>
                  </tr>
                  <tr>
                    <td>Married</td>
                    <td>181.90</td>
                  </tr>
                  <tr>
                    <td>Married with children</td>
                    <td>197.79</td>
                  </tr>
                  <tr>
                    <td>Divorced</td>
                    <td>142.50</td>
                  </tr>
                  <tr>
                    <td>Widowed</td>
                    <td>362.50</td>
                  </tr>
                </tbody>
              </table>
              <table-wrap-foot>
                <fn><p>Source: Prepared by the researcher based on statistical analysis results.</p></fn>
              </table-wrap-foot>
            </table-wrap>
          </sec>
          
          <sec id="sec4-2-2-6">
            <title>Sixth Sub-Hypothesis of the Second Hypothesis</title>
            <p>States that: "There are no significant differences in the perception of donors of nonprofit organizations in the Arab Republic of Egypt regarding the study variables (electronic word of mouth on social media, nonprofit brand image) according to urban/rural residence." To test this hypothesis, the researcher relied on the Mann-Whitney test. <xref ref-type="table" rid="table17">Table 17</xref> shows the test results.</p>
            
            <p>From <xref ref-type="table" rid="table17">Table 17</xref>, it is clear that:</p>
            <list list-type="bullet">
              <list-item>
                <p>The Z value for the variable electronic word of mouth on social media equals -0.426 with a significance level of 0.670, which means that there are no significant differences in the perception of donors of electronic word of mouth on social media according to urban/rural residence.</p>
              </list-item>
              <list-item>
                <p>The Z value for the variable nonprofit brand image equals -1.271 with a significance level of 0.204, which means that there are no significant differences in the perception of donors of nonprofit brand image according to urban/rural residence.</p>
              </list-item>
              <list-item>
                <p>This indicates the complete validity of the sixth sub-hypothesis.</p>
              </list-item>
            </list>
            
            <table-wrap id="table17" position="float">
              <label>Table 17</label>
              <caption>
                <title>Significant Differences in the Perception of Donors of Nonprofit Organizations in the Arab Republic of Egypt Regarding Study Variables According to Urban/Rural Residence</title>
              </caption>
              <table>
                <thead>
                  <tr>
                    <th>Variable</th>
                    <th>Residence</th>
                    <th>Mean Rank</th>
                    <th>U</th>
                    <th>Z</th>
                    <th>Sig.</th>
                  </tr>
                </thead>
                <tbody>
                  <tr>
                    <td rowspan="2">Electronic Word of Mouth on Social Media</td>
                    <td>Rural</td>
                    <td>193.20</td>
                    <td rowspan="2">8459.000</td>
                    <td rowspan="2">-0.426</td>
                    <td rowspan="2">0.670</td>
                  </tr>
                  <tr>
                    <td>Urban</td>
                    <td>186.52</td>
                  </tr>
                  <tr>
                    <td rowspan="2">Nonprofit Brand Image</td>
                    <td>Rural</td>
                    <td>204.46</td>
                    <td rowspan="2">7839.500</td>
                    <td rowspan="2">-1.271</td>
                    <td rowspan="2">0.204</td>
                  </tr>
                  <tr>
                    <td>Urban</td>
                    <td>184.58</td>
                  </tr>
                </tbody>
              </table>
              <table-wrap-foot>
                <fn><p>Source: Prepared by the researcher based on statistical analysis results.</p></fn>
              </table-wrap-foot>
            </table-wrap>
          </sec>
          
          <p>From the above, it is clear that:</p>
          <list list-type="bullet">
            <list-item>
              <p>There are no significant differences in the perception of donors of nonprofit organizations in the Arab Republic of Egypt regarding the study variables (electronic word of mouth on social media, nonprofit brand image) according to gender (male - female) completely.</p>
            </list-item>
            <list-item>
              <p>There are no significant differences in the perception of donors of nonprofit organizations in the Arab Republic of Egypt regarding the study variables (electronic word of mouth on social media, nonprofit brand image) according to age completely.</p>
            </list-item>
            <list-item>
              <p>There are no significant differences in the perception of donors of nonprofit organizations in the Arab Republic of Egypt regarding the study variables (electronic word of mouth on social media, nonprofit brand image) according to educational level completely.</p>
            </list-item>
            <list-item>
              <p>There are no significant differences in the perception of donors of nonprofit organizations in the Arab Republic of Egypt regarding the study variables (electronic word of mouth on social media, nonprofit brand image) according to income completely.</p>
            </list-item>
            <list-item>
              <p>There are no significant differences in the perception of donors of nonprofit organizations in the Arab Republic of Egypt regarding the study variables (electronic word of mouth on social media, nonprofit brand image) according to marital status completely.</p>
            </list-item>
            <list-item>
              <p>There are no significant differences in the perception of donors of nonprofit organizations in the Arab Republic of Egypt regarding the study variables (electronic word of mouth on social media, nonprofit brand image) according to urban/rural residence completely.</p>
            </list-item>
          </list>
          
          <p>This means the complete validity of the second hypothesis.</p>
        </sec>
      </sec>
    </sec>
    
    <sec id="sec5" sec-type="conclusions">
      <title>Summary of Results and Recommendations</title>
      
      <sec id="sec5-1">
        <title>Summary of Study Results</title>
        <list list-type="bullet">
          <list-item>
            <p>There is a significant positive effect of electronic word of mouth on social media on nonprofit brand image for donors of nonprofit organizations in the Arab Republic of Egypt at a significance level of 0.01. This means that electronic word of mouth on social media for donors of nonprofit organizations in the Arab Republic of Egypt can improve nonprofit brand image, and this result can be explained through the study of <xref rid="ref1" ref-type="bibr">Hafeez et al. (2021)</xref> which concluded that brand image depends on electronic word of mouth.</p>
          </list-item>
          <list-item>
            <p>There are no significant differences in the perception of donors of nonprofit organizations in the Arab Republic of Egypt regarding the study variables (electronic word of mouth on social media, nonprofit brand image) according to demographic variables (gender, age, educational level, income, marital status, urban/rural residence).</p>
          </list-item>
        </list>
      </sec>
      
      <sec id="sec5-2">
        <title>Study Recommendations</title>
        <p>Nonprofit organizations in the Arab Republic of Egypt must pay attention to electronic word of mouth on social media for donors on a permanent and continuous basis in a way that ensures reducing negative comments and supporting nonprofit brand image in a positive manner, as the study concluded that there is a significant positive effect of electronic word of mouth on social media on nonprofit brand image for donors of nonprofit organizations in the Arab Republic of Egypt. Therefore, the researcher recommends paying attention to the topic of electronic word of mouth on social media and nonprofit brand image by doing the following:</p>
        
        <list list-type="order">
          <list-item>
            <p>Enhancing electronic word of mouth on social media through (active interaction with the audience, encouraging donors to share their positive experiences, monitoring and improving brand image based on comments).</p>
          </list-item>
          <list-item>
            <p>Improving digital communication strategy through (developing inspiring and attractive content, using digital influencers to increase reach and enhance trust).</p>
          </list-item>
          <list-item>
            <p>Investing in training and skill development through (training employees on managing and developing digital presence, following the latest trends in social media).</p>
          </list-item>
          <list-item>
            <p>Focusing on the unified vision through (ensuring clarity of message and principles across all communication channels).</p>
          </list-item>
          <list-item>
            <p>Conducting continuous analytics through (using data analysis tools to evaluate campaign effectiveness, adjusting strategies based on analytics to achieve goals).</p>
          </list-item>
        </list>
        
        <p>The researcher recommends conducting more research related to both electronic word of mouth on social media and nonprofit brand image, which can be presented as follows:</p>
        
        <list list-type="bullet">
          <list-item>
            <p>The role of digital influencers in improving the brand image of nonprofit organizations.</p>
          </list-item>
          <list-item>
            <p>The effect of electronic word of mouth on the motivation to donate.</p>
          </list-item>
          <list-item>
            <p>The effects of online advertising campaigns on the brand image of nonprofit organizations.</p>
          </list-item>
        </list>
      </sec>
    </sec>
  </body>
  
  <back>
    <ack>
      <title>Acknowledgments</title>
      <p>The author expresses gratitude to all donors who participated in this study for their valuable time and responses.</p>
    </ack>
    
    <ref-list>
      <title>References</title>
      
      <ref id="ref1">
        <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">
          <person-group person-group-type="author">
            <name><surname>Abbas</surname><given-names>H.</given-names></name>
            <name><surname>Hafeez</surname><given-names>H.</given-names></name>
            <name><surname>Rasheed</surname><given-names>A.</given-names></name>
            <name><surname>Saeed</surname><given-names>U.</given-names></name>
            <name><surname>Rathore</surname><given-names>F.</given-names></name>
          </person-group>
          <article-title>The impact of electronic word of mouth on brand image and consumer purchase intention: An empirical study of the clothing industry in Pakistan</article-title>. 
          <source>Governance and Management Review</source>. 
          <year>2021</year>;
          <volume>3</volume>
          <issue>(2)</issue>:
          <fpage>45</fpage>-
          <lpage>65</lpage>.
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      
      <ref id="ref2">
        <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">
          <person-group person-group-type="author">
            <name><surname>Abouzeid</surname><given-names>W.</given-names></name>
            <name><surname>Mahmoud</surname><given-names>A. E. A.</given-names></name>
            <name><surname>Mohammad</surname><given-names>S. T.</given-names></name>
          </person-group>
          <article-title>The impact of electronic word-of-mouth dimensions on consumer purchase intention and brand trust in the Egyptian market</article-title>. 
          <source>MSA-Management Science Journal</source>. 
          <year>2023</year>;
          <volume>2</volume>
          <issue>(4)</issue>:
          <fpage>76</fpage>-
          <lpage>93</lpage>.
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      
      <ref id="ref3">
        <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">
          <person-group person-group-type="author">
            <name><surname>Al-Agha</surname><given-names>A. S. M.</given-names></name>
          </person-group>
          <article-title>Strategic alignment between declared orientations and published activities: An analytical study of AMAN Coalition in Palestine</article-title>. 
          <source>Arado Business Journal</source>. 
          <year>2026</year>;
          <volume>1</volume>
          <issue>(1)</issue>:
          <fpage>21</fpage>-
          <lpage>41</lpage>.
          <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.64190/abj.1.1.2026.3</pub-id>
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      
      <ref id="ref4">
        <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">
          <person-group person-group-type="author">
            <name><surname>Andreasen</surname><given-names>A. R.</given-names></name>
          </person-group>
          <article-title>Marketing social marketing in the social change marketplace</article-title>. 
          <source>Journal of Public Policy and Marketing</source>. 
          <year>2002</year>;
          <volume>21</volume>
          <issue>(1)</issue>:
          <fpage>3</fpage>-
          <lpage>13</lpage>.
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      
      <ref id="ref5">
        <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">
          <person-group person-group-type="author">
            <name><surname>Bennett</surname><given-names>R.</given-names></name>
            <name><surname>Gabriel</surname><given-names>H.</given-names></name>
          </person-group>
          <article-title>Image and reputational characteristics of UK charitable organizations: An empirical study</article-title>. 
          <source>Corporate Reputation Review</source>. 
          <year>2003</year>;
          <volume>6</volume>
          <issue>(3)</issue>:
          <fpage>276</fpage>-
          <lpage>289</lpage>.
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      
      <ref id="ref6">
        <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">
          <person-group person-group-type="author">
            <name><surname>Bendapudi</surname><given-names>N.</given-names></name>
            <name><surname>Singh</surname><given-names>S. N.</given-names></name>
            <name><surname>Bendapudi</surname><given-names>V.</given-names></name>
          </person-group>
          <article-title>Enhancing helping behavior: An integrative framework for promotion planning</article-title>. 
          <source>The Journal of Marketing</source>. 
          <year>1996</year>;
          <volume>60</volume>
          <issue>(3)</issue>:
          <fpage>33</fpage>-
          <lpage>49</lpage>.
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      
      <ref id="ref7">
        <mixed-citation publication-type="book">
          <person-group person-group-type="author">
            <name><surname>Colton</surname><given-names>D.</given-names></name>
            <name><surname>Covert</surname><given-names>R. W.</given-names></name>
          </person-group>. 
          <source>Designing and constructing instruments for social research and evaluation</source>. 
          <publisher-loc>San Francisco, CA</publisher-loc>: 
          <publisher-name>John Wiley and Sons</publisher-name>; 
          <year>2007</year>.
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      
      <ref id="ref8">
        <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">
          <person-group person-group-type="author">
            <name><surname>Cheung</surname><given-names>M. Y.</given-names></name>
            <name><surname>Luo</surname><given-names>C.</given-names></name>
            <name><surname>Sia</surname><given-names>C. L.</given-names></name>
            <name><surname>Chen</surname><given-names>H.</given-names></name>
          </person-group>
          <article-title>Credibility of electronic word-of-mouth: Informational and normative determinants of online consumer recommendations</article-title>. 
          <source>International Journal of Electronic Commerce</source>. 
          <year>2009</year>;
          <volume>13</volume>
          <issue>(4)</issue>:
          <fpage>9</fpage>-
          <lpage>38</lpage>.
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      
      <ref id="ref9">
        <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">
          <person-group person-group-type="author">
            <name><surname>Haq</surname><given-names>M. D. U.</given-names></name>
            <name><surname>Tseng</surname><given-names>T. H.</given-names></name>
            <name><surname>Cheng</surname><given-names>H. L.</given-names></name>
            <name><surname>Chiu</surname><given-names>C. M.</given-names></name>
          </person-group>
          <article-title>An empirical analysis of eWOM valence effects: Integrating stimulus-organism-response, trust transfer theory, and theory of planned behavior perspectives</article-title>. 
          <source>Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services</source>. 
          <year>2024</year>;
          <volume>81</volume>:
          <fpage>104026</fpage>.
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      
      <ref id="ref10">
        <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">
          <person-group person-group-type="author">
            <name><surname>Hennig-Thurau</surname><given-names>T.</given-names></name>
            <name><surname>Walsh</surname><given-names>G.</given-names></name>
          </person-group>
          <article-title>Electronic word-of-mouth: Motives for and consequences of reading customer articulations on the Internet</article-title>. 
          <source>International Journal of Electronic Commerce</source>. 
          <year>2003</year>;
          <volume>8</volume>
          <issue>(2)</issue>:
          <fpage>51</fpage>-
          <lpage>74</lpage>.
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      
      <ref id="ref11">
        <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">
          <person-group person-group-type="author">
            <name><surname>Hong</surname><given-names>S.</given-names></name>
            <name><surname>Pittman</surname><given-names>M.</given-names></name>
          </person-group>
          <article-title>eWOM anatomy of online product reviews: Interaction effects of review number, valence, and star ratings on perceived credibility</article-title>. 
          <source>International Journal of Advertising: The Review of Marketing Communications</source>. 
          <year>2020</year>;
          <volume>39</volume>
          <issue>(7)</issue>:
          <fpage>892</fpage>-
          <lpage>920</lpage>.
          <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1080/02650487.2019.1703386</pub-id>
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      
      <ref id="ref12">
        <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">
          <person-group person-group-type="author">
            <name><surname>Hua</surname><given-names>X.</given-names></name>
            <name><surname>Hasan</surname><given-names>N. A. M.</given-names></name>
            <name><surname>De Costa</surname><given-names>F.</given-names></name>
            <name><surname>Qiao</surname><given-names>W.</given-names></name>
          </person-group>
          <article-title>The mediating role of electronic word-of-mouth in the relationship between CSR initiative and consumer satisfaction</article-title>. 
          <source>Heliyon</source>. 
          <year>2024</year>;
          <volume>10</volume>:
          <fpage>e09876</fpage>.
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      
      <ref id="ref13">
        <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">
          <person-group person-group-type="author">
            <name><surname>Huang</surname><given-names>S.</given-names></name>
            <name><surname>Ku</surname><given-names>H.</given-names></name>
          </person-group>
          <article-title>Brand image management for nonprofit organizations: Exploring the relationships between websites, brand images, and donations</article-title>. 
          <source>Journal of Electronic Commerce Research</source>. 
          <year>2016</year>;
          <volume>17</volume>
          <issue>(2)</issue>:
          <fpage>80</fpage>-
          <lpage>100</lpage>.
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      
      <ref id="ref14">
        <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">
          <person-group person-group-type="author">
            <name><surname>Hung</surname><given-names>S. W.</given-names></name>
            <name><surname>Chang</surname><given-names>C. W.</given-names></name>
            <name><surname>Chen</surname><given-names>S. Y.</given-names></name>
          </person-group>
          <article-title>Beyond a bunch of reviews: The quality and quantity of electronic word-of-mouth</article-title>. 
          <source>Information and Management</source>. 
          <year>2023</year>;
          <volume>60</volume>
          <issue>(3)</issue>:
          <fpage>103777</fpage>.
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      
      <ref id="ref15">
        <mixed-citation publication-type="book">
          <person-group person-group-type="author">
            <name><surname>Ismagilova</surname><given-names>E.</given-names></name>
            <name><surname>Dwivedi</surname><given-names>Y. K.</given-names></name>
            <name><surname>Slade</surname><given-names>E.</given-names></name>
            <name><surname>Williams</surname><given-names>M. D.</given-names></name>
          </person-group>. 
          <source>Electronic Word-of-Mouth (eWOM)</source>. 
          <publisher-loc>Cham, Switzerland</publisher-loc>: 
          <publisher-name>Springer International Publishing</publisher-name>; 
          <year>2017</year>.
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      
      <ref id="ref16">
        <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">
          <person-group person-group-type="author">
            <name><surname>Ismagilova</surname><given-names>E.</given-names></name>
            <name><surname>Slade</surname><given-names>E. L.</given-names></name>
            <name><surname>Rana</surname><given-names>N. P.</given-names></name>
            <name><surname>Dwivedi</surname><given-names>Y. K.</given-names></name>
          </person-group>
          <article-title>The effect of electronic word of mouth communications on intention to buy: A meta-analysis</article-title>. 
          <source>Information Systems Frontiers</source>. 
          <year>2020</year>;
          <volume>22</volume>
          <issue>(6)</issue>:
          <fpage>1203</fpage>-
          <lpage>1226</lpage>.
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      
      <ref id="ref17">
        <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">
          <person-group person-group-type="author">
            <name><surname>Jwayyed</surname><given-names>M.</given-names></name>
          </person-group>
          <article-title>The role of Facebook in enhancing social accountability in local governments: A case study of Ramallah and Al-Bireh municipalities</article-title>. 
          <source>Arado Business Journal</source>. 
          <year>2026</year>;
          <volume>1</volume>
          <issue>(2)</issue>:
          <fpage>111</fpage>-
          <lpage>126</lpage>.
          <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.64190/abj.1.2.2026.20</pub-id>
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      
      <ref id="ref18">
        <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">
          <person-group person-group-type="author">
            <name><surname>King</surname><given-names>R. A.</given-names></name>
            <name><surname>Racherla</surname><given-names>P.</given-names></name>
            <name><surname>Bush</surname><given-names>V. D.</given-names></name>
          </person-group>
          <article-title>What we know and don't know about online word-of-mouth: A review and synthesis of the literature</article-title>. 
          <source>Journal of Interactive Marketing</source>. 
          <year>2014</year>;
          <volume>28</volume>
          <issue>(3)</issue>:
          <fpage>167</fpage>-
          <lpage>183</lpage>.
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      
      <ref id="ref19">
        <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">
          <person-group person-group-type="author">
            <name><surname>Le-Hoang</surname><given-names>P. V.</given-names></name>
          </person-group>
          <article-title>The effects of electronic word of mouth (eWOM) on the adoption of consumer eWOM information</article-title>. 
          <source>Independent Journal of Management and Production</source>. 
          <year>2020</year>;
          <volume>11</volume>
          <issue>(6)</issue>:
          <fpage>1760</fpage>-
          <lpage>1777</lpage>.
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      
      <ref id="ref20">
        <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">
          <person-group person-group-type="author">
            <name><surname>Lim</surname><given-names>T. Y.</given-names></name>
            <name><surname>Lim</surname><given-names>B. C. Y.</given-names></name>
            <name><surname>Leong</surname><given-names>C. M.</given-names></name>
            <name><surname>Phang</surname><given-names>I. G.</given-names></name>
            <name><surname>Foong</surname><given-names>W. H.</given-names></name>
          </person-group>
          <article-title>Consumer adoption of on-demand digital platforms: An integrated model</article-title>. 
          <source>Global Business and Organizational Excellence</source>. 
          <year>2023</year>;
          <volume>42</volume>
          <issue>(6)</issue>:
          <fpage>75</fpage>-
          <lpage>88</lpage>.
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      
      <ref id="ref21">
        <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">
          <person-group person-group-type="author">
            <name><surname>Litvin</surname><given-names>S. W.</given-names></name>
            <name><surname>Goldsmith</surname><given-names>R. E.</given-names></name>
            <name><surname>Pan</surname><given-names>B.</given-names></name>
          </person-group>
          <article-title>Electronic word-of-mouth in hospitality and tourism management</article-title>. 
          <source>Tourism Management</source>. 
          <year>2008</year>;
          <volume>29</volume>
          <issue>(3)</issue>:
          <fpage>458</fpage>-
          <lpage>468</lpage>.
          <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.tourman.2007.05.011</pub-id>
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      
      <ref id="ref22">
        <mixed-citation publication-type="confproc">
          <person-group person-group-type="author">
            <name><surname>Liu</surname><given-names>Y.</given-names></name>
            <name><surname>Jiang</surname><given-names>D.</given-names></name>
            <name><surname>Zhou</surname><given-names>G.</given-names></name>
          </person-group>
          <article-title>The effect of eWOM on tourist purchase intentions: The mediating effect of trust</article-title>. 
          <source>Proceedings of the International Conference on Education, Management, and Computer</source>. 
          <conf-loc>Shenyang, China</conf-loc>; 
          <conf-date>12-14 August 2019</conf-date>. p. 
          <fpage>456</fpage>-
          <lpage>468</lpage>.
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      
      <ref id="ref23">
        <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">
          <person-group person-group-type="author">
            <name><surname>Michaelidou</surname><given-names>N.</given-names></name>
            <name><surname>Micevski</surname><given-names>M.</given-names></name>
            <name><surname>Kadic-Maglajlic</surname><given-names>S.</given-names></name>
            <name><surname>Budhathoki</surname><given-names>T.</given-names></name>
            <name><surname>Sarkar</surname><given-names>S.</given-names></name>
          </person-group>
          <article-title>Does nonprofit brand image mean the same across cultures? An exploratory evaluation of nonprofit brand image in three countries</article-title>. 
          <source>International Marketing Review</source>. 
          <year>2019</year>;
          <volume>36</volume>
          <issue>(6)</issue>:
          <fpage>979</fpage>-
          <lpage>995</lpage>.
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      
      <ref id="ref24">
        <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">
          <person-group person-group-type="author">
            <name><surname>Michaelidou</surname><given-names>N.</given-names></name>
            <name><surname>Micevski</surname><given-names>M.</given-names></name>
            <name><surname>Cadogan</surname><given-names>J. W.</given-names></name>
          </person-group>
          <article-title>An evaluation of nonprofit brand image: Towards a better conceptualization and measurement</article-title>. 
          <source>Journal of Business Research</source>. 
          <year>2015</year>;
          <volume>68</volume>
          <issue>(8)</issue>:
          <fpage>1657</fpage>-
          <lpage>1666</lpage>.
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      
      <ref id="ref25">
        <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">
          <person-group person-group-type="author">
            <name><surname>Michel</surname><given-names>G.</given-names></name>
            <name><surname>Rieunier</surname><given-names>S.</given-names></name>
          </person-group>
          <article-title>Nonprofit brand image and typicality influences on charitable giving</article-title>. 
          <source>Journal of Business Research</source>. 
          <year>2012</year>;
          <volume>65</volume>
          <issue>(5)</issue>:
          <fpage>701</fpage>-
          <lpage>707</lpage>.
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      
      <ref id="ref26">
        <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">
          <person-group person-group-type="author">
            <name><surname>Mughoffar</surname><given-names>M.</given-names></name>
            <name><surname>Sumarwan</surname><given-names>U.</given-names></name>
            <name><surname>Tinaprilla</surname><given-names>N.</given-names></name>
          </person-group>
          <article-title>The effect of e-WoM and brand image on the interest in buying the Heavenly Blush yoghurt product</article-title>. 
          <source>Indonesian Journal of Business and Entrepreneurship</source>. 
          <year>2019</year>;
          <volume>5</volume>
          <issue>(2)</issue>:
          <fpage>158</fpage>-
          <lpage>167</lpage>.
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      
      <ref id="ref27">
        <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">
          <person-group person-group-type="author">
            <name><surname>Reed</surname><given-names>G. A.</given-names></name>
          </person-group>
          <article-title>Getting ahead in the race for a cure: How nonprofits are financing biomedical R&amp;D</article-title>. 
          <source>Research Policy</source>. 
          <year>2020</year>;
          <volume>49</volume>
          <issue>(8)</issue>:
          <fpage>104032</fpage>.
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      
      <ref id="ref28">
        <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">
          <person-group person-group-type="author">
            <name><surname>Reichelt</surname><given-names>J.</given-names></name>
            <name><surname>Sievert</surname><given-names>J.</given-names></name>
            <name><surname>Jacob</surname><given-names>F.</given-names></name>
          </person-group>
          <article-title>How credibility affects eWOM reading: The influences of expertise, trustworthiness, and similarity on utilitarian and social functions</article-title>. 
          <source>Journal of Marketing Communications</source>. 
          <year>2014</year>;
          <volume>20</volume>
          <issue>(1-2)</issue>:
          <fpage>65</fpage>-
          <lpage>81</lpage>.
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      
      <ref id="ref29">
        <mixed-citation publication-type="book">
          <person-group person-group-type="author">
            <name><surname>Saunders</surname><given-names>M.</given-names></name>
            <name><surname>Thornhill</surname><given-names>A.</given-names></name>
            <name><surname>Lewis</surname><given-names>P.</given-names></name>
          </person-group>. 
          <source>Research methods for business students</source>. 
          <edition>6th ed.</edition>. 
          <publisher-loc>Harlow, UK</publisher-loc>: 
          <publisher-name>Pearson Education</publisher-name>; 
          <year>2012</year>.
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      
      <ref id="ref30">
        <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">
          <person-group person-group-type="author">
            <name><surname>Sharma</surname><given-names>M.</given-names></name>
            <name><surname>Kaushal</surname><given-names>D.</given-names></name>
            <name><surname>Joshi</surname><given-names>S.</given-names></name>
            <name><surname>Kumar</surname><given-names>A.</given-names></name>
            <name><surname>Luthra</surname><given-names>S.</given-names></name>
          </person-group>
          <article-title>Electronic waste disposal behavioral intention of millennials: A moderating role of electronic word of mouth (eWOM) and perceived usage of online collection portal</article-title>. 
          <source>Journal of Cleaner Production</source>. 
          <year>2024</year>;
          <volume>413</volume>:
          <fpage>141121</fpage>.
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      
      <ref id="ref31">
        <mixed-citation publication-type="book">
          <person-group person-group-type="author">
            <name><surname>Thompson</surname><given-names>S. K.</given-names></name>
          </person-group>. 
          <source>Sampling</source>. 
          <edition>3rd ed.</edition>. 
          <publisher-loc>Hoboken, NJ</publisher-loc>: 
          <publisher-name>John Wiley and Sons</publisher-name>; 
          <year>2012</year>.
          <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1002/9781118162934</pub-id>
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      
      <ref id="ref32">
        <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">
          <person-group person-group-type="author">
            <name><surname>Wang</surname><given-names>Y.</given-names></name>
            <etal/>
          </person-group>
          <article-title>Electronic word-of-mouth and consumer purchase intentions in social e-commerce</article-title>. 
          <source>Electronic Commerce Research and Applications</source>. 
          <year>2015</year>;
          <volume>14</volume>
          <issue>(5)</issue>:
          <fpage>346</fpage>-
          <lpage>360</lpage>.
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      
    </ref-list>
  </back>
</article>