Ảnh hưởng của tính vị chủng trong hành vi tiêu dung và quốc gia xuất xứ tới thái độ đối với sản phẩm điện tử: So sánh thực nghiệm giữa người tiêu dung Đài Loan và Campuchia

Nội dung text: Ảnh hưởng của tính vị chủng trong hành vi tiêu dung và quốc gia xuất xứ tới thái độ đối với sản phẩm điện tử: So sánh thực nghiệm giữa người tiêu dung Đài Loan và Campuchia

1. THE EFFECTS OF CONSUMERS ETHNOCENTRISM AND COUNTRY OF ORIGIN ON ATTITUDES TOWARDS ELECTRONIC PRODUCTS: AN EMPIRICAL COMPARISONS OF TAIWANESE AND CAMBODIAN CONSUMERS ẢNH HƯỞNG CỦA TÍNH VỊ CHỦNG TRONG HÀNH VI TIÊU DUNG VÀ QUỐC GIA XUẤT XỨ TỚI THÁI ĐỘ ĐỐI VỚI SẢN PHẨM ĐIỆN TỬ: SO SÁNH THỰC NGHIỆM GIỮA NGƯỜI TIÊU DUNG ĐÀI LOAN VÀ CAMPUCHIA Ying-Kai Liao, Ph. D - Nanhua University, Taiwan Nguyen Ha Giang - Tunghai University, Taiwan AoBory - National Chengkung University, Taiwan Abstract Most of developing and especially underdeveloped countries have the problems with the economic growth because they face the problems of finding the market for their products. Developed/advanced countries such as the United State or Japan have gained the advantages of home country bias. A consumer prefers to buy the products from the developed countries rather than developing or underdeveloped countries. The gaps between developed countries and developing/underdeveloped countries are very big. A study of country of origin effects has been begun since the 1960s, however most these researches involve in more developed countries. Therefore, this study tries to seek for investigating the consumers’ attitudes and purchasing intention in new developed and underdeveloped country-Taiwan and Cambodia-on the electronic products made in four different levels of economic development countries: Taiwan, China, Thailand, and Japan. This study also examines phenomenon of consumer ethnocentrism and consumers’ perception of products’ quality and price of the electronic products from different sources. The results indicate that both Taiwanese and Cambodian respondents perceive Japanese electronic products as the most favorable and high quality with high attitudes and intention to purchase. Taiwanese, Thai, and Chinese electronic products are perceived in a second, third, and fourth, respectively. Chinese electronic products are perceived as low and cheap price, while electronic products made in Thailand are getting stuck in the middle. On the other hand, high and low ethnocentric consumers also perceive Japanese products to be the most favorable, and they demonstrate high attitudes and intention to purchase Japanese electronic products rather than their own products (Taiwanese electronic products) that reverse with the consumer ethnocentrism concept. The major reasons might due to (1) the culture tied between Taiwan and Japan and (2) this study employs general electronic products, which are not specific on the brand name that cause respondents rely more on the country of origin. Keywords: Country of Origin Effects,Consumer Ethnocentrism, Perceived Quality, Perception of Price, Attitudes and Purchasing Intention. 82
2. Tóm tắt Hầu hết các nước đang phát triển và chậm phát triển đều gặp khó khăn với việc tăng trưởng kinh tế vì họ phải đối mặt với nhiều vấn đề trong việc tìm kiếm thị trường cho sản phẩm. Các nước phát triển như Mỹ hay Nhật Bản đã đạt được nhiều lợi thế thiên về xuất xứ sản phẩm. Người tiêu dùng thường thích mua các sản phẩm của các nước phát triển hơn các nước đang/ chậm phát triển. Khoảng cách giữa các nước phát triển và đang/ chậm phát triển là quá lớn. Nghiên cứu về ảnh hưởng của quốc gia xuất xứ đã bắt đầu từ những năm 1960, nhưng hầu hết đều được thực hiện tại các nước phát triển hơn. Do đó, nghiên cứu này nhằm mục đích tìm hiểu thái độ và ý định mua của người tiêu dùng tại các nước mới phát triển và chậm phát triển – Đài Loan và Campuchia – đối với sản phẩm điện tử sản xuất tại bốn quốc gia có trình độ phát triển kinh tế khác nhau gồm Đài Loan, Trung Quốc, Thái Lan và Nhật Bản. Nghiên cứu này cũng xem xét hiện tượng chủ nghĩa vị chủng trong hành vi tiêu dùng và nhận thức của người tiêu dùng về chất lượng và giá cả sản phẩm điện tử từ những nguồn khác nhau. Kết quả nghiên cứu cho thấy rằng các đối tượng nghiên cứu Đài Loan và Campuchia đều coi đồ điện tử Nhật Bản là sự lựa chọn hàng đầu với chất lượng cao và thái độ cũng như ý định mua cao. Sản phẩm điện tử Đài Loan, Thái Lan và Trung Quốc được nhận thức ở vị trí thứ hai, thứ ba và thứ tư. Đồ điện tử Trung Quốc được coi là có giá rẻ trong khi sản phẩm Thái Lan ở mức trung bình. Ngược lại, những người tiêu dùng có chủ nghĩa vị chủng cao và thấp đều coi sản phẩm Nhật Bản là sự lựa chọn hàng đầu, họ thể hiện thái độ và ý định mua sản phẩm điện tử Nhật Bản cao hơn sản phẩm của chính nước mình (sản phẩm Đài Loan). Điều này mâu thuẫn với khái niệm chủ nghĩa vị chủng trong hành vi tiêu dùng. Nguyên nhân của hiện tượng này có thể bao gồm (1) nền văn hóa gần gũi giữa Đài Loan và Nhật Bản và (2) nghiên cứu này sử dụng sản phẩm điện tử nói chung, không đề cập tới thương hiệu cụ thể nên đối tượng nghiên cứu chủ yếu dựa trên quốc gia xuất xứ. Từ khóa: Tác động Quốc gia xuất xứ, Chủ nghĩa vị chủng trong hành vi tiêu dùng, Chất lượng cảm nhận, Nhận thức về giá, Thái độ và ý định mua. 1. Introduction Turn to the world of globalization; the global products have been increasing by 50 percent, the gross of domestic products in the world trade reached about 30 percent (Cai, 2004 c/o WTO, 2001). The term globalization describes businesses’ deployment of facilities and operations around the world. Worldwide exports account for more than 30 percent of worldwide gross national product, up from 12 percent in 1962. The results of globalization tend to be increasing in import from and export to various countries around the world, often called “offshore sales and imports.” Meanwhile, globalization of services is also widespread; the value of world trade in service is about 20 percent of total world trade. Banking, law, information services, airlines, education, consulting, and restaurant services are particularly active globally. With a new economy discovery, suppliers, manufacturers, distributors, warehouses, retailers and consumers have implemented a new 83
3. strategy named as “win-win strategy” that allow all the traded parties gain from doing business by changing from an old strategy “win-lose strategy” which means that one or more of traded parties gain advantages from trading while one or more of them lose. They have their own strategies to compete with each other in free market. Dramatically changing in the economy environment cause firms more challenging to get engage in strategic alliances, increasing export to and import from various countries, country of design, country of parts, and country of manufacturing and country of original. Discussing in various aspects in the production process of outsourcing, firms try to engage their production in the developing countries and/or least developed countries in order to take advantage from lower labor wage rates. Most of the firms engage in developing and/or least developed countries to manufacture component parts with importing the product design and talents professional engineers from developed countries. This result in more difficult to consumer’s perception of the association between products and country of origin, a consumer may think about the country of origin of products, where the products were made. As an example, Sony is usually considered as product from Japan even it made in Mainland China, however a consumer may also consider about the manufactured country. Sony made in Mainland China may have a lower image compare to Sony made in Japan. A consumer who beliefs on high quality of product if that product designed, assembled, using parts from the same country that exist in high image (e.g., Japan or US); he/she may be willing to pay more premium on this products. Thus, the research on COO effects may be become more critical. Since country of origin has been served as a signal of product quality, therefore high-developed countries such as Japan have also recognized as a high country image associated with high price from the global consumers’ perspectives. By the way, Taiwan and Thailand are a new developed and developing counties, respectively, their products have been recognized as somewhat high or medium quality. On the other hand, China is a least developed country so that its products tend to be considered as poor quality image and consumers tend to express low attitude toward its products. Based on the research background and motivation, most of the studies have con- ducted on the influence of single-dimensional country of origin and multi-dimensional country of origin on consumer behaviors in developed countries and their attitude toward products. Only a few studies have focused on the consumers in developing countries. The consumer attitude in underdeveloped countries toward the imported products from developing and/or developed countries is rarely to be explored. Furthermore, since previous studies did not provide clear answer on the interaction among COO, consumer ethno-centrism, products attributes and quality, attitude toward product, purchasing intention, and price. Therefore, this study is to explore and test the receptivity model of consumers in Cambodia and Taiwan toward electronic products from various origins by way of testing respondents’ perspective about country of origin, ethnocentrism, perceived products attributes and quality, attitude toward products, price, and purchasing intention. It is to know whether or not all the dimensions have significant relations with consumer’s purchasing intention. Finally, this research will compare the difference of consumers’ 84
4. buying behavior between two countries and discuss how cultural differences- Cambodian and Taiwanese culture- addressed in the country of origin effect. To businesses, this research provides options and more opportunities for businesses to deeply understand on consumers’ attitude, behavior, and intention toward electronic products made in different countries and different level of economic development. To academic researchers, the re- search provides more opportunities to explore the internal differentiations across nations for more understanding on the global sourcing, globalization of marketing strategy, country of origin and reaction. The purposes of this study are addressed as follows: (1) To examine how country of origin evaluations are influenced on Taiwanese and Cambodian respondents’ attitudes and purchasing intention to the electronic products made in four selected countries—Taiwan, China, Thailand, and Japan. (2) To address how respondents perceive the quality of electronic products from different levels of economic development of home producers. (3) To fully understand the consumer ethnocentrism impact on the country of origin effect and products (electronic products) evaluation, and defining the consumer behavior responding to their national products vs. imported products. (4) To address how country of origin effect on consumers’ perception of prices and the relationship between prices and products qualities. (5) To compare the difference of consumers’ buying behavior between two countries and discuss how cultural differences—Cambodian and Taiwanese culture—addressed in the country of origin effect. 2. Literature review 2.1. Interrelationship between Country of Origin and Quality of Products Verlegh and Steenkamp (1999) found that country of origin had a greater effect on perceived quality of products than attitude toward the product or purchase intention. Besides, it is supported that country of origin plays a decisive role in consumers’ acceptance of a product, especially in terms of quality judgment (Shawn et al. 2014). Furthermore, the degree of economic development of the countries of producers could influence the country of origin effects. To be more specific, the brands depriving from developed countries are believed to get more favorable quality perceptions from customers, and it is consequently different from brands originate from less developed nations (Bayraktar, 2015). Therefore, the levels of economic development of a country seem to the important cues that influence on consumer’s perception of product quality and purchasing behavior (Baughn&Yaprak, 1993; Crawford & Lumpkin, 1993). In general, consumers express the higher level of economic development or higher technologies countries (developed countries, for example, US and Japan) as the high country images (CI) of products and recognize their products as the high qualities. Finally consumers demonstrate their high attitudes towards the products made in there, and then make the purchase decisions. In consistently, moderate level of economic development or technological countries of manufacturers would be rated as the moderated country images (CI) and 85
5. moderated quality, and attitude toward those products. Parallel phenomenon, consumers demonstrate low country images, low products quality, and low attitudes towards the foreign products from less developed countries. Based on the above discussions, this study developed a conceptual framework to explain the interrelationship between country of origin and product quality. It is suggested that the levels of development of the manufacturing countries will be highly correlated with consumers’ perceptions on the levels of perceived product. Therefore, customers, especially who face limited related- product information, tend to use their general perceptions about the countries to support their own purchasing decision (Berry et al. 2015). Besides, COO information is also believed to be more important for buyers than brand knowledge in making, particularly, low-involvement purchase decisions (Adina et al. 2015). This study constructs the first hypothesis following this phenomenon and tests the relationships among the degree developments of home countries producers; we therefore build the hypothesis that: H1: Country of Origin has significant effects on perceived product quality rating and economic development level of home country producer has a positive relationship. 2.1. Interrelationship between COO and Perception of Prices When it comes to products’ information search stage in buyer, the “made-in” and “designed-in” country-of-origin labels often offer customers information regarding the quality and price dimensions of the product (Adina et al. 2015). In general, consumers expect to get lower price in order to compensate a negative country of origin of products (Chéron&Propeck, 1997). For the same products made in two different countries— developed county and less developed country—consumers are more likely to purchase the same products made in less developed country, when the price of less developed country products are decreased (Cai, et al., 2004). Thus, there should be a significant interrelation between country of origin and price of products; or in other words, when actual price is unknown, the majority of buyers tend to use other attributes, especially the COO factor (Jung, 2012). Based upon the above discussion, we therefore construct the second hypothesis that: H2: A low-image country of origin results in low prices perceived by respondents. 2.2. Interrelationship between Perception of Prices and Products Quality The relationship between prices and perceive quality has been studied for decades. As a matter of factors, customers who are not fully aware of product attributes, ingredients and benefits nor do they know all about actual value of the products, especially fast- moving consumer goods will be more likely to infer quality from price (Herbst et.al 2012). For this reasons, it should be stated that interrelationship exists between perceived quality and price. According to Modes (1987) prices and perceived quality of products and services have highly correlation. Price is used as an indicator to indicate the products quality, in general consumers perceive that a product which is expensive because this product is high quality. While many researchers found that prices are signal of quality, 86
6. however, Stiving (2000) agued that price is not necessary being a signal of quality. He concluded that firms likely set prices around the numbers when they use higher prices as signal of quality; however, prices-ending themselves are not necessarily a signal of quality.Based on the above discussion, there is a little empirical evidence founding the correlation between prices and quality, to deeper understand, this study propose the third hypothesis to further explore this relationship. H3: There are positive relationship between perception of prices and the quality products. 2.3. Interrelationship between COO and Attitude towards the Products Generally, it is widely accepted that developed countries’ products do enjoy a great welcome from overall consumers. The imported products from developed countries are believed to be preferred than products from less developed countries (Hoffmann et al. 2014).With in the same area Wang and Lamb (1983) also pointed out the importance relationship between product attribute (country of origin) and the economic development state of a particular country. Han (1989), Hong and Wyer (1989; 1990), and Johansson (1989) revealed that there were numerous of researches have verified the importance of country of origin to determine the consumers’ attitude towards product. By the way, the products of developing and developed countries were found as the products gaining the advantage of country of origin bias (Hoffmann et al. 2014) As we mentioned earlier a new developing country and less developed country result in poor country image from consumers’ perspectives. Thus, consumers tend to demonstrate moderate or low attitude toward the imported products from developing and less developed countries, respectively. In contrast, consumers tend to express high attitude toward products from developed countries or advanced technological countries. To deeper understand this phenomenon, we therefore construct the hypotheses that: H4: Level of country of origin that the consumer perceived which are influenced by the development of economic of the home producers will be positively related to the level of the consumer’s attitude toward products. 2.5. Interrelationship between Quality of Product and Purchasing Intention In today’s global environment, researchers and marketers try to develop the information for the consumers, which they can rely on to make their product evaluation and choice preference. This intent to provide the consumers with more information in order to assist them in making better decision on the complex nature of global products today. As the world wide economy, global venture increase in complexity, consumers may rely on other informational cues to infer a product’s COO information about product where the product was made. In this case consumers may refer to single-dimensional country of origin information. All Consumers believe that high developed countries would produce high quality of products, and they intent to buy the products imported from these countries. However, the main effect of product quality on the consumers purchasing intention has not been widely studied, thus this study attempts to construct the product quality effect to be 87
7. well understood. Based on the above mention, we therefore propose the firth hypothesis as following: H5: A consumer would demonstrate high intention to purchase a product, which he/she considers the product as high quality. 2.6. Interrelationship between Quality of Products and Attitude towards the Products Owing to the previous researchers such as revealed that perceived quality and attitude can be independently formed of each other. However, perceived quality is a key to component of attitude, according to the conceptual support for perceived quality (Frank et al. 2104). On the other hand, a concept of attitude toward a product is broader than perceived quality of product, since not only perceived quality of product influenced on overall consumers’ attitude toward a product, but they also need convenience, fun and beauty (Lloyd et al. 2014). However, by using Arab-American respondents, Obermiller and Spangenberg (1989) found that Arab-American people demonstrated their negative attitude towards Israel’s product although they are recognized the superior quality of product of Israel. In general, attitude toward a product can be influenced by perceived quality, but in a specific case, even consumers learn about the quality of product from one country, yet they may not express their attitude toward this product. Based on the above statement, we therefore propose the sixth hypothesis that: H6: High quality of products held by consumers will demonstrate in high attitudes towards those products when they have a very strong attitude toward a manufactured country. 2.7. Interrelationship between Attitude toward Products and Purchasing Intention One of the influential models in predicting human behavior and behavioral dispositions is a theory of reasoned action (TRA), which proposed that behavior is affected by behavioral intentions which, in turn, are affected by attitudes toward the act and by subjective norm (Shin &Hancer, 2015). Chiou (1998) invested on the influence of attitude, social norm, and personal control on consumer purchasing intention. He found that all these three independent variables had significantly effects on consumers purchasing intention. Cannière, Pelsmacker and Geuens (2010) found that there is highly correlation between actual behavior and intention. In general, behavior is determined by intention and intention is determined by attitude and social norm toward behaving. Although we found numerous of researchers discuss about attitude, behavior, social norm, and intention. Yet it is rarely to see the research examined on the interrelationship between consumer attitude towards product and consumer purchasing intention. Therefore, this study tries to fulfill this gap. We assume that there positive relationship between the level of attitude towards the products and level of making purchase decision of consumers. This means that high attitude toward products of consumers addressed in high percentage of purchasing decision making by consumers. Based on the above statement, we therefore propose the seventh hypothesis that: H7: There is positive relationship between attitudes toward products and purchasing intention held by consumers. 88
8. 2.8. Interrelationship between COO and Consumer Ethnocentrism In over one decade ago, Shimp and Sharma (1987) constructed the 17-iterm CETSCALE to measure consumer ethnocentrism tendencies of buying imported products versus American products. They defined that consumer ethnocentrism represents to the beliefs held by consumers about the appropriateness in order to buy the products from foreign countries (Shimp& Sharma, 1987). Then, numerous scholars had conducted the research on the consumer ethnocentrism and COO effects fields, tried to observe the interrelationship between these two potential factors with linking the consumer ethnocentrism perception of products to the original country made products. This leads the re-searchers to fulfill the answers of the question “how can consumer ethnocentrism respond to the COO effects.” Originally, the theory of ethnocentric consumers has been employed to study the trend of the effects of COO (Mascarenhas&Kujawa, 1998). Consumer ethnocentrism express in high usage of country of origin, they usually think that purchase foreign product may hurt their homemade products. Moreover, consumer ethnocentrism may be strongly affected by country of origin of products (e.g., they always check made in label of product whether where the product come from in or- der to help them making the decision) and they always rate high quality to their own products (domestic products). Moreover, consumer ethnocentrisms demonstrate their preference to the domestic products rather than imported products. Owing to the concept of consumer ethnocentrism, highly ethnocentric consumers might refuse to buy foreign made products because they think this may hurt domestic products that cause to have unemployment of their own people, while the domestic economy might also drop down. By the way, nonethnocentric consumers may have different opinions from consumer ethnocentrism. They may buy foreign made products without consideration on the above problems as consumer ethnocentrisms do. Furthermore, they may give high value to the imported products. Bettmann (1988) suggested that non-ethnocentric consumers are more likely to evaluate imported products on the products’ own merits, while Huang et al. (2008) addressed that ethnocentric consumers view foreign products as unacceptable because of patriotic reason. Hence all the issues are not clearly explored, in order to clarify these issues, we therefore propose the hypothesize that: H8: When domestic and foreign products are provided as alternatives, high- ethnocentric consumers are influenced by their own country made perception, while low-ethnocentric consumers are not influenced by their own country made perception. 2.9. Interrelationship between Consumer Ethnocentrism and Attitude toward Products Based on the consumer ethnocentrism concept, ethnic consumers exhibit high preference on domestic product rather than foreign product. Some researchers have found that, there has been a positive bias toward domestic products and against bias toward foreign products (Negashima, 1977; Etzel& Walker, 1974; Krishnakumar, 1974; Nagashima, 1970; Bannister & Sunders, 1978; Kaynak&Cavusgil, 1983). However, some 89
9. studies found that consumers demonstrate their preference on imported products and dis- criminate against their domestic products (Krishnakumar, 1974; Kaynak&Cavusgil, 1983); this may be due to the poor country image of domestic product. According to the earlier research on the country of origin effect on Chinese consumers in a case of consumers in Guangzhou, Au and Sha (2003), found that respondents rated higher level of technological capability on products from Korea than Thailand and China. Moreover, respondents are more likely preferred Korean products and seemed to have least favorable on products from Thailand and their own country—China, which is opposite to consumer ethnocentrism concept. A large majority studies reinforce the conclusion that consumers from developed countries demonstrate a negative attitude towards products from developing countries (Smith, 1993). By the way, a product from least developed countries are tend to be least favorable if compare to product from developing countries. In conclusion, high ethnocentric consumers are more likely to have a positive evaluation on domestic products and demonstrate negative evaluation on imported products than nonethnic consumers. However, although consumer ethnocentrism exhibit a positive bias on domestic products but they may have a positively toward foreign product if this product is associated with high country image, highly technological or developed countries (for example made in Japan or US). Owing to the presented above, we therefore construct hypothesis that: H9: High-ethnocentric consumers will express high attitude towards domestic products, while low-ethnocentric consumers seem not to be influenced by their home country made perception. 1.10. Interrelationship between Consumer Ethnocentrism and Purchasing Intention From a theoretical perspective, consumer ethnocentrism concept is one of the fun- damental factors to better understand both consumers and commercial buyers’ behavior as well. This concept will contribute to clarify the consumers’ purchasing behavior how consumers decide to buy the products—domestic products versus foreign products. Based on this phenomenon, Orth and Firbrasová (2003) conducted the research by examining the behavior of Czech people whether how they decide on choosing domestic products versus foreign products and how individual evaluations are subject to biases. Orth and Firbrasová (2003) had employed 17-intem CETSCALE to predict Czech consumers’ evaluation on Czech made yoghurt. Therefore, this study attempts to build the similar hypothesis as follow: H10: High-ethnocentric consumers will demonstrate high purchasing intention on domestic products rather than on foreign made products, while low-ethnocentric consumers seem not to be influenced by their home country made perception. 3. Research design and methodology 3.1. Selection of Product and Countries Electronic products are highly concerned about the new technology, innovation, fashion, etc. by consumers; therefore, it should be selected. 90
10. Figure 3-1. The research framework and hypotheses of this study. This study was concerned about the attitudes of Taiwanese and Cambodian respondents about electronic products made in four countries in Asia namely, Taiwan, China, Thailand, and Japan. The primary reason for the inclusion of these four countries is the considerable presence of their products especially electronic products in Cambodian market. According to Cambodia currently does not have electronic products which could be used to compare with other countries, thus Cambodia is excluded. Taiwanese electronic products are commonly used in Taiwan; on the other hand, Japan is one of the major sources of Taiwan imports and there are many Japanese products including electronic products are popular in Taiwan, therefore Taiwan and Japan are very suitable being selected for this study. Although, Chinese and Thai electronic products are amounted not so many and not very popular in Taiwan, however, Taiwanese people know and under- stand very well about these two countries products which could be included in this study. 3.2. Questionnaire Design As we have discussed above, a 95-item survey questionnaire is developed to obtain the responses from students (Cambodia and Taiwan) about their opinions on various re- search variables. The questionnaire of this study is consisted of six constructs: “country of origin evaluation (3 items x 4),” “consumer ethnocentrism (7 items),” “perceived at- tributes and quality of electronic products (8 items x 4),” “perception of prices (4 items x 4),” “attitude toward product (4 items x 4),” and “purchasing intention (3 items x 4).” A preliminary version of this questionnaire is designed by the author and discussed with the thesis advisor. Two panel discussions with doctoral students and graduated EMBA student of National Cheng Kung University will be conducted to discuss appropriateness of the research questionnaire items inducing the approaches of asking questions. The questionnaire will be pre-tested through a pilot study by the EMBA and IMBA students of National Cheng Kung University. Questionnaire items will be revised based upon the results of the pilot study before being put into the final form. 91
11. 3.3. Sample Plan A sampling plan is developed to ensure that certain types of respondents will be included in this study. The study will be conducted at (1) Royal University of Law and Economics (RULE), National Institute of Management (NIM), Pannasastra University of Cambodia, and Build Bride University (BBU) in Cambodia by using Bachelor students, from fist year to fourth year students, and senior and junior MBA students as samples and (2) at National Cheng Kung University (NCKU) in Taiwan by using IMBA, EMBA, MBA, and Ph.D students as the samples. 4. Research analysis and results 4.1. Characteristics of Respondents Sample characteristics including six major items in this study: (1) gender, (2) marriage, (3) age, (4) education, (5) monthly income, and (6) occupation are addressed in Table 1, characteristics of Taiwanese respondents and Table 2, characteristic of Cambodian respondents. Table 2 shows that there were 53.2% of respondents are male, 46.8% are female and 70.2% of the respondents are single and 29.8% are married. Table 1 Characteristic of Taiwanese Respondents There were 74.6% of the respondents are more than 25 years old and 64.3% of the respondents possess a graduated school. More than half of the respondents earn less than 30,000 NT$ per month. About 52% of the respondents are students. Table 4-2 is shown that there were 60.7% of respondents are male, 39.3% are female and 82.9% of the 92
12. respondents are single and 16.4% are married. There were 51.4% of the respondents are mare than 25 years old, 86.4% of the respondents study at university and 12.1% possess a graduated school. More than half of the respondents earn less than USD100 per month. About 49% of the respondents are students. Table 2 Characteristic of Cambodian Respondents 4.2. Comparisons of Country of Origin Among Four Countries The results of the first construct, country of origin evaluation, indicated that Taiwanese and Cambodian respondents evaluated the highest scores on electronic products made in Japan: positive (mean = 6.35 and 6.19, respectively), favorable (mean = 6.31 and 6.09, respectively) and good (mean = 6.32 and 6.18, respectively), followed by Taiwanese electronic products (mean = 5.48 and 4.11, 5.33 and 3.98, and 5.52 and 4.15, respectively) in second. Thailand was rated in the third with mean scores 3.27 and 3.70, 3.16 and 3.69, and 3.22 and 3.64, respectively. Finally, China ranked last among the selected four countries with the mean = 2.91 and 3.58, 2.81 and 3.54, and 2.79 and 3.44, respectively. Independence sample t-test indicated that there are statically significant differences between Taiwanese and Cambodian respondents perception of the electronic products made in Taiwan, China, and Thailand at the 95% level of confidence. However, the results indicated that there are not statistically differences between Taiwanese and Cambodian respondents’ perception of the electronic products made in Japan. 93
13. The results demonstrate the inherent difficulty faced by Chinese and Thai electronic products in terms of home country made perceived by consumers to compete with the electronic products made in developed country such as Japan. Therefore, less developed and developing such as China and Thailand should keep innovating the products characteristic and increasing consumer perceptions through marketing activities. 4.3. Comparisons of Perceived Quality Among Four Countries One-way ANOVA and T-test were used to test how Taiwanese and Cambodian respondents perceive the attributes and quality of electronic products from four countries, Taiwan, China, Thailand, and Japan. The results of independent-sample T-test indicate that there are statistically different between Taiwanese and Cambodian respondents’ perception on all the scales of items of attributes and quality of electronic products made in Taiwan, at the significant level of 0.01. Taiwanese respondents perceive quality of their own products (Taiwanese electronic products) on all the scales items to be significantly higher than Cambodian respondents. Yet, Cambodian respondents perceive Chinese electronic products quality to be higher than Taiwanese respondents do on the seven of eight scales items, the differences at the significant level of 0.05, except a scale item of easy to operate which is not statistically different (t = -.19, p > .05). Cambodian respondents also perceive Thai electronic products attributes and quality to be higher than Taiwanese respondents do on the six of eight scales items, the differences at the significant level of 0.05, except the scales items of easy to operate and superior remote control which are not statistically different at the significant level of 0.05 (t = -1.62, p > .05; t = -1.17, p > .05, respectively). For the Japanese electronic products, Taiwanese and Cambodian respondents perceive to be not very different. At the significant level of 0.05, there are three of eight scales items were found to be statistically significant different (t = 3.01, p < .05; t = 3.05, p < .05; t = 2.29, p < .05). However, Taiwanese respondents perceive Japanese electronic products to be higher than Cambodian respondents do, in terms of design, innovative, and fashionable. On the other hand, One-way ANOVA indicate that there are statistically differences at the significant level of 0.05 among the four places, across all the eight scales items which measure the construct of products attributes and quality. The results indicate that Taiwanese and Cambodian respondents perceive attributes and quality of Japanese electronic products to significantly higher than those of Taiwan, China, and Thailand on all the scales items and Taiwan was rated in the second for all the scales items. From Taiwanese respondents’ perspective, Thailand was ranked in the third and China was ranked at last on all the scales items. However, Cambodian respondents perceive Chinese and Thai electronic products design to be the same (mean = 3.99). Other scales items including picture quality, sound quality, innovative, reliable, easy to operate, superior remote control, and fashionable seem to be not very different (Thailand was rated a little higher than China). This finding is very similar to the previous research, Han (1989) also suggested that developed countries including Germany and France are associated with high quality of products and newly developing countries including Russia, are associated with poor quality of products. In addition, we can conclude that the levels of economic 94
14. development of home producers play an important role in consumers evaluating quality of products. Therefore, these results leading us to conclude that H1 is partially supported. The results of independent-samples t-test analysis indicates that Taiwanese and Cambodian respondents had the means of 3.70 and 4.29, 5.09 and 4.74, 4.63 and 4.07, respectively, on electronic products made in Taiwan, China, and Thailand in terms of low prices, respectively, and the means shown the significantly differences at the p .05), on the prices “satisfaction” of electronic products made in China and Thailand (t = 1.02, p > .05; t=1.12, p > .05). 4.4. Comparisons of Perceived Price among Four Countries One-way ANOVA analysis indicate that there are statistically significant differences at the significant level of 0.05 among all the scales items of perception of prices perceived by Taiwanese and Cambodian respondents for the electronic products made in four selected countries. Both respondents perceive electronic products made in China as lower and cheaper prices (mean = 5.09, 4.74 prices are low; mean = 5.20, 4.11 prices are cheap) among electronic products made in four selected countries. Taiwanese respondents perceive their own electronic products as reasonable and satisfied prices (mean = 4.66 and 4.58, respectively), while Cambodian respondents placed it to Japanese electronic products (mean = 4.92 and 5.65, respectively). Han (1989) revealed that in product evaluation, the role of COO is similar to the role of price consumers use COO as inferences about the products quality and COO also affects consumers’ belief about products attributes. In addition, we can conclude that low-image home producers such as China and Thailand result in lower prices perceived by consumers. Therefore, Hypothesis 2 is validated. On the other hand, both respondents perceive electronic products made in China to be very low quality, low and cheap prices among four selected. In this experiment study case, pries do have positive relationship with perceived quality, there by supporting Hypothesis 3. The results of the independent-samples t-test analysis indicates that Taiwanese and Cambodian respondents had the means of 5.15 and 4.11, 2.67 and 3.36, 3.12 and 3.61, 95
15. respectively, on electronic products made in Taiwan, China, and Thailand in terms of high quality, respectively, and the means shown the significantly differences at the p < .05 level. For the scale item of a consumer’ attitude is favorable, Taiwanese and Cambodian respondents had the means of 5.27 and 4.12, 3.05 and 3.65, 3.36 and 3.83 on Taiwanese, Chinese, and Thai electronic products, respectively, and the means shown the significantly differences at the p < .05 level with t-value 9.35, -4.01, and -3.19, respectively. For the scale item of benefit, Taiwanese and Cambodian respondents had the means of 5.23 and 4.27, 3.34 and 3.70, 3.59 and 4.00 on Taiwanese, Chinese, and Thai electronic products, respectively, and the means shown the significantly differences at the p < .05 level. Finally, for the scale item asking respondents to rate their opinion on the seven point scales whether they like electronic products made in four selected countries, Taiwanese and Cambodian respondents had the means of 5.26 and 4.10, 2.81 and 3.39, and 3.17 and 3.53 on Taiwanese, Chinese, and Thai electronic products, respectively, and the means shown the significantly differences at the p < .05 level. How-ever, at the significant level of 0.05, there is no statistically difference between Taiwan-ese and Cambodian respondents’ attitudes toward all the scales items for electronic products made in Japan. 4.5. Comparisons of Attitude towards Product among Four Countries One-Way ANOVA indicate that there is statistically significant difference, at the significance of 0.05 level with F-value over 82.43, among all the scales items for the four selected countries, both respondents do pay more attention on the electronic products made in Japan where is considered as a high developed country. Japan is considered as a most preferable country among these four selected countries, respondents demonstrate high attitude towards Japanese electronic products with the mean over 5.85. Following by Taiwanese electronic products with the mean over 4.10, Thailand and China are ranked in the third and the fourth with the mean over 3.12 and 2.67, respectively. This finding is similar to the earlier research (Chen, 2004) illustrated that Taiwan-ese people were more likely preferred products from Japan than products from their own country and they preferred products from their own country than the products from Mainland China. More over, the previous finding also indicated that a national of less advanced technologies countries demonstrate their attitude towards the foreign (imported) products from advanced technologies countries (Au & Sha, 2003; Barnabas & Jonathan, 1999; Patterson & Tai, 199C1). There results suggested that the level of economic development of home producers do influence on consumers’ attitudes, there by supporting H4. 4.6. Comparisons of Purchase Intention among Four Countries The results of One-way ANOVA indicate that for all the scales items of the construct of purchasing intention, both respondents demonstrate their intention to purchase the electronic products made in four selected countries differently, at the significance level of 0.05 with F-value over 9.19. Taiwanese and Cambodian consumers demonstrate their purchasing intention to Chinese and Thai electronic products in different way. Taiwanese 96
16. respondents express very low intention to purchase electronic products made in China with mean of 2.86, 2.99, and 2.65 for all the three scales items of purchasing intention— consider to purchase, will purchase, and recommend others to purchase, respectively, and Thailand is rated in the third. On the other hand, Cambodian respondents demonstrate lowest intention to purchase electronic products made in Thailand and China is placed in the third. There maybe due to the different perspectives between Taiwanese and Cambodian respondents on China and Thailand. Taiwanese respondents give high image on Thailand over China, while Cambodian respondents do not think much difference images between China and Thailand. Or may be due to the politic problems between Taiwan and China, and depute between Cambodia and Thailand, which lead them to response in different ways. However, Taiwanese and Cambodian respondents demonstrate high intention to purchase electronic products made in Japan, then following by Taiwan which is one Taiwan is one of the four East Asia Tigers with a mean over 4.05. This indicates that country of origin does play an important role in the process of consumer purchasing decision. Consumers would prefer to purchase products made in developed countries rather than developing or less developed countries because consumers believe that developed countries can produce products with a good quality. Both Taiwanese and Cambodian respondents rated high products attributes and qualities on electronic products made in Japan and the second was Taiwan, which we can conclude that a consumer demonstrates high intention to buy the products that s/he considering as high products attributes and qualities. There-fore, Hypothesis 5 is validated. Both respondents perceive the products made in Japan to be high attributes and qualities, and electronic products made in Taiwan to be the second rank among the four selected countries. They also demonstrate higher attitudes and purchasing intention towards electronic products made in Japan, and then following by Taiwan. These results show that when the consumers perceive high quality of products they will also demonstrate high attitude towards those products, there by supporting H6. However, for the case of Cambodian respondents, even they demonstrate their attitudes toward electronic products from Thailand to be somewhat higher than those of China, yet their purchasing intention are lower than those of China. Therefore, when consumers demonstrate high attitude towards products, they might not always express high purchasing intention to those products, consequently Hypothesis 7 is not all supported. 4.7. Cluster and Paired Sample t-test To verify Hypotheses 8, 9, and 10, Cluster analysis is employed to cluster high and low ethnocentric consumers and paired sample t-test to test how Taiwanese respondents perceive the electronic products made in four selected countries, in terms of country of origin perception, products attributes and qualities, and purchasing intention. Each pair formed with Taiwan and one other remain three—China, Thailand, and Japan, this is to measure whether high and low ethnocentric consumers’ opinion on foreign made products. Taiwan is selected as the basis for pair comparison because we want to test high and low ethnocentric consumers by using Taiwanese respondents’ opinion on their own products compare to imported products whether any significant difference between them. How high 97
17. and low ethnocentric consumers respond to the high and low image foreign made products. As shown in Table 4-12, all three pair comparisons (Taiwan vs. China, Taiwan vs. Thailand, and Taiwan vs. Japan) show differences at the significant level of 0.001, across all the three constructs except the results of high-ethnocentric consumers’ purchasing intention on Taiwanese and Japanese electronic products which is significant at the significant level of 0.05. The results show that high-ethnocentric consumers perceive the electronic products made in Taiwan to be significant higher than those of China and Thailand (MCOOCH = 3.00 MCOOTH = 3.42; t = 14.46, p MCOOJP = 6.09, t = - 5.46, p MCOOTH = 3.05; t = 21.42, p MCOOJP = 6.53, t = -10.85, p MCOOTH = 5.94; t = 12.35, p MCOOTH = 3.23; t = 14.63, p MCOOJP = 6.46, t = -5.94, p MCOOJP = 6.11, t = -9.57, p PAK > PAT). Diversely, high ethnocentrism consumers demonstrated their attitude toward Korean products to be the most favorable compare to Japanese and Taiwanese products (PAJ PAT). These maybe due to the culture tied between Taiwan and Japan, which lead Taiwanese respondents both high and low ethnocentrism perceiving Japanese electronic products to be higher over their own homemade electronic products. Therefore, we can conclude that the results do not support Hypotheses, 8, 9, and 10. 98
18. 5. Conclusions and suggestions 5.1. Research Conclusions Purposes of this study are: (1) to examine how country of origin evaluations are influenced on Taiwanese and Cambodian respondents’ attitudes and purchasing intention to the electronic products made in four selected countries: Taiwan, China, Thailand, and Japan. (2) How respondents perceive the quality of electronic products from different levels of economic development of home producers. (3) To fully understand consumer ethnocentrism impact on the country of origin effect and products (electronic products) evaluation, and defining the consumer behavior responding to their national products vs. imported products. (4) To address how country of origin effect on consumers’ perception of prices and the relationship between prices and products qualities. (5) To compare the difference of consumers’ buying behavior between two countries and discuss how cultural differences—Cambodian and Taiwanese culture—addressed in the country of origin effect. It is suggested that people with different culture background may elicit level of country of origin and results in the differences of consumer attitude toward products and purchasing intention. The hypotheses were tested with the results as shown in Table 2. Table 2. Hypotheses and the Results of Empirical Tests As the results showed that both Taiwanese and Cambodian respondents evaluate the electronic products made in Japan as the most favored country of origin and they 99
19. demonstrate high attitude and intention to purchase Japanese electronic products. Both respondents also evaluate Japan as a home producing high quality of electronic products including good design, high picture and sound quality, innovative, reliable, easy to operate, supper remote control, and fashionable among these four selected countries. Followed by Taiwan, where is evaluated as the second favored country of origin, Thailand and China are evaluated as the third and the fourth, respectively. To Cambodian respondents, Japanese electronic products are perceived as reasonable and satisfied prices. On the other hand, to Taiwanese respondents, Taiwanese electronic products are perceived as reason- able and satisfied prices. However, both respondents perceive Chinese electronic products as somewhat lower and cheaper prices, while electronic products made in Thailand are getting stuck in the middle and do not have clear image on respondents’ mind in term of prices perception. This study also attempt to investigate the consumer ethnocentrism, Taiwanese respondents were employed. The results found that both high and low ethno- centrism perceived their own electronic products to be higher than those of China and Thailand. However, both high and low ethnocentric consumers perceived Japanese electronic products to be somewhat higher than their own homemade electronic products. The major reasons might due to (1) the culture tied between Taiwan and Japan and (2) this study employs general electronic products, which are not specific on the brand name that cause respondents rely more on the country of origin (Schaefer, 1995). 5.2. Research Suggestions and Discussions According to the research results, this study suggests that poor image of country of origin such as China and Thailand can be improved by developing marketing strategies such as brand, price, promotion, advertising. A potential marker can develop a strong marketing strategy to attract or push up consumers’ attitude toward the products, for ex- ample, marketing manager should develop a strong advertising to enforce consumer to get familiar or to know the products. Papadopolous et al. (1990) demonstrated that consumers in Canada, the United State (US), Great Britain, Greece, and Hungary are more likely to purchase the Japanese’ products rather than the similar products made in their home country. All these results showed that Japanese products achieved globally high consumer preferences via competent and aggressive advertising. Therefore, this study suggests that strongly marketing strategies such as building a good brand name for product, offer in reasonable price, provide strong warranty, and aggressive advertising can offset the negative country of origin of product. Therefore, producers in both developing and less developed countries should pay attention on marketing strategy in order to offset the low country images of the products. These mean that producers could try to develop the quality of products with using the effectiveness at works to decrease the prices in other to absorb the customers. Thorelli, et al. (1989) stated that product warranty can moderate the country of origin effect by compensating the poor country image in consumer product evaluation. As a role of strong brand name, a negative country of origin of a product can be offset by offering a high warranty that was defined as a good marketing strategy especially for electronic products or video cassette recorders (Ahmed &d’Astous, 1995). 100
20. According to the empirical results of this study found that, both Taiwanese and Cambodian consumers did take products quality into their account before making the de- cision of buying. Generally, in the literature agree that there has a high positive relation- ship between price and the perceived quality of products or services (Motes, 1987). Many investigators in this field such as Stephen, et al. (1985); Hugstad and Durr (1986); and Kraft and Chung (1992) found that the perception of quality play an important role in product evaluation and decision making of consumers. Usually, consumers use the degree of economy of home countries produced products to judge the quality of product. There fore, Lim and Darley (1997) conducted their research in the area of country of origin by starting with a question “Why do people buy ‘made in there’ and not ‘made in here’?” In conclusion, they suggested that the producers in less developed country should try to innovate the advertising of their products by emphasizing on the warranty and/or pricing strategies in order to compensate the negative of country of origin. Similar to Lim and Darley (1997)’s suggestion, Paivio (1971), Shepard (1978), and Mitchell and Olson (1981) indicated that product can be improved its image and increase consumers’ purchase preference via advertising strategies. A parallel relationship has been reported between advertising influence, brand attitude, and consumer preference. Japan is a good example, after World War II, Japan’s economy has dramatically grown up and their products started to stand in the high-ranking product categories in the world market. Then made in Japan label has become a sign of good quality product in the global marketplace. In the past studies of multi-cue products experiment, they found that consumers did use country of origin, brand, and price on their products judgment. Among these three factors, country of origin was found as a most significant factor effecting on consumer’s assessment of product quality (Wall, et al., 1991). With the same result, Okechuku and Onyemah (1999) also found that COO did have a most significant sign effect on consumer’s preference in Nigerian than price and other factors—including reliability and safety. Hong and Wyer (1989) also addressed that country of origin had its own symbolic and emotional meaning and played an important role along with quality and reliability in shaping consumers’ attitudes toward products. REFERENCES Adina, C., Gabriela, C., & Roxana-Denisa, S. (2015). Country-of-Origin Effects on Perceived Brand Positioning. Procedia Economics and Finance, 23, 422-427. Bayraktar, A.(2015). The Effect Of Macro And Micro Country Image On Consumers’ Quality Perceptions: Evidence From A Developed And A Developing Country. American Journal of Business Research. 8(1). Berry, C., Mukherjee, A., Burton, C., &Howlett, E. (2015). A COOL Effect: The Direct and Indirect Impact of Country-of-Origin Disclosures on Purchase Intentions for Retail Food Products. Journal of Retailing,91(3), 533–542. Cannière, M.H.De., Pelsmacker, P.De.,&Geuens, M. (2010). Relationship Quality and Purchase Intention and Behavior: The Moderating Impact of Relationship Strength. Journal of Business and Psychology, 25(1), 87-98. 101
21. Herbst, K.C., Leary, M.R.,& Collin, P.M.L. (2012). Social-evaluative influences moderate the relationship between price and perceived quality,Social Influence - Taylor and Francis Group, 54-69. Hoffmann, S.,Ma, R., &Smirnova, M.(2014). Development and Validation of a Cross- Nationally Stable Scale of Consumer Animosity.Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice,19(2), 235-252. Huang, Y. A., Phau,I., Lin, C.,Chung, H. J., &Lin, K. H. C.(2008). Allocentrism and Consumer Ethnocentrism: The effects of Social Identity on Purchase Intention.Social Behavior and Personality, 36(8), 1097-1109. Lloyd, A.E., Chan, R.Y.K., Yip, L.S.C., & Chan, A. (2014). Time buying and time saving: effects on service convenience and the shopping experience at the mall. Journal of Services Marketing,28(1), 36-49. Frank, B., Torrico, B.H., Enkawa, T., Schvaneveldt, S.J. (2014). Affect versus Cognition in the Chain from Perceived Quality to Customer Loyalty: The Roles of Product Beliefs and Experience. Journal of Retailing,90(4), 567–586. Jung H.B., & Yoon, S.H. (2012).Country of origin factors influencing US consumers' perceived price for multinational products.Journal of Consumer Marketing,29(6), 445- 454. Shawn, T., Thelen, E. D., Honeycutt, J. R., & Thomas, P. M. (2014). Services offshoringDoes perceived service quality affect country-of-service origin preference? Managing Service Quality: An International Journal, 20(3),196-212. Shin, Y.H.,&Hancer, M. (2015). The role of attitude, subjective norm, perceived behavioral control, and moral norm in the intention to purchase local food products. Journal of Foodservice Business Research,19(4), 338-351. Ahmed, S. A., &d’Astous, A. (1995). L’influence du pays d’origine sur l’évaluation de produitssuscitantdifférentsniveauxd’implication: Uneapproche multi-attributs. Revue Canadienne des Sciences de l’Administration, 10(1), 48-59. Au, A. K. M., & Sha, Z. Q. (2003). Location and sourcing impacts on the country of origin effects on Chinese consumers: A case in Guangzhu. Journal of International Marketing and Marketing Research, 28(2), 69. Bannister, J. P., & Saunders, J. A. (1978). UK consumers’ attitudes towards imports: The measurement of national stereotype image. European Journal of Marketing, 12(8), 562-570. Barnabas, A. A., & Jonathan, U. E. (1999). Attitudes of developing countries towards “country-of-origin” products in an Era of multiple brands. Journal of International Consumer Marketing, 11(4), 97-116. Baughn, C. C., &Yaprak, A. (1993). Mapping country of origin research: Recent developments and emerging avenues. In N. Papadopoulos & L. Heslop (Eds.), Product- Country Images: Impact and Role in International Marketing.International Business Press, 89-116. Chéron, E., &Propeck, J. (1997). The effects of the country of origin on the evaluation of products: A state of the art review and research propositions. IAE de Paris. Crawford, J. C., & James R. L. (1993). Environmental influences on country of origin bias. In N. Papadopoulos & L. A. Heslop, editors, Product-Country Image: Impact and Role 102
22. in International Marketing. Binghamton, NY: International Business Press, 341-375. Ettenson, R. (1993). Brand names and country-of-origin effects in emerging market economies of Russia, Poland, and Hungary. International Marketing Review, 10(5), 14- 36. Ettenson, R., Gaeth, G., & Wagner, J. (1988). Evaluating the effect of country-of-origin and the 'made in USA' campaign: A conjoint approach. Journal of Retailing, 64(1), 85- 100. Etzel, M. J., & Walker, B. J. (1974). Effects of alternative follow-up procedures on mail survey response rates. Journal of Applied Psychology, 59, 219-220. Han, C. M. (1989). Country image: Halo or summary construct? Journal of Marketing Research, 26(2), 222-229. Hester, S. B., & Yuen, M. (1986). The influence of country-of-origin on consumer attitude and buying behavior in the United States and Canada. In Melanie, W. and Paul, A. (Eds.) Advances in Consumer Research, 14, Provo, Utah: Association for Consumer Research, 538-542. Hong, S. T., &Wyer, R. S. (1989). Effects of country-of-origin and product-attribute information on product evaluation: An information processing perspective. Journal of Consumer Research, 16(2), 175-187. Hugstad, P. S., &Durr, M. (1986). A study of country of manufacturer impact on consumer Perceptions. In Naresh, M. and Hawes, J. (Eds.) Developments in Marketing Science, 9, Coral Gable, Florida: Academy of Marketing Science, 115-119. Johansson, J.K. (1989). Determinants and effects of the use of “Made in” labels. International Marketing Review, 6(1), 47-58. Kaynak, E., &Cavusgil, S. T. (1983). Consumer attitudes toward products of foreign origin: Do they vary across product classes? International Journal of Advertising, 2, 147-157. Kraft, F. B., & Chung, K. H. (1992). Korean importer perceptions of US and Japanese industrial goods exporters. International Marketing Review, 9(2), 59-73. Krishnakumar, P. (1974). An exploratory study of the influence of country of origin on the product images of persons from selected countries. Ph.D. dissertation, The University of Florida. Lim, J. S., & Darley, W. K. (1997). An assessment of demand Artefacts in country-of- origin studies using three alternative approaches. International Marketing Review, 14(4), 201-217. Mascarenhas, O. A. J., &Kujawa, D. (1998). American consumer attitude toward foreign investments and their products. Multinational Business Review, 6, 1-9. Mitchell, A. A., & Olson, J. C. (1981). Are product attribute beliefs the only mediator of advertising effects on brand attitude? Journal of Marketing Research, 18(3), 318-332. Moon, B. J. (2004). Effects of consumer ethnocentrism and product knowledge on consumer’ utilization of country of origin information. Advance in Consumer Research, 31, 667-673. Motes, W. H. (1987). Replication of pricing effects on brand choice behavior. European Journal of Marketing, 21(1), 14-25. 103
23. Nagashima, A. (1970). A comparison of Japanese and US attitudes toward foreign products. Journal of Marketing, 34(1), 68-74. Obermiller, C., & Spangenberg, E. (1989). Exploring the effect of country of origin labels: An information processing framework. Advances in Consumer Research, 16, 454-459. Okechuku, C., &Onyemah, V. (1999). Nigerian consumer attitude toward foreign and domestic products. Journal of International Business Studies, 30(3), 611-622. Orth, U.R., &Firbasová, U.Z. (2003). The role of consumer ethnocentrism in food product evaluation. Agribusiness, 19(2), 137-153. Paivio, A. (1971). Imagery and verbal processes. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston. Patterson, P., & Tai, S. K. (1991). Consumer perceptions of country of origin in the Australian apparel industry. Marketing Bulletin, 2, 31-40. Schaefer, A. (1995). Consumer knowledge and country of origin effects. European Journal of Marketing, 31(1), 56-69. Shepard, R. N. (1978). The mental image. American Psychologist, 33(2), 125-137. Shimp, T. A., & Sharma, S. (1987). Consumer ethnocentrism: Construction and validation of the CETSCALE. Journal of Marketing Research, 24(3), 280-289. Stephen, K. T., Fox, H. W., & Leonard, M. J. (1985). A comparison of preferences concerning the purchase of domestics products versus imports: United States and Jamaica. In Narush, K. M. (Ed.) Development in Marketing Science, 8, Coral Gables, Florida: Academy of Marketing Science, 100-104. Stiving, M. (2000). Price-endings when prices signal quality. Management Science, 46(12), 1617. Thorelli, H.B., Lim, J.S., & Ye, J. (1989). Relative importance of country-of-origin, warranty on retail store image on product evaluations. International Marketing Review, 6(1), 35-46. Wall, M., John, L., &Heslop, L. A. (1991). Impact of country of origin cues on consumer judgments in multi-cue situation: A covariance analysis. Journal of Academy of Marketing Science, 19(2), 105-113. Wang, C. K., & Lamb, C. (1983). The impact of selected environmental forces upon consumers’ willingness to buy foreign product. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 11, 71-84. Yaprak, A., &Baughn, C. (1991). The country of origin effects in cross-national consumer behaviour: emerging research avenues. Proceedings of the Fifth Bi-Annual World Marketing Congress of the Academy of Marketing Science, 263-269. 104