The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at www.emeraldinsight.com/0265-1335.

htm

Antecedents, moderators and dimensions of country-of-origin evaluations

Sadrudin A. Ahmed
Faculty of Administration, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Canada, and

Country-of-origin evaluations

75
Received August 2006 Revised June 2007 Accepted July 2007

Alain dAstous
HEC Montreal, Montreal, Canada
Abstract
Purpose The purpose of this paper is to provide an in-depth examination of country-of-origin (COO) perceptions of consumers in a multinational setting. It shows how explanatory factors like demographics, familiarity with a countrys products, purchase behaviour and psychological variables jointly work to explain consumers COO perceptions. Design/methodology/approach This is a quantitative study using a drop-off and pick-up survey among three samples of consumers in Canada, Morocco and Taiwan. The nal sample size was comprised of 506 male consumers. The data were analyzed using factor analysis to group countries of origin and analyses of variance to relate COO perceptions to the explanatory variables. Findings The familiarity with products made in a country was the strongest predictor of country perceptions, followed by nationality and the manufacturing process and product complexity dimensions of country evaluation. Canadians had the highest propensity to distinguish between countries of origin on the basis of product technological complexity and manufacturing dimensions and Moroccans the least. Taiwanese appeared to show animosity towards China. Research limitations/implications The study used an only-male sample from a limited number of countries. Future research should seek to develop a multi-dimensional scale for the familiarity construct. They should also explore the concept of consumer capacity to distinguish between COOs. Cross-national studies using cognitive style scales should be carried out. A qualitative examination of Taiwaneses COO perceptions is also recommended. Practical implications It seems important to increase consumers familiarity with a COO and its products to improve its overall perception. Products made in Latin American countries have the lowest level of familiarity in general. Thus, increasing familiarity with their products is particularly important to achieve export success. Originality/value This study contributes to the marketing and international business literatures and provides insights to international marketers by bringing valuable information that can help make decisions as to where to manufacture and how to promote global products. It provides guidance as to what types of nations are likely to require multi-dimensional information about countries of origin. Keywords Country of origin, Consumer behaviour, International marketing, Canada, Morocco, Taiwan Paper type Research paper

Introduction A large body of research has provided strong empirical evidence of country-of-origin (COO) effects on product evaluations (Pharr, 2006). COO is one of the most widely
The authors would like to thank Christian Champagne, Jelloul Eljabri and Jean Brice Yoou for their help in collecting the data for this study.

International Marketing Review Vol. 25 No. 1, 2008 pp. 75-106 q Emerald Group Publishing Limited 0265-1335 DOI 10.1108/02651330810851890

IMR 25,1

76

researched concepts in marketing and consumer behavior, yielding over 700 published studies to date (Papadopoulos and Heslop, 2003). From a marketing point of view, global companies that are operating in highly competitive domestic and foreign markets need to understand consumers perceptions and evaluations of foreign-made products. Understanding global consumer behavior is the rst step of corporate learning about how to compete in the world market (Craig and Douglas, 1996). Questions such as whether to cluster countries based on the similarity of target consumer groups within each country or to target different segments in different countries with the same product (Hassan et al., 2003) need to get appropriate answers. This is why international marketing academics have shown a great deal of interest in identifying the variables that affect consumers evaluation of domestic and foreign products. Within this context, instead of simply considering COO information as a single cue, recent studies have attempted to compare the relative salience of manufacturing dimensions such as the country of assembly (COA) and the country of design (COD) on product evaluations (Insch and McBride, 2004) and additionally, to understand how this salience may vary across such product dimension as the level of technological complexity (e.g. low versus high) (Ahmed et al., 2002a, b). Other authors have attempted to delineate the antecedents and moderators of COO image (Balabanis and Diamantopoulos, 2004; Hsieh et al., 2004; Kucukemiroglu et al., 2005; Roth, 1995; Samiee et al., 2005). Although some research has linked the evaluation of countries of origin to antecedents and moderators such as the familiarity with a country, demographic characteristics, shopping behaviour, attitudes and human values (Balabanis et al., 2002; Hsieh et al., 2004; Kucukemiroglu et al., 2005; Samiee et al., 2005; Wall et al., 1991), or manufacturing dimensions such as COD and COA (Insch and McBride, 2004) across products of varying degree of complexity, little is known about how these variables jointly work in a multinational setting. Understanding how country evaluations are related to the product and manufacturing dimensions of a COO and antecedents such as demographics, and personal traits, and moderators such as product familiarity and shopping behaviour across a variety of nations may help international marketing researchers to better understand the contributing factors underlying the formation of COO evaluations and how these vary across nations. It may also help to uncover gaps in our knowledge of the COO concept and suggest further research avenues to ll these gaps. The aim of this research is to examine the COO perceptions of consumers in the context of increasing global trade ows. Our interest centres on an in-depth examination of consumers from Canada, Taiwan and Morocco (three culturally and economically diverse countries) with regards to their perceptions of highly industrialized countries (HIC) and newly industrialized countries (NIC) in the Americas, Europe and Asia, varying both as sources of technologically simple (TS) and technologically complex (TC) products and as CODs and COAs. We are particularly interested in examining the effect of nationality on these perceptions. This research should be particularly relevant for learning about cross-national differences in the evaluations of products originating from diverse countries along their design and assembly dimensions, taking into account their degree of technological complexity. International marketing researchers need answers to such questions as: What are the cross-national differences in the perceptions of products made in NICs and in HICs?

Do these differences in perception depend on the technological complexity of products? Do consumers view design and assembly functions differently? Can these systematic variations in perception across nations be attributed to differences in the cultural heritage and/or level of economic development of a country? A number of studies have looked at COOs evaluative dimensions (Chao, 2001; Thakor and Lavak, 2003) or its demographic and socio-psychological antecedents and moderators (Balabanis and Diamantopoulos, 2004; Balabanis et al., 2002; Hsieh et al., 2004; Kucukemiroglu et al., 2005; Wall et al., 1991), but these studies were mostly conducted in a single-country context. There does not seem to be an in-depth multi-country study directly linking COO evaluations with their manufacturing and product dimensions, antecedents and moderators. Although there is a growing recognition that COO is a multidimensional concept varying across dimensions such as manufacturing process and technology (Pharr, 2006), so far there has been little attempt to understand how a countrys culture and economic development impact on product/country perceptions along these dimensions. To this end, in this study, COD and COA consumer perceptions of durable products varying in technological complexity, collected in three culturally and economically diverse countries, namely, Canada, Taiwan and Morocco, are examined along with their antecedents and moderators. The paper reviews the COO literature relevant to fullling the objectives of this study, derives the research propositions that guided the study design and provides a research framework and a description of the research methodology. This is followed by a discussion of the empirical results, conclusions and managerial and public policy implications. In the paragraphs below, some background to the study is offered through a discussion of the three data collection sites, namely, Canada, Taiwan and Morocco. Following this, the literature dealing with COO effects on consumer product evaluations is briey reviewed and research propositions based on this literature are presented. The research propositions are put forward with a view to provide a research structure and build a conceptual framework. Data collection sites The data collection sites were chosen with the objective of gathering data from countries with a large variance in the level of per capita income, geographical location and socio-cultural background. In the following section, a brief description of each site is presented, based on CIA (2007). The per capita GNP gures are stated in $US purchasing power parity. An afuent, high-tech industrial society, Canada today closely resembles the USA in its market-oriented economic system, pattern of production and high standards of living. With a population of 33 million, its GNP per capita is $35,500. The median age of the Canadian population is 38 and the average population growth of 0.9 per cent is largely attributable to immigration. Canadas dominant religion is Christianity (60 per cent Catholic and 40 per cent Protestant) (Statistics Canada, 2001). The proportion of Catholics in the French speaking province of Quebec is about 80 per cent. Taiwan has a dynamic capitalist economy. Largely urban-based, the Taiwanese population is 23 million with an annual growth rate of 0.65 per cent and a median age of 33.6 years. The per capita GNP is $25,300. Buddhism and Confucianism, the two main religions, have had a profound and pervasive inuence on the Taiwanese culture.

Country-of-origin evaluations

77

IMR 25,1

78

Morocco is a fast-growing, economically-emerging North-African country located only 12 kilometers from Europe, with a population of 33 million and a per capita income of $4,200. With a young and rapidly growing population, it possesses a small but very wealthy middle class. With a median age of 23.3 years, its population is growing at a rate of 1.6 per cent. Strong cultural and economic ties are maintained with France and the European Union and the French language is widely used by the middle class and in the countrys educational institutions and commerce. Islam is the prevailing religion in Morocco and Arabic is the most common language. While Morocco is located in Africa, it belongs in fact to the Arab World. The three countries also differ with respect to their fundamental cultural orientations (Hofstede, 2001). Among the three groups, Canadians are the most individualistic, least masculine, least prone to uncertainty avoidance, and least likely to maintain power distance. Moroccans, on the other hand, score low on individualism, maintain the highest degree of power distance and are more prone to uncertainty avoidance and most masculine than Canadians. Taiwanese fall between Canadians and Moroccans in terms of uncertainty avoidance, power distance and masculinity and like Moroccans, score low on individualism. Several studies have shown the relevance of Hofstedes (2001) cultural value framework for understanding national differences in consumer behaviour. Hsieh et al. (2004) have used Hofstedes (2001) four value system scales to explain cross-national differences in product advertising image. These value scales have also been found to be related to country differences in tipping behavior (Lynn et al., 1993), product usage (de Mooij, 2000), consumer innovativeness (Steenkamp et al., 1999), perceived good-life image (Zinkhan and Prenshaw, 1994), information search (dAstous et al., 2005) and brand image (Kale, 1995). Literature review Stereotyping is one psychological process that is commonly used to explain how consumers react to COO information (Maheswaran, 1994; Tse and Gorn, 1993). Stereotypes are used as standards to evaluate products from foreign countries affecting the cognitive processing of other product-related cues. Since, country stereotypes may be negative or positive, the management of a products national image is therefore an important element in the strategic marketing decision-making process of international rms (Al-Sulaiti and Baker, 1998). A great number of studies have demonstrated that a products COO affects different aspects of consumer evaluation and choice behaviour. As an extrinsic attribute, COO has an inuence on consumers perceptions of a products quality (Ahmed et al., 2002a, b; Kaynak et al., 2000) and of its attributes (Kim and Pysarchik, 2000; Leonidou et al., 1999), on consumer attitudes towards a product (Lee and Ganesh, 1999), on their perception of risk (Johansson, 1989) and the perceived value of that product (Ahmed and dAstous, 1996; dAstous and Ahmed, 1999). COO has also been shown to inuence consumer preferences (Knight and Calantone, 2000) and purchase intentions (Kim and Pysarchik, 2000). In addition, COO effects have been observed with products in general (Kaynak et al., 2000; Leonidou et al., 1999) as well as with specic product categories (Kim and Pysarchik, 2000; Teas and Agarwal, 2000) and both as regards the behaviour of individual consumers and that of organizational buyers (Ahmed and dAstous, 1995). Recent research (Laroche et al., 2005; Pereira et al., 2005) using structural equation modelling contends that COO evaluations are part of a larger COO image

construct consisting of cognitive, affective and conative components. This research suggests that COO is a complex construct, perhaps much more complex than originally conceived and encompasses symbolic and emotional components, as well as cognitions. COO has been very extensively studied and is now a mature research topic (Papadopoulos and Heslop, 2003). Detailed literature reviews on this topic have been provided by Samiee (1994), Peterson and Jolibert (1995), Al-Sulaiti and Baker (1998), Chao (1998), Verlegh and Steenkamp (1999), Kaynak and Kara (2002) and Pharr (2006). Therefore, in what follows, the discussion of the COO literature will be limited to issues directly related to the objectives of this study. COO effects on product evaluations vary by product category (Papadopoulos and Heslop, 1993; Roth and Romeo, 1992). The economic, social and cultural systems of countries as well as their relative stage of economic development are pieces of information which serve to position countries hierarchically in consumers mind (Lin and Sternquist, 1994). For example, although Iran, a NIC, is generally perceived negatively as a COO, woollen rugs made in this country are perceived quite favourably. The global nature of businesses, the presence of multinational corporations and the intertwined nature of commercial transactions complicate the assessment of COO effects on product evaluations. Thus, a distinction between COD and COA is critical as rms attempt to become global suppliers via central manufacturing, using standardized marketing programs that include global brands and universal appeals for their products. Although COA and COD constitute factual information, consumer perceptions are the crucial elements (Chao, 1998; dAstous and Ahmed, 1995; Samiee, 1994). These perceptions are inuenced by such factors as product complexity (Samiee, 1994), the level of involvement in a product class (Maheswaran, 1994), the familiarity with a COO (Zhang, 1996), as well as demographic and socio-psychological characteristics (Kucukemiroglu et al., 2005). Development of research propositions The literature indicates that a COO image depends on the perception of the level of economic development of the country (Roth and Romeo, 1992). The higher the level of industrialization of a country, the more favourable is the perception of the quality of its workers (Li and Monroe, 1992), which in turn is reected in the perceived quality of its products (Iyer and Kalita, 1997). However, as mentioned above, COO is not a unidimensional concept (Chao, 1998; Thakor and Lavak, 2003). In an increasingly global economy, products may be designed in one country and assembled in another. Thus, COD and COA are two important dimensions in the perception of COO. Recent COO studies have found that consumers do indeed distinguish between COD and COA and take both types of information into account when making product evaluations (see, e.g. Ahmed and dAstous, 2002 in the Philippines and in Thailand; Chao,1993 in the USA; Insch and McBride, 2004 in Mexico; Thakor and Lavak, 2003 in Canada). It has also been found that NICs are less negatively evaluated as COAs than as CODs (Ahmed and dAstous, 2007; dAstous and Ahmed, 1995): P1a. HICs are more favourably perceived than NICs with respect to their product design and assembly capabilities. P1b. A NIC is less negatively evaluated as a COA than as a COD.

Country-of-origin evaluations

79

IMR 25,1

80

Consumers usually place products into mental categories and make use of this organized prior knowledge to evaluate them (Meyers-Levy and Tybout, 1989). Johansson (1989) states that when production technology is non-standardized, there should be some differences in country manufacturing skills and thus, COO effects should be more pronounced. Therefore, the inuence of the perceived quality of a countrys workers on COO perceptions (Li and Monroe, 1992) should be greater as products get more TC: P2. A NIC is less favourably evaluated as a COO for TC products than it is for TS products.

Many studies have found that COO perceptions vary across countries. Kaynak et al. (2000) have shown that COO evaluations in a developing country differ from those in developed countries. Koreans have been found to be more prejudiced than Americans against less favourably evaluated countries (Nebenzahl and Jaffe, 1996). Jaffe and Martinez (1995) report that Mexicans are literally obsessed with USA and Japanese products. Consumers from developing countries have been shown to have more stereotyped perceptions (Okechuku and Onyemah, 1966). Klein et al. (1998) found that Chinese consumers demonstrated animosity towards Japanese products because of cruelties committed by the Japanese during their occupation of China. These numerous ndings, based on cross-national differences in the level of economic development, culture, ethnocentrism and animosity, lead to the following general proposition: P3a. COO perceptions vary across nations. Balabanis et al. (2001) have discussed the role of ethnocentrism in global product evaluations. Research on consumer ethnocentrism and national loyalty indicates that attitudes are affected by ones sense of loyalty to the nation and to other macro-oriented groupings (Bruning, 1997). Studies have shown that consumers tend to perceive their countrys products more favourably than do consumers in different countries (Balabanis and Diamantopoulos, 2004; Elliott and Cameron, 1994; Hsieh et al., 2004). Therefore: P3b. Country residents evaluate their countrys products more favourably than non-residents. Cultures can be broadly classied as either collectivist or individualist (Hofstede, 2001). An individualist culture is representative of a loosely knit society in which people take care of themselves and their families, whereas a collectivist culture represents a tightly knit society in which the group takes care of the people and the people are loyal to the group. In such cultures, consumer behavior is dictated by group norms and individuals tend to sacrice their own needs and desires if this is perceived as beneting the group (Gurhan-Canli and Maheswaran, 2000b). For example, in a study involving American and Japanese consumers, Gurhan-Canli and Maheswaran (2000a) found that the cultural value of individualism/collectivism signicantly explains COO perceptions. Similar ndings were reported by Suh and Kwan (2002) with American and South Korean respondents. As discussed earlier, Canadians are much more individualistic than Moroccans and Taiwanese. Additionally, Hall (1977) states that Arabs have a very high-context culture, Americans a very low-context culture and that East Asians are in between these two groups.

Thompson and Hamilton (2006) point out the role of the information processing mode on how information is absorbed. Comparison and contrasts appear to be more effective among consumers who use an analytic mode rather than an imagery mode. Ng and Houston (2006) have found that individuals with an independent self-view focus on the traits of an object whereas those characterized by an interdependent self-view place more emphasis on the contextual factors surrounding an object. On the basis of the size of the economy and per capita income, Canadians are most likely to be exposed to a large number of TS and complex products and made aware of the importance of both COD and COA in making product quality evaluations of TC and TS products. For instance, Insch and McBride (2004) found that COD was less important in Mexico than in the USA when evaluating athletic shoes, mountain bikes and televisions. Therefore, it is proposed that: P3c. Canadians product/country evaluations are most likely to differ based on manufacturing process (i.e. COD versus COA) and product technological complexity (i.e. simple versus complex), followed by those of Taiwanese and those of Moroccans, in that order. There are differences in the level of importance given to COO by consumers (Samiee, 1994). Rawwas et al. (1996) found that world-minded consumers display a lower level of prejudice towards foreign products. World-minded consumers tend to be younger, better educated and more afuent (Hett, 1993). Consumers with more income and education accept foreign products more readily (Niss, 1996). Leonidou et al. (1999) found that younger and upper-class consumers show a lower level of prejudice towards products originating from less-developed countries. Several authors found that younger, wealthier and more educated consumers evaluate foreign products more favourably (Ahmed and dAstous, 2002; Han and Terpstra, 1988): P4. COO evaluations are related to consumers age, marital status, having children, income and education.

Country-of-origin evaluations

81

In the global marketplace, lifestyle variables are used to segment markets (Cateora and Graham, 2004). Innovativeness is one such variable (Hett, 1993). Consumers who are technological innovators are more willing to try out new products and to put greater value on new product features: P5. Consumers who are technologically innovative evaluate COOs differentially than consumers who are not.

Based on an extensive literature search, Samiee (1994) has concluded that product familiarity is related to COO evaluation. Consumers tend to develop country images through familiarity with foreign products (Roth and Romeo, 1992). According to Balabanis et al. (2002), a greater level of direct contact with a country or its products lead to more objective consumer product perceptions. Moorman et al. (2004) have shown how subjective knowledge exemplied by product familiarity can affect the quality of consumers choices by having an inuence on where consumers search for information. Cowley and Mitchell (2003) have found that the level of knowledge affects the usage of information; higher levels of knowledge about an object lead to a more efcient use of knowledge about that object. Therefore:

IMR 25,1

P6.

COO perceptions depend on the level of familiarity with products made in that country.

82

A greater involvement in shopping for a product has been shown to be associated with a greater search for COO information (Hugstad and Durr, 1986). The elaboration likelihood model championed by Petty and Cacioppo (1986) suggests that if a stimulus is relevant to the consumer, there is a greater likelihood of analytical information processing. Eroglu and Machleit (1989) found that involvement in a product class was related to the causal antecedents of COO effects. Insch and McBride (2004) reported that the ownership of a product was related to the strength of COO cues: P7. Shopping variables such as purchase ease, extent of information search, purchase, product ownership and purchase involvement have a signicant impact on COO evaluations.

Research framework The framework underlying this research (shown in Figure 1) is derived from the literature review and the research propositions. According to this model, antecedents are the precursors to or the determinants of the COO construct. The empirical research described earlier suggests that consumers COO evaluations derive from both endogenous and exogenous sources. Studies of endogenous sources look for measurable traits within consumers, such as demographics or psychological variables, to explain variance in COO evaluations whereas studies of exogenous sources investigate the structural or cultural dimensions of target countries to explain variance in respondents COO evaluations. Studies of potential moderators, like the familiarity with a countrys products and shopping behaviour, focus on how to better

Conceptual framework: Research model Exogenous Antecedents Level of economic developmernt Culture (individualism/ collectivism) Country-Specific Beliefs Endogenous Antecedents Demographics (income, age, education, marital status, children) Dimensions of COO Evaluations Manufacturing process (assembly, design) Product technological complexity (low, high)

Moderators Product-country familiarity Shopping behaviour (involvement, product ownership, ease of purchase, extent of information search)

Figure 1. Conceptual framework: research model

Psychological variables (techn. sophistication, techn. innovativeness)

circumscribe (Peterson and Jolibert, 1995) COO evaluations in the presence of numerous inuences that would be typical in real-world buying situations. According to this framework, consumers country-specic beliefs (our dependent variable) are the result of their countrys level of economic development and culture (exogenous antecedents) and their demographic and psychological prole (endogenous antecedents). These beliefs lead to evaluations of countries of origin along two product and manufacturing dimensions. These evaluations are assumed to be moderated by familiarity with a countrys products as well as various shopping behaviour variables.

Country-of-origin evaluations

83

Method Questionnaire The questionnaire was originally written for French-Canadian respondents. It was then back-translated into Chinese for Taiwanese respondents. Before collecting data in the three countries, the questionnaire was pre-tested with a convenience sample of Canadian (in the city of Sherbrooke), Taiwanese (in the city of Taipei) and Moroccan (in the city of Agadir) residents. Based on the results of this pre-test, no changes were made to the Canadian questionnaire, but the Moroccan and Taiwanese questionnaires had to be slightly altered to take into account the local usage of the French language in Morocco and that of the Chinese language in Taiwan. In the rst section of the questionnaire, 13 countries had to be evaluated as CODs and COAs using nine-point bipolar scales (very poor/excellent) and for familiarity with their TC and simple products (very unfamiliar/very familiar). Canada, England, Germany, Japan and the USA represented the HICs; Mexico, Chile and Argentina represented Latin American countries (LACs); and China, Singapore, South Korea, Taiwan and Thailand represented East Asian countries (EACs). The HICs covered most of the large advanced economies, the LACs covered the three most prosperous Spanish-speaking Latin economies that have also attained a moderate degree of industrialization and the EACs covered the most prosperous and/or fastest growing Asian exporters that have attained a moderate to high degree of industrialization. To ensure that the concepts of COD and COA were understood, respondents were provided with descriptive information; COD was dened as the country where the product is conceived, designed, or engineered whereas COA was described as the country where the product is assembled or manufactured. Similarly, in order to ensure that the concept of technological complexity was clearly understood, it was explained as follows in the questionnaire:
Some of the products that we buy, for example computers, are technologically more complex than others, such as televisions. The products that are TC evolve rapidly. Therefore, computers are quickly surpassed when new and more rened models are born. Other products, those that are simple, dont alter much.

The last section of the questionnaire included ve questions about shopping behaviour, two four-item purchase-related individual difference measures, namely technological sophistication and innovativeness and standard socio-demographic variables (these measures are presented in the Appendix). The annual income question was framed in the local currencies being used at the research sites.

IMR 25,1

84

Data collection The Canadian study was carried out in Sherbrooke, a Canadian city located 90 miles east of Montreal. Sherbrooke is a mid-sized city (about 120,000 inhabitants) in the French-speaking province of Quebec in Canada. Its demographic prole reects the average population of the province of Quebec. The Taiwanese study was carried out in Taipei, capital and the major business centre of the state of Taiwan. Taipei is a very large city (about 3,000,000 inhabitants) located in the very top end of the Taiwan Island. The Moroccan data were collected in Agadir, an industrial and services (tourism) centre with a population of about 200,000. The choice of the three locations was guided by the opportunity to collect data from very diverse geographical locations that are also very different in terms of their level of economic development. Homes were visited by graduate business students in the city of Sherbrooke using an area sampling procedure. After giving appropriate instructions concerning how to proceed with the materials, the interviewer left the questionnaire with the respondents and picked it up the next day or at a convenient time. From a total of 250 questionnaires that were distributed in Sherbrooke, 70 (28 per cent) were incomplete, 29 (12 per cent) were badly completed and therefore 151 (60 per cent) usable answers could be collected. As we were particularly interested in getting the participation of present and potential buyers of a TC product like a computer and given the relatively lower income of Taiwanese and Moroccans, the sampling procedure was somewhat different in Taipei and Agadir. Only middle and upper-middle class neighborhoods were selected for the distribution of the questionnaires. In Taipei, 300 questionnaires were distributed, 72 (24 per cent) were incomplete, 28 (9 per cent) were badly completed and 202 (67 per cent) usable answers could be collected. A further sampling restriction was added in Agadir; respondents had to be uent in the French language. With this procedure, 275 questionnaires were distributed in Morocco, 83 (30 per cent) were incomplete, 39 (14 per cent) were badly completed and 153 (56 per cent) usable answers were collected. The lower response rate in Morocco, as compared with that in Canada and Taiwan, can probably be attributed to the lower level of experience of Moroccans with participating in survey research. In order to be eligible, all participants had to be males over 18 years of age. This was done because panel survey results indicate that in Taiwan husbands have more inuence than wives in the purchase of durable products like computers and televisions (Panel Study of Family Dynamics, 2004). Because of cultural and religious constraints, the collection of data from male subjects is recommended by Kaynak et al. (2000) in patriarchic Islamic countries like Morocco. Canadian data were also collected from male subjects in order to maintain consistency with Taiwan and Morocco. Results and discussion Sample description The mean age of Canadian participants was 41 years. The sample included more married or cohabiting people (74 per cent) than singles (26 per cent). About 12 per cent had high school or less education, 24 per cent some post-secondary education, 18 per cent some university education, 39 per cent completed university and 7 per cent had post-graduate education. Thus, the sample is somewhat more educated than the average Canadian population. The mean age of Taiwanese participants was 34 years.

The sample included as many married people (50 per cent) as singles (50 per cent). About 5 per cent had high school or less education, 15 per cent some post-secondary education, 58 per cent completed university and 22 per cent had post-graduate education. The Taiwanese sample is somewhat younger but much more highly educated than the average population. The mean age of Moroccan participants was 30 years, 31 per cent were married and 69 per cent were single or divorced. In terms of education, 9 per cent had secondary education, 76 per cent had some university education and 15 per cent had some post-secondary education. The Moroccan sample therefore is older and very highly educated in comparison with the average population of this country. In terms of inter-country differences, the Moroccan sample is the youngest and the most educated. The age and educational proles of the Taiwanese sample fall in between those of the Moroccan and Canadian samples. Manipulation checks As expected, respondents felt that buying a computer is more important, more difcult and requires a greater extent of information search than buying a television. All differences are statistically signicant ( p , 0.001). Factor analysis To conrm the a priori country groupings into HICs, LACs and EACs, the evaluations of the countries as COO were factor analyzed. These evaluations included the evaluations of TC and TS products on COD and COA processes for each respondent. A principal components analysis followed by a varimax rotation was performed. As shown in Table I, three factors clearly emerged using both the eigenvalue . 1 and scree plot criteria for extracting factors. The three factors explained 63 per cent of the common variance. The results presented on Table I clearly indicate that Germany, England, France, the USA and Canada load most heavily on Factor 1 (which can be interpreted as HICs) with factor loadings ranging from 0.66 for Japan to 0.79 for Germany. Chili, Argentina and Mexico load most heavily on Factor 2 (LACs), with
Factor loadings Factor 2 20.22 20.08 0.34 0.45 20.03 0.09 0.83 0.85 0.80 0.24 0.41 20.03 0.27 0.06

Country-of-origin evaluations

85

Countries Japan USA England Canada Germany France Argentina Chile Mexico China Thailand Taiwan Singapore South Korea

Factor 1 0.66 0.74 0.76 0.68 0.79 0.74 0.07 0.03 0.01 0.07 0.06 0.11 0.16 0.22

Factor 3 0.28 0.17 0.08 0.03 0.07 0.11 0.21 0.21 0.16 0.62 0.65 0.78 0.68 0.76

Note: Mean scale values range from 1 (low) to 9 (high)

Table I. Factor structure matrix based on COO evaluations

IMR 25,1

factor loadings of 0.83 for Argentina, 0.85 for Chile and 0.80 for Mexico. Finally, Taiwan, South Korea, Singapore, Thailand and China load most heavily on Factor 3 (EACs). The individual factor loadings for EACs vary from a low of 0.62 for China to a high of 0.78 for Taiwan. Thus, the factor analysis results conrmed the initial country grouping. Psychological variables Two four-item scales were used to measure the participants technological sophistication and innovativeness as previous research has shown that these two variables moderate COO perceptions (Ahmed et al., 2002a, b). Cronbachs a for technological sophistication was equal to 0.79 and that for innovativeness was 0.85. These levels of reliability were deemed satisfactory for carrying out further analyses with these two scales. Country familiarity and perceptions Disaggregated results covering the Canadian, Taiwanese and Moroccan respondents are presented in Table II for familiarity and for the four individual COO characteristics, namely COD and COA processes and TC and TS products in Table III. To simplify the presentation, results of the tests of statistical signicance for differences between variables are only reported for familiarity. All the differences in country evaluations discussed in this paper are statistically signicant at p , 0.05.

86

Type of country

Canada

Taiwan 7.7 7.6 4.7 4.4 6.7 5.1 6.1 6.4 2.2 2.1 1.8 2.0 4.4 2.8 7.9 5.0 5.7 5.2 4.5

Statistics Morocco 8.0 7.5 4.9 4.3 6.4 7.5 6.4 6.8 1.9 1.8 1.5 1.7 6.1 5.0 6.3 4.1 5.4 5.3 5.0

F-value 0.7 3.4 0.6 170.8 2.7 52.5

p value 0.04 0.0001 0.07 0.0001

Table II. Consumer familiarity with countries of origin

Highly industrialized countries Japan 7.8 USA 8.0 England 5.0 Canada 8.1 Germany 6.2 France 5.9 Mean HIC 6.8 Excluding Canada 6.5 Latin American countries Argentina 2.8 Chile 3.5 Mexico 4.3 Mean LAC 3.5 East Asian countries China 5.5 Thailand 4.4 Taiwan 5.8 Singapore 3.8 South Korea 4.6 Mean EAC 4.8 Excluding Taiwan 4.6

12.7 52.6 152.2 96.8 27.7 50.8 57.6 11.2 10.4

0.0001 0.0001 0.0001 0.0001 0.0001 0.0001 0.0001 0.0001 0.0001

Note: Scale values range from 1(low) to 9 (high)

COD Complex products (TC) CA TA MO Highly industrialized countries Japan 7.9 8.2 USA 7,6 7.8 England 6.4 6.2 Canada 7.3 5.7 Germany 7.7 7.8 France 6.6 6.4 Mean HIC 7.2 7.0 Excluding Canada 7.2 7.3 Total HIC Latin American countries Argentina 3.5 3.1 Chile 3.5 3.1 Mexico 3.1 2.5 Mean LAC 3.4 2.9 Total LAC East Asian countries China 4.7 3.9 Thailand 3.9 3.2 Taiwan 4.6 7.0 Singapore 4.2 5.7 South Korea 4.8 5.7 Mean EAC 4.4 5.1 Excluding Taiwan 4.4 4.6 Total-EAC Grand total 8.2 8.0 6.2 6.0 7.2 7.0 7.1 7.3

COA

Number of COD versus COA and TC Simple Complex Simple versus TS products products products differences (TS) (TC) (TS) CA TA MO CA TA MO CA TA MO CA TA MO 7.5 7.8 6.9 7.6 7.6 7.0 7.4 7.4 7.2 6.8 5.8 5.4 6.7 5.8 6.3 6.5 3.6 3.6 3.4 3.5 4.8 4.1 6.9 5.6 5.6 5.4 5.0 8.1 7.4 5.9 5.9 7.0 7.5 7.0 7.2 2.8 2.8 2.5 2.7 6.4 5.3 6.2 4.9 6.0 5.8 5.7 8.0 7.6 6.9 7.6 7.5 6.8 7.4 7.4 4.7 4.8 4.8 4.8 5.8 5.2 5.8 5.3 5.7 5.6 5.6 8.1 7.7 6.5 6.0 7.7 6.6 7.1 7.3 3.6 3.4 3.0 3.3 4.4 3.7 7.2 6.1 5.9 5.5 5.1 8.0 7.8 6.2 5.9 7.1 7.2 7.0 7.2 3.5 3.4 2.8 3.2 6.7 5.9 6.4 5.5 6.6 6.2 6.4 7.9 7.7 7.1 7.8 7.5 7.1 7.5 7.4 5.2 5.3 5.9 5.5 6.3 5.8 6.2 5.7 6.1 6.0 6.0 7.4 7.1 6.0 5.7 7.0 6.0 6.5 6.7 3.9 3.9 3.7 3.8 4.8 4.2 6.9 5.8 5.8 5.5 5.2 8.2 7.6 6.0 5.8 7.2 7.5 7.0 7.2 3.3 3.3 2.9 3.2 7.0 5.9 6.6 5.5 6.6 6.3 6.2 2 2 1 5 2 2 2 1 2 2 11 3 2 3 8 3 3 1 7 26 2 2 3 7 2 2 3 3 2 12 19

Country-of-origin evaluations

87

2.6 4.3 2.8 4.3 2.0 4,3 2.5 4.3 6.3 5.1 5.8 4.5 5.8 5.5 5.4 5.4 4.6 5.3 4.9 5.4 5.1 5.0

4 4 4 12 4 4 4 4 4 20 35

Notes: Mean scale values range from 1 (low) to 9 (high); statistical signicance at p , 0.05; CA Canada; TA Taiwan; MO Morocco

Table III. Disaggregated evaluations of countries of origin by Canadian, Taiwanese and Moroccan consumers and number of statistically signicant differences between COD versus COA and TC versus TS evaluations

The order of data presentation was guided by Keller (2003), who points out that brand familiarity precedes brand evaluation. As can be seen in Table II, respondents were most familiar with products made in HICs and least familiar with products made in LACs. The smallest level of cross-national differences was obtained with HICs. The cross-national differences were substantial and statistically signicant only in the case of Canada and France. Canadian respondents were the most familiar with HIC products, followed by the Moroccans and the Taiwanese. In comparison with Moroccan and Taiwanese respondents, Canadians showed a much greater familiarity with products made in LACs. On the other hand, Moroccans and Taiwanese displayed a somewhat greater familiarity with products made in EACs than did the Canadians. Unsurprisingly, Canadian respondents were much more familiar with products made in Canada than were the Taiwanese and the Moroccans. Similarly, Taiwanese were more familiar with products made in Taiwan than Canadians and Moroccans.

IMR 25,1

88

Moroccan respondents were more familiar with products made in France, China and Thailand than were the Canadians and the Taiwanese. This greater familiarity may be explained by Moroccos past political relationship with France, the predominance of imports from France in the consumer market and its geographical closeness to France. The greater familiarity displayed by Moroccans with products made in China and Thailand in comparison with the Taiwanese is counterintuitive because these two countries are socio-culturally very different and geographically very far from Morocco. On the other hand, Taiwan is closer to China and Thailand both socio-culturally and geographically. Therefore, one explanation for the greater familiarity of the Moroccans with Chinese and Thai products may lie in the much lower per capita income of the Moroccans in comparison with the Taiwanese. The lower ones income, one may surmise, the greater ones tendency to purchase low-price products that come from low-wage countries like China and Thailand. On a regional level, all respondents were much more familiar with the products made in HICs (average familiarity 6.4) than in LACs (average familiarity 2.4) and in EACs (average familiarity 5.1). As one would expect, in general, the HICs were better evaluated by consumers than the NICs. Among the NICs, the EACs were better evaluated than the LACs. An examination of the results for specic HICs reveals that Japan, the USA and Germany were evaluated somewhat more favourably than Canada, England and France. Among the EACs, Taiwan and South Korea were evaluated substantially more positively than Thailand whereas Singapore and China fell in between. There was not much difference in the evaluation of the three LACs, namely, Chile, Argentina and Mexico. The overall negative perception of NICs observed in the data conforms to the existing literature and provides support for P1a. In support of P2, the HICs were perceived somewhat more favourably than the NICs as regards complex products. This superiority of the HICs was evident even more strongly in the case of country perceptions regarding the design and engineering of products, i.e. COD. According to Li and Monroe (1992), differences in perceived product quality between HICs and NICs are due to consumer beliefs that HICs workers are more technologically sophisticated than NICs workers and consequently more capable of making TC products. It appears that Canadian, Taiwanese and Moroccan consumers share the views held by US consumers. The evaluation differences between the HICs and NICs were larger in the case of design capabilities than they were with respect to assembly. Whereas, the HICs were evaluated quite similarly on all COO dimensions, the NICs were evaluated more positively as COAs than they were as CODs. This observation of a larger difference between the HICs and NICs on product design and engineering than on assembly is consistent with previous research (Ahmed and dAstous, 2001, 2002) and supports P1b. The function of product design is more creative and complex than manufacturing and assembly, thus requiring a higher level of worker sophistication. As proposed (P3a), nationality was related to COO evaluation. Moroccans evaluated products made in France, Thailand and China much more favorably than did the Canadians and the Taiwanese. Moroccans were, in general, more positive towards products made in EACs. Canadians were the least negative towards products made in LACs and Moroccans the most negative. Among the three nationalities, Taiwanese respondents evaluated products assembled in HICs the least favourably.

More specically, Canadian and Taiwanese respondents evaluated products made in their own country more positively than did the respondents from other countries, a result which is consistent with P3b. It is interesting to note that Taiwanese respondents were less favourable toward TS products designed or assembled in HICs than were Canadians and Moroccans. In fact, they perceived Taiwan to be as good as the HICs in terms of both COD and COA for TC and TS products, and in fact superior to countries like Canada and England. Ahmed and dAstous (2003) had found that Mexicans also evaluated their own country to be as good as an average HIC, superior to countries like Belgium and equal to Canada, France and Italy. This may reect a higher level of self-condence that comes from rapid industrialization and the fact that prestigious brand name products are manufactured and assembled in their own country. It should be noted that except for a higher level familiarity with France among Moroccans, there were no differences in the familiarity with HICs between Moroccans and Taiwanese. China was quite favourably perceived by Moroccans, both as a COD and COA for TC and TS products. Canadians perceived China somewhat favourably as a COD and COA for TS products and neither favorably or unfavorably as a COD and a COA for TC products. On the other hand, China was perceived unfavorably both as a COD and COA for TC and TS products by Taiwanese. These large differences in perceptions with respect to China raise the question: do Taiwanese consumers hold animosity towards the Chinese because of the perceived political threat of future annexation of Taiwan into China? Or, is it simply the result of the somewhat lower familiarity of Taiwanese with products made in China compared to Morocco and Canada as indicated in Table II? To test P3c, we compared the number of times Canadians, Taiwanese and Moroccans made different product/country evaluations based on manufacturing process (i.e. COD versus COA) and product technological complexity (i.e. TC versus TS). The results are presented in Table III. In the case of HICs, there are 24 possible occasions (6 countries 2 process dimensions 2 technology dimensions) where the mean differences in product/country evaluations of Moroccans can be statistically signicant. As seen in the table, none of the differences was signicant. This compares with ve signicant differences among Canadians and 11 among Taiwanese. With respect to LACs, out of 12 possible occasions, Canadian evaluations were different in all the cases, Taiwanese evaluations were different in nine cases and Moroccans in six cases. With respect to EACs, out of 20 possible occasions, Canadian evaluations were different in all 20 cases, Taiwanese evaluations were different in seven cases and Moroccan evaluations were different in 12 cases. Thus, in total, out of 56 possible occasions, Canadians product/country evaluations were inuenced by the manufacturing process and/or product technological complexity in 35 cases, those of Taiwanese in 26 cases and those of Moroccans in 19 cases. The differences observed in these proportions across the three groups are statistically signicant (x 2 9.21, 2 df, p , 0.01), which gives empirical support to P3c. As pointed out earlier, these differences in evaluations may not be attributed to familiarity with products of a country. For example, although Moroccans were most familiar with the HICs, their evaluations were not inuenced by manufacturing process and product complexity. It is interesting to note that as a COO, China (per capita income $5,600) was evaluated much more positively than Singapore by the Canadians and the Moroccans. Apparently, the actual education and sophistication of the work force in Singapore

Country-of-origin evaluations

89

IMR 25,1

90

(per capita income $27,800) does not seem to impact on the respondents evaluation of Singapore as a COO. On the other hand, Taiwanese consumers gave much better evaluations of COO Singapore than the Canadians and Moroccans. Taiwan is close to Singapore, both socio-culturally and geographically. The mean level of familiarity with products made in Singapore was 4.2 for the Canadians, 4.5 for the Moroccans and 5.7 for the Taiwanese. Thus, one may conclude that Taiwanese are more knowledgeable about Singapore and have had more positive experiences with products made in this country. The mean familiarity with Chinas products was 4.7 among Canadians, 6.7 among Moroccans and only 3.9 among Taiwanese. Thus, these results are consistent with those of Leonidou et al. (1999) who found that 41 per cent of their Bulgarian respondents had a positive attitude towards products made in India, but that this number dropped to 28 per cent for products made in Singapore. Thus, it appears that respondents, especially the Taiwanese and the Moroccans, have a very biased view of LACs. Similarly, Canadians and Moroccans have a biased view of Singapore. This view seems to be rooted to a certain extent in the overall unfamiliarity with products made in these countries. Unfamiliarity with a countrys products, however, does seem to have a less important impact on the evaluation of products made in HICs. For example, COO England with an average familiarity of 4.9 was rated higher than COO China with an average familiarity of 5.3. Thus, it seems that the enormous progress made in the industrial capacity of such sophisticated economies as Singapore (Gavin and Wilson, 2002) has been largely unnoticed by the Canadians and Moroccans. Analyses of variance of country perceptions In order to ascertain whether the dimensions, antecedents and moderators of COO are related to country perceptions and to examine the other research propositions, the respondents COO perceptions were subjected to analyses of variance using as independent variables the COO manufacturing dimensions (i.e. COD versus COA), product complexity (i.e. TS versus complex) and various COO antecedents. In order to further explore the possible predictors of COO effects, the ANOVA models included interactions between COO manufacturing dimensions, product complexity and nationality. The adjusted R 2 for the analysis of variance models and F-values of individual variables are presented in Table IV for the HICs, Table V for the LACs and Table VI for the EACs. Only the F-values of statistically signicant independent variables ( p , 0.05) are reported in the tables. The results indicate that the independent variables are strongly related to the evaluation of the COOs, especially in the case of LACs and EACs. The adjusted R 2 associated with these relationships range from very low in the case of Japan (R 2 0.09), the USA (R 2 0.06), England (R 2 0.07) and Germany (R 2 0.06) to high for Canada (R 2 0.36), France (R 2 0.32), all the LACs (R 2 ranging from 0.25 for Mexico to 0.29 for Argentina) and all the EACs (R 2 ranging from 0.24 for China to 0.34 for South Korea). The strongest COO manufacturing dimension impact is observed with Mexico followed by Thailand. The strongest impact of product complexity is associated with Argentina followed by Mexico. With 11 entries and an average F-value of 58, the COO manufacturing dimension factor is more strongly related to COO perceptions than product complexity (11 entries, average F-value 20). This is particularly true in the case of EACs where, with six entries

Variables COO dimensions Manufact. process (PRO) Tech. complexity (TEC) COO antecedents Nationality (NAT) Psychological Technological sophistication (TS) Technological innovativeness (TI) Demographics Age Marital status Children Family income Education COO moderators Familiarity (FAM) Shopping behaviour Ease of purchase computer (PEC) Ease of purchase TV (PETV) Search computer (ISC) Search TV (ISTV) Own computer (OC) Own TV (OTV) Involvement computer (IC) Involvement TV (ITV) Interactions NAT TEC NAT PRO TEC PRO Adjusted R 2

HICs ANOVA statistics F-values Number of Average entries size Japan USA England Canada Germany France 2 5 4 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 3 2 3 2 2 6 2 6 1 6 6 17 13 8 13 18 6 10 5 543 8 10 9 12 9 33 10 13 4 0.16 11 10 17 12 67 11 18 4 0.09 40 18 0.06 35 9 0.07 6 27 4 5 13 27 6 13 5 457 5 11 10 6 15 9 7 0.36 32 13 0.06 8 10 28 6 30 13 19 5 11 6 7

Country-of-origin evaluations

91

629 7 9 8 6 6 13 0.32 Table IV. F-values based on ANOVAs involving HICs

and an average F-value of 66, COO manufacturing dimensions performed much more strongly than product complexity with four entries and an average F-value of 18. Thus, these results conform to the disaggregated results reported earlier and provide further insight into the level of the contribution of COO manufacturing and product complexity dimensions. Looking at the effects of nationality and product familiarity, two highly inter-correlated antecedents of COO inuence, it can be seen that familiarity had a greater overall impact in terms of magnitude of explained variance, but that nationalitys impact was across a greater number of countries. The proportion of explained variance in the evaluations of four countries, namely Japan, the USA, England

IMR 25,1
Variables COO dimensions Manufact. process (PRO) Technological complexity (TEC) COO antecedents Nationality (NAT) Psychological Technological sophistication (TS) Technological innovativeness (TI) Demographics Age Marital status Children Family income Education Moderators Familiarity (FAM) Shopping behaviour Ease of purchase computers (PEC) Ease of purchase TV (PETV) Search computers (ISC) Search TV (ISTV) Own computer (OC) Own TV (OTV) Involvement computer (IC) Involvement TV (ITV) Interactions NAT TEC NAT PRO TEC PRO Adjusted R 2

F-values LACs ANOVA statistics Number of entries Average size Argentina Chile Mexico 3 2 3 2 2 1 2 2 1 3 1 3 3 2 3 70 82 117 27 7 5 352 28 15 5 17 12 14 4 0.27 21 5 5 382 323 33 9 4 84 80 83 63 124 77 209

92

17 15 5 17 14 8 5 0.29 15 13 0.28 5

40 6

Table V. F-values based on ANOVAs involving LACs

8 21 4 0.25

and Germany was quite low. This may be attributed to their lack of signicant relationship with familiarity and the relatively weak relationship with nationality. The strongest performance of nationality was observed with LACs with an entry into all three analyses of variance models and an average F-value of 117, followed by EACs with ve entries and an average F-value of 51. Nationality performed somewhat poorly with HICs with four entries and an average F-value of 13. These results based on aggregated multivariate analyses conrm the disaggregated results reported earlier. With four entries and an average F-value of 524, familiarity performed the best with EACs, followed by two entries and an average F-value of 352 for LACs. With only two out of six possible entries (Canada and France) and a high-average F-value of 543, the performance of familiarity in the case of HICs was unequal. Among the NICs, familiarity did not enter into the Mexico and China models. This may be attributed to a strong correlation between nationality and familiarity, with the nationality effect being stronger than familiarity in these two cases. These results delineate the very important role of product familiarity in explaining the variance contained in COO evaluations.

F-values EACs ANOVA statistics Number of Average entries size China Thailand Taiwan Singapore 6 4 5 3 2 3 3 1 2 2 1 3 1 4 5 5 66 18 51 14 20 12 10 6 524 28 15 5 17 8 9 0.30 17 15 5 17 6 0.24 6 11 0.30 3 12 0.30 8 7 0.29 6 8 0.34 5 40 6 52 32 110 21 28 8 15 13 10 6 268 470 530 829 90 14 62 59 19 46 10 32 11 13 15 4 67 South Korea 60 5 3

Country-of-origin evaluations

Variables COO dimensions Manufact. process (PRO) Technological complexity (TEC) COO antecedents Nationality (NAT) Psychological Technological sophistication (TS) Technological innovativeness (TI) Demographics Age Marital status Children Family income Education Moderators Familiarity (FAM) Shopping behaviour Ease of purchase computers (PEC) Ease of purchase TV (PETV) Search computers (ISC) Search TV (ISTV) Own computer (OC) Own TV (OTV) Involvement computer (IC) Involvement TV (ITV) Interactions NAT TEC NAT PRO TEX PRO Adjusted R 2

93

Table VI. F-values based on ANOVAs involving EACs

Our results also support the earlier ndings of Insch and McBride (2004) who found that familiarity moderates the impact of other independent variables on the evaluation of a COO. The results related to the interaction effects of manufacturing dimensions, product complexity and nationality seem to indicate that, with a signicant entry into 13 out of 14 analysis of variance models, the nationality product complexity interaction performed the strongest among the three independent variable interaction effects. With only three entries, the product complexity manufacturing dimension interaction was marginal in the analysis of variance models. Nationality manufacturing

IMR 25,1

94

dimension effects were present in the case of LACs and EACs, but not in the case of HICs. The sizes of the F-values for the interaction effects were rather small. Thus, although product complexity and, to a lesser degree, manufacturing dimensionality interacted signicantly with nationality, these effects were not substantial. The results related to shopping behaviour indicate that with 20 out of 48 possible entries into the multivariate models, the strongest relationship were observed among HICs. With six entries and an average F-value of 33, computer involvement was the strongest predictor for the HICs. All the other variables, except the ownership of computers, showed some signicant relationships among HICs, ranging from three entries with an F-value of 9 in the case of information search for computers to two entries with an F-value of 9 in the case of ownership of computers. With seven out of 28 possible relationships for the LACs and 11 out of 40 possible entries for the EACs, the contribution of the shopping variables in explaining the COO evaluations of LACs and EACs were more modest. With two entries and an average F-value of 28, search for information about computers was the strongest shopping variable for the LACs. In the case of EACs, with four entries and an average F-value of only 7, purchase ease with computers was related to the largest number of COO evaluations, but with only two entries and an average F-value of 23, involvement with computers showed the strongest relationships. In general, shopping variables related to shopping behaviour for computers showed stronger relationships with COO evaluations. Although our results in general support P5, the empirical evidence appears to be weak and sketchy. Among the psychological variables, technological sophistication and innovativeness did not enter into any of the LAC models. Their relationship with the evaluation of HICs was also quite weak (only two marginal F-value entries for technological sophistication and one for technological innovativeness). Technological innovativeness performed much better with the EACs with three entries and an average F-value of 14, followed by technological innovativeness with two entries and an average F-value of 20. Therefore, there is some weak empirical support in support of our research propositions. With only six out of 40 possible entries for the HICs, ve out of 15 possible entries for the LACs and seven out of 35 possible entries for the EACs, demographic variables were the weakest predictors of COO evaluations among the four groups of antecedents. P8 is therefore very marginally supported. Among the demographic variables, with two entries for the HICs (average F-value 28), 2 entries for the LACs (average F-value 27) and three entries for the EACs (average F-value 12), age performed the best. With only one entry with respect to the HICs, having children was the variable having the worst performance. The results observed with demographic variables are consistent with those reported by Balabanis et al. (2002) who found that demographic variables had little effect on the evaluation of COO Germany in their Czech and Turkish samples. Samiee et al. (2005) also reported a small contribution of demographic variables in explaining COO perceptions. The ndings reported here extend their results to not one but 14 COOs in a three-nation study. It is worth noting that previous strong relationships between COO evaluations and three COO correlates, namely shopping behaviour (Insch and McBride, 2004), psychological variables (Ahmed et al., 2002a, b) and demographics (Ahmed and dAstous, 2002; Insch and McBride, 2004) were obtained by means of univariate,

one-country-at-a-time analyses. In contrast, these effects were not observed in this research using multivariate analyses and data from three nations. This suggests that because of their inter-correlations and very strong relationship with familiarity and nationality, individual variables that perform well in univariate settings may not perform substantially in multivariate settings. Insch and McBride (2004) used product familiarity measures that bear similarity to our shopping behaviour variables as a proxy for country familiarity. They found that the relationship between their measure of familiarity and COO perception was not very strong. The results of the present study indicate that a generalized country-specic product familiarity measure appear to perform much better than the measure of familiarity with specic products used by Insch and McBride (2004). Therefore, it seems that the predictive strength of a familiarity measure in COO studies depends on the degree to which the measure is country-specic. Limitations, theoretical and managerial implications and future research Limitations The results presented in this paper should be interpreted with care. This research considered only a limited number of COOs and sample sites, was conducted in a single location in the data collection countries with a sample composed uniquely of males and used a limited number of product stimuli and a somewhat limited sample size. Given the large size and geographical dispersion of Canada and the existence of two language groups, French- and English-speaking Canadians, our data are more representative of French-speaking Canadians than English-speaking Canadians living in the eastern part of Canada. To maintain equivalency with the Moroccan and Taiwanese samples, the Canadian sample should have included younger respondents. In addition, with respect to product stimuli, the use of television to represent a TS product may have, perhaps, confused some respondents, especially in Canada and Taiwan where expensive at screen televisions are beginning to signicantly increase their market share. Theoretical implications In this study, we have examined how familiarity and purchase behaviour factors moderate the effect of endogenous and exogenous factors on COO evaluations. Our framework incorporates manufacturing dimensions of COO (design and assembly) and technological product dimensions (simple versus complex). The inclusion of exogenous factors like nationality, endogenous factors like demographics and psychological variables and moderators like purchase behavior and familiarity in a predictor model enhances the validity and practical utility of the results. It also provides additional evidence of individual differences in COO evaluations, thus adding to the present body of theory associated with COO. It seems evident that nationality and product-country familiarity strongly affect country evaluation. However, few studies have considered various COO evaluation sources in a single framework. Also, there is a need to bring both manufacturing and product technological dimensions of COO together and to consider both individual and national-level factors in a single study to globally enhance research validity. This is what this study tried to accomplish. We have tested our research propositions across three nations and have used reasonable sample sizes of male consumers, which gives some empirical generalizability to our ndings.

Country-of-origin evaluations

95

IMR 25,1

96

In general, these ndings have added the following new conclusions to the current COO literature: . nationality is related to a consumers propensity to differentially evaluate COOs on the basis of their manufacturing (COD and COA) and product technology (TS and TC) dimensions; . Taiwanese respondents evaluation of China as a COO appears to reect some animosity towards China; . Taiwanese respondents tend to perceive products assembled in Taiwan to be equal to or better than products assembled in HIC COOs; and . familiarity has a signicant and substantial impact on COO evaluations. The results of this study also indicate that whereas HICs are evaluated more favourably than LACs and EACs on all COO characteristics, this favourable perception is strongest in the case of COD judgements and for TC products. HICs COO perceived superiority is greater when the comparison is made with LACs than when it is made with EACs. Among the two COO evaluative dimensions, manufacturing process (i.e. design versus assembly) was more strongly related to country evaluations than product complexity. Both COO dimensions had a stronger impact on COO evaluations in the case of LACs and EACs than in the case of HICs. An examination of the impact of various explanatory independent variables indicates that product-country familiarity (a country-specic moderator variable) and to a lesser extent nationality (an exogenous antecedent) were strong predictors of COO evaluations. Specically, nationality was strongly related to the evaluation of all the LACs and all the EACs, except South Korea. Product-country familiarity was very strongly related to the evaluation of two HICs, namely Canada and England, two LACs, namely Argentina and Chile and all the EACs, except China. The LACs were evaluated more favorably by the Canadians and the EACs by the Taiwanese and the Moroccans. As for the remaining three groups of explanatory variables, namely, psychological variables, demographics and shopping behaviour, they did not perform well in the context of the estimated multivariate models. An interesting point emerging from this study is that the effect of animosity in product-country evaluation appears to be evident not only in countries like China, where past cruelties committed by Japanese during World War II provoked hatred towards Japan (Klein et al., 1998) but also in countries like Taiwan where no such cruelties were committed by China. Accordingly, we suggest that global rms continue to engage in research activities that may help to uncover such animosities held by consumers towards a COO in the country-markets they serve and take necessary marketing actions to attenuate their impact. The theory associated with the role of information processing mode on information absorption (Thompson and Hamilton, 2006) suggests that in countries like Morocco, it makes sense not to emphasize COD versus COA as well as TS versus TC distinctions when providing COO information to consumers, in order to make it easier for them to retrieve the information from memory. On the other hand, such complex information should be provided to Canadians. As for the moderating effect of familiarity, our ndings extend Balabanis et al.s (2002) work, which suggests that the greater the level of direct contact with a country

or its products, the more objective are consumer product perceptions. The present research provides additional and substantive evidence of the explanatory power of familiarity in explaining COO evaluations. Research on consumer ethnocentrism (Shimp and Sharma, 1987) and national loyalty indicates that attitudes are affected by ones sense of loyalty to the nation and to other macro-oriented groupings one belongs to (Bruning, 1997). Our ndings corroborate these conclusions by providing evidence based on Taiwanese data and extend this theoretical statement by showing that consumers in a very fast growing NIC like Taiwan consider products assembled in their own country to be equal to and even superior to HIC products. Managerial implications The results of this research suggest that a multinational rm that chooses to manufacture its products, especially TC ones, in an EAC in order to reduce production costs may nd better acceptance of its products in countries like Taiwan and Morocco than in countries like Canada. On the other hand, products manufactured in LACs should nd lesser acceptance in Taiwan and Morocco, and products made in China would nd much lesser acceptance in Taiwan and much greater in Morocco. The negative LAC COO effect may be much more difcult to overcome for more complex products. An international LAC corporation that wishes to enter the global market would face the impact of both a negative COD and COA perception. Various options are open to such corporations. They may choose to assemble their LAC products in a HIC for the North American market or in an EAC for the East Asian market and prot from a positive COA effect and/or they may choose to adopt a foreign sounding brand name that creates a favourable product image (Leclerc et al., 1994) and leave an impression with consumers that the product may indeed be associated with a more prestigious country. In a rapidly industrializing country like Taiwan, where there is great national pride in the countrys assembly capacity, having the product assembled in a HIC or EAC may not have a positive effect. These strategies may involve a very heavy investment in production or promotional programme. A less costly strategy would be to associate LAC products with a well known HIC or EAC retail chain store and use the already established chain brand name to convey both brand image and quality assurance. Among the EACs, Singapore which on the basis of its per capita GNP of $27,300 resembles a HIC, suffers from a relatively poor COO image in Canada and Morocco. This result is not very surprising. Because of low-product familiarity, Singapore is perhaps associated with other less developed countries in the South East Asian region. Although COO Singapore is viewed just as favourably as COO Canada in Taiwan, this prestige does not appear to be directly transferable to the North American and North African consumer markets. Because of the small size of this country and the relative unavailability of made-in Singapore consumer products in the North American and North African markets, this negative image may not be easily overcome. The answer may be to export Singapore-made products to countries such as Taiwan that already have a positive opinion of this country. In spite of its much lower per capita income of $5,000, in comparison with other EACs, China enjoys a more positive COO image among Canadians and Moroccans. This image may be attributed to Canadian and Moroccan consumers

Country-of-origin evaluations

97

IMR 25,1

98

high level of familiarity with Chinese products. China is indeed a major exporter of consumer products to North America and North Africa. Therefore, these consumers are likely to have had direct experience with the products made there. Such products often carry very prestigious foreign brand names. Thus, the positive brand image may well be carried over to the country where the product was manufactured. In addition, China is often billed as a super power, thus projecting an image of modernity that goes far beyond its present technological sophistication. Thus, for global corporations that are looking for an EAC location for manufacturing parts or assembling products, China can provide not only an economically favourable location but also a less negative COA image in markets like Canada and Morocco. For sophisticated NICs, such as Singapore, which manufacture products in China to export to North American and North African markets, there may be a lesson to be learnt. By exporting products made in China that may have been designed in and whose parts are sourced from more sophisticated NICs, the positive product experience is transferred to China whereas the parent country remains relatively unknown to consumers, especially if the brand name is not associated with the COD. Perhaps, such products should prominently feature the source of design in order to build up a positive parent country image. For companies located in LACs, which because of their present or future free trade relationship with the USA and Canada are planning to export their products designed and assembled in these countries, it makes sense to begin the process with less complex products. Over time, as the familiarity with LAC products increases and country reputation improves, highly complex products made by them may then be introduced in North America. In order to get their products accepted in the North African and East Asian markets, LACs have to nd ways of increasing consumer familiarity with their products. For multinational corporations that market their TC products originating from LACs or EACs at competitive prices to HICs, there is some evidence that suggests that it will be more protable to target such products to consumers who demonstrate a high level of involvement in the purchase decision. Consumers who are highly involved in the purchase of complex products are more likely to be informed about the technologically advanced manufacturing capacity of more developed LACs and EACs and thus, may be able to appreciate the favourable price-quality relationship provided by products made in these countries. Given the very low level of consumer familiarity with products made in LACs in the Taiwanese and Moroccan markets, it is recommended that country brand promotion efforts by LACs in such markets begin by a selection of appropriate target segments. In this research, it was found that younger respondents are less prejudiced towards LAC products than older ones. Therefore, this segment can be an appropriate target market for country brand promotion. We found that Canadians were most likely to distinguish product-country offerings on the basis of their manufacturing and technological dimensions and Moroccans were least likely to do so. Therefore, country-brand marketers will be well advised to provide, through their advertising programme, detailed information about their countrys products in countries like Canada and more global and holistic information in countries like Morocco.

Future research This research presents opportunities for further research, including: . replicating this study using a wider range of manufacturing process dimensions and product technology dimensions, more appropriate product examples to illustrate product technology, the inclusion of female respondents and the use of larger sample sizes; . a more in-depth examination of consumers propensity to differentiate between COOs on the basis of manufacturing process and product complexity; . a more in-depth examination of the COO perceptions of Taiwanese consumers; and . constructing a valid scale to measure product-country familiarity. In our study, we have only dealt with two dimensions of the manufacturing process, namely design and assembly. Future studies may add a third dimension, namely parts (Chao, 1998). Similarly, we have used two product-complexity dimensions (simple versus complex). Future studies may consider the inclusion of low involvement such as coffee, bread (Ahmed et al., 2004a, b). We sampled only male respondents and therefore future studies should include female respondents as well. Given the rapid changes that have occurred in television technology recently, future studies may pay greater attention to selecting examples of low- or high-technology products. Future studies should also be conducted in a greater number of countries and regions within a country and choose more appropriate products for each country to illustrate product complexity. Our results indicate that the consumer propensity to differentiate between dimensions of COOs and product types varies across nations. We proposed that this can be attributed to differences in cultural values (Hofstede, 2001) and greater experience with product purchase due to product availability and variety in the market place. Future studies may nd that this tendency is explained by national differences in cognitive style (Riding and Rayner, 2001). If this was the case, these ndings may have managerial implications also for multi-cultural nations like the USA. Given the strong role played in this research by product-country familiarity as a moderating variable in explaining the variance contained in COO evaluations, one question that must be asked is how can one more effectively and efciently increase consumers familiarity with a COO? In order to provide an answer to this important question, a better measure of product-country familiarity than the one that was used in this study must be developed. It must be recognized that there are multiple dimensions of product-country familiarity as well as multiple sources or means to create product-country familiarity. This familiarity may be based on tangible, product-related information or intangibles like a halo effect (Han, 1989), or both. In addition, country marketing can create dimensions which in turn affect consumer response. One needs to know the antecedents and consequences of product-country familiarity. Therefore, the construction of a multi-item scale to measure product-country familiarity is a pre-requisite to being able to take appropriate country-branding actions. Some surprising results came out from the analysis of the Taiwanese data. First, Taiwanese respondents gave an unfavourable evaluation of COO China. Given that Taiwanese and Chinese share the same racial and cultural heritage and that Taiwan is

Country-of-origin evaluations

99

IMR 25,1

100

one of the most important investor in China in the manufacturing sector (Zhang, 2003), this result is particularly surprising. We have attributed it to a possible animosity towards China because of Chinas expressed desire to annex Taiwan. Second, we found that the Taiwanese consider their countrys assembly capacity to be equal to or superior to that of HICs. We have attributed this phenomenon to an extension of ethnocentrism (Shimp and Sharma, 1987). It is conceivable that these two surprising results are linked in some way and that there may be other explanations. A qualitative study directed at examining in depth why these COO beliefs are being held may clear up this matter. It may examine whether the home country bias is rooted in a greater familiarity with locally-made products, allowing more informed judgments regarding their quality. Similarly, the lack of familiarity with foreign products may perhaps explain the less positive appreciation of their true qualities.
References Ahmed, S.A. and dAstous, A. (1995), Comparison of country of origin effects on household and organizational buyers product perceptions, European Journal of Marketing, Vol. 29 No. 3, pp. 31-5. Ahmed, S.A. and dAstous, A. (1996), Country of origin and brand effects: a multi-dimensional and multi-attribute study, Journal of International Consumer Marketing, Vol. 9 No. 2, pp. 93-115. Ahmed, S.A. and dAstous, A. (2001), Canadian consumer perceptions of products made in newly industrializing East Asian countries, International Journal of Commerce and Management, Vol. 11 No. 1, pp. 54-81. Ahmed, S.A. and dAstous, A. (2002), South East Asian consumer perceptions of countries of origin, Journal of Asia Pacic Marketing, Vol. 1 No. 1, pp. 19-41. Ahmed, S. and dAstous, A. (2003), Product country images in the context of NAFTA: a Canada-Mexico study, Journal of Global Marketing, Vol. 17 No. 1, pp. 23-44. Ahmed, S.A. and dAstous, A. (2007), Moderating effect of nationality on country-of-origin perceptions: English-speaking Thailand versus French-speaking Canada, Journal of Business Research, Vol. 60 No. 3, pp. 240-8. Ahmed, S.A., dAstous, A. and Eljabri, J. (2002a), Impact of technological complexity on consumers perceptions of products made in highly and newly industrialising countries, International Marketing Review, Vol. 19 Nos 4/5, pp. 387-407. Ahmed, S.A., dAstous, A. and Yoou, J.B. (2004a), Exporting to Morocco: consumer perceptions of countries of origin, in Spotts, H.E. (Ed.), Developments in Marketing Science, Academy of Marketing Science, Vancouver, pp. 267-70. Ahmed, Z.U., Johnson, J.P., Ling, C.P., Fang, T.W. and Hui, A.K. (2002b), Country of origin and brand effects on consumers evaluations of cruise lines, International Marketing Review, Vol. 19 No. 3, pp. 279-302. Ahmed, Z.U., Johnson, J.P., Yang, X., Fatt, C.H., Teng, H.S. and Teng, L.C. (2004b), Does country of origin matter for low involvement products, International Marketing Review, Vol. 20 No. 1, pp. 102-20. Al-Sulaiti, K. and Baker, M.J. (1998), Country of origin effects: a literature review, Marketing Intelligence & Planning, Vol. 16 No. 3, pp. 150-99. Balabanis, G. and Diamantopoulos, A. (2004), Domestic country bias, country of origin effect, and consumer ethnocentrism, Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Vol. 32 No. 1, pp. 80-91.

Balabanis, G., Mueller, R. and Melewar, T.C. (2002), The human values lenses of country of origin images, International Marketing Review, Vol. 19 No. 6, pp. 582-610. Balabanis, G., Diamantopoulos, A., Mueller, R.D. and Melewar, T.C. (2001), Impact of nationalism, patriotism and internationalism on consumer ethnocentric tendencies, Journal of International Business Studies, Vol. 32 No. 1, pp. 157-75. Bruning, E.R. (1997), Country of origin, national loyalty and product choice: the case of international air travel, International Marketing Review, Vol. 14 No. 1, pp. 59-74. Cateora, P.R. and Graham, J.L. (2004), International Marketing, Richard P. Irwin, Chicago, IL. Chao, P. (1993), Partitioning country-of-origin effects: consumer evaluations of a hybrid product, Journal of International Business Studies, Vol. 24 No. 2, pp. 291-306. Chao, P. (1998), Impact of country-of-origin dimensions on product quality and design quality perceptions, Journal of Business Research, Vol. 42 No. 1, pp. 1-6. Chao, P. (2001), The moderating effects of country of assembly, country of parts, and country of design on hybrid product evaluations, Journal of Advertising, Vol. 30 No. 4, pp. 67-81. CIA (2007), World Fact Book, CIA, available at: www.cia.gov Cowley, E. and Mitchell, A.W. (2003), The moderating effect of product knowledge on the learning and organization of product information, Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 30 No. 3, pp. 443-55. Craig, C.S. and Douglas, S.P. (1996), Responding to the challenges of global markets: change, complexity, competition and conscience, Columbia Journal of World Business, Vol. 31 No. 4, pp. 6-18. dAstous, A. and Ahmed, S.A. (1995), Multidimensional country of origin effects on product evaluations: a study in Morocco, International Journal of Commerce and Management, Vol. 5 No. 3, pp. 32-45. dAstous, A. and Ahmed, S.A. (1999), The importance of country images in the formation of consumer product perceptions, International Marketing Review, Vol. 16 No. 2, pp. 108-25. ` dAstous, A., Caru, A., Koll, O. and Sigue, S.P. (2005), Moviegoers use of lm reviews in the search for information: a multi-country study, International Journal of Arts Management, Vol. 7 No. 3, pp. 32-45. de Mooij, M. (2000), The future is predictable for international marketers: converging incomes lead to diverging consumer behavior, International Marketing Review, Vol. 17 No. 2, pp. 103-28. Elliott, G.R. and Cameron, R.S. (1994), Consumer perception of product quality and the country-of-origin effect, Journal of International Marketing, Vol. 2 No. 2, pp. 49-62. Eroglu, S.A. and Machleit, K.A. (1989), Effects of individual and product-specic variables on utilizing country of origin as a product quality cue, International Marketing Review, Vol. 6 No. 6, pp. 27-41. Gavin, P. and Wilson, P. (2002), Economic Growth and Development in Singapore: Past and Future, Edward Elgar, Cheltenham. Gurhan-Canli, Z. and Maheswaran, D. (2000a), Cultural variations in country of origin effects, Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 37 No. 3, pp. 309-17. Gurhan-Canli, Z. and Maheswaran, D. (2000b), Determinants of country-of-origin evaluations, Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 27 No. 1, pp. 96-108. Hall, E.T. (1977), Beyond Culture, Anchor Books, Garden City, NY. Han, C.M. (1989), Country image: halo or summary construct, Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 26 No. 2, pp. 222-9.

Country-of-origin evaluations

101

IMR 25,1

102

Han, C.M. and Terpstra, V. (1988), Country of origin effects for uni-national and bi-national products, Journal of International Business Studies, Vol. 19 No. 3, pp. 235-55. Hassan, S.S., Craft, S. and Kortam, W. (2003), Understanding the new bases for global market segmentation, Journal of Consumer Marketing, Vol. 20 No. 5, pp. 446-62. Hett, E.J. (1993), The development of an instrument to measure global-mindedness, Dissertation Abstracts International, Vol. 52, p. 2099A. Hofstede, G. (2001), Cultures Consequences: Comparing Values, Behaviors, Institutions and Organizations Across Nations, Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA. Hsieh, M.H., Pan, S.L. and Setiono, R. (2004), Product-, corporate- and country-image dimensions and purchase behavior: a multicountry analysis, Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Vol. 32 No. 3, pp. 251-70. Hugstad, P. and Durr, P. (1986), A study of manufacturer impact on consumer perceptions, in Malhotra, N. and Howes, J. (Eds), Development in Marketing Science, Vol. 9, Academy of Marketing Science, Coral Gables, FL, pp. 155-99. Insch, G.S. and McBride, B. (2004), The impact of country-of-origin cues on consumer perceptions of product quality: a bi-national test of the decomposed country-of-origin construct, Journal of Business Research, Vol. 57 No. 3, pp. 256-65. Iyer, G.R. and Kalita, J.K. (1997), The impact of country-of-origin and country-of-manufacture cues on consumer perceptions of quality and value, Journal of Global Marketing, Vol. 11 No. 1, pp. 7-28. Jaffe, E.D. and Martinez, C.R. (1995), Mexican consumer attitudes towards domestic and foreign made products, Journal of International Consumer Marketing, Vol. 7 No. 3, pp. 7-26. Johansson, J.K. (1989), Determinants and effects of the use of made-in labels, International Marketing Review, Vol. 6 No. 6, pp. 47-58. Kale, S.H. (1995), Grouping euroconsumers: a culture-based clustering approach, Journal of International Marketing, Vol. 3 No. 3, pp. 35-48. Kaynak, E. and Kara, A. (2002), Consumer perceptions of foreign products: an analysis of product country images (PCI) and ethnocentrism, European Journal of Marketing, Vol. 36 Nos 7/8, pp. 115-32. Kaynak, E., Kucukemiroglu, O. and Hyder, A.S. (2000), Consumers country-of-origin (COO) perceptions of imported products in a homogenous less-developed country, European Journal of Marketing, Vol. 34 Nos 9/10, pp. 221-41. Keller, K.L. (2003), Brand synthesis: the multidimensionality of brand knowledge, Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 29 No. 4, pp. 595-600. Kim, S. and Pysarchik, D.T. (2000), Predicting purchase intentions for uni-national and bi-national products, International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management, Vol. 28 No. 6, pp. 280-91. Klein, J.G., Ettenson, R. and Morris, M.D. (1998), The animosity model of foreign product purchase: an empirical test in the Peoples Republic of China, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 62 No. 1, pp. 89-100. Knight, G.A. and Calantone, R.J. (2000), A exible model of consumer country-of-origin perceptions: a cross-cultural investigation, International Marketing Review, Vol. 17 No. 2, pp. 114-26. Kucukemiroglu, O., Kara, A. and Harcar, T. (2005), Exploring buyer life-style dimensions and ethnocentrism among Canadian consumers: an empirical study, The Business Review, Vol. 4 No. 1, pp. 210-7.

Laroche, M., Papadopoulos, N., Heslop, L. and Mourali, M. (2005), The inuence of country image structure on consumer evaluations of foreign products, International Marketing Review, Vol. 22 No. 1, pp. 96-116. Leclerc, F., Schmitt, B.H. and Dube, L. (1994), Foreign branding and its effects on product perceptions and attitudes, Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 31 No. 2, pp. 263-70. Lee, D. and Ganesh, G. (1999), Effects of partitioned country image in the context of brand image and familiarity: a categorization theory perspective, International Marketing Review, Vol. 16 No. 1, pp. 18-39. Leonidou, L.C., Hadjimarcou, J., Kaleka, A. and Stamenoua, G.T. (1999), Bulgarian consumers perceptions of products made in Asia Pacic, International Marketing Review, Vol. 16 No. 2, pp. 126-42. Li, W.K. and Monroe, K.B. (1992), The role of country of origin information on buyers product evaluation: an in-depth interview approach, Enhancing Knowledge Development, Vol. 3, Proceedings of the American Marketing Association Educators Conference, pp. 274-80. Lin, L. and Sternquist, B. (1994), Taiwanese consumers perceptions of product information cues, European Journal of Marketing, Vol. 28 No. 1, pp. 5-18. Lynn, M., Zinkhan, G.M. and Harris, J. (1993), Consumer tipping: a cross-country study, Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 19 No. 4, pp. 478-88. Maheswaran, D. (1994), Country of origin as a stereotype: effects of consumer expertise and attribute strength on product evaluations, Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 21 No. 2, pp. 354-65. Meyers-Levy, J. and Tybout, A.M. (1989), Schema congruity as a basis for product evaluations, Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 16 No. 2, pp. 39-54. Moorman, C., Diehl, K., Brinberg, D. and Kidwell, B. (2004), Subjective knowledge, search locations, and consumer choice, Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 31 No. 3, pp. 673-80. Nebenzahl, I.D. and Jaffe, E.D. (1996), Measuring joint effects of brand and country images on consumer evaluation of global products, International Marketing Review, Vol. 13 No. 4, pp. 5-22. Ng, S. and Houston, M.J. (2006), Exemplars or beliefs? The impact of self view on the nature and relative inuence of brand association, Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 32 No. 1, pp. 581-91. Niss, H. (1996), Country of origin marketing over the product life cycle: a Danish case study, European Journal of Marketing, Vol. 30 No. 3, pp. 6-22. Okechuku, C. and Onyemah, V. (1966), Nigerian consumer attitudes towards foreign and domestic products, Journal of International Business Studies, Vol. 30 No. 3, pp. 611-22. Panel Study of Family Dynamics (2004), available at: http://psfd.sinica.edu.tw Papadopoulos, N. and Heslop, L.A. (1993), Product-Country Images: Impact and Role in International Marketing, International Business Press, New York, NY. Papadopoulos, N. and Heslop, L.A. (2003), Country equity and product-country images: state of art in research and implications, in Jain, S.C. (Ed.), Handbook of Research in International Marketing, Edward Elgar, Cheltenham, pp. 402-33. Pereira, A., Hsu, C. and Kundu, S.K. (2005), Country-of-origin image: measurement and cross-national testing, Journal of Business Research, Vol. 58 No. 1, pp. 107-28. Peterson, R.A. and Jolibert, A.J.P. (1995), A meta-analysis of country-of-origin effects, Journal of International Business Studies, Vol. 26 No. 4, pp. 83-101.

Country-of-origin evaluations

103

IMR 25,1

104

Petty, R.E. and Cacioppo, J.T. (1986), Communication and Persuasion: Central and Peripheral Routes to Attitude Change, Springer-Verlag, New York, NY. Pharr, J.M. (2006), Synthesizing country-of-origin research from the last decade: is the concept still salient in the era of global brands?, Journal of Marketing Practice and Theory, Vol. 13 No. 4, pp. 34-45. Rawwas, M.Y.A., Rajendran, K.N. and Wuehrer, G.A. (1996), The inuence of worldmindedness and nationalism on consumer evaluation of domestic and foreign products, International Marketing Review, Vol. 13 No. 2, pp. 20-38. Riding, R.J. and Rayner, S.G. (2001), International Perspectives on Individual Differences: Cognitive Styles, Vol. 1, Ablex Publishing, Stamford, CT. Roth, M.S. (1995), The effect of culture and socio-economics on the performance of global brand image strategies, Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 50 No. 2, pp. 135-45. Roth, M.S. and Romeo, J.B. (1992), Matching product category and country image perceptions: a framework for managing country-of-origin effects, Journal of International Business Studies, Vol. 23 No. 2, pp. 477-97. Samiee, S. (1994), Consumer evaluation of products in a global market, Journal of International Business Studies, Vol. 25 No. 3, pp. 579-604. Samiee, S., Shimp, T. and Sharma, S. (2005), Brand origin recognition accuracy: its antecedents and consumers cognitive limitations, Journal of International Business Studies, Vol. 36 No. 4, pp. 379-98. Shimp, T.A. and Sharma, S. (1987), Consumer ethnocentrism: construction and validation of the CETSCALE, Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 24 No. 3, pp. 280-9. Statistics Canada (2001), available at: www40.statscan.ca Steenkamp, J.B., Hofstede, F.T. and Wedel, M. (1999), A cross-national investigation into the individual and national cultural antecedents of consumer innovativeness, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 63 No. 2, pp. 55-70. Suh, T. and Kwan, G.K. (2002), Globalization and reluctant buyers, International Marketing Review, Vol. 19 No. 6, pp. 663-80. Teas, K. and Agarwal, S. (2000), The effects of extrinsic product cues on consumers perceptions of quality, sacrice, and value, Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Vol. 28 No. 2, pp. 278-90. Thakor, M.V. and Lavak, A.M. (2003), Effect of perceived brand origin associations on consumer perceptions of quality, Journal of Product & Brand Management, Vol. 12 No. 6, pp. 394-408. Thompson, D.V. and Hamilton, R.W. (2006), The impact of information processing mode on consumers responses to comparative advertising, Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 32 No. 1, pp. 530-41. Tse, D.K. and Gorn, G.J. (1993), An experiment on the salience of country of origin in the era of global brands, Journal of International Marketing, Vol. 1 No. 1, pp. 57-76. Verlegh, P.W.J. and Steenkamp, J.E.M. (1999), A review and meta-analysis of country-of-origin research, Journal of Economic Psychology, Vol. 20 No. 5, pp. 521-46. Wall, M., Liefeld, J. and Heslop, L.A. (1991), Impact of country-of-origin cues on consumer judgments in multi-cue situations: a covariance analysis, Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Vol. 19 No. 2, pp. 105-14. Zhang, W.B. (2003), Taiwans Modernization, World Scientic Publishing, River Edge, NJ.

Zhang, Y. (1996), Chinese consumers evaluation of foreign products: the inuence of culture, product types and product presentation format, European Journal of Marketing, Vol. 30 No. 12, pp. 50-68. Zinkhan, G.M. and Prenshaw, P.J. (1994), Good life images and brand name associations: evidence from Asia, America and Europe, in Allen, C. and Roeder, D. (Eds), Advances in Consumer Research, Vol. 21, Association for Consumer Research, Provo, UT, pp. 496-500. Further reading Kim, C.K. and Chung, J.Y. (1997), Brand popularity, country image and market share: an empirical study, Journal of International Business Studies, Vol. 28 No. 2, pp. 361-86. Appendix. Description of variables included in the study Process The products we often buy come from foreign countries. When we talk about the origin of a product, it is important to distinguish two things: (1) The design, the conception or the engineering: for example, the design and engineering of a computer might have been done in the USA. (2) The assembly: for example, the assembly of the same computer might have been done in Japan. Technological complexity Some of the products that we buy, for example computers, are technologically more complex than others, such as televisions. The products that are TC evolve rapidly. Therefore, computers are quickly surpassed when new and more rened models are born. Other products, those that are simple, do not alter much, which is why televisions have changed little in the past 20 years. Country evaluation Please evaluate the following countries with reference to the conception, the design and the engineering (or assembly) of TC (or TS) products. Circle the number that mostly corresponds to your opinion: Country (e.g. the USA) Very poor 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Excellent Product-country familiarity Please indicate your level of familiarity with TC (or TS) products made in the following countries. Circle the number that mostly corresponds to your opinion: Country (e.g. the USA) Not familiar at all 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Very familiar Shopping behaviour When you shop for a computer (or a TV), . Do you consider the purchase as being: Not important 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Very important . Do you search for: Very little information 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 A lot of information . Do you feel: Not very involved 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Highly involved . Is it a purchase that is: Very easy 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Very difcult

Country-of-origin evaluations

105

IMR 25,1

106

Technological sophistication . In general, I feel uncomfortable with technologically sophisticated products (i.e. bank teller machines, video cassettes, computers). . I can say that I do not experience difculty in understanding the functions of technologically sophisticated products that I usually utilize. . I often feel incapable of operating an appliance whose technology seems complex. . I do not like to nd myself in a situation where I have to use a technologically sophisticated product. Technological innovativeness . In general, I can say that I am very interested in new features associated with technologically sophisticated products (cameras, computers. . .). . When I hear about a new high-tech product, I take advantage of the very rst occasion to nd out more about it. . I like to buy new technologically-sophisticated products introduced in the market. . When it comes to buying a technologically-sophisticated product, I prefer to buy new rather than existing products.

Corresponding author Sadrudin A. Ahmed can be contacted at: ahmed@gestion.uottawa.ca

To purchase reprints of this article please e-mail: reprints@emeraldinsight.com Or visit our web site for further details: www.emeraldinsight.com/reprints