İKİ BOYUTLU MENŞE ÜLKE ETKİSİ VE TÜKETİCİ ETNOSENTRİZMİ ETKİLEŞİMİ

Year 2019, Volume: 17 Issue: 1, 77 - 93, 01.03.2019

Ebru Genç

https://doi.org/10.11611/yead.424317

Cited By: 2

Abstract

Uluslararası
alanda faaliyet gösteren şirketler üretimlerini farklı ülkelere kaydırınca ülke
menşei kavramı da üretim-menşe-ülke ve dizayn-menşe-ülke gibi farklı boyutlar
kazanmıştır. Bu çalışmada Türk tüketicilerinin ürün değerlendirmelerinde
üretim-menşe-ülke ve dizayn-menşe-ülke bilgilerini dikkate alıp almadıklarını
ve bu değişkenlerin hem birbirleri arasında hem de tüketici etnosentrizmiyle
nasıl bir etkileşim halinde oldukları araştırılmıştır. Bu etkilerin araştırılması
için bir gelişmiş ülke (ABD), bir gelişmekte olan ülke (Bangladeş) ve
Türkiye’nin karşılaştırması şeklinde üç farklı ülke menşei seviyesi ele
alınmıştır. Bunun yanında tüketici etnosentrizminin de tüketicilerin ürün
değerlendirmelerine olan etkisine bakılarak bu değişkenin de diğer
değişkenlerle olan etkileşimi analiz edilmiştir. Çalışmada 3x3 tam faktöriyel
dizayn şeklinde deneysel metot kullanılarak 490 kişilik örneklemden veri
toplanmıştır. Ancak deneysel manipülasyonu doğru hatırlamayanlar çıkarıldıktan
sonra analizler kalan 319 kişilik örneklemle yapılmıştır. Yapılan ANCOVA
analizlerinin sonucunda üretim-menşe-ülke bilgisinin tüketicilerin ürün
değerlendirmelerini önemli bir şekilde etkilediği bulunmuştur ancak bu etkinin
dizayn-menşe-ülkesi için geçerli olmadığı görülmüştür. Ayrıca bulgularımız tüketici
ürün değerlendirmelerinde etnosentrizm ve üretim-menşe-ülke arasında önemli bir
etkileşim etkisinin mevcut olduğunu bize göstermiştir. Yüksek etnosentrizme
sahip tüketicilerin düşük olanlara göre ABD üretim-menşeli ürünü Türkiye üretim-menşeli
ürüne göre önemli ölçüde daha düşük değerlendirdiklerini göstermiştir bu
durumun düşük etnosentrizme sahip tüketicilerde tam tersi olduğu gözlenmiştir.

Keywords

Üretim-menşe- ülke, dizayn-menşe- ülke, tüketici etnosentrizmi

THE INTERACTION OF TWO-DIMENSIONAL COUNTRY-OF-ORIGIN EFFECT and CONSUMER ETHNOCENTRISM

Abstract

Today, as companies have increasingly been producing in developing countries, the emerging image problem leads to the widespread use of county-of-design labelling. In parallel to that, county-of origin has been studied as a multi-dimensional concept in the literature.  In this study, county-of-origin has been examined with two dimensions as county-of-manufacturing (COM) and country-of-design (COD). In particular, we study whether Turkish consumers process the country-of-manufacturing and country-of-design information in their product evaluations, and how these variables interact with each other as well as with consumer ethnocentrism. In the analyses, country-of-origin variables were treated to have three levels; a developed country (USA), a developing country (Bangladesh) and Turkey. We used 3*3 full factorial experimental design and gathered data from an initial sample size of 490 consumers. After eliminating the responses that do not correctly remember the experimental manipulation of COM and COD, we had a final sample size of 329. Upon conducting ANCOVA, while we found that COM significantly effects consumers’ product evaluations, the impact of COD has been found as insignificant. Our results also showed that the impact of the interaction effect between consumer ethnocentrism and country-of-manufacturing on consumer product evaluations has been found as significant. More specifically, consumers with high consumer ethnocentrism scores, evaluated the product with USA county-of-manufacturing information significantly lower than Turkey county-of-manufacturing information whereas a reverse effect has been found for consumers with low consumer ethnocentrism scores.

Keywords

County-of manufacturing, country-of-design, consumer ethnocentrism

References

• Ahmed, S. A., & d'Astous, A. (1995). Comparison of country of origin effects on household and organizational buyers' product perceptions. European Journal of Marketing, 29(3), 35-51.
• Ahmed, S. A., & d'Astous, A. (1996). Country-of-origin and brand effects: a multi-dimensional and multi-attribute study. Journal of International Consumer Marketing, 9(2), 93-115.
• Bilkey, W. J., & Nes, E. (1982). Country-of-origin effects on product evaluations. Journal of international business studies, 13(1), 89-100.
• Chao, P. (2001). The moderating effects of country of assembly, country of parts, and country of design on hybrid product evaluations. Journal of Advertising, 30(4), 67-81.
• Chowdhury, H. K., & Ahmed, J. U. (2009). An examination of the effects of partitioned country of origin on consumer product quality perceptions.International Journal of Consumer Studies, 33(4), 496-502.
• Chryssochoidis, G., A. Krystallis, & P. Perreas. 2007. Ethnocentric beliefs and country-of-origin (COO) effect: Impact of country, product and product attributes on Greek consumers’ evaluation of food products. European Journal of Marketing, 41 (11): 1518–1544.
• Dinnie, K. (2004). Country-of-origin 1965-2004: A literature review. Journal of Customer Behaviour, 3(2), 165-213.
• Erickson, G. M., Johansson, J. K., & Chao, P. (1984). Image variables in multi-attribute product evaluations: country-of-origin effects. Journal of Consumer Research, 694-699.
• Hamin, H., C. Bauman, & R. L. Tung. 2014. Attenuating double jeopardy of negative country of origin effects and latecomer brand: An application study of ethnocentrism in emerging markets. Asia Pacific Journal of Marketing and Logistics, 26 (1): 54–77.
• Hamin, H., & G. Elliott. 2006. A less-development country perspective of consumer ethnocentrism and “country of origin” effects: Indonesian evidence. Asia Pacific Journal of Marketing and Logistics, 18 (2): 79–92.
• Hamzaoui, L., & Merunka, D. (2007). Consumers' product evaluations in emerging markets: does country of design, country of manufacture, or brand image matter? International Marketing Review, 24(4): 409-426.
• Hamzaoui, L., & Merunka, D. (2006). The impact of country of design and country of manufacture on consumer perceptions of bi-national products' quality: an empirical model based on the concept of fit. Journal of Consumer Marketing, 23 (3): 145-155.
• Han, C. M. (1989). Country image: Halo or summary construct. Journal of Marketing Research, 26(2), 222-229.
• Hastak, M., & Hong, S. T. (1991). Country‐of‐origin effects on product quality judgments: An information integration perspective. Psychology & marketing, 8 (2): 129-143.
• Hong, S. T., & Wyer Jr, R. S. (1989). Effects of country-of-origin and product-attribute information on product evaluation: An information processing perspective. Journal of Consumer Research, 175-187.
• Hong, S. T., & Wyer Jr, R. S. (1990). Determinants of product evaluation: Effects of the time interval between knowledge of a product's country of origin and information about its specific attributes. Journal of Consumer Research, 277-288.
• Insch, G. S., & McBride, J. B. (2004). The impact of country-of-origin cues on consumer perceptions of product quality: A binational test of the decomposed country-of-origin construct. Journal of Business Research, 57 (3): 256-265.
• Insch, G. S., & McBride, J. B. (1999). Decomposing the Country-of-Origin Construct: An Empirical Test of Country of Parts and Country of Assembly. Journal of International Consumer Marketing, 10(4): 69-91.
• Johansson, J. K., Douglas, S. P., & Nonaka, I. (1985). Assessing the impact of country of origin on product evaluations: a new methodological perspective. Journal of Marketing Research, 388-396.
• Kaynak, E., & A. Kara. 2001. An examination of the relationship among consumer lifestyles ethnocentrism, knowledge structures, attitudes and behavioral tendencies: A comparative study in two CIS states. International Journal of Advertising 20 (4): 455–482.
• Kucukemiroglu, O. (1999). Market segmentation by using consumer lifestyle dimensions and ethnocentrism: An empirical study. European Journal of Marketing, 33(5/6), 470-487.
• Lee, J. K., & W. N. Lee. 2009. Country-of-origin effects on consumer product evaluation and purchase intention: The role of objective versus subjective knowledge. Journal of International Consumer Marketing, 21 (2): 137–151.
• Maheswaran, D., & Chen, C. Y. (2006). Nation equity: Incidental emotions in country-of-origin effects. Journal of Consumer Research, 33(3), 370-376.
• Nebenzahl, I. D., & Jaffe, E. D. (1996). The Dynamics of Country-of-Origin Effect: The Case of South Korea. In EIBA Conference, Stockholm, Sweden.
• Nebenzahl, I. D., Jaffe, E. D., & Lampert, S. I. (1997). Towards a theory of country image effect on product evaluation. MIR: Management International Review, 27-49.
• Ozsomer, A., & Cavusgil, S. T. (1991). Country-of-origin effects on product evaluations: a sequel to Bilkey and Nes review. Enhancing Knowledge Development in Marketing, 2(1991), 269-277.
• Papadopoulos, N., & Heslop, L.A. (2002), “Country equity and country branding: problems and prospects”, Journal of Brand Management, Vol. 9 No. 4-5, pp. 294-314.
• Russell, D. W., & Russell, C. A. (2006). Explicit and implicit catalysts of consumer resistance: The effects of animosity, cultural salience and country-of-origin on subsequent choice, International Journal of Research in Marketing, 23(3), 321-331.
• Samiee, S. (1994). Customer evaluation of products in a global market. Journal of International Business Studies, 579-604.
• Sharma, P. 2011. Country of origin effects in developed and emerging markets: Exploring the contrasting roles of materialism and value consciousness. Journal of International Business Studies, 42:285–306.
• Shimp, T. A., & S. Sharma. 1987. Consumer ethnocentrism: construction and validation of the CETSCALE. Journal of Marketing Research, 24 (8): 280–289.
• Steenkamp, J.-B. E. M., Hofstede, F. T., &Wedel, M. 1999. A cross-national investigation into the individual and national cultural antecedents of consumer innovativeness. Journal of Marketing, 63(2): 55–69.
• Upadhyay, Y., & S. K. Singh. 2006. Preference for domestic goods: A study of consumer ethnocentrism. Vision: The Journal of Business Perspective, 10 (3): 59–68.
• Verlegh, P. W., & Steenkamp, J. B. E. (1999). A review and meta-analysis of country-of-origin research. Journal of Economic Psychology, 20(5): 521-546.
• Verlegh, P. W. J. 2007. Home country bias in product evaluation: The complementary roles of economic and socio-psychological motives. Journal of International Business Studies, 38(3): 361–373.
• Wang, C. L., & Z. X. Chen. 2004. Consumer ethnocentrism and willingness to buy domestic products in a developing country setting: Testing moderating effects. Journal of Consumer Marketing, 21 (6): 391–400.
• Wong, C. Y., M. J. Polonsky, & R. Garma. 2008. The impact of consumer ethnocentrism and country of origin sub-components for high involvement products on young Chinese consumers’ product assessments. Asia Pacific Journal of Marketing and Logistics, 20 (4): 455–478.