Tüketici Ulus Merkezciliğinin Küresel Kültür Konumlandırması ile Oluşturulan Reklamlara Yönelik Tutum Üzerine Etkisi: Irak-Türkiye Örneği

Öz

Bu çalışma ile tüketicilerin ulus merkezci eğilimlerinin, küresel kültür konumlandırma ile yapılan bir reklama yönelik tutumları üzerine etkileri araştırılmaktadır. Bu etkileri araştırmak için Türkiye ve Irak’ta bulunan toplam 400 hane halkı üzerinden anket yöntemi ile veri toplanmış olup, bu iki ülke karşılaştırmalı olarak incelenmiştir. Bu karşılaştırma 17 sorudan oluşan ve “Toplum Yanlı Olma, Biliş, Tehdit, Tepkisellik ve Alışkanlık” boyutlarını içeren beş boyutlu tüketici ulus merkezci eğilimi genişletilmiş ölçeği CEESCALE ile gerçekleştirilmiştir. Çalışma kapsamında, Türk ve Iraklı katılımcılar için CEESCALE ölçeği içerisinde yer alan boyutların geçerliliği faktör analizi kullanılarak test edilmiştir. Yapılan faktör analizi sonucunda, ulus merkezciliğin beş boyutundan biri olan “Alışkanlık” boyutu hem Iraklı ve Türk katılımcılar için anlamlı bir boyut olarak çıkmamıştır. Daha sonra, ulus merkezci eğilimin geçerli olan boyutları ve küresel reklama yönelik tutum arasındaki ilişkiyi incelemek üzere regresyon analizi kullanılmıştır. Irak için ulus merkezciliğin “Biliş” ve “Tehdit” boyutları, küresel tüketici kültürü konumlandırma ile yapılan bir reklama yönelik tüketicilerin tutumları üzerine olumlu bir etkiye sahip olduğu saptanmıştır. Türk katılımcılar için ise “Toplum Yanlı Olma” boyutunun tüketici kültürü konumlandırma ile yapılan bir reklama yönelik tüketicilerin tutumları üzerine olumsuz etkisi saptanmıştır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Tüketici ulus merkezciliği
• küresel tüketici kültürü konumlandırma
• reklam
• CEESCALE
• Irak
• Türkiye

The Effect of Consumer Ethnocentrism on Attitudes towards Global Consumer Culture Advertisements: Iraq – Turkey Example

Öz

This study investigates the effects of consumer ethnocentrism dimensions on attitudes towards an advertisement made with global culture positioning. A total of 400 household data were collected through a questionnaire in Turkey and Iraq to investigate these effects in these countries comparatively. A multidimensional scale CEESCALE that consisted of 17 questions and five dimensions (Prosociality, Cognition, Insecurity, Reflexiveness, and Habituation) was used to test ethnocentrism tendencies of the two countries. Exploratory factor analysis was conducted to test the validity of the dimensions for both Turkey and Iraq. According to factor analysis, “Habituation” is not a valid dimension for neither Turkish nor Iraqi participants. A regression analysis was conducted to test the relationship between consumer ethnocentrism and the attitude toward global consumer culture positioning ads. For Iraqi participants, “Cognition” and “Insecurity” dimensions of ethnocentrism positively affect attitudes towards global consumer culture positioning ads. For Turkey, the “Prosociality” dimension negatively affects attitudes towards global consumer culture positioning ads.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Consumer ethnocentrism
• global consumer culture positioning
• advertising
• CEESCALE
• Iraq
• Turkey

Kaynakça

1. Aaker, D. (1991). Managing brand equity. Free Press.
2. Acharya , C. ve Elliott, G. (2003). “Consumer Ethnocentrism, Perceived Product Quality and Choice—An Empirical Investigation,”. Journal of International Consumer Marketing, 15(4), 87–115.
3. Akaka, M. A. ve Alden, D. L. (2010). Global Brand Positioning and Perception: International Advertising and Global Consumer Culture. International Journal of Advertising, 29(1), 37-56.
4. Alden, D. L., Jan-Benedict, E. S. ve Batra, R. (1999). “Brand Positioning Through Advertising in Asia, North America, and Europe: The Role of Global Consumer Culture,”. Journal of Marketing, 63, 75-87.
5. Alden, D. L., Steenkamp, J. B. ve Batra , R. (1999). Brand Positioning Through Advertising in Asia, North America, and Europe: The Role of Global Consumer Culture. The Journal of Marketing, 63(1), 75-87.
6. Bahar, R. (2011). Tüketici Etnosentrizmi Ve Menşe Ülke Etkisi Kavramlarının Satın Alma Kararları Açısından Önemi: Adıyaman Üniversitesi Öğrencileri Üzerine Bir Uygulama. Adıyaman: Yüksek Lisans Tezi, Adıyaman Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü.
7. Balabanis, G. ve Diamantopoulos, A. (2008). Brand Origin Identification by Consumers: A Classification Perspective. Journal of International marketing, 16(1), 39-71.
8. Balabanis, G., Diamantopoulos, A. ve Mueller, R. D. (2001). The Impact of Nationalism, Patriotism and Internationalism on Consumer Ethnocentric Tendencies. Journal of International Business Studies, 157-175.

9. Bartikowski, B. ve Cleveland, M. (2017). “Seeing is Being”: Consumer Culture and the Positioning of Premium Cars in China. Journal of Business Research, 77, 195-202.
10. Batra, R., Ramaswamy, V., Alden, D. L., Steenkamp, J. B. ve Ramachander, S. (2000). Effects Of Brand Local And Nonlocal Origin On Consumer Attitudes İn Developing Countries. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 9(2), 83-95.
11. Batra, R. ve Ray, M. L. (1986). Affective Responses Mediating Acceptance of Advertising. Journal of consumer research, 13(2), 234-249.
12. Bawa, A. (2004). Consumer Ethnocentrism: CETSCALE Validation and Measurement of Extent. Vikalpa, 29(3), 43-57.
13. Bizumic, B. (2014). Who Coined the Concept of Ethnocentrism? A Brief Report.  Journal of Social and Political Psychology, 2(1), 3-10.
14. Burke, M. C. ve Edell, J. A. (1989). The İmpact Of Feelings on Ad-Based Affect and Cognition. Journal of marketing research, 26(1), 69-83.
15. Camic, C. (1986). The Matter of Habit. American Journal of Sociology, 91(5), 1039-1087.
16. Devine, P. G. (1989). Stereotypes and Prejudice: Their Automatic and Controlled Components. Journal of Person ality and Social Psychology, 56(1), 5-8.
17. Ding, Q. S., Niros, M. I., Pollalis, Y. A., Zhou, Y. ve Tsogas, M. H. (2017). Consumer Ethnocentrism Threatens Import Brands? Empirical Evidence From China and Greece and Validation of CEESCALE.
18. Douglas, S. P. ve Nijssen, E. J. (2003). On the Use of “Borrowed” Scales in Cross-National Research: A cautionary Note. International Marketing Review, 20(6), 621-642.
19. Douglas, S. P. ve Nijssen, E. J. (2011). Consumer World-Mindedness and Attitudes toward Product Positioning in Advertising: An Examination of Global versus Foreign versus Local Positioning. Journal of International Marketing, 19(3), 113-133.
20. Eryiğit, C. (2009). Ulus Merkezcilik Ve Kişilerarası Etkilerin Tüketicilerin Yabancı Ürün Satın Alma Niyeti Üzerindeki Etkilerinin Kültürlerarası İncelemesi. Ankara: Yayınlanmış Doktora Tezi, Hacettepe Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü.
21. Gammoh, B. S., Koh, A. C. ve Okoroafo, S. C. (2011). Consumer Culture Brand Positioning Strategies: An Experimental Investigation. Journal of Product & Brand Management, 20(1), 48-57.
22. Hadjimarcou, J. ve Hu, M. Y. (1999). An Examination of Categorisation and Stereotyping Heuristics in Global Product Evaluations. Journal of Marketing Management, 15(5), 405-433.
23. Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J. ve Anderson, R. E. (2010). Multivariate Data Analysis (7 ed.). Englewood Cliffs: Prentice Hall.
24. Han, C. M. ve Terpstra, V. (1988). Country-of-Origin Effects for Uni-National and Bi-National Products. Journal of International Business Studies, 19(2), 235-255.
25. Haytko, D. L., Clark, R. A., Hermans , C. M. ve Parker, S. R. (2018). Examining the Dimensionality in Global Attitudes Toward Advertising: A Comparison of Perceptions of Chinese and United States Consumers. Journal of International Consumer Marketing, 30(2), 85-97.
26. Hilton, J. L. ve Hippel, W. (1996). Stereotypes. Annual Review of Psychology, 47(1), 205-235.
27. Huang, Y. (2016). Global Consumer Culture Positioning (GCCP): Reviews and Conceptual Framework, Journal of International Business Research, 15(1), 56-62.
28. Hult, G. T. ve Keillor, B. D. (1994). The Impact of Social Desirability Bias on Consumer Ethnocentrism Research: A Cross-National Perspective. Journal of Marketing Management, 4(2), 48–55.
29. Kanso, A. (1992). International advertising Strategies: Global commitment to Local Vision. Journal of Advertising Research, 32(1), 10–14.
30. Kapferer, J. N. (1997). Managing Luxury Brands. Journal of Brand Management, 4(4), 251-259.
31. Küçükemiroğlu, O. (1999). Market Segmentation by Using Consumer Lifestyle Dimensions and Ethnocentrism. European Journal of Marketing, 33(5,6), 470-487.
32. Kwak, H., Jaju, A. ve Larsen, T. (2006). Consumer Ethnocentrism Offline and Online: The Mediating Role of Marketing Efforts and Personality Traits in the United States, South Korea, and India. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 34(3), 367.
33. Lee, W. N., Hong, Y. J. ve Lee, S. J. (2003). Communicating with American Consumers in the Post 9/11 Climate: An Empirical Investigation of Consumer Ethnocentrism in the United States. International Journal of Advertising, 22(4), 487-510.
34. Levitt, T. (1983). The Globalization of Markets. Harvard Business Review, 61 (May/June), 92- 102.
35. Liu, S. S. ve Johnson, K. F. (2005). The Automatic Country-of-Origin Effects on Brand Judgments. Journal of Advertising, 34(1), 87-97.
36. Mackenzie, S. B. ve Lutz, R. J. (1989). An Empirical Examination of The Structural Antecedents of Attitude Toward The Ad in an Advertising Pretesting Context. Journal of Marketing, 53(2).
37. McDonald, K. (2006) Global Movements: Action and Culture, Blackwell, Oxford
38. Mueller, B. ve Taylor, C. R. (2010). Global Consumer Culture Positioning: Testing Perceptions of Soft-Sell and Hard-Sell Advertising Appeals Between U.S. and Japanese Consumers. Journal of International Marketing, 18(2), 20-34.
39. Mutlu, H., Çevikler, A. ve Çirkin, Z. (2011). Tüketici Etnosentrizmi ve Yabancı Ürün Satın Alma Niyeti: Türkiye ve Suriye Üzerine Karşılaştırmalı Analiz. Sosyo Ekonomi Dergisi.Ocak-Haziran .
40. Moon, B. J. ve Jain, S. C. (2001). Consumer Processing of International Advertising: The Roles of Country of Origin and Consumer Ethnocentrism. Journal of International Consumer Marketing, 14(1), 89-109.
41. Nijssen, E. J. ve Douglas, S. P. (2011). Consumer World-Mindedness and Attitudes Toward Product Positioning in Advertising: An Examination of Global Versus Foreign Versus Local Positioning. Journal of International Marketing, 19(3), 113-133.
42. Netemeyer, R. G., Durvasula, S. ve Lichtenstein, D. R. (1991). A Cross-National Assessment of the Reliability and Validity of the CETSCALE. Journal of Marketing Research, 320-327.
43. Özsomer, A. ve Altaras, S. (2008). Global Brand Purchase Likelihood: A Critical Synthesis and an Integrated Conceptual Framework. Journal of International Marketing, 16(4), 1-28.
44. Paylan, M. A., Çetinkaya, C., Özceylan, E. ve Dabbaa, A. (2017). Tüketici Etnosentrizmi: Suriyeli Göçmenler Üzerinde CEESCALE Ölçeği ile Bir Uygulama. Gaziantep University Journal of Social Sciences, 16(4).
45. Rahme, J. G. (1999). Ethnocentric and Stereotypical Concepts in the Study of Islamic and World History. The History Teacher, 32(4), 473-494.
46. Ruyter, K., Van, B. M. ve Wetzels, M. (1998). Consumer Ethnocentrism in International Services Marketing. International Business Review, 7(2), 185-202.
47. Saffu, K. ve Walker, J. (2005). An Assessment of the Consumer Ethnocentric Scale (CETSCALE) in an Advanced and Transitional Country: The Case of Canada and Russia. International Journal of Management, 22(4), 556.
48. Samiee, S., Shimp, T. A. ve Sharma, S. (2005). Brand Origin Recognition Accuracy: Its Antecedents and Consumers’ Cognitive Limitations. Journal of international Business studies, 36(4), 379-397.
49. Shankarmahesh, M. N. (2006). Consumer Ethnocentrism: An Integrative Review of Its Antecedents and Consequences. International Marketing Review, 23(2), 146-172.
50. Sharma, S., Shimp , T. ve Shin, J. (1995). Consumer Ethnocentrism: A Test of Antecedents and Moderators. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 23(1), 26-37.
51. Sharma, S., Terence, S. A. ve shin, J. (1995). Consumer Ethnocentrism: A Test of Antecedents and Moderators. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 23(1), 26 -37.
52. Shimp, T. ve Sharma, S. (1987). Consumer Ethnocentrism: Construction and Validation of the CETSCALE. Journal of Marketing Research, 24(3), 280-289.
53. Shocker, A. D., Srivastava, R. K. ve Ruekert, R. W. (1994). Challenges and Opportunities Facing Brand Management: An Introduction to the Special Issue. Journal of Marketing Research, 31(2), 149-158.
54. Siamagka, N. T. ve Balabanis, G. (2015). Revisiting Consumer Ethnocentrism: Review, Reconceptualization, and Empirical Testing. Journal of International Marketing, 23(3), 66-86.
55. Sumner, W. G. (1906). Folkways: A Study Of The Sociological İmportance Of Usages, Manners, Customs, Mores, And Morals. Boston: Ginn and Company.
56. Tiedens , L. Z. ve Linton, S. (2001). Judgment Under Emotional Certainty and Uncertainty: The Effects of specific Emotions on Information Processing. Journal of Personality and Social Psycholog, 81(6), 973-88.
57. Upadhyay, Y. ve Singh, S. K. (2006). Preference for Domestic Goods: A Study of Consumer Ethnocentrism. Vision: The Journal of Business Perspective, 10(3), 59-68.
58. Wang, C. L. ve Chen, Z. X. (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.
59. Westjohn, S. A., Singh, N. ve Magnusson, P. (2012). Responsiveness to Global and Local Consumer Culture Positioning: A Personality and Collective Identity Perspective. Journal of International Marketing, 20(1), 58-73.
60. Witkowski, T. H. (1998). Consumer Ethnocentrism in Two Emerging Markets: Determinants and Predictive Validity. Advances in Consumer Research, 25, 258-263.
61. Zajonc, R. B. ve Markus, H. (1982). Affective and Cognitive Factors in Preferences. Journal of consumer research, 9(2), 123-131.
62. Zhou, L., Hui, M. ve Yang, Z. (2010). Non-Local or Local Brands? A Multi-Level Investigation into Confidence in Brand Origin Identification and Its Strategic Implications. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 28(2), 202-218.
63. Zhou, N. ve Belk, R. W. (2004). Chinese Consumer Readings of Global and Local Advertising Appeals. Journal of Advertising, 33(3), 63-76.