Modelo estadístico

Consumer ethnocentrism and the COO-image are two crucial variables that influence consumer perceptions and purchase intentions (Khan, 2012). Research has identified product types as determinants of the effects of the strong COO-image on consumer product evaluation

103

(Chattalas et al., 2008). It was further found that the strong COO-image may have a positive effect on consumer product involvement and evaluation, but this effect may not be equally strong for all product types (LeClerc et al., 1994). According to Piron (2000), the level of consumer ethnocentrism sometimes varies with different levels of consumer product involvement. Khan (2012) further concluded that consumers have greater ethnocentric tendencies for product categories that are not very important, and have low consumer product involvement.

Consumers’ negative feelings for a particular country may play a strong role in shaping the effects of the COO-image on products’ perception, irrespective of their level of product involvement. For instance, Europeans like US made products, but they dislike the US foreign policy and similarly, Arab-Americans recognise the exceptional quality of Israeli Optical instruments, but have negative attitudes towards Israeli made products (Wang et al., 2012). In the case of fast moving consumer goods (FMCG), considerable national icons and symbols are used in the packaging to attract the consumers with high ethnocentrism while exploiting their associations with the COO of products and their patriotic tendencies to buy locally manufactured products (Insch and Florek, 2009). According to Zolfagharian et al, (2014) the COO-image is one of the most important bases of consumer preference for domestic products, for example, British consumers’ shift towards buying local food and the ‘new organic’ trend (Insch and Florek, 2009). Roth and Romeo (1992) suggested that the national associations which influence consumer buying intentions are based on their product involvement level, product experience, knowledge of the COO and patriotism. In the case of high involvement products, an ethnocentric bias affects brand evaluations (Abraham, 2013). For example, there

104

are consumers in the USA that hold and disseminate attitudes towards the COO cue often due to economic, cultural or political threats to the local market posed by globalisation (Balabanis et al., 2001).

Previous research found that the COO-image of a product is associated with the perceived inferiority, superiority or competence of the manufacturing country (Orth and Firbasová, 2003). This association minimises the effect of consumer ethnocentrism and has a significant influence on consumer product evaluation: German cars are viewed as superior to Russian cars, and even the Russians prefer German cars over Russian cars (Hamin et al, 2014). Consumers, who associate superiority with their own country and are highly ethnocentric, prefer their domestic products (Claret et al., 2012). Consumers’ favouritism for domestic products is strongly dependent on the perceived competence of product’s COO and the COO- image in a certain product category (Roth and Diamantopoulous, 2009). The image of a country’s national competence in a certain product category often has a link to its perceived competitive advantage and consumers’ evaluation of the COO labels (Jaffe and Nebenzahl, 2001). Quality conscious consumers base their product purchase decision on the perceived competence of a COO and perceived quality of its products in a certain product category, rather than their ethnocentrism (Rezvani et al., 2012; Miranda and Parkvithee, 2013). The research found that consumers’ perception of the quality of complex products has four dimensions: (1) prestige, (2) use of advanced technology, (3) cost to calibrate country’s competence and (4) workmanship (Han and Terpstra, 1988). However, other COO studies measuring quality perceptions of less complex products suggested that assembly and designing capability of the COO are vital (Ahmed and d’Astous, 2004). Research found that

105

consumers prefer locally made products when the quality of the product is better or equivalent to that of foreign products (Hamin et al, 2014).

Research has found that non-ethnocentric consumers evaluate the foreign products favourably simply because they are not domestically made (Lee et al., 2013). Such consumers base their product evaluation on the level of industrialisation of the COO of product (Zolfagharian et al., 2014). It was suggested that the impact of consumer ethnocentrism is dependent upon the level of development or advancement of consumers’ home country (Poon et al., 2010). As previously stated, researchers are generally in agreement with the notion that the products which originate in developed countries are perceived as being of better quality, performance, reliability and workmanship, compared with those from developing countries (Kaynak et. al., 2000). Based on the negative stereotype of the emerging countries, consumers evaluate their product negatively since these countries are usually perceived to have average, if not bad, quality using old fashion technologies (Lee et al., 2013). Studies conducted in emerging markets have mixed findings, such as the study by Klein et al., (2006) that found a negative effect of consumer ethnocentrism on the evaluation of foreign products; by contrast a study by Huddleston et al., (2001) found no significant effects of consumer ethnocentrism on the evaluation of foreign products. Hamin and Elliott (2006) suggested that consumer ethnocentrism effects vary based on different product types; Koreans were found to be prejudiced against less favourably evaluated countries (Nebenzahl and Jaffe, 1996), while Mexicans were obsessed with American and Japanese products (Jaffe and Martinez, 1995). These findings are mostly based on cross national differences in the level of economic development, ethnocentrism, national animosity and culture. From the Nigerian consumers'

106

point of view, the COO is more important than price and other product attributes, such as reliability and safety (Okechuku and Onyemah, 1999). Sharma (2011) further included that consumers in developed countries tend to prefer locally-manufactured products followed by the products from other developed countries, and lastly products from less developed countries.