Está en la página 1de 13

Intern. J. of Research in Marketing 23 (2006) 227 239 www.elsevier.

com/locate/ijresmar

Consumer attitudes toward marketplace globalization: Structure, antecedents and consequences


Dana L. Alden a,, Jan-Benedict E.M. Steenkamp b , Rajeev Batra c
a

Marketing, College of Business Administration, University of Hawaii, 2404 Maile Way, Honolulu, HI 96822, USA b Kenan-Flager Business School, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC 27514, USA c Ross School of Business, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI 48109, USA

Abstract This study examines relationships between a new measure of consumer attitudes toward consumption alternatives resulting from market globalization, several attitudinal antecedents (materialism, susceptibility to normative influence and consumer ethnocentrism), and a hypothesized consequence of these attitudes preference for global brands. Following validation of the new measure in three culturally distinct markets, South Korea, the US, and China, the hypothesized antecedents and consequence are tested in South Korea. Empirical findings broadly support hypotheses and provide important implications for future research on market globalization. 2006 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
Keywords: Globalization; Global brands; Consumer attitudes; International marketing

1. Introduction The world continues to globalize (Holt, Quelch, & Taylor, 2004). Globalization is due to a host of factors including worldwide investment, production and marketing, advances in telecommunication technologies and the internet, increases in world travel and the growth of global media (Ozsomer & Simonin, 2004; Steenkamp & Ter Hofstede, 2002; Stremersch & Tellis, 2004; Van Everdingen, Aghina, & Fok, 2005). Some scholars (e.g., Hannerz, 1990; Levitt, 1983) have proposed that this leads to the creation of a global consumer culture (Alden, Steenkamp, & Batra, 1999). Others have argued that local cultures remain a very powerful influence or that consumers are hybridizing (Hermans & Kempen, 1998; Holton, 2000), glocalizing (Ritzer, 2003; Turner, 2003) or creolizing these global and local cultural influences (Friedman, 1996). The central motivations for this study are to test consumer preferences for globalized, localized or hybridized alternatives within a given consumption domain and to identify potential antecedents and consequences of such preferences. To these ends, we introduce a new construct referred to as global con Corresponding author. Tel.: +1 808 956 8565; fax: +1 808 956 9886. E-mail addresses: dalden@hawaii.edu (D.L. Alden), JBS@unc.edu (J.-B.E.M. Steenkamp), rajeevba@umich.edu (R. Batra). 0167-8116/$ - see front matter 2006 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved. doi:10.1016/j.ijresmar.2006.01.010

sumption orientation (GCO) and examine relationships between GCO and macro factors such as exposure to global mass media and globalizing travel influences as well as individual dispositions such as materialism, susceptibility to normative influence, and ethnocentrism. While the overall model is tested in South Korea only, we conduct validation studies in South Korea, the US and China. 2. Attitudes towards global cultural influences 2.1. Cultural globalization theory Globalization theorists study the processes and consequences of cross-national transmission of media forms, symbols, lifestyles and attitudes (Crane, 2002). One school argues that large numbers of people around the world are substituting globally diffused consumer images, symbols and preferences that flow primarily from the West (Zhou & Belk, 2004) for those from their traditional, local cultures (Holton, 2000; Pieterse, 1995). Others stress the continued desire of many consumers to maintain local culture and to reject influences perceived as global (Ger & Belk, 1996). Indeed, it is clear that many people prefer local consumption imagery because they more easily identify with local lifestyles, values, attitudes and behaviors (Crane, 2002).

228

D.L. Alden et al. / Intern. J. of Research in Marketing 23 (2006) 227239

A third hypothesized response embraces elements of global culture and integrates them to a greater or lesser degree into local culture. Appadurai (1990) believes that global cultural forces tend to become indigenized in one way or another. Many refer to this process as glocalization, defined by Ritzer (2003. p. 193) as, the interpenetration of the global and the local, resulting in unique outcomes in different geographic areas. Consider the fact that even McDonald's makes widespread use of hybrid, glocalized approaches that incorporate local food preferences and values serving Kimchi Burgers in Korea, beer in The Netherlands and wine in France. As opposed to modernization theory, which predicts unyielding standardization, Turner (2003, p. 137) argues for liquid differentiation that results from the differentiation of modernity and the rise of hybrid cultures (see also Ritzer, 2003; Salcedo, 2003). In considering possible responses to globalization, we distinguish a fourth alternative a lack of interest in global, hybrid or local consumption alternatives. This response is infrequently discussed in the globalization literature, which generally assumes that consumers have strongly held attitudes toward globalization. However, in the marketing literature, support exists for the notion that there are consumers who either hold weakly developed attitudes toward globalization (Park & Moon, 2003; Zaichkowsky, 1985) or are generally alienated from the marketplace (Allison, 1978; Singh, 1990). Such marginalization or cultural alienation is also noted in the acculturation literature (e.g., Berry, Kim, Power, Young, & Bujaki, 1989; Oetting & Beauvais, 19901991), where this response concerns rejection of all symbols of culture, often as a result of acculturative stress (Ryder, Alden, & Paulhus, 2000, p. 53). These consumers may care primarily about product functionality rather than cultural themes. They may be low on materialism (Richins & Dawson, 1992); high on postmaterialism (Inglehart, 1990); and/or low on exposure to brand communications in general. For such reasons, this group of consumers is likely to have no opinions about or very weak attitudes toward global/local/ hybrid alternatives. Furthermore, they are likely to express this orientation as a lack of interest in any of the other alternatives. Finally, it is important to recognize that the extent to which a given consumer expresses globalized, glocalized or localized preference depends on multiple factors, e.g., consumption category and goal. However, attitudinal consistency also seems likely across consumption contexts (Zhou & Belk, 2004). We now turn to a description of the proposed model and its subsequent test in three national markets: the Republic of Korea, the U.S., and China. 3. A model of global consumption orientation Based on the foregoing review of the globalization literature, four sets of attitudinal responses to the global diffusion on consumption choices are hypothesized: 1) assimilation/homogenization/convergence; 2) separation/polarization; and 3) hybridization/creolization/glocalization; and 4) lack of interest/ marginalization (Berry et al., 1989; Crane, 2002; Holton, 2000; LaFromboise, Coleman, & Gerton, 1993; Sandikci & Ger, 2002). We label this attitude set as global consumption orientation (GCO).

We seek to operationalize and test this construct for the first time. Thus, our study begins by measuring and structurally analyzing consumer preferences for global, local or hybrid alternatives. To enhance external validity, this test of structure is performed in three countries that differ significantly on each of the five Hofstede (2001) dimensions of national culture, two of which are Asian and one Western. If we are able to replicate the structure underlying GCO in vastly different national cultures, confidence in the generalizability of the results is enhanced (Steenkamp, 2005). 3.1. Testing global consumption orientation in South Korea The Republic of Korea was selected as one of three study sites for testing the GCO scale because of its rapid economic development and relatively recent openness to global influences and brands. Whereas South Korea was 28% urban in 1960, it is 82% urban today. Literacy has grown from 71% in 1960 to 98%. In addition, per capita income has increased from US$62 in 1967 to US$12,030 in 2003. Finally, South Korean consumers are relatively ethnocentric on average (Sharma, Shimp, & Shin, 1995) and the South Korean marketplace is relatively difficult for foreign brands to penetrate (Ulgado & Lee, 1998). Increasing economic and social prosperity have been accompanied by growing receptivity to foreign goods and services, all of which make South Korea a valuable test site for this study. 3.1.1. Method Consumer responses to GCO were measured with preference indicators from four central consumption-related domains not previously examined in the globalization literature: lifestyle, entertainment, furnishings and clothing (cf., Holt, 1998; see Measurement Appendix).While related individual difference scales have been tested in other contexts (e.g., global openness, Suh & Kwon, 2002; internationalism, Balbanis, Diamantopuolos, Mueller, & Melewar, 2001, cultural openness, Sharma et al., 1995), our operationalization draws directly from the acculturation tradition (e.g., Berry et al., 1989; Flannery, Reise, & Yu, 2001; Tsai, Ying, & Lee, 2000). Acculturation studies suggest that consumers generally have an overall preference for a particular response, but that variations across domains may occur (Arends-Tth, 2003; Birman & Trickett, 2001), necessitating a multi-item (behavioral domain) measurement instrument. Consumption-related categories were selected at a sufficiently abstract level to minimize the risk of functional and conceptual non-equivalence across cultures (Onkvisit & Shaw, 2004). All questions were deliberately worded as contrasts to the global consumption alternative. For each category, respondents selected the statement that most closely matched their relative preference for: 1) a global alternative (one with no strong association to any individual country or region but broadly demanded in many countries around the world, e.g., preferring clothing that is perceived as in demand in multiple national markets); 2) a localized alternative, e.g., preferring clothing that is traditionally worn in the consumer's country; or 3) a hybrid alternative, e.g., preferring a mix of clothing that is traditional and clothing that is worn in many other countries. Importantly, the

D.L. Alden et al. / Intern. J. of Research in Marketing 23 (2006) 227239

229

nature of the mix was not specified in the questionnaire. This allowed respondents who preferred combinations of the global and local, whether as separate pieces or as more or less integrated hybrid forms, to select this attitudinal response (Holton, 2000). The fourth alternative allowed the consumer to express a lack of interest in any of the other three alternatives and/or the consumption category as a whole. The questionnaire was administered in Korean. A rigorous double-back translation process was employed and care was taken to maximize functional and conceptual equivalence during the translation process. Using randomized cluster sampling in a middle-class urban Seoul area characterized by condominium and apartment buildings, 2000 households were selected. Of these, 370 women (18.5% response rate) participated. All respondents were responsible for at least one-half of the shopping for the living unit shopping. 3.1.2. Results To examine the dimensional structure underlying the data, we use multiple correspondence analysis (MCA). MCA is an appropriate analytic technique for the categorical data collected with the GCO scale (Hoffman & Franke, 1986). It quantifies categorical data by assigning numerical values to the respondents and the four consumption categories measured in this study on each of the underlying dimensions. As such, MCA determines whether consumers' GCO attitudes are consistent across consumption categories (i.e., furnishings, clothing, entertainment and lifestyle). The first two MCA dimensions explained 73.1% of the variance. For the first dimension, the canonical correlation was .73 and for the second, .63. This statistic indicates the strength of the overall relationship between respondents and consumption categories and can be regarded as a measure of reliability in MCA analyses. While larger for the first than the second, both are sufficiently strong to warrant further analysis. The first MCA dimension depicted in Fig. 1 represents relative preference for our hypothesized consumption alternatives, with global versus local consumption preferences at the extremes, and hybrid located in-between. The finding that local and global consumption alternatives are polar opposites, with hybrid in between is consistent with the globalization literature (Hermans & Kempen, 1998; Holton, 2000). High response density within each cluster indicates that consumer attitudes were consistent across the four consumption domains (Hoffman & Franke, 1986). For simplicity, in the rest of this paper, we will refer to a preference for global consumption alternatives as positive GCO attitudes, and a preference for local consumption preferences as negative GCO attitudes. The second dimension supported our expectations regarding the existence of consumers who lack interest in any of the three response alternatives or the consumption category in general. Pro-global, local and hybrid consumption attitudes cluster together far above what we refer to as the disinterested responses (see Fig. 1). This pattern indicates similar attitude intensity in response to globalization among those who are interested in global/local/hybrid alternatives (Nguyen, Mess, & Stollak, 1999). The lower clustering of the disinterested

responses on the Y-axis indicates low response intensity. In sum, the second dimension captures what one could call consumer response intensity. 3.2. Empirical validation of the GCO dimensions in the United States The US study served two purposes, viz., 1) to replicate the Korean results in a vastly different cultural environment (Hofstede, 2001), and 2) to provide evidence on the construct validity of the GCO dimensions. Since we measure GCO using specific consumption domains, one issue involves the extent to which the results are specific to these domains. One way to investigate this issue is to assess whether our GCO measure correlates with generalized dispositions that are not related to consumptionspecific domains (Bagozzi, 1994). In the US study, we included the non-consumption domain specific constructs of cosmopolitanism and admiration of foreign country lifestyle. Cosmopolitanism (Baughn & Yaprak, 1996; Thompson & Tambyah, 1999) refers to the desire of consumers to learn about and emulate other cultures and interest in interacting with those from other countries. Additionally, Alden et al. (1999), Appadurai (1990) and Batra, Ramaswamy, Alden, Steenkamp, and Ramachander (2000) have theorized that consumers who admire foreign lifestyles are likely to desire ownership of consumption symbols from those countries. Consumers who score highly on these measures should also hold more positive attitudes toward GCO. 3.2.1. Measures and sample The same GCO items used in the South Korean study were applied in the US. Cosmopolitanism was measured using seven items similar to those used by Baughn and Yaprak (1996) while admiration of lifestyles in foreign countries was measured with three items based on Batra et al. (2000). Two-hundred and forty-seven responses from a national random sample of 2000 women (obtained from a professional sampling service) were collected using a mail survey (response rate = 12.5%).

Fig. 1. Market globalization attitudes in South Korea.

230

D.L. Alden et al. / Intern. J. of Research in Marketing 23 (2006) 227239

Participants in the study were responsible for at least half of the shopping in their household. 3.2.2. MCA results As in Korea, the MCA scree test indicated a two-dimensional solution, explaining 72.6% of the variance (after optimal scaling). Canonical correlations indicated acceptable reliability within each factor: 0.69 for the first and 0.68 for the second. The first dimension was again interpreted as relative preferences for either global, local or hybrid consumption alternatives, with the hybrid (and disinterested) responses located between the global and local preference clusters. Likewise, the second dimension again reflected consumer response intensity, suggesting that consumers with more positive attitudes toward global, hybrid and local alternatives have similar levels of relatively strong attitudinal intensity. The similarity between the South Korean and the US configurations was examined formally by computing their congruence after optimal rotation (Steenkamp, Van Trijp, & Ten Berge, 1994). Congruence was high (.832, p < .001). This attests to the fact that there is a high degree of GCO attitudinal structure stability across two culturally dissimilar countries. 3.2.3. Relationships between attitude toward GCO and related constructs As mentioned, further evidence for the construct validity of the GCO scale would exist if we were to find that consumers with more positive attitudes toward GCO were also more cosmopolitan and more admiring of lifestyles in foreign countries. To test these relationships, MCA factor scores for attitudes toward GCO were correlated with cosmopolitanism and admiration of foreign countries, using confirmatory factor analysis.1 The three-factor model yielded a good fit: 2(42) = 91.80 ( p < .001), CFI = .980, GFI = .933, RMSEA = .073. All factor loadings were significant at p < .001, all (standardized) factor loadings were above .40, the average loading being .758, indicating convergent validity (Steenkamp & Van Trijp, 1991). The correlation between attitude toward GCO and cosmopolitanism was .522 ( p < .001) and the correlation between attitude toward GCO and admiration of lifestyles in foreign countries was .625 ( p < .001). These results support the construct validity of our measure of attitude toward GCO (Bagozzi, 1994), and show that our measures of GCO attitudes reflect orientations that go beyond the specific consumption domains used in our GCO assessment. 3.3. Empirical validation of the GCO dimensions in China The China study served two purposes: 1) to replicate the Korean results in still another, greatly different cultural context (Hofstede, 2001), and 2) to examine to what extent the MCA solution is specific to our four signifier categories. Although the US study provides evidence on the construct validity of our
1 In MCA, a respondent's score on an underlying dimension is computed as the average of the category quantifications for those response categories indicated by him/her. Like factor analysis, respondents' scores are standardized per dimension and uncorrelated across dimensions (Hoffman & Franke, 1986).

GCO scale, the question remains whether the MCA structure would change when another consumption domain was added. Foods are an important and involving category, in which many consumers prefer local alternatives, such that a choice of a global alternative ought to be especially revealing (Alden et al., 1999). Thus, in this second validation study we added food as one of our consumption domains, increasing the number of GCO questions from four to five consumption domains. The global market research agencies GfK and Taylor Nelson Sofres collected data on our GCO measurement instrument. The items were translated in Chinese, using back-translation. Data were collected using small intercepts in multiple regions/locations. Data were obtained for 419 respondents. A graphical representation of the two-dimensional MCA results, explaining 70.4% of the variance, is provided in Fig. 2. Canonical correlations indicated acceptable reliability within each factor: .68 for the first and .60 for the second. It can be clearly seen that even with food added as a fifth domain, and even with possibly country-specific interpretations of our GCO questions the structure is remarkably similar to that of South Korea. Again, the first dimension can be interpreted as relative preferences for either global, local or hybrid consumption alternatives, with the hybrid responses located between the global and local preference clusters. Likewise, the second dimension reflects consumer response intensity. 4. Antecedents to and consequences of GCO Having found evidence for GCO's similar dimensionality and structure in three diverse countries as well as robustness by adding another consumption domain in China, we return to the South Korean data set to explore possible relationships between the new construct, several theory-based attitudinal antecedents and mediators, and an important consequence.

Fig. 2. Market globalization attitudes in China.

D.L. Alden et al. / Intern. J. of Research in Marketing 23 (2006) 227239

231

4.1. Broad globalization antecedents: exposure to global cultural flows According to Appadurai (1990, p. 299), media provide (especially in their television, film and cassette forms) large and complex repertoires of images, narratives and ethnoscapes to viewers throughout the world from which scripts can be formed of imagined lives, their own as well as those of others living in other places. Consumers are exposed to this global, macro-level flow when they are exposed to such media. To the extent that consumers self-select mass media (movies, television and magazine content) from foreign countries, they are likely to be exposed to multi-cultural experiences and with increasing familiarity should develop more positive attitudes toward consumption alternatives from outside their local environment. This leads to our first hypothesis: H1a. Consumers who have been more frequently exposed to mass-media influences from other countries are more likely to hold more positive attitudes toward GCO. Appadurai (1996) also argues that mass migration plays a major role in the diffusion of global culture. Within his framework, mass migration does not refer to groups of individuals moving abroad permanently. Rather, it describes the fact that in today's world of low cost and speedy travel, people are continually moving in and out of their home and other cultures. Every year, hundreds of millions of businesspeople, government officials, students, tourists and relatives with family members abroad visit and return from foreign cultures. In Appadurai's (1996) work, mass migration refers to three types of crosscultural interactions: 1) traveling to outside cultures; 2) having social contacts with relatives, friends, etc. who have been abroad for some time; and 3) having social contacts with foreigners. Other scholars have documented the facilitating effect of foreign country travel on globalization (Wilk, 1995), as well as interactions with foreigners in one's own country (Belk, 2000). While some have questioned how much tourism actually facilitates cross-cultural understanding (Thompson & Tambyah, 1999) and others have noted that mass migration has fueled local resentment in certain cultures and/or regions (Chua, 2002), we conclude that the preponderance of theory suggests that consumers who have been more frequently exposed to global and foreign consumption alternatives through travel-related contact with foreign cultures will have more positive attitudes toward global consumption alternatives. As a result, we hypothesize: H1b. Consumers who have had more exposure to foreign cultures through travel-related (direct and indirect) contact are more likely to hold more positive attitudes toward GCO. 4.2. Consumer disposition antecedents: materialism and SNI Materialism concerns the importance a consumer attaches to worldly possessions and the belief that he/she will derive pleasure and happiness from their ownership. Some of this satisfaction comes from owning what reference groups consider valuable (e.g., see Belk's, 1985 envy sub-dimension). This construct is

of interest for several reasons. First, linkages between materialism and socialization influences are relevant to understanding alternative responses to globalization (Ahuvia & Wong, 2002). Second, theory directly links global culture to materialism (Chua, 2002; Johansson, 2004). Third, materialism has been associated with the economic center (Holton, 2000, p. 142). Global media content, heavily influenced by western advertising and drama, is often laden with images of materialistic success and accompanying symbols (Holton, 2000). Social comparison theory (Lockwood & Kunda, 1997) suggests that consumers with higher levels of exposure to global media are more likely to view materialism as an important life objective. In addition, Richins (1987) reported a positive correlation between mass media exposure and materialism. For these reasons, we expect that global media exposure will be positively related to materialism. Thus: H2a. Consumers who have had more exposure to mass media influences stressing foreign culture content are likely to be more materialistic. Furthermore, as noted by Holton (2000, p. 142) global culture sells dreams of affluence, personal success and self-gratification attributes associated with materialism and often with more developed countries. As a result, we expect that consumers who score higher on materialism will also hold more positive attitudes toward GCO as they are more likely to value its predominant value-orientation and symbol set. For this reason, we hypothesize: H2b. Consumers who are more materialistic are likely to hold more positive attitudes toward GCO. In addition, postmaterialism theory from Inglehart (1990) suggests that a meaningful number of consumers are likely to eschew materialism in favor of satisfying higher order needs such as self-expression and quality of life. As a result, individuals who are low on materialism are likely to have relatively less intense feelings about global, hybrid or local alternatives. Hence we hypothesize: H2c. Consumers who are less materialistic are likely to exhibit lower levels of intensity toward GCO. Susceptibility to normative influence (SNI; Batra, Homer, & Kahle, 2001; Bearden, Netemeyer, & Teel, 1989) represents how strongly an individual is influenced by relevant others in normative domains. High SNI individuals are more likely to view material possessions as means to impress reference group members. As noted earlier, only in the past 1015 years has South Korea achieved newly developed country status and opened its markets (Ulgado & Lee, 1998). Hence, most consumers grew up in a relatively deprived environment in which quality goods were rather scarce. Assuming Ahuvia and Wong's (2002) finding of a link between relative deprivation during youth and later materialistic tendencies holds outside of the US, there is reason to think that many South Koreans will have materialistic tendencies. If so, then consumers with high SNI should be even more strongly influenced by this norm and therefore, have relatively higher materialistic tendencies. It is possible that a focus on the collective (Hofstede, 2001), survival values (Inglehart & Baker, 2000) and Confucian values

232

D.L. Alden et al. / Intern. J. of Research in Marketing 23 (2006) 227239

(Park & Cho, 1995) in South Korea may limit the influence of SNI on materialism. However, recent research indicates that such traditional values may be weaker among South Korean women (the focus of this study), particularly in complex urban environments such as Seoul where the sample resided (Hyung, 2001). Thus, although we hypothesize a positive relationship between SNI and materialism, we recognize that arguments for an alternative relationship can be made. H3a. Consumers who are higher on SNI will be more materialistic. If the norms of one's group favor global consumption alternatives, as was the case for the consumers studied by Belk (2000), high SNI might lead to more positive attitudes toward such global alternatives. However, the literature indicates that positive attitudes toward GCO are unlikely to be predominant among consumers in most societies today (Featherstone, 1990). Indeed, given the centrality of local culture to self-concept (Ryder et al., 2000), it seems likely that consumption of local cultural symbols serves a central self-verification function for many consumers (Escalas & Bettman, 2003). Furthermore, to the extent that consumers are high on SNI, they are more likely to want to stand-in and not differentiate themselves from predominant consumption norms (Schroeder, 1996). Thus, we expect that local culture norms will exert substantially stronger influences on consumers who are prone to SNI than will global or hybrid norms (cf., Alden et al., 1999). Following this logic, we hypothesize: H3b. Consumers who are higher on SNI will hold more negative attitudes toward GCO. In addition, consumers who are more susceptible to social normative influence should be more concerned about the match between their own consumption preferences and those held by their reference group (Bearden et al., 1989). For this reason, they are likely to more intensely hold their attitudes toward GCO whether pro-global, local or hybrid. This leads to the following prediction: H3c. Consumers who are high on SNI will exhibit higher levels of intensity in their attitudes toward GCO. 4.3. Consequence of global consumption orientation: attitude toward global brands Individuals with positive attitudes towards a group often hold more positive attitudes toward symbols of affiliation with that group than individuals with less positive attitudes. Hence, consumers with more positive attitudes toward global consumption are expected to more strongly prefer one obvious set of globalization symbols global brands. On the other hand, consumers who have negative GCO should be less favorably disposed because the cultural meanings they value are less compatible with global brand meanings. Therefore: H4. Consumers who hold more positive attitudes toward GCO will also hold more positive attitudes toward global brands.

4.4. Mediator of global consumption orientation on attitudes toward global brands: CET Attitudes along the globallocal consumption dimension involve tension between the local and the global (Holton, 2000). Applied to the present context, we propose an important role of consumer ethnocentrism (CET) as mediator between global consumption orientation and attitudes toward global brands. CET represents consumer beliefs about the appropriateness, indeed morality, of purchasing foreign-made products (Shimp & Sharma, 1987, p. 280). Sharma et al. (1995) found a negative relationship between cultural openness and CET. Furthermore, Baughn and Yaprak (1996) found that economic nationalism, which is closely related to CET, is negatively affected by cultural openness. For these reasons, we expect that GCO will be negatively related to CET: H5a. Consumers with more positive attitudes toward GCO will exhibit lower levels of CET. The findings of Crane (2002) and Steenkamp, Batra, and Alden (2003) suggest that ethnocentric sentiments play an important role in shaping individuals' responses to global products and brands. Highly ethnocentric consumers tend to reject brands that are culturally dissimilar while favoring those that originate in their own culture (Shimp & Sharma, 1987). Thus, individuals who exhibit low levels of CET are likely to hold more positive attitudes toward global brands: H5b. Consumers who exhibit lower levels of CET will hold more positive attitudes toward global brands. We recognize that reasonable arguments can be made for an alternative model in which GCO mediates the relationship between CET and global brand attitudes. In our model, GCO is conceptualized as a broader attitudinal predisposition, while CET has been applied to the relatively narrower domain of purchasing (or not) goods made overseas. More general or situationally invariant constructs should causally precede those that are less general and more situationally variable (see e.g., Ajzen & Fishbein, 1980, pp.157167). Hence, we hypothesize that the more general construct, GCO precedes the more situation-dependent construct, CET. Nevertheless, it is important to validate this hypothesis by testing alternative models (e.g., reversing this path; Bagozzi and Yi, 1988), which we do in a subsequent section. Finally, we note that there is a literature suggesting that globalization has impacted teens and other young adults to a greater degree than their older counterparts (Walker, 1996). However, as our sample consists of relatively older homemakers in South Korea, we offer no hypotheses but include age as a control variable. 5. Empirical study into antecedents to and consequences of GCO 5.1. Data collection To test our hypotheses regarding antecedents and consequences of GCO (see Fig. 3), data from the South Korean

D.L. Alden et al. / Intern. J. of Research in Marketing 23 (2006) 227239

233

Fig. 3. Nomological net.

sample described previously was analyzed. Items and sources for the instruments are reported in the Measurement Appendix. Extreme care was taken to assure an accurate and meaningful translation of measurement items from English to Korean (e.g., double-back translation was used). Furthermore, to reduce questionnaire length and respondent fatigue, only the highest loading items on the first, largest factor in factor analyses in prior studies were selected for materialism, SNI and CET (see Batra et al., 2000; Ter Hofstede, Steenkamp, & Wedel, 1999 for similar practice). Two criteria guided the selection of brands to serve as test stimuli. First, to enhance the generalizability of the results, we selected categories that varied on involvement and utilitarian/ hedonic characteristics. These dimensions have been used repeatedly in consumer research to distinguish between the product categories (Ratchford, 1987). Second, categories needed to include brands perceived as global. In a pre-test, South Korean consumers rated a large number of product categories and brands on high/low involvement, utilitarian/ hedonic characteristics and globalness (brands only). The larger set of product categories and potential brands was identified earlier in focus groups held in Seoul. Reflecting variance on involvement and utilitarian/hedonic dimensions but consistency in terms of brand globalness ratings (all high), product categories (global brands) chosen were: cola (Coca Cola)/hedonic-low involvement; toothpaste (Colgate)/ utilitarian-low involvement; color TV sets (Sony)/hedonic-high involvement; and refrigerators (Whirlpool)/utilitarian-high involvement.2 Product categories were counterbalanced across questionnaires, in sets of two categories for any one questionnaire. Hence, each respondent rated two global brands, from two product categories.
2 As a manipulation check, respondents rated brands on three perceived globalness items ( = .79). Respondents indeed perceived the brands as global. The mean ratings on a 7-point scale with 1 indicating that the brand is perceived to be a local brand, sold only in South Korea and 7 indicating a global brand, sold all around the world (Batra et al., 2000) were: Coca Cola, 6.1; Sony, 5.8; Colgate, 5.2; Whirlpool, 5.3.

5.2. Measurement quality LISREL 8.54 was used to assess our constructs' measurement quality. To allow for a stringent test of convergent and discriminant validity, all constructs were included in a single 9factor confirmatory factor model. For the constructs of attitude toward GCO and intensity of attitudes toward GCO, the MCA factor scores of respondents were used. Although the 2 was significant, other indicators were close to or exceeded conventional cutoff levels (Byrne, 1998): 2(211) = 921.50; p < .001, CFI = .892, GFI = .911, RMSEA = .069. All factor loadings were significant at p < .001, only one (standardized) factor loading was below .40 (.36) and the average loading was .65. All factor correlations were below unity ( p < .0001). These findings support the convergent and discriminant validity of the measures (Steenkamp & Van Trijp, 1991). Table 1 shows construct means, standard deviations and disattenuated correlations among the constructs, while construct reliabilities are given in the Measurement Appendix. 5.3. Tests of hypotheses The structural model (see Fig. 3) was estimated using LISREL 8.54.3 Model fit was good, given the complexity of the model: 2(267) = 1087.26 ( p < .001), CFI = .880, GFI = .901, RMSEA = .063. The standardized path coefficients are presented in Table 2. H1ab posited that exposure to foreign cultures through mass media and travel has a positive effect on a person's GCO. Both hypotheses are supported: (foreign mass media) = .133 ( p < .01); (travel-related contact) = .169 ( p < .01). Also consistent with expectations (H2a), a person's materialistic orientation was positively affected by exposure to foreign mass media ( = .206, p < .01). Thus, hypotheses concerning these direct antecedents are supported. Furthermore, as predicted, higher
3 Brand dummies were added to the equation involving attitude toward the brand as dependent variable as covariates to control for unobserved, brandspecific effects (e.g., objective quality, distribution coverage, market share).

234

D.L. Alden et al. / Intern. J. of Research in Marketing 23 (2006) 227239

Table 1 Means, standard deviations and correlations among constructs1 Constructs 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9.


1) 2)

Mean 2.867 4.254 3.665 47.458 .006 .001 3.215 4.935

S.D. 1.259 1.336 1.318 6.097 1.003 1.007 1.586 1.201

1 1.000 0.170 0.127 0.542 0.139 0.020 0.115 0.096 0.136

2 1.000 0.264 0.288 0.064 0.259 0.221 0.168 0.241

SNI Mass media exposure Mass migration exposure2 Materialism Age GCO Intensity GCO CET Attitude toward global brands

1.000 0.179 0.099 0.249 0.173 0.145 0.416

1.000 0.093 0.404 0.145 0.327 0.267

1.000 0.041 0.032 0.034 0.079

1.000 0.005 0.417 0.234

1.000 0.049 0.138

1.000 0.275

1.000

Reported are disattenuated (LISREL) correlations. Not applicable (items measured on different scales).

levels of materialism were associated with more positive attitudes toward GCO: ( = .531, p < .01), supporting H2b. Turning next to SNI, consumers who were higher on SNI were also more materialistic as expected (H3a): = .503 ( p < .01) and those with higher SNI held more negative attitudes toward GCO (H3b): = .351 ( p < .01).When considered together, evidence on behalf of H2ab and H3ab supports the proposed intervening role materialism plays in the impact of SNI and foreign mass media exposure on attitudes toward a global consumption orientation. The intervening role of materialism is very different for SNI versus foreign mass media exposure. The indirect effect of foreign mass media exposure through materialism on GCO (.109, p < .01) strengthened its direct effect (.133, p < .01), resulting in a substantial total effect of foreign mass media exposure (.242, p < .01). On the other hand, the direct (.351, p < .01) and indirect (.267, p < .01) effects of SNI on GCO contradicted each other. Indeed, consistent with the continued importance of local culture and local cultural norms (Alden et al., 1999), high SNI consumers had less positive GCO. However, high SNI was also associated with a more materialistic orientation and more materialistic consumers held more positive attitudes toward GCO. As a result, the total effect of SNI on positive attitudes toward GCO was much smaller and only marginally significant (.084, p < .10). Thus, taking into account the mediating role of materialism leads to more precise insights into the effects of SNI and foreign mass media exposure on attitudes. H4 and H5ab concern consumption consequences of attitudes toward GCO. Consistent with H4, consumers with positive GCO attitudes held more positive attitudes toward global brands ( = .145, p < .01). Moreover, there was an indirect effect through CET. Consumers with positive GCO exhibited lower levels of CET ( = .416, p < .01), while more ethnocentric consumers held more negative attitudes toward global brands ( = .201, p < .01). Supporting H5ab, the indirect effect was significant: .084 ( p < .01), while the total effect of GCO (direct and via CET) on attitudes toward global brands was .229 ( p < .01). The last set of results reports on the two hypotheses that focused on the second dimension, intensity of attitudes toward GCO. We hypothesized that both materialism (H2c) and SNI (H3c) would be positively associated with the intensity of consumer attitudes toward GCO. Both coefficients were directionally consistent with

our hypotheses but marginally significant at best ( = .093, p = .10, and = .092, p = .11, respectively). 5.4. Rival models It is important to establish that our model fits the complex pattern of covariances between items better than other plausible rival models (Bagozzi & Yi, 1988). We estimated two plausible rival models. The first rival model specifies reverse causal relations. A case could be made that consumers who are lower on consumer ethnocentrism and who have more positive attitudes toward global brands will consequently have a more positive attitude toward GCO. Brands are important and very visible signs of consumer culture (Aaker, Benet-Martinez, & Garolera, 2001) and if a person thinks positively about global brands, he/she will think more positively about GCO with which these brands are associated. After all, brands may be more tangible and easier to process aspects of GCO than many other aspects. Moreover, people who hold weaker beliefs about the moral duty of purchasing local brands may face lower psychological barriers to liking GCO, with its inherent nonterritorial focus. In addition, people with a more positive attitude toward GCO may be more inclined to expose themselves
Table 2 Structural coefficients Paths Hypothesized paths H1a Foreign mass media exposure GCO H1b Mass migration exposure GCO H2a Foreign mass media exposure Materialism H2b Materialism GCO H2c Materialism GCO Intensity H3a SNI Materialism H3b SNI GCO H3c SNI GCO Intensity H4 GCO Attitude toward global brands H5a GCO CET H5b CET Attitude toward global brands Control variable: Age GCO Age GCO Intensity p .10; p .05; p .01. Expected sign + + + + + + + + Standardized coefficient .133 .169 .206 .531 .093 .503 .351 .092 .145 .416 .201

.020 .053

D.L. Alden et al. / Intern. J. of Research in Marketing 23 (2006) 227239

235

to foreign mass media and maintain contacts with foreigners. It may also contribute to their materialistic orientation, given that the GCO is not exclusively but nevertheless heavily materialistic in scope. Further, positive attitudes toward GCO could reduce one's degree of SNI as a global mindset may reduce inclination to follow local social norms. Finally, materialism could have reverse effects on SNI and global media exposure. The fit of the rival model was worse than the proposed model: 2(278) = 1138.35 ( p < .001), CFI = .874, GFI = .895, RMSEA = .064. For model comparison, the information criterion AIC which also imposes a penalty on fitting additional parameters is particularly powerful. In an extensive study, Williams and Holahan (1994) found that AIC was the most effective index for distinguishing between correctly and incorrectly specified models. Lower values of AIC indicate better fit but they have no absolute meaning (i.e., they are only useful in comparing rival models). AIC for the proposed model was 1204.27 versus 1252.09 for the rival model. Thus, AIC supports the proposed model rather than the rival model specifying reverse causal effects. Our proposed model specifies a number of mediating constructs. Another rival model might specify direct paths from each of the exogenous constructs (foreign media exposure, mass migration, SNI) to each of the endogenous constructs (materialism, attitude toward GCO, intensity of consumer attitudes toward GCO, CET, attitude toward global brands). This second rival model imposes fewer constraints on the data in that it allows each exogenous construct to directly affect each endogenous construct. However, AIC for the second rival model was again higher than for the proposed model: 1243.96 versus 1204.27, indicating poorer fit for the rival model. The other fit indices also did not support the rival model: 2 (261) = 1076.55 ( p < .001), CFI = .881, GFI= .899, RMSEA = .065. The 2 for the rival model is only 10.71 lower while using 6 degrees of freedom. GFI and CFI (which do not correct for additional parameters estimated) are the same as for the proposed model, and since the rival model estimates more parameters, this shows the proposed model is superior. RMSEA is slightly worse for the rival model. In sum, in addition to the conceptual arguments developed above delineating the causal relations between the various constructs as outlined in Fig. 3, the findings for two plausible rival models provide empirical support for our hypothesized model. 6. Discussion 6.1. Conclusions This study provides initial evidence that attitudes toward consumption alternatives resulting from market globalization cluster along a globalhybridlocal continuum. We refer to the observed variation in consumer attitudes along the continuum as Global Consumption Orientation (GCO). This new construct integrates theoretical and measurement approaches from both the globalization and acculturation traditions. GCO also builds on existing qualitative studies of the diverse responses to globalization (e.g., Belk, 2000; Ger, Belk, & Lascu, 1993; Sandikci & Ger, 2002). It does this by quantitatively modeling consumption pre-

ferences for services, goods and lifestyles that vary in terms of cultural content from global to local. GCO demonstrates the value of drawing on multiple streams to develop a model that is well-grounded in past research with a strong potential for future development. Further light is shed on the GCO construct from our examination of its interplay with global flows, global brand attitudes and important dispositional consumer constructs such as materialism, SNI and CET. Support was found for central predictions regarding the positive effects on GCO of exposure to foreign cultures through mass media and travel (H1aH1b) as well as materialism (H2b). Also as hypothesized (H3b), SNI had a negative impact on GCO. In turn, GCO was positively related to positive attitudes toward global brands (H4). Finally, CET was found to play an important mediating role between GCO and global brand attitudes as expected (H5a/b). Evidence on behalf of such hypotheses argues for the overall model's construct validity (Bagozzi, 1994) and demonstrates the importance of including dispositional consumer constructs in order to obtain a clearer picture of the relationships between the antecedents and consequences of GCO. 6.2. Managerial implications Several important managerial implications follow from this study. First, our results provide reason to question the view among many global marketers that the future will inevitably favor standardized global brands over localized competitors (Pitcher, 1999). A key rationale for managers' emphasis on global brands is the allegedly increasing uniformity of global consumer cultures and tastes, driven by the growth in global media and travel flows (see, e.g., Levitt, 1983). The resulting use by marketers of the symbols of GCO to position their brands as global has been documented (Alden et al., 1999). In our study, however, we find instead sufficient variation in levels of GCO to suggest that such homogenization is not inevitable. Our findings thus indicate that globalization and cultural homogenization are not equivalent. Rather, consumers more often integrate local and global consumption symbols. Hence, even though complete standardization might yield companies larger cost-savings, a more profitable global strategy may be to blend global with local symbols. Following this route, MTV has conquered countries like Italy, Russia and Brazil by skillfully combining global culture with local traditions (Business Week, 2002). Similarly, we would argue that companies may find it more profitable (particularly in larger markets) to offer a portfolio of brands that differ in terms of attribute associations along the globalhybridlocal continuum. Of course, the nature of such a portfolio is likely to vary by country, depending on target market attitudes toward globalization. The seemingly unstoppable flows of global media and migration and their impact on GCO shown in our study may suggest to some that a homogenous GCO will eventually dominate local markets. However, we found sufficient variation in GCO attitudes and evidence of moderating variables (socio-demographic and others) to support the conclusion that diverse attitudes toward GCO will exist for the foreseeable future.

236

D.L. Alden et al. / Intern. J. of Research in Marketing 23 (2006) 227239

Hence, from a global marketing manager's perspective, this study provides insight on potential positioning strategies depending on target market attitudes toward GCO. For instance, in a market characterized by substantial numbers of consumers with strong negative attitudes toward GCO, a locally positioned brand is likely to meet with more success than one that is positioned as part of the GCO symbol set. Alternatively, a global brand may attempt to overcome opposition by performing actions that are locally valued. For example, in many developing countries, Coca Cola has invested in the infrastructure to produce clean water, benefiting both the company and the local population. On the other hand, markets in which consumers hold more positive GCO offer the global brand manager more flexibility in positioning the brand as local, global or foreign. In these cases, additional factors such as competitive brand positioning, consistency with strategy used in other markets and cost-related concerns should play a larger role. GCO can also be used as segmentation basis, both within and across countries. Specific findings within the general model also hold promise for managerial action for marketers of global brands. The fact that consumers' exposure to mass media positively influences GCO and (through GCO) global brand attitudes, suggests the importance of continued emphasis on this communication channel. With the advent of global media channels such as Star TV, co-promotion of international programming that enhances GCO among targeted adults is feasible and should result in benefits to brands positioned as global. As another illustration, sponsoring events that feature GCO icons may provide additional value, e.g., a worldwide concert tour featuring an internationally recognized star such as Jennifer Lopez. Likewise, linking global brands to the positive experiences of consumers in other countries visited by target market consumers should also enhance brand value. At the same time, the negative relationship between SNI and GCO indicates that consumers who are interested in brands with global associations may be relatively more independent of social norms. This finding too has targeting and communication implications for managers. Finally, mediation of the path between GCO and attitudes toward global brands by consumer ethnocentrism is a sober reminder that consumers continue to hold varying opinions about whether the global availability of consumer goods and lifestyles is a positive or negative fact of modern life. Clearly, it remains critical for global brand managers to conduct local market research using these constructs to measure and work with varying levels of consumer ethnocentric opposition to global brands. 6.3. Limitations and future research Our study has limitations that offer avenues for future research. First, our tests of hypothesized relationships between GCO and other variables employed cross-sectional data that cannot prove cause. Experimental studies could test specific causal effects. Second, the GCO construct was operationalized using preferences for global, local or hybrid attributes in four consumption domains. While high reliability across these domains increases confidence in the results, and adding foods does not change the MCA structure, future research with additional domains is desirable to

assure the scale's validity. A related avenue for future research is to develop a GCO scale that does not make reference to specific consumption domains and hence is free of product context effects. Of special interest is a rigorous comparison of the concurrent and predictive validity of our GCO scale versus a product-context free scale. Future scale development might also consider separating a no interest from a no preference response. Other avenues for future research are also available. In the globalization literature, the hybridization response is least precisely defined. In developing measures for this response, we sought an approach that would reflect the widely discussed (but often unspecified) construct of glocalization. For this reason, we operationalized the hybrid construct as holding a positive attitude toward a mix of home cultural and global cultural consumption choices. This left the nature of the global/local mix to the respondent's interpretation. Several hybridization mixtures can be theorized. First, a consumer could alternate between separate local and global cultural frameworks, depending on the circumstances (LaFromboise et al., 1993). Alternatively, the consumer may integrate global elements into the local (or vice versa; Belk, 2000). Third, the consumer may fuse local and global consumer culture, creating new and unique elements that are atypical of both (Sandikci & Ger, 2002). These alternative modes of hybridization are clearly related but there are also subtle differences. Future research should investigate whether alternative hybridization responses can be fruitfully separated and underlying processes and outcomes better understood, particularly in terms of consumer responses to global cultural flows. It is also important to consider adding a dynamic perspective to our static model. Currently, market globalization is dominated by brands originally from the West and Japan. How will this change if more people and more brands, from countries such as India, China South Africa or Brazil become participants in globalizing markets? This refers to what Iwabuchi (2000, p. 269) calls, the shift from a Western gaze to a global gaze. Another dynamic aspect relates to the length of time, people and societies are exposed to global consumer culture influences. Recent work in acculturation suggests that prolonged intercultural contact may lead to ethnogenesis the emergence of a new culture, containing a mixture and combination that not only contains the best of the original cultures but also new and unique elements that are atypical of both of them (Flannery et. al., 2001). We speculate that when consumers and societies are exposed to global consumer culture for a longer time period (after all, globalization is a fairly recent phenomenon), the various facets of the hybridization response noted above may emerge as a separate dimension, global cultural ethnogenesis, leading to a tridimensional model of consumer responses to cultural globalization. Global cultural ethnogenesis may thus lead to the emergence of new cultures, possibly at the regional level (e.g., East Asia; Iwabuchi, 2000). Still another dynamic aspect worth studying is a consumer's position over time on GCO. Jun, Ball, and Gentry (1993) argued that acculturation is best described as a U-shaped process. It is hypothesized to begin with a honeymoon phase, followed by a rejection phase and ultimately, a more stable relationship with the host culture. Related findings in the globalization literature

D.L. Alden et al. / Intern. J. of Research in Marketing 23 (2006) 227239

237

speak of a return to more local consumption once the novelty of global offerings wears-off (Sandikci & Ger, 2002). Thus, individuals' relative mix of attitudes across the GCO continuum may change over time as well. Longitudinal research at the individual level would help determine whether this occurs. In addition, although linkages in this study between the intensity dimension and its two hypothesized antecedents (materialism and SNI) were marginal, the rationale for this dimension in the marketing (Allison, 1978; Zaichkowsky, 1985) and acculturation literatures (Berry et al., 1989; Oetting & Beauvais, 19901991) is strong and suggests the importance of continued theoretical and measurement attention. In the latter literature, the low end of the intensity dimension is associated with low cultural identification, loss of identity and problems of wellbeing. There are many possible reasons for this response. Clearly, our study did not address the underlying antecedent factors associated with the low intensity versus high intensity dimension. It will be important for future research to investigate this dimension in greater detail to better understand the causes and nature of consumer attitude intensity with respect to GCO. Finally, additional antecedents, mediators (such as independent vs. inter-dependent self-construal: Markus and Kitayama, 1991), moderators (e.g., cultural capital: Holt, 1998), and consequences (e.g., liking of global advertisements) need to be tested. Acknowledgements The author(s) would like to thank the reviewers for their helpful recommendations and AiMark for the assistance with collecting consumer data for this study from China. Appendix A. Measurement appendix A.1. Items used in the South Korean study Attitude toward Global Consumption Orientation (GCO)4 (new scale) Lifestyle ___ It is important for me to have a lifestyle that I think is similar to the lifestyle of consumers in many countries around the world rather than one that is more unique to or traditional in Korea. ___ I try to blend a lifestyle that is considered unique to or traditional in Korea with one that I think is similar to the lifestyle of consumers in many countries around the world. ___ It is more important for me to have a lifestyle that is unique to or traditional in Korea rather than one that I think is similar to the lifestyle of consumers in many countries around the world. ___ To be honest, I do not find the typical lifestyle in Korea or the lifestyles of consumers in other countries very interesting.

Entertainment ___ I enjoy entertainment that I think is popular in many countries around the world more than traditional forms of entertainment that are popular in my own country. ___ While I like entertainment that I think is popular in many countries around the world, I also enjoy traditional forms of entertainment that are popular in my own country. ___ Entertainment that is traditional in my own country is more enjoyable to me than entertainment that I think is popular in many countries around the world. ___ To be honest, most entertainment, whether from my own traditional culture or from other countries, is boring to me. Furnishings ___ I prefer to have home furnishings that I think are popular in many countries around the world rather than furnishings that are considered traditional in my own country. ___ I do not mind mixing home furnishings that are traditional in my country with those that I think are popular in many countries around the world. ___ I like to furnish my home with traditional items from my culture more than with furnishings that I think are popular in many countries around the world. ___ I am not sure that I like my country's traditional furnishings or furnishings that I think are popular in many countries around the world. Clothing ___ I prefer to wear clothing that I think is popular in many countries around the world rather than clothing traditionally worn in my own country. ___ It is not difficult for me to alternate or mix clothing choices so that I wear clothing that is traditionally popular in my own country as well as clothing that I think is popular in many countries around the world. ___ I would rather wear clothing that is traditionally popular in my own country than clothing that I think is popular with consumers in many countries around the world. ___ It doesn't matter whether you're talking about traditional clothing from my country or clothing that is preferred by consumers in other countries, I am not interested in clothing. Exposure to mass-mediated events involving information about foreign people ( = .78)5,6 (Based on Appadurai, 1990) How often do you watch fictional or non-fictional television programs (other than standard news programs) that are about people who live in other countries of the world? How often do you read features, reports or stories in magazines (other than standard news) that are about people who live in other countries? How often do you see movies in a theater or rent one for home with fictional or non-fictional stories about people who live in other countries? How often do you watch television programs that are produced in other countries and shown in your country?

Respondents were asked to check in front of the statement that best described their feelings. For each domain, statements one through four indicate global, hybrid, local consumption preference, and disinterest, respectively.

Items were scored on seven-point scales with very seldom or never (=1) and very often (=7) as anchors. 6 indicates composite reliability coefficient (Steenkamp & Van Trijp, 1991).

238

D.L. Alden et al. / Intern. J. of Research in Marketing 23 (2006) 227239 Appadurai, A. (1996). Modernity at large: cultural dimensions of globalization. Minneapolis, MI: University of Minnesota Press. Arends-Tth, J. V. (2003). Psychological acculturation of Turkish migrants in The Netherlands: issues in theory and assessment. Amsterdam, Netherlands: Dutch University Press. Bagozzi, R. P. (1994). Measurement in marketing research: basic principles of questionnaire design. In R. P. Bagozzi (Ed.), Principles of marketing research (pp. 149). Cambridge, MA: Basil Blackwell. Bagozzi, R. P., & Yi, Y. (1988). On the evaluation of structural equation models. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 16(2), 7494. Balbanis, G., Diamantopuolos, A., Mueller, R., & Melewar, T. (2001). The impact of nationalism, patriotism, and internationalism on consumer ethnocentric tendencies. Journal of International Business Studies, 33(1), 157175. Batra, R., Homer, P. M., & Kahle, L. R. (2001). Values, susceptibility to normative influence, and attribute importance weights: a nomological analysis. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 11(2), 115128. Batra, R., Ramaswamy, V., Alden, D. L., Steenkamp, J. -B. E. M., & Ramachander, S. (2000). Effects of brand local/non-local origin on consumer attitudes. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 9(2), 8395. Baughn, C. C., & Yaprak, A. (1996). Economic nationalism: conceptual and empirical development. Political Psychology, 17(4), 759778. Bearden, W. O., Netemeyer, R. G., & Teel, J. E. (1989). Measurement of consumer susceptibility to interpersonal influence. Journal of Consumer Research, 15 (1), 473481. Belk, R. W. (1985). Materialism: trait aspects of living in the material world. Journal of Consumer Research, 12(4), 265280. Belk, R. W. (2000). Consumption patterns of the new elite in Zimbabwe. In C. L. ShultzII & B. Grbac (Eds.), Marketing contributions to democratization and socioeconomic development, proceedings of the 25th macrcomarketing conference, Lovran, Croatia (pp. 120137). Berry, J. W., Kim, U., Power, S., Young, M., & Bujaki, M. (1989). Acculturation attitudes in plural societies. Applied Psychology, 38(2), 185206. Birman, D., & Trickett, E. J. (2001). Cultural transitions in first-generation immigrants: acculturation of Soviet Jewish refugee adolescents and parents. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 32(4), 456477. Business Week (2002, February 18). MTV's world (pp. 4045). Byrne, B. M. (1998). Structural equation modeling with LISREL, PRELIS, and SIMPLIS: basic concepts, applications, and programming. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Chua, A. (2002). World on fire: how exporting democracy breeds ethnic hatred and global instability. New York: Doubleday Books. Crane, D. (2002). Culture and globalization. In D. Crane, N. Kawashima, & K. Kawasaki (Eds.), Global culture: Media, arts, policy and globalization (pp. 125). New York: Routledge. Escalas, J. E., & Bettman, J. R. (2003). You are what they eat: the influence of reference groups on consumers' connections to brands. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 13(3), 339348. Featherstone, M. (1990). Global culture: an introduction. Theory, Culture and Society, 7(2/3), 114. Flannery, W. P., Reise, S. P., & Yu, J. (2001). An empirical comparison of acculturation models. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 27(8), 10351045. Friedman, J. (1996). Global systems, globalization and the parameters of modernity. In M. Featherstone, S. Lash, & R. Robertson (Eds.), Global modernities (pp. 6990). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Ger, G., & Belk, R. W. (1996). I'd like to buy the world a Coke: consumptionscapes in a less affluent world. Journal of Consumer Policy, 19(3), 271304. Ger, G., Belk, R. W., & Lascu, D. -N. (1993). The development of consumer desire in marketizing and developing economies: the cases of Romania and Turkey. In L. McAlister, & M. L. Rothschild (Eds.), Advances in consumer research, Vol. 20. (pp. 102107)Provo, Utah: Association for Consumer Research. Hannerz, U. (1990). Cosmopolitans and locals in world culture. Theory, Culture and Society, 7(2/3), 237251. Hermans, H. J. M., & Kempen, H. J. G. (1998). Moving cultures. American Psychologist, 53(10), 11111120. Hoffman, D. L., & Franke, G. R. (1986). Correspondence Analysis: graphical representation of categorical data in marketing research. Journal of Marketing Research, 23(3), 213227.

Exposure to mass-migration influences ( = .60)7 (Based on Appadurai, 1990) How often have you travelled to other countries? What is the longest period of time you have lived, worked, vacationed or studied in another country or countries? What is the longest period of time another member of your immediate family lived, worked, vacationed or studied in another country or countries? I enjoy meeting people who are from other countries. Materialism ( = .65)8 (Richins & Dawson, 1992) I admire people who own expensive homes, cars and clothes Some of the most important achievements in life include acquiring material possessions. I like to own things that impress people The things I own say a lot about how well I'm doing in life. Consumer ethnocentrism ( = .88)8 (Shimp & Sharma, 1987) Purchasing foreign-made products is un-Korean. Koreans should not buy foreign products because this hurts Korean business and causes unemployment. A real Korean should always buy Korean made products. It is not right to purchase foreign products. Susceptibility to normative influence (SNI) ( = .66)8 (Bearden et al., 1989) If I want to be like someone, I often try to buy the same brands that they buy When buying products, I generally purchase those brands that I think my friends and family will approve I achieve a sense of belonging by purchasing the same products and brands that friends or family purchase. Attitude toward the brand ( = .59)9 I think this brand is good/I think this brand is bad I have a negative opinion of it/I have a positive opinion of it References
Aaker, J. L., Benet-Martinez, V., & Garolera, J. (2001). Consumption symbols as carriers of culture: a study of Japanese and Spanish brand personality constructs. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 81(3), 492508. Ahuvia, A. C., & Wong, N. Y. (2002). Personality and values based materialism: their relationship and origins. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 12(4), 389402. Ajzen, I., & Fishbein, M. (1980). Understanding attitudes and predicting social behavior. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall. Alden, D. L., Steenkamp, J. -B. E. M., & Batra, R. (1999). Brand positioning through advertising in Asia, North America and Europe: the role of global consumer culture. Journal of Marketing, 63(1), 7587. Allison, N. K. (1978). The psychometric development of a test for consumer alienation from the marketplace. Journal of Marketing Research, 15(4), 565575. Appadurai, A. (1990). Disjuncture and difference in the global cultural economy. Theory, Culture and Society, 7(2/3), 295310.

7 The first item was scored on a five-point scale ranging from no travel to another country in the last two years (=1) to more than three trips to another country (=5). The second and third item were scored on a six-point scale from never (=0) to more than 2 years (= 5). The fourth item was scored on a sevenpoint scale with strongly disagree (=1) and strongly agree (=7) as anchors. 8 Items were scored on seven-point scales with strongly disagree (=1) and strongly agree (=7) as anchors. 9 Items were scored on seven-point bipolar scales with the end-poles given in the items.

D.L. Alden et al. / Intern. J. of Research in Marketing 23 (2006) 227239 Hofstede, G. (2001). Culture's consequences, 2nd Ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Holt, D. B. (1998). Does cultural capital structure American consumption? Journal of Consumer Research, 25(2), 125. Holt, D. B., Quelch, J. A., & Taylor, E. L. (2004). How global brands compete. Harvard Business Review, 82(9), 19. Holton, R. (2000). Globalization's cultural consequences. Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 570(4), 140152. Hyung, K. J. (2001). Sociocultural change and traditional values: Confucian values among Koreans and Korean Americans. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 25(2), 203229. Inglehart, R. (1990). Culture shift in advanced industrial society. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press. Inglehart, R., & Baker, W. E. (2000). Modernization, cultural change and the persistence of traditional values. American Sociological Review, 65(1), 1951. Iwabuchi, K. (2000). From western gaze to global gaze. In D. Crane, N. Kawashima, & K. Kawasaki (Eds.), Global culture: media, arts, policy and globalization (pp. 256273). New York: Routledge. Johansson, J. K. (2004). In your face: how American marketing excess fuels anti-Americanism. New York: Financial Times-Prentice Hall. Jun, S., Ball, A. D., & Gentry, J. W. (1993). Modes of consumer acculturation. In L. McAlister, & M. Rothschild (Eds.), Advances in consumer research, Vol. 20. (pp. 7682)Provo, UT: Association for Consumer Research. LaFromboise, T., Coleman, H. L. K., & Gerton, J. (1993). Psychological impact of biculturalism: evidence and theory. Psychological Bulletin, 114(3), 395412. Levitt, T. (1983). The globalization of markets. Harvard Business Review, 61 (3), 91102. Lockwood, P., & Kunda, Z. (1997). Superstars and me: predicting the impact of role models on the self. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 73 (1), 91103. Markus, H., & Kitayama, S. (1991). Culture and self: implications for cognition, emotion and motivation. Psychological Review, 98(2), 224253. Nguyen, H. H., Mess, L. A., & Stollak, G. E. (1999). Toward a more complex understanding of acculturation and adjustment: cultural involvements and psychosocial functioning in Vietnamese youth. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 30(1), 531. Oetting, E. R., & Beauvais, F. (19901991). Orthogonal cultural identification theory: the cultural identification of minority adolescents. International Journal of the Addictions, 25(5/6), 655685. Onkvisit, S., & Shaw, J. J. (2004). International marketing: analysis and strategy. New York: Routledge. Ozsomer, A., & Simonin, B. L. (2004). Marketing program standardization: a cross-country exploration. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 21(4), 397414. Park, C. W., & Moon, B. J. (2003). Product involvement and product knowledge: moderating roles of product type and product knowledge type. Psychology and Marketing, 20(11), 977997. Park, I., & Cho, L. (1995). Confucianism and the Korean family: special issue: families in Asia: beliefs and realities. Journal of Comparative Family Studies, 26(1), 117134. Pieterse, J. N. (1995). Globalization as Hybridization. In M. Featherstone, S. Lash, & R. Robertson (Eds.), Global modernities (pp. 4568). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Pitcher, G. (1999). Consumer brands cull makes room to grow.Marketing Week, 23 (40, Nov. 4th). Ratchford, B. T. (1987). New insights about the FCB grid. Journal of Advertising Research, 27(4), 2438. Richins, M. L. (1987). Media, materialism, and human happiness. In M. Wallendorf, & P. Anderson (Eds.), Advances in consumer research, Vol. 14. (pp. 352356) Provo, UT: Association for Consumer Research. Richins, M. L., & Dawson, S. (1992). A consumer values orientation for materialism and its measurement: measure development and validation. Journal of Consumer Research, 19(4), 303316. Ritzer, G. (2003). Rethinking globalization: Glocalization/grobalization and something/nothing. Sociological Theory, 21(3), 193209. Ryder, A. G., Alden, L. E., & Paulhus, D. L. (2000). Is acculturation unidimensional or bidimensional? A head-to-head comparison in the prediction of personality,

239

self-identity, and adjustment. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 79 (1), 4965. Salcedo, R. (2003). When the global meets the local at the mall. The American Behavioral Scientist, 46(8), 10841104. Sandikci, ., & Ger, G. (2002). In-between modernities and postmodernities: theorizing Turkish consumptionscape. In S. Broniarczyk, & K. Nakamoto (Eds.), Advances in consumer research, Vol. 29. (pp. 465470)Valdosta, GA: Association for Consumer Research. Schroeder, J. E. (1996). An analysis of the consumer susceptibility to interpersonal influence scale. Journal of Social Behavior and Personality, 11(3), 585599. Sharma, S., Shimp, T. A., & Shin, J. (1995). Consumer ethnocentrism: a test of antecedents and moderators. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 23 (1), 2637. Shimp, T. A., & Sharma, S. (1987). Consumer ethnocentrism: construction and validation of the CETSCALE. Journal of Marketing Research, 24(3), 280289. Singh, J. (1990). A typology of consumer dissatisfaction response styles. Journal of Retailing, 66(1), 5797. Steenkamp, J. -B. E. M. (2005). Moving out of the U.S. silo: a call to arms for conducting international marketing research. Journal of Marketing, 69(4), 68. Steenkamp, J. -B. E. M., Batra, R., & Alden, D. L. (2003). How perceived brand globalness creates brand value. Journal of International Business Studies, 34(1), 5365. Steenkamp, J. -B. E. M., & Ter Hofstede, F. (2002). International market segmentation: issues and perspectives. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 19(3), 185213. Steenkamp, J. -B. E. M., & Van Trijp, H. C. M. (1991). The use of LISREL in validating marketing constructs. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 8(4), 283299. Steenkamp, J. -B. E. M., Van Trijp, H. C. M., & Ten Berge, J. M. F. (1994). Perceptual mapping based on idiosyncratic sets of attributes. Journal of Marketing Research, 31(1), 1527. Stremersch, S., & Tellis, G. J. (2004). Understanding and managing international growth of new products. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 21(4), 421438. Suh, T., & Kwon, I. -K. G. (2002). Globalization and reluctant buyers. International Marketing Review, 19(6), 663685. Ter Hofstede, F., Steenkamp, J. -B. E. M., & Wedel, M. (1999). International market segmentation based on consumerproduct relations. Journal of Marketing Research, 36(1), 117. Thompson, C. J., & Tambyah, S. K. (1999). Trying to be cosmopolitan. Journal of Consumer Research, 26(4), 214241. Tsai, J. L., Ying, Y. -W., & Lee, P. A. (2000). The meaning of Being Chinese and Being American. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 31(3), 302332. Turner, B. S. (2003). McDonaldization: linearity and liquidity in consumer cultures. The American Behavioral Scientist, 47(2), 137153. Ulgado, F. M., & Lee, M. (1998). The Korean versus American marketplace: consumer reactions to foreign products. Psychology and Marketing, 15(6), 595614. Van Everdingen, Y. M., Aghina, W. B., & Fok, D. (2005). Forecasting crosspopulation innovation diffusion: a Bayesian approach. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 22(3), 293308. Walker, C. (1996). Can tv save the planet? American Demographics, 18(5), 4249. Wilk, R. R. (1995). Learning to be local in Belize: global systems of common difference. In D. Miller (Ed.), Worlds apart: modernity through the prism of the local (pp. 110133). London: Routledge. Williams, L. J., & Holahan, J. (1994). Parsimony-based fit indices for multipleindicator models: do they work? Structural Equation Modeling, 1(2), 161189. Zaichkowsky, J. (1985). Measuring the involvement construct. Journal of Consumer Research, 12(4), 341352. Zhou, N., & Belk, R. W. (2004). Chinese consumer readings of global and local advertising. Journal of Advertising, 33(3), 6377.