This study aims to investigate what consumer’s preference, as group members, to participate in boycott movement in Indonesia.
A mix method, qualitative (the first phase) and quantitative (the second phase), approach is used. The first phase used secondary data from media reporting interconnected themes on boycott, and the result of which was analyzed using content analysis method. Based on the results of the first phase, the authors continue with the second phase. The second phase used primary data from survey. The data were analyzed using analytical hierarchy process method.
The results showed that the primary target of boycott is the firm. The primary objective of boycott is the changing in firms’ behavior (instrumental), and the primary root cause of boycott is economy.
The study contributes to improve the authors’ knowledge about consumers’ preference, as group members, in their attempt to get involved in boycott movement. From the perspective of reference group theory, the study shows that consumers always compare what they do to what their groups do. Consumers also tend to be willingly persuaded if an opinion has been adopted by a group of preferred people or when they are the members. From the perspective of expectancy-value theory, the decision to present particular behaviors is the results of rational process directed to a particular objective. Behavior chosen is considered, consequences and results of an action are evaluated, and the decision is made whether or not to take any action.
Hendarto, K., Dharmmesta, B., Purwanto, B. and Moeliono, M. (2018), "Analyzing consumer participation in boycott movement using the analytical hierarchy process", Journal of Islamic Marketing, Vol. 9 No. 4, pp. 698-726. https://doi.org/10.1108/JIMA-11-2016-0086Download as .RIS
Emerald Publishing Limited
Copyright © 2018, Emerald Publishing Limited
Burger King, the US giant fast food, decided not to buy palm oil from Sinar Mas and its subsidiaries. This implies that Burger King has joined with Unilever, Nestle and Kraft to refuse palm oil from Sinar Mas (Detik.Com, 2010). More recent news implied that when the Taiwan Health Bureau and Taiwan Health Department announced to remove all instant noodles from Indonesia, the stock price of PT Indofood Sukses Makmur Tbk with the code of INDF and its subsidiary declined sharply on Monday 11 October 2010. The closing price declined to 4.41 per cent and 4.35 per cent from the previous day. This is thought to result from investors’ negative sentiment to the removal of Indomie instant noodle in Taiwan because of the suspected content of hazardous preservatives of methyl hydroxybenzoate (KOMPAS, 2010).
In general, Islamic consumers avoid purchase of products because of the hazardous side effects, religion (instruction not to consume) and dissatisfaction. Reasons on religion is given by God. However, the reason on side effects and dissatisfaction are the avoidable factor. In organizational behavior, Robbins and Judge (2014) mentioned that a dissatisfied worker may take a number of actions. He is either showing active behaviors (exit and voice) and passive behaviors (loyalty and neglect). This active behavior is known as boycott in marketing.
With the total population of 237 million in 2010, 87.18 per cent of which is Muslim (BPS, 2011), Indonesia is a potential market for firms to market their products. However, there have been only few studies on boycott in Indonesia, although the potential loss because of product boycott in Indonesia is apparent. The results of the review of studies on boycott conducted outside Indonesia, we found the following major gap: First, most studies were conceptual and descriptive (Klein et al., 2004). Hendarto et al. (2011) also found that the studies use mathematical or deterministic technique of analysis to ensure the certain solution. Only few studies use stochastic or probabilistic technique in the analysis. Different from deterministic technique, in probabilistic technique the results contain uncertainty, with possible alternative solution. Second, a number of studies on boycott test consumers’ beliefs and attitude in their participation of boycott without considering the contextual variable (whether the rationale of boycott is relevant for consumers) (Hoffman, 2013. Meanwhile, a number of Islamic consumers probably take part in boycott because of peer pressure or group influence (Sari et al., 2017). Hendarto et al. (2012) also stated that firms (target) of boycott and consumers are active in nature. The boycotted firms will strive to avoid appeal of boycott. On the other hand, consumers who take part in boycott may begin, cancel, terminate or continue boycott in different ways. For example, they either leave or stay in group. Third, most empirical studies of consumers’ boycott use quantitative approach (i.e. Klein et al., 2002; Klein et al., 2004; Sen et al., 2001; Hoffman and Muller, 2009; Farah and Newman, 2010) and qualitative approach (Kozinet and Handelman, 1998; Lee et al., 2009; Braunsberger and Buckler, 2010). However, studies about boycott that combine both (mixed methods) are limited in number.
This study aims to narrow these gaps. First, this study used probabilistic technique, analytical hierarchy process (AHP), as the analysis tool. The prime use of AHP is the resolution of choice problem in a multi criteria environment. In that mode, its methodology includes comparison of objectives and alternatives in a natural pairwise manner (Forman and Gass, 2001). Second, this study used mixed method. Teddlie and Tashakkori (2009) argued that there are at least three advantages of mixed methods study than a single method. They are as follows:
Mixed methods are able to answer the question of study that other methods fail to.
Those methods give stronger process of conclusion.
Those methods give an opportunity to present wider perspectives.
In line with their argument, Woodside (2010) added that the use of mixed methods in case studies will improve the accuracy and complexity/scope for a better generalization.
The objective of this study is to identify the preference of consumers, as members, in Indonesia context, to participate in boycott movement. The questions of study to be answered include: what is the primary: targets; objectives; and roots causes; that motivate individual to participate in boycott? To answer the questions, this study uses the sequential exploratory strategy. This strategy involves the collection and analysis of qualitative data at the first phase, that is followed by the collection and analysis of quantitative data at the second phase based on the results of the first phase (Creswell, 2013). Therefore, this article is organized in some parts. At Phase 1, at the initial section of this part, the agenda setting theory is described. Then, secondary data are collected from media and is analyzed by content analysis method. The results of the analysis are presented and discussed. At Phase 2, at the initial section of this part, reference group and expectancy-value (EV) theory are described. Primary data are collected from the respondents based on the results of the analysis at the previous phase. The collected data are then analyzed by the method of AHP. The results finding are presented and discussed. Finally, the conclusion, limitation and suggestion are offered based on empirical findings.
Agenda setting theory and research question
Mass media might serve as the reflector of public life and as social power or agent (McQuail, 1994). As a reflector, mass media is assumed to be the institution that process social facts existing in society. It is assumed to be the social fact agenda maker. In other words, what are released by mass media are considered important social documents in society. On the contrary, when a number of events are missed, the events are considered normal and unimportant. As the social agent and power, mass media is assumed to be a social institution taking an important role in the development of public opinion and attitude to a particular issue or event.
Furthermore, Severin and Tankard (2001) reported that the agenda setting theory refers to the media ability, with repeated news coverage, to raise the importance of an issue in the public mind. The assumption in the agenda setting theory is that media filter news, articles or writings to be published. Selectively, the “gatekeepers” such as proofreaders, editors and even journalists determine which news are deserve to be published and which others have to be declined. Because of the readers, audience and listeners get information mostly from media, the agenda of the media is certainly related with the agenda of the society. In other words, according to this theory, media do not inform others about “what to think”; instead, they inform “what to think about”. There are 2 levels in the theory of agenda setting. They are determining the public issues considered to be important and determining the parts or aspects of the issues considered to be important (Littlejohn and Foss, 2009).
The research question of this phase is to describe boycotts that are released in Indonesia national press. To achieve such the objective, the research questions are:
What is the target of boycott?
What is the objective of boycott?
What is the root cause of boycott in Indonesia?
Although we are mostly exposed with mass communication, our personal experience is limited and selective in nature (Wright, 1985). Being limited means that it is impossible for us to pay attention to all mass media (reading newspaper, listening to radio, watching television, browsing internet). Being selective means that our knowledge of what is transferred by mass media is biased by our personal preference. In other words, we are likely to be selective and make a choice of what we are going to read, listen, watch and browse.
The method used at the Phase 1 is content analysis. Some of the advantages of this analysis are:
That humans are not used as the object of study. Content analysis is non-reactive analysis since nobody is interviewed, asked to fill up questionnaires or asked to go to laboratory.
That it can be applied when a survey study is not applicable (due to limited memory of respondents), for example in the study of chronic political conflicts, religious conflicts and others lain (Adiputra, 2008).
Stokes (2006) suggested that the other advantages of content analysis is that it is possible to generate facts and numbers to be used as proof of an argument.
Population and sample
The population at this phase is all news in KOMPAS. This study selects KOMPAS for several reasons:
KOMPAS is a national daily newspaper.
It is the daily with the largest circulation.
It has all-Indonesia coverage, both the news content and the distribution.
This can be seen from the fact that KOMPAS has remote printing system, KOMPAS update, as well as the website www.kompas.com.
Strategy of sampling, reliability and computer coding is required in the study of content analysis (Lacy et al., 2015). In addition to strategy of sampling, determining the most optimal size of sample is equally important (Graneheim and Lundman, 2004). What is the optimal size of sample? The best answer is that “it depends” on the characteristics of the population, types of data analysis, confidence level and accuracy needed in the objectives of the study (Neuman, 2009).
This study uses purposive sampling with the following criteria:
The news is about boycott product.
The news is put in KOMPAS since the beginning to the end of the observation, that is from mid-1965 to 17 June 2010 or during 45 years.
The study takes a long observation because this study seeks also to identify the differences of news reports in different orders (in Indonesia, it is publicly known that there are three Government orders since the independence. They are the old order in the period of 1945-1967, the new order from 1967 to 1998 and the reform order since 1998-2010). To minimize researcher’s subjectivity, this study uses the strategy of data saturation by taking the whole elements of population meeting the criteria to be included in the sample as suggested by Guthrie et al. (2004).
Operational definition is quantification of a nominal/dictionary definition (Black and Champion, 1976). Kerlinger and Lee (2000) stated that operational definition gives meaning to a variable by specifying the operations or activities needed to measure these variables. While Kuncoro (2003) mentioned that operational definition is the procedure to be followed by researchers in the measurement of a variable. In this study, the operational definitions are as follows:
Location is the place where boycott takes place. In this study, the locations are divided into two: Indonesia and beyond Indonesia.
Product is something useful made by factories, grows or taken from the nature. In the study, product is defined as the goods or services produced by a firm or country of origin.
Target is an object, person or place that is deliberately chosen to be attacked. In this study, target is defined as a country of origin or a firm, chosen purposively for boycott. Country of origin is the country of manufacture, production where a product comes from. Firm is a legally-based business activity intended to generate profit while conforming the prevailing regulation.
Objective or aim is something hoped to be achieved by a plan, action or activity. There are three objectives to be seen in the news releases of media. They are: instrumental, expressive and clean hands (Friedman, 1999; Klein et al., 2002). Instrumental boycott is the boycott that declares the objective explicitly and in structured way. The final objective of instrumental boycott is the transformed policy and behavior of the target. Expressive boycott is the boycott which objective is declared not explicitly and in unstructured way and is only intended to express the anger or frustration to the target. Clean hand boycott is the boycott which participants want to present the comfort and security and avoid the feeling of guilty in a group.
Sponsor is group or someone who officially introduces or supports a proposal for a new law (Longman, 2003). In this study, a sponsor is individual or group that provides the support to boycott action.
Trigger is an event that cause boycott, but it is not important and inadequate to explain boycott.
Root cause or pivotal factor is the heart of boycott and deserve attention to solve boycott permanently. The ethic stream of utilitarianism values the goodness and badness of an action based on the effect on many people. Keraf (2002) informed that the principle adopted in this stream is “act in such a way that it can result in the biggest benefit for the largest number of people.” Because most boycotts are the root cause by unethical behavior, then unethical behavior is the behavior that results in the least benefit for the least number of people. In this study, the least benefit will be seen from political, economic, legal and environmental dimension. It is called a political dimension when the unethical behavior is related to the social and politic norms. It is economic dimension when the unethical behavior is related to the trade, industry and management of money. It has legal dimension when the unethical behavior is related to the legality of the prevailing regulation. Environmental dimension is characterized by unethical behavior related to air, water, ground, plant and animal.
Data processing and analysis
Berelson (1952) found that in most cases validity does not seem to be a major problem in content analysis. With careful operational definition and accurate and correct indicator selection, the coding sheet is assumed to measure what it should be measured. Kassarjian (1977) added that in content analysis it is enough to use face validity. Face validity here is a judgment by scientific community that the indicator in coding sheet really measures the construct. Neuman (2009) informed that inter-coder reliability is a common type of reliability reported in content analysis. Inter-coder reliability arises when there are several observers, raters or coders of information. This study measures reliability by calculating the value of inter-coder reliability as Holsti (1963) suggested:
The development of coding sheet had been consulted in advance to a researcher at the Center for Culture and Popular Media Research. The objective of the consultation was to have validity test in the coding sheet. To assess the face validity of the coding sheet, we submitted the coding sheet and a letter introducing our research objectives to a researcher at the Center for Culture and Popular Media Research. This expert provided feedback and qualitative comments about coding sheet in general. As a result of this procedure, we reworded some operational definition and indicator to integrate terminologies currently used by professionals (see Appendix 1 and 2). Afterwards, with the assistance of a researcher at the Institute of Research and Community Service, Gadjah Mada University, the reliability was tested. Krippendoff (2012) revealed that in content analysis, there are three methods of reliability testing: stability, reproducibility and accuracy. Of the three methods, accuracy is the strongest. Kassarjian (1977) revealed that although accuracy is the strongest method, it is difficult to be carried out. It is difficult because it requires standard data for comparison. Therefore, reproducibility is the most frequently used method. Reproducibility method is sometimes called inter-coder reliability. It is so-called because reliability is coded by some coders, the results of which are compared to each other. In other words, two or more coders are needed to code text content and the results of which are then compared. In this study, coding was made by two coders from the Center for Culture and Popular Media Research and from the Institute of Research and Community Service, Gadjah Mada University.
There is a difference in determining the cut off of reliability coefficient acceptance. Krippendoff (2012) reported that the lower limit of acceptance of reliability coefficient is 0.8; Scott in Hasrullah (2001) put it over 0.75, while Berelson (1952) informed the coefficient should be between 0.79 and 0.96. The reliability at this phase is 0.88 or above the score proposed by Krippendoff and Scott and between the ranges suggested by Barelson.
General description of boycott in media
In democratic society, information is very important. Journalists are expected to provide information needed by the society for decision making (Mencer in Rianto, 2009). In collecting the data, 50 news releases containing the phrase “boycott product” was collected (see Appendix 4). The first news about boycott was put on KOMPAS on July 9, 1982. Since then the news about product boycott is sometimes either present or absent in a year. Of that number, 32 news releases (61.54 per cent) contained the news about boycott in Indonesia. After the reform era of 1998, there was higher rate of news about boycott. This is partly caused by better democracy in media than before. There are more various media and they have better courage to release the news about realities although it may result in conflicting interest with some public bureaucrats. The distribution of news about boycott in KOMPAS is presented in Figure 1.
Target of boycott
Different from the news release of boycott in outside Indonesia, the news release about boycott in Indonesia is more complete. What is meant by “complete” here is that it includes interviews with competent sources and includes investigative news. For details, please refer the following Table I.
Table I shows that the news about boycott specify the target. The target can be firms or countries. For boycott in Indonesia, the news contains interviews from relevant news source. The news source consists of those involved in boycott, witness, the government and academicians who understand/have expertise in the ongoing boycott. Interviews from news sources are relevant to be presented for check and recheck or verification purpose. This is common in journalism.
Objectives of boycott
Friedman (1999) classified boycott based on the objectives: instrumental boycott and expressive boycott. Klein et al. (2002) added another objective of boycott which is clean hands boycott. Instrumental boycott is the boycott intended to insist the target of boycott to change the policy or behavior. Expressive boycott is the general form of boycott to the target of boycott. The difference between instrumental boycott and expressive boycott can be seen from the objectives. The objective of the instrumental boycott is clearly stated and structured while in expressive boycott the opposite is true. It is not clearly stated and not structured and it is merely an expression of anger or frustration to the target of boycott. Meanwhile, clean hands boycott is the boycott in which consumers participate in the boycott just to feel secure and comfortable and to avoid the feeling of guilty.
From the collected data, it can be concluded that both forms of boycott are found in Indonesia: instrumental boycott and expressive boycott. For example, instrumental boycott happens when some firms in Semarang disposed their wastes to Kali Tapak.” Consumers deserve to have clean and healthy environment and thus it is understandable that they boycott the industry, because boycott not to buy the products of the industries that pollute the environment is one of consumers’ strength” said Nabiel Makariem (KOMPAS 24/4/1991). Likewise, when some firms dispose their wastes to Kali Surabaya. “if we do not consume their products, we indirectly have saved Kali Surabaya” said Prigi Arisandi (KOMPAS 10/11/2004). Another case is seen in the news about Lapindo mud (KOMPAS 4/10/2006). It was quoted that:
If the activity of a firm destroys the environment and life of the local people, take a piece of paper, and make some columns on it. The first column contains the names of the products of that firm. The second column contains the list of the goods/services. And the third column contains the list of brands and the visual samples. The fourth column contains the details of markets, buyers, local targets, national, global, and so on. What for? It is intended for public movement to boycott the products of the firms and to urge betterment. This is not against the law. This is relevant to the market logics echoed by the think-tanks financed by the firms. This strategy has been used in some countries, and strategy is a matter of imagination. It is even surprising that we have not tried to do it. So, what are we waiting for? Likewise is the news about the boycott to the firms alleged to have taken away the BLBI (liquidity support from the Bank of Indonesia).
On KOMPAS of 3/7/2007, the General Chairman of the National Board of Muhammadiyah Din Syamsuddin stated that “jihad” (boycott to the products of the firms allegedly to manipulate the BLBI) is a form of responsibility among the Moslem to deal with the national problems. “This declaration is intended to encourage all Moslem to participate in determining the future of this nation in order that such case of BLBI will not occur any longer.” According to Din, the manipulation of BLBI is a kind of a real fraud and has to be concretely treated. However, the “jihad” by the Moslem does not mean to exclude participation by other religious followers.
Expressive boycott is found in KOMPAS of 27/3/2003:
In Surabaya, the office of the General Consulate of the USA, yesterday, became the target of demonstration. This time students under the Kesatuan Aksi Mahasiswa Muslim Indonesia (KAMMI) Surabaya protested while threw the office with tens of tomatoes.
Likewise, in photo news, the captions read as follow:
A paper doll of the President of the USA, George Bush, was thrown with tomatoes and left by the protesters from the Aliansi Mahasiswa Muslim Bina Sarana Informatika who came to the Embassy Office of the USA in Jakarta, Friday (27/5) (KOMPAS 28/5/2005).
On the other hand, no clean hands boycott was found. However, another form that is almost similar to clean hands boycott was found. We call it solidarity boycott. Solidarity boycott results from loyalty and agreement among the members of groups and among groups because they have similar goal. Solidarity boycott is found in KOMPAS of 18/1/2005:
More than 100 log vendors in the region of DI Yogyakarta-Central Java under the Koalisi Massa Peserta Lelang Perhutani, or Kompeni, made a demonstration in the auction of logs by the Perum Perhutani in Gedung Olahraga Among Rogo, Yogyakarta, Monday (17/1). They refused the increased price of logs in auction up to 27 per cent, and insisted Perhutani to minimize the ratio of price increase to approximately five percent.
The vendors boycotted the auction by Perhutani because of the price increases up to 27 per cent. We urge that the policy be re-evaluated that the price be maximally 5 per cent:
Said HM Anas Arba Ani, the Secretary of Himpunan Pedagang Kayu Jepara (HPKJ). The vendors refused the very high increase that caused the vendors, especially the small and medium ones, unable to afford.
Also, the news in KOMPAS of 18/1/2005:
Approximately 200 people under the Solidaritas Petani Sawit Indonesia demonstrated at the office of DPRD Sumatera Utara, Wednesday (14/4). They urged the society to boycott the products of PT Nestle and PT Unilever. The two firms have terminated the contract of palm oil purchasing.
Trigger and root cause of boycott
KOMPAS reported a number of triggers of boycott. Glazer et al. (2010) informed that some consumers or groups pay attention not only to the products but also to whether the firm behaves ethically or not. Person who join boycott are typically willing to pay higher price for goods produced by firms not boycotted. Unethical behavior (according to those sponsoring the boycott) of the country of origin or firms are among the main triggers of boycott. The most frequently reported triggers are the attack to Afghanistan and Iraq, nuclear test in South Pacific, protection to separatism activists and environment/river pollution.
Most cases of boycott in Indonesia put in KOMPAS are sponsored by groups. Friedman (1985) stated that in America, the sponsor groups of boycott include consumer groups, labor unions, minority groups, religious groups and women groups. The analysis of this study showed different results. In Indonesia, the groups that sponsored boycott consist of religious groups (27.7 per cent), environment monitoring groups (16.7 per cent), labor groups and consumer groups (11.1 per cent).
It is interesting to know some individuals that provoke or refuse boycott. Appeal to get involved in boycott and appeal to refuse boycott were put in the opinion column of KOMPAS. The reason to refuse boycott (with regard to the attack to Afghanistan and Iraq) is that in a global world, it is not possible that we can live, consume and produce without any relation with other countries, moreover, if the attack is a collective attempt with the NATO, which is also approved by some other countries.
Table II shows that the underlying problem of boycott can be categorized into two main categories: those originating from firm’s internal behavior; and those deriving from firm’s external behavior. Internal behavior is the behavior of the firm that potentially trigger boycott, such as ignoring employee’s interest and unwilling to spend more on waste treatment. External behavior includes behavior of the firms or state that potentially trigger boycott, such as donating part of their profits for transgenic research and tax manipulation. Either internal or external behaviors are further categorized into political, economic, legal and environmental behaviors.
The results of the analysis at Phase 1 show that in Indonesia, the targets of boycott are the countries from which the products originate (country of origin) and also the firms. The objectives of boycott are instrumental, expressive and solidarity boycott. The boycott is the root cause by unethical behavior of the countries of origin or firms. Such unethical behaviors are related to political, economic, legal and environmental matters. In addition, boycott in Indonesia is also sponsored by groups, either religious groups, environment monitoring groups, labor unions, minority groups or individuals.
Reference group and expectancy-value theory
Engel et al. (1992) informed that the term reference group was initially introduced by Hyman in 1942. Until the end of 1970s researchers generally agreed that reference group theory has two functions: normative and informative (Tudor and Carley, 1998). The two functions were initially introduced by Deutsch and Gerard (1955). Park and Lessig (1977) extended Deutsch and Gerard’s study and define reference group as either actual or imaginary individuals/groups having significant relevance upon the one’s evaluations, aspirations or behavior. They also suggest that normative function can be divided into utilitarian and value-expressive functions. Therefore, reference group serves informative, utilitarian and value-expressive functions.
Effect of information will be received when an individual perceives that the information will enrich his knowledge about the environment and/or capability of environmental aspect mitigation. Information may also be influential when the information source is credible. How does an individual use the information from a reference group? First, the individual intentionally seeks the information needed from the reference group. Second, the individual make conclusion after observing the reference group.
In marketing, the utilitarian influence of the reference group will be seen when individuals are involved in purchase of particular products. Individuals will follow the reference group if they perceive that:
The reference group significantly mediates reward or punishment.
Their behavior is seen or known by other people.
He is motivated to realize the reward and avoid punishment.
The value-expressive influence of the reference group correlates with the motive of the individual to improve or support their self-concept. The influence is characterized by two different processes. First, they individually utilize the reference group to express themselves or to support their ego. In this case, there must be a consistency between the desire to actualize themselves and psychological image of the reference group. Second, individuals are influenced by the value-expressive function of the reference group because of their preference to the group. In this case, no consistence is needed between one’s self-image and psychological image of the reference group.
With either positive or negative influence, White and Dahl (2006) suggested three types of reference group. They are: membership group, aspirational group and dissociative group. Membership group is a group to which an individual inherently belongs to at current time (e.g. a family, a peer-group and one’s gender group). This type of reference group has positive influence and thus individuals identify themselves with, are attracted to and feel psychologically involved in the reference group. Nearly the same as membership group, aspirational group also generates positive influence on individuals. At this type, individuals identify themselves with and are attracted to, but are not members of the group. Individuals wish or aspire to become members of the group (e.g. celebrities, a desired social group membership). Meanwhile, dissociative group is a group to which individuals attempt to avoid any relationship and refuse any identification with the group. The influence of the reference group on individuals is negative.
The relation of thinking, feeling and action has become the subject of study since Aristotle, Descartes and Plato until now (Copley, 1988). Each researcher proposed a different model to explain why people behave in a particular way and what they will do. One of the dominant models is Fishbein and Ajzen’s model. Fishbein and Ajzen (1980) proposed a “expectancy-value model” of attitude formation postulating that the sum strength of our beliefs and their concurrent, affective evaluation of the beliefs, combine to determine attitudes toward performance of an action. The attitude then influences our intentions to perform the act and that the intention has a direct influence upon our behavior. Sears et al. (1985) mentioned that in this theory, the decision is made on the basis of:
value of possibly made decisions; and
degree of expectation about the result of the decision.
This theory is frequently used to examine persuasion. Persuasion is defined as the explicit attempt to influence belief, attitude and behavior (Mowen and Minor, 2001). Taylor et al. (2009) added that according to this theory, the formation and transformation of the attitude are derived from the loss and benefit calculation, of which people will choose the best one. For example, we have to decide whether we have to take the scholarship from X University (abroad) or Y University (domestic). Then we will consider the expectation and value of our choices to study at X university (meeting more new people, having to adapt to a new culture, etc.). Likewise, when we choose Y University: meeting fewer new people, not having to adapt to a new culture, etc. When the decision is accepting the scholarship from X University, then we think that adaptation difficulties to the new culture is not equivalent to the great pleasure to meet more new people. On the other hand, when we choose to accept the scholarship from Y University, then meeting more people will not be equivalent to the little problem to adapt to the new cultures. In other words, this theory assumes that people are very calculative, active and rational. It can be said that although reference groups influence the decision of purchasing or not purchasing a product, people will make a rational calculation before making a decision.
The AHP involves three basic steps:
decomposition or the hierarchy construction;
comparative judgments or defining and executing data collection to obtain a pairwise comparison data on the elements of the hierarchical structure; and
synthesis of priorities or constructing an overall priority rating (Babu and Sharma, 2005).
The first step of AHP is the formation of a hierarchical structure to solve a difficult problem into some integrated dimensions. Saaty (1993) informed that complex problems can be easily understood when we divide them into elements and compose them into a hierarchy. Stein and Ahmad (2009) added that in general a hierarchical structure consists of objective, criteria and decision alternatives. In a hierarchy, objective is put at the highest level. Criteria come next and decision alternatives at the lowest. At this step, the results of analysis from previous phase are used as the basis. The AHP model is presented in Figure 2.
The second step of AHP is assessing the relative interest of two elements at particular levels (Latifah, 2005). This assessment is made by comparing two alternatives based on particular criteria and indicates a preference (Taylor, 2006).
Synthesis of priorities
The final step in AHP is making a priority of decision alternatives in each criterion (Taylor, 2006). This stage is called synthesis. Synthesis includes combining what have been decomposed at the first step into an integrated unity.
In brief, the three basic steps can be described as follows:
Perform a pairwise comparison matrix for each alternative of decision alternative based on each criterion from each respondent’s answer.
Asses the consistency of the pairwise matrix. The testing of consistency in AHP is equivalent to the testing of reliability and tested by finding the value from Consistency Index (CI). In a simple way, Saaty (1993) informs the following consistency index as follows:
while the consistency ration is obtained from the following formula:where CI = consistency index; n = the number of items being compared; CR = consistency ratio; RI = random index; λmax = the largest eigen value of an n x n pairwise comparison matrix. If the value of CR is lower than or equal to 10 per cent thus the inconsistency is tolerable (Saaty, 1993). If the value of CR is higher than 10 per cent, a serious inconsistency may exist and the AHP may not yield a meaningful result.
Compute the relative weights (synthesized):
totaling the values in each column of the pairwise comparison matrices;
developing normalization matrices, by dividing the value of each column in the comparison matrices by the number of the column sum;
calculating the preference vector by averaging the value in each row of the normalization matrices; and
combining the vectors of preference for each criterion into one preference matrix that shows the preference for each alternative for each criterion.
Develop a pooled matrix of each respondent’s answer. It is obtained by using the geometric mean of each matrix, both the vector of criterion preference and the vector of alternative preference, pairwise difference with the following formula:
It asses the consistency of the pooled matrix.
It computes the relative weights of the pooled matrix.
Then, it calculates the total score for each criterion and decision alternative by multiplying the vector of the criteria preference by the vector of the alternative preference.
Population and sample
The population in the study is the members and/or organizers of groups. The scope of study is those who meet the criteria: adults; reading and writing literacy; and willingness to be involved in the study. The sample is selected by judgment/purposive sampling. Judgment sampling is a form of convenience sampling which population is selected on the basis of researcher’s judgment. The researcher selects the elements to be included in the sample when the elements are surely thought to represent or relevant to the population of the study (Malhotra, 2009). The data collected are the primary data of respondents’ opinion obtained through directly distributed questionnaires.
Some studies using AHP involved a fewer sample (Cheung et al., 2002) using 36 respondents; Pearson et al. (2007) using 19 respondents; Wei et al. (2009) using 20 respondents; Nguyen et al. (2010) using 10 respondents; Lee et al. (2010) using ten respondents). As written by Cheng and Li in Lee et al. (2010), the small amount of sample is allowed in the perspective of AHP methodology. AHP is a subjective methodology that does not require a large sample. They add that the opinion of fewer respondents is sometimes adequate to produce reliable and useful results, although the estimation may be crude. This study used 30 respondents, (63.33 religious group and 36.66 per cent other).
The questionnaire consists of two main parts. The first part asks about respondents’ preferences. Initial items of this part are filter questions. Cooper and Schindler (2006) suggested that filter questions are used to qualify respondents’ knowledge about the matters asked. In this questionnaire, filter questions are used to identify if the respondents are really the members of active groups (in line with the sample method used at Phase 2 of this study). After that, respondents were given news about boycott from media. The news was chosen on the basis of the results of Phase 1 considered to reflect the four dimensions of boycott root cause. In choosing the news, we were assisted by a researcher from Charles Sturt University. The second part of the questionnaire asked about respondents’ identity.
The AHP used a pairwise comparison. Malhotra (2009) mentions that as implied in the name, a respondent is exposed to two objects (alternatives) and requested to choose one of them based on particular criteria. With this technique, respondents can express their attitude accurately, different from sequence scale, by choosing one of two alternatives. Taylor (2006) informs that the standard preference scale (see Table III and IV) has been determined by experienced researchers in AHP to be a reasonable basis for comparing two items or alternatives. Therefore, this study also adopted the standard preference scale.
Prior research using AHP for analysis did not specifically mention how they tested the validity. In this study, a lecturer in the Department of Mathematics, Faculty of Mathematics and Physical Sciences, UGM, was requested to give comments on the questions derived from the model (face validity). After that, 30 questionnaires were distributed to respondents. Of the 30 questionnaires, some respondents completed inconsistently. The consistency testing is illustrated as follow: For example, there are three teams of national football players: A, B and C. Respondents were requested to choose which of the three teams the most favorite using pairwise comparison is. If between A and B he chooses B with the score probability of 1-7. Between A and C, he chooses A with the score probability of 0-3. So, when he/she is asked to choose between B and C, he/she should have chosen B with the score probability of 0-9 to be consistent. Although in AHP the consistency is the main requirement, for analysis, Saaty (1993) suggested that the consistency is acceptable when the difference is below 10 per cent. This is because in the real world, consistency is rarely found.
For respondents who answered the questions inconsistently, we revisited. We asked the respondents to repeat the answer. If they agree, we showed the model that we would like to test to make them easier to give consistent answers. But if they disagree to repeat answering the questionnaires, we eliminated them and sought other respondents of the same type. This is intended to reach the target of 30 respondents.
After the testing of the respondents’ answers consistency, a pooled matrix is developed. This matrix is the geometrical average of the respondents’ answers. The pooled matrix is then tested again for consistency. After that, the Eigen value which is the ranking of respondents’ choices is determined. The results are presented in Table IV(b).
The main findings of AHP can be resumed as follows. First, in getting involved in a boycott, the consumers prefer to boycott the firms to country of origin. Logically, this results from the facts that for consumers, getting involved in boycott movement to a particular product with the target of the country of origin is very abstract. Second, the main objective of the consumers to boycott firms’ products is to transform firms’ behavior. This indicates that boycott to a particular product is a kind of a manifested appeal. In other words, boycott to a particular product is a kind of a moral appeal manifested in an action. Third, the primary root cause of consumers’ boycott is the firms’ economic dimension in unethical behavior.
Besides being a country whose majority of population is Muslim (87.18 per cent), Indonesia is the archipelago divided into three time zones. They are as follows:
Indonesia Western Time including Java Island, Sumatra Island and parts of Kalimantan Island;
Indonesia Central Time including parts of Kalimantan Island, Sulawesi Island and Nusa Tenggara Islands; and
Indonesia Eastern Time including Papua Island and Maluku Islands.
As a country with the great number of islands, it is possible that inequality among islands exists. The inequality may include population, commodity price, education, poverty, policy, individual talent and others.
ADB (2012) reported that increasing and continuous inequality is the factor that inhibits economic growth. High rate of inequality may result in social conflicts, poor sense of collectiveness, labor strike, high rate of criminality and apathetic citizens losing the trust to various governmental policies. In empirical study, there are two types of inequality. They are income distribution inequality and inter-region inequality (Kuncoro, 2013).
Income distribution inequality is measured by the Gini ratio. Quoting previous studies, Iryanti (2014) stated that before the economic crisis in Indonesia in 1997/1998 the economic growth had successfully decrease inequality; approaching the crisis in 1997/1998 inequality expanded and although the growth was evenly distributed in all economic levels, regional inequality occurred where in Java the growth was higher than other regions; after the economic crisis inequality even drastically increased, particularly among the economic groups and between urban and rural areas. World Bank (2014) reported that inequality in Indonesia has increased since 2000. Between 1999 and 2012, the official data on poverty showed decrease from 24 per cent to 12 per cent. However, the Gini coefficient increased from 0.308 in 1999 to 0.41 in 2012 (Figure 3).
Inequality among regions in Indonesia has been likely to be concentrated in Java Island. In 2016, the spatial economic structure in Indonesia contributing much to the Gross Domestic Product (GDP) was dominated by the group of provinces in Java Island. Provinces in Java Island contributed 58.49 per cent to national GDP, followed by provinces in Sumatra Island (22.03 per cent), provinces in Kalimantan Island (7.85 per cent), provinces in Sulawesi Island (6.04 per cent) and other remaining provinces (Figure 4).
How does equality occur in other countries? The USA being a developed country with a great number of economic experts also suffers from the same problems. Technological advancement and globalization have failed to solve the inequality. On the contrary they contribute to the wider inequality between the rich and the poor (Wibowo, 2016). Further it is said that the USA is the home for billionaires and the super-rich people, but one fourth of the population, the lowest income group have not had income increment since the past 25 years. On the contrary, the 1 per cent population who are the richest people enjoys three-time income increments and enjoys 20 per cent of national assets. Technological advancement and globalization (industrial relocation in attempt to seek cheap labors and industrial locations) contribute much to the inequality. In 1979, the automobile manufacturer of General Motors had 850,000 of workers. Now, globally Microsoft has only 100,000 workers, Google has 50,000 workers and Facebook has 5,000 workers.
In term of the aforementioned inequality, is boycott also practiced in the USA? Yes, it is. It reveals that boycott is refusal by particular parties to have a business with particular parties due to dissatisfaction. This leads to a pressure for other parties to transform the dissatisfaction. Dissatisfaction sources may have different forms and rationales. However, it is clear that dissatisfaction has resulted in negative emotion and perception to other parties adequate enough to result in pressure to address inequality (Abdul-Talib et al., 2016). This is in line with Manalu’s (2009) opinion suggesting that since the initial phase, social behavior perspective has contributed significantly by stating that the root cause of conflicts, violence and social movements is dissatisfaction. The forms of dissatisfaction may be directed to the prevailing norms, injustice social structure, oppressive regime, explorative economy or group/identity discrimination. Dissatisfaction can be viewed from different perspective (Abosag , 2010; Muhamad and Mizerski, 2010; Al-Hyari et al., 2012; Abdul-Talib et al., 2016; Dekhil et al., 2017) viewed boycott from religiosity perspective; Klein et al. (2004), Abd-Razak and Abdul-Talib (2012), Mrad et al. (2013); Sari et al. (2017) viewed it from animosity perspective; Huddleston et al. (2001), Ettenson and Klein (2005), Bamber et al. (2012) viewed it from ethnocentrism perspective]. In general, previous studies have tested consumers’ beliefs and attitude to intentionally participate in boycott without considering the context whether the consumers belong to particular groups or not.
To obtain clearer description, we can illustrate the event of Jakarta Gubernatorial election in 2017. Two candidates competed for gubernatorial position. One candidate held the belief X (the same as majority of voters) and the other one held belief Y (different from majority of voters). Two persons A and B were members of the group standing against candidate Y and held different belief from Y. During the political campaign, the group appealed the group members “not to vote for the leader with different faith/belief” (the objective of which is boycott candidate Y). Person A thought that the appeal was socially irresponsible. Voting for the candidate should have been based on the track record. To decline the appeal for boycott, he developed his own attitude of voting Y. He collected any relevant information, fact, track record and advancement probably achieved by candidate Y when he was finally elected. Not to look selfish in his group Person A did not show out his attitude. However, beyond the group, he apparently showed up his attitude. On the other hand, Person B had intention to comply with the group’s decision. He would not vote for Y. To materialize his intention, he developed attitude leading to likelihood not to vote Y. It is clear that context (obedience or disobedience to group) may influence belief and attitude to boycott.
Moschis (1976) mentioned that Festinger in 1954 introduced a theory called social comparison theory. In the theory, he suggested that individuals need to compare themselves, about particular attributes, to other people to value the behavioral consequences when physical evidence is absent. Baron and Byrne (2003) stated that as long as our view is approved by other people, we will perceive that our idea or attitude is appropriate. Meanwhile, when other people have similar idea, attitude or view as ours, we perceive that the view is right. Due to this process, we frequently change our attitude to adjust with other people.
Membership of individuals in particular groups is unavoidable and universal (Johnson and Johnson, 2012). Every day we interact within our group and with other groups. Our family life, leisure time, friendship and professional life are all related to groups. Therefore, individuals will compare themselves particularly to the group where they belong (membership group) and then to the group they are interested in (aspirational group). Kim and Markus (1999) demonstrate that cultural context has influence on this comparison. Individualistic culture (such as in the USA and Western Europe) will be different from collectivistic culture (such as in Asia, including Indonesia). Bond and Smith (1996) also mention that voluntariness to take similar actions with the reference group will be higher in collectivistic culture than in individualistic culture.
In this study, respondents were required to respond first time call for boycott and then compare their attitude to the reference group. This comparison was intended to value what actions are right and favorable to the group. To behave properly, respondents will seek information as much as possible. The information from the group will be accepted when the respondents perceived that the information will enrich their knowledge about the environment. This is in line with Coleman et al. (1958), they suggested that the more difficult the task, the higher the likelihood of people to adjust with the group.
Desire to be favored by a group is another reason why respondents compare themselves with the reference group. We frequently expect that other people accept us, favor us and treat us appropriately. At the same time, we also avoid rejection, humiliation or disgrace (Janes and Olson, 2000).
Although collectivistic culture and task difficulty have likely made individuals to adjust themselves to the group, Cialdini and Trost (1998) stated that group size, group uniformity and our commitment to group also has effect on the influence reference group on individuals. With regard to group size, Asch (1955) demonstrated interesting results from his study. He varied the majority size from 2 to 15, and found that a person will generate pressure to conformity of 3.6 per cent; two persons will generate pressure to conformity of 13.6 per cent; three persons will generate pressure of 31.8 per cent; four persons will generate pressure of 35.1 per cent; six persons will generate pressure of 35.2 per cent; seven persons will generate pressure of 37.1; and 15 persons will generate pressure of 31.2. From the results of the study, it is apparent that two persons will generate more pressures to conformity than one person; three persons generates higher pressure than two, while four persons will generate almost equal pressure as three persons. The increase of pressure after four persons will not substantially increase the conformity level.
As the number of group members in the sample is higher than that in Arch, we use the theory of EV in further explanation. EV theory is a cognitive-motivation theory stating that individuals’ motivation to behave and choose particular objectives are the multiplication of their expectation of successful objective achievement and their individual subjective values for the objectives (Broeck et al., 2010). Expectancy refers to the belief in how people will behave in different tasks/activities; value refers to how the action to take is related to the received incentive reason.
When respondent considers the boycott target choice, country of origin-the firm, he will think of various activities when they boycott the products of particular country of origin (seeking information about the products’ country of origin, the shops that sell the products deriving from the countries other than the boycotted countries, consumption postponement), the value resulting from the activities (longer shopping time, higher cost due to the search for the products, but no consumption postponement) and expectation for the consequence of the activities (seeking information of the products’ country of origin and consumption postponement). By considering the value and expectation, he prefers to boycott the firm (instead of the products’ country of origin). This reveals that consumption postponement is not proportionate to the little pleasure resulting from obtaining the information about the products’ country of origin and the shops that sell the products deriving from the countries other than the targeted boycott.
When respondent consider the objective of boycott, instrumental-expressive-solidarity, he will consider the consequences or activities when he boycotts for instrumental purpose (knowing for sure the objective of boycott, knowing how to measure the achievement of boycott objectives, avoiding legal conflict), the value of the activities (understanding about the objectives of boycott, taking longer time to understand the objectives of boycott and avoiding legal conflict at once) and expectation about the consequences of the activities (will understand the objective of boycott and will not get involved in legal conflict). When he decides to prefer participation in instrumental boycott, the absence of legal conflicts with the legal authority is not proportionate to the lengthy time or difficulty to understand the objective of boycott.
Such is also the case for the underlying the root cause of boycott. When respondent decided to participate in economic dimension, he will consider various consequences or activities when he participates in the boycott (understanding the loss the state will suffer, understanding the loss of the individual/group suffers, not having direct economic impact), the value of the activity (understanding the loss of the state/individual/group, without any direct economic impact on him) and expectation about the consequences of the activities (will be able to understand the loss of the state/individual/group, but with little likelihood of direct economic impact on him). When respondent decides to participate in economic dimension boycott, not feeling direct economic impact will not be proportionate to the little pleasure to understand the loss of the state/individual/group. Therefore, EV theory considers incentive balance and predicts that in the situation where there are conflicting objectives, people will prefer the position that maximizes their benefits (Taylor et al., 2009).
Conclusion, limitation and suggestion
This study investigates what preferences consumer to participate in boycott movement by using two phases. The results of the analysis at Phase 1 show that the target of boycott is the country of origin and the firm, the objective of boycott is instrumental, expressive and solidarity. The root cause of boycott includes political, economic, legal and environmental. The results of analysis at this phase serve as the basic data and problem limitation for the study at Phase 2. The final results show that the primary target of boycott is the firm. The primary objective of boycott is the changing in firms’ behavior (instrumental) and the primary root cause of boycott is economy.
The study contributes to improve our knowledge about consumers’ preference, as group members, in their attempt to get involved in boycott movement. From the perspective of agenda setting theory, we can see that there is a complex transactional relation between media and boycott movement. In addition, media can also serve as an effective forum to popularize the social movement of boycott to become a means for public support establishment, to put pressure on the firms and the Government. However, not all social movements of boycott are publicized in media. The news release about boycott related to ethnicity, religion, race and group affiliation will be avoided by media. For example, there were no report on some appeals for boycott to the seasoning product suspected to have contained ham fat and to Danish product because of the publication of the 12 cartoons of the Prophet Muhammad in Jyllands-Posten on 30 September 2005. This shows that the proofreaders, editors and even journalists selected and directed people’s attention to a particular event instead of another. The results of the study also show that there is a positive correlation between the community and media agenda. When in the community there is a feeling of injustice after the invasion of the USA, especially to Afghanistan and Iraq, media captured the matter and put the news of the appeal for boycott from some groups in media.
From the perspective of reference group theory, the study shows that consumers always compare what they do to what their groups do. Consumers also tend to be willingly persuaded if an opinion has been adopted by a group of preferred people or when they are the members. Therefore, knowledge about the groups in which the consumers become the members or the groups to which the consumers refer themselves sometimes can help predict consumers’ behavior. From the perspective of EV theory, the decision to present particular behaviors is the results of rational process directed to a particular objective. Behavior chosen is considered, consequences and results of an action are evaluated and decision is made whether or not to take any action. In case of boycott, the decision to get involved is influenced by consumers’ expectation that their involvement will contribute to the successful achievement of boycott movement target. However, although the consumers have desires, in this case getting involved in boycott movement, they evaluate expectation about other people’s behavior before the consumers really join.
The findings have implications for both management and firm. First, as an empirical study, the study results in useful findings for the firms in Indonesia. Good governance (accountability, fairness, transparency and responsibility) will minimize the possible boycott by consumers. Corporation (the firm and the leaders) are held responsible for the owners and stockholders because stockholders and owners have given the economic mandate to the corporation. In addition, corporation is also held responsible for any economic, political, legal and environmental demands from both primary (internal) and secondary (external) stakeholder. Thus, corporation is morally and socially held responsible for the constituents, meaning that they have to build accountable relation with the stakeholders as well as responsive to ethically based requests (Rindjin, 2004). Hartman and DesJardin (2010) stated that consumers’ boycott against popular firm such as Nike, McDonald’s, Home Depot and Wal-Mart has urged the firm leaders, even the skeptic ones, to concern on ethics. Trust, loyalty, commitment, creativity and initiatives are some benefits that ethically stable and credible firms will get. Second, firm have to have intensive and continuous dialogues with the stakeholders. Consumers’ power has increased and will consistently increase due to the advancement of information technology (e.g. blog, Twitter, Facebook, WhatsApp and Instagram). Therefore, one-way firm can have dialogue is through information technology advancement. By paying more balanced attention to stakeholder, it is expected that there will be balanced values between the stakeholders’ and the firm’s. Continuous and sustainable dialogue with stakeholder is advisable. In so doing, firms will be able to identify and understand mutual interests. This will result in better trust and commitment between the stakeholder and the firm.
There are some limitations of this study. First, the limitation at Phase 1 is that the news releases were taken only from 1 media; that is KOMPAS. However, using purposive sampling method and data saturation, this weakness can be minimized. Other media can be used to identify the consistency of the study results. Second, AHP is a technique suitable to answer the question of “which one”. However, time limit for respondents to answer the questions consistently is one of the weaknesses of this method. By revisiting the respondents, explaining in detail about the model and requiring them to do again, such problem can be overcome. The data were analyzed by Microsoft Office Excel 2007. Other programs such as Expert Choice can be used in the future studies.
List of location, targets, products, sponsor, trigger and root cause of boycott in KOMPAS
|1||Beyond Indonesia||Christian Dior||Clothes||Newark City Council||Advertisement of Dior product accused for degrading the people||External Firm (Community) Legal Dimension|
|2||Beyond Indonesia||Singapore||n.a.||Malaysia Chinese Association (MCA)||Arrest of Malaysian China Association (MCA) leaders by the government of Malaysia||External Firm (Community) Politic Dimension|
|3||Indonesia||Agung Perdana Tugu Indah, Apollo Jaya, Bukit Perak, Makara Dewa Wisesa, Sukasari, Kemas Teguh Indah Sakti, Semarang Diamond, Sanmaru||Textile, soap, cold storage, ketchup, corrugated box, citrate acid, instant noodle||15 NGOs in Semarang||Firms not willing to allocate some amount of money for waste treatment||Internal Firm-Economic Dimension|
|4||Indonesia||France||Perfume, industry and energy products||Masyarakat Antinuklir Indonesia||France’s plan to have nuclear experiment in South Pacific and refusing the development of Pembangkit Listrik Tenaga Nuklir (PLTN) in Indonesia||External Firm (State)-Politic Dimension|
|5||Both Indonesia and Beyond Indonesia||France||Wine, cheese, cosmetics, Air France, France’s ship||Japan opposition, Taufa Vakatele as minister of education of Fiji, Coalition of Ireland, Consumer Association of Finland, Labor union of Australia, Labor union in Sydney airport and Melbourne harbor||Plan of nuclear experiment in South Pacific||External Firm (State)-Politic Dimension|
|6||Indonesia||AFTA memberships||n.a||Kwik Kian Gie||Suggestion for sooner enactment of AFTA||External Firm (State)-Economic|
|7||Both Indonesia and Beyond Indonesia||Coca Cola, Green Giant Harvest Burgers, Nestle Crunch, Similac powdered milk, Kraft salad dressing, Fleischmann margarine, Fritos, Karo, Quaker Oats corn, McDonald fried potatoes||Food and beverage||Consumer group, Euro Commerce, Pure Food||Approved distribution of transgenic products that may cause resistance in plant disease||External Firm (Community) Environment Dimension|
|8||Indonesia||Indonesia||Cigarette, coffee, shoes, beer, textile||60 internet users in Brazil||Human rights violation in East Timor||External Firm (Community) Legal Dimension|
|9||Indonesia||The USA and Israel||Food, clothes, technology||Laskar Jundullah, Corps Hizbullah, Pemuda Muhammadiyah, Kokam, IRM, FPI Surakarta, FKAM, Forum Komunikasi Ahlusunnah wal Jamaah and PII||Invasion by the USA on Afghanistan||External Firm (State)-Politic Dimension|
|10||Indonesia||The USA||n.a||Students, Common people, Opponent party, Australian Labor Union||Invasion by the USA on Afghanistan||External Firm (State)-Politic Dimension|
|11||Indonesia||The USA||n.a||n.a.||Invasion by the USA on Afghanistan||External Firm (State)-Politic Dimension|
|12||Indonesia||The USA||n.a||Sjahrir||Invasion by the USA on Afghanistan||External Firm (State)-Politic Dimension|
|13||Indonesia||The USA||n.a||n.a.||Invasion by the USA on Afghanistan||External Firm (State)-Politic Dimension|
|14||Indonesia||The USA||Food, clothes||n.a.||Invasion by the USA on Afghanistan||External Firm (State)-Politic Dimension|
|15||Indonesia||The USA||n.a||n.a.||Invasion by the USA on Afghanistan||External Firm (State)-Politic Dimension|
|16||Indonesia||McDonald, KFC, CFC and USA corporation||Food and beverage||n.a.||Invasion by the USA on Afghanistan||External Firm (State)-Politic Dimension|
|17||Indonesia||The USA||n.a||n.a.||Invasion by the USA on Afghanistan||External Firm (State)-Politic|
|18||Indonesia||The USA||Food||n.a.||Invasion by the USA on Afghanistan||External Firm (State)-Politic Dimension|
|19||Indonesia||The USA||n.a||Agus Muhhamad, Perhimpunan Pengembangan Pesantren dan Masyarakat||Invasion by the USA on Afghanistan||External Firm (State)-Politic Dimension|
|20||Beyond Indonesia||The USA||Food||University student, opposition party, Labor union, Aborigine union, Malaysia reconciliation, EUCOM||Invasion by the USA on Iraq||External Firm (State)-Politic Dimension|
|21||Indonesia||McDonald, USA||Food||n.a.||Invasion by the USA on Iraq||External Firm (State)-Politic Dimension|
|22||Indonesia||Caltex, Freeport, Exxon||Energy resource||Indonesia Consumer Watch Foundation (YLKI)||Invasion by the USA on Iraq||External Firm (State)-Politic Dimension|
|23||Indonesia||McDonald, KFC, CFC, USA corporation||Food and beverage||n.a.||Invasion by the USA on Iraq||External Firm (State)-Politic Dimension|
|24||Indonesia||The USA||n.a.||Banten youth group||Invasion by the USA on Iraq||External Firm (State)-Politic Dimension|
|25||Indonesia||The USA||Food, beverage, cigarrete, clothes, chemical matter, Baterai, stationery, hand phone, electronics, car, bank||Pemuda Keadilan Movement||Invasion by the USA on Iraq||External Firm (State)-Politic Dimension|
|26||Indonesia||Sweden||Volvo||Golkar party member||Allowing the leader of Gerakan Aceh Merdeka (GAM) to live and manage action from Sweden||External Firm (State)-Politic Dimension|
|27||Indonesia||Sweden||n.a||Indonesia Importer Association||Allowing the leader of GAM to live and manage action from Sweden||External Firm (State)-Politic Dimension|
|28||Indonesia||Indonesia||Wooden||LSM from abroad||The government was accused for ignoring natural conservation||External Firm (Community)-Environment Dimension|
|29||Beyond Indonesia||Malaysia||Product and tourism||n.a.||Deforestation and the trade of forest commodities||External Firm (Community)-Environment Dimension|
|30||Indonesia||Sinar Surya Sosro, Suparmao, Titani Alam Lestari, Sarimas Permai, Surabaya Agung Pulp and Paper||n.a.||Ecoton (Lembaga Kajian Ekologi dan Konservasi Lahan Basah)||A firm polluted Surabaya river||External Firm (Community)-Environment Dimension|
|31||Indonesia||Perum Perhutani||Wooden||Himpunan Pedagang Kayu Jepara||Excessively high increase of teakwood auction price (27%)||Internal Firm-Economic Dimension|
|32||Indonesia||Indonesia||Wooden||Civil servant at Forestry Department||Lack of coordination in illegal logging prevention||External Firm (State)-Politic Dimension|
|33||Beyond Indonesia||Japan||n.a||n.a.||Bending the history of cruelty of Japan in China in World War II and Licensing for oil extraction in the region disputed by Japan and China||External Firm (State)-Politic Dimension|
|34||Indonesia||The USA||n.a||Aliansi Mahasiswa Muslim Bina Sarana Informatika||Harassment of Al Quran in Guantanamo prison||External Firm (Community) Legal Dimension|
|35||Beyond Indonesia||Indonesia||Bali tourism||n.a.||Sentence for Schapelle Corbi||External Firm (Community) Legal Dimension|
|36||Beyond Indonesia||Thailand||n.a.||Thailand||Forceful action by Bangkok to the Muslim in South Thailand||External Firm (State)-Politic Dimension|
|37||Beyond Indonesia||Indonesia||Palm oil||n.a.||Firm not meeting the requirements for economic and environmental sustainability||External Firm (Community) Economic Dimension|
|38||Beyond Indonesia||Corporate interconnected with Thaksin (DBS Thai Danu Bank, UOB, Hard Rock Coffee, Tiger Beer, Heineken, Cathay Pacific, Seven Eleven)||Satellite communication, bank, coffee, beer, aviation||Thailand Opposition, People Alliance for Democracy||Tax-free selling of Shin Corp, owned by Thaksin Sinawatra||External Firm (Community) Economic Dimension|
|39||Beyond Indonesia||Indonesia||n.a||n.a.||Sentence for Schapelle Corbi||External Firm (Community) Legal Dimension|
|40||Both Indonesia and Beyond Indonesia||The USA||n.a||Mexico Labor Union||Expansive economic caption by the USA in Mexico||External Firm (Community) Economic Dimension|
|41||Indonesia||Corporate interconnected with Lapindo||n.a||B. Herry Priyono, STF Driyakarya||A Firm damaged the environment and life of the local people||External Firm (Community) Environment Dimension|
|42||Indonesia||Corporate that contributed to Bush’s campaign and not hampered community existence, McDonald, Coca Cola, Freeport, New Mont, Exxon||Not including Microsoft||Surachman Nugroho, Diponegoro University||Arrogance of the USA through the invasion on Afghanistan and Iraq||External Firm (Community) Politic Dimension|
|43||Indonesia||Corporate that had a debt to Bank Indonesia||n.a||Muhammadiyah, NU, Persatuan Islam, Alwasliyah, Dewan Dakwah Islamiyah Indonesia, Pergerakan Mahasiswa Islam Indonesia||State’s loss due to BLBI embezzlement||External Firm (Community) Economic Dimension|
|44||Indonesia||TV program||TV program sponsored||Civil servant at Communication and Information Department||Increasing trend of unhealthy TV programs||External Firm (Community) Legal Dimension|
|45||Beyond Indonesia||Polluted firms||n.a.||n.a.||A firm polluted environment||External Firm (Community) Environment Dimension|
|46||Both Indonesia and Beyond Indonesia||Indonesia||Palm oil||Green Peace||Firm’s operation massively damaging the environment||External Firm (Community) Environment Dimension|
|47||Beyond Indonesia||France||n.a.||Jordanian Muslim Friendship||Biased statement of French President about Hamas||External Firm (State) Politic Dimension|
|48||Beyond Indonesia||Indonesia||Pulp and paper product||Australian Orangutan Project, Humane Society International, Australia Zoo, Dream World, Zoos South Australia and Auckland Zoo||Conversion of Taman Nasional Buki Tigapuluh (TNBT) supporting region into Hutan Tanaman Industri (HTI)||External Firm (Community) Legal Dimension|
|49||Beyond Indonesia||China||n.a.||Nihat Ergun, Minister of Industry and Trade of Turkey||Unsatisfactory settlement of dispute among factory workers, the majority of whom were the Uighur||Internal Firm-Legal Dimension|
|50||Indonesia||Nestle, Unilever||Palm oil product based||Solidaritas Petani Sawit Indonesia||Termination of Crude Palm Oil (CPO) purchase contract by firm||Internal Firm-Economic Dimension|
Relative degree of importance for pairwise comparisons
|Intensity of Relative Importance||Description||Explanation|
|1||Equal importance||Two types contribute equally to objective|
|3||Weak importance of one over another||Experience and judgment strongly favor one over another|
|5||Essential or strong importance||Experience and judgment strongly favor one over another|
|7||Demonstrated importance||A type is strongly favored and its dominance is demonstrated in practice.|
|9||Absolute or extreme importance||The importance of one over another is affirmed on the highest possible order.|
|2, 4, 6, 8||Intermediate values between the two adjacent judgments|
Source: Adopted from Saaty (1993)
Pairwise comparison of objectives with respect to targets
|Purpose of Boycott||Target Boycott|
|Country of Origin||Firm|
Overall results of comparative study
|Root Causes||Objective of Boycott|
Abd-Razak, I. and Abdul-Talib, A. (2012), “Globality and intentionality attribution of animosity: An insight into the consumer boycotts in the Muslim dominant markets”, Journal of Islamic Marketing, Vol. 3 No. 1, pp. 72-80.
Abdul-Talib, A., Abd-Latif, S. and Abd-Razak, I. (2016), “A study on the boycott motivations of Malaysian non-muslims”, Journal of Islamic Marketing, Vol. 7 No. 3, pp. 264-287.
Abosag, I. (2010), “Dancing with macro-boycotter: the case of Arla food”, Marketing Intelligence and Planning, Vol. 28 No. 3, pp. 365-373.
ADB (2012), Asian Development Outlook 2012: Confronting Rising Inequality in Asia, Asian Development Bank, Metro Manila.
Adiputra, W.M. (2008), “Metode penelitian analisis isi: beberapa aspek dan prosedurnya”, Bahan Pelatihan Monitoring and Evaluasi Pemberitaan Surat Kabar Indonesia, 21-24 March, Kerjasama PKMBP dan Dewan Pers, Yogyakarta.
Al-Hyari, K., Alsour, M., Al-Weshah. and Haffar, M. (2012), “Religious beliefs and consumer behaviour: from loyalty to boycotts”, Journal of Islamic Marketing, Vol. 3 No. 2, pp. 155-174.
Asch, S.E. (1955), “Opinions and social pressure”, Scientific American, Vol. 193 No. 5, pp. 31-35.
Babu, T.K.S. and Sharma, K. (2005), “Analytical hierarchy process for vendor evaluation-a case with a research institute”, South Asian Journal of Management, Vol. 12 No. 1, pp. 101-115.
Bamber, D., Phadke, S. and Jyotishi, A. (2012), “Product knowledge, ethnocentrism and purchase intention: COO study in India NMIMS”, Management Review, Vol. 23, pp. 59-81.
Baron, R.A. and Byrne, D. (2003), Social Psychology, 10th ed., Pearson Education, New York, NY.
Berelson, B. (1952), Content Analysis in Communication Research, Hafner Press, New York, NY.
Black, J.A. and Champion, D.J. (1976), Methods and Issues in Social Research, John Wiley and Sons, Baltimore.
Bond, E. and Smith, P.B. (1996), “Culture and conformity: a meta analysis of studies using Asch’s (1952b, 1956) line judgement task”, Psychological Bulletin, Vol. 119 No. 1, pp. 111-137.
BPS (2011), Kewarganegaraan, Suku Bangsa, Agama, Dan Bahasa Sehari-Hari Dari Penduduk Indonesia Hasil Sensus Penduduk 2010, Badan Pusat Statistik, Jakarta.
BPS (2017a), “Tingkat ketimpangan pengeluaran penduduk Indonesia September 2016 menurun”, Berita Resmi Statistik, No. 15/02/Th.XX, Badan Pusat Statistik, Jakarta.
BPS (2017b), “Gini rasio menurut provinsi tahun 1996, 1999, 2002, 2005, 2007-2013”, available at: www.bps.go.id/linkTabelStatis/view/id/1493 (accessed 2 September 2017).
BPS (2017c), “Pertumbuhan ekonomi Indonesia tahun 2016”, Berita Resmi Statistik, No. 16/02/Th.XX, Badan Pusat Statistik, Jakarta.
Braunsberger, K. and Buckler, B. (2010), “What motivates consumers to participate in boycotts: Lesson from the ongoing Canadian seafood boycott”, Journal of Business Research, Vol. 64 No. 1, pp. 96-102.
Broeck, A.V., Vansteenkiste, M., Lens, W. and Witte, H.D. (2010), “Unemployed individuals’ work values job flexibility: an explanation from expectancy-value theory and self-determination theory”, Applied Psychology, Vol. 59 No. 2, pp. 296-317.
Cheung, F.K.T., Kuen, J.L.F. and Skitmore, M. (2002), “Multi-criteria evaluation model for the selection of architectual consultans”, Construction Management and Economics, Vol. 20 No. 7, pp. 569-580.
Cialdini, R.B. and Trost, M.R. (1998), “Social influence: social norms, conformity, and compliance”, in Gilbert, D.T., Fiske, S.T. and Lindzey (Eds), The Handbook of Social Psychology, Vols 1/2, 4th ed., McGraw-Hill, New York, NY, pp. 151-192.
Coleman, J.F., Blake, R.R. and Mouton, J.S. (1958), “Task difficulty and conformity pressures”, Journal of Abnormal Psychology, Vol. 57 No. 1, pp. 120-122.
Cooper, D.R. and Schindler, P.S. (2006), Business Research Methods, 9th ed., McGraw-Hill International Edition, Boston.
Copley, J.W. (1988), “Relationships between beliefs, attitudes, intentions and perception in an hypnotic induction: an examination of two models of estimating future behavior”, Unpublished PhD dissertation, Graduate Faculty of Texas Tech University, TX.
Creswell, J.W. (2013), Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed Methods Approaches, 4th ed., Sage, Thousand Oaks.
Dekhil, F., Jridi, H. and Frhat, H. (2017), “Effect of religiosity on the decision to participate in a boycott: the case of Coca-Cola”, Journal of Islamic Marketing, Vol. 8 No. 2, pp. 309-328.
Detik.com (2010), “Sinar mas Kecewa Burger King Putuskan Kontrak”, available at: www.detik-finance.com/read/2010/09/03/165348/1434619/4/burger-king-tak-mau-beli-minyak-sinar-mas (accessed 5 October 2010).
Deutsch, M. and Gerard, H.B. (1955), “A study of normative and informational influence upon individual judgement”, Journal of Abnormal Psychology, Vol. 51 No. 3, pp. 629-636.
Engel, F.F., Blackwell, R.D. and Miniard, P.W. (1992), Consumer Behavior, 6th ed., Dryden Press, New York, NY.
Ettenson, R. and Klein, J.G. (2005), “The flout from French nuclear testing in the South Pacific: a longitudinal study of consumer boycotts”, International Marketing Review, Vol. 22 No. 2, pp. 199-224.
Farah, M.F. and Newman, A.J. (2010), “Exploring consumer boycott intelligence using a socio-cognitive approach”, Journal of Business Research, Vol. 63 No. 4, pp. 347-355.
Fishbein, M. and Ajzen, I. (1980), Understanding Attitudes and Predicting Social Behavior, Prentice-Hall, NJ.
Forman, E.H. and Gass, S.I. (2001), “The analytic hierarchy process-an exposition”, Operation Research, Vol. 49 No. 4, pp. 469-486.
Friedman, M. (1985), “Consumer boycotts in the United States, 1970-1980: contemporary events in historical perspective”, Journal of Consumer Affairs, Vol. 19 No. 1, pp. 96-117.
Friedman, M. (1999), Consumer Boycotts: Effecting Change through the Marketplace and Media, Routledge, New York, NY.
Glazer, A., Kanniainen, V. and Potvaara, P. (2010), “Firms’ ethics, consumer boycott, and signaling”, Eoropean Journal of Political Economy, Vol. 26 No. 3, pp. 340-350.
Guthrie, J., Yongvanich, K. and Ricceri, F. (2004), “Using content analysis as a research method to inquire into intelectual capital reporting”, Journal of Intellectual Capital, Vol. 5 No. 2, pp. 282-293.
Hartman, L. and DesJardin, J. (2010), Busines Ethics: Decision-Making for Personal Integrity and Social Responsibility, 2nd ed., McGraw-Hill, New York, NY.
Hasrullah (2001), Megawati Dalam Tangkapan Pers, LKiS, Yogyakarta.
Hendarto, K.A., Dharmmesta, B.S., Purwanto, B.M. and Moeliono, M.M.M. (2011), “Boycott and marketing in EBSCO electronic database, 1937-Mid 2010: a review of the literature”, Jurnal Manajemen, Vol. 15 No. 3, pp. 276-292.
Hendarto, K.A., Dharmmesta, B.S., Purwanto, B.M. and Moeliono, M.M.M. (2012), “Firms react to a call for boycott: Indonesia context”, Akuntabilitas, Vol. 12 No. 1, pp. 73-88.
Hoffman, S. (2013), “Are boycott motives rationalizations?”, Journal of Consumer Behaviour, Vol. 12 No. 3, pp. 214-222.
Hoffman, S. and Muller, S. (2009), “Consumer boycotts due to factory relocation”, Journal of Business Research, Vol. 62 No. 2, pp. 239-247.
Holsti, O.R. (1963), “The quantitative analysis of content”, in Robinson, J.A. (Ed.), Content Analysis: A Handbook with Application for the Study of International Crisis, Nortwestern University Press, Nortwestern, pp. 37-53.
Huddleston, P., Good, L.K. and Stoel, L. (2001), “Consumer ethnocentrism, product necessity and polish consumers’ perceptions of quality”, International Journal of Retail and Distribution Management, Vol. 29 No. 5, pp. 236-246.
Iryanti, R. (2014), “Kemiskinan dan ketimpangan di Indonesia: permasalahan dan tantangan”, paper presented at Seminar Sehari, 5 September, Magister Sains dan Doktor, Fakultas Ekonomika dan Bisnis, Universitas Gadjah MadaYogyakarta.
Janes, L.M. and Olson, J.M. (2000), “Jeer pressure: the behavioral effects of observing redicule of others”, Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, Vol. 26 No. 4, pp. 474-485.
Johnson, D.W. and Johnson, F.P. (2012), Dinamika Kelompok: Teori Dan Ketrampilan, in Theresia, S.S. (Ed.), 9th ed., Indeks, Jakarta.
Kassarjian, H.H. (1977), “Content analysis in consumer research”, Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 4 No. 1, pp. 8-18.
Keraf, A.S. (2002), Etika Lingkungan, Penerbit Buku Kompas, Jakarta.
Kerlinger, F.N. and Lee, H.B. (2000), Foundations of Behavioral Research, 4th ed., Holt Rinehart and Winston Inc., New York, NY.
Kim, H. and Markus, H.R. (1999), “Deviance uniquiness, harmony or confirmity? A cultural analysis”, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, Vol. 77 No. 4, pp. 785-800.
Klein, J.G., Smith, N.C. and John, A. (2002), “Exploring motivations for participation in a consumer boycott”, Advances in Consumer Research, Vol. 29, pp. 363-369.
Klein, J.G., Smith, N.C. and John, A. (2004), “Why we boycott: consumer motivations for boycott participation”, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 68 No. 3, pp. 92-109.
KOMPAS (2010), “Pasar modal: Indomie Ditarik, Saham Merosot”, KOMPAS, 12 October, p. 1.
Kozinet, R.V. and Handelman, J. (1998), “Ensouling consumption: a netnographic exploration of the meaning of boycotting behavior”, Advances in Consumer Research, Vol. 25, pp. 475-480.
Krippendoff, K. (2012), Content Analysis: An Introduction to Its Methodology, 3rd ed., Sage, Baverly Hill, CA.
Kuncoro, M. (2003), Metode Riset Untuk Bisnis and Ekonomi: Bagaimana Meneliti and Menulis Tesis?, Erlangga, Jakarta.
Kuncoro, M. (2013), “Mengurangi ketimpangan”, KOMPAS, 2 March, p. 6.
Lacy, S., Watson, B.R., Riffe, D. and Lovejoy, J. (2015), “Issues and best practices in content analysis”, Journalism and Mass Communication Quarterly, Vol. 92 No. 4, pp. 791-811.
Latifah, S. (2005), Prinsip-Prinsip Dasar Analytical Hierarchy Process, Universitas Sumatra Utara e-USU Reposritory, Medan.
Lee, C., Huang, H. and Yeh, H. (2010), “Developing an evaluation model for destination attractiveness: sustainable Forest recreation tourism in Taiwan”, Journal of Sustainable Tourism, Vol. 18 No. 6, pp. 818-828.
Lee, M.S.W., Motion, J. and Conroy, D. (2009), “Anti-consumption and Brand avoidance”, Journal of Business Research, Vol. 62 No. 2, pp. 169-180.
Littlejohn, S.W. and Foss, K.A. (2009), Teori Komunikasi, in Hamdan, M.Y. (Eds), 9th ed., Penerbit Salemba Humanika, Jakarta.
Longman (2003), Advanced American Dictionary, Pearson Education Limited, Harlow.
McQuail, D. (1994), Mass Communication Theory: An Introduction, 3rd ed., Sage, New Delhi.
Malhotra, N.K. (2009), Marketing Research: An Applied Orientation, 6th ed., Prentice Hall, New York, NY.
Manalu, D. (2009), Gerakan Sosial Dan Perubahan Kebijakan Publik: Studi Kasus Gerakan Perlawanan Masyarakat Batak vs PT Inti Indorayon Utama di Sumatera Utara, Gadjah Mada University Press, Yogyakarta.
Moschis, G.P. (1976), “Social comparison and informal group influence”, Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 13 No. 3, pp. 237-244.
Mowen, J.C. and Minor, M. (2001), Consumer Behavior, 5th ed., Harcout Inc., New York, NY.
Mrad, S.B., Sheng, S.Y. and Hart, L.K. (2013), “Do rumbling lead to real action? A case of animosity and boycott in China”, International Journal of China Marketing, Vol. 3 No. 2, pp. 35-48.
Muhamad, N. and Mizerski, D. (2010), “The constructs mediating religions’ influence on buyers and consumers”, Journal of Islamic Marketing, Vol. 1 No. 2, pp. 124-135.
Neuman, W.L. (2009), Social Research Methods: Qualitative and Quantitative Methods, 7th ed., Pearson, Boston.
Nguyen, H.L., Fong, C. and Ho, C. (2010), “Using analytical hierarchy process in decision analysis-the case of Vietnam state securities commission”, iBusiness, Vol. 2 No. 2, pp. 139-144.
Park, C.W. and Lessig, V.P. (1977), “Student and housevives: Differences in susceptibility to reference group influence”, Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 4 No. 2, pp. 102-110.
Pearson, M.M., Lawrence, K.E. and Hickman, T. (2007), “Selecting foreign distribution partners with AHP (analytical hierarchy process)”, Marketing Education Review, Vol. 17 No. 1, pp. 7-13.
Rianto, P. (2009), “Literasi media: urgensi dan signifikansinya Bagi Praktisi humas”, in Adiputra, W.M. (Ed.), Berkawan Dengan Media: Literasi Media Untuk Praktisi Humas, Yayasan Tifa dan Pusat Kajian Media dan Budaya Populer, Yogyakarta, pp. 33-43.
Rindjin, K. (2004), Etika Bisnis Dan Implementasinya, Gramedia Pustaka Utama, Jakarta.
Robbins, S.P. and Judge, T.A. (2014), Organizational Behavior, 16th ed., Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River.
Saaty, T.L. (1993), Pengambilan Keputusan: Bagi Para Pemimpin, in Setiono, L. (Ed.), PT Pustaka Binaman Pressindo, Jakarta.
Sari, D.K., Mizerski, D. and Liu, F. (2017), “Boycotting foreign products: a study of Indonesia Muslim consumers”, Journal of Islamic Marketing, Vol. 8 No. 1, pp. 16-34.
Sears, D.O., Freedman, J.L. and Peplau, L.A. (1985), Social Psychology, 5th ed., Prentice-Hall, Inc., Boston.
Sen, S., Gurhan-Canli, Z. and Morwitz, V. (2001), “Withholding consumption: a social dilemma perspective on consumer boycotts”, Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 28 No. 3, pp. 399-417.
Severin, W.J. and Tankard, J.W.Jr (2001), Communication Theories: Origins, Methods, and Uses in the Mass Media, 5th ed., Addison Wesley Longman, Inc., London.
Stein, E.W. and Ahmad, N. (2009), “Using the analytical hierarchy process (AHP) to construct a measure of the magnitude of consequences component of moral intensity”, Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 89 No. 3, pp. 391-407.
Stokes, J. (2006), How to Do Media and Cultural Analysis, 2nd ed., Sage, CA.
Taylor, B.W. III. (2006), Introduction to Management Science, 9th ed., Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River.
Taylor, S.E., Peplau, L.A. and Sears, D.O. (2009), Social Psychology, 12th ed., Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River.
Teddlie, C. and Tashakkori, A. (2009), “Problematika dan kontroversi utama seputar penggunaan metode campuran dalam ilmu-ilmu sosial dan perilaku”, in Tashakkori, A. and Teddlie, C. (Eds), Mixed Methods in Social and Behavioral Research, translated by Daryatno, Pustaka Pelajar, Yogyakarta, pp. 3-44.
Tudor, R. and Carley, J. (1998), “Reference group theory revisited”, available at: www.sbaer.ucn.edu/research/sma/1998/pdf/06.pdf (accessed 26 July 2015).
Wei, C.H., Chen, C.J. and Chung, M.C. (2009), “Technology sourcing evaluation of an advanced technology industry”, Asia Pacific Management Review, Vol. 14 No. 4, pp. 509-517.
White, K. and Dahl, D.W. (2006), “To be or not be? The influence of dissociative reference groups on consumer preferences”, Journal of Consumer Psychology, Vol. 16 No. 4, pp. 404-414.
Wibowo, T. (2016), “Ketimpangan pendapatan dan Middle income trap”, Kajian Ekonomi and Keuangan, Vol. 20 No. 2, pp. 111-132.
Woodside, A.G. (2010), “Bridging the chasm between survey and case study research: research methods for achieving generalization, accuracy, and complexity”, Industrial Marketing Management, Vol. 39 No. 1, pp. 64-75.
Wright, C.R. (1985), Mass Communication: A Sociological Perspective, in Trimo, L. and Rakhmat, J. (Eds), CV Remadja Karya, Bandung.
Graneheim, U.H. and Garry, T. (2003), “Qualitative content analysis in nursing research: Concepts, procedures and measures to achieve trustworthiness”, Nurse Education Today, Vol. 24 No. 2, pp. 105-112.
World Bank (2017), “Menurunkan Ketimpangan di Indonesia”, available at: www.worldbank.org/in/country/indonesia/brief/reducing-inequality-in-indonesia (accessed 1 September 2017).