Search Results

This study is set out to assess the country of origin effect on Turkish consumption practices in order to provide a richer context for its formation process.

The research is exploratory and interpretative in nature. It follows a qualitative design with in-depth analysis of consumption experiences by utilizing semi-structured interviews.

The research shows that country of origin effect is product specific, and when it exists, it has an essential effect on product evaluations. It reveals that the country of origin effect is intrinsically constituted with the individual perceptions of and attitudes toward brands, countries, and past experiences, and it is extrinsically constituted with socially created perceptions by media, marketplace myths, and popularity.

This research investigated country of origin effect in a specific context of a developing country with a qualitative methodology. Unlike the existing literature, this study analyzes consumers’ actual purchase decisions in different product categories. Country of origin effect is found to be formed by individual and societal factors.

The purpose of this paper is to examine how developing country brand name and brand origin affect the customer’s evaluation of the brand in radically new high-tech products. Using processing fluency as a theoretical underpinning, this study can answer the following questions: first, does foreign brand name (developed vs developing Asian brand name) affect the customer’s attitude toward the brand? Second, does the brand origin (developed vs developing country) moderate the effect of foreign brand name on attitude toward the brand? Third, does the individual difference (knowledge and technological sophistication) matter in determining the brand origin and fit effect on willingness to buy?

A 2×2 between subject experiment was conducted in which two factors were manipulated: foreign brand name (developed: Japan vs developing: China) and brand origin (developed: Japan vs developing: China).

The fit between brand origin and brand name leads to better evaluation of the brand than no fit. On the other hand, for developing country brand origin (e.g. China), the brand naming effect is mitigated by enhanced processing fluency caused by fit, which leads to better evaluation of developing country brand. Fit effect is more pronounced for more knowledgeable consumers. Technologically more sophisticated consumers are more willing to buy the developing country brand origin than technologically less sophisticated consumers due to the processing fluency effect.

This paper introduces the two dimensions of foreign brand name (developed vs developing) and examines the interaction with the brand origin. This research fills the gap of under-researched area in brand naming literature, which is the effect of developing country brand naming on attitude toward the brand of radically new high-tech products. This research extends the previous literature by applying linguistic mechanism, processing fluency to examine the Asian brand naming including emerging market. This research makes an important theoretical contribution by identifying an underlying individual-level construct, “knowledge” and “technological sophistication,” which explains and influences the effects of brand name and brand origin on willingness to buy the brand.

The purpose of this paper is to explore the impact of country of origin image on brand equity of branded generic drugs.

Brand equity of branded generics is examined through an analytical review. Country of origin image is hypothesised to influence components of brand equity, i.e. brand strength and brand awareness, which in turn influence brand equity. An empirical investigation was carried out among professionally similar respondents, i.e. doctors of different categories in Kolkata megapolis, India.

Results showed that country of origin image had a positive and significant effect on components of brand equity, i.e. brand strength and brand awareness, derived from factor analysis conducted on brand equity components. The result also showed that country of origin image of branded generics significantly, but indirectly, affected brand equity through the mediating variables, brand strength and brand awareness.

Different variables have influence on brand equity. This study dealt with only one type of variable, i.e. country of origin image, that may limit the total process of brand equity enhancement.

Marketing actions should be implemented to enhance brand strength and awareness levels. Country of origin image should be assessed as a multidimensional concept for enhancing brand equity. Marketers should be aware of the fact that physicians are influenced by the brand's original country image.

This research work has extended prior country of origin research by conceptualising the country of origin image as a brand equity enhancing tool in a new area called branded generic drugs.

Drawing from the entitativity theory, the purpose of this paper is to focus on the European Union (EU) as a superordinate entity and investigate the extent to which a “Made-in-EU” designation leads to superior/inferior brand evaluations and through them to higher/lower purchase intentions than different country-specific designations.

Prior literature and qualitative interviews with consumers are used to generate several propositions regarding the role of the EU as a brand origin. These are subsequently tested in a series of four experimental studies using a common design but different country-specific origins as stimuli.

While a “Made-in-EU” designation is interpreted as a quality signal, linking a brand to the EU fails to generate positive affective associations. Furthermore, the exact impact of a “Made-in-EU” brand designation very much depends on the standard of comparison, that is, the specific country against which the EU is evaluated.

Superordinate designations such as the EU can indeed represent distinct entities in consumers’ minds which strongly impact their perceptions and intended behavior.

Moving from a “home country” label to a “Made-in-EU” label is not advisable for owners of domestic brands. For foreign brands from EU countries with an unfavorable country image, adopting a “Made-in-EU” label is worth considering since it can strengthen quality perceptions. However, any quality advantage might be offset by weaker brand affect perceptions.

The concept of entitativity introduces a new conceptual lens in the context of origin research which – almost exclusively – has previously focused on the individual country as the unit of analysis.

The purpose of this paper is to present a rejoinder. The rejoinder is written in response to the commentaries provided by Saeed Samiee and Jean‐Claude Usunier on the authors’ original research piece: “‘What? I thought Samsung was Japanese’: accurate or not, perceived country of origin matters”.

The rejoinder is organized into three separate sections. The first section identifies areas of agreement between the authors, and Samiee and Usunier. The second section responds directly to the empirical and conceptual criticisms levied by Samiee and Usunier and clarifies the authors’ contribution. The rejoinder concludes by identifying areas of future research that may help further advance the field.

In addition to responding directly to the criticism of the original study, perhaps more importantly, the authors note several areas of common ground. First, there is agreement that future country‐of‐origin (COO) research designs must be careful to not artificially expose subjects to country cues that the consumer otherwise may not have considered. Second, in a globalizing world, brand origin perception appears to be more important than “made in” labels.

The authors do not consider the COO field outdated or irrelevant, but rather that it is a vibrant field of considerable interest to both practitioners and researchers. There is much still to be learned, and the authors hope the original research study and the ensuing debate have sparked fresh ideas and will lead to a continued effort in this interesting research field.

Examines consumers’ perception of brands as influenced by their origins and the differences in classification ability between consumers’ knowledge levels. Specifically, culture‐of‐brand‐origin (COBO) is proposed to have replaced country‐of‐origin (COO) as the most important origin influence regarded by consumers in their perceptions of brands. Culture‐of‐brand‐origin is used to mean the cultural origin or heritage of a brand. Data were gathered from 459 respondents in the Asian city of Singapore; and used to assess Singaporean consumers’ ability to classify the cultural origins of fashion clothing brands. This was compared to their ability to classify the country origins of the same brands. Six brands were used in a between‐subjects design, with three brands of western countries and three of eastern countries. Results indicate that consumers can more readily identify the cultural origin of brands over their country‐of‐origin. Reveals that a consumer’s ability to make this distinction is influenced by the consumer’s perception of how well he/she knows the brand.

The purpose of this paper is to analyse the “region-of-origin” effect in the purchase of cava, a sparkling wine. Cava is a multiregional designation of origin: although it is a product typical of a particular Spanish region (Catalonia), it is also produced in other regions in Spain.

The technique of conjoint analysis is used to identify the structure of the preferences of cava consumers, and to evaluate how that structure is affected by the inclusion of a message that highlights the regional origin of the product. A survey was conducted among 473 wine buyers in the region of Extremadura (Spain).

The main findings show that the “region-of-origin” effect is significant for the regional buyer of this type of wine, and that the sales of regional brands of cava would be greater if their regional origin were emphasized by indicating the location of the producer in a prominent place on the label. Moreover, three segments of purchasers differentiated by their preference structure are identified.

The novelty of the study lies in the fact that this PDO is a multiregional designation of origin, and that the technique used, conjoint analysis, is applied not only to determine the buyer’s preference structure, but also to evaluate how that structure is affected when the regional origin of the product is highlighted in the message to the purchaser. This study is of value to academic researchers, wineries managers, and regional governments as it highlights important aspects to design marketing strategies and trade policies.

The purpose of this paper is to comment on Magnusson et al.'s paper. Rather than entering into the COO (country of origin) relevance debate, the author observes the shift from manufacturing to brand origin and outline consequences for future COO research by taking into account linguistic aspects of brand names.

This paper documents the issue of brand origin recognition accuracy (BORA, a central theme in Magnusson et al.'s paper) and the progressive replacement of COO and COM (country of manufacture) by COB (country of brand). Linguistic cues lead to both incorrect and correct classification of brands in terms of their national origin, which the author subsumes in four ideal‐typical situations, by taking into account company intention to manipulate origin information or not. The author then outlines factors which cause and moderate incorrect versus correct classification, especially brand size, corporate vs product names, and linguistic devices.

A framework is developed crossing causes of incorrect versus correct classification with company strategic branding intents. Suggestions are provided for future research combining linguistic and non‐linguistic aspects of BORA.

Companies willing to build on the origin and favorability of their brand names should deploy a deliberate naming strategy that is expressed in the textual part, as well as in the visual part (i.e. brand name fonts, logo, packaging) and the accompanying marketing communications, especially advertising copy.

This paper takes distance from the raging debate on the relevance of COO research, and suggests to deepen the understanding of BORA. This is done by looking at causes and moderating variables of BORA, and taking into account linguistic aspects of strategic branding in the global market.

The purpose of this study investigates the asymmetric effects of brand origin confusion (BOC) on consumer preference and the purchase of local versus foreign brands in China. Drawing on the general country‐of‐origin (COO) literature and recent developments in brand‐origin studies and the emerging market phenomenon globally, it proposes and test a model of the asymmetric effects of BOC on consumer preference and the purchase of local versus foreign brands in China. This study intends to help to explain from a new angle the decreasing competitiveness of foreign brands in emerging markets, such as China.

The study pretest on nationally distributed brands across seven product categories resulted in a final set of 67 brands: 35 foreign and 32 local. Four hundred respondents evaluated measures related to brand origin, brand awareness, brand value, brand preference, and brand purchases in the previous six months. Hierarchical regression analysis was used in data analysis.

The hypotheses on the asymmetric effects of BOC between local and foreign brands in China were mostly supported. Specifically, the results showed that local brands are likely to be in an advantageous position when there is a high level of BOC. However, as the brand knowledge of consumers increases, the effects of BOC decrease.

This study provides evidence of the asymmetric effects of BOC between local and foreign brands and the moderating role of brand knowledge for local brands in China. It fills a gap in the international branding and marketing communication literature, and offers meaningful managerial insights for both local and international companies to formulate effective branding and marketing communication strategies in China and possibly in other emerging markets.

Consumers' evaluations of brand extensions have gained considerable attention in the marketing literature. The purpose of this study is to investigate how a brand's perceived global or local origin impacts evaluations of brand extensions and creates transfer effects of brand meaning. The paper conceptually characterizes the transference process and empirically tests the nature and extent of spillover effects of origin associations across multiple parent brands and extensions.

For the empirical testing of the conceptual model of transfer effects of origin associations we undertook a cross‐sectional consumer survey amongst a sample of 267 Norwegian respondents. Structural equation modelling was used to investigate the causal relationships between the latent exogenous and endogenous variables in the conceptual model.

The present study indicates that the global and local origin framework, first introduced by Steenkamp et al. in 2003, can explain the occurrence of reciprocal transfer of brand meaning across parent brands and extensions. The paper shows that global and local origin associations operate in a manner very similar to brand associations in the transference of perceptions. It finds that distinct origin associations influence the pre‐brand image and drive the forward effect on the attitude towards the extension as well as the subsequent backward effect upon the post‐brand image of the parent brand.

This paper reveals for the first time that distinct origin associations can initiate spillover effects across parent brands and extensions. This study is therefore an important step towards the generalizability of main brand extension studies to other contexts such as extensions of global brands.