Consumer Profiles and Perceptions: Country‐of‐origin Effects

Abstract

Country‐of‐origin research has concentrated on the examination of consumer product perceptions or attitudes towards products made in different countries based on a variety of intrinsic or extrinsic cues. This research takes a different approach by examining the impact of country of origin, levels of foreign product ownership and consumer′s occupational status on interpersonal perceptions. Since respondents were not asked to engage in direct evaluations of various products of domestic or foreign origins, consumer normative response tendencies should be minimized. This approach also allows the examination of differential effects of country of origin on different consumer segments according to the occupational status.

Assessments of country of origin and brand cues in evaluating a Croatian, western and eastern European food product

“…Furthermore, researchers have conducted studies on the effects of COO predominantly in developed countries. Their findings (Chao and Rajendran, 1993) suggest a tendency for consumers to evaluate their own country's products and brands more favorably than imported products and brands. Taking both factors into consideration, O'Cass and Lim (2002) conclude that favorability in consumer evaluations of products and brands is a result of the cognitive tradeoff between the preference for products and brands from a developed economy, and the preference for products and brands of domestic origin.…”

The Impact of Country of Brand Image on Symbolic Value of Luxury Brands

“…Saeed (1994) suggested that COM was the last location where the product was manufactured; (2) COA, the country where the product was assembled (Chao & Rajendran, 1993); (3) COD, the country where R & D located (Chao & Rajendran, 1993;Ahmed & d' Astous, 1996). (4) COB.…”

Country image effect on product assessment: moderating role of consumer nationality

“…Since several variables have been argued to affect the impact of CoO, we employed the following controls in our study: age (Good, & Huddleston, 1995;Hsieh, Pan, & Setiono, 2004), gender (Bilkey, & Nes, 1982;Good, & Huddleston, 1995;Lawrence, Marr, & Prendergast, 1992), and level of formal education (Chao, & Rajendran, 1993).…”