Journal of Consumer Marketing

Dimensions of consumer knowledge and its impacts on country of origin effects among Australian
consumers: a case of fast-consuming product
Ian Phau Vasinee Suntornnond
Article information:
To cite this document:
Ian Phau Vasinee Suntornnond, (2006),"Dimensions of consumer knowledge and its impacts on country of origin effects among
Australian consumers: a case of fast-consuming product", Journal of Consumer Marketing, Vol. 23 Iss 1 pp. 34 - 42
Permanent link to this document:
http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/07363760610641145
Downloaded on: 23 December 2014, At: 05:19 (PT)
References: this document contains references to 27 other documents.
To copy this document: permissions@emeraldinsight.com
The fulltext of this document has been downloaded 3558 times since 2006*
Downloaded by ANADOLU UNIVERSITY At 05:19 23 December 2014 (PT)

Users who downloaded this article also downloaded:

Anja Schaefer, (1997),"Consumer knowledge and country of origin effects", European Journal of Marketing, Vol. 31 Iss 1 pp.
56-72 http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/03090569710157034
Khalid I. Al-Sulaiti, Michael J. Baker, (1998),"Country of origin effects: a literature review", Marketing Intelligence &
Planning, Vol. 16 Iss 3 pp. 150-199 http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/02634509810217309
Alexander Josiassen, A. Assaf, (2010),"Country-of-origin contingencies: their joint influence on consumer behaviour", Asia
Pacific Journal of Marketing and Logistics, Vol. 22 Iss 3 pp. 294-313 http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/13555851011062241

Access to this document was granted through an Emerald subscription provided by 384482 []
For Authors
If you would like to write for this, or any other Emerald publication, then please use our Emerald for Authors service
information about how to choose which publication to write for and submission guidelines are available for all. Please visit
www.emeraldinsight.com/authors for more information.
About Emerald www.emeraldinsight.com
Emerald is a global publisher linking research and practice to the benefit of society. The company manages a portfolio of
more than 290 journals and over 2,350 books and book series volumes, as well as providing an extensive range of online
products and additional customer resources and services.
Emerald is both COUNTER 4 and TRANSFER compliant. The organization is a partner of the Committee on Publication Ethics
(COPE) and also works with Portico and the LOCKSS initiative for digital archive preservation.

*Related content and download information correct at time of download.

 Dimensions of consumer knowledge and
its impacts on country of origin effects
among Australian consumers:
a case of fast-consuming product
Ian Phau and Vasinee Suntornnond
Curtin University of Technology, Perth, Australia

Abstract
Purpose The main purpose of the study is to extend Schaefers paper by investigating how different dimensions of consumer knowledge may affect
country of origin cues with an Australian sample.
Design/methodology/approach A self-administered mail survey was used in this study. The main sample consisted of Australian residents who are
aged 18 and above and may or may not be alcoholic drinkers. The mailing list was purchased from a local council consisting of a suburb of metropolitan
Perth, Western Australia. The total usable response rate was 38.7 per cent.
Downloaded by ANADOLU UNIVERSITY At 05:19 23 December 2014 (PT)

Findings The results indicated that country of origin cues affect Australian consumers in beer evaluations despite its weak influences. It suggested
that brand familiarity and objective product knowledge mediate the extent to which consumers relied on country of origin in product evaluation.
However, the study found inconsistent results between different levels of objective knowledge and its effects on country of origin of manufacture.
Originality/value The paper replicates Schaefers with extensions. Despite the inconclusive results, objective product-country knowledge, to some
extent, may distort country of origin influences on consumers. This finding yields some insight for the efficiency in market segmentation. By segmenting
consumers on different levels of knowledge, the marketers will subsequently make a better decision of how brand and country of origin should be
managed.

Keywords Country of origin, Consumers, Brands, Australia

Paper type Research paper

An executive summary for managers and executive
readers can be found at the end of this article.
Introduction
Country origin effects on consumer behaviour are considered
one of the most widely researched issues in international
marketing (Peterson and Jolibert, 1995; Tan and Farley,
1987; Al-Sulaiti and Baker, 1998; Bilkey and Nes, 1982).
Samli (1995) summarised country-of-origin as a concept that
is a critical information cue, which plays a major role in
having the product accepted in a different world market.
Country of origin effects can also act as an intangible barrier
to enter new markets in the form of negative consumer bias
toward imported products (Wang and Lamb, 1983). More
recently, Laroche et al. (2005) found that country image is a
three-dimensional concept comprising of cognitive, affective
and conative components. Among other individual factors,
consumer knowledge (Samiee, 1994; Maheswaran, 1994) is
perceived to impact consumers use of country of origin.
However, the specific detail regarding consumer knowledge
and country of origin cues has only received limited attention.
The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at
www.emeraldinsight.com/0736-3761.htm
Journal of Consumer Marketing
23/1 (2006) 34 42
q Emerald Group Publishing Limited [ISSN 0736-3761]
[DOI 10.1108/07363760610641145]
This study attempts to close this gap. Through extension of
Schaefers (1997) study, the main objectives of this paper are
to investigate how different dimensions of consumer
knowledge affect country of origin cues and to test the
generalisability with an Australian sample.
Relevant literature
Dimensions of consumer knowledge
Prior literature reflects that country of origin effects is a
complex phenomenon and various moderators can influence
its magnitude. One of these is consumer knowledge
(Maheswaran, 1994; Chiou, 2003). Previous studies failed
to distinguish between different dimensions of consumer
knowledge and how these may relate to country of origin
effects (Scribner and Weun, 2001). Further, the level of
product knowledge will also affect information use since
increased familiarity results in better developed knowledge
structures or schema about the product (Marks and Olsen
cited in Rao and Monroe, 1988, p. 254). Consumer
knowledge certainly plays a role in the acquisition and
evaluation of extrinsic cues. For instance, Cordell (1997) has
investigated the dimensionality of consumer knowledge and
each dimensions moderating effects on consumer use of
extrinsic cues. In his study based on a 35 mm camera,
different cues such as products brand name (well-known
versus invented), retailer (full-line department stores versus
discount store), and country of origin (industrialised versus
industrialising) are all salient in consumer evaluation. As
such, there is a need to examine the relationship between

34
 Dimensions of consumer knowledge
Ian Phau and Vasinee Suntornnond
various dimensions of consumer knowledge and consumers
use of country of origin.
There are some inherent gaps in the literature. Previous
country of origin studies mostly used durable, complex and
high financial risk products, such as, automobiles and
electronic appliances. Very few studies investigated solely
non-durable, low financial risk as fast consuming goods.
Second, for such low risk (or considered low-involvement)
products, consumers are often not very involved in the
purchase and thus unlikely to engage in lengthy information
search and processing (Hoyer and MacInnis, 2000). It can be
speculated that consumers will rely more on their own
knowledge.
Brand familiarity
Brand familiarity is one dimension of consumer knowledge
that is hypothesised to have an influence on country of origin
effects. This is due to the fact that there is a distinction
between general product class knowledge and specific brand
Downloaded by ANADOLU UNIVERSITY At 05:19 23 December 2014 (PT)
familiarity. General product class knowledge relates to
knowledge about the features or attributes of a product,
regardless of whether the consumer uses these features to
make a decision. Specific brand familiarity refers to the
consumer knowledge regarding the brand that exists in a
product category. This knowledge includes how brands
compare on different attributes and which brands own
unique attributes (Baker et al., 2002). Punj and Staelin (1983)
noted that consumers brand knowledge pertains to the
quantity of directly relevant brand information held in
memory. In other words, this type of consumer knowledge
is concerned with specific information about brands, which
exhibits a negative relationship with external search for
information. Fiske et al. (1994) commented that this
relationship associates with a de-motivating effect. It
signified that the more an individual already knows about
the brands in a product category, the less the need for external
information search because there is less new information that
is not yet known.
Hence, it can be argued that consumers direct experience
with a particular brand is likely to enhance the use of brand
name specifically as a choice criterion. This will diminish the
effects of country of origin cues, whereas, general product
class knowledge will probably facilitate the use of other
extrinsic product cues including country of origin. Lampert
and Jaffe (1998) posited that differences in country of origin
effects occur over product categories and within categories,
varying by individual product and brand. Thus, familiarity
and experience with countrys products moderate country of
origin effects. In a situation that an individual has tried a
specific brand originating from a given country and built a
relationship with the brand, the consumer tend to reach
product judgment quickly without much attempts of external
search. This is because consumer perceived the product based
largely on perceived benefits of that brand. While, country of
origin plays a minor role, if any, the product image is
determined largely through the salience of a specific brand.
On the contrary, Johansson (1989) contended that individuals
who consider themselves familiar with brands in a product
class are more willing to let country of origin cues enter their
evaluation process.
According to Cordell (1997) among other extrinsic cues,
brand name is the most common indicator for consumers to
assess products. When consumers are familiar with a
35
Journal of Consumer Marketing
Volume 23 Number 1 2006 34 42
particular brand in the product category, there is a less
tendency that they will search for more information. Hence, it
may be assumed that consumers who are accustomed to a
particular brand will not use country of origin, or attribute
information, to any large extent in evaluating that brand.
Based on the above premise, it can be hypothesised that:
H1. In a situation where only brand name and country of
origin are available as information cues, consumers are
more likely to rely on country of origin if the brand
name is unfamiliar than if it is familiar.
However, knowledge that consumers obtain through direct
personal experience will be perceived to be more trustworthy
than information from other communications. This results in
more strongly held beliefs (Swaminathan et al., 2001). Direct
experience with a particular brand tends to dilute country of
origin effects on consumer because such experience reinforces
consumers reliance on brand attributes. It can be
hypothesised that:
H2. Consumers who have personally tried a particular
brand will rely to a lesser extent on country of origin
when evaluating that particular brand than consumers
who have not personally tried the brand.
Objective product class knowledge
If a consumer is familiar with a particular brand in a
product category, the consumers level of objective product
class knowledge may not have any great impact on the use
of the country of origin cue. On the contrary, for an
unfamiliar brand, objective product class knowledge will
probably play a major role in a consumers evaluation and
choice processes.
Under a situation when both intrinsic and extrinsic cues of
product attribute information are available and the search for
such information is warranted, consumer with higher levels of
objective product knowledge may base evaluations on intrinsic
attributes rather than extrinsic cues (such as country of
origin). This is because highly objective consumers value the
cues that provide diagnostic utility. On the other hand, in a
case that product attribute information is not available in
choice situations and the search for it is not always warranted,
consumers may rely more on extrinsic cues for evaluation of
unfamiliar brands. Therefore, it can be expected that such
informational extrinsic cues as price, warranty or country of
origin will play a role in product evaluation.
However, country of origin is a more complicated cue than
price and warranty and its meaning differs for different
product class. In other words, country of origin perception is
not completely independent of products (Jaffe and
Nebenzahl, 2001). For example, Afghanistan is considered
as a third world underdeveloped country. When asked about
its products, most would evaluate it on a lower scale. Yet,
Afghan rugs are highly valued in the world markets. Hence,
objective product class knowledge might contain both product
class knowledge and country knowledge, which may to some
extent overlap, but they may not be entirely identical.
As a result, when examining the impact of consumer
knowledge on country of origin effects, it may be particularly
useful to employ a measure that incorporates product class
knowledge. This is important, as it is associated to country of
origin or country knowledge linking to products. Hence, in a
situation that only limited extrinsic cues are available as the
 Dimensions of consumer knowledge Journal of Consumer Marketing
Ian Phau and Vasinee Suntornnond Volume 23 Number 1 2006 34 42

evaluative criteria at the point of purchase, it can be
hypothesised that:
H3. Consumers with higher levels of objective product-
country knowledge will be more likely to rely on
country of origin when evaluating low-involvement
products, particularly if these products carry an
unfamiliar brand name, than consumers with lower
levels of product-country knowledge.
Methodology
Mail survey
A self-administered mail survey was chosen for the study. The
main sample consisted of Australian residents who are aged
18 and above and may or may not be an alcoholic drinker.
The mailing list was purchased from a local council consisting
of a suburb of metropolitan Perth, Western Australia. Names
were systemically chosen (every tenth name) from the list and
Downloaded by ANADOLU UNIVERSITY At 05:19 23 December 2014 (PT)
consumer knowledge and country of origin effects constructs
is 0.8800. This suggests that the scale is highly reliable.
Analysis and results
The majority of respondents are male (56.9 per cent). More
than half of the respondents are under 30 years old (52.1 per
cent). Majority of the respondents are currently in the tertiary
education (39.3 per cent). For the income categories, the
majority (34.7 per cent) falls into the lowest group, where the
earning is on average between AU$5,000 to AU$15,000.
Nearly half of the respondents are single (46.1 per cent).
Lastly, most of the respondents (93.5 per cent) are Australian
citizen, which corresponds to the research objective. The
remaining are Australian residents who have been in Australia
for the last five years.
A summary of respondents ratings on the product
dimensions of overall quality, value for money and
social acceptability is presented in Table I. The results show

were sent out in three batches one week apart of each other. that respondents evaluation of country image of beer was
In total, 1,275 were mailed out with a covering letter highest for Germany (mean 5.75). This is followed by The
explaining the nature of the study. A total of 316 were rejected Netherlands (5.42), Australia (5.36) and New Zealand
due to invalid addresses or that the respondents were no (4.68). For the dimension of value for money, Australia
longer staying in that address. A total of 371 surveys were (5.54) was ranked first. This is followed by New Zealand
received of which six were incomplete. This makes a final total (4.40), The Netherlands (4.38) and Germany (4.37). For the
useable response rate of 38.7 per cent. dimension of social acceptability, German beer
(mean 5:80) was ranked first followed by The
Survey instrument Netherlands (5.54), Australia (5.19) and New Zealand
The self-administered questionnaire was designed replicating (4.60).
many items from Schaefers (1997) study. Beer was chosen as For familiar brands, Heineken is ranked first for the
the product category as this will also allow comparisons with dimensions of product quality (5.59) and social
Schaefers (1997) study. Some changes were incorporated. acceptability (5.59). This is followed by Becks on
The country of manufacture cues used were Australia, dimension of product quality (mean 5:26) and social
Germany, New Zealand and The Netherlands. These acceptability (mean 5:31). Surprisingly, Steinlager
countries were chosen as it reflects the current market of received a better rating than Victoria Bitter on two
the beer industry. Two brands were included for each country. dimensions. These are namely, product quality means of
The familiar brand was chosen from the most popular brand 4.87 and 4.14 and social acceptability means of 4.85 and
for each country of origin. The unfamiliar brand name was a
fictitious brand name invented by the researchers.
In question 1, respondents were asked to evaluate their self- Table I Summary of statistical ratings of brands and countries
knowledge about beer on a four-point scale. This is to Quality Value Acceptability
measure subjective product class knowledge. In question 2,
Items Mean Std dev. Mean Std dev. Mean Std dev.
respondents were requested to tick the four brands of beer
(real brands) that they have tasted. In question 3, respondents Made in Australia 5.36 1.21 5.54 1.29 5.19 1.26
were presented with all eight brands of familiar and unfamiliar VB 4.14 1.53 4.59 1.48 3.66 1.60
(fictitious) brands of beer. They were required to identify the Johntons 3.89 1.11 3.70 1.00 3.90 1.11
country of origin. Question 4 was designed to determine
respondents product evaluations of the eight brands based on Made in The
three product dimensions namely overall quality, value for Netherlands 5.42 1.12 4.38 1.20 5.54 1.16
money and social acceptability. Seven-point semantic- Heineken 5.59 1.21 4.38 1.44 5.59 1.16
differential scales were used to rate the products. The country Van de Veer 4.21 1.09 3.82 1.07 4.21 1.21
cues were made available to the respondents.
Question 5 measures respondents evaluation of the product Made in Germany 5.75 1.05 4.37 1.25 5.80 1.11
dimensions of overall quality, value for money and
Becks 5.26 1.17 4.33 1.26 5.31 1.27
social acceptability of the country of manufacture of beer.
Schneider 4.49 1.15 3.79 1.14 4.54 1.34
This is also measured on a seven-point semantic scale.
Demographic information was elicited in the last section.
These included gender, age, education attainment, income, Made in New Zealand 4.68 1.34 4.40 1.27 4.60 1.36
marital status, and citizenship. The citizenship question was Steinlager 4.87 1.41 4.16 1.44 4.85 1.33
used as a screening question. As the study aims to investigate Massey 3.94 1.01 3.85 1.02 4.00 1.17
only Australian consumers, non-Australian respondents were Note: Familiar brand shown after country followed by unfamiliar (invented)
automatically excluded from the study. The result shows that brand; Scale range from 1 (very bad) to 7 (very good)
the Cronbachs alpha for the 58 items tapping dimensions of

36
 Dimensions of consumer knowledge Journal of Consumer Marketing
Ian Phau and Vasinee Suntornnond Volume 23 Number 1 2006 34 42

3.66 respectively. However, Victoria Bitter received the
highest ranking for the dimension of value for money
(4.59).
For unfamiliar brands, Schneider is the ranked first for both
dimensions of product quality (4.49) and social
acceptability (4.54). This is followed by Van de Veer (4.21)
for both dimensions. Massey received the highest mean for
the dimension of value for money (3.85).
Country of origin effects evidence
The evidence for respondents use of country of origin cue in
product evaluations was measured by correlating means for
each product dimensions, country of manufacture cues and
the brand names. This is presented in Table II. The results
show positive correlations in most of the cases, which indicate
that there is country of origin effects on both familiar and
unfamiliar brands. However, it appears to vary between
countries and product dimensions. For example, for
dimension for product quality, New Zealand has the
Downloaded by ANADOLU UNIVERSITY At 05:19 23 December 2014 (PT)
When evaluating both familiar and unfamiliar brands from
Australia, respondents depended more on country of origin
cue in every product dimension (r 0:4101 . 0:136 for
quality, r 0:377 . 0:167 for value, and r 0:344 .
20:071 for acceptability). The same pattern appeared in
other countries and their products in all product dimensions
as well. This suggests that respondents seemed to rely more
on country of origin cue when evaluating familiar brands
rather than unfamiliar brands. Moreover, a Sign test shows
that correlations between country ratings and ratings of
familiar brands are overall significantly stronger (p 0:000)
than correlations between country ratings and ratings of
unfamiliar brands. Therefore, H1 is rejected.
The finding is similar to the Schaefers (1997) study. The
possible explanation is that respondents may not be too
confident to rely solely on country of origin when evaluating a
product with an unknown brand name. This is especially so
for non-drinker respondents in this study. Second, the image
of a familiar brand may be a strong constituent of product-

strongest country of origin effect on beer for both familiar and country images and may thus have an impact on country
unfamiliar brands (r 0:528 and 0.351 respectively). ratings (Schaefer, 1997).
Germany has the weakest effect on the acceptability
dimension for familiar brands (r 0:277). Personal brand experience and country of origin effects
It was hypothesised in H2 that consumers with personal
Brand familiarity and country of origin effects experience of a brand would be less likely to rely on country of
In H1, it was hypothesised that in a situation where only origin than consumers without personal experience, when
brand name and country of origin information cues are evaluating that particular brand. In Table III, the correlation
available, country of origin effects would be stronger if the coefficient between country of origin and brands are shown
brand name is unfamiliar than if it is familiar. This is because separately for respondents with and without personal
when the brand name is familiar, consumers would rely on the experience of the brand chosen for the study.
known attributes of the brand rather than country of origin The results show a positive correlation between country and
cues. However, the results shown in Table II seem to reflect brand of consumers with and without brand experience in
the contrary. Despite weak positive correlations, the most of the items. One exception is Victoria Bitter in all three
correlations of country of origin and familiar brands are product dimensions and Heineken for acceptability
stronger than those of unfamiliar brands. dimension for non-experience respondents. The results
show that for these items, correlations were not significant.
Table II Evidence for country of origin effects: Spearmans rho One possible reason is that most of the respondents had
correlation efficient between brand and country rating personally tried this brand (89.97 per cent of the
respondents). Second, since Victoria Bitter is a domestic
Quality Value Acceptability brand, respondents including non-experienced respondents
n n n are likely to be more accustomed to the brand. As a result,
Australia country of origin cue may not be used in the evaluation
Victoria Bitter 365 0.401 * * 360 0.377 * * 360 0.344 * * process. Heineken is a global brand with high brand
Johntons 281 0.136 * 278 0.167 * * 278 2 0.071 familiarity. In addition, the brands positioning and the
active marketing activities of Heineken in Australia may have
lessened the reliance of country of origin when respondents
The Netherlands
assessed the social acceptability dimension of the brand.
Heineken 361 0.435 * * 359 0.420 * * 360 0.298 * *
When comparing correlation between respondents with and
Van de Veer 283 0.222 * * 283 0.217 * * 284 0.144 *
without brand experience, Victoria bitter reflected moderately
strong positive correlations for brand experience group
Germany (r 0:415 for quality dimension; 0.369 for value
Becks 335 0.394 * * 334 0.374 * * 337 0.277 * * dimension; and 0.360). There is no significant correlation
Schneider 288 0.285 * * 289 0.294 * * 294 0.163 * * for those without experience in any product dimension.
Similarly, for Steinlager, the positive correlations of
New Zealand respondents with experience are stronger than those without
Steinlager 339 0.528 * * 342 0.332 * * 341 0.406 * * experience for all dimensions (r 0:532 . 0:480 for
Massey 285 0.351 * * 285 0.261 * * 286 0.254 * * quality; r 0:428 . 0:311 for value; r 0:501 . 0:240
for acceptability).
Notes: *Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (two-tailed);
* *Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (two-tailed); Sign test In contrast, for Heineken, the correlations of respondents
comparing correlation involving familiar brands vs unfamiliar brands: with experience are weaker than those of respondents without
correlation between country ratings and ratings of familiar brands are experience for dimensions of overall quality and value for
significant stronger (p 0:000) money dimensions (r 0:377 , 0:576 for quality; r
0:401 , 0:704 for value), The correlation for acceptability

37
 Dimensions of consumer knowledge Journal of Consumer Marketing
Ian Phau and Vasinee Suntornnond Volume 23 Number 1 2006 34 42

Table III Correlation between brand and country ratings by respondent with and without brand experience
Brand experience No brand experience
Quality Value Acceptability Quality Value Acceptability
No. of No. of No. of No. of No. of No. of
respondents respondents respondents respondents respondents respondents
Victoria Bitter
Australia 332 0.415 * 332 0.369 * 332 0.360 * 28 0.108 28 20.056 28 0.217
Heineken
The Netherlands 320 0.377 * 318 0.401 * 318 0.267 * 41 0.576 * 41 0.704 * 42 0.048
Becks
Germany 208 0.343 * 207 0.391 * 209 0.302 * 127 0.419 * 127 0.377 * 128 0.269 *
Steinlager
New Zealand 186 0.532 * 190 0.428 * 188 0.501 * 153 0.480 * 152 0.311 * 153 0.240 *
Note: *Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (two-tailed); Sign test comparing strength of correlation of brand experience vs no brand experience:
no significant differences (p 0:146)
Downloaded by ANADOLU UNIVERSITY At 05:19 23 December 2014 (PT)

of experienced respondents is greater (r 0:267 . 0:048).
The correlations of respondents who have personally tasted
Becks are stronger than those who have not for the dimension
of overall quality but not for value for money and social
acceptability dimensions (r 0:343 , 0:480 for quality;
r 0:319 . 0:377 for value; and r 0:302 . 0:269).
However, a further analysis of the entire items by a Sign
test suggests that there is no significant difference in the
strength of the correlations based on personal experience with
a brand of beer (p 0:146). Therefore, H2 is rejected.
Objective product-country knowledge and country of
origin effects
H3 speculated that consumers with higher levels of objective
product-country knowledge would rely more on country of
origin than consumers with lower level of product-country
knowledge when evaluating products with an unfamiliar
brand name. Hence, stronger correlations between country
and brand ratings are expected with higher levels of product
knowledge. In the data analysis, respondents were divided
into three sub-samples according to a number of right
identifications of country of origin of the brand names of beer
in the questionnaire. The sub-samples consist of low (0-2
right answers), medium (3-5 right answers), and high (5-8
right answers).
As reflected in Table IV, the correlation between country
and brand ratings is shown separately for respondents with
different levels of knowledge and different product
dimensions. For familiar brands, the results indicated that
in most of the cases, the correlations of low knowledge
respondents are stronger than those of medium knowledge
respondents in all product dimensions. Only for the brand
Steinlager, that medium knowledge sub-group has stronger
correlations for the dimensions of overall quality and
social acceptability than low knowledge respondents
(r 0:578 . 0:510 for quality; and r 0:592 . 0:163 for
acceptability).
When comparing correlations between low and high
categories towards familiar brands the results for the
dimension of overall quality is contrary to expectation. In
all cases, high knowledge respondents have weaker
correlations than low knowledge sub-group. In contrast, for
value knowledge, the results appeared to support the
hypothesis. The positive correlations of high knowledge group
are stronger than those with low knowledge in all brands
(r 0:788, 0.738, 0.664, and 0.592 for VB, Heineken, Becks
and Steinlager respectively).
For familiar brands, the results revealed that the
correlations of high knowledge respondents are stronger
than medium knowledge subgroup only for the dimension of
value for money in all items. Only the brand Becks reflects
that high knowledge group has stronger correlation than
medium knowledge subgroup for the dimension for social
acceptability (r 0:476 . 0:173).
For unfamiliar brands, results showed that medium
knowledge sub group has stronger correlations than low
knowledge sub groups in most cases. These are r 0:220 .
0:189 for value; r 0:232 . 0:191 for the dimension of
social acceptability for Van de Veer brand, r 0:290 .
0:219 for quality of Schneider, and r 0:448 . 0:309 for
quality; r 0:448 . 0:342 for value for money of
Massey.
The correlation differences between low and high
knowledge groups are that high knowledge group reflects
several stronger correlations. These include r 0:775 .
0:189 for value of Van de Veer, r 0:693 . 0:219 for
quality and r 0:622 . 0:246 for value for money of
Schneider, r 0:836 . 0:342 for value for money for
Massey.
When comparing correlation between medium and high
knowledge subgroups, the results demonstrated that high
knowledge respondents have stronger correlations than
medium knowledge respondents for several product
dimensions of several brands. They are r 0:775 . 0:220
for value of Van de Veer, r 0:693 . 0:219 for quality
and r 0:622 . 0:246 for value of Schneider, r 0:836 .
0:342 for value of Massey.
In summary, a Sign test comparing the correlation between
rating by the different sub-samples in Table IV shows that
there are no significant differences in strength of correlations
between country ratings and ratings of familiar brands by
respondents with different levels of objective product-country
knowledge. The comparisons between low versus
medium groups was p 0:146; medium versus high
groups was p 0:388; and low versus high was
p 1:000.
On the contrary, a Sign tests shows that there is a significant
difference in strength of correlations between country ratings

38
 Dimensions of consumer knowledge Journal of Consumer Marketing
Ian Phau and Vasinee Suntornnond Volume 23 Number 1 2006 34 42

Table IV Correlation between brand and country ratings by objective product country knowledge
Low knowledge Medium knowledge High knowledge
Quality Value Acceptability Quality Value Acceptability Quality Value Acceptability
Sample size Sample size Sample size Sample size Sample size Sample size Sample size Sample size Sample size
VB
Australia 196 0.454 * * 194 0.080 195 0.419 * * 146 0.301 * * 148 0.227 * * 147 0.279 * * 18 0.409 18 0.788 * * 18 0.000
Johntons
Australia 149 2 0.047 149 0.134 149 2 0.086 113 0.318 * * 113 0.208 * 113 0.141 16 20.011 16 0.495 16 20.543 *
Heineken
The Netherlands 193 0.501 * * 192 0.453 * * 194 0.285 * * 150 0.372 * * 149 0.330 * * 148 0.241 * * 18 0.129 18 0.738 * * 18 0.242
VandeVeer
The Netherlands 150 0.219 * * 150 0.189 * 152 0.191 * 118 0.185 * 118 0.220 * 117 0.232 * 15 0.470 15 0.775 * * 15 0.148
Becks
Germany 172 0.410 * * 173 0.364 * * 173 0.334 * * 145 0.354 * * 143 0.349 * * 146 0.173 * 18 0.229 18 0.664 * * 18 0.476 *
Schneider
Germany 154 0.219 * * 154 0.246 * * 159 0.143 118 0.290 * * 119 0.326 * * 119 0.275 * * 16 0.693 * * 16 0.622 * 16 20.172
Steinlager
Downloaded by ANADOLU UNIVERSITY At 05:19 23 December 2014 (PT)

NZ 181 0.510 * * 180 0.405 * * 182 0.163 * 142 0.578 * * 146 0.353 * * 144 0.195 * 16 0.501 * 16 0.592 * 16 0.313
Massey
NZ 152 0.309 * 152 0.342 * * 152 0.263 * * 117 0.448 * * 117 0.182 * 118 0.334 * * 16 0.381 16 0.836 * * 16 20.047
Notes: *Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (two-tailed); * *Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (two-tailed); Sign test comparing correlation:
Familiar brands: low vs medium no significant difference (p 0:146); Medium vs high no significant difference (p 0:388); Low vs high no significant
difference (p 1:000); Unfamiliar brands: Low vs medium medium significantly stronger correlation (p 0:039); Medium vs high no significant difference
(p 1:000); Low vs high no significant difference (p 0:388)

and unfamiliar brands ratings by respondents with low
versus medium objective knowledge level (p 0:039,
medium significantly stronger correlations). Nevertheless,
this pattern did not apply to the comparisons of other sub-
groups. Evidently, there are no significant differences between
respondents with medium objective knowledge versus
high objective knowledge level (p 1:000), as well as,
low versus high objective knowledge level (p 0:388).
The results suggested that only respondents with medium
objective knowledge tend to rely on country of origin when
evaluating unfamiliar brands, whereas, the highest objective
knowledge group did not rely on country of origin as
expected. H3, therefore, is partially supported.
Discussion and managerial implications
The empirical findings indicate that while country of origin
effects have an influence on Australian consumers, there are
only weak associations between product dimensions and
country of origin cues particularly for evaluations of
unfamiliar brands. The descriptive data showed that, at the
country level, Germany is perceived by Australian consumers
as the best in product quality and social acceptability.
These positive perceptions are subsequently transferred to the
evaluation of the fictitious brand from Germany, which
gained highest score for each of the similar product
dimensions.
The finding suggests that consumers did not rely on
country of origin when they evaluate an unknown brand
name. According to Blackwell et al. (2001), consumers are
unlikely to purchase a product when they lack sufficient
information. Hence, it can be implied that consumers hesitate
to evaluate unknown brand names simply because they may
feel that inadequate information is made available to them.
Similarly, many respondents may not be adequately confident
to rely solely on country of origin cue when judging a product
with an unfamiliar brand name (Schaefer, 1997).
Further, the image of a familiar brand may be a strong
constituent of product-country images and may thus have an
impact on country image ratings. In other words, many
international brands have a basic credibility or reputation
based on their country of origin image (Rugimbana and
Nwankwo, 2003). Therefore, the consumers may find it
difficult to link the unknown brand name to a country image,
which resulted in less dependency of country of origin cues.
This finding is also contradictory to Han and Qualls
(1985), who posits that customers with lower levels of brand
familiarity are expected to pay closer attention to country
origin image. It was found that consumer perceptions of
product quality of Grundig television sets (a brand with which
respondents were unfamiliar) were favourably influenced by
their country of origin, Germany. Consumers inferred the
German superiority image of German technology and
transferred this attribute to an unfamiliar brand name of
German origin.
There are many managerial implications that can be drawn
from the findings. Since consumers do not rely on country of
origin for unfamiliar brands evaluations, beer producers of
international brands or importers may not need to focus on
country of origin in promotion strategy when introducing new
brand to the market. Rather, they should emphasise other
uniqueness of the new brands, such as, product attributes,
e.g. distinguish package, or, other elements of marketing
strategies. However, the foreign brands available in the market
such as Heineken and Becks can make use of their country of
origin images by emphasising their superiority in product
quality and social acceptability. The results of country ratings
suggest that consumers perceived New Zealands image better

39
 Dimensions of consumer knowledge
Ian Phau and Vasinee Suntornnond
than Australia only for social acceptability. Therefore, if the
company wants to address the country of origin related
message in the promotion strategy, they should accentuate
trendiness of the product rather than its quality.
The findings indicated that consumers without personal
experience of a brand did not rely on country of origin. In
contrast, consumer with brand experience relied more on
country of origin cues. The possible reasons may be similar to
those suggested earlier. Further, since all the brands chosen in
the study (Victoria Bitter, Heineken, Becks and Steinlager)
have been actively marketed in Australia, the consumers
without experience may base their judgment on what they
have heard or seen all communication campaigns rather than
only informational cue provided in the survey.
As consumers with personal brand experience depended on
country of origin cue, the marketers may address the positive
images of country of brand origin. For instance, the country
image means showed the most positive perceptions towards
quality and social acceptability are for German beer. Becks
Downloaded by ANADOLU UNIVERSITY At 05:19 23 December 2014 (PT)
can also emphasise these messages through its promotion
campaign. Further, the company can also charge premium
prices to stress brands country of origin superior image.
On the other hand, other strategies can be used for the
segment of inexperienced consumers. Instead of emphasising
country of origin messages, sales promotions, such as, price
deals, coupons, a free sample, or premiums may be a more
efficient way to get these consumers to try the products.
The findings indicate some support for consumers with
higher levels of objective knowledge rely more frequently on
country of origin cues especially when evaluating unfamiliar
brands. However, this pattern only applies between low and
medium levels of objective knowledge groups and not
between medium versus high levels nor low versus
high levels of objective knowledge groups. Moreover, in a
case of familiar brands, the results suggest that consumers
with higher levels of objective knowledge relied more
frequently on objective product country knowledge than
those with lower levels of knowledge when evaluating different
brands of beer.
Unlike the previous research, which found consistent
patterns along every level of objective knowledge, this study
only found a weak evidence of an objective knowledge-
country of origin relationship. Hence, the mediating effect of
this knowledge dimension on country of origin magnitude is
inconclusive. This questions the generalisability of the
previous studys results, as well as the validity of the
measurement used. The inconsistency of the findings may
be due to the lack of external validity of current country of
origin studies (dAstous and Ahmed, 1999). In reality,
consumers may not generally seek country of origin
information and consequently may not think it is important
despite of a consensus of country of origin effects. Further,
consumers may want to appear logical, reasonable and
rational individuals who base their judgment about products
on intrinsic product cues rather than on extrinsic cues such as
country of origin (Johansson, 1993; dAstous and Ahmed,
1999).
Despite the inconclusive results, objective product-country
knowledge, in some extent, may distort country of origin
influences on consumers. Consumers with moderate objective
knowledge seem to be the most sensitive about country of
origin cues. This finding yields some insight for the efficiency
in market segmentation. By segmenting consumers on
40
Journal of Consumer Marketing
Volume 23 Number 1 2006 34 42
different levels of knowledge, the marketers will
subsequently make a better decision of how brand and
country of origin should be managed. For example, when the
marketers target moderately knowledgeable consumers, they
can make use of a favourable product-country image to
position a new product. On the other hand, an unfavourable
product-country image may hinder the success of a new brand
targeted at this segment. For low or high knowledgeable
consumers, marketers do not need to be too concerned about
product-country images.
Limitations and future research directions
The homogeneity of countries chosen for the study may be a
caveat. According to Jaffe and Nebenzahl (2001), country
image is influenced by exogenous factors such as a countrys
economic development, national identity and its cultural
environment. Since all countries used in the study, as stimuli
are highly developed countries, it leads to the question if
results may differ for consumers in developing or less
developed countries. Future research should focus on
countries with different economical levels, different political
backgrounds and different cultures as stimuli.
In this study, respondents were not motivated by real
purchase situation. As a consequence, some were reluctant to
evaluate unfamiliar brands, which may affect the study
outcomes. However, it can be argued that if a real
environment setting is used, it will be very difficult to
control availability of informational cues. This is because in
real-life situations, the respondents may process other
extrinsic cues, such as, price, packaging, or even liquor stores.
The validity of objective product-country knowledge
measurement may also be questionable. By asking
respondents to identify country of origin of both real and
fictitious brand, highly knowledgeable respondents may
recognise that the unfamiliar brands were invented and
decide not to provide answers to those questions. On the
other hand, the respondents who verified themselves as
pertaining low knowledge about beers tended to answer all of
the questions without realising which brands were real or
fictitious. As a result, the former group received lower scores
than the latter. This needs to be addressed in future studies.
This study should be extended to other product in the same
category and to other product categories. If there are
supported by the subsequent research, they will contribute
to our understanding of consumer knowledge on country of
origin effects by enriching the profile that can be drawn from
consumers in other countries.
References
Al-Sulaiti, K.I. and Baker, M.J. (1998), Country of origin
effects: a literature review, Marketing Intelligence & Planning,
Vol. 16 No. 3, pp. 150-99.
Baker, T.L., Hunt, J.B. and Scribner, L.L. (2002), The effect
of introducing a new brand on consumer perceptions of
current brand similarity: the roles of product knowledge
and involvement, Journal of Marketing, Fall, pp. 45-57.
Bilkey, W.J. and Nes, E. (1982), Country-of-origin effects on
product evaluation, Journal of International Business
Studies, Vol. 8 No. 1, pp. 89-99.
 Dimensions of consumer knowledge
Ian Phau and Vasinee Suntornnond
Blackwell, R.D, Miniard, P.W and Engel, J.F.. (2001),
Consumer Behavior, 9th ed., Thomson Learning, Mason,
OH.
Chiou, J.-S. (2003), The impact of country of origin on
pretrial and posttrial product evaluations: the moderating
effect of consumer expertise, Psychology and Marketing,
Vol. 20 No. 10, pp. 935-54.
Cordell, V.V. (1997), Consumer knowledge measures as
predictors in product evaluation, Psychology and
Marketing, Vol. 14 No. 3, pp. 241-60.
dAstous, A. and Ahmed, S.A. (1999), The importance of
country images in the formation of consumer product
perceptions, International Marketing Review, Vol. 16 No. 2,
pp. 108-25.
Fiske, C.A., Luebbehusen, L.A., Miyazaki, A.D. and Urbany,
J.E. (1994), The relationship between knowledge and
search: it depends, Advances in Consumer Research, Vol. 21,
Association for Consumer Research, Provo, UT, pp. 43-50.
Han, C.M. and Qualls, W.J. (1985), Country-of-origin
Downloaded by ANADOLU UNIVERSITY At 05:19 23 December 2014 (PT)
effects and their impact upon consumers perception of
quality, in Tan, C.T. and Sheth, J. (Eds), Historical
Perspectives in Consumer Research, School of Management,
University of Singapore, Singapore.
Hoyer, W.D. and MacInnis, D.J. (2000), Consumer Behavior,
2nd ed., Houghton Mifflin, Boston, MA.
Jaffe, E.D. and Nebenzahl, I.D. (2001), National Image and
Competitive Advantage: The Theory and Practice of Country-
of-Origin Effect, Copenhagen Business School Press,
Copenhagen.
Johansson, J.K. (1989), Determinants and effects of the use
of made in labels, International Marketing Review, Vol. 6
No. 1, pp. 47-58.
Johansson, J.K. (1993), Missing a strategic opportunity:
managers denial of country-of-origin effect, in
Papadopoulos, N. and Heslop, L.A. (Eds), Product
Country Images: Impact and Role in International Marketing,
International Business Press, New York, NY, pp. 77-86.
Lampert, S.I. and Jaffe, E.D. (1998), A dynamic approach to
country-of-origin effect, European Journal of Marketing,
Vol. 32 Nos 1/2, p. 61.
Laroche, M., Papadopoulos, N., Heslop, L. and Mourali, M.
(2005), The influence of country image structure on
consumer evaluations of foreign products, International
Marketing Review, Vol. 22 No. 1, pp. 96-115.
Maheswaran, D. (1994), Country of origin as a stereotype:
effects of consumer expertise and attribute strength on
product evaluations, Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 21
No. 2, pp. 354-65.
Peterson, R.A. and Jolibert, A.J. (1995), A meta-analysis of
country-of-origin effects, Journal of International Business
Studies, Vol. 26 No. 4, pp. 883-96.
Punj, G.N. and Staelin, R. (1983), A model of consumer
information search behavior for new automobiles, Journal
of Consumer Research, Vol. 9 No. 3, pp. 366-80.
Rao, A.R. and Monroe, K.B. (1988), The moderating effect
of prior knowledge on cue utilization in product
evaluations, Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 15,
September, pp. 253-64.
Rugimbana, R. and Nwankwo, S. (2003), Cross Cultural
Marketing, Thomson Nelson, Hampton.
Samiee, S. (1994), Customer evaluation of products in a
global market, Journal of International Business Studies,
Vol. 25 No. 3, pp. 579-604.
41
Journal of Consumer Marketing
Volume 23 Number 1 2006 34 42
Samli, A.C. (1995), International Consumer Behavior: Its Impact
on Marketing Strategy Development, Quorum Books, New
York, NY.
Schaefer, A. (1997), Consumer knowledge and country of
origin effects, European Journal of Marketing, Vol. 31 No. 1,
pp. 56-72.
Scribner, L.L. and Weun, S. (2001), Developing a
multdimensional subjective product knowledge scale,
working paper.
Swaminathan, V., Fox, R.J. and Reddy, S.K. (2001),
The impacts of brand extension introduction on choice,
Journal of Marketing, Vol. 65 No. 10, pp. 1-15.
Tan, C.T. and Farley, J.U. (1987), The impact of cultural
patterns on cognition and intention in Singapore, Journal
of Consumer Research, Vol. 13 pp. 540-44.
Wang, C. and Lamb, C. (1983), The impact of selected
environmental forces upon consumers willingness to buy
foreign products, Journal of the Academy of Marketing
Science, Vol. 11 No. 2, pp. 71-84.
About the authors
Ian Phau is a senior lecturer at Curtin Business School of
Marketing in Western Australia. His research interests lie in
country image, luxury branding and brand piracy. His
teaching specialisations are in consumer behaviour and
market research. He is also active in consulting work in the
luxury industry. Ian Phau is the corresponding author and can
be contacted at: ian.phau@cbs.curtin.edu.au
Vasinee Suntornnond has just completed her Masters study
at Curtin Business School of Marketing in Western Australia.
She is currently working in the service industry.
Executive summary and implications for
managers and executives
This summary has been provided to allow managers and executives
a rapid appreciation of the content of this article. Those with a
particular interest in the topic covered may then read the article in
toto to take advantage of the more comprehensive description of the
research undertaken and its results to get the full benefits of the
material present.
Dimensions of consumer knowledge and its impacts on
country of origin effects among Australian consumers:
a case of fast-consuming product
Knowledge about a products country of origin (COO) can
significantly influence consumer perceptions of a brand.
Whether these impressions are positive or negative will
invariably go some way to enhancing or inhibiting the success
of products in foreign markets. Of course, COO prompts will
not be the only knowledge to influence consumer perception
and, ultimately, purchase intentions. The value for marketers
is obviously to identify those situations when COO cues can
be most effective and target the consumer appropriately.
To this end, Phau conducted a mail survey of Australian
residents over 18 years of age. Respondents were asked to
complete a questionnaire relating to eight brands of beer from
four different countries. From each country, one leading
brand and one fictitious brand were included. Part of the
motivation for selecting these stimuli was the scarcity of
previous studies concerning fast-consuming products. The
authors primary aim was to investigate how difference aspects
 Dimensions of consumer knowledge
Ian Phau and Vasinee Suntornnond
of consumer knowledge affect COO prompts. Respondents
were asked to identify country of origin of the beers and
evaluate each brand and COO in respect of overall quality,
value for money and social acceptability.
In line with a majority of earlier studies, the author assumed
that brand familiarity would be a highly influential factor.
Personal experience with a particular brand would lessen the
need to seek other cues, such as COO. Consumers would
instead make judgments based on brand features or attributes
known to them. The brand name itself will thus influence
decisions made.
However, the findings proved contrary to expectation.
There were closer links between COO and familiar brands
than with unfamiliar brands, although the evidence itself was
insubstantial. Speculation was that consumers might not be
sufficiently confident to rely solely on COO when faced with
the task of evaluating an unfamiliar brand. The lack of other
information was assumed to be especially significant to non-
drinking respondents in this survey.
Downloaded by ANADOLU UNIVERSITY At 05:19 23 December 2014 (PT)
Likewise, it is also noted that brand image and product-
country image are often inextricably linked. When this
relationship is especially close, any reference to the brand also
activates COO associations. A prime example of this is
German goods reputation for quality a common
assumption that even applied to the fictitious brand
included within this study. That this link would not usually
be apparent where unfamiliar brands are concerned obviously
suggests that COO cues are likely to be less influential.
Some consumers may be unfamiliar with a specific brand,
yet possess high levels of knowledge about products in the
same category. The author suggests that these consumers are
less likely to use extrinsic cues such as price, warranty or
COO on occasions when intrinsic product attribute cues are
also available. But, in the absence of such information, COO
may have a more prominent role to play. It is also believed
that COO is potentially most important when few extrinsic
clues are available to the consumer. This argument is
particularly relevant on occasions when knowledge about a
product comes packaged with knowledge relating to its
country of origin.
The author had predicted that product-country links would
make consumers with high objective product-country
knowledge more likely to be influenced by COO when
evaluating unfamiliar brands. However, the findings indicated
that this only applied to consumers with medium levels of
objective product-country knowledge.
To purchase reprints of this article please e-mail: reprints@emeraldinsight.com
Or visit our web site for further details: www.emeraldinsight.com/reprints
42
Journal of Consumer Marketing
Volume 23 Number 1 2006 34 42
The results of this investigation suggest that marketers
would not benefit from using COO cues when introducing a
product to a market where the brand was unfamiliar. A more
productive strategy would be to instead concentrate on other
attributes that might differentiate the brand. And, while COO
use is clearly more appropriate to customers with experience
of a brand, care is needed to strike the right chord. For
example, respondents in this study rated New Zealand higher
than Australia with regard to social acceptability. As the
author rightly points out, the scope for COO to make a
positive impact would only occur if strategies to market a
brand originating from New Zealand emphasized the
products trendiness rather than its quality or price.
Similarly, it is possible that German organizations will be
able to exploit the countrys reputation for quality in order to
justify charging higher prices. For consumers without
personal brand experience, COO would be wasted. Sales
promotions, discounts or free samples are a few of the more
effective strategies for getting such consumers to try the
product.
However, the inconclusive nature of the study is
emphasized by its contradiction to earlier research in which
participants used COO cues to positively evaluate an
unfamiliar German brand of television. If nothing else, the
discrepancy suggests that strength of COO cue is also an
important factor to take into account. This further supports
the need to emphasize the right aspects if COO is employed as
part of a marketing strategy.
The evidence also suggests that marketers should segment
consumers based on their levels of objective product-country
knowledge and employ COO prompts only to target those
with moderate levels.
While there are useful implications to draw from this study,
the author concedes that the lack of a real life situation
possibly removed other extrinsic cues from the equation.
Likewise, he points out that different results may be obtained
using products from less developed countries for which the
COO effect might differ considerably. Expanding the study in
this direction and into other product categories may further
understanding of the issue.
(A precis of the article Dimensions of consumer knowledge and its
impacts on country of origin effects among Australian consumers: a
case of fast-consuming product. Supplied by Marketing
Consultants for Emerald.)
 This article has been cited by:

1. Zuhal Cilingir, Cigdem Basfirinci. 2014. The Impact of Consumer Ethnocentrism, Product Involvement, and Product Knowledge
on Country of Origin Effects: An Empirical Analysis on Turkish Consumers Product Evaluation. Journal of International
Consumer Marketing 26, 284-310. [CrossRef]
2. Dr Ramendra Singh, Madhurima Deb, Himadri Roy Chaudhuri. 2014. Impact of firm's reputation and ethnocentrism on attitude
towards foreign products. Marketing Intelligence & Planning 32:5, 646-664. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
3. A. Engelbrecht Josias, Herbst Frikkie, Bruwer Johan. 2014. Region-of-origin (ROO) certification as marketing strategy in the
South African wine market. International Journal of Wine Business Research 26:2, 139-162. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
4. Cigdem Basfirinci. 2013. Effect of brand origin on brand personality perceptions: an empirical analysis from Turkey. Asia Pacific
Journal of Marketing and Logistics 25:4, 539-560. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
5. Heike Klckner, Nina Langen, Monika Hartmann. 2013. COO labeling as a tool for pepper differentiation in Germany. British
Food Journal 115:8, 1149-1168. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
6. Alexander Josiassen, Bryan A. Lukas, Gregory J. Whitwell, A. George Assaf. 2013. The halo model of origin images:
Conceptualisation and initial empirical test. Journal of Consumer Behaviour 12:10.1002/cb.v12.4, 253-266. [CrossRef]
7. Narissara Parkvithee, Mario J. Miranda. 2013. Are Consumers Hesitant to Purchase National Brands Manufactured in Other
Countries?. Journal of Asia-Pacific Business 14, 244-264. [CrossRef]
Downloaded by ANADOLU UNIVERSITY At 05:19 23 December 2014 (PT)

8. Mario Joseph Miranda, Narissara Parkvithee. 2013. The influence of social class on the perceptions of country of origin. Marketing
Intelligence & Planning 31:4, 388-404. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
9. Juan Carlos Gzquez-Abad, David Jimnez-Castillo, Gema M. Marn-Carrillo. 2012. Differences in Perceived Image of Fruit
and Vegetables from a Specific Origin: The Moderating Role of Familiarity. Journal of Food Products Marketing 18, 397-416.
[CrossRef]
10. Johan Bruwer, Courtney Buller. 2012. Consumer Behavior Insights, Consumption Dynamics, and Segmentation of the Japanese
Wine Market. Journal of International Consumer Marketing 24, 338-355. [CrossRef]
11. Johan Bruwer, Courtney Buller. 2012. Countryoforigin (COO) brand preferences and associated knowledge levels of Japanese
wine consumers. Journal of Product & Brand Management 21:5, 307-316. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
12. Zafar U. Ahmed, Imad J. Zbib, Arif Sikander, Ralph Gilbert Noujaim. 2012. Does country of brand origin (COBO) matter for
the Lebanese consumers?. EuroMed Journal of Business 7:2, 108-128. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
13. Juan Carlos Gzquez-Abad, David Jimnez-Castillo, Gema M. Marn-Carrillo. 2012. Sinergias entre los atributos del producto
y la familiaridad con su origen. Efectos sobre la imagen percibida. Cuadernos de Economa y Direccin de la Empresa 15, 73-83.
[CrossRef]
14. Narissara Parkvithee, Mario J. Miranda. 2012. The interaction effect of countryoforigin, brand equity and purchase involvement
on consumer purchase intentions of clothing labels. Asia Pacific Journal of Marketing and Logistics 24:1, 7-22. [Abstract] [Full
Text] [PDF]
15. TingHsiang Tseng, George Balabanis. 2011. Explaining the productspecificity of countryoforigin effects. International
Marketing Review 28:6, 581-600. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
16. Piyush Sharma. 2011. Demystifying Cultural Differences in Country-of-Origin Effects: Exploring the Moderating Roles of
Product Type, Consumption Context, and Involvement. Journal of International Consumer Marketing 23, 344-364. [CrossRef]
17. Nicolas Hamelin, Meriam Ellouzi, Andrew Canterbury. 2011. Consumer Ethnocentrism and Country-of-Origin Effects in the
Moroccan Market. Journal of Global Marketing 24, 228-244. [CrossRef]
18. Imad J. Zbib, Barbara R. Wooldridge, Zafar U. Ahmed, Yeghig Benlian. 2010. Purchase of global shampoo brands and the
impact of country of origin on Lebanese consumers. Journal of Product & Brand Management 19:4, 261-275. [Abstract] [Full
Text] [PDF]
19. Alexander Josiassen, A. Assaf. 2010. Countryoforigin contingencies: their joint influence on consumer behaviour. Asia Pacific
Journal of Marketing and Logistics 22:3, 294-313. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
20. M. Sadiq Sohail, Osman Gokhan Sahin. 2010. Country-of-Origin Effects on Consumers Evaluations of Automobiles:
Perspectives from a Developing Nation. Journal of International Consumer Marketing 22, 245-257. [CrossRef]
21. Stephen Henderson, Samia Ferdous Hoque. 2010. The Ethnicity Impact on Attitudes toward Country of Origin for Products
with Different Involvement Levels. Journal of International Consumer Marketing 22, 271-291. [CrossRef]
 22. Zafar U. Ahmed, Imad J. Zbib, Arif Sikander, Karla Tanios Farhat. 2010. Predicting consumer behavior based on country of
origin (COO). EuroMed Journal of Business 5:1, 37-56. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
23. Pat Auger, Timothy M. Devinney, Jordan J. Louviere, Paul F. Burke. 2010. The importance of social product attributes in
consumer purchasing decisions: A multi-country comparative study. International Business Review 19, 140-159. [CrossRef]
24. Sebastian Dieng, Christoph Drrenbcher, Jens GammelgaardSubsidiary brands as a resource and the redistribution of decision-
making authority following acquisitions 141-160. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] [PDF]
25. Xiaoling Hu, Leeva Li, Charlene Xie, Jun Zhou. 2008. The effects of countryoforigin on Chinese consumers' wine purchasing
behaviour. Journal of Technology Management in China 3:3, 292-306. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
26. Ian Phau, Paul Chao, Alexander Josiassen, Bryan A. Lukas, Gregory J. Whitwell. 2008. Countryoforigin contingencies.
International Marketing Review 25:4, 423-440. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
Downloaded by ANADOLU UNIVERSITY At 05:19 23 December 2014 (PT)