Article2013

“Bonds” or “Calvin Klein” Down‐under

27 citations0/0 files storedJournal of Fashion Marketing and Management

No readable copy stored yet — this record is metadata only.

No open-access location is known for this record yet.

Literature note Cite in a project Citation map

Consumer Behavior in Brand Consumption and Identification Consumer Market Behavior and Pricing Consumer Perception and Purchasing Behavior

Abstract

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to determine if high versus low ethnocentric consumers differ in their attitudes toward buying domestic and foreign brands of underwear that are made domestically or in foreign countries. Design/methodology/approach Australian residents recruited through a mall intercept participated in this study through a self‐completed questionnaire. Fishbein's Multi‐Attribute model was used as the measure, along with repeated‐measures ANOVA and t‐tests, to examine whether the groups differed in their attitudes toward buying underwear with “Made in Australia”, “Made in the USA”, and “Made in China” labels. Findings The findings generally indicated that there is no significant difference between high and low ethnocentric consumers in attitude towards underwear that are made in Australia and the USA. On the other hand, high ethnocentric consumers viewed domestically made and branded underwear as more durable, easier to care for, better priced, more colourful, more attractive, more fashionable, of stronger brand name, more appropriate for occasions, and more choices of styles. Domestically‐made but foreign‐branded underwear is viewed as easier to care for and better priced. Practical implications The study suggests that China should improve its country image as compared to such developed nations as Australia and the USA in terms of production and manufacturing standards. The study also purports that American underwear brands with strong presence in the global fashion world that have not already established operation in Australia can consider entering the market. Originality/value The paper fills the gap in the ethnocentrism literature by validating the study in Australia and focusing on the attitudes of high ethnocentric (and low ethnocentric) consumers. It also examines underwear, which is a common product category in apparels but inherently deficient in the literature.

Paper brief

Loading…

Cite this work

Citation unavailable for this work.

BibTeX RIS CSL-JSON

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Citations in this library

Citation map →

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 27 citations exist upstream.

References

1987Consumer Ethnocentrism: Construction and Validation of the CETSCALE 1968Readings in Attitude Theory and Measurement 1992Matching Product Catgeory and Country Image Perceptions: A Framework for Managing Country-of-Origin Effects 1994Consumer Ethnocentrism: A Test of Antecedents and Moderators 1988Country-of-Origin Effects for Uni-National and Bi-National Products 1995Consumer ethnocentrism: A test of antecedents and moderators 2004Domestic Country Bias, Country-of-Origin Effects, and Consumer Ethnocentrism: A Multidimensional Unfolding Approach 1985Assessing the Impact of Country of Origin on Product Evaluations: A New Methodological Perspective

Cited by

2016Does this fit my style? The role of self-congruity in young women’s repurchase intention for intimate apparel 2021Limited‐edition advertising does not always work for luxury brands: The influence of consumption contexts 2015A brief affair with underwear: Uniqueness and innovativeness in male underwear brand purchases 2020When foreign brands appear local, and local brands appear foreign 2015

Explore the map →

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.

Imported from OpenAlex (CC0) — nothing here is generated.