2.Cultural Value, Consomption Value and Global Brand Image

7/29/2019 2.Cultural Value, Consomption Value and Global Brand Image

1/23

Cultural Value, ConsumptionValue, and Global BrandImage: A Cross-NationalStudy

Hye-Jung ParkKorea Polytechnic University

Nancy J. RaboltSan Francisco State University

ABSTRACT

In expanding their market to the global level with clear and consistentglobal brand images across nations, marketers are ever confrontingthe issue of how to deal with different cultural values. Cultural valueis identified as an influential factor on brand image and is widelyaccepted as one of the crucial concepts in understanding consumerconsumption value, which determines choices of consuming everydayproducts and services. Most firms endeavoring to establish and main-tain consistent global brand images, however, adopt a standardized

brand image strategy that usually does not consider individualtarget markets characteristics, including the concepts of culturalvalue and consumption value. This study developed a conceptualframework which incorporated cultural value not only as a directantecedent of brand image, but also as an indirect antecedent ofbrand image through consumption value, and empirically tested itusing the category of apparel. Following this framework, this studyhypothesized the differences in brand image, cultural value, andconsumption value between the U.S. and South Korea. Data weregathered through surveying university students residing in theSan Francisco and Seoul metropolitan areas using a convenience

sampling method. A total of 329 completed questionnaires were usedin factor analysis, discriminant analysis, and structural equation


2/23

modeling. The results provide insights into standardized brandimage strategies and suggest some implementable tools that mightprove effective in both countries. 2009 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

In the increasingly competitive marketplace, strong and consistent brand imagescontribute to nurturing a loyal customer base (Haynes, Lackman, & Guskey,1999). A consistent and effective brand image also helps develop and reinforce

brand equity in the long run (Biel, 1992; Keller, 1993; Roth, 1995a). Marketersfailure to achieve brand image consistency may confuse consumers, which inturn will negatively affect long-term brand equity (Hsieh, 2002). Dunning (1981)

proposed ownership advantage, internalization advantage, and location advan-tage as three conditions needed for a company to undertake its expansion to theglobe. The more of these advantages a company has, the more likely it is that

the company will effectively expand its global customer base. Considered as anequity, a strong and consistent global brand image might be one of the core

asset-based ownership advantages of a global company that contributes to thecompanys successful global market expansion.

The dominance of transnational corporations manufacturing and marketing

consumer goods around the world has fueled the proliferation of global con-sumer culture (Ger & Belk, 1996), and global integration has accelerated thishomogenization of consumer behavior among developed countries and emerg-

ing markets (Dholakia & Talukdar, 2004). The need for strong empirical stud-ies supporting global consumption homogenization was raised by Wind (1986)over two decades ago, and much research (Boddewyn, Soehl, & Picard, 1986;

Gabel & Boller, 2000; Holt, Quelch, & Taylor, 2004; Quelch, 1999; Sheth, 1986;

Zhou, Teng, & Poon, 2008) has discussed global consumer culture along withthe standardized marketing strategies adopted by global brands. Other than the

study by Dholakia and Talukdar (2004), which revealed the existence of con-sumption convergence in emerging markets, no meaningful empirical researchhas been conducted to date on global consumer homogenization.

Assuming the homogeneity of consumers, without strong evidence, transna-tional corporations tend to employ standardized global brand image strategies

rather than localized ones, and especially when running international advertis-ing campaigns, they often ignore cultural values in local markets (Gregory &Munch, 1997). Pointing out the importance of cultural differences in the global

market, however, many marketing studies (Huang & Tai, 2003; Khairullah &Khairullah, 2002; Lowe & Corkindale,1998; McCarty & Hattwick,1992; Roberts &Hart, 1997) have empirically shown differences in cultural values cross-culturally

or cross-nationally. Regarding these differences,Wong and Ahuvia (1998) notedthat consumers in Asian and Western societies may buy the same products butnot always for the same reasons or purposes. Hence, establishing a consistent

brand image globally while not adapting brand image strategies to culturalvalues and other characteristics of individual markets is not an easy task.

Brand image needs to be tailored across countries reflecting cultural differ-

ences across markets, which are indicators of consumers different needs across

nations (Roth, 1995b). Considering the importance of brand image managementacross the global market, Roth (1995a) concluded that brand image perform-ance is influenced by cultural characteristics and that the degree of brand image


3/23

(1984) cultural dimensions. Related to brand globalization, Hsieh (2002) pro-

posed a measure of the degree of global brand image perception cohesivenessacross markets as an indicator of the degree of brand globalization and foundthat national characteristics such as the level of economic development, cul-

tural dimensions, and geographic distance affect brand image perception. Con-cerning global brand image, other research (Roth,1992, 1995b) emphasized that

countries are culturally heterogeneous.As such, marketers constantly encounterthe issue of how to establish consistent brand image across the globe despitecultural differences. Even though the global brand strategies adopted by transna-tional corporations have received a great deal of attention, empirical studies on

the establishment of global brand image are still limited. This study, therefore,was intended to provide some insight on this issue and encourage marketers tofocus their efforts on understanding how to effectively develop and implement

strong and consistent brand images, which will enable them to successfully com-pete in the global market.

The aforementioned studies, however, have not addressed the concept of indi-

vidual consumption value that is specific to a product, which belongs to a brand,overlooking the interlinking between cultural values and consumption values.

Consumers from different cultures may use different product attributes toexpress similar underlying consumption values (Tse, Wong, & Tan, 1988). In thiscontext, Taylor (2000) raised the need for more research identifying how cul-

ture influences consumer behavior and marketing, and Steenkamp (2001) notedthat culture has long been recognized as a major factor underlying systematicdifferences in behavior. McGregor (2000) empirically showed that cultural value

and consumption value are related, but not exactly the same, through cross-cultural comparative analysis using cultural value as a proxy for consumption

value. He noted that cultural value influences consumption value in thatcultural value is seen to act as a justification for individuals acquiring certaingoods and services. Huang and Tai (2003) also identified significant effects of

cultural value on consumption value. In recent years, the influence of cultureon consumption and marketing has received increasing attention (Soares,Farhangmehr, & Shoham, 2007).

Recognizing the differences in cultural and consumption values across mar-kets and their impact on brand images, each cultural value and consumption

value should be carefully considered in establishing global brand image strate-

gies. In other words, standardized brand image strategies should be modified and

adapted according to cultural and consumption differences across nations. Inorder to support this, this study proposed a conceptual framework which incor-

porated cultural value not only as a direct antecedent of brand image, but alsoas an indirect antecedent through consumption value, and then empiricallytested it for both the U.S.and South Korea. Under this framework, it was hypoth-

esized that brand image as well as its two antecedents, cultural value and con-sumption value, differ between the two countries. The results may reveal why

brand images are perceived differently across nations and may suggest ways toincorporate differences in brand image strategies to establish a consistent globalbrand image across nations.

As apparel brands are representative of globalized consumer product brands,this study was conducted using an apparel product. Most global apparel com-panies whose product lines change frequently implement standardized image


4/23

marketers are more likely to standardize their marketing programs when they

compete in industries where product changes are frequent. However, a global-ized clothing brand being the subject, this study may show how vulnerable a stan-dardized strategy is in building and sustaining the same brand image across

nations where cultural and consumption values differ.Dobni and Zinkhan (1990) addressed factors that contribute to developing

brand image: product attributes, sponsoring organization, marketing mix, modesthrough which people tend to perceive, personal values, experience, type of peo-ple associated with the use of brand, and context variables. Also, marketingpractitioners have emphasized that marketing mix, such as manufacturing,

assortment, and advertising, should take into account cultural differences(Translating a Brand Image Abroad,1998). However, ideas about how to reflectthese differences in actual strategies is vague due to the lack of empirical tests.

Therefore, it may be meaningful to examine whether these individual and cul-tural differences lead to different brand images across nations.

CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK AND HYPOTHESES

Cultural values are identified as influential factors on brand images (Roth,1992, 1995a) and consumption values are related to cultural values (Henry,

1976; Huang & Tai, 2003; McGregor, 2000). Based on these findings, this studyconceptualized that cultural value and consumption value, which are expectedto be inherently different across nations, formulate brand images. Based on this

conceptual framework, three hypotheses are developed.The following section dis-cusses how brand image is influenced by cultural and consumption values and

shows the development of the hypotheses.

Brand Image

In marketing research, brand image is defined in a variety of ways. By tracingvarious definitions and justifications, Dobni and Zinkhan (1990) defined brand

image as the concept of a brand held by the consumer and is largely a subjectiveand perceptual phenomenon formed through consumer interpretation (p. 118).

Besides the diverse definitions, there is no consensus on the most accurate

and effective standardized measurement for brand image (Hsieh & Li, 2008;

Martinez & Chernatony, 2004; Martinez, Polo, & Chernatony, 2008). Pointing outthe need for the development of different scale items of brand image according

to product category, Low and Lamb (2000) proposed a protocol for developingproduct categoryspecific measures of brand image which was empirically tested.Measurements should be customized to accommodate the unique characteris-

tics of specific brand categories (Bearden & Etzel, 1982; Park & Srinivasan,1994). In consideration of this, the brand image scale used in this study wasdeveloped following the protocol recommended by Low and Lamb.This protocol

begins with a pretest which asks a small number of respondents, who are rele-vant to a main study population, to provide any ideas, feelings, or attitudes that

they associate with a brand. Based on analyzing and tabulating the open-endedresponses, most frequently named terms are used to develop semantic differentialbrand image items which are asked of the studys sample while showing a brand


5/23

Despite the growing importance of global brand image in the international

marketing arena, studies to understand the differences in global brand imagebetween the home market and foreign markets are still limited. Most of theattention on brand image has focused on identifying the relationship between

brand image and consumer behavior at the national level, such as consumerpersonality (Shank & Langmeyer, 1994), self image (Graeff, 1996; Hogg, Cox, &

Keeling, 2000; Schenk & Holman, 1980), consumption situation (Graeff, 1997),price promotion (Hunt & Keaveney, 1994; Villarejo-Ramos & Snchez-Franco,2005), retailer image perception (Pettijohn, Mellott, & Pettijohn, 1992), andbehavioral outcomes (Esch et al., 2006). In entering foreign markets, marketers

should deal with the issue of standardization versus adaptation to local markets.Most research related to this issue is focused on products rather than on brands.Therefore, there is a need to review the issue related to standardized brand

image strategy which might not fit with cultural values of all countries. Eventhough the issue of how brand images differ across nations is dealt with in many

studies (Roth, 1992, 1995a; Hsieh, 2002), there is no research about the influ-

ence of cultural and consumption values on brand image, especially the differ-ences of brand images cross-nationally.

Thus, as the first step to identify this relationship, this study hypothesizedthe difference in brand image perceptions between the U.S. and South Korea.Perceptions about brand images spurred by standardized brand image strate-

gies may differ significantly in different countries according to each countryscultural and consumption values which are learned behaviors.

H1: There are differences in brand image perceptions between the U.S. and

South Korea.

Cultural Value

Culture provides a sort of shared understanding among people in a society thatallows them to predict and coordinate social activities (Sternquist, 1998), and

cultural values refer to the core of the entire cultures mindset shared by a soci-ety (McGregor, 2000). Shared cultural values help to shape the contingencies towhich members of a society should adapt in the institutions in which they spend

their time (Schwartz, 1999). Therefore, it seems apparent that cultural valuesin the U.S. and South Korea are quite different from each other because of their

different cultures.In spite of the growing awareness of the importance of global brand image to

international marketers, there has been no research on whether cultural valuesmay influence brand image.Related to brand, there is only one study (Zinkhan &

Prenshaw, 1994) that identified the impact of differences in visions of good life,which are culturally determined, among Asia, the U.S., and Europe on brand

name image rather than on brand image. Sternquist (1998) pointed out thatthe element of culture is an important factor for retailers and that the retailer isbeing confronted with culturally different surroundings, although the retailer

operates using a standard format throughout the globe.

As globalization is a pervasive phenomenon in the business arena, muchresearch has been conducted on cultural values across the globe, revealing

that marketing success depends on knowledge of cultural differences Most of


6/23

(Sondergaard, 1994), including masculinityfemininity, individualism

collectivism, uncertainty avoidance, and power distance. Other measurementinstruments, such as VALS (Values and Lifestyle Segmentation), RVS(Rokeach Value Survey), LOV (List of Values), and SVS (Schwartz Value

Survey), have been used to measure cultural values in marketing studies.Steenkamp (2001) noticed that SVS has much potential for international

marketing studies because of its solid theoretical foundation. SVS recently hasbeen applied in various research (Collins, Steg, & Koning, 2007; Hartmanet al., 2006; Johnson & Lenartowicz, 1998; Polegarto & Bjerke, 2006) attest-ing to its usefulness.

Schwartz (1994, 1999) showed the structure of SVS efficiently capturing thedifferences in national cultures of over 40 nations, including the U.S. and SouthKorea. Thus, this study used SVS to measure cultural values in the two coun-

tries. SVS is composed of seven types of values (harmony, egalitarianism, intel-lectual autonomy, affective autonomy, conservatism, hierarchy, and mastery)

and uses 45 items in measuring such values.

H2: There are differences in cultural values between the U.S. and South Korea.

Consumption Value

As this study was specific to apparel and clothing, it used the variable clothingconsumption value, which refers to the values attached to the consumption of

clothing. In the clothing research arena, the term clothing value is widelyperceived to have the same meaning as clothing consumption value. This studyadopted the term clothing consumption value because it is more widely used in

the marketing arena than clothing value.In identifying consumer behavior related to consumption values, many stud-

ies (Albaum et al., 2002; Chen, Shang, & Lin, 2008; Finch, Trombley, & Rabas,1998;Long & Shiffman, 2000; Pope,1998) have used Sheth, Newman, and Gross(1991) theory of consumption values, composed of functional value, social value,

emotional value,epistemic value, and conditional value. The theory defined eachvalue as follows: Functional value is the utility that is perceived to possess oncriteria salient to its physical or functional purposes (p. 32); social value is

derived from its association with one or more distinctive social groups (p. 38);emotional value is derived from feelings or affective states (p. 50); epistemic

value is derived from its capacity to provide novelty, arouse curiosity, and/or sat-isfy knowledge-seeking aspirations (p. 62); and conditional value is derivedfrom its capacity to provide temporary functional or social value in the contextof a specific and transient set of circumstances or contingencies (p. 69).

The theory of Sheth, Newman, and Gross (1991) provided standardized pro-cedures and questionnaire formats to researchers by enabling them to adapt

them to their research topics, and it is appropriate in capturing value contentdue to its flexibility. This study followed the theory in identifying consumption

value of clothing.The theory recommends using focus groups in developing con-

sumption value scales; however, this study used an open-ended questionnaire

because of the difficulty of using the same level of qualified interviewers and thelocation and time limitations across the U.S. and South Korea.

Tse Wong and Tan (1988) found differences of clothing consumption values


7/23

cross-cultural study. Based on this study, which found differences in clothing

consumption values in five geographically proximate Asia Pacific regions (Japan,South Korea, Hong Kong, Singapore, and Taiwan), it seems apparent that thereare differences in clothing consumption values between the United States, a

Western culture, and South Korea, a Confucian culture. The differences areworth studying as most global fashion retailers targeting the younger genera-

tion generate standardized advertisements assuming clothing consumption val-ues are the same across the globe.

H3: There are differences in consumption values between the U.S. and South

Korea.

METHOD

Developing Measurement of Variables

Measures for Brand Image. The brand Polo was chosen both becausethere are abundant subjects around the globe who know the brand well enoughto rate its brand image, and Polo implements standardized advertising and mer-

chandise strategies across the global market. The researchers of this studyexamined Polos advertisements in American fashion magazines such as Vogue

and Allure and the Korean versions of those magazines and confirmed that

the company used the same advertisements in the U.S. and South Korea. Theresearchers also confirmed that the advertisements did not contain any cul-turally relevant stimuli that could have been evaluated and processed differently

by individuals within the individualist culture and the collective culture asfound by Leach and Liu (1998).

Brand image measures were developed by a pretest, as suggested by Lowand Lamb (2000). Fifty-three female university students from the U.S. and 60from South Korea were asked to write down brand image words representing

ideas, feelings, and attitudes that they associated with clothing. The open-endedresponses were categorized on the basis of common meanings and content andexamined by frequency, and the most frequently named responses in each cat-

egory were selected to develop semantic differential items to measure brandimage. The content and frequency analyses led to 14 items for the U.S. and 19

for South Korea, with nine items common to both countries. The final set of 24brand image items were selected: expensive/inexpensive, high status/low status,good quality/poor quality, trendy/outdated, popular/unpopular, sexy/unappealing,feel positive/feel negative, professional/unprofessional, luxurious/economic,

sophisticated/unsophisticated, fun/boring, youthful/old, fashion/basic, unique/common, active/inactive, romantic/practical, cute/ugly, feminine/masculine,

elegant/inelegant, colorful/dull, casual/formal, comfortable/uncomfortable, global/local, and soft/hard.

Advertising is essential to the process of informing consumers of inherent

product benefits and positioning the brand in their mind (Meenaghan, 1995).

Therefore, Low and Lamb (2000) showed an advertisement for a brand to theirsubjects before asking them to rate the brand image. However, this study did

not provide an advertisement for the following two reasons First creating


8/23

value-expressive, symbolic, or utilitarian. These advertising appeals are also

found by some research to be the reflection of consumers commonly held val-ues (Cho et al., 1999; Fam & Grohs, 2007; Gregory & Munch, 1997; Lowe &Corkindale, 1998; Moon & Chan, 2005; Roberts & Hart, 1997). Second, through

brand extension, Polo has many affiliated brands that have their own designconcepts, price ranges, and target markets.Therefore, there was a concern that

showing a single Polo advertisement to the subjects of this study might merelymake them focus on the one brand. For these reasons, instead of showing anadvertisement of one of Polos brands, this study showed an image of the Polobrand logo to its subjects. Acknowledging that brand logo as a visual stimulus

is a crucial part of brand strategy (Henderson et al., 2003) and that, in the caseof Polo, an identical brand logo is used throughout its extended brand productsand brand image strategies globally, the Polo brand logo was shown on the top

of the brand image questions in the questionnaire. Subjects were asked toexpress their brand images of Polo on 24 brand image scales following the ques-

tion, I think that the brand is. Semantic differential scales ranging from

extremely (1) toextremely (7) were used (for example, extremely casual toextremely formal), since semantic differential is regarded as a common tool

for measuring perceptions of brands (Fry & Claxton, 1971).

Measures for Cultural Value. Using scales developed by Schwartz (1992,1994, 1999), the subjects of this study were asked to rate the importance of each

value item as guiding principles in my life, using a nine-point scale: of supreme

importance (7), very important (6), unlabeled (5, 4), important (3), unlabeled

(2, 1), not important (0), or opposed to my values (1). This study used 45 itemsfrom the most recent study by Schwartz (1999), and the number of cultural

value items for each factor was 6, 5, 3, 9, 15, 4, and 3, measuring mastery, hier-archy, harmony, egalitarianism, conservatism, affective autonomy, and intel-lectual autonomy, respectively. Each value item was followed by a short

explanatory phrase in parentheses, as described in Schwartzs (1992) study.

Measures for Clothing Consumption Value. Although many studieswere conducted to identify clothing values and the influence of those values onclothing behaviors, they lacked a consistent clothing consumption values meas-urement. Because there is no single best measurement of clothing consump-

tion value,especially across countries, this study developed a clothing consumption

value measurement utilizing the theory of consumption value by Sheth,Newman,and Gross (1991), composed of functional, emotional, epistemic, social, and con-

ditional values. In developing clothing consumption values, a pilot test wasconducted with 62 female university students from the U.S. and 66 from SouthKorea who were not included in the pretest for developing brand image meas-

ures. The students were asked to provide some of the most important attrib-utes, feelings, aspirations, associations, and temporary values that influence

their purchasing of clothing. For this, following Sheth, Newman, and Grosssconsumption value theory, the following questions were used to draw out meas-urements of each of the five values (functional, emotional, epistemic, asocial,

and conditional value items respectively) from subjects: (1) What are some ofthe benefits (physical and utilitarian attributes) or problems that you associatewith purchasing clothing?; (2) What feelings are aroused by your decision


9/23

(usually pertaining to curiosity and the desire for knowledge, novelty, and com-

plexity)?; (4) What are the groups of people associated with the clothing youpurchase?; and (5) What are the circumstances or situations that would causeyou to purchase clothing?

For each value, the responses obtained from each country were separately cat-egorized and examined by frequency. The most frequently named responses from

each country in each value were selected and combined as clothing consumptionvalues held by consumers in both countries. As a result, eight items of salientresponses, six in common for both countries and one each from the U.S.and SouthKorean subjects, were determined for functional value. Regarding emotional

value, six items, four in common for both countries and two from the U.S. subjects,were determined.There were nine items, four in common for both countries, fourfrom the U.S. subjects, and one from the South Korean subjects, for epistemic

value. For social value, nine items, four in common for both countries, two fromthe U.S. subjects, and three from the South Korean subjects, were selected. For

conditional value, there were nine items, five in common for both countries, two

from the U.S. subjects, and two from the South Korean subjects.In the questionnaire, subjects were asked to complete 41 consumption value

scales under each value category. For functional value, subjects were asked toindicate their perception of each benefit or problem associated with purchasingclothing. For emotional value, subjects were asked to indicate their feelings

associated with their decision to purchase clothing. Epistemic values were meas-ured by asking subjects to indicate their level of agreement with reasons forpurchasing their clothing. The question on social value in this study was not

consistent with the case of buy or not to buy cited in the theory of consump-tion value by Sheth, Newman, and Gross (1991).Therefore, the question was mod-

ified to investigate the degree of influence of social groups associated withpurchasing clothing; the question recommended by the theory is intended tomeasure the degree of consumers beliefs about certain social groups behaviors

as consumers. For measuring social value and conditional value, subjects wereasked to indicate how much they are associated with each referent when pur-chasing clothing and how much their behavior in purchasing clothing would be

changed by each condition, respectively. Seven-point Likert-type scales wereused, ranging from strongly disagree (1) to strongly agree (7) for functional,emotional, and epistemic values and fromextremely not at all (1) toextremelyvery much (7) for social and conditional values.

Data Collection

Aiming to better support hypotheses of the difference of values and brand imagesbetween the U.S.and South Korea, this study employed subjects who were homo-

geneous across the two countries. Since university students are more homoge-nous than other samples, the sample for this study was composed of femaleuniversity students in the San Francisco and Seoul metropolitan areas.As sim-

ilar segments of consumers across borders are more likely to be found in urbanthan in rural areas (Quelch, 1999), students in urban areas were selected. The

fact that the two cities are generally perceived as two of the most cosmopolitancities in the two countries was also considered in the selection process.

Conducting this study with university students may also provide useful infor-


10/23

consumers in the global market. Solomon (2007) pointed out that global mar-

keting efforts are likely to succeed when targeting consumers in different coun-tries who share a common world view, not only because their frame of referenceis relatively more international or cosmopolitan, but also because they receive

much of their information about the world from sources that incorporate a world-wide perspective. He suggested that the youth segment is the first to tap because

their tastes are strongly influenced by the mass media, which deliver many ofthe same images to the globe simultaneously. Currently, the proliferation of theInternet has accelerated the pace towards homogeneity among the younger gen-eration of the world.

Utilizing the convenience sampling method, the data were gathered by sur-veying female students during fashion-related classes at a university in SanFrancisco and two universities in Seoul. The questionnaire for this study con-

tained measurement scales of brand image, cultural values, and consumptionvalues; 158 questionnaires from the U.S. and 171 from South Korea were used

in exploratory factor analysis and discriminant analysis using the SPSS program.

The Amos 4.0 program was also used for structural equation modeling usingmaximum likelihood estimation in order to provide confirmatory factor analy-

sis, the fit of the scales, and the fit of the model proposed in this study. The fitswere evaluated by examining chi-square statistics, goodness-of-fit index (GFI),normed fit index (NFI), and Tucker-Lewis index (TLI).This study also examined

comparative fit index (CFI) because CFI is robust to sample size while otherindexes are not (Bentler, 1990).

RESULTS

Factor Analysis and Variable Reliabilities

Exploratory Factor Analysis. To identify the underlying factors of brandimage and each of the five consumption values, an exploratory factor analysis using

principal component method with varimax rotation was performed. In conductingthe analysis, this study used combined data from the U.S. and South Korea toextract the common factor items of the two countries and thus could show the

relative differences of brand images and values between the two countries. Com-paring the brand images and values between the two countries based on the same

brand images and values enables this study to achieve its research purpose.In conducting factor analysis, an eigenvalue of greater than one was used as

the criterion for extracting factors. A factor reduction process was carried out toeliminate the scale items having small loadings (below 0.50) and sizable cross-

loadings on more than one factor.Four factors of brand image were extracted after eliminating 11 items. Total

variance explained with the four factors was 62.05%. For consumption values,two factors each for functional, emotional, and epistemic values and three fac-tors each for social and conditional values were extracted after eliminating one

item of social value and two items of each of epistemic and conditional values.

Total variance explained with the two factors for functional, emotional, andepistemic values was 53.36%, 67.85%, and 66.81%, respectively. Total variance

explained with the three factors for social and conditional values was 64 33% and


11/23

Confirmatory Factor Analysis. Regarding brand image and consump-tion value scales, confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) was conducted to further

investigate whether the extracted factor properties of the scales fit to each of thetwo countries. CFA was also conducted for the cultural value scale in order toinvestigate whether the seven-dimension structure of cultural value, which was

used by Schwartz (1999), fit to each of the two countries. Using a first-order

CFA model, the tests were conducted for each group separately. Throughout thisprocess, items and factors which had factor loadings and regression weightsbelow 0.50 or not significant with their latent variables atp 0.05 in either dataset were eliminated to develop common factors or dimensions for both coun-

tries, and the modification indexes were examined to eliminate or add paths asnecessary.

For brand image, a two-factor model was best fitted and two items and one

item each of the two factors were eliminated in the process.The tests for the fac-torial validity for each country are shown in Table 1. Chi-square statistics weresignificant and GFI,TLI, and CFI were also quite acceptable, indicating responses

to the brand image could be explained by the two factors. Therefore, the factorscould be considered to best represent the structure of brand image items foreach country. The Cronbachs coefficient alphas for the two factors of brand

image were 0.66 and 0.70 for the U.S. subjects and 0.58 and 0.77 for the SouthKorean subjects (see Table 2), indicating that acceptable reliability was achieved

for both countries.In order to confirm the cultural value dimensionality, seven-factor analysis

was performed for each group separately. For this variable, two items each of mas-

tery, hierarchy, and egalitarian values and three items of conservatism value wereeliminated. The fit of the scale items confirmed the cultural value dimension-

ality as follows: For the U.S. subjects, 2 647.72,p 0.000, GFI 0.83,TLI 0.95, CFI 0.96; for the South Korean subjects, 2 565.08,p 0.031,GFI 0.85, TLI 0.98, CFI 0.98 (see Table 1). Although the 2 statisticwas significant and the values of GFI (0.83 and 0.85) for both subjects were

Table 1. Dimensionality Test for Brand Image, Cultural Value, and Consump-

tion Value.

U.S. (N 158) Korea (N 171)

2

p GFI TLI CFI 2

p GFI TLI CFI

Brand Image 7.05 0.22 0.98 0.98 0.99 5.30 0.26 0.99 0.97 0.99

Cultural Value 647.72 0.00 0.83 0.95 0.96 565.08 0.03 0.85 0.98 0.98

Consumption Value

Functional value 5.84 0.6 0.99 1.02 1.00 4.88 0.7 0.99 1.02 1.00

Emotional value 2.30 7 0.99 0.97 0.99 8.02 7 0.98 0.88 0.98

Epistemic value 9.26 0.1 0.98 0.99 0.99 11.24 0.0 0.98 0.97 0.99

Social value 0.74 3 0.99 1.01 1.00 0.22 1 0.99 1.05 1.00

Conditional value 0.15 0.3 1.00 1.06 1.00 1.97 0.1 0.99 0.90 0.98

2 3

0.3 0.6

9 4

0.7 0.1


12/23

Table 2. Reliability for Brand Image, Cultural Value, and Consumption Value

U.S. Korea

(N 158) (N 171)

a a

Brand Image

1. Trendy 0.70 0.77OutdatedTrendy/UnappealingSexy.

2. Refined 0.66 0.58

InelegantElegant/PracticalRomantic/NegativePositive.

Cultural Value

1. Mastery 0.87 0.84

2. Hierarchy 0.70 0.78

3. Harmony 0.80 0.87

4. Egalitarian 0.90 0.89

5. Conservatism 0.90 0.89

6. Affective autonomy 0.87 0.79

7. Intellectual autonomy 0.83 0.84

Consumption Value

Functional Value

1. Benefit 0.76 0.79

Clothes make me look better/Clothes protect my body/

I enjoy aesthetic of clothing/I enjoy expressing myself

with clothes.

2. Problem 0.56 0.54

It is difficult because clothes dont fit me well/

It is difficult to find comfortable clothes.

Emotional Value 0.85 0.87Good/Confident/Satisfied/Excited

Epistemic Value

1. Hedonic Seeking 0.77 0.79

I often feel like buying anything including clothes/

I sometimes purchase clothing by impulse/

I want to change my mood by purchasing clothes.

2. Novelty Seeking 0.85 0.74

I like clothes that are new different/

I like to experiment with clothing.

I like the aesthetic expression through clothing.

Social Value1. Fashion forward people influence 0.80 0.66

Celebrities/High society people.

2. Peer influence 0.64 0.53

Friends/People who have the same taste with me.

Conditional Value

1. Situational factor 0.52 0.50

Weather condition/Have time to shop.

2. Stimulation by others 0.50 0.58

Stimulation by shopping companions/Stimulation

by sales persons.


13/23

indicative of a very poor fit, TLI and CFI were quite acceptable. Therefore, it could

be concluded that the seven-dimension structure of cultural value is validatedfor the data across the two countries, as in the study of Schwartz (1999). TheCronbachs coefficient alphas for the factors of cultural value ranged from 0.70

to 0.90 for the U.S. subjects and from 0.78 to 0.89 for the South Korean subjects(see Table 2), indicating that all item measures for each cultural value dimen-

sion showed high degrees of internal consistency in both countries.For consumption value, a first-order CFA model was used for each value

dimension in order to investigate the factorial validity of each value dimension.The two-factor analysis was for functional, emotional, and epistemic values

and the three-factor analysis was for social and conditional values.Throughoutthe analyses,one factor each of emotional, social, and conditional values was elim-inated; also, one item each of one factor in epistemic value and of two factors in

social value and two items of one factor in functional value were eliminated.The tests for the factorial validity for each country are shown in Table 1. All

factors for both countries except for emotional value for the South Korean sub-

jects did not reach 2 statistical significance, and other fit statistics were alsoquite acceptable. For the South Korean subjects, two values showed minimal

acceptable values of TLI: emotional value 0.88 and conditional value 0.90.The results indicate that all factor structures of each consumption value dimen-sion were well fitted across the two countries. Consequently, it could be con-

cluded that responses to the value dimensions of consumption value could beexplained by extracted factors. Therefore, the factors derived from exploratoryfactor analysis, except for one factor each of social and conditional values, were

retained for further analysis. Despite the low internal consistency of one factorof functional value both for the U.S. subjects (a 0.56) and the South Korean

subjects (a 0.54), of one factor of social value for the South Korean subjects(a 0.53), and of two factors of conditional values for both for the U.S. subj-ects (a 0.52, 0.50) and the South Korean subjects (a 0.50, 0.58), all of which

were below 0.60 (see Table 2), this study retained these factors based on theCFA for each country.

Regarding brand image and value dimensions of consumption value, the

results showed the generated factors from the combined data adequately fit tothe data of each country, and thus the factors could be used as common factoritems for both countries to show the relative differences of brand images and val-

ues. CFA confirmed the seven-dimension structure of cultural value was well fit-

ted across the two countries, enabling this study to conduct further analysis.

Test of Model

Having sufficiently good fits of factorial structure and dimensionality of variables,this study proceeded to test the differences of responses of factorial and dimen-sional structures of each variable between the two countries. However, there

was an additional need to test for the validity of a causal structure, whichthe hypotheses of this study were based on, related to the three variables. Theextracted factors and established dimensions of variables in the model were

used as observed variables, but not as latent variables. This is not problematicbecause the aforementioned CFA for each country confirmed their factorial and

dimensional validity The observed variables for brand image and cultural value


14/23

those for consumption value were calculated with the means of factor scores,

which were calculated with the means of factor items.The conceptual framework was tested on each data set using structural equa-

tion modeling. Figure 1 shows the measures of the latent constructs from theconceptual framework and the path coefficients among latent constructs for eachcountry with their degree of significance.The goodness-of-fit measures for the pro-

posed model for each data set is shown in Table 3. For both countries, 2 statis-tics were not significant, and the values of GFI, TLI, and CFI were also a quite

acceptable fit: For the U.S. subjects,2 76.22,p 0.123, GFI 0.93,TLI 0.98,CFI 0.98; for the South Korean subjects, 2 87.39,p 0.078, GFI 0.94,TLI 0.97, CFI 0.98. The goodness-of-fit measures indicated that the model

represented a substantively reasonable fit to both countries.Even though the purpose of this study was not to identify the effect of cultural

value and consumption value on brand image this study provided the path coef-

Brand ImageAffective Autonomy

Intellectual Autonomy Refined

0.48***

(0.27**)

0.29*

(0.17*)

Mastery

Hierarchy

Harmony

Egalitarian

Conservatism

Cultural Value

Trendy

Consumption Value

Functional Emotional Epistemic Social Conditional

0.21*

Note: Path coefficients for the U.S. subjects are shown with those for the Korean subjects in paren-

theses. Dotted arrows indicate insignificant paths for the Korean subjects.

*p 0.05; **p 0.01; ***p 0.001.

Figure 1. Structural equation model.

Table 3. Fit Statistics of the Model (Goodness-of-Fit Measures).

2 p GFI TLI CFI

U.S. students (N 158) 76.22 0.123 0.93 0.98 0.98

Korean students (N 171) 87.39 0.078 0.94 0.97 0.98


15/23

adequately proposed. For the U.S. subjects, all paths were significant. For the

South Korean subjects, all paths except the one between cultural value andbrand image were significant.Therefore, it could be concluded that, for the U.S.subjects, cultural value influences brand image not only directly but also indi-

rectly through consumption values, whereas for the South Korean subjects, cul-tural value has influence on brand image only indirectly through consumption

value.The results showed why brand images are different between the two coun-

tries: It is because cultural values significantly influence brand image directlyand/or indirectly through consumption value. All the significant path coeffi-

cients confirmed the proposed relationship between the variables in the modelwas acceptable, indicating that cultural value is a determinant of brand imageand consumption value intervenes in the process. As such, it can be concluded

that the differences in cultural and consumption values result in different brandimages between the two countries and that the model fit for each country is

acceptable for further analysis to test the hypotheses.

Hypothesis Test

In order to ascertain the differences in the extracted factors from brand imageand consumption value and dimensions of cultural value between the U.S. andSouth Korea, data were analyzed by stepwise discriminant analysis, since this

reveals the factors and dimensions discriminating the two countries as well asthe differences between the two countries.

For brand image, the two factors of brand image were retained by the step-wise procedure. As shown in Table 4, the trendy factor of brand image was a

powerful discriminating variable, with standardized canonical discriminantfunction coefficient of 0.95. Although the refined factor was a discriminating

variable, it showed little influence, with the coefficient of 0.12. The differencesin the factors of brand image for the two countries supported H1, indicating

that the U.S. subjects were more likely to perceive the brand to be trendy andrefined than the South Korean subjects. The findings suggest that Polos mar-keting efforts to build brand images in the South Korean market should be

focused on making South Korean consumers perceive the brand to be trendy

Table 4. Discriminant Analysis for Brand Images Between the U.S. andKorea.

U.S. Korea

Factor Coefficient M SD M SD

Trendy 0.95 0.24 1.19 1.10 0.86

Refined 0.12 0.11 1.04 0.06 0.92

Eigenvalue 0.474

Canonical correlation 0.567

Wilks lambda 0.678

Chi-square 126.446***

Notes: Scale ranges from 1 to 7


16/23

and refined as much as their American counterparts do, supporting the need for

localized marketing communication efforts to sustain a consistent global brandimage across nations.

Table 5 presents the results of the discriminant analysis for cultural val-

ues. Of the seven dimensions of cultural value, five were retained by the step-wise procedure. The egalitarian value dominated in discriminating the U.S.

subjects from the South Korean subjects, with the coefficients of 0.79, and theaffective autonomy, intellectual autonomy, harmony, and hierarchy values wereinfluential, in that order, with the coefficients of 0.55, 0.25, 0.12, and 0.08,

respectively. Therefore, it can be concluded that cultural values were differentacross the two countries, supporting H2. The results suggest that brand build-ing should reflect different value systems across the two countries, knowing that

Americans are more likely to consider egalitarian, affective autonomy, intel-lectual autonomy, and harmony values more important than South Koreans,while South Koreans are more likely to consider hierarchy value more impor-

tant than Americans.

Table 6 presents the results of the discriminant analysis for consumptionvalues. Of the nine factors of consumption values, two were retained by the

stepwise procedure. With the coefficient of 0.96, the situational factor of con-ditional value is the most discriminating variable. The hedonic seeking factor

of epistemic value has little influence, with the coefficient of0.08.The resultsindicate that, when purchasing clothing,Americans are more likely to be influ-enced by the situational factor, while South Koreans are more likely to be

influenced by the hedonic seeking factor, supporting H3. The results showingdifferent purchasing motives for the Polo brand in the two countries suggestthat different consumption values should be reflected in efforts to build con-

sistent brand images across nations. In other words, localized brandingcontent touching consumers at different levels of consumption values in eachcountry would be effective for building a consistent global brand image across

Table 5. Discriminant Analysis for Cultural Values Between the U.S. and

Korea.

U.S. Korea


Egalitarian 0.79 5.85 1.19 3.95 1.49Affective autonomy 0.55 5.81 1.27 4.46 1.48

Intellectual autonomy 0.25 5.74 1.39 5.13

Hierarchy 0.12 3.70 1.65 4.05

Harmony 0.08 3.87 1.65 3.63

Eigenvalue 0.791


Wilks lambda 0.558


Note: Scale ranges from 1 to 9.

***p 0.001.


17/23

CONCLUSIONS

This study examined the effectiveness of standardized brand image strategies

and revealed the differences in brand images in two countries, which are prod-ucts of differences in cultural and consumption values. The issue of how brandimages differ across nations has been reviewed by many studies; however, none

before this study has offered information about the influence of cultural andconsumption values on brand images.This would be the first empirical study to

approach brand images across nations by identifying the differences in under-lying consumption values along with cultural values with scales developed tomeasure the values and brand images held by consumers across nations.

The results of this study may serve as guidelines for apparel companies in

adapting standardized brand image strategies seeking to establish and sustainconsistent global brand images across nations.As indicated by the results of dis-

criminant analysis, the subjects of this study in two countries held differentbrand images, cultural values, and consumption values.Regarding brand images,

Americans were more likely to perceive the Polo brand to be trendy and refined

compared to South Koreans. Regarding cultural values, Americans were more

likely to value egalitarian, affective autonomy, intellectual autonomy, and har-mony values compared to South Koreans, whereas South Koreans were more

likely to value hierarchy compared to Americans.Regarding consumption values,American were more likely to be influenced by situational factors,such as weatherconditions and having time to shop, compared to South Koreans,whereas South

Koreans were more likely to emphasize the hedonic pleasure of their consump-tion of clothing compared to Americans. The findings offer some insights aboutwhat differences in brand image could exist between different countries and may

help global retailers in implementing brand image manipulations in each indi-vidual country for the sake of establishing and maintaining consistent brand

images across nations.When communicating with consumers in different coun-tries, marketing managers should also take into account the differences in cul-tural and consumption values in those countries Moreover the result of the

Table 6. Discriminant Analysis for Consumption Values Between the U.S. and

Korea.

U.S. Korea


Conditional value 0.96 5.03 1.22 3.95 1.19(Situational factor)

Epistemic value 0.08 4.91 1.41 5.01 1.23

(Hedonic seeking)

Eigenvalue 0.218


Wilks lambda 0.821


Note: Scale ranges from 1 to 7.

***p 0.001.


18/23

countries suggests on what aspects of global branding marketers should put

more effort to be more effective.Based on the additional findings of causal relationship in this study, it is pos-

sible to conclude that the perceptions about brand images spurred by stan-

dardized brand image strategies differ in different countries according to eachcountrys cultural and consumption values, which are learned behaviors. The

results clearly show that consumers in different countries have different brandimages for a specific brand, and these are attributed to differences in cultural

values and consumption values, which are difficult to control by standardizedstrategies. Global marketers could use these results in enhancing their under-

standing of what makes consumers perceptions of a brand in different countriesdifferent, and they may incorporate this in their global brand image strategies.

The results that cultural values play a significant role in explaining differ-

ent perceptions of brand image both directly and indirectly suggest that globalmarketers should continuously monitor the intrinsic value system in local mar-

kets and evaluate their global branding strategies across nations in terms of how

each cultural difference influences their brand images. And then the contentsof standardized global branding strategies should reflect individual countries

different brand image perception and value system. This study improves theunderstanding of brand image dimensionality and consumption values acrossnations following a rigorous method to identify the brand image dimensional-

ity and consumption values commonly held by the subject countries.

LIMITATIONS AND FUTURE RESEARCH

Reflecting on limitations of this study, some directions for future research aresuggested as follows. First, the results of this study might stem from the dif-ferences between Confucian and Western cultures beyond the national differ-

ences. Therefore, further studies may replicate this study for different countriesin Confucian and Western cultures. No differences in the results might imply that

cultural characteristics rather than country characteristics should be consideredin identifying the differences in brand images and that brand image study is therealm of the cross-cultural study of consumer behavior. Second, exclusion of

some factors of brand image and values in discriminant analysis might be causedby their relatively low reliabilities. In conducting cross-national studies, there-

fore, future studies should use measures that are highly reliable in applying toall subject countries. Third, this study examined only cultural and consump-tion values in identifying differences in brand images across nations. There maybe other variables that could influence brand images other than these values.

Future research, therefore, may include additional variables in an effort to iden-tify the differences in brand images across the globe. For instance, level of eco-nomic development as a national characteristic may be considered as a variable,

as Hsieh (2002) showed that countries with similar levels of economic develop-ment have similar brand image perceptions. Fourth, the result showing non-

significance between cultural value and brand image for only the South Korean

subjects suggests that the theoretical framework proposed in this study mightnot be generalized throughout the globe. In addition, the possibility of general-

ization of causal relationships between cultural value and brand image in the


19/23

various countries. In other words, future studies should examine whether this

framework is applicable to other countries. It should be of interest not only tomarketers working cross-nationally, but also to researchers working on brandimage. Fifth, the researchers of this study experienced difficulty in a priori the-

orizing that constituted the hypotheses of this study because of limited priorresearch findings. Empirical results of this study may suggest new directions for

a priori theorizing for future studies. Sixth, the subjects of this study were lim-ited to university students living in metropolitan areas and to apparel. There-fore, future studies should examine whether the proposed model can begeneralizable to broader populations and businesses such as service and Inter-

net industries other than consumer goods industries.

REFERENCES

Albaum, G., Baker, K. G., Hozier, G. C., & Rogers, R. D. (2002). Smoking behavior, infor-

mation sources, and consumption values of teenagers: Implications for public policy

and other intervention failures. Journal of Consumer Affairs, 36, 5076.

Bearden, W. O., & Etzel, M. J. (1982). Reference group influence on product and brand

purchase decisions. Journal of Consumer Research, 9, 183194.

Bentler, P. M. (1990).Comparative fit indexes in structural models.Psychological Bulletin,

107, 238246.

Biel,A. L. (1992). How brand image drives brand equity. Journal of Advertising Research,

32, RC-6RC-12.

Boddewyn, J. J., Soehl, R., & Picard, J. (1986). Standardization in international market-

ing: Is Ted Levitt in fact right? Business Horizons, 29, 6975.

Chen, Y.-C., Shang, R.-A., & Lin, A.-K. (2008). The intention to download music files in

a P2P environment: Consumption value, fashion, and ethical decision perspectives. Elec-tric Commerce Research and Applications, 7, 411422.

Cho, B., Kwon, U., Gentry, J. W., Jun, S., & Kropp, F. (1999). Cultural values reflected in

theme and execution: A comparative study of U.S. and Korean Television commer-

cials. Journal of Advertising, 28, 5973.

Collins, C. M., Steg, L., & Koning, M. A. (2007). Customers values, beliefs on sustainable

corporate performance, and buying behavior. Psychology & Marketing, 24, 555577.

Dholakia, U. M., & Talukdar, D. (2004). How social influence affects consumption trends

in emerging markets: An empirical investigation of the consumption convergence

hypothesis. Psychology & Marketing, 21, 775797.

Dobni, D., & Zinkhan, G. M. (1990). In search of brand image: A foundation analysis.

Advances in Consumer Research, 17, 110119.Dunning, J. (1981). International Production and the Multinational Enterprise. Boston,

MA: Allen & Unwin.

Esch, F.-R., Langner, T., Schmitt, B. H., & Geus, P. (2006).Are brands forever? How brand

knowledge and relationships affect current and future purchases. Journal of Product

& Brand Management, 15, 98105.

Fam, K.-S., & Grohs, R. (2007). Cultural values and effective executional techniques in

advertising. International Marketing Review, 24, 519538.

Finch, J. E.,Trombley, C.M., & Rabas, B. J. (1998). The role of multiple consumption val-

ues in consumer cooperative patronage:An application of the theory of market choice

behavior. Journal of Marketing Management, 8, 4456.

Fry, J. F., & Claxton, J. D. (1971). Semantic differential and nonmetric multidimensionalscaling descriptions of brand images. Journal of Marketing Research, 8, 238240.

G b l T G & B ll G W (2000) A i di t di i li i f th l b l


20/23

of consumer-choice dynamism resulting from the influx of new forms of retailing.

Advances in Consumer Research, 27, 166172.

Ger, G., & Belk, R. W. (1996). Id like to buy the world of Coke: Consumptionscapes of the

less affluent world. Journal of Consumer Policy, 19, 271304.

Graeff, T. R. (1996). Image congruence effects on product evaluations: The role of self-

monitoring and public/private consumption. Psychology & Marketing, 13, 481499.

Graeff, T. R. (1997). Consumption situations and the effects of brand image on consumersbrand evaluations. Psychology & Marketing, 14, 4970.

Gregory, G. D., & Munch, J. M. (1997). Cultural values in international advertising: An

examination of familial norms and roles in Mexico. Psychology & Marketing, 14, 99119.

Hartman, J. B., Shim, S., Barber, B., & OBrien, M. (2006). Adolescents utilitarian and

hedonic web-consumption behavior: Hierarchical influence of personal values and

innovativeness. Psychology & Marketing, 23, 813839.

Haynes,A., Lackman, C., & Guskey, A. (1999). Comprehensive brand presentation: Ensur-

ing consistent brand image. Journal of Product & Brand Management, 8, 286300.

Henderson, P. W., Cote, J. A., Leong, S. M., & Schmitt, B. (2003). Building strong brands

in Asia: Selecting the visual components of image to maximize brand strength. Inter-

national Journal of Research in Marketing, 20, 297-313.Henry, W. A. (1976). Cultural values do correlate with consumer behavior. Journal of

Marketing Research, 13, 121127.

Hofstede, G. (1984). Cultures consequences. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publications.

Hogg, M. K., Cox, A., J., & Keeling, K. (2000). The impact of self-monitoring on image

congruence and product/brand evaluation. European Journal of Marketing,34, 641666.

Holt, D.B., Quelch, J. A.,& Taylor, E. L. (2004). How global brands compete. Harvard Busi-

ness Review, 82, 6875.

Hsieh, A.-T., & Li, C.-K. (2008).The moderating effect of brand image on public relations

perception and customer loyalty. Marketing Intelligence & Planning, 26, 2642.

Hsieh, M. H. (2002). Identifying brand image dimensionality and measuring the degree

of brand globalization: A cross-national study. Journal of International Marketing,10, 4667.

Huang, C., & Tai, A. (2003). Different cultural values reflected in customer value per-

ceptions of products:A comparative study of Chinese and American. Journal of Inter-

national Marketing & Marketing Research, 28, 3756.

Hunt, K. A., & Keaveney, S. M. (1994). A process model of the effects of price promotions

on brand image. Psychology & Marketing, 11, 511-532.

Johnson, J. P., & Lenartowicz, T. (1998). Culture, freedom and economic growth: Do cul-

tural values explain economic growth? Journal of World Business, 33, 332356.

Keller, K. L. (1993). Conceptualizing, measuring, and managing customer-based brand

equity. Journal of Marketing, 57, 122.

Khairullah, D., & Khairullah, Z. (2002). Dominant cultural values: Content analysis ofthe U.S. and Indian print advertisement. Journal of Global Marketing, 16, 4770.

Leach, M. P., & Liu A. H. (1998). The use of culturally relevant stimuli in international

advertising. Psychology & Marketing, 15, 523546.

Long, M. M., & Shiffman, L. G. (2000). Consumption values and relationship: Segment-

ing the market for frequency programs. Journal of Consumer Marketing, 17, 214232.

Low, G. S., & Lamb, C.W. (2000). The measurement and dimensionality of brand associ-

ations. Journal of Product & Brand Management, 9, 350368.

Lowe,A. C., & Corkindale, D. R. (1998). Differences in cultural values and their effects

on responses to marketing stimuli:A cross-cultural study between Australians and Chi-

nese from the Peoples Republic of China. European Journal of Marketing,32, 843867.

Martinez, E., & Chernatony, L. (2004). The effect of brand extension strategies upon

brand image. Journal of Consumer Marketing, 21, 3950.

Martinez, E., Polo, Y., & Chernatony, L. (2008). Effect of brand extension strategies on


21/23

McCarty, J., & Hattwick, P. (1992).Cultural value orientation: A comparison of magazine

advertisements from the United States and Mexico.Advances in Consumer Research,

19, 3428.

McGregor, S. (2000). Using social and consumer values to predict market-place behav-

iour: Questions of congruency. Journal of Consumer Studies & Home Economics, 24,

94103.

Meenaghan, T. (1995). The role of advertising in brand image development. Journal ofProduct & Brand Management, 4, 2334.

Moon, Y. S., & Chan, K. (2005). Advertising appeals and cultural values in television

commercials: A comparison of Hong Kong and Korea. International Marketing Review,

22, 4866.

Park, C., & Srinivasan, V. (1994). A survey-based method for measuring and under-

standing brand equity and its extendability. Journal of Marketing Research, 31,

271288.

Pettijohn, L. S., Mellott, D.W., & Pettijohn,C.E. (1992). The relationship between retailer

image and brand image, Psychology & Marketing, 9, 311328.

Polegarto, R., & Bjerke, R. (2006). The link between cross-cultural value associations

and linking: The case of Benetton and its advertising. Journal of Advertising Research,46, 263273.

Pope, N. (1998). Consumption values, sponsorship awareness, brand and product use.

Journal of Product & Brand Management, 7, 124136.

Quelch, J. (1999). Global brands: Taking stock. Business Strategy Review, 10, 114.

Roberts, S.D., & Hart,H. S. (1997). A comparison of cultural value orientations as reflected

by advertisements directed at the general U.S. market, the U.S. Hispanic market, and

the Mexican market. Journal of Marketing Theory & Practice, 5, 9199.

Roth, M. S. (1992).Depth versus breadth strategies for global brand image management.

Journal of Advertising, 21, 2537.

Roth, M. S. (1995a). The effects of culture and socioeconomics on the performance of

global brand image strategies. Journal of Marketing Research, 32, 163175.Roth, M. S. (1995b).Effects of global market conditions on brand image customization and

brand performance. Journal of Advertising, 24, 5572.

Samiee, S., & Roth, K. (1992). The influence of global marketing standardization on per-

formance. Journal of Marketing, 56, 117.

Schenk, C. & Holman, R (1980). A sociological approach to brand choice: The concept of

situational self image. Advances in Consumer Research, 7, 610614.

Schwartz, S. H. (1992). Universals in the content and structure of values: Theoretical

advances and empirical tests in 20 countries. Advances in Experimental Social Psy-

chology, 25, 165.

Schwartz, S. H. (1994). Are there universal aspects in the structure and contents of

human values? Journal of Social Issues, 50, 1945.Schwartz, S. H. (1999). A theory of cultural values and some implications for work.

Applied Psychology: An International Review, 48, 2347.

Shank, M. D., & Langmeyer, L. (1994). Does personality influence brand image? The

Journal of Psychology, 128, 157164.

Sheth, J. (1986). Global markets or global competition? Journal of Consumer Market-

ing, 3, 911.

Sheth, J., Newman, B., & Gross, B. (1991). Consumption values and market choice. Cincin-

nati, OH: South-Western Publishing.

Soares, A. M., Farhangmehr, M., & Shoham, A. (2007). Hofstedes dimensions of culture

in international marketing studies. Journal of Business Research, 6, 277284.

Solomon, M. (2007). Consumer behavior, 7th ed. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.

Sondergaard, M. (1994). Research note: Hofstedes consequences: A study of reviews,

citations, and replications. Organization Studies, 15, 447456.


22/23

Sternquist, B. (1998). International retailing. New York: Fairchild Publications.

Taylor, C.R. (2000). Emerging issues in marketing. Psychology & Marketing, 17, 441447.

Translating a brand image abroad. (1998, May). Chain Store Age, 195.

Tse, D. K., Wong, J. K., & Tan, C. T. (1988). Towards some standardized cross-cultural

consumption values. Advances in Consumer Research, 15, 387395.

Villarejo-Ramos, A. F., & Snchez-Franco, M. J. (2005). The impact of marketing com-

munication and price promotion on brand equity. Brand Management, 12, 431444.Wind, Y. (1986). The myth of globalization. Journal of Consumer Marketing, 3, 2326.

Wong, N.Y., & Ahuvia, A.C. (1998). Personal taste and family face: Luxury consumption

in Confucian and Western societies. Psychology & Marketing, 15, 423441.

Zhou, L.,Teng, L., & Poon, P. S. (2008). Susceptibility to global consumer culture:A three-

dimensional scale. Psychology & Marketing, 25, 336351.

Zinkhan, G. M., & Prenshaw, P. J. (1994). Good life images and brand name associations:

Evidence from Asia, America, and Europe. Advances in Consumer Research, 21,

496500.

Correspondence concerning this paper should be addressed to Hye-Jung Park, G-209,

Department of Liberal Arts, Korea Polytechnic University, 2121 Jeongwang-Dong,Siheung-Si, Kyeongki-Do 429-793, Korea ([email protected]).


23/23

Date post:	14-Apr-2018
Category:	Documents
Upload:	sabina-huzum
View:	217 times
Download:	0 times

2.Cultural Value, Consomption Value and Global Brand Image

Documents