Group Title: exploratory study of the influence of country of origin on the product images of persons from selected countries
Title: An Exploratory study of the influence of country of origin on the product images of persons from selected countries
CITATION PDF VIEWER THUMBNAILS PAGE IMAGE ZOOMABLE
Full Citation
STANDARD VIEW MARC VIEW
Permanent Link: http://ufdc.ufl.edu/UF00097550/00001
 Material Information
Title: An Exploratory study of the influence of country of origin on the product images of persons from selected countries
Physical Description: xi, 220 leaves. : illus. ; 28 cm.
Language: English
Creator: Krishnakumar, Parameswar, 1942-
Publication Date: 1974
Copyright Date: 1974
 Subjects
Subject: Attitude (Psychology)   ( lcsh )
Consumers' preferences   ( lcsh )
Marketing thesis Ph. D   ( lcsh )
Dissertations, Academic -- Marketing -- UF   ( lcsh )
Genre: bibliography   ( marcgt )
non-fiction   ( marcgt )
 Notes
Thesis: Thesis--University of Florida, 1974.
Bibliography: Bibliography: leaves 210-219.
Additional Physical Form: Also available on World Wide Web
General Note: Typescript.
General Note: Vita.
 Record Information
Bibliographic ID: UF00097550
Volume ID: VID00001
Source Institution: University of Florida
Holding Location: University of Florida
Rights Management: All rights reserved by the source institution and holding location.
Resource Identifier: alephbibnum - 000869247
notis - AEG6272
oclc - 014258443

Downloads

This item has the following downloads:

PDF ( 9 MBs ) ( PDF )


Full Text











AN EXPLORATORY STUDY OF THE INFLUENCE OF COUNTRY OF ORIGIN
ON THE PRODUCT IMAGES OF PERSONS FROM SELECTED COUNTRIES

















BY

PAPAMESE SWAR KRISH."KUMA R


A DISSEPRTATIO; PRESENTED TO TEE GRADUATE COU-CL O
THE UNIVERSITY O FLORIEA IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT
OF THE RE-UIRElENTS F? T HE DEGREE OF
DOCTOR OF PITTLOS OP





UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA


-174













ACKNOWLEDGMENTS


The author wishes to express his gratitude to the

members of his supervisory committee, Dr. R. B. Thompson,

Chairman, Dr. J. D. Butterworth, Dr. J. H. Faricy,

Dr. W. W. Menke, and Dr. J. R. Vernon, for their generous

support, counsel, and guidance. The author gratefully

acknowledges the valuable help provided by Dr. David T.

Hughes, Assistant Professor of Statistics, in developing

the statistical models and completing the statistical

analysis. He is thankful to Mr. Y. P. Kakad, doctoral

student in Mechanical Engineering, for the time he so

freely gave in assisting the author in the use of terminal-

based computer languages and programs. Mr. Steve Snyder,

doctoral student in English, should also be acknowledged

for editorial assistance.

The author is indebted to the University of Florida

for granting him financial support. Without this assis-

tance this study could never have been completed.

Finally, the author wishes to express his deep appre-

ciation to Dr. R. B. Thompson, Dr. J. D. Butterworth,

Dr. H. 'aric Dr W. W. Menke, and Dr. J. B. McFerrin

for their continued support, guidance, and encouragement

throughout his five and one-half years at the University

of Florida.














TABLE OF CONTENTS


Page

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS . .. . . . . . . . ii

LIST OF TABLES . . . . . . . . .. .v

ABSTRACT . . . . . . . . vii

CHAPTER

I. INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . .

National and International Marketing .. 3
The International Scene . . . . . 5
Problem Area . . .. . . . . 6

II. THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK . . . . ... 9

Summary of Related Studies . . . . 9
Purpose of This Study .. . . . . 18
Less-Developed Countries . . . .. 18
Role of Marketing in Less-Developed Coun-
tries . . . . . . . . . .19
Significance of This Research . . .. 21
"Made in" Image . . . . . . . 23
Nature and Scope of This Study . . .. 27
Research Hypotheses in the Null Form .29
Evaluation of Product Classes and Products 30
Choice of Products . . . . . .. 33

III. RESEARCH METHODOLOGY . . . . . .. 35

Measurement of "Made in" Image . . .. 35
Pilot Study . . . . . .. . . 38
General Description of the Research Instru-
ment . . ............... . 40
Pretest Form of the Research Instrument . 41
Pretest . . . . . . . ... .45
Selection and Classification of Cou'ntri'es
for Final Investigation ......... 48
Final Form of the Research Instrument 51
The Respondents . . . . . . .. .55
Fieldwork . . . . . . . . 56


iii












CHAPTER

IV. RESULTS . . . . . . . . .

Tests of Hypotheses Concerning "Made in"
Images . . . . . . . . .
Product Classes and Products . . .
Choice of Products . . . . . .

V. CONCLUSIONS . . . . . . . .

Less-Developed Countries . . . .
The Comparative Framework . . . .
Markets Within a Market . . . . .
"Made in" Image of Japanese Products .
Limitations of This Study . . . .
Areas for Future Research . . . .
Final Comments . . . . . . .


APPENDICES

A. FINAL FORM OF THE RESEARCH INSTRUMENTS ADMINIS-
TERED TO INDIANS, CHINESE, AND AMERICANS

B. SEMANTIC DIFFERENTIAL SCALES FROM PILOT
STUDIES AND THE PRETEST FORM OF THE RESEARCH
INSTRUMENT . . . . . . . . .

C. ECONOMIC DATA . . . . . . . .

D. ANALYSIS OF PRETEST DATA . . . . .

E. RESULTS OF SUPPLEMENTARY TESTS . . . .

F. SUPPLEMENTARY FIGURES . . . . . .

BIBLIOGRAPHY . . . . . . . . . .

BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH . . . . . . . . .


Page


91
95
98
100
101
102
104


107



153

171

174

184

202

210

220














LIST OF TABLES


Table Page

1. Multivariate Test of Means for Differences in
"Made in" Images--Hypothesis I (Indians) . 65

2. Results of Tests for Differences in Individual
Dimensions of Profiles, Made in India vs. Made
in U.S.A. (Indians) . . . . . . 66

3. Test of Mean Vectors for Differences in "Made in"
Images Between Indian and Chinese Respondents--
Hypothesis II . . . . . . . . 69

4. Tests of Mean Vectors for Differences in "Made
in" Images Between Indian and American Respon-
dents--Hypothesis III .. . . . . 72

5. Multivariate Test of Parameters for Differ-
ences in Images (Indians). . . . . . 75

6. Multivariate Test of Means for Differences in
"Made in" Images--Hypothesis V (Americans) . 76

7. Results of Tests for Differences in Individual
Dimensions of Profiles, Made in U.S.A. vs.
Made in Japan (Americans) . . . . .. 77

8. Multivariate Test of Means for Differences in
"Made in" Images--Hypothesis I (Chinese) . 79

9. Results of Tests for Differences in Individual
Dimensions of Profiles, Made in Taiwan vs.
Made in U.S.A. (Chinese) . . . . . 80

10. Product Classes and Products, Comparisons of
Made in India and Made in U.S.A. (Indians) 82

11. Product Classes and Products, Comparisons of
Made in Taiwan and Made in U.S.A. (Chinese) 4

12. Product Classes and Products, Comparisons of
Made in U.S.A. and Made in Japan (Americans) 85









Table Page

13. Chi-Square Test for Choice of Products (Indians) 88

14. Chi-Square Test for Choice of Products (Chinese) 89

15. Chi-Square Test for Choice of Products (American) 90









Abstract of Dissertation Presented to the Graduate Council
of the University of Florida in Partial Fulfillment of the
Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy

AN EXPLORATORY STUDY OF THE INFLUENCE OF COUNTRY OF ORIGIN
ON THE PRODUCT IMAGES OF PERSONS FROM SELECTED COUNTRIES


By

Parameswar Krishnakumar

August, 1974

Chairman: Dr. Ralph B. Thompson
Major Department: Marketing

This study examines the influence of country of origin

on the product images of persons from less-developed coun-

tries. Secondarily, it examines the influence of country of

origin on the product images of Americans. A comparative

framework is used, enabling the product images of persons

from the separate less-developed countries to be compared.

Also, this framework enables the comparison of the product

images of Americans with those of persons from less-developed

countries.

The research instrument consisted of a questionnaire

divided into four sections: the first used the semantic

differential method to explore the nature of product images;

the second was designed to scale the attitudes toward pro-

duct classes and products; the third explored the choice

process of the respondents; the fourth collected demographic

data. The four sections were integrated into a single


vii








questionnaire and administered to persons from selected

less-developed countries and Americans at the University of

Florida.

Since the analysis of the pretest had indicated the

dependence structure of the elements of the profiles evolved

by the semantic differential method, major hypotheses con-

cerning the product images were tested by multivariate

statistical methods. Specifically, statistical methods

employed for testing the hypotheses concerning product images

included multivariate tests of means, tests on mean vectors,

and multivariate regression analysis. Tests of subsidiary

hypotheses, concerning individual dimensions of the product

images, attitude toward products, and product classes and

choice process of respondents were also carried out.

The results of this study indicated that persons from

less-developed countries tended to have an unfavorable

"Made in" image of their domestic products in terms of work-

manship, reliability, durability, technical superiority, and

other characteristics defined by the semantic differential

scales used in the study. The unfavorable "Made in" image

of the domestic product colored these persons' view of

both product classes and products, and affected their choice

behavior as well. The final interpretation of the results

of this study indicated that in most instances, persons

from less-developed countries were biased against products

of domestic origin. This type of bias against domestic

products is a situation contrary to that which prevails


viii









among persons from advanced nations, such as the United

States, who in many instances evaluated their domestic pro-

ducts as superior to foreign products. The results of the

study pointed out that the incidence and intensity of the

bias against domestic products varies between peoples from

different less-developed countries. Hence, while it is

easy to classify all less-developed countries as one market

based on the bias against domestic products which exists

among natives of these countries, for a successful marketing

strategy, it is very important to take into consideration

the specific nature and extent of the bias in each of these

countries.

The results of the study also indicated that Americans

had a favorable "Made in" image of Japanese products.

American respondents found no significant differences be-

tween Made in U.S.A. and Made in Japan in terms of work-

manship, quality of materials, durability, reliability, and

technical superiority. Inspite of such a favorable "Made

in" image, in most instances Japanese products were not

chosen over American, German, or English products by the

American respondents. Finally, the results of this research

indicated the possibility that the level of economic develop-

ment of a country iiay be usea as a factor fcr predicting the

nature of "Made in" images among natives of that country.















CHAPTER I

INTRODUCTION


The last two decades have witnessed a great, though

subtle, shift in the relationship of a marketer toward his

consumers. This shift, which has been a re-orientation of

focus from "production" to "consumer wants," has brought

with it new problems which must be dealt with. To explore

one such problem area, referred to as the influence of

country of origin, is the ultimate concern of this study;

accordingly, in so far as this influence is an integral

part of the shift toward consumer orientation, an explana-

tion of this change and its implications will be fruitful

here in order to see our topic in perspective.

As Jones noted, market awareness involves not merely

knowing the location of the consumer but knowing his wants,

which are constantly changing.

A firm does not have market awareness by simply knowing
the location of customers, meeting delivery dates, and
promptly and fairly making service adjustments. Such
things are important for efficient operation but they
do not constitute market awareness. To have market
awareness, the firm must be tuned to the wants of the
consumer. These wants must be known, their implica-
tions grasped, and interpretations of them made in
terms of the firm's products, services, and profit ob-
jectives. The ever-changing nature of consumer wants
must be accepted and an attempt made to adjust the firm
and its products to the changes. A sufficient knowledge
of consumer as he is today is required if a reasoned
estimate about his future is to be made. (Jones, 1964,
p. 4)









How well an offering can satisfy a demand depends upon the

perception of the buyer. Accordingly, a product, as Narver

and Savitt noted, "is a demander's total set of percepts of

want-satisfying elements a supplier is offering for sale or

lease" (1971, p. 61).

Thus the success of a product is determined by what

the consumer perceives to be true of it in relation to his

own wants. Because of this fact, the marketer is con-

trolled by the consumers rather than vice versa.

The marketing strategist recognizes the adaptive
character of the problem-solving consumer and inte-
grates this fact into marketing strategy. He does not
view the consumer as an inert individual capable of
being manipulated. Instead, the consumer is recog-
nized as an information seeker who evaluates communi-
cations and product choices in terms of his drives and
aspirations. When products are consonant with his
problem-solving strategies, the consumer chooses those
products. When products are unsatisfactory, he chooses
others. Thus to say that consumers are controlled by
marketers is naive, unless one means that marketers
induce consumers to buy their products by producing
what they want and telling them about it. In reality,
it is the marketer who is controlled by the adaptive,
satisfaction-seeking behavior of the consumer.
(Engel, Kollat, and Blackwell, 1968, p. 614)

This focus on the consumer is reflected in many ways.

In recent years both marketing practitioners and academi-

cians have shown a great amount of interest in the study of

the consumer and his behavior. Business firms, for example,

have discarded their production orientation. They now

manufacture and sell products to suit the needs and wants

of the consumer. More emphasis is placed on consumer re-


search than hitherto.









National and International Marketing


Consumer orientation is of utmost importance for inter-

national marketing as well as for national marketing, par-

ticularly because demands vary according to a country's

stage of development.

Markets, in the simplest of terms, are people with
money and a willingness to spend. The market grid
concept is even more applicable in world markets than
in the American economy. This is because demands vary
according to a country's stage of development and
potential for growth--as well as other economic social
and cultural factors. (McCarthy, 1968, p. 137)1

The result of this fact, as McCarthy noted, is a need for

marketing management, marketing research, and the market

grid concept for international marketing which recognizes

the uniqueness of each potential market.

The great variations in phases of economic develop-
ment, income, population, literacy and other factors,
however, mean that foreign markets must be treated
as many separate little target markets--and each
studied carefully. Lumping foreign nations together
under the common and vague heading of "foreigners"
or, at the other extreme, assuming that they are just
like U.S. customers is almost a guarantee of failure.
So is treating them like common movie stereotypes. It
is clear that marketing management, marketing research
and the market grid concept all can play a significant
role in international marketing. (McCarthy, 1968,
p. 149)


iIn selecting a target market, a marketer must keep in
mind that what appears to be one market may consist of
several smaller markets. Market grid approach can be used
to divide this bigger market into smaller, more homogeneous
markets. "The market grid concept sees any market as a box
that is cross-hatched, like a checkboard or grid, on the
basis of relevant market characteristics" (McCarthy, 1968,
p. 23).










In the case of domestic or national marketing, mar-

keting management must research the needs and wants of the

domestic market. But, when marketing on an international

scale, the firm must also be concerned with the needs and

wants of foreign consumers. This is so because the trade

takes place across national borders rather than within

national domains (Bartels, 1970, p. 239). Economic, social,

and cultural environments differ across national boundaries.

These factors have to be taken into account while the mar-

keting mix is formulated. Although there are similarities

in domestic marketing and international marketing, inter-

national marketing is a more complex process because of

the existence of additional environmental constraints of

which a marketer might not be aware.

In domestic marketing, such factors as behavior norms,
social stresses, and political and economic strains
are treated as exogenous variables because at the
macro level they are either constant during a given
decision period or moving very slowly. Thus they are
not important for most "in-culture" decisions. In
international marketing, however, these factors are
endogenous at the country classification level, making
the decision process more difficult and their cognition
and measurement more important. (Sethi, 1971)

It is especially important to recognize the complexity of

international marketing, since free trade on a world-wide

basis could be a reality by the 1980s (Schirmer, 1968). If

so, this situation will be a great challenge to an innova-

tive and imaginative marketer and success or failure will

be based on the evolution of a proper marketing mix. This,




5



in turn, depends on the study of the consumer and his be-

havior, which is the key to success in any market, whether

domestic or foreign.


The International Scene

A few years ago, Servan-Schreiber noted that American

corporations are dominating the European scene.

Fifteen years from now it is quite possible that the
world's third greatest industrial power, just after
the United States and Russia, will not be Europe, but
American industry in Europe. Already, in the ninth
year of the common market, this European market is
basically American in organization.
The importance of U.S. penetration rests, first
of all, on the sheer amount of capital invested--
currently about $14 billion--($14,000,000,000). Add
to this the massive size of firms carrying out this
conquest. Recent efforts by European firms to cen-
tralize and merge are inspired largely by the need to
compete with American giants like International
Business Machines (IBM) and General Motors. (Servan-
Schreiber, 1968, p. 3-4)

However, in recent years "the American challenge" has been

countered by Western European nations. Rhodes (1969),

writing in the Harvard Business Review, asserted that

European firms are very vigorous competitors in the Common

Market. He also suggested that cooperation within the

Common Market combined with the "leapfrogging" technology

has caused this transformation. Consequently, there are a

few analysts who feel that the United States has not been

sufficiently competitive in recent years (Grove, 1969).

Other analysts have forecast diminishing trade surpluses

for the U.S. in the decade ahead (Hazen, 1971). Increasingly









sophisticated marketing and production techniques adopted

by Western European nations and Japan threaten to pose prob-

lems for American products at home and abroad (Slesinger,

1969). A global export offensive has been mounted by Japan,

with all sectors of the economy mobilized for this purpose

(Kraar, 1970)

Less-developed countries thus far have only a small

share of the industrial exports (Rose, 1970), but many of

the less-developed countries are entering into foreign mar-

kets. Gaedeke (1973) pointed out that many consumer goods

from Hong Kong, Taiwan, India, and many other less-developed

countries are now in the U.S. market. International trade

has important implications for less-developed countries

(Thompson, Bevins, and t:alsh, 1964). With visions of inde-

pendence, affluence, and security, less-developed countries

are also promoting export trade. Thus the international

market scene is now highly competitive.


Problem Area

Success in such a dynamic scene depends on the formula-

tion of an appropriate marketing strategy. While entering

a foreign market, the marketer faces many difficulties.

Although the basic desires and needs of people are
sirnilar throughout the worlt, the means of satisfying
them differ widely. The critical issue for inter-
national marketing is adjusting existing marketing
strategies to the world market by taking into account
such factors as language, customs, living standards,
religion and tradition. (Nagashima, 1970)








In addition to these problems created by environmental

differences, marketers may face such obstacles as embargoes,

quotas, and tariffs. In addition, marketers entering

foreign markets will confront consumer biases based on the

origin of the product (Schooler, 1965). Since 1959 several

studies have investigated the effect of product origin on

consumer attitudes and concluded that, in fact, a product's

country of origin is likely to influence consumer attitudes.

For example, Curtis Reierson explained the dilemma faced

by Japanese products competing in the American market.

Japanese products are often the object of unfavorable
casual remarks. For example, a college faculty mem-
ber while having a cup of coffee broke the plastic
spoon with which he was stirring sugar and then re-
marked, "One of those cheap Japanese products." The
spoon was made in the United States. Another instance
recently occurred on Red Skelton's television show over
the Columbia Broadcasting System (March 30, 1965) when
the guest star, Raymond Burr said, "Marriage is made
in heaven; everything else that does not last is made
in Japan." (Reierson, 1966a)

Reierson (1966a) also pointed out other instances involving

products from France and Italy.

The products of other nations face the problem of un-
favorable stereotyping. Not long ago a college stu-
dent made some strongly unfavorable remarks to the
writer concerning French products in general, empha-
tically saying that he would buy nothing produced in
France. When questioned he revealed that his own
first-hand knowledge of the French products was limited
to the unfortunate experience of a friend of his who
had serious mechanical problem with a French auto-
mobile. Other students expressed a similar dislike
for Italian products for even less reason. (Reierson,
1966a)

The specific cases noted by Reierson referred to stereo-

typing of foreign products by American consumers. Schooler,









in a study conducted at Guatemala, also found a bias against

products from other Central American Common Market countries.

Schooler concluded

. that informal barriers to increased trade within
CACM do exist and that attitude toward people of a
given country is a factor in existing preconceptions
regarding the products of that country. (Schooler,
1965)

This consumer bias based on the product's country of

origin is the problem area chosen for this study. The re-

mainder of this study is organized into four chapters.

Chapter II gives a summary of research so far done in this

area. Then the problem area is narrowed and the purpose of

the study is defined. Research hypotheses are also

developed in this chapter. Chapter III develops the re-

search methodology and presents the instrument used. Field

work and other pertinent aspects are also discussed here.

Chapter IV is concerned with data analysis and interpreta-

tion. Statistical methods used in this study are explained.

Results of hypotheses tests and other relevant results are

presented. Chapter V draws conclusions from the study and

discusses their implications. Areas for future research

are also delineated.













CHAPTER II

THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK


This chapter provides further background concerning

the problem area and then develops the major hypotheses to

be tested. First, major studies dealing with the problem

of consumer bias based on product origin are summarized.


Summary of Related Studies


Yankelovich Study (Printer's Ink, 1959)

In the spring of 1959, Yankelovich conducted a study

in the United States to determine American attitudes toward

foreign products and also to examine the attitude of

Americans toward trade with Communist countries. Structured

interviews were conducted in four geographic areas across

the U.S. While the idea of free trade was supported in

most cases, there were objections to trade with the Communist

bloc. The study indicated that products from foreign coun-

tries should meet quality and feature requirements of the

consumers. If these requirements are not met, then the low

price of some of the imported goods is not considered a

bargain. According to Yankelovich, there is a distinctive

quality called cachet for some high quality imported goods

like German lenses. The elements of this cachet are superior









quality at high price, opportunity for status, and oppor-

tunity for self-enhancement. The researcher suggested that

this cachet quality can be used as an effective and powerful

marketing tool by foreign nations to market their products

in the U.S.


Young and Rubicam Study (Advertising Age, 1960)

Young and Rubicam in 1960 investigated the attitudes

of Americans toward domestic and foreign products. The

study was based on interviews with 2,600 American consumers.

The study reported that most Americans tend to look at their

own products as the best, but the study also showed that

there is little aversion to foreign products. Some other

interesting aspects of the study are given below.

1. Patriotism plays a big part in the purchase pro-
cess. Assuming all products are equal, 93% of the
respondents selected the domestic products.

2. In gaining acceptance, quality and value are the
determining factors.

3. Further studies are required to determine the
point at which price differential between the
foreign product and domestic product will start
interfering with the market for domestic products.

4. It may not be true always that consumers will buy
the product which he thinks is the best.
(Advertising Age, 1960)


Study by Market Facts, Roc International (1930)

A "Made in" image study %;as conducted by Market Facts,

Roc International, in the United States and six other









European countries, England, France, Italy, Germany,

Holland, and Sweden. Three general principles emerge from

this study.

1. The "Made in" image colors people's views of many
products, even those not seeking to present them-
selves as national specialities.

2. The image is closely associated with what people
think is the national character of the country
concerned. Thus, a manufacturer of technical
equipment may find himself victimized by a belief
that his country lacks industrial skills and,
consequently, a refusal to accept his products
as reliable.

3. Less well-known products are more likely to be
influenced by a "Made in" image based on a
stereotyped view of the national character.
(Market Facts, Roc International, 1960, p. 4)


St:.udy by Schooler (1955)

The purpose of this study was to examine the consumer

ci3ss based on product origin in the Central American Commjon

markett. The respondents were students at Guatemala City.

They w .re asked to evaluate products labeled as Made in

*.,uatermala, Made in El Salvador, Made in Costa Rica, and

Made Ln Mexico. No significant differences were found be-

tween products from Mexico and Guatemala. Products iden-

Liffied .-s being from Mexico and Guatemala were evaluated

higher than those products identified as being from Costa

-._ca and El Salvador. Guatemala, Cosza Rica. n d El

Salvadcr are members of the Central -iAerican Coirmon Market

(CACMI) whereas Mexico does-; not belong to the organization.

.Th study 'o.Lnted out that regional jealousies, fears, and










animosities among CACM countries may account for this bias

against products from other CACM countries. Schooler also

investigated whether attitudes toward government, business

structure, labor organizations, people and travel experience

are related to preconceptions concerning a product. The re-

sults indicated that there is an inter-relationship between

the attitude toward the people of a nation and preconcep-

tions concerning the products of that country.


Reierson Study (1966b)

The Reierson study was conducted to determine the atti-

tudes of American consumers toward foreign products. Re-

spondents were students at Baylor University and Texas A

and M University. The results showed that stereotyping of

foreign products is present among students. Products made

in the United States were ranked first in every category.

Japan always came last in their ranking. This was true for

products in general, product classes, and specific products.


Reierson Study (1967)

The aim of the second Reierson study was to examine

the effects of various communications media on the foreign

product image of the American consumer. Students at the

University of Texas were chosen as the respondents.

Adopting an experimental approach, Reierson investigated

whether communications media could change the attitude of









Americans toward Italian and Japanese products. The commu-

nications media used were films, periodical advertising,

publications, and merchandise displays. Each experimental

group was exposed to one medium, and the responses obtained

from the experimental groups were compared to those from the

control group. In the case of Italian products, experi-

mental groups exposed to a medium gave significantly higher

ratings than control groups. One exception was the experi-

mental group exposed to a film display, since in this in-

stance there were no statistically significant differences

between the mean scores of the experimental group and the

control group. None of the experiments for Japanese prod-

ucts produced significant results with the exception of a

cumulative impact experiment in which the same group was

exposed to several of the communications media. Results of

the cumulative impact experiment showed statistically

significant differences in the evaluation of Japanese

products by the control group and the experimental group.

Reierson concluded,

There is every indication that if the prejudice of
consumers toward a nation's product is not too in-
tense, consumer attitude may be made significantly
more favorable by even slight exposure to communica-
tion and promotion devices.

But if there is a strong prejudice toward any nation's

product, then this may not be the case. Reierson said,

A nation such as Japan with strong unfavorable atti-
tudes toward its product cannot change such attitudes
without substantial efforts; the attitudes can be
changed however.









Reierson noted that one way that products can be made

more favorable is through association with the names of

prestige retailers in the U.S.


Study by Schooler and Wildt (1968)

A study by Schooler and Wildt was conducted at the

University of Missouri. Respondents were students from the

School of Business and Public Administration. The study

showed that many American consumers are biased against

Japanese products because of their national origin. But

an unfavorable image does not mean that the consumers will

always be unwilling to buy the foreign products. The re-

sults of this study established the fact that suitable

price concessions for the foreign products may help to

overcome the bias based on product origin. An elasticity-

of-product-bias curve for the test product is derived by

Schooler and Wildt.


Study by Schooler and Sunoo (1969)

The main purpose of the study was to examine the bias

against products from developing areas with regional labels

instead of national labels. It was conducted among students

at the University of Missouri. For instance, test products

were labeled as Made in Asia, Made in Latin America, etc.

The results indicated that there is no bias against manu-

factured goods of developing areas labeled regionally.









Nagashima Study (1970)

This study compared Japanese and American attitudes

toward foreign and domestic products. The study was con-

ducted in two parts, the first part among Minnesota business-

men and the second part among Tokyo businessmen. The

measuring instrument was a semantic differential question-

naire supplemented with some additional questions. Japanese

businessmen rated Made in Germany as the best. American

businessmen gave the highest rating to their domestic label.

The results of the study also showed that the "Made in"

image is strongly influenced by some representative products

of the country.


Schooler Study (1971)

A probability sample drawn from 83 Missouri counties

and the city of St. Louis was used in this study. The re-

search instrument was a semantic differential questionnaire.

This study indicated that products are evaluated differently

based on national origin. Intensity of bias seemed to vary

depending on the foreign origin. The study could not point

out any differences in evaluation between regionally labeled

products and nationally labeled products. Also, no dif-

ferences were found on the basis of product category.

Schooler cautioned against comparing studies where different

types of stimuli are used. He added that socio-demographic

variables affect the incidence and intensity of bias.










Study by Gaedeke (1973)

This study was conducted at California State College,

Sacramento, with the purpose of examining attitudes of

Americans toward products from developing countries. Re-

spondents were students in undergraduate classes. Products

Made in the United States were ranked first, for products

in general, food products, electronic items, and textiles.

Products from developing countries were ranked much lower

than U.S. products. Chi-square analysis showed significant

differences of opinion toward the quality of products from

developing countries. Results of the study also showed

that "the country of origin information does not signifi-

cantly affect opinions about the quality of branded pro-

ducts in general" (Gaedeke, 1973).

It is seen from the above studies that product bias

based on national origin has been treated mainly from the

point of view of the consumers of an advanced nation. The

respondents in almost all the studies are either American

consumers or consumers from Western Europe or Japan. The

only exception is the study conducted by Schooler (1965)

where the respondents were from Guatemala. No study has

yet been done on the attitudes of consumers from less-

developed countries when faced .ith their products as well


Mexico is a relatively advanced nation when compared
to other countries like Guatemala, El Salvador, and Costa
Rica. But the focus of the study is the consumer bias to-
ward products from other CACM countries.









as similar products from advanced nations. Price and

quality criteria are important factors in purchase deci-

sions, but the country of origin of a product has an im-

portant influence on the consumer attitudes, as seen from

prior research.

The cachet quality of the foreign products, as pointed

out by Yankelovich (Printer's Ink, 1959), may have a role

in the consumer purchase decisions in less-developed

nations. In addition, one could possibly expect consumers

from less-developed countries to have more confidence in

the technology and skill of advanced nations rather than of

their own country. Even in the case of Japan, which is

technically and economically advanced, this lack of confi-

dence in their own products has been visible. In fact,

Nagashima (1970) has stated that, in some factors of the

semantic profile such as technical advancement and world-

wide distribution, American businessmen gave a higher

rating to Japanese products than the Japanese themselves.

It is also interesting to note that, in Nagashima's study

(1970), 93 percent of the American respondents gave the

U.S. label first choice, but only 57 percent of the Japanese

gave their own label first preference. This being the case

with Japan, a country which has developed rapidly after the

Second World War, one could possibly expect a similar bias

against domestic products among persons from less-developed

countries.









Purpose of This Study

Research has uncovered that the country of origin of

the product influences consumer attitudes. The primary

objective of this exploratory study is to examine the

impact of product origin on consumers from less-developed

countries when faced with their domestic products and

products from advanced nations.

Prior research has also indicated that American con-

sumers are biased against some foreign products based on

the country of origin of the product, but the situation

seems to have changed over the years. Nagashima (1970)

indicated that "prejudice against Japanese products in the

U.S. market is fading as a result of satisfactory consumer

experience with Japanese products." As a secondary ob-

jective, this study examines this claim.


Less-Developed Countries

In this study, less-developed countries are defined as

those which have a per capital national income of less than

$500 per year. Lipson and Lamont (1969) in a study of less-

developed countries used this classification scheme. They

further added,

LDCs are those countries which have a per capital na-
tional income of less than $500 per year. Their
middle class is small; the majority of the people are
poor. Markets are highly fragmented in terms of in-
come, social class, language and tribal differences
and other socio-economic characteristics. The insti-
tutional structure needed to integrate these markets
is organized on a very ineffective basis or is non-
existent.









As Anderson has pointed out, measures of economic develop-

ment are imprecise and no single measure can be an accurate

indicator of development (Anderson, 1970, p. 6). Since the

limited nature of this study does not permit further investi-

gation of measurement problems, per capital income is used

as an indicator of the level of development. Selection and

classification of countries into categories of less-

developed and advanced nations based on the above criterion

is explained in Chapter III.


Role of Marketing in Less-Developed Countries

Paul Mazur, writing in Fortune (1947), defined mar-

keting as delivery of a standard of living. It is the most

effective engine of economic development and also a

developer of standards in an under-developed economy.

Drucker stressed the role of marketing in economic develop-

ment:

Marketing occupies a critical role in respect to the
development of such "growth" areas. Indeed marketing
is the most important "multiplier" of such develop-
ment. It is in itself in every one of these areas the
least developed, the most backward part of the
economic system. Its development, above all others,
makes possible economic integration and the fullest
utilization of whatever assets and productive capacity
an economy already possesses. (Drucker, 1958)

While the marketing literature indicates the important

role of marketing in economic development, marketing

practice in less-developed countries leaves much to be de-

sired. Abbot (1962) pointed out the inefficiencies existing









in the marketing systems of developing countries. Slater

(1968) pointed out that the economic growth in many under-

developed countries is impeded by the existence of barriers

in marketing channels. In Peru, there is very little

acceptance of the consumer-oriented marketing concept

(Strong and Littlefield, 1970). In Guatemala there seems

to be a "tragic defeat" for marketing (Lamont, 1970). It

is evident that marketing function is mostly neglected in
2
many less-developed countries. More research concerning

marketing problems faced by less-developed countries is

needed. The techniques applied in advanced nations can be

adapted to suit the conditions in less-developed countries

(Lipson and Lamont, 1969).

This study is conducted with the hope that some addi-

tional light can be shed on a major problem faced by many

less-developed countries in their quest for economic

growth and development.


An interesting question can be raised concerning this
neglect of marketing function in less-developed countries:
Are economies less-developed because marketing is neglected?
Or is marketing neglected because it has no role to play in
an economy of subsistence as opposed to one of abundance?
No direct and exact answer to this question seems to be
possible. As Bauer and Yamey (1960, p. 182) have indicated,
"The emergence of a market or exchange economy in place of
a subsistence economy is an essential condition of economic
progress beyond a most primitive level." Kindleberger
(1958, p. 93) also adopted a similar view suggesting that
"a commercial revolution is a vital and necessary step on
the way to industrial revolution as it sets pre-conditions
for rapid economic growth."









Significance of This Research

Many of the less-developed nations are in the process

of industrialization, and they need to develop a national

market for their own products. It is possible that con-

sumers of these developing countries may have an unfavorable

image about their domestic products. One such instance is

pointed out by Stanton (1967).

Foreign consumers' preference for American products
often overcomes their nationalistic feelings, so in
many instances a company can use the same brand that
is used in the domestic market. In one case an
American pharmaceutical firm built a plant in a South
Asian country. This was a nationalistic country
fostering local industry. The product was labeled as
a local product and its American origin concealed.
The product was a market failure, because people did
not trust the purity and quality of local drugs.
(Stanton, 1967, p. 621)

If such an attitude toward domestic products is a common

phenomenon, then less-developed countries may find it diffi-

cult to develop a national market for their own products.

Sherbini (1965) has pointed out that marketing diffi-

culties have proven to be great in many of the under-

developed areas, and he cited instances when import-oriented

marketing channels may be unsuitable, or even hostile, to

local products. Accordingly, in evolving a marketing

strategy, it is important to examine the attitude of con-

sumers toward the domestic and foreign products. If there

is any bias against the domestic product, a countervailing

strategy may be needed to overcome this bias.










Many of the less-developed countries are also in the

process of developing an export market. "Historically the

export of manufactured goods has usually followed or

paralleled the development of national market' (Rostow,

1965). In entering foreign markets, the products from

less-developed countries face a bias based on the product

origin (Gaedeke, 1973). American consumers in Gaedeke's

study (1973) rated products from less-developed countries

much lower than American products. Products from less-

developed countries face a similar problem while entering

the market in other less-developed countries. Henley

(1968) provided an interesting example.

With regard to entrance in competition with established
brands, I know of no systematic study of brand pref-
erence in Latin America. A number of Latin American
businessmen have suggested that a consumer reaction
to be overcome is that of negative attitudes towards
other Latin country products. Apparently it has been
difficult enough for locally manufactured items to
gain acceptance in the early stages of industrializa-
tion, without bringing the consumer uncertainty in
the form of product from another developing country.
(Henley, 1968)

In short, whether it be the case of developing a

national market or an export market, products from less-

developed countries may have to overcome this bias based

on product origin. American firms also will benefit from

further exploration in this area, since consumer attitudes

in less-developed countries toward American products and

products from other countries are of relevance in formulating

a market strategy. Young and Rubicam (Advertising Age,








1960) in their study reported that Americans have little

aversion to foreign products. Other studies (Reierson,

1966b, 1967) later pointed out that Americans have a bias

against products from Japan. Nagashima (1970) suggested

that the bias against Japanese products may be less now be-

cause of satisfactory consumer experience. Further in-

vestigation into this area will be of use to both American

and Japanese producers. Finally, researching this area

may be of use to European nations also since they compete

with others in the international market scene.


"Made in" Image

Over the years, image research has been of great in-

terest to marketers. Many articles have been published

concerning the nature and importance of images (Harris,

1958; Crespi, 1961; Fisk, 1961-1962; Nelson, 1962; Heidings-

field, 1965; Gardner, 1965; Crissy, 1972). Bristol (1960)

and Riley (1963) provided a good review of corporate image

studies. In fact, corporate image studies are in abundance

(Mlartineau, 1958b, 1960; Tucker, 1961; Hill, 1962; Cox,

1962; Stephenson, 1963; Clevenger et al., 1965; Odiorne,

1966; Cohen, 1967). Retail image studies (Martineau, 1957,

1958a; Levy and Greene, 1960; Rich and Portis, 1964;

7yckhan, 1967; Lessig, 1973) as w 11 product and br3nd

image studies (Gardner and Levy, 1955; Evans, 1959, 1961;

Kauelen, 1960; Greenberg, 1959; Myers, 1966; Simon, 1970)

have found an important place in marketing literature.









However, despite their studies, the concept of "Made

in" image has not received a great deal of attention.

"'Made in' image is the picture, the reputation, the stereo-

type that businessmen and consumers attach to products of

a specific country" (Nagashima, 1970). This is the image

conveyed when a product is tagged Made in U.S.A., Made in

France, etc. (Market Facts, Roc International, 1960, p. 1).

A "Made in" image is affected by several factors. Nagashima

(1970) has pointed out some of them: national characteris-

tics, representative products, economic and political back-

ground, history and traditions. What people think is the

national characteristic of a country affects the "Made in"

image as exemplified by the Market Facts, Roc International,

study.

The image of "Made in England" runs parallel with the
image of the Englishman. There is a general picture
of the serious, solid, correct and reticent English-
man as the producer of goods which themselves are
purposeful, well made and modest in their appearance.
(1960, p. 5)

Nagashima (1970) in his study has emphasized the importance

of representative products in the formation of a "Made in"

image.

The "Made in" image is naturally affected by the
familiarity and availability of the country's product,
and the stereotype of that country. Some representa-
tive products of the country influence the total prod-
uct imaqe. SL h products as Coca-Cola, Chevrolet,
Ford, IBM and Sunkist are forming the Japanese image
of "Made in U.S.A." On the other hand, such promi-
nent Japanese products as Sony, Nikon, Toyota and
Honda are the driving force in changing the image of
"Made in Japan" in the U.S. Market. (Nagashima, 1970)










Political and economic background, history and tradi-

tions also seem to affect strongly the "Made in" image.

For example, Yankelovich in his study (Printer's Ink, 1959)

has pointed out that products made in Communist countries

were not well received by Americans. Market Facts, Roc

International, study pointed out in 1960 that German prod-

ucts were evaluated according to values based on the

history of Germany, which gave them a Made in Krupp image

(Market Facts, Roc International, 1960, p. 10). The tra-

ditions of a country also seem to affect the "Made in"

image: "The aesthetic shortcomings of English products are

linked with the picture of Englishman hide-bound by tradi-

tion" (Market Facts, Roc International, 1960, p. 6). An-

other factor which may have some effect on "Made in" image

is the attitude toward people of a country. Schooler (1965)

in his study of the Central American Common Market found

that the attitude of consumers toward people of another

country affects the preconceptions concerning the latter

country's product. Formation of "Made in" images and fac-

tors affecting them are yet to be explored in depth. How-

ever, the state of existing knowledge concerning "Made in"

images seems to indicate the possibility of forming some

generalizations and testing them statistically.

"Made in" images of products from different countries

differ. Market Facts, Roc International (1960), in a study

based on depth interviews, indicated that "Made in" images









of products from the U.S., France, England, Germany,

Holland, Italy, and Sweden are different. Young and Rubicam

(Advertising Age, 1960) reported similar results based on

interviews. Nagashima (1970) also found that "Made in"

images of products from different countries differ. This

finding was based on an inspection of profiles rather than

any statistical analysis.

People from different countries may have "Made in"

images which are different. "Made in" image is affected

by many factors, as previously seen, including national

characteristics, representative products, political and

economic background, history and traditions (Nagashima,

1970). The impact of these factors on people from different

cultural, social, political, and economic environments may

differ, resulting in the formation of "Made in" images which

are dissimilar in many respects. For example, Made in U.S.A.

may be evaluated in significantly different ways by English-

men and Russians. Also, Made in Japan may be evaluated in

different ways by Americans and Ugandans.

Among people of the same nationality, demographic

variables seem to affect the nature of "Made in" images.

Schooler (1971) reported that attitudes toward products

from different countries are affected by demographic vari-

ables like age, sex, race, education, etc. The study was

conducted among Americans drawn from 83 Missouri counties

and St. Louis (Schooler, 1971). Young and Rubicam










(Advertising Age, 1960) in their study of Americans found

that "the younger people, the better educated people, upper

income people, and coastal dwellers" accept foreign products

more readily than others. Nagashima (1970) found that the

"young post-war Japanese generation has a stronger pref-

erence for U.S. products." Thus, it seems that demo-

graphic variables may serve as predictor variables for

differences in "Made in" images among persons from the same

country.


Nature and Scope of This Study

This study was conducted at the University of Florida

among persons from less-developed countries and Americans,

and uses a comparative framework. The primary objective

of this study, as indicated previously, is to explore the

nature of "Made in" images prevalent among persons from

less-developed countries. A comparative framework was used

so that "Made in" images prevalent among persons from

separate less-developed countries can be compared. Also,

the comparative framework enables the comparison of "Made

in" images existing among Americans with those existing

among persons from less-developed countries. A comparative

approach such as this may point out similarities and dif-

ferences in "Made in" images among people from different

countries. The primary objective of this study also










includes as a corollary, an investigation of the effect of

demographic variables on the "Made in" images among con-

sumers from less-developed countries.

A secondary objective of this study is to examine the

"Made in" images among Americans, with the intention of

isolating any differences in "Made in" images between

American and Japanese products.

The following questions are explored in this study:

I. Less-Developed Countries

What are the "Made in" images prevalent among

persons from less-developed countries? Are there

any differences between the "Made in" image of

domestic products and the "Made in" image of

products from an advanced nation? If there are

differences, what are they?

II. Comparison Between Less-Developed Countries

Are there any differences between the "Made in"

images prevalent among persons from two separate

less-developed countries? If there are dif-

ferences, what are they?

III. Comparison Between a Less-Developed Country and
an Advanced Nation

Are there any differences between the "Made in"

images prevalent among persons from a less-

developed country and those that are prevalent

among persons from an advanced nation? If there

are differences, what are they?









IV. Less-Developed Country (Effect of Demographic
Variables

Are there any differences in "Made in" images

prevalent among persons from less-developed coun-

tries based on demographic variables?

V. The United States (Advanced Nation)

What are the "Made in" images prevalent among

Americans? Are there any differences between the

"Made in" images of domestic products and the

"Made in" images of Japanese products? If there

are differences, what are they?


Research Hypotheses in the Null Form

I. Among persons from a less-developed country, there are

no significant differences between the "Made in"

image of domestic products and the "Made in" image

of products from an advanced nation.

II. There are no significant differences between the

"Made in" images prevalent among persons from sepa-

rate less-developed countries.

III. There are no significant differences between the "Made

in" images prevalent among persons from a less-

developed country and those that are prevalent among

persons from an advanced nation.

IV. There are no significant differences in the "Made in"

images prevalent among persons from a less-developed

country based on demographic variables.










V. Among Americans, there are no significant differences

between the "Made in" image of American products and

the "Made in" image of Japanese products.


Evaluation of Product Classes and Products

While only hypotheses concerning "Made in" images have

been set up in the previous section, as a secondary area

of research it is necessary to investigate certain related

phenomena. First, it is proposed to examine whether there

is any bias among persons from less-developed countries

against product classes and products of domestic origin.

Secondly, it is proposed to see whether American consumers

show any bias against product classes and products from

Japan.

As indicated in Market Facts, Roc International, study

(1960), "The 'Made in' image colors people's views of many

products." This may result in significantly different

evaluations of product classes and products from different

countries. For example, Market Facts, Roc International,

study reported that there is a belief among Europeans and

Americans that French products lack technical finish and

durability. As a result they have less confidence in French

technical products, with the sole exception of automobiles.

Similarly, the lack of industrial image of Holland "virtually

stifles any thoughts of Holland as being able to produce in-

dustrial goods." Reierson (1966b) in his study of American









attitudes toward products from different countries found

that statistically significant differences exist in the

evaluation of specific products, product classes, and

products in general. Gaedeke (1973) also reported similar

results in his survey of American attitudes toward products

from the U.S. and developing countries like Taiwan, Korea,

etc. Prior research has also indicated that products from

Japan are evaluated by Americans as inferior in quality to

American products. But it seems possible that the evolu-

tion of Japan as an industrial power with an array of high

quality products like Sony, Nikon, and Toyota has now

created a favorable American attitude toward Japanese

products.

In the case of persons from less-developed countries,

similar differences in evaluation of product classes and

products from different countries may also exist. The lack

of "industrial image" of their native countries, combined

with the lack of confidence in the technical skill of the

domestic producers, may cause the natives of many of these

less-developed countries to give a lower rating to their

domestic product classes and products when compared with

product classes and products from advanced nations. Several

instances of bias against domestic products have been noted

by marketing scholars (Stanton, 1967; Dinerman, 1963). In

India the consumers have no trust even in the domestic food

products because the adulteration of food products is very









common. Sugar and flour, for example, may often be adul-

terated with chalk dust (Westfall and Boyd, 1960).

It is the intention of this study to examine the atti-

tudes of persons from less-developed countries and Americans

toward product classes and products from different nations.

Specifically, the aim of this research is to answer the

following questions concerning persons from less-developed

countries and Americans.


Persons From Less-Develoned Countries

a) How do they evaluate product classes of domestic

and foreign origin? Are there any differences

between the evaluation of domestic product classes

and product classes from an advanced nation?

b) How do they evaluate specific products of domestic

and foreign origin? Are there any differences be-

tween the evaluation of domestic products and

products from an advanced nation?


Americans

a) How do they evaluate domestic product classes and

product classes from foreign countries? Are there

any differences between the evaluation of domestic

product classes and product classes from Japan?

b) How do they evaluate specific products from the

U.S. and foreign countries? Are there any dif-

ferences between the evaluation of American and

Japanese products?









No specific hypotheses are set up since there are a

large number of them. Instead, all the results of hypotheses

tests are to be tabulated and summarized. Salient aspects

of these tabulated results are discussed in Chapter IV and

V.


Choice of Products

Another area of investigation proposed in this project

concerns the choice behavior of persons from less-developed

countries and Americans when faced with a choice between

domestic products and products from other countries.

In the case of persons from less-developed countries,

the unfavorable image of domestic products may result in a

preference for products from advanced nations over their

own domestic products. This pattern of choice behavior, if

it exists, may have serious implications for developmental

programs of many of these less-developed countries. Also,

as Kindleberger (1962) indicated, exports need a broad

domestic base and, unless a given industry can achieve

sufficient size and economies of scale, development of an

export market may be difficult. Hence, it is relevant to

explore whether persons from less-developed countries have

any preferences when they choose from domestic and foreign

products.

Young and Rubicam (Advertising Age, 1960) concluded

that Americans in general prefer their domestic products









over products from other nations. In their study, 93 per-

cent of the American respondents chose their own domestic

products as compared to 1 percent who chose Japanese prod-

ucts. As mentioned previously, the American attitude to-

ward foreign products in general, and Japanese products in

particular, seems to be more favorable now than it was a

decade ago. An examination of the selection decision of

Americans between domestic and foreign products may be very

fruitful here.

In summary, this section of the research hopes to

answer the following questions:


Persons From Less-Developed Countries

Are there any preferences in the choice of products

when domestic products and products from advanced nations

are available?


Americans

Are there any preferences in the choice of products

when domestic products and products from other countries

are available?

As in the previous case of evaluation of product

classes and products, no specific hypotheses are set up

here. Results of hypotheses tests concerning the choice

of products are presented in Chapter IV and further

discussed in Chapter V.














CHAPTER III

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY


This chapter explains the research methodology used in

this study, the research instrument developed after a pilot

study and pretest, the selection and classification of

countries into the categories of advanced and less-developed

countries, and the field work phase of the project.


Measurement of "Made in" Image

Many different methods for the measurement of images

have been described in the marketing literature (Bolger,

1959; Crespi, 1961; Lee, 1963; Cohen, 1963; Fry and Claxton,

1971). The methods vary in nature from the trait card

method suggested by Bolger (1959) to nonmetric multidimen-

sional scaling proposed by Fry and Claxton (1971). How-

ever, for this study the most applicable scale appears to

be the "semantic differential method." As Gatty and Allais

noted,

It is one of the few means of standardizing and
quantifying the description of an image and possi-
bilities of application include the image comparison
of company names, brand names, trademarks, product
and package designs and advertisements. (Gatty and
Allais, n.d., p. 42)


A complete discussion of the method is given in the
Measurement of Meaning by C. E. Osgood, C. J. Suci and P. H.
Tannenbaum (Urbana, University of Illinois Press, 1957).









Moreover, the semantic differential as a research instru-

ment is reliable and has high validity and objectivity

(Osgood, Suci, and Tannenbaum, 1957, p. 172-74). Clevenger

et al. (1965), in a study of corporate images, found that

semantic differential scales are robust and that "the

measuring ability of the instrument is not necessarily sub-

verted by the characteristics of the respondents to whom it

is administered, or the specific concepts measured."

Nagashima (1970) in his "Made in" image study used a
2
modified form of the semantic differential. Schooler

(1965, 1971) used evaluative semantic differential scales

to explore the impact of product origin. The intention of

this study is to use the modified form of semantic dif-

ferential method to explore the nature of "Made in" images.

The advantages of using this method in the investigation of

images are numerous, as Mindak (1961) noted. According to

him, it is a quick, efficient means of obtaining the

direction and intensity of opinions and attitudes toward a

concept. In addition, the modified form of semantic dif-

ferential method provides a comprehensive picture of the

"image" or meaning of a product, while getting at the

multitude of factors which go to make up a brand or product

image. Mindak (1961) indicated that this method is easily


2
A complete discussion of the modified form of the
semantic differential can be found in "Fitting the Semantic
Differential to the Marketing Problem" by William A. Mindak,
Journal of Marketing, April, 1961.









repeatable, quite reliable, avoids stereotyped responses

and allows for individual frames of reference. He also felt

that the semantic differential method eliminates problems

of question phrasing and facilitates interviewing of in-

articulate respondents.

Mindak also suggested that the profile of the mean

ratings of respondents over relevant dimensions, using a

semantic differential method, gives a complete picture of

the image of the concept. Myers also adopted a view

similar to Mindak's (1961).

An image score can be derived by simply altering the
sequence in which summations are made. Thus, if we
first sum across individuals for each attribute and
take the mean, the mean represents the average posi-
tion of all respondents on that brand attribute. A
profile of these means is most often used as a
measure of the image of the brand to the population--
its public image! (Myers, 1968, p. 127-128)

Sheth (1973) suggested that "the most effective measure

of attitude can be obtained from measures of a consumer's

evaluative beliefs about a brand." According to him, the

evaluative beliefs should be retained separately and dis-

tinctly as profile measures rather than aggregated into a

single score. Nagashima (1970) in his analysis did not ex-

plicitly define the "Made in" image as a profile even though


3As Gatty and Allais have pointed out, "the word con-
cept is used in a broad sense. It can be any concrete
object or a symbol representing it, like word or picture.
It can be an idea or abstraction" (Gatty and Allais, n.d.,
p. 4).









A
he uses the profiles of different concepts' for comparison

purpose. In this study "Made in" image is viewed as a

profile of the mean ratings of respondents over the relevant

dimensions applicable to the evaluation of "Made in" con-

cepts. These relevant dimensions applicable to "Made in"

images were selected on the basis of a pilot study conducted

among Americans and foreign students at the University of

Florida and were then used in the pretest. The final form

of the research instrument for exploring the "Made in"

images was developed after further analysis of pretest data.


Pilot Study

A pilot study was conducted during the period June-

July, 1973. The study consisted of personal interviews of

foreign and American students. After being interviewed,

the students were also requested to note down the criteria

they used in choosing (1) products in general, (2) mechani-

cal products, (3) electronic products, (4) food products,

(5) fashion products, (6) cosmetic products, (7) television

sets, (8) automobiles, (9) orange juice, (10) men's suits

or ladies' dresses, and (11) perfumes or after-shave

lotions. The sample of twenty students was drawn from


The concepts are Made in U.S.A., Made in England,
Made in Japan, etc.

"Made in" concepts are Made in U.S.A., Made in
England, Made in Germany, etc.









eleven different countries and consisted of six Americans,

three Indians, two Brazilians, two students from Thailand,

and one each from Argentina, Pakistan, Hong Kong, Taiwan,

Japan, Colombia, and Uganda. From this study the important

dimensions of a "Made in" image were obtained. (The seman-

tic differential scales developed from the pilot study

applicable to a "Made in" image are presented in Appendix

B.) Also, the researcher was able to select the important

criteria for various product classes and specific products.

In addition, another aim of the pilot study was to in-

vestigate the familiarity of respondents with different

"Made in" products. In general, the respondents from less-

developed countries were found to be familiar with products

from the United States, Germany, Japan, and England in

addition to their domestic products. This investigation

of familiarity was deemed to be important so as to avoid

ambiguous responses concerning the products from different

countries. As Carlson (1963) pointed out, image research

generally lacks preliminary investigations of a classi-

factory nature, thus affecting the quality of its results.

A persistent shortcoming of much of the research done
on corporate images is the failure to use a sufficient
number of preliminary, certifying questions which
establish in fact the respondent has any significant
knowledge or feeling about the company, industry, or
issue under study. Especially lamented is the prac-
tice of lumping together "don't know" and "no
answer" for analytical purposes in such surveys.
(Carlson, 1963)










Only those "Made in" concepts which seemed familiar to

respondents from all countries were selected to be used in

the pretest stage and in the final form of the research

instrument. For instance, Made in France was not included,

since many of the respondents were extremely unfamiliar

with products from France. Four "Made in" concepts selected

for the pretest after the pilot study are: Made in U.S.A.,

Made in England, Made in Germany, and Made in Japan.


General Description of the Research Instrument

The research instrument consists of a questionnaire

divided into four sections. Complete instructions on how

to complete each section are provided. An introduction

explains the purpose of the study and requests the coopera-

tion of the respondent. The first section uses the semantic

differential method to explore the "Made in" images. The

second section is concerned with the evaluation of various

product classes and products. In the third section, re-

spondents are asked to choose between products from dif-

ferent countries. The fourth section is designed so as to ob-

tain demographic data from the respondents.









Pretest Form of the Research Instrument


Made in U.S.A., Made in England, Made in Germany, and

Made in Japan are the concepts selected to be included in

the pretest. As seen in the pilot study, all respondents

were familiar with these four concepts.


Section I: "Made in" Image

The first section of the research instrument is in

the semantic differential form. The scales developed from

the pilot study are used in this section to measure the

"Made in" images. The four concepts are presented together

on each dimension as shown below:

Reasonable Unreasonable
Price Price

Made in U.S.A.

Made in Japan

Made in England

Made in Germany :___ ___

By such a presentation the respondents can evaluate

all the four concepts along the same scale at the same time.

This circumstance offers an opportunity for comparison and

discrimination between concepts. Nagashima (1970) used

this technique and presented all concepts together on the

same scale so as to obtain discrimination between concepts.


6See Appendix B for the pretest form of the research
instrument.









Wells and Smith (1960) had also suggested that this type of

approach is useful when discrimination between concepts is

important. A regular seven-step continium is used, as in

other image studies (Gatty and Allais, n.d.; Mindak, 1961;

Tucker, 1961; Nagashima, 1970). Order of the concepts

along each scale as well as the bipolar terms are rotated

so as to avoid any type of bias.


Section II: Evaluation of Product Classes
and Products

The second section of the research instrument is

designed to obtain the evaluation of various product classes

and products. Product classes chosen after the pilot study

are (1) mechanical products, (2) electronic products, (3)

food products, and (4) fashion products. Specific products

chosen for evaluation on the basis of the pilot study are

(1) automobiles, (2) television sets, (3) soft drinks, and

(4) dress shirts. The respondents are asked to evaluate

the product classes and the products on a superior-

inferior scale as shown below:

Superior Inferior

Made in U.S.A. :___: :_

Made in England :__

Made in Japan

Made in Germany :









The four concepts Made in England, Made in Japan, Made

in U.S.A., and Made in Germany are presented together so as

to offer an opportunity for comparison and discrimination.

The ordering of the concepts, as well as the favorable and

unfavorable terms of the scale, are rotated as in the pre-

vious section to avoid any bias. A seven-step continium is

used here as in the previous case.


Section III: Choice of Products

In the third section of the research instrument the

respondents are asked to choose between products from dif-

ferent countries, assuming that price and other quality

criteria are equal. The products offered for selection are

automobiles, television sets, soft drinks, and dress

shirts. In each instance the respondents are asked to

choose among products from the United States, England,

Japan and Germany. An example will illustrate the approach

used in this section.

Indicate your choice of an automobile produced in the
following countries based on the assumption that they
are equal in terms of price, quality, reliability,
etc.

a. Made in Japan
b. Made in U.S.A.
c. Made in Germany
d. Made in England

The order of the "Made in" concepts are rotated to avoid

any bias.









Section IV: Demographic Data Sheet

This fourth and final section of the research instru-

ment is designed to gather demographic data from the re-

spondents. Nationality, age, sex, marital status, and

education are of primary importance. Two other variables

are felt to be crucial to this study. First, travel ex-

perience in various countries is likely to have some in-

fluence on the nature of "Made in" images. For one reason,

travel in different countries may offer a person an oppor-

tunity to sample representative products of these countries.

This possibility in turn may mold, or change, the "Made in"

images of products from these countries. Travel experience

especially becomes important in the case of persons from

countries where there are strict import restrictions, for

these persons might not have had an opportunity to become

familiar with products from different nations.

Secondly, "the length of time a respondent has lived

in U.S.A." is included due to the unique nature of this

study. As seen before, the primary objective of this

study is to explore the nature of "Made in" images preva-

lent among persons from less-developed countries. The re-

spondents are natives of less-developed countries residing

in the United States. Some of these respondents may have

been in this country for many years, whereas the others

have been here for a much shorter period. Hair (1971, p.









72) found that one of the factors that affect the extent of

acculturation of foreign students in the United States is

the "length of time in U.S." Also, since consumer behavior

is clearly related to the acculturation process (Hair, 1971,

p. 71) this factor may account for some differences in

"Made in" images.

This section of the questionnaire is also prepared with

great care so that the respondents from different countries

can understand and answer these questions easily and with-

out any ambiguity.


Pretest

The research instrument in the pretest form was ad-

ministered to twenty-five foreign and native students at

the University of Florida. The sample consisted of sixteen

Americans, two Indians, two persons from Thailand, and one

person each from Pakistan, Taiwan, Colombia, France, and

Brazil. In most cases the respondents were contacted

individually at their homes. The research instrument was

left with them after necessary instructions. This was done

so as to give the respondents sufficient time to complete

the questionnaire. The completed questionnaire was col-

lected by the researcher after a few days. The respondents

in general found no major difficulty with either the format

or the content of the questionnaire. The only difficulty

in the format was the way in which the bipolar terms









"superior/inferior" were rotated in Section II. Foreign

students, in particular, were slightly confused by this

rotation of the favorable and unfavorable terms. While

the students were able to complete this section correctly,

they expressed some irritation with the way in which the

terms were rotated. Hence, some alterations were made in

this section in the final form of the research instrument.

Pretest data was analyzed7 to see whether the respon-

dents were able to discriminate between the concepts on

different scales. In Section I, concerning "Made in"
8
images, tests were significant in all but one case. There

was no discrimination between the concepts on the scale:

"reasonable service charges/unreasonable service charges."

In spite of this, the scale is also included in the final

form of the research instrument. This is done since it is

felt that this dimension may be relevant in comparing

products from less-developed countries and those from

advanced nations. Many of the less-developed countries

have an abundance of cheap labor; hence, service charges

in these countries may not be received as high or unrea-

sonable by respondents. As a result, some significant dif-

ferences along this dimension can be expected when com-

paring "Made in" images of products from advanced nations

with those of products from less-developed countries.


Results of the pretest are in Appendix D.

See Appendix D for results of the tests.









Results of the tests for product classes and products
9
are also summarized. These tests show that the respon-

dents discriminate between product classes and products

from the test countries. The only notable exception occurs

in the product area of automobiles. There are no signifi-

cant differences in the evaluation of automobiles from the

four test countries. This is no surprise, since in the

pretest, products from only advanced nations, namely the

United States, England, Germany, and Japan, are included.

In the final investigation products from less-developed

countries are also to be included in this section, and

there could be very significant differences in the evalua-

tion of all product classes and products. As such, auto-

mobiles are also included in the final form of the re-

search instrument.

Chi-square analysis of the pretest data from the third

section shows that the respondents have preferences in

their choice of products from different countries.1 Null

hypothesis of "no preference" was rejected in the case of

automobiles, television sets, soft drinks, and dress shirts.

Respondents of the pretest did not find any difficulty with

the fourth section of the research instrument, the demo-

graphic data sheet.


See Appendix D for results of the tests.

10See Appendix D for the results. See Introduction to
Probability and Statistics, William Mendenhall, 1967, pp.
249-262 for an explanation of Chi-square analysis.










In conclusion, pretest and analysis of the data show

that the research instrument is suitable for the purpose

of this study.


Selection and Classification of
Countries for Final Investigation

The major concern of this study, as pointed out in the

previous chapter, is to explore the impact of product origin

on persons from less-developed countries. For this purpose,

after the exploratory research, two less-developed countries

have been chosen to serve as a focal point.

Since the study was to be conducted in the university

community, at Gainesville, one of the criterion of selection

was the composition of foreign population in Gainesville.

A preliminary examination of the records at the International

Center indicated that India and Taiwan are the two countries

which have the largest representation on the campus, and can

be designated as less-developed countries by the standard

used in this study. Per capital income for India is $88 and

for Taiwan it is $364.11 These figures fall well below the

$500 mark which is set as the standard in this study. A

further examination of economic indicators and other rele-
12
vant factors tend to confirm this classification.


11
See Appendix C for economic data.
12
See Appendix C for economic data.










Some of the socio-economic conditions which are characteris-

tic of a less-developed country are: low aggregate and

per capital income, low levels of literacy, rapid population

growth, very low consumption expenditures, unsatisfactory

housing conditions and medical facilities, and poor health

standards. India is typical of many of these less-developed

countries. Weinraub (1973) pointed out the hard conditions

in India.

The nation's economic growth rate is near zero.
Wholesale prices have climbed more than 20 per
cent in the past year, and production declined in
the first quarter of 1973. The population is in-
creasing on an average of 13 million people a year.
In the 1961-71 decade, the percentage increase in
the population was 24.6, and by the end of the cen-
tury there will probably be one billion Indians.
Despite huge investments in agriculture, food pro-
duction has not increased as much as was hoped, and
still depends heavily on the vagaries of the monsoons.
Nearly 40 per cent of the population, 220 million
people, live below the poverty level, earning less
than $40 a year.

In this project, major hypotheses concerning less-developed

countries are tested in terms of responses from Indians.

Research instrument in the final form was administered to

Indians in the university community at Gainesville.

Since the study uses a comparative framework, Taiwan

is chosen as the other less-developed country. Even though

it falls within the classification of less-developed coun-

tries, it differs vastly from India in terms of economic,

political, cultural, and social environment. Even in terms

of per capital income alone, the vast difference between









India and Taiwan is significant. While both fall into the

less-developed category, they seem to be at different stages

of economic development.13

Finally on examining the economic data, we find that

the United States, Germany, England, and Japan fall into

the category of advanced nations. In terms of per capital

income the U.S.A. is at the top with $4,274 followed by

Germany--$2,698, U.K.--$1,993, and Japan--$1,658. These

are much above $500 level set as a standard for this study,

thus, these countries fall into the category of advanced

nations. "Made in" images prevalent among Americans (per-

sons from an advanced nation) are also explored in this

study. These "Made in" images existing among Americans are

compared with those that exist among persons from less-

developed countries, specifically India, the test country.

Even though this study uses only per capital income as

a measure of economic development, classification arrived

at in this study bears comparison to results of other

studies. Based on Berry's "Patterns of Economic Develop-

ment" (1961), Sherbini (1967a) classified countries into

five different developmental levels. The United Kingdom,

West Germany, the United States, and Japan are classified

as "most highly developed," whereas India, the test country


13
See economic data in Appendix C for comparison, and
items cited below.









in this study, is listed among "semi-developed countries."

Taiwan is not included in the above study by Sherbini. In

another study Sherbini (1967b) uses a regional typological

approach. That is, regional typologies are prepared using

socio-economic and geo-political factors relevant to

marketing. Results of this study show that India and Taiwan

fall into different clusters when only Far Eastern countries

are considered. This alignment agrees with the contention

of this study that India and Taiwan are different in terms

of environmental factors even though they both are classi-

fied as less-developed countries for purposes of explora-

tion and analysis.

14
Final Form of the Research Instrument4

The final form of the research instrument is identical

to the pretest form except for some minor differences.

Separate questionnaires were prepared for administering to

respondents from India, Taiwan, and the United States.

Indians were asked to evaluate Made in India, Made in U.S.A.,

Made in Germany, and Made in England. Chinese were asked to

evaluate Made in Taiwan, Made in U.S.A., Made in England,

and Made in Germany. Americans, in turn, evaluated Made in

U.S.A., Made in England, Made in Germany, and Made in Japan.


14See Appendix A for the final form of the research in-
strument. Separate questionnaires used for Indians,
Chinese, and Americans are presented.










In summary, Indians and Chinese were asked to evaluate

their domestic products and products from advanced nations.

Americans were asked to evaluate their domestic products,

products from Japan, and products from other advanced

nations.


Section I: "Made in" Image


In this section semantic differential scales as used

in the pretest are presented. The general form of this

section as presented to Indians, Chinese, and Americans is

given below.


Indians


Good


Made

Made

Made

Made


Bad


in India

in U.S.A.

in England

in Germany


Chinese


Good Bad

*
*


*

*


in Taiwan

in U.S.A.

in England

in Germany


Made

Made

HMade

Made










Americans


Made in U.S.A.

Made in England

Made in Japan

Made in Germany


Section II: Evaluation of Product Classes
and Products


As in the pretest form of the research instrument the

respondents were asked to evaluate various product classes

and products on a superior-inferior scale. Product classes

and products used are the same as in the pretest. Bipolar

terms are not rotated in this section. This arrangement

has been used because the respondents expressed irritation

over the rotation of these terms in the pretest question-

naire. An example of the approach used in this section of

the questionnaire for respondents of different nationalities

is shown below.


Indians


Superior Inferior





*


Made in U.S.A.

Made in England

Made in India

Made in Germany


Good


Bad













Super


ior


Inferior


U.S.A.

England

Taiwan

Germany


Americans


Superior Inferior







: "


U.S.A.

England

Japan

Germany


Section III: Choice of Products


In this section, respondents are asked to choose be-

tween products from different countries. As in the pretest,

products used are automobiles, television sets, soft drinks,

and dress shirts. Indians are asked to choose between

products from India, England, Germany, and the United

States. Americans have to choose between products from

the United States, Japan, England, and Germany.


Section IV: Demoqraohic Dita Sheet


Some minor changes were made in the format of the demo-

graphic data sheet based on the reaction obtained from the


Chinese


Made

Made

Made

Made


Made

Made

Made

Made









pretest. But for these changes, the demographic data sheet

as used in the pretest was found to be suitable for the

purposes of this study.


Final Comments on the Research Instrument

Care was taken to see that the physical layout and

reproduction of the questionnaire were conducive to securing

cooperation from the respondents. Separate instructions are

provided for each section. These instructions are elaborate

and they include an example on how to answer the questions

in each section. A brief introduction explaining the pur-

pose of the study is also provided.


The Respondents

The respondents included in the final investigation

were 120 persons selected from the university community.

The number of Americans was forty. There were also forty

persons each from India and China. Each of these nationality

groups was administered the research instrument in the final

form developed especially for that group. In each case the

sample consisted of students, staff, faculty members, and

also their families. In the case of Indians and Chinese,

an effort was extended to include as many "new arrivals"

as possible. Since data was collected during the fall

quarter of 1973, many of the respondents were persons who

had arrived in the U.S.A. a few weeks before. This fact is









important since one of the demographic variables which may

have strong influence on attitudes toward foreign and

domestic products is the time of stay in the United States.


Fieldwork

The interviewing team consisted of two persons: the

researcher himself and a Chinese student at the University

of Florida. This student was given intensive training con-

cerning data-gathering procedures before his services were

utilized. The data from Indians and Americans was col-

lected by the researcher himself. The Chinese student was

extremely helpful in assisting the researcher to collect

the data from Chinese students, faculty, staff, and their

families.

A standard procedure was adopted for the interviews.

The respondents were first contacted at their homes for an

appointment. The questionnaire was administered to them

at an appointed time. The format and content of the

questionnaire were explained to them carefully. The re-

spondents were then requested to spend some time for filling

it out as accurately and completely as possible. The

questionnaire was then left with the respondents to fill

out at their convenience. The interviewer went back and

picked up the completed questionnaire at an appointed time.

In general, the respondents were very cooperative and com-

pleted the research instrument accurately. In the case of




57




Americans, the questionnaire was completed at the first

appointment itself and, hence, the interviewer did not have

to go back and collect it on another day. Altogether about

fifteen questionnaires had to be eliminated since they were

improperly filled. The data was gathered between September

15 and December 1, 1973.














CHAPTER IV

RESULTS


This chapter details the analysis and interpretation of

the data gathered during the investigation. Results of the

statistical tests of hypotheses concerning "Made in" images,

product classes, products, and the choice process of respon-

dents are presented and explained here.

The "Made in" images prevalent among Indians, Chinese,

and Americans were developed from the questionnaire responses.

The first section of the research instrument was directed

toward exploring the nature of "Made in" images. Indians

were asked to evaluate Made in India, Made in England,

Made in U.S.A, and Made in Germany. Chinese respondents

evaluated Made in Taiwan, Made in U.S.A., Made in England,

and Made in Germany. The concepts for the Americans were

Made in U.S.A., Made in England, Made In Germany, and Made

in Japan.

For each group, the average rating of the group of re-

spondents on each scale for each concept was calculated.

For example, Indians evaluated Made in India on all the

fifteen semantic differential scales selected for this study.

For each scale, a mean rating for Indians as a group was

obtained by summing up the individual ratings and then divid-

ing by the total number of respondents. These average








positions of Indians, Chinese, and Americans on different

scales and concepts are presented in Tables E-1, E-2, and

E-3 (Appendix E).

Further, by linking these average positions on the

semantic scales for a specific "Made in" concept, a profile

of the mean scores by a group of respondents for that con-

cept can be generated. Such profiles for Indians, Chinese,

and Americans are shown in Figures 1, 2, and 3 respectively.

As explained in the previous chapter, these profiles, in

fact, are the "Made in" images existing among the three

groups of respondents. The primary focus of this study is

the "Made in" images among persons from less-developed

countries. As indicated before, India was selected as the

test country and major hypotheses concerning less-developed

countries were tested for Indians. Taiwan was selected as

the other less-developed country for purposes of comparison.

The United States was chosen as the advanced nation, and

"Made in" images prevalent among Americans were also compared

with those of Indians, the test country group.

Before entering into the actual test of the hypotheses,

an important point is to be noted. The scores recorded for

each of the fifteen sclaes used for exploring the "Made in"

images are correlatedI with each other,2 and this fact needs


For a clear and concise explanation of simple corre-
lation and multiple correlation, see Statistical Analysis
For Business Decisions, William A. Spur and Charles P.
Bonini, 1967, p. 541-630.

See Appendix D for correlation matrix developed from






Unr. Pr.



P. Wkmns.


P. Matr.


N. Dur.


Unfam. Br.


Rec. Few


Unr. Serv.-


Unreliable -


Diff. Serv.


Tech. Infr.


Unattr. App. L


Old-Fash. Des.


Unec. Use


Massive


- Reas. Pr.


- G. Wkmns.


G. Matr.


V. Dur.


Fam. Br.


SRec. Many


-Reas. Serv.


Reliable


-Easy Serv.


- Tech. Supr.


- Attr. App.


- Mod. Des.


- Econ. Use


- Compact


Common -S" Exclusive

-- Made n India
--- iMcde in U.S.A.

M de in Germany
c Made in Eng cnd


Figure 1. Profiles of Domestic and Foreign Products, Indians






Unr. Pr.


P. Wkmns.


P. Matr.


N. Dur.


Unfam. Br.


Rec. Few


Unr. Serv.[


Unreliable


Diff. Serv.


Tech. Infr.


Unattr. App.

Old-Fash.
Des.


Unec. Use r


Massive -


Common


Reas. Pr.
i'

- G. Wk:mns.


G. Matr.


V. Dur.


Fam. Br.


I Rec. Many


I Reas. Serv.


SReliable


_ Easy Serv.


- Tech. Supr.


- Attr. App.


Mod. Des.


-Econ. Use


SCompact


Exclusive


--- Made In Taiwan

A- Made In U.S.A.
.- Made in Germany
..... Made in Englacnd



Figure 2. Profiles of Domestic and Foreign Products,
Chinese








Unr. Pr.j


P. Wkmns. -


P. Matr.


N. Dur.


Unfam. Br.


Rec. Few-


Unr. Serv-


Unreliable I


Diff. Serv.,


Tech. Infr.


Unattr. App.


Old-Fash.
Des.

Unec. Use


Massive


Common -


Reas. Pr.


G. Wkrnns.


G. Matr.


V. Dur.


Fam. Br.


Rec. Many


Reas. Serv.


Reliable


Easy Serv.


Tech. Supr.


Attr. App.


Mod. Des.


Econ. Use


Compact


Exclusive


--, M=de In U.S.A.

I- 3Made in Jacan
Icde in Grmi'iny
..... Made in Engla7nd


Figure 3. Profiles of Domestic and Foreign Products, Americans









to be considered while the data is analyzed. This depen-

dence structure of the elements of the profile necessitates

the use of a multivariate statistical model (Morrison, 1967,

p. 76) for testing the hypotheses concerning the "Made in"
3
images.


Tests of Hypotheses Concerning "Made In" Images

Hypothesis I

Among persons from a less-developed country, there are

no significant differences between the "Made in" image of

domestic products and the "Made in" image of products from

an advanced nation.

The "Made in" images prevalent among Indians, the test

country group, is the focus of interest here. The null

hypothesis states that there are no significant differences

between the "Made in" image of the domestic products and

that of products from an advanced nation. The domestic

"Made in" image for Indians is the profile of Made in India

generated from the mean scores on the semantic differential

sclaes. The image of Made in U.S.A. is set as the standard

for "Made in" image of products from an advanced nation.


the pre-test data using the Biomedical Computer Program
BMDO2D, Dixon, 1971, p. 49-59.

3For an excellent nontechnical discussion of multivari-
ate techniques commonly used in marketing studies, see "Multi-
variate Analysis in Marketing," Jagdish N. Sheth, Journal
of Advertising Research, February, 1970, p. 29-39. See also
"The Multivariate Revolution in Marketing Research," Jagdish
N. Sheth, Journal of Marketing, January, 1971, p. 13-19. See
also Multivariate Analysis in Marketing: Theory and Applica-
tions, David A. AaKer, 1971.










Considering the fact that all the respondents in this project

are familiar with and have some experience of products from

the United States, this is an acceptable criterion. Thus

the test of this null hypothesis is concerned with the pro-

files--Made in U.S.A. and Made in India--shown in Figure 1.

The null hypothesis expects no differences between these two

profiles. As one knows from the analysis of pretest data,

the elements of each of these profiles have a dependence

structure. Hence a multivariate test of means, which takes

into account this nature of dependence between the elements

of the same profile is the method chosen to test this hy-
4
pothesis. Biomedical Computer Program BMDX63 (Dixon, 1970,

p. 23-33) is used for this purpose.5 Results obtained from

the computer run are presented in Table 1. The null hypothe-

sis of "no significant differences" between "Made in" images

is rejected. Since the multivariate test for differences be-

tween the profiles proved to be significant, the next step

was to examine the individual dimensions along which the


4
This statistical method uses a test statistic known
as Hotelling T2. This is a multivariate generalization of
univariate t2. For detailed explanation, proofs, and also
for the relationship between T2 and F statistic, refer to
Multivariate Statistical Method, Donald F. Morrison, McGraw-
Hill Inc., New York, 1967, p. 117-141.

5Using a multivariate general linear model, Y = XB + E,
this program tests hypothesis of the form ABC = D where B
is a matrix of regression coefficient. Matrices A, C, and
D are to be specified by the user. For an explanation on how
to use this program and computational procedure, see BMD
Biomedical Computer Programs, X Series Supplement, W. J.
Dixon, 1970, p. 23-33.










Table 1

Multivariate Test of Means for Differences in
"Made in" Images--Hypothesis I (Indians)


Profiles tested F value DF Significancea

Made in India

vs. 24.807 15/25 yes

Made in U.S.A.


Note: Null Hypothesis I rejected.
significant at a = .05 level.


profiles differ. For this purpose, paired t tests were

carried out and the results are shown in Table 2. The table

indicates that there are significant differences between the

mean scores of Made in India and Made in U.S.A. on twelve of

the fifteen dimensions defined by the semantic differential

scales. For ten of the twelve categories, Made in U.S.A. is

rated significantly higher than Made in India. Some of the

dimensions along which Made in U.S.A.is rated higher than

Made in India are "poor workmanship/good workmanship," "not

so durable/very durable," "unreliable/reliable," "technically

inferior/technically superior," etc. On the other hand,

as seen from the differences in mean scores, Indian respon-

dents associate Made in India with more reasonable service


6See Introduction to Probability and Statistics,William
Mendenhall, 1967, p. 189-205, for an explanation of the
Student t distribution and also for details of t tests and
paired difference tests.












I
-H (U







rd













aL r! Q m.








H 0


( ) --

a cd

H4-
(U(a


U4
-l


a4
-4
0

U)
r-



H-





rd


> D
S-H


0 (t











0
0*











Ci
*H












SH


0
4o 0


4-H



O



0_
c4 >

a)
0- t


9 5


.0 r



0 r-
0 (UI

N




ri

i0 (

( -
S-H
(


0 0 (
^: 0


0 0U0 0n u) u 0) 0 0
Q0 Q0 0 Q) (U 0) 0 0(
>1 >1 >1 >1 >1 >1 r- r- >1


V Qa 0 0J
>1 > > > >1




mo 0n co Hr-l :l

az m on Ln a-

cN in omm coo
I I I I I I







o Co a 0 Co
v i-i co an G )

1n 0n Ln za n LO 1







in 0n LDCo Ln o
r-> N cN CD r-> t
I CM O H H o 10
* * on
< m NM) ri n '


0
U,


(3
C(


0


-4
en












0 C
O
(t





(0
U

r-

C1 0



a u


-4 co
&) CO
ino


Co o







Vn Co

* c*
(N in










oo

L") L


%L Cn N Co r-

o Co (N cN co

Co n + i M
r-l +
I L





o n 1n L, co
L (N "r- CN Ln
n Qo c" co n









SCo o o
(N o Co C o r-
f 0-
r-- c-i rc- to
* *
n m *rM


Ln
c) n










Co in
,r co










L L
Clo Co



l 10








10
0 UN
n Co
*O C
ro- IN









-J,
0
*-'-I


a4


01


U




> U
-4, -


0 4-3
> 0






0

O - (U
Ur -





0->i
C q 0
0&

H -H


0 -P
(UP F2


Q)
U)


0



0



(U
0
0







r>
ed


o


0





u.
0 0

r(


0 0


0 0-
c >
0 -H
0 U)

C r
3 a


0
>
-H1
-Ii
U
c

4-)
-p

4\
0

CJ



0





-Hu
0 U


J0
-J04

0


0
0



0 0(



4
(U
C)





0 0
N E




0
0 O
r
\ O
m 0

\ 0



0H u
U M\

01 *H




rd

0 0



C 0
O -








charges as compared to Made in U.S.A. The results also

indicate that Made in India is more exclusive than Made in

U.S.A., according to the evaluation of Indians.

Hypothesis II

There are no significant differences between the "Made

in" images prevalent among persons from separate less-

developed countries.

India and Taiwan are the less-developed countries chosen

for this research. It is also noted in Chapter III that,

while both India and Taiwan are classified as less-developed

countries, the "Made in" images existing among the natives

of these nations may differ, because the countries differ

greatly in terms of economic, political, social, and cul-

tural environments. In each instance the respondents were

asked to evaluate their domestic "Made in" image as well as

the "Made in" image of the products from the United States,

Germany, and England. Four sets of profiles developed from

the evaluation of Indian and Chinese respondents are shown

in Figures F-l, F-2, F-3, and F-4 in Appendix F. Figure

F-l shows the profiles of domestic products among Indians

and Chinese. Figures F-2, F-3, and F-4 indicate the pro-

files of American, German, and English products among the

two tests groups. In each figure, profiles of the same

"Made in" concepts, as developed from the mean scores (on

the fifteen scales) of Indian and Chinese respondents, are

presented. The only exception is Figure F-l in which










profiles of Made in India and Made in Taiwan are presented,

since they represent the "Made in" images of domestic pro-

ducts among Indians and Chinese respectively. The null

hypothesis states that there should be no significant dif-

ferences between the "Made in" images prevalent among the

two groups of respondents. In other words, a statistical

test should show that there are no major differences between

the profiles for each set. The statistical method used for

this purpose is a multivariate technique known as a test of

mean vectors. For each set of profiles in Figures F-l, F-2,

F-3, and F-4 a separate test of mean vectors is carried out

to determine whether the profiles in each set are signifi-

cantly different. BMDX63 (Dixon, 1970, p. 23-33) is the

computer program that was used to carry out the four separate

tests of mean vectors. The results of the tests are pro-

vided in Table 3. It can be seen that the F values obtained

are significant in each of the four cases. As a result,

Hypothesis II in the null form is rejected.

In addition, for each set of profiles t tests were con-

ducted to find out the dimensions along which the profiles in

a set differ. Results of these tests for each set of pro-

files are shown in Tables E-4, E-5, E-6, and E-7 in Appendix E.



For an explanation of the method and statistical assump-
tions, refer to Multivariate Statistical Methods, Donald F.
Morrison, 1967, p. 125-130.

See footnote 6.










Table 3

Test of Mean Vectors for Differences in "Made in" Images
Between Indian and Chinese Respondents--Hypothesis II


Test F value DF Significancea

Domestic images 6.757 15/64 yes

Made in U.S.A. 6.315 15/64 yes

Made in Germany 3.251 15/64 yes

Made in England 4.072 15/64 yes


Note: Null Hypothesis II rejected.
Significant at a = .05 level.


Table E-4 (Appendix E) concerning domestic "Made in"

images indicates that there are significant differences in

the evaluation on ten of the fifteen dimensions. On eight

of these dimensions, Chinese respondents rated Made in

Taiwan higher than Indians' evaluation of Made in India.

Similar analysis for Made in U.S.A. is presented in

Table E-5 (Appendix E). Statistically significant differ-

ences in mean scores were found on only six of the dimensions

between the two profiles. These dimensions are price,

workmanship, materials, service charges, appearances, and

design. The Indian respondents' evaluation of Made in U.S.A.

is higher than that of the Chinese group on five of the six

above dimensions: price, workmanship, materials, appearance,

and design.










Tests for differences on individual dimensions between

profiles of Made in Germany, shown in Figure F-3 (Appendix F),

provided some interesting results. There were significant

differences between the mean scores of Indians and those of

Chinese on seven of the fifteen pairs, and in each case

Made in Germany was given a higher rating by the Indian re-

spondents than the Chinese. Table E-6 (Appendix E) contains

the complete results.

An inspection of the profiles of Made in England in

Figure F-4 (Appendix), as evolved form the evaluation of

Indian and Chinese respondents, shows that Indians have

rated Made in England higher than the Chinese on every one

of the fifteen dimensions. On ten of the above fifteen dimen-

sions, the differences are statistically significant.

Table E-7 (Appendix E) presents the results of the t tests.


Hypothesis III

There are no significant differences between the "Made in"

images prevalent among persons from a less-developed country

and those that are prevalent among persons from an advanced

nation.

In this case the "Made in" images among Indians, the

test country group, and the "Made in" images among Americans,

persons from an advanced nation, were considered. As seen

in Chapter III, Indians and Americans evaluated domestic

"Made in" concepts as well as Made in Germany and Made in











England. The three common sets of profiles developed are

shown in Figures F-5, F-6, and F-7 in Appendix F. Figure F-5

presents the profile of Made in U.S.A. obtained from the

mean scores of Americans and profile of Made in India evolved

from the rating of Indians. Profiles of Made in Germany

and Made in England for these two groups of respondents are

shown in Figures F-6 and F-7. As in the case of Hypothesis
9
II, separate tests of mean vectors were conducted to see

whether these profiles developed from the mean scores of

Indians are in any way different from the corresponding pro-

files developed from the average scores of Americans. Re-

sults of these tests are given in Table 4. It shows that

the two profiles in each set are significantly different from

one another, and this is true for all the three sets. So

Hypothesis III in the null form is rejected. That is, there

are significant differences between the "Made in" images

among persons from a less-developed country and those that

exist among persons from an advanced nation.

Further statistical tests were carried out to determine

the dimensions along which the "Made in" images among Indians

differ from the "Made in" images among Americans. Table E-8

(Appendix E) presents the results of t tests for differences

in individual dimensions between the "Made in" images of

domestic products among Indians and Americans. Americans'

evaluation of Made in U.S.A. is higher than the Indians'

rating of Made in India on nine of the fifteen dimensions as


9 Fnn-nT 7









seen from the results of t tests. On the other hand, Made in

Germany obtained higher average scores among Indians on

fourteen of the fifteen characteristics. On six of the

above fourteen dimensions, the differences are significant,

as seen from data in Table E-9 (Appendix E). A similar

pattern of evaluation is exhibited for the "Made in" image

of English products. The evaluation of Made in England by

Indians was significantly higher than that of Americans on

ten of the fifteen categories. Table E-10 in Appendix E

contains these results.


Table 4

Tests of Mean Vectors for Differences in "Made in" Images
Between Indian and American Respondents--Hypothesis III


Test F value DF Significancea

Domestic images 19.672 15/64 yes

Made in Germany 2.411 15/64 yes

Made in England 4.873 15/64 yes


Note: Null Hypothesis III rejected.
significant at a = .05 level.


Hypothesis IV

There are no significant differences in the "Made in"

images prevalent among persons from a less-developed country,

based on demographic variables.

As in the previous cases, Indians, the test country

group, receive the focus of interest in this hypothesis also.








The demographic variables included are age, sex, marital

status, education (occupation), travel experience, and

length of stay in the United States. The concern of this

hypothesis is to test whether these demographic variables

can account for differences between the "Made in" images

existing among persons from a less-developed country. As

seen in Chapter II, prior research has indicated that the

"Made in" images among Americans are different, based on

demographic variables like age, sex, etc. In this case

one goes a step further and examines whether demographic

variables can be used as a predictor of differences between

the "Made in" images among persons from a less-developed

country. The hypothesis was tested to determine if the

demographic variables can serve as predictors for differ-

ences between the profiles of Made in India and Made in

U.S.A. for Indians, the test country group (see Figure 1).

By using the Biomedical Computer Program, BMDX63,

(Dixon, 1970, p. 23-33), test of this hypothesis can be

done as a test of parameters of a multivariate general

linear model.11 Results of the multiparameter test, which



10This variable is coded as student/nonstudent rather
than by the specific year in college or by the exact nature
of the accusation.
11BMDX63 uses a model Y = XB + E. This, in fact, per-
forms a multiple regression where the dependent variable is
a vector. By specifying proper A, C, and D matrices, this
program is adapted for the purposes of testing the parameters
of a linear model where the demographic variables serve as
predictors of differences between "Made in" images. The









included all the demographic variables, proved to be signifi-

cant and hence the Null Hypothesis IV was rejected. Results

of the multiparameter test, as well as the results of the

tests for the demographic variables on an individual basis,

are presented in Table 5. Only in the case of two demographic

variables--sex and travel experience--did the F value exceed

the rejection criterion as seen in Table 5.


Hypothesis V

Among Americans, there are no significant differences

between the "Made in" image of American products and the

"Made in" image of Japanese products.

The focal point of this hypothesis is the "Made in"

image of American and Japanese products among Americans.

The profiles developed from the semantic differential method

are presented in Figure 3. According to the null hypothesis

there are no differences between the "Made in" images of

American products and Japanese products among Americans.

As in the case of Hypothesis I, the statistical technique

adopted for this test is the multivariate test of means


demographic variables are coded as follows:

XI = 1--age equal or above 30 X4 = 1--has travel experience
X1 = 0--age less than 30 X4 = 0--no travel experience
X2 = 1--male X5 = 1--student
X2 = 0--female X = 0--nonstudent
X3 = 1--married X6 = 1--time of stay in the
X3 = 0--single United States--one year
or more
X6 = 0--time of stay in the
United States--less than
one year.









Table 5

Multivariate Test of Parameters for Differences in
Images (Indians)


Test F value DF Significancea

Multiparameter test
on all demographic
variables 10.481 90/113 yes

Tests on
individual Ss

Age 1.127 15/19 no

Sex 2.241 15/19 yes

Marital status 1.107 15/19 no

Travel 2.454 15/19 yes

Student (or not) 1.099 15/19 no

Time of stay 2.033 15/19 no


Note: Null Hypothesis IV rejected.
aSignificant a a = .05 level.


using Hotelling T2 as a test statistic.12 Results exhibited

in Table 6 show that the null hypothesis is to be rejected.

Results of further tests conducted for isolating differences

in mean scores between Made in U.S.A. and Made in Japan on

individual dimensions defined by the semantic differential

scales are presented in Table 7. Significant differences in


12See footnote 4. Also BMDX63 (Dixon, 1970, p. 23-33)
is the computer program used for testing this hypothesis.










evaluation occurred only on seven dimensions. In three of

the above seven cases, Made in Japan was rated better than

Made in U.S.A. These are "unreasonable price/reasonable

price," "uneconomical to use/economical to use," and "massive/

compact." In the case of the other four categories, Made

in U.S.A. was rated better than Made in Japan. The pairs

are "unfamiliar brand names/familiar brand names"

"difficult to obtain service/easy to obtain service,"

"unattractive appearance/attractive appearance," and "old-

fashioned design/modern design." It is interesting to note

that Americans, now, find no significant differences between

Made in U.S.A. and Made in Japan in terms of workmanship,

quality of materials, durability, reliability, and technical

superiority.


Table 6

Multivariate Test of Means for Differences in
"Made in" Images--Hypothesis V (Americans)


Profiles tested F value DF Significancea

Made in U.S.A.

vs. 10.019 15/25 yes

Made in Japan


Note: Null Hypothesis V rejected.
aSignificant at a = .05 level.




















In
U)


4-1
0
,4


O

A4


O

iU)
0C






4-1
U -H-





00






HO

-H


0 -
--c



















4! J
-*t 3


C
-4 -H


O




n
0



0






cn



cn
0
4-1 G


1

H 0

M 0
U3





--




nin







0 -H 0 04






(6n
C *


0 -H(0 0-i




























0
,4
0
C)


d0

C
1-4
(0 .Q
-H

000
) r-l -H4

S (3 -H
M E
0 t N

0 4 4

0 0 r-

h- 0






0 42 fO
OD



& 2


U) mU m w0
00 00 0 T 0 0
C r >1 > > >1 >1 C


CJ0 0 0 J 0








rT r o O- > c)










CO O) CO) CC
U) t"- cN U) > U)


m l m G I
S + +






Ln t i Ln in in c










cLTD Lm Ln cD m

Ca. r- co C ) '

meeverL m


>1 O0

(0

e 0



00 0


0
Nj 0
0 >4





y <
0
a UU
D0
3 -H
C) >
0 0

> 0 C7J
0 D
C C0 U


0 (j c e


+ +







o n
CO CO

i- m
*^rcI


NN CO
mm


+n o









U CO
I







o tn










kCN

co C)

mr a'


c m o m mCIt


mN *N '0 > n +
+ + I






0 0 0 0 t.O
CO C CO CN
o to on o








in in in -n o
r- r- r- r- O
' C 0 on UL

n *) m ,m CD


0

- 1



O4





C)
0

0



a



>0
3



-H 0
0(




(0a
f3
CO


in
























-4






aO
S0
0


00







-H 0
0L -ri
>





CM
4-4

0
O
H ,
HO +


O-r
Qu>
ccn
4


0
0
-4

O)

0Q &


0 0
ro

0
30 0



-4 r-4
0 0
Oe
( 3
a




4 o
CJ U







0

U) C
C )



a 0
0 0



O O
O 0










Additional Comments on "Made in" Images

Hypothesis I concerning "Made in" images prevalent

among persons from a less-developed country was tested on

the Chinese respondents also, to see whether further support

could be derived for the notion that there are significant

differences between the "Made in" image of domestic pro-

ducts and that of products from an advanced nation. Results

presented in Table 8 show that the null hypothesis of "no

differences" is to be rejected, thus supporting the results
13
arrived at previously. Paired t tests were carried out

to find out more about the evaluation of two "Made in" con-

cepts on individual dimensions. Results are exhibited in

Table 9. For fourteen of the fifteen semantic differential

pairs, the evaluations of Made in Taiwan and Made in U.S.A.

are significantly different. Made in U.S.A. is rated higher

than Made in Taiwan in eleven cases.

The data in Tables E-ll, E-12, and E-13 (Appendix E)

show how the three groups of respondents rated the "Made in"

concepts on different dimensions defined by the semantic

differential scales. Unlike in the previous tables, here the

"Made in" concepts are ranked according to the mean rating

they received on each of the characteristics. This new

arrangement throws some additional light on the nature of



3Statistical test used is a multivariate test of means.
Made in U.S.A. is set as a standard to represent the "Made in"
image of products from an advanced nation. See the profiles
of Made in Taiwan and Made in U.S.A. in Figure 2.










"Made in" images among Indian, Chinese, and American respon-

dents. In fourteen of the fifteen categories, Indians have

given the highest rating to the "Made in" concept of an

advanced nation. A similar pattern was exhibited by the

Chinese also, for they gave the highest rating to the "Made

in" concept of an advanced nation for eleven of the fifteen

dimensions. In the case of Americans, Made in Germany had

the highest rating for six dimensions, closely followed by

Made in U.S.A., which has the highest rating for five. It

is important to note that Made in Germany was given the

highest rating by Americans for workmanship, quality of

materials, durability, recommendations, reliability, and

technical superiority. Made in Japan was rated as the best

in terms of "unreasonable price/reasonable price," "unecon-

omical to use/economical to use," and massive/campact."


Table 8

Multivariate Test of Means for Differences in
"Made in" Images--Hypothesis I (Chinese)


Profiles tested F value DF Significancea

Made in Taiwan

vs. 7.960 15/25 yes

Made in U.S.A.


Note; Null Hypothesis I rejected.
aSignificant at a = .05 level.










1


*^ u

C





CO

















u
Ie























e -H
r--


cn
Q)

,-4



C4
0







ul-
0


Qa)









0 C>
0 -H
Eu










q-4. -,-
a )
3-H








rU)

->4







C)
-- -H




O
4-1 0

0 m
ME





U
O


En in n in m a n n
0) Q) ) >1 >. >1 >1 >1 >1 >1 >1 r-


ro nom n in U)

> > >1 >1 >1 >1 >1







n Q0 c ik n 0 ->

r-- in r-- CN c o Ln









in o in in in Co

Sn -1 co C







ln o o in in in

Sin cn in m '

m oo) n m c m
Is a Io 0 I I



otoutom e L 0


rN in








nin

o 0
0 0


>i


C r)




E 0
SO



O 0



0 _
OSC
)U C


\C U




o C)
S> .0






0 0


O C O
0 -) (
U 0 C) C

C 4C 4
OC) u)


CL)
in in 4r







0 0
co co

in

i m






0



5-H
O

U)





oa



4> C


0 r-4
- 0



4-I C)







> U
-,
QC) U


0- CJ



.0 0 O


4-1 o


a) Co -1 a) cr
'IT C -i a) cc
w 0 kD U t
cc o o >-- in









C Li C iLn in
CD IN CD CO







CD M.CD L 0
Lnor M Lr i- (D
co IN in co

in m m mc






co i in o
'mo e in co N
Ln

> tn
o o
-H -H
.4-I

U 0

-4

\ '0



0) 0



- 4 C

cO 0
4C 0C
C O -H
4-) e)




0 m
c, r-





C)
Ui- C) -

C) f U)
5-i C) 4-



3 0


C)



0
0

O

0
4-I



4 )
C-)
U

E
0


C)
0



U)


0 I
0 U
3

OOOu
*- U >


O 0


1-








II


r--



c$


-H



0t'


Lr) CD
in 0c
in o
< co


'0

C)
>1




C
- C)



'-4




> rJ


Cr

.0 1C
C -H


> E
o H
O !









Product Classes and Products

The second section of the research instrument is con-

cerned with the evaluation of product classes and products.

Each group of respondents was asked to evaluate product

classes and products from four countries. Indians, the test

country group, evaluated product classes and products from

India, the United States, Germany, and England. Chinese

respondents evaluated Made in U.S.A., Made in Germany,

Made in England, and Made in Taiwan. Americans evaluated

product classes and products from the United States, Germany,

England, and Japan. The mean ratings of each group for each

product class and product are calculated. These are exhibited

in Tables E-14, E-15, and E-16 (Appendix E). Table E-14

shows the evaluation of Indian respondents, Tables E-15 and

E-16 present the evaluation of Chinese and Americans

respectively.


Less Developed Countries
14
The results of paired difference tests4 conducted be-
15
tween the evaluation of Made in India and Made in U.S.A.

by Indians for product classes and products are presented in

Table 10. It is clear that Indians have rated every product


14
See The Design and Analysis of Experiments, William
Mendenhall, 1968, p. 40-44, for an expianarion or the paired
test and also the underlying assumptions.

As before, Made in U.S.A. is the standard. Product
classes and products from the United States are adopted as
the standard to represent those from advanced nations in
general.










class from India significantly lower than product classes

labeled as Made in U.S.A. For example, Indians have given a

rating of only 2.425 for their domestic mechnaical products

as compared to 5.925 for mechanical products from the United

States. Similar results are obtained in the case of specific

products also. Indian respondents' evaluation of domestic

products also seems to be significantly different from their

evaluation of products from an advanced nation like the United

States. Table 10 shows the results of the tests concerning

specific products also. In all instances Indian respondents

have given lower ratings to products from India than to those

from the United States. These products are automobiles,

television sets, soft drinks, and dress shirts. In Table E-17


Table 10

Product Classes and Products, Comparisons of Made in India
and Made in U.S.A. (Indians)


Mean Mean
Products and Made in Made in
Product Classes India U.S.A t value Significancea

Mechanical products 2.425 5.925 -13.555 yes
Electronic Products 2.775 6.175 -11.525 yes
Food products 3.600 6.500 9.781 yes
Fashion products 4.675 6.075 3.695 yes
Automobiles 2.400 5.975 -10.357 yes
Television sets 2.400 6.150 -13.328 yes
Soft drinks 3.900 6.575 8.999 yes
Dress shirts 4.975 6.175 3.300 yes

Significant at a. = .05 level.










(Appendix E), the ranking of the different "Made in" con-

cepts based on the mean rating given by the Indian re-

spondents is shown. For all product classes and products

the highest rating is always given to one originating from

an advanced nation. Food products, fashion products, tele-

vision sets, soft drinks, and dress shirts from the United

States were considered as the best. Mechanical products,

electronic products, and automobiles from Germany were ranked

first based on the average rating given by Indian respon-

dents. Perhaps, more important is the fact that product

classes and products from India have been given the lowest

rating in all but one case. This only exception is dress

shirts from India which ranks third according to the average

rating of Indian respondents.

Similar analysis as above was done for the data gathered

from the Chinese respondents. Results of the paired differ-

ence tests are presented in Table 11. Chinese respondents

have rated the mechanical products and electronic products

from the United States as superior to those from Taiwan.

In the case of food products, Made in Taiwan was evaluated

as superior to Made in U.S.A. There is no significant dif-

ference in the rating of fashion products. Automobiles,

televis Lon sets, and soft drinks from the United States were

evaluated as superior to those from Taiwan. No differ-

ences in the rating seem to exist between dress shirts from

the United States and those from Taiwan. Table E-18










(Appendix E) shows the ranking of product classes and pro-

ducts from the four countries based on the mean scores by

Chinese respondents. For mechanical products, electronic

products, and automobiles, Made in Germany is ranked first;

for food products, fashion products, and-dress shirts, Made

in Taiwan is at the top. Television sets and soft drinks

from the United States have the highest average rating as

seen in Table E-18 (Appendix E).


Table 11

Product Classes and Products, Comparisons of Made in Taiwan
and Made in U.S.A. (Chinese)


Mean Made
Products and Made in Made in
Product Classes Taiwan U.S.A. t value Significancea

Mechanical products 3.525 5.450 -7.272 yes

Electronic products 4.425 5.475 -4.108 yes

Food products 5.825 4.550 +4.148 yes

Fashion Products 5.300 5.250 +0.197 no

Automobiles 3.250 5.400 -7.001 yes

Television sets 4.675 5.650 -3.655 yes

Soft drinks 4.425 6.000 -4.831 yes

Dress shirts 5.375 5.200 +0.764 no


aSignificant at a =


.05 level.


Americans

Results of the tests for the evaluation of product

classes and products by Americans are shown in Table 12.









Table 12

Product Classes and Products,Comparisons of Made in U.S.A.
and Made in Japan (Americans)


Mean Mean
Products and Made in Made in
Product Classes U.S.A. Japan t value Significancea

Mechanical products 4.875 4.675 +0.662 no

Electronic products 5.300 5.675 -1.272 no

Food products 5.375 3.525 +5.640 yes

Fashion products 5.650 3.325 +8.571 yes

Automobiles 4.350 5.200 -2.856 yes

Television sets 5.700 5.500 +0.392 no

Soft drinks 6.225 3.700 +9.341 yes

Dress shirts 5.600 3.650 +7.346 yes


Significant at a =


.05 level.


Statistically there are no differences between the mean

scores of attitude toward mechanical products from the

United States and those from Japan. As seen in Table 12,

this seems to be the case for electronic products also.

Food products and fashion products from the United States

are rated as superior to those from Japan. Japanese auto-

mobiles are felt to be superior to American automobiles.

In the case of television sets there are no differences in

evaluation between Made in U.S.A. and Made in Japan, based

on the result of statistical tests. Mean scores of attitudes









toward soft drinks and dress shirts from the United States

are significantly higher than those toward Japanese soft

drinks and dress shirts.

The "Made in" concepts are ranked based on the mean

scores for product classes and products in Table E-19

(Appendix E). Made in U.S.A. has the highest average rating

in food products, fashion products, television sets, soft

drinks, and dress shirts. Americans rated mechanical pro-

ducts and automobiles from Germany as the best on an

inferior-superior scale. Surprisingly, American automobiles

obtained the lowest rating on the inferior-superior scale.

Electronic products from Japan are rated as superior to

those from all other countries included in this study.


Choice of Products

The third section of the questionnaire focuses on the

choice process among the three groups of respondents. The

products chosen for this section are the same as before:

automobiles, television sets, soft drinks, and dress shirts.

Indians and Chinese had to choose from their domestic pro-

ducts along with products from England, Germany, and the

United States. Americans, on the other hand, were given the

choice between products from the United States, Germany,

England, and Japan. Results of this part of the survey are

presented in Tables E-20, E-21, and E-22 (Appendix E).










Less-Developed Countries

The data in Table E-20 (Appendix E) show how Indians

chose between products from different countries. Automo-

biles from Germany seem to be the overwhelming choice since

twenty-eight of the respondents chose them over automobiles

from India, England, or the United States. American tele-

vision sets were chosen by nineteen respondents, closely

followed by the German television sets, chosen by fifteen

people. American soft drinks are very popular, and twenty-

seven of the forty Indians in the sample chose them. Only

for dress shirts do Indians show an apparent preference for

their domestic product, with seventeen of the respondents

choosing Indian dress shirts.
16
Results of the chi-square analysis are shown in

Table 13. For each product the null hypothesis of "no pref-

erence" is rejected as seen from the table. This means that

Indians show preferences in their choice of products from

different countries even when price and other quality criteria

are supposed to be equal for domestic products and products

from various advanced nations.

Very similar results were obtained in the analysis of

the data from this part of the survey for the Chinese group

also, as seen from data in Taole E-21. Nineteen of the


16
For an explanation of the test of hypothesis con-
cerning a multinomial experiment using the chi-square statis-
tic, see Introduction to Probability and Statistics, William
Mendenhall, 1967, p. 249-262.









forty Chinese respondents preferred automobiles from Germany.

Twenty respondents selected television sets made in the

United States. Soft drinks of the United States seem to be

the overwhelming favorite as twenty-nine of the respondents

chose those over drinks from other nations. As in the pre-

vious instance (Indians), domestic dress shirts seem to be

the most popular, with twenty-one of the forty Chinese

respondents choosing dress shirts from Taiwan.


Table 13

Chi-Square Test for Choice of Products (Indians)


Products X value Significancea

Automobiles 43.4 yes

Television sets 21.2 yes

Soft drinks 45.4 yes

Dress shirts 14.0 yes

Note: In each case the null hypothesis of "no preference"
is rejected.
aSignificant at a = .05 level.


Results of the chi-square analysis are presented in

Table 14. As seen from the data in Table 14, in all in-

stances the null hypothesis of "no preference" is to be re-

jected. In other words, Chinese respondents also exhibit

preference patterns in the choice of products from differ-

ent countries even when the products are supposed to be

equal in terms of price and quality criteria.









Table 14

Chi-Square Test for Choice of Products (Chinese)


Products X value Significancea

Automobiles 21.2 yes

Television sets 16.6 yes

Soft drinks 54.2 yes

Dress shirts 21.2 yes

Note: In each case the null hypothesis of "no preference"
is rejected.
aSignificant at a = .05 level.


Americans

As shown in Table E-22 (Appendix E), Americans seem to

prefer domestic products in two instances. Twenty-three of

the respondents chose American television sets whereas thirty-

seven chose American soft drinks. For dress shirts, Made

in England is the predominant choice, with twenty-two of the

respondents opting for it. In the case of Automobiles

Made in Germany is chosen by twenty people with Made in

U.S.A. a close second. Products from Japan do not fare well,

since many Americans did not choose them over products from

other countries. The only exception occurs with television

sets, with twelve people choosing the Japanese make. This

is second only to Made in U.S.A. in which case twenty-three

people chose the American television set.










Table 15 presents the results of chi-square analysis.

In the case of each product the null hypothesis of "no

preference" is rejected. In other words, Americans seem

to show certain preferences in their choice process even

when domestic products and products from other countries

are assumed to be equal in terms of price and quality criteria.


Table 15

Chi-Square Test for Choice of Products (Americans)


Products X- value Significance

Automobiles 19.8 yes

Television sets 28.6 yes

Soft drinks 97.8 yes

Dress shirts 37.4 yes

Note: In each case the null hypothesis of "no preference"
is rejected.
Significant at a = .05 level.













CHAPTER V

CONCLUSIONS


No attempt was made in the last chapter to enter into

detailed discussions of the results of the testing or to

draw implications and arrive at conclusions. Chapter V is

devoted to this aspect of discussions, inferences and con-

clusions.


Less-Developed Countries

The results of the study presented in Chapter IV show

that persons from less-developed countries have an un-

favorable "Made in" image of their domestic products in

terms of many of the characteristics defined by the seman-

tic differential scales. In fact, Indians gave the lowest

rating to Made in India on eleven of the fifteen cate-

gories, which included workmanship, quality of materials,

durability, reliability, technical factors, appearance,

and design. An unfavorable "Made in" image of the domestic

products among persons from a less-developed country affects

their view of product classes as well as of products. For

instance, the Indian respondents have evaluated their

domestic product classes and products as inferior to those

from advanced nations. While the nature of the link




University of Florida Home Page
© 2004 - 2010 University of Florida George A. Smathers Libraries.
All rights reserved.

Acceptable Use, Copyright, and Disclaimer Statement
Last updated October 10, 2010 - - mvs