Influence of Reference Groups

1. This article was downloaded by: [Southern Illinois University] On: 31 December 2014, At: 05:04 Publisher: Routledge Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK Journal of Advertising Publication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/ujoa20 How Do Reference Groups Influence Self-Brand Connections among Chinese Consumers? Yujie Wei a & Chunling Yu b a Department of Marketing and Real Estate, Richards College of Business, University of West Georgia b Department of Marketing, School of Economics and Management, Tsinghua University, Beijing Published online: 08 Mar 2013. To cite this article: Yujie Wei & Chunling Yu (2012) How Do Reference Groups Influence Self-Brand Connections among Chinese Consumers?, Journal of Advertising, 41:2, 39-54, DOI: 10.2753/JOA0091-3367410203 To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.2753/JOA0091-3367410203 PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the “Content”) contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinions and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors, and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content should not be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sources of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising out of the use of the Content. This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http:// www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

2. Journal of Advertising, vol. 41, no. 2 (Summer 2012), pp. 39–53. © 2012 American Academy of Advertising. All rights reserved. Permissions: www.copyright.com ISSN 0091-3367 (print)/ISSN 1557-7805 (online) DOI: 10.2753/JOA0091-3367410203 Coca-Cola was dismayed at an unexpected sales drop in China after one of its nationally televised commercials featured a famous pop singer as a celebrity endorser (Du, Yu, and Zhao 2009). A little research revealed that male Chinese consumers decided to boycott Coca-Cola because the pop singer’s androgy- nous image—though popular among female consumers, who mimicked her masculine hairstyle and clothing—annoyed men. To avoid any possibility that they would be perceived as fans, men stopped drinking Coke to dissociate themselves from her fan base. This event clearly illustrates the impact of advertising on consumer self–brand connections: Using the singer as a spokesperson for Coke improved the self–brand connections among her fans, but severed those connections for men who disliked the singer. Coca-Cola thus took on new meaning for men, as it became associated with androgyny, the celebrity, and her fans—a highly visible social subgroup. The self–brand connection (SBC) refers to the psychological association a person develops with a brand. High SBC means that consumers feel a strong connection with a brand, whereas low SBC implies a weak connection. Advertising helps build SBC by serving as an instrument of meaning transfer from the brand to the consumer (Elliott and Wattanasuwan 1998; McCracken 1986, 1989). A successful meaning transfer in turn helps consumers identify themselves with the brand and “put[s] them to work in the construction of their no- tions of the self and the world” (McCracken 1989, p. 314). Self-congruity theory suggests that consumers prefer brands whose images closely correspond with their own self-concepts (e.g., Childers and Rao 1992). A higher degree of congruence between a consumer’s self-concept and the brand image then leads to more positive emotional (e.g., love, pride, joy) and cognitive responses toward the ad, as well as heightened purchase intentions (see, e.g., Chang 2008; Mehta 1999). That is, advertising appeals that are congruent with viewers’ self- concepts are more persuasive than are incongruent appeals in terms of advertising effectiveness (Agrawal and Maheswaran 2005; Hong and Zinkhan 1995). Beyond advertising, SBC may be subject to the influence of other people or reference groups (Escalas and Bettman 2003, 2005; Sirgy 1982; Swaminathan, Page, and Gürhan-Canli 2007; White and Dahl 2006). Consumer–brand connections likely involve three reference groups: member groups; aspiration groups, whom consumers aspire to be like; and dissociative groups, whom they want to avoid. Because people generally agree on some aspects of a brand’s meaning (Escalas and Bettman 2005), consumers who buy a specific brand per- ceive themselves as similar to others who consume that same brand, but different from those who own a competing brand (Escalas and Bettman 2003, 2005). Furthermore, consumers exhibit differing levels of susceptibility to reference group Yujie Wei (Ph.D., Georgia State University) is an associate professor of marketing, Department of Marketing and Real Estate, Richards College of Business, University of West Georgia. Chunling Yu (Ph.D., Tsinghua University) is an associate professor of marketing, Department of Marketing, School of Economics and Management, Tsinghua University, Beijing. This paper was jointly funded by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (no. 70772018) and the Chinese Ministry of Education (no. 08JZD0019). Both authors contributed equally; their names are listed alphabetically. How Do Reference Groups Influence Self–Brand Connections Among Chinese Consumers? Implications for Advertising Yujie Wei and Chunling Yu ABSTRACT: This paper investigates the influence of reference groups on self–brand connections among Chinese consumers and the implications for advertising in China. Reference groups include the in-group (member group) and out-groups (aspiration, dissociative, and neutral). Two studies test five hypotheses involving both Chinese and foreign brands. The results indicate that Chinese consumers report higher self–brand connections for Chinese brands in member and aspiration group settings, but higher connections with foreign brands in a dissociative group setting. Furthermore, individualism/ collectivism moderates the influence of reference groups on this connection. For brands with images congruent with the in-group, compared with more individualistic consumers, more collectivist consumers exhibit stronger self–brand connections with Chinese brands than with foreign brands. For brands with images congruent with the dissociative group, compared with more collectivist consumers, more individualistic consumers report stronger self–brand connections with foreign brands than with Chinese brands. These results have critical implications for advertising in China. Downloaded by [Southern Illinois University] at 05:04 31 December 2014

3. 40 The Journal of Advertising influences, depending on their age, gender, ethnic background, and social relations (see, e.g., Childers and Rao 1992; Escalas and Bettman 2005; Martin, Wentzel, and Tomczak 2008; Wooten and Reed 2004). For example, compared with those of U.S. consumers, the brand attitudes of Thai consumers tend to depend more on their familial groups (parents, uncles, and aunts) than peer groups (coworkers, friends, and neighbors). Hispanic consumers’ perceptions of reference group influence vary according to the extent of their ethnic identification in the United States (Webster and Faircloth 1994). In research into recent advertisements in the Chinese market, we have found that both Chinese and foreign brands can leverage the influence of reference groups in advertising. Typically, slogans encapsulate different reference groups, which may enhance consumer–brand connections. For example, the South Korean Samsung Corporation has applied such strategies in advertisements across different stages of its entry into China. In the initial stages (1997–2004), Samsung tried to build a strong connection between its brands and Chinese consumers by adopting an in-group effect slogan: “Samsung, striving to be a firm liked by the Chinese people and con- tributing to Chinese society.” By 2004, Samsung had earned a “most respectable company” award in China, and with this greater acceptance among Chinese consumers, it switched to a new advertising message: “Own me, and you will own the world.” With this aspiration group effect, Samsung appeals to Chinese consumers who want more global recognition for their accomplishments. In accordance with these examples, this study pursues three main research objectives. First, we investigate the impact of reference groups on SBC among Chinese consumers. Although research has demonstrated the significant influence of reference groups on SBC among Westerners (see, e.g., Escalas and Bettman 2003, 2005; White and Dahl 2006, 2007), who tend to represent individualist cultures (Hofstede 1980, 2001), we question whether current theoretical and empirical findings about interrelationships between reference group influence and SBC transfer perfectly from Western to non-Western cultural contexts. Second, we examine the potential moderating effect of individualism and collectivism for reference group influences on SBC. Third, with regard to brand origin, or the brand’s country of origin, we consider how SBC varies for Chinese and foreign brands, which may have implications for international advertisers (Zhou, Yang, and Hui 2010). Our study contributes to advertising literature in two ways. First, to the best of our knowledge, this research is the first to deal with reference group influences on self–brand connections from an advertising perspective. Thus, our findings enrich existing literature regarding advertising, reference group influences, and SBC. Second, in a global environment, our findings can help Westerners understand Chinese consumers’ attitudes toward foreign brands and advertisements, and provide prac- tical implications for international advertisers that hope to cross changing cultural barriers and ensure acceptance of their advertisements by Chinese consumers, as well as establish appropriate positioning for their brands in China. ADVERTISING AND SELF–BRAND CONNECTIONS Research based on social identity theory indicates that consumers purchase brands in part to construct their self-concepts and, in so doing, form self–brand connections (Escalas and Bettman 2005; Sirgy 1982). Generally, people are more interested in developing stronger connections with particular brands that can define and help them create their self-concepts (Sirgy 1982; Sprott, Czellar, and Spangenberg 2009). Advertising research on consumer product and service branding increasingly ad- dresses the connections between consumers and brands as a key issue, because self-concept measures can provide richer insights about how people think and feel about themselves and how they react to advertising and the advertised brand (Chang 2008; Elliott and Wattanasuwan 1998; Mehta 1999). Advertising can provide both existing and newly introduced goods with new meanings that consumers can adopt to build their own identities (McCracken 1986). To transfer meanings this way, advertising brings “the consumer good and a representation of the culturally constituted world together within the frame of a particular advertisement” (McCracken 1986, p. 74), usually by employing visual images and verbal materials. Congruence between the self-concept and the brand image depends on viewers’ evaluations of themselves and the advertised brand (Mehta 1999). Moreover, consumer–brand connections form at both individual and group levels (Swaminathan, Page, and Gürhan- Canli 2007). Thus, a U.S. consumer’s connection with a foreign brand, such as Mercedes, may reflect a desire to express an individual-level, unique identity (e.g., self-concept connection), but a relationship with a local brand (e.g., Ford) may be based on a group-level, patriotic, national identity (e.g., country-of-origin connection). Dong and Tian find that Chi- nese consumers tend to “infuse Western brands with meaning, rendering them politically useful in articulating a reaction to the West and realizing imaginings of the future Chinese nation” (2009, p. 505). In this sense, SBC depends not only on brand and self-identity, but also on the opinions of reference groups that are important to an individual consumer. THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK AND HYPOTHESES Social Identity Theory Social identity theory (Reed 2002; Sirgy 1982; Turner 1982) proposes that identity consists of two components: personal (i.e., individual sense of self) and social (i.e., groups to which Downloaded by [Southern Illinois University] at 05:04 31 December 2014

4. Summer 2012 41 the person belongs). Social identity is a self-concept derived from perceived membership in social groups (Tajfel 1986), and the identification process specifically pertains to a role relationship with the referent group (Reed 2002). Group membership constitutes a vital part of self-concept, because people often define their sense of self in terms of “we” rather than “I,” and are therefore motivated to comply with group norms (Bearden and Etzel 1982; Turner and Oakes 1986). Group membership helps create an in-group and self-categorization, such that people are motivated to differentiate their in-group from a comparison out-group on some valued dimension (Brown 2000). Strong in-group favoritism also may drive people to seek positive distinctiveness for their in-group, at the expense of the out-group (Tajfel and Turner 1979). Social identity theory further postulates that different social contexts trigger a person to think, feel, and act on the basis of personal, family, or national levels of the self (Kleine, Kleine, and Kernan 1993). To achieve various purposes, a person may favor a particular in-group that seems central to his or her self-definition and provides a meaningful comparison. If the surrounding context changes, the person may shift to another self-identity and identify more strongly with this newly activated identity to act as a group member rather than as an individual (e.g., Tajfel 1986). In summary, social identity theory suggests that situational factors activate particular components of identity, which then influence a person’s cognition, affect, and behavior (Lam et al. 2010; Markus and Kitayama 1991). Researchers in turn use social identity theory to explain reference group influences on self–brand connections (see, e.g., Escalas and Bettman 2003; Swaminathan, Page, and Gürhan-Canli 2007; White and Dahl 2007). Reference groups have direct impacts on brand attitude and choices (Duhachek, Zhang, and Krishnan 2007; Sirgy 1982; Wooten and Reed 2004). When a consumer “endorses” a brand by using it during interactions with reference groups, that person signals a desire to be associated with the kind of other people whom he or she perceives as also consuming that brand (Grubb and Hupp 1968; Lam et al. 2010). Reed (2002) suggests that if the portrayal of an athletic shoe in an advertisement shows its wearer receiving accolades from significant others or relevant reference groups, perceptions of potential external positive reinforcement should drive consumers to purchase that shoe. Therefore, a reference group provides an important source of brand meaning to consumers, including a sense of how other people may view them, which influences their brand evaluations and SBC (Escalas and Bettman 2003, 2005). Reference groups consist of two categories: in-groups and out-groups (White and Dahl 2006). The in-group, or member group, refers to a group to which the consumer belongs. A brand image consistent with the in-group can lead to higher SBC (Escalas and Bettman 2003). However, the influence of groups on SBC may also depend on the brand’s country of origin (COO). The brand’s COO represents a group-level variable and is particularly meaningful as a means to differentiate in-group from out-group members (Swaminathan, Page, and Gürhan-Canli 2007). In an advertising setting, COO effects occur automatically and contribute to product evaluations without consumers’ intention or control (Liu and Johnson 2005). For example, highly ethnocentric Chinese consumers overestimate the quality of Chinese products and underesti- mate that of imported products (Balabanis and Diamantopou- los 2004). Consumer ethnocentrism derives from the sense of cultural openness, patriotism, conservatism, and collectivism of different countries (Lee, Hong, and Lee 2003; Sharma, Shimp, and Shin 1995); in recent years, China has experienced a strong wave of nationalism, largely in response to nationwide educational programs on patriotism and people’s growing interest in traditional Confucian doctrines (Dong and Tian 2009; Economist 2007; Wang and Lin 2009). The situational priming of China itself may thus increase Chinese consumers’ ethnocentrism, as reflected in ethnocentric attitudes toward foreign brands and advertisements (Pham 2008). On the basis of the social identity theory and previous research pertaining to the effects of consumer ethnocentrism and reference groups, we therefore hypothesize that a brand’s COO information can activate Chinese consumers’ in-group favoritism, such that they prefer Chinese brands to foreign brands, even if both brands’ images are congruent with the in-group image. Hypothesis 1: For brands with an image that is congruent with the member group, among Chinese consumers, the Chinese brand will have higher self–brand connections than will the foreign brand. Out-groups refer to groups to which a person does not belong and consist of three versions: aspirational, neutral, and dissociative. An aspirational group is one to which a person wishes to belong—perhaps an occupation such as college professors, an ethnic group, a gender group, certain age groups, or even nationality groups. If a social group is considered aspirational by most people of the society, the group likely becomes a societal referent, represented by many things, including brands (Aaker, Brumbaugh, and Grier 2000; Grier and Deshpande 2001). As a result of recent economic growth in China, many people seek well-known brands to distinguish themselves from other social groups or classes (Hung, Gu, and Tse 2005; Lin 2001). In particular, higher-priced, name brands function as symbols and demonstrate social distance between different groups in China (Li and Su 2007). Status appeals are therefore common in advertisements for luxury goods in China, such as automobiles, which highlight images of modernity, affluence, and social achievement. Recent research shows that Chinese consumers tend to buy domestic brands (e.g., Wang and Wang 2007; Zhuang et al. 2008), for three main reasons. Downloaded by [Southern Illinois University] at 05:04 31 December 2014

5. 42 The Journal of Advertising First, intensive patriotic education and chronic identification with a conservative, traditional culture have increased their ethnocentrism, so Chinese consumers use their consumption of domestic brands as an outlet for collective expression that symbolizes a sense of belonging to a national community (Wang and Wang 2007; Zhao and Belk 2008). Second, Chinese enterprises are increasingly competitive with global players (Roberts et al. 2004; Zeng and Williamson 2003), and have undertaken a series of acquisitions of global brands (e.g., Chinese PC producer Lenovo’s acquisition of the PC branch of IBM; the automaker Geely’s acquisition of Volvo). Thus, Chinese consumers have gained more confidence in domestic products and believe domestic brands are equal to or even better than their foreign counterparts (Chan, Cui, and Zhou 2009). The prevalence of “international-level” quality standards and prestigious certifications, including ISO 9000, among Chinese manufacturers has further increased local consumers’ preference for domestic brands. Third, along with quality improvements, Chinese enter prises invest heavily in their brands in both domestic and global markets (Zhou, Yang, and Hui 2010). The central government has provided significant support for domestic enterprises to re- juvenate traditional brands and create and nurture new brands. Domestic firms have learned from their foreign counterparts how to manage and promote brands effectively (Chan, Cui, and Zhou 2009; Zhou, Yang, and Hui 2010). In addition, they can more easily take advantage of the favorable Chinese business environment and are willing to spend significant revenues promoting brands through complicated campaigns and programs. These campaigns, which fuse distinct Chinese cultural elements with appropriate public sentiments, have attracted many Chinese consumers to domestic brands. Metersbonwe, created in 1995 as a local casual wear apparel line, became the largest apparel brand in the country in 2006, mainly through its application of modern branding techniques. Its well-known slogans (e.g., “Be Different!” and “Be a New Chinese Brand!”) have appealed to millions of young consumers. Following this discussion, we postulate that Chinese consumers who aspire to be members of higher social status groups demonstrate higher SBC with Chinese rather than foreign brands. We further suggest that the influence of this aspirational group on Chinese consumers’ SBC with domestic brands should be similar to the influence of an in-group. Thus: Hypothesis 2: For brands with images that are congruent with an aspirational group, for Chinese consumers, a Chinese brand will have higher self–brand connections than will the foreign brand. When a person wants to avoid a group, however, that group is dissociative (Englis and Soloman 1995; White and Dahl 2007). Dissociative groups have negative influences on SBC, consumer evaluations, and choices (Aaker, Brumbaugh, and Grier 2000; Grier and Deshpande 2001; White and Dahl 2006). According to social identity theory, and as exemplified in our opening Coca-Cola example, consumers refuse to identify with brands congruent with dissociative groups, because doing so may harm their self-image (Kleine, Kleine, and Ker- nan 1993; Wooten and Reed 2004). Therefore, we posit that in any dissociative condition, Chinese consumers will avoid all brands, but they are expected to be somewhat less likely to avoid foreign brands. This prediction again is based on three key premises. First, at the individual–brand relationship level, social balance theory suggests that consumers attempt to maintain consistency among a triad of linked attitudes (Heider 1958), such that when evaluating an advertisement and brand, any inconsistency drives negative ad evaluations and motivates a change in attitudes toward both the brand and the ad (Rus- sell and Stern 2006). Therefore, when evaluating domestic and foreign brands associated with out-groups, Chinese consumers should not want to associate with either type of brand, so they can maintain a consistent self-concept. Second, at a social and group level, brands are powerful cultural symbols that Chinese consumers use for social purposes (Chan, Cui, and Zhou 2009). According to Lam et al. (2010), in new brand introductions, consumers’ evaluations depend more on sociopsychological value than on functional utility. Because Chinese brands offer more sociopsychological value for them, Chinese consumers should avoid Chinese brands more so than foreign brands, congruent with out-group influences, because these consumers use domestic brands mainly for goal- related tasks, such as building social relationships, maintain- ing distance from out-groups, and ensuring similarity with in-groups. In contrast, because foreign brands are not tools for meeting self-related goals among Chinese consumers, they should be less likely to work to disconnect themselves from foreign brands. Therefore, driven by self-presentation needs, Chinese consumers may avoid impressions that are likely to provoke negative evaluations by target audiences or create impressions that could be challenged, disapproved, or even unjustified (Duhachek, Zhang, and Krishan 2007; Wooten and Reed 2004; Zhou and Wong 2008). Third, our prediction that Chinese consumers are less likely to avoid foreign brands is consistent with social comparison theory. Brown (2000) suggests that people are selective in their choice of comparison out-group, and they tend to compare their in-group with other out-groups to form attitudes toward brands that offer images that are congruent with different out- groups. Social identity theory further suggests that in-group bias should be stronger toward similar rather than dissimilar out-groups (Cadinu and Reggiori 2002). For Chinese consumers, an out-group that identifies with Chinese brands consists of their own countrymen, which is more similar to them than an out-group that identifies with foreign brands, which could include foreigners and other Chinese. Thus, it seems reasonable Downloaded by [Southern Illinois University] at 05:04 31 December 2014

6. Summer 2012 43 to predict that Chinese consumers display stronger in-group bias toward domestic brands than toward foreign brands con- nected with out-groups. Accordingly, we argue that brands that are congruent with dissociative out-groups pose both individual-level identity threats and the risk of social disapproval for Chinese consumers. In a dissociative setting, Chinese consumers avoid both domestic and foreign brands so that they can seek individual benefits (consistency), pursue the fulfillment of personal goals (self-concept), and engage in a protective style of self-presentation to gain approval and social acceptance. They should be less likely to avoid foreign brands, however, because in-group bias and the effect of social comparison are diminished. Hypothesis 3: For brands with images that are congruent with dissociative groups, among Chinese consumers, the foreign brand will have higher self–brand connections than will the Chinese brand. STUDY 1 Design In Study 1, we examine how reference groups (member, aspiration, and dissociative) influence self–brand connections using a 4 (group type: member, aspiration, dissociative, and neutral groups) × 2 (brand origin: Chinese versus foreign brands) mixed-model design (with group type as the between- subjects variable and brand origin as the within-subjects variable). Neutral groups control for experimental confounding effects that may arise from the research design. We assigned the participants randomly to one of the four reference group conditions. Participants One hundred and twenty (49 men, 71 women) participants from a major Chinese university in Beijing completed ques- tionnaires pertaining to their brand selections. Each participant received RMB5 (US$.80) for their participation. However, incomplete or improper responses prompted us to eliminate 23 participants from the data (10 did not list their reference group, 3 listed Chinese brands as foreign brands, and 10 did not answer the SBC questions), leaving a total of 97 participants (41% men, with an average age of 20.3 years). Questionnaire The questionnaire was prepared in Chinese. A Chinese trans- lation of the seven-item SBC scale was backtranslated into English by three Chinese scholars, all of whom teach at a major Chinese university and speak both languages fluently. The translated version of the SBC scale was compared with its original version by a group of five scholars and seven students who were not involved in the research. They confirmed that the items in the translated version were similar to or had the same meaning as the original items in the SBC scale. Stimulus Brands In a pretest designed to select advertised brands in China that would be meaningful to the participant population, 30 students from the same university listed up to five Chinese brands and five foreign brands for each of four product categories (i.e., clothes, cars, cell phones, and toothpaste), in a procedure adapted from Escalas and Bettman’s (2005) work. These four product categories reflect four choice criteria, namely, they (1) include both publicly and privately used products, (2) are advertised products in China, (3) are frequently used by consumers to express self-concepts, and (4) offer both Chinese and foreign brands in the Chinese market. Clothes and cell phones are publicly used products that reflect the preferences and personal tastes of the owner, so they express self-concepts. Toothpaste traditionally is a private product in Western countries, but users generally demonstrate stable preferences for toothpaste brands, and our pretest showed that many participants used toothpaste brands to express their self-identity. Finally, a growing number of Chinese families buy cars for their personal use; car sales reached 18 million in 2010, meaning China has become the largest car market in the world. This sales increase is prompting dramatic increases in the number of car advertisements for both Chinese and foreign brands, and consumers are familiar with most brands. To minimize any confounding effects, when selecting the brands, we also attempted to ensure that the Chinese and foreign brands were relatively similar in terms of their visibility, sales, and market share. From approximately 600 candidate brands, we chose the top 12 Chinese and foreign brands, based on separate rank- ings of their Chinese and foreign identity, for the main study (see Table 1). All selected brands had attained relatively high visibility in the Chinese market and were frequently used by consumers to represent their self-concepts. Procedure and Measures The participants were randomly assigned to one of the four reference group situations—in-group, aspiration, dissociative, or neutral. In each condition, participants identified an in-group (to which they belonged), an aspiration group (to which they did not belong but wanted to join), a dissociative group (with which they did not want to be associated), or a neutral group (to which they did not belong, but neither wanted to avoid nor join), as appropriate. Next, they answered questions regarding the degree to which they belonged to this identified reference Downloaded by [Southern Illinois University] at 05:04 31 December 2014

7. 44 The Journal of Advertising group; these questions served as manipulation checks. Subse- quently, participants selected two brands (one Chinese and one foreign) whose brand images were congruent with their chosen reference groups from among the pools of 12 Chinese and 12 foreign brands, preselected for the four product categories. If participants did not feel comfortable with the preselected brands, they could list their own brands, but no one did so, and all participants chose from the pools (see Table 2). Im- mediately following the brand choice, the participants rated their SBC for each brand separately. Finally, the questionnaire gathered demographic information, including gender and age. The entire procedure took approximately 30 minutes. Self–Brand Connection Measures To measure SBC, we used seven items (anchored by 1 = strongly disagree and 7 = strongly agree), averaged to form one SBC score per participant per brand (α = .91) (see Table 3). Manipulation Checks We used the three-item scale by Escalas and Bettman (2005) for the manipulation checks for in-group membership (“I consider myself this type of person,” “I belong to this group,” and “I fit in with this group of people,” anchored by 1 = strongly disagree and 7 = strongly agree; α = .88). The measures of fit with the aspiration, dissociative, and neutral groups relied on the average of two, seven-point scale items: “I look up to this type of person” and “I wish I could become a member of this group,” again anchored by 1 (strongly disagree) and 7 (strongly agree; α = .89). Results Manipulation Checks We first consolidated the data from all the groups and compared the degree to which participants belonged to the group to which they had been assigned. The results indicated that participants of the member group believed they belonged to the member group significantly more than to the out-group, Min-group = 6.46, Mout-group = 2.90, F(1, 95) = 164.08, p < .001. Then we compared the degree to which participants in the three out-groups belonged to their group and found significant differences, F(2, 68) = 52.87, p < .001. Furthermore, Tukey’s HSD post hoc tests revealed that any two groups exhibited significant differences at the .05 level (Maspiration = 4.16, Mneutral = 2.76, Mdissociative = 1.52, p < .05). Hypotheses Tests An analysis of variance (ANOVA) was conducted on the measure of SBC. We found a significant interaction effect of reference group type by brand origin on SBC for both Chinese and foreign brands, F(3, 93) = 53.47, p < .001. Brand origin and group type also had significant main effects, F(1, 93) = 51.79, p < .001; F(3, 93) = 93.35, p < .001, respectively. As suggested by H1, Chinese brands provided higher SBC than foreign brands in a member group setting, MChinese = 5.33, Mforeign = 4.07; a priori contrast F(1, 93) = 126.47, p < .001. Similarly, in support of H2, Chinese consumers exhibited higher SBC for Chinese brands in an aspirational group, MChinese = 5.78, Mforeign = 4.77; a priori contrast, F(1, 93) = 78.58, p < .001. As we predicted in H3, Chinese brands achieved weaker SBC than foreign brands in a dissociative group setting, MChinese = 1.79, Mforeign = 2.40; a priori contrast F(1, 93) = 23.19, p < .001. Compared with foreign brands, Chinese brands indicated almost equal SBC in the neutral group setting, MChinese = 3.71, Mforeign = 3.69; a priori contrast, F(1, 93) = .04, p = .845. We summarize these results in Table 4 and Figure 1. Discussion The findings from Study 1 indicate a significant impact of reference groups on Chinese consumers’ SBC for both Chinese and foreign brands. As we predicted, Chinese consumers reported higher SBC for Chinese brands in an in-group setting (H1), confirming the in-group influence on SBC among Chinese consumers. We also predicted that Chinese consumers aspiring to join a group would have higher SBC with a Chinese brand than with a foreign brand (H2); the support for this hypothesis TABLE 1 Study 1: Brands Used in Experiments (by Product Category, Brand Origin) Clothes Cars Cell phones Toothpaste Chinese brands Baleno Yishion Septwolves Chery QQ Xiali Red Flag Lenovo Amoi Haier Zhong Hua Blue Sky Nice Foreign brands Pierre Cardin Jack Jones Louis Vuitton Mercedes-Benz BMW Volvo Nokia Samsung Sony Ericsson Colgate Crest LG Bamboo Salt Downloaded by [Southern Illinois University] at 05:04 31 December 2014

8. Summer 2012 45 indicated that Chinese brands were more appealing to them. These results are in line with Chang’s (2008) findings that Chinese participants rate products with Chinese, as opposed to English, brand names higher in terms of brand friendliness, brand trust, SBC, and brand liking. Foreign brands achieved higher SBC than Chinese brands in the dissociative group setting (H3); that is, Chinese people were more likely to avoid Chinese brands associated with a dissociative group. STUDY 2 Study 2 explored the potential moderating impact of individualism–collectivism on the reference group’s influence on SBC. Cultural theories suggest that cultural orientation shapes self- concepts, which then guide people’s behavior (e.g., Hofstede 2001). An emerging emphasis in research into reference group influences considers individualism and collectivism, or independent and interdependent self-construals, rather than self- concepts in general (e.g., Earley and Gibson 1998; White and Dahl 2007). China represents a typical collectivist country, in which consumers’ selves tend to be shaped more by in-groups than other factors (Hofstede 1980, 2001). Unlike the Western self, the self in Chinese culture reflects social relationships and roles (Earley and Gibson 1998). Therefore, we consider it both interesting and beneficial to investigate the moderating effect of individualism and collectivism on the reference group influence on SBC, which arises from the need to choose between foreign and Chinese brands in the Chinese market. Moderating Effects of Individualism and Collectivism The concept of individualism–collectivism refers to the range of social connectedness people experience (Earley and Gibson 1998), which entails both the nature of group memberships and the number of in-groups to which a person belongs (Triandis 1994). Collectivists belong to many in-groups, view group membership as stable and long-term, and define the self by their successful in-group memberships (Earley and Gibson 1998). In contrast, individualists belong to fewer in-groups and adopt them only if the in-groups are instrumental for at- taining desired outcomes, such that their sense of self does not depend on in-group memberships. Furthermore, individualists and collectivists differ in the scope and intensity of their conformity with in-groups: Individualists operate according to self-interest, whereas collectivists may pursue self-interests but first give priority to the group. Researchers have confirmed that individualistic and collectivistic tendencies appear in any given culture at different levels of analysis or situations (e.g., Triandis 1995); therefore, the construct is bidimensional (i.e., individualism and collectivism rather than individualism versus collectivism), and an individualist may display collectivistic behavior in a given situation, just as a collectivist may act individualistically. Brown (2000) suggests that group attitudes that involve group contexts and in-group bias should be investigated along TABLE 2 Study 1: Examples of Reference Groups and Brands Listed by Participants Reference group type Groups listed Chinese brands Foreign brands Member Young people Yishion LG Bamboo Salt College students Lenovo Sony Ericsson Males Septwolves Mercedes-Benz Aspirational Government officials Red Flag Nokia CEOs and managers Lenovo Pierre Cardin University professors Zhong Hua Colgate Dissociative Females Amoi Samsung Part-timers Nice Colgate Peddlers Xiali Louis Vuitton Neutral Lawyers Septwolves BMW Clerks Blue Sky Nokia Internet experts Chery QQ LG Bamboo Salt TABLE 3 Self–Brand Connection Scale Items 1. This brand reflects who I am. 2. I can identify with this brand. 3. I feel a personal connection to this brand. 4. I use this brand to communicate who I am to other people. 5. I think this brand helps me become the type of person I want to be. 6. I consider this brand to be “me” (it reflects who I consider myself to be or the way that I want to present myself to others). 7. This brand suits me well. Sources: Escalas and Bettman (2003, 2005). Downloaded by [Southern Illinois University] at 05:04 31 December 2014

9. 46 The Journal of Advertising this dimension. Escalas and Bettman (2005) also find that consumer self-construals moderate reference group influences on SBC among Asian, Hispanic, and white consumers in the United States. Generally, Chinese people view themselves as collectivistic and strongly embedded in their surrounding social context (Hofstede and Bond 1988; Jacobs and Gao 1995; Triandis and Gelfand 1998), though Ho and Chiu (1994) also find that both individualism and collectivism operate in Chinese society. A study of Generation X in mainland China illustrates that these young people are bicultural (Zhang 2009). Therefore, we predict that the basic effects postulated in our hypotheses from Study 1 are moderated by consumer individualism or collectivism. Specifically, in an in-group situation, collectivism should enhance reference group influences on SBC for Chinese brands, because Chinese consumers, similar to interdependent Asian consumers in North America, should be more likely to use brands whose images are congruent with in-groups, to establish their psychological association with these groups (Escalas and Bettman 2005). In contrast, even if foreign brands’ images are congruent with in-groups, the reference group influence on SBC toward foreign brands should be weaker, because collectivist Chinese consumers tend to conform (Earley and Gibson 1998). Collectivism should also activate a sense of ethnocentrism among Chinese consumers, who then feel obligated to favor domestic brands and maintain a distance from foreign brands because of their “foreignness” TABLE 4 Study 1: Means (Standard Deviations) of SBC by Brand Origin and Group Type Member group Aspirational group Dissociative group Neutral group (as control) Chinese brand 5.33*** (.92) (n = 26) 5.78*** (.70) (n = 25) 1.79*** (.73) (n = 20) 3.71 (.53) (n = 26) Foreign brand 4.07 (1.02) (n = 26) 4.77*** (.56) (n = 25) 2.40*** (.69) (n = 20) 3.69 (.54) (n = 26) Total 4.70 (.89) (n = 26) 5.27 (.56) (n = 25) 2.09 (.67) (n = 20) 3.70 (.52) (n = 26) Notes: SBC = self–brand connections. A comparison of each reference group to the neutral control group focused on brand origin. In each row, means marked *** are significantly different, compared with the mean of the neutral group. *** Significant at the p < .001 level. FIGURE 1 Study 1: Self–Brand Connections as a Function of Reference Group, Brand Origin Downloaded by [Southern Illinois University] at 05:04 31 December 2014

10. Summer 2012 47 (Zhou, Yang, and Hui 2010). Because collectivism should mitigate reference group influences on SBC for foreign brands in in-group contexts, we posit: Hypothesis 4: The effect of in-groups from H1, where the in- group influence leads to higher SBC for Chinese brands compared with foreign brands, will be more pronounced for collectivist compared with individualistic consumers. However, in a dissociative group condition, in which group membership and goals are subordinate, Chinese consumers are not required to conform to any group norms or show loyalty to the out-group. Therefore, individualism and collectivism should work in opposite ways, just as in the in-group condition. On the one hand, collectivism should strengthen the needs to avoid dissociative groups and stay away from brands embraced by dissociative groups. On the other hand, individualism should strengthen the needs of Chinese consumers, particularly individualist ones, to pursue their own self-interests. Escalas and Bettman (2005) find that the negative effect of out-group brand associations on SBC is stronger for independent (individualistic) consumers than for interdependent (collectivistic) consumers, because the independent consumers have stronger needs to differentiate themselves from out-groups. Our prediction follows this rea- soning, but we further predict that the moderating effects of individualism and collectivism work differently for domestic versus foreign brands. That is, the degree to which Chinese consumers avoid dissociative brands should differ, such that there is a stronger negative effect of dissociative brand associations on SBC toward domestic brands, because the domestic brands are more identity based and pose more of a threat to the group identity of consumers. A weaker negative effect on SBC toward foreign brands is likely, because foreign brands are more capable of differentiating Chinese consumers from their groups, particularly among individualistic Chinese consumers. Thus, we hypothesize that individualism and collectivism strengthen the negative effects of dissociative group influences on SBC toward domestic brands, but mitigate this negative effect on SBC toward foreign brands. Hypothesis 5: The effect of dissociative groups in H3, where dissociative influence leads to lower SBC for Chinese brands compared with foreign brands among Chinese consumers, will be more pronounced for individualist compared with collectivist consumers. Design In Study 2, we examined the moderating effect of individualism and collectivism on the influence of reference groups on SBC with Chinese and foreign brands. This study therefore featured a 2 (in-group versus out-group) × 2 (Chinese versus foreign brands) × 2 (collectivism versus individualism) mixed design, with brand origin and individualism–collectivism as the between-subjects variables and reference group type as the within-subjects variable. Participants For this study, we recruited 198 participants from the same university in Beijing that we used in Study 1. Each participant received RMB5 (US$.80) for their participation. Eighteen participants were eliminated from the data (6 did not answer the manipulation check questions, and 12 did not answer the SBC questions). The data from the remaining 180 respondents (45% men; age = 20.2 years) provide the input for the analysis. Using median splits, we divided the participants into high and low collectivism and individualism groups (5.44 versus 5.29; the two medians are close, suggesting that young people in China are bicultural, in line with Zhang [2009]). Participants high in collectivism and low in individualism were considered more collectivistic; those high in individualism and low in collectivism were considered more individualistic. This procedure is the same as that employed in previous research (see, e.g., Escalas and Bettman 2005; Zhang 2009). Ninety-four participants who earned consistently high or low scores on both scales were eliminated from the data set, leaving a total of 86 participants (41.9% men; age = 20.03 years), with 44 collectivists and 42 individualists. Procedure and Measures We adapted the study procedure from Escalas and Bettman (2005) and White and Dahl (2007). We first randomly assigned participants to two groups: Chinese brand or foreign brand. Respondents in each group listed one in-group (“you are a member of the group”) and one out-group (“you are not a member of the group”), and indicated the degree to which they related to both groups, as manipulation checks. For example, many participants listed “college students” as their in-group, and some participants listed “blue-collar workers” as their out-group. Then, participants in the Chinese brand group listed two Chinese brands, whereas those in the foreign brand group listed two foreign brands, with the requirement that the brands’ images be consistent with the corresponding in-group and out-group. They also completed a series of scale questions pertaining to SBC and individualism–collectivism, and provided demographic information, such as age and gender. Finally, the participants were debriefed, thanked, and dismissed. The entire procedure took approximately 30 minutes. Self–Brand Connection Measures The same SBC measures from Study 1 measured self–brand connections, again anchored at “strongly disagree” and Downloaded by [Southern Illinois University] at 05:04 31 December 2014

11. 48 The Journal of Advertising “strongly agree.” The seven items were averaged to form one SBC score per participant per brand (α = .88). Individualism–Collectivism Measures Participants completed the entire scale provided by Triandis and Gelfand (1998) for individualism (eight items, α = .69) and collectivism (eight items, α = .73). Manipulation Checks The degree to which the participant believed he or she belonged to each group was assessed using the average of three items, with the same scale that was used in Study 1 (α = .86). Results Manipulation Checks Participants believed they belonged to the in-group significantly more than to the out-group, Min-group = 4.01, Mout‑group = 1.73, F(1, 84) = 48.41, p < .001. Hypotheses Tests In H4 and H5, we proposed a three-way interaction of individualism–collectivism, reference group, and brand origin. To test this, we used a general linear model, with individualism–collectivism, group type, and brand origin as the independent variables. The dependent variable was SBC. We found a significant individualism–collectivism × group type × brand origin interaction, F(1, 82) = 32.17, p < .001, suggesting support for H4 and H5. The results show that the collectivists only had high SBC for Chinese brands used by the in-group, with equally low SBC for foreign brands used by the in-group and both Chinese and foreign brands used by the out-group. Specifically, the collectivists exhibited higher SBC toward Chinese than foreign brands congruent with the in-group, t(82) = 10.41, p < .001; higher SBC toward Chinese brands congruent with the in-group than Chinese brands congruent with the dissociative groups, t(82) = 13.58, p < .001; and higher SBC toward Chinese than foreign brands congruent with the dissociative groups, t(82) = 9.84, p < .001. The individualists exhibited lower SBC toward Chinese than foreign brands congruent with the dissociative group, t(82) = –3.17, p < .01; lower SBC toward Chinese brands congruent with the dissociative group than Chinese brands congruent with the in-group, t(82) = –3.34, p < .01; and lower SBC toward Chinese than foreign brands congruent with the in-group, t(82) = –3.42, p < .01. We summarize these results in Table 5 and depict them graphically in Figure 2. Discussion The results of Study 2 supported our prediction that individualism–collectivism moderates the influence of the reference group on consumers’ self–brand connections. The moderating effect seems more significant in the in-group situations, in which a Chinese brand activates the collectivism of Chinese consumers and enhances the in-group influence on SBC (H1). Thus, collectivists only have high SBC for Chinese brands used by their in-group, and they exhibit low SBC for foreign brands used by the in-group. In a dissociative group situation, the moderating effect of individualism–collectivism also seems significant but moderate, in that individualism induces a higher SBC for foreign brands than Chinese brands. The positive effect of collectivism, more pronounced in in-group conditions than individualism is, suggests that Chinese consumers continue to be greatly influenced by the type of collectivism endorsed by Confucianism. This finding is consistent with previous research. Traditionally, Chinese TABLE 5 Study 2: Means (Standard Deviations) of SBC by Brand Origin and Collectivism/Individualism In-group Out-group Collectivist Individualist Collectivist Individualist Chinese brand 6.25 (.74) (n = 24) 4.18 (.96) (n = 22) 3.08 (.65) (n = 24) 3.35 (.60) (n = 22) Foreign brand 3.15 (1.18) (n = 20) 4.35 (1.27) (n = 20) 3.27 (.75) (n = 20) 4.02 (.77) (n = 20) Total 4.84 (1.38) (n = 44) 4.26 (1.10) (n = 42) 3.17 (.70) (n = 44) 3.67 (.76) (n = 42) Note: SBC = self–brand connections. Downloaded by [Southern Illinois University] at 05:04 31 December 2014

12. Summer 2012 49 FIGURE 2 Study 2: Self–Brand Connections Across Group Type by Individualism–Collectivism consumers have held strong collectivist values, placing great emphasis on group consensus. Loyalty within a small group instead of extended groups is very important and prioritized. Therefore, Chinese consumers are more likely to stick with the brands that their reference group accepts and are less likely to deviate from in-group norms (Uncles, Wang, and Kwok 2010; Yau 1988). In summary, collectivism enhances SBC with in-group brands, but not with dissociative group brands. As Earley and Gibson concluded, “a collectivist’s pursuit of in-group goals may well represent ‘selfish’ interests to the degree that a person views in-group interests as his/her own” (1998, p. 296). GENERAL DISCUSSION Drawing on social identity theory, in Study 1, we tested the reference group influence on consumer self–brand connections with Chinese and foreign brands. All three hypotheses receive support; a reference group influence on SBC exists among Chi- nese consumers. In Study 2, we explored the moderating effect Downloaded by [Southern Illinois University] at 05:04 31 December 2014

13. 50 The Journal of Advertising of individualism–collectivism on the reference group’s influence on SBC. Our finding of support for H4 and H5 confirms that individualism–collectivism has a moderating effect. This research makes two major theoretical contributions to advertising literature. First, our results provide some empirical evidence that reference groups influence the meaning of a brand for consumers and their SBC with advertised brands. Our findings support the use of an SBC approach in advertising, such that advertisers should realize how SBC forms and evolves in different cultures, as well as which factors contribute to stronger connections with domestic or foreign brands. We thus extend advertising research to a new theoretical context that may enable researchers to explore the influence of reference groups on advertising effectiveness. Second, we build on prior reference group research by incorporating individualism–collectivism and investigating its moderating effect. Our findings provide meaningful insights into the interplay between individualism–collectivism and reference groups, as well as their impact on consumer attitudes. Advertisers should integrate reference groups into their advertising strategies, as well as note consumers’ general levels of individualism– collectivism when developing advertisements for consumers in different cultures. Our findings provide several managerial implications for both domestic and international advertisers. First, as brand equity based on symbolic values and cultural meanings becomes ever more important, advertisers need to try to integrate reference group influences into their brand positioning, advertising message strategies, and images. Specifically, to induce in-group effects among targeted consumers, advertisers should emphasize the group interests and brand preferences, preferably accompanied by images of in-group or aspirational group members. They should avoid using images of dissociative members. International advertisers should use distinct Chinese cultural elements in their messages, such as family-oriented values, the color red (which symbolizes happiness), and images of the Great Wall (which symbolizes China’s unity). Such messages and images can help reduce the “otherness” of the advertised foreign brands while also fostering positive SBC toward them (Wang and Wang 2007). In addition, international advertisers should avoid using any language or controversial images that may be interpreted by Chinese consumers as disrespectful to Chinese culture or the nation, because it could result in resent- ment and even boycotts against brands (Dong and Tian 2009). For example, Nippon’s dragon ads, published in International Advertising in 2004, invited strong criticism from those who believed that the dragon image, a national totem in China, had been used disrespectfully. The incident greatly harmed Nippon’s brand image among Chinese consumers. Second, in designing advertising campaigns, advertisers, and international advertisers in particular, should develop a differentiated understanding of Chinese consumers’ collectivistic sentiments, and then pursue programs and communication that help encourage and even promote collectivism, even as they acknowledge individual needs. Advertisers should attempt to employ more collectivism, group consensus appeals, and representations of consensual, family-oriented cultural traditions (Lin 2001). In addition, in planning an advertising campaign, international advertisers might take advantage of some traditional Chinese occasions, such as festivals (e.g., the Spring Festival, equal to Christmas in the West). Because Chinese consumers tend to use expensive gifts to help build interpersonal relationships and fulfill filial duties to their parents and relatives during such holidays, advertisements designed for and published on those occasions that incorporate Chinese cultural values should be more persuasive to Chinese buyers. They can also help establish self–brand connections with the advertised brands. Third, advertisers should adopt different strategies when targeting individualist and collectivist groups, highlighting the differentiated brand benefits that reflect unique symbolic values and meanings. For collectivists, advertising that em- phasizes in-group identity and Chinese cultural values, such as conformity with family preferences, is appropriate (Cheng 1994); for individualists who have grown up in a freer market system and have been exposed to Western influences, advertising that focuses on uniqueness and personal values may be more effective (Lin 2001; Zhang and Shavitt 2003). Furthermore, advertisements aimed at collectivists should highlight the local production or Chinese style of their brands, whereas those for individualists should concentrate on the foreign origin or global style of their brands. To maximize SBC with foreign brands in China, advertisers might consider brand localization in the country, which can reduce or minimize unfavorable brand COO effects (Zhuang et al. 2008). For example, foreign brands might adopt Chinese names when first introduced to China, which can induce greater preference by consumers who misperceive the brands as local (Chang 2008). Several limitations of this study also provide directions for further research. First, although we tested reference group influences in three contexts (member, aspirational, and dissociative) in Study 1, we included only in-group and dissociative group contexts in Study 2. Therefore, we could not test the moderating effects of individualism–collectivism for the influences of aspirational group on SBC. These potential effects are worth further investigation. Second, we used China as our research setting; additional research should test our proposed model in other cultural contexts, such as India, Brazil, Korea, Japan, and Russia—that is, other countries traditionally considered collectivistic. The applicability of our model to those countries may help scholars better understand various conceptualizations of SBC in advertising. Third, this study pertains to the self–brand connection and its implications for advertising, but the experiments did not feature a typical ad- Downloaded by [Southern Illinois University] at 05:04 31 December 2014

14. Summer 2012 51 vertising context. In both studies, we required that all Chinese and foreign brands listed by participants must be advertised brands in the Chinese market. Further research should repli- cate our study in a realistic advertising environment. Fourth, additional research should measure the impact of advertising appeals that are consistent with different reference groups on SBC and test for potential moderating effects on the reference group influence. REFERENCES Aaker, Jennifer, Anne Brumbaugh, and Sonya Grier (2000), “Nontarget Markets and Viewer Distinctiveness: The Impact of Target Marketing on Advertising Attitudes,” Journal of Consumer Psychology, 9 (3), 127–140. Agrawal, Nidhi, and Durairaj Maheswaran (2005), “The Effects of Self-Construal and Commitment on Persuasion,” Journal of Consumer Research, 31 (4), 841–849. Balabanis, George, and Adamantios Diamantopoulos (2004), “Domestic Country Bias, Country-of-Origin Effects, and Consumer Ethnocentrism: A Multidimensional Unfold- ing Approach,” Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 32 (1), 80–95. Bearden, William O., and Michael J. Etzel (1982), “Reference Group Influence on Product and Brand Purchase Decisions,” Journal of Consumer Research, 9 (2), 183–194. Brown, Rupert (2000), “Social Identity Theory: Past Achieve- ments, Current Problems and Future Challenges,” European Journal of Social Psychology, 30 (6), 745–778. Cadinu, Mara, and Cinzia Reggiori (2002), “Discrimination of a Low-Status Outgroup: The Role of Ingroup Threat,” Euro- pean Journal of Social Psychology, 32 (4), 501–515. Chan, Tsang-Sing, Geng Cui, and Nan Zhou (2009), “Competi- tion Between Foreign and Domestic Brands: A Study of Consumer Purchases in China,” Journal of Global Marketing, 22 (3), 181–197. Chang, Chingching (2008), “Chronological Age Versus Cogni- tive Age for Younger Consumers,” Journal of Advertising, 37 (3), 19–32. Cheng, Hong (1994), “Reflection of Cultural Values: A Con- tent Analysis of Chinese Magazine Advertisements from 1982 and 1992,” International Journal of Advertising, 13 (2), 167–183. Childers, Terry L., and Akshay R. Rao (1992), “The Influence of Familial and Peer-Based Reference Groups on Consumer Decisions,” Journal of Consumer Research, 19 (2), 198–211. Dong, Lily, and Kelly Tian (2009), “The Use of Western Brands in Asserting Chinese National Identity,” Journal of Consumer Research, 36 (3), 504–523. Du, Weiqiang, Chunling Yu, and Ping Zhao (2009), “The Influ- ence of Different Kinds of Reference Groups on Self-Brand Connections,” Acta Psychologica Sinica, 41 (2), 156–166. Duhachek, Adam, Shuoyang Zhang, and Shanker Krishnan (2007), “Anticipated Group Interaction: Coping with Va- lence Asymmetries in Attitude Shift,” Journal of Consumer Research, 34 (3), 395–405. Earley, Christopher P., and Cristina B. Gibson (1998), “Taking Stock in Our Progress on Individualism-Collectivism: 100 Years of Solidarity and Community,” Journal of Management, 24 (3), 265–304. Economist (2007), “Confucius Makes a Comeback” (May 17), 48–48. Elliott, Richard, and Kritsadarat Wattanasuwan (1998), “Brand as Symbolic Resources for the Construction of Identity,” International Journal of Advertising, 17 (2), 131–144. Englis, Basil G., and Michael R. Solomon (1995), “To Be and Not to Be: Lifestyle Imagery, Reference Groups, and the Clustering of America,” Journal of Advertising, 24 (1), 13–28. Escalas, Jennifer E., and James R. Bettman (2003), “You Are What They Eat: The Influence of Reference Groups on Consumers’ Connections to Brands,” Journal of Consumer Psychology, 13 (3), 339–348. ———, and ——— (2005), “Self-Construal, Reference Groups, and Brand Meaning,” Journal of Consumer Research, 32 (3), 378–389. Grier, Sonya A., and Rohit Deshpande (2001), “Social Dimen- sions of Consumer Distinctiveness: The Influence of Social Status of Group Identity and Advertising Persuasion,” Journal of Marketing Research, 38 (May), 216–224. Grubb, Edward L., and Gregg Hupp (1968), “Perception of Self, Generalized Stereotypes, and Brand Selection,” Journal of Marketing Research, 5 (February), 58–63. Heider, F. (1958), The Psychology of Interpersonal Relations, New York: John Wiley & Sons. Ho, David Y. F., and Chi-Yue Chiu (1994), “Component Ideas of Individualism, Collectivism, and Social Organization: An Application in the Study of Chinese Culture,” in In- dividualism and Collectivism: Theoretical and Methodological Issues, Uichol Kim, Harry C. Triandis, Çig¬dem Ka[g¬itçibas*i, Sang-Chin Choi, and Gene Yoon, eds., Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, 137–156. Hofstede, Geert (1980), “Motivation, Leadership, and Organiza- tion: Do American Theories Apply Abroad,” Organizational Dynamics, 9 (1), 42–63. ——— (2001), Culture’s Consequences: Comparing Values, Behav- iors, Institutions, and Organizations Across Nations, 2d ed., London: Sage. ———, and Michael H. Bond (1988), “The Confucius Con- nection: From Cultural Roots to Economic Growth,” Organizational Dynamics, 16 (4), 5–21. Hong, Jae W., and George M. Zinkhan (1995), “Self-Concept and Advertising Effectiveness: The Influence of Congru- ency, Conspicuousness, and Response Mode,” Psychology and Marketing, 12 (1), 53–77. Hung, Kineta, Flora Fang Gu, and David K. Tse (2005), “Im- proving Media Decisions in China,” Journal of Advertising, 34 (1), 49–63. Jacobs, Laurence, and Guopei Gao (1995), “Confucian Roots in China: A Force for Today’s Business,” Management Decisions, 33 (10), 29–34. Kleine, Robert E., III, Susan Schultz Kleine, and Jerome B. Kernan (1993), “Mundane Consumption and the Self: A Downloaded by [Southern Illinois University] at 05:04 31 December 2014

15. 52 The Journal of Advertising Social-Identity Perspective,” Journal of Consumer Psychology, 2 (3), 209–235. Lam, Son K., Michael Ahearne, Ye Hu, and Niels Schillewaert (2010), “Resistance to Brand Switching When a Radically New Brand Is Introduced: A Social Identity Theory Per- spective,” Journal of Marketing, 74 (6), 128–146. Lee, Wei-Na, Ji-Young Hong, and Se-Jin Lee (2003), “Com- municating with American Consumers in the Post 9/11 Climate: An Empirical Investigation of Consumer Eth- nocentrism in the United States,” International Journal of Advertising, 22 (4), 487–510. Li, Julie Juan, and Chenting Su (2007), “How Face Influences Consumption: A Comparative Study of American and Chi- nese Consumers,” International Journal of Market Research, 49 (2), 237–255. Lin, Carolyn A. (2001), “Cultural Values Reflected in Chinese and American Television Advertising,” Journal of Advertis- ing, 30 (4), 83–93. Liu, Scott S., and Keith F. Johnson (2005), “The Automatic Country-of-Origin Effects on Brand Judgments,” Journal of Advertising, 34 (1), 87–97. Markus, Hazel R., and Shinobu Kitayama (1991), “Culture and the Self: Implication for Cognition, Emotion, and Motiva- tion,” Psychological Review, 98 (2), 224–253. Martin, Brett A. S., Daniel Wentzel, and Torsten Tomczak (2008), “Effects of Susceptibility to Normative Influence and Type of Testimonial on Attitudes Toward Print Adver- tising,” Journal of Advertising, 37 (1), 29–43. McCracken, Grant (1986), “Culture and Consumption: A Theoretical Account of the Structure and Movement of the Cultural Meaning of Consumer Goods,” Journal of Consumer Research, 13 (1), 71–84. ——— (1989), “Who Is the Celebrity Endorser? Cultural Foun- dations of the Endorsement Process,” Journal of Consumer Research, 16 (December), 310–321. Mehta, Abhilasha (1999), “Using Self-Concept to Assess Ad- vertising Effectiveness,” Journal of Advertising Research, 39 (1), 81–89. Pham, Sherisse (2008), “Olympic Ads Tap China’s Pride,” Women’s Wear Daily, 196 (27), 8–9. Reed, Americus, II (2002), “Social Identity as a Useful Perspec- tive for Self-Concept-Based Consumer Research,” Psychology and Marketing, 19 (3), 235–266. Roberts, Dexter, Frederik Balfour, Bruce Einhorn, Michael Arndt, Michael Shari, and David Kiley (2004), “China’s Power Brands,” BusinessWeek (November 7), 77–84. Russell, Cristel Antonia, and Barbara B. Stern (2006), “Con- sumers, Characters, and Products,” Journal of Advertising, 35 (1), 7–21. Sharma, Subhash, Terrence A. Shimp, and Jeongshin Shin (1995), “Consumer Ethnocentrism: A Test of Antecedents and Moderators,” Journal of Academy of Marketing Science, 23 (1), 26–37. Sirgy, Joseph M. (1982), “Self-Concept in Consumer Behavior, a Critical Review,” Journal of Consumer Research, 9 (3), 287–300. Sprott, David, Sandor Czellar, and Eric Spangenberg (2009), “The Importance of a General Measure of Brand Engage- ment on Market Behavior: Development and Validation of a Scale,” Journal of Marketing Research, 46 (February), 92–104. Swaminathan, Vanitha, Karen L. Page, and Zeynep Gürhan-Canli (2007), “‘My’ Brand or ‘Our’ Brand: The Effects of Brand Re- lationship Dimensions and Self-Construal on Brand Evalua- tions,” Journal of Consumer Research, 34 (2), 248–259. Tajfel, Henri (1986), The Social Identity Theory of Intergroup Behavior, Chicago: Nelson. ———, and John C. Turner (1979), “An Integrative Theory of Intergroup Conflict,” in The Social Psychology of Intergroup Relations, William G. Austin and Stephen Worchel, eds., Monterey, CA: Brooks/Cole. Triandis, Harry C. (1994), Culture and Social Behavior, New York: McGraw-Hill. ——— (1995), Individualism and Collectivism, Boulder, CO: Westview Press. ———, and Michele J. Gelfand (1998), “Converging Measure- ment of Horizontal and Vertical Individualism and Collec- tivism,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74 (1), 118–128. Turner, John C. (1982), “Towards a Cognitive Redefinition of the Social Group,” in Social Identity and Intergroup Relations, Henri Tajfel, ed., Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. ———, and Penelope J. Oakes (1986), “The Significance of the Social Identity Concept for Social Psychology with Refer- ences to Individualism, Interactionism and Social Influence,” British Journal of Social Psychology, 25 (3), 237–252. Uncles, Mark D., Chao Wang, and Simon Kwok (2010), “A Temporal Analysis of Behavioral Brand Loyalty Among Urban Chinese Consumers,” Journal of Marketing Manage- ment, 26 (9/10), 921–942. Wang, Cheng, and Xiaohua Lin (2009), “Migration of Chinese Consumption Values: Traditions, Modernization, and Cultural Renaissance,” Journal of Business Ethics, 88 (3), 399–409. Wang, Jian, and Zhiying Wang (2007), “The Political Symbolism of Business,” Journal of Communication Management, 11 (2), 134–149. Webster, Cynthia, and James B. Faircloth III (1994), “The Role of Hispanic Ethnic Identification on Reference Group Influence,” Advances in Consumer Research, 21 (1), 458–463. White, Katherine, and Darren W. Dahl (2006), “To Be or Not to Be? The Influence of Dissociative Reference Groups on Consumer Preferences,” Journal of Consumer Psychology, 16 (4), 404–414. ———, and ——— (2007), “Are All Out-Groups Created Equal? Consumer Identity and Dissociative Influence,” Journal of Consumer Research, 34 (4), 525–536. Wooten, David B., and Americus Reed II (2004), “Playing It Safe: Susceptibility to Normative Influence and Protec- tive Self-Presentation,” Journal of Consumer Research, 31 (3), 551–556. Downloaded by [Southern Illinois University] at 05:04 31 December 2014

16. Summer 2012 53 Yau, Oliver H. M. (1988), “Chinese Cultural Values: Their Di- mensions and Marketing Implications,” European Journal of Marketing, 22 (May), 44–57. Zeng, Ming, and Peter J. Williamson (2003), “The Hidden Dragons,” Harvard Business Review, 81 (10), 82–99. Zhang, Jing (2009), “The Effect of Advertising Appeals in Activating Self-Construals,” Journal of Advertising, 38 (1), 63–81. ———, and Sharon Shavitt (2003), “Cultural Values in Adver- tisements to the Chinese X-Generation,” Journal of Advertis- ing, 32 (1), 23–33. Zhao, Xin, and Russell W. Belk (2008), “Politicizing Consumer Culture: Advertising’s Appropriation of Political Ideology in China’s Social Transition,” Journal of Consumer Research, 35 (2), 231–244. Zhou, Lianxi, and Amy Wong (2008), “Exploring the Influence of Product Conspicuousness and Social Compliance on Pur- chasing Motives of Young Chinese Consumers for Foreign Brands,” Journal of Consumer Behaviour, 7 (6), 470–483. ———, Zhiyong Yang, and Michael K. Hui (2010), “Non- Local or Local Brands? A Multi-Level Investigation into Confidence in Brand Origin Identification and Its Strategic Implications,” Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 38 (2), 202–218. Zhuang, Guijun, Xuehua Wang, Lianxi Zhou, and Nan Zhou (2008), “Asymmetric Effects of Brand Origin Confusion,” International Marketing Review, 25 (4), 441–457. Downloaded by [Southern Illinois University] at 05:04 31 December 2014

17. Downloaded by [Southern Illinois University] at 05:04 31 December 2014

Influence of Reference Groups

Du liest eine Vorschau.

Hier ansehen

Influence of Reference Groups

Weitere Verwandte Inhalte

Ähnlich wie Influence of Reference Groups (20)

Aktuellste (20)