ASSOCIATION FOR CONSUMER RESEARCH

Labovitz School of Business & Economics, University of Minnesota Duluth, 11 E. Superior Street, Suite 210, Duluth, MN 55802

Countervailing Influences of Consumer Animosity and Nostalgia on Purchasing Decisions Adamantios Diamantopoulos, Harvard University, USA and University of Vienna, Austria Justina Gineikien, Vilnius University, Lithuania Sigitas Urbonaviius, Vilnius University, Lithuania

We offer empirical evidence that nostalgia may act as countervailing force to animosity in settings when formerly occupied countries become independent. For ownership of nostalgic products, nostalgia is a better predictor than animosity; the opposite holds for non- nostalgic products. Ethnocentrism plays no role when nostalgia and animosity are also predictors.

[to cite]: Adamantios Diamantopoulos, Justina Gineikien, and Sigitas Urbonaviius (2013) ,"Countervailing Influences of Consumer Animosity and Nostalgia on Purchasing Decisions", in NA - Advances in Consumer Research Volume 41, eds. Simona Botti and Aparna Labroo, Duluth, MN : Association for Consumer Research.

[url]: http://www.acrwebsite.org/volumes/1014655/volumes/v41/NA-41

[copyright notice]: This work is copyrighted by The Association for Consumer Research. For permission to copy or use this work in whole or in part, please contact the Copyright Clearance Center at http://www.copyright.com/. Countervailing Influences of Consumer Animosity and Nostalgia on Purchasing Decisions Justina Gineikienė, Vilnius University, Lithuania Adamantios Diamantopoulos, Harvard University, USA & University of Vienna, Austria Sigitas Urbonavičius, Vilnius University, Lithuania

EXTENDED ABSTRACT periods. Nostalgic products were already available during Soviet times, whereas non-nostalgic products have been launched to the Introduction market after Lithuania regained independence. In recent years, consumer animosity has received a lot of attention in international marketing literature (for a review, see Conceptual Background and Hypotheses Riefler and Diamantopoulos 2007). The construct is conceptually Impact of Consumer Animosity defined as “remnants of antipathy related to previous or ongoing Animosity is theoretically expected to be negatively related military, political or economic events” (Klein, Ettenson, and Morris to buying products from the offending country, since Lithuanian 1998, 90) and has been repeatedly found to have a negative effect consumers’ animosity feelings are likely to bear on purchasing on consumers’ willingness to buy foreign products (e.g., Klein et al. decisions, leading to the avoidance of Russian products. In a prior 1998; Klein 2002; Shimp, Dunn, and Klein 2004). Animosity may research, product ownership was assessed by Klein et al. (1998), also adversely impact product evaluations (Ettenson and Klein 2005; who validated their willingness to buy measure with a measure of Rose, Rose, and Shoham 2009; Shoham et al. 2006). Its influence actual ownership of six consumer products (e.g., radios, cameras); has been found to be separate from that of consumer ethnocentrism, by Shin (2001), who asked respondents to freely list all products namely, the “beliefs held by consumers about the appropriateness of Japanese origin they possess; and by Klein (2002), who asked and indeed morality of purchasing foreign-made products” (Shimp respondents to indicate whether they own a Japanese car. Shoham and Sharma 1987, 280), which has similar effects on foreign product et al. (2006) used a change-in-purchase behavior scale that featured buying behavior (for a review, see Shankarmahesh 2006). six actual product categories produced or marketed by Israeli Arabs, In some purchase settings, there may be a countervailing force to while Guido et al. (2010) observed animosity effects on purchases animosity, namely nostalgia, reflecting “a preference (general liking, on two additional product categories. As all these studies empirically positive attitude, or favorable affect) toward objects (people, places, confirm that animosity negatively influences actual ownership, we or things) that were more common (popular, fashionable, or widely also expect that: circulated) when one was younger (in early adulthood, in adolescence, in childhood, or even before birth” (Holbrook and Schindler 1991, Hypothesis 1: Consumer animosity is negatively related to ac- 330). Such settings typically occur when countries that experienced tual ownership of Russian products. painful long-lasting occupation, become independent. For example, after the collapse of the Soviet Union, dozens of new countries were In their seminal study, Klein et al. (1998) found that animosity established where consumers are exposed to products that are closely toward a foreign nation affects negatively the purchase of products connected with consumers’ youth and past, but at the same time, produced by that country independently of judgments of product they originate in a (now) foreign and disliked country. Under these quality. Thus, consumers may acknowledge the (good) product circumstances, negative attitudes due to animosity may co-exist with quality stemming from the offending country, but still avoid such positive attitudes due to consumer nostalgia and the question arises products because the foreign country concerned has engaged in as to which construct has the strongest impact on consumer behavior. military, political, or economic acts that a consumer finds both Against this background, the purpose of the current study grievous and difficult to forgive (Klein et al. 1998). While several is to empirically examine consumer animosity and nostalgia as studies subsequently confirmed the non-significant link between countervailing forces on consumer behavior in Lithuania, while animosity and product judgment (e.g., Witkowski 2000; Shin 2001; controlling for the effects of consumer ethnocentrism. Lithuania Klein 2002), other authors found a direct negative effect of animosity provides a suitable setting for nostalgia and country animosity on product judgment (e.g., Ettenson and Klein 2005; Mostafa 2010; research as the country was occupied by the Soviet Union for five Shoham et al. 2006). Shoham et al. (2006) draw on the principle decades (1940˗1990) and only regained its independence relatively of cognitive consistency theory (Festinger 1957) and balance theory recently. The Russian Federation is thus a target country for negative (Heider 1958). Researchers argue that consumers who feel heightened sentiments as it is a legal successor to the Soviet Union and an ex- animosity will seek to restore the balance and be motivated to adapt controlling state of this union. Russian-made products may give rise their cognitions (product-quality judgments) downward. Thus, an to nostalgic feelings (as those products are connected with the past), increase in animosity levels will bring about a decrease in product- but at the same time evoke animosity feelings due to historical events. quality judgment to maintain the harmony. Moreover, the impact of The latter include mass deportation campaigns to Siberia, partisan animosity on product judgment may be country specific (e.g., Japan resistance fights, and more recent independence fights (Laurinavičius, may be a target country of animosity, but, at the same time, it enjoys Motieka, and Statkus 2005). Attitudes towards products made in a positive image in terms of quality and workmanship). In the current Russian Federation are thus probably simultaneously loaded both case, we expect that animosity will lead to a denigration of products with (positive) nostalgic memories and (negative) animosity feelings. made in the Russian Federation as the latter tends to be associated Unlike most previous studies of animosity and nostalgia, the with a poor product quality stereotype. Thus: focus of the present study is not on intended, but on actual behavior (product ownership) as the key outcome variable. More specifically, Hypothesis 2: Consumer animosity is negatively related to two types of products are considered: nostalgic and non-nostalgic product judgment of Russian products products. Both types of products are manufactured and imported from the Russian Federation, but originate from different time

Advances in Consumer Research 456 Volume 41, ©2013 Advances in Consumer Research (Volume 41) / 457 Impact of Nostalgia Extant literature has not explicitly addressed the relationship Findings regarding the relationship between nostalgia and among consumer ethnocentrism, animosity and nostalgia. According purchase behavior are mixed. For example, Sierra and McQuitty to Social identity theory (SIT) (Tajfel and Turner 1979, for a review (2007) found that nostalgia positively influences consumers’ see Hogg 2006), ethnocentrism is associated with a negative out- intentions to purchase nostalgic products, while Ford and Merchant group bias toward foreign products in general and animosity – with (2010) found that appeals for charity that evoke personal nostalgia negative out-group bias towards specific country. To the contrary, have a positive impact on the charitable-donation intentions of nostalgia is associated with in-group favoritism (Sierra and McQuitty consumers. In contrast, Rindfleisch, Freeman, and Burroughs 2007) and may assist in connecting with a desirable past and with (2000) found that nostalgia is a poor predictor of product preference other people who shared the same experience (Kleine, Kleine, and and choice for such products as automobiles. Similarly, Lambert- Allen 1995). As in our case we research specific country-made Pandraud and Laurent (2010) concentrated on actual ownership of products and not foreign products in general, the effects of animosity perfume and found that nostalgia does not offer a strong explanation and nostalgia may dominate the consumer choices in contrast to of older consumers’ tendency to use older perfumes. the consumer ethnocentrism (e.g., consumers might avoid buying The above mixed findings can (at least) partly be explained by foreign products in general, but this ethnocentric tendency is weaker differences in the level of specificity of the nostalgia scales used. than country specific animosity and country specific nostalgia). Some aforementioned studies used Holbrook’s (1993) general Thus, in the case when specific country products are analyzed the nostalgia scale (e.g., Rindfleisch et al. 2000) and linked to specific, specific attitudes should dominate general ethnocentric attitudes, but not necessarily nostalgic, brands. Other studies focused on therefore we propose that: nostalgic products and also used more product-specific items in their nostalgia measure (e.g., Sierra and McQuitty 2007). In the present Hypothesis 7: Consumer ethnocentrism effects will be weak case, since we explicitly consider both nostalgic and non-nostalgic when animosity and nostalgia are also present products, we expect that: Since product judgment is well-known to be positively related Hypothesis 3: Nostalgia is positively related to actual purchas- to product ownership (e.g., Guido et al. 2010; Klein et al. 1998; es of nostalgic Russian products only. Shoham et al. 2006), we further posit that:

Prior research has not addressed the relationship between Hypothesis 8: Product judgment of Russian products is posi- nostalgia and product judgment. However, bearing in mind that tively related to actual ownership of Russian nostalgia reflects a “yearning for yesterday” (Davis 1979, 18), products. one could expect that such a state of mind may lead to a harsher evaluation of the products of today. In addition, the scale used to Method measure nostalgia (product nostalgia factor) incorporate product Data were collected through mall intercepts (Bruwer and judgment items (e.g., “They don’t make them like they used to”). Haydam 1996) in the biggest shopping mall of Lithuania in Vilnius The consumers who hold attitude that products were better in the old by randomly approaching consumers entering the mall. A total days will be more positive towards Soviet products (that originate of 419 questionnaires were included in the analysis. The sample from the old days). We thus hypothesize that: includes almost equal numbers of male and female respondents. Just Hypothesis 4: Nostalgia is positively related to product judg- over 12% of the respondents were younger than 19 years of age, 45% ment of nostalgic Russian products only. fell into 20˗29 years age group, 23.2% were between 30˗39 years old, 9.8% between 40˗49 and 9.2% were 50+ years old. In terms of household income, most respondents fell into three almost equal Impact of Consumer Ethnocentrism groups (each accounting around 29%), and only the lowest-income As already noted, in the current study, consumer ethnocentrism group was significantly smaller (12% of the sample). Compared serves as a control variable for the effects of animosity and nostalgia to Lithuania’s general population, the sample consists of slightly on product judgment and ownership. Ethnocentric consumers would younger, urban respondents with a higher income (Lithuanian consider purchasing imported products as being wrong because it Department of Statistics 2011). hurts the domestic economy, causes loss of jobs, and is unpatriotic To operationalize the study constructs, we adapted scales (Shimp and Sharma 1987). Whereas ethnocentrism is strongly linked that had been validated in previous research. Consumer animosity towards preferences for domestic products and negatively related towards Russia was measured with a three-item scale based on Klein towards all foreign products, animosity is country˗specific (Klein et al. (1998) and adapted to the Lithuanian context (example item: I 2002; Klein and Ettenson 1999). A substantial body of research cannot forgive Russia for the mass deportation campaigns of people shows that consumer ethnocentrism has a significant negative impact to Siberia). The scale focused on war animosity which captures the on product judgment and willingness to buy foreign products (e.g., most relevant and sensitive aspect of animosity towards Russia in Klein 2002; Netemeyer, Durvasula, and Lichtenstein 1991; Sharma, the survey country. Nostalgia was measured by four items drawn Shimp, and Shin 1995). We, thus, expect that: from Holbrook (1993). Consistent with prior research revealing two- dimensional nature of the scale (Borges and Boulbry 2003; Evans et Hypothesis 5: Consumer ethnocentrism is negatively related to al. 2010; Reisenwitz, Iyer, and Cutler 2004; Rindfleisch et al. 2000; actual ownership of Russian products. Rousseau and Venter 1999, 2000), two of the items captured product nostalgia (example item: They don’t make them like they used to) Hypothesis 6: Consumer ethnocentrism is negatively related to and the other two progress nostalgia (example item: Technological product judgment of Russian products. change will ensure a brighter future). Consumer ethnocentrism was measured by the four-items scale used by Klein (2002) which is based on Shimp and Sharma’s (1987) original CETSCALE (example 458 / Countervailing Influences of Consumer Animosity and Nostalgia on Purchasing Decisions item: It is not right to purchase foreign products, because it puts offering no support for hypothesis 4. Surprisingly, and in contrast Lithuanians out of jobs). Product judgment was measured on a to hypothesis 5 and hypothesis 6, consumer ethnocentrism reveals three-item scale based on items developed by Klein et al. (1998), no significant impact on either product ownership or product Darling and Arnold (1988), Wood and Darling (1993) (example judgment. As expected, consumer ethnocentrism effects are weak item: Products made in Russia are of good quality). when animosity and nostalgia are also present and hypothesis 7 is Product ownership was measured by asking respondents confirmed. Finally, as predicted by hypothesis 8, product judgment whether they had bought different Russian convenience goods is positively related to product ownership; this effect holds for both during the last six months. As currently there is not many nostalgic nostalgic (β = 0.41, p ˂ .01) and non-nostalgic products (β = 0.42, products available that had been manufactured during the Soviet p ˂ .01). times, we included three brands that used to be the pride of Soviet manufacturing sector (black tea and mineral water). They are still Discussion and Conclusions manufactured by Russian companies, keeping the old brand names. Our findings offer some evidence that consumer nostalgia Non-nostalgic products were represented by three brands currently may indeed act as a countervailing force to consumer animosity in manufactured in the Russian Federation but not available during certain settings. However, it is only product nostalgia that impacts Soviet times (dressing and cosmetics). Product ownership was consumer behavior and its influence is limited to nostalgic products. measured as sums of all brands purchased in the nostalgic and non- Indeed, with regard to ownership of the latter, nostalgia is a better nostalgic categories respectively. predictor than consumer animosity; the opposite holds in the case of non-nostalgic products ownership of which is affected by animosity Results but not nostalgia. Regarding product judgment, only animosity was found to be a significant predictor, as also observed by Ettenson Measurement model and Klein (2005) and Mostafa (2010), among others. Given that We investigated the dimensionality, reliability and validity of product judgment also strongly impacts product ownership, it can our construct measures via a confirmatory factor analysis (Anderson be concluded that consumer animosity has a greater explanatory and Gerbing 1988). Overall fit was satisfactory (χ² = 252, df = power than either nostalgia or consumer ethnocentrism. Indeed, 85, RMSEA = 0.065, CFI = 0.952, SRMR = 0.041). Composite the latter was unexpectedly found to have no significant effects reliabilities of measurement models ranged from .67 to .93, while on either product judgment or product ownership. In this context, average variance extracted (AVE) values ranged from .51 to .81. All some animosity studies found that consumer ethnocentrism is the AVEs exceeded the squared correlation between each construct with dominant factor in choosing between a domestic good and a foreign all other constructs (Fornell and Larker 1981). good (e.g., Klein 2002). The current findings suggest that the relative Structural model strength of consumer ethnocentrism may be weak, when animosity To test our hypotheses, we estimated a structural equation and nostalgia also influence product purchases. model with LISREL 8.8 (Jöreskog and Sörbom 2007), which From a managerial perspective, the study findings have produced a satisfactory fit (χ² = 236, df = 85, RMSEA = 0.065, implications for advertisers, who normally benefit from positive CFI = 0.952, SRMR = 0.041). The relevant standardized parameter consumer responses to nostalgia (Reisenwitz et al. 2004). Advertisers estimates and associated t-values are shown in figure 1. Supporting communicating products that strengthen consumers’ nostalgic hypothesis 1, country animosity is negatively related to ownership of responses should expect that nostalgia can produce a competitive both nostalgic (β = -0.09, p ˂ .10) and non-nostalgic (β = -0.11, p ˂ advantage only when exploited in appropriate settings. In countries .05) Russian products. Moreover, and consistent with hypothesis 2, where nostalgic memories co-exist with animosity feelings, messages animosity negatively impacts product judgment (β = -0.40, p ˂ .01). from the past should be used cautiously as they may elicit public In support of hypothesis 3, product nostalgia is positively linked to outrage. A recent negative publicity example in Lithuania involves a ownership of nostalgic Russian products (β = 0.17, p ˂ .05); however, supermarket chain which promoted food products carrying “Soviet” no such effect is observed for progress nostalgia. Moreover, neither as a brand name during the commemoration of victims of the fight product nor progress nostalgia are related to product judgment, thus for independence day. The campaign not only provoked negative consumer responses, but also encouraged discussion at the political level that brand names with Soviet connotations have to be banned. Figure 1: Hypothesis Testing Results Regarding future research, three issues merit attention. First, the current study should be replicated in other settings in which both animosity and nostalgia may co-exist (e.g., other ex-Soviet countries, former Yugoslavia) in order to assess the generalizability of our findings. Second, instead of using Holbrook’s (1993) scale which captures nostalgia in general, future studies may develop scales that focus on some specific former period; this would make the measurement of nostalgia more comparable to measures of animosity which, by definition, focus on specific events (Riefler and Diamantopoulos 2007). Finally, a longitudinal study seeking to explicate the development the relationship between animosity and nostalgia over time would offer important insights on the dynamics of the constructs.

Note: standardized estimates shown (t˗values in brackets) Advances in Consumer Research (Volume 41) / 459 REFERENCES Klein, Jill (2002), “Us versus them, or us versus everyone? Anderson, James. C. and David W. Gerbing (1988), “Structural Delineating consumer aversion to foreign goods,” Journal of Equation Modeling in Practice: A Review and Recommended International Business Studies, 33 (2), 345-363. Two-Step Approach,” Psychological Bulletin, 103(3) (May), Klein, Jill, Richard Ettenson, and Marlene D. Morris (1998), 411-423. “The Animosity of Model of Foreign Product Purchase: An Borges, Adilson and Gaëlle Boulbry (2003), “Measuring French Empirical Test in the People’s Republic of China,” Journal of Nostalgia: the Validation of The Holbrook´s Nostalgia Marketing, 62 (January), 89-100. Proneness Scale in France,” Ninth Cross-Cultural Research Klein, Jill and Richard Ettenson (1999), “Consumer animosity and Conference, December 10-14, Half Moon Bay Resort, Rose consumer ethnocentrism: An analysis of unique antecedents,” Hall, Jamaica. Journal of International Consumer Marketing, 11 (4), 5-24. Bruwer, Johan W and Norbert E. Haydam (1996), “Reducing bias Kleine, Susan Schultz, Robert E. Kleine, III, and Chris T. in shopping mall-intercept surveys: The time-based systematic Allen (1995), “How is a Possession ‘Me’ or ‘Not Me?’ sampling method,” South African Journal of Business Characterizing Types and an Antecedent of Material Management, 27 (June), 9-17. Possession Attachment,” Journal of Consumer Research, 22 Darling, John R. and Danny R. Arnold (1988), “The Competitive (December), 327-343. Position Abroad of Products and Marketing Practices of the Lambert-Pandraud, Raphaelle and Gilles Laurent (2010), “Why Do United States, Japan, and Selected European Countries,” Older Consumers Buy Older Brands? The Role of Attachment Journal of Consumer Marketing, 5 (Fall), 61-68. and Declining Innovativeness,” Journal of Marketing; 74 Davis, Fred (1979), Yearning for Yesterday: A Sociology of (July), 104-121. Nostalgia, New York: The Free Press. Laurinavičius, Česlovas, Egidijus Motieka, and Nortautas Statkus Ettenson, Richard and Jill G. Klein (2005), “The Fallout from (2005), Baltijos valstybių geopolitikos bruožai: XX amžius, French Nuclear Testing in the South Pacific: A Longitudinal Vilnius: LII. Study of Consumer Boycotts,” International Marketing Lithuanian Department of Statistics (2011), “Gyventojų sudėtis,” Review, 22(2) (February), 199-224. http://www.stat.gov.lt/lt/pages/view/?id=2420. Evans, Robert D., Phillip M. Hart, John E. Cicala, and Dan L. Mostafa, Mohamed M. (2010), “A structural equation analysis of Sherrell, D. (2010), “Elvis: Dead and Loving It - The Influence the animosity model of foreign product purchase in Egypt,” of Attraction, Nostalgia, and Risk in Dead Celebrity Attitude Global Business Review, 11 (October), 347-363. Formation,” Journal of Management and Marketing Research, Netemeyer, Richard G., Srinivas Durvasula, and Donald R. 3, 1-13. Lichtenstein (1991), “A cross-national assessment of the Festinger, Leon (1957), A Theory of Cognitive Dissonance. reliability and validity of the CETSCALE,” Journal of Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press. Marketing Research, 28(3) (August), 320-27. Ford, John B. and Altaf Merchant (2010), ”Nostalgia Drives Reisenwitz, Timothy H., Rajesh, Iyer, and Bob Cutler (2004), Donations: The Power of Charitable Appeals Based on “Nostalgia Advertising and the Influence of Nostalgia Emotions and Intentions,” Journal of Advertising Research, Proneness,” Marketing Management Journal, 14 (2), 55–66. 50(4), 450-59. Riefler, Petra and Adamantios Diamantopoulos (2007), “Consumer Fornell, Claes and David G. Larcker (1981), “Evaluating Animosity: A Literature Review and a Reconsideration of Structural Equation Models with Unobservable Variables and Its Measurement,” International Marketing Review, 24 (1), Measurement Error,” Journal of Marketing Research, 18(1) 87-119. (February): 39-50. Rindfleisch, Aric, Dan Freeman, and James E. Burroughs (2000), Guido, Gianluigi, Irene M. Prete, Tedeschi Piermario, and “Nostalgia, Materialism, and Product Preference: An Initial Luly Dadusc (2010), “Effects of Jewish-Italian Consumer Inquiry,” in Advances in Consumer Research, 27, Steve Hoch Animosity Towards Arab Products: the Role of Personality,” and Robert Meyer, ed. Provo, UT: Association for Consumer Marketing Management Journal, 20(1) (March) , 1-18. Research, 27, 36-41. Heider, F. (1958), The Psychology of Interpersonal Relations. New Rose Mei, Gregory M. Rose, and Aviv Shoham (2009), “The York: John Wiley & Sons. impact of consumer animosity on attitudes towards foreign Hogg, Michael (2006). Social identity theory. In P. J. Burke (Ed.), goods: a study of Jewish and Arab Israelis,” Journal of Contemporary social psychological theories (pp. 111-136). Consumer Marketing 26(5), 330–39. Palo Alto, CA: Stanford University Press. Rousseau , G.G., Venter, D.J.L (1999), “The Influence of Nostalgia Holak, Susan L., William J. Havlena and Alexei V. Matveev on Consumer Preference,” Journal of Industrial Psychology, (2006), “Exploring Nostalgia in Russia: Testing the Index 25(2), 2-10. of Nostalgia-Proneness,” European Advances in Consumer Rousseau , G.G., Venter, D.J.L (2000), “The Relationship Between Research, 7, 195–200. Nostalgia and Consumer Preference: Replication and Holbrook Morris B. and Robert M. Schindler (1991), “Echoes of Extension,” Journal of Industrial Psychology, 26(2), 32-36. the Dear Departed Past: Some Work in Progress on Nostalgia,” Shankarmahesh, Mahesh N. (2006), “Consumer Ethnocentrism: Advances in Consumer Research, 18, 330–33. An Integrative Review of its Antecedents and Consequences,” Holbrook, Morris B. (1993), “Nostalgia and Consumption International Marketing Review, 23(2), 146-172. Preferences: Some Emerging Paterns of Consumer Tastes,” Sharma, Subhash, Terrence A. Shimp, and Jeongshin Shin, J. Journal of Consumer Research, 20 (September), 245-256. (1995), “Consumer ethnocentrism: A test of antecedents and Jöreskog, Karl G. and Dag Sörbom (2007), LISREL 8.8., Chicago: moderators,” Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Scientific Software International. 23(1), 26-37. 460 / Countervailing Influences of Consumer Animosity and Nostalgia on Purchasing Decisions

Shimp, Terence A., Tracy, H. Dunn, and Jill G. Klein (2004), Tajfel, Henry and John Turner (1979). An integrative theory of “Remnants of the U. S. Civil War and Modern Consumer intergroup conflict. In W. G. Austin & S. Worchel (Eds.), Behavior,” Psychology & Marketing, 21(2), 75-91. The social psychology of intergroup relations (pp. 33-48). Shimp, Terence A. and Subash Sharma (1987), “Consumer Monterey, CA: Brooks/Cole. Ethnocentrism: Construction and Validation of the Witkowski, Terrence H. (2000), “Effects of Animosity Toward CETSCALE,” Journal of Marketing Research, 24 (August), China on Willingness to Buy Chinese Products,” in Managing 280-89. in a Turbulent International Business Environment, Shin, Mincheol (2001), “The Animosity Model of Foreign Product Gary N. McClean, Erdener Kaynak, and Oscar A. Aliaga Purchase – Does It Work In Korea?” Journal of Empirical ed., Hummelstown, PA: The International Management Generalisations in Marketing Science, (6), 1-14. Development Association, 470-77. Shoham, Aviv, Moshe Davidow, Jill G. Klein, and Ayalla Ruvio Wood. Van R. and John R. Darling (1993), “The Marketing (2006), “Animosity on the Home Front: The Intifada in Challenges of the Newly Independent Republics: Product Israel and Its Impact on Consumer Behavior,” Journal of Competitiveness in Global Markets,” Journal of International International Marketing, 14 (3), 92-114. Marketing, 1(1), 77-102. Sierra, Jeremy J. and Shaun McQuitty (2007), “Attitudes and Emotions as Determinants of Nostalgia Purchases: An Application of Social Identity Theory,” Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice, 15 (Spring), 99-112.