INFORMATION TO USERS

This manuscript has been reproduced from the microfilm master. UMI films the text directly from the original or copy submitted. Thus, some thesis and dissertation copies are in typewriter face, while others may be from any type of computer printer.

The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted. Broken or indistinct print, colored or poor quality illustrations and photographs, print bleedthrough, substandard margins, and improper alignment can adversely affect reproduction.

In the unlikely event that the author did not send UMI a complete manuscript and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if unauthorized copyright material had to be removed, a note will indicate the deletion.

Oversize materials (e.g., maps, drawings, charts) are reproduced by sectioning the original, beginning at the upper left-hand comer and continuing from left to right in equal sections with small overlaps. Each original is also photographed in one exposure and is included in reduced form at the back of the book.

Photographs included in the original manuscript have been reproduced xerographically in this copy. Higher quality 6" x 9” black and white photographic prints are available for any photographs or illustrations appearing in this copy for an additional charge. Contact UMI directly to order. UMI* Bell & Howell Information and Learning 300 North Zeeb Road, Ann Arbor, Ml 48106-1346 USA 800-521-0600

CHINESE CONSUMERS AND US-MADE CLOTHING: A CULTURAL PERSPECTIVE

DISSERTATION

Presented in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for

the Degree Doctor of Philosophy in the Graduate

School of The Ohio State University

By

Dong Shen, M. S.

*****

The Ohio State University 1999

Approved by

Dissertation Committee: Ou>à

Professor Catherine P. Montalto Co-Adviser Professor Curtis Haugtvedt College of Human Ecology UMI Number: 9941432

Copyright 1999 by Shen, Dong

All rights reserved.

UMI Microform 9941432 Copyright 1999, by UMI Company. All rights reserved.

This microform edition is protected against unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States Code.

UMI 300 North Zeeb Road Ann Arbor, MI 48103 Copyright by Dong Shen 1999 ABSTRACT

The US has a serious apparel trade deficit with China. An increase in the export of US-made clothing into the Chinese market would help balance trade. But for this to happen, a question that needs to be addressed is how Chinese consumers view US-made clothing as compared to China-made clothing.

There were four objectives in this study: (1) to investigate Chinese consumers’ attitudes toward US-made and China-made clothing, (2) to determine factors explaining

Chinese consumers’ attitudes toward US-made and China-made clothing, (3) to test the

Fishbein Behavioral Intention Model with Chinese consumers, and (4) to extend the

Fishbein Behavioral Intention Model by adding personal cultural preference.

A survey was conducted in Beijing, Shanghai, and Guangzhou during October and November 1998. Parents of students in the public school system were the participants. Of 3000 questionnaires distributed, 2017 were returned and usable (usable rate = 67.2%). Regression analysis, factor analysis, paired-sample t-tests, J-tests, and F- tests were used to examine the twelve hypotheses in the study.

The findings indicated that the Chinese market is an attractive market for US- made clothing because Chinese consumers have positive attitudes toward the US-made clothing. Personal cultural preference was significantly related to Chinese consumers’ attitudes toward US-made clothing. Furthermore, this study showed that besides attitudes

i i toward purchasing clothing, consumers’ personal cultural preferences are associated with their purchasing intentions for clothing as well.

Three groups of contributions were made with this study. Regarding theoretical contributions, the Fishbein Behavioral Intention Model was tested for its cross-cultural applicability. More importantly, the Fishbein Behavioral Intention Model was extended by adding personal cultural preference. Regarding methodological contributions, two measures of personal cultural preference were developed and applied, which provided valuable suggestions for further improvement of the measure of personal cultural preference. Besides, the survey method used in this study, distributing questionnaires throughout the Chinese educational system, illustrated a means for conducting research in

China. With respect to practical contributions, the findings in this study can benefit

American clothing manufacturers and international trade of US clothing.

Ill Dedicated to my parents and my husband

IV ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

I would like to express my sincerest gratitude to my advisors. Dr. Marsha Dickson

and Dr. Sharron Lennon, for their guidance, enthusiasm, and ideas throughout all the

stages o f completing this dissertation. They have not only shared their knowledge and experience with me, but also personally showed me how to be a good researcher. I would also like to thank the other two committee members. Dr. Catherine Montalto and Dr.

Curtis Haugtvedt, for their support, guidance, and interest in my dissertation research.

Special thanks goes to the China National Clothing Design and Research Center, especially to Mr. Xiaoke Wang, who provided full support to the survey carried out in

China. I would also like to thank the Department of Commodity Science at the People’s

University of China and the chair. Professor Rong Wan, who was particularly helpful throughout questionnaire development. Thanks also go to the U.S. Department of

Agriculture and the Ohio Agricultural Research and Development Center for funding this study.

Finally, my deepest appreciation goes to my parents, who are always there to support, love, and guide me unlimitedly. I also would like to say thousands of thanks to my husband, Li, for sharing his love and ideas with me. VITA

December 14, 1969 Bom - Beijing, China

1988- 1992 B.S. Textile Design,

China Textile University.

1992- 1995 M.S. Textile Commodity Science,

People’s University of China

PUBLICATIONS

Research Publications

1. Shen, D., & Dickson, M.A. (1998). Consumers’ ethical beliefs toward purchasing clothing: Influence of culture and personality. In N. Owens (Ed.), ITAA Proceedings. pp. 102. Monument, CO: ITAA Inc.

2. Shen, D. (1995). Present situation and coimter-measures of Chinese urban clothing consumption. Proceedings of the annual conference of CHIC'95 (China International Clothing & Accessory Fair): The development trends of China's garment market of the 21st century. Beijing, China: The China National Garment Research and Design Center.

FIELDS OF STUDY

Major Field: Human Ecology

VI TABLE OF CONTENTS

Abstract...... ii

Dedication ...... iv

Acknowledgments ...... v

Vita...... vi

Table of Contents ...... vii

List of Tables ...... xi

List of Figures ...... xiv

Chapters:

1. Introduction ...... 1

S tatement of purpose ...... 9 Research obj ectives ...... 10 Limitations ...... 10 Relevance to a larger project ...... 11 Definition of terms ...... 12 Organization of dissertation ...... 12

2. Literature review...... 14

Country of origin and attitudes toward purchasing clothing...... 15 Consumers’ attitudes toward domestic and foreign products...... 17 Consumers in developed coimtries ...... 18 Consumers in developing countries ...... 19 Factors affecting attitudes toward foreign and domestic products ...... 22 National stereotyping ...... 23

VU Personal cultural preference ...... 27 Cultural influences on consumer behavior and psychology ...... 32 Clothing as a culture-oriented product ...... 37 Cultural influences on attitudes ...... 38 The theory of Cultural Economics ...... 40 The Diffusion of Innovations ...... 44 Chinese consumers’ attitudes toward domestic and foreign clothing 47 Flood of western culture to developing countries ...... 47 Western culture and products in China...... 49 Extension of the Fishbein Behavioral Intention Model ...... 51 The Fishbein Behavioral Intention Model ...... 51 Application of the Fishbein Behavioral Intention Model in textiles and clothing ...... 57 Cross-cultural validity ...... 59 Test and extension of the Fishbein Behavioral Intention Model 60 Attitudes toward behavior versus attitudes toward the objects 62 Which component is more important? ...... 63 Multidimensionality versus unidimensionality of attitude toward behavior and subjective norm ...... 67 Additional factors affecting behavioral intentions ...... 69 Summary of research ...... 72

3. Method ...... 75

Sample ...... 75 Participants ...... 75 Sampling strategy ...... 77 Questionnaire development ...... 84 Variables of interest ...... 84 Personal cultural preference ...... 85 Cultural products and events ...... 85 Cultural values and norms ...... 89 Attitudes toward clothing ...... 93 Variables in the Fishbein Behavioral Intention Model ...... 95 Purchasing intention ...... 97 Attitude toward purchasing clothing ...... 97 Subjective norms ...... 98 Scale...... 99 Demographics ...... 101 Questionnaire stmcture ...... 102 Pretests and translation ...... 104 Translation ...... 104 Pretest 2...... 107

vm Procedure ...... 108 Data collection in Shanghai ...... 109 Data collection in Guangzhou ...... 109 Data collection in Beijing ...... 110 Data analysis...... I ll Preli.ninary data analysis...... I ll Sample ...... I ll Variables of interest ...... 112 Hypotheses testing ...... 112 Simple regression analysis ...... 113 Multiple regression analysis ...... 113 Paired-sample t-test ...... 114 Principal component factor analysis ...... 114 Davidson-MacKinnon J-test ...... 115 F-test...... 117 Level of statistical significance ...... 117

4. Preliminary results...... 118

Sample checking and description ...... 118 Response rate, non-response, and incomplete questionnaires ...... 118 Sample description ...... 122 Overall participant demographics ...... 122 Description of sub-sample in each city ...... 125 Reliability and validity of measures ...... 129 Reliability check...... 129 Validity testing ...... 131 Variables of interest ...... 140 Personal cultural preference...... 140 Attitudes toward clothing ...... 147 Attitudes toward purchasing clothing ...... 149 Subjective norms ...... 150 Purchasing intentions ...... 152

5. Results of hypotheses tests ...... 154

Chinese consumers’ attitudes toward US-made and China-made clothing and its purchase ...... 154 Effects of country of origin on attitude toward purchasing clothing 155 Chinese consumers’ attitudes toward clothing and purchasing clothing ...... 157 The effects of personal cultural preference on attitudes toward clothing ...... 159

IX The influence of personal cultural preference on the difference between Chinese consumers’ attitudes toward US-made and China-made clothing ...... 162 The Fishbein Behavioral Intention Model ...... 167 Comparison between attitudes toward products and attitudes toward purchasing products ...... 167 Comparison between attitude toward purchasing and subjective norm ...... 173 Multidimensionality versus unidimensionality ...... 180 The effects of personal cultural preference on purchasing intention 187

6. Discussion and conclusions ...... 193

Summary of research ...... 193 Research propose and objectives ...... 193 Theoretical framework ...... 194 Research method ...... 196 Summary of results ...... 199 Attitudes toward US-made clothing and China-made clothing 199 The Fishbein Behavioral Intention Model ...... 204 Conclusions ...... 211 The Chinese market is an attractive market for the US-made clothing ...... 211 Consumers’ personal cultural preferences are associated with their attitudes toward products ...... 213 Consumers’ personal cultural preferences are associated with their purchasing intentions ...... 214 Contributions...... 216 Implications for clothing manufacturers ...... 219 Future studies...... 222

References...... 227

Appendices...... 242

Appendix A: Cover letter ...... 242 Appendix B: Pretest questionnaire ...... 243 Appendix C: Questionnaire ...... 246 Appendix D: Human subjects proposal ...... 256 Appendix E: Coding guide ...... 257 LIST OF TABLES

Table Page

1.1 Examples of foreign clothing in China ...... 5

2.1 Examples of studies using the Fishbein Behavioral Intention Model 56

2.2 Summary of relevant studies of the Fishbein Behavioral intention Model.. 66

2.3 Hypotheses ...... 74

3.1 Randomly selected schools and grades in the three cities ...... 82

3.2 Questions on the US and Chinese products and events...... 88

3.3 Chinese values and norms measure ...... 93

3.4 Location of measures on the questionnaire ...... 103

3.5 Comparison of questions on Chinese cultural values between original questionnaire and final questionnaire ...... 106

3.6 Procedure for the J-test ...... 116

4.1 Unusable questioimaires caused by incorrectness and incompleteness 120

4.2 Demographic description of the sample ...... 123

4.3 Demographic reports of the sample across Beijing, Shanghai, and Guangzhou ...... 126

4.4 Reports of reliability tests ...... 130

4.5 Validity check with item-to-total correlation: Purchasing intentions 134

xi 4.6 Validity check with item-to-total correlation: Attitudes toward purchasing clothing ...... 135

4.7 Validity check with item-to-total correlation: US Products and Events Measure...... 136

4.8 Validity check with item-to-total correlation: Chinese Products and Events Measure...... 137

4.9 Validity check with item-to-total correlation: Chinese Values and Norms Measure...... 138

4.10 Personal cultural preference ...... 142

4.11 Three-way split of sample based on personal cultural preference with the Products and Events Measure ...... 143

4.12 Numbers of participants in different groups based on personal cultural preference with either the Products and Events Measure or the Values and Norms measure ...... 146

4.13 Method to calculate attitudes toward clothing ...... 148

4.14 Chinese consumers’ attitudes toward clothing (Ao) ...... 149

4.15 Chinese consumers’ attitudes toward purchasing clothing (Ab) ...... 150

4.16 Subjective norms (SN) ...... 151

4.17 Transformation from “0 to 100” scale to “1 to 7” scale ...... 153

5.1 The relationship of country of origin with attitudes toward purchasing clothing ...... 156

5.2 Attitudes toward clothing and attitudes toward purchasing clothing 158

5.3 Effects of personal cultural preference on Chinese consumers’ attitudes toward clothing ...... 161

5.4 Comparison between Chinese consumers’ attitudes toward US-made clothing and attitudes toward China-made clothing when personal cultural preference was measured by the Products and Events Measure...... 165

XU 5.5 Comparison between Chinese consumers’ attitudes toward US-made clothing and attitudes toward China-made clothing when personal cultural preference was measured by the Values and Norms Measure...... 166

5.6 The relationship among attitudes toward clothing, attitudes toward purchasing clothing, and purchasing intentions ...... 169

5.7 J-test comparing the Ao model and the Ab model for US-made clothing... 171

5.8 J-test comparing the Ao model and the Ab model for China-made clothing ...... 172

5.9 The relationship among attitudes toward purchasing clothing, subjective norms, and purchasing intentions when personal cultural preference is measured by the Products and Events measure ...... 175

5.10 The relationship among attitudes toward purchasing clothing, subjective norms, and purchasing intentions when personal cultural preference is measured by the Values and Norms measure ...... 178

5.11 Factor loadings for US-made clothing attributes ...... 182

5.12 Comparison between multidimensional and unidimensional attitudinal structure...... 184

5.13 J-test for multidimensional and unidimensional attitudinal structures 186

5.14 Effects of personal cultural preference on purchasing intentions ...... 189

5.15 F-test for the effects of personal cultural preference on purchasing intentions ...... 192

X lll LIST OF FIGURES

Figure Page

2.1 A model of consumer behavior ...... 36

2.2 The theory of Cultural Economics ...... 41

2.3 The Fishbein Behavioral Intention Model ...... 53

3.1 Sampling strategy ...... 80

XIV CHAPTER 1

INTRODUCTION

A small amount of US-made clothing is currently available in the Chinese market.

This phenomenon has lasted for at least five decades and is caused by both historical and political reasons (Graham & Kilduff, 1994). However, there are several reasons for the

US to increase its clothing exports into the Chinese market. The first reason is related to

Chinese consumers. Dramatic changes have taken place in China since 1978 (LaTour &

Henthome, 1990). Chinese consumers’ purchasing power has rapidly increased along with fast economic growth (Li, 1996; Xu, 1995). As a percent of income, clothing expenditures for Chinese consumers were 14.6 % in 1985,13.4% in 1990, and 13.7% in

1994, remaining around 14% throughout the period (Lu, 1997). However, the Income per person has increased 129.2% from 1990 to 1994 (Lu, 1997). In 1994, clothing retail sales amounted to US S26 billion and by 1998 had reached US S45 billion (Guo, 1998).

Despite its recent economic growth, China is still a developing country.

Consumers there have much lower purchasing power than those do in developed countries. The prices of imported clothing are very high and not affordable for many

Chinese consumers. For example, the price of men’s designer suits (e.g., Cerrutti 1881) is around 12,0ÜU to 15,000 Yuan in China (equal to approximately US 51,500 - 2,000’)

and only 1% of Beijing consumers have an income higher than 10,000 Yuan per month.

Approximately 12% have a monthly income between 5,000 and 10,000 Yuan in 1998

(Lin & Chen, 1998).

However, there are at least two reasons why the Chinese market could be an

attractive one for foreign clothing companies. First, imported clothing from other

countries is the first type of luxury product Chinese consumers consider purchasing when

money is available. While a house is an attractive luxury product for consumers in other

developing countries, it is less of a priority for Chinese consumers (Lin & Chen, 1998).

Most urban Chinese citizens live in government-supported housing with very low rent

and they do not need to purchase a home (Li & Gallup, 1995). While a car is viewed as a

second luxury product for consumers in other countries, high population density and

well-developed public transportation in large Chinese cities make it unnecessary for

urban residents to purchase private cars. Therefore, foreign clothing is an attractive

luxury product for Chinese consumers. Additionally, the nearly 1.3 billion population in

China provides a large number of potential consumers even if only a small proportion of

them have enough money to purchase foreign clothing. The number of Chinese consumers who are able to afford imported products is over 60 million in 1997 (Cui,

1997). According to a 1995 Chinese State Statistical Bureau survey of Beijing, Shanghai,

and Guangzhou, at least 1.5% of families there earned more than US 512,000 per year

(Cui, 1997). This group of consumers is likely to use credit cards and own cellular

u s S 1 = 8.3 Yuan (Fall1998) phones. They also enjoy purchasing and consum ing imported products as status symbols

(Xia, 1996).

Most Chinese consumers have given up the “Mao uniform.” They are more knowledgeable about clothing and desire a variety of different clothing attributes (King &

McDaniel, 1989). A forecast of China-made clothing consumption suggests that Chinese consumers will purchase clothing that reflects individualism, aesthetics, fashionability, and novelty. Brand names and quality also attract the attention of Chinese consumers

(Yan, 1996). Another economic forecast predicts that China, as the fastest growing nation in the world, will rapidly increase consumer expenditures including apparel and footwear expenditures (Whitley, 1995).

In sum, Chinese consumers are becoming very knowledgeable regarding clothing.

When purchasing clothing, they tend to have higher standards and more requirements than before, and they are becoming more and more aware of foreign clothing. The increase in Chinese consumers’ income provides the economic condition for purchasing and consuming foreign products. Although the proportion of Chinese consumers who can afford foreign clothing is low, the absolute number is still very high due to the population of China. Based on the foregoing discussion, it is reasonable to say that at least a portion of Chinese consumers, are ready to purchase foreign products. It could be a propitious time for foreign enterprises to enter this market.

Regarding the second reason for US manufacturers to increase their exports, the business performance of other foreign clothing enterprises in China provides further evidence for the possible success of US-made clothing in the Chinese market. Approximately 50 well-known international clothing brand names have entered China.

Some companies have opened specialty stores and others sell products in Chinese state-

owned stores. Most foreign clothing products are made in European countries, such as

France and Italy (Lin, & Chen, 1998).

The first foreign clothing to enter the Chinese market was clothing made in

France carrying the Pierre Cardin label in 1989. In 1996 Pierre Cardin made US $60 million in China and currently his specialty stores have opened in more than 20 cities in

China (Lin & Chen, 1998). Because of the success of Pierre Cardin, more European clothing manufacturers have entered the Chinese market in the 1990s. Table 1.1 lists some European clothing brand names that are doing business in China. Some prominent brand names include Yves Saint Laurent, Christian Dior, Versace, Valentino, Cerrutti

1881, and Boss (Lin & Chen, 1998). Most foreign branded specialty stores have opened in Beijing, Shanghai, Guangzhou, and other large cities along the eastern coast (Lin &

Chen, 1998).

Although the prices of foreign clothing are very high, the monthly sales are good.

For example. Ports International, a Canadian brand, retails a woman’s suit for 1,000 to

3,000 Yuan (USS130 - $370 per set). In July 1998, the monthly sales were 620,000

Yuan in one clothing specialty store in Beijing, then rose to 960,000 Yuan in September and reached 1,100,000 Yuan in October (Lin & Chen, 1988). These data demonstrate that the Chinese market holds promise for foreign clothing and some are already making good money. Brand Name Country of Year Entered Location of Sales Origin China

Cardin France 1989 Beijing, Shanghai, Guangzhou, and other big cities

Chanel France 1992 Beijing, Shanghai, Guangzhou

Dior France 1992 Beijing, Shanghai, Guangzhou

Valentino Italy 1993 Beijing, Shanghai, Guangzhou

G. Versace Italy 1993 Beijing, Shanghai, Guangzhou

Table 1.1 Examples of foreign clothing in China.

Even through many European clothing manufacturers and retailers have been successful in China, few US-made clothing brands have entered the market. Although in

1989, 72% of Chinese consumers had purchased US-made products, the majority of these products were photography equipment and supplies rather than clothing (King &

McDaniel, 1989). However, when asked whether they would like to purchase other US- made products, such as clothing, if available, 96.9% of Chinese consumers surveyed responded “yes” (King & McDaniel, 1989). This is a clear sign for US clothing companies to investigate conducting business in China.

The serious clothing trade deficit between the US and China is the third reason for the US to expand clothing exports. The trade deficit has been a serious problem for the

US in recent years, and the problem is even more serious in trade with China (U.S.

Department of Commerce, 1998). In 1995, the US trade deficit with China was US $33.8 billion, and reached to US $39.5 billion in 1996 (The U.S. Department of State, 1997). In

1997, the deficit increased by more than US $10 billion (U.S. Department of Commerce,

1998). Specific to textiles and apparel, the US exported textiles and clothing valued at

US $63 million to China in 1997 while importing US $8.25 billion worth of products from China (U.S. Department of Commerce, 1997). Thus, a serious trade deficit also exists for US trade with China in terms o f textiles and clothing.

In order to solve the issue of unbalanced trade, the US has two options. The first is to limit textile and clothing imports from China, and other is to export more to China.

Regarding the first option, the phase-out of import quotas in 2005 will likely remove the main barrier from China-made clothing imported to the US. Without the limitation, more

China-made clothing can enter the US market likely due to the competitiveness of China- made clothing. Because production of clothing is a labor-intense industry, cheap labor is necessary for the production of low-priced clothing and China is a source of cheap labor

(Dickerson, 1995). So a more feasible solution for the US to balance the textile and apparel trade with China is to export more textile and apparel products to China (Jacobs,

1997). Since 1978 China has been an attractive market for many countries. How to

effectively and efficiently reach this new and potentially large market has received great

attention from multinational firms (Chan, 1986; Sin & Sham, 1986) Western researchers

have begun investigating Chinese consumers from regional, demographic, and lifestyle

perspectives (e.g., Ariga, Yasue, & Wen, 1997; Schmitt, 1997). The majority of studies

have focused on the prospects and problems related to trade between the US and China

(e.g., Clare, 1986; Goldenberg, 1987). Results from those studies provide a perspective

on how to describe and understand the Chinese market and Chinese consumers by getting

information on the economic, political, cultural, and historical situation. However, to

fully understanding this market needs to investigate Chinese consumers’ perceptions of

foreign products (LaTour & Henthome, 1990). One key question concerns how Chinese

consumers view US-made clothing. In other words, what are Chinese consumers’

attitudes toward US-made clothing and their attitudes toward purchasing US-made

clothing? Furthermore, determining the factors affecting their attitudes is also critical.

Several researchers have found that consumers in developing countries evaluate

foreign clothing from developed countries more positively than domestic clothing (e.g..

Tan & Farley, 1987). Do Chinese consumers have more positive evaluations of US-made

clothing than China-made clothing?

When the factors affecting consumers’ attitudes are examined, previous research provides evidence that consumers’ attitudes toward foreign products are influenced by the national stereotypes consumers hold for that country (Kaynak & Cavusgil, 1983;

Maheswaran, 1994; Nagashima, 1977; Papadopoulos & Heslop, 1993). However, some findings cannot be explained by national stereotypes (e.g., Klein, Ettenson, & Morris,

1998; Lin & Stemquist, 1993). In this study, a cultural-reiated term, personal cultural

preference, is proposed to provide explanations for consumers’ attiti^^es toward foreign

and domestic clothing.

Clothing is a cultural oriented product (Gay, 1997). Consumers’ cultural beliefs

and preferences tend to influence their selection of clothing (LaTour & Henthome, 1995;

Shim & Chen, 1996). The Diffusion of Iruiovations theory (Rogers, 1995) proposes that

only when an innovation is compatible with cultural values and beliefs, can the

innovation be further diffused. An economic theory, the theory of Cultural Economics,

also supports that culture affects the development and acceptance of innovations

(Brinkman, 1981). If US-made clothing is viewed as one kind of innovation by Chinese

consumers, the compatibility between US-made clothing and Chinese consumers’

cultural beliefs and preferences is the prerequisite for Chinese consumers’ purchases.

Personal cultural preference describes a person’s cultural beliefs and preference when

more than one culture exits simultaneously, such as both western culture and eastern

culture existing in Hong Kong.

If personal cultural preference affects consumers’ attitudes toward clothing, will it

also influence purchasing intentions? The Fishbein Behavioral Intention Model has been widely applied in research on purchasing intentions. According to the model, consumers’ purchasing intentions are explained by two components, consumers’ attitudes toward purchasing clothing and subjective norms (Ajzen & Fishbein, 1980). Previous studies

(e.g., Casselman & Damhorst, 1991; Dickson & Littrell, 1996; Witter & Noel, 1978) have found that the Fishbein Behavioral Intention Model is appropriate to explain consumers’ purchasing intentions for clothing. If consumers’ personal cultural preferences are related to their purchasing intentions for clothing, will personal cultural preference be one more factor that can significantly contribute to explain purchasing intention? Before extending the model by adding personal cultural preference, its applicability to Chinese consumers will be tested. The Fishbein Behavioral Intention

Model was developed in the US. No study has been conducted to test whether it can be used in China, the country with one-fourth of the world’s population.

Statement of Purpose

The purpose of this study is twofold. First, by investigating Chinese consumers’ evaluations of, attitudes toward, and preferences for US-made clothing, a basic understanding of Chinese consumers can be achieved in terms of their purchasing domestic and foreign clothing. The fundamental understanding will benefit US apparel trade with China and the US textile and apparel industries.

Secondly, by studying the cultural influence on Chinese consumers’ attitudes toward and purchasing intentions for US-made and China-made clothing, consumers’ purchasing domestic and foreign clothing can be further imderstood from a theoretical perspective. Examining personal cultural preference along with the Fishbein Behavioral

Intention Model can make theoretical contributions to consumer behavior research. Research Objectives

There are four objectives included in this study. First, Chinese consumers'

attitudes toward US-made and China-made clothing, and their attitudes toward

purchasing US-made and China-made clothing are examined. The second objective is to

study factors influencing Chinese consumers’ attitudes toward US-made and China-made

clothing. A new term, personal cultural preference, is proposed in this study and an

examination of personal cultural preference on attitudes toward foreign products is conducted.

The third objective is to test the Fishbein Behavioral Intention Model for its ability to explain Chinese consumers’ purchasing intentions toward US-made and China- made clothing. The last objective is to investigate the role of personal cultural preference

in the Fishbein Behavioral Intention Model. By doing this, the model can be extended to provide a better explanation and understanding of consumers’ purchasing intentions.

Limitations

(1) The sample is limited to married Chinese consumers with school children. Single

Chinese consumers, especially those who are from 18 to 28 years old, might be a

segment who are interested in US-made clothing, but they are not included here.

Ariga et al. (1997) suggest that single Chinese consumers whose ages are between

18 and 28 believe that foreign products act as a medium though which western culture can be experienced. They respect western culture and they are proud of owning products with well-known brand names, especially foreign brand names. Thus, they tend to form

1 0 the major segment that enjoys purchasing and consuming foreign products. Although in

this study, this segment was not included in the final sample, investigating married

consumers still provides valuable insight. If married consumers have positive attitudes

toward US-made clothing, those single consumers might have more positive attitudes

toward US-made clothing as well.

(2) The sample is limited to Chinese residing in urban areas.

Chinese urban consumers are consuming leaders, whereas rural consumers are

followers. Chinese urban consumers have much higher household incomes, higher

brand-name awareness, and recognition of foreign brands than rural consumers (Schmitt,

1997). Currently, understanding how urban consumers view US-made clothing and their

purchasing intentions for US-made clothing can provide a picture of future rural

consumers’ characteristics in term of US-made clothing. So investigating Chinese urban

consumers in this study can still provide valuable information of Chinese rural consumers

who follow their lead.

Relevance to a Larger Project

This research is part of a larger project that aims to investigate the

competitiveness of US natural fiber apparel products in China. The research was funded

with a National Research Initiative Competitive Grant from the US Department of

Agriculture. The Principal Investigator and Senior Research Associates are Drs. Marsha

A. Dickson, Catherine P. Montalto, and Sharron J. Lennon of The Ohio State University.

There are five objectives addressed in the larger project: 1) to determine Chinese

11 consumers’ perceptions of, preferences for, and likelihood of buying US natural fiber apparel; 2) to compare Chinese consumers’ perceptions of, preferences for, and likelihood of buying natural fiber apparel from the US and from China; 3) to determine how individual economic and demographic characteristics of Chinese consumers influence the likelihood of buying US made natural fiber apparel products, and to provide a demographic profile of the Chinese consumer of US made natural fiber apparel products; 4) to provide sub-profiles detailing homogeneous market segments in which US natural fiber products can be competitive; and 5) to predict how changes in various attributes of US made natural fiber apparel products would result in increased purchase of such products, thus optimizing US participation in the market.

Being part of the larger project, the questionnaire used in this dissertation is also part of the questionnaire developed for the larger project. The sample and data collection procedures for the dissertation and the larger project are identical.

Definition of Terms

US-made clothing: Clothing with “Made in US” labels.

China-made clothing: Clothing with “Made in China” labels.

Organization of Dissertation

Six chapters are included in this dissertation. Chapter 1 provided an introduction to the study. In Chapter 2, relevant literature is reviewed. The methods used in this study are discussed in Chapter 3. Chapter 4 outlines the preliminary results obtained fi-om this

1 2 study. The hypotheses are tested in Chapter 5. Finally, Chapter 6 provides a discussion of the results, conclusions, contributions, and implications.

13 CHAPTER 2

LITERATURE REVIEW

The relevant literature is reviewed in this chapter. First, a discussion of whether

Chinese consumers care about country of origin when evaluating and purchasing clothing is provided. Chinese consumers’ attention to country-of-origin is the prerequisite condition for further investigation in this study. In the second section, consumers’ attitudes toward foreign and domestic products are addressed from the perspectives of both consumers in developed countries and consumers in developing countries. Factors that may influence Chinese consumers’ attitudes toward US-made clothing and China- made clothing are outlined in the third section. A widely-studied-factor, national stereotype, and a new factor proposed by me, personal cultural preference, are introduced, respectively. The theory of Cultural Economics and the Diffusion of

Innovations theory support personal cultural preference from a theoretical perspective.

Finally, the role of culture in consumer behavior, more specifically, how personal cultural preference affects purchasing intentions, is discussed in the last section.

14 Country of Origin and Attitudes toward Purchasing Clothing

With the development of global trade, how consumers view purchasing foreign products has caught researchers’ attention. The main concern is how consumers perceive and evaluate domestic and foreign products when faced with both types of products.

Before asking consumers’ views on imported and domestic clothing, it is necessary to determine whether they are aware of the country of origin and care about country of origin when making purchase decisions (Dickerson, 1982). Generally, “made-in” labels are the most direct and easiest way for consumers to know where products are manufactured. Country of origin, as a product attribute, can affect consumers’ attitude formation in at least two ways. On one hand, country of origin is used as a predictor of product quality, especially when necessary product information is missing. On the other hand, consumers form their overall evaluations depending on country of origin, due to the consumers’ willingness to eliminate unnecessary information processing by using country of origin as a mental “short-cut” (Heimbach, Johansson, & MacLachlan, 1989;

Johansson, 1988; Lin & Stemquist, 1993). Besides these two ways, there might be a third way that country of origin can affect attitude formation, which is that country of origin directly influences attitude toward purchasing products rather than attitude toward products themselves.

Much evidence has been provided by previous studies showing that the country of origin has a substantial effect on consumers’ attitudes toward products (e.g., Cheung &

Denton, 1995; Dickerson, 1982; Gaedeke, 1973; Okechuku, 1994). US consumers perceived US-made clothing more positively than garments produced in other countries

15 (Dickerson, 1982). When American college students were surveyed, they also showed

significantly different opinions on products from different countries (Gaedeke, 1973).

Regarding Chinese consumers, LaTour and Henthome (1990) surveyed 481

Chinese consumers from five cities in China by asking them to evaluate three products,

televisions, refrigerators, and washing machines, made in the US, Japan, Germany, and

China. MANOVA results indicated that country of origin played a significant role in

Chinese consumers’ product perceptions. Findings from another study conducted by

King and McDaniel (1989) are consistent with LaTour and Henthome’s (1990)

conclusions. Two hundred and fifty-six consumers in Shanghai were asked to evaluate

ten products made in the US, Japan, China, and Europe, including hand soap, lipstick,

perfume, toothpaste, cigarettes, beer, color film, eye shadow, hand lotion, and scientific

calculators. The results indicated that their perceptions of products from the US, Japan,

China, and Europe were significantly different (King & McDaniel, 1989).

There are two related topics that have not been studied. First, clothing is not

included in either King and McDaniel’s study (1989) or LaTour and Henthome’s (1990)

study regarding Chinese consumers. Second, the effects of country of origin on

consumers’ attitudes toward purchasing clothing has not been investigated yet; attitudes

toward purchasing are different from attitudes toward clothing itself. So how country of

origin influences Chinese consumers’ attitudes toward purchasing US-made and China-

made clothing is investigated in this study first. Previous research provides evidence that

attitudes toward products are correlated with attitudes toward purchasing products

(Dickson & Littrell, 1996,1997). So based on King and McDaniel’ study (1989), and

1 6 LaTour and Henthome’s (1990) study, which found that country of origin influenced

Chinese consumers attitudes toward foreign products, the following hypotheses were developed:

HI. Importance of country of origin (US) affects Chinese consumers’ attitudes

toward purchasing US-made clothing.

H2. Importance of country of origin (China) affects Chinese consumers’

attitudes toward purchasing China-made clothing.

Consumers’ Attitudes toward Domestic and Foreign Products

How consumers evaluate domestic and foreign products has often been investigated by way of either consumers in developed countries or developing countries

(Bilkey & Nes, 1982; Gaedeke, 1973; Kaynak & Cavusgil, 1983; LaTour & Henthome,

1990; Lin & Stemquist, 1993). Consumers in developed countries and developing countries have different attitudes toward imported products and domestic products.

Developed countries are those that have higher economic and industrialization levels.

Residents of developed coimtries, such as the US, Germany, and Japan, have prosperous lives. By contrast, developing coimtries refer to those that have much lower economic levels and industrialization and people's lives are much poorer, such as China, India, and

Mexico (Dickerson, 1995). Many researchers have found that products from developed countries generally receive more positive evaluations than those from developing countries (Bilkey & Nes, 1982; Gaedeke, 1973; Lin & Stemquist, 1993).

1 7 Consumers in Developed Countries

US consumers have been comprehensively studied by researchers. Wang (1978)

investigated the effects of foreign economic, political, and cultural environments on US

consumers’ willingness to buy foreign products and found that willingness to buy foreign

products depended on consumers’ perceptions of the level of economic development,

political climate, and culture of the products’ country of origin. In particular, US

consumers tended to positively evaluate products from highly economically developed

countries with more western culture, such as the European countries, Australia, and New

Zealand, and were more willing to buy products from those countries.

Another two studies examining US consumers were conducted by Gaegeke

(1973) and Kaynak and Cavusgil (1983). US consumers viewed products made in the

US, including textiles, electronic items, and food products, as the best in general as compared with those from foreign countries (Gaegeke, 1973). Kaynak and Cavusgil

(1983) also found that when no actual products were shown, US consumers tended to perceive higher quality for products from developed countries than those from developing countries. Their study included four product classes: electronic items, food products, fashion merchandise, and household goods.

Dickerson (1982) found that the majority of US consumers preferred domestically produced apparel to imported apparel, mainly because they perceived the garments manufactured in other countries to have poorer quality than domestic garments. When US college students were investigated. Shim, Morris, and Morgan (1989) found that students had more favorable attitudes toward domestic apparel than imported apparel. Because

18 they thought that domestic clothing was better than imported clothing in the following

ways: it fit them better, was more durable, was easier to care for, had more reasonable

prices, was more comfortable, had better quality, was more suitable to them, was more

appropriate for the occasion, had better color choices, looked more attractive, and was

more pleasing to others.

Besides US consumers, Baumgartner and Jolibert (1978) investigated consumers

in another developed country. They found that when French consumers evaluated winter

coats, playing cards, life insurance, and cough syrup from the US, Germany, England,

and France, they had a strong preference for domestic products.

Based on the foregoing discussion, three generalizations can be made regarding

how consumers in developed countries evaluate domestic and imported products. First,

when evaluating foreign products from either developed countries or developing countries, consumers in developed countries are more likely to prefer products from developed countries to those fi’om developing countries. Second, when products

imported from a developing country and domestic products are compared, consumers in developed countries tend to have more positive evaluations of domestic products than

foreign products. Finally, when imported products from developed countries and domestic products are available, consumers in developed countries tend to prefer the domestic products to foreign products.

Consumers in Developing Countries

Compared to those on consumers in developed countries, relatively few studies have been conducted to examine how consumers in developing countries evaluate

19 domestic and foreign products (Lin & Stemquist, 1993). However, one tendency is observed; consumers in developing countries tend to evaluate foreign products from developed countries more positively than domestic products (Hu, 1994; LaTour &

Henthome, 1990; Tan & Farley, 1987).

Hu (1994) investigated Chinese consumers' attitudes toward foreign-brand and

Chinese-brand apparel using participants from Shanghai, a large city in China. She examined whether Chinese consumers' perceived quality, perceived price, and purchase willingness differed by apparel brand origins, and whether Chinese consumers' attitudes toward foreign- and Chinese-branded apparel were different. She found that Chinese consumers' perceived quality, perceived price, and willingness to purchase men's dress shirts made in France and the US were significantly higher than those for identical shirts made in China. Furthermore, the consumers’ attitudes toward foreign-brand apparel were significantly more favorable than those toward Chinese-brand apparel. They believe that wearing foreign-brand apparel can create higher self-esteem than wearing Chinese-brand apparel, and foreign-brand apparel itself has better style and quality than Chinese-brand apparel (Hu, 1994).

In another study by LaTour and Henthome (1990), the effect of country of origin on product perceptions was also examined from the viewpoint of Chinese consumers. On the basis of information on coimtry of origin, Chinese consumers perceived products from the US, Germany, Japan, and China differently in terms of inexpensiveness, reliability, workmanship, and whether manufacturers are concerned with outward appearance of the products. Regarding the US products, consumers in four of the five

2 0 cities surveyed, Beijing, Tianjin, Guangzhou, and Chongqing, indicated a high degree of interest in US products (LaTour & Henthome, 1990). In King and McDaniel’s study

(1989), products from the US and Japan were evaluated much more positively than

Chinese products by Chinese consumers. When consumers in Singapore were studied.

Tan and Farley (1987) found that consumers’ attitudes toward products of local origin were lower than attitudes toward imports from the US and European countries, which was consistent with Hu’s findings. Another developing country in Europe, Hungary, was studied by Papadopoulous, Heslop, and Beracs (1988), and the results indicated that

Hungarian consumers ranked their domestic products last, while western products from

US, Canada, Great Britain, France, and Germany were ranked much higher in terms of quality, workmanship, and reliability.

Based on the foregoing discussion, it could be inferred that consumers in developing countries evaluate foreign products from developed countries more positively than domestic products. In other words, these consumers tend to have more positive attitudes toward products made in developed countries than domestic products.

Furthermore, there is close relationship between attitudes toward objects and attitudes toward purchasing the objects (Ajzen & Fishbein, 1980; Dickson & Littrell, 1996). Thus, the following hypotheses were developed:

H3. Chinese consumers have more positive attitudes toward

(a) US-made clothing than China-made clothing;

(b) purchasing US-made clothing than purchasing China-made clothing.

2 1 Factors Affecting Attitudes toward Foreign and Domestic Products

There must be reasons why consumers from different countries perceive and view

foreign and domestic products in different ways. One reason may relate to technological support in that technology directly influences product quality. Generally speaking, the more developed the technology, the better the product quality. Developed countries, which have advanced technology and equipment, could produce products with better quality. In contrast, the quality of products manufactured in developing countries cannot be guaranteed. As a result, consumers in developed countries oAen positively evaluate domestic products, which are often manufactured in a situation with more advanced technology than foreign products, while for consumers in developing countries, domestic products are often made with lower technology than foreign products.

However, two phenomena allow us to question the flmction of technological support on product evaluation. First, when consumers are shown two of the exact same products with only country of origin manipulated to be different (one from a developed country and the other one from a developing country), they have different attitudes toward the two products (Hu, 1994). Secondly, when consumers are asked to rank products made in different countries without actually evaluating the products, consumers tend to evaluate products from developed countries higher than those from developing countries (Kaynak & Cavusgil, 1983; LaTour & Henthome, 1990). In both conditions, products were not evaluated objectively; rather, consumers seem to use a national stereotype, which influenced evaluation of products. Hence, technological

2 2 support may not be the only factor influencing consumers' evaluations of domestic and

foreign products.

National Stereotyping

Some researchers who have investigated consumers’ attitudes toward foreign

products suggest that the images of foreign nations or national stereotypes are the key

factors in the formation of attitudes toward foreign and domestic products (K.aynak &

Cavusgil, 1983; Nagashima, 1977). Specifically, when consumers compare foreign products with domestic products, they often use country of origin as a cue to evaluate products based on national stereotypes. In other words, images of the manufacturing nation have a substantial impact on judgments of product quality and overall evaluation

(Maheswaran, 1994; Papadopoulos & Heslop, 1993).

Researchers have found that for those consumers who lack enough knowledge and information regarding a country’s products, country image acts as a halo when consumers evaluate the products from that country (Bilkey & Nes, 1982). With an increase of knowledge and experience, country image may become a summary construct that consumers rely on when evaluating products from a country (Han, 1989). So no matter whether the knowledge of one country is too little or enough, consumers may tend to rely on national stereotypes to evaluate the products manufactured in a country

(Johansson, 1988).

Bilkey and Nes (1982) suggest that people tend to have common notions about other countries, and these stereotyping evaluations carry over into the realm of product evaluations. They further found that overall evaluations of the products were almost

23 always affected by country stereotyping. Furthermore, researchers have suggested that

consumers hold different stereotypes for different countries due to the different levels of

economic development (Hampton, 1977; Tongberg, 1972; Wang, 1978). More

specifically, there could be a positive relationship among product evaluations, degree of economic development, and national stereotypes (Hampton, 1977; Wang, 1978). An empirical study conducted by Darling and Wood (1990) tested the relationship between economic development and national image. Finnish consumers’ attitudes toward

Japanese and US products were investigated across a ten-year period. The results indicated that while Finnish consumers’ perceptions of US products improved over time, the corresponding perceptions of Japanese products improved substantially more (Darling

& Wood, 1990). The critical reason was that Japan had made rapid economic progress and attained a major competitive position in many world markets since the end of World

War II (Lazer, Murata, & Kosaka, 1985).

In a study conducted by Bannister and Saunders (1978), the results indicated that products from a less developed country were perceived less positively than products from a more developed country, because consumers’ evaluations of products were associated with national stereotypes and national stereotypes could be influenced by the country’s economic development.

Kaynak and Cavusgil (1983) investigated consumers’ perceived quality of products. Without presenting products to the participants; they asked the participants how they felt in general about products manufactured in the US, Canada, England, and other countries. They found that consumers tended to form quality perceptions of foreign

24 products based on the stereotype of that country. The Canadian consumers believed that

top five countries where the best products were manufactured were the US, Canada,

England, Germany, and France, all of which are developed countries. The countries

tahked as producing the lowest quality products were India, Philippines, South Africa,

^ûuth Korea, and Romania, all of which are less developed. Gaedeke's ( 1973) study also

found that US products were perceived to be of higher quality and were evaluated better

thun products made in less developed countries, such as Indonesia.

Lin and Stemquist (1993) further tested the relationship between product

^Valuations and national stereotypes by investigating consumers in Taiwan. Specifically,

Vnpien’s sweaters from four countries, the US, Italy, Japan, and Taiwan, were the stimuli

the participants were asked to evaluate their quality. The results indicated that the

Sweater labeled “Made in Taiwan” received the lowest evaluation from the Taiwanese

Consumers and the sweater labeled “made in Japan” received the highest. One way Lin

Stemquist (1993) explained these results was with the notion of a stereotyped image

3 nation. Products from more developed countries often receive more positive

^Valuations than products from developing countries. Japan, the US, and Italy, all

4^veloped countries, are perceived as having positive national images in Taiwanese

Consumers’ minds (Lin & Stemquist, 1993).

Therefore, many researchers conclude that a national stereotype could be a factor

that influences consumers’ evaluations of foreign and domestic products. Specifically, l^rnducts Grom more developed coimtries, which generally have better national images in

25 consumers’ minds, receive more positive evaluations than products from less developed

countries, which generally have poorer national images.

If national stereotypes are key to explaining consumers’ attitudes toward foreign

products, we could infer that all products manufactured in developed coimtries would be

positively accepted by all consumers in developing countries. However, two phenomena

contradict this inference. First, with respect to products, not all products manufactured in

a developed country are positively perceived by consumers in a developing country

(Klein et al., 1998). Second, regarding consumer, for one product from a developed

country, not all consumers in a developing country have positive attitudes toward the

product (Hu, 1994).

Since it has been fully accepted that Japan is a developed country, it should be

perceived positively in terms of national stereotype by Chinese consumers who are in a developing country. However, Klein et al. (1998) found that Chinese consumers had

negative attitudes toward Japanese products. In this case, the national stereotype

explanation does not hold.

Another study questioning the effect of national stereotype was conducted by Lin and Stemquist (1993), in which Taiwanese consumers were asked to evaluate clothing

from the US, Italy, Japan, and Taiwan. Since the US, Italy, and Japan are developed countries, all should be positively perceived by Taiwanese consumers in terms of national image. Thus, there should not be significant differences between the evaluations of clothing from the US, Italy, and Japan. However, Taiwanese consumers perceived the

2 6 Japanese clothing much more positively than clothing from either the US or Italy. Again

in this example, the national stereotype explanation cannot explain the results.

Based on the foregoing discussion, the national stereotype cannot fully explain

consumers’ attitudes toward foreign products. Besides technological support and

national stereotypes, there may be other factors that could aid our understanding of

consumers’ evaluation of foreign products. One such factor that may help explain

consumers’ attitudes toward foreign products is personal cultural preference.

Personal Cultural Preference

In this section, personal cultural preference is defined first. Then three reasons to

consider this factor are discussed, which are: 1 ) cultural influences on consumer behavior

and psychology; 2) clothing as a culture-oriented product; and 3) cultural influences on

attitude. Thirdly, the theory of Cultural Economics and the Diffusion of Innovations

theory are discussed, both of which provide theoretical support for examining the effects of personal cultural preference on clothing evaluations. Finally, corresponding hypotheses are developed.

Personal cultural preference is a new terra proposed and defined by the author.

Personal cultural preference refers to an individual’s choice of cultural norms, values, rules, and customs when more than one group of cultural norms, values, rules, and customs surroimds the individual. In some situations, an individual can be surrounded by multiple cultures. Comparing all the cultures, the one that is more acceptable to the individual represents the individual’s personal cultural preference. For example, citizens in Hong Kong used to be simultaneously surrounded by both western culture from Great

2 7 Britain and eastern culture from mainland China (Cheung & Denton, 1995). In this

condition, consumers may have been influenced by both cultures to different degrees. If

an individual tends to agree more with western cultural norms and values than with

eastern cultural norms and values, then s/he prefers western culture to eastern culture, and

her or his personal cultural preference is western culture. Likewise, the individual’s

personal cultural preference is eastern culture if s/he is more accepting of Chinese

culture.

Personal cultural preference is different from the external cultural situation. It

focuses more on internal cultural identity from an individual’s personal perspective.

Therefore, “personal” is used in the term to describe this difference. But there is likely a

close relationship between personal cultural preference and the external cultural situation.

If an individual is totally isolated from US culture, her or his personal cultural preference

could not be US culture. Yet, personal cultural preference is not always consistent with

external cultural situation when more than one culture exists in an individual’s immediate

surroundings. If we still use the Hong Kong example, both western culture and eastern

culture were influential in Hong Kong during the last several decades. When more than

one culture is available in the external cultural situation, individuals can choose their personal cultural beliefs from one culture over another one. Then their personal cultural preferences are guided by the extemal cultural situation, but may not be exactly the same as the extemal cultural situation.

There is a close relationship between personal cultural preference and acculturation. Actually, personal cultural preference is one way to measure acculturation.

2 8 The classic definition of acculturation is as follows:

“Acculturation comprehends those phenomena which result when groups of individuals having different cultures come into continuous first-hand contact, with subsequent changes in the original culture patterns of either or both groups.” (Redfield, Linton, & Herskovits, 1936).

Acculturation refers to the process of learning and accepting a culture that differs from

the one in which the individual was raised (Moschis, 1987). The two conditions of

acculturation are the contact of at least two autonomous cultures and the changes in one

or other of the two groups which results from the contact (Berry, 1983).

Acculturation has been studied widely by anthropologists and sociologists from both theoretical and practical perspectives. One similarity across a number of those

studies is the focus on immigrants’ acculturation since acculturation may occur after

immigration, such as Mexican Americans (Arbona, Flores, &, Novy, 1995; Teske,

Raymond, & Nelson, 1976), Cuban Americans (Garcia & Lega, 1979; Szapocznik,

Mercedes Area Scopetta, & Maria, 1978), and Japanese Americans (Masuda, Matsumoto,

& Meredith, 1970; Matsumoto, Meredity, & Masuda, 1970). Even in the field of textiles and clothing, acculturation of immigrants has been investigated. Shim and Chen (1996) examined acculturation characteristics and apparel shopping orientations of Chinese students and spouses residing in the southwest of the US. All of these studies examined acculturation after people moved from one location to another location. This kind of acculturation caused by the movement of people is very typical of the last several decades. However, with the development of international communication and global trade, mass communication can also lead to acculturation. In particular, with the

29 development of international communication, people are likely to watch foreign movies

and enjoy foreign music and plays. With the expansion of international trade, consumers

are able to purchase and consume more foreign products. Therefore, people may be

influenced by foreign cultures without moving to another country. This is the case in this

study. With the flood of western culture into the Chinese market, Chinese citizens have

come into continuous first-hand contact with western culture. Although the two groups

of members, Chinese citizens and US citizens, may not be in direct contact, the two

conditions of acculturation can still be met, one of which is the contact of at least two

autonomous cultures and the other is the changes in one or other of the two groups which

results from the contact (Berry, 1983). Therefore, acculturation needs to be extended

from only the movement of people to the movement of culture as well.

How to measure acculturation has been another topic studied by several

researchers. Because acculturation of immigrants was the main focus before, the

measures developed by previous researchers were very specific to immigrants’ situations.

Although there have been different questionnaires developed, the majority of items

included in them were related to language usage and cultural heritage. If we take

Mexican Americans as an example, the typical questions asked in terms of language usage are (Keefe & Padilla, 1987):

(1) Do you prefer to speak/read/write in Spanish or English?

(2) What language do you speak with your parents/fiiends/spouse/children?

English or Spanish?

And the typical questions of cultural heritage are (Keefe & Padilla, 1987):

30 (1) How many years have you lived in the US?

(2) If bom in Mexico, at what age did you move permanently to the US?

(3) How many times have you visited Mexico in the last five years?

It is obvious that all the above questions are appropriate to immigrants after they move from one country to another country. However, if the acculturation caused by the movement of culture instead of the movement of people is studied, the above questions are no longer appropriate. Therefore, in this study, another measure of acculturation is designed and developed, which is personal culture preference. The items in this measure should be related to the preferences for cultural products and events, such as movies, music, and food rather than language usage because cultural products and events from another country, such as the US, may be the only connection between the US culture and

Chinese citizens.

Although items, such as language usage and cultural heritage, used in the previously developed questionnaires to measure acculturation caused by the movement of people are not reasonable to be used to study acculturation caused by the movement of culture, one valuable insight could still be obtained from previous studies. That is,

Szapocznik et al. (1978) suggested that there were at least two distinct ways to measure acculturation: one was a behavioral acculturaticn scale and the other was a value acculturation scale. Particularly, in their study the participants were asked to report the relative frequency with which they engaged in each behavior, such as “in what language are the TV programs you watch, Spanish or English?” and “are the radio stations you listen to Spanish or English?”. This is the behavioral acculturation scale. When the

31 value acculturation scale was used, the participants were asked questions such as “what

should a family do if it discovers that one of its members uses drugs?”. Similarly, Teske,

Raymond, and Nelson (1973) also conceptualized values and behavioral components

when Mexican Americans were studied. The two scales were found to be significantly

correlated (r=.64, p<.00015) in that study.

Therefore, there could also be two ways to measure acculturation by personal

cultural preference. The first one is to rely on the evaluations of cultural products from

different countries. For example, if an individual prefers US movies, music, food, drinks,

and other cultural products to Chinese movies, music, food, drinks, and other cultural

products, her or his personal cultural preference is more likely to be US culture. This is

developed based on Moschis’ (1987) proposition that evaluations of cultural products can

reflect cultural beliefs to some degree. The second measure could be composed of questions regarding social values and norms related to one particular culture

(McCullough, Tan, & Wong, 1986; Tan & McCullough, 1985). If an individual is more

accepting of Chinese cultural values and norms than US cultural values and norms, her or his personal cultural preference is more likely to be Chinese culture.

Cultural Influences on Consumer Behavior and Psychology

Much evidence supports the proposition that culture greatly influences consumer behavior and psychology from both applied perspective (Chiu, Tsang, & Yang, 1988;

LaTour & Henthome, 1995; Henry, 1976; Pitts & Woodside, 1984; Shim & Chen, 1996;

Vinson, Scott, & Lamont, 1977) and theoretical perspectives (McCracken, 1990;

McDonald, 1995).

32 Empirical research shows that with different cultural backgrounds, consumers tend to have different need recognition, information search and processing, product and alternative evaluation, and purchase and postpurchase consumer behavior (Andrews,

Lysonski, & Durvasula, 1991; Tse, Belk, & Zhou, 1989; Yau, 1988; Zandpour, Chang, &

Catalano, 1992). Cultural factors affect brand loyalty and customer satisfaction (Yau,

1988), consumers’ attitudes toward advertisements and the products promoted in the ads

(Andrews et al., 1991), consumers’ compliant behavior (Richins, 1980), consumers’ evaluation of the contents of particular ads (Tse et al., 1989), and shopping orientations

(e.g., shopping interest, shopping planning, shopping confusion, brand consciousness, fashion consciousness, and interaction with salespeople) (Shim & Chen, 1996). Culture's effects have penetrated into almost every part of consumer behavior and consumer psychology (McCracken, 1986).

An example of cultural effects on consumer behavior is Richins’ (1980) study of consumers’ complaint behavior. Richins (1980) discovered that US consumers' complaint behavior was best predicted by norms of complaining whereas it was poorly predicted by cost of complaining. This was because US consumers have a long history of consumer activism (Richins, 1980). In contrast, Chinese consumers in Hong Kong tended to behave in a totally opposite way regarding complaint behavior. In this case, the cost of complaining was the best predictor of complaint action, while the norm of complaining was the poorest predictor (Chiu et al., 1988). The Chinese culture accepted in Hong Kong can be used to explain these results. One key characteristic associated with Chinese culture is saving face to avoid embarrassment (Ho, 1978). For Chinese,

33 face is the respect a person can claim from others, which is related to status, authority,

and prestige. In order to avoid losing face, Chinese tend to control their activities and try

to act properly all the time. Complaining can increase the possibility of losing face and

consequently reduce Chinese consumers' willingness to complain (Chiu et al., 1988).

In another comparison between American and Japanese consumers, whether

culture significantly influences consumer decision-making was investigated (McDonald,

1995). The results indicated that Japanese consumers were more comfortable with

logical and rational decision-making while Americans were more receptive to emotional

decision-making (McDonald, 1995). McDonald (1995) suggested that if a cultiue's value

structure placed a particular emphasis on rationality, this attribute could appear often in

consumer decision-making. Likewise, if a culture placed a premium on social

gratification, emotional explanations for consumer behavior could often be given.

The function of culture on consiuner behavior has also been studied from a

theoretical perspective. A complete model of consumer behavior is proposed by Engel,

Blackwell, and Miniard (1993). The main parts of the model are shown in Figure 2.1.

As shown in Figure 2.1, in the consumer behavior model, there are two groups of

variables that influence consumers’ decision processes: environmental variables and

individual differences. Among the environmental variables, culture is listed first

followed by social class, personal influences, family, and situation (Engel et al., 1993).

Along with the other four environmental variables, culture influences every stage in the decision process. In other words, when consumers recognize a need, search, evaluate alternatives, purchase, and experience the outcomes, culture is influential. How culture

34 influences alternative evaluation in the third stage is the focus of this study (product evaluation and attitudes toward alternative products).

In sum, consumers' cultural background and their personal cultural preferences do affect consumer behavior and psychology from both applied and theoretical perspectives.

Forming attitudes toward products and evaluating products are parts of consumer behavior. So consumers’ personal cultural preferences likely influence their product evaluation and attitudes toward products. Moreover, consumers’ cultural preferences might have greater influence when consumers need to make a decision between imported and domestic products than when only domestic products are available. The cultural meanings embodied by the foreign products and the cultural meanings expressed by the domestic products could be in conflict with each other or be consistent with each other.

When consumers need to choose between foreign and domestic products, the concept of personal cultural preference may be helpful for understanding and explaining consumers’ attitudes and decisions. For example, if a Chinese consumer prefers US movies to

Chinese movies when both countries’ movies are available, this preference might be related to her or his personal cultural preference for US culture.

35 Decision Process Variables Influencing Decision Process

Need Recognition Environmental Influences

Culture Social Class Search Personal Influences Family Situation

Alternative Evaluation

Individual Differences

Purchase Consumer Resources Motivation and Involvement Knowledge Attitudes Outcomes Personality, Values, and Lifestyle

Figure 2.1 A model of consumer behavior (Engel et al., 1993).

36 Clothing as a Culture-Oriented Product

Clothing is a cultural product. Cultural products are those that are closely related

to cultural values and norms and the product attributes, such as clothing style and colors,

are greatly influenced by cultural characteristics (Gay, 1997). For example, a movie

always tells a story under some specific social situation in a cultural context. The

costume, music, language, and pictures used in the movie are greatly influenced by the

cultural background of the story. So a movie is a cultural product. In contrast, computer

products, which tend to have similar features wherever they are manufactured, are not

cultural products. When consumers evaluate cultural products, their cultural beliefs

might be more likely to play a critical role than when they evaluate non-cultural products.

One typical example of cultural products comes from the Disney Company. The

wide range of products marketed along with Disney’s films include videos, television

programs, computer software, musical recordings, magazines, clothing, hats, key chains,

and even water bottles (Negus, 1997). A.11 of these products clearly express cultural

meanings of the Disney Company created by the US under US cultural background

(Negus, 1997).

Clothing is used by people to express meaning, such as social status, occupations, or social roles (Kaiser, 1990). Clothing features, such as style and color, are greatly affected by cultural characteristics. For example, Winakor and Navarro (1987) found that while white was associated with weddings and black with funerals in western culture, white was related to funerals and bright colors were wedding colors according to Korean culture. Furthermore, fashion trends for clothing are often directly influenced by popular

3 7 culture. McCracken (1986) proposed that popular cultural meaning is drawn from a culturally constituted world and transferred to fashionable clothing, thus fashionable clothing is a “creation” of popular culture. Therefore, clothing is a cultural product.

Since clothing is closely associated with culture, it makes sense that evaluations of clothing should be highly culture-dependent. Because cultural beliefs play a critical role in the evaluation of cultural products, Chinese consumers’ attitudes toward US-made clothing and China-made clothing should also be affected by their personal cultural preference.

Cultural Influences on Attitudes

In what follows, valuable findings and suggestions are provided related to the influence of culture on consumers’ evaluations of foreign products. Lin and Stemquist

(1993) found that consumers sharing similar cultural values tended to be similar in their evaluations of foreign clothing. Yavas and Aplay (1986) found that culture affects consumers’ evaluations of domestic and imported products. Connecting cultural background with national stereotype, Hooley, Shipley, and Krieger (1988) suggest that in relatively homogeneous cultures, the influence of stereotypical perceptions appear to be held constant. All of the three studies indicate the cultural influence on consumers’ evaluations of domestic and foreign products. With similar cultural beliefs, consumers tend to hold similar attitudes toward either foreign products or domestic products. When the personal cultural preferences are different, the attitudes toward foreign and domestic products could be diverse.

38 When cultural preference is used to explain consumers’ attitudes toward foreign

products, findings from Klein et al. (1998) and Lin and Stemquist’s (1993) studies can be

further understood. Klein et al. (1998) found that Chinese consumers had negative

attitudes toward Japanese products although Japan is a developed country whereas China

is a developing country. Generally speaking, national stereotype is positively related to

level of development (Bannister & Saunders, 1978; Darling & Wood, 1990; Hampton,

1977; Tongberg, 1972; Wang, 1978). As a result, Chinese consumers should hold a

positive national stereotype toward Japan, and the positive national stereotype may lead

to Chinese consumers’ positive attitudes toward Japanese products. However, in this

case national stereotype cannot be used to explain Chinese consumers’ negative attitudes

toward Japanese products.

Regarding the reason for negative attitudes toward Japanese products from

Chinese consumers, Klein et al (1998) further suggested that the Japanese invasion of

China during World War II seriously hurt the Chinese and the animosity caused by the

invasion has affected Chinese culture. So culture was used to explain the negative

attitudes rather than national stereotype by the authors. The values and norms of Chinese culture include rejection of Japan. When Chinese culture is a consumer’s personal cultural preference, attitudes toward products firom Japan will be negative even when

Japanese product quality is better.

Lin and Stemquist (1993) found that Taiwanese consumers perceived Japanese clothing much more positively than clothing firom either the US or Italy. This finding cannot be explained by national stereotype. It is reasonable to expect that Taiwanese

3 9 consumers should have positive national stereotypes for all three countries, Japan, the

US, and Italy, because all are developed countries with high levels of economics. As a result Taiwanese should tend to have similar positive attitudes toward the products fforu these three countries. However, the findings do not support the inference. Actually, personal cultural preference can be used to better understand the findings, which cannot be explained by national stereotype. Both Taiwan and Japan are in Asia, where they share many similarities in terms of eastern cultural values and norms. However, the popular culture in the US and Italy is western culture. Taiwanese consumers, who have eastem culture as a personal cultural preference, may be more accepting of Japanese clothing, which also embodies eastem cultural meanings. The similarity between the culture represented by Japanese clothing and Taiwanese consumers’ personal cultural preference could lead to Taiwanese consumers’ positive attitudes toward Japanese clothing.

The foregoing discussion raises the possibility of personal cultural preference effects on consumers’ attitudes toward foreign and domestic products. Yet, theoretical support is lacking. Therefore, the theory of Cultural Economics and the Diffusion of

Innovations theory are discussed in detail in the next section. These two theories may explain how personal cultural preference influences consumers’ attitudes toward foreign and domestic products.

The Theorv of Cultural Economics

Developed by Brinkman in 1981, the basic propositions of the theory of Cultiu^al

Economics lie in a wheel structure, which is composed of four stages (see Figure 2.2).

40 The whole wheel represents economic development. That is, as a country smoothly progresses through all four stages, its economy should be developed correspondingly. If any of the stages is blocked, economic development is not realized.

Technics Creation

Effects on Culture Function.Culture

Techno log' . Formation

Figure 2.2 The theory of Cultural Economics (Brinkman, 1981).

Stage A involves creation of new technics. Technics refer to the scientific findings obtained from laboratories, such as a finding of a new gene. On the other hand, technology refers to the comprehensive use of technics in production and daily life. In

41 other words, if finding a new gene is viewed as a technic, the corresponding technology could be fomaed only when the new gene is applied comprehensively into the biological industry, medicine, or agricultural production.

Stage B works as a test of culture on the new technics. When the new technics fit the culture, they will be accepted for production and daily life. If they do not fit the culture, technics will be abandoned without further development to technology.

Once the new technics are accepted by the culture. Stage C begins, during which the technics will be developed and accumulated into technology. In other words, the new technics will be used comprehensively in production, social life, and other human activities. New technics will be developed from the level of scientific research to their application in production, which is technology.

Finally, technology will affect culture in Stage D, because the new technology could lead to cultural changes in social life, social production, and social structure. Then based on the new culture, which has been influenced by technology, new technics might be found, marking the beginning of the next circle and generating economic development.

According to this model, we find that culture is a necessary condition of economic development; it acts not only as a gatekeeper of new technics, but also a storehouse for new technology. In other words, if the new technics do not fit the cultural background, no matter how wonderful they are, they will not be comprehensively used and will not lead to further economic development.

4 2 Brannen (1991) supports this proposition by investigating the implementation of

the Japanese quality management system in the US. Cmrently, Japanese automobile

manufacturers have a large share of the auto market in the US and some Japanese

automobile companies have opened branches in the US, such as Honda Company’s plant

in Marysville, Ohio. With their manufacturing plants the Japanese have brought their

management systems, such as the quality management system, which could be new

technics for the US. However, they failed to consider the differences between the US and

Japanese attitudes toward work that are key to the successful implementation of the

management system and this has led to failures (Brannen, 1991). Top Japanese managers

were willing to implement the management system in the US, which had been successful

in Japan. However US employees did not accept it due to a different cultural

background, such as attitudes toward work, the relationsliip between employees and the

company, and attitudes toward quality (Brannen, 1991). Thus, the failure of the Japanese

management system in the US appears to support the proposition that only when technics

fit the cultural norms and values, will they be accepted and developed. Otherwise, even

though technics have been developed in one culture, they may be rejected in another culture if they are inconsistent with the new culture.

When consumer behavior and psychology are considered, imported products from

foreign countries can be viewed as new technics. According to the theory of Cultural

Economics, only when the technics match the culture, can they be comprehensively accepted and developed. In other words, views and perceptions of imported products

from foreign countries filter through the gatekeeper played by culture. The products that

43 match the culture can be kept and comprehensively adopted. The products that do not fit

the cultural situation are discarded and abandoned. Therefore, how consumers evaluate

domestic and foreign products may be decided by which culture plays the dominating

role. If western culture dominates, the cultural products firom western culture will be

adopted while those not fitting western culture will be abandoned.

From a micro personal viewpoint, how an individual evaluates domestic and foreign products depends on her or his personal cidtural preference. Particularly, the

more an individual accepts foreign culture, the greater the possibility that the individual

will form positive attitudes toward foreign products. Likewise, if an individual’s

personal cultural preference is the domestic culture (assuming there is only one domestic

culture), s/he would have more positive attitudes toward domestic products than toward

foreign products.

The Diffusion of Innovations

The cultural influence on consumers’ attitudes toward foreign and domestic products is not only supported by the economic theory, the theory of Cultural Economics, but is also consistent with a sociological theory, the Diffusion of Innovations. Diffusion is a process by which an innovation, such as a new fashion, is communicated through certain channels over time among the members of a social system (Rogers, 1995). The

four elements of the diffusion of innovations are innovahon, communication chaimels, time, and social system. There are five different attributes of innovations which describe the diffusion of innovations, which are (1) relative advantage, (2) compatibility, (3) complexity, (4) trialability, and (5) observability (Rogers, 1995). The second attribute.

44 compatibility, is closely related to this study. Compatibility refers to the degree to which

an innovation is perceived as consistent with the existing values, past experiences, and

needs of potential adopters (Rogers, 1995). The more compatible an innovation is with a

person’s needs, values and beliefs, and past experiences, the more rapid its rate of

adoption (Sands, 1981). According to the Diffusion of Innovations theory, an innovation

can be compatible or incompatible with (1) socio-cultural values and beliefs; (2)

previously introduced ideas; and (3) client needs for innovations (Rogers, 1995).

Specifically focusing on socio-cultural values and beliefs, when the current values and

beliefs are compatible with the innovation, the rate of adoption will rise. In contrast,

cultural values will block the diffusion of innovations if they are incompatible with the

innovation.

The Diffusion of Innovations theory has been adapted to study the case of fashion

extensively by researchers, such as Baumgarten (1975), Darden and Reynolds (1972),

Gindereng (1965), Polegato and Wall (1980), and Summers (1970). Fashion, as an

innovation, is diffused across five different types of consumers (innovators, early

adopters, early majority, late majority, and laggards) through certain channels (e.g.,

fashion magazines, visual display, word of mouth, and so forth) over time. When the five

characteristics of innovation are concerned, two studies have also been conducted related

to textiles and clothing. In a study of attitudes, practices, and preferences of pesticide

users toward protective apparel, the five attitudes of innovation, relative advantage, compatibility, complexity, trialability, and observability were adopted as the framework

for both attitudinal and behavioral question development (DeJonge, Vredevoogd, &

45 Henry, 1983-84). When apparel and gift retailers were investigated in terms of the

influence of perceived characteristics of innovations on retailers’ technology innovations,

the five attributes of innovation were perceived differently across innovators, early adopters, early majority, late majority, and laggards (Shim & Kotsiopulos, 1994).

According to the Diffusion of Innovations theory, innovation, as the first element of iimovation diffusion, refers to an idea, practice, or object perceived as new by an individual (Rogers, 1995). Then US-made clothing, as an object perceived as new by

Chinese consumers, can be viewed as an innovation. As discussed above, the Diffusion of Innovations theory indicates that the compatibility of socio-cultural values and beliefs influences adoption. Then how Chinese consumers view US culture could affect their attitudes toward US-made clothing. Particularly, if Chinese consumers are more accepting of US culture, the compatibility of their cultural values and beliefs could lead to their positive attitudes toward US-made clothing. In contrast, negative attitudes toward US-made clothing could be formed if Chinese consumers’ cultural values and beliefs are incompatible with the innovation, US-made clothing.

Both the economic theory, the theory of Cultural Economics, and the sociology theory, the Diffusion of Innovations, provide the theoretical support for the possible influence of personal cultural preference on Chinese consumers’ attitudes toward US- made clothing and China-made clothing. Therefore, the following two hypotheses were developed:

H4. Chinese consumers’ personal cultural preferences affect their attitudes

toward US-made clothing.

46 H5. Chinese consumers’ personal cultural preferences affect their attitudes

toward China-made clothing.

Chinese Consumers’ Attitudes toward Domestic and Foreign Clothing

According to the above discussion, how Chinese consumers evaluate clothing

manufactured in the US or manufactured in China will depend on Chinese consumers’

personal cultural preference. In particular, if Chinese consumers accept US culture,

clothing manufactured in US should be more positively evaluated than domestic clothing.

Chinese consumers should have more positive attitudes toward domestic clothing if

Chinese culture is their personal cultural preference. In the next section, popular culture

in China will be discussed.

Flood of Western Culture to Developing Countries

Latouche (1996) reported that a one-way cultural flood from developed countries

to developing countries has lasted for many years and still continues. This is caused by

the control of media. Developed countries have much more power in terms of media and

almost all the media in the world are dominated by developed countries. For example, in

the 1960s, the news market was the virtual monopoly of four agencies: Associated Press

(US), United Press (US), Reuter (Britain), and France-Press (Latouche, 1996).

Furthermore, 65% of world news comes from the US. Since existing international

communication systems arc dominated by western industrialized nations (Constantino,

1986), western culture thrives in developing countries. The flood of culture and the corresponding cultural products lead to the formation of desires and needs for products

47 from developed countries in developing countries. In addition, the educational systems and ways of life in the developing countries that are based on the developed countries' culture are also popular in developing countries (Latouche, 1996). Therefore, many consumers, especially those young and modem ones, commonly adopt westem values and behaviors and give up their traditional culture (McCullough et al., 1986).

The frequent portrayal of westem models in ads and the amount of westem language contained in ads could be indicative of the degree of westemization of culture

(Mueller, 1992). Mueller (1992) found that 75% of Japanese print ads contain at least one English-language word. In their study, Cutler, Javalgi, and White (1995) found that

English words were more often used to represent either the company, the product, or the brand name in Asian countries; and westem models were portrayed substantially more frequently than Asian models in some situations. Furthermore, Cutler et al. (1995) stated that “rapidly changing technological development in the broadcasting industry appears likely to ftirther accentuate the influence that westem culture has upon the other cultures of the world” (pp. 24).

Mehmet (1995) also emphasizes the tendency for westemization of the Third

World but from another perspective. Many governmental leaders in the Third World were educated in westem countries, whose ideology has been deeply influenced by the

West. Then when they manage their countries in the Third World, their policies are often based on a European-centered world view (Mehmen, 1995). In this manner the Third

World is affected by westem countries to some degree.

48 As one representative of westem culture, the US has many cultural exports to developing countries. Although the trade balance across many products has been damaged between the US and other countries, such as clothing with China, and automobiles with Japan, the world’s appetite for Hollywood and rock and roll is helping the US trade balance (Huey, 1990). US software, movies, TV programming, music, and home videos have accounted for an annual trade surplus o f US $8 billion for the US.

Only aerospace (aircraft and related equipment) outranks popular culture as an export.

Besides the popular culture exports through entertainment products, there are many other

US cultural products, such as McDonald’s burgers, Levi’s jeans, Coca-Cola’s soft drinks,

Mickey Mouse toys, hats, books, and watches (Huey, 1990). McDonald’s eams more money in China than it does in the US and Coca-Cola makes more profit in Japan than it does in the US. Since developed countries' cultures are becoming more and more popular in developing countries, the corresponding cultural products, such as movies, television, programming, apparel, and food, may be accepted by a number of people in developing countries.

Westem Culture and Products in China

With the popularity of westem culture in developing countries, consumers there are more accepting of cultural products from developed countries. China is one developing country faced with the flood of westem culture. Hu (1994) found that there was a tremendous desire for westem products in China since the average income had grown and a wealthy class had emerged in large Chinese cities. Westem merchandise.

49 such as Rolex watches and Mercedes Benz, have been viewed as status symbols in China

(Lockwood, 1993). More and more foreign companies from developed countries are doing business in China, such as Jianlibao American Limited Corporation (Emproto &

Prince, 1993), Nanuet Entertainment Company (Tanzer, 1992), Avon Products (Tanzer,

1992), Nike (Clifford, 1993), Pepsi-Cola International (Bangsberg, 1992), and McCall

Pattern Company (Condrell, 1991). US brand names have high recognition in China.

For example, in 1997 Coca Cola had 62% recognition all over the country and 94% in large cities, and Pepsi Cola had 42% recognition for the rural sample and 85% for the large cities (Schmitt, 1997). Interest in US-made products was found to be very strong in a Chinese consumer study conducted by LaTour and Henthome (1990).

Westem culture is entering the Chinese market with more and more strength.

Influenced by the westem cultural invasion, Chinese traditional culture is being forgotten little by little, especially by the young generation (Cui, 1997). Consumers in China, especially the younger ones, have picked up westem ideas very rapidly (Tai & Tam,

1997). As a result the cultural products from westem cultures may be accepted and retained in China, such as US-made clothing. Chinese consumers may evaluate products positively from developed countries. Furthermore, Chinese consumers, who have westem culture as their personal cultural preferences, might prefer westem products, such as US apparel, to domestic products, while those who still view Chinese culture as their personal cultural preferences might prefer clothing manufactured in China. So another two hypotheses were developed as follows:

50 H6. Chinese consumers whose personal cultural preferences favor Chinese

culture have more positive attitudes toward Clûna-made clothing than US-

made clothing.

H7. Chinese consumers whose personal cultural preferences favor US culture

have more positive attitudes toward US-made clothing than China-made

clothing.

Extension of the Fishbein Behavioral Intention Model

Consumers’ personal cultural preferences could influence their attitudes toward foreign and domestic products. Then can personal cultural preferences affect purchasing intentions as well? The Fishbein Behavioral Intention Model (i.e. Theory of Reasoned

Action) is often used to explain consumer behavior, one social behavior, in terms of purchasing intentions. If personal cultural preferences influence attitudes toward products, it may also affect intentions to purchase products.

In the next section, the Fishbein Behavioral Intention Model is reviewed. Then the cross-cultural validit>' of the model is discussed since it was developed in the US but is applied in China in this study. After that, several topics related to the model are reviewed and discussed followed by the development of corresponding hypotheses.

Finally, the role of personal cultural preference in the model is discussed.

The Fishbein Behavioral Intention Model

The Fishbein Behavioral Intention Model is a social behavior model which has been comprehensively applied across different kinds of social behaviors, such as use of

51 cigarettes and alcohol (Morrison, Simpson, Gillmore, & Wells, 1996), dental hygiene

(McCaul, O’Neill, & Glasgow, 1988), blood donation (Bumkrant & Page, 1988), voting

behavior (Netmeyer & Burton, 1990), and seat-belt use (Budd, Notth, & Spencer, 1984).

The basic assumption of the Fishbein Behavioral Intention Model is that humans think rationally and systematically before taking action. Thus, social behaviors controlled by subconscious motives or thoughtless affects are not explained by this model (Ajzen &

Fishbein, 1980) and this is why this model is also called the Theory of Reasoned Action.

According to the model, a person’s behavioral intention is a function of two basic determinants: attitude toward behavior and subjective norm (see Figure 2.3). An example of attitude toward the behavior is consumers’ attitudes toward purchasing clothing manufactured in the US or China. The focus is on the act of purchasing rather than simply the product. Subjective norm refers to the person’s perception of the social pressure to perform or not perform the behavior (Ajzen & Fishbein, 1980). Furthermore, attitudes toward behavior are influenced by behavioral beliefs and evaluations of these behavioral beliefs. Subjective norms are determined by normative beliefs and motivation to comply with these beliefs (Fishbein & Ajzen, 1975).

52 Behavioral Beliefs Attitudinal Component Outcome Evaluation Behavioral Behavior Intention

Normative Beliefs Normative Component Motivation To Comply

Figure 2.3 The Fishbein Behavioral Intention Model (Ajzen & Fishbein, 1980).

53 Dulany’s theory of Propositional Control was the origin for the Fishbein

Behavioral Intention Model (Ryan & Bonfield, 1975). In an experiment, Dulany (1968)

varied a continuous stream of air (cool, neutral, or hot), which biew onto the participants’

faces, to signify that the participants’ verbal response was correct, neither correct nor

incorrect, or incorrect. Dulany (1968) proposed that when an individual was in a

changeable situation (the changeable stream), the individual could have various verbal

responses due to the changes of the situation. The following structure was suggested by

Dunlany (1968):

B « BI = [ (RH)(RS) ]w/ + [ (BH)(MC) ]W 2

In the above formula, B is the actual behavior (verbal responses); BI is behavioral

intention; RH refers to the degree to which the participant thinks a particular response is caused by a manipulation of the situation (the stream); RS refers to the value the participant places on the manipulation (the stream); BH means the degree to which the participant believes a specific response is expected by people around her or him in that situation (with the stream); and MC means motivation to comply (Dulany. 1968). So the

Fishbein Behavioral Intention Model is an adaptation of the fundamental meanings and basic stmcture contained in Dulany’s theory of Propositional Control. The central equations in the Fishbein Behavioral Intention Model are as follows:

54 B a BI = [ Ab ]w/ + [ SN ]W2

n Ab = S biCi f = l

k SN = S NBjMCj 7=1

Similar to Dulany’s theory, B and BI refer to final behavior and behavioral

intention respectively. Differently, attitude toward behavior (Ab) refers to attitude

toward the behavior, such as purchasing clothing manufactured in the US or China;

subjective norm (SN) refers to the person’s perception of the social pressure to perform

or not perform the behavior. Because it deals with subjective perceptions, it is termed

subjective norm (Ajzen & Fishbein, 1980). Furthermore, attitude toward behavior is a

function of behavioral beliefs, whereas the subjective norm is a function of normative

beliefs. Particularly, bi is the belief that performing the behavior leads to the ith outcome,

such as purchasing medicine could cure illness; e, is the individual’s evaluation of ith

consequence of performing the behavior, which could be either positive or negative; and n is the number of salient outcomes. NBj refers to the normative belief regarding referent j ’s expectations as to whether the individual should or should not perform the behavior;

MCj refers to the individual’s motivation to comply or not to comply with the expectation of the jth referent; and k refers to the number o f salient referents (Fishbein & Ajzen,

1975).

Regarding how well the Fishbein Behavioral Intention Model can predict behavioral intentions, empirical studies have shown some results. Examples of these

55 studies are listed in Table 2.1. The percentage of variation in behavioral intentions

explained by the model in each study is shown on the third column of Table 2.1.

Research Study Behavioral Percentage of Variance (author/year) Intention Accounted for (%)

Albarracin, Fishbein, Condom use 32 & Middlestadt (1998)

Beck & Ajzen (1991 ) Cheating 45 Shoplifting 61 Lying 32

Morrison et al. (1996) Drinking 25 Smoking 37

Koslowsky, Hoffman, Work hard in computer class 21 & Lazar(1990)

Wilson, Mathews, Purchasing toothpaste 45 & Harvey (1975)

Table 2.1 Examples of studies using the Fishbein Behavioral Intention Model.

56 Application of the Fishbein Behavioral Intention Model in Textiles and Clothing

In the field of textiles and clothing, the Fishbein Behavioral Intention Model has been applied and tested from the following two perspectives. First of all, the majority of the studies conducted by researchers in the textiles and clothing field have been focused solely on the first component of the model, the attitudinal structure, which is also called the Fishbein Attitude Model. According to the Fishbein Attitude Model, attitude toward clothing and attitude toward purchasing clothing should be measured differently.

Regarding attitude toward clothing, beliefs of clothing attributes and evaluations of those attributes are necessary. With respect to attitude toward purchasing clothing, beliefs about purchasing clothing and evaluations of those beliefs of purchasing clothing are required. Most studies in the field of textile and clothing that have applied the Fishbein

Attitude Model focus on attitude toward clothing.

Shim et al. (1989) examined the Fishbein Attitude Model by comparing American college students’ attitudes toward imported and domestic apparel. Furthermore, they extended the attitudinal structure by investigating the effects of another four external variables on attitudes toward apparel, which were demographics, self perception, level of fashion involvement, and clothing attitudes (a prestige clothing attitude, a garment styling clothing attitude, a quality clothing attitude, and a social activities clothing attitude).

They foimd that after adding the four external variables to the Fishbein Attitude Model, another 15% of the variation in college students’ attitudes toward imported clothing could be explained and another 16% of the variation in their attitudes toward domestic apparel could be explained. In a study in which purchasing intentions for ethnic apparel were

57 investigated (Dickson & Litirell, 1996), the Fishbein Attitude Model was used to obtain

attitudes toward ethnic apparel. When Taiwanese consiuners’ attitudes toward US-made

clothing and Taiwanese clothing were investigated, Fishbein Attitude Model was applied

to determine those two groups of attitudes, and significantly better attitudes toward US-

made clothing than Taiwanese clothing was found (Wang, 1997).

Secondly, studies have also been conducted to examine whether the whole

Fishbein Behavioral Intention Model works in term of clothing purchase rather than just

focusing on part of the model. One adjustment some researchers in the textile and clothing field have made is the substitution o f attitude toward purchasing clothing (Ab) by attitude toward clothing (Ao) when the apparel itself is of most interest (e.g.,

Casselman & Damhorst, 1991; DeLong, Minshall, & Lamtz , 1987; Witter & Noel,

1978). Investigating details about clothing attributes rather than predicting purchasing intention makes this substitution acceptable. However, other researchers did not do the substitution when predicting purchasing intention was of most interest (e.g., Chang,

Bums, & Noel, 1996).

One of the early studies discovered that the Fishbein Behavioral Intention Model was highly significant in explaining behavioral intentions to purchase shoes and pantyhose (Witter & Noel, 1978). When purchasing intentions for sweaters were investigated, DeLong et al. (1987) found that there was a highly significant statistical relationship between purchasing intentions and attitude toward behavior and subjective norm. Attitudes toward purchasing sweaters contributed significantly to the variation in purchasing intentions, whereas subjective norms did not (DeLong et al., 1987). Another

5 8 study examined the capability of the model in terms of describing apparel (five shirts)

purchase decisions (Casselman & Damhorst, 1991). In this study, two questions were

investigated: 1) how well do the two components, attitude toward behavior and subjective

norm, explain the variation in clothing purchasing intentioiia; and 2) how best to describe

the relative importance of attitude toward behavior and subjective norm in clothing

purchasing intention prediction. The results indicated that attitude toward purchasing

clothing made a significant contribution to the prediction of purchasing intentions across

all five shirts. The beta coefficient for attitudes toward purchasing clothing was

approximately .60, whereas the subjective norm component only significantly increased

the prediction of purchasing intentions for two out of five shirts (Casselman & Damhorst,

1991).

When US college students’ purchasing intentions for brand-name casual apparel

were investigated, both the attitudinal component and the normative component were

statistically significant predictors of purchasing intentions (Chang et al., 1996).

Furthermore, the attitudinal component played a more important role than the normative

component In explaining the variation in purchasing intentions (Chang et al., 1996). As a

result, the Fishbein Behavioral Intention Model is appropriate to be applied to predict clothing purchase decisions and explain clothing purchasing intentions.

Cross-cultural Validity

Although the Fishbein Behavioral Intention Model originated in the US, researchers have found that it can also be applied in other countries with different cultural backgrounds. Godin et al. (1996) examined the Fishbein Behavioral Intention Model

59 across three ethnic groups in Canada: Latin American, English-speaking Caribbean, and

South Asian. In each ethnic group, both attitude toward behavior and subjective norm

carried significant beta weights and the multiple regression R square was .48 for the Latin

American group, .37 for the English-speaking Caribbean group, and .54 for the South

Asian group.

Furthermore, Lee and Green (1991) tested the Fishbein Behavioral Intention

model with Korean participants, who had grown up with a Confucian cultural

background, a culture differentiating them firom the Judeo-Christian culture that

dominates the US and Western Europe. The advantage of this study was that the

participants had been living in their own country rather than immigrating to another

country, which could be a better test of the cross-cultural validity of the model. They

found that the model could be used to explain consumers’ behavioral intention formation

in Korea (Lee & Green, 1991).

Although the two studies reviewed above have tested the Fishbein Behavioral

Intention Model in different cultural situations, its applicability in China is still questionable. Therefore, carrying out this study can further test the cross-cultural validity of the Fishbein Behavioral Intention Model.

Test and Extension of the Fishbein Behavioral Intention Model

According to Warshaw (1980), the Fishbein Behavioral Intention Model was designed to predict widely varying social behaviors rather than being tailored specifically for purchase behaviors. However, there are unique characteristics of purchase behaviors, that are not typical among other social behaviors, such as affordability considerations.

6 0 availability and existence of product type, and brand-specific cognition and recognition

(Warshaw, 1980). These unique characteristics necessitate the extension of the model

especially for consumer and marketing applications. Therefore, in this study, the

Fishbein Behavioral Intention Model is tested first by examining Chinese consumers’ purchasing intentions for US-made and China-made clothing, and then extended by

investigating the effects of personal cultural preference in the model.

Since the emergence of the Fishbein Behavioral Intention Model proposed by

Fishbein and Ajzen in 1975, several questions have been raised and investigated related to the model. Generally speaking, the questions can be classified into four groups:

(1) Does attitude toward behavior explain more variation in behavioral intentions

than attitude toward the object (e.g., Dickson, 1994; Ryan & Bonfield, 1975;

Warshaw, 1980)?

(2) O f the two components, attitude toward behavior and subjective norm, which

one explains more variation in behavioral intentions (e.g., Albarracin et al.,

1998; Dickson & Miniard, 1978; Lee & Green, 1991; Wilson et al., 1975)?

(3) Is multidimensionality or unidimensionality a better way to investigate the

attitude toward behavior and subjective norm; which explains more variation

in behavioral intentions (e.g., Bagozzi, 1981; Shimp & Kavas, 1984)?

(4) Are attitude toward behavior and subjective norm the only two factors

influencing behavior intentions (e.g., Albarracin et al., 1998; Ajzen, 1991;

Bandura, 1977; McCaul et al., 1988)?

In the following section, all four questions are reviewed and discussed.

61 Attitudes toward Behavior versus Attitudes toward the Objects

Some studies have investigated the effects of attitudes toward purchasing

behavior and attitudes toward the objects on purchasing intentions. It has been widely

accepted that attitudes toward purchasing behavior explain more variation in purchasing

intentions than attitudes toward the objects. Although some products have many kinds of good characteristics, sometimes people do not believe that owning those products will definitely lead to positive outcomes (Ryan & Bonfield, 1975). Attitudes toward an object cannot predict purchasing intention under this circumstance. Regarding differences between attitudes toward objects and attitudes toward behavior, Warshaw (1980) mentioned that there were three dimensions to attitudes toward behavior: product use

(e.g., functional performance), affordability, and accessibility. In contrast, among the three dimensions to attitudes toward behavior, only the first dimension, product use, determines attitudes toward objects. Sometimes the latter two dimensions, affordability and accessibility, influence the formation of purchasing intentions. Thus, attitudes toward behavior might be able to explain more variation in purchasing intention than attitudes toward objects.

Empirical studies have compared the predictive powers of attitudes toward purchasing behavior and attitudes toward the objects. When purchasing intentions for toothpaste were examined by questioning 162 housewives who were shopping in a mall,

Wilson et al. (1975) found that the attitudes toward purchasing toothpaste explained

25.2% o f the variation in purchasing intentions, while attitudes toward toothpaste only explained 16%. The results indicated that when attitudes toward behavior and attitudes

6 2 toward the object were compared by being put into the Fishbein Behavioral Intention

Model, attitudes toward behavior explained more variation in behavioral intentions than attitudes toward the objects.

When investigating apparel purchasing, comparison between the relative importance of attitudes toward purchasing ethnic apparel and attitudes toward ethnic apparel for predicting purchasing intentions was conducted (Dickson & Littrell, 1996,

1997). The findings indicated that there is a significant difference between the predictive power of attitudes toward purchasing ethnic apparel and attitudes toward ethnic apparel for purchasing intentions. The apparent advantage of attitudes toward purchasing ethnic apparel over attitudes toward ethnic apparel itself provides further support from the field of textiles and clothing. Accordingly, the following hypothesis was developed:

H8. Attitudes toward purchasing clothing explain more variation in Chinese

consumers’ clothing purchasing intentions than attitudes toward clothing.

Which Component is More Important?

Two components are included in the Fishbein Behavioral Intention Model, attitudes toward behavior and subjective norm. Which of these two components has more predictive power for behavioral intentions has been investigated by several researchers. Ajzen and Fishbein (1980) proposed that the relative importance of these two factors varied with the kind of behavior that is being predicted, with the conditions under which the behavior was to be performed, and with the person who was to perform the behavior. Sometimes, attitude toward behavior may dominate and other times, subjective norm may be more important.

63 Valleran et al. (1992) demonstrated that the attitudinal construct was a greater predictor of behavioral intention than the normative construct by conducting an empirical study of moral behavior in sport. In a study of condom use, Albarracin et al. (1998) found that the attitudinal component had a beta weight of .52 (p <.01), whereas the normative component had a beta weight of .35 (p <01). Their findings are consistent with Valleran et al.’s (1992).

Specific to purchasing behavior, two groups of findings have been obtained. On one hand, subjective norms explained more variation in purchasing intentions than attitudes toward purchasing behavior when purchasing intentions for toothpaste were examined (Wilson et al., 1975). Wilson et al. (1975) found that US consumers’ purchasing intentions for toothpaste were predicted by subjective norms with .418 R square whereas by attitude toward behaviors with .252 R square. On the other hand, when clothing and other accessories were investigated, most studies obtained opposite findings. In a study of US college students’ purchasing intentions for unisex shirts, attitudes toward purchasing shirts explained more variation in purchasing intentions than subjective norms (Casselman & Damhorst, 1991). Similar findings were obtained when

US college students’ purchasing intentions for brand-name casual apparel were investigated (Chang et al., 1996), and when US college students’ purchasing intentions for sweaters were examined (DeLong et al., 1987).

Warshaw (1980) proposed two reasons why many studies foimd a more important role for attitudes toward behavior than subjective norms. The first reason was that subjective norms and attitudes toward behavior are highly correlated. The second reason

64 was that important referents, such as spouse, friends, or colleagues could hold conflicting opinions. Under this circumstance, the confusion could make people rely less on subjective norms (Warshaw, 1980).

In a cross-cultural study when Korean and US consumers’ purchasing intentions for sneakers were compared, attitudes toward behavior were more important than subjective norms in explaining purchasing intentions in the US, whereas subjective norms made a more significant contribution to purchasing intentions in Korea (Lee &. Green,

1991). Lee and Green (1991) suggested a third reason to explain attitudes toward behavior and subjective norms besides the two proposed by Warshaw (1980). That is, collectivist characteristics of Korean culture and individualist characteristics of US culture could explain the difference between Korean and US consumers. In Korea, collectivism makes Koreans care about others’ opinions, which could increase the importance of subjective norms on purchasing intentions. In contrast, admiration for freedom and independence in the US leads to more consideration for one’s own opinions and feelings rather than those of other people. In this case, subjective norms might play a less important role than attitudes toward behavior. The cultural effects could also provide an explanation for most of the studies discussed previously (see Table 2.2). As illustrated in Table 2.2, when the participants were American or Canadians who were from individualistic cultures, attitudes toward behavior almost always explained more variation in behavioral intentions than subjective norms. This may be because they cared more about their own personal beliefs toward the behavior than about the normative and social beliefs toward the behavior.

65 Author Sample Behavior Product Culture Results (Year)

Albarracin US Condom Individualism Ab>SN et al. (1998) Residents Use

Casselman & US College Purchase Shirt Individualism Ab>SN Damhorst Students (1991)

Chang US College Purchase Brand-name Individualism Ab>SN et al. Students Casual (1996) Apparel

DeLong US College Purchase Sweater Individualism Ab>SN et al. (1987) Students

Lee & Green US and Purchase Sneaker Individualism Ab>SN (1991) Korean Collectivism SN>Ab College Students

Valleran Canadian Moral Individualism Ab>SN et al. (1992) Athletes Behavior

Wilson US Purchase Toothpaste Individualism SN>Ab et al. (1975) Housewives

Table 2.2 Summary of relevant studies of the Fishbein Behavioral Intention Model.

66 In this study, all the participants were Chinese consumers. However, their

personal cultural preference could be different. For those whose personal cultural

preferences are Chinese culture, a collectivist culture, subjective norms may have higher

predictive power on purchasing intentions than attitudes toward behavior. In contrast, for

those whose personal cultural preferences are US culture, an individualist culture,

attitudes toward purchasing behavior may explain more variation in purchasing intentions

than subjective norms. Therefore, the following two hypotheses were developed:

H9. Subjective norms explain more variation in Chinese consumers’ clothing

purchasing intentions than attitudes toward behavior for those whose

personal cultural preferences are Chinese culture.

HIO. Attitudes toward behavior explain more variation in Chinese consumers’

clothing purchasing intentions than subjective norms for those whose

personal cultiual preferences are US culture.

Multidimensionalitv versus Unidimensionalitv of Attitude toward Behavior and

Subjective Norm

Fishbein and Ajzen (1975) originally proposed that attitude toward behavior was the sum of outcome and belief cross-products; likewise, the sum of normative belief and motivation to comply cross-products embodies subjective norms. This is called unidimentionality because all the components are assumed to have the same weight and are added together ending up with one item. The unidimentionality of attitudes toward behavior and subjective norms has been widely used and accepted. However, unidimensionality has been questioned by some researchers in favor of

67 multidimensionality. In multidimensionality, the components in the attitudinal structure have different weights. So a summation of all the components cannot describe attitudes correctly. In order to find the structure of the components in attitude, all the components need to be factor analyzed first. Then regression will be run with the resulting factors as the independent variables and attitude as the dependent variable. The subjective norm structtire needs to be examined in the same way in terms of multidimensionality.

Considering the dimensionality of attitudes toward behavior, in a study of blood donation, Bagozzi (1988) factor analyzed seven beliefs. Two factors related to immediate consequences and the third reflected delayed consequences. Similarly, in a study of coupon usage, Shimp and Kavas (1984) concluded that a three-factor structure composed of perceived inconveniences of coupon usage, perceived encumbrances, and perceived rewards represented a significant improvement over the one-factor structure.

The multidimensionality of subjective norms has also been studied. When coupon usage is examined as behavioral intention, Shimp and Kavas (1984) suggested that spouse, family, and friends/neighbors affect behavioral intentions differently and that friends/neighbors was poorly related to overall perceived social norms. By conducting a study on smoking intentions, Grube, Morgan, McGree (1986) found that peers and parents were the two key referents influencing smoking intentions, differentiating them from other referent groups. Morrison et al. (1996) also supported multidimensionality of both attitudes toward behavior and subjective norms with their findings regarding smoking and drinking.

6 8 Empirical studies have shown that unidimensionality is not always appropriate for

behavioral intention prediction. Simple summation of all items together by treating them

with the same weight does not work as well as separating them into different concepts

with unique weights, which is multidimensionality. Based on this rationale the following

hypothesis was developed:

HI 1. Multidimensional attitudinal structures and normative structures explain

more variation in Chinese consumers’ clothing purchasing intentions than

unidimensional attitudes and norms.

Additional Factors Affecting Behavioral Intentions

Another issue attracting researchers’ attention is whether there are other

components influencing behavioral intention besides attitudes toward behavior and

subjective norms. This idea is not consistent with the original Fishbein Behavioral

Intention Model. According to Ajzen and Fishbein (1980), all other factors work through

attitudinal and subjective constructs rather than directly influencing behavioral intentions;

attitudes toward behavior and subjective norms are sufficient to predict behavioral intentions. However, researchers have found other variables that could aid in the prediction of behavioral intentions besides attitude toward behavior and subjective norm.

Some of them are self-efficacy, income and race, past behavior, perceived behavioral control, and perceived moral values.

McCaul et al. (1988) proposed adding self-efficacy in the Fishbein Behavioral

Intention Model, which refers to the beliefs that an individual can or cannot perform some behavior (Bandura, 1977). In a study on dental hygienic behaviors, the effects of

69 self-efficacy on behavioral intention were found (McCaul et ai., 1988). Similarly,

individual’s income and race increase the explanation of behavioral intention when both

are added into the model (Morrison et al., 1996). In another study by Albarracin et al.

(1998), another variable was found to significantly affect behavioral intention, which was

past behavior. Regarding perceived behavioral control, due to its significant contribution

to explain behavioral intention, the Fishbein Behavioral Intention Model was extended to

Ajzen’s Theory of Planned Behavior (Ajzen, 1991).

Based on the forgoing discussion, it might be reasonable to hypothesize that the

two components, attitude toward behavior and subjective norm, in the Fishbein

Behavioral Intention Model are not enough to predict behavioral intentions. There are

possibilities for other factors to increase the explanations of behavioral intention. Could

personal cultural preference be a third factor explaining behavior intentions?

Ajzen (1991) proposed that in some circumstances, only investigating the

function of social norms on behavioral intentions was not enough; rather, both social and personal norms need to be considered. Personal norms refer to what an individual believes regarding norms, values, and obligations and how s/he thinks s/he should behave. Social norms are represented by how other groups, such as parents, fiiends, co­ workers, or religious groups who surround the individual, think the individual should behave (Fishbein, 1976, p. 489). In the Fishbein Behavioral Intention Model, only social norms are included, represented by normative belief (NB), the individual’s beliefs about what s/he should do based on the important referents around him; NB is based on social norms. The other norms, personal norms, have not been considered.

7 0 Ryan and Bonfield (1975) presented a theoretical proposition which inferred the possible function of personal norms on behavior intention as follows:

BwBI = [ Ab ]wo + [ NBs • MCs ]w/ + [ NBp • MCp ]W 2 where s and p refer to social norms and personal norms respectively. Beck and Ajzen

(1991) also suggest that not only perceived social pressure needs to be considered, but also personal feelings of moral obligation or responsibility to perform, or refusal to perform some behavior, need to be examined.

Empirical studies have been conducted to examine the role of personal norms in the Fishbein Behavioral Intention Model. Ajzen (1991) hypothesized that personal moral obligations, which referred to personal feelings of moral obligation or responsibility to perform, or refusal to perform a certain behavior based on one’s own normative beliefs

(Gorsuch & Ortberg, 1983), could influence intentions parallel to the other two components, attitude toward behavior and subjective norm. Pomazel and Jaccare (1976) and Zuckerman and Reis (1978) found that the addition of moral norms to the Fishbein

Behavioral Intention Model significantly increased the predictive power for intentions in the case o f blood donation. In another study of organ donor behavior, personal norms carried around two to three times as much weight as did attitude toward behavior and subjective norm (Schwartz & Tessler, 1972). Beck and Ajzen (1991) examined the role of personal norms in three contexts: cheating on a test, shoplifting, and lying to get out of taking a test or turning in an assignment on time. Across all three behaviors, significant betas for perceived moral obligation were found and the regression R square was

71 significantly increased by 3 to 6 % when perceived moral obligation was added (Beck &

Ajzen, 1991).

The reviewed studies investigated different factors, personal norms, personal

feelings of moral obligation, or personal moral beliefs. Yet, all three factors are similar and refer to the norms, beliefs, and values an individual tends to accept and agree with.

This is very similar to the definition of personal cultural preference. Hence, personal cultural preference could raise the explained variation in behavioral intention.

Since personal norms, personal feelings of moral obligation, and personal moral beliefs have been found to be the possible third component in the Fishbein Behavioral

Intention Model (Beck & Ajzen, 1991; Pomazel & Jaccare, 1976; Schwartz & Tessler,

1972; Zuckerman & Reis, 1978), personal cultural preference could also affect intentions independently from the other two components. That is, a Chinese consumer may have positive attitudes toward purchasing US-made clothing and believe that important referents support the purchase of US-made clothing, but without the consistency of personal cultural beliefs (s/he does not accept US culture), the final behavioral intention may be low. Thus the following hypothesis was developed:

H12. Personal cultural preference affects Chinese consumers’ clothing

purchasing intentions.

Summary of Research

Chinese consumers’ attitudes toward US-made clothing and China-made clothing have been reviewed and discussed from both applied and theoretical perspectives. The

72 theory of Cultural Economics and the Difhision of Innovations theory provide theoretical support for the effects of consumers’ personal cultural preferences on their attitudes toward foreign and domestic products. When the Fishbein Behavioral Intention Model is used to investigate Chinese consumers, the model may be extended by the addition of personal cultural preference. Based on the foregoing review, a number of hypotheses were developed. These are summarized in Table 2.3.

7 3 HI. Importance of country of origin (US) affects Chinese consumers’ attitudes toward purchasing US-made clothing.

H2. Importance of country of origin (China) affects Chinese consumers’ attitudes toward purchasing China-made clothing.

H3. Chinese consumers have more positive attitudes toward (a) US-made clothing than China-made clothing; (b) purchasing US-made clothing than purchasing China-made clothing.

H4. Chinese consumers’ personal cultural preferences affect their attitudes toward US-made clothing.

H5. Chinese consumers’ personal cultural preferences affect their attitudes toward China-made clothing.

H6. Chinese consumers whose personal cultural preferences favor Chinese culture have more positive attitudes toward China-made clothing than US-made clothing.

H7. Chinese consumers whose personal cultural preferences favor US culture have more positive attitudes toward US-made clothing than China-made clothing.

H8. Attitudes toward purchasing clothing explain more variation in Chinese consumers’ clothing purchasing intentions than attitudes toward clothing.

H9. Subjective norms explain more variation in Chinese consumers’ clothing purchasing intentions than attitudes toward behavior for those whose personal cultural preferences are Chinese culture.

HIO. Attitudes toward behavior explain more variation in Chinese consumers’ clothing purchasing intentions than subjective norms for those whose personal cultural preferences are US culture.

HI 1. Multidimensional attitudinal structures and normative structures explain more variation in Chinese consumers’ clothing purchasing intentions than unidimensional attitudes and norms.

HI2. Personal cultural preference affects Chinese consumers’ clothing purchasing intentions.

Table 2.3 Hypotheses.

74 CHAPTERS

METHOD

This study examined Chinese consumers’ attitudes toward US-made clothing and the effects of personal cultural preference on their attitudes. A test and extension of the

Fishbein Behavioral Intention Model were also investigated. In this chapter, the methods applied in conducting this study are discussed. The following topics are included: sampling, questionnaire development, procedures, and data analysis.

Sample

Participants

There were three criteria for selecting participants for this study. The first criterion was that all the participants should have had the opportunity to see US-made clothing and have access to purchasing US-made clothing. Consumers living in rural areas, remote areas, and small towns are unlikely to meet this requirement because clothing manufactured in the US is not sold in stores in those areas (Schmitt, 1997) and the items in the questionnaire would not make sense. To satisfy the criterion that all the participants have likely seen US-made clothing, three of the largest cities in China,

75 Beijing, Shanghai, and Guangzhou were chosen for data collection. Foreign companies

entering the Chinese market tend to focus on these three cities (Lin & Chen, 1998). The physical infrastructure in these cities is far more developed than the rest of China and

there are more wealthy consumers there who are willing to buy imported products than in other places in China (Cui, 1997).

The economic, cultural, political, and geographic characteristics in Beijing,

Shanghai, and Guangzhou also make them three of the most frequently chosen cities for surveys (Schmitt, 1997). For example, in 1996 Grey Advertising and A.C. Nielsen conducted a survey of Chinese consumers’ buying preferences and price sensitivity in

Beijing, Guangzhou, and Shanghai (Scarry, 1996). Dentsu, a Japanese survey company which conducted three surveys in China in 1986, 1993, and 1995, selected these three cities as survey locations every time (Arigaet al., 1997).

The second criterion for sample selection was that respondents be residents of the three cities, rather than temporary visitors or tourists. All three cities, however, have large transitory populations. Beijing, as the capital of China, is famous for its historical scenery, political image, governmental power, and other features attracting many tourists

(CERNIC, 1999). Guangzhou, as the largest and most developed city in southern China, is often the first choice for people from rural areas who migrate to cities in search of jobs

(South China University of Technology, 1999). Shanghai’s westernization and developed businesses provide a shopping haven for people from all over the country

(Jiang, 1998).

76 In order to find Chinese resident respondents for the survey, parents of school

children were sampled. Questionnaires were distributed to teachers in elementary

schools and middle schools who then distributed the questioimaires to their students.

Students were instructed to take the questionnaires home and ask either their mother or

father to complete the questionnaires. Using students’ parents as the participants

guaranteed that the participants were residents, because according to Chinese government

policy, only children of city residents can obtain an education in these three cities (Rosen

& Chu, 1987); thus all participants satisfy the criterion of being residents.

The last criterion was that the participants be chosen as randomly as possible from

the population of urban Chinese of all sexes, occupations, levels of income, and social

status in the cities. The participants selected through the school system of each city can

be considered representative of the population in that city, which directly influences the

generalization of the results. The sampling strategy assuring a representative sample is

detailed in the next section.

Regarding the sample size, 1,000 questionnaires were distributed in each city.

Thus, a total of 3,000 participants were sampled. With each questionnaire, an incentive was offered. The sample size was determined by financial limits.

Sampling Strateev

Survey methodology was used in this study. Generally speaking, telephone surveys and mail surveys are most typically used in the US. In China, however, both are inappropriate for data collection. In order to conduct a telephone survey, most of the population must have a telephone. It helps if the telephone numbers are included in a

77 published telephone list. In China both of these conditions cannot be met; there is no

complete published telephone list and many families do not have telephones (King &

McDaniel, 1989). Additionally, the mailing system is unreliable, which makes mail

surveys impossible. Thus neither mail nor telephone surveys are viable for collecting data in China. In an attempt to obtain a representative sample of Chinese consumer residents, an innovative procedure was used to collect data for this study.

Generally, there are two major difficulties involved in survey methodology. The

first problem is inaccessibility, which happens wheti there is no way to reach the needed respondents. The second problem is refusal, which occurs when the respondents do not agree to cooperation (Roslow, Nicholls, & Comer, 1993). In order to decrease the

influence from these two elements, students’ parents were obtained as participants through the public school system. Dealing with instructors in schools was expected to increase the accessibility of the population since once the instructor agreed to cooperate, s/he could be responsible for communicating with students’ parents. Additionally, I anticipated that the authority of teachers in the Chinese education system could further decrease the possibility of refusal. Because research has indicated that people are more likely to comply with a request if it comes from an authority or firom a person who is associated with an authority (Bushman, 1984; Groves, Cialdini, & Couper, 1992).

Besides the authority function, social validation may also decrease the possibility of refusal. Social validation suggests that individuals are more willing to comply with a request when they believe that similar others would comply with it (Groves et al., 1992).

In this study, if a student’s parents knew (a) the questionnaires were distributed to all

78 students’ parents in the class and (b) the other parents would participate in the survey, then the incidence of refusal to fill out the questionnaire may decrease.

In order to obtain a representative sample of the population of interest, a multi­ stage sampling procedure was employed (see Figure 3.1). There were eight steps involved in the procedure. In the first step, the total number of participants required in each city was obtained. The second step aimed to determine how many classes needed to be visited in each city. In Chinese schools there are around 40-50 students in each class, then 20-25 classes were required in each city to obtain the desired 1000 participants from each city. If half the participants were from elementary schools and the other half from middle schools, 10 to 12 classes needed to be selected from elementary schools and the other 10 to 12 from middle schools according to steps 3 and 4. In steps 5 and 6, five to six elementary schools and five to six middle schools were required in each city since two classes from each school were selected. In the Chinese education system, elementary and middle schools have six grades, then two classes were needed from each grade according to steps 7 and 8.

79 Step 1 - Determine # of students per city Total students 4- # of cities 3,000 4-3 = 1,000

Step 2 - Determine # of classes to visit Total students per city 4- average class size

per city 1,000 4- (40-50) = (20-25)

Step 3 - Determine # of classes to visit in Total classes to visit per city 4- 2 (half from elementary schools per city elementary schools, half from middle schools) (20-25) ^ 2 = (10 - 12)

Step 4 - Determine # of classes to visit in Total classes to visit per city 4- 2 (half from middle schools per city elementary schools, half from middle schools)

(20-25) 4- 2 = (10- 12) ______

Step 5 - Determine # of elementary schools Total classes in elementary schools to visit per

to visit per city city4 - # of classes chosen from each school

(10- 12) 4- 2 = (5-6)______

Step 6 - Determine # of middle schools Total classes in middle schools to visit to per

to visit per city city4 - # of classes chosen from each school

(10- 12) 4- 2 = (5-6)

Step 7 - Determine # of classes to visit in Total classes in elementary schools to visit per elementary schools per grade per city city 4- ^ of grade in elementary schools (10-12)4-6 = 2

Step 8 - Determine # of classes to visit in Total classes in middle schools to visit per city middle schools per grade per city 4- # of grade in middle schools (10-12)4-6 = 2

Figure 3.1 Sampling strategy.

80 The lists o f elementary schools and middle schools in each city were obtained

from the telephone Yellow Pages. Key schools were removed from the sampling frame.

Key schools are those that have the academically best students from all over the city with

the main goal of sending graduates to college. In China, students who attend key schools

tend to have higher family background in terms of income, social statues, and occupation.

In these three cities, around 1% of all students attend key schools. Keeping these schools

in the sampling frame could decrease the sample’s representativeness of the population.

After removing all the key schools from the lists, all the remaining schools were numbered. In Beijing there were 260 middle schools and 374 elementary schools,

Shanghai had 398 middle schools and 808 elementary schools, and Guangzhou had 189 middle schools and 392 elementary schools. Then 6 out of 260,6 out of 398, and 6 out of

189 middle schools were randomly selected in Beijing, Shanghai, and Guangzhou, respectively. Likewise, 6 out of 374, 6 out of 808,6 out of 392 elementary schools were randomly chosen in Beijing, Shanghai, and Guangzhou, respectively.

A Visual Basic program was used to generate random numbers. For example, in order to randomly select six elementary schools in Shanghai, 1 and 808 were established as the starting and ending numbers. Then six numbers were randomly generated by the computer, which were 72, 198, 264, 399, 510, and 720. According to these six numbers, the corresponding six schools were identified. Using this strategy, the 12 schools in each city were identified. A back-up plan to randomly generate additional schools was prepared in case a teacher refused her or his class’s participation.

81 Table 3.1 shows the schools and classes selected for data collection based on the above strategy. One thing to note is that in Shanghai, elemenlmy schools only have five grades rather than six grades. So three classes were selected from grades 1 and 5, and two classes fi'om grades 2, 3, and 4.

Beijing Shanghai Guangzhou

Elementary 53(1 and 2) 72 (1 and 2) 91 (1 and 2) School numbers 99 (2 and 3) 198 (2 and 3) 149 (2 and 3) (Grade numbers) 142 (3 and 4) 265 (3 and 4) 189 (3 and 4) 251 (4 and 5) 388 (4 and 5) 211 (4 and 5) 283 (5 and 6) 510 (5 and 1) 236 (5 and 6) 349 (6 and 1) 720 (1 and 5) 328 (6 and 1)

Middle School 7(1 and 2) 5 (1 and 2) 23 (1 and 2) Numbers 49 (2 and 3) 101 (2 and 3) 89 (2 and 3) (Grade numbers) 74 (3 and 4) 156 (3 and 4) 153 (3 and 4) 103 (4 and 5) 233 (4 and 5) 156 (4 and 5) 148 (5 and 6) 278 (5 and 6) 168 (5 and 6) 237(6 and 1) 355 (6 and 1) 175 (6 and 1)

Table 3.1 Randomly selected schools and grades in the three cities.

82 Using this sampling strategy, the three criteria could be reasonably met. Parents

of students are definitely residents of the three cities and have likely seen clothing

manufactured in the US. By randomly choosing schools from the list of each city, the

obtained sample included a broad range of ages and could be considered representative of

the population from the perspectives of gender, income, and social status.

Students in Chinese elementary and middle schools typically range in age from 6

to 20 years old, and their parents would range in age from 25 to 60 years old, because

Chinese urban couples tend to have children when they are approximately 20 to 35 years

old (Rosen & Chu, 1987). Second, elementary and middle schools in China enroll

students from nearby locations regardless of family income and social status. Therefore,

this sampling strategy also guarantees the variability of participants’ income, occupation,

and expenditures. Finally, half the questiormaires were to be completed by women and

the other half by men. The cover letter of the questionnaire specified whether the

questionnaire was to be completed by the mother or by the father (see Appendix A). In

each class, half the students received the questionnaire for women and the other half

received the questionnaires for men. In this way, the sample represented both male and

female Chinese consumers. So the third criterion, representativeness, was met by this

sampling strategy.

Tull and Hawkins (1980) propose that there are six criteria for evaluation of

survey methods: (1) speed, (2) amount of information obtained, (3) cost, (4) desired accuracy, (5) acceptable level of non-response, and (6) representativeness of the sample.

For the Chinese situation, doing a survey through the public school system is a

83 reasonable strategy that can obtain a maximum amount of information during a short

period of time with a low rate of non-response and low cost. However, one major

limitation of this sampling strategy is the missing data on single participants, particularly

those aged from 18 to 35 years old. Generally speaking, the single population from 18 to

35 years old is a group with high buying power and strong pursuit for foreign products

(Ariga et al., 1997). These consumers are missing from this survey.

Questionnaire Development

Variables of Interest

The function of a questioimaire is to achieve the research objectives by measuring variables of interest (Oppenheim, 1966). This study aimed to examine Chinese consumers’ attitudes toward US-made clothing, to investigate the effect o f personal cultural preference on Chinese consumers’ attitudes toward US-made clothing, to test the

Fishbein Behavioral Intention Model, and to extend the model by adding personal cultural preference. Therefore, there are several variables related to these objectives, including personal cultural preference, attitudes toward clothing, and variables related to the Fishbein Behavioral Intention Model including purchasing intentions of US-made clothing, attitudes toward purchasing US-made clothing, and subjective norms.

Demographic variables are also discussed in this part, which can provide general information on the sample.

84 Personal Cultural Preference

As discussed in Chapter 2, personal cultural preference describes an individual’s preference for cultural values and norms when simultaneously faced with more than one group of values and norms. Personal cultural preference measures acculturation when acculturation caused by the movement of culture is studied instead of the movement of people. There are two ways to measure acculturation by personal cultural preference.

The first one is to rely on the evaluation and behaviors toward cultural products and events, and the second one is composed of questions regarding social values and norms related to one particular culture.

Cultural products and events. Moschis (1987) suggested that there were many factors which could be used to determine the extent to which an individual has taken on the identity of a culture, such as behavioral patterns, which could include dress, food, place of residence, and language; involvement in social structure, which could be occupation or religion; and choice of marriage partner. Consumption of some commodities could further reveal the consumers’ cultural background and customs.

Some examples include the consumption of eggnog as a Christmas food, dishes and appliances as wedding gifts, diamond rings as engagement tokens, and organic products as health food, all of which are associated with culture in North America (Applbaum &

Jordt, 1996). Therefore, selection of cultural products, such as movies and music, consumption of some commodities, such as food and drink, and interests in cultural related events, such as politics, sports, and festivals could reveal an individual’s cultural preference.

85 Nine items were developed in this study based on the literature discussed above.

The first two items were related to movies and music, which are cultural-related products.

Another three items focused on food, drink, and brand names of products. The last four items were related to sports, celebrities, politics, and festivals, which are cultural-related events.

Description of acculturation through personal cultural preference cannot be appropriate by only measuring the consumption of cultural products and interest in cultural events under one culture. An individual can enjoy both soccer and US football if s/he is a sport fan since these two kinds of sports are not mutually exclusive. Then s/he has high scores on both US football and soccer. Likewise, a person could be uninterested in either the US politics or Chinese politics if s/he has no interest in politics at all. In this case, s/he has low scores on both the US politics and Chinese politics.

The cultural products and events under western and eastern cultures are not totally contradictory to each other. Being interested in the US cultural products and events does not definitely mean one has no interest in Chinese cultural products and events. What is needed to describe personal cultural preference is the d i f f e r e n ce between the individuals’ interest in US and Chinese cultural products and events. Only measuring an individual’s interest in Chinese cultural products and events cannot lead to the conclusion that her or his personal cultural preference is Chinese culture even if s/he shows great interests in

Chinese cultural products and events. Only when considering preference ratings for both the US and Chinese culture, is the individual’s personal cultural preference known.

Therefore, nine pairs of questions were developed to measure personal cultural

8 6 preference (see Table 3.2). The left column shows the nine questions as they relate to

Chinese culture, called the Chinese Products and Events Measure; and the right column

shows the nine questions constituting the US Products and Events Measure. A 7-point

scale was used to all items (1 = totally disagree, 7 = totally agree). After summing the

scores on the Chinese Products and Events Measure and summing the scores on the US

Products and Events Measure, the difference between the two summations can describe

the individual’s personal cultural preference.

Pretest 1 was conducted to check the reliability of both the Chinese Products and

Events and the US Products and Events measures. Chinese students and scholars in

American universities were the participants. The pretest questionnaire was distributed through e-mail (see Appendix B). Particularly, I contacted Chinese students and scholars’ associations at Michigan State University, University of Pennsylvania,

Louisiana State University, and Clemson University. The questionnaire was posted on the homepage of each association, and students and scholars voluntarily filled out the questionnaires and emailed them back to me. By using this strategy, 37 completed questionnaires were obtained, among which 62.2 % were completed by males, 35.1% by females, and one with missing information on sex. The age of respondents ranged firom

20 to 41 years. The Cronbach’s alpha for the US Products and Events Measure was

.6517, and the Cronbach’s alpha for the Chinese Products and Events Measure was .5420.

Nunnally (1967) suggested that the minimally acceptable level of Cronbach’s alpha be fi'om 0.5 to 0.6. Both Cronbach’s alphas were greater than the minimal level.

87 Chinese Products and Events Measure US Products and Events Measure

1) When I go to theaters, I always 1) When 1 go to theaters, I always want to see Chinese movies; want to see American movies; 2) 1 like Chinese traditional music 2) I like American pop music very very much; much; 3) I like Chinese traditional fast 3) 1 like American fast food; food; 4) 1 enjoy watching soccer very 4) 1 enjoy watching American much; football very much; 5) I am interested in what has 5) 1 am interested in what has happened to Chinese famous happened to American famous people, such as movie stars or people, such as movie stars or sports stars; sports stars; 6) 1 am interested in Chinese 6) I am interested in American politics; politics; 7) 1 like Chinese traditional drink. 7) I like American drink, such as such as tea; coffee and Coke; 8) Chinese Spring Festival is very 8) Christmas is very important for important for me; me; 9) When 1 am shopping, I always 9) When I am shopping, 1 always want to buy Chinese brands if I want to buy American brands if I have enough money. have enough money.

Table 3.2 Questions on the US and Chinese products and events.

8 8 However, two pairs of questions in Table 3.2 were deleted later not due to a statistical reason, but because of sensitivity. The first pair was related to Christmas, a typical holiday in US culture, and Spring Festival, a typical holiday in Chinese culture.

The Human Subject Review Committee at The Ohio State University suggested removing the question on Christmas because it was related to religion, and its disclosure could potentially bring harm to the respondents. Correspondingly, the question on

Chinese Spring Festival in the Chinese Products and Events Measure was deleted. The other pair of questions deleted was about politics. At the first survey location, Shanghai, I was told to remove the political questions by the Shanghai

Education Bureau, because the political questions were too sensitive in China. A similar situation happened when King and McDaniel (1989) conducted their study in China. As a result seven pairs of items remained to measure personal cultural preference on the US

Products and Events Measure and on the Chinese Products and Events Measure. After removing these two pairs of items from the data obtained in Pretest 1, the Cronbach’s alpha for the US Products and Events Measure was .6906 and the Cronbach’s alpha for

Chinese Products and Events Measure was .5725.

Cultural values and norms. Cultural values and norms are also used to judge individuals’ cultural preferences. For each culture, there are typical values, norms, customs, and rules. Some cultures share more similarities, such as US culture and

Canadian culture, than other cultures, such as US culture and Chinese culture. There are two major groups of cultures in the world, western culture and eastern culture. US

89 culture is a representative of western culture, whereas Chinese culture represents eastern

(Davis, 1993).

There are many differences between the US and Chinese culture. The

corresponding values and norms under each culture are inconsistent, sometimes even

contradictory to each other. One example o f the difference between these two cultmes is

in attitudes toward group and individualism. Americans hold individualism in very high

esteem, whereas Chinese regard it as selfishness (Santayana, 1934; Xing, 1995). Hall

(1976) proposed a concept of cultural context as a way to imderstand different cultural orientations. Cultural context refers to how people in a culture relate to one another, such as spouses, children, relatives, and parents. The results in the study indicated that

Chinese culture belonged to high-context cultures, whereas US culture was classified as a low-context culture (Kim, Pan, & Park, 1998). In other words, influenced by Chinese culture, Chinese people tend to have much closer relationships with their spouses, children, relatives, parents, friends, and colleagues as compared to US people.

Therefore, individualism versus collectivism is one example of differences between the

US and Chinese culture (Triandis, Villareal, Asai, & Lucca, 1988). Besides, Chinese culture and US culture attach different values and norms to many other things, such as family, parents, children, marriage, ancestors, country, life, time, and success (Szalay,

Strohl, Fu, & Lao, 1994).

Because many cultural values and norms under US culture are inconsistent with those under Chinese culture, there is little possibility for an individual to accept the values and norms of both cultures. This is different fi-om the cultural products and events

90 discussed above. So a measure including typical values and norms under Chinese culture can be used to examine whether an individual has Chinese culture as a personal cultural preference. If an individual has Chinese culture as a personal cultural preference, there is little possibility for her or him to hold US culture as a personal Cultural preference at the same time, since many Chinese cultural values and norms are inconsistent with US cultural values and norms. As a result, one group of items tapping Chinese cultural values and norms was developed to measure personal cultural preference, which is called the Chinese Values and Norms Measure.

Attachment to family and social conformity are two characteristics of Chinese culture. Tan and Farley (1987) investigated Singapore consumers’ preferences for

Chinese culture from these two perspectives. They found that those consumers in

Singapore whose cultural preference was Chinese culture tended to have high scores on the following four items related to family: 1) affection for family; 2) interaction with family members; 3) parental influence on thought; and 4) tendency to compromise subjective needs for family needs. This group of participants also had high scores on two items associated with social conformity: 1) behaving according to what others expect, and 2) giving up personal desires to conform to social norms (Tan & Farley, 1987).

Another character of Chinese culture is about losing face. Ho (1978) states that for Chinese, face is the respect a person receives from other related to status, authority, and prestige. In order to avoid losing face, Chinese tend to moderate their own activities, avoiding extremity, and they always try to act properly.

91 Furthermore, China is a country deeply influenced by Confucianism. Many codes for social conduct are based on Confucianism. The basic principles of Confucianism include obedience to superiors and parents, respect for superiors and parents, duty to family, loyalty to friends, humility, sincerity and courtesy (Chinapoint, 1998). These principles are well reflected in Chinese culture.

Based on these characteristics of Chinese culture, a Chinese culture scale developed by McCullough et al. (1986) and Tan and McCullough (1985) was adopted for this study. There are ten items in the scale that are related to social values and norms regarding women, elderly, sons, parents, relatives, marriage, losing face, returning favors, showing affection, and behavior. The items reflect the typical cultural values and norms under Chinese culture (see Table 3.3). A 7-point scale was used in the measure: 1

(strongly disagree), 4 (uncertain), and 7 (strongly agree). The reliability of the Chinese

Values and Norms Measure in Pretest 1 was examined, and the Cronbach’s alpha was

.6027 when the item related to having a son was deleted.

In sum, there are two ways to measure individual’s cultural preference, cultural products and events, and cultural values and norms. Few studies have conducted a comparison between these two approaches to measure cultural preference. In this study, by testing and comparing both measures, I address two questions. First, is there consistency between these two measures of personal cultural preference? If an individual accepts one kind of culture, is s/he more willing to accept the corresponding cultural products? The second question is which one of the two could be more powerful for

92 explaining consumers’ attitudes toward clothing. In Pretest 1, these two measures of

personal cultural preference were applied and their correlation was 0.571 (p < .01).

A woman’s place is in the home. Caring for one’s aged parents is the duty of every person. Every family should have a son. My relationship with my parents is formalized. I often do the right things so as not to lose face. I feel strongly about returning favors to others. I interact frequently and closely with my relatives. Showing my affection openly is not acceptable. Marriage should be a lifetime commitment. One should not go to the extremes in ones’ behavior.

Table 3.3 Chinese Values and Norms Measure.

Attitudes toward Clothing

Attitude toward an object has been measured by the Fishbein Attitude Model (Ao

= Z biei ) in several studies (e.g., Dickson, 1994; Wilson et al., 1975). Attributes of products and evaluations of the attributes are required by this model. Specific to clothing, there are several key attributes for consumers including color, style, fabric, comfort, price, and brand (Abraham-Nurali & Littrell, 1995; Dickson & Littrell, 1997;

Eckman, Damhorst, & BCadolph, 1990; Lee & Green, 1991).

93 Focusing on Chinese consumers, researchers have examined clothing attributes

thought to be important for Chinese consumers. In a study of Chinese consumers’ attitudes toward foreign brand and Chinese brand apparel, eleven clothing attributes were

Investigated: fit, style, quality, durability, fabric, comfort, workmanship, ease of care, color, price, and packaging (Hu, 1994). When investigating Chinese consumers’ characteristics, Shen (1995) examined six clothing attributes: style, color, pattern, fabric, brand, and price. In response to an open-ended question in another study conducted by myself, 300 Chinese college students listed the following nine important clothing attributes: style, color, price, comfort, brand, workmanship, quality, fabric, and fit. As a result, these nine clothing attributes are included in the measure of attitude toward clothing in this study. Additionally, another two attributes used by other researchers were added in this study, durability and ease of care. The participants in this study were parents with children. So ease of care and durability of clothing could be important.

Therefore, a total of eleven clothing attributes were investigated in this study.

Beliefs were measured by asking the respondents whether they agreed that US- made clothing and China-made clothing was characterized by the eleven attributes (1 = mostly disagree, 7 = mostly agree). Because all the clothing attributes were listed into two groups either under US-made clothing or China-made clothing, there was no need to assess belief on country of origin.

Evaluations were assessed by asking the respondents how important the following attributes of clothing were to them on 7-point scales anchored with "very low" (1) and

"very high" (7). In the first English version of the questionnaire, evaluations were

94 measured by asking the respondents “how much do you want each of the following characteristics when purchasing clothing”. The 7-point scales were anchored with 1 = very much unwanted and 7 = very much wanted. There are differences between

"important” and “wanted”. “Important attributes” could have two meanings: either

“wanted attributes” or “unwanted attributes”. For example, when the latest fashionable style is considered as one clothing attribute, person A thinks it is important because s/he pursues the latest fashion, whereas person B also thinks it is important because s/he always avoids wearing clothing with fashionable style. The evaluation o f importance from person A could be same as that from person B, but they have different meanings.

So using “important” to describe attributes can lead to ambiguity (Dickson & Littrell,

1997), and it was avoided when the questionnaire was developed. However, because this study was conducted in China, the questionnaire was translated into Chinese. The word

“important” in Chinese relates to desirable rather than undesirable and “want” is translated to “important” in Chinese. Therefore, in the final Chinese version questionnaire, the Chinese word for “important” was used to replace the Chinese word for "wanted”. There were 13 items included in evaluation of the object: durable, reasonable price, good workmanship, easy to care for, of latest fashion, o f good hand, comfortable, of good quality, of fashionable color, fits me well, famous brand, made in the US, and made in China.

Variables in the Fishbein Behavioral Intention Model

Three variables are needed to test the Fishbein Behavioral Intention Model, purchasing intention, attitude toward purchasing clothing, and subjective norm.

95 Measures of the Fishbein Behavioral Intention Model used in the study have been formulated and employed in previous research (e.g., Ajzen & Fishbein, 1980; Bagozzi,

1981; Godin et al., 1996; Lee & Green, 1991; Shimp & Kavas, 1984). These measures have been shown to possess high reliability and both convergent and discriminant validity

(Bumkrant & Page, 1982; Oliver & Bearden, 1985; Ryan, 1982).

In Kimiecik’s study (1992), the Cronbach’s alpha for the first component in the

Fishbein Behavioral Intention Model, the attitudinal structure, was .86, and the

Cronbach’s alpha for the second component, the normative structure, was .85 when the intentions for participating in vigorous physical activity were studied. When purchasing toothpaste was examined, the attitudinal structure had a Cronbach’s alpha of .87, which had four items (price, taste, decay, and breath). Regarding the normative structure, when dentists, children, and spouses were included, the Cronbach’s alpha was .83 (Ryan,

1982). Specific to purchasing clothing, when attitudes toward imported and domestic apparel among US college students were investigated, the Cronbach’s alpha of their evaluations of 14 clothing attributes was .78, the Cronbach’s alphas of their beliefs about

14 clothing attributes were .89 (imported apparel) and .92 (domestic apparel) (Shim et al.,

1989). In another study on purchasing apparel products fi'om an alternative trading organization (Dickson & Littrell, 1996), the Cronbach’s alphas for the attitudinal components were above .64. Therefore, these previous studies provide statistical support

(reliability and validity) for the adoption of the measures in this study regarding the

Fisbhein Behavioral Intention Model.

96 Additionally, the measures used in this study were adopted from previous studies

by specifying the items on a certain type of garment, pants. Fishbein (1976) stated that

the Fishbein Behavioral Intention Model should be applied to a specific behavior, so a

certain type of garment was required in this study. Because female and male participants

were surveyed, a type of unisex clothing, pants, was chosen.

Purchasing intention. Purchasing intentions for US-made clothing and China-

made clothing were measured separately. Three pairs of items were included in the

purchasing intention inventory. The first pair asked the respondents about the possibility

of purchasing clothing made in China (made in the US) for themselves within the

following 12 months. The second pair were “Will you probably purchase clothing made

in China (made in the US) next year?” A 7-point scale was used for both pairs of

questions anchored with highly impossible (I) and highly possible (7). The last pair of questions asked the respondents to indicate the possibility they would purchase clothing made in China (made in the US) for themselves this year. A 0-100 scale was used here, where 0 represents no possibility of purchase and 100 represents the highest possibility to purchase. Because of the similarity of the items in this measure, respondents might try to provide consistent answers. To avoid this possibility and thus to enhance reliability, the three pairs were scattered pair by pair in the questionnaire.

Attitudes toward purchasing clothing. Attitudes toward purchasing clothing manufactured in the US and clothing manufactured in China were measured by three pairs of items: 1) buying clothing manufactured in China (manufactured in the US) is foolish or wise; 2) buying clothing manufactured in China (manufactured in the US) is

97 bad or good; and 3) buying clothing manufactured in China (manufactured in the US) is

impractical or practical. A 7-point semantic differential scale was applied here. In

Pretest I, the reliability of the measure of attitudes toward purchasing clothing was

examined. The Cronbach’s alpha o f attitudes toward piuchasing US-made clothing was

.6710, and was .6975 in terms of attitudes toward purchasing China-made clothing. The

same strategy was used in this measure as that used in the purchasing intention measure.

Because the three pairs of items measuring attitudes toward purchasing clothing were

similar to each other, they were scattered pair by pair in the questionnaire to avoid

respondents’ tendency to purposely answer these questions consistently.

Subiective norms. Subjective norms refer to pressure an individual feels from

referents regarding conducting some behavior. It requires the investigation of normative

beliefs and motivation to comply. Before measuring these two variables, salient referents

need to be identified. In Pretest 1, an open-ended question asked the participants to list

all the persons whose opinions they consider when they purchase clothing. There were

four answers: fnends (78.3%), family members (26.1%), colleagues (4.3%), and celebrities (4.3%). Friends and family members were kept for the final questionnaire since the other two referents, colleagues and celebrities, were only important for a small group of the participants.

A third possible referent, store salesperson, was also included in the final questionnaire. There may be several reasons why the participants in Pretest 1 did not mention salespersons while salespersons might be a salient referent for consumers in

China. First, the participants in Pretest 1 were Chinese who ciurently live in the US.

98 Although most of them can speak English, they might still have problems chatting with

others, such as salespersons. So they may rely less on salespersons when shopping for

clothing. However, this does not occur for Chinese who live in China. There would not

be a language problem between Chinese consumers and Chinese salespersons. Secondly, compared to the Chinese shopping situation, there are far fewer salespersons in US stores than in Chinese stores and there might be fewer opportunities for consumers to receive suggestions from salespersons. In contrast, according to my experience in fall 1998, the density of salespersons in Chinese stores was much higher than that in the US, and there were still many shopping areas in China where goods were not openly displayed. So whenever consumers are interested in taking a close look at some clothing or trying on the clothing, they have to ask salespersons to get the clothing. Under this circumstance, there could be more interactions between salespersons and consumers. Therefore, salespersons, friends, and family were included in the final questionnaire as salient referents.

The items measuring normative beliefs asked “do your family members (friends / salespersons) support your purchasing clothing made in China (made in the US)?” A 7- point scale was used here (1 = not support and 7 = strongly support). Motivation to comply was measured by another three items. Participants were asked to rate “how often do your family members’ (fiiends’ / salespersons’) opinions influence your clothing purchasing decision” on 7-point scales anchored with "not at all" (1) and "very often" (7).

Scale. The type of scale to use for testing the Fishbein Behavioral Intention

Model was a concern in this study. Fishbein (1965) and Dulany (1968) provide statistical

99 support for using a scale with -3 to +3 rather than a scale with 1 to 7 for beliefs,

evaluations, normative beliefs, and motivation to comply. They concluded that only the

bipolar scale scores clearly fit the model while the other scaling methods seem illogical.

Many empirical studies (e.g., Dickson & Littrell, 1997; Lee & Green, 1991; Shim et al.,

1989) that investigate the Fishbein Behavioral Intention Model in the field of textiles and

clothing have also used the scale of -3 to +3.

However, in this study a scale of 1 to 7 was used rather than a scale o f -3 to +3.

There are two reasons for this change. First of all, the anchor of “-3” is viewed by

participants as more extreme than “1” (Schwarz, Knauper, Hippier, Noelle-Neumann, &

Clark, 1991). In previous research, when the participants were asked “How successful

would you say you have been in life?”, they interpreted the anchor o f “1” as the absence

of success, but interpreted the “-3” as the presence of failure (Schwarz et al., 1991).

Chinese tend to avoid extreme behaviors and answers, so when the scale of -3 to +3 is

used Chinese participants might tend to avoid choosing “-3” not because their situation does not match “-3”, but because they are avoiding an extreme answer. This potential bias could be avoided by using the scale of 1 to 7.

Secondly, a scale of -3 to +3 might be confusing for Chinese consumers, who are not as accustomed to surveys as US consumers (Ariga et al., 1997). The scale of 1 to 7 could be easier for Chinese consumers to understand because it is consistent with a

Chinese way to describe degrees. Furthermore, it was considered important to use the same response scale throughout the entire questionnaire rather than to ask respondents to alternate between rating scales (Katcher, 1995). Therefore, a scale o f 1 to 7 was used for

t o o most items in this study, except demographic items. However, for data analysis, all scores on behavioral beliefs, evaluations, normative beliefs, and motivations to comply were recoded from 1 to 7 to -3 to +3. Because Fishbein (1965) and Dulany (1968) provide statistical support for the proposition that using a scale with -3 to +3 rather than a scale with 1 to 7 for beliefs, evaluations, normative beliefs, and motivation to comply can clearly fit the model while the other scaling methods cannot.

Demographics

The last part of the questionnaire was composed of questions on demographics including age, sex, income, occupation, education, and number of family members.

Several researchers have found that the evaluation of foreign products varies with respondent age (e.g.. Schooler, 1971; Tongberg, 1972), sex (e.g.. Schooler, 1971), income (e.g., Wang, 1978), and education (e.g., Anderson & Cunningham, 1972; Wang,

1978). Wang (1978) found that US consumers’ socio-demographics affect their willingness to buy foreign products. Individuals with an educational level above high school and annual family income above US $5,000 were more willing to buy foreign products than consumers with an educational level below 10'^ grade and an annual family income below US $5,000 (Wang, 1978).

Regarding Chinese consumers, Hu (1994) found that monthly household income per person significantly influenced Chinese consumers' attitudes towards foreign brand apparel. That is, the higher the income, the more favorable their attitudes towards foreign brand apparel. However, respondent age, occupation, and education level did not influence Chinese consumers’ attitudes towards foreign brand apparel (Hu, 1994).

101 In contrast, Schmitt (1997) proposed that sex, age, income, education, and

occupation were useful demographic factors for Chinese consumer segmentation.

Particularly, Chinese male consumers aged 30-45 were “utility shoppers”, while women

from 30 to 45 years old were “value and convenience shoppers”. Consumers aged 30 and

under were least concerned about price and were most attracted to western products

(Schmitt, 1997). Furthermore, more-affluent and better-educated consumers were more

willing to purchase western products than less-affluent and less-educated consumers.

When occupation was considered, those who worked in the private sector or joint-venture

companies were more likely to purchase western products than government employees

(Schmitt, 1997).

In this study, sex, age, household income, education, occupation, marital status,

and number of family members were included in the demographic section. Questions on demographics were asked last because sometimes respondents may be unwilling to provide information on their income, family members, and occupations. However, they are more likely to answer these questions once they have psychologically committed to the survey (Katcher, 1995).

Ouestiormaire Stmcture

Based on the above discussion of variables of interest, three major parts were included in the final questionnaire: measurement of variables in the Fishbein Behavioral

Intention Model, cultural inventories, and demographics. As mentioned in Chapter 1, this study is part of a larger project. Table 3.4 outlines only the questions used for this portion of the study. The entire questionnaire is located in Appendix C.

102 Content Question No.

The Fishbein Behavioral Intention Model

Purchasing Intentions for US-made Clothing Q5,Q12,Q18 Purchasing Intentions for China-made Clothing Q4,Q11,Q17

Attitudes toward Purchasing US-made Clothing Q3,Q10,Q16 Attitudes toward Purchasing China-made Clothing Q2, Q9,Q15

Beliefs about US-made Clothing Q8 Beliefs about China-made Clothing Q7

Evaluations of Clothing Q14

Normative Beliefs on US-made Clothing Q20 Normative Beliefs on China-made Clothing Q20

Motivation to Comply Q21

Personal Cultural Preference

US Cultural Products and Events Q22a

Chinese Cultural Products and Events Q22b

Chinese Cultural Values and Norms Q23

Demographics Q 24-Q 34

Table 3.4 Location of measures on the questionnaire.

103 Pretests and Translation

Two pretests were conducted for questionnaire development. Pretest 1, as discussed earlier, focused on examining the reliability of the US Products and Events

Measure, the Chinese Products and Events Measure, the Chinese Values and Norms

Measure, and the attitudes toward purchasing clothing measure, and identifying salient

referents. After Pretest 1, translation and back-translation were conducted since the final questionnaire would be in Chinese. Finally, for Pretest 2, a focus group was conducted to discuss every questionable item on the Chinese version of the questionnaire. The

following section covers the translation procedures and Pretest 2.

Translation

Because the original language used to develop the questionnaire was different

from the target language that was used in the final survey, translation and back- translation were required during questionnaire development. Brislin (1986) recommends that in back-translation, one bilingual translates from the source language to the target

language, then another bilingual translates back to the source language.

A five-step procedure for questionnaire development in a cross-cultural study was provided by Godin et al. (1996). First of all, a draft of the English questionnaire was developed by refining each question for specificity. Second, the questionnaire was translated into the non-English version. Revision and correction of the non-English questionnaire was carried out thirdly, which was followed by back translation into

English as the fourth step. The major advantage of back-translation is that it gives researchers control over the instrument development in that they can examine original

104 and back-translated version and make inferences about the quality of translation (Brislin,

1986). Finally, revision and correction of the back translation was conducted.

In the current study, a similar questionnaire development was applied. After

developing the English version of the questionnaire and the approval by the Human

Participants Review Board (see Appendix D), two Chinese graduate students in textiles

and clothing did translation from English to Chinese. The back-translation was then

completed by a Chinese accountant who was working in the US. After the back

translation, the original questionnaire and the translated version were compared. Based

on the comparison, the questionnaire was adjusted and revised. Two types of changes were made during the comparison, one was to add missing information to the questionnaire and the other was to replace some words with those which would not only be understood in Chinese but also approach the original meaning in the first English version. After the adjustment, another non textiles and clothing graduate student checked to see whether the changes made sense in Chinese. Most of the wording changes were made in the Chinese Values and Norms Measure. Table 3.5 provides examples of these changes by listing both the original English questionnaire and the version after back- translation. There was also concern about the translation of one question in the demographic section and one in the culture section. These two questions were clarified during Pretest 2 conducted in China.

105 Original English Version Back Translated from Chinese

1) A woman’s place is in the home. 1) Women should stay at home. 2) Caring for one’s aged parent is the 2) It is everyone’s responsibility to duty of every person. respect the aged people. 3) Every family should have a son. 3) Every family should have a son. 4) My relationship with my parents is 4) I have a very traditional relationship formalized. with my parents. 5) I often do the right things so as not to 5) 1 always act properly in order to save lose face. embarrassment. 6) I feel strongly about returning favors 6) 1 believe appreciation is a good to others. conduct. 7) I interact frequently and closely with 7) I have a close relationship with my my relatives. relatives. 8) Showing my affection openly is not 8) Kissing spouse in a public place is acceptable. not acceptable. 9) Marriage should be a lifetime 9) People should be committed to their commitment. marriage during their whole life. 10) One should not go to the extremes in 10) People should control their own act. ones’ behavior.

Table 3.5 Comparison of questions on Chinese cultural values between original questionnaire and final questionnaire.

106 Pretest 2

A key issue in questionnaire development is whether participants’ understanding of each item validly matches what researchers have in mind (Schwartz, 1996). When the original and targeted languages used in the questionnaire are different, this issue becomes more critical. Brislin (1986) recommends to do pretest to check what questions the final respondents will have and what items need further improvement. So Pretest 2 was performed as a final check of the Chinese version questiormaire. Particularly, the

following three points were examined: 1) whether all the items in the questionnaire were understandable, 2) whether the choices under each item were reasonable and complete, and 3) whether Chinese participants had any questions on the content of the questionnaire. A focus group was used in this pilot study, because research has indicated that focus groups are ideal for in-depth exploration of respondents’ opinions (Katcher,

1995).

Pretest 2 was conducted at Renmin University (People’s University of China) in

Beijing, China. Fifteen Chinese college students participated, among them were 10 men and 5 women. The students were asked to complete the questionnaire after an explanation of why this pilot study was necessary. After aroimd twenty minutes, all the students had completed the questionnaire. During a two-hour discussion that followed, the two questions left after the back translation were solved and some other changes were made, most of which were closely related to either Chinese language or the Chinese situation. An example associated with language was that in China there is a word describing both widows and widowers. Then this Chinese word replaced both widow and

107 widower that were originally used to measure marital status. An example related to the

Chinese situation was that in China few parents of children are single. Thus the choice of single under marital status was deleted from the questionnaire. After making the corrections from Pretest 2, the final questionnaire was ready for the survey.

Procedure

Generally, 1 was required to make three trips to each school. First 1 located teachers of pre-selected grades in each school and talked with them addressing the following information. 1 briefly introduced the study by describing its basic goals and topics. An explanation of how to conduct the study and the necessary cooperation from the teachers, students, and students’ parents was given to the teachers. Several points emphasized to the teachers were: 1) this was an academic study not for commercial gain;

2) there were no “correct” or “wrong” answers for questions; 3) all responses would be kept anonymous; and 4) the respondents did not need to write their names on the questionnaires. Then an incentive of US S3.00 (around 24 Yuan) per questionnaire was offered to the teachers. Because the researcher just dealt with the teachers rather than parents, the incentive was given to the teachers and the teachers were asked to distribute the incentive to each parent. Research has indicated that an individual would be more willing to comply with a request if a kind of payment, such as a gift, favor, or concession, is offered (Groves et al., 1992). So providing incentives to respondents can increase response rates (Kathcher, 1995). Furthermore, some researchers suggest that offering incentives prior to administering the survey will result in higher participation rates than if

1 0 8 the gift was given after the completion of questionnaire (Groves et al., 1992). If the teachers agreed to administer the survey in their classes, I set up a time with them for delivery of the questionnaires.

On the second visit, I took the questionnaires to the class and talked with the students directly. After a brief introduction of the study, I went through all the questions with the students explaining how to use the different scales. For example, I pointed out for which questions answering by numbers were required and for which questions answering with a check (“ V” )was appropriate. Finally, the teacher and I set up the third visit for collecting returned questionnaires.

Data Collection in Shanghai

In order to carry out the survey more smoothly, 1 enlisted the help of the Shanghai

Education Bureau. When talking with the office director, 1 introduced the study and asked the Shanghai Education Bureau to provide introduction letters to the schools. I emphasized the cooperation of the China National Clothing Design and Research Center, the largest Chinese governmental textile and clothing research center. With the introduction and help of the Shanghai Education Bureau, no school in Shanghai refused to participate in the study. A total of 500 questionnaires were distributed to middle school classes, and the other 500 to elementary school classes. After 14 days, all 1,000 questionnaires were returned.

Data Collection in Guangzhou

Because the survey went well in Shanghai with an introduction firom the Shanghai

Education Bureau, I attempted the same procedure with the Guangzhou Education

109 Bureau. However, the Guangzhou Education Bureau refused to help with the survey because the bureau officials thought that the survey had nothing to do with education and they had not heard of the China National Clothing Design and Research Center.

Therefore, in Guangzhou, I had to approach schools directly without any letters of introduction. I went to the middle schools with numbers 17 and 54, and elementary schools with numbers of 28 and 55 and all four refused to allow the survey to be administered.

I sought out another chance to gain assistance from the Guangzhou Education

Bureau, this time through a personal contact (one of my parents’ friends knew an official in the Bureau). During the second meeting with another office director, I emphasized the educational aspects of the study for my Ph.D. dissertation. The Bureau agreed to provide introduction letters. The remaining schools (middle schools - 89,153, 168, 175; elementary schools - 91, 189,211, 328) participated and another two middle schools (23 and 156) and elementary schools (149 and 236) were randomly selected. With the letters of introduction, all the schools agreed to allow the survey to be administered. One thousand questionnaires were distributed and 815 were returned.

Data Collection in Beiiing

In Beijing, I directly approached the selected schools without help fi-om the

Beijing Education Bureau. Surprisingly, there was no middle school that refused to do the survey; actually they were happy to cooperate. However, two elementary schools refused to participate because they thought the questioimaire was too complex and the students were too young to explain correctly to their parents how to use the scales. The

110 two elementary schools, 99 and 293, which refused to distribute the survey were replaced

by another two randomly selected schools, 112 and 264. Finally, 956 questionnaires

were returned in Beijing.

Data Analysis

Two sections on data analysis are included in this part: preliminary data analysis

and hypotheses testing. In the first section, preliminary data analysis involved checking

data for accuracy, calculating frequencies and other descriptive statistics, analyzing

variables of interest, and checking reliability and validity. The procedures for testing the

twelve hypotheses are discussed in the second section.

Preliminary Data Analvsis

Sample

There were two criteria used in this study to check the returned questionnaires,

correctness and completeness. Survey research has a relatively short history in China as

compared to the US (Ariga et al., 1997), so Chinese people are not as knowledgeable on question formats used in surveys, how to answer questions in surveys, and other technical topics. Completing questionnaires correctly is still an issue for surveys carried out in

China. For example, when a scale of 1 to 7 is used, participants may answer with responses outside that range. Alternatively, when percentages are expected, participants may answer by using a check “V” . In both cases, the answers are inappropriate although participants answered both questions. Concerning completeness of questionnaires, a 15%

111 cutoff criterion was suggested by Dickson (1994) and used to determine whether a questionnaire would be deleted from the data set for non-response.

Based on the 15% cutoff criterion, data entry was conduced first (see Appendix

E). Then the data set was checked for accuracy. Particularly, I examined frequencies for all items to look for out-of-range responses. For example, on items measured by a scale of 1 to 7, some participants’ answers were 8 or 0. In these cases, the original questionnaire was checked to determine whether a mistake was made during data entry.

After that, frequencies and means were used to provide a brief description of the whole data set, especially the description of the sample.

Variables of Interest

The next step in the preliminary data analysis was to prepare composite variables for hypothesis testing. The variables of interest included attitudes toward clothing, attitudes toward purchasing clothing, subjective norms, purchasing intentions, and personal cultural preference. The design of the items and scales used to measure these variables was discussed in the early part of Chapter 3. In order to avoid repetition, analysis of the variables and reports of the corresponding results are provided in Chapter

4.

Hvpotheses Testing

In this section, the statistical methods involved in this study to test the hypotheses are discussed, including simple regression analysis, multiple regression analysis, paired- sample t-test, principal component factor analysis, J-test, and F-test.

112 Simple Regression Analvsis

Simple regression was used to test HI, H2, H4, H5, H8, H9, and HIO. Simple

regression analysis is a procedure for analyzing associative relationships between one

dependent variable and one independent variable. It can be used to determine whether

the independent variable explains significant variation in the dependent variable, how

much of the variation in the dependent variable can be explained by the independent

variable, and the structure or form of the relationship between the dependent variable and

independent variable (Malhotra, 1996). The statistics associated with simple regression

analysis include the standardized regression coefficient (Beta) and the coefficient of determination or R-square (R*). The regression model is

Y = 6X

Y is the dependent variable, X is the independent variable, and 6 is the standardized regression coefficient. The coefficient of determination (R^) represents how much strength of association is measured by the independent variable. It varies between 0 and

1, which signifies the proportion of the total variation in Y that is accounted for by the variation in X (Malhotra, 1996).

Multiple Regression Analvsis

Multiple regression was used to test HI 1 and H I2. Multiple regression involves a single dependent variable and two or more independent variables, which can determine whether the variation in the dependent variable can be explained in terms of variation in the independent variables and how much of the variation in the dependent variable can be explained by each independent variable individually (Malhotra, 1996). The general form

113 of the multiple regression model is as follows:

Y = BiXi + B2X2 + B3 X3 + ..... + 6 k X k where Y is the dependent variables, and X:, X2 , X3 , X k are the independent variables.

The statistical terms described under simple regression also apply to multiple regression.

Paired-sample t-test

Paired-sample t-tests were used to test H3, H6 and H7. A paired-sample t-test is a statistical test of the null hypothesis that two population means are equal. It is used when the observations for the two groups can be paired in some way. For example, in this study, for each participant, her or his attitudes toward US-made clothing and China- made clothing were measured. So the paired-samples t-test procedure compares the means of two variables for a single group. It computes the differences between values of the two variables for each case and tests whether the average differs from 0.

Principal Component Factor Analvsis

Principal component factor analysis was used prior to testing HI 1. Principal component analysis is one kind of factor analysis that is used for data reduction and summarization. Particularly, it is applied to identify underlying dimensions (or factors) that explain the correlations among a set of variables (Malhotra, 1996). An eigenvalue criterion is often used as a cut-off point to determine the number of factors (Mun & Yau,

1979). Eigenvalues can reflect the variance explained by each factor. Although the initial matrix indicates relationships among the factors and individual variables, it seldom results in factors that can be interpreted because the factors are correlated with each other. Rotation of the factors can solve this problem. The most commonly used method

114 for rotation is the varimax procedure, which can minimize the mmiber o f variables with

high loadings on a factor and enhance the interpretability of the factors (Malhotra, 1996).

Davidson-MacKinnon J-test

Davidson-MacKinnon J-tests were used when testing H8, H9, HIO, and HU. The

J-test is a statistical method applied when there are two regression models which have

different independent variables and the same dependent variable (nonnested models)

(Greene, 1997). Whether the difference between the two R squares from two regression

models is statistically significant is tested with the Davidson-MacKinnon J test (Greene,

1997).

Table 3.6 outlines the six steps of the J-test (Greene, 1997). As illustrated in

Table 3.6, there are two models to estimate Y: (1) Y = ao+ aiX; and (2) Y = bo+ biZ.

When the two independent variables, X and Z, are separately used to explain the

dependent variable, Y, the amount of variation explained by X or Z might be different. If

X explains a greater amount of variation than Z, then the researcher must determine if

that amount is statistically significant, “ a ” in Table 3.6 represents estimation. Therefore,

Y refers to the estimated value of Y. As outlined in Table 3.6, the first step is to regress

X on Y. Estimating the Y value for each participant using Model I is the second step. In

the third step, Z is used as the one independent variable, plus the scores of Ÿ obtained

from step 2 as the second independent variable. Y is regressed on both Ÿ and Z. In step

4, 5, and 6, a similar procedure is repeated by only changing the roles of Z and X.

Finally, if C2 in step 3 is statistically significant and da in step 6 is not statistically significant, then Model 1 (Y = ao+ aiX) explains a significantly greater amount of

115 variation than Model 2 (Y = bo + biZ). If dz is statistically significant and C 2 is not

statistically significant, then Model 2 explains a significantly greater amount of variation

than Model 1. If C2 and d2 are both statistically significant or neither C 2 nor d 2 is

statistically significant, the J-test cannot determine whether there is a significant

difference in the R squares between the two models.

Step 1. Model 1 : Y = ao+aiX

A A A Step 2. Calculate Y = ao+ aiX

A Step 3. Regression: Y = C0 + ciZ -t- C2 Y

Step 4. Model 2: Y = bo + biZ

A A A Step 5. Calculate Y = bo + biZ

A Step 6. Regression: Y = do+ diX + d 2 Y

Table 3.6. Procedure for the J-test.

116 F-test

The F-test was used in testing H I2. F-test is another statistical method used to compare two regression models, when the two regression models have the same dependent variable and one model (Model 2) has at least one more independent variable than the other model (Model 1). Generally speaking, adding one more independent variable into Model 2 can increase the variation explained by the model. Whether the extra variation explained by adding an extra independent variable in Model 2 is significant can be determined by a F-test (Greene, 1997):

(R2‘ - Ri-)/J F[J,n-K] = (l-R2 -)/(n-K)

Rr : R" of Regression Model 1 (restricted model) Ra *: R^ of Regression Model 2 (unrestricted model) J : number of restrictions K; number of parameters n: sample size

Level of Statistical Significance

In order to test all the hypotheses, a level of statistical significance must be set.

Many researchers use either .05 or .01 in tests of significance. Because this study has a relatively large sample size, which increases the possibility of accepting hypotheses due to the large number of degrees of fireedom, the more strict .01 was adopted.

1 17 CHAPTER 4

PRELIMINARY RESULTS

In this chapter, preliminary results outlining sample checking for accuracy and description, reliability and validity testing of scales, and description of variables of interest are reported.

Sample Checking and Description

Response Rate. Non-response, and Incomplete Questionnaires

Totally, 1,000 questionnaires were distributed in each city. There were 2,771 out of 3,000 questionnaires returned. The overall response rate was 92.4%. Specific to city,

Shanghai had 100% as an overall response rate, which was followed by Beijing with a

95.6% response rate and Guangzhou with 81.5%.

Two criteria were applied to determine whether the returned questionnaires were usable for final analysis. The first criterion was related to correctness; that is, did the participants complete the items in a correct manner? Some participants did not correctly fill out the items for US Cultural Products and Events, Chinese Cultural Products and

Events, Chinese Cultural Norms and Values, Subjective Norm Measure, Belief Measure,

118 and Evaluation Measure. All the items in those measures were developed with the same

format. That is, at the top of each measure, a description of the scale used in the measure

was provided. For example, for Chinese Cultural Norms and Values, the following scale

was clarified prior to listing the items on Chinese cultural norms and values:

Please read the following statements carefully and indicate your opinion regarding these social values:

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Totally Totally Disagree Agree

Respondents were expected to use this scale to rate each item listed in the inventory,

filling in the appropriate number at the space provided next to the item. However, a portion^of participants did not rate the items one by one; rather, they just circled one number on the sample scale. While there is a possibility that some participants meant to rate all the items the same and just circled the number on the scale instead of writing numbers for each item, it is also possible that some participants did not understand that they needed to rate each item. They may have picked up the item which was most interesting or appropriate to them for rating or they may have considered all the items together and chosen one number which represented their general rating for the items as a group. Although the participants in the first possibility group needed to be kept for later analysis, there was no way to recognize and separate them firom those in the second group. Therefore, all the participants who responded this way had to be discarded fi-om the final data set. This kind of response did not appear in the two pretests, so improving

119 the format of these measures to avoid this kind of misunderstanding was impossible

before the final survey.

As reported in Table 4.1, there were 419 questionnaires deemed unusable because

they were filled out incorrectly. Specific to city, Guangzhou had 202, followed by

Beijing with 163, and Shanghai with 54.

Total # of Unusable # of Incorrect # of Incomplete Questionnaires Questionnaires Questionnaires

Beijng 292 163 129

Shanghai 125 54 71

Guangzhou 337 202 135

Total 754 419 335

Table 4.1 Unusable questionnaires caused by incorrectness and incompleteness.

After incorrect questiotmaires were removed, completeness was considered.

Dickson (1994) used a 85% complete rate as a cutoff point for inclusion in the data set.

120 That is, those questionnaires which have 15% incomplete items were not retained. This questionnaire had a total of 80 items excluding demographic questions. Therefore, if one questionnaire had more than 12 unanswered items, it was discarded. The demographic items were not included in this count because no hypotheses addressed demographics.

No matter how the demographic part was filled out, the questionnaire was retained if

85% of the remaining items were complete. There was a total of 335 incomplete questionnaires. Regarding each city, Guangzhou had 135, which was followed by

Beijing (n=129), and Shanghai (n=71) (see Table 4.1).

Using the criteria discussed above, 2,017 returned questionnaires were usable for data analysis. Of them, 664 were from Beijing, 875 were from Shanghai, and 478 were from Guangzhou. Thus, the usable response rate was 67.2%. The usable response rate was high compared to studies of American consumers, and similar to other studies of

Chinese consumers. For example, in a study of Chinese consumers’ perceptions of country of origin, a survey was conducted in five cities in China, Beijing, Shanghai,

Guangzhou, Tianjin, and Chongqing, by distributing questionnaires through the workplace (LaTour & Henthome, 1990). A usable response rate of 70% was obtained.

In Yau’s (1994) study, using a stratified random sample, the response rate was 66%. Yau

(1994) stated that there were three possible reasons which caused the 34% non-response rate: (1) people were not at home; (2) there was nobody living there; and (3) refusals.

With respect to the sample strategy applied in this study, all of these three reasons could be effectively avoided. As discussed in Chapter 3, the two major problems for survey research, inaccessibility and refusal, were solved by sampling students’ parents through

121 the public school system in China. The authority function of teachers for students and students’ parents, and parents’ psychological characteristics of social validation made this sample strategy successful in China’s large cities.

Sample Description

Overall Participant Demographics

Table 4.2 illustrates the final sample demographics. There appeared to be a small number of questionnaires that had been completed by someone other than the parents, but they were left in the data set due to the small number.

Of the sample, 46.5% were men, and 53.5% were women. Regarding age, 57.9% of the participants were aged from 31 to 40 years of age, and 34.5% were from 41 to 50 years of age. The participants younger than 30 years of age or older than 51 years accounted for 7.7% of the sample. The average age was 39. As to marital status, 94.2% of the participants were married. Regarding education, 41.6% of the participants had graduated from high school and 34.8% had graduated from college. With respect to occupation, around half of the participants worked for government, manufacturers, or wholesalers and retailers. The other half were scattered in other kinds of jobs. As to household income, 30% of participants reported household incomes between 27,601 and

51,600 Yuan, which equaled to US $1,150 and 2,150 (in fall 1998, US$1 =8.3 Yuan).

The average number of family members was three and 70.4% of participants had three family members. In sum, the sample was mainly composed of young or middle aged, married consumers with at least a high school education and a relatively high household income as compared to consumers in rural areas.

122 Characteristic Number Frequency

Gender Male 870 46.5 Female 999 53.5

Age <20 33 1.8 21-30 67 3.7 31-40 1,062 57.9 41-50 634 34.5 >51 38 2.1

Marital Status Married 1,864 94.2 Divorced 35 1.8 Widow or Widower 15 0.8 Other 65 3.2

Education Level Obtained Not Complete 0.4 Elementary School Elementary School 23 1.1 Junior High School 243 12.1 High School 835 41.6 Technical School 145 7.2 Undergraduate 697 34.8 Graduate 53 2.6

(continued)

Table 4.2 Demographic description of the sample.

123 Table 4.2 (continued)

Government 256 13.4 Manufacturing 407 21.3 Wholesale & Retail 288 15.1 Banking 109 5.7 Health 81 4.2 Engineering 105 5.5 University Professor 32 1.7 Educator in Primary & 186 9.8 Middle Schools Other 443 23.2

Household Income fYuan per vear) <6,000 104 5.2 6,001-15,6000 325 16.4 15,601-21,600 309 15.6 21,601-27,600 389 19.8 27,601-51,600 605 30.6 >51,601 245 12.4

124 Description of Sub-sample in Each City

Table 4.3 shows that the proportions of participants from all three cities were similar in term of gender, slightly more women filled out the questionnaires than men.

The majority (80-90%) of the participants across all three cities ranged from 31 to 50 years old. However, Shanghai has the largest group of consumers ranged from 31 to 40 years old, 25% more than Guangzhou and 30% more than Beijing. The average age was

37.93 in Shanghai, 38.59 in Guangzhou, and 40.71 in Beijing. In term of marital status, around 90 percent of the participants were married across the three cities. Regarding education, most participants had graduated from either high schools or colleges, which accounted for around 70% across the three cities. With respect to occupation, in Beijing, the two most frequent occupations were governmental and manufacturing. In Shanghai, the two most frequent were manufacturing and wholesale and retail. And in Guangzhou, occupations in government and primary and middle schools were the two most frequent.

When household income was investigated, Shanghai had the highest household income, while Beijing ranked last. There were 44.2% of participants whose family income per year were between 27,606 and 51,600 Yuan in Shanghai, which was 20% more than

Guangzhou, and 30% more than Beijing. The average number of family members in

Shanghai and Beijing was three and was four in Guangzhou.

125 Beijing Shanghai Guangzhou

Characteristic Number Frequency Number Frequency Number Frequency

Gender Male 300 47.8 410 47.0 160 43.4 Female 327 52.2 463 53.0 209 56.6

Age <20 13 2.1 1 0.1 19 5.3 21-30 4 0.7 41 4.7 22 6.2 31-40 269 44.2 622 71.6 171 47.9 41-50 312 51.2 185 21.3 137 38.4 >51 11 1.8 19 2.2 8 2.2

Marital Status Married 622 94.8 831 96.7 411 88.6 Divorced 14 2.1 16 1.9 5 1.1 Widow or Widower 2 0.3 9 1.0 4 0.9 Other 18 2.7 3 0.3 44 9.5

Education Level Obtained Not Complete 0 0.0 3 0.3 6 1.3 Elementary School Elementary School 3 0.5 3 0.3 17 3.6 Junior High School 92 13.9 87 9.9 64 13.6 High School 260 39.4 411 47.0 164 34.9 Technical School 39 5.9 76 8.7 30 6.4 Undergraduate 251 38.0 276 31.5 170 36.2 Graduate 15 2.3 19 2.2 19 4.0

(continued)

Table 4.3 Demographic reports of the sample across Beijing, Shanghai, and Guangzhou.

126 Table 4.3 (continued)

Occupation Government 120 18.4 69 8.6 67 14.8 Manufacturing 119 18.2 238 29.6 50 11.1 Wholesale & Retail 77 11.8 157 19.6 54 11.9 Banking 21 3.2 73 9.1 15 3.3 Health 28 4.3 36 4.5 17 3.8 Engineering 51 7.8 37 4.6 17 3.8 University Professor 7 1.1 15 1.9 10 2.2 Educator in Primary 34 5.2 86 10.7 66 14.6 & Middle Schools Other 195 30.0 92 11.5 156 34.5

Household Income (Y uan per vearl <6,000 43 6.6 13 1.5 48 10.5 6,001-15,6000 172 26.5 67 7.7 86 18.9 15,601-21,600 144 22.2 107 12.3 5 8 12.7 21,601-27,600 144 22.2 141 16.2 104 22.8 27,601-51,600 114 17.5 385 44.2 106 23.2 >51,601 33 5.1 158 18.1 54 11.8

127 Compared with available statistical data and results from other surveys conducted

in these three cities, the sample obtained in this study is representative to some degree.

Statistical data shows that in 1997 the average household annual income was 30,600

Yuan in Shanghai (Shanghai Municipal Information Office, 1998). Almost half of the

participants in this sample had household incomes between 27,601 and 51,600 Yuan. In

1996, the average household annual income was 20,000 Yuan in Beijing (Beijing Center

for Planning Development of Enterprises in Depth, 1996). In this study, the frequencies

of six categories of Beijing’s household incomes were approximately normally

distributed and the median point was 21,600 Yuan. Statistical data shows that in 1996 in

Beijing 31.3% residents had household annual incomes less than 17,999 Yuan, 47.1%

had incomes between 18,000 and 35,999 Yuan, 17.0% had incomes between 36,000 and

71,000 Yuan, and the rest 4.6% had more than 72,000 Yuan annual incomes (Blue Bridge

Enterprises, 1996). This study foimd a similar income structure in Beijing.

In a survey conducted in 1995 across Beijing, Shanghai, and Guangzhou using a

cluster systematic random sampling method (each district is one cluster), 47.8% of the

participants were male and 52.2% female. Seventy-seven and six-tenths percent of the

participants from Beijing were married, 81.0% from Shanghai were married, and 73.7 %

from Guangzhou were married. In Shanghai, 40.6% of the participants worked in

manufacture, 28.7% in Beijing, and 27.4% in Guangzhou. Seventeen and six-tenths percent of the participants from Shanghai worked in business, 16% in Beijing, and 18.1%

in Guangzhou (Guo & Liu, 1997). The sample obtained in this study had similar demographic characteristics as the sample obtained from Guo and Liu’s survey.

1 2 8 Reliability and Validity of Measures

Reliability Check

In this study, three groups of inventories required reliability testing: (1) purchasing intentions for US-made clothing and for China-made clothing; (2) attitudes toward purchasing US-made clothing and purchasing Chinese clothing; and (3) Chinese

Cultural Products and Events Measure, US Cultural Products and Events Measme, and

Chinese Values and Norms Measure.

Reliability refers to the degree to which the scale produces consistent and stable scores on a series of repeated tests (Cronbach, 1970). There are five methods to test reliability: (1) test-retest reliability; (2) split-sample reliability; (3) alternative reliability;

(4) intemal-comparison reliability; and (5) scorer reliability (Tull & Hawkins, 1980).

Two approaches were applied in this study: Cronbach’s alpha coefficient of intemal- construct and the split-half method. The statistical value used to test intemal-comparison reliability was the Cronbach alpha coefficient (Tull & Hawkins, 1980). Nunnally (1967) suggested that the minimally acceptable level of Cronbach alpha be from 0.5 to 0.6. The split-half method is another type of internal comparison, which is obtained by comparing the results of half the items of a measure with the results from the remaining items (Yau,

1994). Table 4.4 shows the results of both reliability tests. Because there were only three items included in the measures of purchasing intention and attitude toward purchasing clothing, the split-half method was not appropriate. So only Cronbach’s alpha coefficient of intemal-construct was used for those two measures. All reliability coefficients are greater than the minimally acceptable level set by Nurmally (1967).

129 Measure Number Reliability of Items Coefficient

Cronbach’s Alpha Coefficient

Purchasing Intention

Purchase Intention for US-made Clothing 3 .7948 Purchase Intention for China-made Clothing 3 .7571

Attitude toward Purchasing Clothing

Attitude toward Purchasing US-made Clothing 3 .7727 Attitude toward Purchasing China-made Clothing 3 .7926

Personal Cultural Preference

US Products and Events Measure 7 .7993 Chinese Products and Events Measure 7 .7551 Chinese Values and Norms Measure 10 .7523

Solit-half Reliability

Personal Cultural Preference

US Products and Events Measure Sample 1 4 .6964 Sample 2 3 .7161

Chinese Products and Events Measure Sample 1 4 .6334 Sample 2 3 .6007

Chinese Values and Norms Measure Sample 1 5 .5905 Sample 2 5 .6933

Table 4.4 Reports of reliability tests.

130 The Cronbach’s alpha coefficients reported in Table 4.4 were compared to the results obtained from Pretest 1. In Pretest 1, the Cronbach’s alpha for attitudes toward purchasing US-made clothing was .6710, and was .6975 in terms of attitudes toward purchasing China-made clothing. Regarding the Products and Events Measure, the

Cronbach’s alpha of US Products and Events Measure was .6906, and the Cronbach’s alpha of Chinese Products and Events Measure was .5725. All of the Cronbach’s alphas obtained using the final sample were greater than those in Pretest 1. This might be caused by the increase in sample size.

Regarding the Values and Norms Measure of personal cultural preference, the item about having a son was deleted to obtain the Cronbach’s alpha of .6027 in Pretest 1.

However, in the final questionnaire, the item related to having a son in a family did not need to be removed. Although the participants in Pretest 1 were Chinese, they were

Chinese who had been staying in the US. They may have formed different values regarding sons since moving to the US. When all ten items were included, the

Cronbach’s alpha of the Chinese Values and Norms Measure was .7523, which was acceptable.

Validity Testing

Validity represents the degree to which a particular scale measures what it has been constructed to measure (Lundstrom, 1974). There are several kinds of validity, such as content validity, predictive validity, convergent validity, and construct validity.

Among those types of validity, the weakest form is content validity and the most crucial

131 and also the most difficult to pursue is construct validity (Yau, 1994). In this study, both content and construct validity were examined.

Content validity indicates how well an instrument covers what it is supposed to study, such as the subjects’ behaviors and skills (Touliatos & Compton, 1992). This type of validity does not involve a statistical test. Rather, it needs experts’ evaluations of the instrument. In this study, during the questionnaire development, five researchers who were familiar with the topics involved discussed and examined whether all the Items measuring purchasing intentions, attitudes toward purchasing clothing, the US products and events, Chinese products and events, and Chinese values and norms were appropriate to be included.

Construct validity is the statistical relationship of a scale and its underlying theoretical construct (Lundstrom, 1974). There are three approaches suggested by

Lundstrom (1974) to test validity of an instrument: (1) correlation of the scale under construction with other scales purported to measure the same construct; (2) item-to-total correlation analysis; and (3) the “known groups” approach. The first approach requires another scale that has already been proven valid. The third approach needs two groups of participants that are known to be different and the scale is able to differentiate between the two groups. In this study, neither of these two approaches could be applied. So the item-to-total correlation analysis was used. Statistically, if an item is positively and significantly correlated with the total scale score minus this item, it can contribute to the measurement. If all the items in the scale have significantly positive relationships with the total scale score, construct validity is realized (Yau, 1994).

1 3 2 Table 4.5 shows the item-to-total correlations for all three items of the measure of purchasing intentions for either US-made clothing or Chinese clothing. All correlations were positive and significant at the 0.01 level, showing construct validity for the measure of purchasing intentions.

Likewise, Table 4.6 illustrates the item-to-total correlations for all items of the measure of attitudes toward purchasing either US-made clothing or China-made clothing.

Table 4.7 shows the item-to-total correlations for all items included in the US Products and Events Measure. Table 4.8 outlines the item-to-total correlations for all seven items included in the Chinese Products and Events Measure. And Table 4.9 shows the item-to- total correlations for all ten items in the Chinese Values and Norms Measure. Using the same criterion applied in the validity checking for the purchasing intentions measure, which is that all items are significantly positively correlated with the total scale score, the measures of attitudes toward purchasing clothing, the US Products and Events, the

Chinese Products and Events, and the Chinese Values and Norms have construct validity.

1 3 3 Item Correlation (P)

Purchasing Intentions for US-made Clothing

What is your possibility of purchasing clothing made in U.S. .661 (p<.0001) for yourself within the following 12 months?

Will you probably purchase clothing made in U.S. next year? .674(p<.0001)

How much you are willing to purchase clothing made in U.S. .594 (p<.0001) for yourself this year

Purchasing Intentions for China-made Clothing

What is vour Dossibilitv of purchasing clothing made in China .608 (p<.0001) for yourself within the following 12 months?

Will YOU nrobablv purchase clothing made in China next vear? .638 (p<.0001)

How much you are willing to purchase clothing made in China .538 (p<.0001) for yourself this year

Table 4.5 Validity check with item-to-total correlation: Purchasing intentions.

134 Item Correlation (P)

Attitudes toward Purchasing US-made Clothing

How do you feel about purchasing clothing made in U.S.? .599(p<.000I) Stupid vs. Wise

How do you feel about purchasing clothing made in U.S.? .635(p<.0001) Wrong vs. Right

How do you feel about purchasing clothing made in U.S.? .591 (p<.0001) Impractical vs. Practical

Attitudes toward Purchasing China-made Clothing

How do you feel about nurchasine clothing made in China? .612(p<.0001) Stupid vs. Wise

How do YOU feel about purchasing clothing made in China? .653 (p<.OOOI) Wrong vs. Right

How do you feel about nurchasine clothing made in China? .597 (p<.0001) Impractical vs. Practical

Table 4.6 Validity check with item-to-total correlation: Attitudes toward purchasing clothing.

135 Item Correlation (P)

When I go to the movies, I always want to see .504 (p<.0001) American films.

I like American pop music very much. .605 (p<.0001)

I like American fast food. .6I2(p<.0001)

I like American football. .658 (p<.0001)

I am interested in American stars, such as American .589 (p<.0001) movie stars and sport stars.

I like American style drinks, such as Coca-Cola and coffee. .641 (p<.0001)

When I am shopping, I always want to buy American .611 (p<.0001) brands if I have enough money.

Table 4.7 Validity check with item-to-total correlation: US Products and Events Measure.

136 Item Correlation (P)

When I go to the movies, I always want to see .487 (p<.0001) Chinese films.

I like Chinese classical music very much. .581 (p<.0001)

I like Chinese traditional food. .645 (p<.0001)

I like soccer. .619(p<.0001)

I am interested in Chinese stars, such as Chinese .588 (p<.0001) movie stars and sport stars.

1 like Chinese style drinks, such as tea. .602 (p<.OOOI)

When I am shopping, I always want to buy Chinese brands. .697 (p<.0001)

Table 4.8 Validity check with item-to-total correlation: Chinese Products and Events Measure.

137 Item Correlation (P)

Women should stay at home. .459 (p<.0001)

It is everyone’s responsibility to respect the aged people. .611 (p<.0001)

Every family should have a son. .537(p<.0001)

1 have a very traditional relationship with my parents. .601 (p<.0001)

1 always act properly in order to save embarrassment. .531 (p<.0001)

1 believe appreciation is a good conduct. .488 (p<.0001)

1 have a close relationship with my relatives. .567 (p<.0001)

Kissing spouse in a public place is not acceptable. .549 (p<.OG01)

People should be committed to their marriage during their .672 (p<.0001) whole life.

People should control their own act. .653 (p<.0001)

Table 4.9 Validity check with item-to-total correlation: Chinese Values and Norms Measure.

138 Convergent validity can be determined when there are two different measures (A and B) of the same concept, one of which (A) is known to be reliable and valid. If the scores on the other measure (B) are highly correlated with scores on the first measure (A) which is know to be reliable and valid, then the measure B has convergent validity

(Lundstrom, 1974). For the measure of personal cultural preference, which was developed in this study, convergent validity cannot be tested; there are no similar measures that have been applied before. One of the most similar measures is consumer ethnocentrism developed by Shimp and Sharma (1987), which is also called the

CETSCALE. The CETSCALE is designed to measure consumers’ ethnocentric tendencies related to purchasing foreign versus domestic products based on their beliefs about the appropriateness or morality of purchasing foreign products. In other words, purchasing foreign products is wrong in the minds of ethnocentric consumers because it hurts the domestic economy, causes loss of jobs, and is unpatriotic (Shimp & Sharma,

1987). Most items included in the CETSCALE are related to obligation and responsibility instead of voluntary preference. So the CETSCALE measures consumers’ purchases of products from a moral, patriotic, and ethical perspective. However, the personal cultural preference measures consumers’ purchases from a cultural and voluntary perspective. Although both measures focus on consumers’ purchases of foreign products versus domestic products, their internal basis are different. Therefore, even though the CETSCALE is known to be reliable and valid, it cannot help test convergent validity of the measure of personal cultural preference.

139 Variables of Interest

In this section, five variables are discussed in terms of procedures for calculating scores and the descriptive results of the sample. The variables are personal cultural preference, attitudes toward clothing, attitudes toward purchasing clothing, subjective norms, and purchasing intentions.

Personal Cultural Preference

There were two measures of personal cultural preference, one focused on products and events, and the other focused on values and norms. Regarding products and events, the US Products and Events and Chinese Products and Events Measures were used.

There were seven pairs of items included in each of the final Products and Events

Measures which were associated with Chinese movies, music, food, soccer, stars, drink, and brands, or US movies, music, food, football, stars, drink, and brands. A 7-point scale was used: 1 (totally disagree), 4 (uncertain), and 7 (totally agree). For each participant, personal cultural preference was calculated as the difference between the summation of items on the Chinese Products and Events Measure and the summation of the US Products and Events Measiure (see the following formula).

Products and Events Measure:

Personal Cultural Preference = Z Chinese (movie + music + food + soccer 4- star + drink + brand) - Z US (movie + music + food + soccer + star + drink + brand)

If the score was positive, the participants tended to have Chinese culture as their personal cultural preference. If the results were negative, US culture tended to be the participants’

140 personal cultural preference. If the results were zero, the participants were viewed as having no preference for either US culture or Chinese culture.

The second measure of personal cultural preference was the Chinese Values and

Norms Measure. There are ten items in the scale, which are associated with social values and norms regarding women, the elderly, sons, parents, relatives, marriage, losing face, returning favors, showing affection, and behavior. The items reflect the typical cultural values and norms under Chinese culture. The sum of all ten items represents the respondents’ personal cultural preference (see the following formula).

Values and Norms Measure:

Personal Cultural Preference = S (woman + parent + son + relation + face + favor + relative + kiss + marriage + extreme)

The higher the score, the more likely the participant has Chinese culture as her or his personal cultural preference.

Table 4.10 reports personal cultural preference of the sample by both measures.

When the Products and Events Measure was used, the mean was 5.51 (SD = 11.08).

When the Values and Norms Measure was used, the mean was 49.72 (SD = 9.73).

Furthermore, regarding the Products and Events Measure, the possible minimum score was -42. However, the minimum score that appeared in the sample was -35, which implied that there might be few participants in the sample who extremely preferred US culture.

141 Variable N Mean SD Min. Max.

Products and Events 2006 5.51 11.08 -35 42 Measure

Values and Norms 2005 49.72 9.73 10 70 Measure

Table 4.10 Personal cultural preference.

In order to test H6 and H7, and H9 and HID, two groups of participants were required: one that preferred Chinese culture and the other that preferred US culture.

Using the Products and Events Measure of personal cultural preference, a one-third cutoff was used to divide the sample into three groups (see Table 4.11). Because there were seven items measuring Chinese cultural products and events and another seven items measuring US cultural products and events, which were measured by “1 to 7” scales, then the possible range of summed scores was from 7 to 49. When using the summation of

Chinese Cultural Products and Events to subtract the summation of US Cultural Products and Events, the range of possible differences was from -42 to 42. If a three-way split was applied, the whole sample could be divided into three groups with scores of participants in Group I from -42 to -14, Group 2 from -13 to 13, and the remaining participants in

142 Group 3 with scores from 14 to 42. The participants in Group 1 have US culture as their personal cultural preferences; those in Group 3 have Chinese culture as their personal cultural preferences; and those in Group 2 have no obvious preference for either US culture or Chinese culture.

Items Range (Minimum to Maximum)

Summation of Chinese Cultural 7 to 49 Products and Events (SUMI)

Summation of US Cultural 7 to 49 Products and Events (SUMII)

Personal Cultural Preference = -42 to 42 SUMI - SUMU

3 Subgroups of -42 to -14 (Group 1) Personal Cultural Preference -13 to 13 (Group 2) (three-way split) 14 to 42 (Group 3)

Table 4.11 Three-way split of sample based on personal cultural preference with the Products and Events Measure.

143 The method discussed above is a 3-way split based on scale score rather than a 3-

way split based on number of respondents. The advantage of using the split on numbers

of respondents would have been that it produces three subgroups with similar numbers of

participants no matter how the scores are distributed against the scale. However, the

cutoff points for this method are likely to be different when the samples are different. By

calculating cut-offs for personal cultural preference based on numbers of participants, it

will be difficult to make comparisons between respondents in this study with those in

later studies. The 3-way split based on scale scores does not have this problem because

the scale is fixed. One more important reason to use the 3-way split based on scale scores

in this study is that H6 and H7 were developed to investigate the participants in Group 1

separate from the participants in Group 3. Therefore, having the same number of

participants in each group is unnecessary. This method for splitting a sample has been

suggested and applied in several marketing studies (Varadarajan, 1986; Zeithamal & Fry,

1984). Although this approach may lead to a large reduction in the sample size, the

reduced sample is more accurate in terms o f tfie participants’ characteristics of interest

(Varadarajan, 1986).

A 3-way split of scale scores was also used with the Chinese Values and Norms

Measure to generate three groups of respondents. There are ten items in the Chinese

Values and Norms Measure with a “ 1 to 7” scale, thus the possible range of summed scores was from 10 to 70. The participants whose scores were between 50 and 70 were in

Group 3; participants with scores from 31 to 49 were in Group 2; and the rest whose scores were from 10 to 30 were in Group 1. Group 1 has participants who do not favor

144 Chinese culture, while the personal cultural preferences of participants in Group 3 is

Chinese culture.

Table 4.12 shows the number of participants in each group for both measures of personal cultural preference. The results from both measures showed many differences.

Regarding Group 1 which includes the participants who do not favor Chinese culture or favor US culture, 22% participants are included if the Products and Events Measure is used, while only 4.6% are included when Values and Norms Measure is used. For Group

3 who favor Chinese culture, only 4% of the participants are included if the Products and

Events Measure is used, whereas 56.3% are included when the Values and Norms

Measure is used. In other words, the findings from the Products and Events Measure indicate that the majority of the participants do not favor either US culture or Chinese culture, and among the remaining participants, more participants prefer US culture than those who prefer Chinese culture. With respect to the Values and Norms Measure, the majority of the participants were found to favor Chinese culture, followed by those who did not favor either culture, and finally those few who preferred US culture. Due to the differences between the two measures, both are used to test H6, H7, H9, and HIO.

145 Measure Group Number Frequency (Label)

Products and Events Measure Group 1 442 22.0 (US-Group) Group 2 1484 74.0 (Med-Group) Group 3 80 4.0 (China-Group)

Values and Norms Measure Group 1 92 4.6 (NonChina-Group) Group 2 784 39.1 (Med-Group) Group 3 1129 56.3 (China-Group)

Table 4.12 Numbers of participants in different groups based on personal cultural preference with either the Products and Events Measure or the Values and Norms Measure.

146 Attitudes toward Clothing

Attitudes toward clothing were computed using the model "Ao = S biei”. Beliefs about clothing attributes and evaluations of clothing attributes were required. As discussed in Chapter 3, evaluations were assessed by asking the respondents how important the attributes of clothing were to them on 7-point scales anchored with "very low" (1) and "very high" (7). There were 13 items included in evaluation of the object: durable, reasonable price, good workmanship, easy to care for, of latest fashion, o f good hand, comfortable, of good quality, of fashionable color, fits me well, famous brand, made in the US, and made in China. Beliefs were measured by asking the respondents whether they agreed that clothing manufactured in the US or China was characterized by

11 attributes. Because all the clothing attributes were listed into two groups either under

US-made clothing or China-made clothing, the 13 items included in the evaluation measure were reduced to 11 items in the belief measure. A 7-point scale was used from

1= mostly disagree to 7 = mostly agree.

The measures of beliefs and evaluations provided two sets of data, one in terms of

US-made clothing and the other related to China-made clothing. Before calculating attitudes toward clothing, all the scores of beliefs and evaluations were recoded from a “1 to 7” scale to a “-3 to +3” scale. Table 4.13 shows the details of how attitudes toward clothing were computed. Attitudes toward US-made clothing and attitudes toward China- made clothing were obtained in the same way.

147 Beliefs (bi) Evaluations (ei) biei Ao

Durable (b I) Durable (el) blxel S blxel + Price (b2) Price (e2) b2xe2 b2xe2 + Workmanship (b3) Workmanship (e3) b3xe3 b3xe3 + Care (b4) Care (e4) b4xe4 b4xe4 + Style (bS) Style (eS) bSxeS bSxeS 4- Fabric (b6) Fabric (e6) b6xe6 bôxeô + Comfort (b7) Comfort (e7) b7xe7 b7xe7 + Quality (b8) Quality (e8) b8xe8 b8xe8 + Color (b9) Color (e9) b9xe9 b9xe9 + Fit (b 10) Fit (elO) blQxelG blQxelO + Brand (bl 1) Brand (el 1) bllxel1 blIxell

Table 4.13 Method to calculate attitudes toward clothing.

As shown in Table 4.14, the average of Chinese consumers’ attitudes toward US-

made clothing was 27.95 (SD = 34.42), while the average of their attitudes toward China-

made clothing was 23.84 (SD = 23.84). So based on the absolute values, Chinese consumers tend to have more positive attitudes toward US-made clothing than China- made clothing. Whether the difference between these two groups of attitudes was significant was examined in Chapter 5.

1 4 8 Variable N Mean SD Min. Max.

Attitudes toward 2004 27.95 34.42 -99 99 US-made Clothing

Attitudes toward 2001 23.84 34.22 -99 99 China-made Clothing

Table 4.14 Chinese consumers’ attitudes toward clothing (Ao).

Attitudes toward Purchasing Clothing

Attitudes toward purchasing US-made clothing and China-made clothing were

measured with three pairs of items: 1) buying clothing manufactured in China

(manufactured in the US) is foolish or wise; 2) buying clothing manufactured in China

(manufactured in the US) is bad or good; and 3) buying clothing manufactured in China

(manufactured in the US) is impractical or practical. A bipolar 7-point scale was applied here. Attitude toward purchasing clothing (Ab) was calculated by summing the three items.

Table 4.15 shows that the mean of Chinese consumers’ attitudes toward purchasing US-made clothing is 11.33 (SD = 3.87), less than the mean of their attitudes toward purchasing China-made clothing, which is 16.82 (SD = 3.29). Chinese consumers’ attitudes toward purchasing US-made clothing is not as positive as toward purchasing China-made clothing (Ab). This direction is opposite to their attitudes toward

149 clothing (Ao). That is, when only considering the clothing itself, Chinese consumers are

likely to have more positive attitudes toward US-made clothing than China-made

clothing. However, when purchasing clothing is concerned, they tend to have more

positive attitudes toward purchasing China-made clothing than purchasing US-made

clothing.

Variable N Mean SD Min. Max.

Attitudes toward 1973 11.33 3.87 3 21 Purchasing US-made Clothing

Attitudes toward 1979 16.82 3.29 3 21 Purchasing China-made Clothing

Table 4.15 Chinese consumers’ attitudes toward purchasing clothing (Ab).

Subiective Norms

Subjective norm (SN) was calculated by the model “SN = ZNBjMCj”. NB refers to the normative beliefs, which were measured by the three pairs of questions for US- made clothing and China-made clothing, respectively. The three items were: (1) Do your family members support your purchasing clothing made in China (made in the US)? (2)

Do your friends support your purchasing clothing made in China (made in the US)? And

150 (3) Do salespersons support your purchasing clothing made in China (made in the US)?

These items were anchored by “strongly support”(7) and “not support at aU”(l).

MG refers to motivation to comply, which was measured by asking the participants: ( 1) how often do your family members’ opinions influence your purchasing clothing decision? ( 2 ) how often do your fiiends’ opinions influence your purchasing clothing decision? and (3) how often do salespersons’ opinions influence your purchasing clothing decision? These items were anchored by “very often’’(7) and “not at all" (1).

Similar to the way of calculating attitudes toward clothing (Ao), the summation of outcomes of normative beliefs multiplied by motivation represents subjective norms.

Prior to calculation, all the scores of normative beliefs and motivation to comply were recoded from “1 to 7” to “-3 to +3”. Table 4.16 reports the results of subjective norms.

The means of subjective norms regarding both US-made clothing and China-made clothing are near 0 , the mathematical median point.

Variable N Mean SD Min. Max.

Subjective Norms 2013 -0.17 8.32 -27 27 Regarding US-made Clothing

Subjective Norms 2013 0.78 8.61 -27 27 Regarding China-made Clothing

Table 4.16 Subjective norms (SN).

151 Purchasing Intentions

Purchasing intentions for US-made clothing and China-made clothing were

measured separately. Three pairs of items were included in the purchasing intention

inventory. The first pair asked the respondents about the possibility of purchasing

clothing made in China (made in the US) for themselves within the following 12 months.

The second pair asked “Will you probably purchase clothing made in China (made in the

US) next year?” A 7-point scale was used for both pairs of questions anchored with highly impossible (1) and highly possible (7). The last pair of questions asked the respondents to indicate the possibility they would purchase clothing made in China (made

in the US) for themselves this year. A 0-100 scale was used here, where 0 represents no possibility of purchase and 100 represents the highest possibility to purchase. So all the scores from the last items need to be recoded from a “0 to 100” scale to a “1 to 7” scale.

Table 4.17 shows how the transformation was completed. Particularly, the scope of 0 to

100 was divided into seven groups (100 -r 7 = 14.3). The participants in the first group whose scores lay between 0 to 14.3 with the “0 to 100” scale were scored with “1”.

Similarly, the remaining scores in the other six groups were recoded. In order to check the transformation, the correlation between the original scores with “ 0 to 1 0 0 ” scale and the final scores with “ 1 to 7” scales was analyzed. The correlation between the original scores and recoded scores was .990 (P<.0001) regarding purchasing intentions for US- made clothing, and was .989 (P<.0001) in term of China-made clothing. So the transformation was acceptable. After that, the sum of the scores fi'om the three items was calculated to represent purchasing intention.

152 0 to 100 Scale 1 to 7 Scale

<14.3 1 14.4 - 28.6 2 28.7 - 42.9 3 43.0-57.1 4 57.2-71.4 5 71.5-85.7 6 >85.8 7

Table 4.17 Transformation from “0 to 100” scale to “ 1 to 7” scale.

Illustrated in Table 4.18, the mean of Chinese consumers’ purchasing intentions

for US-made clothing is 10.22 (SD = 4.06), less than the mean of their purchasing

intentions for China-made clothing, which is 16.95 (SD = 3.57). Thus, Chinese consumers tend to have higher purchasing intentions for China-made clothing than for

US-made clothing, even though they have more positive attitudes toward US-made clothing than China-made clothing.

Variable N Mean SD Min. Max.

Intention to Purchase 1995 1 0 .2 2 4.06 3 21 US-made Clothing

Intention to Purchase 1999 16.95 3.57 3 21 China-made Clothing

Table 4.18 Chinese consumers’ purchasing intentions (BI).

153 CHAPTER 5

RESULTS OF HYPOTHESES TESTS

In this chapter, results from testing all twelve hypotheses are reported. The first seven hypotheses were associated with Chinese consumers’ attitudes toward US-made clothing and China-made clothing and the purchase of that clothing. The remaining five hypotheses were related to the Fishbein Behavioral Intention Model. These two groups of hypotheses are discussed in the following sections.

Chinese Consumers’ Attitudes toward US-made and

China-made Clothing and Its Piu’chase

Chinese consumers’ attitudes toward US-made clothing and China-made clothing

(Ao), and attitudes toward purchasing US-made clothing and purchasing China-made clothing (Ab) are the main focus in this section. The relevant hypotheses, HI to H7, are tested. First the effects of country of origin on consumers’ attitudes toward purchasing clothing were tested. If Chinese consumers care about which country the clothing is made in, they are more likely to have different attitudes toward clothing with different country of origin.

154 Effects of Country of Origin on Attitude toward Purchasing Clothing

According to the literature reviewed in Chapter 2 , the following two hypotheses

were developed:

HI. Importance of country of origin (US) affects Chinese consumers’ attitudes toward purchasing US-made clothing. ^

H2. Importance of country of origin (China) affects Chinese consumers’ attitudes toward purchasing China-made clothing.

Simple regression was used to test HI and H2. For testing HI, the dependent

variable was the composite score of attitudes toward purchasing US-made clothing,

which was derived by summing scores on the three items that tapped attitudes toward

purchasing clothing. The independent variable was the one item measuring the

importance of the US as country of origin. Similarly, when H2 was tested, the dependent

variable was the composite score of attitudes toward purchasing China-made clothing and

the independent variable was the importance of China as country of origin.

Table 5.1 shows that importance of made in the US is significantly related to

Chinese consumers’ attitudes toward purchasing US-made clothing, F(,, ig^g) = 260.74,

£<.0001, and the importance of made in China is significantly associated with Chinese

^ In HI and H2, the data could only test whether there was significant correlation between the importance of country of origin and Chinese consumers’ attitudes toward purchasing clothing rather than the causal effects of importance of country of origin on attitudes toward purchasing clothing. However, based on the available literature and the logical relationship between the two variables, the hypotheses that importance of country of origin affects consumers’ attitudes toward purchasing clothing are reasonable. When the data showed a significant correlation between the importance of country of origin and Chinese consumers’ attitudes toward purchasing clothing, HI and H2 could be supported. H4, H5, and H I2 were tested similarly.

1 5 5 consumers’ attitudes toward purchasing China-made clothing, F(l, 1975) = 208.78,

£<.0001. The importance of country of origin (US) accounted for 12% (R^ = 0.12) of the

variation in attitudes toward purchasing US-made clothing and these two variables were

positively related, P = 0.34, £<.0001. The importance of country of origin (China)

accounted for 10% (R^ = 0.10) of the variation in attitudes toward purchasing China-

made clothing and these two variables were positively related, P = 0.31, £<.0001. That

is, the more important the consumers evaluate a particular garment’s country of origin,

the more positive their attitudes toward purchasing the clothing made in that country.

Both HI and H2 were supported.

IV DV Beta df R: F (P) (P)

Importance of Attitude toward Purchasing 0.34 1966 0 .1 2 260.74 Country of Origin US-made Clothing (.0 0 0 1 ) (.0 0 0 1 ) (US)

Importance of Attitude toward Purchasing 0.31 1975 0 .1 0 208.78 Country of Origin China-made Clothing (.0 0 0 1 ) (.0 0 0 1 ) (China)

Table 5.1 The relationship of country of origin with attitudes toward purchasing clothing.

156 Chinese Consumers’ Attitudes toward Clothing and Purchasing Clothing

Since country of origin was significantly related to Chinese consumers' attitudes toward purchasing clothing, it is time to examine whether Chinese consumers' attitudes toward purchasing "made in US" clothing and "made in China" clothing are different. H3 was developed as follows in Chapter 2:

H3. Chinese consumers have more positive attitudes toward (1) US-made clothing than China-made clothing; (2) purchasing US-made clothing than purchasing China-made clothing.

H3 was tested with paired-sample t-tests. Two pairs of attitudes were considered: attitudes toward US-made clothing and attitudes toward China-made clothing, and attitudes toward purchasing US-made clothing and purchasing China-made clothing.

Attitudes toward clothing were calculated by the summation of beliefs multiplied by evaluations, and attitudes toward purchasing clothing were computed by the sum of three items in the measure of attitudes toward purchasing clothing.

As illustrated in Table 5.2, there was a significant difference between Chinese consumers’ attitudes toward US-made clothing and their attitudes toward China-made clothing. Particularly, the mean of Chinese consumers’ attitudes toward US-made clothing was 27.96 and the mean of their attitudes toward China-made clothing was

23.85. Chinese consumers’ attitudes toward US-made clothing were significantly greater than their attitudes toward China-made clothing, tfiggo) = 4.728, £<.0001. However, the mean of their attitudes toward purchasing US-made clothing was 11.33 and the mean of their attitudes toward purchasing China-made clothing was 16.82. Contrary to

157 expectations, Chinese consumers’ attitudes toward purchasing China-made clothing were more positive than their attitudes toward purchasing US-made clothing, t(igsi) = -43.522,

2 ,<.0 0 0 1 . H3 was partially supported.

Variables Mean Mean Difference t df P

Attitudes toward US-made Clothing 27.96 4.11 4.728 1990 .0 0 0 1

Attitudes toward 23.85 China-made Clothing

Attitudes toward Purchasing 11.33 -5.49 -43.522 1951 .0 0 0 1 US-made Clothing

Attitudes toward 16.82 Purchasing China-made Clothing

Table 5.2 Attitudes toward clothing and attitudes toward purchasing clothing.

158 The Effects of Personal Cultural Preference on Attitudes toward Clothing

The findings of H3 indicated that Chinese consumers had more positive attitudes

toward US-made clothing than toward China-made clothing. Why do Chinese consumers

have different attitudes toward US-made clothing and China-made clothing? One possible factor proposed in Chapter 2 was consumers’ personal cultural preferences. The two corresponding hypotheses were developed as follows:

H4. Chinese consumers’ personal cultural preferences affect their attitudes toward US-made clothing.

H5. Chinese consumers’ personal cultural preferences affect their attitudes toward China-made clothing.

Simple regression was used to test H4 and H5. Personal cultural preference was the independent variable when testing both H4 and H5. Attitude toward US-made clothing was the dependent variable when testing H4 and attitude toward China-made clothing was the dependent variable for testing H5. Both measures of personal cultural preference. Products and Events Measure and Values and Norms Measure, were used to test H4 and H5.

As shown in Table 5.3, when personal cultural preference was measured by the

Products and Events Measure, personal cultural preference was significantly related to attitudes toward US-made clothing, F(i, 1991) = 41.336, p<.0001, and China-made clothing, F(i, i 9gg) = 90.565, p<.0001. Personal cultural preference accounted for 2%

(R^ = .0 2 ) of the variation in attitudes toward US-made clothing and those two variables were negatively related, p = -0.143, g<.0001. That is, the more a consumer prefers

159 Chinese culture, the less positive attitudes toward US-made clothing the consumer has; and the more preference for US culture, the more positive attitudes toward US-made clothing. Personal cultural preference accounted for 4% (R^ = .04) of the variation in attitudes toward China-made clothing and those two variables were positively related,

P = .209, £<.0001. That is, the more preference a consumer has for Chinese culture, the more positive attitudes are her or his toward China-made clothing; the more preference for US culture, the less positive the attitudes toward China-made clothing.

With respect to the Values and Norms Measure of personal cultural preference, significant relationships between personal cultural preference and attitudes toward US- made clothing (F(i, iggo) = 31.559, g<.0001), and between personal cultural preference and attitudes toward China-made clothing (F(i, iggg) = 54.068, £<.0001) were also found.

Particularly, personal cultural preference accounted for 2% (R^ = .02) of the variation in attitudes toward US-made clothing and those two variables were negatively related,

P = -0.125, £<.0001. That is, the more preference for Chinese culture a consumer has, the less positive attitudes toward US-made clothing the consumer has. Personal cultural preference accounted for 3% (R^ = .03) of the variation in attitudes toward China-made clothing and those two variables were positively related, p = .163, £<.0001. That is, the more preference for Chinese culture a consumer has, the more positive attitudes toward

China-made clothing the consumer has. H4 and H5 were supported with both measures of personal cultural preference.

160 IV DV Beta df F (P) (P)

Products and Events Measure

Personal Cultural Attitudes toward -0.143 1991 .0 2 41.336 Preference US-made Clothing (. 0 0 0 1 ) (.0 0 0 1 )

Personal Cultural Attitudes toward 0.209 1988 .04 90.565 Preference China-made Clothing (.0001) (.0 0 0 1 )

Values and Norms Measure

Personal Cultural Attitudes toward -0.125 1990 .0 2 31.559 Preference US-made Clothing (.0 0 0 1 ) (.0 0 0 1 )

Personal Cultural Attitudes toward 0.163 1988 .03 54.068 Preference China-made Clothing (.0001) (.0 0 0 1 )

Table 5.3 Effects of personal cultural preference on Chinese consumers' attitudes toward clothing.

161 The Influence of Personal Cultural Preference on the Difference between

Chinese Consumers’ Attitudes toward US-made and China-made Clothing

H4 compared attitudes towaid US-made clothing across diiTerent participants and

H5 compared attitudes toward China-made clothing across different participants.

However, for the same participants, are their attitudes toward US-made clothing

significantly different from their attitudes toward China-made clothing? H 6 and H7

compared (within subjects) attitudes toward US-made clothing and China-made clothing

for the same participant. H 6 hypothesized that for those Chinese consumers who

preferred Chinese culture, their attitudes toward China-made clothing were significantly

more positive than toward US-made clothing. H7 stated that if the personal cultural

preference was US culture, consumers' attitudes toward US-made clothing were

significantly more positive than toward China-made clothing.

H6 . Chinese consumers whose personal cultural preferences favor Chinese culture have more positive attitudes toward China-made clothing than US- made clothing.

H7. Chinese consumers whose personal cultural preferences favor US culture have more positive attitudes toward US-made clothing than China-made clothing.

Paired-sample t-tests were used to test H 6 and H7. To test H 6 and H7, two

groups of participants were needed: one group of participants who favor Chinese culture and the other group who favor US culture. Using the Products and Events Measure of personal cultural preference, a one-third cutoff was used to divide the sample into three

162 groups (see Chapter 3). The participants in Group 3 had Chinese culture as their personal cultural preferences; those in Group 1 had US culture as their personal cultural preferences; and those in Group 2 had no obvious preference for either US culture or

Chinese culture. As was shown in Table 4.12 (p.146), there were 442 participants included in Group 1, and 80 participants in Group 3. When testing H 6, a paired-samples t-test was run with participants in Group 3 and the participants in Group 1 were used to test H7.

When the Chinese Values and Norms Measure was used to measure personal cultural preference, a one-third distribution by scale generated another three groups of respondents. Group 1 participants did not favor Chinese culture, while the personal cultural preferences of participants in Group 3 were Chinese culture. As was show in

Table 4.12 (p. 146), there were 92 participants included in Group 1, and 1129 participants in Group 3. The respondents in Group 3 were used to test H 6 , and the participants in

Group 1 were used to test H7. Although the participants in Group 1 who did not favor

Chinese culture could favor or not favor US culture, using them to test H7 can still provide valuable insight.

Table 5.4 outlines the results when personal cultural preference was measured by the Products and Events Measure. For those participants who favored Chinese culture, the mean of attitudes toward US-made clothing was 21.39, and the mean of attitudes toward China-made clothing was 30.93. Then Chinese consumers who favor Chinese culture had significantly more positive attitudes toward China-made clothing than toward

163 US-made clothing, 1(434) = -4.377, g<.0001. When H7 was tested using Group 1 whose

personal cultural preference was culture, significantly more positive attitudes toward US-

made clothing (mean=44.34) than attitudes toward China-made clothing (mean=2.04)

were found, 1(7 9) = 6.820, £<.0001. Thus, H6 and H7 were supported when personal cultural preference was measured by the Products and Events Measure.

Table 5.5 shows the results with the Values and Norms Measure of personal cultural preference. H 6 was not supported using this measure since Chinese consumers who favored Chinese culture had more positive attitudes toward US-made clothing

(mean=31.39) than China-made clothing (mean=28.10), t(mi) = 2.924, £<.004.

Regarding H7, as discussed above, for those who did not favor Chinese culture, their attitudes toward US-made clothing and China-made clothing were not different,

1(9,) = 0.210, £<.834. So H 6 and H7 were not supported with the Values and Norms

Measure of personal cultural preference.

164 Variables Mean Mean t df P Difference

Those who favor Chinese culture

Attitudes toward 21.39 -9.54 -4.377 434 .0001 US-made Clothing

Attitudes toward 30.93 China-made Clothing

Those who favor US culture

Attitudes toward 44.34 42.300 6.820 79 .0001 US-made Clothing

Attitudes toward 2.04 China-made Clothing

Table 5.4 Comparison between Chinese consumers’ attitudes toward US-made clothing and attitudes toward China-made clothing when personal cultural preference was measure by the Products and Events Measure.

165 Variables Mean Mean t df P Difference

Those who favor Chinese culture

Attitudes toward 31.39 3.29 2.924 1111 .004 US-made Clothing

Attitudes toward 28.10 China-made Clothing

Those who do not favor Chinese culture

Attitudes toward 17.82 1.11 0.210 91 .834 US-made Clothing

Attitudes toward 16.71 China-made Clothing

Table 5.5 Comparison between Chinese consumers’ attitudes toward US-made clothing and attitudes toward China-made clothing when personal cultural preference was measured by the Values and Norms Measure.

166 The Fishbein Behavioral Intention Model

In this section, the results of testing and extending the Fishbein Behavioral

Intention Model are reported. The relevant hypotheses, from H8 to H I2, were tested.

Attitude toward behavior (Ab) and attitude toward object (Ac) were investigated first in

H8 in terms of their relationship to purchasing intention.

Comparison between Attitudes toward Products

and Attitudes toward Purchasing Products

Regarding which attitude explains the greater amount of variation in purchasing intention, H8 was developed as follows based on the relevant literature reviewed in

Chapter 2:

H8. Attitudes toward purchasing clothing explain more variation in Chinese consumers’ clothing purchasing intentions than attitudes toward clothing.

Simple regressions and J-test were used to test H8. Chinese consumers’ purchasing intentions were regressed on attitudes toward clothing (Ao) and then on attitudes toward purchasing clothing (Ab), using the following two models:

Model I : BI = au + ai Ao Model 2: BI = bo + bi Ab

For Model I, Chinese consumers’ purchasing intention for US-made clothing was the dependent variable and their attitude toward US-made clothing was the independent variable. Regarding Model 2, Chinese consumers’ purchasing intention for US-made clothing was the dependent variable and their attitude toward purchasing US-made clothing was the independent variable. Purchasing intention for China-made clothing was investigated in a similar way. Purchasing intention was calculated by summing the

167 three items included in the purchasing intention inventory. Attitude toward purchasing clothing was computed by summing the three items in the attitudes toward purchasing clothing measure. Attitude toward clothing was computed by summing the beliefs multiplied by evaluations.

Table 5.6 shows that when US-made clothing was investigated, Chinese consumers’ attitudes toward US-made clothing (Ao) only explain 4.3% of the variation in their purchasing intentions for US-made clothing, F(i, igsi) = 89.894, p<.0001. There is a significantly positive relationship between attitudes toward US-made clothing and purchasing intentions for US-made clothing, p = .208, p<.0001. Chinese consumers’ attitudes toward purchasing US-made clothing (Ab) explain 53.2% of the variation in their purchasing intentions for US-made clothing, F(i, 1950) = 2219.694, p<.0001, and there is a significantly positive relationship between attitudes toward purchasing US- made clothing and purchasing intentions for US-made clothing, P = .729, £<.0001.

Regarding China-made clothing, Chinese consumers’ attitudes toward China- made clothing (Ao) only explain 3.9% of the variation in their purchasing intentions for

China-made clothing, F(i, 1933) = 81.511, p<.0001. There is a significantly positive relationship between attitudes toward China-made clothing and purchasing intentions for

China-made clothing, P = .199, £<.0001. Chinese consumers’ attitudes toward purchasing China-made clothing (Ab) explain 35.6% of the variation in their purchasing intentions for China-made clothing, F(i, 1905) = 1087.642, p<.0001. There is a significantly positive relationship between attitudes toward purchase China-made clothing and purchasing intentions for China-made clothing, p = .597, £<.0001.

1 6 8 IV DV Beta df Rz F Value (P) (P)

Attitudes toward Purchasing Intentions 0.208 1981 0.043 89.894 US-made Clothing for US-made Clothing (.0001) (.0001)

Attitudes toward Purchasing Intentions 0.729 1956 0.532 2219.694 Purchasing US-made for US-made Clothing (.0001) (.0001) Clothing

Attitudes toward Purchasing Intentions 0.199 1983 0.039 81.511 China-made for China-made (.0001) (.0001) Clothing Clothing

Attitudes toward Purchasing Intentions 0.597 1965 0.356 1087.642 Purchasing Chinese- for China-made (.0001) (.0001) Made clothing Clothing

Table 5.6 The relationship among attitudes toward clothing, attitudes toward purchasing clothing, and purchasing intentions.

169 Although the absolute values of R squares from the Ab model and Ao model were different, whether or not that difference was significant was still questionable. To determine whether the variation in Chinese consumers’ clothing purchasing intentions explained by attitudes toward clothing (Ao) was significantly different from that explained by attitudes toward purchasing clothing (Ab), the Davidson-MacKinnon J-test was applied (Greene, 1997).

According to procedures for the J-test, Table 5.7 and 5.8 were made in terms of

US-made clothing and China-made clothing. As shown in Table 5.7, the beta of estimated purchasing intentions for US-made clothing at step 6 is 0.723 (£<.0001), which is statistically significant, while the beta of the estimated purchasing intentions at step 3 is 0.035 (p<.03), which is not statistically significant at p<.01. Then Model 2 (the Ab model) explains a significantly greater amoimt of variation in purchasing intentions for

US-made clothing than Model 1 (the Ao Model). Similarly, Table 5.8 reports that the beta of estimated purchasing intention for China-made clothing at step 6 is 0.598

(£<.0001), which is statistically significant, while the beta of estimated purchasing intention at step 3 is -0.005 (£<.799), which is not statistically significant at p<.01. So

Model 2 (the Ab model) explains a significantly greater amoimt of variation in purchasing intentions for China-made clothing than Model 1 (the Ao Model). In sum, for both US-made clothing and China-made clothing, attitudes toward purchasing clothing explain significantly more variation in Chinese consumers’ clothing purchasing intentions than attitudes toward clothing. Therefore, H8 was supported.

170 Step 1. Model 1: BI = ai Ao A ai = 0.208

A Step 2. Calculate BI = 0.208AO

A Step 3. Regression: BI = Cl Ab + czBI = Cl Ab + C2 (O.2 O8A0 ) A Cl = 0.723 (p<.0001)

A C2 = 0.035 (p <.030)

Step 4. Model 2: BI = biAb A bi = 0.729

A A Step 5. Calculate BI = 0.729Ab

A A Step 6. Regression: BI = diAo + chBI = di Ao +

A di = 0.035 (p <.030)

A d2 = 0.723 (p<.0001)

Table 5.7 J-test comparing the Ao model and the Ab model for US-made clothing.

171 Step 1. Model 1: BI = ai Ao A ai = 0.199

A Step 2. Calculate BI = 0.199AO

A Step 3. Regression: BI = ciAb + czBI = c I Ab + C2 (0.199Ao) A Cl = 0.598 (p<.0001)

A C2 = -0.005 (p <799)

Step 4. Model 2: BI = biAb A bi = 0.597 A A Step 5. Calculate BI = 0.597Ab A A Step 6. Regression: BI = diAo 4- d 2 BI = di Ao + d 2 (0.597Ab)

A di = -0.005 (p <799)

A d2 = 0.598 (p <0001)

Table 5.8 J-test comparing the Ao model and the Ab model for China- made clothing.

172 Comparison between Attitude toward Purchasing and Subjective Norm

After attitude toward clothing and attitude toward purchasing clothing were compared, the predictive power of attitude toward behavior (Ab) and subjective norm

(SN) on behavioral intention (BI) were examined. Two corresponding hypotheses were developed in Chapter 2:

H9. Subjective norms explain more variation in Chinese consumers’ clothing purchasing intentions than attitudes toward behavior for those whose personal cultural preferences are Chinese culture.

HIO. Attitudes toward behavior explain more variation in Chinese consumers’ clothing purchasing intentions than subjective norms for those whose personal cultural preferences are US culture.

Before testing H9 and HIO, the participants were divided into three groups based on personal cultural preference, using the same methods as when H6 and H7 were tested.

Using the Products and Events Measure, the participants in Group 3, whose personal cultural preference was Chinese culture, were used to test H9 and those in Group 1, who favored US culture, were used to test HIO. When the Values and Norms Measure was applied. Group 3, in which all the participants favored Chinese culture, was used to test

H9, and the participants in Group 1 were used to test HIO.

When testing H9, purchasing intentions for US-made clothing and China-made clothing were the dependent variables in two separate models, and subjective norms under US-made clothing or China-made clothing were the independent variables in

Model 1, and attitudes toward purchasing either US-made clothing or China-made clothing were the independent variables in Model 2, as shown in the following two models:

173 Model 1: BI = biSN Model 2: BI = ba Ab

Table 5.9 outlines the results when personal cultural preference was measured by

the Products and Events Measure. For those who favored Chinese culture, 46.7% of the variation in purchasing intentions for US-made clothing was explained by attitudes toward purchasing US-made clothing, F( 1,42g) = 374.685, £<.0001. Attitudes toward purchasing US-made clothing was significantly positively related to purchasing

intentions, P = .683, £<.0001. In contrast, subjective norms were not significantly related to purchasing intentions. Likewise, 24.8% of the variation in purchasing intentions for

China-made clothing was explained by attitudes toward purchasing China-made clothing,

£ (1, 429 ) = 141.450, £<.0001. Attitudes toward purchasing China-made clothing were significantly positively related to purchasing intentions, p = .498, £<.0001, whereas subjective norms were not significantly related to piuchasing intentions.

When Group 1, the participants who favored US culture, was investigated, 53.9% of the variation in purchasing intentions for US-made clothing was explained by attitudes toward purchasing US-made clothing, F(i, 7 7 ) = 90.159, £<.0001. Attitudes toward purchasing US-made clothing were significantly positively related to purchasing intentions, P = .734, £<.0001. But subjective norms were not significantly related to purchasing intentions. Similarly, 42.5% of the variation in purchasing intentions for

China-made clothing was explained by attitudes toward purchasing China-made clothing,

F(i, 77) = 56.956, £<.0001. Attitudes toward purchasing China-made clothing were significantly positively related to purchasing intentions, P = .652, £<.0001. In contrast, subjective norms were not significantly related to purchasing intentions.

174 rV DV Beta df F Value (P) (P)

Participants who Favor Chinese Culture.

US-made Clothing

Attitudes toward Purchasing Intentions 0.683 428 0.467 374.685 Purchasing for US-made Clothing (.0001) (.0001) US-made Clothing

Subjective Norms Purchasing Intentions 0.089 435 0.008 3.479 for US-made Clothing (.063) (.063)

China-made Clothing

Attitudes toward Purchasing Intentions 0.498 429 0.248 141.450 Purchasing for China-made Clothing (.0001) (.0001) China-made Clothing

Subjective Norms Purchasing Intentions -0.049 436 0.002 1.063 for China-made Clothing (.303) (.303)

(continued)

Table 5.9 The relationships among attitudes toward purchasing clothing, subjective norms, and purchasing intentions when personal cultural preference is measured by the Products and Events Measure.

175 Table 5.9 (continued)

Participants who Favor US Culture.

US-made Clothing

Attitudes toward Purchasing Intentions 0.734 77 0.539 90.157 Purchasing for US-made Clothing (.0001) (.0001) US-made Clothing

Subjective Norms Purchasing Intentions -0.147 78 0.022 1.715 for US-made Clothing (.194) (.194)

China-made Clothing

Attitudes toward Purchasing Intentions 0.652 77 0.425 56.956 Purchasing for China-made Clothing (.0001) (.0001) China-made Clothing

Subjective Norms Purchasing Intentions -0.092 78 0.008 .695 for China-made Clothing (.419) (.419)

176 Table 5.10 reveals the results when the personal cultural preference was

determined by the Values and Norms Measure. When the participants in Group 3 who

favored Chinese culture were investigated, 52.3% of the variation in purchasing

intentions for US-made clothing was explained by attitudes toward purchasing US-made

clothing, F(i, iioo) = 1203.75, p<.0001. Attitudes toward purchasing US-made clothing

were significantly positively related to purchasing intentions, P = .723, g<.0001. In

contrast, subjective norms were not significantly related to purchasing intentions.

Similarly, 29.4% of the variation in purchasing intentions for China-made clothing was

eJcplained by attitudes toward purchasing China-made clothing, F(i, noa) = 459.719, g<.0001. Attitudes toward purchasing China-made clothing were significantly positively related to purchasing intentions, p = .542, p<.0001. But subjective norms were not significantly related to purchasing intentions.

When Group 1, the participants who did not favor Chinese culture, was

investigated, 53.6% of the variation in purchasing intentions for US-made clothing was gJcplained by attitudes toward purchasing US-made clothing, F(i, 34) = 96.934, p<.0001.

Attitudes toward purchasing US-made clothing were significantly positively related to purchasing intentions, P = .732, p<.0001. But subjective norms were not significantly related to purchasing intentions. Likewise, 36.4% of the variation in purchasing intentions for China-made clothing was explained by attitudes toward purchasing China- made clothing, F(i, 83) = 47.489, £<.0001. Attitudes toward purchasing China-made clothing were significantly positively related to purchasing intentions, P = .603, £<.0001.

However, subjective norms were not significantly related to purchasing intentions.

177 IV DV Beta d f F Value (P) (P)

Participants who Favor Chinese Culture.

US-made Clothing

Attitudes toward Purchasing Intentions 0.723 1100 0.523 1203.75 Purchasing for US-made Clothing (.0001) (.0001) US-made Clothing

Subjective Norms Purchasing Intentions 0.031 1116 0.007 1.521 for US-made Clothing (.652) (.652)

China-made Clothing

Attitudes toward Purchasing Intentions 0.542 1106 0.294 459.719 Purchasing for China-made Clothing (.0001) (.0001) China-made Clothing

Subjective Norms Purchasing Intentions 0.009 1118 0.000 0.096 for China-made Clothing (.757) (.757)

(continued)

Table 5.10 The relationships among attitudes toward purchasing clothing, subjective norms, and purchasing intentions when personal cultural preference is measured by the Values and Norms Measure. Table 5.10 (continued)

Participants who did not Favor Chinese Culture.

US-made Clothing

Attitudes toward Purchasing Intentions 0.732 84 0.536 96.934 Purchasing for US-made Clothing (.0001) (.0001) US-made Clothing

Subjective Norms Purchasing Intentions -0.025 86 0.003 0.230 for US-made Clothing (.419) (.633)

China-made Clothing

Attitudes toward Purchasing Intentions 0.603 83 0.364 47.489 Purchasing for China-made Clothing (.0001) (.0001) China-made Clothing

Subjective Norms Purchasing Intentions -0.245 86 0.060 5.475 for China-made Clothing (.022) (.022)

179 Based on the results illustrated in both Table 5.9 and 5.10, it was found that

personal cultural preference had no influence on the effects of subjective nonns (SN) and

attitudes toward purchasing clothing (Ab) on purchasing intentions (BI). Chinese consumers’ attitudes toward purchasing clothing explain more variation in their purchasing intentions than their subjective norms regardless of their personal cultural preference. H9 was rejected and HIO was supported.

Multidimensionalitv versus Unidimensionalitv

H11 focused on multidimensional structures for both attitudinal and normative components and unidimensional structures for both attitudinal and normative components. Based on the literature reviewed in Chapter 2, the following hypothesis was developed:

Hll. Multidimensional attitudinal structures and normative structures explain more variation in Chinese consumers’ clothing purchasing intentions than unidimensional attitudes and norms.

Factor analysis was conducted, followed by multiple regression to test HI 1. First, principal component factor analyses were calculated for the 11 clothing attributes and 3 salient referents separately to identify the latent factors in clothing attributes and salient referents. The factors with eigenvalues greater than 1 were retained. New multidimensional variables were created by summing the items in each factor; they were then used as independent variables to run multiple regression on purchasing intentions, the dependent variable, as seen in Model 1. Model 2 was obtained using the Fishbein

Behavioral Intention Model in the unidimensional way.

1 8 0 Model I : BI = a/ Factor 1 + a : Factor 2 + a s Factor 3 + Model 2: BI = b j[ A o ] + 6 ’[ SN ]

n Ao = S biei /=i k SN = 2 NBjMQ y=i

One change made here was that attitudes toward clothing (Ao) were used to

predict purchasing intentions rather than attitudes toward purchasing clothing (Ab). The

reason for this change is that the comparison between multidimensionality and

unidimensionality is the major concern here. The structure of the attitudinal component

and normative component might influence the prediction for purchasing intentions. In

this study, in order to obtain attitudes toward clothing (Ao), beliefs of clothing and

evaluations of the corresponding beliefs were measured separately, which could possibly

be structured either in multidimensional way or unidimensional way. The attitudes

toward purchasing clothing were not measured by beliefs of purchasing clothing and

evaluations of the corresponding beliefs in the questionnaire. So I substituted attitudes

toward clothing (Ao) in place of attitudes toward purchasing clothing (Ab) to test

multidimensionality versus unidimensionality.

Regarding US-made clothing, all 11 attitude items (biei) were factor analyzed.

When eigenvalues were greater than 1, a factor was retained. Table 5.11 shows that five out of eleven clothing attributes related to US-made clothing loaded on two factors after varimax rotation. Factor 1 had three items: style, color, and brand, which were related to social image. Factor 2 was associated with value including price and care. The

181 remaining six items were cross loaded on both factors if a minimum difference in loadings of 0.4 was used as cutoff (see Table 5.11). The eigenvalue o f Factor 1 was

6.452, and its Cronbach’s alpha was 0.8186. Factor 2’s eigenvalue was 1.082, and its

Cronbach’s alpha was 0.6769. Factor 1 explained 58.65% of the variation in the eleven items, and Factor 2 explained another 9.84%.

Factor 1 Factor 2

Item Color .831 .203 Style .820 .259 Brand .731 9.298E102 Care .311 .787 Price -.104 .775 Workmanship .615 .677 Fit .515 .672 Quality .553 .658 Fabric .561 .655 Comfort .593 .612 Durable .489 .564

Eigenvalue 6.452 1.082 Cronbach’s Alpha 0.8186 0.6769

Table 5.11 Factor loadings for US-made clothing attributes.

182 When China-made clothing was concerned, all the 11 items (biei) of attitudes

toward China-made clothing were factor analyzed with the criterion of eigenvalue greater

than 1. Only one factor was produced which contained all 11 items and explained 58.6% of the variation (eigenvalue was 6.445). The Cronbach’s alpha for this factor was 0.9278.

Because only one factor was found here, a multidimensional attitudinal structure for

China-made clothing could not be examined.

Components of subjective norm were also factor analyzed. Considering US-made clothing, the three items comprising subjective norm were factor analyzed with the criterion of eigenvalue greater than 1. Only one factor was produced which contained all three items: family, friend, and salesperson. The eigenvalue was 1.610, and the

Cronbach’s alpha was 0.5390. The factor explained 53.7% of the variation. Similarly, regarding China-made clothing, only one factor was found which consisted of all the three items and accounted for 54.2% of the variation. The eigenvalue was 1.625, and the

Cronbach’s alpha was 0.5475. Thus, regarding both US-made clothing and China-made clothing, a multidimensional normative structure was not obtained. Thus, only multidimensional and unidimensional attitudinal structures were compared in term of US- made clothing.

Table 5.12 shows the results of testing for multidimensionality and unidimensionality. Regarding multidimensionality, purchasing intention for US-made clothing was the dependent variable and the attitudinal two factors and subjective norm were the three independent variables. Seven and six-tenths percent (R^ = .076%) of the variation in purchasing intentions was explained by these three variables.

1 8 3 E(3 , 1976) = 53.985, 2 < 000l. Factor I was significantly positively related to purchasing

intentions (P = .252, p<.0001), so were factor 2 (P = .036, p<.003) and subjective norms

(P = .098, E<.0001). With respect to unidimensionality, attitudes toward clothing and subjective norms were the two independent variables, which only explained 5.2% of the variation in purchasing intentions, £( 2 , 1970) = 54.054, £<.0001. Additionally, attitudes toward clothing were positively related to purchasing intentions (P = .209, £<.0001), so were subjective norms (P = .097, £<.0001).

DV IV df R- F Beta (p) (P)

Purchase Factor 1 Factor 2 SN Intentions for US-made .252 .063 .098 1976 .076 53.985 Clothing (.0001) (.003) (.0001) (.0001)

Purchase Ao SN Intentions for US-made .209 .097 1976 .052 54.054 Clothing (.0001) (.0001) (.0001)

Table 5.12 Comparison between multidimensional and unidimensional attitudinal structure.

184 In order to examine whether the difference between a multidimensional and unidimensional attitudinal structure was significant, the J-test was used. Because for US- made clothing, there were two factors under attitudes toward purchasing clothing, the following two models were compared with the J-test.

Model 1 : BI = a/ Factor 1 + æ Factor 2 + as [ SN ] Model 2: BI = b/[ Ao ] + bi[ SN ]

As shown in Table 5.13, in step 3 the coefficient of estimated purchasing intentions based on the multidimensional attitudinal structure is .961 (p<.0001), while in step 6 the coefficient of estimated purchasing intentions based on the unidimensional attitudinal structure is -.084 (p<.160). Then Model 1 (multidimensional attitudinal structure) explains a significantly greater amount of variation in purchasing intentions for

US-made clothing than Model 2 (unidimensional attitudinal structure). Because the attitudinal structure in term of China-made clothing and the normative structures in terms of both US-made clothing and China-made clothing were not obtained, HI I could not be fully tested. Therefore, HI 1 was only partially supported.

185 Step 1. Model I: BI = aiFactor I + æFactor 2 + aj [ SN ] ai = .252

32 = .063 a3 = .098 A Step 2. Calculate BI .252Factor 1 + .063Factor 2 + .098 [ SN]

Step 3. Regression: BI =ci[ Ao ] + C2 [ SN ] + caBI = ci[ Ao ] + C2 [ SN ] + 03 (.252Factor 1 + .063Factor 2 + .098 [ SN])

Cl = -.039 (p <.335) 02 =-.825 (p<.OOOI)

0 3 = .961 (p <.0001)

Step 4. Model 2: BI = bi[Ao] + b 2 [SN] bi = .209 A =.097

A Step 5. Calculate BI = .209[Ao] + .097[SN]

A Step 6. Regression: BI = diFactor 1 + d 2 Faotor 2 + d a [ SN ] + d4BI = di Factor 1 + d2 Factor 2 + da [ SN ] + d4 (.209[ Ao ] + .097[ SN]) di= .313 (p<.0001) A d2 = .112 (p <.006) da= .105 (p <.0001) d4 = -.084 (p<.160)

Table 5.13 J-test for multidimensional and unidimensional attitudinal stmotures.

1 8 6 The Effects of Personal Cultural Preference on Purchasing Intention

After testing the Fishbein Behavioral Intention Model using the previous four

hypotheses, extending the model was investigated here by examining the effects of

personal cultural preference on purchasing intention. HI 2 was developed as follows:

H12. Personal cultural preference affects Chinese consumers’ clothing purchasing intentions.

Multiple regression and F-tests were applied to test HI2. Regarding regression,

purchasing intention was the dependent variable. Attitudes toward purchasing clothing

and subjective norms were the two independent variables in Model 1 and one more

independent variable was added in Model 2, which was personal cultural preference.

Both measures of personal cultural preference, the Products and Events Measure and

Values and Norms Measure, were applied separately.

Model 1: BI = w/[ Ab ] + VV2 [ SN ] Model 2: BI = w i [ Ab ] + Wi[ SN ] + Wi [ PC? ]

As shown in Table 5.14, Model 1 had two independent variables, attitudes toward purchasing US-made clothing and subjective norms, while Model 2 had one more independent variable, personal cultural preference, measured by the Products and Events

Measure, and Model 3 included personal cultural preference as measured by the Values and Norms Measure. Another similar three models were investigated in term of China- made clothing: models 4,5, and 6 .

In Model 1,53.1% of the variation in purchasing intentions for US-made clothing was explained by Model 1, F( 2, 1951) = 1103.548, £<.0001. There was a significantly positive relationship between attitudes toward purchasing US-made clothing and

187 purchasing intentions (P = .726, g<.000l), while the relationship between subjective norms and purchasing intentions was not significant. In Model 2, when personal cultural preference measured by the Products and Events Meastu^e was addvd, 54.4% of the variation in purchasing intentions was explained, £( 3 , ,94,) = 771.433, p<.000l. In addition, there was a significant negative relationship between personal cultiual preference and purchasing intentions for US-made clothing, P = -. 123, p<.0001. In

Model 3, 53.5% of the variation in purchasing intentions was explained after personal cultiual preference was added as measured by the Values and Norms Measure,

E(3, 1939) = 742.376, E<.0001. Personal cultural preference was significantly negatively related to purchasing intentions for US-made clothing, P = -.054, £<.001.

Regarding China-made clothing. Model 4 explained 35.5% o f the variation in purchasing intentions, £( 2 , 1950) = 540.085, £<.0001. Attitudes toward purchasing China- made clothing were significantly positively related to purchasing intentions (P = .596,

£<.0001), while subjective norms were not related to purchasing intentions. After personal cultural preference measured by the Products and Events Measure was added into Model 5, the same amount of variation (35.5%) was explained by Model 5, £ ( 3 ,1 9 5 0 )

= 357.472, £<.0001. Additionally, only attitudes toward purchasing clothing were significantly positively related to purchasing intentions among the three independent variables, p = .587, £<.0001. In Model 6 , when personal cultural preference measured by the Values and Norms Measure was added, 36.4% of the variation was explained by

Model 6 , £(3, i95o) = 371.964, £<.0001. Personal cultural preference was significantly positively related to purchasing intentions for China-made clothing (P = .091, £<.0001), so were attitudes toward purchasing clothing, P = .572, £<.0001. 188 IV DV Beta d f F (P) (P) Model 1 Attitudes toward Purchasing Intentions 0.726 1951 0.531 1103.548 Purchasing US-made for US-made (.0001) (.0001) Clothing (Ab) Clothing (PI)

Subjective Norms (SN) 0.024 (.128)

Model 2 Attitudes toward Purchasing Intentions 0.686 1941 0.544 771.433 Purchasing US-made for US-made (.0001) (.0001) Clothing (Ab) Clothing (PI)

Subjective Norms (SN) 0.022 (.156)

Personal Cultural -0.123 Preference (.0001) (Products and Events Measure)

Model 3 Attitudes toward Purchasing Intentions 0.728 1939 0.535 742.376 Purchasing US-made for US-made (.0001) (.0001) Clothing (Ab) Clothing (PI)

Subjective Norms (SN) 0.016 (.318)

Personal Cultural -0.054 Preference (.001) (Values and Norms Measure)

(continued)

Table 5.14 Effects of personal cultural preference on purchasing intentions.

189 Table 5.14 (continued)

Model 4 Attitudes toward Purchasing Intentions 0.596 1960 0.355 540.085 Purchasing Chinese- for China-made (.0001 ) (.0001) Made Clothing (Ab) Clothing (PI)

Subjective Norms (SN) -0.023 (.199)

Model 5 Attitudes toward Purchasing Intentions 0.587 1950 0.355 357.472 Purchasing Chinese- for China-made (.0001 ) (.0001) Made Clothing (Ab) Clothing (PI)

Subjective Norms (SN) -0.019 (.292)

Personal Cultural 0.026 Preference (.173) (Products and Events Measure)

Model 6 Attitudes toward Purchasing Intentions 0.572 1950 0.364 371.964 Purchasing Chinese- for China-made (.0001) (.0001) Made Clothing (Ab) Clothing (PI)

Subjective Norms (SN) -0.023 (.211)

Personal Cultural 0.091 Preference (.0001) (Values and Norms Measure)

190 In order to check whether adding personal cultural preference significantly

increase the explanation of variation in purchasing intentions, a F-test was applied

(Greene, 1997).

(R2^- Rr)/J F[J,n-K]= _ (1 -R 2 ^)/(n-K)

Ri^ : R" of Regression Model I (restricted model) R2 ^: R^of Regression Model 2 (unrestricted model) J: number of restrictions (J = 1 in this study) K: number of parameters (K=3 in this study) n: sample size.

Table 5.15 shows that when Model 2 is compared to Model 1, it accounts for

significantly greater variation than Model 1, F(i, 1941) = 55.336, p<.0001. Model 3 also

accounts for significantly greater variation than Model 1, F(i, 1939) = 16.68, p<.0001. So

when US-made clothing was investigated, Chinese consumers' personal cultural

preference significantly contributed to explain the variation in their piuchasing intentions,

regardless of the measure of personal cultural preference. Additionally, Model 6

accounts for a significantly greater amount of variation than Model 4, F(i, 1950) = 27.594,

£<.0001, while Model 5 does not compared to Model 4. So Chinese consumers’ personal

cultural preference explains significantly more variation in their purchasing intentions for

China-made clothing only when the Values and Norms Measiure of personal cultural preference is applied. H12 was only partially supported.

191 Comparison J K n R.,2 R 2 ^ F(J,n-K) P

Model 1 vs. 1 3 1944 0.531 0.544 55.336 (:, 1941) .0 0 0 1 Model 2

Model 1 vs. 1 3 1942 0.531 0.535 16.680 ( 1, 1939) .0 0 0 1 Model 3

Model 4 vs. 1 3 1953 0.355 0.355 0 ( 1, 1950 ) NA Model 5

Model 4 vs. 1 3 1953 0.355 0.364 27.594 ( 1, i95o) .0 0 0 1 Model 6

Table 5.15. F-tests for the effects of personal cultural preference on purchasing intentions.

192 CHAPTER 6

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS

In the last chapter, the study’s background, purpose and research objectives are summarized. Then the results are outlined and discussed. Three conclusions are drawn from the finding and the contributions of the research are addressed. Finally, topics for future studies are provided.

Summary of Research

Research Purpose and Obiectives

Since 1978, the average income of Chinese consumers has rapidly increased (Xu,

1995). A portion of China’s 1.3 billion population can afford foreign clothing (Cui,

1997). Foreign clothing has entered the Chinese market during the last decade, but most was from European countries, such as Italy and France (Lin & Chen, 1998). The US has a serious trade deficit with China, especially for apparel trade (U.S. Department of

Commerce, 1997). An increase in the export of US-made clothing into the Chinese market would help balance trade (Jacobs, 1997). But for this to happen, a question needs to be addressed: How do Chinese consumers view US-made clothing as compared to

193 China-made clothing? In other words, what are Chinese consumers’ attitudes toward US- made clothing, attitudes toward purchasing US-made clothing, and purchasing intentions for US-made clothing?

The purpose of this study was twofold. First, a practical question was investigated related to Chinese consumers’ attitudes toward clothing. There were two objectives related to this question: (1) to investigate Chinese consumers’ attitudes toward

US-made clothing and China-made clothing and (2) to identify factors explaining

Chinese consiuners’ attitudes toward US-made and China-made clothing. With respect to the second purpose, Chinese consumers’ attitudes toward purchasing US-made and

China-made clothing were investigated from a theoretical perspective. Another two objectives were developed under this purpose: (1) to test the Fishbein Behavioral

Intention Model with Chinese consumers’ attitudes toward purchasing clothing (Ab), subjective norm (SN), and purchasing intention (BI) and (2) to extend the Fishbein

Behavioral Intention Model by adding a cultural factor, personal cultural preference.

Theoretical Framework

In this study, I proposed that consumers’ personal cultural preferences were related to their attitudes toward clothing and purchasing intentions for clothing. The theory of Cultural Economics, an economic theory, and the Diffusion of Innovations theory, a sociological theory, provided theoretical support. A wheel, which consists of four stages, describes the theory of Cultural Economics (see Figure 2.2, p. 41). Stage A involves creation of new technics. Stage B works as a test of culture on the new technics.

When the new technics created in Stage A fit the culture, they will pass the test of culture

194 and be further developed at Stage C. If they do not fit the culture, culture will block the diffusion of the technics. In Stage C the technics will be developed and accumulated into technology. In other words, the new technics will be used comprehensively in production, social life, and other human activities. Finally, technology will affect culture

in Stage D, because the new technology could lead to cultural changes in social life, social production, and social structure. Then based on the new culture, that has been

influenced by technology, new technics might be created, marking the beginning of the next circle (Brinkman, 1981).

When consumer behavior and psychology are considered, imported products from

foreign countries, such as US-made clothing, can be viewed as a kind of new technics for

Chinese consumers. According to the theory of Cultural Economics, only when the technics match the culture, can they be comprehensively accepted and developed. In other words, views and perceptions of imported products from foreign countries must

filter through the gatekeeper played by culture. Then how an individual evaluates US- made and China-made clothing depends on her or his personal cultural preference. The more an individual favors US culture, the greater the possibility that the individual will form positive attitudes toward US-made clothing. Likewise, if an individual’s personal cultural preference is Chinese culture, s/he would have more positive attitudes toward

China-made clothing.

The cultural influence on consumers’ attitudes toward foreign and domestic products is also consistent with a sociological theory, the Diffusion of Innovations theory.

Diffusion is a process by which an irmovation, such as a new fashion, is communicated

195 through certain channels over time among the members of a social system (Rogers,

1995). One prerequisite for diffusion of innovations is compatibility, which refers to the degree to which an innovation is perceived as consistent with the existing values, past experiences, and needs of potential adopters (Rogers, 1995). The more compatible an innovation is with a person’s cultural values and beliefs, the more rapid its rate of adoption (Sands, 1981). In contrast, cultural values will block the diffusion of innovations if they are incompatible with the innovation. According to the Diffusion of

Innovations theory, innovation, as the first element of innovation diffusion, refers to an idea, practice, or object perceived as new by an individual (Rogers, 1995). US-made clothing, as an object perceived as new by Chinese consumers, can be viewed as an innovation. Then Chinese consumers’ cultural beliefs and preference could affect their attitudes toward US-made and China-made clothing. Particularly, if Chinese consumers are more accepting of US culture, the compatibility of their cultural values and beliefs could lead to their positive attitudes toward US-made clothing. In contrast, negative attitudes toward US-made clothing could be formed if Chinese consumers’ cultural values and beliefs are incompatible with the innovation.

Research Method

A questionnaire was designed in English, which included the measures of purchasing intentions, attitudes toward purchasing clothing and toward clothing itself, normative beliefs, motivation to comply, personal cultural preference, and demographic characteristics. In order to check the reliability of the measures developed in this study.

Pretest 1 was carried out with 37 Chinese students and scholars who were living in the

196 u s. Then the questionnaire was translated to Chinese and back translated to English to

check the consistency between the Chinese and English version. Pretest 2 was conducted

at a Chinese university with 15 Chinese college students to check whether participants’

understanding of each item validly matched what the researchers had in mind.

Three thousand questionnaires were distributed in Beijing, Shanghai, and

Guangzhou during October and November 1998. Parents of students in elementary and

middle schools were the participants. The schools were randomly selected from each

city. In the final sample, almost half of the participants were female and the other half

were male. More than 90% were aged from 30 to 50 years old. More than 40% of the

families had yearly household incomes greater than Yuan 30,000 (= US $3,615). Around

70% of participants had three family members residing in their households. Most

participants had either a high school diploma or a college degree. Furthermore, the sub­

sample in each city represented the whole city’s demographic characteristics to some

degree (Beijing Center for Planning Development of Enterprises in Depth, 1996; Blue

Bridge Enterprises, 1996; Guo & Liu, 1997; Shanghai Municipal Information Office,

1998). So the sampling strategy applied in this study reached expectations in terms of

representativeness. When the response rate was concerned, this sampling strategy also turned out to be successful. Data collection lasted six weeks, two weeks in each city. A total of 2,771 questionnaires were returned and among them 2,017 were usable. Thus, the returned rate was 92.4% and the usable rate was 67.2%.

I encountered different problems with data collection in each city. Shanghai was the easiest place to carry out the survey; I did not have many difficulties there and

197 obtained the highest return and usable rates there. Shanghai has the longest history of

international trade and business with western countries and its residents are familiar with

and respect western culture (Jiang, 1998). Additionally, participants from Shanghai had

the highest average income, so they may have been more interested in the topic of US-

made clothing in the study.

Different from residents in Shanghai, those in Guangzhou were not as interested

in participating in this research and they were less knowledgeable about how to fill out

surveys. The development of Guangzhou started much later than Shanghai, and the city

does not yet have well-developed trade and business systems. Residents there may not be

familiar with western ideas and products yet. Therefore, the most difficulties came from

the residents of Guangzhou, the return rate was lowest, while the number of unusable

questionnaires was highest there.

The return and usable rates of questionnaires from Beijing were between those

from Shanghai and Guangzhou. Being residents in the capital of China, citizens of

Beijing are likely more familiar with western ideas and products than those in

Guangzhou. However, residents of Beijing may not respect and admire western ideas

and products as much as residents of Shanghai. Although they were knowledgeable

about how to fill out the survey, they may not be so interested in the topic of US-made

clothing in the research as residents in Shanghai.

The participants in both Beijing and Shanghai liked to write comments on the questionnaire, whereas those in Guangzhou had fewer comments. When the obtained comments were examined, participants in Shanghai often questioned when more US-

198 made clothing would be available in the market for their purchase, while those in Beijing had more comments on the questionnaire design and opinions on the research per se. In sum, surveying consumers in China is a very complex project due to the different situations in the surveyed locations. Obtaining participants through the education system, as was applied in this study, is a reasonable strategy for data collection in China.

Summarv of Results

Attitudes toward US-made Clothing and China-made Clothing

Seven hypotheses were developed to investigate Chinese consumers’ attitudes toward US-made and China-made clothing. The first two hypotheses, HI and H2, tested whether Chinese consumers cared about country of origin of clothing, the corresponding answers were prerequisite for further investigation.

HI. Importance of country of origin (US) affects Chinese consumers’ attitudes

toward purchasing US-made clothing.

H2. Importance of country of origin (China) affects Chinese consumers’

attitudes toward purchasing China-made clothing.

Simple regression was used to test these hypotheses, in which the evaluation of importance of country of origin of clothing was the independent variable and attitude toward purchasing clothing was the dependent variable. The findings indicated that country of origin was related to Chinese consumers’ attitudes toward purchasing clothing.

Both HI and H2 were supported. Much evidence has been provided by previous studies showing that the country of origin has a substantial effect on consumers’ attitudes toward products (e.g., Cheung & Denton, 1995; Dickerson, 1982; Gaedeke, 1973; Okechuku,

199 1994). Specific to Chinese consumers, country of origin has been found to be significantly related to their attitudes toward products (King & McDaniel, 1989; LaTour

& Henthome, 1990). This study answers the question of the relationship between country o f origin and Chinese consumers’ attitudes toward purchasing products. Chinese consumers’ attitudes toward purchasing clothing products are associated with the importance they place on country of origin. The more important a particular country of origin is to Chinese consumers, the more positive their attitudes toward purchasing the products of that country.

The third hypothesis compared Chinese consumers’ attitudes (a) toward US-made and China-made clothing, and (b) toward purchasing US-made and China-made clothing.

H3. Chinese consumers have more positive attitudes toward

(a) US-made clothing than China-made clothing;

(b) purchasing US-made clothing than purchasing China-made clothing.

Paired-sample t tests were used to test these hypotheses. The findings show that

Chinese consumers had opposite attitudes toward US-made c l o t h i n gand p u r c h a s i n US- g made clothing. Although their attitudes toward US-made clothing were more positive than toward China-made clothing, their attitudes toward purchasing US-made clothing were more negative than toward purchasing China-made clothing. H3 (a) was supported, while H3 (b) was not.

The finding from H3 (a) is consistent with previous studies, which is that consumers in developing countries tend to evaluate foreign products from developed countries more positively than domestic products (Hu, 1994; LaTour & Henthome, 1990;

200 Tan & Farley, 1987). However, H3 (b) was rejected, which could imply that there is not always a close relationship between attitudes toward objects and attitudes toward buying these same objects. This finding supports Ryan and Bonfield (1975)’s proposition, that although some products have many good attributes, consumers do not always believe that purchasing those products would definitely lead to positive outcomes. There are several factors that can influence attitudes toward purchasing once the products are favorably evaluated. One such factor is perceived affordability (Warshaw, 1980). That is, if a

Chinese consumer has positive attitudes toward US-made clothing, but cannot afford or does not perceive that s/he can afford the clothing, s/he may have negative attitudes toward purchasing.

Personal cultural preference, the variable proposed in this study to explain

Chinese consumers’ attitudes toward US-made and China-made clothing, was investigated when H4 and H5 were tested.

H4. Chinese consumers’ personal cultural preferences affect their attitudes

toward US-made clothing.

HS. Chinese consumers’ personal cultural preferences affect their attitudes

toward China-made clothing.

Simple regression was used to test H4 and H5. The attitude toward clothing was the dependent variable and personal cultural preference was the independent variable using both the Products and Events Measure and Values and Norms Measure. The findings indicate that Chinese consumers’ personal cultural preference affects their attitudes toward US-made and China-made clothing regardless of the measurement of

201 personal cultural preference. Both H4 and H5 were supported. Consumers’ attitudes toward foreign and domestic products are not only influenced by technological development in that country and the national stereotype of that country (Bilkey & Nes,

1982; Kaynak & Cavusgil, 1983; Maheswaran, 1994; Nagashima, 1977; Papadopoulos &

Heslop, 1993), but are also related to consumers’ personal cultural preference. The findings from H4 and H5 are consistent with the theory of Cultural Economics

(Brinkman, 1981) and the Diffusion of Innovations theory (Rogers, 1995). That is, when a new product is compatible with consumers’ personal cultural beliefs and preferences, the consumers’ attitudes toward the product can be positive. In contrast, when the compatibility between the new product and the consumers’ cultural beliefs and preferences does not occur, negative attitudes toward the product may be held by the consumers.

If personal cultural preference is related to consumers’ attitudes toward products, is there a significant difference between Chinese consumers’ attitudes toward US-made clothing and attitudes toward China-made clothing when the consumers prefer a certain culture? H6 and H7 were developed as follows:

H6. Chinese consumers whose personal cultural preferences favor Chinese

culture have more positive attitudes toward China-made clothing than US-

made clothing.

H7. Chinese consumers whose personal cultural preferences favor US culture

have more positive attitudes toward US-made clothing than China-made

clothing.

202 A 3-way split was used to divide the participants into three groups in terms of

their personal cultural preference. The China Group was used to test H6, and the US

Group was used to test H7 with paired-sample t tests. When personal cultural preference

was measured by the Products and Events Measure, those Chinese consumers who preferred Chinese culture (n = 80) had more positive attitudes toward China-made

clothing than US-made clothing and those who favored US culture (n = 442) had more positive attitudes toward US-made clothing than toward China-made clothing. However,

when personal cultural preference was measured by the Values and Events Measure, the

China Group (n = 1129) had more positive attitudes toward US-made clothing than toward China-made clothing, and the Non-China Group (n = 92) did not have significant differences between their attitudes toward US-made clothing and China-made clothing.

So H6 and H7 were only partially supported.

The reason for failure to support H6 and H7 with the Values and Norms Measure of personal cultural preference may lie with the measurement. Different from the

Products and Events Measure, where both Chinese Products and Events and US Products and Events were considered, the Values and Norms Measure only included Chinese

Values and Norms. The participants could only be identified to the extent that they accepted, or did not accept Chinese culture. It carmot be assumed that lower scores on the Chinese Values and Norms Measure represent a preference for US culture. Although

Chinese culture and US culture are inconsistent from many perspectives, the values and norms under these two cultures are not always contradictory to each other. Therefore, the participants in the China Group may not only favor Chinese culture, but also favor US

203 culture. If they preferred US cultural values and norms to Chinese culture, they may

have more positive attitudes toward US-made clothing than toward China-made clothing.

For those who did not favor Chinese culture, they conceivably may not favor US culture

either, so there would not necessarily be a significant difference between their attitudes

toward US-made clothing and China-made clothing. Therefore, the US cultural values

and norms need to be included to measure personal cultural preference with the Values

and Norms Measure for later research.

The Fishbein Behavioral Intention Model

Another five hypotheses were developed to test and extend the Fishbein

Behavioral Intention Model. First, attitude toward clothing and attitude toward purchasing clothing were investigated in terms of their explanation of behavioral intention. H8 was developed as follows:

H8. Attitudes toward purchasing clothing explain more variation in Chinese

consumers’ clothing purchasing intentions than attitudes toward clothing.

Simple regression and J-tests were used. Purchasing intention was the dependent variable, and either attitude toward clothing or attitude toward purchasing clothing was the independent variable. H8 was supported, showing that Chinese consumers’ attitudes toward p u r c h a s i n US-made g clothing significantly explained 48.8% more of the variation in purchasing intentions than their attitudes toward US-made clothing. Their attitudes toward purchasing China-made clothing explained 31.7% more variation in purchasing intentions than attitudes toward China-made clothing. These findings are consistent with previous studies (Dickson & Littrell, 1997; Wilson et al., 1975).

204 Warshaw (1980) suggests that attitudes toward products are influenced only by

the functional performance, while attitudes toward owning the products are affected by

affordability and accessibility as well. The extra amount of variation explained by

attitudes toward purchasing clothing may be related to affordability and accessibility of

US-made clothing for Chinese consumers. Perhaps the 48.8% more variation accounted

for in terms of US-made clothing and the 31.7% more variation explained in terms of

China-made clothing are due to consumers’ views on the affordability and accessibility of

the clothing. It seems that the more difficult to afford and the more impossible to access

the clothing, the more divergence there is between attitudes toward products and attitudes

toward purchasing the products in terms of explaining purchasing intentions.

Therefore, regarding the research on purchasing intentions for clothing, when the

research goals are focused on predicting purchasing intentions for clothing, attitudes

toward purchasing clothing are more appropriate to be used than attitudes toward

clothing. However, if the research goals are associated with clothing itself, such as

clothing attributes, attitudes toward clothing can provide more information and insight

than attitudes toward purchasing clothing in terms of purchasing intentions for clothing.

Which variable is appropriate to be studied depends on the various research goals.

H9 and HIO were associated with attitudes toward purchasing clothing and subjective norms, and also draw in personal cultural preferences. Particularly, the

following two hypotheses were developed:

205 H9. Subjective norms explain more variation in Chinese consumers’ clothing

purchasing intentions than attitudes toward behavior tor those whose

personal cultural preferences are Chinese culture.

HIO. Attitudes toward behavior explain more variation in Chinese consumers’

clothing purchasing intentions than subjective norms for those whose

personal cultural preferences are US culture.

Simple regressions were used to test H9 and HIO. Purchasing intention was the

dependent variable and either attitude toward purchasing clothing or subjective norm was

the independent variable. The findings imply that Chinese consumers’ attitudes toward purchasing clothing explain more variation than subjective norms no matter which culture they prefer. H9 was rejected and HIO was supported. These findings are not consistent with a previous study involving consumers in an eastern culture. Lee and

Green (1991) found that attitudes toward behavior were more important than subjective

norms in explaining purchasing intentions among US consumers whereas subjective norms made a more significant contribution to purchasing intentions among Korean consumers. They further suggested that the collectivist characteristics of Korean culture and individualist characteristics of US culture could explain the difference. The cultural

influences on attitudes toward behavior and subjective norms found in Lee and Green’s study (1991) were not supported in this study.

The main explanation for the inconsistency between this study’s findings and Lee and Green’s (1991) results may lie in the current Chinese situation. As discussed in

Chapter 1, there has been only a small amount of US-made clothing exported into the

206 Chinese market. Due to the shortage of US-made clothing, Chinese consumers are

unlikely to discuss purchasing US-made clothing or share their experience and opinions

regarding purchasing US-made clothing. Although those consumers who prefer Chinese culture, a collectivist culture, care about others’ opinions, they may have no opinions

regarding purchasing US-made clothing to follow if others seldom discuss purchasing

US-made clothing.

If this is true, however, why did those participants who favor Chinese culture

form their purchasing intentions for China-made clothing mainly based on attitudes

toward purchasing rather than subjective norms? A reason proposed by Warshaw (1980)

might be able to provide explanation, which is that important referents, such as spouse,

friends, or colleagues may hold conflicting opinions. Under this circumstance, the confusion could make people rely less on subjective norms (Warshaw, 1980). It is likely that motivation to comply with salient referents’ opinions under collectivist cultures is greater than that under individualist cultures. However, normative beliefs, that reflect salient referents’ opinions on the behavior, may be positive in term of purchasing US- made clothing if the salient referents favor US culture or be positive in term of purchasing China-made clothing if they favor Chinese culture. Although Chinese consumers may share their opinions of purchasing China-made clothing with each other, the diversity of their normative beliefs on purchasing China-made clothing might decrease the effects of subjective norms on their purchasing intentions for China-made clothing. So the few normative beliefs regarding purchasing US-made clothing and the

207 diversity of normative beliefs about purchasing China-made clothing may depress the

influence of subjective norms on Chinese consumers’ purchasing intentions.

HI 1 investigated attitudinal and normative structures and was developed as

follows:

Hll. Multidimensional attitudinal structures and normative structures explain

more variation in Chinese consumers’ clothing purchasing intentions than

unidimensional attitudes and norms.

Principal components factor analysis was conducted followed by multiple regression to test Hll. After factor analysis, only a multidimensional attitudinal structure was obtained for US-made clothing. The normative structure for US-made clothing, and both attitudinal and normative structures for China-made clothing, were only uni dimensional. Regarding China-made clothing, all eleven attributes, including durability, price, workmanship, care, style, fabric, comfort, quality, color, fit, and brand, were viewed and evaluated as one group. When US-made clothing was investigated, brand, style, and color were grouped as Factor 1, and price and care were included in

Factor 2. The other attributes cross loaded but had high factor loadings.

Availability and affordability may also explain these differences. China-made clothing is comprehensively available in the Chinese market and it has a large diversity of clothing attributes. Then it is possible for Chinese consumers to care about all kinds of clothing attributes. Additionally, China-made clothing is affordable for Chinese consumers, which makes Chinese consumers have the economic ability to care about a variety of attributes when purchasing China-made clothing. In contrast, there is only a

208 small amount of US-made clothing available in the Chinese market and it may not be diverse in terms of different clothing attributes. Furthermore, the high prices of US-made clothing may make it impossible for Chinese consumers to consider every attribute of clothing when purchasing US-made clothing. They have to choose the most important clothing attributes and spend money on purchasing US-made clothing that matches their requirements for those attributes. Therefore, five out of eleven clothing attributes loaded on two factors in term of US-made clothing: Factor I was related to social image including style, color, and brand, and Factor 2 was associated with value including price and care. In the multidimensional attitudinal structure, both factors were significantly positively related to purchasing intentions for US-made clothing. That is, the more fashionable the style and color, the more famous the brand, the more reasonably priced, and the easier to care for, the stronger the intentions to purchase US-made clothing.

Multidimensional normative structures for both US-made and China-made clothing were not obtained, perhaps because only three salient referents were included in the measure.

Although there was no way to test multidimensionality across all four structures, the attitudinal stmcture for US-made clothing still provided support for multidimensionality as compared to unidimensionality at least with US-made clothing.

Thus, HI 1 was partially supported.

H12 was developed as follows to extend the Fishbein Behavioral Intention Model.

H12. Personal cultural preference affects Chinese consumers’ clothing

purchasing intentions.

209 Multiple regression and an F-tests were applied to test H I2. Purchasing intention was the dependent variable. Attitudes toward purchasing clothing and subjective norms were independent variables in Model 1 and besides these two independent variables,

Model 2 included personal cultural preference as the third independent variable. The findings indicated that in most cases personal cultural preference significantly contributed to purchasing intentions for both US-made and China-made clothing. H12 was partially supported. However, compared with attitudes toward purchasing clothing, the effects of personal cultural preference on purchasing intentions were quite small. In other words, attitudes toward purchasing clothing were still the biggest influence on purchasing intentions.

While Chinese consumers purchasing intentions for US-made clothing were significantly explained by personal cultural preference with both the Products and Events and Values and Norms Measures, their purchasing intentions for China-made clothing were only significantly explained by personal cultural preference measured with the

Values and Norms Measure. Familiarity with the products could explain this difference.

Because it is likely that Chinese consumers are not so familiar with US-made clothing due to the small amount of US-made clothing available in the Chinese market, they may have to rely on their experience with other US-made products, such as US movies and drinks, when forming their purchasing intentions for US-made clothing. So Chinese consumers’ personal cultural preference as measured by Products and Events Measure significantly explained purchasing intentions for US-made clothing. In contrast, Chinese consumers are very familiar with China-made clothing, so they do not need to rely on

210 their assessment of other China-made products to form their purchasing intentions for the clothing. Thus, their personal cultural preference, as measured by the Products and

Events measure, did not significantly contribute to purchasing intentions for China-made clothing.

Conclusions

Based on the findings and the corresponding discussions, three major conclusions can be drawn from the study.

The Chinese Market is an Attractive Market for US-made Clothing

First of all, as a whole Chinese consumers have positive attitudes toward US- made clothing. They even hold more positive attitudes toward US-made clothing than

China-made clothing. When two pairs o f pants were compared, one from the US and the other firom China, Chinese consumers evaluated the US-made pants more positively than the China-made pants. This finding indicates potential attractiveness and competitive power for US-made clothing in the Chinese market as I assume that the consumers would compare other clothing products from the two countries in a similar way.

But if US-made clothing is imported into the Chinese market, will Chinese consumers choose to piuchase it over China-made clothing? The findings in this study indicate that Chinese consumers have more positive attitudes toward purchasing China- made clothing than toward purchasing US-made clothing. So Chinese consumers’ positive attitudes toward US-made clothing itself can not currently guarantee successful sales in the Chinese market. The main reason to explain the different trends between

211 Chinese consumers’ attitudes toward US-made clothing (Ao) and attitudes toward

purchasing US-made clothing (Ab) may lie in the perceived affordability of US-made

clothing. Overall, the Chinese market is very price sensitive (Graham & Kilduff, 1994).

When the prices of US-made clothing are set much higher than those for China-made

clothing, Chinese consumers’ concern with prices become more important. That is why

when Chinese consumers form their attitudes toward US-made clothing, price and care, a

type of value, was one attitudinal dimension influencing their purchasing intentions. In

other words, reasonable price and ease of care were concerns for Chinese consumers in

term of US-made clothing. Even if Chinese consumers hold positive attitudes toward

US-made clothing due to their satisfaction with US-made clothing’s quality, style, color,

workmanship, price, care, or other attributes, their attitudes toward purchasing US-made

clothing can be negative if they do not perceive they can afford it. Given this, is

exporting US-made clothing to the Chinese market an appropriate and feasible strategy

for US manufacturers?

It has been estimated that once income per person in China exceeds US $1,000 per year, Chinese consumers will be able to afford imported clothing from developed countries (Graham & Kilduff, 1994). Although this earnings figure seems low, the corresponding real income and purchasing power are greater due to the low living costs and a very large amount of income that is uncounted (Graham & Kilduff, 1994). The sample in this study shows that at least 40% of the participants have household incomes of over Yuan 30,000, which equals around US $3,600. At least 70% of the participants have three family members. Then at least 40% of residents across these three cities has

212 the average income per capita o f more than US $1,200. Furthermore, with the continuous

development of the Chinese economy, the average income per capita in China is

increasing. So the Chinese market is becoming an attractive market for importeù clothing

from developed countries including that made in the US.

Consumers’ Personal Cultural Preferences are

Associated with Their Attitudes toward Products

The second conclusion drawn from the study is associated with reasons why

Chinese consumers have more positive attitudes toward US-made clothing than toward

China-made clothing. Particularly, personal cultural preference is significantly related to

Chinese consumers’ attitudes toward clothing. If segmenting Chinese consumers into

two groups in terms of personal cultural preference, those who prefer US culture have

significantly more positive attitudes toward US-made clothing. In contrast, those who

favor Chinese culture tend to hold significantly more positive attitudes toward China-

made clothing. These findings indicate the cultural influence on consumers’ attitude

formation. When consumers develop their attitudes toward clothing, or other types of cultural products, the objective characteristics and attributes of the particular products are not the only factors which influence their attitudes. Consumers’ subjective cultural beliefs and preferences also have significant influences and are especially important when both imported and domestic products are available. When the cultural meanings expressed by the products are consistent with consumers’ cultural beliefs, consumers are more likely to accept these products. If this consistency does not exist, the degree of acceptance may decrease.

213 McCracken (1986) states that culture constitutes the phenomenal world in two ways. First, culture works as the “lens” through which individuals view phenomena.

Second, culture serves as the “blueprint” for human activity. As a lens, culture determines how the world is seen and understood. As a blueprint, it determines how the world is fashioned by human effort (McCracken, 1986). From a macro perspective, the entire world is viewed, explained, understood, formed, and developed by culture to some degree. For consumer behavior, a more micro and specific activity, cultural functions are also critical. This study provides empirical support to McCracken’s cultural propositions by investigating Chinese consumers’ attitudes toward US-made clothing and China-made clothing. Furthermore, this study also supports the proposition suggested by the theory of

Cultural Economics and the Diffusion of Innovations theory, which is that the prerequisite condition for acceptance and diffusion of an innovation, such as US-made clothing for Chinese consumers, is the compatibility between the innovation and cultural beliefs.

Consumers’ Personal Cultural Preferences are

Associated with Their Purchasing Intentions

The third conclusion drawn from this study is related to the Fishbein Behavioral

Intention Model. According to the Fishbein Behavioral Intention Model, people’s social behaviors are explained by two components. One influence is from an individual’s personal beliefs and evaluations regarding the behavior and the other influence comes from the social and normative beliefs regarding the behavior. In previous studies of purchasing clothing, consumers’ purchasing intentions for clothing were influenced by

214 their attitudes toward purchasing clothing and subjective norms regarding purchasing clothing. However, this study did not find a significant influence of subjective norms on purchasing intentions for clothing, but found another factor which was significantly associated with consumers’ purchasing intentions, consumers’ personal cultural preference. If consumers’ cultural preferences are consistent with the cultural meanings expressed by the products, their purchasing intentions for the products are significantly increased. If the consistency does not exist, consumers’ purchasing intentions for the products are significantly decreased.

For example, an individual who prefers US culture wants to purchase and wear clothing that matches and expresses her or his cultiual beliefs. Thus the attributes of

China-made clothing, such as “made in China”, Chinese brand names, and popular

Chinese styles and colors, are inconsistent with her or his cultural preference. Finally the purchasing intentions for this piece o f China-made clothing will decrease and the final behavior will be negatively influenced. If an individual who prefers Chinese culture wants to purchase and wear clothing that matches and expresses her or his cultural beliefs, the attributes of China-made clothing, such as “made in China”, Chinese brand names, and popular Chinese styles and colors, are consistent with her or his Chinese cultural beliefs. Then the purchasing intentions for the China-made clothing will increase and the final behavior will be positively influenced.

Therefore, by investigating personal cultiual preference, this study shows that attitudes toward behavior and subjective norms are not always the only two components influencing behavioral intentions. Although the improvement in predicting purchasing

215 intentions contributed by personal cultural preference is much less than attitudes toward purchasing, statistical tests indicate that personal cultural preference makes a significant contribution.

Contributions

Three groups of contributions are made with this study: (I) theoretical, (2) methodological, and (3) practical.

Where theoretical contributions are concerned, the Fishbein Behavioral Intention

Model was tested in this study for its cross-cultural applicability. Although the Fishbein

Behavioral Intention Model was originated and developed in the US, it does provide explanations for Chinese consumers’ purchasing intentions for US-made and China-made clothing. Along with its application to Korean consumers (Lee & Green, 1991), this study provides further cross-cultural validity for the Fishbein Behavioral Intention

Model.

More importantly, the Fishbein Behavioral Intention Model was extended in this study by adding personal cultural preference to the model. Several previous studies have questioned whether attitudes toward behavior and subjective norms are the only two factors affecting behavioral intentions (e.g., Albarracin et al., 1998; Ajzen, 1991;

Bandura, 1977; McCaul et al., 1988). This study examined this question from a cultural perspective and the significant relationship between consumers’ personal cultural preferences and their purchasing intentions provides the answer. Therefore, testing and

2 1 6 extending the Fishbein Behavioral Intention Model in this study brings theoretical contributions.

Regarding methodological contributions, two measures of personal cultural preference were investigated and applied in this study. The Products and Events and

Values and Norms Measures showed reasonable reliability and validity (face and construct validity). However, these two measures resulted in different groups of consumers who favored US culture, who did not favor either US culture or Chinese culture, and who favored Chinese culture. Furthermore, H6 and H7 were supported when personal cultural preference was measured by the Products and Events Measure, while they were rejected when the Values and Norms were used. When the Products and

Events Measure was used, both Chinese Products and Events and US Products and

Events were considered and the difference between the two summations from the two measures described personal cultural preference. So the two anchors of personal cultural preference are preference for Chinese culture versus preference for US culture. However, consideration of only Chinese values and norms was included in the Values and Norms.

The anchors of personal cultural preference are greater or lesser preference for Chinese culture. Although many US cultural values and norms are inconsistent with Chinese cultural values and norms, they are not exactly contradictory to each other, as discussed in Chapter 3. So those participants who did not favor Chinese cultural values and norms did not definitely favor the US cultiural values and norms. It seems that in order to identify participants who favor the US culture, the US cultural values and norms must be

217 included in the Values and Norms Measure. This finding provides valuable information for further improvement of the measure of personal cultural preference from the perspective of cultural values and norms.

Another methodological contribution made in this study is associated with conducting research in China. The Chinese market is becoming more and more attractive for the rest of the world, especially for western countries (King & McDaniel, 1989). The shortage of information about this market requires much research. However, strategies for conducting studies in China still need to be developed and refined. In this study, a large-size survey was successfully administered to a representative group of urban

Chinese consumers. Distributing questionnaires throughout the Chinese educational system, which was applied for the first time in this study, was successful in terms of the high response rate and representativeness. Thus, the survey method used in this study offers a way to conduct research in China.

With respect to practical contributions, the findings obtained in this study can benefit US clothing manufacturers and international trade in US clothing. The Chinese market is an attractive market for US-made clothing because Chinese consumers have positive attitudes toward US-made clothing. With the increase o f their average income,

US-made clothing is becoming affordable for more and more Chinese consumers. From this study, it seems that it is time for the US to increase clothing exports into China.

218 Implications for Clothing Manufacturers

What marketing strategies might be useful when entering the Chinese market?

Several suggestions are provided based on results of this study. First, this study found that besides clothing attributes, consumers’ cultural beliefs also significantly influence their attitudes toward clothing and purchasing intentions for clothing. So encouraging more Chinese consumers to accept and prefer US culture is an effective way to build US- made clothing purchases. The most effective way may be to use media advertising, because Chinese consumers are becoming more and more exposed to advertisements and rely on advertisements as a guide to select products (Xu, 1992). Currently, there are

1,076 newspapers, 2,197 magazines, 1,211 radio and 747 television stations that run advertisements in China. In addition to those channels, nearly a quarter of a million billboards and street signs are available to carry advertisements (Xu, 1992).

Advertisements can expose US culture to more Chinese, and as a result more Chinese consumers may have US culture as their personal cultural preference. Advertisements should probably be not only relevant to US-made clothing, but also to other US cultural products and events, as favorable attitudes about a variety of US products influence consumer’s purchasing intentions.

The findings from this study indicate that major urban centers are good places to introduce US-made clothing. The average income of residents there make US-made clothing affordable for many of them and their attitudes toward US-made clothing are more positive than toward China-made clothing. Due to the large geographic area of

China, it is neither possible nor feasible to implement a nationwide marketing strategy.

219 Rather, starting with regional media that serve large cities, such as Beijing, Shanghai, and

Guangzhou, will be a good strategy. One successful example of this strategy is S.C.

Johnson and Son, Inc.’s joint venture, which first introduced Agree shampoo in Shanghai in 1988, the shampoo has now become popular nationwide (Xu, 1992).

The next business strategy is to segment Chinese consumers. Due to the large population in China, targeting all consumers there is impossible. Schmitt (1997) suggested that there were three ways to segment Chinese consumers: (1) geographic segmentation, (2) demographic segmentation, and (3) psychographics and lifestyle segmentation. The findings fi-om this study provide suggestions to segment Chinese consumers from these three perspectives.

Regarding geographic areas, the findings fi’om this study imply that Chinese urban consumers have positive attitudes toward US-made clothing as a whole, at least in large cities, such as Beijing, Shanghai, and Guangzhou. This is consistent with Schmitt’s

(1997) findings. Thirty-four thousand participants were interviewed in 1994 by Gallup, the survey provided a national picture of Chinese consumers. The findings indicated that urban consumers had much higher brand-name awareness and recognition of foreign brands than rural consumers and they were more likely to see and accept advertisements before purchase (Schmitt, 1997). The most rapid market development has occurred in

Shanghai, Beijing, Guangzhou, and other cities in the Northeast area of China, where over 500 million consumers earn about twice as much per capita as the inland areas

(Graham & Kilduff, 1994).

220 With respect to demographics, age, sex, and income were emphasized by Schmitt

(1997), who found that yoimg, more-affluent and better-educated consumers were more

likely to try new products and foreign products than old, less-affluent and less-educated

consumers. Another way to segment Chinese consumers from a demographic perspective was suggested by Ariga et al. (1997). They divided most Chinese consumers into three age groups: (1) Generation I (45-59 years old); (2) Generation II (30-44 years old); and

(3) Generation III (18-29 years old), which were developed by their outcome from the

Cultural Revolution. Generation I consumers had obtained a good education and have good social status. Generation II consumers have lost the chance to be well educated and many of them are working for state enterprises with low incomes. They spend their income on their only child (there is one-child plan in China). Consumers in Generation in often have a good educational background and many receive a good income by working in foreign-invested or joint-venture firms. Most of them are single or have just married. There are several unique characteristics of Generation HI regarding their consumption. First, they believe that foreign products act as a medium though which western culture can be experienced, which they respect. Second, they are attracted to well-known brand names, especially foreign brand names. They are proud of owning products with well-known brand names. Third, they feel a maximum amoimt of happiness when pursing the newest products (Ariga et al., 1997). Although in this study.

Generation HI was not included in the final sample, which is one limitation of this study, investigating Generation I and H still provides valuable insight. If consumers in

Generation I and II have positive attitudes toward US-made clothing, those in Generation

221 m might have more positive attitudes toward US-made clothing than Generation I and II based on Ariga et al.’s propositions.

When pyschographics and lifestyles are concerned, this study provides a way to segment consumers based on their personal cultural preferences because with different personal cultural preferences, Chinese consumers develop different attitudes toward US- made and China-made clothing and form various purchasing intentions for US-made and

China-made clothing.

Future Studies

There are several ideas for future studies that can be developed from this research.

First of all, how perceived affordability affects attitudes toward purchasing products or purchasing intentions is worth studying. Perceptions of affordability refer to whether a person perceives that s/he can or cannot afford the products (Notani, 1997). The findings from this study show an inconsistency between consumers’ attitudes toward purchasing clothing and attitudes toward clothing. Warshaw (1980) suggests that perceived affordability is one factor that can influence attitudes toward purchasing once the products are favorably evaluated. However, Notani (1997) investigated whether perceptions of affordability contributed to purchasing intentions. By doing a survey among US college students, the inclusion of affordability perceptions into the Fishbein

Behavioral Intention Model increased variation explained in purchasing intentions over and above that explained by attitudes toward purchasing products (Ab) and subjective norms (SN) (Notani, 1997). This implies that besides possessing a positive attitude

222 toward purchasing products and social pressures to purchase the products, perceptions of

whether one feels s/he can afford is important for explaining more variation in purchasing

intentions.

Perceived affordability, which was not measured in this study, might be a reason

explaining some key findings obtained in this study. In other words, it may influence

both attitudes toward purchasing products and purchasing intentions for products. This is

consistent with Meyer’s (1982) proposition, which is that consiuner researchers need to

understand and predict consumer purchasing intentions not only based on psychological

preferences, but also fi’om an economic perspective in terms of cost and price effects on

consumers’ formation of purchasing intentions. One way to carry out consumer research

from an economic perspective is to measure perceived affordability, attitudes toward

purchasing product, and purchasing intentions. Then regression analysis can provide

necessary answer to this question.

The second topic for future research would be to further improve the measure of

personal cultural preference. This study measured personal cultural preference by

comparing two groups of products and events, but did not compare two groups of cultural

values and norms. The Products and Events Measure turned out to be more effective than

the Values and Norms Measure. If the Values and Norms Measure is carried out in the

same way as the Products and Events Measme, further comparison between the two

measures of personal cultural preference can be made.

This study found that Chinese consumers’ purchasing intentions for US-made clothing (BI) were influenced by their attitudes toward purchasing US-made clothing

223 (Ab) and personal cultural preferences (PCP), while subjective norms (SN) did not affect their purchasing intentions. Besides, when the findings were dia^ussed above, perceived affordability (PA) was proposed due to its possible influence on purchasing intentions. In contrast, the Fishbein Behavioral Intention Model suggests that attitudes toward purchasing products (Ab) and subjective norms (SN) are the only two components to affect purchasing intentions. Then the next topic is to study when, under what kind of conditions, and how attitudes toward purchasing products (Ab), subjective norms (SN), personal cultural preference (PCP), and perceived affordability (PA) affect purchasing intentions (BI). The corresponding findings can further provide valuable insights to the

Fishbein Behavioral Intention Model.

The findings obtained from this study indicate that consumers’ personal cultural preferences affect their attitudes toward clothing and purchasing intentions for clothing.

Then when personal cultural preference influences attitudes toward products (Ao) and purchasing intentions (BI) needs further investigation. According to the discussion in

Chapter 2, personal cultural preference is one way to measure acculturation. So only when acculturation occurs, can personal cultural preference make sense. In other words, the movement of people fi’om one culture to another culture or the movement of culture firom one location to another location is one prerequisite for personal cultural preference.

When multiple cultures exist simultaneously in the situation, consumers’ personal cultural preference might influence their attitudes toward products and purchasing intentions. So cultural variety forms the first prerequisite condition.

224 Another condition for personal cultural preference’s influence on attitudes toward

products and purchasing intentions might come from products themselves. That is, if the

products are not as culture-oriented as clothing, can personal cultural preference affect

consumers’ attitudes toward the products and purchasing intentions for the products?

The product investigated in this study was clothing, which is very culture-related.

Generally, clothing expresses some cultural meaning or reflects some cultural norms. So

when the culture expressed by the clothing is consistent with consumers’ personal cultural preference, they have positive attitudes toward the clothing and purchasing

intentions for the clothing. If another type of product, such as a computer that is less related to culture, is investigated, will personal cultural preference affect attitudes toward the product and purchasing intentions for the product? In other words, can the function of personal cultural preference be generalized to other products? If the types of products are not associated with the effects of personal cultural preference on purchasing intention for the products, the reliability of the extension of the Fishbein Behavioral Intention

Model suggested in this study can be achieved. Thus, the two factors, cultural variety and product type, which may affect the personal cultural preference’s influence on attitudes toward products and purchasing intentions for the products, need further investigation.

Another topic for future research is to further investigate Chinese consumers in terms of their evaluations of foreign brand names. In this study, clothing “made in US” versus clothing “made in China” were compared and the findings imply that Chinese consumers’ attitudes toward US-made clothing are positive. However, US-made clothing

225 is fairly rare, the largest share of the worlds’ clothing production occurs outside the US.

If a piece of clothing is made in China but carries a US brand name, how is it perceived by Chinese consumers? The answers to this question can make both practical and theoretical contributions. From the practical perspective, if Chinese consumers have more positive attitudes toward China-made clothing with a US brand name than toward

China-made clothing with a Chinese brand name, the price issue may be solved due to the cheaper labor in China than in the US. US clothing manufacturers could rely on the

Chinese manufacturers by having their brand name goods assembled in China. From a theoretical perspective, in addition to country of origin, brand names should be studied in terms of consumers’ attitudes toward products, toward purchasing products, and their purchasing intentions.

Finally, experimental design is needed in future study to further test HI, H2, H4,

H5, and HI2. Survey research methods were applied in this study to examine the relationship between importance of country of origin and consumers’ attitudes toward purchasing clothing (HI and H2), the relationship between personal cultural preference and consumers’ attitudes toward clothing (H4 and H5), and the relationship between personal cultural preference and consumers’ purchasing intentions for clothing (HI2).

Manipulations with experimental design could provide direct evidence to support these hypotheses.

226 REFERENCES

Abraham-Murali, L., & Littrell, M. A. (1995). Consumers’ conceptualization of apparel attributes. Clothing and Textiles Research Journal. 13('21. 65-74.

Alban'acin, D., Fishbein, M., & Middlestadt, S. (1998). Generalizing behavioral findings across times, samples, and measures: A study of condom use. Journal of Applied Social Psychology. 28(81. 657-674.

Ajzen, 1. (1991). The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes. 50. 179-211.

Ajzen, I., & Fishbein, M. (1980). Understanding attitudes and predicting social behavior. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, Inc.

Anderson, T. W., & Cunningham, W. (1972). Gauging foreign product promotion. Journal of Advertising Research. 12fFebruarv). 29-34.

Andrews, J. C., Lysonski, S., & Durvasula, S. (1991). Understanding cross- cultural student perception of advertising in general: Implications for advertising educators and practitioners. Journal of Advertising. 2 0 ( D . 15-28.

Applbaum, K., & Jordt, I. (1996). Notes toward an application of McCracken's cultural categories” for cross-cultural consumer research. Journal of Consumer Research. 23(December), 204-218.

Arbona, C., Flores, C. L., & Novy, D. M. (1995). Cultural awareness and ethnic loyalty: Dimensions of cultural variability among Mexican American college students. Journal of Counseling and Development. 73(61. 610-614.

Ariga, M., Yasue, M., & Wen, G. X. (1997). China’s generation IE: Viable target segment implications for marketing communications. Marketing and Research Todav. 25(1), 17-24.

Bagozzi, R. P. (1981). Attitudes, intentions, and behavior: A test of some key hypotheses. Joumal of Personality and Social Psychology. 4 1 ( 4 ) .607-627.

227 Bagozzi, R. p. (1988). The rebirth of attitude research in marketing. Joumal of the Marketing Research Society. 3 0 .163-195.

Bandura, A. (1977). Social learning theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

Bangsberg, P. T. (1992, May 28). Pepsi to market trademark clothing for new generation of Chinese. Joumal of Commerce and Commercial. 392(27736). 4A.

Bannister, F. D., & Saunders, J. A. (1978). UK consumers’ attitudes towards imports: The measurement of national stereotypes. European Joumal of Marketing. 12. 562-570.

Baumgarten, S. A. (1975). The innovative communicator in the diffusion process. Joumal o f Marketing Research. 12(Febmarvl. 603-605.

Baumgartner, G., & Jolibert, A. (1978). The perception of foreign products in France. Advances in Consumer Research. 5. 603-605.

Beck, L., & Ajzen, I. (1991). Predicting dishonest actions using the theory of planned behavior. Joumal of Research in Personality. 25(31. 285-301.

Beijing Center for Planning Development of Enterprises in Depth (1996). Beiiing window. Retrieved on July 16,1999. From World Wide Web: http://china- windo w. com/beij ing/beij ing/indexe.htm

Berry, J. W. (1983). Acculturation: A comparative analysis of alternative forms. In R. J. Samuda and S. L. Woods (Eds.), Perspective in immigrant and minority education. New York, NY: University Press of America.

Bilkey, W. J., & Nes, E. (1982). Country-of-origin effects on product evaluations. Journal of Intemational Business Studies. 13(Spring/Summerl. 89-99.

Blue Bridge Enterprises (1996). Average Salary in Beiiing. Retrieved on July 16, 1999. From World Wide Web: http://www.welcome-to-china.com/biz/tid/69p.htm

Brannen, M. Y. (1991). Culture as the critical factor in implementing innovation. Business Horizons. 34(6159-67.

Brinkman, R. L. (1981). Cultural economics. Portland: Hapi Press.

Brislin, R. W. (1986). The wording and translation of research instruments. In W. J. Conner and J. W. Berry (Eds.), Field methods in cross-cultural research. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

228 Budd, R. J., North, D., & Spencer, C. P. (1984). Understanding seat-belt use: A test of Rentier and Speckhart’s extension of the “Theory of Reasoned Action”. European Joumal of Social Psychology. 14. 69-78.

Bumkrant, R. E., & Page, T. J. (1988). The structure and antecedents of the normative and attitudinal components of Fishbein’s theory of reasoned action. Journal of Experimental Social Psvcholoev. 24. 66-87.

Bushman, B. J. (1984). Perceived symbols of authority and their influence on compliance. Joumal of Applied Social Psychology. 14. 501-508.

Casselman, M. A., & Damhorst, M. L. (1991). Behavioral intentions and the apparel purchase decision: Testing the Fishbein Model. ITAA Proceeding. 48. 77.

CERNIC (1999). Beiiing - The capital of China. Retrieved July 15, 1999 from the World Wide Web: http://www.edu.cn/beijing/indexsed.html.

Chan, J. (1986). Selling books in China. Publishers Weekly. 230(August 9), 23- 26.

Chang, Y., Bums, L. D., & Noel, C. J. (1996). Attitudinal versus normative influence in the purchase of brand-name casual apparel. Family and Consumer Sciences Research Joumal. 25fll 79-109.

Cheung, W., & Denton, L. (1995). National stereotypes and product evaluations about Japan and the United States: A Hong Kong perspective. Joumal of Intemational Consumer marketing. 5(41. 59-79.

Chinapoint (1998, August 17). China Hong Kong business: Chinese society, culture, nationalism and attitude towards foreigner. Retrieved August 17, 1998 from the World Wide Web: http:// www.chinapoin.com/news/business/asia/china/culture/ confuciansim.htm

Chiu, C. Y., Tsang, S. C., & Yang, C. F. (1988). The role of face situation and attitudinal antecedents in Chinese consumer complaint behavior. The Joumal of Social Psychology. 128(21. 173-180.

Clare, T. O. (1986). The business challenge in China. Vital Speeches of the Day. 53(October 15), 18-20.

Clifford, M. (1993, February 11). Marketing: Making the shoe fit. Far Eastem Economic Review. 156/61 45-46.

Condrell, P. (1991, September/October). Sewing up the China market. China Business Review. 18C5). 46-48.

229 Constantino, R. (1986). Mass culture: Communication and development. Philippine Joumal of Communication. 12.13-26.

Cronbach, L. J. (1970). Essentials of psychological testing. New York: Harper and Row.

Cui, G. (1997). The different faces of the Chinese consumer. The China Business Review. 2 4 ( 4 ) . 34-38.

Cutler, B. D., Javalgi, R. G., & White, D. S. (1995). The westernization of Asian print advertising. Joumal of Intemational Consumer Marketing. 7141. 23-37.

Darden, W. R., & Reynolds, R. D. (1972). Predicting opinion leadership for men’s apparel fashions. Joumal of Marketing Research. I lfAugustl. 324-328.

Darling, J. R., & Wood, V. R. (1990). A longitudinal study comparing perceptions of U.S. and Japanese consumer products in a their/neutral country: Finland 1975 to 1985. Joumal of Intemational Business Studies. 21131. 427-450.

Davis, W. W. (1993). Eastem and westem history, thought and culture. 1600- 1815. Lanham: University Press of America.

DeLong, M. R., Minshall, B., & Lamtz, K. (1987). Predicting consumer response to fashion apparel. Home Economics Research Joumal. 16(21.150-160.

DeJonge, J. O., Vredevoogd, J., & Henry, M. S. (1983-84). Attitudes, practices, and preferences of pesticide users toward protective apparel. Clothing and Textiles Research Joumal. 2. 9-14.

Dickerson, K. G. (1995). Textiles and apparel in the global economy 12"'' ed.). New Jersey: Prentice-Hall Inc.

Dickerson, K. (1982). Imported versus U.S.-produced apparel: Consumer views and buying pattems. Home Economics Research Joumal. 1 OfMarchl. 241-252.

Dickson, M. A. C. (1994). Consumers of ethnic apparel and textile crafts from alternative trading organizations. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Iowa State University, Ames, Iowa.

Dickson, M. A., & Littrell, M. A. (1997). Consumers of clothing from alternative trading organizations: Societal attitudes and purchase evaluative criteria. Clothing and Textiles Research Joumal. 15 (H. 20-33.

Dickson, M. A., & Littrell, M. A. (1996). Socially responsible behaviour: Values and attitudes of the alternative trading organisation consumer. Joumal of Fashion Marketing and Management. 1(11. 50-69. 230 Dickson, P. R., & Miniard, P. W. (1978). A further examination of two laboratory tests of the extended Fishbein Attitude Model. Joumal o f Consumer Research, 4, 261-266.

Dulany, D. E. (1968). Awareness, rules, and prepositional control: A confrontation with S-R behavior theory. In D. Horton and T. Dixon (Eds.), Verbal behavior and general behavior theory fpp.340-3871. New York: Prentice-Hall.

Eckman, M., Damhorst, M. L., & Kadolph, S. J. (1990). Toward a model of the in-store purchase decision process: Consumer use of criteria for evaluating women’s apparel. Clothing and Textiles Research Joumal. 8(21. 13-22.

Emproto, R., & Prince, G. W. (1993). You will take a short joumey and find a Chinese beverage: Others who hope to crow. Beverage World. 112(1553). 8.

Engel, J. P., Blackwell, R. D., & Miniard, P. W. (1993). Consumer behavior (7'*’ ed.). Fort Worth: The Dryden Press.

Fishbein, M. A. (1965). A consideration of beliefs, attitude, and their relationship. In 1. D. Stemer and M. Fishbein (Eds.), Current studies in social psychology (pp. 107-120). NY: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston.

Fishbein, M. A. (1976). Attitude and the prediction of behavior. In M. Fishbein (Ed.), Readings in attitude theory and measurement (pp. 477-492). New York: Wiley.

Fishbein, M., & Ajzen, I. (1975). Belief, attitude, intention, and behavior: An introduction to theory and research. MA: Addison-Wesley.

Gaedeke, R. (1973). Consumer attitudes toward products “made in” developing countries. Joumal of Retailing. 49(2). 13-24.

Garcia, M., & Lega, L. I. (1979). Development of a Cuban ethnic questionnaire. Hispanic Joumal of Behavioral Sciences. 1.247-262.

Gay, P. D. (1997). Production of culture/cultures of production. London: Sage Publication.

Godin, G., Maticka-Tyndale, E., Adrien, A., Manson-Singer, S., Willms, D., & Cappon, P. (1996). Cross-cultural testing of three social cognitive theories: An application to condom use. Joumal of Applied Social Psychology. 26(171. 1556-1586.

Goldenbert, S. (1987). Joint ventures in China. Canadian Business Review. 14(Winter),31-33.

231 Gorsuch, R. L., & Ortberg, J. (1983). Moral obligation and attitudes: Their relation to behavioral intentions. Joumal of Personality and Social Psvcholoev. 44. 1025- 1028.

Graham, I., & Kilduff, P. (1994). Textiles and clothing in China. London: Pearson Professional Ltd.

Greene, W. H. (1997). Econometric analysis. New Jersey: Prentice Hall.

Grindereng, M. P. (1965). Fashion diffusion: A study o f price range of style dispersion and style leadership. Unpublished Master’s thesis. The Ohio State University, Columbus, OH.

Groves, R. M., Cialdini, R. B., & Couper, M. P. (1992). Understanding the decision to participate in a survey. Public Opinion Ouarterlv. 56(41.475-495.

Grube, J. W., Morgan, M., & McGree, S. T. (1986). Attitudes and normative beliefs as predictors of smoking intentions and behaviors: A test of three models. British Joumal of Social Psychology. 25. 81-93.

Guo, K. J., & Liu, X. L. (1997). The relationship between two generation: Comparison research of Beijing, Shanghai, and Guangzhou. Research of Youth. 3 .23- 32.

Guo, S. Z. (1998). Developing tendency of Chinese consumption marketing in 1990s (in Chinese: Jiu Shi Mian Dai Zhong Hou Qi Wo Guo Xiao Fei Pin Shi Chang Fa Zhan Qu Shi). Economic Research. 7. 3-11.

Hall, E. T. (1976). Bevond culture. New York: Anchor Press - Doubleday.

Hampton, G. M. (1977). Perceived attributes in buying products made abroad by American firms. Buyer Business Studies. October. 175-187.

Han, C. M. (1989). Country image: Halo or summary construct? Joumal of Marketing research. 26(MavL 222-229.

Heimbach, A. E., Johansson, J. K., & MacLachlan, D. L. (1989). Product familiarity, information processing, and country-of-origin cures. Advances in Consumer Research. 16.460-467.

Heiury, W. A. (1976). Cultural values do correlate with consumer behavior. Joumal of Marketing Research. 13. 121-127.

Ho, D. Y. (1978). On the concept of face. American Joumal o f Sociology. 81(41. 867-884.

232 Hooley, G. J., Shipley, D., & Krieger, N. (1988). A method for modeling consumer perceptions of country of origin. International Marketing Review. 7. 67-76.

Hu, Q. Y. (1994). China's Consumer Market: Shanghai Consumers’ Attitudes Toward Foreign-Brand and Chinese-Brand Apparel. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Missouri-Columbia, Columbia, MO.

Huey, J. (1990). America’s hottest export: Pop culture. Fortune. 122(16). 50-60.

Jacobs, B. A. (1997). Talking textiles. China Business Review. 24121. 30-37.

Jiang, S. (1998). Shanghai: Paris of the orient. Retrieved on July 15, 1999. From World Wide Web: http://pubweb.nwu.edu/~xjil23/shanghai.html

Johansson, J. K. (1988). Determinants and effects of the use of “made in” labels. International Marketing Review. 6111.47-58.

Kaiser, S. (1990). The social psvchologv of clothing. New York: Macmillan Publishing Co.

Katcher, B. L. (1995). Readership surveys. Folio: The Magazine for Magazine Management. 24171. 32-33.

Kaynak, E., & Cavusgil, S. T. (1983). Consumer attitudes towards products of foreign origin: Do they vary across product classes? International Journal of Advertising. 2 147-157.

Keefe, S. E., & Padilla, A. M. (1987). Chicano ethnicity. University of New Mexico Press.

Kim, D., Pan, Y., & Park, H. S. (1998). High- versus low-context culture: A comparison of Chinese, Korean, and American cultures. Psychology and Marketing. 15(6), 507-521.

Kimiecik, J. (1992). Predicting vigorous physical activity of corporate employees: Comparing the theories of reasoned action and planned behavior. Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology. 14. 192-206.

King, A. C. & McDaniel, S. W. (1989). China’s consumer market: How are U.S. products perceived? The Journal of Consumer Marketing. 6(4). 51-59.

Klein, J. G., Ettenson, R., & Morris, M. D. (1998). The animosity model of foreign product purchase: An empirical test in the People’s Republic of China. Journal of Marketing. 62(Januarv\ 89-100.

233 Koslowsky, M., HofBuan, M., & Lazar, A. (1990). Predicting behavior on a computer from intentions, attitudes, and experience. Current Psvchologv: Research and Reviews. 9flL 75-83.

LaTour, M. S., & Henthome, T. L. (1990). The PRC: An empirical analysis of country of origin product perceptions. Journal of International Consumer Marketing. 2(4), 7-36.

Latouche, S. (1996). The westernization of the world. Cambridge UK: Polity Press.

Lazer, L., Murata, S., & Kosaka, H. (1985). Japanese marketing: Towards a better understanding. Journal of Marketing. 49(Spring). 68-81.

Lee, C., & Green, R. T. (1991). Cross-cultural examination of the Fishbein behavioral intentions model. Journal of International Business Studies. 22(2). 289-305.

Li, L. (1996, January 8-14). China’s economic reform and opening. Beiiing Review. 15-17.

Li, D., & Gallup, A. M. (1995). In search of the Chinese consumer. The China Business Review. 22(5). 19-22.

Lin, L.W., & Stemquist, B (1993). Taiwanese consumers’ perceptions of product information cues: Country of origin and store prestige. European Journal of Marketing. 28(1), 5-18.

Lin, T., & Chen, K. (1998). Foreign apparel enters the Chinese market: Background. (In Chinese: Guo Wai Shi Zhuang Jing Ru Zhong Guo Shi Chang De Bei Jing). Unpublished manuscript. China National Clothing Design and Research Center, Beijing, China.

Lockwood, L. (1993, May 26). Donna does China. Women's Wear Dailv. pp. 8- 9.

Lu, J. R. (1997). Study of Chinese citizen consumption structure (In Chinese; Zhong Guo Cheng Zhen Ju Min Xiao Fe Jie Gou Yan Jiu). Consumption Economics. 1 , 30-34.

Lundstrom, W. J. (1974). The development of a scale to measure consumer discontent. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. The University of Colorado, Denver, CO.

Maheswaran, D. (1994). Country-of-origin as a stereotype: Effects of consumer expertise and attribute strength on product evaluations. Joumal of Consumer Research. 21 (September), 354-365.

234 Malhotra, N. K. (1996). Marketing research: An applied orientation. Prentice Hall.

Masuda, M., Matsumoto, G. H., & Meredith, G. M. (1970). Ethnic identity in three generations of Japanese Americans. The Joumal of social Psychology. 81.199-207^

Matsumoto, G. H., Meredity, G. M., & Masuda, M. (1970). Ethnic identification: Honolulu and Seattle Japanese-Americans. Joumal of Cross-Cultural Psychology. 1. 63- 65.

McCaul, K. D., O’Neill, H. K., & Glasgow, R. E. (1988). Predicting the performance o f dental hygiene behavior: An examination of the Fishbein and Ajzen Model and self-efficacy expectations. Joumal of Applied Social Psychology. 18t21. 114- 128.

McCracken, G. (1990). Culture and consumer behavior: An anthropological perspective. Joumal of the Market Research Society. 32(11. 3-11.

McCracken, G. (1986). Culture and consumption: A theoretical account of the structure and movement of the cultural meaning of consumer goods. Joumal of Consumer Research. IStJunel. 71-81.

McDonald, W. J. (1995). American versus Japanese consumer decision making: An exploratory cross-cultural content analysis. Joumal of International Consumer Marketing. 7131. 81-93.

McCullough, J., Tan C. T., & Wong J. (1986). Effects of stereotyping in cross cultural research: Are the Chinese really Chinese? Advances in Consumer Research. 13. 93-101.

Mehmet, O. (1995). Westernizing the third world: The Eurocentricitv of economic development theories. New York: Routledge,

Meyer, W. (1982). The research programme of economics and the relevance of psychology. British Joumal of Social Psychology. 21. 81-91.

Morrison, D. M., Simpson, E. E., Gillmore, M. R., & Wells, E. A. (1996). Children’s decisions about substance use: An application and extension of the Theory of Reasoned Action. Joumal of Applied Social Psvchologv. 26G81. 1658-1679.

Moschis, G. P. (1987). Consumer socialization. Lexington, Massachusetts: D C. Heath and Co.

Mueller, B. (1992). Standardization versus specialization: An examination of Westernization in Japanese advertising. Joumal of Advertising Research. 32fJanuarvl. 15-24. 235 Mun, K.. C., & Yau, O. H. M. (1979). Marketing research: Basic methods. Hong Kong: The Chinese University Press. (In Chinese)

Nagashima, A. (1977). A comparison of Japanese and US attitudes toward foreign products. Joumal of Marketing. 34fJanuarvl. 68-74.

Negus, K. (1997). The production of culture. In G. Paul Œd.l. Production of culture/cultures of production (pp.67-118V London: Sage Publications.

Netmeyer, R. G., & Burton, S. (1990). Examining the relationships between voting behavior, intention, perceived control, and expectation. Joumal of Applied Social Psvchologv. 20. 661-680.

Notani, A. S. (1997). Perceptions of affordability: Their role in predicting purchase intent and purchase. Joumal of Economic Psvchologv. 18(51. 525-546.

Nunnally, J. C. (1967). Psvchometric theorv. New York: McGraw-Hill.

Okechuku, C. ( 1994). The importance of product country of origin: A conjoint analysis of the United States, Canada, Germany and the Netherlands. European Joumal of Marketing. 28(4). 5-19.

Oliver, R. L., & Bearden, W. O. (1985). Crossover effects in the Theory of Reasoned Action: A moderating influence attempt. Joumal of Consumer Research. 12(3), 324-340.

Oppenheim, A. N. (1966). Questionnaire design and attitude measurement. London: Heinemann.

Papadopoulos, N., & Heslop, L. (1993). Product-country images: Impact and role in international marketing. New York: International Business Press.

Papadopoulos, N., Heslop, L. A., & Beracs, J. (1988). National stereotypes and product evaluations in a socialist country. International Marketing Review. 7. 32-47.

Pitts, R. E., & Woodside, A. G. (1984). Personal values and consumer psvchologv. Lexington, MA: Lexington Books.

Pomazal, R., & Jaccard, J. (1976). An informational approach to altruistic behavior. Joumal of Personality and Social Psvchologv. 33. 317-326.

Polegato, R., & Wall, M. (1980). Information seeking by fashion opinion leaders and followers. Home Economics Research Joumal. SIMavl. 327-338.

236 Redfield, R., Linton, R., & Herskovits, M. J. (1936). Memorandum on the study of acculturation. American Anthropologist. 38. 149-152.

Richins, M. L. (1980). An investigation of consumer's attitudes toward complaining. Advances in Consumer Research. 8. 502-506.

Rogers, E. M. (1995). Diffusion of innovations. NY: The Free Press.

Rosen, S., & Chu, D. (1987). Survev research in the People’s Republic of China. University of Southern Califomia, Los Angeles, California.

Roslow, S., Nicholls, J. A. P., & Comer, L. B. (1993). Cooperation rates in place- based media surveys. Marketing Research. 5(41.28-31.

Ryan, M. J. (1982). Behavioral intention formation: The interdependency of attitudinal and social influence variables. Joumal of Consumer Research. 9(December), 263-278.

Ryan, M. J., & Bonfield, E. H. (1975). The Fishbein extended model and consumer behavior. Joumal of Consumer Research. 2. 118-136.

Sands, S. (1981). Using adoption and diffusion theory to improve the odds of new-product success. Illinois Business Review. 38(21. 6-10.

Santayana, G. (1934). Character and opinion in the United States. New York: W.W. Norton.

Scarry, J (1996). K.eeping tabs on the Chinese consumer. The China Business Reyiew,_23(3), 34.

Schmitt, B. (1997). Who is the Chinese consumer? Segmentation in the People’s Republic of China. European Management Joumal. 15(21.191-194.

Schooler, R. D. (1971). Bias phenomena attendant to the marketing of foreign goods in the U.S. Joiumal of International Business Studies. Spring. 71-80.

Schwarz, N. (1996). Survey research; Collecting data by asking questions. In G. R. Semin and K. Fiedler (Eds.), Applied social psvchologv. London: Sage Publication.

Schwarz, N, Knauper, B., Hippier, H. J., Noelle-Neumann, E., & Clark, F. (1991). Rating scales: Numeric values may change the meaning of scale labels. Public Opinion Quarterlv. 55. 570-582.

237 Schwartz, S., & Tessler, R. (1972). A test of a model for reducing measured behavior-attitude discrepancies. Joumal of Personality and Social Psychology. 24.225- 236.

Shanghai Municipal Information Office (1998). Shanghai basic facts. Retrieved on July 16, 1999. From World Wide Web: http://www.china- window.com/shanghai/shgl/english/eshgl.html

Shen, D. (1995). Present situation and counter-measures of Chinese urban clothing consumption. Paper presented at the annual conference of CHIC’95 (China International Clothing and Accessory Fair), The Development Trends of China’s Ganment Market of the 21®‘ Century, Beijing, China.

Shim, S., & Chen, Y. Q. (1996). Acculturation characteristics and apparel shopping orientations: Chinese students and spouses from the People’s Republic of China residing in the Southwest. Clothing and Textiles Research Joumal. 14(3). 204-215.

Shim, S., & Kotsiopulos, A. (1994). Technology innovativeness and adopter categories of apparel/gift retailers: From the diffusion of innovations perspective. Clothing and Textile Research Joumal. 12121. 46-57.

Shim, S., Morris, N. J., & Morgan, G. A. (1989). Attitudes toward imported and domestic apparel among college students: The Fishbein model and extemal variables. Clothing and Textiles Research Joumal. 7(41. 8-18.

Shimp, T. A., & Kavas, A. (1984). The Theory of Reasoned Action applied to coupon usage. Joumal of Consumer Research. 11 (December). 795-809.

Shimp, T. A., & Sharma, S. (1987). Consumer ethnocentrism: Construction and validation of the CETSCALE. Joumal of Marketing Research. 24fAugust). 280-289.

Sin, O., & Sham, P. (1986). The pitfalls of joint ventures with China. World Press Review. 33IfNovember). 51.

South China University of Technology (1999). A brief introduction to Guangzhou. Retrieved on July 15,1999. From World Wide Web: http:// www.gznet.edu.en/WWW/scn/guangdong/e_gz.html

Summers, J. (1970). The identity of women’s clothing fashion opinion leaders. Joumal of Marketing Research. 7fM avl 178-185.

Szalay, L. B., Strohl, J. B., Fu, L., & Lao, P. S. (1994). American and Chinese perceptions and belief svstems. New York: Plenum Press.

2 3 8 Szapocznik, J., Mercedes Area Scopetta, W. K., & Maria, A. (1978). Theory and measurement of acculturation. Interamerican Joumal of Psychology. 12. 113-130.

Tai, S. H. C., & Tam, J. L. M. (1997). A lifestyle analysis of female consumers in greater China. Psvchologv and Marketing. 14G1. 287-307.

Tan, C. T., & Farley, J. U. (1987). The impact o f cultural patterns on cognition and intention in Singapore. Joumal of Consumer Research. 13(March). 540-544.

Tan, C. T., & McCullough, J.(1985). Relating ethnic attitudes and consumption in an Asian context. Advances in Consumer Research. 12. 122-125.

Tanzer, A. (1992, December 21). The China's dolls. Forbes. 150(141.250-252.

Teske, J., Raymond, H. C., & Nelson, B. H. (1976). An analysis of differential assimilation rates among middle-class Mexican Americans. The Sociological Quarterly. 12, 218-235.

Teske, J., Raymond, H. C., & Nelson, B. H. (1973). Two scales for the measurement of Mexican-American identity. Intemational Review of Modem Sociology. 3, 192-203.

The U.S. Department of State (1997). 1997 country reports on economic policy and trade practices. Retrieved on August 17,1998. From World Wide Web: http;//www.state.gov/www/issues/eco...ade_reports/eastasia97/china97.html

Tongberg, R. C. (1972). An empirical study of relationship between dogmatism and consumer attitudes towards foreign products. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. School of Business, The Pennsylvania State University, University Park, PA.

Touiiatos, J., & Compton, N. H. (1992). Research methods in human ecology/home economics. Ames, LA: Iowa State University Press.

Triandis, R. B., Villareal, M., Asai, M., & Lucca, N. (1988). Individualism and collectivism: Cross-cultural perspective on self-ingroup relationships. Joumal of Personality and Social Psychology. 54(2). 323-338.

Tse, D., Belk, R., & Zhou, N. (1989). Becoming a consumer society: A longitudinal and cross-cultural content analysis of print ads from Hong Kong, the People’s Republic of China, and Taiwan. Joumal of Consumer Research. 15(Marchl. 457-472.

Tull, D. S., & Hawkins, D. I. (1980). Marketing research: Measurement and method. New York: Macmillan Publishing Co. Inc.

239 U.S. Department of Commerce (1997, December). Trade balance report. Retrieved on August 17,1998. From The World Wide Web: http://otexa.ita.doc.gov/tbrimp.htm.

U.S. Department of Commerce (1998, February 19). Trade balance report. Retrieved February 25, 1998 from the World Wide Web: http://otexa.ita.doc.gov/tbrimp.htm.

Valleran, R. J., Deshaies, P., Cuerrier, J. P., Pelletier, L. G., & Mongeau, C. (1992). Ajzen and Fishbein’s Theory of Reasoned Action as applied to moral behavior: A confirmatory analysis. Joumal of Personalitv and Social Psvchologv. 62(11. 98-109.

Varadarajan, P. R. (1986). Product diversity and firm performance: An empirical investigation. Joumal of Marketing. SOCJulv). 43-57.

Vinson, D. E., Scott, J. E., & Lamont, L. M. (1977). The role of personal values in marketing and consumer behavior. Joumal of Marketing. 41 f April!. 44-50.

Wang, C. K. (1978). The effect of foreign economic, political, and cultural environment and consumers’ socio-demographics on consumers’ willingness to buv foreign products. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. Texas A and M University, College Station, Texas.

Wang, Y. (1997). Taiwanese consumers' attitude toward buving domestic versus U.S. made apparel. Unpublished Mater’s thesis. The Florida State University, Tallahassee, FL.

Warshaw, P. R. (1980). A new model for predicting behavioral intentions: An altemative to Fishbein. Joumal of Marketing Research. 7/21. 153-172.

Whitley, J. (1995). Consumer spending forecasts for the world's largest economies 1995-2005. London: The Economist Intelligence Unit.

Wilson, D. T., Mathews, H. L., Harvey, J. W. (1975). An empirical test of the Fishbein Behavioral Intention Model. Joumal of Consumer Research. 1. 39-48.

Winakor, G., & Navarro, R. (1987). Effect of achromatic value of stimulus on responses to women’s clothing styles. Clothing and Textiles Research Joumal. 5(21.40- 48.

Witter, B. S., & Noel, C. (1978). Deceptive advertising: An attitude change approach. ACPTC Proceedings. 102-103.

240 Xia, Z. H. (1996). Current situation, problems and counter-strategy of Guangzhou citizen consumption (In Chinese, Guang Zhou Cheng Zhen Ju Min Jia Ting Xiao Fei de Xian Zhuang, Wen Ti, Ji Dui Ce). Consumption Economics. 6. 30-33.

Xing, F. (1995). The Chinese cultural system: Implications for cross-cultural management. SAM Advanced Management Joumal. 60(1). 14-20.

Xu, B. Y. (1992). Reaching the Chinese consumer. The China Business Review. 19(6), 36-42.

Xu, X. (1995). Status quo and prospect of China's apparel and accessories imports. Paper presented at the annual conference of CHIC'95 (China Intemational Apparel and Accessory Fair), The Development Trends of China's Garment Market of the 21“ Century, Beijing, China.

Yan, X. F. (1996). Analysis of Chinese consumption market and forecast of tendency (In Chinese: Guo Nei Xiao Fei Pin Shi Chang Xing Shi Fen Xi Yu Qu Shi Yi Ce). Jing Ji Gong Zuo Zhe Xue Xi Zi Liao. 32. 37-43.

Yau, O. H. M. (1994). Consumer behavior in China. NK: Routledge.

Yau, O. H. M. (1988). Chinese cultural values: Their dimensions and marketing implications. Europeans Joumal of Marketing. 2 2 ( 5 ) . 44-57.

Yavas, B., & Alpay, G. (1986). Does an exporting nation enjoy the same cross­ national commercial image? Intemational Joumal of Advertising. 2 . 109-119.

Zeithaml, C. P., & Fry, L. W. (1984). Contextual and strategic differences among mature businesses in four dynamic performance situation. Academv of Management Joumal. 27rDecember). 841-860.

Zandpour, F., Chang, C., & Catalano, J. (1992). Stories, symbols and straight talk: A comparative analysis of French, Taiwanese, and U.S. commercials. Joumal of Advertising Research. 32flJ. 25-38.

Zuckerman, M., & Reis, H. (1978). Comparison of three models for predicting altruistic behavior. Joumal of Personalitv and Social Psvchologv. 36. 498-510.

241 APPENDIX A

COVER LETTER

Dear Sir (Madam),

This large-scale survey is carried out with the aim of understanding Chinese consumers’ attitudes toward domestic clothing and foreign clothing, and purchasing intention of domestic and imported clothing. Particularly, compared with domestic merchandise, how do Chinese consumers view the imported goods, and are they willing to accept imported goods? Getting more information on this issue will not only benefit Chinese consumers by providing more wanted goods from importers, but improve and develop the intemational trade between China and other countries. Therefore, your answers to every question in the enclosed questionnaire will be very important for our research, and eventually, your cooperation will contribute to both individual consumers and the country.

This questionnaire will take about 15-20 minutes to complete. Please remember to answer all the questions, which will be important for our later data analysis. There is not “correct” or “wrong” answer for any question. Giving us your real views will be very valuable for us. Of course, all responses are voluntary and will be kept anonymous. You do not need to write your name on the questionnaire. After you complete the questionnaire, please send this back to the teacher tomorrow. All the data and results will be used only for research rather than other purposes.

Thank you for your cooperation. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact us at _____.

The China Clothing Design and Research Center The Ohio State University

October, 1998

242 APPENDIX B

PRESTEST QUESTIONNAIRE

Please indicate your answers to the following questions regarding your opinions on Americanproducts and Chinese products. {Pleases use the scale below and fill in the num ber in the space provided that you feel best expresses your opinions on American or Chinese products)

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 totally uncertain totally disagree agree

1. When I go to the theater, I always want to see American movies. ______

2. I like Americanpop music very much. ______

3. I like American fast food. ______

4. I enjoy watching American football very much. ______

5. I am interested in what has happened to famous Americanpeople, such as movie

stars or sports stars. ______

6. I am interested in Americanpolitics. ______

7. I like Americandrinks, such as coffee and Coke. ______

8. I celebrate Christmas.______

9. When I am shopping, I always want to buy Americanbrands if I have enough

money. ______

10. When 1 go to the theater, 1 always want to see Chinese movies. ______

243 11.1 like Chinese traditional music very much.

12.1 like Chinese traditional fast food. ______

13.1 enjoy watching soccer very much.______

14.1 am interested in what has happened to famous Chinese people, such as movie stars

or sports stars. ______

15.1 am interested in Chinese politics. ______

16.1 like Chinese traditional drinks, such as tea.

17.1 celebrate Chinese Spring Festival. ______

18. When I am shopping, I always want to buy Chinese brands.

Please indicate your answers to the following questions regarding your opinions on some social values and norms. {Pleases use the scale below and fill in the num ber in the space provided that you feel best expresses your opinions on som e social values and n o r m s )

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 totally uncertain totally disagree agree

1. woman’s place is in the home. ______

2. Caring for one’s aged parent is the duty of every person.

3. Every family should have a son. ______

4. My relationship with my parents is formalized. ______

5. I often do the right things so as not to lose face. ______

6. I feel strongly about returning favors to others. ______

7. I interact frequently and closely with my relatives.

8. Showing your affection openly is not acceptable. _

244 9. Marnage should be a lifetime commitment.

10. One should not go to the extremes in ones’ behavior.

Please indicate your answers to the following questions regarding your attitude toward purchasing clothing manufactured in the USA or China for yourself. {Pleases circle one num ber fo r each statement)

1. Buying clothing manufactured in the USA is

1 7 Foolish Wise

Bad Good

1 2 3 4 Impractical Practical

2. Buying clothing manufactured in Chinais

1 2 3 4 7 Foolish Wise

1 2 7 Bad Good

1 2 7 Impractical Practical

Please list all the salient referents whom you consider when you purchase clothing (for example, your friends, your mother, or your colleagues).

Please answer the following items based on your information

Age

Sex

Occupation

245 APPENDIX C

QUESTIONNAIRE

Have you ever bought clothing with American brand names? Such as Levi, Lee, CK, DKNY or others.

Yes No

1. We are interested in the attitude that describes you as potential consumers. For each of the eight formal shirts, please indicate how likely it is for you to purchase it. Your answers will be a number based on the scale from 0 to 100, while 0 represents the lowest possibility to purchase and 100 represents the highest possibility to purchase.

Shirt #1

MADE IN QUALITYPRICEFABRIC BRAND COLOR STYLE U.S.A. Averase 150 RMB 100% Cotton American Latest Trend Fashion

How likely is it for you to purchase Shirt #1?______(Please select a number between 0 to 100. Hint: 0=Lowest Possibility to Purchase, 100=Highest possibility to Purchase)

Shirt #2

MADE IN QUALITYPRICE FABRIC BRAND COLOR STYLE U.S.A. Average 450 RMB 65% Polyester Chinese Traditional Conservative 35%Cotton

How likely is it for you to purchase Shirt #2?______(Please select a number between 0 to 100. Hint: 0=Lowest Possibility to Purchase, 100=Highest possibility to Purchase)

246 Shirt #3

MADE IN QUALITY PRICE FABRIC BRAND COLOR STYLE U.S.A. Good 150 RMB 65% Polyester American Traditional Fashion 35%Cotton

How likely is it for you to purchase Shirt #3?______(Please select a number between 0 to 100. Hint: 0=Lowest Possibility to Purchase, IOO=Highest possibility to Purchase)

Shirt #4

MADE IN QUALITY PRICE FABRIC BRAND COLOR STYLE U.S.A. Good 450 RMB iOO%Cotton Chinese Latest Trend Conservative

How likely is it for you to purchase Shirt #4?______(Please select a number between 0 to 100. Hint: 0=Lowest Possibility to Purchase, 100=Highest possibility to Purchase)

Shirt #5

MADE IN QUALITY PRICE FABRIC BRAND COLOR STYLE China Average 150 RMB 100% Cotton Chinese Traditional Conservative

How likely is it for you to purchase Shirt # 5______? (Please select a number between 0 to 100. Hint: 0=Lowest Possibility to Purchase, 100=Highest possibility to Purchase)

Shirt #6

MADE IN QUALITY PRICE FABRICBRAND COLOR STYLE China Average 450 RMB 65% Polyester American Latest Trend Conservative 35%Cotton

How likely is it for you to purchase Shirt # 6______? (Please select a number between 0 to 100. Hint: 0=Lowest Possibility to Purchase, 100=Highest possibility to Purchase)

Shirt#?

MADE IN QUALITY PRICE FABRIC BRANDCOLORSTYLE China Good 150 RMB 65% Polyester Chinese Latest Trend Fashion 35%Cotton

2 4 7 How likely is it for you to purchase Shirt #7?______(Please select a number between 0 to 100. Hint: 0=Lowest Possibility to Purchase, IOO=Highest possibility to Purchase)

Shirt #8

MADE IN QUALITY PRICE FABRIC BRAND COLOR STYLE China Good 450 RMB 100% Cotton American Traditional Fashion

How likely is it for you to purchase Shirt #8?______(Please select a number between 0 to 100. Hint: 0=Lowest Possibility to Purchase, 100=Highest possibility to Purchase)

2. How do you feel about purchasing clothing made in China? Please circle a number.

1 7 Stupid Wise

How do you feel about purchasing clothing made in U.S.? Please circle a number.

7 Stupid Wise

4. What is your possibility of purchasing clothing made in China for yourself within the following 12 months? (please circle a number)

1 4 7 Highly Neutral Highly Impossible Possibly

5. What is your possibility of purchasing clothing made in U.S. for yourself within the following 12 months?(please circle a number)

1 4 7 Highly Neutral Highly Impossible Possibly

6. Do you often plan ahead carefully about what to buy?

7 Rarely Always

7. Do you think pants made in China carry the following characteristics? (Please read each of the following statements carefully, and then, indicate whether you agree with it)

248 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Mostly Mostly Disagree Agree ______Durable ______Reasonably priced ______Good workmanship ______Easy to take care of ______Of latest fashion ______Of good hand-feeling ______Very comfortable ______Of good quality ______Fashionable color ______Fit me well ______Famous brand

8. Do you think pants made in USA carry the following characteristics? (Please read each of the following statements carefully, and then, indicate whether you agree with it)

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Mostly Mostly Disagree Agree

______Durable ______Reasonably priced ______Good workmanship ______Easy to take care of ______Of latest fashion ______Of good hand-feeling ______Very comfortable ______Of good quality ______Of fashionable color ______Fit me well ______Famous brand

9. How do you feel about purchasing clothing made in China? Please circle a number.

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Wrong Right Decision Decision

10. How do you feel about purchasing clothing made in U.S.? Please circle a number.

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Wrong Right Decision Decision

249 11. Will you probably purchase clothing made in China next year? (please circle a number)

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Highly Uncertain Highly Impossible Possible

12. Will you probably purchase clothing made in U.S. next year? (please circle a number)

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Highly Uncertain Highly Impossible Possible

13. Will you buy substitute if you don’t find what you plan to buy?

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Rarely Always

14. After reading each of the following statements regarding pants, please indicate how important it is to you by selecting a number from 1 to 7.

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Very Low Very High

______Durable ______Reasonably priced ______Good workmanship ______Easy to take care o f ______Of latest fashion ______Made in U.S. ______Of good hand-feeling ______Very comfortable ______Of good quality ______Fashionable color ______Fit me well ______Famous brand Made in China

15. How do you feel about purchasing clothing made in China? Please circle a number.

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Highly Highly Impractical Practical

250 16. How do you feel about purchasing clothing made in U.S.? Please circle a number.

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Highly Highly Impractical Practical

17. Please indicate how much you are willing to purchase clothing made in China for yourself this year: ______(Your answers will be a number based on the scale from 0 to 100, while 0 represents the lowest possibility to purchase and 100 represents the highest possibility to purchase.)

18. Please indicate how much you are willing to purchase clothing made in U.S. for yourself this year: ______(Your answers will be a number based on the scale from 0 to 100, while 0 represents the lowest possibility to purchase and 100 represents the highest possibility to purchase.)

19. Do you often not buy anything beyond your purchasing plan? ______

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Rarely Always

20. Please read the following statements carefully, and indicate how other people judge on your purchase of clothing made in U.S. or China.

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Not support Strongly At all Support

______Do your family members support you to purchase clothing made in U.S.? ______Do your friends support you to purchase clothing made in U.S.? ______Do the salespersons support you to purchase clothing made in U.S.? ______Do your faniily members support you to purchase clothing made in China? ______Do your friends support you to purchase clothing made in China? ______Do the salespersons support you to purchase clothing made in China?

21. Please read the following statements carefully, and indicate how often other people’s opinions influence your purchasing clothing decisions.

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Not at all Very often

251 Your family members’ opinions Your friends’ opinions Salespersons’ opinions

22a. Please read the followüig statements carefully, and indicate your opinion regarding American products.

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Totally Totally Disagree Agree

When 1 go to the movies, 1 always want to see American films. 1 like American pop music very much. 1 like American fast food. 1 like American football. 1 am interested in American stars, such as American movie stars and sport stars. I like American style drinks, such as Coca-Cola and coffee. When I am shopping, I always want to buy American brands if I have enough money.

22b. Please read the following statements carefully, and indicate your opinion regarding Chinese products.

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Totally Totally Disagree Agree

______When I go to the mo\-ies, 1 always want to see Chinese films. ______1 like Chinese classical music very much. ______I like Chinese traditional food. ______1 like soccer. ______1 am interested in Chinese stars, such as Chinese movie stars and sport stars. ______I like Chinese style drinks, such as tea. ______When I am shopping, I always want to buy Chinese brands.

23. Please read the following statements carefully, and indicate your opinion regarding traditional values.

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Totally Totally Disagree Agree

252 Women should stay at home. It is everyone’s responsibility to respect the aged people. Every family should have a son. I have a very traditional relationship with my parents. I always act properly in order to save embarrassment. I believe appreciation is a good conduct. I have a close relationship with my relatives. Kissing spouse in a public place is not acceptable. People should be committed to their marriage during their whole life. People should control their own act.

24. How many members are there in your family?

25. Starting from yourself, please list everyone living in your household, including their gender, their age, and their relationships with you.

Gender Age Relationship 1 Yourself 2 3 4 5

26. What is your highest education level?

Elementary School (not completed) ______Technical School Elementary School ______Undergraduate Junior High School ______Graduate High School

27. What is your marital status? (Please select only one item)

Married ____ Widowed or Widowered Divorced Others

28. What is your employment status? (Please select only one item)

______Full-time, without part-time j ob ______F ull-time, with part-time j ob ______Part time ______Unemployed while searching jobs ______Unemployed without searching jobs

253 29a. If your are working full-time or part-time, please answer the following two questions.

Who is your employer? Full-time employed Part-time employed Government Goyemment Non-profit organization (culture, Non-profit organization (culture, education, health, research, service) education, health, research, service) State owned entity State owned entity Group owned entity Group owned entity Private owned entity Private owned entity Foreign or cooperated entity Foreign or cooperated entity Others Others

29b. What is your occupational field? Full-time employed Part-time employed Government or organizations Government or organizations Manufacturing or constructions Manufacturing or constructions Wholesale, retailing, or food industry Wholesale, retailing, or food industry Banking, insurance, or real estate Banking, insurance, or real estate Health Health Engineer or research Engineer or research College Professor or instructor College Professor or instructor Teacher in elementary/middle school Teacher in elementary/middle school Other Other

30. Compared to the total amount spent on clothing last year, what is the percentage you spent on: (percentages should sum to 100%)

_% Clothing made in U.S. _% Clothing made in China _% Neither from U.S. nor from China

31. Compared to your household income, what is the percentage you spent on? (percentages should sum to 100%)

% Foods % Education % Saving % Transportation % Clothing % Health % Housing % Others

254 (rent, utility, and others

32. What is the average amount you spend on clothing every month?

Less than 70 RMB 321 -6 0 0 RMB 70-180 RMB 601 -670 RMB 181 -2 5 0 RMB More than 671 RMB 251 - 320 RMB

33. What is your monthly household income? Your household income includes salary, wages, bonus, and any other compensation. (Please select only one item)

LESS THAN 500 RMB ____ 1,801 - 2,300 RMB 5 0 0 - 1,300 RMB ____ 2,301-4,300 RMB 1,301-1,800 RMB ____ More than 4,300 RMB

34. What is your household income last year? Your household income includes salary, wages, bonus, and any other compensation. (Please select only one item)

LESS THAN 6000 RMB ____ 21,601-27,600 RMB 6,000-15,600 RMB ____ 27,601-51,600 RMB 15,601-21,600 RMB ____ More than 51,600 RMB

Thank you very much for your help!

255 APPENDIX D

h u m a n s u b je c t s p r o p o s a l

THE OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY Pmocol No. 3 1 Æ Û I3 2 : (Cficm Utt Ontji

application f o r e x e m pt io n f r o m t h e h u m a n s u b je c t s INSTITUTIONAL REVIEW BOARD '

All nescarch activities that wQl involve human bdots as research subjects must be reviewed and approved by the appropriate human subjects IRB, or receive exemption status, prior to implementation of the research.

Priodp.1 Innjti{iior ______Dickson, Marsha IMabtOSUfamIr,) ff)ptd r} Lm nm bwni (S p a m )

AaiSemlcTItte: A ss& +»*e P r o fe s s o r ______Phone No. 2-1564 Fax No 8-5565

Department Consumer and Textile Sciences Department No 1505

Campus Addrms: 265 X Campbell 1787 Neil Ave. Room Number BuiUiog Sowt Address

Co*lnvesticatorts}: Shen, Oon-j Lm Fust IniBal- - - - ^

Latt Fir»i hmat (Sgnanre)

> PROTOCOLTTTLE: Comoetitivenes^ of US Aooarel in China

* THE ONLY INVOLVEMENT OF HUMAN SUBJECTS IN THE PROPOSED RESEARCH ACT!V ITT WILL BE IN ONE OR MORE OF THE EXEMPTION CATEGORIES LISTED ON THE BACK 0FTH I5 APPLICATION.

^CATEGORY: (CXnà n 13 fS

> SOURCE OF FUNDING FOR PROPOSED RESEARCH: {OtokAnfS}

A OSURF: Sponscr USDA/CSREES RF Propoul/Project No. 736131

B. Oiherf/drnfi^j OAROC C o m p e titiv e G ran t ______617171

OfTice EXEMPTION STATUS; .DISAPPROVED"

AUG 31 1998

Daic Ouirperwn

•• PhRcpil î-.»îitij3for ir.utt »ubnai j -'ofoccl to appmpiuz K .runSu-;tca Rcvie# C .

INtPORTA.NT NOTICE TO jNVESlTf! \TORS; Ezfmpiin{ jfi from rtWew DOES NOT abwl»e the in»e%::*aron :f thr activity from fiuuhmg (hj( thcH ctfjreofhunun subjects in (be jciisity Ls prjtrctrd snd di3t methods used.ar.il iof ;rTr;jL:m p r o ' led . to gain subject ca n v n t a r t ap p ro p riate to t h ; activity.

256 APPENDIX E

CODING GUIDE

Code with a if data are missing. For Q25, if the respondent indicated that four live in her family, yet there are only data on three, code Rel4 with a If it is inappropriately left blank (e.g. Q25, the respondent indicated that four live in her family, all four are reported, and the fifth is left blank, thus inappropriate), code with a “9”. ALL OTHER MISSING VALUES ARE CODED AS

Column # Name Meaning Out

1-4 SN Subject Number Record 1 Record 1 6 sex 0-male; 1-female 7-8 version 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8 - male questionnaire 9,10,11,12,13,14,15,16 - female questionnaire 9 buy 0-no; 1-yes 10 BCwise Buying China-made clothing is wise. Q2 11 BAwise Buying USA clothing is wise. Q3 12 Cbuyl2 How likely to buy China-made Q4 clothing in the next 12 months? 13 Abuyl2 How likely to buy American Q5 clothing in the next 12 months? 14 PlanBbuy Plan before buy Q6 15 Cdurable durable Q7 16 Cprice reasonable price Q7 17 Cworkman good workmanship Q7 18 Ccare easy care Q7 19 Cstyle fashionable style Q7 20 Cfabric fabric feels good Q7 21 Ccomfort wear comfortable Q7 22 equality good quality Q7

257 23 Ccolor fashionable color Q7 24 Cfit fit me Q7 25 Cbrand prestigious brand name Q7 26 Adurable durable Q8 27 Aprice reasonable price Q8 28 Aworkman good workmanship Q8 29 Acare easy care Q8 30 Astyle fashionable style Q8 31 Afabric fabric feels good Q8 32 Acomfort wear comfortable Q8 33 Aquality good quality Q8 34 Acolor fashionable color Q8 35 Afit fit me Q8 36 Abrand prestigious brand name Q8 37 BCgood Buying China-made clothing is good.Q9 38 BAgood Buying A clothing is good. QIO 39 BCneyear Buy C clothing next year? Q ll 40 BAneyear Buy A clothing next year? Q12 41 Original buy something else instead of Q13 the original plan? 42 Durable durable pants Q14 43 Price reasonable price Q14 44 Workman good workmanship Q14 45 Care easy care Q14 46 Style fashionable price Q14 47 USA manufactured in USA Q14 48 Fabric fabric feels good Q14 49 Comfort wear comfortable Q14 50 Quality good quality Q14 51 Color fashionable color Q14 52 Fit fit me Q14 53 Brand prestigious brand name Q14 54 China manufactured in China Q14 55 Cpractic Buying C clothing is practical. Q15 56 Apractic Buying A clothing is practical. Q16 57-59 Cbuyyear How likely to buy clothing Q17 made in China this year? 60-62 Abuyyear How likely to buy clothing Q18 made in USA this year? 63 Notbuy not buy anything other than Q19 what I planned to buy 64 FamsupA family members support you to Q20 buy clothing made in USA?

258 65 FriendA friends support you to buy Q20 clothing made in USA? 66 SalesupA Salespersons support you to Q20 buy clothing made in USA? 67 FamsupC family members support you Q20 to buy clothing made in China? 68 FriendC friends support you to buy Q20 clothing made in China? 69 SalesupC Salespersons support you to buy Q20 clothing made in China? 70 Fammatt family’s opinions matter to you? Q21 71 Friendmt friends’ opinions matter to you? Q21 72 Salematt salespersons’ opinions matter to you Q21 73 Amovie want to see American movies Q22a 74 Amusic like American pop music Q22a 75 Afood like American fast food Q22a 76 Afootbal like American football Q22a 77 Astar interested in American stars Q22a 78 Adrink like American drinks Q22a 79 Abran like American brands Q22a 80 Cmovie want to see Chinese movies Q22b

1 Record2 Record 2 2 Cmusic like Chinese pop music Q22b 3 Cfood like Chinese fast food Q22b 4 Csoccer like soccer Q22b 5 Cstar interested in Chinese stars Q22b 6 Cdrink like Chinese drinks Q22b 7 Cbran like Chinese brands Q22b 8 Woman A woman’s place is in the home Q23 9 Elderly Caring for elderly is the duty Q23 for everyone. 10 Son Every family should have a son. Q23 11 Parent My family is formalized. Q23 12 Face I do the right things so as not Q23 to lose face. 13 Favor I feel strongly about returning Q23 favors to others. 14 Relative I interact closely with my relatives. Q23 15 Kiss Kissing spouse in public place is Q23 embarrassing. 16 Marriage Marriage is a lifetime commitment. Q23

259 17 Behavior One should not go to the extremes Q23 in ones’ behavior. 18 People how many people live in your home Q24 19 Rsex respondent sex (male-0, female-1) Q25 20-21 Rage respondent age Q25 22 Sex2 male-0, female-1 Q25 23-24 Age2 Q25 25 Rel2 spouse-1, son-2, daugter-3, mother-4,Q25 father-5 26 Sex3 male-0, female-1, inappropriate-9 Q25 (2 persons in the family) 27-28 Age3 inappropriate-9 Q25 (2 persons in the family) 29 Rel3 spouse-1, son-2, daugter-3, mother-4,Q25 father-5, inappropriate-9 (2 persons in the family) 30 Sex4 male-0,female-l, inappropriate-9 Q25 (3 persons in the family) 31-32 Age4 inappropriate-9 Q25 (3 persons in the family) 33 Rel4 spouse-1, son-2, daugter-3, mother-4,Q25 father-5, inappropriate-9 (3 persons in the family) 34 Sex5 male-0,female-l, inappropriate-9 Q25 (4 persons in the family) 35-36 Age5 inappropriate-9 Q25 (4 persons in the family) 37 Rel5 spouse-1, son-2, daugter-3, mother-4,Q25 father-5, inappropriate-9 (4 persons in the family) 38 Educate 1-not complete elementary Q26 2-elementary school 3-junior high school 4-high school 5-technical school 6-undergraduate 7-graduate 39 Marriag 1-married Q27 2-divorced 3-widow or widower 4-others

260 40 Employ 1-full-time without part-time job Q28 2-full-time with part-time job 3-part-time 4-unemployed while searching jobs 5-unemployed without searching jobs 41 Fuloccu 1-government organization Q29a 2-institution 3-state owned enterprise 4-collective enterprise 5-private enterprise 6-foreign-owned enterprise 7-other 42 Partoccu 1-government organization Q29a 2-institution 3-state owned enterprise 4-collective enterprise 5-private enterprise 6-foreign-owned enterprise 7-other 43 Fuijob 1-government Q29b 2-manufacturing 3-wholesale, retails 4-banking, etc. 5-health 6-enhineering 7-university professor 8-educator in primary, middle schools 9-other 44 Partjob 1-government Q29b 2-manufacturing 3-wholesale, retails 4-banking, etc. 5-health 6-enhineering 7-university professor 8-educator in primary, middle schools 9-other 45-47 Aperc what is the percentage you spent on Q30 buying American clothing? 48-50 Cperc what is the percentage you spent on Q30 buying China-made clothing? 51-53 Neiperc what is the percentage you spent on Q30 buying neither American nor Chinese clothing?

261 54 -56 foodsP food percentage Q31 57-59 educatP education percentage Q31 60-62 saving? saving percentage Q31 63-65 transpoP transportation percentage Q31 66-68 clothP clothing percentage Q31 69-71 health? health percentage Q31 72-74 housing? housing percentage Q31 75-77 others? others percentage Q31 78 clospent 1- <70 Q32 2- 70-180 3- 181-250 4- 251-320 5- 321-600 6- 601-670 7- >671 79 incomemo 1- <500 Q33 2- 500-1300 3- 1301-1800 4- 1801-2300 5- 2301-4300 6- >4301 80 mcomeyr 1- <6000 Q34 2- 6001-15600 3- 15601-21600 4- 21601-27600 5- 27601-51600 6- >51600

1 record3 record 3 2 city 0-Beijing; 1-Shanghai; 2-Guangzhou 3-5 shirt 1 possibility to buy shirt 1 Qi 6-8 shirt2 possibility to buy shirt2 Qi 9-11 shirt3 possibility to buy shirt3 Qi 12-14 shirt4 possibility to buy shirt4 Qi 15-17 shirt5 possibility to buy shirt5 Qi 18-20 shirt6 possibility to buy shirt6 Qi 21-23 shirt7 possibility to buy shirt7 Qi 24-26 shirt8 possibility to buy shirt8 Qi

262 27 country of origin 28 quality 29 price 30 fabric 31 brand 32 color 33 style

263