Cosmopolitanism, Consumer Ethnocentrism, and Materialism: An Eight-Country Study of Antecedents and Outcomes

Cosmopolitanism, Consumer
Ethnocentrism, and Materialism:

An Eight-Country Study of Antecedents
and Outcomes
ABSTRACT Although there is a consensus that industries are globalizing, the

notion that consumer attitudes and behaviors worldwide are likewise
homogenizing remains disputed. Despite widespread discourse on
Keywords: cross-cultural consumer this topic, there is a dearth of empirical investigations. This inter-
behavior, cosmopolitanism, national research examines similarities and differences with respect to
consumer ethnocentrism, the nature of three consumer attitudinal dispositions: cosmopoli-
materialism, globalization tanism, consumer ethnocentrism, and materialism. The authors cross-
culturally compare demographic antecedents with these dispositions,
as well as behavioral outcomes. They test the validation of the con-
struct measures and associated hypotheses using survey data drawn
from consumers in eight countries and structural equation modeling
techniques, including multigroup analysis. Empirical findings broadly
support the cross-cultural applicability of the constructs, though the
links to the various demographic antecedents vary considerably from
sample to sample. The role of each construct on behavior also varies
substantially across the range of product categories considered and
across and between national groups.
Although globalization continues unabated across industries and

Mark Cleveland, organizations, it does not necessarily follow that consumers world-
wide likewise are globalizing. Indeed, among theorists, there is
Michel Laroche, widespread disagreement on this topic. On the one hand, capital-
and Nicolas ism, global transport, communications, marketing and advertising,
and transnational cosmopolitanism are interacting to dissolve the
Papadopoulos boundaries across national cultures and economies (Ger 1999) and,
in the eyes of many (e.g., Alden, Steenkamp, and Batra 1999; Firat
1995; Hannerz 1990; Ter Hofstede, Steenkamp, and Wedel 1999),
accelerating the emergence of a homogeneous global consumption
culture. On the other hand, the idea that societies around the world
are inexorably converging has drawn skepticism (e.g., De Mooij
2004), under the counterargument that local cultures remain influ-
ential on consumer behavior (or, indeed, that globalization leads to
increasing entrenchment of local cultures, motivating people to
resist global forces). Still others argue that consumer behavior is
increasingly the product of a transmutation of global and local cul-
tural influences (Craig and Douglas 2006; Ger 1999; Howes 1996).
The inconsistency of opinions is exacerbated by the paucity of

hard empirical evidence either supporting or refuting the notion
of global consumers: “Further investigation of the different
impacts of globalization among different cultures on buyers’ atti-
tudes and behaviors should be brought into the research agenda”
Journal of International Marketing (Suh and Kwon 2002, p. 663). As markets become more inter-
© 2009, American Marketing Association dependent and as consumer research efforts become more inter-
Vol. 17, No. 1, 2009, pp. 116–146
ISSN 1069-031X (print) national, the need for constructs and theories developed primarily
1547-7215 (electronic) in the United States to be applicable to other countries and cul-
116
tures becomes ever more pressing. The current research was moti-
vated by the need for greater insight into how and which consumer
attitudes and behaviors are similar and different across countries.
Today’s competitive environment requires managers to target their
products successfully at segments that cross national frontiers. The
international marketer can only do so with a consumer-oriented
strategy that considers the attitudes and values of the targeted con-
sumers (Ter Hofstede, Steenkamp, and Wedel 1999). Successful
marketing largely depends on achieving a match between product
attributes and customer attitudes and values; therefore, a strong
case can be made for directing attention at consumer, rather than
country, characteristics (Keillor, D’Amico, and Horton 2001). To
this end, psychographic segmentation is a powerful method of
classifying consumers across countries (De Mooij 2004), supple-
menting the more common economic and demographic segmenta-
tion approaches. In this international research, we focus on simi-
larities and differences regarding three dispositional constructs
linked to globalization—materialism (MAT), cosmopolitanism
(COS), and consumer ethnocentrism (CET)—as well as the poten-
tial antecedents and outcomes of these constructs. We seek a
greater understanding of when and where the dispositions of MAT
and COS are likely to favor consumer receptivity to global and for-
eign brands/products and identify where and when CET will be
inauspiciously associated with the same. We contend that research
on these constructs will shed light on alternative global consumer
trajectories.
Our first objective is to assess the structure and reliability of these

constructs and to test hypotheses regarding their interrelationships,
across different countries. To enhance external validity, our investi-
gation draws on data from consumers in eight countries on four
continents that differ substantially in terms of ethnic composition,
relative affluence, and level of economic development; moreover,
these countries vary widely on Hofstede’s (1991) dimensions of
national culture. Our second objective is to scrutinize the nomologi-
cal validity of these three constructs, focusing on how they func-
tion in different countries with respect to a broader framework of
demographic antecedents and behavioral outcomes. To this end, we
first test hypotheses regarding the predictive roles of four demo-
graphic variables (sex, age, income, and education) that are com-
monly employed for segmenting international markets. Then, we
examine how these constructs apply to consumer behaviors across a
broad variety of product categories, including foods/beverages,
apparel, appliances, consumer electronics and communication
devices, and luxury products. To date, little attention has been
directed toward examining how these dispositional responses to
globalization combine to affect consumer behavior differentially
across different product categories and how these relationships
could vary cross-culturally.
The most important dilemma facing the international marketing

manager is the degree to which marketing programs should be stan- THEORETICAL BACKGROUND
dardized globally versus tailored to local conditions. Global market AND HYPOTHESES
segmentation is still in its infancy (Bolton and Myers 2003). Con-
ventionally, marketers have derived international segments by
Segmenting International
clustering countries along market-level indicators (e.g., level of
economic development, Hofstede’s indexes) rather than using the
Markets
Cosmopolitanism, Consumer Ethnocentrism, and Materialism 117

characteristics of the individual consumers who constitute any
given market (Choi and Rajan 1997). Using countries as the unit of
analysis is problematic. First, most countries are multicultural.
Second, within-country variation among consumers is often
greater than between-country variation (Roth 1995; Ter Hofstede,
Steenkamp, and Wedel 1999), such as the extent to which indi-
vidual consumers identify with and practice local cultural norms
(Cleveland and Laroche 2007). Along these lines, some theorists
argue that globalization is increasing commonalities among con-
sumers across countries while reducing similarities within coun-
tries (e.g., Craig and Douglas 2006; Hannerz 1990). Research on
measurable indicators that point to the similarity of consumer
behaviors around the world would help managers plan superior
international marketing activities. The literature suggests three
key dispositional constructs that managers should consider for
global segmentation purposes: two associated with the homoge-
neity hypotheses (MAT and COS) and one linked to the hetero-
geneity hypothesis (CET).
Particularly in the West, the term “consumer” increasingly has

MAT served as the basis for defining the human experience (Firat 1995).
This consumption-based orientation has largely been viewed as a
trait of economic affluence and Western postindustrial life;
although it has existed in isolated pockets since ancient times, only
recently “has it become available and embraced by entire popula-
tions” (Ger and Belk 1990, p. 186). Nations find themselves
increasingly pressured to open up, by “the forces of media, tech-
nology, and travel which have fueled consumerism throughout the
world” (Appadurai 1990, p. 305). The international dissemination
of concrete manifestations of culture, including consumer prod-
ucts, is believed to be much less encumbered than purely ideologi-
cal aspects of culture (Howes 1999).
Long a topic of interest to researchers and social commentators,

MAT has been defined as “the importance ascribed to the owner-
ship and acquisition of material goods in achieving major life goals
or desired states” (Richins 2004, p. 210). Material values are con-
ceptualized as spanning three domains: (1) the centrality of posses-
sions in a person’s life, (2) the belief that the acquisition of posses-
sions yields happiness and satisfaction with life, and (3) the use of
possessions to infer the success of oneself and others. Major reli-
gions have long attempted to curb materialistic desires, rendering
material passion a vice or an unacceptable moral transgression.
Today, consumers around the world mimic consumer desire as “an
affirmation of belonging in a globalizing consumer culture” (Belk,
Ger, and Askegaard 2003, p. 347). Thus, the study of MAT is rele-
vant to understanding consumer responses to globalization (Alden,
Steenkamp, and Batra 2006), and indeed, several theorists have
linked global culture to MAT. Barber (1996) coined the term
“McWorld” to describe the emergent materialist global culture;
others have referred to this phenomenon as the “Coca-colonization
of the world” (Hannerz 1992, p. 217) and the “cultural imperialism
hypothesis” (Wilk 1998, p. 316). The common thesis in these works
is that the combination of Western-controlled mass media and
advertising and the natural desire for humans to improve their
lives materially compels consumers worldwide to emulate those in
118 Mark Cleveland, Michel Laroche, and Nicolas Papadopoulos

the developed West. Ger and Belk (1996a) find support for their
premise that higher levels of MAT are associated with periods and
places undergoing rapid social and cultural change. On the basis of
a study of 12 countries, they conclude that MAT is neither unique
to Western cultures nor related to affluence. In research comparing
consumers in the United States, Denmark, and Turkey, Belk, Ger,
and Askegaard (2003) uncover further evidence that substantiates a
globally spreading materialistic consumer culture.
Individual consumers construct meanings for material goods, and

these meanings tend to be specific but dynamic. Whereas some
objects assume relatively static meanings (e.g., heirlooms, which
symbolize continuity), others (e.g., branded products) assume dif-
ferent meanings to both the same and different people, over time
and place (Kleine and Baker 2004). Therefore, materialistic values
not only vary across individual consumers but also are differen-
tially manifested across consumption contexts. This is relevant to
the current research because it implies that for one person, materi-
alistic tendencies will drive certain consumption behaviors but not
others.
The rise of nation-states has produced national cultures; it is not

implausible that the current integration is producing a global cul- COS
ture, leading to the emergence of groups of people who are more
globally than locally oriented. Unlike those before the modern
epoch, cultures today need not be territorially bounded (Appadurai
1990; Craig and Douglas 2006; Hannerz 1990). Transnational cul-
tures consist of structures of meaning carried by social networks
that are not based in any single territory (Hannerz 1992). Transna-
tionals are “those intellectuals who are at home in the cultures of
other peoples as well as their own” (Konrad 1984, p. 208). The cos-
mopolitan label describes people who frequently travel, are rou-
tinely involved with other people in various places elsewhere, and
provide doorways into other territorial cultures (Hannerz 1992).
More than cultural brokers, cosmopolitans also serve as gatekeepers:
They decide “on what gets in, and what will be kept out, ignored,
explicitly rejected” (Hannerz 1992, p. 258). Because most of these
transnational cultures have their roots in the West, they are princi-
pally extensions or transformations of American and European cul-
tures, though they may be penetrable to various degrees by local
meaning (Hannerz 1992).
The nature of COS has been the subject of much debate: Some
researchers implicate predisposition at birth as the main determi-
nant, others envision it as a personality trait, and still others clas-
sify it as a learnable skill (see Cannon and Yaprak 2002; Thompson
and Tambyah 1999). Although the term has been used loosely to
describe almost any person who moves about in the world, more
appropriately COS refers to a specific set of beliefs, attitudes, and
qualities held by certain people. A cosmopolitan has “a conscious
openness to the world and to cultural differences” (Skrbis,
Kendall, and Woodward 2004, p. 117) and “a willingness to engage
with the Other, an intellectual and aesthetic stance of openness
toward divergent cultural experiences” (Hannerz 1992, p. 252),
coupled with personal competence toward the alien culture.
Tourists are more akin to spectators than participants in a host cul-

ture. For cosmopolitans, it is the other way around; they “want to
be able to sneak backstage rather than being confined to the
frontstage areas” (Hannerz 1990, pp. 241–42) and to actively con-
sume cultural differences (Thompson and Tambyah 1999). Belong-
ing to an elite class is no longer a prerequisite for COS. Given the
culture-shaping power of the media and its ability to convey
images and information about other peoples, it is possible to be
cosmopolitan without ever leaving one’s own country of origin
(Douglas and Craig 2006; Hannerz 1990). Perhaps COS is conceptu-
alized best as situational and a matter of degree rather than as an
absolute trait: “Cosmopolitans can be dilettantes as well as con-
noisseurs, and are often both, at different times” (Hannerz 1992, p.
253). Skrbis, Kendall, and Woodward (2004) posit that links
between cosmopolitan traits and various consumption behaviors
are circumstantial. However, the application of COS in the litera-
ture has been chiefly theoretical, with scant empirical research on
the antecedents or outcomes of COS.
Because cosmopolitans perceive themselves as less provincial and

more international (Hannerz 1990), presumably they would be
more responsive to global consumer culture positioning strategies
(Alden, Steenkamp, and Batra 1999) and, thus, more likely to adopt
products from other cultures and places. In line with this, Belk
(2000, p. 13) states that the “rise of global consumption ideals,
potentially makes the elite among Third World consumers into cos-
mopolitans who are more concerned with how they compare to the
world’s privileged consumers than they are to compare themselves
locally.” Global culture has been connected with increasing MAT
(e.g., Cleveland and Laroche 2007; Ger and Belk 1996b; Johansson
2004), and Thompson and Tambyah (1999) propose that COS is a
style of consumption, creating and maintaining status distinctions
between high- and low-cultural-capital consumers. However, in
sociology, COS has been portrayed as a postmaterial value and a
postnational outlook. Under the postmaterialism theory (Inglehart
1990), people who consistently have experienced high affluence
(as opposed to those who have endured scarcity) are less concerned
about material needs; having broader horizons, they place priority
on abstract concerns, such as self-actualization, humanism, and
environmentalism. From this perspective, materialists could be less
cosmopolitan than postmaterialists. Therefore, because we believe
that COS does not necessarily entail MAT (or vice versa), we
hypothesize an independent relationship:
H1: The relationship between MAT and COS is not significant.
Evidence corroborates the worldwide spread of dispositions such as

CET MAT, but globalization has also wrought resistance behaviors. As
Ger (1999, p. 65) states, “The differentiating impact of globalization
strengthens or reactivates national, ethnic, and communal identi-
ties.” The (re)emergence of strong ethnic and religious movements
and/or geographic nationalism may represent attempts “to regain a
sense of stability and identity” (Ger and Belk 1996b, p. 284). For
international marketers, the germane question is how these reac-
tions are manifested in the marketplace. De Mooij (2004) contends
that many consumption behaviors are based on longtime habits and
that globalization does not harmonize people’s values or national

feelings. Undoubtedly, many consumers continue to hold a strong
desire to uphold traditional local culture, defying influences con-
strued as global. Ethnocentrism “represents the universal proclivity
for people to view their own group as the center of the universe, to
interpret other social units from the perspective of their own group,
and to reject persons who are culturally dissimilar while blindly
accepting those who are culturally like themselves” (Shimp and
Sharma 1987, p. 280). One’s own ethnic or national symbols are
objects of attachment and pride, whereas those of others may be
held with contempt. Some researchers contend that a society’s rela-
tive openness to foreign cultures is amenable to supporting the
acceptance of foreign goods and services, whereas aspects such as
patriotism, conservatism, and ethnocentrism impede the accept-
ance of such products (Kaynak and Kara 2002; Shimp and Sharma
1987).
To the ethnocentric consumer, foreign or global brands represent

not only an economic threat but also a cultural menace. Champi-
oning their country’s culture and products, highly ethnocentric
consumers will make even economic sacrifices by choosing local
brands. In return, they enjoy the psychological gain derived from
avoiding contact with the out-group (Baughn and Yaprak 1996).
This bias toward locally produced products is known as CET
(Shimp and Sharma 1987) and represents another dispositional
response to globalization. Suh and Kwon (2002) find partial sup-
port for their model in which consumers’ “global openness” and
purchasing behavior were mediated by their ethnocentric tenden-
cies. Researching Turkish consumers, Kaynak and Kara (2002) find
that consumers scoring high on CET were less willing to buy for-
eign products and that the degree of CET varied considerably
across consumers (e.g., religious versus nonreligious, urban versus
rural) and regions of the country. They also show that CET is corre-
lated to various lifestyle dimensions and that it differentially
affects foreign/local product dispositions, depending on the nature
of the product category and the product’s country of origin. As with
MAT and COS, this suggests that beyond constituting an absolute
trait, CET tendencies may be differentially manifested.
The nature of COS contradicts that of CET, and therefore we con-

jecture a negative relationship. Indeed, Sharma, Shimp, and Shin
(1995) find a negative relationship between a related construct
(cultural openness) and CET. The link between CET and MAT is
less clear-cut. On the one hand, because the global forces of mar-
keting and media indeed convey consumption values and behav-
iors, it could be construed that highly ethnocentric consumers
would eschew such global influences and therefore be less con-
cerned about material possessions. On the other hand, CET does
not need to be contradictory with MAT: Ethnocentric consumers
may still place a high value on the pursuit of material objects
(because material and status enrichment are latent and universal)
but seek out local objects to satiate such desires. Taken together, we
posit that the link between CET and MAT is independent. Formally
stated, we hypothesize the following:
H2: COS and CET are negatively related.

H3: The relationship between MAT and CET is not significant.

MAT. Educated and/or wealthier consumers are likely to be less
Demographic Antecedents of susceptible to local conformity pressures, while holding a greater
MAT, COS, and CET desire and economic ability to purchase foreign, status-enhancing
products. Yet Richins and Dawson (1992) do not find any relation-
ship between educational attainment and MAT. Although higher
levels of income are naturally associated with the ability to pur-
chase status-enhancing items, most research (e.g., Ger and Belk
1996a; Richins and Dawson 1992) has established no relationship
between MAT and affluence. One explanation is that income is
confounded by age, given the general finding that older people
tend to be less materialistic than their younger counterparts
despite higher earning power in general. This explanation may also
partially account for the absence of any strong empirical link
between education and MAT. Both Richins and Dawson (1992) and
Belk (1985) report negative relationships between MAT and age.
Thus, we conjecture the following:
H4: MAT is negatively related to age.
COS. In line with our previous review, we conceptualize COS as

not only innate but also learnable. In general, compared with their
older counterparts, younger people are less set in their ways and,
therefore, less suspicious of different perspectives (De Mooij 2004).
Furthermore, having grown up in the global era and being avid con-
sumers of media that enable global connectivity (e.g., the Internet),
younger people are presumably more world-minded than their
older counterparts. Wealthier people are likely to be more positive
about (and able to avail themselves of) the many consumption
choices afforded by globalization. Furthermore, in general, the
affluent are more educated than their less wealthy counterparts.
With greater exposure to outside cultures and perspectives, edu-
cated people are less prone to submit to local cultural pressures,
which makes them more global as consumers (Keillor, D’Amico,
and Horton 2001). The environment under which advanced educa-
tion takes place (universities) also exposes people to different cul-
tures and perspectives. Robertson and Zill (1997) report a strong
positive relationship between COS and education; they also find
that women score higher on COS than men. Men have a greater pre-
disposition to be self-focused and are guided by agentic goals (e.g.,
self-assertion, mastery), whereas women are predisposed toward
harmonizing relations between themselves and disparate parties
(Meyers-Levy 1988). Therefore, women’s communal predisposition
should be manifested in a greater openness to different cultural
perspectives. We postulate the following demographic relation-
ships to COS:
H5: (a) COS is negatively related to age, (b) COS is positively

related to income, (c) COS is positively related to the level
of educational attainment, and (d) women have higher
mean COS scores than men.
CET. As with COS, in general, younger people, particularly those

with more education, are less committed to definite ways of life
and are more open to broader perspectives and things (e.g., foreign
products) than older (often less-educated) people (De Mooij 2004),
who tend to be suspicious of new perspectives and, therefore, less

likely to modify established attitudes and behaviors. Keillor,
D’Amico, and Horton (2001), Shimp and Sharma (1987), and Wat-
son and Wright (2000) all report strong positive links between age
and CET. Watson and Wright also report a negative relationship
between wealth and CET. As consumers become wealthier, rising
disposable income fuels demand for imported products (Kaynak
and Kara 2002). We hypothesize the following demographic rela-
tionships to CET:
H6: CET is (a) positively related to age, (b) negatively related

to income, and (c) negatively related to the level of educa-
tional attainment.
Identities and belongingness are asserted through lifestyles, which

in turn are manifested through the consumption of consumer Behavioral Outcomes
goods (McCracken 1986). People around the world are increasingly
aware of and interested in learning about different cultures (i.e.,
COS), and materialistic values are spreading globally. In other
respects, consumer cultures remain heterogeneous: “Historical and
current local conditions, interacting with global forces, shape the
specific consumption patterns and meanings in each locality” (Ger
1999, p. 65). This interaction or fusion of global and local values
has been alternatively referred to as hybridization (Ger 1999),
creolization (Howes 1999), and transculturation (Hannerz 1992).
Research in sociology presents cultural processes less as fixed
responses and more as emergent and adaptive due to specific con-
ditions. For example, a person can be cosmopolitan in one domain
but local in another (Yoon, Cannon, and Yaprak 1996). Here, we
conjecture that the influence of MAT, COS, and CET on behavior
varies across different product-category behavioral contexts.
MAT. De Mooij (2004, p. 163) states that “branded luxury products

like Vuitton purses fulfill the need to conform…. Teenage girls
want Vuitton because ‘everyone has it.’” Beyond signifying cul-
tural membership, attire functions as a status symbol, conveying
style and social class. Consistent with hedonic consumption
theories, Dubois and Duquesque (1993) conclude that people pur-
chase luxury goods for what they symbolize (i.e., for status and
recognition purposes), partly as a consequence of powerful media
promoting immediate self-indulgence and gratification. Material-
ists place a high value on their possessions, particularly those that
can be used as markers to gauge personal success. For these rea-
sons, we posit that MAT will positively predict behaviors associ-
ated with the hedonistic, expressive, and status-enhancing prod-
ucts considered in this research. Formally stated, we hypothesize
the following:
H7: MAT positively predicts (a) the purchasing frequency of

luxury products, (b) the frequency of wearing specific
apparel items, (c) the importance of owning consumer elec-
tronics, (d) the frequency of behaviors associated with
modern media, (e) the importance of owning appliances,
and (f) the importance of automobile ownership.
COS. Dubois and Duquesque (1993) find a strong association

between positive attitudes toward culture change and luxury con-

sumption. Flexibility toward cultural change implies a degree of
openness to different cultural perspectives, meaning that COS can
be a driver of luxury purchases. Alden, Steenkamp, and Batra
(1999) argue that, over time, certain brands are likely to lose their
association with their country of origin and instead become associ-
ated with something broader: the global consumption set. Their
international study reveals that the frequency of global consumer
positioning strategies (i.e., those “appealing to globally shared,
consumption-related symbols that signal membership in global con-
sumer segments” [p. 79]) was the highest for high-tech consumer
durables, followed by (in descending order) low-tech consumer
durables, personal durables, household nondurables, food non-
durables, and consumer services. It is appropriate that consumer
electronics are at the top of the list: These products are used simi-
larly across the world and satisfy universal consumer needs (e.g.,
the desire for superior communication technology). Because COS
symbolizes modern lifestyles or an association with the global elite
(Friedman 1990), likewise we expect that it has a positive role in the
following product areas:
H8: COS positively predicts (a) the importance of owning con-

sumer electronics, (b) the frequency of behaviors associ-
ated with modern media, (c) the purchasing frequency of
luxury products, and (d) behaviors associated with glob-
ally popular apparel.
CET. Culture-bound products require greater marketing-mix adap-

tations than culture-free products. Reviewing the literature, De
Mooij (2004) concludes that cross-cultural differences in product
ownership and usage could largely be attributed to the link
between product category and cultural values. In general, the older
the product category, the stronger is the influence of traditional
culture. Consumer ethnocentrism should be most prominent for
product categories that are highly culture bound. Foods and fash-
ions commonly serve as instruments of traditional cultural expres-
sion; therefore, we expect CET to be positively predictive of behav-
iors related to traditional food and clothing items. In contrast,
because food consumption and attire provide opportunities for
people to take on different identities, we expect that people with
low levels of CET will be more likely to consume and wear globally
popular foods and fashions, respectively. As we noted for COS,
high-tech consumer products, particularly those that enable global
connectivity (e.g., mobile phones, computers), embody modern
lifestyles and are marketed similarly worldwide. Therefore, we
expect that people with low levels of CET will embrace modern
consumer electronics more readily than their high-CET-level coun-
terparts. Behaviors associated with these devices should also be
more frequent among people with low levels of CET. Formally, we
hypothesize the following:
H9: (a) CET positively predicts behaviors associated with tradi-

tional foods and fashion, (b) CET negatively predicts
behaviors associated with globally popular foods and
apparel, (c) CET negatively predicts the importance of own-
ing consumer electronics, and (d) CET negatively predicts
the frequency of behaviors associated with modern media.

Despite the risk of overlooking culturally specific aspects, an etic
research design uses common metrics and therefore is appropriate METHODOLOGY
for comparative cross-cultural research (Luna and Gupta 2001). We
measured all construct items using seven-point Likert scales (1 = Survey Description
“strongly disagree,” and 7 = “strongly agree”; see Appendix A). We
used a shorter version (nine items) of Richins and Dawson’s (1992)
material value scale, validated by Richins (2004), to tap MAT. Fol-
lowing previous research (Batra et al. 2000; Klein 2002), we
employed a shorter (four items) version of the extensively validated
CETSCALE (Kaynak and Kara 2002; Shimp and Sharma 1987).
Reliable and generalizable measures for COS are rare. Thus, we

developed a novel scale for COS, employing Churchill’s (1979)
procedure for psychometric scale development. Following a com-
prehensive review of the relevant social sciences literature on
COS (e.g., Belk 2000; Hannerz 1990, 1992; Skrbis, Kendall, and
Woodward 2004; Thompson and Tambyah 1999) and drawing
from existing measures for related concepts, such as global open-
ness and world-mindedness (Baughn and Yaprak 1996; Rawwas,
Rajendran, and Wuehrer 1996; Suh and Kwon 2002), we generated
a pool of 23 scaled items to tap COS. As part of an ongoing
research project, we created an additional 15 items using qualita-
tive methods, specifically through the analyses of the verbal proto-
col generated from (1) a series of one-on-one depth interviews
(involving four informants, three of whom were female) and
(2) two focus group sessions (to enable group dynamics), each
with four informants (one group with three females and the other
with one female). Interviewers followed a loose set of questions
and statements that were designed to initiate and probe discussion
on the topics of globalization and cultural openness, thus using an
emergent design. Because we drew from a convenience sample of
consumers, informants varied considerably in terms of ethnicity,
age, education, occupation, and traveling experiences. The final
step in item generation consisted of administering 25 expert opin-
ion surveys to marketing faculty. These surveys defined COS,
included several tentative items, and directed respondents to sug-
gest additional possible measures (of which 21 unique suggestions
were retained). We compiled a total of 59 scaled measures and
carefully pared them down to 30 after eliminating redundant,
ambiguous, or otherwise problematic (because of vocabulary and
so on) items. A survey including the remaining items was admin-
istered to a sample of 162 (147 usable) undergraduate and gradu-
ate respondents. We retained 13 items, from which a reliable scale
for COS emerged (α = .92). Then, we included these items in a sec-
ond survey administered to a new, larger sample (n = 400, 392
usable) of students. Analysis conducted on this second data set
yielded a reliable scale for COS on a reduced set of measures (α =
.91, 8 items).
A total of 48 consumption-related statements tapped a broad array

of consumer behaviors. We constructed these measures to include
specific behaviors associated with food/beverage consumption,
apparel, consumer electronics and communication devices, appli-
ances, and luxury products. As with the constructs, we scaled the
response format for the dependent measures from 1 to 7. The ques-
tion wording and phrasing of endpoint anchors varied across the

behaviors, after we considered the relative probability and/or fre-
quency of purchasing and consuming the items corresponding to
the particular product category (Appendix A). We used product
categories in this study to reduce the potential confounding effects
associated with judgments arising from actual brands, given differ-
ences in the connotations and availability of particular brands
across the eight countries. Furthermore, previous research has
shown that consumers often distort their brand evaluations by rely-
ing heavily on general product-category attribute beliefs (Elliot and
Roach 1993). The use of abstract product categories curtails the
possibility of functional and/or conceptual nonequivalence across
the different countries (Alden, Steenkamp, and Batra 2006). The
final part of the survey covered demographic variables. A cover let-
ter included instructions for completing the questionnaire.
Survey data for this study (n = 2015 usable of 2800 distributed) was
The Sample collected from respondents in eight countries (one urban area per
country): Canada (n = 241), Mexico (n = 231), Chile (n = 192), Swe-
den (n = 329), Greece (n = 317), Hungary (n = 332), India (n = 236),
and South Korea (n = 137). Because of the difficulty of obtaining
representative sampling in some of these countries, we employed a
snowballing sampling approach. Within each country, participants
in selected undergraduate and graduate university courses were
directed to fill out one questionnaire themselves and to administer
a predetermined quota (three to five) of surveys to designated
respondents (one to two each of adult family members, coworkers,
and neighbors). A detailed protocol form provided the students
with instructions for survey administration. Eligible respondents
had to be native-born nationals, 18 years of age or older, and fluent
in English. To achieve these ends, each questionnaire included sev-
eral screening questions. Although this approach had the effect of
centering the research on certain socioeconomic strata, we consid-
ered the resulting sample reasonably diffuse (Appendix B). The
sampling method was also focused on respondent types who
would be more likely to be interested in the subject matter, includ-
ing opinion leaders whose views and behaviors influence the
broader population.
Overall, 52% of the respondents were female, and 66% of the sam-
ple was composed of either full- or part-time students. The majority
of respondents were members of the workforce taking managerial
courses, with 63% actively employed (part-time 33%, full-time
30%). Approximately two-thirds of the sample were between 20
and 29 years of age. Regarding educational attainment, 30% and
18% reported undergraduate and graduate levels, respectively, and
29% and 23% reported college/diploma and high school (or lower)
levels, respectively.
We conducted exploratory factor analysis on the construct meas-

ANALYSIS AND RESULTS ures (principal component extraction with varimax rotation). Two
items each for MAT and COS were unstable across the different
Preliminary Results sample groups, and thus we removed them. A three-factor struc-
ture accounted for 57% of the cumulative variance and retained 17
of the original 21 items. These items exhibited high factor loadings
(Appendix A), and the factors had high reliability coefficients
(MAT: seven items, α = .83; COS: six items, α = .86; CET: four items,

α = .84). We also calculated reliability coefficients for each country
sample (Appendix B), and all except one were higher than .70.
Examination of the adjusted construct means (with sex, age, house-
hold income, and education entered into the multivariate analysis
of covariance as covariates) revealed that with the exception of
South Korea, in general, COS scores were high and consistent
across the countries (Appendix B). This is partially attributable to
the relatively youthful, educated, and affluent composition of the
samples. Intercountry MAT scores were likewise consistent (with
the lowest levels expressed by Chileans and Swedes), though con-
siderably lower than those for COS. Of the three constructs, inter-
country variation was greatest for CET (Mexicans highest, Canadi-
ans and Swedes lowest).
To test the structural cross-cultural equivalence, we subjected the

retained items to the multigroup confirmatory factor analytic proce- Structural Equation Modeling
dure (Steenkamp and Baumgartner 1998), using the maximum like- Measurement and
lihood fitting process in AMOS 16. We examined configural equiva- Demographic Findings
lence, which entailed testing baseline measurement models, for the
aggregate sample and then did the same for each country data set.
To evaluate model goodness of fit, we examined the comparative fit
index (CFI, recommended ≥.90), the root mean square error of
approximation (RMSEA, recommended ≤.08), and the adjusted chi-
square test (χ2/degrees of freedom, with values ranging between 1
and 5 indicative of reasonable fit). The baseline measurement
model for the entire data set (depicted on the left-hand side of Fig-
ure 1) yielded a good fit to the data (CFI = .961, RMSEA = .045,
χ2/d.f. = 5.15). Correlations between the latent factors were modest,
with COS–MAT not significant (r = –.005, p = .856), COS–CET nega-
tively correlated (r = –.145, p < .001), and MAT–CET positively cor-
related (r = .078, p = .003). Respectively, these findings lend support
to H1 and H2 but not to H3. With the exception of Korea, according
to Hu and Bentler’s (1999) cutoff criteria, the models for each coun-
try sample demonstrated reasonably good fit (Table 1). All factor
loadings were significant at p < .01 across all country models.
The next step involved assessing metric invariance, which we

tested with a hierarchy of models with increasing constraints on
the number of invariant parameters, following Byrne’s (2001) pro-
cedure. As we list in Table 2, fit statistics for Model 1a (constrain-
ing all measurement weights [factor loadings] to equality across the
groups, CFI = .931, RMSEA = .020, χ2/d.f. = 1.82, Δχ2 = 185.8, Δd.f. =
98, p < .01) and Model 1b (constraining both measurement weights
and structural covariances, CFI = .919, RMSEA = .020, χ2/d.f. =
1.92, Δχ2 = 185.6, Δd.f. = 42, p < .01) were reasonable but signifi-
cantly inferior to those of the unconstrained model (CFI = .938,
RMSEA = .020, χ2/d.f. = 1.81), indicating that some parameters
were noninvariant across the eight groups. For the unconstrained
model (Model 1), the factor loadings across the eight groups were
all significant (p < .01), and of a total of 136 standardized loadings
(17 parameters × eight groups), only 10 were lower than the .50
threshold (Korea: COS1, 5, 6, MAT1, 6; Hungary: MAT6; India: COS6,
MAT6, 7; Chile: MAT6). For the measurement weights constrained
model (Model 1a), factor loadings for all groups were all highly sig-
nificant (p < .001); only 7 were lower than .50 (Mexico: MAT6;
Korea: COS3, 5, 6, MAT1, 6; India: MAT6). Note that for the latter

err
Figure 1. MAT1
.69*
Latent Constructs err MAT2
.67*
Measurement Model and
Res1
Structural Model Linking err MAT3 .65*
Demographics to Cultural .65*

Constructs err MAT4 MAT MAT
.64*
err MAT5
.64*
n.s.
err MAT6 .57*

–.22*
SEX
err MAT7 –.00 n.s.
n.s.
err COS1 .02
.80*
–.12*
err COS2 .77* .05*
AGE Res2
n.s.
err COS3 .73*
n.s.
COS .08* .05* .11* COS

.70*
err COS4
n.s.
.65*
err COS5 .41* INCOME .15*

.59*
err COS6 –.15* .10* n.s.
.14*
err CET1 .82*
–.07* Res3
EDU
err CET2 .76*
–.10*
.76*
CET CET
err CET3
.68*
err CET4
Model fit statistics: Model fit statistics:

χ2/d.f. = 5.148 χ2/d.f. = 5.466
CFI = .961 CFI = .961
RMSEA = .045 RMSEA = .047
*Statistically significant.
Notes: Left-hand side: Minimum was achieved (model overidentified, distinct sample moments =
153, number of distinct parameters to be estimated = 37, d.f. = 116, N = 2015). Standardized
coefficients are shown. Right-hand side: Minimum was achieved (model overidentified, distinct
sample moments = 231, number of distinct parameters to be estimated = 56, d.f. = 175, N =
2015). n.s. = not significant. Standardized coefficients are shown.
model, standardized (but not unstandardized) parameter estimates

vary slightly across groups because the variances of the variables are
not constrained.
In practice, full measurement invariance regularly does not hold

(Steenkamp and Baumgartner 1998) and is considered “a condition
to be striven for, not one expected to be fully realized” (Horn 1991,
p. 125). This is particularly the case as the number of groups under
consideration increases. The conventional method for identifying
the noninvariance of specific parameters proceeds in a pairwise
manner; however, in a study involving eight cultural groups, 28
pairwise combinations would be necessary, making it highly

Country Sex Age Income Education Model Fit (1) Model Fit (2)
Canada (n = 241)
MAT .102 –.266* .020 –.018 χ2/d.f. = 1.808 χ2/d.f. = 1.737
COS –.140** .017 –.029 .105 CFI = .948 CFI = .932
CET .049 .319* .012 –.113 RMSEA = .058 RMSEA = .055
Mexico (n = 231)
MAT .142 –.056 –.065 –.012 χ2/d.f. = 1.618 χ2/d.f. = 1.653
COS .063 –.006 .091 .223* CFI = .924 CFI = .893
CET –.061*** .146*** –.173** –.109 RMSEA = .052 RMSEA = .053
Greece (n = 317)
MAT –.102*** –.126** .035 –.108*** χ2/d.f. = 2.242 χ2/d.f. = 2.234
COS –.189* .017 –.021 .175* CFI = .935 CFI = .909
CET –.186* .149* .003 –.265* RMSEA = .063 RMSEA = .062
Korea (n = 137)
MAT –.084 .012 .127 .004 χ2/d.f. = 1.536 χ2/d.f. = 1.475
COS –.148 –.303* .112 .091 CFI = .856 CFI = .819
CET –.001 .255* –.038 –.153 RMSEA = .063 RMSEA = .059
Cosmopolitanism, Consumer Ethnocentrism, and Materialism

Table 1.
Samplesa
Relationships Across Country
Constructs and Demographics
129
130
Continued
Table 1.
Country Sex Age Income Education Model Fit (1) Model Fit (2)
Hungary (n = 332)
MAT –.066 –.062 .025 –.070 χ2/d.f. = 2.193 χ2/d.f. = 2.063
COS –.120** –.141*** .006 .141*** CFI = .929 CFI = .914
CET –.044 .189* –.097 –.081 RMSEA = .060 RMSEA = .057
India (n = 236)
MAT .117 .002 –.017 –.125 χ2/d.f. = 1.490 χ2/d.f. = 1.540
COS .083 .117 –.036 –.102 CFI = .939 CFI = .910
CET .055 .169** .043 –.101 RMSEA = .046 RMSEA = .048
Chile (n = 192)
MAT –.175** –.214** –.052 .024 χ2/d.f. = 1.550 χ2/d.f. = 1.577
COS –.042 .123 .020 .055 CFI = .935 CFI = .905
CET –.117 .180** .077 –.047 RMSEA = .054 RMSEA = .055
Sweden (n = 329)
MAT .147* –.350* .082 –.088 χ2/d.f. = 2.013 χ2/d.f. = 1.946
COS –.194* –.126** .004 .252* CFI = .959 CFI = .945
CET .049 .204* –.033 –.201* RMSEA = .056 RMSEA = .054
All (n = 2015)b
MAT .045*** –.223* .010 –.004 χ2/d.f. = 5.148 χ2/d.f. = 5.466
COS –.121* –.038 –.004 .151* CFI = .961 CFI = .940
CET –.026 .137* –.065* –.100* RMSEA = .045 RMSEA = .047
Mark Cleveland, Michel Laroche, and Nicolas Papadopoulos

Correlationsc CET–COS COS–MAT CET–MAT
Canada –.212* –.098 –.119
Mexico –.081 .106 .093
Greece –.099 –.017 .136**
Korea –.204*** .363* –.150
Hungary –.178* .084 .010
India –.218* .115 .083
Chile .010 –.030 .310*
Sweden –.291* –.032 .074
*p < .01.
**p < .05.
***p < .10.
aDemographics → constructs: Standardized path coefficients listed are from the multiple group model, with measurement weights constrained across groups (Model 2a).
bFor the aggregated sample (N = 2015), statistics and path coefficients are from the unconstrained model (Model 2).
c Correlations are from the measurement weights constrained model (Model 2a).
Notes: Model fit (1) = baseline measurement models, and model fit (2) = baseline demographics and constructs structural models.

Table 1.
Continued
131
unlikely that all pairwise group parameter comparisons would be
completely invariant. Here, the assumption of partial metric invari-
ance seems to be reasonably supported (Byrne, Shavelson, and
Muthén 1989). The correlations among the constructs varied con-
siderably across the samples even after we constrained the factor
loadings to equality (Table 1). In five groups, the CET–COS correla-
tion (H2) was significant and negative (Canada, Korea, Hungary,
India, and Sweden). In addition, COS and MAT were largely uncor-
related (H1), except among Korean respondents, for whom we
obtained a strong positive link. In most instances, CET and MAT
were not significantly correlated (H3), though we found a positive
link for the Greek and Chilean samples.
The baseline structural model (aggregated data set) linking the

demographic variables (sex was dummy coded as 0 = female, 1 =
male) to the constructs yielded a good fit (CFI = .940, χ2/d.f. =
5.47, RMSEA = .047), as depicted on the right-hand side of Figure
1. We also evaluated country-specific models (Table 1). In certain
instances, fit statistics deteriorated below the acceptable cutoff
criteria, but for the most part, we judged the fit of each of the
tested models to be satisfactory. Model 2a, which constrained fac-
tor loadings to equality while freely estimating the factor covari-
ances and demographic → construct structural weights, fit the data
reasonably well (CFI = .910, RMSEA = .020, χ2/d.f. = 1.79, Δχ2 =
189.5, Δd.f. = 98, p < .01) and was a significant improvement over
more fully constrained models in which the structural weights
and structural covariances were also constrained to be equal
across groups (Models 2b and 2c; Table 2). The findings discussed
next are those corresponding to Model 2a (measurement weights
constrained).
Overall, age was the strongest predictor of the three cultural con-
structs (14 significant instances across the eight data sets), fol-
lowed by sex and education (with 9 and 7 significant instances,
respectively). Income was the weakest predictor; it was negatively
related to CET in only the Greek sample. For the aggregated data set
(Figure 1), the significant findings were as follows: In line with H4
and H6a, younger people were more materialistic than older people
(significantly corroborated in four groups: Canada, Greece, Chile,
and Sweden), but older people scored higher on CET than younger
people (upheld in all eight groups). Lending marginal support to
H6b, income was negatively related to CET (upheld only in the
Mexican sample). Income was predictive of neither MAT nor COS
(refuting H5b), and this was true for all groups. More educated
respondents tended to be more cosmopolitan (substantiated in the
Mexican, Greek, Hungarian, and Swedish samples) and less con-
sumer ethnocentric (confirmed in the Greek and Swedish samples)
than their less educated counterparts, in support of H5c and H6c.
Although support for H5a was lacking in the aggregated sample, the
predicted negative relationship between age and COS was substan-
tiated in three groups (Korea, Hungary, and Sweden). In line with
H5d, women scored higher on COS than men, also evidenced in
four samples (Canada, Greece, Hungary, and Sweden). Overall,
men tended to be more materialistic than women, and though this
result was upheld for the Swedish sample, the reverse was the case
for the Greek and Chilean samples.

Model χ2 d.f. χ2/d.f. CFI RMSEA Δχ2 Δd.f.
1. Unconstrained measurement 1676.431* 928 1.806 .938 .020 — —
1a. Measurement weights constrained 1862.238* 1026 1.815 .931 .020 185.805* 98
1b. Structural covariances constrained 2047.869* 1068 1.917 .919 .021 185.632* 42
2. Unconstrained demographic-latent 2490.052* 1400 1.779 .917 .020 — —
2b. Structural weights constrained 2832.683* 1582 1.791 .905 .020 153.155* 84
2c. Structural covariances constrained 3164.922* 1652 1.916 .885 .021 332.238* 70
3. Unconstrained food consumption 4015.040* 2544 1.578 .926 .017 — —
4. Unconstrained ownership importance 4826.055* 2992 1.613 .917 .017 — —
5. Unconstrained consumer behaviors 4457.669* 2768 1.610 .919 .017 — —
*p < .01.
Notes: Italics indicate models selected for further interpretation (i.e., constraining all measurement weights to equality across the groups).

Table 2.
Analyses
Results of the Multigroup
Structural Equation Model
133
Because of the quantity of dependent variables under consideration
Structural Equation Modeling (and the ensuing number of estimated structural equation modeling
Consumer Behavior Findings parameters, which increases exponentially), we elected to partition
our analyses of the 48 behaviors, grouped according to (1) food con-
sumption (14 variables), (2) importance of product ownership (con-
sumer electronics, appliances, and durables: 18 variables), and
(3) other nonfood consumer behaviors (apparel, luxury products,
and technology behaviors: 16 variables). These baseline models
included covariance parameters between the dependent variables to
account for error correlation. For illustration, the first model is
depicted in Figure 2. All three baseline models fit the data well:
Model 1 (CFI = .958, χ2/d.f. = 3.59, RMSEA = .036), Model 2 (CFI =
.949, χ2/d.f. = 3.74, RMSEA = .037), and Model 3 (CFI = .949, χ2/d.f. =
3.92, RMSEA = .038). Of the 48 behaviors (Table 3), MAT was a sig-
nificant predictor in 39 instances (37 positive path coefficients),
COS influenced behavior in 34 instances (2 negative), and CET was
antecedent of 34 behaviors (13 negative).
The standardized path coefficients listed in Table 3 reveal several

patterns. First, most behavioral outcomes were influenced by mul-
Figure 2.
err
err
err
err
err
err
err
err
err
err
err
err
err
err
err
err
err
Baseline Structural Model
Example: Food Consumption
COS5
MAT2
MAT3
MAT5
MAT7
MAT1
MAT4
MAT6
COS3
COS2
COS6
CET2
CET3
CET1
CET4
C0S1
C0S4
.66*.65* .65* .64* .53* .77*.73* .70* .65* .82* .76* .76* .68*
.70* .57* .80* .59*
MAT COS –.20* CET

NS
.12*
MAT n.s. n.s. n.s. .15* .14* –.07* n.s. .16* n.s. n.s. .12* .16* .19* .09*
COS n.s. .09* .08* n.s. n.s. .13* .11* n.s. n.s. .19* .12* n.s. –.07* .07*
CET .29* .21* .29* .25* .22* n.s. n.s. n.s. .07* n.s. n.s. n.s. n.s. n.s.
trad. beverage
champagne
trad. snack
hamburger
trad. meal
trad. food
soft drink
trad. rest.
chocolate
coffee
pizza
wine
beer
tea
err
err
err
err
err
err
err
err
err
err
err
err
err
err
Model fit statistics:

χ2/d.f. = 3.588
CFI = .958
RMSEA = .036
*Statistically significant.
Notes: Minimum was achieved (model overidentified, distinct sample moments = 496,
number of distinct parameters to be estimated = 178, d.f. = 318, N = 2015). Standardized
coefficients are shown. Error correlations between dependent variables are included in model,
but not shown. n.s. = not significant.

tiple constructs (i.e., 25 associated with two constructs, 17 with all
three, and only 6 associated with one). Second, the role of each
construct varied considerably across the different contexts. Regard-
ing the positive relationships, CET was strongly linked to all five
traditional food behaviors (sustaining H9a), as well as to three other
foods (beer, pizza, and boxed chocolates). Consumer ethnocentrism
positively predicted the importance of owning certain consumer
electronics (VCR, CD player, and videogame console), appliances
(hair dryer and food processor), and both transportation products
(bicycle and automobile). It was also positively associated with
two apparel categories (business attire and traditional fashion) and
the purchasing frequency of four luxuries (fur/leather coats, fra-
grances, jewelry, and antique furniture).
As expected, MAT had a strong positive influence on the purchas-

ing frequencies of all seven luxury products (cosmetics, fra-
grances, jewelry, fur/leather coats, antique furniture, boxed choco-
lates, and expensive wine/champagne). It was also positively
associated with the four apparel categories (jeans, athletic shoes,
business attire, and traditional fashions), ownership importance
for all eight consumer electronic products (personal portable
stereo, VCR, CD player, videogame console, DVD player, television
set, digital camera, and computer), and all seven electronic
media/communication behaviors (DVD purchasing, television
watching, mobile phone and computer usage, Internet surfing and
e-mailing, and automated teller machine [ATM] usage). MAT also
positively predicted the importance of owning five appliances
(clothes dryer, dishwasher, hair dryer, microwave oven, and food
processor) and automobiles. In general, these findings support
H7a–f. We also found that though not hypothesized, MAT posi-
tively affected the consumption of traditional snack items and
restaurants, soft drinks, pizza, and hamburgers.
Sustaining H8a–b, COS positively predicted the importance of own-

ing six of the eight consumer electronics (personal portable stereo,
Item MAT COS CET

1 Traditional meals .036 .008 .286*
Table 3.
2 Traditional beverages .032 .092* .207*
MAT, COS, CET, and
Consumer Behavior (Baseline
3 Traditional food items –.018 .079* .293*
Models)
4 Traditional snack items .148* .023 .252*
5 Traditional restaurants .142* –.025 .220*
6 Tea –.070* .127* .015
7 Coffee .012 .106* –.008
8 Soft drinks .158* .017 .020
9 Beer .027 .045*** .065*
10 Wine (table) –.002 .192* .039
11 Champagne/expensive wine .112* .122* .011
12 Pizza .163* –.033 .044***
13 Hamburgers .190* –.073* .021
14 Boxed chocolates .086* .066* .045***

Item MAT COS CET
Table 3. 15 Personal portable stereo .279* .075* –.030
Continued
16 VCR .136* .035 .059**
17 Washing machine .006 .128* –.063*
18 Clothes dryer .184* –.010 –.093*
19 Dishwasher .125* –.007 –.011
20 Hair dryer .132* .050** .101*
21 Vacuum .018 .068* –.065*
22 CD player .156* .106* .041***
23 Bicycle –.116* .087* .060**
24 Videogame console .214* –.071* .052**
25 DVD player .209* .080* –.067*
26 Refrigerator –.013 .149* –.077*
27 Microwave oven .127* .077* –.053**
28 Television set .204* .046*** –.031
29 Digital camera .225* .074* .027
30 Personal or laptop computer .132* .108* –.103*
31 Food processor .170* .035 .123*
32 Automobile .195* .014 .081*
33 Blue jeans .141* .046*** –.071*
34 Athletic shoes .134* .077* –.032
35 Business attire .082* .110* .067*
36 Traditional fashion .056** .013 .117*
37 Fur/leather coats .180* –.025 .129*
38 Fragrances .226* .060** .086*
39 Cosmetics .257* .078* .022
40 Jewelry .190* .041*** .046***
41 Antique furniture .091* .014 .139*
42 Purchase DVDs .165* .045*** .028
43 Watch television .120* .021 –.010
44 Use mobile phone .179* .057** –.092*
45 Use personal computer/laptop .096* .061* –.184*
46 Surf Internet .109* .099* –.210
47 Send e-mail .051** .164* –.181*
48 Use automated teller machine .159* .061* –.060**
*p < .01.
**p < .05.
***p < .10.
Notes: N = 2015. Standardized path coefficients, from structural equations modeling.
CD and DVD players, television set, digital camera, and computer)

and six of the seven electronic media/communication activities
(mobile phone, ATM, computer usage, Web surfing and e-mail, and
DVD purchasing). In addition, COS was positively antecedent for
the importance of owning five appliances (washing machine, hair
dryer, vacuum, refrigerator, and microwave oven) as well as a bicy-

cle. In support of H8c–d, COS positively influenced the purchasing
frequencies of five of the seven luxuries (fragrances, cosmetics,
jewelry, expensive wine/champagne, and boxed chocolates), as
well as three of the four apparel categories (jeans, athletic shoes,
and business attire). Although not hypothesized, COS also posi-
tively predicted six food consumption frequencies (beer, wine, cof-
fee, tea, and traditional foods and beverages).
Of the 17 significant, negative relationships, CET accounted for 13,

indicating that products associated with these behaviors would be
poor candidates for foreign brand penetration into areas in which
strong sentiments of CET are held. Providing limited support for
H9c–d, respondents with strong CET sentiments tended to eschew
certain electronic media products and behaviors (mobile phone
usage, ownership and use of computers, the Internet, e-mail,
ATMs, and DVD players). We obtained narrow support for H9b, in
which consumers with high CET levels abstained from blue jeans.
High CET levels were associated with reduced importance ascribed
to owning five of the eight appliances (washing machine, clothes
dryer, vacuum, refrigerator, and microwave oven). Of the remain-
ing negative relationships, cosmopolitans avoided hamburgers and
videogame console ownership, whereas materialists shunned bicy-
cles and tea.
The next step involved applying multigroup analyses to the three

baseline models, comparing the fit of the unconstrained models
(Models 3, 4, and 5) with increasingly restrictive models (Table 2).
Although the fit statistics of Models 3a, 4a, and 5a (constraining
measurement weights to equality across the eight groups) were sig-
nificantly inferior to the unrestricted models, the deterioration was
relatively marginal when compared with the more fully restrictive
models (3b, 4b, and 5b, in which structural weights were also con-
strained to equality). Given our objective of making cross-cultural
comparisons, balanced against the presence of partial measure-
ment invariance and adequacy of model fit statistics, we drew the
results discussed in the following section from the models in
which the measurement weights were constrained to equality.
Space limitations preclude a detailed review of all revealed inter-

country similarities and differences, so our focus here is on the
most robust consistencies and discrepancies.1 Among the most
consistent relationships were the positive links between CET and
various traditional foods and fashions. In the majority of sample
groups, COS positively predicted the consumption of three bever-
ages (tea, table wine, and expensive wine/champagne), whereas
MAT was positively associated with three global foods (soft drinks,
pizza, and hamburgers). Commonly across at least half of the
groups, COS positively predicted the use of modern communica-
tion devices, including computers (and the importance of com-
puter ownership), the Internet, e-mail, and mobile phone usage,
whereas CET was negatively linked to such behaviors. The most
universal finding was the positive links of MAT to the importance
of owning various hedonistic and/or status-enhancing products
(portable stereo, CD and DVD players, DVDs, videogame console,
television set [and television watching], digital camera, and auto-
mobile), the purchasing frequencies of four luxury products
(fur/leather coats, fragrances, cosmetics, and jewelry), the impor-

tance of owning four appliances (clothes dryer, hair dryer,
microwave oven, and food processor), and ATM use.
Considerable dissimilarities were revealed with respect to the

antecedent role (or lack thereof) of the constructs on various behav-
iors, particularly for COS and CET. For example, the importance
ascribed to automobile ownership was a positive function of COS
among Hungarians and Mexicans, whereas for Canadians and
Koreans, a negative relationship was revealed. In many instances, a
relationship was revealed in one or two groups, but not in others
(e.g., COS and pizza in Mexico, MAT and business attire in Korea
and Sweden), indicating that the behavioral outcomes of these psy-
chographic drivers were not only category specific but also often
country specific. In conclusion, the highest degree of uniformity
(within and between product categories) across the groups was evi-
denced for MAT, and the discrepancy was greatest for COS.
Several key contributions and implications can be drawn from this

GENERAL DISCUSSION AND research, from theoretical and practical perspectives. It is vitally
CONCLUSIONS important to investigate the robustness of constructs and models
developed in Western contexts to varied international settings, so
as to broaden consumer behavior theory across cultures. Here, we
validated measures for three dispositional constructs that are use-
ful for identifying cross-national segments—two reflecting global
consumer trajectories (MAT and COS) and one representing the
entrenchment of national consumer differences (CET)—across
samples drawn from a diverse collection of countries. We assessed
the nomological validity of these constructs further by examining
the broader network of demographic antecedents and behavioral
outcomes, across the eight groups.
Regarding the behavioral outcomes, our results demonstrated that

under certain conditions, CET and MAT are compatible as behav-
ioral predictors. Four distinct patterns can be discerned according to
the directional influence of these two constructs: (1) traditional con-
sumption (e.g., traditional foodstuffs), in which CET is positively
antecedent and MAT is negatively (or nonsignificantly) predictive of
behavior; (2) necessity consumption (e.g., tea, refrigerator), in which
both MAT and CET are negatively (or nonsignificantly) prognostic of
behavior; (3) hedonistic local consumption (e.g., traditional snacks
and restaurants), in which both MAT and CET positively predict
consumption; and (4) hedonistic global consumption (e.g., blue
jeans, Internet surfing), which describes behaviors that are positively
a function of MAT and negatively (or nonsignificantly) a function of
CET. The third pattern implies that ethnocentric consumers do not
necessarily eschew the pursuit of material objects; however, they
seek out local alternatives to satisfy their materialistic cravings.
Beyond their bias for locally produced products, country-of-origin
stereotypes tend to be more entrenched among ethnocentric con-
sumers (Kaynak and Kara 2002), though perceived cultural similar-
ity affects ethnocentric consumers’ evaluations of foreign products
(Watson and Wright 2000).
With their ability to “traverse, consume, appreciate, and empathize

with cultural symbols and practices that originate outside their
home country” (Skrbis, Kendall, and Woodward 2004, p. 129), cos-

mopolitans gravitate toward exotic foods, art, music, and fashion
(Thompson and Tambyah 1999). To the cosmopolitan, this omnivo-
rous consumption is perceived as “a symbol of social status and of
one’s moral worthiness” (Skrbis, Kendall, and Woodward 2004, p.
131). Successful global branding often entails promoting cosmo-
politan, modern, and sophisticated images (Friedman 1990). We
recommend this positioning strategy for products that satisfy com-
munication needs (e.g., computers, mobile phones), for which we
obtained positive and negative behavioral links to COS and CET,
respectively. In terms of the aggregate data set, we found that MAT
and COS jointly and positively predicted behavior in 22 of the 48
product categories; there were only four instances in which behav-
ior was positively a function of one and negatively a function of the
other. Possessing foreign brands enhances the owner’s status in
many developing countries (Ger and Belk 1996a, b). However, our
finding of the statistical independence between COS and MAT
(except in the Korea sample) implies that openness toward other
(and global) cultural perspectives does not engender greater sus-
ceptibility to materialistic values. More likely, mediascapes
(Appadurai 1990) and other global cultural flows trigger a latent,
universal human desire for status and material enrichment.
In defining the target market and designing the marketing strategy

(in particular, communication appeals), the key for international
marketers is to recognize (1) the circumstances that increase the
salience of traditional cultural affiliation and attendant CET dispo-
sitions (e.g., foods, other culturally laden products), (2) the contexts
favoring the emergence of COS dispositions (e.g., products appeal-
ing to human universals, products that connote membership in
transnational communities), and (3) when and where consumption
is driven by MAT (e.g., socially visible products). With advances in
communications technology and the correspondingly rapid diffu-
sion of ideas, images, and products, some researchers have argued
that the formulation of cultural entities is no longer dependent on
geographic proximity (Craig and Douglas 2006). Subsequently, the
search for common consumer groups across boundaries will
become more important than delineating groups along national dis-
tinctions (Alden, Steenkamp, and Batra 1999; Bolton and Myers
2003; Roth 1995). Although commonalities were evidenced across
the country samples regarding the roles of the psychographic con-
structs on behavior, many discrepancies were also substantiated.
These findings imply that globalization has made uneven inroads
on consumer attitudes and behaviors, lending credence to Alden,
Steenkamp, and Batra’s (2006) conclusion that globalization and
cultural homogenization are neither interchangeable nor inevitable.
In some respects, geography still matters. Therefore, further
research should investigate how MAT, COS, and CET are related to
cultural characteristics. With roots in occidental culture, the acqui-
sition of cosmopolitan traits may be abetted or thwarted by the
local environment (e.g., universities where students are apt to be
exposed to transnational individuals and ideals) and the main-
stream society (e.g., individualist Canadian versus collectivist
Korean). Within- and between-country variation was greatest for
CET. Across markets, uneven proportions of consumers are biased
toward local alternatives. Whether globalization is accelerating the
growth of the proportion of highly CET consumers relative to the

proportion of consumers holding cosmopolitan dispositions is left
to additional research.
Further research on similar topics should draw from a broader cross-

section of the population and consider a wider array of product- and
service-dominated categories. The findings presented herein should
be interpreted with vigilance, particularly when generalizing them
to the broader country populations. The relatively youthful, affluent,
educated, and English-fluent sample doubtlessly inflated and under-
stated mean COS and CET levels, relative to the mainstream popula-
tions. However, the samples were carefully selected to attend to the
difficulties of representative sampling, while departing from a pure
convenience sampling approach. By collaborating with mature stu-
dents (who also were members of their nation’s workforce), we
acquired data from a broader section of the population. The sam-
pling protocol adhered to in each country generated groups that
were roughly similar in terms of demographics, with respect to the
distributions of age, income, and education. Our intention was not
to generalize the findings to specific countries but rather to confirm
the structure of these psychographic constructs internationally,
assess the consistency of key demographic antecedents across differ-
ent groups, and illustrate which constructs are drivers of what
behaviors in which locales. By offering insights into when and why
consumers might desire global products to local alternatives, our
study extends the scant extant research on transnational consumer
segments.
1. A table summarizing the significant findings for each country

NOTE data set is available from the authors on request.
Factor
Appendix A. Construct Items 1 (MAT) 2 (COS) 3 (CET)
Construct Measures (Factor (MAT1) I like a lot of luxury in my life. .745
Loadings)a and Behavioral
(MAT2) Buying things gives me lots of pleasure. .725
Measures
(MAT3) My life would be better if I owned
certain things I don’t have. .709
(MAT4) I admire people who own expensive
homes, cares, and clothes. .708
(MAT5) I’d be happier if I could afford more
things. .707
(MAT6) It sometimes bothers me quite a bit that
I can’t afford to buy all the things that I like. .698
(MAT7) I like to own things that impress people. .640
(COS1) I enjoy exchanging ideas with people
from other cultures or countries. .823
(COS2) I am interested in learning more about
people who live in other countries. .805
(COS3) I enjoy being with people from other
countries to learn about their views and
approaches. .779
(COS4) I like to observe people of other
countries, to see what I can learn from them. .764
(COS5) I like to learn about other ways of life. .723
(COS6) I find people from other cultures
stimulating. .664

Factor
Construct Items 1 (MAT) 2 (COS) 3 (CET) Appendix A.
(CET1) [Countrymen] should not buy foreign
Continued
products, because this hurts [home country’s]
businesses and causes unemployment. .846
(CET2) It is not right to purchase foreign products,
because it puts [countrymen] out of jobs. .828
(CET3) A real [country person] should always
buy [home country]-made products. .809
(CET4) We should purchase products manu-
factured in [home country] instead of letting
other countries get rich off of us. .789
Measures for Consumer Behaviorsb
On a scale from 1 (“never”) to 7 (“daily”), how often do you consume the
following food and drink items?
•Pizza, tea, beer, traditional “country” (e.g., Swedish) food items, hamburgers,
coffee, wine, soft drinks, traditional “country” (e.g., Greek) beverage items
On a scale of 1 (“never”) to 7 (“daily”), how often do you wear the following
items?
•Blue (denim) jeans, athletic/running shoes, business suits/attire
On a scale from 1 (“not at all essential”) to 7 (“very essential”), for you, how
essential (important) are the following items?
•Personal stereo player (e.g., walkman, iPod), VCR (videocassette recorder),
washing machine, clothes dryer, dishwasher machine, electric hair dryer,
vacuum cleaner, CD (compact disc) player, bicycle, videogame console (e.g.,
Playstation, Xbox, Nintendo), DVD (digital video disc) player, refrigerator,
microwave oven, television set, digital camera, personal (and/or laptop)
computer, electric food processor, automobile
On a scale from 1 (“never”) to 7 (“daily”), how often do you …
•Watch television, use a cell phone (mobile phone), use a personal (and/or
laptop) computer, use (surf) the Internet (World Wide Web), send e-mail
(electronic mail), use an automatic banking machine (ATM), eat traditional
“country” (e.g., Korean) meals, eat traditional “country” (e.g., Mexican)
snacks
On a scale from 1 (“never”) to 7 (“several times per week”), how often do you …
•Visit traditional “country” (e.g., Hungarian) restaurants, wear traditional
“country” (e.g., Indian) fashions
On a scale from 1 (“never”) to 7 (“at least once per month”), how often do you
purchase these items?
•Boxed chocolates, expensive cosmetics, movie or music DVDs (digital video
discs), fragrances (e.g., perfumes/colognes)
On a scale from 1 (“never”) to 7 (“several times per year”), how often do you
purchase these items?
•Jewelry, antique furniture, fur/leather coats, expensive wine/champagne
aPrincipal component analysis; Varimax rotation with Kaiser normalization. Rotation
converged in four iterations, and loadings are for the entire sample (N = 2015). Cumulative
percentage of variance explained = 57.22. Kaiser–Meyer–Olkin measure of sampling
adequacy = .868. Bartlett’s test of sphericity: significant (χ2153 = 12936.36, p = .00).
bStatements were adapted when necessary, with respect to the sampled country (e.g.,
traditional Swedish food items, traditional Korean food items).

142
Coefficientsc
Scoresb, and Reliability
Descriptive Statisticsa, Mean
Appendix B.
Characteristic Canada Mexico Greece Korea Hungary India Chile Sweden Total
Sample Size (n) 241 231 317 137 332 236 192 329 2015
Female (%) 120 (50) 122 (53) 170 (54) 45 (33) 196 (59) 96 (41) 116 (60) 183 (56) 1048 (52)
Male (%) 121 (50) 109 (47) 147 (46) 92 (67) 136 (41) 140 (59) 76 (40) 146 (44) 967 (48)
Age (years)d
0–24 167 (70) 130 (56) 116 (37) 117 (85) 177 (53) 169 (72) 116 (60) 121 (37) 1113 (55)
25–29 29 (12) 48 (21) 98 (31) 5 (4) 48 (15) 38 (16) 25 (13) 82 (25) 374 (19)
30–39 15 (6) 29 (13) 73 (23) 4 (3) 51 (15) 12 (5) 29 (15) 61 (19) 274 (14)
40+ 30 (12) 24 (10) 30 (10) 11 (8) 55 (17) 17 (7) 22 (12) 65 (20) 254 (13)
Household Incomee
<$30,000 33 (14) 38 (17) 83 (26) 43 (31) 113 (34) 96 (41) 81 (42) 81 (25) 568 (28)
$30,000–$79,999 86 (36) 83 (36) 189 (60) 43 (31) 175 (53) 68 (29) 75 (39) 90 (27) 809 (40)
>$80,000 122 (51) 110 (48) 45 (14) 51 (37) 44 (13) 72 (31) 36 (19) 158 (48) 638 (32)
Educationf
High school (inc.) 1 (0) 7 (3) 2 (1) 5 (4) 9 (3) 3 (1) 7 (4) 14 (4) 48 (2)
High school 32 (13) 34 (15) 39 (12) 34 (25) 143 (43) 28 (12) 33 (17) 68 (21) 411 (20)
College/technical/diploma 140 (58) 70 (30) 94 (30) 54 (39) 62 (19) 36 (15) 42 (22) 77 (23) 575 (29)
Undergraduate degree 45 (19) 78 (34) 100 (32) 41 (30) 48 (15) 101 (43) 79 (41) 100 (30) 592 (29)
Graduate degree 23 (10) 42 (18) 82 (26) 3 (2) 70 (21) 68 (29) 31 (16) 70 (21) 389 (19)
Mark Cleveland, Michel Laroche, and Nicolas Papadopoulos

Characteristic Canada Mexico Greece Korea Hungary India Chile Sweden Total
MAT α .863 .787 .838 .710 .794 .743 .815 .883 .830
M 4.66 4.26 4.64 4.57 4.40 4.84 4.03 4.16 4.44
SD 1.16 1.36 1.14 .81 1.06 1.02 1.13 1.33 1.15
COS α .909 .780 .874 .648 .864 .760 .819 .907 .855
M 5.69 5.73 5.59 4.91 5.68 5.59 5.91 5.52 5.58
SD 1.05 .80 .98 .75 .95 .85 .81 1.05 .96
CET α .750 .766 .856 .798 .837 .810 .791 .848 .839
M 2.95 4.41 3.96 3.86 3.70 3.67 3.54 2.64 3.59
SD 1.12 1.20 1.37 1.18 1.34 1.41 1.27 1.23 1.38
aColumn percentages may not add up exactly to 100% because of rounding.
bCronbach’s alphas (all, N = 2015); CET, four items; MAT, seven; COS, six.
cAdjusted mean scores, with the following entered into the model as covariates: sex = .48, age = 3.09, household income = 5.11, and educational attainment = 3.43.
dAge categories aggregated from original nine intervals.
eCanadian currency equivalent; income categories aggregated from original nine intervals.
fHighest completed level (not in progress), converted to Canadian educational level equivalent.

Continued
Appendix B.
143
Alden, Dana L., Jan-Benedict E.M. Steenkamp, and Rajeev Batra (1999),
REFERENCES “Brand Positioning Through Advertising in Asia, North America, and
Europe: The Role of Global Consumer Culture,” Journal of Marketing, 63
(January), 75–87.
———, ———, and ——— (2006), “Consumer Attitudes Toward Market-
place Globalization: Structure, Antecedents, and Consequences,” Inter-
national Journal of Research in Marketing, 23 (3), 227–39.
Appadurai, Arjun (1990), “Disjuncture and Difference in the Global Econ-
omy,” Theory Culture & Society, 7 (2/3), 295–310.
Barber, Benjamin R. (1996), Jihad Versus McWorld: How Globalism and
Tribalism Are Reshaping the World. New York: Ballentine Books.
Batra, Rajeev, Venkatraman Ramaswamy, Dana L. Alden, Jan-Benedict
E.M. Steenkamp, and S. Ramachander (2000), “Effects of Brand
Local/Non-Local Origin on Consumer Attitudes,” Journal of Consumer
Psychology, 9 (2), 83–95.
Baughn, C. Christopher and Attila Yaprak (1996), “Economic Nationalism:
Conceptual and Empirical Development,” Political Psychology, 17 (4),
759–78.
Belk, Russell W. (1985), “Materialism: Trait Aspects of Living in the Mate-
rial World,” Journal of Consumer Research, 12 (December), 265–80.
——— (2000), “Consumption Patterns of the New Elite in Zimbabwe,” in
Marketing Contributions to Democratization and Socioeconomic Devel-
opment: Proceedings of the 25th Macromarketing Conference, C.L.
Shultz II and B. Grbac, eds. Lovran, Croatia: CL, 120–37.
———, Güliz Ger, and Søren Askegaard (2003), “The Fire of Desire: A Mul-
tisited Inquiry into Consumer Passion,” Journal of Consumer Research,
30 (3), 326–51.
Bolton, Ruth N. and Matthew B. Myers (2003), “Price-Based Global Market
Segmentation for Services,” Journal of Marketing, 67 (July), 326–51.
Byrne, Barbara M. (2001), Structural Equations Modeling with AMOS:
Basic Concepts, Applications, and Programming. Mahwah, NJ:
Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
———, Richard J. Shavelson, and Bengt Muthén (1989), “Testing for the
Equivalence of Factor Covariance and Mean Structures: The Issue of
Partial Measurement Invariance,” Psychological Bulletin, 105 (May),
456–66.
Cannon, Hugh M. and Attila Yaprak (2002), “Will the Real-World Citizen
Please Stand Up! The Many Faces of Cosmopolitan Consumer Behav-
ior,” Journal of International Marketing, 10 (4), 30–52.
Choi, Jay and Murli Rajan (1997), “A Joint Test of Market Segmentation
and Exchange Risk Factor in International Capital Markets,” Journal of
International Business Studies, 28 (1), 29–49.
Churchill, Gilbert A. (1979), “A Paradigm for Developing Better Measures
of Marketing Constructs,” Journal of Marketing Research, 16 (February),
64–73.
Cleveland, Mark and Michel Laroche (2007), “Acculturation to the Global
Consumer Culture: Scale Development and Research Paradigm,” Jour-
nal of Business Research, 60 (3), 249–59.
Craig, C. Samuel and Susan P. Douglas (2006), “Beyond National Culture:
Implications of Cultural Dynamics for Consumer Research,” Inter-
national Marketing Review, 23 (3), 322–42.
De Mooij, Marieke (2004), Consumer Behavior and Culture: Consequences for
Global Marketing and Advertising. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Dubois, Bernard and Patrick Duquesne (1993), “The Market for Luxury Goods:
Income Versus Culture,” European Journal of Marketing, 27 (1), 35–44.

Elliot, Kevin and David Roach (1993), “Service Quality in the Airline
Industry: Are Carriers Getting an Unbiased Evaluation from Con- THE AUTHORS
sumers?” Journal of Professional Services Marketing, 9 (2), 71–82.
Firat, A. Fuat (1995), “Consumer Culture, or Culture Consumed?” in Mar- Mark Cleveland is Assistant
keting in a Multicultural World, Janeen Arnold Costa and Gary J. Professor of Marketing, Aubrey
Bamossy, eds. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, 105–123.
Dan Program in Management and
Friedman, Jonathan (1990), “Being in the World: Globalization and Local- Organizational Studies,
ism,” in Global Culture: Nationalism, Globalization, and Modernity, University of Western Ontario
Mike Featherstone, ed. London: Sage Publications, 311–28. (e-mail: mclevela@uwo.ca).
Ger, Güliz (1999), “Localizing in the Global Village: Local Firms Compet-
ing in Global Markets,” California Management Review, 41 (4), 64–83. Michel Laroche is Royal Bank
——— and Russell W. Belk (1990), “Measuring and Comparing Material- Distinguished Professor of
ism Cross-Culturally,” in Advances in Consumer Research, Vol. 17, G. Marketing, John Molson
Gorn and R. Polley, eds. Provo, UT: Association for Consumer Research, School of Business,
186–92. Concordia University (e-mail:
——— and ——— (1996a), “Cross-Cultural Differences in Materialism,” laroche@jmsb.concordia.ca).
Journal of Economic Psychology, 17 (1), 55–77.
——— and ——— (1996b), “I’d Like to Buy the World a Coke: Consump- Nicolas Papadopoulos is
tionscapes of the ‘Less Affluent World,’” Journal of Consumer Policy, 19 Professor of Marketing and
(September), 271–304. International Business, Eric
Hannerz, Ulf (1990), “Cosmopolitans and Locals in World Culture,” Sprott School of Business,
Theory, Culture, and Society, 7 (2–3), 237–51. Carleton University (e-mail:
——— (1992), Cultural Complexity: Studies in the Social Organization of npapadop@carleton.ca).
Meaning. New York: Columbia University Press.
Hofstede, Geert (1991), Cultures and Organizations: Software of the Mind.
London: McGraw-Hill. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
Horn, John L. (1991), “Comments on ‘Issues in Factorial Invariance,’” in
Best Methods for the Analysis of Change, Linda M. Collins and John L. The authors gratefully acknowledge
Horn, eds. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association, the support of SSHRC Canada. They
114–25. extend thanks to the three
Howes, David (1996), Cross-Cultural Consumption: Global Markets, Local
anonymous JIM reviewers for their
Realities. London: Routledge. constructive comments in the review
process. They also thank the
——— (1999), “Cultural Transfer, America and Europe: 500 Years of Inter-
following people for their assistance
culturation,” The Canadian Review of Sociology and Anthropology, 36
(1), 152–54.
in the data collection for this project:
Leslie Szamosi, City College
Hu, Li-Tze and Peter M. Bentler (1999), “Cutoff Criteria for Fit Indices in (affiliated institution of the
Covariance Structure Analyses: Conventional Criteria vs. New Alterna-
University of Sheffield),
tives,” Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 6 (1),
1–55.
Thessaloniki, Greece; Bigyan Verma,
Kohinoor Business School, Mumbai,
Inglehart, Ronald (1990), Culture Shift in Advanced Industrial Society. India; Annika Hallberg, Göteborg
Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
University, Göteborg, Sweden; József
Johansson, Johny K. (2004), In Your Face: How American Marketing Berács, Corvinus University of
Excess Fuels Anti-Americanism. New York: Financial Times–Prentice Budapest, Hungary; Roberto Solano,
Hall. Universidad de las Américas Puebla,
Kaynak, Erdener and Ali Kara (2002), “Consumer Perceptions of Foreign Mexico; Kye-Chung Song,
Products: An Analysis of Product-Country Images and Ethnocentrism,” Information and Communications
European Journal of Marketing, 36 (7/8), 928–49. University, Daejeon, South Korea;
Keillor, Bruce D., Michael D’Amico, and Veronica Horton (2001), “Global and José Rojas Méndez (formerly of
Consumer Tendencies,” Psychology and Marketing, 18 (1), 1–19. Universidad de Talca, Talca, Chile)
Klein, Jill Gabrielle (2002), “Us Versus Them, or Us Versus Everyone? and Statia Elliott, both at Carleton
Delineating Consumer Aversion to Foreign Goods,” Journal of Inter- University, Ottawa, Canada.
national Business Studies, 33 (2), 345–63.
Kleine, Susan S. and Stacey M. Baker (2004), “An Integrative Review of
Material Possession Attachment,” Academy of Marketing Science

Review, (accessed November 5, 2005), [available at http://www.
amsreview.org/articles/kleine01-2004.pdf].
Konrad, George (1984), Antipolitics. San Diego: Harcourt Brace
Jovanovich.
Luna, David and Susan F. Gupta (2001), “An Integrative Framework for
Cross-Cultural Consumer Behavior,” International Marketing Review, 18
(1), 377–86.
McCracken, Grant (1986), “Culture and Consumption: A Theoretical
Account of the Structure and Movement of the Cultural Meaning of Con-
sumer Goods,” Journal of Consumer Research, 13 (January), 71–84.
Meyers-Levy, Joan (1988), “The Influence of Sex Roles on Judgment,” Jour-
nal of Consumer Research, 14 (March), 522–30.
Rawwas, Mohammed Y.A., K.N. Rajendran, and Gerhard A. Wuehrer
(1996), “The Influence of Worldmindedness and Nationalism on Con-
sumer Evaluation of Domestic and Foreign Products,” International
Marketing Review, 13 (2), 20–38.
Richins, Marsha L. (2004), “The Material Values Scale: Measurement Prop-
erties and Development of a Short Form,” Journal of Consumer
Research, 31 (1), 209–219.
——— and Scott Dawson (1992), “A Consumer Values Orientation for
Materialism and Its Measurement: Scale Development and Validation,”
Journal of Consumer Research, 19 (3), 303–316.
Robertson, J.P. and N. Zill (1997), “Matters of Culture,” American Demo-
graphics, 19, 48–52.
Roth, Martin S. (1995), “The Effect of Culture and Socioeconomics on the
Performance of Global Brand Image Strategies,” Journal of Marketing
Research, 32 (May), 163–75.
Sharma, Subhash, Terence A. Shimp, and Jeongshin Shin (1995), “Con-
sumer Ethnocentrism: A Test of Antecedents and Moderators,” Journal
of the Academy of Marketing Science, 23 (1), 26–37.
Shimp, Terence A. and Subhash Sharma (1987), “Consumer Ethnocen-
trism: Construction and Validation of the CETSCALE,” Journal of Mar-
keting Research, 24 (August), 280–89.
Skrbis, Zlatko, Gavin Kendall, and Ian Woodward (2004), “Locating Cos-
mopolitanism: Between Humanist Ideal and Grounded Social Cate-
gory,” Theory, Culture, and Society, 21 (6), 115–36.
Steenkamp, Jan-Benedict E.M. and Hans Baumgartner (1998), “Assessing
Measurement Invariance in Cross-National Consumer Research,” Jour-
nal of Consumer Research, 25 (June), 78–90.
Suh, Taewon and Ik-Wang G. Kwon (2002), “Globalization and Reluctant
Buyers,” International Marketing Review, 19 (6), 663–80.
Ter Hofstede, Frenkel, Jan-Benedict E.M. Steenkamp, and Michel Wedel
(1999), “International Market Segmentation Based on Consumer–
Product Relations,” Journal of Marketing Research, 36 (February), 1–17.
Thompson, Craig J. and Siok Kuan Tambyah (1999), “Trying to be Cos-
mopolitan,” Journal of Consumer Research, 26 (3), 214–41.
Watson, John J. and Katrina Wright (2000), “Consumer Ethnocentrism and
Attitudes Toward Domestic and Foreign Products,” European Journal of
Marketing, 34 (9/10), 1149–57.
Wilk, Richard (1998), “Emulation, Imitation, and Global Consumerism,”
Organization & Environment, 11 (3), 314–33.
Yoon, Sung-Joon, Hugh M. Cannon, and Attila Yaprak (1996), “Evaluating
the Cymic Cosmopolitanism Scale on Korean Consumers,” in Advances
in International Marketing, Vol. 7, Charles Taylor, ed. New York: JAI
Press, 211–32.

Cosmopolitanism, Consumer Ethnocentrism, and Materialism: An Eight-Country Study of Antecedents and Outcomes

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Cosmopolitanism, Consumer Ethnocentrism, and Materialism: An Eight-Country Study of Antecedents and Outcomes

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Cosmopolitanism, Consumer

Ethnocentrism, and Materialism:

ABSTRACT Although there is a consensus that industries are globalizing, the

Although globalization continues unabated across industries and

The inconsistency of opinions is exacerbated by the paucity of

Our first objective is to assess the structure and reliability of these

The most important dilemma facing the international marketing

Cosmopolitanism, Consumer Ethnocentrism, and Materialism 117

Particularly in the West, the term “consumer” increasingly has

Long a topic of interest to researchers and social commentators,

118 Mark Cleveland, Michel Laroche, and Nicolas Papadopoulos

Individual consumers construct meanings for material goods, and

The rise of nation-states has produced national cultures; it is not

Cosmopolitanism, Consumer Ethnocentrism, and Materialism 119

Because cosmopolitans perceive themselves as less provincial and

H1: The relationship between MAT and COS is not significant.

Evidence corroborates the worldwide spread of dispositions such as

120 Mark Cleveland, Michel Laroche, and Nicolas Papadopoulos

To the ethnocentric consumer, foreign or global brands represent

The nature of COS contradicts that of CET, and therefore we con-

H2: COS and CET are negatively related.

Cosmopolitanism, Consumer Ethnocentrism, and Materialism 121

H4: MAT is negatively related to age.

COS. In line with our previous review, we conceptualize COS as

H5: (a) COS is negatively related to age, (b) COS is positively

CET. As with COS, in general, younger people, particularly those

122 Mark Cleveland, Michel Laroche, and Nicolas Papadopoulos

H6: CET is (a) positively related to age, (b) negatively related

Identities and belongingness are asserted through lifestyles, which

MAT. De Mooij (2004, p. 163) states that “branded luxury products

H7: MAT positively predicts (a) the purchasing frequency of

COS. Dubois and Duquesque (1993) find a strong association

Cosmopolitanism, Consumer Ethnocentrism, and Materialism 123

H8: COS positively predicts (a) the importance of owning con-

CET. Culture-bound products require greater marketing-mix adap-

H9: (a) CET positively predicts behaviors associated with tradi-

124 Mark Cleveland, Michel Laroche, and Nicolas Papadopoulos

Reliable and generalizable measures for COS are rare. Thus, we

A total of 48 consumption-related statements tapped a broad array

Cosmopolitanism, Consumer Ethnocentrism, and Materialism 125

We conducted exploratory factor analysis on the construct meas-

126 Mark Cleveland, Michel Laroche, and Nicolas Papadopoulos

To test the structural cross-cultural equivalence, we subjected the

The next step involved assessing metric invariance, which we

Cosmopolitanism, Consumer Ethnocentrism, and Materialism 127

Demographics to Cultural .65*

err MAT6 .57*

COS .08* .05* .11* COS

err COS5 .41* INCOME .15*

err COS6 –.15* .10* n.s.

Model fit statistics: Model fit statistics:

model, standardized (but not unstandardized) parameter estimates

In practice, full measurement invariance regularly does not hold

128 Mark Cleveland, Michel Laroche, and Nicolas Papadopoulos

Cosmopolitanism, Consumer Ethnocentrism, and Materialism

Mark Cleveland, Michel Laroche, and Nicolas Papadopoulos

Cosmopolitanism, Consumer Ethnocentrism, and Materialism

The baseline structural model (aggregated data set) linking the

132 Mark Cleveland, Michel Laroche, and Nicolas Papadopoulos

Cosmopolitanism, Consumer Ethnocentrism, and Materialism

The standardized path coefficients listed in Table 3 reveal several

MAT COS –.20* CET

Model fit statistics: