The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available on Emerald Insight at:

https://www.emerald.com/insight/1355-5855.htm

APJML
35,4 Battle between psychological
ownership and consumer
animosity to influence
944 consumers’ buying behavior:
Received 8 December 2021
Revised 14 March 2022
a moderated mediation model
18 May 2022
Accepted 28 May 2022 Sita Mishra and Garima Saxena
Institute of Management Technology, Ghaziabad, India, and
Ravi Chatterjee
Institute of Management Technology, Dubai, UAE

Abstract
Purpose – This study aims to understand the effect of consumers’ national identity (NI) on their willingness to
buy (WTB) domestic (Indian) products vis-
a-vis foreign (Chinese) products. Secondly, it explores the role of
psychological ownership (PO) and consumers’ animosity in explaining their WTB domestic products.
Design/methodology/approach – In this paper data were collected online from Indian consumers (N 5 408)
through the survey method, using a structured questionnaire. Data analysis was conducted using SPSS AMOS
Version 24 and the PROCESS SPSS macro, using mediations and moderated mediation models.
Findings – This study establishes the positive effect of consumers’ NI on their WTB domestic products
over Chinese ones. With a long history of hostility between India and China in the backdrop, the authors
find a significant mediating role of PO and consumer animosity (CA) in the relationship between NI and
WTB . The results also demonstrate that while consumer ethnocentrism (CET) positively moderates the
mediating path via PO at all levels from low to high, it moderates the path via CA only at the mean and high
levels.
Originality/value – This study applies the Psychological Ownership Theory, Social Identity Theory (SIT)
and the Attribution Theory to explore the interplay between consumers’ NI, PO , CA and ethnocentrism in the
Indian context. The study asserts the distinction between these constructs by analyzing the interaction and
inter-relationships between these variables. Further, it provides a comprehensive understanding of Indian
consumers’ preference for domestic products over Chinese ones.
Keywords National identity, Consumer ethnocentrism, Consumer animosity, Psychological ownership
theory, Social identity theory
Paper type Research paper

Asia Pacific Journal of Marketing
and Logistics
Vol. 35 No. 4, 2023
pp. 944-961
© Emerald Publishing Limited
1355-5855
DOI 10.1108/APJML-12-2021-0884
1. Introduction
Along with rising globalization, there has been an increased focus on consumers’ ethnocentric
behavior and inter-country/regional rivalry that has attracted researchers worldwide to
study the social, cultural and psychological effects of globalization (Sobol et al., 2018; Lee
et al., 2021). As global brands enter newer geographies for growth, especially developing
economies, consumers continually make consumption choices between foreign and domestic
products. In such market situations, consumers, on occasions, display an ‘in-group bias’
favoring local products, while at other times, adopting a more cosmopolitan consumption
pattern in preferring foreign products (Zeugner-Roth et al., 2015). To successfully operate in
such interconnected markets, global and local brands require knowledge of the process and
the factors that effectively influence the consumers’ perceptions and preferences about
foreign vis-
a-vis local brands. Although some typical consumer behavior patterns concerning
nationalism versus global cosmopolitanism exist, a large part of extant literature showed that
consumers across different nations and cultures vary in their preference for local products
(Keillor and Hult, 1999; Pereira et al., 2002). As a result, many scholars from this area have Psychological
studied country-specific issues (Blank and Schmidt, 2003; Rose et al., 2009; Sobol et al., 2018; ownership
Verlegh, 2007). However, past research primarily focused on ethnocentrism, especially in
developed countries (Souiden et al., 2018). There is scant literature investigating the interplay
versus consumer
between ethnocentrism and animosity behavior in the context of emerging markets. animosity
Such knowledge is especially critical for an economy like India; it has risen to be among the
fastest-growing and most open-to-foriegn direct investment (FDI) economies globally in the
past decade. The Indian market houses prominent global brands and multi-national 945
organizations that face tough competition from domestic products and brands to win
consumers over (Jain and Jain, 2013). China, for instance, has been one of the biggest exporters
to India, leading to a prominent presence of its products in the Indian market. These products
commonly compete with their domestic counterparts under various categories, including
personal goods, household items, toys, handicrafts and consumer electronics. However, we
chose to limit the scope of goods to low-end consumer goods, including toys, plastic items,
electrical goods, accessories, etc.
To understand the rationale for such a competitive scenario between Indian and
Chinese products, one must understand and appreciate its backdrop. Sino-India relations
have a long and intense history of economic and political hostility; in fact, the relationship
has also borne the brunt of war in the past (Sengupta, 2020). However, it may be noted that
although the influence of antagonistic Sino-India relations may by and large be latent,
anger and hostility in consumer behavior do intensify in times of heightened conflict
between the two countries.
To understand consumers’ preferences for local products vis-
a-vis foreign products
marketing researchers have given considerable attention to consumers’ ethnocentrism and
have identified it as a crucial antecedent in the phenomena (Siamagka and Balabanis, 2015;
Han, 2017). Some studies have also been done in the Indian context, exploring the role of
consumer ethnocentrism (CET), specifically, the consumers’ preference for domestic products
(Bandyopadhyay, 2014; Jain and Jain, 2013; Kumar et al., 2013). Another crucial variable that
influences an individual’s pro-nation behavior is national identity (NI). However, extant
research has only recently applied it to the consumption context, despite its recognized
importance and distinction from ethnocentrism (Zeugner-Roth et al., 2015). By applying the
Social Identity Theory (SIT), we explore the interactional effect of these two in-group
variables, i.e. CET and NI, on consumers’ willingness to buy (WTB) domestic products.
Further, we also apply the Psychological Ownership Theory, along with the Attribution
Theory, besides SIT, to explain the mechanisms underlying the effect of consumers’ NI on
their WTB domestic products. While past research recognized CET and animosity as
important antecedents influencing consumers’ WTB domestic products (Shoham et al., 2016),
this study introduces psychological ownership (PO) as a critical variable. We establish PO as
a far more effective path than consumer animosity (CA) to effectively influence Indian
consumers’ preference for domestic products (vis-a-vis their Chinese counterparts).
Summarily, the research objectives for this study are as follows:
(1) To examine the influence of NI on consumers’ WTB domestic (Indian) products
against foreign (Chinese) ones.
(2) To understand the role of PO and CA in influencing consumers’ WTB domestic
products.
(3) To study the influence of CET on the above relationships.
The following section explains the theoretical background and hypotheses formulation,
followed by the research methodology, data collection, analysis and results section. The last
APJML section concludes with a discussion on the theoretical contribution, managerial and policy
35,4 implications, and future research scope.

2. Theoretical background
2.1 Consumer ethnocentrism and consumer animosity
Based on normative assumptions, CET questions the wisdom of buying foreign goods (He
946 and Wang, 2015; Shimp and Sharma, 1987) and it stems from both love and concern for one’s
own country (Verlegh, 2007; Wang et al., 2018). CET drives people to seek ways to distinguish
their national social identity from others, leading to loyalty toward domestic products (Shimp
and Sharma, 1987). However, CA refers to “antipathy toward past or current political,
military, economic, or diplomatic events” (Klein et al., 1998, p. 90). It is important to note that
unlike CET, which measures belief in foreign products, CA shows hostility toward a specific
country (Antonetti et al., 2019). In a globalized economy, CET and CA have influenced
customers’ purchasing decisions (Khan et al., 2019).
The SIT’s in-group versus out-group concepts are related to CET and CA. SIT indicates
that people put extra effort into their group to stand out from others (Tajfel and Turner, 1986).
Concern for one’s identity increases accountability when it is strongly linked to an institution,
locality or country (Verkuyten and Martinovic, 2017). As a result, each person begins to favor
their group (country) and reject out-group products (foreign products). Further, categorizing
in-group and out-group leads to contrasts between these groups, which may lead to anger
towards the out-group country and its products. Using SIT, we investigate how NI affects
consumers’ WTB in the presence of CET and CA. With SIT as a foundation, we develop and
test a conceptual framework that examines the relationship between socio-psychological
traits (NI, CET and CA) and in-group and out-group bias related to domestic product
preferences.
We also believe the Attribution Theory can explain CA. A war or political or economic
hostility between two countries may have caused individuals to prefer domestic products
(Weiner, 1985). For attribution, Weiner (1985) proposed the locus, controllability and stability
of the cause-effect connection. CA’s negative image of a country influences consumer buying
behavior for products from that country (Antonetti et al., 2019). The hostility a country faces
antagonizes its people, causing them to blame the offending country and avoid buying its
products.

2.2 Consumer ethnocentrism and psychological ownership

Generally, due to an individual’s strong cognitive and emotional relationship, he/she tends to
develop a sense of ownership towards external items (Pierce et al., 2003). This sense might be
felt for tangible, ethereal or elusive targets, such as a product, a brand or even a country
(Brylka et al., 2015). This study focuses on the idea of PO toward a country which describes as
a sense of possession of one’s country of origin and arises when people perceive ownership
toward the country (Brylka et al., 2015). Extant literature discussed PO having four origins:
(1) stimulation, (2) effectance and efficacy, (3) self-identity and (4) having a position (Jussila
et al., 2015). Because of PO, people strive to achieve one or more of these goals. However, in
this study, we argue that feelings of PO towards their own country may provide a meaningful
explanation for preferring domestic products. Notably, national identity motives could
trigger this affective feeling of individuals towards their country, providing an avenue to
connect psychologically with their country. We explore the role of PO towards the country in
shaping and exploring the relationship between NI and preferences for domestic products.
We also examine the impact of CET on PO since Turner (1999) discovered that an individual’s
desire to acquire domestic items is influenced by their ethnocentric inclinations, as it fulfills
both NI and PO.
3. Hypothesis formulation Psychological
3.1 National identity and willingness to buy ownership
NI refers to individuals’ positive bond with their nation and the extent to which they
internalize national culture (Blank and Schmidt, 2003), which is evident in their beliefs, values
versus consumer
and way of life (Malhotra and Ramalingam, 2022). In other words, NI revolves around people’s animosity
identification process with their nation while integrating different patterns associated with
the nation (Spielmann et al., 2020). This association may be positive or negative (Blank, 2003,
p. 260); most often, it is positive. 947
SIT’s research (Tajfel and Turner, 1986) shows that WTB a domestic product can predict
consumer behavior (Zeugner-Roth et al., 2015). NI precedes it when it comes to preferring
domestic products (Blank, 2003). Further, this is also linked to their life events and thoughts
(Cheah et al., 2016). Verlegh (2007) and Malhotra and Ramalingam (2022) found that
consumers with high NI strongly prefer WTB domestic products. Hence, we hypothesize:
H1. NI positively impacts the WTB domestic products.

3.2 Mediating role of psychological ownership

Psychologically, as individuals develop familiarity with an object, they become more involved
and experience ownership of it (Pierce et al., 2003). The emotional feeling that “it is mine!” is
what PO is all about (Pierce et al., 2003, p. 86). Research on a product’s PO showed that it is
linked to a favorable judgment of a product (Jussila et al., 2015). The bond between citizens and
the country brings about a psychological attachment. Previous studies have established that
individuals’ attitudes and behavior are affected, especially when PO has been developed
towards a target object (Mishra and Malhotra, 2021; Karahanna et al., 2015). Psychologically,
buying or owning a domestic product helps individuals maintain their social identity and
satisfies their national identification process (Turner, 1999, p. 8). People tend to prefer
increasing their self-worth by projecting good personal characteristics onto a possessed object
while increasing the perceived value of ownership (Dommer and Swaminathan, 2013). Given
that individuals’ PO demonstrates their feelings towards the nation and thereby influences
their desire to purchase domestic products (Gineikiene et al., 2017), we hypothesize:
H2. NI impacts the WTB domestic products through the mediating role of psychological
ownership.
3.3 Mediating role of consumer animosity
Consumers’ negative feelings toward a particular country permeate their perceptions of the
country’s products and services (Maher et al., 2010). As CA fosters a hostile attitude, it
influences consumers’ purchasing behavior (Rose et al., 2009), causing them to reject products
and brands from the hostile country (Jimenez and San Martn, 2010). Similarly, Antonetti et al.
(2019) proposed that extremely negative emotions lead to a lower perception of products
originating in a hostile foreign country. When the intensity of customer animosity is high, so
are the negative feelings associated with it (Antonetti et al., 2019; Zhang et al., 2019). These
extreme emotions amplify the negative impact of consumer dissatisfaction on purchasing
decisions (Li et al., 2021). Furthermore, because of CA, customers with high NI develop a
defense mechanism that causes them to prefer domestic products over foreign ones. Thus, we
hypothesize:
H3. NI impacts the WTB domestic products through the mediating role of CA.

3.4 Moderated effects of consumer ethnocentrism

CET refers to a consumer’s belief in the superiority of domestic products and their
moral obligation to buy them over imported goods (Shimp and Sharma, 1987; Wang and
APJML Chen, 2004). People from other cultures threaten ethnocentric people (Sharma et al., 1995) as
35,4 they believe that foreigners will harm the domestic economy and the job market (Shimp and
Sharma, 1987). This creates a bias in consumers’ minds that they must support domestic
companies. According to Hamin et al. (2014), ethnocentrism influences consumers’ preference
for late-comer brands. Han (2017) discovered that ethnocentrism plays a minor role in brand
evaluations among young Chinese and Korean consumers.
Further, consumers with high ethnocentric tendencies are loyal to products manufactured
948 in the domestic market (Shimp and Sharma, 1987). PO for one’s country develops a possessive
feeling translating to WTB for domestic products. Due to their national identification process,
this loyalty often comes with greater ethnocentric tendencies (Turner, 1999, p. 8). Hence, we
hypothesize:
H4. CET will moderate the influence of NI on (a) PO and (b) WTB such that the effect of
CET becomes stronger with an increase in CET.
CET refers to a consumer’s beliefs about the superiority of domestic products and the degree
to which they consider it a moral obligation to purchase them over foreign products (Shimp
and Sharma, 1987; Wang and Chen, 2004). Individuals with ethnocentric tendencies feel
threatened by people from other cultures (Sharma et al., 1995). They think that people from
different cultures would hurt the domestic economy and negatively influence the job market
(Shimp and Sharma, 1987). This creates a bias in the consumers’ minds, and they take it as a
national duty to support domestic companies. In the context of emerging markets, Hamin
et al. (2014) explained how ethnocentrism influences the consumers’ preference for their late-
comer brands. Interestingly, Han (2017) found that ethnocentrism played a subdued role in
brand evaluations, albeit in the context of young consumers from China and Korea.
Further, CET positively influences NI to buy domestic products, as consumers with high
ethnocentric tendencies are loyal to products manufactured in the domestic market (Shimp
and Sharma, 1987). As discussed earlier, individuals’ PO for their nation develops a possessive
feeling translating to WTB for domestic products. This loyalty often comes with greater
ethnocentric tendencies, which influence the individuals’ desire to own domestic products, as
it satisfies their national identification process (Turner, 1999, p. 8). Hence, we hypothesize:
H5. CET will moderate the influence of NI on (a) CA and (b) WTB such that the effect of
CET becomes stronger with an increase in CET.
Figure 1 presents the conceptual model and the hypotheses used in the present study.
Appendix provides the operational definitions of all the constructs in the framework.

4. Research methodology
4.1 Sample and data collection
Data for the study were collected online using a structured questionnaire survey method. We
identified potential respondents (18 years and above) from 3 Indian metro cities (i.e. Delhi,
Mumbai and Bangalore) through a professional online survey organization, as these cities
have a large and diverse population and ensure a large enough sample size data in a relatively
short period. We offered the participants gift coupons to a prominent Indian cafe store to
increase the response rate. Notably, before the final data collection, we conducted a pre-test of
the questionnaire with 22 respondents to evaluate the clarity and comprehensibility of the
questionnaire items. After making a few changes to the pre-tested questionnaire, we sent out
the request to participate in the survey through various online forums. The questionnaire
clearly stated the scope of products in this study (e.g. low-value consumer goods, including
toys, plastic items, electrical goods, accessories, etc.). We received 497 responses; however,
after discarding missing values and data cleaning, we finally had 408 useable responses,
 Consumer Psychological
Ethnocentrism ownership
versus consumer
animosity
H4

H5 949

Psychological
Ownership
H2

NaƟonal Willingness to
IdenƟty buy
H1

H3

Consumer
Animosity Figure 1.
Conceptual framework
Source(s): Designed by authors

ready for data analysis. Table 1 summarizes the demographic characteristics of the
respondents that we captured.

4.2 Measurement
We collected data through established scales used in previous studies. However, to match this
study’s context, we made slight changes in the wording of the items of existing scales. All scale
items were measured on a Likert scale of 1–7 (1 5 strongly disagree and 7 5 strongly agree).
The scale for the NI was adapted from Verlegh (2007); items of both CET and CA were adapted

Demographic characteristics Items Sample size N 5 408 (%)

Gender Male 212 (51.9)

Female 196 (48.1)
Age 18–24 yrs 68 (16.6)
25–34 yrs 112 (27.4)
35–44 yrs 123 (30.1)
45–54 yrs 60 (14.7)
More than 55 yrs 45 (11)
Educational Qualification Below Graduation 48 (11.7)
Graduation 129 (31.6)
Master’s degree 177 (43.4)
Higher than Master’s degree 54 (13.2)
Monthly income US$ 1000 and below 79 (19.4)
US$ 1000–US$3000 136 (33.3)
US$ 3000–US$5000 116 (28.4) Table 1.
More than US$5000 77 (18.8) Sample characteristics
APJML from Klein et al. (1998). Four items of PO towards the country were adapted from Van Dyne
35,4 and Pierce (2004). Lastly, the scale for WTB domestic products was based on Zolfagharian
et al. (2014). Table 2 depicts all measurement items of five constructs used in the study.

Estimate (standardized Composite

950 Constructs and scale items factor loading) α reliability (CR) AVE

Consumer ethnocentrism (CET) 0.912 0.913 0.638

CET1: Indian products, first, last and foremost 0.757
CET2: Purchasing foreign-made products is 0.768
un-Indian
CET3: It is not right to purchase foreign products, 0.814
because it puts Indians out of jobs
CET4: We should purchase products manufactured 0.844
in India instead of letting other countries get rich off
of us
CET5: We should buy from foreign countries only 0.779
those products that we cannot obtain within our
own country
CET6: Indian consumers who purchase products 0.825
made in other countries are responsible for putting
their fellow Indians out of work
Psychological ownership towards country (PO) 0.854 0.856 0.646
PO1: I sense that this is my Country 0.748
PO 2: I feel a very high degree of personal 0.721
ownership for my country
PO 3: This country is a part of me 0.839
PO 4: I feel as though I own a part of this country 0.784
National identity (NI) 0.882 0.887 0.665
NI1: Being a Indian citizen means a lot to me 0.899
NI2: I am proud to be an Indian citizen 0.888
NI3: When a foreign person praises India, it feels 0.753
like a personal compliment
NI4: I feel strong ties with India 0.704
Consumer Animosity (CA) 0.802 0.805 0.579
CA1: I do not like China. * 0.532
CA2: I feel angry toward Xi Jinping’s border dispute 0.763
with India
CA3: China is not a reliable trading partner 0.766
CA4: China wants to gain economic power over 0.702
India
CA5: China is taking advantage of India* 0.529
CA6: China has too much economic influence in 0.751
India
CA7: The Chinese are doing business unfairly with 0.769
India
Willingness to buy (WTB) 0.841 0.845 0.647
WTB1: It is very likely that I will buy products from 0.751
India rather than Chinese
WTB 2: I will purchase products from India in 0.842
comparison to Chinese the next time I need
products
Table 2. WTB 3: I will definitely try products from India 0.817
Construct and rather than China
measurement Note(s): *items deleted due to poor loading
assessment Model fit: Normed χ 2 5 2.864; RMSEA 5 0.073, CFI 5 0.916, TLI 5 0.913, IFI 5 0.917, GFI 5 0.908
As measures of constructs used in this study were derived from self-reporting data, we used a Psychological
single informant approach. The potential problem of common method variance requires ownership
testing. To avoid this common method bias, we have used multiple approaches. We assured
the respondents about the anonymity and privacy of their responses. Further, we presented
versus consumer
the questionnaire items related to all five constructs non-sequentially to the respondents. animosity
Harman’s one-factor test was conducted to check for common method bias (Podsakoff et al.,
2003). Notably, the largest eigenvalue does not explain 50% of all variables (36.48% of
variance). Hence, it indicates that common method bias wasn’t a problem in this study. We 951
also estimated common method bias through the unmeasured latent method construct
(ULMC) method. We evaluated individually std. path coefficients values for both
measurement models (with common latent factor) and measurement model (without
common latent factor). The minimal differences in standard path coefficients varied between
0.068 and 0.162 (less than 0.2). This affirms that there was no common method bias in the
current data set.

5. Data analysis and results

5.1 Measurement model analysis
The study performed confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) to evaluate the model’s accuracy,
and assess reliability, convergent validity and discriminant validity. SPSS AMOS version
24 and PROCESS SPSS macro (Hayes, 2018) were used for CFA and hypotheses testing.
The model fit indices of the measurement model were as follows Normed χ 2 5 2.864
(chi-square 5 458.243, df 5 160); RMSEA 5 0.073, GFI 5 0.908, CFI 5 0.916, TLI 5 0.913,
IFI 5 0.917. All the indicators were within the threshold values suggested by Hair et al. (2010).
Table 2 presents Cronbach’s α and composite reliability values to assess construct
reliability. Both these values for all constructs were above the threshold value of 0.7. Hence,
the result suggests internal consistency in the data (Hair et al., 2010). We employed the
convergent and discriminant validity tests to test construct validity; for convergent validity,
we checked the average variance estimate (AVE), which for all constructs was above 0.50
(ranging from 0.579 to 0.665). Further, we checked the convergent validity based on the AVE,
standardized factor loading and composite reliability. Table 2 shows the AVEs for all
constructs above 0.50; standardized factor loading of all items was above 0.6, and composite
reliability was more than 0.7. Additionally, the square roots of AVEs were higher than the
correlation among constructs; this, in turn, demonstrates discriminant validity (Fornell and
Larcker, 1981). Table 3 presents the mean, standard deviation, correlation and square root
of AVE.

5.2 Structural model analysis

We tested the hypotheses using PROCESS Macro for mediation (model 4). We tested the
moderated mediation models (model 58) with NI as an independent variable, PO and CA as

Mean SD WTB CET PO NI CA

Williingness to buy (WTB) 6.013 0.983 0.804

Consumer ethnocentrism (CET) 4.952 1.341 0.607 0.798 Table 3.
Psychological ownership towards country (PO) 6.073 0.979 0.642 0.566 0.804 Inter-construct
National identity (NI) 6.418 0.887 0.489 0.471 0.793 0.815 correlations, means,
Consumer Animosity (CA) 5.751 1.057 0.341 0.289 0.343 0.284 0.761 standard
Note(s): Values on the cross diagonals represent the square root of AVE deviations (SD)
APJML mediators, CET moderator and WTB as a dependent variable. Bootstrapping with 5,000
35,4 times was used to provide confidence intervals.

5.3 Result
5.3.1 Test of direct and mediation analysis. Table 4 indicates the findings of direct and
mediation effects. It is observed that NI is positively and significantly related to WTB
952 (b 5 0.493, t 5 8.367, p-value <0.001), supporting hypothesis H1 thereof. Table 4 also reveals
NI’s direct and indirect effect on WTB (via PO). It is seen here that the direct effect of NI on
WTB is not significant (b 5 0.095, t 5 1.228, p-value >0.05), whereas the indirect effect is
positive and statistically significant at a 5% significance level (b 5 0.397, lower limit
confidence interval (LLCI) 5 0.257, upper limit confidence interval (ULCI) 5 0.597). Hence, it
is affirmed that PO fully mediates the relationship between NI and WTB, supporting thereby
H2. To test H3, we tested both the direct and indirect effects of NI on WTB (via CA). As may be
seen from Table 4, both direct (b 5 0.432, t 5 7.054, p-value <0.000) and indirect effects
(b 5 0.061, LLCI 5 0.013, ULCI 5 0.125) are significant. Thus, it is affirmed that CA partially
mediates the relationship between NI and WTB, supporting H3 thereof.
5.3.2 Test of moderated mediation. Table 5 reports the findings of moderated mediation
analysis. The interaction effect of NI and CET (with PO as outcome) shows a positive and
significant impact (b 5 0.103, LLCI 5 0.052, ULCI 5 0.155). This interaction effect explains
58% of the variation. Further, the interaction term between PO and CET (with WTB as
outcome) also shows positive and significant impact (b 5 0.106, LLCI 5 0.048, ULCI 5 0.164).
This interaction effect explains 43% of the variation. Thus, H4a and H4b are both accepted.
Table 5 shows that NI’s effect on PO increases with a corresponding increase in CET, which is
significant at all CET levels (
1SD, mean, þ1 SD). A conditional indirect effect of NI on WTB
at different CET levels explains that NI’s effect on WTB increases with a corresponding
increase in CET. The value of B increases from 0.216 to 0.580 and is significant at all three
levels of CET (low, mean and high).
Next, we examined the moderation impact of NI on WTB (via CA) through CET. The first
interaction term NI X CET (with CA as outcome) indicates positive and significant impact
(b 5 0.119, LLCI 5 0.038, ULCI 5 0.201). Similarly, second interaction term CA X CET (on
WTB as outcome) is also positive and significant (b 5 0.092, LLCI 5 0.031, ULCI 5 0.152).
Thus, CET does moderate NI and WTB (via CA) on both paths, supporting in the process,
both H5a and H5b. Examining the conditional indirect impact of CET via mediator CA shows

Effect t p-value

H1: National identification → Willingness to buy 0.493 8.367 0.000

National identification → Willingness to buy (via PO)
Direct relationship tested 0.095 1.228 0.220
Indirect relationship tested B BootSE BootLLCI BootULCI
H2: National identification → Psychological 0.397 0.087 0.257 0.597
ownership towards country → Willingness to buy
Effect t p-value
National identification → Willingness to buy (via CA)
Direct relationship tested 0.432 7.054 0.000
Indirect relationship tested B BootSE BootLLCI BootULCI
Table 4.
Direct and Mediation H3: National identification → Consumer 0.061 0.028 0.013 0.125
effects Animosity → Willingness to buy
 B t p-value LLCI ULCI
Psychological
ownership
(a) Moderating Effect of consumer ethnocentrism (CET) Via PO versus consumer
Interaction effect of NI X CET on PO (outcome) 0.103 3.935 0.000 0.052 0.155
Interaction effect of PO X CET (with WTB as 0.106 3.622 0.000 0.048 0.164 animosity
outcome)
Conditional indirect of NI on WTB (via PO) at Effect BootSE LLCI ULCI
different levels 953

1 SD (CET) 0.216* 0.072 0.094 0.378
Mean (CET) 0.475* 0.106 0.256 0.678
þ1 SD (CET) 0.580* 0.137 0.281 0.826
(b) Moderating Effect of consumer ethnocentrism (CET) Via CA
Interaction effect of NI X CET on CA (outcome) 0.119 2.907 0.004 0.038 0.201
Interaction effect of CA X CET (with WTB as 0.092 2.989 0.003 0.031 0.152
outcome)
Conditional indirect of NI on WTB (Via CA) at
different levels

1 SD (CET)
0.016 0.032
0.086 0.041 Table 5.
Mean (CET) 0.070* 0.041 0.003 0.162 Moderated mediation
þ1 SD (CET) 0.118* 0.057 0.031 0.249 effect

positive and significant values at mean and high CET, while at low CET, it is non-significant.
Further, it is observed that at a low level of CET, the effect is not much remarkable (it is also
statistically insignificant, as shown in Table 5), while at an average and high level of CET, the
impact of NI on WTB is much sharper and higher. Hence, an increase in CET makes the
relationship stronger.

6. Discussion
Past research has identified CET as a critical antecedent influencing preference for domestic
over foreign products. In contrast, Carvalho et al. (2019) and Zeugner-Roth et al. (2015)
proposed that multiple in-group variables together might effectively explain consumers’
preference for domestic products than Cet alone. In line with their proposition, we examined
NI and CET’s interaction on WTB domestic products directly and via PO and CA.
The findings support the hypothesis that NI influences consumers’ WTB preference for
domestic over foreign products via PO and CA. The effect of NI on WTB is fully mediated by
PO towards the home country (India). In contrast, CA towards a foreign country (China)
partially mediates NI’s effect on WTB. Compared to products from an antagonistic foreign
country, consumers’ feelings of ownership for their country (PO) are a more pivotal force
behind purchasing domestic products (Carvalho et al., 2019). Also, high NI consumers show
love, attachment, patriotism and loyalty towards their country (Carvalho et al., 2019; Kumar
et al., 2013) and, thus, PO for the target (Th€ urridl et al., 2020). This study extends these
findings to show that NI does increase WTB for domestic products, primarily due to the
positive feelings for one’s home country than the negative feelings it arouses against specific
foreign countries. This explains Indian consumers’ preference for domestic products versus
Chinese products.
The results also show that CET increases NI’s impact on consumers’ WTB via PO (i.e. low,
average and high). However, in the case of CA, the moderation effect of CET on NI’s effect on
WTB via CA is only found to be significant at mean and high levels of CET. This finding
asserts the distinction between the constructs of CET and CA in the Indian versus Chinese
APJML products context. Ethnocentrism is a general avoidance of foreign goods to protect one’s
35,4 country, while animosity is targeted toward specific foreign countries (Carvalho et al., 2019).
Although CET may manifest in avoidance behaviors for foreign products, the anti-out group
motives in CET are driven by positive feelings of extending support to domestic
organizations (Kumar et al., 2013; Zeugner-Roth et al., 2015). Moreover, consumers’ NI and
PO are associated with similar positive feelings of attachment, loyalty and desire to protect
the home country (Blank and Schmidt, 2003; Brylka et al., 2015). Hence, CET is likely to be
954 closely associated with both NI and PO constructs. However, NI’s association with CA is
unlikely to be high because, unlike CET, CA is purely rooted in negative feelings of hostility,
anger and antipathy against a specific country (Cheah et al., 2016; Riefler and
Diamantopoulos, 2007). Table 3 shows that CET is more correlated with NI and PO than
CA. Our findings show that even low CET increases NI’s effect on WTB via PO is explained
by this higher association of CET with NI and PO. However, the effect of NI on WTB via CA is
only moderated at higher levels of CET.

6.1 Theoretical contributions

With marketplaces worldwide becoming interconnected and global, marketing research has
paid much attention to CET in understanding its effect on consumers’ product judgments,
attitudes and buying intentions towards foreign products vis-
a-vis domestic ones (Sharma
et al., 1995; Verlegh, 2007; Wang and Chen, 2004; Zeugner-Roth et al., 2015). Extant research
has also indicated that CET in developing countries is less evident than in developed
countries (Karoui and Khemakhem, 2019). CET in India has been found to differ from other
countries, like the United States, South Korea and China (Bawa, 2004). Resultantly,
researchers have lately conducted studies to understand CET, specifically in the Indian
context (Bandyopadhyay, 2014; Jain and Jain, 2013; Kumar et al., 2013). However, despite the
long acknowledged importance of consumer identities (self, local, regional, ethnic, national
and global), research on NI’s effect on consumer behavior remains limited (Carvalho et al.,
2019). This study focuses on the interaction effect of Indian consumers’ NI and ethnocentrism
on their WTB domestic products over products from China, a country with which India has
had a long conflicting past.
Past research has recognized NI, CET and CA as important drivers of approach behaviors
for consumers of domestic products (Carvalho et al., 2019), but researchers have not
adequately studied their inter-relationships. By studying the mediating effect of CA and PO
along with the moderating effect of CET, we demonstrate the underlying relationships
between these variables in the overall positive effect of NI on consumers’ WTB domestic
products.
Psychological ownership is a well-established concept in the organizational context (Pierce
et al., 2001, 2009; Van Dyne and Pierce, 2004) but it has only recently been adopted in the
marketing context (Th€ urridl et al., 2020). Extending the findings of Brylka et al. (2015), this study
applies the PO theory to explain the mechanism underlying the effect of Indian consumers’ NI on
their WTB domestic products over Chinese products. Further, in line with SIT, we incorporate
both in-group and out-group variables, i.e. CET and CA, to compare their impact and
comprehensively understand NI’s effect on WTB. Notably, the moderating effects of CET show
that not just high levels but even low levels of CET significantly accentuate NI’s effect on WTB
for domestic products via PO. However, only at high levels of CET does the effect of NI on WTB
for domestic products significantly rises via CA. On the one hand, these findings specify the
importance of CET in accentuating NI’s effect on WTB, and on the other, it provides evidence for
a more central role of PO than CA in the impact of NI on WTB for domestic products.
This study also contributes to the literature on the attribution theory to indicate that
Indian consumers’ preference for domestic products (versus Chinese products) is driven more
by their feelings of ownership of the home country and much less by their animosity towards Psychological
China. While the SIT has helped brand managers understand the importance of NI and ownership
ethnocentric elements to evoke in-group biases in consumers, we apply PO and attribution
theories to explain the mechanism of these effects. Our findings tie SIT and PO theory
versus consumer
together to establish that brands will benefit more from extending consumers’ in-group animosity
biases into a positive sense of ownership for their nation than resorting to out-group
sentiments like animosity towards specific foreign countries.
955
6.2 Implications for managers and policy makers
Understanding NI and the meanings attached to foreign brands is critical in deciding whether
a standardized marketing strategy with minor variations or a completely localized marketing
strategy is best for a nation (Keillor and Hult, 1999; Westjohn et al., 2012). Our findings
suggest that for Indian consumers, NI has a positive and significant impact on WTB
local products. This is evident in the success of certain Indian brands that have become
“nationally iconic’ brands (Spielmann et al., 2020, p. 397). As with Patanjali and Kama
Ayurveda, they designed and positioned their products as authentically rooted in Indian
heritage and values.
Zeugner-Roth et al. (2015) provided a clear distinction that NI is a “pro-in-group” construct
with an attachment and deep bond with the nation, whereas CET has “anti-out-group
motives” (p. 28). CET questions the morality of purchasing foreign-made goods and
encourages consumers to buy domestic goods to protect against imports and support
domestic organizations (Fernandez-Ferrn et al., 2015). The results of this study show that
combining these two constructs positively impacts consumers’ WTB. However, brand
managers may struggle to evoke both emotions simultaneously. While some domestic
organizations have sometimes benefited from raising anti-foreign sentiments against certain
foreign countries with a history of economic or political tensions with the home country, most
brands would not want to go down that path. Instead, brands can freely associate with pro-
nation and in-group sentiments and our findings suggest that in this way, they would benefit
more from arousing PO and NI.
Evoking a sense of responsibility, loyalty and an emotional connection to the homeland
may increase WTB domestic products. Furthermore, such sentiments can be developed in
people through their country’s government policies and “buy-local campaigns” (Siamagka
and Balabanis, 2015, p. 66) for national development (Zeugner-Roth et al., 2015). “Make in
India’ and “Aatma Nirbhar Bharat’ are two government initiatives launched in India to
support self-reliance. These have boosted NI in Indian consumers and slowed their desire for
global brands. As a result, Indians increasingly prefer domestic products and brands
(Shashidhar, 2021). To compete against local brands, Chinese brands like Xiaomi took
concerted actions to assert their “Indian-ness’ by highlighting their Indian workforce and
communicating their contribution to the country’s research, development and economic
growth (Lung, 2020 in Forbes). Global brands that respect local culture and strive for cultural
compatibility have been shown to have more positive consumer attitudes and purchase
likelihood (Guo et al., 2019). International brands can achieve cultural compatibility by
participating in national activities like sports, festivals and community service and
contributing to other developmental initiatives (Carvalho et al., 2019).

7. Limitations and future scope of research

This study shows the impact of NI and CET on consumer preferences for domestic products.
Other related variables such as national consciousness, nationalism, patriotism, ethnic identity,
CET and regional identity have been defined as distinct constructs (Carvalho et al., 2019;
APJML Sobol et al., 2018; St€ottinger and Penz, 2019). Future research may explore if some of these other
35,4 constructs, known to induce a local bias, have an equally significant and distinct influence on
consumption behavior.
According to St€ottinger and Penz (2019), regional identities influence consumer behavior
more than NI in countries like Austria, which are not very multi-ethnic. Since India has
strong regional identities, it may be pertinent for future studies to compare how regional
identities influence consumers’ choice between foreign, domestic or regional products. This
956 would help understand different boundary conditions that become more prominent in
influencing these purchase decisions. Also, we have only considered Indians as the research
sample population, but the results could vary if the sample comprised respondents from
different nationalities.
Socio-psychological variables like CET and NI may differ between countries (Keillor and
Hult, 1999). This study did not compare how many Indian consumers identify with their
country to other consumers. This study’s findings focus on the influence of CET, NI and CA
on Indian consumers’ preference for domestic over Chinese products. Future research could
examine similar economic or political conflicts between countries to see if the relationships
hold or change.
We exclusively focused on low-value products. Sengupta (2020) found that most Indian
consumers prefer Chinese products and brands for their lower price, attractive features,
availability and brand recognition, but they also characterized Chinese products as inferior
quality. However, for high-ticket items, where quality consideration becomes paramount and
product failure risk is higher, it would be interesting to see if NI and CET affect Indians’
preference for domestic products against Chinese products. Individual-related variables, such
as personality traits and dispositions, may also moderate the impact of NI and CE on
consumption behavior (Sobol et al., 2018; Westjohn et al., 2012). Thus, future research could
show how different personalities and purchase situations affect the relationship between NI
and domestic product preference.

References
Antonetti, P., Manika, D. and Katsikeas, C. (2019), “Why consumer animosity reduces product quality
perceptions: the role of extreme emotions in international crises”, International Business Review,
Vol. 28 No. 4, pp. 739-753.
Bandyopadhyay, S. (2014), “Country-of-origin perceptions, consumer ethnocentrism, and product
Evaluations in the Indian market”, Global Journal of Business and Social Science, Vol. 1 No. 8,
pp. 21-30.
Bawa, A. (2004), “Consumer ethnocentrism: CETSCALE validation and measurement of extent”,
Vikalpa, Vol. 29 No. 3, pp. 43-57, doi 10.1177/0256090920040304.
Blank, T. (2003), “Determinants of national identity in East and West Germany: an empirical
comparison of theories on the significance of authoritarianism, anomie, and general self-
esteem”, Political Psychology, Vol. 24 No. 2, pp. 259-288, doi 10.1111/0162-895x.00328.
Blank, T. and Schmidt, P. (2003), “National identity in a United Germany: nationalism or patriotism?
An empirical test with representative data”, Political Psychology, Vol. 24 No. 2, pp. 289-312,
available at: https://www.jstor.org/stable/3792352.
Brylka, A., M€ah€onen, T.A. and Jasinskaja-Lahti, I. (2015), “National identification and intergroup
attitudes among members of the national majority and immigrants: preliminary evidence for
the mediational role of psychological ownership of a country”, Journal of Social and Political
Psychology, Vol. 3 No. 1, pp. 24-45, doi 10.5964/jspp.v3i1.275.
Carvalho, S.W., Luna, D. and Goldsmith, E. (2019), “The role of national identity in consumption: an
integrative framework”, Journal of Business Research, Vol. 103 October, pp. 310-318, doi 10.
1016/j.jbusres.2019.01.056.
Cheah, I., Phau, I., Kea, G. and Huang, Y.A. (2016), “Modelling effects of consumer animosity: Psychological
consumers’ willingness to buy foreign and hybrid products”, Journal of Retailing and Consumer
Services, Vol. 30 May, pp. 184-192, doi 10.1016/j.jretconser.2016.01.018. ownership
Dommer, S.L. and Swaminathan, V. (2013), “Explaining the endowment effect through ownership: the role
versus consumer
of identity, gender, and self-threat”, Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 39 No. 5, pp. 1034-1050. animosity
Donato, C. and Raimondo, M.A. (2020), “Tactile sensations in E-retailing: the role of web
communities”, Emotional, Sensory, and Social Dimensions of Consumer Buying Behavior, IGI
Global, pp. 225-247. 957
Fernandez-Ferrın, P., Bande-Vilela, B., Klein, J.G. and Luisa Del Rıo-Ara
ujo, M. (2015), “Consumer
ethnocentrism and consumer animosity: antecedents and consequences”, International Journal
of Emerging Markets, Vol. 10 No. 1, pp. 73-88, doi 10.1108/IJOEM-11-2011-0102.
Fornell, C. and Larcker, D.F. (1981), “Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable
variables and measurement error”, Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 18 No. 1, pp. 39-50.
Gineikiene, J., Schlegelmilch, B.B. and Auruskeviciene, V. (2017), “‘Ours’ or ‘theirs’? Psychological
ownership and domestic products preferences”, Journal of Business Research, Vol. 72 March,
pp. 93-103.
Guo, X., Heinberg, M. and Zou, S. (2019), “Enhancing consumer attitude toward culturally mixed
symbolic products from foreign global brands in an emerging-market setting: the role of
cultural respect”, Journal of International Marketing, Vol. 27 No. 3, pp. 79-97, doi 10.1177/
1069031X19843912.
Hair, J.F., Black, W.C., Babin, B.J. and Anderson, R.E. (2010), Multivariate Data Analysis, a Global
Perspective, 7th ed., Pearson, NJ, p. 816.
Hamin, H., Baumann, C. and Tung, R.L. (2014), “Attenuating double jeopardy of negative country of
origin effects and latecomer brand: an application study of ethnocentrism in emerging
markets”, Asia Pacific Journal of Marketing and Logistics, Vol. 26 No. 1, pp. 54-77.
Han, C.M. (2017), “Cosmopolitanism and ethnocentrism among young consumers in emerging Asia:
Chinese vs Koreans towards Japanese brands”, Asia Pacific Journal of Marketing and Logistics,
Vol. 29 No. 2, pp. 330-346.
Hayes, A.F. (2018), Introduction to Mediation, Moderation, and Conditional Process Analysis: a
Regression-Based Approach, The Guilford Press, New York.
He, J. and Wang, C.L. (2015), “Cultural identity and consumer ethnocentrism impacts on preference
and purchase of domestic versus import brands: an empirical study in China”, Journal of
Business Research, Vol. 68 No. 6, pp. 1225-1233.
Jain, S.K. and Jain, R. (2013), “Consumer ethnocentrism and its antecedents: an exploratory study of
consumers in India”, Asian Journal of Business Research, Vol. 3 No. 1, pp. 1-18, doi 10.14707/
ajbr.130001.
Jimenez, N.H. and San Martın, S. (2010), “The role of country-of-origin, ethnocentrism and animosity in
promoting consumer trust. The moderating role of familiarity”, International Business Review,
Vol. 19 No. 1, pp. 34-45.
Jussila, I., Tarkiainen, A., Sarstedt, M. and Hair, J.F. (2015), “Individual psychological ownership:
concepts, evidence, and implications for research in marketing”, Journal of Marketing Theory
and Practice, Vol. 23 No. 2, pp. 121-139.
Karahanna, E., Xu, S.X. and Zhang, N. (2015), “Psychological ownership motivation and use of social
media”, Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice, Vol. 23 No. 2, pp. 185-207.
Karoui, S. and Khemakhem, R. (2019), “Consumer ethnocentrism in developing countries”, European
Research on Management and Business Economics, Vol. 25 No. 2, pp. 63-71, doi 10.1016/j.iedeen.
2019.04.002.
Keillor, B.D. and Hult, G.T.M. (1999), “A five-country study of national identity: implications for
international marketing research and practice”, International Marketing Review, Vol. 16 No. 1,
pp. 65-82, doi 10.1108/02651339910257656.
APJML Khan, M.A., Ashraf, R. and Malik, A. (2019), “Do identity-based perceptions lead to brand avoidance?
A cross-national investigation”, Asia Pacific Journal of Marketing and Logistics, Vol. 31 No. 4,
35,4 pp. 1095-1117.
Klein, J.G., Ettenson, R. and Morris, M.D. (1998), “The animosity model of foreign product purchase: an
empirical test in the people’s Republic of China”, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 62 No. 1, pp. 89-100,
doi 10.1177/002224299806200108.
Kumar, A., Fairhurst, A. and Kim, Y.K. (2013), “The role of personal cultural orientation in consumer
958 ethnocentrism among Indian consumers”, Journal of Indian Business Research, Vol. 5 No. 4,
pp. 235-250, doi 10.1108/JIBR-02-2013-0018.
Lee, H.M., Chen, T., Chen, Y.S., Lo, W.Y. and Hsu, Y.H. (2021), “The effects of consumer ethnocentrism
and consumer animosity on perceived betrayal and negative word-of-mouth”, Asia Pacific
Journal of Marketing and Logistics, Vol. 33 No. 3, pp. 712-730.
Li, Y., Li, B., Wang, G. and Yang, S. (2021), “The effects of consumer animosity on demand for
sharing-based accommodations: evidence from Airbnb”, Decision Support Systems, Vol. 140,
113430.
Lung, T. (2020), “Xiaomi is proudly ‘made in India’”, Forbes, June 29, 2020, 1:00 pm EDT. available at:
https://www.forbes.com/sites/tiffanylung/2020/06/29/xiaomi-is-made-in-india/?sh52282
6bc31ab6 (accessed 2 March 2022).
Maher, A.A., Clark, P. and Maher, A. (2010), “International consumer admiration and the persistence
of animosity”, Journal of Consumer Marketing, Vol. 27 No. 5, pp. 414-424.
Malhotra, G. and Ramalingam, M. (2022), “Does impact of campaign and consumer guilt help in
exploring the role of national identity and purchase decisions of consumers?”, Journal of
Retailing and Consumer Services, Vol. 65 March, 102839.
Mayhew, M.G., Ashkanasy, N.M., Bramble, T. and Gardner, J. (2007), “A study of the antecedents and
consequences of psychological ownership in organizational settings”, The Journal of Social
Psychology, Vol. 147 No. 5, pp. 477-500.
Mishra, S. and Malhotra, G. (2021), “The gamification of in-game advertising: examining the role of
psychological ownership and advertisement intrusiveness”, International Journal of
Information Management, Vol. 61 December, 102245.
Pereira, A., Hsu, C.C. and Kundu, S. (2002), “A cross-cultural analysis of ethnocentrism in China, India,
and Taiwan”, Journal of International Consumer Marketing, Vol. 15 No. 1, pp. 77-90, doi 10.
1300/J046v15n01_05.
Pierce, J.L., Kostova, T. and Dirks, K.T. (2001), “Toward a theory of psychological ownership in
organizations”, Academy of Management Review, Vol. 26 No. 2, pp. 298-310, doi 10.5465/AMR.
2001.4378028.
Pierce, J.L., Kostova, T. and Dirks, K.T. (2003), “The state of psychological ownership: integrating
and extending a century of research”, Review of General Psychology, Vol. 7 No. 1,
pp. 84-107.
Pierce, J.L., Jussila, I. and Cummings, A. (2009), “Psychological ownership within the job design
context: revision of the job characteristics model”, Journal of Organizational Behavior, Vol. 30
No. 4, pp. 477-496, doi 10.1002/job.
Podsakoff, P.M., MacKenzie, S.B., Lee, J.Y. and Podsakoff, N.P. (2003), “Common method biases in
behavioral research: a critical review of the literature and recommended remedies”, Journal of
Applied Psychology, Vol. 88 No. 5, p. 879.
Riefler, P. and Diamantopoulos, A. (2007), “Consumer animosity: a literature review and a
reconsideration of its measurement”, International Marketing Review, Vol. 24 No. 1,
pp. 87-119, doi 10.1108/02651330710727204.
Rose, M., Rose, G.M. and Shoham, A. (2009), “The impact of consumer animosity on attitudes towards
foreign goods: a study of Jewish and Arab Israelis”, Journal of Consumer Marketing, Vol. 26
No. 5, pp. 330-339, doi 10.1108/07363760910976583.
Sengupta, A. (2020), “Perception and purchase behavior of young Indian consumers towards Chinese Psychological
products under the backdrop of their economic and political rivalry”, Journal of Public Affairs,
Vol. 22 No. 1, doi 10.1002/pa.2388. ownership
Sharma, S., Shimp, T.A. and Shin, J. (1995), “Consumer ethnocentrism: a test of antecedents and
versus consumer
moderators”, Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Vol. 23 No. 1, pp. 26-37. animosity
Shashidhar, A. (2021), “Craze for global brands fading; Indians want ‘made in India’”, Business Today,
May 28, 2021, available at: https://www.businesstoday.in/latest/economy-politics/story/
conscientious-consumers-aligned-to-good-causes-locally-made-products-top-picks-for-indian- 959
buyers-297204-2021-05-28 (accessed 4 October 2021).
Shimp, T.A. and Sharma, S. (1987), “Consumer ethnocentrism: construction and validation of the
CETSCALE”, Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 24 August, pp. 280-289.
Shoham, A., Gavish, Y. and Rose, G.M. (2016), “Consequences of consumer animosity: a meta-analytic
integration”, Journal of International Consumer Marketing, Vol. 28 No. 3, pp. 185-200, doi 10.
1080/08961530.2015.1116040.
Siamagka, N.T. and Balabanis, G. (2015), “Revisiting consumer ethnocentrism: review,
reconceptualization, and empirical testing”, Journal of International Marketing, Vol. 23 No. 3,
pp. 66-86, doi 10.1509/jim.14.0085.
Sobol, K., Cleveland, M. and Laroche, M. (2018), “Globalization, national identity, biculturalism and
consumer behavior: a longitudinal study of Dutch consumers”, Journal of Business Research,
Vol. 82 September, pp. 340-353, doi 10.1016/j.jbusres.2016.02.044.
Souiden, N., Ladhari, R. and Chang, L. (2018), “Chinese perception and willingness to buy Taiwanese
brands: the role of ethnocentrism and animosity”, Asia Pacific Journal of Marketing and
Logistics, Vol. 30 No. 4, pp. 816-836.
Spielmann, N., Maguire, J.S. and Charters, S. (2020), “Product patriotism: how consumption practices
make and maintain national identity”, Journal of Business Research, Vol. 121 January 2018,
pp. 389-399, doi 10.1016/j.jbusres.2018.05.024.
St€ottinger, B. and Penz, E. (2019), “Balancing territorial identities: how consumers manage their
ethnic, regional, and national identities in daily life and consumption situations”, International
Marketing Review, Vol. 36 No. 5, pp. 805-827, doi 10.1108/IMR-03-2018-0115.
Tajfel, H. and Turner, J.C. (1986), The Social Identity Theory of Intergroup Behaviour, Psychology of
Intergroup Relations, Nelson-Hall, Chicago, IL, pp. 7-24.
Th€ ussenbach, S. and Dickert, S. (2020), “From happy consumption
urridl, C., Kamleitner, B., Ruzeviciute, R., S€
to possessive bonds: when positive affect increases psychological ownership for brands”,
Journal of Business Research, Vol. 107 November, pp. 89-103, doi 10.1016/j.jbusres.2019.10.019.
Turner, J.C. (1999), “Some current issues in research on social identity and self-categorization
theories”, Social Identity: Context, Commitment, Content, Vol. 3, pp. 6-34.
Van Dyne, L. and Pierce, J.L. (2004), “Psychological ownership and feelings of possession: three field
studies predicting employee attitudes and organizational citizenship behavior”, Journal of
Organizational Behavior, Vol. 25 No. 4, pp. 439-459, doi 10.1002/job.249.
Verkuyten, M. and Martinovic, B. (2017), “Collective psychological ownership and intergroup
relations”, Perspectives on Psychological Science, Vol. 12 No. 6, pp. 1021-1039.
Verlegh, P.W.J. (2007), “Home country bias in product evaluation: the complementary roles of
economic and socio-psychological motives”, Journal of International Business Studies, Vol. 38
No. 3, pp. 361-373, doi 10.1057/palgrave.jibs.8400269.
Wang, C.L. and Chen, Z.X. (2004), “Consumer ethnocentrism and willingness to buy domestic products
in a developing country setting: testing moderating effects”, Journal of Consumer Marketing,
Vol. 21 No. 6, pp. 391-400, doi 10.1108/07363760410558663.
Wang, W., He, H., Sahadev, S. and Song, W. (2018), “UK consumers’ perceived risk of buying products
from emerging economies: a moderated mediation model”, Journal of Consumer Behaviour,
Vol. 17 No. 3, pp. 326-339.
APJML Weiner, B. (1985), “An attributional theory of achievement motivation and emotion”, Psychological
Review, Vol. 92 No. 4, p. 548.
35,4
Westjohn, S.A., Singh, N. and Magnusson, P. (2012), “Responsiveness to global and local consumer
culture positioning: a personality and collective identity perspective”, Journal of International
Marketing, Vol. 20 No. 1, pp. 58-73, doi 10.1509/jim.10.0154.

Zeugner-Roth, K.P., Zabkar, V. and Diamantopoulos, A. (2015), “Consumer ethnocentrism, national
identity, and consumer cosmopolitanism as drivers of consumer behavior: a social identity
960 theory perspective”, Journal of International Marketing, Vol. 23 No. 2, pp. 25-54, doi 10.1509/jim.
14.0038.
Zhang, P., Lee, H.M., Zhao, K. and Shah, V. (2019), “An empirical investigation of eWOM and used
video game trading: the moderation effects of product features”, Decision Support Systems,
Vol. 123, 113076.
Zolfagharian, M., Saldivar, R. and Sun, Q. (2014), “Ethnocentrism and country of origin effects among
immigrant consumers”, Journal of Consumer Marketing, Vol. 31 No. 1, pp. 68-84.

Appendix

Sr. No. Constructs Definitions

1 National Identity (NI)
2 Willingness to Buy
(WTB)
3 Psychological
Ownership (PO)
4 Consumer Animosity
Table A1. (CA)
Operational definitions 5 Consumer
of key constructs of Ethnocentrism (CET)
the study
The word “national identity” refers to a fundamentally positive and
subjectively significant emotional link with a country (Tajfel and
Turner, 1986)
The behavioral intention of a consumer to buy a particular product
(Donato and Raimondo, 2020)
The phrase “this is mine!” encapsulates psychological ownership (Pierce
et al., 2003, p. 86). In the absence of any formal or legal claims of
ownership, psychological ownership is a sensation of possession
(Mayhew et al., 2007)
“The remnants of antipathy related to previous or ongoing military,
political or economic conflicts” (Klein et al., 1998, p. 91)
“A unique economic form of ethnocentrism that captures the beliefs held
by consumers about the appropriateness and, indeed, morality of
purchasing foreign-made products” (Shimp and Sharma, 1987, p. 280)

About the authors

Sita Mishra has more than 25 years of experience in teaching, industry and research. She is currently a
Professor at IMT, Ghaziabad. Her research areas include consumer behavior, social media, retail
marketing and management education. She was invited as a guest faculty at Rouen Business School,
France, Universidad del Pacıfico, Peru and SGH School of Economics, Poland. She has published more
than 80 papers in various international/national journals, contributed book chapters in various
management books and edited a book on Case Studies in Business Management. She has presented
papers in international/national conferences and is on review panel of various international/national
journals and conferences. She has been honored with “Outstanding Paper Award” in 2018 Emerald
Literati Awards.
Garima Saxena is an Assistant Professor (Marketing), at Institute of Management Technology,
Ghaziabad, India. She holds a Fellowship in Management degree from XLRI – Xavier School of
Management, Jamshedpur, India. Her research interests include consumer behavior, consumer choice
and decision making, and retail management. Her research has published in several reputed academic
journals including International Journal of Retail and Distribution Management, Marketing Intelligence
and Planning, Services Marketing Quarterly, and Journal of Information and Knowledge Management. Psychological
Garima Saxena is the corresponding author and can be contacted at: gsaxena@imt.edu
Having 6þ years of academic and 3þ years of corporate experience, Dr. Ravi Chatterjee is abreast ownership
with knowledge in Marketing, Human Resource, Entrepreneurship and Soft Skills. He is a team player, versus consumer
keen planner and implementer with phenomenal communication, interpersonal, analytical and problem animosity
solving skills. He is a passionate teacher and a great motivator. He holds a doctorate degree in
Management and has done his post-graduation in Business Management from Army Institute of
Management Kolkata which is a premier Institute in Management education. He is also the Co-chair for 961
International Research Symposium in Service Management (IRSSM) India 2020 and 2021. He has strong
research collaborations with professors from leading universities in the world and has published in high
impact journals.

For instructions on how to order reprints of this article, please visit our website:
www.emeraldgrouppublishing.com/licensing/reprints.htm
Or contact us for further details: permissions@emeraldinsight.com