Sample Demographic and Socio Economic Characteristics (n=100)

Characteristics Group Frequency Percentage (%)

Gender Male 46 46
Female 54 54

Age Below 20 17 17
20-30 56 56
31-40 10 10
41-50 10 10
51-60 6 6
Over 60 1 1

Ethnicity Chinese 31 31
Malay 30 30
Native (Dayak) 32 32
Others 7 7

Education Background High School 14 14

Vocational 2 2
College/Undergraduate 70 70
Masters 6 6
Doctorate 1 1
Others 7 7

Monthly Income <RM1,000 42 42

RM1,000-RM2,999 23 23
RM3,000-RM4,999 21 21
RM5,000-RM7,999 8 8
RM8,000-RM9,999 3 3
>RM10,000 3 3
Discussion/Explanation for Findings.

Hypotheses Results
H1(a) Consumers tend to perceive products made in developed countries as higher quality in Hypothesis supported
comparison to products made in less developed countries.
H1(b) Consumers tend to perceive products made in developed countries as more expensive in Hypothesis supported
comparison to products made in less developed countries.
H2(a) High ethnocentric consumers prefer domestic products compared to low ethnocentric Hypothesis not supported
consumers.
H2(b) Low ethnocentric consumers prefer foreign products compared to high ethnocentric consumers. Hypothesis not supported
H3(a) Low ethnocentric consumers prefer products made in more developed countries compared to Hypothesis supported
less developed countries.
H3(b) High ethnocentric consumers’ products preferences are not influenced by the level of Hypothesis not supported
development of the country of origin of the products.

H1: Malaysian consumers tend to perceive products made in developed countries as higher in quality and more expensive compared to
products made in less developed countries. Generally, consumers perceive products from Japan (Developed Country) as of highest
quality and price, followed by products from Korea (Newly Developed Country) and perceive products from China (Least Developed
Country) as lowest in quality and price, which is in line with the studies of Shenge (2010), where products from economically
prosperous and technologically advanced nations are viewed in more positive light and Drozdenko and Jensen (2009) where consumers
are more willing to pay a higher price for products from developed countries relative to less developed countries.
H2: Both high and low ethnocentric consumers prefer foreign products to domestic products. Generally high and low ethnocentric
consumers prefer foreign products especially from products from Japan (except shampoo). This may be due to a few reasons such as
follows:

 Foreign products are perceived as higher quality compared to domestic products (In line with H1’s findings.) In developing country,
such as Malaysian, the impact of ethnocentrism may be mitigated by quality perception (Wang and Chen, 2004), thus Malaysian
consumers prefer foreign products to domestic products regardless of the level of their ethnocentrism.

 Japanese products have been in Malaysian market far longer than domestic products. For example, Japanese automobile such as
Toyota and Honda has already been in Malaysian market since 1968 and 1958 respectively, while Malaysia’s very own Proton was
only established in 1983. Apart from that, Malaysia’s automobile was also established with the technology from Japanese
automobile manufacturer, Mitsubishi.

 Japanese electronic appliances such as television had also been in Malaysian market for a long time. Japanese products such as
Sony and Panasonic has been in Malaysian market since 1973 and 1976 respectively while Malaysian electronic manufacturer was
only established in 1988 (Pensonic) and 1992 (Khind). As Japanese products has been in the Malaysian market for a longer time,
Malaysian consumers had come to know and experience the products and this would have caused them to develop positive
feelings about the products (Han, 1990) and hence, causing them to prefer foreign products to domestic products.

 In terms of technology, Malaysian made products such as televisions and mobile phones, unlike foreign products, are not
technologically advanced, where Malaysian manufacturers still only manage to produce conventional televisions and not
 technologically advanced televisions such as LCD or LED televisions. Malaysian made mobile phones are also low quality imitation
of technology advanced phones such as Blackberry. Although high is ethnocentrism level, consumers may view domestic goods as
inferior to imports, thus favor foreign goods (Klein, Ettenson and Krishnan, 2005)

 There is no significant difference between the preference of foreign or domestic product in shampoo for high ethnocentric may be
because shampoo is considered a less technologically complex product (technologically simpler product) and less involvement
product, therefore shampoo from a technologically advanced country such as Japan may not be considered to be more preferable.

H3: Both high and low ethnocentric consumers are influenced by the level of development of the country of origin of the products.
Both high and low ethnocentric consumers prefer products from more developed country such as Japan and do not prefer products
from less developed country such as China. Generally, high and low consumers prefer products firstly from Japan (Developed Country),
followed by Korea (Newly Developed Country) and then China and (Less Developed Country).

 Japan and Korea are perceived as more developed countries and more advance in technology know how compared to Malaysia and
China, and products from these countries may be perceived as higher in quality (In line with H1’s finding) compared to domestic
and Chinese products, causing high ethnocentric consumers to also prefer products from these countries.
Descriptive Statistics COO, Price Quality and Preference Evaluations (n=100)

Quality Country Televisions Automobiles Mobile Phones Shampoo

Evaluation Mean Std Dev Mean Std Dev Mean Std Dev Mean Std Dev
PQ1 China 3.26 1.481 3.36 1.396 3.22 1.454 3.39 1.595
PQ2 Korea 5.24 1.248 5.22 1.151 5.20 1.231 4.88 1.157
PQ3 Japan 6.17 0.995 6.19 0.992 5.83 1.120 5.18 1.132
PQ4 Malaysia 4.58 1.342 4.53 1.507 4.18 1.500 4.91 1.364

Price Evaluation Country Televisions Automobiles Mobile Phones Shampoo

Mean Std Dev Mean Std Dev Mean Std Dev Mean Std Dev
PP1 China 3.00 1.491 3.37 1.522 2.97 1.473 3.18 1.566
PP2 Korea 4.99 1.374 5.09 1.505 5.12 1.313 4.74 1.346
PP3 Japan 5.28 1.260 5.87 1.390 5.60 1.206 5.05 1.381
PP4 Malaysia 4.20 1.279 4.65 1.313 4.02 1.407 4.32 1.449
Summary of Comparison (Mean)
Products Quality Price
Television PQ3 > PQ2 > PQ4 > PQ1 PP3 > PP2 > PP4 > PP1
Automobile PQ3 > PQ2 > PQ4 > PQ1 PP3 > PP2 > PP4 > PP1
Mobile phone PQ3 > PQ2 > PQ4 > PQ1 PP3 > PP2 > PP4 > PP1
Shampoo PQ3 > PQ4 > PQ2 > PQ1 PP3 > PP2 > PP4 > PP1

PQχ/PPχ χ: 1=China, 2=Korea, 3=Japan, 4=Malaysia

Findings

Generally, Malaysian consumers perceive products from Japan (Developed country) and Korea (Newly developed country) as higher
quality and more expensive compared to products from less developed country such as China. Malaysian consumers also perceive
domestic products as lower quality and cheaper compared to products from countries which are more developed such as Japan and
Korea.

Conclusion

Hypotheses Results
H1(a) Consumers tend to perceive products made in developed countries as higher quality in comparison to Hypothesis supported
products made in less developed countries.
H1(b) Consumers tend to perceive products made in developed countries as more expensive in comparison Hypothesis supported
to products made in less developed countries.
 Country of Comparisons for High and Low Ethnocentric Consumers’ Preference of Foreign and Domestic Products. (H2)

High Ethnocentrism Low Ethnocentrism

Malaysia China Korea Japan Malaysia China Korea Japan
Mean Mean t-value Mean t-value Mean t-value Mean Mean t-value Mean t-value Mean t-value
Television 4.82 3.23 -7.946* 5.15 1.357ns 6.06 5.587* 3.88 2.47 -4.022* 5.24 4.537* 6.32 8.507*
Automobile 5.09 3.30 -8.385* 4.94 -0.659ns 6.00 3.832* 3.97 2.24 -5.976* 4.97 2.872** 6.44 8.798*
Mobile phone 4.77 3.08 -7.861* 5.02 1.038ns 5.53 3.329* 3.18 2.24 -3.442** 5.29 6.599* 5.59 8.322*
Shampoo 5.30 3.47 -7.346* 4.80 -2.601* 5.30 0.000ns 4.21 2.18 -6.573* 4.62 1.209ns 4.97 2.012**
Notes: Significant at .001* Significant at .05** ns=not significant
3 pairs of comparison; Malaysia vs China, Malaysia vs Korea and Malaysia vs Japan for both high and low ethnocentrism

Summary of Comparison

Products High Ethnocentrism Low Ethnocentrism

Television PEJ > PEK > PEM > PEC PEJ > PEK > PEM > PEC
Automobile PEJ > PEM > PEK > PEC PEJ > PEK > PEM > PEC
Mobile phone PEJ > PEK > PEM > PEC PEJ > PEK > PEM > PEC
Shampoo PEJ = PEM > PEK > PEC PEJ > PEK > PEM > PEC
Findings
Generally, both high and low ethnocentric consumers prefer foreign products especially products from Japan and Korea to domestic
products. However they are not in favor of products from China and prefer domestic products to products made in China.

Conclusion
Hypotheses Results
H2(a) High ethnocentric consumers prefer domestic products compared to low ethnocentric consumers. Hypothesis not supported
H2(b) Low ethnocentric consumers prefer foreign products compared to high ethnocentric consumers. Hypothesis not supported
COO (Country’s Development) & Product Preference (H3)
COO (Country’s Development) & Product Preference: Television
COO/Product Preference
Malaysia Japan Korea China
Ethnocentrism Tendencies Mean t-value Mean t-value Mean t-value Mean t-value
High Ethnocentrism (n=66) 4.82 6.06 5.15 3.23
Low Ethnocentrism (n=34) 3.88 3.107* 6.32 1.237ns 5.24 0.2895ns 2.47 2.5323*
Note: Significant at .05* ns=not significant

COO (Country’s Development) & Product Preference: Automobile

COO/Product Preference
Malaysia Japan Korea China
Ethnocentrism Tendencies Mean t-value Mean t-value Mean t-value Mean t-value
High Ethnocentrism (n=66) 5.09 6.00 4.94 3.30
Low Ethnocentrism (n=34) 3.97 3.6741* 6.44 1.8966ns 4.97 0.0974ns 2.24 4.0322*
Note: Significant at .05* ns=not significant
COO (Country’s Development) & Product Preference: Mobile Phone
COO/Product Preference
Malaysia Japan Korea China
Ethnocentrism Tendencies Mean t-value Mean t-value Mean t-value Mean t-value
High Ethnocentrism (n=66) 4.77 5.53 5.02 3.08
Low Ethnocentrism (n=34) 3.18 5.5193* 5.59 0.206ns 5.29 0.8907ns 2.24 2.8667*
Note: Significant at .05* ns=not significant

COO (Country’s Development) & Product Preference: Shampoo

COO/Product Preference
Malaysia Japan Korea China
Ethnocentrism Tendencies Mean t-value Mean t-value Mean t-value Mean t-value
High Ethnocentrism (n=66) 5.30 5.30 4.80 1.73
Low Ethnocentrism (n=34) 4.21* 3.637 4.97 1.071ns 4.62 0.5933ns 1.14 13.451*
Note: Significant at .05* ns=not significant
Summary of Comparison (Mean)

Products High Ethnocentrism Low Ethnocentrism

Television PEJ > PEK > PEM > PEC PEJ > PEK > PEM > PEC
Automobile PEJ > PEM > PEK > PEC PEJ > PEK > PEM > PEC
Mobile phone PEJ > PEK > PEM > PEC PEJ > PEK > PEM > PEC
Shampoo PEJ = PEM > PEK > PEC PEJ > PEK > PEM > PEC

Findings

There is no significant difference between the preferences of high and low ethnocentric consumers where both high and low
ethnocentric consumers prefer products from more developed countries where they prefer Japan’s (Developed Country) products first,
followed by products from Korea (Newly Developed Country) and they do not prefer products from China (Developing Country).

Conclusion
Hypotheses Results
H3(a) Low ethnocentric consumers prefer products made in more developed countries compared to Hypothesis supported
less developed countries.
H3(b) High ethnocentric consumers are not influenced by the level of development of the country of Hypothesis not supported
origin of the products.