Journal of International Business Studies (2008) 39, 996–1009

& 2008 Academy of International Business All rights reserved 0047-2506

www.jibs.net

Understanding consumer animosity in

an international crisis: nature, antecedents,
and consequences

Siew Meng Leong1, Abstract

Joseph A Cote2, The nature, antecedents, and consequences of consumer animosity during the
1997 Asian economic crisis are investigated, based on a large-scale survey of
Swee Hoon Ang1, 2000 adult consumers representative of five affected nations (Indonesia,
Soo Jiuan Tan1, Kwon Jung3, Malaysia, Singapore, South Korea, and Thailand). An animosity model was
Ah Keng Kau1 and developed and tested with the US and Japan as target countries. As predicted,
stable and situational animosity reduced willingness to buy products from a
Chanthika Pornpitakpan4 perceived hostile national entity. Affective evaluations and cognitive judgments
1
were negatively influenced by situational animosity but not by stable
Department of Marketing, NUS Business animosity. As expected, situational animosity was increased by external
School, National University of Singapore,
attribution, perceived external control, and stable animosity. Implications of
Singapore, Republic of Singapore; 2Washington
State University, Vancouver, USA; 3KDI School of these findings are discussed, and directions for future research suggested.
Public Policy and Management, Korea; 4Faculty Journal of International Business Studies (2008) 39, 996–1009.
of Business Administration, University of Macau, doi:10.1057/palgrave.jibs.8400392
China
Keywords: animosity; Asia; crisis; international marketing
Correspondence: SM Leong, Department of
Marketing, NUS Business School, National
University of Singapore, 1 Business Link, INTRODUCTION
Singapore 117592, Republic of Singapore. Expanding globalization makes it necessary that marketers have a
Tel: þ 65 6516 3172;
Fax: þ 65 6779 5941;
better understanding of foreign consumer reactions toward their
E-mail: bizlsm@nus.edu.sg brands. Recent research suggests that perceptions of a product’s
home country affiliation can affect consumers’ buying decisions
directly and independently of product performance (Klein, 2002;
Klein, Ettenson, & Morris, 1998). While country affiliation can
convey positive attributes, it may also create brand animosity,
particularly when it is ignited during times of crisis. For example,
the ongoing Iraq conflict has fanned anti-US sentiment overseas,
which may result in American brands being shunned in some
markets. Indeed, the Asian edition of BusinessWeek’s ranking of the
world’s most valuable brands came under the headline ‘‘Brands in
an Age of Anti-Americanism’’ (Khermouch, Brady, Holmes, Ihlwan,
Kripalani, & Picard, 2003; see also Kripalani, 2004). Another
notable example of animosity is the Korean ban on Japanese
products, which was completely lifted only in 2002, more than 50
years after the end of World War II (Miami Herald, 2003).
The possibility that a country’s political actions in the interna-
Received: 21 July 2005
Revised: 1 September 2006
tional arena may create animosity towards brands affiliated with
Accepted: 20 June 2007 that nation has motivated research into consumer animosity, its
Online publication date: 15 May 2008 antecedents, and its effects on purchase intentions and behavior.
 Consumer animosity in an international crisis
Animosity is the emotional antagonism towards a
particular entity (Averill, 1982). Jung, Ang, Leong,
Tan, Pornpitakpan, and Kau (2002) found that
animosity can be split into situational animosity,
which is sparked by a particular episode, and stable
animosity, which tends to accumulate over time,
evolving into a long-lasting hostility.
Continuing this line of inquiry, we propose and
test a model that examines the antecedents and
consequences of situational and stable animosity
associated with the Asian economic crisis. Our
contribution is threefold. Conceptually, we seek to
provide insights into the extent to which animosity
translates into economic preferences. Instead of
identifying animosity as a single construct with
specific manifestation, such as war or an economic
event (Klein et al., 1998), we define animosity as a
two-dimensional construct that can be episodic
(situational animosity) or enduring (stable animos-
ity). Unlike past research, which explored mainly
demographic and socio-economic antecedents of
animosity (Klein & Ettenson, 1999), we draw on
Weiner’s (1986) attribution theory to propose
external control and external attribution as two
important psychological antecedents to situational
animosity. Extant animosity research has explored
only the direct effect of animosity on willingness to
buy and on product judgment (Klein, 2002; Liefeld,
1993). We propose that, given its emotional core,
situational and stable animosity will also influence
affective evaluations of products, and that stable
animosity will impact on situational animosity.
Our second contribution pertains to marketing
practice. Marketing experts have long extolled the
value of country of origin on international brands
(Heslop, Panadopoulos, & Bourk, 1998; Maheswaran,
1994). For example, Japan has been cited as a good
example of a country that has succeeded rapidly in
altering its value as a provenance brand (Anholt,
2000). It has also been contended that ‘‘because a
country’s brand is usually highly complex and
robust, and built up over centuries, it is relatively
hard to alter or damage it except through major
political, economic or social upheaval’’ (Anholt,
2000: 22). In this era of heightened political and
social sensitivity, it is important for global brand
marketers to recognize and detect any such senti-
ments in the foreign markets that could destroy
brands with strong country-of-origin linkages.
Hence, on the managerial front, our examination
of the animosity construct helps decision-makers
recognize whether and how animosity affects
consumer preferences. By using early cues based
Siew Meng Leong et al
997
on an understanding of the psychological determi-
nants of animosity, international marketers can
devise strategies to defuse potential damage to their
brands arising from animosity towards the country
with which their brands are associated.
Our third contribution is methodological in
nature. Past animosity research has typically
employed respondents from a single country, and
has focused on a single reference nation as a target
of hostility (Klein et al., 1998). In contrast, our data
provide more robust insights into the nature,
antecedents, and consequences of animosity, as
they were derived from a large, representative
sample of adult consumers from five Asian nations,
and employed two major nations – the US and
Japan – as target nations.
We next review the animosity literature to
develop our conceptual model and hypotheses.
We then provide our research methodology,
followed by the results of our survey. We conclude
by discussing the implications, limitations, and
future research directions of our work.
DEVELOPMENT OF CONCEPTUAL MODEL
Animosity refers to strong feelings of dislike and
enmity based on beliefs arising from previous or
ongoing military, political, or economic actions
between nations and peoples that are perceived as
hostile, unwarranted, or violating social norms
(Averill, 1982). Initial marketing research explored
the effects of animosity as a unidimensional
construct (e.g., Klein et al., 1998). More recent
research has demonstrated animosity to be multi-
dimensional. Nijssen and Douglas (2004) found
that war animosity had a strong effect on reluc-
tance to buy foreign products, while economic
animosity affected reluctance to buy indirectly
through consumer ethnocentrism. Tse, Gu, and
Yim (2005) found that national animosity is a
multidimensional and emotionally based construct
that biases recall and affective judgments.
Unlike ethnocentrism, where anything other
than one’s own country is viewed unfavorably
(Shimp & Sharma, 1987), animosity is targeted
towards a particular country, ethnic group, or
entity. Animosity has been found to be a hostile
attitude comprising emotion and belief compo-
nents toward national out-groups (Jung et al.,
2002). Brummett et al. (1988) conceptualized
hostility as having both a cognitive and an
attitudinal component. The cognitive dimension
involves cynical beliefs and mistrust of others, and
Journal of International Business Studies
 Consumer animosity in an international crisis
998
the attitudinal dimension involves negative
emotions of anger, contempt, and disgust.
This suggests that animosity can influence both
cognitive judgments and affective evaluations of
products (cf. Klein, 2002). Thus the hostile beliefs
regarding one country can be extended to judg-
ments regarding quality of products from that
country. Beliefs about product quality are tainted
by beliefs about the country that it comes from.
Krisnakumar (1974) has shown that Indian stu-
dents evaluate British products more positively
than do students from Taiwan, a difference attribu-
table to the past colonial link between the United
Kingdom and India. In the Cold War years there
was a backlash against anything Western in China.
However, with the opening up of China, and its
normalization of relationships with countries in
North America and Europe since the late 1980s,
imported (Western) products have been viewed
favorably over domestic products in China, even
at prices that are three to four times higher (Tefft,
1994).
Affective evaluations would likewise be influ-
enced, where the greater the animosity, the less
favorable is the liking for products from the
concerned country. Indeed, the strong emotional
core of the animosity construct suggests that it
should correspondingly influence consumers’ affec-
tive evaluations of products. In turn, the lower
levels of product judgment and affect lead to
decreased willingness to purchase. For example,
the recent success of such brands as Mecca-Cola
and Qibla-Cola in Muslim nations is derived partly
from Islamic consumers’ disapproval of American
foreign policy following the invasion of Iraq.
Affected Middle Eastern consumers have switched
to such offerings to show active support for brands
that advertise a political and ethical alternative to
American brands (Parmar, 2004). Aside from its
indirect impact via cognitive judgments and affec-
tive evaluations posited here, animosity has also
been found to have a direct, negative impact on
willingness to buy (Klein et al., 1998). For instance,
following an incident in 2003 when a group of
Japanese tourists attended a brothel-type party in
Zhuhai, China, on the anniversary of Japan’s attack
on China during World War II, about 30% of the
Chinese college students’ chat room comments
rallied for actions against Japan, including the
boycott of Japanese goods (Tse et al., 2005).
Empirically, Shimp, Dunn, and Klein (2004) found
that animosity correlated with the degree to which
consumers chose products from their own region
Journal of International Business Studies
Siew Meng Leong et al
and the extent to which they were willing to pay
premium prices to obtain these items. Thus we
hypothesize:
Hypothesis 1: The more animosity a consumer
feels towards a country, the less favorable are his
or her other cognitive judgments and affective
evaluations of products from that country.
Hypothesis 2: The more animosity a consumer
feels towards a country, the less willing he or she
is to buy products from that country.
Hypothesis 3: The less favorable the cognitive
judgments and affective evaluations a consumer
has of products from a country, the lower his or
her willingness to purchase products from that
country.
Since animosity is based on beliefs arising from
previous or ongoing hostility, the emotion can be
situationally driven by a particular event, or can
evolve over time through a series of events ( Jung
et al., 2002). The former is referred to as situational
animosity, and the latter as stable animosity.
Whereas situational animosity refers to a specific
circumstance, stable animosity is long lasting and
deep rooted, becoming ingrained over time. For
instance, the 1997 Asian economic crisis may have
prompted situational animosity towards countries
perceived to have contributed to the crisis. The
animosity is situational, as it pertained to a specific
event. In contrast, if the event becomes drawn out,
or several economic crises occur one after the other,
with the same country being viewed as responsible
for the occurrences, then the animosity can become
ingrained and stable over time. War between two
countries, for example, arouses situational animos-
ity at the time of occurrence, but can evolve into
stable animosity over time as the atrocities of war
are remembered, though not necessarily personally
experienced, for generations.
We predict that Hypotheses 1–3 would hold for
both stable and situational animosity. Thus, regard-
less of whether animosity is derived from a current
or an ongoing series of events, it should negatively
impact on willingness to buy, as well as on
cognitive judgments and affective evaluations of,
products from the perceived target of hostility.
Moreover, we expect a positive relationship
between stable and situational animosity. When
situational animosity towards a particular entity is
aroused, information pertaining to the current
 Consumer animosity in an international crisis
event may be processed in a manner biased by
stable animosity towards that entity. Research has
shown that, when consumers have strongly held
preferences, they engage in motivated processing
( Jain & Maheswaran, 2000). For instance, the anti-
Japanese protests and demonstrations that spread
throughout China in mid-April 2005 over the
Japanese Ministry of Education’s approval to print
a school textbook that glossed over Japanese war
atrocities (Marquardt, 2005) are a manifestation of
the deep-rooted negative feelings that the Chinese
have over Japan’s war atrocities in China. The
Japanese act also caused the South Korean president
to caution Japan about a possible diplomatic war,
and reduced economic activities between the two
countries (Marquardt, 2005). Hence:
Hypothesis 4: The greater the stable animosity a
consumer feels towards a country, the greater the
situational animosity that will be felt towards
that country.
Weiner’s (1986) attribution theory suggests two
other antecedents of situational animosity that will
be investigated here: locus of attribution, and
controllability of the cause and effect. Locus of
attribution addresses the ‘‘who is to blame?’’
question. It concerns the attribution of outcomes.
External attribution occurs when an external party
is blamed for the occurrence, whereas internal
attribution relates to inferences made towards
dispositional causes for the event’s occurrence: the
greater the external attribution, the greater the
animosity towards the entity concerned. If Asian
consumers blame America for the 1997 economic
crisis, the greater is their situational animosity
towards the US. Hence:
Hypothesis 5: The greater the external attribu-
tion made, the more situational animosity will be
felt towards the outside entity.
Controllability concerns the extent to which the
entity perceived to be responsible for an outcome
has the power to modify the course of events. Low
controllability suggests that there is little that the
party responsible for the event can do to avoid the
outcome, whereas high controllability implies that
much can be done by the party responsible for the
outcome to change the consequences. If the
external entity is viewed to have control, animosity
towards that entity is expected to be greater than
when the external entity is viewed as having low
Siew Meng Leong et al
999
Figure 1 Hypothesized model.
Note: Correlations among exogenous factors were modeled but
are not shown in the figure.
control. Federn (1985) found that resentment was
elevated when the instigating party was perceived
to have control over the provocation. Formally:
Hypothesis 6: The greater the external controll-
ability, the greater the situational animosity
towards the outside entity.
The hypothesized model is shown in Figure 1.
METHOD
Background
The research context was the 1997 Asian economic
crisis, an event of significant international political,
economic, and marketing proportions. Data were
collected from nationally representative samples
of adult consumers from five Asian countries:
Indonesia, South Korea, Malaysia, Singapore, and
Thailand. These countries varied in how severely
affected they were by the crisis (Indonesia, South
Korea, and Thailand were hurt most), the type of
economic controls instituted (Indonesia looked
towards IMF for help, whereas Malaysia instituted
capital controls to contain the crisis), and their
historical relationship with the US and Japan
(Indonesia, Malaysia, Singapore, and Korea were
occupied by Japan during World War II, whereas
Thailand was never under foreign jurisdiction).
Adults in these five countries were asked for their
views regarding two major countries – the US and
Japan – in general, as well as specific to the crisis.
The Asian economic crisis reflects the situational
Journal of International Business Studies
 Consumer animosity in an international crisis
1000
animosity felt by Asian consumers. In Malaysia, for
instance, there were widespread accusations that
the root of the crisis was the intense currency
speculation by American fund managers (The New
Republic, 1999), suggesting situational animosity
towards the US. The animosity arising from histor-
ical military occupation in the region is suggestive
of stable animosity. For instance, Korea was under
Japanese occupation for 35 years, and experienced
some of the worst war atrocities in Asia, implying
stable animosity towards Japan.
Respondents
The data were collected in the fourth quarter of
1998, when most Asian countries were reeling from
the effects of the economic crisis. A leading
international research company was commissioned
to collect the data. Professional interviewers blind
to the purpose of the research surveyed 400 adult
nationals aged 20–59 years from the capital city of
each country, giving a total sample size of 2000.
In-home face-to-face interviews were conducted
using stratified random sampling to obtain a
representative sample for each country. Specifically,
sampling areas for each country were selected based
on electoral divisions or polling wards containing a
certain population of households. To ensure wide-
spread coverage, each electoral division was divided
into primary sampling units (PSUs) of about equal
size of around 500 dwelling units. Each PSU was
then selected to represent the polling division.
Some 30–40 PSUs were employed for each of the
capital cities in which the survey was conducted.
Half the respondents in each country were asked to
respond with regard to the US, and the other half to
Japan.
Questionnaire
The questionnaire consisted of several sections,
with items using five-point scales anchored on
‘‘Strongly disagree’’ (1) and ‘‘Strongly agree’’ (5).
Items employed to measure the various constructs
of interest are contained in the Appendix, which
also reports the average composite reliabilities and
average variance extracted of the scales. The items
were first developed in English. Given that several
measures were included from scales used in pre-
vious studies with Western consumers, the initial
draft survey was assessed for cultural compatibility
and adequacy for an Asian sample by native
speakers fluent in English (Douglas & Craig,
1984). Minor modifications were made, based on
their feedback, to ensure that all items to be
Journal of International Business Studies
Siew Meng Leong et al
employed were appropriate, adequate, and mean-
ingful for respondents. The research instrument
was then translated and back-translated indepen-
dently by professionals engaged by the market
research agency for linguistic and conceptual
equivalence (Bhalla & Lin, 1987). Pretests were
then conducted to ensure that the intended mean-
ings were conveyed and understood by respon-
dents. The final questionnaire was produced in
both English and the local language. Bilingual
interviewers used the version that respondents felt
more comfortable with in administering the survey.
The animosity measures were taken from Jung
et al. (2002). Three items were used to measure
stable animosity. These items concerned views about
how well America/Japan had behaved towards their
country over the years. Situational animosity was
measured by six items using the Asian economic
crisis as the context. The items measured how they
personally felt towards Americans/Japanese during
this crisis.
The external attribution and external control
items were adapted from Weiner (1986) to reflect
the context of the Asian crisis. Four items were used
to measure external attribution. The items reflected
attributions made concerning the country’s
economic crisis. External control was measured using
four items concerning views about how much
influence the external party had over the economic
situation of respondents’ country.
Affective evaluation was measured using four items
that have been employed in other work (e.g., Tse
et al., 2005). They included how much respondents
liked, trusted, were in favor of buying, and found it
appealing to buy products from America/Japan. The
scale for cognitive judgment consisted of five items
taken from Klein et al. (1998). They concerned
perceptions of workmanship, technological
advancement, color and design, reliability, and
value for money of American/Japanese products.
Finally, willingness to buy was measured using four
items, three of which were from Klein et al. (1998).
The items included how willing they were to buy,
felt guilty buying, avoided buying, and liked the
idea of owning American/Japanese products.
RESULTS
Tests of Measure Equivalence
We adopted Steenkamp and Baumgartner’s (1998)
approach for comparing multi-country data and
assessing measure invariance. They recommend
fitting a sequential set of increasingly constrained
 Consumer animosity in an international crisis
multi-group structural equation models to demon-
strate that results are comparable across countries.
The first test is for configural invariance, which
shows that the pattern of salient and nonsalient
loadings defines the structure of the measurement
instrument. This test involves constraining model
specifications to be identical for all countries, but
allowing the parameters to be uniquely estimated.
In other words, the factor structures for the scales
and the specified relationships among the con-
structs are identical, but estimates of the loadings
and path coefficients differ among countries.
Metric invariance tests whether consumers in
different countries respond to the scale items in
the same way. In other words, is the size of the
factor loadings equal across countries? To test the
metric model, we constrained the loadings between
a given indicator and its factor to be equal across all
10 country/target pairs (e.g., the loading for Korean
evaluations of the US were the same as Thai
evaluations of Japan). Finally, factor invariance1
specifies that the relationships among constructs
are the same for all countries. We tested factor
invariance by imposing equality constraints on the
structural relationships, factor variances, and factor
covariances across countries. If there is configural,
metric, and factor invariance across the multiple
groups, we can conclude that the relationships
among the constructs are the same for all countries.
Steenkamp and Baumgartner (1998) suggest using
RMSEA, CFI, CAIC, and/or NNFI when comparing
fit across models. For simplicity, we compare only
the RMSEA and CFI values for each model.
The configural invariance model fitted well
(unrestricted model CFI¼0.876, RMSEA¼0.023)
using the raw data (covariance matrix).2 However,
the metric invariance model failed to fit due to
numerous estimation problems. Given these pro-
blems, we analyzed normed data per Mullen (1995).
The norming process was done separately for each
country/data set combination (e.g., the correlation
matrix was calculated separately for each country/
target combination).
Using normed data, the configural invariance
model fitted well (CFI¼0.877, RMSEA¼0.023).
The full metric invariance model did not fit
well (CFI¼0.836, RMSEA¼0.025). Steenkamp and
Baumgartner (1998) note that it is unrealistic to
expect fully constrained metric and factor invar-
iance models to fit well, and suggest using mod-
ification indices to relax constraints until a
reasonable fit is achieved. If relatively few para-
meters are freed, then partial invariance has been
Siew Meng Leong et al
1001
achieved. After relaxing 35 of the 486 constraints in
the metric invariance model, a good fit was
achieved CFI¼0.863, RMSEA¼0.023). Only four of
the released constraints were factor loadings, while
31 were associated with measurement error. Most of
the modifications were for Korea (11) and Malaysia
(10), but all countries had constraints released.
There were greater differences between the target
country data. The Japanese ratings accounted for 26
of the 35 released constraints. Based on these
results, we conclude that adequate metric invari-
ance was demonstrated.
The fully constrained factor invariance model
had a moderate fit (CFI¼0.850, RMSEA¼0.024).3
Releasing only 22 of the 586 constraints brought
the fit close to the metric invariance model
(CFI¼0.859, RMSEA¼0.023). Ten of the released
constraints were disturbance terms, indicating that
the model explained different amounts of variance
among the countries/target pairs. Twelve of the
constraints related to country differences in the
structural relationships. Eleven of these differences
were the effect of stable animosity (six constraints)
and situational animosity (five constraints) on the
dependent variables.
Hypotheses Tests
The structural estimates are presented in Table 1,
and country differences are noted. In general, the
results support the hypotheses. Overall, the model
was able to explain a large amount of variance in
willingness to buy (R2¼0.615) and situational
animosity (R2¼0.528). The model explained a
modest amount of variance for affective evalua-
tions (R2¼0.293) and a small amount of the
variance in cognitive judgments (R2¼0.057). With
few exceptions, the results were the same across
country–target pairs. Situational animosity leads to
less favorable affective evaluations and cognitive
judgments. Overall, the effect on affective evalua-
tions was much higher than for cognitive judg-
ments. The effects of situational animosity on
affective evaluations and cognitive evaluations
were the same for all countries, except for:
Malaysia, where the effect on affective evaluations
was more negative; Singapore, where it was more
negative only towards the US; and Korea, where it
was positive for the US. However, the influence of
stable animosity on affective evaluations and
cognitive judgment was not supported. The excep-
tions were for Singapore, where stable animosity
had a large negative effect on affective evaluations
for both target countries and cognitive judgments
Journal of International Business Studies
 Consumer animosity in an international crisis Siew Meng Leong et al
1002

Table 1 Structural estimates for the factor invariance model

Affective evaluations Cognitive judgments Situational animosity Stable animosity Disturbance R2

(a) Willingness to buy

US
Indonesia 0.551* 0.015
0.182*
0.234* 0.631 0.602
Malaysia 0.680* 0.014
0.163*
0.216* 0.368 0.864
Singapore 0.503* 0.015
0.169*
0.219* 0.592 0.649
Thailand 0.556* 0.016
0.172*
0.239* 0.645 0.583
Korea 0.552* 0.015
0.201*
0.230* 0.621 0.614

Japan
Indonesia 0.569* 0.016
0.184* 0.118 0.777 0.396
Malaysia 0.508* 0.014
0.177*
0.215* 0.582 0.662
Singapore 0.502* 0.016
0.161*
0.213* 0.576 0.668
Thailand 0.589* 0.015
0.176*
0.225* 0.607 0.631
Korea 0.603* 0.017
0.054
0.262* 0.708 0.499

Situational animosity Stable animosity Disturbance R2

(b) Affective evaluations

US
Indonesia
0.369*
0.060 0.913 0.167
Malaysia
0.654*
0.058 0.724 0.476
Singapore
0.376*
0.445* 0.667 0.555
Thailand
0.346*
0.060 0.924 0.146
Korea
0.408*
0.059 0.897 0.196

Japan
Indonesia
0.361*
0.060 0.918 0.158
Malaysia
0.687*
0.060 0.679 0.539
Singapore
0.359*
0.571* 0.536 0.713
Thailand
0.333*
0.054 0.929 0.137
Korea
0.340*
0.061 0.935 0.126

Situational animosity Stable animosity Disturbance R2

(c) Cognitive judgments

US
Indonesia
0.102*
0.062 0.989 0.022
Malaysia
0.099*
0.062 0.990 0.021
Singapore
0.345*
0.058 0.923 0.148
Thailand
0.094*
0.062 0.990 0.019
Korea 0.231*
0.061 0.979 0.042

Japan
Indonesia
0.099*
0.062 0.990 0.021
Malaysia
0.107*
0.062 0.987 0.026
Singapore
0.084*
0.486* 0.840 0.294
Thailand
0.102*
0.062 0.989 0.023
Korea
0.092*
0.062 0.993 0.014

Stable animosity External attribution External control Disturbance R2

(d) Situational animosity

US
Indonesia 0.402* 0.319* 0.205* 0.636 0.596
Malaysia 0.415* 0.330* 0.211* 0.656 0.569

Journal of International Business Studies

 Consumer animosity in an international crisis
Table 1 continued
Stable animosity External attribution
Singapore 0.405* 0.322*
Thailand 0.434* 0.345*
Korea 0.357* 0.284*
Japan
Indonesia 0.413* 0.328*
Malaysia 0.636* 0.302*
Singapore 0.414* 0.329*
Thailand 0.400* 0.318*
Korea 0.078 0.355*
*Indicates parameter significant at po0.05.
Italic indicates constraints that were freed.
for Japan. However, it appears that the effect of
stable animosity was mediated by situational
animosity. When situational animosity’s effects on
evaluations and judgment were dropped, stable
animosity had a significant negative effect. This
provides further evidence that the effect of stable
animosity on affective evaluations and cognitive
judgments was mediated by situational animosity.
These results partially support Hypothesis 1.
Hypothesis 2 was fully supported. Both situa-
tional and stable animosity had a significant effect
on willingness to buy. As hypothesized, the more
animosity a consumer felt towards a country, the
less willing he or she was to buy products from that
country. The exceptions were for Korea, where
situational animosity had no effect on willingness
to buy Japanese products, and Indonesia, where
stable animosity had a positive effect on willingness
to buy Japanese products. Possibly, the stable
animosity of Koreans towards the Japanese may
be so strong that their situational animosity has
little effect on willingness to buy. Holloway (1991)
noted that many Indonesians who were not overly
influenced by Western thinking perceive that the
Japanese occupation was beneficial, despite the fact
that Indonesia suffered as much as other Asian
countries during World War II. Moreover, Japanese
trade, aid, and investments were crucial ingredients
to the country’s success, and signaled Japan’s long-
term commitment to Indonesia.
Hypothesis 3 was generally supported. Positive
affective evaluations led to higher willingness to
buy (the effect was stronger for the Malaysia–US
pairing). This effect was also quite large. However,
cognitive judgments did not have an effect on
willingness to buy. As Hypothesis 4 posited, the
greater the stable animosity a consumer felt
Siew Meng Leong et al
1003
External control Disturbance R2
0.206* 0.641 0.589
0.221* 0.686 0.529
0.182* 0.745 0.445
0.210* 0.653 0.573

0.144 0.601 0.639
0.211* 0.654 0.572
0.204* 0.634 0.599
0.228* 0.852 0.275
towards a country, the greater the situational
animosity felt towards that country (the effect was
stronger for Malaysian evaluations of Japan, and
not significant for Korean evaluations of Japan).
Hypotheses 5 and 6 were both supported, with
estimates equal across all countries. As suggested by
Hypothesis 5, the greater the external attribution
made, the more situational animosity was felt
towards the outside entity. Similarly, as Hypothesis
6 posited, greater external controllability was
related to higher levels of situational animosity
towards the target entity.
DISCUSSION
This study examined the antecedents and conse-
quences of stable and situational animosity using a
large sample of representative adult consumers
from five Asian nations against the backdrop of
the economic crisis of the late 1990s. The survey
results generally supported the proposed model.
Situational and stable animosity reduced willing-
ness to buy both US and Japanese products.
Situational animosity also negatively influenced
cognitive judgments and affective evaluations of US
and Japanese products. However, stable animosity
did not impact on cognitive judgments and
affective evaluations, except through situational
animosity. In terms of antecedents, feelings of
situational animosity were increased by external
attribution, perceived external control, and stable
animosity.
Our findings cast added conceptual light on the
animosity construct on several counts. First, we
extend recent research that explores the nature of
animosity (Nijssen & Douglas, 2004). Whereas such
work focused on different sources of the construct’s
manifestation (war and economic), we distinguish
Journal of International Business Studies
 Consumer animosity in an international crisis
1004
between stable and situational animosity, a dichot-
omy that is consistent with extant theorizing in the
emotional aggression literature (Jung et al., 2002).
Berkowitz (1994) had suggested that emotional
aggression could be triggered by situational influ-
ences or personality dispositions. Our stable–
situational dichotomy is thus more generalizable
than previous accounts, since it accommodates
various sources of animosity. For example, stable
animosity could arise from non-military events, as
illustrated by the defensive attitude the French
adopt towards ‘‘American’’ culture. They appear
‘‘fascinated by the American Way of Life as an
exotic item but many French people, including
politicians, would be horrified to have it at home’’
(Usunier, 1993: 199).
Second, our results suggest that while situational
and stable animosity reduced consumer willingness
to buy products from perceived targets of hostility,
these effects work through different mechanisms.
In particular, our findings suggest that while
situational animosity has both a direct and an
indirect influence on willingness to buy via affec-
tive evaluation, the impact of stable animosity is
mediated by situational animosity. It would appear
that stable animosity exacerbates animosity based
on current events. In turn, affective evaluations are
adversely impacted, which then reduces purchase
intentions. It appears that intense emotions initi-
ally formed may have persistent effects on future
emotions triggered by hostile events, and that such
emotions can overwhelm cognition. Our findings
thus underscore the more prominent role of affect
over cognition in animosity models.
Aside from stable animosity, our results demon-
strate that situational animosity is also influenced
positively by external controllability and external
attribution. These findings were robust across the
US and Japanese data. Our research thus augments
the scant body of attribution research in the
international consumer behavior literature (Folkes,
1988; Leigh & Choi, 2003). In social psychology, it
has been found that people of collectivistic cultures
characteristic of most East Asian nations tend to
make external inferences (Lee, Hallahan, & Herzog,
1996; Morris & Peng, 1994). We extend this line
of research by finding a relationship between
such attributional inferences and animosity levels.
Weiner (2000) had proposed an attributional
process that links attribution to emotions (such as
anger, hope, and fear) and, in turn, to consumer
behavior. Our examination and confirmation of
the significant impact of external attribution on
Journal of International Business Studies
Siew Meng Leong et al
situational animosity (an expression of anger) for
both the Japan and US data provides empirical
support for this linkage.
Implications for Practice
Our results also have implications for marketing
managers and policymakers. While much has been
written regarding the use of marketing to advance
political candidates and agendas (Newman, 1999),
the stream of research on animosity illustrates the
politicization of marketing. For example, in the
context of American foreign policy, Huntington
(1999) noted that the US corporate interests abroad
have been promoted under the slogans of free trade
and open markets, through the shaping of World
Bank and International Monetary Fund policies,
and through getting foreign countries to adopt
economic and social policies that benefit American
economic interests. Such actions are sometimes
viewed with hostility by foreign countries. Negative
reactions to the US imposing unpopular policies
may well affect America’s economic performance
internationally. This is especially true as the
perceived hostile policies imposed by the US may
be viewed as controllable, and can accumulate
over time into stable animosity. The current
unpopularity of US military policy can further
increase animosity. Thus any political, economic,
or military actions viewed as being hostile
will lower product judgment and evaluation,
as well as reduce willingness to buy brands from
the aggressor nation.
Klein et al. (1998) provided several sound recom-
mendations for foreign marketers in such situa-
tions, including: exporters conducting marketing
research to gauge the level of animosity in foreign
target markets; downplaying ‘‘Made in’’ labels and
brand names associated with the aggressor country;
engaging in strategic marketing and manufacturing
alliances to make and offer hybrid products that de-
emphasize the source of the products; and employ-
ing public relations and other communications
efforts to improve country perceptions and address
sources of international tension.
In addition, we suggest that foreign marketers
may localize their brands by using local production
and raw materials, or by launching local versions of
their offerings. Investing in the affected country,
possibly in conjunction with a local partner, may
also demonstrate a long-term commitment to that
country (Ang, Jung, Kau, Leong, Pornpitakpan, &
Tan, 2004). Cause-related marketing may also be
employed in this connection. Foreign firms may
 Consumer animosity in an international crisis
support local causes, such as sponsoring events that
raise money for the adversely affected, or be
involved in activities of local community organiza-
tions (Vence, 2004). Hiring local talent and placing
them in key management roles, as General Electric
does, may reduce animosity in addition to promot-
ing diversity (Khermouch et al., 2003). Foreign
marketers may also foster closer partnerships with
their local distributors. Setting up local subsidiaries
to handle and manage their dealers, and providing
them with financial and marketing assistance, may
likewise contribute to strengthening their roots in
affected markets (Slater, 1999). To the extent that
hostility is peculiarly favorable to social cohesion
(Mead, 1929), foreign businesses may engage in
discussions of which both they and consumers in
the affected countries have a common dislike
(Rawwas, Rajendran, & Wuehrer, 1996). Collec-
tively, these initiatives may be more imperative for
marketers of iconic brands strongly identified
with their national heritage (e.g., McDonald’s and
Coca-Cola with the US).
Firms could also consider ways in which they can
dissociate themselves from the policies and actions
of the home government. Such actions may also
redirect affected consumers’ external attributions
away from themselves, to reduce perceptions of the
firms’ controllability over the event. Foreign mar-
keters should not engage in actions that may
exacerbate feelings of animosity in affected coun-
tries. During the Asian economic crisis, nearly 2000
Malaysian companies were wound up by their
creditors. The Malaysian registrar of companies
noted that ‘‘If every company that is in trouble is
just wound up by creditors, it is tantamount to
killing the development of local companies.’’ He
urged creditors to be more patient, and consider
flexible repayment schemes (Pereira, 1998). Acquir-
ing local businesses and assets (e.g., distributorships
and retail locations) at deep discounts is another
example. Thus US investment banks and multi-
nationals have been perceived to scour the region
on ‘‘vulture tours’’ during the crisis to establish and
strengthen their foothold in Asia (Head, 1998).
While such actions appear financially and
strategically well motivated, they should be
handled with care and sensitivity, to avoid reinfor-
cing consumer resentment and inviting a possible
backlash.
In addition, our findings suggest to international
marketers that having a better product may not be
sufficient to compensate for animosity. Indeed,
for most products, functional performance is
Siew Meng Leong et al
1005
becoming more comparable over time. This implies
that negative affect will be harder to overcome, and
that as developing countries improve product
quality, such affective evaluations will play a bigger
role in choice. Thus, while major global brands
have been able to generally ignore their home
country’s political actions, this may be less true in
the future. For example, French wine is considered
better by US consumers, but sales dropped drama-
tically after the French failed to support US Iraqi
policies.
More generally, by understanding the psycholo-
gical determinants of the animosity construct,
international marketers can devise strategies to
defuse damage to their brands arising from animos-
ity towards the country with which their brands
have strong linkage. For example, they can focus on
other aspects of brand personality (apart from
performance or quality) that are less related to
country of origin during crisis periods when
animosity is invoked. Since situational animosity
negatively impacts on affective evaluations, inter-
national marketers should downplay the country
linkage when animosity is aroused against their
brand’s country of origin, especially since our
results demonstrate that external attribution has a
strong impact on situational animosity. However,
situational animosity is sporadic, and has a short
lifespan (e.g., the Chinese students’ call for boycott
of Japanese products has abated, and many Japanese
businesses are back to normal in China). Thus
international marketers need to be alert to events
that may arouse situational animosity and, in turn,
their brand.
Less attention has focused on what domestic
marketers may do under such circumstances. Klein
et al. (1998) suggest that importers identify the
level of animosity towards particular foreign sup-
pliers. Domestic marketers may also defend them-
selves by promoting ‘‘buy local’’ campaigns. For
example, during the Asian economic crisis, the Thai
government urged its citizens to ‘‘Eat Thai, Use
Thai, Buy Thai, and Travel Thai.’’ More extreme
actions may involve organizing boycotts against
products of businesses from the hostile nation.
However, proactive domestic marketers may exploit
the situation by launching niche brands to appeal
to consumers sympathetic to their cause and
resentful of that of the hostile nation. For example,
Arab cola marketers have offered alternatives for
Muslims and related sympathizers to show their
disapproval of American Middle East policy and
support for alternative values and lifestyles (Parmar,
Journal of International Business Studies
 Consumer animosity in an international crisis
1006
2004). Thus Qibla Cola’s tagline of ‘‘Liberate your
taste’’ furthers the metaphor that consumers of the
two leading cola brands may now find a viable
substitute. Yet leveraging on anti-American senti-
ment alone may be insufficient for long-term
growth. Expansion beyond the niche markets they
appeal to may require a broadened positioning, as
well as depend on how successfully these
brands market their alternative values and lifestyles
globally.
Policymakers responsible for influencing interna-
tional marketing performance with potentially
hostile actions may also help to reduce animosity
levels. For example, during the Asian economic
crisis Japan was repeatedly encouraged by the
regional and international communities to take
bold initiatives to revive its economy to absorb
imports from affected Asian nations (Lee, 1998).
Other measures may involve governmental efforts
to correct attributions of blame, as well as proactive
efforts such as sending aid and trade missions to
affected countries. In the absence of such actions,
the contemporary and cumulative effects of unpop-
ular policy may well reverberate into the rejection
of offerings from perceived hostile nations, and
consequently reduce their exports to affected
international markets. At the minimum, public
policymakers should be cognizant of the interna-
tional business repercussions of their actions (e.g.,
Chua, 2005), particularly in a crisis situation, where
emotions run high and are fueled by angry
sentiments drawn from past provocations.
Limitations and Directions for Future
Research
Several directions for future research can be recom-
mended, based on the findings and limitations of
our work. First, we propose that animosity research
employ a more theory-driven approach by examin-
ing its psychological antecedents. We empirically
assessed two attribution-related constructs to this
end. Although this is promising, future work may
investigate other aspects of attribution, such as
globality (whether the cause is universal, or unique
to specific circumstances) and intentionality
(whether the entity intended for the outcome to
occur), for added insights (Meyer, 1980). Examining
other psychological constructs as antecedents as
well as potential moderators of animosity will lead
to the development of a more comprehensive and
generalizable nomological framework for the con-
struct. In particular, it would be useful to assess the
boundary conditions relating to the effects of
Journal of International Business Studies
Siew Meng Leong et al
animosity on product judgment and affective
evaluation, which was not a focus of our research.
Second, our research analyzed the effects of
animosity using willingness to buy as the ultimate
dependent measure. Future research might consider
a broader range of dependent variables, including
actual brand purchase behavior, brand choice,
word-of-mouth recommendation, ownership and
usage patterns, and product disposal.
Third, improvements could also be made on the
psychometric front. Extant measures of animosity
vary from study to study, limiting the comparabil-
ity of research results. For example, our animosity
items were developed to capture the construct’s
stable and situational dimensions, whereas pre-
vious scales tapped its sources of occurrence, or
were unidimensional in nature. Developing more
standardized inventories in this area would thus be
a productive avenue for future work.
Finally, our respondents hailed from five coun-
tries in Asia. This furnishes insights into the
robustness of the relationships across nations, as
well as facilitates the uncovering of possible
cultural variations in our findings. Our results
suggest that while some cross-national differences
occurred, they did not detract from the overall
consistent pattern of results. This implies that the
proposed model of animosity’s antecedents and
consequences appears to be generalizable. None-
theless, as Asia represents a myriad of cultures and
religions, future research might involve respon-
dents from more countries in the region. Indeed,
animosity research would also benefit from
data collection efforts in other continents and
cultures (e.g., the Middle East). Expanding
the targets of hostility to other nations besides the
US and Japan examined here would also be
instructive.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The authors thank the National University of Singapore
for funding this research, and the two anonymous JIBS
reviewers and departmental editor David K. Tse for
their helpful comments.
NOTES
1
Steenkamp and Baumgartner (1998) differentiate
between factor covariance and factor variance invar-
iance. Since we do both simultaneously, we use the
term ‘‘factor invariance’’ to imply both variance and
covariance invariance, as well as invariance in the
structural estimates.
 Consumer animosity in an international crisis
2
Sharma, Mukherjee, Kumar, and Dillon (2005) note
that for a model with as few as 24 indicators and a
sample size of 200, cutoff CFI values should fall to
about 0.85 (or less) and 0.07 to 0.08 for RMSEA.
Increased model complexity would suggest lowering
the CFI cutoff value and raising the RMSEA cutoff
REFERENCES
Ang, S. H., Jung, K., Kau, A. K., Leong, S. M., Pornpitakpan, C.,
& Tan, S. J. 2004. Animosity towards economic giants: What
the little guys think. Journal of Consumer Marketing, 21(3):
190–207.
Anholt, S. 2000. The nation as brand. Across the Board, 37(10):
22–27.
Averill, J. 1982. Anger and aggression: An essay on emotion. New
York: Springer-Verlag.
Berkowitz, L. 1994. On the escalation of aggression. In M.
Potegal & J. F. Knutson (Eds), The dynamics of aggression:
Biological and social processes in dyads and groups: 33–41.
Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Bhalla, G., & Lin, L. 1987. Cross-cultural marketing research: A
discussion of equivalence issues and management strategies.
Psychology and Marketing, 4(4): 275–285.
Brummett, B. H., Maynard, K. E., Babyak, M. A., Haney, T. L.,
Siegler, I., Helms, M. J., & Barefoot, J. C. 1988. Measures of
hostility as predictors of facial affect during social interaction:
Evidence for construct validity. Annals of Behavioral Medicine,
20(3): 168–173.
Chua, C. H. 2005. China’s message to Japan over shrine visits.
The Straits Times, May 24: 1.
Douglas, S. P., & Craig, C. S. 1984. Establishing equivalence in
comparative consumer research. In E. Kaynak & R. Savitt (Eds),
Comparative marketing systems: 93–113. New York: Praeger.
Federn, E. 1985. The therapeutic management of violence.
Milieu Therapy, 4: 41–49.
Folkes, V. S. 1988. Recent attribution research in consumer
behavior: A review and new directions. Journal of Consumer
Research, 14(4): 548–565.
Head, M. 1998. US leads attack on Japan at G-7 meeting. World
Socialist Web Site http://www.wsws.org/news/1998/feb1998/
japf26.shtml. Accessed 17 July 2003.
Heslop, L. A., Panadopoulos, N., & Bourk, M. 1998. An inter-
regional and intercultural perspective on subculture differ-
ences in product evaluations. Canadian Journal of Adminis-
trative Sciences, 15(2): 113–127.
Holloway, N. 1991. Japan in Asia. Hong Kong: Review Publishing
Company Ltd.
Huntington, S. P. 1999. The lonely superpower. Foreign Affairs,
78(2): 35–49.
Jain, S. P., & Maheswaran, D. 2000. Motivated reasoning: A
depth-of-processing perspective. Journal of Consumer Research,
26(4): 358–371.
Jung, K., Ang, S. H., Leong, S. M., Tan, S. J., Pornpitakpan, C., &
Kau, A. K. 2002. A typology of animosity and its cross-national
validation. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 33(6): 525–539.
Khermouch, G., Brady, D., Holmes, S., Ihlwan, M., Kripalani, M.,
& Picard, J. 2003. Brands in an age of anti-Americanism.
BusinessWeek Asian Edition, August 4: http://www.business-
week.com.
Klein, J. G. 2002. Us versus them, or us versus everyone?
Delineating consumer aversion to foreign goods. Journal of
International Business Studies, 33(2): 345–363.
Klein, J. G., & Ettenson, R. 1999. Consumer animosity and
consumer ethnocentrism: An analysis of unique antecedents.
Journal of International Consumer Marketing, 11(4): 5–24.
Siew Meng Leong et al
1007
value. Our very complex model, with numerous
constraints, exceeds the cutoffs suggested by Sharma
et al. (2005).
3
The constraints released in the metric invariance
model remained released in the factor invariance
model.
Klein, J. G., Ettenson, R., & Morris, M. D. 1998. The animosity
model of foreign product purchase: An empirical test in the
People’s Republic of China. Journal of Marketing, 62(1):
89–100.
Kripalani, M. 2004. Ban outsourcing? Bad idea. BusinessWeek
Asian Edition, March 29: http://www.businessweek.com.
Krisnakumar, P. 1974. An exploratory study of the influence of
country of origin on the product images of persons from
selected countries. Unpublished PhD Dissertation, University
of Florida.
Lee, F., Hallahan, M., & Herzog, T. 1996. Explaining real-life
events: How culture and domain shape attributions. Person-
ality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 22(7): 732–741.
Lee, P. P. 1998. Japan and the Asian economic crisis. The Business
Times (ISEAS Trends), April 25–26: 9.
Leigh, J. H., & Choi, Y. T. 2003. Attributions about life events
and perceptions of foreign products: Contrasts in individual-
ism and collectivism. In U.S. Tate (Ed), Proceedings of the 2003
Association of Collegiate Marketing Educators Conference: 22–
23. Texas: College of Business University of North Texas
Association of Collegiate Marketing Educators.
Liefeld, J. P. 1993. Experiments on country-of-origin effects:
Review and meta-analysis of effect size. In N. Panadopoulos &
L. A. Heslop (Eds), Product-country images: Impact and role in
international marketing: 117–146. New York: International
Business Press.
Maheswaran, D. 1994. Country-of-origin as a stereotype:
Effects of consumer expertise and attribute strength on
product evaluations. Journal of Consumer Research, 21(2):
354–365.
Marquardt, E. 2005. The price of Japanese nationalism. Asia
Times Online, April 14: http://www.atimes.com.
Mead, G. H. 1929. National-mindedness and international-
mindedness. The International Journal of Ethics, 39(4):
385–407.
Meyer, J. P. 1980. Causal attribution for success and failure: A
multivariate investigation of dimensionality, formation, and
consequences. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,
38(5): 704–718.
Miami Herald, The 2003. Ban on Japan’s imports to end in
celebration. December 31: http://www.mercurynews.com.
Morris, M. W., & Peng, K. 1994. Culture and cause: American
and Chinese attributions for social and physical events. Journal
of Personality and Social Psychology, 67(2): 949–971.
Mullen, M. R. 1995. Diagnosing measurement equivalence in
cross-national research. Journal of International Business Stu-
dies, 26(3): 573–596.
Newman, B. I. 1999. The mass marketing of politics: Democracy in
an age of manufactured images. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
New Republic, The 1999. The plot thickens. December 6: 18–20.
Nijssen, E. J., & Douglas, S. P. 2004. Examining the animosity
model in a country with a high level of foreign trade.
International Journal of Research in Marketing, 21(1): 23–38.
Parmar, A. 2004. Drink politics. Marketing News, February 5: 1,
11–12.
Pereira, B. 1998. Economic crisis kills off 2,000 firms. The Straits
Times, April 20: 59.
Journal of International Business Studies
 Consumer animosity in an international crisis
1008
Rawwas, M. Y. A., Rajendran, K. N., & Wuehrer, G. A. 1996. The
influence of worldmindedness and nationalism on consumer
evaluation of domestic and foreign products. International
Marketing Review, 13(2): 20–38.
Sharma, S., Mukherjee, S., Kumar, A., & Dillon, W. R. 2005. A
simulation study to investigate the use of cutoff values for
assessing model fit in covariance structure analysis. Journal of
Business Research, 58(7): 935–943.
Shimp, T. A., & Sharma, S. 1987. Consumer ethnocentrism:
Construction and validation of the CETSCALE. Journal of
Marketing Research, 24(3): 280–289.
Shimp, T. A., Dunn, T. H., & Klein, J. G. 2004. Remnants of the
US Civil War and modern consumer behavior. Psychology &
Marketing, 21(2): 75–91.
Slater, J. 1999. Squeezing the middlemen. Far Eastern Economic
Review, 162 (January 14): 20–21.
Steenkamp, J.-B., & Baumgartner, H. 1998. Assessing measure-
ment invariance in cross-national consumer research. Journal
of Consumer Research, 25(1): 78–90.
Tefft, S. 1994. China’s savvy shoppers load carts with expensive
imported goods. Advertising Age, June 20: 1–21.
Tse, D. K., Gu, F. F., & Yim, C. K. 2005. National animosity:
Conceptualization, measurement characteristics, and salience in
international business decisions. Working paper, School of
Business, University of Hong Kong.
Usunier, J. C. 1993. International marketing: A cultural approach.
London: Prentice-Hall.
Vence, D. L. 2004. You talkin’ to me? Marketing News, March 1:
1, 9–11.
Weiner, B. 1986. An attributional theory of motivation and
emotion. New York: Springer-Verlag.
Weiner, B. 2000. Attributional thoughts about consumer
behavior. Journal of Consumer Research, 27(3): 382–387.
APPENDIX
CONSTRUCT MEASURES
Stable animosity (average composite reliability¼
0.66; average variance extracted¼0.49)
1. America/Japan is a friend of my country only in
good times.
2. America/Japan has never been fair to my country.
3. America/Japan is not reliable.
Situational animosity (average composite reliability
¼0.84; average variance extracted¼0.58)
1. I feel upset that the Americans/Japanese caused
my friends to lose their jobs during this economic
crisis.
2. I resent the Americans/Japanese for making my
family poorer.
3. I find it hard to forgive the Americans/Japanese
for exploiting me during this economic crisis.
4. The Americans/Japanese have made me feel
more insecure now.
5. The Americans/Japanese have made me more
anxious about my future.
6. I am unhappy with the Americans/Japanese as
they have gained a lot from this economic crisis.
External attribution (average composite reliability¼
0.82; average variance extracted¼0.66)
Journal of International Business Studies
Siew Meng Leong et al
1. The Americans/Japanese caused my country’s
current economic problems.
2. I blame the American/Japanese government for
my country’s current economic problems.
3. We are poorer now because of what Americans/
Japanese business people have done.
4. Our currency is worth less now because of a(n)
American/Japanese conspiracy.
External control (average composite reliability¼
0.57; average variance extracted¼0.36)
1. Whatever the Americans/Japanese do will affect
my country’s current economic problems.
2. American/Japanese business people can solve my
country’s economic problems.
3. The Americans/Japanese could have prevented
my country’s economic problems from happening.
Cognitive judgment (average composite reliability
¼0.78; average variance extracted¼0.50)
1. Products made in America/Japan are carefully
produced and have fine workmanship.
2. Products made in America/Japan show a very
high degree of technological advancement.
3. Products made in America/Japan usually show a
very clever use of color and design.
4. Products made in America/Japan are usually
quite reliable and seem to last the desired length
of time.
5. Products made in America/Japan are usually
good value for the money.
Affective evaluation (average composite reliability¼
0.82; average variance extracted¼0.65)
1. I dislike American/Japanese products. (Reversed)
2. American/Japanese products do not appeal to
me. (Reversed)
3. I do not trust American/Japanese products.
(Reversed)
4. I do not favor buying American/Japanese products.
(Reversed)
Willingness to buy (average composite reliability¼
0.73; average variance extracted¼0.53)
1. I would feel guilty if I bought a(n) American/
Japanese product. (Reversed)
2. From now on, I am less willing to buy American/
Japanese products. (Reversed)
3. Whenever possible, I avoid buying American/
Japanese products. (Reversed)
4. I do not like the idea of owning American/
Japanese products. (Reversed)
 Consumer animosity in an international crisis
ABOUT THE AUTHORS
Siew Meng Leong is Professor of Marketing at the
National University of Singapore (NUS) Business
School. He obtained his PhD from the University of
Wisconsin at Madison and is a native of Singapore.
His research in consumer behavior and interna-
tional marketing has been published in Journal of
Marketing, Journal of Marketing Research, and Journal
of Consumer Research. He can be reached at
bizlsm@nus.edu.sg.
Joseph A Cote is Professor of Marketing at
Washington State University, Vancouver. He
obtained his PhD from the University of Arizona
and is a US citizen. His research interests include
consumer behavior and marketing theory. He has
published in Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of
Marketing Research, Journal of Marketing, and Journal
of Applied Psychology. He can be reached at cote@
wsu.edu.
Swee Hoon Ang is Associate Professor of Marketing
at the NUS Business School. She received her PhD
from the University of British Columbia and is a
citizen of Singapore. Her research in consumer
behavior, advertising, and cross-cultural issues
have been published in Journal of the Academy of
the Marketing Science, Journal of Advertising, and
Marketing Letters. She can be reached at bizangsh@
nus.edu.sg.
Soo Jiuan Tan is Associate Professor of Marketing at
the NUS Business School. She obtained her PhD
from Washington University in St Louis and is a
Accepted by David Tse, Departmental Editor, 20th June 2007. This paper has been with the authors for two revisions.
Siew Meng Leong et al
1009
native of Singapore. Her research interests are in the
areas of global marketing strategies, consumer
values and lifestyles, game theoretic applications
in marketing, and new product and brand
management. She can be reached at biztansj@
nus.edu.sg.
Kwon Jung is Associate Professor of Marketing, KDI
School of Public Policy and Management. He
received his PhD from University of Illinois,
Urbana-Champaign and is a native of Korea. He is
interested in cross-cultural research, marketing
simulation exercises, and lifestyle segmentation
and can be reached at jungk@kdischool.ac.kr.
Ah Keng Kau is deputy director of the NUS
Entrepreneurship Centre. He received his PhD from
the London Graduate School of Business Studies
and is a native of Malaysia. His research focuses on
entrepreneurship and consumer behavior. He has
published in Journal of Marketing Research, Interna-
tional Marketing Review, Psychology and Marketing,
and Social Indicators Research. He can be reached at
neckauak@nus.edu.sg.
Chanthika Pornpitakpan is Associate Professor of
the Faculty of Business Administration, University
of Macau. She obtained her PhD from University of
British Columbia and is a citizen of Thailand. Her
research interests are in cross-cultural consumer
behavior, persuasion, consumer information pro-
cessing, advertising and packaging effects, brand
management, and personality assessment. She can
be reached at ynvynv@yahoo.com.
Journal of International Business Studies