Int. Journal of Business Science and Applied Management, Volume 7, Issue 2, 2012
Differences on the image of Brazil in external markets according
to consumers’ age, gender, knowledge about the country and
country of residence
Fernanda de Tavares Canto Guina
Master of Science in Business Administration, University of São Paulo
Av. Bandeirantes, 3900. Ribeirao Preto, SP. ZIP: 14040-905. Brazil.
Telephone: 55-16-3602-4970
Email: fernandacanto@yahoo.com.br
Janaina de Moura Engracia Giraldi
Tenured Professor at the Department of Business Administration, University of São Paulo
Av. Bandeirantes, 3900. Ribeirao Preto, SP. ZIP: 14040-905. Brazil.
Telephone: 55-16-3602-4970
Email: jgiraldi@usp.br
Abstract
A country’s image could be managed to give greater value to products from that country, while making the
country more attractive to investors and more desirable as a tourism destination. Considering two important
gaps in the literature on country image (discrepant results on the influence of socio-demographic characteristics
on the image of a country and few studies on the image of Brazil), this paper’s objective is to check for
differences on Brazil image according to the following consumers’ characteristics: age, gender, knowledge
about Brazil and country of residence. A quantitative survey was distributed to 380 respondents from four
European countries: Germany, Ireland, England and France. This study concluded that beliefs about countries
may differ according to the degree of perceived similarity with a given country and to certain demographic
issues, and respondents that had better evaluations on Brazil’s image were: young, men, with a high level of
knowledge about Brazil and from France. Moreover, aspects related to communication, distribution and
differentiation of Brazilian products were those that received the worst evaluation by consumers participating in
the survey, which indicates the need for greater investments from both the Brazilian government and the private
sector in communicating and promoting Brazilian products abroad.
Keywords: country image, Brazilian products, European market
Acknowledgments: This research has received financial support from FAPESP/Brazil.
Int. Journal of Business Science and Applied Management / Business-and-Management.org
14
1 INTRODUCTION
Several studies on country image have been conducted since the 1960s (Pharr, 2005; Usunier, 2006). In
general, they point to the idea that consumers have very distinct but generalised perceptions of products from
other countries. These perceptions of a country have a significant effect on consumer attitudes regarding brands
of products made in certain countries (Balabanis, Mueller & Melewar, 2002; Han, 1989). Several authors call
this phenomenon the “country-of-origin effect” (Han, 1989; Jaffe & Nebenzhal, 2001; Martin & Eroglu; 1993;
Pappu, Quester & Cooksey, 2007).
By analysing the research on country image and its relevance in a decade when global brands were already
consolidated (i.e., the 2000s), Pharr (2005) reports that one conclusion can be unequivocally drawn: the origin
of the product continues to influence the evaluation the consumer makes of that product. According to Pharr
(2005), to oppose the rules of origin as well as to search for reduced trading tariffs or to reduce the labour costs
by reallocating manufacturing facilities, including lower salaries, major companies are redefining the country of
origin of their products and services.
Bhaskaran and Sukumaran (2007) indicate that the findings of past country image studies can sometimes be
contradictory, with some authors concluding that country image is a salient variable that influences product
evaluations and purchase intentions, and others concluding that many other factors influence customer beliefs
and purchase intentions much more strongly. They have suggested that country image beliefs are highly
contextual and evolve over time, and that past studies may have not considered the potential influences,
interactions and interconnectedness of factors such as brand names, hybrid offerings, communication and
promotional activities, customer characteristics and market dynamics.
Thus, the image of a country can be influenced by exogenous factors such as the level of economic
development, national identity, people, political factors, culture and personal values (Jaffe & Nebenzhal, 2001;
Balabanis, Mueller & Melewar, 2002), leading to different results. Specifically, studies involving age as an
influential factor have presented significant results, with younger consumers more open and receptive with
regard to foreign products (Good & Huddleston, 1995). Gender also plays an important role in the perception of
“made-in’’ images (Johansson et al. 1985), but results are not consistent and this is one of the motivations for
developing this research. For instance, Balabanis, Mueller and Melewar (2002) explain that females have a
higher bias against foreign products and in favor of domestic ones. On the other hand, Good and Huddleston
(1995) indicate that women tend to evaluate foreign products in a more favourable manner. This discussion
leads to the idea that the consumers’ perceptions actually can change based on their socio-demographic or
cultural characteristics, which is an influence investigated in this research.
By understanding the influence of a country’s image on one or more products, the managers of private
institutions, such as the export companies, may or may not use the country of origin emphatically as a marketing
strategy, or they can alter the product price to increase competitiveness and minimise the negative effects of the
country’s negative image among consumers (Han, 1989; Jaffe & Nebenzhal, 2001).
Additionally, companies, industries and government should work collaboratively so that the nation’s image
can be positively formed and successfully explored. Individually, a company cannot control the image of its
country overseas. At the same time, managers of both private and public institutions should be aware of the
magnitude of the “country-of-origin effect” in terms of consumer perception and market competition (Jaffe &
Nebenzhal, 2001).
Considering the existing scales for measuring country image, despite the fact that there are many of them,
only a few correlate with one another; researchers develop a new approach rather than improve an already-
existing scale (Roth & Diamantopoulos, 2009). Many scales have sought to assess the dimensions of country
image, while others try to evaluate how this image can affect purchase intentions regarding foreign products. In
addition, the majority of these scales have been used in countries such as Germany, France, Canada, and the
USA, and only few studies regarded the image of Brazil (Giraldi & Carvalho, 2006), despite the growing
importance of the country in the world economy. Brazil is the 7
th
economy in GDP numbers (US$ 2,304.646
million in 2011), with a population of around 196.7 million inhabitants (The World Bank, 2012). However,
according to Usunier (2006), Brazil has served as a research topic for only 2% of the total amount of work on
this theme.
Considering two important gaps in the literature on country image (discrepant results on the influence of
socio-demographic characteristics on the image of a country and few studies on the image of Brazil), this
paper’s objective is to grow the current literature on the topic, by checking for differences on Brazil image
according to the following consumers’ characteristics: age, gender, knowledge about Brazil and country of
residence.
The present study sought to evaluate the image of Brazil from the perspective of a group of European
consumers through a quantitative survey. Some European market countries were chosen for this survey, as
consumers from these countries tend to be environmentally conscious and active, thus resulting in their
consumption behaviours having as little impact as possible on the environment (Prieur, 2001).
Fernanda de Tavares Canto Guina and Janaina de Moura Engracia Giraldi
15
2 COUNTRY IMAGE
There have been many studies on country image (Pharr, 2005; Usunier, 2006). In fact, the academic
community has sought to deepen the analyses of country image, particularly in the last 30 years, and to
determine how these images can influence individuals’ purchasing decisions and attitudes as well as their choice
of country to visit. In addition, a country’s image affects other governments’ decisions regarding partnerships
for development of joint projects or even companies’ choices of new regions for investment (Han, 1989; Jaffe &
Nebenzhal, 2001; Pappu, Quester & Cooksey, 2007; Roth & Diamantopoulos, 2009; Roth and Romeo, 1992).
The literature on national stereotypes and perceptions of nations dates from the 1930s (Child & Doob,
1943; Katz & Braly, 1933; Klingberg, 1941 apud Roth & Diamantopoulos, 2009). However, it was not until the
1960s that the concept of country image began to draw more attention from marketing researchers as a result of
the intensification of commercial exchanges and financial investments. Research on country image indicates
that, despite globalisation and the growing economic interdependence between nations, countries have been
analysed differently in various regions of the world (Papadopoulos, 1993).
Nagashima (1970) was the first author to define the concept of country image in terms of origin of
products, that is, of country image as being the picture, reputation, and stereotype that businessmen and
consumers associate with the products of a country. This image is created by variables such as history and
tradition, representation of products, political and economic systems and the consumer’s emotional experiences.
For Roth and Romero (1992), country image is the real perception that consumers have of products from a
certain country based on their previous perceptions of the country’s production, market resistance and
weaknesses, while Martin and Eroglu (1993) define country image as the sum of all of the informative,
inferential and descriptive beliefs that an individual has of a country.
For Nebenzhal, Jaffe and Usunier (2003), country image is formed by the consumer’s perceptions of
attributes of a product made in a given country, by the emotions the consumer has regarding the country and by
the perceptions resulting from the social desire to have products manufactured in that country. According to
D’Astous and Boujbel (2007), other countries are strongly present in people’s consciousness through mass
media, products and brands, and travel experiences, and individuals possess organised mental representations of
other countries as they do with other objects (brands, stores, persons) related to personal characteristics (e.g.,
brands) (Aaker, 1997) and stores (D’Astous & Lévesque, 2003).
Beliefs about country image are important when consumers have difficulty distinguishing different
offerings or when they do not have enough information to reduce risky buying behaviour (Heslop &
Papadopoulos, 1993). Therefore, a country’s image affects the consumer’s mind cognitively and intuitively in
four ways: general image of the country based on previous contacts or experiences; general image of the country
in addition to other affective and cognitive influences derived from experiences with its products, thus forming a
country-of-origin image of the product or brand; image of the country in addition to functional and aesthetic
attributes of the product or brand, thus creating beliefs and attitudes; and finally, comparisons with other
countries’ products, thus creating cognitive and affective behaviours (Bhaskaran & Sukumaran, 2007; Heslop &
Papadopoulos, 1993).
An individual’s image of a given country can affect his or her attitudes towards the same country. In other
words, in addition to being a cognitive cue of the quality of the product, the country of origin also evokes
emotions, identity, pride and memories. These symbols and emotions transform the country of origin into an
image attribute, which has been shown to be significant in the decision making regarding purchases and an
important source of brand equity (Verlegh & Steenkamp, 1999).
Some studies show strong evidence that country image changes over time and that beliefs about the country
of origin are indeed changeable as well (Verlegh, 2007). The influence of communication strategies on such
beliefs has been studied by Lotz and Hu (2001), who conclude that a negative country-of-origin image can be
more favourable when products are associated with a prestigious retail market, thus serving as an effective
marketing strategy tool.
For Nagashima (1977), negative beliefs about a country can also change through advertisements and
national campaigns to promote exports. Thus, countries with unfavourable images can change those images over
time, though it is necessary to invest in research that is focused on consumers and investors to improve the
production, logistics and tourism structures of those countries.
Conceptually, the most recent research on country of origin has gradually shifted from a mere assessment
of the product differences and preferences based on a country of origin premise to the analysis of a “more
complex construct”, that is, the country image that is currently accepted (Roth & Diamantopoulos, 2009). While
these conventional studies allow researchers to analyse whether consumers prefer products or brands of one
country over another, the focus on the image perceived by other countries allows these perceptions to be
analysed.
Recent attempts have been made to organise different conceptualisations of country image. For example,
Roth and Diamantopoulos (2009) have established three groups to define country image. The first definition
uses country image (CoI) as a construct involving general images created not only by those products
Int. Journal of Business Science and Applied Management / Business-and-Management.org
16
representing the country, but also by the country’s degree of economic development, the political maturity, the
culture and traditions, the level of technological advancement and the industrialisation (Allred, Chakraborty &
Miller, 1999; Roth & Diamantopoulos, 2009). The second group defines country image in terms of origin of
products, the so-called product-country image (PCI), while the third and last group exclusively defines the
product image (PI) of a country, as described by Nagashima (1970).
According to Roth and Diamantopoulos (2009), the inconsistencies in defining the country-image construct
have resulted in considerable confusion. Some authors define country image as “perceptions” (Han, 1989;
Nebenzahl, Jaffe & Usunier, 2003), while others suggest that it represents impressions or associations (Ittersum,
Candel & Meulenberg, 2003), and still others support the premise that country image is a stereotype (Verlegh &
Steenkamp, 1999) or schema (Askegaard & Ger, 1998). Finally, there are those who identify country image as
“beliefs” (Martin & Eroglu, 1993), i.e., a trait that represents one of the attitude components. This lack of
consensus seems to be the result of a lack of consensus about the country’s image itself (Poiesz, 1989).
Although none of the aforementioned definitions are incorrect (perceptions, stereotypes, schema, and
beliefs), Roth and Diamantopoulos (2009) believe that they are not broad enough to capture the entire scope of
the country-image construct. According to Roth and Diamantopoulos (2009), the theory of attitude is the only
concept in the literature that has no limitations and attempts to explain how country image is formed and how
consumers perceive it. For these authors, this concept can explain both favourable and unfavourable evaluations
about country image. Furthermore, attitude involves not only cognitive aspects but also affective (feelings and
emotions) and conative (behaviour) ones (Verlegh & Steenkamp, 1999).
Most studies on the factors determining country image are based on the country’s characteristics and on the
demographic differences between the countries analysed (Balabanis, Mueller & Melewar, 2002), indicating that
the country image formation is dependent on different antecedents (precursors or determinants), which have
been the focus of investigation of an increasing number of researchers (Balabanis, Mueller & Melewar, 2002;
Roth & Diamantopoulos, 2009; Pharr, 2005; Verlegh & Steenkamp, 1999). Among the antecedents contributing
to the country image formation, one can mention: the level of contact between countries, language similarity,
demographic factors, lifestyle, culture and personal values (Balabanis, Mueller & Melewar, 2002; Chao &
Rajendran, 1993).
With regard to consumers’ characteristics investigated in this research, the age group is related to
differences in the consumer receptiveness to foreign products (Shimp & Sharma, 1987). Interestingly, studies
based on age groups have reported significant results for younger consumers, who seem to be more receptive to
foreign products (Good & Huddleston, 1995). Wall, Heslop and Hofstra (1988) have found gender differences
in evaluations of foreign products, with men relying on technological development and political orientation to
form their opinions about the quality of the products made in another country, whereas women used different
criteria, such as geographical proximity and product specificity (e.g. clothes, shoes), to evaluate the countries.
Balabanis, Mueller and Melewar (2002) have also reported that women have a bias towards foreign products,
being more favourable to national products. On the other hand, Good and Huddleston (1995) found that women
tend to assess foreign products more favourably than men. Therefore, one can observe that despite the consensus
on the fact that consumer gender influences evaluations of the country-of-origin image, the results are indeed
conflicting. In addition to gender, Ahmed and D’Astous (1996) showed that young consumers and individuals
belonging to higher-income classes have more positive beliefs about foreign products.
3 SCALES TO MEASURE THE COUNTRY IMAGE AND ITS DIMENSIONS
Based on the review conducted by Roth and Diamantopoulos (2009), we see that the literature contains at
least thirty studies on ways of measuring country image and another forty studies using methods to measure a
product’s image. In one of the first reviews of the research on country of origin, Bilkey and Nes (1982)
criticised the large number of samples used in the USA, as approximately one-third of the studies used
developing or emergent nations as country of origin for products (Usunier, 2006).
Two-thirds of the scales developed to measure country image were also aimed at measuring product image,
with most scales using “global products” rather than specific categories. The reasons for this methodology are
related to the fact that images of specific products from a given country may not be generalised, thus limiting
the value of such research (Papadopoulos, 1986). Therefore, if the main objective of the research is to explore
general images of countries and their products, global product evaluations are more suitable for measuring the
image of products. If, on the other hand, the objective is to assess the impact of country image on both purchase
intention and evaluations of a product or brand, then researchers should ask about specific products or brands
(Roth & Diamantopoulos, 2009).
Some of the most important scales are presented herein, as they have been largely used in research and
demonstrate a better capacity to measure images within a multidimensional context. In one of the first studies on
country image, Nagashima (1970) evaluated attitudes towards foreign products by comparing those of Japanese
and American origins. Country image was evaluated using twenty questions that covered five dimensions: price
and value; service and engineering; advertising and reputation; design and style; and consumer profile.
Fernanda de Tavares Canto Guina and Janaina de Moura Engracia Giraldi
17
Nagashima (1970) considered the image of a country to consist of several associations with the country’s
products rather than the general image people have of the country itself. Nagashima’s analysis falls into the third
group of definitions suggested by Roth and Diamantopoulos (2009), that is, the image of a country is the result
of various associations with its products.
Han (1990) has sought to measure country image using five dimensions: technical advancement, prestige
value, workmanship, price, and serviceability. For Roth and Romeo (1992), four elements are considered when
assessing a country’s image: innovation, design, finishing, and prestige. Innovation refers to both the inclusion
of new technologies and a product’s technological advances. Design refers to a product’s appearance, style and
colour, and finishing refers to a product’s level of reliability, durability and quality. Finally, prestige refers to the
exclusivity, status and reputation of a product’s brand. These elements are related to aspects of products made in
a given country rather than to the general characteristics of a country.
One can find that the variables adopted by Han (1989) and Roth and Romeo (1992) to assess country image
are only related to the product’s attributes, that is, these variables are not correlated to the country’s attributes.
Therefore, this scale cannot detect any correlation between country-of-origin image and product image, which
suggests a one-dimensional concept based on the product’s quality, not including other important elements, as
observed in a multidimensional concept (Giraldi & Ikeda, 2009).
According to some authors, the concept of country image is not one-dimensional but rather
multidimensional. The focus is no longer the characteristics of the products but the country and those issues
related to its image, such as the country’s economy, history and international importance (Jaffe & Nebenzahl,
2001; Pisharodi & Parameswaran , 2002; Roth & Diamantopoulos, 2009). Since the 1990s, studies have
considered dimensions other than product-related images that impact a country’s image.
Martin and Eroglu (1993) measured country image using three dimensions: political, economic and
technological. Based on the items established by Martin and Eroglu (1993), Pappu, Quester and Cooksey (2007)
sought to investigate country image using two categories of products (television sets and automobiles) and their
dimensions (i.e., innovation, prestige and design) as well as the country-image dimensions (technological,
economic and political).
Pisharodi and Parameswaran (1992, 2002) also sought to measure country image in a multidimensional
manner by using three groups of country-related aspects with their own dimensions. The first group of items,
called “general country attributes” (GCA), is aimed at capturing the respondents’ attitudes towards a given
country. The second group, “general product attributes” (GPA), is aimed at identifying attitudes towards the
general characteristics of the products made in the country under study. The third group, “specific product
attributes” (SPA), identifies attitudes towards specific products.
By studying the Canada’s image and its products, Papadopoulos and Heslop (2000) presented a group of
variables utilised as mental models that are used by consumers to evaluate a country and its products. The
criteria used to evaluate a country were the following: level of country development (technological
development, total growth, level of education), feelings related to people (honesty, hostility, dedication to work)
and established narrow relationships with the country (intent to invest and purchase more products made in the
country). For the product evaluations, the variables used as criteria by the consumers included the following:
price, market presence, and responsibility.
In addition to the scales described above, the personification approach developed by Nebenzahl, Jaffe and
Usunier (2003) measures the image of a country as the origin of products. This scale contains 27 items and has
been tested in Canada, France, Israel, Mexico and the USA. The scale is based on specific questions (e.g.,
“People who buy products made in X are…”) and includes the evaluation of statements made according to an
agreement scale (e.g., “Products made in X have high quality…”). These statements involve evaluative
dimensions as well as the social-emotional dimensions that the consumers attach to the evaluated products.
Consequently, three major dimensions were obtained, representing different personality profiles that are
associated with individuals who buy foreign products, namely, “underdog”, “economic value seeker”, and
“quality and satisfaction seeker”.
More recently, D’Astous and Boujbel (2007) developed a scale to rank countries according to the
respondents’ personal characteristics. The authors listed relevant adjectives obtained from personality scales and
individual interviews with a sample of Canadian French-speaking adults. The authors identified six dimensions
of “country personality”: agreeableness, wickedness, snobbism, assiduousness, conformity and unobtrusiveness.
Int. Journal of Business Science and Applied Management / Business-and-Management.org
18
4 METHODOLOGY
Considering empirical studies samples to measure the country image, different types were used, including
students (Martin & Eroglu, 1993; Pereira, Hsu and Kundu, 2005; Brijs, 2006), housekeepers (Ittersum, Candel
& Meulenberg, 2003; Nebenzahl, Jaffe & Usunier, 2003), consumers (Pappu, Quester & Cooksey, 2007) and
business men (Kuhn, 1993). Concerning the method of sampling, the majority of the studies utilizes
convenience sample (Roth & Diamantopoulos, 2009).
In this regard, this research population consisted of a group of European consumers who were represented
by under-graduate students, post-graduate students and staff of five European institutions, including the
Business School of the University College in Dublin (Ireland); the IESEG School of Management in Paris
(France); the International Office of Sorbonne-Paris (France); the University of Münster Schools of
Management, Economics and Law in Münster (Germany); and the University of Kent Business School in
Canterbury (England). The ages of the participants ranged from 18 to 60 years.
Including all five institutions, the entire population included approximately 4,000 students and staff.
This group of individuals was defined for the study because they represent a segment of interest for
companies as potential buyers of foreign products. In addition, as shown by Verlegh and Steenkamp (1999), the
magnitude of the country-of-origin effect does not differ between studies using samples of students and those
using samples of consumers. However, the choice of this population may have brought some bias to the results
of the evaluation of Brazil's image, as the sample includes individuals with higher levels of education than the
general population. This element is one of the limitations of the research.
This research used a non-probabilistic sample and convenience criteria. As the elements of the sample were
not chosen randomly, it was not possible to objectively evaluate the sampling error (Churchill, 1991). Thus, it is
not possible to place limits on the accuracy of the estimates. In other words, no generalisations can be made of
the results obtained from this sample for the entire survey population, since the key characteristic of a sample
allowing generalization is its probabilistic versus non-probabilistic nature (Mazzocchi, 2008). Therefore, the t-
test to check the statistical significance of differences was not employed. However, the magnitude of differences
was evaluated by the coefficient of variation, which is a way to express the variability of the data from the
average (Anderson, Sweeney & Williams, 2010).
According to Roth and Diamantopoulos (2009), non-probability sampling techniques prevail among studies
on country image, and they are considered acceptable for theory testing purposes, as it is the case in this study
(the investigation of differences on the image of Brazil according to consumers’ age, gender, knowledge about
the country and country of residence).
The variables used in this study to measure Brazil’s image were adapted from a study by Pisharodi and
Parameswaran (2002). This scale was chosen, since it has good reports on both reliability and validity, which
according to Roth and Diamantopoulos (2009) is a critical problem in country image research. Moreover,
considering that the attitude theory perspective is the best way to conceptualize the country image construct
(Roth & Diamantopoulos, 2009), Pisharodi and Parameswaran’s (2002) proposal comprises cognitive, affective
and conative components of attitude.
The items of the scale proposed by Pisharodi and Parameswaran’s (2002) considered in this research are
the ones comprising the dimension “general country attributes” (GCA), which is aimed at capturing the general
attitudes towards a country, and the dimension “general product attributes” (GPA), which is aimed at identifying
general attitudes towards the products made in the country. The items evaluated in this research are presented in
Exhibit 1.
Fernanda de Tavares Canto Guina and Janaina de Moura Engracia Giraldi
19
Exhibit 1: General country attributes and general product attributes used to measure the image of Brazil.
Adapted from Parameswaran and Pisharodi (2002)
General country attributes
Brazil is friendly and internationally admired
Brazilian people are creative and artistically gifted
Brazilian people are well-educated
Brazilian people are hard working
Brazilian people reached high standard of living
Brazilian people have technical skills
Brazil is economically similar to my country
Brazil is politically similar to my country
Brazil is culturally similar to my country
Brazil plays a significant international role
Brazil is well known for producing mainly industrial products
General product attributes
Brazilian products are expensive
Brazilian products are luxury
Brazilian products have quality workmanship
Brazilian products are imitations
Brazilian products are sold in many countries
Brazilian products are not attractive
Brazilian products are heavily advertised overseas
Brazilian products need frequent repairs
Brazilian products have a wide range of models
Brazilian products are long-lasting
Brazilian products have a good value
Brazilian products are highly technological
Brazilian products are easily found
Brazilian products are prestigious
We used a seven-point Likert scale of agreement (1=strongly agree to 7=strongly disagree), and we sought
to reduce data relating to questions about Brazil's image and its products through exploratory factor analysis to
facilitate the identification of the key dimensions that compose Brazil’s image. New variables were created from
the observed composition of factors (mean values of the questions that compose them). Thus, it was possible to
identify those aspects of Brazil’s image that were evaluated more positively and those that were evaluated more
negatively, as well as to check for differences on the evaluations according to consumers’ age, gender,
knowledge about the country and country of residence.
5 RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS
In total, 382 questionnaires were obtained during the months of September and October 2010, in the four
countries mentioned, but two were dropped due to outliers’ identification. According to Roth and
Diamantopoulos (2009), the average sample size of studies on country image is 338, which makes this study’s
sample consistent with the sort of sample sizes typically found in cross-sectional research. Questionnaires were
applied individually to under-graduation and post-graduation students as well as to the staff of the four
aforementioned European universities.
With regard to the sample obtained from the four countries, the mean age of the respondents was 24.4
years, with standard deviation of 6.4 years. The youngest respondent was 18 years old, whereas the oldest was
61. Of the total sample, 60% of the respondents were between 18 and 24 years old, whereas 40% were older,
which justifies the sample being spilt into two age groups. Table 1 lists the participation of each country in the
sample of respondents.
Int. Journal of Business Science and Applied Management / Business-and-Management.org
20
Table 1: Participation of each country in the total sample
Frequency
Percentage
France
40
10
England
116
30.5
Germany
112
29.5
Ireland
114
30.0
Total
382
100.0
The level of knowledge about Brazil among the respondents was assessed by means of a 7-point itemized
scale, ranging from 1 (“I know a lot”) to 7 (“I know nothing”). The mean score was 5.0, with standard deviation
of 1.4, which indicates in general a relatively poor knowledge of Brazil among respondents. Respondents
scoring less than 4 were considered as having good knowledge about Brazil, whereas those scoring more than 4
were considered as knowing little about the country for group comparisons.
It is observed that for the analysis, the variables "Brazilian products are not attractive”, "Brazilian products
need frequent repairs" and "Brazilian products are imitations" were recoded because they are sentences with
negative connotations and should thus have their valences reversed. Accordingly, all of the questions had the
same valence as part of a consistent procedure scoring.
Regarding the critical assumptions necessary for running a factor analysis, the Bartlett's sphericity test was
performed, which confirmed the suitability of the technique. In addition, to measure the fit of the data to factor
analysis, we employed the Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin (KMO) test, with a value obtained of 0,816. This result can be
considered excellent, according to Hair et al. (2005). Furthermore, the commonalities of the variables were
evaluated, and those less than 0.5 were excluded (“Brazilian products are expensive” and “Brazilian products
are luxury”).
The choice of the number of factors to be retained was made by analysing the eigenvalues. We obtained
seven factors with eigenvalues greater than 1, thus explaining, together, 61.045% of the total variance.
Following the suggestion of Hair et al. (2005), we rotated the factors using the VARIMAX method, which is the
most commonly used method for this type of analysis (Malhotra, 1996). Table 2 shows the factor loadings
obtained.
Table 2: Rotated component matrix, name of the variables and Cronbach’s alphas coefficient
Factor name
Cronbach’s
alpha
Factor loads
Factor 1- Face of the Brazilian
People
0.749
0.769
0.732
0.679
0.644
Factor 2 - General Image of the
Brazilian products
0.707
0.801
0.731
0. 601
Factor3 - Communication,
Distribution and Differentiation of
Brazilian Products
0.728
0.740
0.668
0.618
0.523
0.515
Factor 4 - Perceived Similarity
0.720
0.791
0.770
0.639
Factor 5 - Internationalisation of
Brazil
0.507
0.688
0.680
Factor 6 - Beliefs about Brazilian
Arts and Sympathy for Brazil
0.697
0.864
0.843
Factor 7- Negative Aspects of
Brazilian Products
0.429
0.723
0.721
0.488
Fernanda de Tavares Canto Guina and Janaina de Moura Engracia Giraldi
21
Once the rotated solution with seven factors was obtained, the factors were interpreted. According to Hair
et al. (2005), it is necessary to verify the practical significance of the factors found. The authors determined that
the factors that have factor loadings close to .50 are considered to be significant and must be retained. Virtually
all of the factor loadings from the analysis have values greater than 0.50, except for the factor loading on the
correlation between the variable “The Brazilian products have quality workmanship” (0.465) and factor 5.
Therefore, this variable was deleted from the analysis.
Moreover, variables cross-loadings in different dimensions were analysed. Two cases were detected:
“Brazilian products are highly technological”, cross-loading more intensely in Factor 2 (0.444) and Factor 3
(0.523); and “Brazilian products are not attractive”, cross-loading more intensely in Factor 5 (0.482) and Factor
7 (0.488). In the first case, the variable was kept in Factor 3, since the load was higher than 0.5 and, in the
second case, the whole Factor 7 was withdrawn from the analysis, as explained next.
The second step of the process of factor interpretation involves reliability analysis of the results found,
which is a measure of the consistency between the multiple measurements of a variable (Hair et al., 2005).
Internal consistency is a common method of measuring reliability based on the rationale that individual items of
a scale should measure the same construct and, therefore, be highly correlated. Internal consistency was
assessed using Cronbach’s alpha coefficient. According to Hair et al. (2005), the lower limit for Cronbach’s
alpha is 0.070, although 0.60 is acceptable in exploratory research.
Factor 1, which contained variables that describe the Brazilian people in terms of quality of life, education,
work and technical skills, had a Cronbach’s alpha of 0.749, which is considered to be satisfactory. Therefore,
Factor 1 was termed “Face of the Brazilian People”.
Factor 2 had a Cronbach’s alpha of 0.707, thus ensuring its reliability. This factor, consisting of variables
related to evaluations of Brazilian products in terms of model variety, durability, and price, was termed “General
Image of the Brazilian products”.
Factor 3 had a Cronbach’s alpha of 0.728, showing good reliability. This factor consisted of variables
related to access to Brazilian products (if they are easily found), differentiation (if they are highly technological
and prestigious) and communication (if they are heavily advertised internationally). In addition, Factor 3 also
includes the variable “Brazil is well known for producing mainly industrial products” and “Brazilian products
are highly technological”. Therefore, Factor 3 was termed “Communication, Distribution and Differentiation of
Brazilian Products”.
Factor 4 also had a satisfactory Cronbach’s alpha of 0.720. This factor consisted of variables related to the
cultural, economic and political similarities perceived by the respondents between their countries and Brazil.
Therefore, this factor was termed “Perceived Similarity”.
Factor 5 was termed “Internationalisation of Brazil” as it consisted of variables such as “Brazil plays a
significant international role" and “Brazilian products are sold in several countries”. Cronbach’s alpha showed
internal consistency of 0.507, indicating that this factor was not acceptable. In fact, according to Cortina (1993),
the value of Cronbach’s alpha decreases as the number of variables in a factor decreases, as its calculation is
directly proportional to this number (N). Since Factor 5 only has two variables and a low Cronbach’s alpha, it
was decided to drop it from the analysis.
Factor 6, termed “Beliefs about Brazilian Arts and Sympathy for Brazil”, consisted of variables such as
“Brazil is friendly and internationally admired” and “Brazilian people are creative and artistically gifted”. This
might be an indication that Brazilian arts are admired in external markets. The reliability coefficient for this
factor was 0.697, which is very close to the acceptable level. Finally, factor 7 was termed “Negative Aspects of
Brazilian Products”. Because its reliability coefficient was 0.429, this factor was unacceptable for the analysis.
In their study, Parameswaran and Pisharodi (1992) found only two dimensions (factors) related to variables
aimed at measuring country image through the method of structural equations analysis: “People Facet” and
“Perceived Similarity”. In the present study, one additional reliable factor was found that related to Brazilian
image, namely, “Beliefs about Arts and Sympathy for Brazil”.
Parameswaran and Pisharodi (2002) found three factors resulting from variables used to measure product
image. The first factor involves the image of the product itself (e.g., price, durability, variety), the second factor
involves the distribution and marketing of the product (e.g., heavily advertised, easily found), and the third
factor involves negative aspects of the product (e.g., imitations, lack of attractiveness, constant repairs). Similar
factors were found in the current study. Overall, there was a certain similarity between the five image
dimensions for Brazil found here and those observed by Parameswaran and Pisharodi (2002).
New variables were created from the factors composition (mean answer values of related questions). To
identify which dimension was better assessed by the respondents, the factor composition was calculated to rank
the factors obtained. To be considered well evaluated, the dimensions that compose Brazil’s image must obtain
average scores below 4 (i.e., closer to "totally agree"). Negative assessments are represented by average scores
above 4 (i.e., closer to "strongly disagree"). Average scores close to 4 are considered to be neutral assessments.
The scores are presented in Table 3, and the analysis is complemented by the coefficients of variation (CV) of
each variable.
Int. Journal of Business Science and Applied Management / Business-and-Management.org
22
Table 3: Mean scores of Brazil’s image dimensions
Dimensions
N
Mean
Standard
deviation
Coefficient of
variation
Beliefs about Brazilian arts and sympathy for Brazil
380
2.5724
1.06934
0.416
Face of the Brazilian people
380
4.0039
0.87358
0.218
General image of Brazilian products
380
4.1399
0.79914
0.193
Communication, distribution and differentiation of Brazilian products
380
4.6100
0.89616
0.194
Perceived similarity
380
5.1105
1.19700
0.234
Average of Brazil image score
380
4.0873
As shown in Table 3, the highest evaluated dimension is “Beliefs about arts and sympathy for Brazil” (CV
above 40%, i.e., high dispersion). The second highest evaluated dimension is “Face of the Brazilian people”,
received a neutral evaluation considered with an average dispersion of results between 10% and 30%. Therefore,
among the respondents, Brazil is above all considered to be a friendly, creative and artistic country. Such
elements reflect the traditional stereotypes of the country as related to hospitality, festivals and arts, with its
polite, hard-working, skilled people and its good quality of life. However, the two dimensions that are well
evaluated by the sample have high coefficients of variation, indicating a high spread of results among the
respondents. This result indicates that future research should be conducted to confirm the results and identify the
reasons for the variability of responses.
The dimension “General image of Brazilian products” has received a neutral evaluation, i.e., scores very
close to four. The respondents did not assess Brazil’s economy, culture and politics as being similar to those of
their countries, and these aspects are represented by the dimension “perceived similarity”. This finding is
understandable, considering that the survey was conducted in European and non-Latin American countries.
Finally, the image dimension of Brazil that received the lowest scores, with average scores close to five, was
that related to aspects of communication, distribution and differentiation of Brazilian products. In general, when
all dimensions are considered altogether, the image of Brazil can be classified as a neutral one, with average
score value close to 4.
As shown in the literature review, it is believed that demographic, environmental and cultural factors may
facilitate or inhibit the confidence in a country of origin (Pisharodi & Parameswaran, 2002). Some of these
factors are discussed herein to verify whether the assessment of the image dimensions of Brazil differs
according to age, gender, knowledge about Brazil and the respondent’s country of residence. It should be noted
that t-tests to check the statistical significance of differences was not employed, as explained in the methodology
section, since a convenience sample was used in this research. Results thus cannot be generalized to the whole
population.
To compare the answers between different age groups, the sample was divided according to age:
respondents aged 18 to 24 years old and respondents older than 24 years old. Respondents older than 24 years
old were mainly graduate students and staff from the universities and represented 40% of the sample. As
observed in Table 4, both younger and older respondents assessed the dimension “Beliefs about Brazilian arts
and sympathy for Brazil” as being the most positive and the dimension “Communication, distribution and
differentiation of Brazilian products” as being the most negative, while the dimension “General image of the
Brazilian products” was neutrally evaluated. Thus, no age differences were found in this research, considering
the rank ordering of Brazil’s image dimensions. However, when it comes to the average evaluation of Brazil
image, it can be seen that younger respondents have a slightly worse evaluation of Brazil than older ones do.
This is a different result from other ones comparing age groups that have reported more positive results for
younger consumers (Good & Huddleston, 1995).
Fernanda de Tavares Canto Guina and Janaina de Moura Engracia Giraldi
23
Table 4: Mean scores of Brazil’s image dimensions, according to age groups
Aged 18 to 24 years
N
Mean
Standard
deviation
Coefficient
of variation
Beliefs about Brazilian arts and sympathy for Brazil
231
2.5411
1.04254
0.410
Face of the Brazilian people
231
4.0465
0.84427
0.209
General image of Brazilian products
231
4.1775
0.81353
0.195
Communication, distribution and differentiation of Brazilian
products
231
4.6221
0.89129
0.193
Perceived similarity
231
5.1609
1.17532
0.228
Average of Brazil image score (aged 18 to 24 years)
231
4.1096
Older than 24 years
Beliefs about Brazilian arts and sympathy for Brazil
149
2.6208
1.11144
0.424
Face of the Brazilian people
149
3.9379
0.91614
0.233
General image of Brazilian products
149
4.0817
0.77540
0.190
Communication, distribution and differentiation of Brazilian
products
149
4.5913
0.90635
0.197
Perceived similarity
149
5.0324
1.22978
0.244
Average of Brazil image score (older than 24 years)
149
4.0528
When comparing the evaluations performed by men and women, it can be seen that no difference in the
rank ordering of image dimensions were detected, as shown in Table 5. Nonetheless, men have a slightly better
general image of Brazil than women do, as it can be seen from the average score of Brazil image. In the
literature review, it was seen that, although there is a consensus that consumer gender influences evaluations of
a country’s image, results are conflicting. Nonetheless, the results of this research are more in accordance with
Balabanis, Mueller and Melewar’s (2002), who have also reported that women have a worse image of foreign
products. Wall, Heslop and Hofstra (1988) have also observed gender differences in evaluations of foreign
products. The authors found that men rely on technological development and political orientation to form their
opinions about the quality of products made in another country, whereas women use different criteria, such as
geographical proximity and product specificity (e.g., clothes, shoes), to rank the countries.
It was also found here that older individuals (over 24 years of age) and males rated Brazil’s economy,
politics and culture as being more similar to their own countries than did younger and female subjects, having a
better general image of Brazil. Results are in accordance with Han’s (1989), for whom the country evaluation
can differ depending on how consumers perceive similarities (or lack of) between their own country and others
in terms of culture, economy and political systems.
Table 5: Mean scores of Brazil’s image dimensions, according to gender
Male
N
Mean
Standard
deviation
Coefficient of
variation
Beliefs about Brazilian arts and sympathy for Brazil
188
2.5146
1.11988
0.445
Face of the Brazilian people
188
4.0492
0.89876
0.222
General image of Brazilian products
188
4.0709
0.77673
0.191
Communication, distribution and differentiation of Brazilian
products
188
4.5915
0.87333
0.190
Perceived similarity
188
5.0718
0.19855
0.236
Average of Brazil image score (male)
188
4.0596
Female
Beliefs about Brazilian arts and sympathy for Brazil
192
2.6289
0.01719
0.387
Face of the Brazilian people
192
3.9596
0.84820
0.214
General image of Brazilian products
192
4.2075
0.81687
0.194
Communication, distribution and differentiation of Brazilian
products
192
4.6281
0.91989
0.199
Perceived similarity
192
5.1484
1.19741
0.233
Average of Brazil image score (female)
192
4.1145
Int. Journal of Business Science and Applied Management / Business-and-Management.org
24
Table 6 shows the mean values for each dimension and the coefficients of variation according to the level
of knowledge respondents have about Brazil. Respondents with a high level of knowledge about Brazil assessed
all of the dimensions more positively compared to respondents with a lack of knowledge about Brazil, as well as
the general image of Brazil (represented by the mean score lower than 4). The high-knowledge respondents also
regarded Brazil’s culture, economy, and political systems as being more similar to those of their own countries
than did the low-knowledge respondents. However, there is a high variability in the results of the two high rated
dimensions, which also occurred in the previous comparative analysis.
Respondents with greater knowledge about Brazil neutrally evaluated the dimension “Communication,
distribution and differentiation of Brazilian products”, i.e., they provided a more positive assessment of this
dimension than individuals with less knowledge. Those who had little knowledge about Brazil negatively
evaluated the “Overall image of Brazilian products” and the “Communication, distribution and differentiation of
Brazilian products” dimensions, the latter being the most poorly evaluated dimension.
The dimension “Perceived similarity” received the worst average score among the group of respondents
with little knowledge about Brazil, when compared to all other groups. These results may be indicative of the
need to invest in improving aspects related to tourism in and communications about Brazil and its products to
reduce the negative stereotypes, since people that show good levels of knowledge tend to have a better
evaluation of Brazil and Brazilian products.
Table 6: Mean scores of Brazil’s image dimensions, according to level of knowledge
Good knowledge about Brazil
N
Mean
Standard
deviation
Coefficient of
variation
Beliefs about Brazilian arts and sympathy for Brazil
144
2.4479
1.09188
0.446
Face of the Brazilian people
144
3.8701
0.96054
0.248
General image of Brazilian products
144
3.9483
0.85932
0.218
Communication, distribution and differentiation of Brazilian
products
144
4.3730
0.98001
0.224
Perceived similarity
144
4.6551
1.37616
0.296
Average of Brazil image score (good knowledge)
144
3.8589
Poor knowledge about Brazil
Beliefs about Brazilian arts and sympathy for Brazil
236
2.6483
1.05045
0.397
Face of the Brazilian people
236
4.0856
0.80725
0.198
General image of Brazilian products
236
4.2568
0.73782
0.173
Communication, distribution and differentiation of Brazilian
products
236
4.7546
0.80956
0.170
Perceived similarity
236
5.3884
0.97660
0.181
Average of Brazil image score (poor knowledge)
236
4.2267
Table 7 presents the mean scores for each country that participated in the study. Based on these results, we
conclude that French respondents positively assessed the dimensions “Beliefs about Brazilian arts and sympathy
for Brazil” and “Face of the Brazilian people”, whereas the dimension “Communication, distribution and
differentiation of Brazilian products” received the most negative evaluation. French respondents gave the best
overall evaluation of Brazil’s image, as it can be seen from the average image score.
Among the participants from England, the most positively evaluated dimensions were also “Beliefs about
Brazilian arts and sympathy for Brazil” and “Face of the Brazilian people”. Considering the mean scores
obtained from both the French and English respondents, there is little perceived similarity between Brazil’s
culture, economy and political systems and those of France and England. The degree of perceived similarity was
even lower among the Irish and German respondents.
Similarly to the other groups of respondents, Irish respondents positively evaluated the dimensions “Beliefs
about Brazilian arts and sympathy for Brazil” and “Face of the Brazilian people” and negatively evaluated the
dimension “Communication, distribution and differentiation of Brazilian products”. The assessment of the
dimension “General image of Brazilian products” can be considered neutral. It can be said that respondents from
England and from Ireland had very similar overall ratings of Brazil (as shown in the average image score).
Among the German respondents, the most positively evaluated dimensions was “Beliefs about Brazilian
arts and sympathy for Brazil”, whereas the worst evaluation was given to the dimension “Communication,
Fernanda de Tavares Canto Guina and Janaina de Moura Engracia Giraldi
25
distribution and differentiation of Brazilian products”. Because the dimensions “Face of the Brazilian people”
and “General image of Brazilian products” had mean scores close to 4, they were regarded as being neutrally
evaluated by the German respondents. Furthermore, a lower dispersion of results was observed in the German
sample and they gave the worst overall ratings of Brazil image, when compared to respondents from the other
countries.
Table 7: Mean scores of Brazil’s image dimensions, according to country of residence
France
N
Mean
Standard
deviation
Coefficient of
variation
Beliefs about Brazilian arts and sympathy for Brazil
40
2.2625
0.76784
0.339
Face of the Brazilian people
40
3.8469
0.86718
0.225
General image of Brazilian products
40
4.1750
0.71915
0.172
Communication, distribution and differentiation of Brazilian
products
40
4.5450
1.02180
0.225
Perceived similarity
40
5.0542
1.12621
0.223
Average of Brazil image score (France)
40
3.9767
England
Beliefs about Brazilian arts and sympathy for Brazil
115
2.9696
1.16093
0.391
Face of the Brazilian people
115
3.9967
0.79918
0.200
General image of Brazilian products
115
4.0957
0.90404
0.221
Communication, distribution and differentiation of Brazilian
products
115
4.4374
0.95854
0.216
Perceived similarity
115
4.9522
1.38074
0.279
Average of Brazil image score (England)
115
4.0903
Ireland
Beliefs about Brazilian arts and sympathy for Brazil
114
2.5965
1.14998
0.443
Face of the Brazilian people
114
3.9200
0.96239
0.246
General image of Brazilian products
114
4.1418
0.80718
0.195
Communication, distribution and differentiation of Brazilian
products
114
4.5877
0.87342
0.190
Perceived similarity
114
5.2295
1.20152
0.230
Average of Brazil image score (Ireland)
114
4.0951
Germany
Beliefs about Brazilian arts and sympathy for Brazil
111
2.2477
0.81777
0.364
Face of the Brazilian people
111
4.1543
0.84274
0.203
General image of Brazilian products
111
4.1712
0.70513
0.169
Communication, distribution and differentiation of Brazilian
products
111
4.8351
0.75939
0.157
Perceived similarity
111
5.1727
0.99110
0.192
Average of Brazil image score (Germany)
111
4.1162
Based on the results obtained in the present research, one can conclude that the higher the perceived
similarity between Brazil and the country of the respondents, the more positive was their evaluation of other
dimensions related to Brazil’s image. According to Han (1989), the country of origin effect can differ from
country to country as cultural, economic and political similarities may or may not be perceived by the foreign
consumer. This effect may be greater for a product whose country of origin, in the consumer’s opinion, has
social, cultural and economic systems different from his or her own (Han, 1989).
Int. Journal of Business Science and Applied Management / Business-and-Management.org
26
6 CONCLUSIONS
This paper has shown that the consumers’ perceptions can change based on their socio-demographic or
cultural characteristics, by checking for differences on Brazil image according to some consumers’
characteristics. Using a quantitative survey, this study concluded that beliefs about countries may differ
according to the degree of perceived similarity with a given country and to certain demographic issues, such as
country of residence, knowledge about Brazil, gender and age. Respondents that had better evaluations on
Brazil’s image were: young, men, with a high level of knowledge about Brazil and from France. With these
results, it can be said that two important gaps in the literature on country image were addressed: discrepant
results on the influence of socio-demographic characteristics on the image of a country and few studies on the
image of Brazil.
It was also concluded that aspects related to communication, distribution and differentiation of Brazilian
products were those that received the worst evaluation by consumers participating in the survey, which indicates
the need for greater investments from both the Brazilian government and the private sector in communicating
and promoting Brazilian products abroad. In these communication campaigns, it seems important to emphasise
issues related to the arts, festivities and friendliness of the Brazilian people, which were dimensions that were
rated positively by respondents from all of the countries where the survey was conducted.
Considering other practical implications of the results, Brazilian public managers could launch campaigns
aimed to minimise the negative image of the country overseas, thus increasing the likelihood that the products
will be consumed worldwide with higher aggregate value. Projects should be also implemented to improve
airport, port and road infrastructures for export logistics, in addition to offering higher fiscal incentives to
exporters.
Regarding the methodological limitations of this research, we highlight the defined target population for
this study, which does not cover other important markets with which Brazil maintains trade relations, such as
other European and Asian countries, the United States, or even other European consumer segments, such as
professionals and affluent consumers. Moreover, the interviewees were most likely more educated than the
general population; thus, the assessments of the country and product choices in general could have been based
on aspects other than those made by less educated individuals. For example, choices and evaluations made by
more educated individuals may be more rational and less based on stereotypes. Therefore, the fact that we have
used a sample of undergraduate students, post graduate students and faculty members can be considered a
limitation of this research, since they may not represent the opinions of all European consumers or even of
consumers from the countries analysed.
Furthermore, it is stressed that the questionnaire did not cover questions related to respondents’ willingness
to pay a premium price for Brazilian products, or even their intention to buy and to recommend Brazilian
products, what could have allowed for different analysis (such as the relation between a country’s image and the
willingness to pay a premium price).
Future studies could apply different scales to evaluate Brazil’s image in other countries, using samples of
individuals with various educational levels to deepen the discussions and conclusions presented here.
Additionally, future research may help to identify the reasons for the high variability in some of the results.
REFERENCES
Ahmed, S. & D'Astous, A. (1996). Country of origin and brand effects: a multi-dimensional and multi-attribute
study. Journal of International Consumer Marketing, v. 9, n. 2, p. 93 115.
Anderson, David R., Sweeney, Dennis J. & Williams, Thomas A. (2010). Statistics for Business and Economics.
South-Western College.
Balabanis G., Mueller R. & Melewar T. C. (2002). The human values’ lenses of country of origin images.
International Marketing Review, v19, n6, p.582-610.
Bhaskaran S. & Sukumaran N. (2007). Contextual and methodological issues in COO studies. Marketing
Intelligence & Planning, v.25, n1,p. 66-81. doi: 10.1108/02634500710722407
Bilkey, W. J. & Nes, E. (1982). Country-of-origin effects on product evaluations, Journal of International
Business Studies, Spring/Summer, p.89-99.
Brijs, K. (2006). Unravelling country-of-origin: Semiotics as a theoretical basis for a meaning-centred approach
towards country-of-origin effects.2006. 398f. PhD Dissertation, Nijmegen, the Netherlands: Radboud
Universiteit Nijmegen.
Child I. L. & Doob, L. W. (1943). Factors determining national stereotypes. Journal of Social
Psychology,17:203–19.
Fernanda de Tavares Canto Guina and Janaina de Moura Engracia Giraldi
27
Chao, P. & Rajendran, K. (1993). Consumer profiles and perceptions: country of origin effects. International
Marketing Review, v.10, n. 2, p. 22-39.
Cortina, J. (1993). What is Coefficient Alpha? An Examination of Theory and Applications. Journal of Applied
Psychology. v.78 n. 1, p 98-104.
Churchill, G. A. (1991). Marketing research: methodological foundations. Fort Worth: The Dryden Press.
D´Astous A. & Boujbel L. (2007). Positioning countries on personality dimensions: scale development and
implications for country marketing. Journal of Business Research, v.60 pp. 231-239.
D'Astous, A. & Lévesque, M. (2003). A Scale for Measuring Store Personality. Psychology & Marketing, v.20,
n.5, pp. 455-469.
Giraldi, J. M. E. & Carvalho, Dirceu Tornavoi de. (2006). A influência da imagem do Brasil nas atitudes com
relação a produtos brasileiros: uma investigação empírica do efeito país de origem. Revista Eletrônica de
Administração, v. 12, p. 4.
Giraldi, J. M. E. & Ikeda, Ana Akemi (2009). Personal values and the 'country-of-origin effect': the moderating
role of consumers' demographics. International Journal of Consumer Studies, v. 33, p. 309-315.
Good, L. K. & Huddleston, P. (1995). Ethnocentrism of Polish and Russian consumers: are feelings and
intentions related? International Marketing Review, Vol. 12, No. 5, pp. 35-48.
Hair, J. F., Anderson, R. E., Tatham, R. L. & Black, W. C. (2005). Análise Multivariada de Dados. 5. ed. Porto
Alegre: Bookman.
Han, M. (1989). Country Image: Halo or Summary Construct? Journal of Marketing Research, Chicago. v26,
n2. p222-229.
Han, M. (1990). Testing the Role of Country Image in Consumer Choice Behaviour. European Journal of
Marketing, v.24, n 6 p 24- 36.
Ittersum K., Candel M. & Meulenberg M. (2003). The influence of the image of a product's region of origin on
product evaluation. Journal of Business Research, New York, v.56, n.3, p.215–26.
Jaffe, E.D & Nebenzahl I. D. (2001). National Image and Competitive Advantage: the theory and practice of
country of origin effect. Copenhagen: Copenhagen Business School Press.
Johansson, J. K., Douglas, S. P. & Nonaka, I. (1985). Assessing the impact of country of origin on product
evaluations: a new methodological perspective, Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 22, No. 4, pp. 388-
396.
Katz D. & Braly, K. (1933). Racial stereotypes of one hundred college students. Journal of Abnorm Soc
Psychol; 28:280–90.
Klingberg, F. L. (1941). Studies in measurement of the relationship among sovereign states. Psychometrica;
6:335–52.
Kühn R. Das (1993). “Made-in-Image” Deutschlands im internationalen Vergleich. Marketing ZFP; v. 15, n 2,
p. 119–27.
Martin, I. M.& Eroglu, S. (1993). Measuring a multi-dimensional construct: country image. Journal of Business
Research, v. 28, Iss. 3, p. 191-210.
Mazzocchi, M. (2008). Statistics for Marketing and Consumer Research. London, UK: Sage Publications.
Nagashima, A. (1970). A comparison of Japonese and U.S. attitudes towards foreign products. Journal of
Marketing, v. 34, p.68-74.
Nebenzahl, I. D., Jaffe, D. & Usunier, J. C. (2003). Personifying country of origin research. Management
International Review. Wiesbaden, v. 43, n. 4, p. 383-406.
Papadopoulos, N. (1993). What product and country images are and are not. In: Papadopoulos, N; Heslop, L. A
product country images: impact and role in international marketing. London: Haworth Press. p.3-38.
Papadopoulos, N. & Heslop, L. (2002). Country equity and country branding: problems and prospects. Journal
of Brand Management, v.9, ISS. 4/5, p 294-314.
Pappu, R., Quester. P. & Cooksey R. (2007). Country image and consumer based brand equity: relationships
and implications for international marketing. Journal of International Business Studies, v. 38, pp 726-745.
Pereira A., Hsu C.-C. & Kundu S.K. (2005). Country-of-Origin Image: Measurement and Cross-national
Testing. Journal of Business Research, New York, v. 58, n.1, 103-6.
Pisharodi, M. & Parmeswan, R. (1992). Confirmatory factor of a country origin scale: initial results. In: John
Sherry and Brian Sternthal (Eds), Sterntahl Advances in consumer Research. vol.19, pp706-714. Provo, UT
Association for Consumer Research.
Int. Journal of Business Science and Applied Management / Business-and-Management.org
28
Pisharodi, Mohan R & Parameswaran, Ravi. (2002). Assimilation effects in country image reseach. Intemational
Marketing Review, n.19, v.2/3, p. 259-261.
Poiesz, T. B. C. (1989). The image concept: its place in consumer psychology. Journal of Economic
Psychology, 10(4), 457-472.
Prieur, Michel. (2001). Droit de l´environnement. 4. ed. s.l. Dalloz,.
Roth, M.S. & Romeo, J. B. (1992). Matching product category and country image perceptions: a framework for
managing Country-of-Origin Effects. Journal of International Business Studies, Third Quarter: 447-497.
Roth, M.S. & Diamantopoulos, A. (2009). Advancing the country image construct. Journal of Business
Research, v.62, pp 726-740.
Shimp, T.A & Sharma, S. (1987). Consumer ethnocentrism: construction and validation of the CETSCALE.
Journal of Marketing Research, v.24, n.3, pp.280-290.
The World Bank (2012). Retrieved from http://data.worldbank.org/country/brazil.
Usunier, Jean-Claude (2006). Relevance in business research: the case of country-of-origin research in
marketing. European Management Review, v.3, pp. 60–73.
Wall M., Heslop L. & Hofstra G. (1988). Male and Female Viewpoints of Countries as Producers of Consumer
Goods. Journal of International Consumer Marketing, v.1, n1, p.1-26.