Acculturation in the Global Marketplace by Kimberly A. Neuendorf, Ph.D. Professor & Director, Communication Research Center Department of Communication Cleveland State University Cleveland, OH 44115 216-687-3994
[email protected] Brian F. Blake Professor & Head, Consumer and Industrial Research Program Department of Psychology Cleveland State University Cleveland, OH 44115 216-687-2531
[email protected] and Colin Valdiserri M.A. Candidate, Department of Psychology Cleveland State University Cleveland, OH 44115
[email protected]
Paper presented to the Annual Conference of the Midwest Association for Public Opinion Research November 21, 2003
Thanks go to Fariba Arab, Suzanne Grilli, Allison Wright-Frazier, Ruben Jurik, and Chia Chi Liu for their invaluable assistance in data collection. Special thanks go to Catalina Ripan for her invaluable assistance in literature collection.
1 Acculturation in the Global Marketplace
Introduction The unprecedented growth in cross-national and cross-cultural communication due to online capabilities raises new issues of global relations. This new information environment without boundaries provides a backdrop against which world events play out. An important component in this backgrounding is commerce and its related consumer behaviors, a common and vitally important way in which people relate across ethnic and national groups (Penaloza & Gilly, 1999).
At the same time, a substantial body of
evidence within the acculturation literature identifies the role of consumer activity as vital to the acculturation process, and the consumer role as a central one among the variety of different roles in which individuals are cast in the course of their daily lives (e.g., O Guinn & Faber, 1985). Surprisingly, scholars have not investigated this within the context of online activity in general nor online commerce in particular.
2 As indicated by a variety of e-commerce monitoring systems (e.g., A.C. Nielsen at www.acnielsen.com; Taylor Nelson Sofres at www.tnsofres.com; Forrester at Forrester.com; E-commerce Times at www.ecommercetime.com/perl; Graphic, Visualization, & Usability Center s (GVU) WWW User Surveys at www.cc.gatech.educ/gvu/user_surveys), nations differ in the proportion of citizenry shopping online, the demographic profiles of shoppers, and the types of products purchased. Beyond these surface differences, do nations and cultures differ in the features that attract shoppers to one e-commerce website in preference to another? Further, do those in transition i.e., those who have moved from one nation to another adopt the online behaviors and e-commerce habits and preferences of their adoptive nation as part of the acculturation process, or retain their indigenous orientations to online behaviors and consumer activities? Given that nations/cultures differ in media perceptions (e.g., Rice & D Ambra, 1998; Ross, 2001), it comes as no surprise that nations/cultures have been found to differ in the role played by website features in attracting shoppers. Illustratively, Lynch et
al. (2001) noted that nations differ in the role played by trust, site quality, and elicited
3 affect in producing purchase intent and site loyalty. Jarvenpaa and Tractinsky (1999) determined that cultures vary in consumer expectations of what makes a web merchant trustworthy and in the consequences of those judgments of trustworthiness. As the latter note, their results are not entirely consistent with the conclusions of some previous work, however (Quelch & Klein, 1996).
4
Culture and Consumer Behavior Elsewhere, we have proposed a framework for examining international differences in website appeal (Blake & Neuendorf, 2003). Relevant to that, and in order to understand the analyses herein, we need to clarify the difference between nation and culture. Generally, cultural characteristics may exist independent of national boundaries; culture is the deposit of knowledge, habits, traditions, customs, norms, beliefs, and values that are accumulated and passed down over the course of generations (Prosser, 1978). Cultures operate within nations; laws and practices established by a given nation will moderate the manifestations of culture. For example, the federal and state laws of commerce in the United States may facilitate ready access to a wide variety of consumer goods, and have the effect of stimulating consumer activity; tax laws may affect the ways in which consumers make choices about venues for purchase; the information infrastructure of a nation may partly determine how its citizens may do business. That the national context in which consumers operate is an important overlay to their cultural traditions seems well accepted by investigators (Costa & Bamossy, 1995).
5 In the growing international marketplace, there is increasing importance placed on cross-cultural marketing activities (Penaloza & Gilly, 1999) and understanding the clear cultural bases of some consumer behaviors (e.g., Green & Langeard, 1975; Webster s (1994) finding of a relationship between Hispanic ethnic identification and husband dominance in the purchase decision process). Also, studies have identified a process of acculturation with regard to consumer behavior among immigrant groups arriving in the U.S. (Maldonado & Tansuhaj, 2002; Penaloza, 1989) and elsewhere (Lee & Tse, 1994; Maldonado & Tansuhaj, 1999).
Acculturation The process of acculturation has been conceptualized in several different ways by scholars (e.g., Olmedo & Padilla, 1978). Like many others, Maldonado and Tansuhaj (2002) see acculturation as an interactive process, in which changes take place over time, but the immigrant does not necessarily become increasingly like the new culture; a strong indigenous ethnic influence may remain. Building on the work of Berry (1980),
6 they identify four acculturation categories for those moving from one culture to another assimilation (those who consider it important only to maintain relationships with the new, dominant culture), integration (those who consider it to be important to maintain ethnic identity and characteristics and to maintain relationships with the dominant society), segregation (those who consider it important only to maintain indigenous cultural identity and characteristics), and marginalization (those who do not seem interested in relationships with either their indigenous culture or with the new, dominant culture). A parallel set of categories is presented in Lee and Tse s (1994) review of the acculturation literature: Assimilation ( melting pot ),
overshooting (a kind of overcompensation;
Triandis, Kashima, Shimada, & Villareal, 1986, as cited in Lee & Tse, 1994), and ethnic affirmation (a strong retention of one s indigenous culture).
And, Jun, Ball, and Gentry
(1993) have developed two distinct constructs, Cultural Identification (which is attitudinal in nature) and Level of Acculturation (which is behavioral in nature). A number of scholars have applied the notion of acculturation directly to consumer behaviors (e.g., Dato-on, 2000; Gentry, Jun, & Tansuhaj, 1995; O Guinn, Lee, & Faber,
7 1986; Penaloza, 1994). Penaloza (1989) views consumer acculturation as
the
acquisition of skills and knowledge relevant to engaging in consumer behavior in one culture by members of another culture (p. 110).
There seems to be support for the
notion that not all consumer acculturation is of the assimilation type. For example, Wallendorf and Reilly found that contrary to predictions based on the
traditional model
of assimilation, Mexican-American food consumption patterns in the U.S. Southwest were not a simple blending of Mexican and U.S. patterns, but rather a
unique cultural style
(p. 292). In addition, the type of products purchased may be important to acculturation (Gilly, 1995), as possessions that are left behind by those who emigrate take on new meaning (Wallendorf & Arnould, 1988). In their phenomenological inquiry, Maldonado and Tansuhaj (1998) found a consumer s self-esteem to influence the purchase, use and disposal of goods and services during the acculturation process.
Typological Perspectives on Website Feature Preferences
8 This study investigates both online behaviors (including online shopping) and the preferences that users have for particular online shopping websites. Several investigators have suggested that specific features (e.g., download speed, reputation of merchant, variety of products available) have an impact upon website appeal because they perform particular underlying roles or functions. Notably, Srinivasan, Anderson, and Donnavolu (2002) isolated eight factors or functions of site features that impact customer loyalty to a retail site: 1) customization, 2) interactivity, 3)
cultivation (i.e., provision of information
and incentives to extend customer purchasing over time), 4)
care (operationally,
features that keep customers informed of the availability of preferred products and of the status of their orders, or features that minimize disruption in service), 5)
community
(i.e., provision of a structure to facilitate the exchange of user opinions and information about offered products/services), 6) 8)
choice (variety of products), 7) convenience, and
character (i.e., text/graphics/slogans, etc., projecting an image or personality of the
web merchant). All but convenience were found to enhance customer loyalty. Palmer (2002) suggested that various specific features are important to the success of a website
9 because they contribute either to a site s usability or to its media richness (i.e., its ability to communicate information). Other investigations have considered the perceptual or evaluative dimensions a consumer uses in assessing the appeal of a website. Chen and Wells (1999) suggested that users evaluate a website along the three dimensions of how entertaining, how informative, and how organized it is. Yoo and Donthu (2001) noted that users evaluate the quality of a site along four dimensions: ease of use, aesthetic design, processing speed, and security. From the perspective of consumer motives, Keeney (1999) derived 25 categories of online consumer shopping objectives. Objectives were categorized as means oriented (e.g., maximize product information) or fundamentally (ends) oriented (e.g., maximize product quality). Parsons (2002) provided a taxonomy of online shopper motives, differentiating among the functional (e.g., convenience), the personal nonfunctional (e.g., diversion from daily routine), and the social non-functional (e.g., communication with like minded others) motives. Other typologies have been suggested, such as Eighmey s (1997) assessment of
10 the perceived benefits delivered by commercial websites, Liu and Arnett s (2000) exploration of factors associated with the success of commercial websites, and the assessment of preferences for online and traditional retail formats by Keen, Wetzels, de Ruyter, and Feinberg (2001).
Specific Features A variety of particular functions, user responses, or specific site features have been proposed to impact site appeal. A partial listing of these includes: Navigability (e.g., Neilsen, 2000; Palmer, 2002; Radosevich, 1997) Interactivity, including customization (e.g., Coyle and Thorson, 2001; Ghose & Dou, 1998; Palmer, 2002; Schneiderman, 1997; Selz & Shubert, 1997) Security (e.g., Swaminathan, Lepkowska-White, & Rao, 1999; Szymanski & Hise, 2000) Communication utility (Li, Kuo, & Russell, 1999) Vividness (Coyle & Thorson, 2001) Approval by referent others, like family/friends (e.g., Shim, Eastlick, Lotz, & Warrington, 2001) Feature organization (e.g., Palmer, 2002) Complexity (Bucy, Lang, Potter, & Grabe, 1999) Entertainment (fun) value (e.g., Chen, Wigand, & Nilan, 2000; Eighmey, 1997; Goldsmith, Bridges, & Freiden, 2001; Koufaris, 2002)
11 Convenience (e.g., Bhatnagar, Misra, & Rao, 2000; Swaminathan et al., 1999; Syzmanski & Hise, 2000) Flow (Goldsmith et al., 2001; Nel, van Niekerk, Berhon, & Davies, 1999; Novak, Hoffman, & Yung, 2000) Feature organization (e.g., Palmer, 2002) Quality of content (Jarveena & Todd, 1997) Price (e.g., Lynch et al., 2001; Swaminthan et al., 1999) Riskiness (e.g., Bhatnagar et al., 2000; Van den Poel, & Leunis, 1999) Recognizability and/or desirability of brand (e.g., Balabanis & Reynolds, 2001) Time delay/download speed (e.g., Yoo & Danthu, 2001) Responsiveness (Palmer, 2002).
Research Questions From the various literatures on culture, acculturation, and online behaviors, we have developed the following research questions: RQ1: How do those who have emigrated differ from those in their country of origin, and from those in their new, host country, in terms of online activities, online shopping behaviors, and preferences for certain shopping website features? RQ2: Are these differences consistent across cultures/nations of origin?
12 Methods
Site Features Assessed To identify cross-cultural and cross-national differences, a wide variety of features that consumers might value were assessed. A study by Torkzadeh and Dhillon (2002) and the extensive work of Rogers (cf. 1995) suggest the features/functions to include in the set. Based on the earlier analyses by Keeney (1999), Torkzadeh and Dhillon proposed that consumer values serve as yardsticks against which shoppers evaluate a website. Values are either priorities) or
means objectives (i.e., instrumental in achieving more basic
fundamental objectives (i.e., the basic goals/practices). Their factor
analytic study of ratings of site features identified four fundamental and five means factors. The former were: 1) shopping convenience, 2) internet ecology, 3) customer relations, 4) product value. The latter were: 5) product choice, 6) online payment, 7) vendor trust, 8) shopping travel, and 9) shopping errors. Two of the domains may pertain to consumer evaluations of online shopping per se, rather than to evaluations of one website relative to other websites. These two, Internet ecology (No. 3) and shopping travel (No. 8), were
13 therefore dropped from consideration. Additionally, online shopping is often classed as an instance of the adoption of an innovation (e.g., Citrin et al., 2000; Goldsmith, 2000; 2001). Hence, features that express underlying factors that impact the adoption of innovations might as well attract browsers or buyers to a website. Rogers (1995) has suggested that five factors of an innovation can attract or repel adopters: a) comparative advantage over competitors, b) compatibility with one s social environment, c) complexity/simplicity of product use, d) trialability/divisibility which allows the shopper to assess an innovation s value without risking a major commitment, and e) observability of adoption by others in the social environment. From these points of departure 20 features were developed to represent the consumer values from Torkzadeh and Dhillon (1-9) and the innovation characteristics in the Rogers perspective (a-e). The specific operational definitions employed were selected to be consistent with prior empirical demonstrations of factor impact on website appeal, as listed earlier (p. 3).i
14
Table 1. Site Features Considered. Wide selection and variety of products
Easy to find the product looked for (1)
(5) Good price incentives (coupons, frequent Fast response time from customer service shopper programs, etc.) (4,a)
(3)
Customer feedback (i.e., site provides a
Return policy is easy to understand and use
place to learn about other customers
(3)
evaluations of the product) (d) Reputation and credibility of the
Credit card safety (c)
company on the web (7) Order process is easy to use (1)
No tax (4,a)
No language barrier (1,b)
Good place to find a bargain (4,a)
Download speed of page (1)
Low or no charge for shipping and handling (4,a)
Delivery time is short (a)
Product information including FAQ s (d)
(My) friends and family have been
Friends and family will like to know (my)
happy shopping there (b)
opinion of the site (b)
Website is new and different (c)
Hear about it on radio, TV or in newspapers (e)
Questionnaire
15 The 20 feature items were included within a longer multipurpose survey. Respondents were asked:
How much would the following encourage you to shop (seek
information, make a purchase, etc.) at a particular website? For each item, indicate if it would attract you: not at all (1), a little (2), moderately (3), a lot (4). were also asked: Internet?
Respondents
On average, how many hours per week, if any, do you use the
Online activity was measured via a set of items which asked,
On average,
how often do you do each of the following on the Internet? (1) Shopping (that is, searching for product or service information, or making a purchase), (2) Entertainment (game playing, etc.), (3) Communication with others (email, voicemail, BBS, ICQ, Instant Messenger, etc.), (4) Education and news/paper reading (e-books, e-magazines, etc.). The response scale was 1 to 5 with 1=rarely or never and 5=daily. Also included were a wide variety of measures of cultural background and orientation (including O Guinn and Faber s key measure of acculturation, a set of items tapping parental and grandparents nationalities, a sort of
indigenousness indicator), innovativeness (the six-item Goldsmith
and Hofacker (1991) Domain Specific Innovativeness Scale; the Cronbach s alpha for the
16 present study was .77), Internet behaviors, and online consumer habits. Respondents also indicated their gender, age, education, and employment status. The questionnaire was translated into Farsi, Mandarin Chinese, and German for international administration. Multiple back translations were conducted to establish comparability between the English and the non-English versions. The original translator was a native born citizen of the nation in question, speaking English as a second language, as were all but one of the back translators. A minimum of two back translations was required before the non-English version was judged comparable to the English one.
Data Collection An online survey was not used, for it was anticipated that light users of the Internet might be somewhat intimidated by an online survey, particularly in nations in which relatively few use the Internet. An online survey, then, might result in a nation sample seriously biased toward more sophisticated users. Instead, a self-administered print questionnaire booklet was employed.
17 A cover letter explained that the study, performed by University researchers, was meant to explore the factors underlying Internet usage and shopping. The anonymous and voluntary nature of participation was noted.
The objective was to obtain as diverse a
sample as possible in demographics, in Internet use, and in online shopping. When completed, questionnaires were placed in a sealed enveloped and returned to a central location for transmittal to the investigators University. The instrument was administered to seven different convenience samples of adults: (1) residents of Toronto, Canada, (2) residents of Tehran, Iran, (3) residents of Taipei, Taiwan, and (4) residents of Vienna, Austria, plus (5) Chinese-Americans, (6) IranianAmericans, and (7) general U.S. residents, all residing in the Northeast Ohio area. A total of 988 respondents completed the survey. The multiple data sets offer a unique opportunity for comparisons across nations (i.e., U.S./Canada/Iran/Taiwan/Austria), across immigrant group cultures (i.e., ChineseAmerican/Iranian-American), and across a range of acculturation stages (i.e., Taiwan Chinese-American general U.S.; Iran Iranian-American general U.S.).
18 Elsewhere (Blake & Neuendorf, 2003), we develop certain cross-national comparisons, and illustrate our model for assessment of website appeal. The focus of this paper is upon the last type a comparison of the acculturation stages.
Results Table 2 displays descriptive information for the seven samples.
Note that some of
the samples are heavy on highly-educated respondents, and others are low on respondents who are employed full-time, and for this reason education and employment have been used frequently as control variables. All samples are reasonably evenly distributed between the two genders, and are similar in age (with the median age for all samples at either 25-30 or 31-40 years of age). Across all samples, the mean weekly Internet use is 8.0 hours, with the following grand means for the four types of Internet activity (each measured on a 1-5 scale): Internet shopping 2,3, Internet entertainment 2.3, Internet communication 4.3, and Internet education 3.5.
19 Table 3 displays the results of an orthogonal, principal-components factor analysis of preferences for the 20 shopping website features. Following our model (Blake & Neuendorf, 2003), we adjusted the 20 measures in several ways before submission to factor analysis. In order to parse out the impact of sheer response elevation, we ipsatized scores (i.e., adjusted for each respondent s mean of the 20 measures). In order to remove the effect of important aspects of sampling bias for our non-random samples, we then controlled for four demographics (age, education, gender, employment status) and also used a weighting function for the factor analysis, so that greater statistical weight was not given to larger subsamples. Using the latent root criterion, eight factors were derived and rotated, accounting for 62% of the total variance. The factors reveal a range of substantive (e.g., (e.g.,
Product Choice ), service (e.g.,
Customer Service ) and image
Trendy ) dimensions of evaluation. The dimensions bear little resemblance to
those discovered by Torkzadeh and Dhillon (2002) or the five attribute types of Rogers (1995).
20 In order to compare the habits and orientations of the aggregated three target segments U.S. natives, recent immigrant groups (i.e., Iranian-Americans and ChineseAmericans) and foreign nationals (i.e., Taiwanese, Austrians, Iranians; Canadian respondents were not included in these analyses) a series of MANOVA/MANCOVA and ANOVA/ANCOVA analyses were conducted. The results are presented in Table 4. First, due to intercorrelations, the five online activity measures were submitted to MANOVA tests. All omnibus multivariate tests were highly significant (e.g., Wilks lambda=.858, p
