Western model or Chinese model, do Chinese consumers care?

(1)

Western model or Chinese model, do Chinese consumers care?

Sid (Chengxi) Lin University of Amsterdam

11108703 Master’s Thesis

Graduate School of Communication University of Amsterdam

Master’s programme Communication Science Persuasive Communication

Supervisor: Aart Velthuijsen 10 Jan 2017

(2)

Abstract

This study investigates whether Chinese consumers prefer Western models and brands than Chinese models and brands in the fashion clothing industry. The relation between model’s ethnicity and consumer’s ethnicity has long been discussed. Some studies suggest that consumers respond more positively when they see models from their ethnicity.

Meanwhile, there are studies that don’t agree with that. In practice, the guideline is also not consistent. In Western countries, non-Caucasian models are mainly used to target ethnic minority customers. However, in East Asia, non-Asian (Caucasian) models are also used to target ethnic majority customers. To find out how this issue influences Chinese consumers, a 2×2 factorial between-participants experiment, with the factors: Model Type (Caucasian versus Chinese) and Country of Origin (Western versus Chinese), was conducted. 130 Chinese participants were recruited. The findings show that there is no significant relation between the ethnicity of model, brand’s country of origin and participants’ attitude for brand and model. However, there is some interesting association between participants’ pre-existing brand preference (Western preference/Chinese preference) and brand attitude.

(3)

Introduction

Globalization brings more cross-cultural encounters. The use of foreign models in advertising is perhaps to be expected as a corollary of the growth of multinational marketing and the emergence of global brand (Neelankavil, Mummalaneni, & Sessions, 1995). In the Chinese market, Caucasian models are becoming a new trend. Their faces can be found almost everywhere, promoting everything from clothing and food to furniture and cars (Xu, 2014). Not only Western brands are using Caucasian models, many Chinese companies also embrace them. Modeling agents say Chinese companies favor Caucasian models over locals because they look exotic and expensive (Xu, 2014). But what do Chinese consumers think about Caucasian models?

There are many studies about the relations between model’s ethnicity and consumer’s ethnicity in the Western society. In those studies, they usually use the term Asian to refer to the East Asian ethnic groups (e.g., Chinese, Japanese, Korean). This study is going to focus on Chinese and answer the question whether or not Chinese consumers have more positive attitude for the different ethnic (Caucasian) models than the same ethnic (Chinese) models. By answering this question, the current study provides empirical support for the current theories of model’s ethnicity and consumers’ ethnicity in an Asian society (Chinese society). Besides, it also gives practical suggestions to brand managers when they choose models for the Chinese market.

Before any further discussion, I’d like to give the definition of ethnicity in this paper. There have been many discussions about race and ethnicity. In the literature, ethnicity is frequently defined as a fact or state of belonging to a social group that has common national or cultural tradition while race is referred to the biological and/or cultural naturalization of a group based on distinct physical characteristics and/or cultural heritage (Grosfoguel, 2004). Grosfoguel (2004) used the concept of racialized ethnicities in his paper. For example,

(4)

referring African American as “Black” is using the racial category Black as the ethnic identity (Grosfoguel, 2004). On the contrary, ethnicized race means using an ethnic identity to refer a racial category. In this paper, I will refer ethnicity to the concept of ethnicized race. Under this assumption, Chinese refers to people belonging to the Mongoloid race who recognize themselves as Chinese nationals. Caucasian refers to people belonging to the Caucasian race who recognize themselves as nationals of the Western countries.

The similarity between the models and the target audience has long been discussed. Similarity is a major component of the source attractiveness and credibility. Consumers are more likely to be influenced by the source or endorser of a message that they find similar to themselves (Belch & Belch, 2015). Previous studies on model’s ethnicity and consumers’ ethnicity mainly focus on Western countries. In those researches, members in the ethnic minority are usually found to favor the models from their own ethnicity. For example, African American adolescents responded more favorably to the Black-character ads than they did to the Caucasian-character ads (Appiah, 2001). Such result was also found on Asian ethnicities in Western countries. Similar to the African Americans, Asian Americans also related themselves more to the ads that use Asian models (Martin, Pro-, Kwai-Choi Lee, & Se-, 2004). Asian models are perceived to be more credible than the Caucasian models by Asian Americans (Morimoto & La Ferle, 2008).

Self-referencing is used to explain why members of ethnic minorities prefer models from their own race. Self-referencing is a message processing strategy where individuals process information by relating themselves to the message (Martin et al, 2004). For example, in the Western society, an Asian American woman will perceive more similarity between herself and an Asian female model in the ads (Martin et al.). The distinctiveness theory explains why the ethnic identity is a cue that ethnic minorities (e.g., Asian American) relate to. This theory predicts that an individual’s distinctive characteristics will be more salient than

(5)

shared characteristics (Martin et al.). This means an Asian woman will feel more of an Asian than a woman when she is in a group of Caucasian women. However, when this Asian woman stands with a group of Asian men, her feeling of being an Asian won’t be salient. That is because the ethnic changes from the distinctive characteristic to the shared characteristic. Thus, there are researches predict that members of ethnic majority relate themselves less to the ethnic cue (e.g., Whittler, 1989; Appiah, 2001). For example, when the ad itself fits the Western culture, Caucasian adolescents can also identify themselves with Black characters in the ad (Appiah, 2001). This suggests that consumers from the ethnic majority are less

concerned about the ethnic cue. However, the results of empirical studies in this field aren’t always consistent. In a recent study, Parengkuan (2016) found that the ad attitude, brand attitude, feelings of product attractiveness and purchase intention of the dark skin participants (minorities) did not differ from different skin color models. However, the ad attitude and brand attitude of the light skin participants’ (majorities) scored higher when there was a light skin model than a dark skin model (Parengkuan, 2016). By studying whether Chinese

consumers, as the ethnic majority in the Chinese society, are influenced by the ethnic minority (Caucasian) models in ads or not, I’m going to give my answer to this conflicting topic. And this will provide more evidence for the future researchers.

Theoretical Framework Self-referencing and Ethnicity

Self-referencing is a cognitive process whereby information is related to aspects of self (Burnkrant & Unnava, 1995). In the mechanism of self-referencing, people make a judgment about the perceived similarity (Martin et al., 2004). This means people relate themselves to things that have similarities to them. On the contrary, the self-referencing process will fail if the perceived similarity is low. Increasing the self-referencing level will lead to more favorability in consumers' cognitive responses (Burnkrant & Unnava, 1995).

(6)

From this aspect, ads having information with higher similarities to consumers will receive more positive cognitive responses (Martin et al.).

In a society consists of many different ethnicities, the ethnicity is a salient

characteristic to the minorities (Martin et al., 2004). That is because, as the distinctiveness theory proposes, people pay more attention to characteristics that can distinguish them from the environment than the shared characteristics (Martin et al.). Therefore, when a member from the minorities sees an ad, he or she will be more sensitive to the ethnicity cue in this ad. If this person sees the same ethnicity member in this ad, he or she will perceive the ethnicity cue to be the same in ethnicity. Once the judgment of similarity (in this case, the similarity of the ethnicity) is perceived to be high, the mechanism of self-referencing will be successfully completed. As the self-referencing level increase, more positive cognitive response will be generated (Martin et al.). There are many empirical researches support this kind of reasoning (e.g., Kwai-Choi Lee, Fernandez, & Martin, 2002; Morimoto & La Ferle, 2008; Qualls & Moore, 1990).

However, as the distinctiveness theory proposes, the ethnicity is not salient for the ethnic majorities. This means ethnicity can’t generate the self-referencing process for the ethnic majority individuals as it does for the ethnic minority individuals. In fact, the ethnic majorities are less concerned with and less conscious of race (Appiah, 2001; Whittler, 1989). For example, in the Netherlands, the discussion about a fictional character Zwarte Piet (the companion of Saint Nicholas who usually appears in the image of Black) shows how ethnic majorities and minorities can divide on the ethnic cue. Those who support Zwarte Piet are mainly people from the majority ethnic group, the White. They see Zwarte Piet as an icon of cultural tradition and they are less concerned about the ethnic problem behind it. However, the ethnic minorities, the Black, they pick up the ethnic cue sensitively and disagree with this strongly.

(7)

In the case of the Chinese society, the majority of Chinese belongs to the same race group (Mongoloid) and shares the same culture (Chinese culture). Based on the reasoning that ethnic majorities pay less attention to the ethnic cue, the self-referencing process of the

Chinese consumers won’t be generated by the ethnicity cue in the ads. But what kind of cue do they relate themselves to when they perceive information from an ad?

Brand Status and Self-referencing

People use brand as a symbol for their status (Bhat & Reddy, 1998). For consumers from developing countries, products from the more developed countries are related to images of high quality and social symbolic value (Zhou & Hui, 2003, Batra, 1999). One reasoning for this effect is that consumers in developing countries purchase Western brands to fulfill their desire for the Western lifestyle, which is seen as a symbol of status (Batra, Ramaswamy, Alden, Steenkamp, & Ramachander, 2000). As for Chinese consumers, they also associated foreign products (mostly Western products) with such concepts as sophistication, modernity, novelty, and faddishness (Zhou & Hui, 2003). In other words, Western products are

considered as the status symbol in China. Different product categories also influence Chinese consumers’ association with the status symbol (Zhou & Hui, 2003). As for clothing,

consumers’ involvement is highly related to the symbolic nature of the product as consumers take clothing as a means of self-expression (O’Cass & Choy, 2008). For example, Hopkins (2007) wrote that “In the early stages of conspicuous foreign consumption, before expensive brands became easily recognizable, foreign-made sunglasses were often worn with the tag still on, and men wore suits with the labels still on the cuffs to call attention to the brand”. After all these years of economic development, Western clothing brands are still perceived as fashionable in China. In their study about Shanghai consumers’ attitude for Western brand jeans, Wu and Delong (2006) found that “fashion” was singled out as an important attribute of Western jeans brands. These suggest that Chinese consumers still associate Western clothing

(8)

brand as “fashionable” and use them as a symbol of status. Also, a recent study found that the young Chinese consumers are brand concerned and they believe Western brands

communicate status and wealth better than Asian brands (O’Cass & Siahtiri, 2013).

In the process of self-referencing, people make the judgment of perceived similarity. Only when perceived similarity is high, can the self-referencing process be successfully completed. But perceived similarity can also be the similarity that an individual desires. The ideal self is a self-image that a person wishes to have (Krishen, LaTour, & Alishah, 2014). When a consumer processes information, the similarity between information and the ideal self-image can also be the trigger for a successful self-referencing. Such that, when a Chinese consumer sees an ad with Western models, the Western model will be the cue for the concept of “Western”. As in the Chinese market, “Western” is associated with the status symbols, the Western model will lead to the association of status symbol. In the developing economy like China, status display is important (Batra et al., 2000) and status consumption is one of the major contributors to how Chinese young adults perceive brands (O’Cass & Siahtiri, 2013). Therefore, the status symbol represented by the Western model is consistent with the “ideal self” of the consumers. Thus the self-referencing process completes and Chinese consumers relate themselves to the Western model. Since increasing the self-referencing level will lead to more favorability in consumers' attitude (Burnkrant & Unnava, 1995), such that:

H1a: Chinese consumer will have more positive attitude for the brand and the models

in the ad when they see Western (Caucasian) models in the ad due to the association of a positive status symbol.

H1b: Chinese consumer will have less positive attitude for the brand and the models in

the ad when they see Chinese models in the ad due to the lack of the association of a positive status symbol.

(9)

COO of a brand serves as an extrinsic cue, together with other cues, they influence consumers’ brand evaluation (Batra et al., 2000). A positive relationship between country image and levels of economic development may lead to a more favorable country

stereotyping, thus brings positive results to the COO effect (Zhang, 2006). Compared with developing countries, Western countries have higher level of economic development. Because the production and control of popular culture resides in the Western countries, the flow of media images goes from Western countries to the developing countries, making the image of Western countries more desirable (Batra et al.). Thus, in developing countries, the Western origin of a brand is considered to symbolize prestige (Batra et al.).

In the Chinese market, Zhang (2006) found a large COO effect on Chinese consumers, which suggests that Chinese consumers are highly sensitive to COO. It is worth mentioning that ethnocentrism moderates the effect of COO. Higher level of ethnocentrism can lead to less positive attitude for foreign products because buying them would be unpatriotic (Batra et al., 2000). However, the study of Parker, Haytko, & Hermans (2011) found that Chinese consumers generally don’t hold ethnocentrism towards foreign products. As discussed in the brand status and self-referencing paragraphs, Chinese consumers relate Western brands to the symbol of higher status. Therefore, the positive brand evaluation will be more salient when they see a Western brand than a Chinese brand. Such that:

H2: Chinese consumers will have more positive attitude for the brand and the models

in the ad when they see a Western-origin brand than a Chinese-origin brand.

in the ad when they see Western (Caucasian) models than Chinese models in the ad, such effect will be more salient when they see a Western-origin brand than a Chinese-origin brand.

Based on the reasoning above, model type, COO and the perceived brand status are in different phases of the self-referencing process. If we simplify the self-referencing process as:

(10)

A to B to C, COO and the ethnicity of the model are “A”. They are the cues to trigger the information processing. Perceived brand status is “B”, the existing attitude triggered by phase A. The “self” or “ideal self” is “C”, which people eventually relate to. Since brand status is an existing attitude, it is possible that the brand status has an interaction effect on COO and the ethnicity of the model. Such that:

in the ad when they see Western (Caucasian) models than Chinese models in the ad, such effect will be more salient when they perceive Western brand as higher status than Chinese brand.

in the ad when they see a Western-origin brand than a Chinese-origin brand, such effect will be more salient when they perceive Western brand as higher status than Chinese brand.

Figure 1. Conceptual model

Method Design

The experimental design of this study is a 2×2 factorial between-participants design, with the factors: Model Type (Caucasian versus Chinese) and Country of Origin (Western versus Chinese). The experiment was conducted by an online questionnaire powered by Qualtrics. In this questionnaire, perceived brand status, attitude for the brand, attitude for models, involvement for fashion were measured.

(11)

The sample comprised 130 Chinese participants, aged between 18 and 45 years (M = 28, SD = 5.99). They were recruited via online approach from various social media platforms and e-mail. They are friends and ex-colleagues of the researcher. Besides, they were also asked to share the link to their friends and colleagues. All the participants are born and raised in China.

Stimulus material and procedure

This study chooses the fashion clothing as the product category. With the development of Chinese economic, the preference of Western brands among Chinese consumers begins to fade in some product category and Western products have declined in terms of their symbolic value (Laforet & Chen, 2012). However, Western fashion clothing still remains its privilege among Chinese consumers because of its strong branded element and expressive nature (O’Cass & Siahtiri, 2013). This suggests that Chinese consumers may still perceive Western brands as higher status in fashion clothing product category.

The stimulus material is a clothing catalog and each participant only saw one of the four conditions. On the top of the page, there is a headline reveals the brand origin. It goes as: “品牌 X| 来自法国的快时尚(Brand X | Fashion from France)” or “品牌 X| 来自中国的快时尚(Brand X, Fashion from China)”. When they scroll down, they will see six different

models, three females and three males. The models are either all Caucasian models or all Chinese models. Using the Photoshop technique, the Caucasian models and Chinese models wear the same clothes. For example, Caucasian model “1” wears the exact same dress as Chinese model “1” (See figure 2 and appendix). All the models and clothing are retrieved from the real clothing brands in China (Both Western-origin and Chinese-origin).

(12)

Figure 2. Sample of the Stimulus materials

Participants were told to give their opinions about a fashion brand’s catalog. After they signed the informed consent, participants were lead to the catalog. The catalog will be displayed for 30 to 50 seconds. Once they open the catalog page, participants can’t turn to the next page in the first 30 seconds. After 30 seconds, there will be a button that they can press to proceed. After 50 seconds, the catalog page will automatically switch to the next page. After reading the catalog, participants answered questions about their attitude for Brand X and the models and some questions for measuring their perceived brand status for the Western fashion brand and the Chinese fashion brand. Finally, they gave answers about their

demographic information. After their responses were recorded, they will see the debriefing. They were told that the catalog and Brand X are actually fictional, this study is meant to study Chinese consumers’ attitude for Western and Chinese models.

Measures

Attitude for Brand X and models

Question “I think Brand X is…” was used to measure participants’ attitude for Brand X and question “I think on average, the models in the catalog are…” was used to measure the

(13)

attitude for models. As suggested by Ajzen & Fishbein (2000), the attitude questions are measured by 9-point bipolar antonym scale with: bad/good, unpleasant/pleasant,

unfavorable/favorable. For example: I think Brand X is:

bad 1—2—3—4—5—6—7— 8—9 good

unpleasant 1—2—3—4—5—6—7— 8—9 pleasant, unfavorable 1—2—3—4—5—6—7—8—9 favorable, Perceived brand status

To measure how participants associate status with Western and Chinese clothing brand, seven 9-point bipolar antonym scale questions were used (See appendix). There are three questions to measure perceived status for Chinese brands, three questions to measure perceived status for Western brands and one question to measure their preference between Chinese and Western brands. For the Chinese brand, there are (1) “Buying clothing from a Chinese brand makes me feel: lower status/higher status”, (2) “In general, I think Chinese brands: have bad quality/have good quality”, and (3) “In general, I think Chinese brands are: unfashionable/fashionable”. Same questions are also used for measuring Western brands. The question to measure participants’ brand preference goes as: “Regardless of price, I prefer to buy clothes from a: Western brand/ Chinese brand”. In this question, 1 indicates the strongest preference for Western brands and 9 indicates the strongest preference for Chinese brands. All these questions are set to present randomly to participants.

Demographic

Participants gave their demographic information after they answered attitude and brand status questions. The demographic information includes their gender, age, nationality (ethnicity) and nature hair/eye color. In the end, their involvement for fashion was measured. They were asked for their interest for fashion “I’m interested in fashion: not at all/very much”

(14)

and frequency of shopping from fashion clothing brands such as H&M, ZARA etc. “I buy my clothes from fast fashion brands: never/always”. These two questions were also measured by 9-point bipolar antonym scale.

Manipulation check

The manipulation used in this study is very straightforward. The model’s ethnicity is very noticeable and the brand’s country of origin is directly written on the top of the page. It is almost impossible that the participants will misunderstand the manipulation. Thus, there is no need for manipulation check in this study.

Results

134 responses were collected. Two outliers were excluded because they gave the exact same answer for every question. Another two responses were excluded because they don’t have the Mongoloid appearance (different nature hair and eye color than black). Therefore,

130 responses were used for analysis. There are 53 males (Mage = 28.28, SDage = 7.30) and 77

females (Mage = 27.84, SDage = 4.95) in the final sample. Fashion involvement is measured by

the interest in fashion (M = 5.75, SD = 2) and the frequency of shopping from fashion clothing brands (M = 5.55, SD = 2.08).

Randomization

The randomization of participants was effective. Statistics showed that the model type conditions (Western models vs. Chinese models) did not differ significantly with respect to the demographic variables age F(1,128) = 1.70, p = .195, gender (1) = 1.08, p = .299, the interest in fashion F(1,128) = 0.15, p = .700 and the frequency of shopping from fashion brands F(1,128) = 0.25, p = .617. Statistics also showed that the country of origin conditions (Western vs. Chinese) did not differ significantly with respect to the demographic variables age F(1,128) = 0.79, p = .375, gender (1) = 1.22, p = .270, the interest in fashion F(1,128) =

(15)

0.68, p = .412 and the frequency of shopping from fashion brands F(1,128) = 3.50, p = .063. Therefore it can be concluded that these variables do not confound any moderation effects. Effects for attitude for Brand X

Attitude for the Brand X is computed by taking the mean of the three attitude

dimensions (Cronbach's α = .91, M = 4.77, SD = 1.83). A two-way ANOVA with Model Type condition and COO condition on Attitude for Brand X revealed no significant main effect of model type condition, F(1,126) = 1.61, p = .207, so that participants who saw Caucasian models (M = 4.97, SD = 1.83) don’t differ from participants who saw Chinese models (M = 4.57, SD = 1.83). This indicates that participants’ attitude for Brand X doesn’t differ from the

type of models they saw (Caucasian or Chinese). Thus H1 is not supported with respect to

attitude for Brand X. Also, no significant main effect of COO was revealed, F(1, 126) = 0.37,

p = .542, with participants who saw the Western-origin brand don’t differ on attitude for

Brand X (M = 4.86, SD = 1.81) than those who saw the Chinese-origin brand (M = 4.68, SD = 1.87). This indicates that participants’ attitude for Brand X doesn’t differ from the brand’s

COO they saw (Western or Chinese). Thus H2 is not supported with respect to attitude for

Brand X. Besides, no significant interaction was found between model type and COO, F(1, 126) = 0.64, p = .426. This indicates that participants’ attitude for Brand X don’t differ from the type of models they saw (Caucasian or Chinese), nor does COO has an effect on this, vice

versa. Thus H3 is not supported for attitude for Brand X.

Table 1

ANOVA results of model type and COO on attitude for Brand X

Source Df F Sig.

Model Type COO

Model Type * COO

1 1 1 1.612 .374 .639 .207 .542 .426 Note. * p < .05 ** p < .01 *** p < .001

(16)

Effects for attitude for models

Attitude for models is computed by taking the mean of the three attitude dimensions (Cronbach's α = .920, M = 5.32, SD = 1.89). A two-way ANOVA with Model Type condition and COO condition on Attitude for models revealed no significant main effect of model type condition, F(1, 126) =2.59, p = .110, so that participants who saw Caucasian models (M = 5.58, SD = 1.91) don’t differ from participants who saw Chinese models (M = 5.05, SD = 1.86). This indicates that participants’ attitude for models don’t differ from the type of models

they saw (Caucasian or Chinese). Thus H1 is not supported with respect to attitude for models.

Also, no significant main effect of COO was revealed, F(1, 126) = 0.62, p = .433, with participants who saw the Western-origin brand don’t differ on attitude for models (M = 5.43,

SD = 1.90) than those who saw the Chinese-origin brand (M = 5.19, SD = 1.89). This

indicates that participants’ attitude for models don’t differ from the brand’s COO they saw

(Western or Chinese). Thus H2 is not supported with respect to attitude for models. Besides,

no significant interaction was found between model type and COO, F(1, 126) = 1.19, p = .277. This indicates that participants’ attitude for models don’t differ from the type of models they saw (Caucasian or Chinese), nor does COO has an effect on this, vice versa.

Thus H3 is not supported for attitude for models.

Table 2

ANOVA results of model type and COO on attitude for models

Source df F Sig. ModelType COO ModelType * COO 1 1 1 2.593 .619 1.192 .110 .433 .277 Note. * p < .05 ** p < .01 *** p < .001

Effect of perceived brand status

(17)

= .649, M = 4.78, SD = 1.17) and perceived status for Western brands was computed from the three questions for Western brand status (Cronbach's α = .719, M = 5.56, SD = 1.36). There is one question for the preference between Western brands and Chinese brands (M = 3.72, SD = 2.33). There is no effect from model type and COO on attitude for Brand X and models, thus

there is no interaction effect of perceived brand status. Therefore, H4 and H5 are not

supported.

However, the regression model with attitude for Brand X as dependent variable and perceived status for Chinese brands and Western brands as independent variables is

significant, F(2, 127) = 16.93, p < .001. Perceived status for Chinese brands, b* = .302, t = 3.71, p < .001 and perceived status for Western brands, b* = .281, t = 3.45, p < .01, have a significant association with attitude for Brand X. Also, the regression model with attitude for models as dependent variable and perceived status for Chinese brands and Western brands as independent variables is significant, F(2, 127) = 18.26, p < .001. Perceived status for Chinese brands, b* = .279, t = 3.46, p < .01 and perceived status for Western brands, b* = .320, t = 3.98, p < .001, have a significant association with attitude for models. But there is no

significant association between the brand preference question (Western/Chinese) and attitude for Brand X, b* = .137, t = 1.56, p = .121, or attitude for models, b* = .057, t = 0.65, p = .516.

To further discover the relations, several regression analyses were performed under the four experimental conditions (Chinese brand vs. Chinese models, Chinese brand vs. Western models, Western brand vs. Western models and Western brand vs. Chinese models). Under Western brand vs. Chinese models condition, the regression model with attitude for Brand X as dependent variable and perceived status for Chinese brands and Western brands as

independent variables is significant, F(2, 30) = 7.06, p < .01. Perceived status for Chinese brand, b* = .428, t = 2.75, p < .05, have a significant association with attitude for Brand X. This indicates that when participants saw the catalog with a Western brand and Chinese

(18)

models, the more positive they feel about Chinese brands, the more positive will their attitude be for the Brand X they saw. Under Chinese brand vs. Western models condition, the

regression model with attitude for Brand X as dependent variable and perceived status for Chinese brands and Western brands as independent variables is significant, F(2, 30) = 4.06, p < .05. Perceived status for Western brand, b* = .421, t = 2.56, p < .05, have a significant association with attitude for Brand X. This indicates that when participants saw the catalog with a Chinese brand and Western models, the more positive they feel about Western brands, the more positive will their attitude be for the Brand X they saw.

As for the attitude for models, under Chinese brand vs. Chinese models condition, the regression model with attitude for models as dependent variable and perceived status for Chinese brands and Western brands as independent variables is significant, F(2, 28) = 8.33, p < .01. Perceived status for Chinese brand, b* = .530, t = 3.29, p < .01, have a significant association with attitude for models. This indicates that when participants saw the catalog with a Chinese brand and Chinese models, the more positive they feel about Chinese brands, the more positive will their attitude be for the models in the catalog. Under Western brand vs. Chinese models condition, the regression model with attitude for models as dependent

variable and perceived status for Chinese brands and Western brands as independent variables is significant, F(2, 30) = 3.95, p < .05. Perceived status for Western brand, b* = .405, t = 2.41,

p < .05, have a significant association with attitude for models. This indicates that when

participants saw the catalog with a Western brand and Chinese models, the more positive they feel about Western brands, the more positive will their attitude be for the models in the

catalog. Finally, under Chinese brand vs. Western models condition, the regression model with attitude for models as dependent variable and perceived status for Chinese brands and Western brands as independent variables is significant, F(2, 30) = 5.57, p < .01. Perceived status for Western brand, b* = .425, t = 2.69, p < .05, have a significant association with

(19)

attitude for models. This indicates that when participants saw the catalog with a Chinese brand and Western models, the more positive they feel about Western brands, the more positive will their attitude be for the models in the catalog.

Table 3

Regression results of perceived brand status and attitude for Brand X under four experimental conditions Model Type COO Standardized Coefficients _t _Sig. Beta Chinese Chinese

Perceived status for

Chinese brand .288 1.537 .136

Western brand .178 .950 .350

Western

Chinese brand .428 2.753 .010*

Western brand .277 1.781 .085

Western

Chinese

Chinese brand .129 .787 .437

Western brand .421 2.561 .016*

Western

(20)

Table 4

Regression results of perceived brand status and attitude for the models under four experimental conditions Model Type COO Standardized Coefficients Beta t Sig. Chinese Chinese

Chinese brand .530 3.294 .003**

Western

Chinese brand .133 .791 .435

Western

Chinese

Western

Note. * p < .05 ** p < .01 *** p < .001

To further explore the relations, perceived Chinese brand status was computed (Scores higher than 5 are counted as “High” and scores lower than 5 are counted as “Low”) into a dummy variable with 1= high status (N = 43), 0 = low status (N = 87) and perceived Western brand status was also computed by the same method into a dummy variable with 1 = high status (N = 84), 0 = low status (N = 46). The reason why these new dummy variables were not computed from a Median Splits manner is that the distribution of the variables isn’t normal. A two way ANOVA under four experimental conditions (Chinese brand vs. Chinese models, Chinese brand vs. Western models, Western brand vs. Western models and Western brand vs. Chinese models) with perceived status for Chinese brand and perceived status for Western brand on attitude for the Brand X revealed a significant effect of perceived status for Chinese

(21)

brands under Western brand vs. Chinese models condition, F(1, 29) = 6.53, p < .05, so that participants who perceived Chinese brand as high status (M = 5.83, SD = 2.23) score higher than participants perceived Chinese brand as low status (M = 4.33, SD = 1.55). This indicates that when participants see a Western brand with Chinese models, those who perceive Chinese brand as high status have more positive attitude for the brand. There is no other significant result besides the finding above.

Table 5

ANOVA results of perceived brand status on attitude for the brand

Model

Type COO Source df F Sig.

Chinese

Perceived status for Chinese brand 1 .291 .594

Perceived status for Western brand 1 .450 .508

Perceived status for Chinese brand *

Western

Perceived status for Chinese brand 1 6.530 .016*

Perceived status for Western brand Perceived status for Chinese brand *

Perceived status for Western brand

1 2.109 .157

1 1.813 .189

Western

Chinese

Perceived status for Western brand 1 2.323 .138

Western

(22)

Table 6

ANOVA results of perceived brand status on attitude for models

Model

Type COO Source df F Sig.

Chinese

Perceived status for Chinese brand 1 1.458 .238

Western

Chinese

Western

Note. * p < .05 ** p < .01 *** p < .001

Discussion

Different from previous studies, the results of this study didn’t find any significant effect from model type and COO on the attitude for Brand X and models. This suggests that, under the setting of this experiment, participants’ attitude is not directly influenced by the

ethnicity type of the model and the brand’s country of origin. Thus H1, H2 and H3 are not

supported. As there is no main effect, there is no interaction effect of perceived brand status

as predicted in H4 and H5. However, the analysis discovered some statistical associations

between perceived brand status and attitude, which will be discussed later. One possible explanation for not finding any significant main effect is that the symbolic status of Western

(23)

brands is fading among Chinese consumers. As the result reveals, the score of perceived brand status for Chinese brands (M = 4.78, SD = 1.17) is not so different from the score of perceived brand status for Western brands (M = 5.56, SD = 1.36). Once “Western” is no longer the cue of higher status and desirable life style, Chinese consumers don’t associate their ideal self with “Western”. Thus when they see the “Western” elements (Caucasian models and Western brand origin), they don’t perceive the similarity between the ad elements and their self or idea self. Such that, the self-referencing process of consumers won’t be generated and their attitude won’t change.

How Chinese consumers perceive Western brands also depends on the product category. In a recent study, Chinese consumers were found to be less in favor of Western brands in specific product categories such as wine, washing machines, shoes and mineral water (Laforet & Chen, 2012). As for the fashion clothing, a previous study found that Chinese young adults still consider Western brands as symbol of status and use them to express their identity (O’Cass & Siahtiri, 2013). The difference between the study of O’Cass and Siahtiri (2013) and this study is that their participants are younger (age between 18 to 25,

M = 22) and more involved in fashion. In current study, the participants’ age range is wider

(18 to 45 years, M = 28) and they are less involved in fashion (Interest in fashion, M = 5.75). It is possible that for younger and more fashion involved Chinese consumers, they still

consider fashion clothing from Western as a symbol of status and consume for that. But as the age goes older and the fashion involvement goes lower, Chinese consumers don’t favor Western fashion clothing brands as much as they were used to.

No matter how Chinese consumers perceive Western fashion clothing brands, there are statistical associations between Chinese consumers’ perceived brand status and the attitude for Brand X and models. It is supported by the significant regression results found on this study. With respect to the attitude for Brand X, it seems that there is some association

(24)

between perceived brand status and model type. Because when participants saw a Western brand with Chinese models, those who perceive Chinese brand with higher status score higher in their attitude for Brand X. Also, when participants saw a Chinese brand with Western models, those who perceive Western brand with higher status score higher in their attitude for Brand X. This can be explained by the self-referencing process, which we discussed earlier. The models in the ad are the cue for the participants. Chinese models remind them of China while Caucasian models remind them of the West. When the participants perceive Chinese brand as a higher status, they relate themselves more to the Chinese brand. The Chinese models remind them of this desired similarity, thus the self-referencing process is completed and their attitude for the brand become more positive. And vice versa for the Caucasian models situation. With this explanation, the choice of model’s ethnicity does influence

Chinese consumers’ brand attitude. But this influence is dependent on the consumers’ existing perceived brand status. As Western brands losing their higher status symbol among Chinese consumers and Chinese brands gaining trust from them, the perceived status for Western and Chinese brands in the Chinese market might become more and more even. It is possible that the advertisers’ choice of model’s ethnicity in the Chinese market will become less and less important. As for brand managers, one of the factors that they can consider when choosing models is their target consumers’ perceived brand status. Figuring out whether they prefer Western brands or Chinese brands can help brand managers to communicate their brand image in a way that their consumers prefer.

There are also some relations between perceived brand status and attitude for models under different experimental conditions. However, the results don’t show a clear pattern of the relations. It is possible that there are more factors that influence participants’ attitude for models, such as the look of the model, the body of the model, the gesture of the model and the

(25)

expression of the model. Thus it is hard to conclude from this experiment how the perceived brand status influence participants’ attitude for the models.

Discussion of Limitations and Future Research

There are more factors that influence Chinese consumers’ brand attitude. For example, brand familiarity is also found to influence Chinese consumers’ brand choice (Laforet & Chen, 2012). Chinese consumers prefer to choose the brand that they are familiar with. The current study use Brand X to eliminate the pre-existing bias of participants. That can be a reason why participants’ brand attitude is quite neutral and don’t differ much from condition to condition. If Brand X was replaced by a famous Western brand or a famous Chinese brand, the attitude of participants may be more divided.

Income and education are also factors that influence Chinese consumers’ brand preference. For example, people with lower income prefer to buy Chinese brands than

Western brands but evaluate Western brands higher (Laforet & Chen, 2012). The participants of the current study are mainly friends and colleagues of the researcher. Most of them are highly educated and live in the economic developed area of China. It is possible that they hold a very different view towards the status symbol of Western brands from those who come from a less developed area or less educated social class. Previous studies show that Chinese people perceive Western brands as a symbol of status when the economic is still less developed. Therefore, if we do this study with participants from less developed regions of China, we might find the expected effect in the hypotheses.

It will also be interesting to compare the attitude between Chinese consumers and Western consumers (for example, Dutch consumers) in future researches. The study of Laforet and Chen (2012) found very different results between Chinese consumers and British consumers. It appears that British consumers are less fond of Chinese products because the negative association between the negative country image of China and the products (Laforet

(26)

& Chen, 2012). The current study hypothesizes that the higher perceived brand status can lead to more desire to be similar and more positive attitude. It is also possible that the lower

perceived brand status might lead to a less desire to be similar and less positive attitude. Thus, introducing participants from the West may provide support for the theory from another aspect.

(27)

References

Ajzen, I., & Fishbein, M. (2000). Attitudes and the Attitude-Behavior Relation: Reasoned and Automatic Processes. European Review of Social Psychology, 11(1), 1–33.

https://doi.org/10.1080/14792779943000116

Appiah, O. (2001). Black, White, Hispanic, and Asian American adolescents’ responses to culturally embedded ads. Howard Journal Of Communications, 12(1), 29–48. https://doi.org/10.1080/10646170151143361

Batra, R. (1997). Marketing issues and challenges in transitional economies. Journal of

International Marketing, 5(4), 95-114. Retrieved from

http://www.jstor.org.proxy.uba.uva.nl:2048/stable/25048707

Batra, R., Ramaswamy, V., Alden, D. L., Steenkamp, J. B. E., & Ramachander, S. (2014). Effects of brand local and non-local origin on consumer attitudes in developing countries. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 9(2), 83-95.

https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327663JCP0902_3

Belch, George E. and Michael A. Belch (2015), Advertising and Promotions: An Integrated

Marketing Communications Perspective, 10th ed. New York: McGraw-Hill.

Bhat, S., & Reddy, S. K. (1998). Symbolic and functional positioning of brands. Journal of

Consumer Marketing, 15(1), 32–43. https://doi.org/10.1108/07363769810202664

Boerman, S. C., van Reijmersdal, E. A., & Neijens, P. C. (2012). Sponsorship disclosure: effects of Duration on Persuasion Knowledge and Brand Responses. Journal of

Communication, 62(6), 1047–1064. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.2012.01677.x

Bott, S., Davidson, P., Fernandes, T., Jensen, B., Laitinen, R., Wood, S., & Thomsen, S. R. (2010). Does it Matter if She's Black or White? Using Eye Tracking to Explore the Effects of Race on Reader Reaction to Magazine Advertisements. Southwestern Mass

(28)

http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ufh&AN=52918289&site=eh ost-live

Burnkrant, R. E., & Unnava, H. R. (1995). Effects of Self-Referencing on Persuasion. Journal

of Consumer Research, 22(1), 17. https://doi.org/10.1086/209432

Burton, D. (2000). Ethnicity, Identity and Marketing: A Critical Review. Journal of

Marketing Management, 16(8), 853–877.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1362/026725700784683735

Coates, B. (2006). Minority Models in Advertisements in Magazines popular with minorities.

Journalism and Mass Communication Quarterly, 83(3), 596–614.

https://doi.org/10.1177/107769900608300308

Cutler, B. D., Javalgi, R. G., & Erramilli, M. K. (1992). The visual components of print advertising: A five-country cross-cultural analysis. European Journal of Marketing,

26(4), 7-20. https://doi.org/10.1108/03090569210012381

Doleac, J. L., & Stein, L. C. D. (2013). The visible hand: Race and online market outcomes.

Economic Journal, 123(572), 469–492. https://doi.org/10.1111/ecoj.12082

Grosfoguel, R. (2004). Race and Ethnicity or Racialized Ethnicities? Ethnicities, 4(3), 315– 336. https://doi.org/10.1177/1468796804045237

Hopkins, B. E. (2007). Western cosmetics in the gendered development of consumer culture in China. Feminist Economics, 13(3–4), 287–306.

https://doi.org/10.1080/13545700701439416

Kinra, N. (1997). The communicative effectiveness of ethnically oriented advertising.

International Journal of Advertising, 16(3), 221–239.

(29)

Krishen, A. S., LaTour, M. S., & Alishah, E. J. (2014). Asian females in an advertising context: Exploring skin tone tension. Journal of Current Issues & Research in

Advertising, 35(1), 71-85. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10641734.2014.866851

Laforet, S., & Chen, J. (2012). Chinese and British consumers’ evaluation of Chinese and international brands and factors affecting their choice. Journal of World Business,

47(1), 54-63. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jwb.2010.10.020

Martin, B. A., pro-, U. O. O. I. A. A., Kwai-Choi Lee, C., & se-, U. O. A. I. A. (2004). The influence of ad model ethnicity and self-referencing on attitudes: Evidence from New Zealand. Journal of Advertising, 33(4), 27-37.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00913367.2004.10639172

Morimoto, M., & Chang, S. (2009). Western and Asian Models in Japanese Fashion Magazine Ads: The Relationship With Brand Origins and International Versus Domestic Magazines. Journal of International Consumer Marketing, 21(3), 173–187. https://doi.org/10.1080/08961530802202701

Morimoto, M., & La Ferle, C. (2008). Examining the Influence of Culture on Perceived Source Credibility of Asian Americans & the Mediating Role of Similarity. Journal of

Current Issues & Research in Advertising, 30(1), 49–60.

https://doi.org/10.1080/10641734.2008.10505237

Murphy, E. R. (2008). Neuroethics of neuromarketing. Journal of Consumer Behaviour,

12(4), 253–266. https://doi.org/10.1002/cb

Neelankavil, J. P., Mummalaneni, V., & Sessions, D. N. (1995). Use of foreign language and models in print advertisements in East Asian countries: A logit modelling approach.

European Journal of Marketing, 29(4), 24-38.

(30)

O’Cass, A., & Choy, E. (2008). Studying Chinese generation Y consumers’ involvement in fashion clothing and perceived brand status. Journal of Product & Brand

Management, 17(5), 341–352. https://doi.org/10.1108/10610420810896095

O'Cass, A., & Siahtiri, V. (2013). In search of status through brands from Western and Asian origins: Examining the changing face of fashion clothing consumption in Chinese young adults. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 20(6), 505-515. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jretconser.2013.05.005

Parengkuan, N. (2016). Not just the product shown, but also the accompanying skin tone: The

influence of spokesperson skin tone on consumers’ affective responses to

advertisements (Unpublished master’s thesis). Department of Communication Science,

University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam.

Parker, R. S., Haytko, D. L., & Hermans, C. (2011). Ethnocentrism and its effect on the Chinese consumer: A threat to foreign goods? Journal of Global Marketing, 24(1), 4– 17. https://doi.org/10.1080/08911762.2011.545716

Qualls, W. J., & Moore, D. J. (1990). Stereotyping effects on consumers' evaluation of advertising: Impact of racial differences between actors and viewers. Psychology &

Marketing, 7(2), 135-151. https://doi.org/10.1002/mar.4220070205

Río, a. B. Del, Vázquez, R., & Iglesias, V. (2001). The role of the brand name in obtaining differential advantages. Journal of Product & Brand Management, 10(7), 452–465. https://doi.org/10.1108/EUM0000000006242

Tai, S. H. C. (1998). Factors Affecting Advertising Approach in Asia. Journal of Current

Issues & Research in Advertising, 20(1), 33–45.

(31)

Whittler, T. E. (1989). Viewers’ Processing of Actor’s Race and Message Claims in Advertising Stimuli. Psychology and Marketing, 6(4), 287–309.

https://doi.org/10.1002/mar.4220060405

Wu, Juanjuan and Delong, M. (2006). Chinese perceptions of western-branded denim jeans: a Shanghai case study. Journal of Fashion Marketing and Management, 10(2), 238– 250. https://doi.org/10.1108/03090560410539302

Xu Wenwen (2014, August 12). Strike a pose: Western models in demand. Shanghai Daily. Retrieved from http://www.shanghaidaily.com/hangzhou/Strike-a-pose-Western-models-in-demand/

Zhang, Y. (1996). Chinese consumers' evaluation of foreign products: the influence of culture, product types and product presentation format. European Journal of

Marketing, 30(12), 50-68. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/03090569610153309

Zhou, L., & Hui, M. K. (2003). Symbolic value of foreign products in the People’s Republic of China. Journal of International Marketing, 11(2), 36-58.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1509/jimk.11.2.36.20163

(32)

Appendix 1. Chinese model and Chinese brand condition

(33)

(34)

(35)

(36)

5. Questionnaire (In English)

Introduction Dear Participant,

I’m a master student from the University of Amsterdam and I’m conducting research for my Master’s thesis.

The goal of this research is to get your thoughts on a clothing catalog where you will see six different models. If you decide to participate, you will be shown a clothing catalog and asked some relevant questions. This research will be conducted with this online questionnaire and will take around 5-10 minutes to complete.

I really appreciate your cooperation and I thank you in advance for your time and dedication.

C Lin

Informed Consent Dear participant,

With this letter, I would like to invite you to participate in my thesis research study to be conducted under the auspices of the Graduate School of Communication, a part of the University of Amsterdam. By participating you are helping me to complete my thesis research and my Master’s degree in Communication Science, thus your involvement is highly

appreciated.

The title of the study for which I am requesting your cooperation is ‘Consumer’s review on a clothing catalog’. In the online survey, a clothing catalog will be displayed and you will be asked some questions relating to your opinions and evaluation of the catalog, the model and the brand. The goal of this research is to generate insight into the advertising preferences of consumers.

The survey will take 5-10 minutes.

As this research is being carried out under the responsibility of the ASCoR, University of Amsterdam, we can guarantee that:

1) Your anonymity will be safeguarded, and that your personal information will not be passed on to third parties under any conditions, unless you first give your express permission for this.

2) You can refuse to participate in the research or cut short your participation without having to give a reason for doing so.

(37)

3) Participating in the research will not entail your being subjected to any appreciable risk or discomfort, the researchers will not deliberately mislead you, and you will not be exposed to any explicitly offensive material.

4) No later than five months after the conclusion of the research, we will be able to provide you with a research report that explains the general results of the research.

For more information about the research and the invitation to participate, you are welcome to contact the project leader student (sidneylinpku@gmail.com).

Should you have any complaints or comments about the course of the research and the procedures it involves as a consequence of your participation in this research, you can contact the designated member of the Ethics Committee representing ASCoR, at the following

address: ASCoR Secretariat, Ethics Committee, University of Amsterdam, Postbus 15793, 1001 NG Amsterdam; 020-525 3680; ascor-secr-fmg@uva.nl. Any complaints or comments will be treated in the strictest confidence.

We hope that we have provided you with sufficient information. We would like to take this opportunity to thank you in advance for your assistance with this research, which we greatly appreciate.

Kind regards, C Lin

I have read and understood the above consent form and desire of my own free will to participate in this study.

Yes/No

Now you are going to see a clothing catalogue of a clothing brand. To eliminate the bias from brand's name, this brand will be called “Brand X” in this survey. You’ll have 30 seconds to look through it, please read carefully. After 30 seconds you can click the "Next" button to the next page where you can answer questions. If you are ready, please press "Next" button.

(Present either Chinese models or Western models)

1. I think Brand X is:

bad 1—2—3—4—5—6—7—8—9 good

(38)

2. I think on average, the models in the catalog are: bad 1—2—3—4—5—6—7—8—9 good

unpleasant 1—2—3—4—5—6—7—8—9 pleasant unfavorable 1—2—3—4—5—6—7—8—9 favorable In the modern fashion category with brands as H&M, ZARA: 3. Buying clothing from a Chinese brand makes me feel:

lower status 1—2—3—4—5—6—7—8—9 higher status 4. Buying clothing from a Western brand makes me feel:

lower status 1—2—3—4—5—6—7—8—9 higher status 5. In general, I think Chinese brands:

have bad quality 1—2—3—4—5—6—7—8—9 have good quality 6. In general, I think Western brands:

have bad quality 1—2—3—4—5—6—7—8—9 have good quality 7. In general, I think Chinese brands are:

unfashionable 1—2—3—4—5—6—7—8—9 fashionable 8. In general, I think Western brands are:

unfashionable 1—2—3—4—5—6—7—8—9 fashionable 9. Regardless of price, I prefer to buy clothes from a:

Western brand 1—2—3—4—5—6—7—8—9 Chinese brand 10. I’m a Man Woman 11. I’m Chinese Yes No

12. My nature hair and eye color is black or dark brown Yes

No

13. I’m…years old

14. I’m interested in fashion

not at all 1—2—3—4—5—6—7—8—9 very much

15. I buy my clothes from fast fashion brands (Note: click here to learn more about what fast fashion is. In short, retailers such as H&M, ZARA are typical fast fashion brands)

(39)

never 1—2—3—4—5—6—7—8—9 always

Ending and debriefing

Thank you for your participation, your input will greatly help my research! You should know that the catalogue you saw is made only for the purpose of this research. This research is meant to study Chinese consumer's attitude for Western models. As you can see, there are many Western models being used in the Chinese market, I want to find out whether Chinese consumers prefer them than Chinese models or not.

If you want more information about this research please contact the project leader student (sidneylinpku@gmail.com).

6. Questionnaire (In Chinese)

简介您好！我是阿姆斯特丹大学的硕士研究生。这份问卷是我的毕业论文研究的一部分，感谢您的支持。首先，您会浏览一份有六个不同模特的时装单页，之后您需要回答几个相关的问题。整个过程都通过这份在线问卷完成。请保证您的网络连接畅通，您大概需要花 5-10 分钟完成这份问卷。再次感谢您的支持与参与！ C Lin 知情同意书您好！这项研究的主题是“消费者对某份时装单页的态度”。在这份问卷中，您将看到一份时装单页和若干相关问题。这项研究的目的是深入了解消费者的广告偏好。您大约需要 5-10 分钟完成整个问卷。

这项研究是在阿姆斯特丹传播学研究学会（ASCoR, University of Amsterdam）的指导与监督下进行的，我们可以保证：

1）参与过程全程匿名，并且在获得您的许可之前，您的个人信息不会以任何形式泄露给第三方。

(40)

3）参与研究不会导致您感受到任何明显的风险或不适，研究人员不会故意误导您，也不会向您展示任何可能令您感到冒犯或者不愉快的内容。 4）在研究结束后 5 个月内，我们将能够为您提供一份研究结果的简报（英文）。如您希望了解更多相关信息，您可致函 sidneylinpku@gmail.com。如果您对研究过程以及您参与本研究所涉及的程序有任何投诉或意见，您可以致函或致电联系代表 ASCoR 的伦理委员会的指定成员，具体通信地址如下：ASCoR

Secretariat, Ethics Committee, University of Amsterdam, Postbus 15793, 1001 NG Amsterdam; 020-525 3680; ascor-secr-fmg@uva.nl。任何投诉或意见将被严格保密。此致， C Lin 我已经阅读并理解了上述知情同意书并且同意参加这项研究。是／否现在您将看到某服装品牌的产品单页。为保证您的观点中立，不受既有的品牌喜好的影响，该服装品牌在本次调查中将被称为“品牌 X”。您可以花 30 秒左右的时间浏览这张单页。30 秒后您可以点击“下一步”按钮进入下一页回答相关问题。如果您准备好了，请按“下一步”按钮。

(Present either Chinese models or Western models)

1. 我觉得品牌 X : 很差 1—2—3—4—5—6—7—8—9 很好令我不愉快 1—2—3—4—5—6—7—8—9 令我很愉快不讨我喜欢 1—2—3—4—5—6—7—8—9 很讨我喜欢 2. 我认为，总的来说，单页中的模特们：很差 1—2—3—4—5—6—7—8—9 很好令我不愉快 1—2—3—4—5—6—7—8—9 令我很愉快不讨我喜欢 1—2—3—4—5—6—7—8—9 很讨我喜欢

(41)

在快速时尚品牌的范围内 (典型的“快速时尚”欧美品牌主要有 H&M, ZARA, GAP 等，国内品牌有美特斯邦威、以纯、森马、ME&CITY 等。)： 3. 购买国产品牌服装是：没身份的象征 1—2—3—4—5—6—7—8—9 有身份的象征 4. 购买欧美品牌服装是：没身份的象征 1—2—3—4—5—6—7—8—9 有身份的象征 5. 总的来说，我觉得国产品牌的服装：质量很差 1—2—3—4—5—6—7—8—9 质量很好 6. 总的来说，我觉得欧美品牌的服装：质量很差 1—2—3—4—5—6—7—8—9 质量很好 7. 总的来说，我觉得国产品牌的服装：很土气 1—2—3—4—5—6—7—8—9 很时尚 8. 总的来说，我觉得欧美品牌的服装：很土气 1—2—3—4—5—6—7—8—9 很时尚 9. 不考虑价格因素，我更倾向购买...的服装。欧美品牌 1—2—3—4—5—6—7—8—9 国产品牌 10. 性别男女 11. 我是中国人是否 12. 我的自然发色和眼珠颜色是黑色或者褐色或者深褐色是否 13. 年龄_____ 14. 我对时尚感兴趣。一点也不 1—2—3—4—5—6—7—8—9 极其

(42)

15. 我购买快速时尚品牌的衣服 (典型的“快速时尚”欧美品牌主要有 H&M, ZARA, GAP 等，国内品牌有美特斯邦威、以纯、森马、ME&CITY 等。)：从不 1—2—3—4—5—6—7—8—9 总是感谢您的参与及支持！请注意，您所看到的时装单页是专为本次调查所设计的，并非来自某一具体品牌。本研究旨在探讨中国消费者对于西方模特的态度。鉴于当下中国市场中有很多西方模特，我希望了解中国消费者是否偏好西方模特甚于中国模特。如果您想了解更多关于这项研究的信息，您可致函 sidneylinpku@gmail.com。