Social dominance orientation and consumer xenocentrism: Mediating role of status consumption and social comparison

Celik, Bilal; Ercis, Aysel Article Social dominance orientation and consumer xenocentrism: Mediating role of status consumption and social comparison Pakistan Journal of Commerce and Social Sciences (PJCSS) Provided in Cooperation with: Johar Education Society, Pakistan (JESPK) Suggested Citation: Celik, Bilal; Ercis, Aysel (2024) : Social dominance orientation and consumer xenocentrism: Mediating role of status consumption and social comparison, Pakistan Journal of Commerce and Social Sciences (PJCSS), ISSN 2309-8619, Johar Education Society, Pakistan (JESPK), Lahore, Vol. 18, Iss. 2, pp. 226-248 This Version is available at: https://hdl.handle.net/10419/301667 Standard-Nutzungsbedingungen: Die Dokumente auf EconStor dürfen zu eigenen wissenschaftlichen Zwecken und zum Privatgebrauch gespeichert und kopiert werden. Sie dürfen die Dokumente nicht für öffentliche oder kommerzielle Zwecke vervielfältigen, öffentlich ausstellen, öffentlich zugänglich machen, vertreiben oder anderweitig nutzen. Sofern die Verfasser die Dokumente unter Open-Content-Lizenzen (insbesondere CC-Lizenzen) zur Verfügung gestellt haben sollten, gelten abweichend von diesen Nutzungsbedingungen die in der dort genannten Lizenz gewährten Nutzungsrechte. Terms of use: Documents in EconStor may be saved and copied for your personal and scholarly purposes. You are not to copy documents for public or commercial purposes, to exhibit the documents publicly, to make them publicly available on the internet, or to distribute or otherwise use the documents in public. If the documents have been made available under an Open Content Licence (especially Creative Commons Licences), you may exercise further usage rights as specified in the indicated licence. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ Pakistan Journal of Commerce and Social Sciences 2024, Vol. 18(2), 226-248 Pak J Commer Soc Sci Social Dominance Orientation and Consumer Xenocentrism: Mediating Role of Status Consumption and Social Comparison Bilal Celik (Corresponding author) Department of Production Management and Marketing, Bayburt University, Bayburt, Türkiye Email: [email protected] Aysel Ercis Department of Production Management and Marketing, Atatürk University, Erzurum, Türkiye Email: ay[email protected].tr Article History Received: 27 Mar 2024 Revised: 14 June 2024 Accepted: 23 June 2024 Published: 30 June 2024 Abstract This research aims to create a model that elucidates the reasons why people exhibit xenocentric consumer tendencies. In this context, a theoretical framework describing the evolution of consumer xenocentrism (C-XEN) was constructed by integrating elements from diverse theories. Then developed model was analyzed with empirical research involving 534 participants using structural equation modeling (SEM) with AMOS. The findings indicate that individuals with high social dominance orientation are more prone to having C-XEN, and proposes that status consumption and social comparison mediates the relationship between the social dominance orientation and the emergence of C-XEN. The framework allows to grasp the psychological factors contributing to C-XEN. In conclusion, testable propositions that are verifiable are believed to promote additional researches on the matter going forward. Keywords: Consumer xenocentrism, social dominance orientation, system justification, social comparison, status consumption. 1. Introduction Statements like this one are widespread and represent the finding that, a large segment of consumers in many countries, consistently favors foreign products in spite of their higher prices and, in some cases, lower quality. Notably, the observed tendency to choose foreign products is not limited to a certain product category and extends beyond those that are prominently consumed (Balabanis & Diamantopoulos, 2016). Herein, Mueller et al. (2010, p. 8) stated that “the preference for a range of foreign goods are preferred over qualitatively similar or better domestic goods that are often less expensive such as processed food Celik & Ercis 227 formula, cereals, soaps, toothpaste, building materials, pharmaceutical, and clothing”. In some cases, solid antagonistic vibe to a nation may not hamper consumers’ craving for its merchandise (Mahmoud et al., 2021). According to Balabanis et al. (2019) there is no reason why people prefer to purchase products from other countries when their own country’s products are equal or superior in quality. Moreover, consumer affinity, as depicted by Josiassen’s (2011) “consumer attraction-repulsion matrix” is a positive feeling towards other countries. Nevertheless, it does not capture the consumers’ general tendency to prefer foreign products. Since, the latter reflects “a feeling of liking, sympathy and even attachment toward a specific foreign country” (Oberecker et al., 2008, p. 26). Therefore, we are in need of a novel idea to clarify a recurring phenomenon that blatant preference for a foreign good outweighs its utilitarian superiority over domestic goods. Within this context, the consumer xenocentrism (C-XEN) should be taken into consideration as a structure that is thought to have an impact on foreign product preferences. Recently, there has been an uptick in researches about consumer xenocentrism. However, the focus of these researches is primarily on the influence of C-XEN on their purchasing decisions (Diamantopoulos et al., 2019; Camacho et al., 2020; Rojas-Méndez & Kolotylo, 2021; Mahmoud et al., 2021). In addition, a recent conceptual research by Jiang and Christian (2022) aimed to develop a theoretical framework that identifies the antecedents of the emergence of C-XEN. The fact remains, however, that recognizing the context of CXEN is essential. Since, considering the C-XEN as a passive variable will contribute to the understanding of the reasons leading to the tendency and the development of solution proposals. In a global marketplace, consumer preferences such as quality and price may be overshadowed by a concept called xenocentrism (Bozdağ & Durmuş, 2023). The significance of this research lies in this particular rationale. It is because to understand consumer inclination towards foreign products over local ones may aids the government and businesses in making more informed choices to promote local industries. This article therefore delves into the topic of why individuals tend to favor items from other countries rather than their own, and utilizes different theories to uncover the underlying reasons, given the lack of extensive research in this field. Within this context, the primary goal of this current research is twofold. In this sense, we begin by providing some context for the C-XEN literature. This serves as the basis for our hypotheses. The main framework of the research is to test the effect of social dominance orientation on C-XEN. Unlike previous researches, mediation analysis was designed to examine the mediation role of status consumption, social comparison and consumer susceptibility to interpersonal influence on the relationship between C-XEN and social dominance orientation. Insufficient research has been conducted on the topic. Thus, this research might be expected to verify if the existing scales on C-XEN are accurate. It will also advance managerial understanding of the idea of C-XEN in addition to the empirical literature. Social Dominance Orientation and Consumer Xenocentrism 228 2. Conceptual Framework and Hypothesis Development 2.1. Consumer Xenocentrism (C-XEN) Xenocentrism construct defined as “the view of things in which a group other than one’s own group is the center of everything, and all others, including one’s own group, are scaled and rated with reference to it” (Kent & Burnight, 1951, p. 256). Recently, Eshleman et al. (1993, p. 109) described xenocentrism as “the belief that what is foreign is best, that our own lifestyle, products, or ideas are inferior to those of others.” Xenocentrism refers to the tendency to elevate and prefer other groups (the out-group) at the expense of one ’s own, while harboring negative attitudes towards one’s own group (the in-group) (Balabanis & Diamantopoulos, 2016). Even though the potential usefulness of xenocentrism in analyzing consumer behavior has been noticed by Mueller et al. (2010), consumers’ xenocentric tendencies have yet to be thoroughly empirically investigated. In many countries, a large segment of consumers generally tends to favor foreign products consistently, despite their higher prices and sometimes even lower quality (Balabanis & Diamantopoulos, 2016). Li and Agrawal (2014) as of late utilized system justification theory to clarify shopper behaviors such as reusing or utilize of dental floss. Shepherd et al. (2015) also utilized system justification theory to appear that shoppers with a social justification thought process are favorably one-sided toward brands that reflect control. Moreover, Balabanis and Diamantopoulos (2016) embrace system justification theory as the conceptual foundation of the C-XEN build. The basis of the proposition that the C-XEN is triggered by significant differences in terms of socioeconomic status is the act of system justification defined as the “psychological process by which existing social arrangements are legitimized, even at the expense of personal and group interests” put forward by the system justification theory (Jost & Banaji, 1994, p.2). C-XEN defined as: “an individual’s preference for the products or services of a society other than their own. A propensity to rate and scale all products and services in reference to this foreign society and not their own.” (Lawrence, 2012, p.18). While C-XEN is a global phenomenon, it is more prevalent in developing societies such as Latin America. Researchers claimed that behind the customers’ xenocentric propensity is an endeavor to develop a positive image and gain self-esteem in such societies (Ger & Belk, 1996; Gaur et al., 2015). It is due to reasons like external dependency, cultural imperialism and a dominant inequality in socioeconomic status between classes in countries that are generally classified as underdeveloped or developing group/s (Montero, 1986). It is proposed that for some consumers, internalized differences in their home country’s relative standing versus other countries will result in a derogation of domestic goods, as well as a generalized tendency to seek foreign products as signals of perceived higher status (Balabanis & Diamantopoulos, 2016). Therefore, C-XEN is explicitly defined as a consumer’s internalized perception that domestic products are inferior and a related inclination to choose foreign items for social aggrandizement goals (Balabanis & Diamantopoulos, Celik & Ercis 229 2016). Based on the preceding information, it can be hypothesized that the C-XEN cycle operates as illustrated below. Figure 1: Causal Loop Diagram for C-XEN Source: Authors’ Own Illustration Based on the Literature 2.2. Social Dominance Orientation Social dominance orientation incorporates a “general attitudinal orientation toward intergroup relations, reflecting whether one generally prefers such relations to be equal, versus hierarchical, that is, ordered along a superior-inferior dimension” (Pratto et al., 1994, p. 742). “Among members of low status groups, an opposition to inequality may be viewed as a sign of internalized inferiority” (Jost & Thompson, 2000, p. 211–212), whereas opposition to equality is a manifestation of group self-interest for members of high-status groups (Balabanis & Diamantopoulos, 2016). Given that perceived inferiority is a defining feature of C-XEN, it is assumed that the C-XEN will be closely linked to social dominance orientation (Balabanis & Diamantopoulos, 2016). Social dominance orientation reflects the Consumer Xenocentrism Perceived Inferiority Social Aggrandizement Social Dominance Orientation and Consumer Xenocentrism 230 extent of individuals’ desire for group-based dominance and inequality. These aspirations are expressed through individual acts of discrimination and participation in intergroup and institutional processes that produce better outcomes for raids than subordinates. One way to justify the discriminatory actions of individuals with a high social dominance orientation is to support a wide variety of legitimating myths that hold the idea that dominant and subordinate groups deserve relative positions of superiority and inferiority in the social hierarchy (Pratto et al., 2006). In this context, individuals with high social dominance orientation generally accept and try to protect hierarchy or inequalities related to it. Individuals with low social dominance orientation, on the other hand, oppose the inequalities that arise in connection with hierarchy and support ideologies that reduce hierarchy (Pratto et al., 2006). According to Jost (2001), the importance of devaluing the in group, belittling and valuing the out group, and raising it is primarily dependent on supporting the status. In a way, this implies supporting the hierarchy. As a result, persons with a strong social dominance orientation may accept policies that reinforce hierarchy by legitimizing beliefs that strengthen hierarchy, which may result in C-XEN. For high-status group members, opposition to equality or advocacy of hierarchy is viewed as a reflection of the group’s self-interest. In contrast, opposition to inequality among members of low-status groups was seen as a sign of internalized feelings of inadequacy (Jost & Thompson, 2000). In this context, individuals with high social dominance orientation can be expected to have more C-XEN, since internalized inadequacy perception is also a determinant of C-XEN (Balabanis & Diamantopoulos, 2016). Hence, the following hypothesis is proposed: ➢ H1a. Social dominance orientation has a positive effect on C-XEN. 2.3. Status-Seeking and Status Consumption According to Packard (1960) status seekers are individuals who constantly strive to flaunt their possessions and position themselves as superior to others. This explanation emphasizes the importance of material success and status goods in the pursuit of social status. In this manner, status seekers are not mainly concerned with the asking price of any given commodity, but rather with assurances that the status advantages from acquiring the goods would be substantial. Additionally, as status is directly related exhibit wealth in their eyes, it follows that when price increases, a product’s social usefulness improves, giving the supplier of status products with a clear chance to extract considerable profits over production costs (Mason, 1985). Moreover, striving for status is intrinsically linked to the desire for power and monetary advantages like the wealthy leisure class’s “conspicuous consumption” (Veblen, 1899). Eastman et al. (1999, p. 42) defined status consumption as “the motivational process by which individuals strive to improve their social standing through the conspicuous consumption of consumer products that confer and symbolize status both for the individual and surrounding significant others.” Moreover, as conspicuous consumption is purchasing a more expensive object to boost one’s ego, a desire for status entails purchasing something that signifies status to both the individual Celik & Ercis 231 and those around them. Consumption of status products may thus help individuals in their attempt for self-esteem and social approval. As mentioned, C-XEN is a global phenomenon but it is more prevalent in developing societies. It is because the customers’ xenocentric tendency stems from a desire to establish a positive image and gain self-esteem in such societies (Ger & Belk, 1996; Gaur et al., 2015). Thus, the hypothesis proffered is as follows: ➢ H2a. Social dominance orientation has a positive effect on status consumption. ➢ H2b. Status consumption has a positive effect on C-XEN. ➢ H2c. Status consumption mediates the relation between social dominance orientation and C-XEN. 2.4. Social Comparison and Consumption The groups are socioeconomically unequal. For this reason, there is a tendency to compare between groups (own group; in-group) and (other groups; out-group) for individuals (Hornsey, 2008). Social comparisons are psychological mechanisms that influence people’s judgments, experiences, and behaviors. During a social comparison process, the individual’s self-evaluations, emotions, behaviors and interpersonal relationships are affected (Corcoran et al., 2011). Social comparison theory, which was originally proposed by Festinger (1954), asserted that individuals need to compare and contrast their own ideas and thoughts with others. Festinger (1954) presented a set of testable derivatives for interpersonal processes. Individuals usually prefer to compare with others considered to be better. This supports Festinger’s (1954) “upward drive” hypothesis. However, upward social comparisons might be threatening to one’s self (Morse & Gergen, 1970; Tesser, 1988; Zheng et al., 2022). Previous researches also explained that social comparison performed over social networking platforms triggers emotion-based impulsive buying behavior, particularly in young and young adults (Ogden & Venkat, 2001; Liu et al., 2019). According to Hanus and Fox (2015) individuals compare their own material assets with their peers and/or media celebrities in order to obtain external satisfaction. Also, the primary drivers that lead people to compare themselves to others (peers and media celebrities) and how this compares to compulsive purchasing behavior were documented by researchers (Pham et al., 2012 & Reeves et al., 2012). Thus, it is estimated that the widespread use of social media and movie streaming sites among young and young adults will lead to social comparison. It can be expected that the tendency of C-XEN will increase as a result of social comparison, especially in such platforms where strong global brands are given more space. Considering that individuals generally prefer to compare with others who are thought to be better, it can be expected that social comparison will play a mediating role between social dominance orientation and C-XEN. Thus, the following hypothesis is proposed: Social Dominance Orientation and Consumer Xenocentrism 232 ➢ H3a. Social dominance orientation has a positive effect on social comparison. ➢ H3b. Social comparison has a positive effect on C-XEN. ➢ H3c. Social comparison mediates the relation between social dominance orientation and C-XEN. 2.5. Consumer Susceptibility to Interpersonal Influence People organize their preferences, attitudes and behaviors to conform to the norms of the group (Cialdini & Goldstein, 2004). Moreover, people belong to one or more groups with social hierarchies and often pay attention to social hierarchies within the group to achieve success in social interaction, personal performance, and group adjustment (Chiao et al., 2004; Kim et al., 2021). Particularly, in societies where a collective lifestyle is adopted, the behavior of the individual is more sensitive to interpersonal influence. In this sense, consumer susceptibility to interpersonal influence has been stated as the desire and expectation of others’ approval of purchasing decisions through the products and brands purchased and used, as well as monitoring others and seeking information (Bearden et al., 1989). In this sense, Deutsch and Gerard (1955) proposed that interpersonal influence manifests itself through either normative or informational influences. As it is evident from the statement, consumer susceptibility to interpersonal influence impacts product preferences in the form of a normative effect on one side and an information effect on the other. Normative social influence has been defined as “an influence to conform to the positive expectations of another” this effect occurs depending on the reference group. An informational social influence can be defined as “an influence to accept information obtained from another as evidence about reality” (Deutsch & Gerard, 1955, p. 629). Individuals who are willing to build an image related to the group they refer to have a high level of conformity with the expectations of the group members they belong to. This situation is expected to be related to social aggrandizement, which is one of the components of the C-XEN (Balabanis & Diamantopoulos, 2016). Because there may be an exaggeration towards the reference group, in other words, the reference group may be idealized. As with the C-XEN tendency, there is the aim of obtaining status, creating an image and adapting to the expectations of the reference group. Hence the following hypothesis is proposed: ➢ H4a. Social dominance orientation has a positive effect on consumer susceptibility to interpersonal influence. ➢ H4b. Consumer susceptibility to interpersonal influence has a positive effect on C-XEN. ➢ H4c. Consumer susceptibility to interpersonal influence mediates the relation between social dominance orientation and C-XEN. Celik & Ercis 233 2.6. Conceptual Model The preceding discussion leads to the conceptual model depicted in Figure 1. The dashed lines, which represent the mediated effects in this model, examined by this research. The solid lines represent the relationships that have been validated by previous researches. 3. Methodology This research was conducted to see the effects of social dominance orientation on C-XEN as a causal attribution of out-group bias in products preferences in terms of different samples. Unlike previous researches on the subject, the mediation effects of status consumption, consumer susceptibility to interpersonal influence and social comparison were examined. Social Dominance Orientation Consumer Xenocentrism Status Consumption Consumer Susceptibility to Interpersonal Influence Social Comparison Figure 2: Conceptual Model Social Dominance Theory System Justification Theory The Theory of the Leisure Class Reference Group Theory H2a H3a H4a H4b H3b H2b H1a H2c: Social Dominance Orientation → Status Consumption → Consumer Xenocentrism H3c: Social Dominance Orientation → Social Comparison → Consumer Xenocentrism H4c: Social Dominance Orientation → Consumer Susceptibility to Interpersonal Influence → Consumer Xenocentrism Social Comparison Theory Social Dominance Orientation and Consumer Xenocentrism 240 Table 4: Total, Direct, and Indirect Effects of Social Dominance Orientation on Consumer Xenocentrism Effect (SE) t-value p-value 95% CI Total effect 0.198 0.037 5.411 0.000 [0.126, 0.269] Status Consumption as mediator Direct effect 0.035 0.029 1.204 0.229 [-0.022, 0.093] Indirect effect 0.162 0.030 [0.105, 0.225] Social Comparison as mediator Direct effect 0.114 0.029 3.883 0.000 [0.056, 0.171] Indirect effect 0.084 0.025 [0.036, 0.134] Consumer Susceptibility to Interpersonal Influence as mediator Direct effect 0.161 0.032 5.107 0.000 [0.099, 0.223] Indirect effect 0.037 0.020 [0.000, 0.076] 5. Discussion and Conclusion This research developed and tested a research model based on theoretical contributions describes the relationship between psycho-cultural phenomena and attitudinal tendencies affect C-XEN. The findings confirmed the basic research model [social dominance orientation → consumer xenocentrism], which is considered from the perspective of system justification theory and social dominance theory. It means that social dominance orientation positively affects C-XEN. It shows that the structural relationships and theoretical infrastructure in the research model developed and tested in line with the purpose of the research are consistent with the existing literature (Balabanis & Diamantopoulos, 2016). Social dominance theory says that when higher status groups oppose equality, it is because they want to protect their own interests, and when lowerstatus groups oppose equality, it is because they feel inadequate (Bobo & Kluegel, 1993; Jost & Thompson, 2000). This scenario is similar to experiencing an inferiority complex compared to others, which is a contributing factor to C-XEN. Because perceived inferiority in members of socio economically low-status groups foster a strong desire to increase the individual’s status. As a result, members of groups at lower levels in terms of socioeconomic status prefer products that are status symbols that will signal that they are members of groups at higher levels. This situation generally turns into a tendency to purchase foreign products and brands. Thus, socioeconomic differences between individuals must be minimized as much as possible in order to tolerate the C-XEN, which can be expressed as a psycho-cultural obstacle to branding for local industries and as a means of maintaining the status quo for strong brands. Notwithstanding individuals with low social dominance orientation may be expected to have less C-XEN. However, it would be wrong to conclude that individuals with low social dominance orientation do not prefer Celik & Ercis 241 foreign products. Because C-XEN, a concept based on system justification theory, appears to provide more consistent predictions for both domestic and foreign brand bias (Balabanis et al., 2019), it cannot be considered as a determining factor alone. Besides that, other attitudinal variables such as consumer cosmopolitanism and world mindedness are also effective on attitudes toward foreign brands (Nguyen & Pham, 2021). Furthermore, the findings indicated that the inclination to showcase one’s status can lead to a greater C-XEN. Members of groups that are higher in socioeconomic status engage in status consumption as a way to differentiate themselves from other social groups, particularly members of groups that are lower in socioeconomic status. Consumption of imported products in order to gain status has become common in transition economies among many urban consumers (Mai & Smith, 2012). Because there is a dominant consumer belief that acquiring status symbols can help achieve the desired social status (Tambyah et al., 2009). The findings also revealed that social comparison has a positive effect on CXEN. It means that the tendency for C-XEN is high in individuals who engage in social comparison. Social comparison theory says that individuals compare their material assets with the assets of their peers and/or celebrities whom they consider important in order to obtain their own external satisfaction (Hanus & Fox, 2015; Islam et al., 2018). On the other hand, individuals who rank higher in terms of socioeconomic status may be more vulnerable to social comparison and tend to compete more in a conspicuous consumption race with similarly high-ranked peers (Garcia et al., 2013). Comparing oneself to others is common among people in developing societies. The main factor is that individuals in these circles often desire a sense of inclusion and interpersonal relationships. These members compare groups by categorizing and defining in the social comparison process (Ho & McLeod, 2008). According to finding, consumer susceptibility to interpersonal influence has a positive effect on C-XEN. At this point, the reference group effect can be considered as a determining factor. This effect is mainly based on the individual will take the group as a reference and comparison object in self-evaluation in order to make the results of his own behavior consistent with the reference group (Risselada et al., 2014; Ding et al., 2020). This situation can possibly be explained that if the group membership is linked to a norm that encourages the consumption of foreign products, consumer susceptibility to interpersonal influence increases and, accordingly, C-XEN is triggered (Jost & Banaji, 1994; Rojas-Méndez & Chapa, 2020). Unlike existing researches on C-XEN, mediator variables are included in research model. The findings revealed that status consumption and social comparison have a mediator effect in the relationship between social dominance orientation and C-XEN. Based on these findings, individuals with high social dominance orientation seek status and/or want to protect their current status may increase the tendency for C-XEN. Also, individuals with high social dominance orientation make upward social comparisons, which may trigger a C-XEN. Pelser et al. (2023) explained that the development of influencers has raised Social Dominance Orientation and Consumer Xenocentrism 242 materialism and social comparison to a new level by utilizing celebrities and social media figures for marketing efforts. It is thus utilizing public figures and influencers on social media to promote products from local businesses may prove beneficial. Another finding is that the variable of consumer susceptibility to interpersonal influence does not have a mediator effect on the relationship between social dominance orientation and C-XEN. This finding can be interpreted as individuals with high consumer susceptibility to interpersonal influence exhibiting a towards xenocentrism, but they attach more importance to equality between groups rather than the dominance of a particular group. Research indicates that people with higher levels of education are inclined to favor goods from different countries (Camacho et al., 2022). According to the results, 88.3% of the sample has high school or higher education. Thus, the findings might be more focus on this educated group. One way to use these findings is for educators and policy makers in developing countries to encourage buying and using locally-made products. It is also important for local producers to understand the correlation between people’s education and their willingness to purchase foreign goods. Because understanding this correlation can enable them to enhance their products to better align with international preferences. The another finding of this research is about income. Based on the results, 39% of the sample has below ₺2.324 monthly income. This indicates that even those with a low income may have xenocentric tendencies. 5.1. Theoretical and Practical Implications The research’s empirical findings make several key theoretical and practical implications. First, it deals with the subject with an interdisciplinary approach, based on existing theories, and contributes to an in-depth understanding of the subject. Second, most researches have predominantly examined C-XEN towards foreign products (Gaur et al., 2015; Camacho et al., 2020; Mahmoud et al., 2021; Venugopal et al., 2022), ignoring to explore other aspects that influence this tendency. This research aims to help understand the reasons behind the C-XEN by restructuring C-XEN according to some intermediary variables. Third, this research bridges the research gap between social dominance orientation and C-XEN. Whereas previous researches, this research also tested mediating role of status consumption, social comparison and consumer susceptibility to interpersonal influence based on different theories. The findings align with the principles of Social Comparison Theory (Festinger, 1954), Social Dominance Theory (Pratto et al., 2006) and System Justification Theory (Jost & Banaji, 1994). These concepts revolve around inequitable disparities. Because the findings showed that individuals with the mindset of superiority and who compare themselves to higher status groups are more predisposed to being xenocentric. Kent and Burnight (1951) previously noted that xenocentrism is often disregarded by researchers, and this remains the case today. It is therefore when consumers with stronger preferences for out-groups, exploring how the mechanisms affect the xenocentrism influence has theoretical significance. Marketers should concentrate on the perceived value of consumer and empathize with consumers’ feelings to enhance their Celik & Ercis 243 connection with them, as indicated by the research. Put simply, researching approach must be modernized to consumer behavior to account for the preference for foreign or imported products. 5.2. Limitations and Future Research Directions There are some limitations for this research. The first limitation is about gathering the required data set for this research. Because getting the necessary data for the research during the Covid-19 pandemic period was challenging due to time and space constraints. There are numerous factors that can lead consumers xenocentrism. Nevertheless, the research was unable to account for all the variables impacting consumer xenocentrism. This could be seen as a limitation for this research. Thus, future researches are recommended to extend research on C-XEN to other contexts. Also, a mix of numerical data and consumer perspectives could be employed by researchers to gain insight into the causes of conflicting emotions and decision-making in terms of consumer xenocentrism. Online communities and social media have a profound impact on shaping consumer preferences in today’s digital landscape. It is thus recommended that Parasocial Theory can be utilized in future research. Moreover, examining the effects of C-XEN on product categories, service and industry types will be beneficial for marketers, product and brand managers in future Z addition, the socio-political and economic conditions that are effective in minimization of the C-XEN and their temporal and spatial variations are open to research. Research Funding The authors received no internal research grant or external funding for this research study. Ethical Approval and Consent to Participate This article is an extension of a Ph.D. thesis and received ethical approval from the associated school’s ethics committee in 2021. REFERENCES Anderson, J. C., & Gerbing, D. W. (1988). Structural equation modeling in practice: A review and recommended two-step approach. Psychological Bulletin, 103(3), 411-423. Bailey, W., & Pineres, S. A. (1997). Country of origin attitudes in Mexico. Journal of International Consumer Marketing, 9(3), 25-41. Balabanis, G., & Diamantopoulos, A. (2016). Consumer xenocentrism as determinant of foreign product preference: A system justification perspective. Journal of International Marketing, 24(3), 58-77. Social Dominance Orientation and Consumer Xenocentrism 244 Balabanis, G., Stathopoulou, A., & Qiao, J. (2019). Favoritism toward foreign and domestic brands: A comparison of different theoretical explanations. Journal of International Marketing, 27(2), 38-55. Bearden, W. O., Netemeyer, R. G., & Teel, J. E. (1989). Measurement of Consumer Susceptibility to Interpersonal Influence. Journal of Consumer Research, 15(4), 473-481, Bobo, L., & Kluegel, J. R. (1993). Opposition to race-targeting: Self-interest, stratification ideology, or racial attitudes? American Sociological Review, 58(4), 443-464. Bozdağ, A. A., & Durmuş, B. (2023). The Psychological Underpinnings of Turkish Consumer Choices: Xenocentrism. Journal of International Consumer Marketing, 36(4), 336-351. Camacho, L. J., Ramírez-Correa, P., & Salazar-Concha, C. (2022). Xenocentrism and Formal Education: Evaluating its impact on the behavior of Chilean consumers. Journal of Risk and Financial Management, 15(4), 166. Camacho, L. J., Salazar-Concha, C., & Ramírez-Correa, P. (2020). The influence of xenocentrism on purchase intentions of the consumer: the mediating role of product attitudes. Sustainability, 12(4), 1647. Chan, K., & Prendergast, G. (2007). Materialism and Social Comparison among Adolescents. Social Behavior and Personality: An International Journal, 35(2), 213-228. Chiao, J. Y., Bordeaux, A. R., & Ambady, N. (2004). Mental Representations of Social Status. Cognition, 93(2), 49-57. Cialdini, R. B., & Goldstein, N. J. (2004). Social Influence: Compliance and conformity. Annual Review of Psychology, 55(1), 591-621. Corcoran, K., Crusius, J., & Mussweiler, T. (2011). Social Comparison: Motives, Standards, and Mechanisms. In D. Chadee (Ed.), Theories in Social Psychology (pp. 119139). Oxford, UK: Wiley-Blackwell. Cortina, J. M. (1993). What is coefficient alpha? An examination of theory and applications. Journal of Applied Psychology, 78(1), 98-104. Dash, G., & Paul, J. (2021). CB-SEM vs PLS-SEM methods for research in social sciences and technology forecasting. Technological Forecasting & Social Change, 173, 121092. Deutsch, M., & Gerard, H. B. (1955). A Study of Normative and Informational Social Influences Upon Individual Judgment. The Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 51(3), 629-636. Diamantopoulos, A., Davydova, O., & Arslanagić-Kalajdžić, M. (2019). Modeling the role of consumer xenocentrism in impacting preferences for domestic and foreign brands: A mediation analysis. Journal of Business Research, 104, 587-596. Celik & Ercis 245 Ding, S., Lin, J., & Zhang, Z. (2020). Influences of Reference Group on Users’ Purchase Intentions in Network Communities: From the Perspective of Trial Purchase and Upgrade Purchase. Sustainability, 12(24), 10619. Eastman, J. K., Goldsmith, R. E., & Flynn, L. R. (1999). Status consumption in consumer behavior: Scale development and validation. Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice, 7(3), 41-52. Eshleman, J. R., Cashion, B. G., & Basirico, L. A. (1993). Sociology: An Introduction. (4th ed.). New York: HarperCollins College Publishers. Festinger, L. (1954). A Theory of Social Comparison Processes. Human Relations, 7(2), 117-140. Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981). Evaluating Structural Equation Models with Unobservable Variables and Measurement Error. Journal of Marketing Research, 18(1), 39–50. Garcia, S. M., Tor, A., & Schiff, T. M. (2013). The Psychology of Competition: A Social Comparison Perspective. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 8(6), 634-650. Gaur, S. S., Bathula, H., & Diaz, C. V. (2015). Conceptualising the Influence of the Cultural Orientation of Latin Americans on Consumers’’’ Choice of US Brands. European Business Review, 27(5), 477-494. Ger, G., & Belk, R. W. (1996). I’d like to Buy the World a Coke: Consumptionscapes of the “Less Affluent World”. Journal of Consumer Policy, 19(3), 271-304. Hair, J. F., Jr, Matthews, L. M., Matthews, R. L., & Sarstedt, M. (2017). PLS-SEM or CBSEM: updated guidelines on which method to use. International Journal of Multivariate Data Analysis, 1(2), 107-123. Hair, J.F., Black, W.C., Babin, B.J. and Anderson, R.E. (2010), Multivariate Data Analysis, (7th ed.). New York: Pearson. Hanus, M. D., & Fox, J. (2015). Assessing the effects of gamification in the classroom: A longitudinal study on intrinsic motivation, social comparison, satisfaction, effort, and academic performance. Computers & Education, 80, 152-161. Hayes, A. F., & Scharkow, M. (2013). The Relative Trustworthiness of Inferential Tests of the Indirect Effect in Statistical Mediation Analysis: Does Method Really Matter? Psychological Science, 24(10), 1918-1927. Ho, S. S., & McLeod, D. M. (2008). Social-Psychological Influences on Opinion Expression in Face-to-Face and Computer-Mediated Communication. Communication Research, 35(2), 190-207. Hornsey, M. J. (2008). Social Identity Theory and Self-Categorization Theory: A Historical Review. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 2(1), 204-222. Social Dominance Orientation and Consumer Xenocentrism 246 Islam, T., Sheikh, Z., Hameed, Z., Khan, I.U. & Azam, R.I. (2018). Social comparison, materialism, and compulsive buying based on stimulus-response-model: a comparative study among adolescents and young adults. Young Consumers, 19(1), 19-37. Jiang, C., & Christian, R. G. (2022). A conceptual model exploring the emergence of consumer xenocentrism: The role of antecedents and Disidentification. Journal of International Consumer Marketing, 35(2), 180-193. Josiassen, A. (2011). Consumer disidentification and its effects on domestic product purchases: An empirical investigation in the Netherlands. Journal of Marketing, 75(2), 124-140. Jost, J. T. (2001). Outgroup Favoritism and the Theory of System Justification: A Paradigm for Investigating the Effects of Socio-Economic Success on Stereotype Content. In G. Moskowitz (Ed.), Cognitive Social Psychology: The Princeton Symposium on the Legacy and Future of Social Cognition (pp. 89-102). Erlbaum Press. Jost, J. T., & Banaji, M. R. (1994). The Role of Stereotyping in System-Justification and the Production of False Consciousness. British Journal of Social Psychology, 33(1), 1-27. Jost, J. T., & Thompson, E. P. (2000). Group-based dominance and opposition to equality as independent predictors of self-esteem, ethnocentrism, and social policy attitudes among African Americans and European Americans. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 36(3), 209-232. Kent, D. P., & Burnight, R. G. (1951). Group centrism in complex societies. American Journal of Sociology, 57(3), 256-259. Kim, D., Kim, J., & Kim, H. (2021). Increased Conformity to Social Hierarchy Under Public Eyes. Frontiers in psychology, 12, 636801. Lawrence, S.J. (2012). Consumer Xenocentrism and Consumer Cosmopolitanism: The Development and Validation of Scales of Constructs Influencing Attitudes Towards Foreign Product Consumption. [Doctoral dissertation, Wayne State University]. Wayne State University Theses and Dissertations Archive. https://digitalcommons.wayne.edu/oa_dissertations/606/ Liu, P., He, J., & Li, A. (2019). Upward Social Comparison on Social Network Sites and Impulse Buying: A Moderated Mediation Model of Negative Affect and Rumination. Computers in Human Behavior, 96, 133-140. Mahmoud, M. A., Mallen-Ntiador, T. N., Andoh, D., Iddrisu, M., & Kastner, A. N. (2021). Consumer xenocentrism and foreign goods purchase intention in an emerging economy. International Journal of Emerging Markets, 18(3), 567-587. Mai, N. T. T., & Smith, K. (2012). The Impact of Status Orientations on Purchase Preference for Foreign Products in Vietnam, and Implications for Policy and Society. Journal of Macromarketing, 32(1), 52-60. Celik & Ercis 247 Malhotra, N. K. & Birks, D. F. (2007) Marketing Research: An Applied Approach. (3th ed.). Harlow: Pearson Education. Mason, R. (1985). Ethics and the supply of Status Goods. Journal of Business Ethics, 4(6), 457-464. Montero, M. (1986). Political Psychology in Latin America. In M. G. Hermann (Ed.), Political psychology (pp. 414-433). San Francisco, USA: Jossey-Bass Publishers. Morse, S., & Gergen, K. J. (1970). Social comparison, self-consistency, and the concept of self. Journal of personality and social psychology, 16(1), 148-156. Mueller, R. D., Broderick, A. J. (2010). Consumer Xenocentrism: An Alternative Explanation for Foreign Product Bias. In Z. Hoqq (Ed.), Proceedings of Annual Hawaii International Business Research Conference (pp. 1-24). Honolulu, Hawaii. Australia: World Business Institute. Mueller, R. D., Wang, G. X., Liu, G., & Cui, C. C. (2016). Consumer xenocentrism in China: An exploratory study. Asia Pacific Journal of Marketing and Logistics, 28(1), 7391. Nguyen, N. T., Pham, T. N., & Liu, G. (2021). Consumer attitudinal dispositions: A missing link between socio-cultural phenomenon and purchase intention of foreign products: An empirical research on young Vietnamese consumers. Cogent Business & Management, 8(1). 1-15 Nunnally, J. C. (1978). Psychometric theory (2nd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill. Oberecker, E. M., Riefler, P., & Diamantopoulos, A. (2008). The Consumer Affinity Construct: conceptualization, qualitative investigation, and research agenda. Journal of International Marketing, 16(3), 23-56. Ogden, H.J. & Venkat, R. (2001), Social comparison and possessions: Japan vs Canada, Asia Pacific Journal of Marketing and Logistics, 13(2), 72-84. Packard, V. (1960). The Status Seekers. An Exploration of Class Behaviour in America, New York: Longmans. Pelser, T., van Schalkwyk, P. J., & van Schalkwyk, J. H. (2023). The correlation between materialism, social comparison and status consumption among students. South African Journal of Higher Education, 37(2), 185-200. Pham, T. H., Yap, K., & Dowling, N. A. (2012). The impact of financial management practices and financial attitudes on the relationship between materialism and compulsive buying. Journal of Economic Psychology, 33(3), 461-470. Pratto, F., Sidanius, J., & Levin, S. (2006). Social dominance theory and the dynamics of intergroup relations: Taking stock and looking forward. European Review of Social Psychology, 17(1), 271-320. Social Dominance Orientation and Consumer Xenocentrism 248 Pratto, F., Sidanius, J., Stallworth, L. M., & Malle, B. F. (1994). Social dominance orientation: A personality variable predicting social and political attitudes. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 67(4), 741-763. Prince, M., Davies, M. A. P., Cleveland, M., & Palihawadana, D. (2016). Here, there and everywhere: A study of consumer centrism. International Marketing Review, 33(5), 715754. Reeves, R. A., Baker, G. A., & Truluck, C. S. (2012). Celebrity worship, materialism, compulsive buying, and the empty self. Psychology & Marketing, 29(9), 674-679. Risselada, H., Verhoef, P. C., & Bijmolt, T. H. A. (2014). Dynamic Effects of Social Influence and Direct Marketing on the Adoption of High-Technology Products. Journal of Marketing, 78(2), 52-68. Shepherd, S., Chartrand, T. L., & Fitzsimons, G. J. (2015). When Brands Reflect Our Ideal World: The Values and Brand Preferences of Consumers Who Support versus Reject Society’s Dominant Ideology. Journal of Consumer Research, 42(1), 76-92. Tambyah, S. K., Tuyết, N. T., & Jung, K. (2009). Measuring Status Orientations: scale development and validation in the context of an Asian transitional economy. Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice, 17(2), 175-187. Tesser, A. (1988). Toward a self-evaluation maintenance model of social behavior. In Berkowitz L. (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Advances in experimental social psychology Volume 21). Academic Press. 21, 181-227. Tyupa, S. (2011). A Theoretical Framework for Back-Translation as a Quality Assessment Tool. New Voices in Translation Studies, 7, 35-46. Veblen, T. (1899). The Theory of the Leisure Class: An Economic Study of Institutions. London: Unwin Books. Venugopal, V., Mata, M. N., Iloka, C. B., Dantas, R. M., Correia, A. B., Rita, J. X., & Martins, J. M. (2022). Xenocentrism and Consumer Buying Behavior: A Comparative Analysis of Malaysian vs. Nigerian Consumers. Journal of Risk and Financial Management, 15(2), 1-13. Zheng, X., Xu, J., & Shen, H. (2022). To be respected or liked: The influence of social comparisons on consumer preference for competenceversus warmth-oriented products. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 39(1), 170-189.