Insights into Vodka consumer attitude and purchasing behaviors

Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services 32 (2016) 7–14

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/jretconser

Insights into Vodka consumer attitude and purchasing behaviors Catherine Prentice n, Nikolai Handsjuk Associate Professor of Marketing, School of Business & Law, Edith Cowan University, Perth, Australia

art ic l e i nf o

a b s t r a c t

Article history: Received 22 February 2016 Received in revised form 11 May 2016 Accepted 22 May 2016

This study investigates the relationships between the relevant marketing factors and Vodka purchasing behavior and brand preference in Australia. The factors examined in this study include branding, country of origin, packaging, and social media. The theory of planed behavior is deployed to understand how consumers' perception or attitude towards Vodka affect their purchase and loyalty to the brand. This study provides insights into how the selected marketing factors affect Vodka purchasing behaviors among Australian consumers. Findings of this study particularly suggest that the relevant marketers should allocate more resources to build strong brand image, brand awareness, and positive brand perceptions. Implications are highlighted for researchers and practitioners. & 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Keywords: Alcohol marketing Vodka, branding Packaging Country of origin Loyalty

1. Introduction Vodka, defined as a transparent distilled spirit without definite aroma or flavor (Encyclopedia Britannica, 2015), is the largest internationally traded spirit (Gin and Vodka, 2015). Despite the commercial scale and ubiquity of Vodka internationally, little research has examined how marketing may influence Vodka purchasing behaviors. In 2012, sales of Vodka reached 493.9 million nine-litre cases internationally (Gin and Vodka, 2015). However, since 2008 Vodka sales have been declining, largely due to a decrease in volume sales in Russia, the largest market geographically, where consumers have been migrating to brown spirits following a spike in duty tax on white spirits (Cunnington, 2014). Outside of Russia, Vodka sales have seen steady, fair growth, largely due to the broad market reach and global appeal. However, growth in the rest of the world is soon expected to follow Russia's example and slow (Cunnington, 2014). Historically Vodka has maintained steady sales and a good reputation due to its neutrality and application as a mixer, which has helped it maintain popularity in the US. However, in recent times consumer preferences have changed. The flavored and premium Vodka segments have seen a rise in popularity (Cunnington, 2014), whereas the market for economy Vodka has the most significant decline. This decline affects the growth in the spirits industry although other white spirits such as gin have continued to grow in popularity and sales volume (Cunnington, 2015). Gin has become n

Corresponding author. E-mail addresses: [email protected] (C. Prentice), [email protected] (N. Handsjuk). http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jretconser.2016.05.009 0969-6989/& 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

popular in recent years, as said by Rebecca Palmer (24), employee at Gin Firm Martin Miller's; When I was at university we all drank vodka,” she said. “I think that's because that is what everyone had been doing for years and my parents and grandparents were gin drinkers so I didn’t want to drink what they were drinking. Now we are a little older I think most of my friends are choosing gin over vodka. I think it's the 20 and 30-somethings that are really getting into gin now, and obviously the classic gin drinkers of the older generations are still drinking it too, so it is spanning a range of ages which is great. (Gallagher, 2014) The spirit market, breaking away from historical views as a drink retained for the enjoyment of elderly men, has successfully diversified into new demographic markets (Malandrakis, 2015). While Vodka is still selling more by volume, whisky is overtaking in revenue reaping the benefit of a trend towards local, authentic, craft spirits (Nisen, 2014). In an article about the battle between Vodka and whisky, Nisen (2014) says Vodka managed to gain ubiquity through appealing to the baby boomer generation; a premium market by using elaborate packaging and sophisticated marketing. Now sales volume of Vodka is declining and little research has been conducted to understand the factors that may influence Vodka purchase or consumption. Existing research on Vodka, albeit rather limited, or alcohol in general is primarily focused on its negative consequences (e.g. Bissett et al., 2013; Pridemore, 2002; Renaud et al., 1992). The industry, like any other businesses, constituting part of the national or world economy, requires appropriate business strategies to be viable and sustainable. This research, from marketing and business management perspective, examines the influence of

8

C. Prentice, N. Handsjuk / Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services 32 (2016) 7–14

relevant marketing factors on consumers' attitudes and buying behaviors towards this spirit with a focus on purchasing frequency and brand loyalty. Understanding these behaviors would help Vodka producers and other practitioners (i.e. marketers) optimize their resources for achieving best outcomes. Consistent with what is commonly used in alcohol marketing, the factors that are chosen in this study include branding, packaging, country of origin and social media. Previous research on how marketing influences alcohol purchasing and consumption behavior has been largely policy driven, or primarily concerned with high-level marketing factors (e.g. pricing). The effects of marketing on underage consumption has been of particular interest (Garretson et al., 1998; Jones et al., 2007; Katikireddi et al., 2014; Wilcox, 1985). Existing studies have mostly focused on the effects of alcohol branding on underage youths at the level of alcoholic beverage category (wine, spirits, beer, etc.) but never at the level of brand or sub-type (e.g. Vodka, gin and whisky)(Siegel et al., 2013). The use of social media marketing by alcohol products has been investigated to determine its effects on consumption, culture and brand loyalty (Nicholls, 2012; Phan, 2011; Rapp et al., 2013). Country of origin and packaging on product quality perceptions have also been discussed in the context of wine (Hamlin et al., 2006; Sharma et al., 2013; Veale and Quester, 2009) and lagers (Schaefer, 1997). Few studies have investigated their relationships with other products, particularly in the context of sub-categories of spirits (e.g. Vodka). Nevertheless, consumers rely on these extrinsic cues such as branding (Akdeniz et al., 2013; Chu et al., 2005; Li et al., 1994), packaging (Gherasim, 2011; Silayoi et al., 2007; Underwood, 2003; Wang, 2013), and country of origin (Hamlin et al., 2006) when making purchasing decisions. This study adapts a model proposed by Chu et al. (2005) that measures the effect of extrinsic cues on consumer purchasing behaviors, and examine how the above identified factors are associated with consumers' Vodka purchase and brand preference. Results of this study could benefit marketing professionals associated with the alcohol industry when considering marketing strategies and developing marketing plans for related products. Furthermore, the effects of these marketing elements may also be of interest to government policy makers concerned with the effects of marketing on dangerous consumption and purchasing of alcohol, leading to further research on the topic. The following section discusses the relevant literature on the selected variables and presents the hypotheses for testing.

2. Literature review 2.1. Branding Branding is referred to as a “legal instrument, logo, company, shorthand, risk reducer, identity system, image in the consumers' mind, value system, personality, relationship, adding value and evolving entity” (De Chernatony and Dall’Olmo, 1998, p. 418). Brand at the most simplistic level can be viewed as a logo, colors and design to produce a ubiquitous image of a company, exhibiting dissimilitude to its competitors (De Chernatony, 2009). When intrinsic product qualities are not readily observable, consumers rely on cues, such as brand to make their purchase decisions (Akdeniz et al., 2013; Chu et al., 2005; Li et al., 1994). As technologies and social media become more influential and markets become more competitive, business success relies less on product quality and more on brand and differentiation (Todor, 2014). Brands are utilized as a means of creating a point of difference and an association of benefit in the mind of the consumer (De Chernatony, 2009; Gherasim, 2011; Phillips et al., 2014). In

youth culture particularly, there has been an increase in the value attached to brand labels (Casswell, 2004). Brand image is one of the extrinsic cues used in marketing that has been shown to have a significant impact on consumer attitude and behavior (Koubaa et al., 2015). Peț et al. (2014) studied the role of brand in consumers’ purchase decision of soft-drinks and found brand to be an important factor when choosing these products. Branding has also been found to play an essential role in alcohol marketing in general, with development of brand meaning and positive association constituting perhaps the most important role in alcohol marketing (Lin et al., 2011; Siegel et al., 2013). Brand has particular influence on consumers’ purchasing since it is associated with its flavors, make and country of origin. For instance, Grey Goose, French made Vodka, is made of wheat and known for making any type of cocktails (http://bestvodka.net); whereas Smirnoff, a British brand, originated from Russia, is mostly known for variant flavors. If one likes cocktails, Grey Goose brands may be preferred. Those Vodka connoisseurs probably favors Russian brands where Vodka originates. The preference affects how consumers perceive Vodka and drives their purchase frequency and eventually attachment to the brand. Consistent with this view, this research proposes the following hypotheses: H1a: Branding has a positive influence on consumers' attitude towards Vodka. H1b: Branding has a positive influence on Vodka purchase frequency. H1c: Branding has a positive influence on Vodka brand preference. 2.2. Country of origin Researchers have been interested in the effect of a product's country of origin (COO) on consumer behavior since the 1960s (Schaefer, 1997). Not until a decade ago, has the role of COO in brand management been extensively discussed within the marketing literature (Hamlin et al., 2006). In the alcohol context, most research (i.e. Bruwer et al., 2013; Koubaa et al., 2015) is focused on its effect on wine consumption. Hamlin et al., 2006 found that COO had a significant effect on consumers’ perception and evaluation of varietal wine. Similarly, Veale and Quester (2009) examined the impact of COO as extrinsic cues on an intrinsic cue of objective product quality. Koubaa et al. (2015) found that COO has an effect on brand image and product evaluation. Although very limited research has been undertaken to understand the influence of COO on consumers’ attitudes and behaviors towards Vodka, like wine, Vodka's country of origin is associated with quality and brand attributed to its rich history. Vodka is a drink which originated in Eastern Europe, the name stemming from the Russian word 'voda’ meaning water. The first documented production of Vodka was in Russia at the end of 9th century. However the Russian Revolution drove a number of Russian vodka-makers to move to other parts of the world continuing with Vodka production due to the Bolsheviks confiscation (see http://www.ginvodka.org/history/vodkaHistory.asp). Smirnoff, for example, is a French version of Russian Vodka. Not until 1940s, did Vodka start popularizing the Western world. Research shows that alcohol quality perception is dependent upon the consumer's product knowledge (Bruwer et al., 2013), investment and experience (Veith et al., 2013), as well as age, socio-economic status (Schaefer, 1997). Knowledge of Vodka including its history and country of origin likely shares consumers’ attitudes toward Vodka and subsequent purchasing behaviors. For instance, one who is used to Russian Vodka would be reluctant to switch to Australian brand given that Australia is not known for Vodka production. Hence, the following hypotheses are made: H2a: COO has a positive influence on consumer attitude


towards Vodka. H2b: COO has a positive influence on Vodka purchase frequency. H2c: COO has a positive influence on Vodka brand preference. 2.3. Packaging Packaging has been widely discussed in the relevant literature, with respects to its role and significance in marketing, and the consumer decision-making process (i.e. Gherasim, 2011; Silayoi et al., 2007; Underwood, 2003; Wang, 2013). Packaging is strongly related to brand as it plays a considerable role in communicating brand personality through multiple ‘structural and visual elements’ (Underwood, 2003). Studies have found that approximately 70% of consumers make their choice of daily commodities at point of purchase (Clement, 2007; Silayoi et al., 2007), “85% purchase without touching other alternatives, and 90% without picking up the item to view it before purchasing” (Clement, 2007, p. 917). Packaging significantly affects consumers' decisions at the point of purchase (Garber and Lawrence, 1995) by creating a point of differentiation, particularly in saturated markets (Mishra et al., 2012). Studies by Andrews et al. (1990) and Scholes-Balog et al. (2012) found the change incurred in belief and behavior concerning alcohol related fatality and sickness, with the introduction of warning labels on alcohol packaging. Other researchers (Davis et al., 2005; Kravets, 2012) also investigated the relationship of Russian Vodka labels with their political, ideological and societal contexts, and the role they play in building a national identity. The role of packaging as a cue to product quality has been extensively researched (Ampuero et al., 2006; Honea et al., 2012; Venter et al., 2011). Wang (2013) states that packaging directly affects the way consumers perceive the quality of food products and its associated brand, and in some cases packaging has been found to be of greater importance than the product itself (Gherasim, 2011). When subjected to extrinsic cues, consumers are likely to form product benefit perceptions; influencing subsequent purchase behaviors (Sehrawet and Kundu, 2007). On this basis, this research proposes the following hypotheses: H3a: Packaging has a positive influence on consumers' attitude towards Vodka. H3b: Packaging has a positive influence on Vodka purchase frequency. H3c: Packing has a positive influence on Vodka brand preference. 2.4. Social media Today consumers live their lives both online and offline, drawing equally from both the online and offline environment when it comes to collecting information (Powers et al., 2012). Social media has been acknowledged as being potentially the most powerful tool at a business disposal (Chung and Austria, 2010). Despite this, there is still some contention and a lack of understanding as to how and why consumers use social media, particularly in relation to advertising messages (Chung and Austria, 2010). Social media is changing the way that businesses interact and communicate with consumers (Rapp et al., 2013). The development of social media as an actively used marketing tool has become a point of controversy and interest in certain industries. The effect of marketing on consumption of alcohol for example, and the place of government policy in regulating marketing efforts has been a contested issue (Brodmerkel et al., 2013). With alcohol brands directing their marketing attention away from traditional marketing streams, these issues have become particularly prevalent with the introduction and increased use of social media marketing, and its influence on younger target

9

audiences (Nicholls, 2012). Previous studies have investigated the influence and role of social media marketing of alcohol products on youth drinking (Brodmerkel et al., 2013; Mart, 2011; McCreanor et al., 2013). However, this topic is still in its infancy and exploratory stages (Brodmerkel et al., 2013; McCreanor et al., 2013). A study by Bradley et al. (2012) found that the most common view of social media among the 250 businesses in their study was that of a threat. More than ever information can come from anywhere, at any time and although joy is the predominantly expressed post-purchase emotion, consumers will just as readily share negative feelings resulting from products failings (Powers et al., 2012) putting businesses under more pressure than ever. Despite the increasing talk and intrigue of social media, little is known about how marketers can best utilize this new medium (Goodrich and de Mooij, 2014). Phan (2011) found that social media ‘likes’ enhance purchase intention. Social media use and interaction has also been found to positively contribute to brand perception and consumer purchasing preference (Rapp et al., 2013). Consistent with this view, the following hypotheses are offered: H4a: Social media has a positive influence on consumers' attitude towards Vodka. H4b: Social media has a positive influence on Vodka purchase frequency. H4c: Social media has a positive influence Vodka brand preference. 2.5. Consumer attitudes and loyalty The theory of planned behavior (Ajzen, 2011) indicates that an individual's attitudes are associated with his or her behaviors. Consistently, consumers’ attitudes towards a brand or product likely predicts their buying behaviors. From business revenue perspective, customers' loyal behaviors in their purchase and consumption drive business growth and profitability (Bennett et al., 2002; Hallowell, 1996). Hence, customers’ positive attitudes likely generate customer loyalty and subsequently company profitability. Customer loyalty refers to consumers’ repurchasing or repatronizing a preferred product/service from the brand consistently in the future “… despite situational influences and marketing efforts having the potential to cause switching behavior” (Oliver, 1999, p. 34). It can also be referred to as brand loyalty, reflecting a customer’s long-term commitment to a brand (So et al., 2013). Customer commitment is multidimensional, including behavioral and attitudinal commitment or loyalty (Dick and Basu, 1994; Bennett et al., 2002). Behavioral loyalty indicates customers' repurchasing the brand as a habit or convenience, reflecting on purchasing frequency of a brand. Attitudinal loyalty indicates a customer's attitudes towards the brand, reflecting on his or her preference for a brand or intention to repurchase or to recommend the brand to relatives and friends when situational factors (i.e. relocation) refrain him or her from further purchase (see Bennett et al., 2002; Prentice et al., 2012). Behavioral loyalty directly brings the business revenues though customers’ frequent purchase of the same brand. Attitudinal loyalty affects profitability through intention to repurchase and referral of the brand. Capturing both loyal behaviors is important for business growth. Research (i.e. Baldinger et al., 1996; Bandyopadhyay et al., 2007) generally agree that attitudinal loyalty influences behavioral loyalty. Indeed, in the alcohol context, there are numerous spirit types and brands available for consumers. The ultimate purchase is dependent upon individual attitudes towards and preference for a particular type of spirit and brand (Muller et al., 2010; Payne et al., 2008). Attitudes affect alcohol preference which drives purchase and consumption (Melo et al., 2010; Siegel et al., 2011). The

10


foregoing discussion informs the following hypotheses: H5a: Consumers' attitude towards Vodka has a significant influence brand preference. H5b: Consumers' attitude towards Vodka has a significant influence on purchasing frequency. H5c: Vodka brand preference has a positive influence on purchasing frequency.

3. Research methodology 3.1. Sample Online survey was undertaken for the study. Compared to other traditional survey methods such as mail, telephone and fax, online surveys are desirable because they have wide reach, are easy to complete, can include a wide array of different question styles and complexities, draw a high level of complex data, have the potential for high speed returns and come at very low cost (Cobanoglu et al., 2003; Fowler, 2009; Ilieva et al., 2002). As no accessible sampling frame for consumers that have recently purchased Vodka could be found, the social networking site (SNS) members of Facebook have been identified as being viable for social research investigating hard-to-reach samples (Bhutta, 2012; Baltar et al., 2012). Facebook offers a very large and diverse range of easily accessible individuals. A non-probability sample was used, utilizing a virtual snowballing technique as outlined by Baltar et al. (2012). The sample consisted of individuals aged 18 years and older who could legally consume or purchase Vodka in Australia, and who have access to the Internet. The sample was achieved by the use of screening questions, which can be used to ensure that only responses from the required population are analyzed (Van Selm et al., 2006). It is crucial to this study that the respondents have past experience with Vodka purchasing so that they have knowledge and experience relevant to the topic under investigation. The present study draws its sample size from a combination of methods to ensure a sufficient sample that is achievable within the constraints of the study. This study aims for a sample size of 400 and achieves 95% confidence as proposed by Weisberg and Bowen (1977). This sample target is also in accordance with Krejcie et al. (1970), who suggest that the sample size should increase as population size increases, plateauing for a maximum sample size of approximately 380. Because this study uses an online survey of selected Facebook users, the entire potential sample population is approximately 14 million (Cowling, 2015), thereby, the sample goal of 400 will both meet the recommended confidence requirements (Weisberg and Bowen, 1986) and account for the population size and instruments (Krejcie et al., 1970). Prior to commencement of the study, an ethics application including a detailed description of the procedure and a copy of the questionnaire, debriefing statement and consent information statement was prepared for and granted by the relevant ethics authority to ensure the study was ethically appropriate since alcohol drinking could have negative connotation when consumed excessively. 3.2. Measures The main variable items excluding demographic details and screening questions were measured on a 7-point Likert scale with anchors of 1 (strongly disagree) to 7 (strongly agree). Using the 7-point Likert scale enables the researchers to employ a variety of statistical techniques that can be applied to both nominal and ordinal scale data (Malhotra, 2003). This study has adapted measures from existing studies that have been pre-tested for validity

and reliability. All the scale items are adapted and reworded to suit the purpose of this study. Branding was measured using the items adapted from Rapp et al. (2013) and Wu (2015), including, for instance, “I choose Vodka based on the brand's reputation.” The two studies refer to brand reputation as consumer perceptions of the brand as reflected by brand associations and held in the consumers' memory, and a strategic asset that creates competitive advantage. Country of origin was measured by adapting items from Köksal and Tatar (2014) (e.g., “I will pay more for vodka that I think comes from a country that produces better quality vodka”). Country of origin in Köksal and Tatar (2014) is described as having two cognitive effects or roles. Firstly, country of origin can act as an informational cue, indicating quality, dependability and value. Secondly it can relate to the customer and arouse a sense of national sympathy or loyalty. Packaging was measured by items including “Buying vodka with extravagant packaging makes me feel good about myself”. This scale is adapted from Bloch et al. (2003), which evaluated packaging as a visual esthetic based on characteristics such as appearance, proportion and color, rather than focusing on engineering related qualities. Social medial was assessed using a 5-item scale (e.g., “I use social media to enhance my relationship with particular brands of vodka”). The items were adapted from Rapp et al. (2013). Retailers can use social media to engage and interact with their customers and additionally, initiate dialog and engagement between the retailer and customer, or customer and customer. In turn, this may help develop interpersonal relationships and active engagement, increase exposure and improve retailer performance. Consumers’ attitudes towards Vodka was measured by a single item in this study, “Vodka is a highly regarded spirit”. Vodka purchase frequency was assessed by two items including “I regularly purchase Vodka” and “I intend to buy a particular brand frequently”. Measure of brand preference was adapted from Jalilvand and Samiei (2012), and Kumar et al. (2009), including 3 items (e.g., “I will recommend others to try this product/brand”). The reliabilities for these scales are reported in next section. 3.3. Procedure The online survey of Facebook users were reached both directly and indirectly through private messages and public group posts. Potential respondents were approached and sent private messages to request their participation in the survey and to pass it on to their relevant associates and friends. Specifically targeted Facebook groups and pages were also approached e.g. The Melbourne Bartender Exchange, Dan Murphy's and University Stalkerspaces. Administrators were messaged to request permission before posting on private groups. The questionnaire was made accessible through a hyperlink to the survey hosting service SurveyMonkey. This platform allowed easy access for the respondent through a simple point and click format and provided readily analyzable, computerized data. Of a total of 454 individuals who accessed the survey, 355 usable responses were generated. The responses with missing values were removed from the data set as suggested by Acock (2005). Out of usable responses, females take up 64.5%. Interestingly, 82% of respondents were between the ages of 18 and 25, which may be reflective of both the active user group in the sampling frame (Facebook users) and of the market of Vodka drinkers. Half of respondents hold university degrees, however, the majority has a relevant low income. This may be attributed to the majority of young respondents who held relatively low-paid jobs as new university graduates.


4. Analysis and results Structural equation modeling was conducted to test the hypotheses. Following the two-step approach suggested by Anderson and Gerbing (1988), the construct reliabilities and validities were tested prior to testing the proposed relationships between the variables. Confirmatory Factor Analysis and maximum likelihood estimation were used to determine the model fit (Hu and Bentler, 1999). The results of standardized residual co-variances and modification index values indicate no conspicuously significant changes to the model. The average variance extracted for each factor was over .50, indicative of adequate convergence (Fornell and Larcker, 1981). The composite reliability was acceptable for each of the factors. All items have a significant loading on their corresponding constructs, demonstrating adequate convergent validity (see Table 1). The correlation values between factors in Table 2 indicate that they are empirically distinct constructs, and supports discriminant validity. Most of the variables of interest are significantly correlated except the relationship between social media and brand loyalty. Structural equation modeling was undertaken to test Hypotheses 1–5. The model testing shows a reasonably good model fit (X2 ¼ 359.94, p ¼.0005, df ¼150, IFI¼.95, TFI¼.95 CFI ¼.95, RMSEA ¼.06). The results (shown in Table 3 and Fig. 1) from the testing show that branding has a significant effect on consumers’ attitude towards Vodka (β ¼.29, p o.0005), on brand preference (β ¼.27, p o.0005) as well as on purchasing frequency (β ¼ .15, p o.05). Hypotheses 1a–c are supported. Interestingly country of origin has no significant relationships with any of the outcome variables. Hypotheses 2a–c are rejected. Although packaging is not significantly related to consumers' attitudes towards Vodka and purchase frequency, it affects consumers' brand preference (β ¼ .13, p o.05). H3c is supported. In the case of social media, it has a significant effect on purchasing frequency (β ¼ .14, po .01), but not on attitudes and brand preference. Hence, H4b is confirmed. In testing the relationships among consumers' attitudes towards Vodka, brand preference and purchase frequency, the results show that consumers’ attitude does affect Vodka brand preference (β ¼.31, p o.0005) and purchasing frequency (β ¼.26, p o.0005). Brand preference has a substantial effect on purchasing frequency (β ¼ .63, p o.0005).

11

As this research is focused on consumers in Australia, further analyzes were undertaken to gain insight into how Australian consumers perceive Vodka as one type of spirits. Their perceptions analyzed here include 1) perception of Vodka is the best spirit; 2) monthly Vodka purchase frequency; 3)consumption frequency by friends; and 4)perception of Vodka as a highly regarded drink. The results are presented in Fig. 2 below. The results show that of the 355 respondents, there was a standard distribution of opinion of Vodka being the best spirit with approximately 25% of respondents being on either extremely high perception or low perception and 50% being indifferent. However, a large segment of the respondents hold Vodka in high regard (41%) and a considerable percentage of respondents considered their friends to be Vodka drinkers (39%).

5. Discussion and conclusion The study investigates how the relevant marketing factors influence consumers’ attitude and behaviors towards Vodka. Specifically, the research examines the influence of Vodka branding, country of origin, packaging and social media on consumers' attitudes and Vodka purchasing frequency and brand preference. Further testing is undertaken to understand the relationship between consumers’ attitude and loyalty behaviors. Results show that branding has significant effects on consumers’ attitudes towards Vodka, their brand preference and purchase frequency. Surprisingly country of origin has no effects on any of the outcome variables. Packaging has a significant impact on brand preference; nevertheless social media influences Vodka purchasing frequency. The testing of consumer attitudes and loyal behaviors shows that positive attitude significantly influences consumers' brand preference and frequency of purchasing Vodka, and that brand preference has a substantial impact on purchase frequency. The post hoc analyzes show that Vodka is a highly regarded and widely consumed spirit among Australian consumers. Discussion of these relationships is as follows. Findings of this study show that Vodka branding is the most outstanding factor in influencing consumers’ attitudes towards Vodka and loyal behaviors including brand preference and purchasing frequency. Although no prior studies have tested these

Table 1 Confirmatory factor analyzes results. Variables

Item

FL

α

CR

AVE

Branding

I choose vodka based on the brand's trustworthiness I choose vodka based on the brand's reputation I choose vodka based on the brand's history -

.67 .87 .83

.82

.84

.63

COO

I will pay more for a vodka that I think comes from a country that produces better quality vodka Some countries produce better quality vodka than others -

.53 .99

.68

.76

.63

Packaging

Buying vodka with extravagant packaging makes me feel good about myself I associate qualities in packaging with qualities I see in myself When I see vodka packaging that is really well designed I have a strong urge to buy it A vodka’s packaging design can be a source of satisfaction for me I use social media to enhance my relationship with particular brands of vodka I use social media to enhance my understanding of particular brands of vodka I use social media to follow vodka sales promotions I use social media to keep up to date with current vodka product releases I use social media to improve my relationship with alcohol retailers -

.84 .85 .72 .69 .85 .84 .84 .89 .73

.85

.86

.61

.91

.90

.69

Purchasing frequency

I regularly purchase Vodka I tend to buy a particular brand frequently

.68 .93

.77

.79

.66

Brand preference

I would buy this product/brand rather than any other brands available I am willing to recommend others to buy this product/brand I intend to purchase this product/brand in the future -

.76 .81 .78

.82

.83

.61

Social media

COO¼ country of origin, α¼ Cronbach's alpha, FL ¼factor loadings, CR¼ composite reliability, Ave¼ average variance extracted.

12


Table 2 The correlations among the study variables.

Branding Coo Packaging Social medial Attitude Frequency Preference

Mean

SD

Branding

Coo

Packaging

Social

Attitude

Frequency

4.52 4.79 3.83 2.28 4.96 4.08 5.20

1.34 1.36 1.45 1.24 1.37 1.54 1.06

.41nn .36nn .17nn .28nn .17nn .35nn

.27nn .12nn .14nn .20nn .24nn

.37nn .16nn .16nn .25nn

.11n .17nn .10

.46nn .37nn

.52nn

Social ¼ social media, Frequency ¼ purchase frequency, preference ¼ brand preference. n

po .05. po .001.

nn

Table 3 The relationships among the study variables. Variables

Branding COO

Attitude Brand preference Purchase frequency

.29nnn .27nnn .15n

Packaging Social media

.05 .04 .01 .13n .06

.05

.08 .01 .14nn

Attitude Brand preference

.31nnn .26nnn

.63nnn

n

¼ p o.05. ¼ po .01. nnn ¼ p o .0005. nn

Fig. 2. Vodka perceptions among Australian consumers. Note: 1¼ perception of Vodka is the best spirit; 2¼monthly Vodka purchase frequency; 3¼consumption frequency by friends; 4¼ perception of Vodka as a highly regarded drink. Series 1¼low perception, series 2¼ medium perception, series 3¼ high perception. The perception is represented in percentage.

Fig. 1. The structural relationships among the study variables.

relationships in the context of Vodka drinks, these findings are consistent with those reported in Peț et al. (2014), which tested the relationship of brand and purchase intention in the context of soft-drinks. The results are also in accordance with previous studies that developing brand meaning and positive association is conceivably the most important role of marketing in the alcohol industry (Lin et al., 2011; Siegel et al., 2013). Furthermore, these findings correlate to the global trend in Vodka consumption, which has seen a rise in premium (marketing focused) Vodka segment, while the economy Vodka segment has been in decline. The insignificant relationships between country of origin and consumers’ attitude and purchasing behaviors are rather surprising. The finding may indicate that not all Vodka produced in the same country are perceived to be preferred brands. The role of packaging as a cue to product quality has been extensively researched (Ampuero et al., 2006; Venter et al., 2011; Honea et al.,

2012). However, these studies have largely focused on the packaging of food products. The findings of this study indicate that packaging is of relatively low importance to the purchase of Vodka. Packaging and brand are not mutually exclusive. In many cases, packaging has been found to act as a cue to product quality (Ampuero et al., 2006; Venter et al., 2011; Honea et al., 2012) and related to brand by acting as a communicator of brand personality (Underwood, 2003). Considering this, it is plausible that packaging plays a significant role in shaping consumers’ brand preference as shown in this study. Social media in this study shows a significant influence on purchasing frequency. Marketing through social media today is popular. Social media is particularly a powerful tool convening information. Consumers today rely heavily on social media to obtain products or brands related information which influences their purchase intention. This finding is consistent with that of Wang et al., 2012. Their study shows that the reviews posted by peers or anyone who had prior experience with certain product or brand have significant impacts on purchase intention. Interestingly, social media has no effect on consumers’ attitudes or brand preference. The mean value for social media is also rather low as shown in Table 2, which may indicate that consumers have rather low evaluation of social medial in the alcohol context. This finding may suggest that social media marketing of Vodka products is not largely responsible for Vodka consumption; consumers do not actively engage in social media interaction of product marketing agents to help them make decisions. The finding that consumers' attitude affects the loyal behaviors including brand preference and purchase frequency is consistent with the proposed theory of planned behaviors. The significant


relationship between brand preference (so called attitudinal loyalty) and purchase frequency (behavioral loyalty) also conforms to the finding from prior research (e.g. Bandyopadhyay et al., 2007). From marketing and business perspective, identifying factors that affect consumers’ attitude would be imperative to boost Vodka sale and brand loyalty.

6. Implications and future research Findings of this study have significant implications for the relevant literature and alcohol industry practitioners. Essentially, branding is important to build consumer perception/attitude and brand loyalty; packaging can be used to build brand preference. Social media marketing influences purchase frequency. Country of origin is the least important factor in influencing consumers’ attitudes and behaviors. Most Vodka brands in Australia are imported. This finding may give marketers and practitioners a useful guidance on what to look for when importing or producing Vodka. Ultimately, consumers’ attitudes towards Vodka affects their buying intention and behaviors, which is consistent with the theory of planed behaviors. The findings of the study have particular implications for Vodka marketers. Marketing efforts should be focused on building brand awareness. Although many Vodka brands have rather appealing and unique packaging, the factors that contributes to consumers' ultimate purchase are branding and social media. Packaging, however, is important in shaping consumers' brand preference so the cost associated with packaging can be justified in this sense. The study also caution practitioners to seek for more appropriate marketing promotions in spirits (i.e. Vodka) markets. This study expands on the preceding literature investigating how marketing factors influences alcohol purchase and brand loyalty. This is the first study to examine the effects of marketing factors on purchasing of a sub-category alcohol product (e.g. Vodka, Gin, and Rum). This paves the way for future research to further explore the unique influence of specific marketing factors and strategies on purchase behavior across specific product lines; improving and expanding on the existing knowledge of the unique intricacies of marketing specific products categories. The findings of this study provide researchers with insights into the marketing factors in the alcohol market and their unique influence on consumer behaviors. In particular, the present study shows that the theory of planned behavior model applies to the alcohol context. 6.1. Limitations and future research Although this study underwent a rigorous process, a few limitations are noted. The first limitation to this study is the sample, which had a skewed age distribution; falling largely within the 18– 25 year old range of low-income students, and leaving older participants inadequately represented. Due to the skewed sample, generalizing the findings is cautious. Nevertheless, this study provides valuable insights into the behavior of young Australian consumers. Secondly, the scope of this study was limited both by the conceptual model; incorporating only four marketing factors specified, and also the online survey, excluding a non-palpable situation. The findings should therefore not be rashly applied to other purchase circumstances (e.g. point of sale), where the studied factors might be of more or less significance. Future studies should aim to unveil which other marketing factors, beyond those presented in this study influence alcohol purchase. A more encompassing conceptual model should investigate the significance and influence of these factors on the global population. This model could then be cross-tested against other sub-category alcohol industries (e.g. whisky and gin) to

13

provide marketers valuable insights into the unique contribution towards purchase and brand loyalty of different factors across different product lines.

References Acock, A.,C., 2005. Working with missing values. J. Marriage Fam. 67 (4), 1012–1028. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1741–3737.2005.00191.x. Ajzen, I., 2011. Theory of planned behavior. Handb Theor Soc Psychol Vol One, 1, 438. Akdeniz, B., Calantone, R.J., Voorhees, C.M., 2013. Effectiveness of marketing cues on consumer perceptions of quality: the moderating roles of brand reputation and third-party information. Psychol. Mark. 30 (1), 76–89. http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1002/mar.20590. Ampuero, O., Vila, N., 2006. Consumer perceptions of product packaging. J. Consum. Mark. 23 (2), 102–114. Anderson, J.C., Gerbing, D.W., 1988. Structural equation modeling in practice: a review and recommended two-step approach. Psychol. Bull. 103 (3), 411. Andrews, J.C., Netemeyer, R.G., 1990. Believability and attitudes toward alcohol warning label information: the role of persuasive communications theory. J. Public Policy Mark. 9 (1), 1–15. Bagdziunaite, D., Strande J.A., Auning-Hansen, J., Clement, J., and Zoëga Ramsøy, T., 2014. What counts most? How price, country of origin and nationality dynamically affect consumer preference. In: Proceedings of NeuroPsychoEconomics Conference, 39–39. Baldinger, A.L., Rubinson, J., 1996. Brand loyalty: the link between attitude and behavior. J. Advert. Res. 36 (6), 22–35. Baltar, F., Brunet, I., 2012. Social research 2.0 virtual snowball sampling method using Facebook. Internet Res. 22 (1), 57–74. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/ 10662241211199960. Bandyopadhyay, S., Martell, M., 2007. Does attitudinal loyalty influence behavioral loyalty? A theoretical and empirical study. J. Retail. Consum. Serv. 14 (1), 35–44. Bennett, Rebekah, Bove, Liliana, 2002. Identifying the key issues for measuring loyalty. Australas. J. Mark. Res. 9 (2), 27–44. Bhutta, C.B., 2012. Not by the book: Facebook as a sampling frame. Sociol. Methods Res. 41 (1), 57–88. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0049124112440795. Bissett, S., Wood, S., Cox, R., Scott, D., Cassell, J., 2013. Calculating alcohol risk in a visualization tool for promoting healthy behavior. Patient Educ. Couns. 92 (2), 167–173. Bloch, P.H., Brunel, F.F., Arnold, T.J., 2003. Individual differences in the centrality of visual product aesthetics: concept and measurement. J. Consum. Res. 29 (4), 551–565. http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/346250. Bradley, A.J., McDonald, M.P., 2012. Most organizations still fear social media. Harv. Bus. Rev. (Retrieved from) 〈https://hbr.org/2012/07/most-organizations-stillfear?utm_source¼ feedburnerandutm_medium ¼feedandutm_ campaign ¼Feed%253A þ harvardbusiness þ%2528HBR.org%2529#〉 Brodmerkel, S., Carah, N., 2013. Alcohol brands on Facebook: the challenges of regulating brands on social media. J. Public Aff. 13 (3), 272–281. Bruwer, J., Buller, C., 2013. Product involvement, brand loyalty, and country-oforigin brand preferences of Japanese wine consumers. J. Wine Res. 24 (1), 38–58. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09571264.2012.717221. Chung, C., Austria, K., 2010. Social media gratification and attitude toward social media marketing messages: a study of the effect of social media marketing messages on online shopping value. In: Proceedings of the Northeast Business and Economics Association. Casswell, S., 2004. Alcohol brands in young peoples’ everyday lives: new developments in marketing. Alcohol Alcohol. 39 (6), 471–476. http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1093/alcalc/agh101. Chu, W., Choi, B., Song, M.R., 2005. The role of on-line retailer brand and infomediary reputation in increasing consumer purchase intention. Int. J. Electron. Commer. 9 (3), 115–127. Clement, J., 2007. Visual influence on in-store buying decisions: an eye-track experiment on the visual influence of packaging design. J. Mark. Manag. 23 (9/10), 917–928. http://dx.doi.org/10.1362/026725707 250395. Cobanoglu, N., Cobanoglu, C., 2003. The effect of incentives in web surveys: application and ethical considerations. Int. J. Mark. Res. 45 (4) (Retrieved from) 〈http://web.a.ebscohost.com.ezproxy.lib.swin.edu.au/ehost/pdfviewer/pdfview er?sid¼ bd06df4c-a034–48fb-a50c-2612a9913d69% 40sessionmgr4003andvid ¼ 1andhid ¼ 4112〉. Cowling, D., 2015. Social Media Statistics Australia – June 2015, Retrieved from 〈http://www.socialmedianews.com.au/social-media-statistics-australia-june2015/〉. Cunnington, J., 2014. White spirits; difficult times but opportunities lie ahead, Retrieved from 〈http://www.portal.euromonitor.com.ez.library.latrobe.edu.au/por tal/analysis/tab#〉. Cunnington, J., 2015. 2014: Improving but Sluggish Growth for Global Spirits Part 2, Retrieved from file:///Users/nikolaihandsjuk/Desktop/Euromonitor% 20International%20-%20Analysis%20Vodka%20decline%20Whisky%20increase.html. Davis, T., Kravets, O., 2005. Bridges to displaced meaning: the reinforcing roles of myth and marketing in russian vodka labels. Adv. Consum Res. 32 (1) 480-480. De Chernatony, L., 2009. Towards the holy grail of defining'brand’. Mark. Theory 9 (1), 101–105. De Chernatony, L., Dall'Olmo Riley, F., 1998. Defining a "brand": beyond the literature with experts’ interpretations. J. Mark. Manag. 14 (5), 417–443.

14


Dick, A.S., Basu, K., 1994. Customer loyalty: toward an integrated conceptual framework. J. Acad. Mark. Sci. 22 (2), 99–113. Encyclopædia Britannica, 2015. Vodka, Retrieved October 18, 2015, from 〈http:// www.britannica.com/topic/vodka〉. Fornell, C., Larcker, D.F., 1981. Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. J. Mark. Res., 39–50. Fowler, F.J., 2009. Methods of data collection, 4th ed. Sage Publications., Thousand Oaks. Gallagher, P., 2014. Gin on the rise to beat vodka as spirit of the age, Retrieved October 18, 2015, from 〈http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/food-anddrink/news/gin-on-the-rise-to-beat-vodka-as-spirit-of-the-age-9537131.html〉. Garretson, J.A., Burton, S., 1998. Alcoholic beverage sales promotion: an initial investigation of the role of warning messages and brand characters among consumers over and under the legal drinking age. J. Public Policy Mark. 17 (1), 35–47. Gherasim, T., 2011. An approach of the product view through the perspective of the marketing - mix. Econ. Transdiscipl. Cogn. 14 (1), 402–409. Gin and Vodka. (2015). The Vodka Market: A Global Picture, Retrieved October 18, 2015, from 〈http://www.ginvodka.org/factsheets/Vodka_Market_Global_Pic ture.asp〉. Goodrich, K., de Mooij, M., 2014. How ‘social’ are social media? A cross-cultural comparison of online and offline purchase decision influences. J. Mark. Commun. 20 (1–2), 103–116. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13527266.2013.797773. Hallowell, R., 1996. The relationships of customer satisfaction, customer loyalty, and profitability: an empirical study. Int. J. Serv. Ind. Manag. 7 (4), 27–42. Hamlin, R.P., Leith, K.J., 2006. Studying the country-of-origin cue in action: an experimental examination of wine evaluations in the United Kingdom and New Zealand. Place Brand 2 (4), 311–320. Honea, H., Horsky, S., 2012. The power of plain: intensifying product experience with neutral aesthetic context. Mark. Lett. 23 (1), 223–235. http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1007/s11002–011-9149-y. Hu, L.T., Bentler, P.M., 1999. Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Struct. Equ. Model. 6 (1), 1–55. Ilieva, J., Baron, S., Healey, N.M., 2002. Online surveys in marketing research: pros and cons. Int. J. Mark. Res. 44 (3), 361–382 (Retrieved from) 〈http://web.b.ebs cohost.com.ezproxy.lib.swin.edu.au/ehost/pdfviewer/pdfviewer? sid ¼cf393882–6db8–41ec-ba6c-de41ce640251% 40sessionmgr198andvid ¼2andhid ¼ 124〉. Jalilvand, M.R., Samiei, N., 2012. The effect of electronic word of mouth on brand image and purchase intention: an empirical study in the automobile industry in Iran. Mark. Intell. Plan. 30 (4), 460–476. Jones, S.C., Lynch, M., 2007. A pilot study investigating of the nature of point-of-sale alcohol promotions in bottle shops in a large Australian regional city. Aust. N.Z. J. Public Health 31 (4), 318–321. Katikireddi, S.V., Bond, L., Hilton, S., 2014. Changing policy framing as a deliberate strategy for public health advocacy: a qualitative policy case study of minimum unit pricing of alcohol. Milbank Q. 92 (2), 250–283. Koubaa, Y., Methamem, R.B., Fort, F., 2015. Multidimensional structures of brand and country images, and their effects on product evaluation. Int. J. Mark. Res. 57 (1), 95–124. Kravets, O., 2012. Russia's “pure spirit”: vodka branding and its politics. J. Macromarket. 32 (4), 361–376. Krejcie, R.V., Morgan, D.W., 1970. Determining sample size for research activities. Educ. Psychol. Meas. 30, 607–610. Kumar, A., Lee, H., Kim, Y., 2009. Indian consumers’ purchase intention toward a United States versus local brand. J. Bus. Res. 62 (5), 521–527. http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1016/j.jbusres.2008.06.018. Li, W., Monroe, K.B., Chan, D.K.S., 1994. The effects of country of origin, brand and price information: a cognitive-affective model of buying intentions. Adv. Consum Res. 21, 449–457. M., Nisen (2014). How whisky defeated vodka in the battle for American hearts and wallets, Retrieved October 18, 2015, from 〈http://qz.com/262231/how-whiskeydefeated-vodka-for-american-hearts-and-wallets/〉. Müller, S., Piontek, D., Pabst, A., Baumeister, S.E., Kraus, L., 2010. Changes in alcohol consumption and beverage preference among adolescents after the introduction of the alcopops tax in Germany. Addiction 105 (7), 1205–1213. Malandrakis, S., 2015. Alcoholic Drinks 2015 Preview for Spirits: 5 Key Trends, Retrieved from file:///Users/nikolaihandsjuk/Desktop/Euromonitor% 20International%20-%20Analysis.html. Malhotra, N.K., 2003. Marketing Research: An Applied Orientation, Upper Saddle River. Prentice Hall, Pearson. Mart, S.M., 2011. Alcohol Marketing in the 21st Century: New Methods, Old Problems. Subst. Use Misuse 46 (7), 889–892. http://dx.doi.org/10.3109/ 10826084.2011.570622. McCreanor, T., Lyons, A., Griffin, C., Goodwin, I., Moewaka, B., Hutton, F., 2013. Youth drinking cultures, social networking and alcohol marketing: implications for public health. Crit. Public Health 23 (1), 110–120. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/ 09581596.2012.748883. Melo, L., Colin, J., Delahunty, C., Forde, C., Cox, D.N., 2010. Lifetime wine drinking, changing attitudes and associations with current wine consumption: a pilot study indicating how experience may drive current behaviour. Food Qual. Prefer. 21 (7), 784–790. Mishra, H.G., Jain, D., 2012. Impact of packaging in consumer decision making process of namkeen products. J. Mark. Commun. 7 (3), 48–63. Nicholls, J., 2012. Everyday, everywhere: alcohol marketing and social media – current trends. Alcohol Alcohol 47 (4), 486–493. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/alcalc/ags043.

Oliver, R.L., 1999. Whence consumer loyalty? J. Mark., 33–44. Payne, B.K., Govorun, O., Arbuckle, N.L., 2008. Automatic attitudes and alcohol: does implicit liking predict drinking? Cogn. Emot. 22 (2), 238–271. Peț, E., Străin, L.M., Peț, I., Sîrbu, C., Buzamăt, G., 2014. Brand – an important factor in buying decision. Agric. Manag. Lucr. Stiint. Manag. Agric. 16 (2), 101–103. Phan, M., 2011. Do social media enhance consumer's perception and purchase intentions of luxury fashion brands? J. Decis. Mak. 36 (1), 81–84. Phillips, B.J., McQuarrie, E.F., Griffin, W.G., 2014. The face of the brand: how art directors understand visual brand identity. J. Advert. 43 (4), 318–332. http://dx. doi.org/10.1080/00913367.2013.867824. Powers, T., Advinculla, D., Austin, M.S., Graiko, S., Snyder, J., 2012. Digital and social media in the purchase decision process a special report from the advertising research foundation. J. Advert. Res. 52 (4), 479–489. http://dx.doi.org/10.2501/ JAR-52–4-479–489. Prentice, C., King, B.E., Ohtsuka, K., 2012. Casino service quality, tiered customer segments, and casino player retention. Serv. Mark. Q. 33 (4), 277–291. Pridemore, W.A., 2002. Vodka and violence: alcohol consumption and homicide rates in Russia. Am. J. Public Health 92 (12), 1921–1930. Rapp, A., Beitelspacher, L.S., Grewal, D., Hughes, D.E., 2013. Understanding social media effects across seller, retailer, and consumer interactions. J. Acad. Mark. Res. 41 (5), 547–566. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11747–013-0326–9. Renaud, S.D., de Lorgeril, M., 1992. Wine, alcohol, platelets, and the French paradox for coronary heart disease. Lancet 339 (8808), 1523–1526. Schaefer, A., 1997. Do demographics have an impact on country of origin effects? J. Mark. Manag 13 (8), 813–834. Scholes-Balog, K.E., Heerde, J.A., Hemphill, S.A., 2012. Alcohol warning labels: unlikely to affect alcohol-related beliefs and behaviours in adolescents. Aust. N.Z. J. Public Health 36 (6), 524–529. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1753– 6405.2012.00934.x. Sehrawet, M., Kundu, S.C., 2007. Buying behaviour of rural and urban consumers in India: the impact of packaging. Int. J. Consum. Stud. 31 (6), 630–638. Sharma, B., Raciti, M., O’Hara, R., Reinhard, K., Davies, F., 2013. University students’ perceived susceptibility to alcohol retail sales promotions. J. Consum Mark. 30 (3), 283–294. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/07363761311328955. Siegel, M., DeJong, W., Naimi, T.S., Heeren, T., Rosenbloom, D.L., Ross, C., Jernigan, D. H., 2011. Alcohol brand preferences of underage youth: results from a pilot survey among a national sample. Subst. Abus. 32 (4), 191–201. Siegel, M., DeJong, W., Naimi, T.S., Fortunato, E.K., Albers, A.B., Heeren, T., Rosenbloom, D.L., Ross, C., Ostrofff, J., Rodkin, S., King, C., Borzekowski, D.L., Rimal, R. N., Padon, A.A., Eck, R.H., Jernigan, D.H., 2013. Brand-Specific Consumption of Alcohol Among Underage Youth in the United States. Alcohol.: Clin. Exp. Res. 37 (7), 1195–1203. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/acer.12084. Silayoi, P., Speece, M., 2007. The importance of packaging attributes: a conjoint analysis approach. Eur. J. Mark. 41 (11/12), 1495–1517. http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1108/03090560710821279. So, J.T., Andrew, G.P., Yap, S., 2013. Corporate branding, emotional attachment and brand loyalty: The case of luxury fashion branding. J. Fash. Mark. Manag. 17 (4), 403–423. Todor, R.D., 2014. The importance of branding and rebranding for strategic marketing. Bull. Transilv. Univ. Brasov. V Econ. Sci. 7 (2), 59–64. Underwood, R.L., 2003. The communicative power of product packaging: creating brand identity via lived and mediated experience. J. Mark. Theory Pract. 11 (1), 62–76. Van Selm, M., Jankowski, N.W., 2006. Conducting online surveys. Qual. Quant. 40 (3), 435–456. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11135–005-8081–8. Veale, R., and Quester, P. (2009). Does consumer experience match expectations? Predicting the influence of price and country of origin on consumer buyer behavior. Advances in Consumer Research - Asia-Pacific Conference Proceedings, 8, 187–187. Veith, C., Lianu, C., 2013. Origin of the product and the buying decision. Theor. Appl. Econ. 20 (11), 147–164. Venter, K., van der Merwe, D., de Beer, H., Kempen, E., Bosman, M., 2011. Consumers perceptions of food packaging: an exploratory investigation in Potchefstroom, South Africa. Int. J. Consum. Stud. 35 (3), 273–281. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/ j.1470–6431.2010.00936.x. Wang, E.S.T., 2013. The influence of visual packaging design on perceived food product quality, value, and brand preference. Int. J. Retail. Distrib. Manag 41 (10), 805–816. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/IJRDM-12–2012–0113. Wang, X., Yu, C., Wei, Y., 2012. Social media peer communication and impacts on purchase intentions: a consumer socialization framework. J. Interact. Mark. 26 (4), 198–208. Weisberg, H.F., Bowen, B.D., 1977. An Introduction to Survey Research and Data Analysis. San Francisco: W. H. Freeman. Wilcox, G.B., 1985. The effect of price advertising on alcoholic beverage sales. J. Advert. Res. 25 (5), 33–38. Wu, C.W., 2015. Antecedents of franchise strategy and performance. J. Bus. Res. 68 (7), 1581–1588. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2015.01.055. Köksal, Y., Tatar, A., 2014. Foreign product perception in albanian market; an analysis of country origin image, ethnocentrism and the position of turkish products. Arnavutluk Pazarında Yabancı Ürün Algısı, Menşei Ülke Etkisi ve Türk ÜrünlerininPazardaki Yeri Üzerine Bir İnceleme, 14(4), 571–581, Retrieved from 〈http://web.b.ebscohost.com.ezproxy.lib.swin.edu.au/ehost/pdfviewer/pdfview er?sid ¼ a3b2b622-f83b-45fa-a0ba-b189c18a5c79% 40sessionmgr198andvid ¼ 1andhid ¼ 124〉.