Country of origin effects on brand image, brand evaluation, and

purchase intention: a closer look at Seoul, New York, and Paris

fashion collection
1. Introduction
Nations worldwide strive to strengthen their competitiveness, create differentiation, and
generate higher added value from their fashion industries. Amid intense global competition,
fashion collections are recognized as comprehensive art media representing national culture,
Downloaded by University of Newcastle At 23:01 17 March 2017 (PT)

art, and industry from production to consumption (Entwistle and Rocamora, 2006). The most
commercially successful global fashion event is New Yorks fashion week: each year it
attracts 250,000 people from around the world and generates an economic value of
approximately $900 million (Friedman, February 6, 2015).
The essence of fashion is to sell images. Therefore, fashion industries are closely
associated with national images. The four major global collections - from Paris, Milano, New
York, and London - carry images of high fashion (Gilbert, 2006, p. 4). They have distinct
country of origin (COO) images regarding their country, city, product, and brand. For
example, the Paris collection is perceived as luxurious haute couture, a leader in the fashion
industry for well-crafted products and brands (Rocamora, 2009). Milano is known for clusters
of efficient regional production in the value added fashion industry (Jansson and Power,
2010). New York, known for its systematic stable distribution market and major sponsorship
of designer brands (Joo, 2009), projects the message that fashion is a celebration of culture
associated with the brand, nation, and city image. London is famous for its fashion schools
that introduce new designers who create cutting-edge fashion (OByrne, 2009).
Previous studies on fashion collections focused on fashion styles, trends, designs, and
materials (Jeong and Jeong, 2008), and color palette changes (Chung et al., 2011). Marketing
research regarding fashion collections has tended to focus on their roles and values (Joo,
2009). Although those studies are necessary, research is needed regarding business-to-
business fashion collection professionals and studies relating COO image effects on fashion
collections and fashion collection brands. Previous studies have focused on COO images
according to products (Darling and Wood 1990; Howard, 1989), COO images according to
stages of national economic development (Wang and Lamb, 1983), and COO images effects
on product evaluation (Bilkey and Nes, 1982). Under the overarching goal of specifically

1
 verifying COO image effects, this research focuses on national stereotype images for their
impact on COO image regarding fashion collections, fashion brands images, brand
evaluations, and purchase intentions.
Therefore, the purpose of this research is as follows. First, this paper analyzes how a
COO image of fashion collection and fashion brands image, as influenced by a national
stereotype image, affect brand evaluation and purchase intention. Second, this paper
compares and analyzes the differences in national stereotype, COO image of fashion
collection and brand image, brand evaluation, and purchase intention between Korea (Seoul
fashion week as a developing fashion collection) and overseas (NY and Paris fashion week as
Downloaded by University of Newcastle At 23:01 17 March 2017 (PT)

a developed fashion collection). The major goal is to expand the limited product-focused
COO research. Another goal is to establish a marketing strategy based on COO image that
will enhance the development and image of Seouls collection.

2. Theoretical background and research hypotheses

2.1 National stereotypes, COO images of fashion collection, and fashion brands images
People tend to use stereotypes to streamline and interpret information (Duncan, 1976).
Although stereotypes allow rapid information processing, they may also increase errors and
biases in image formation and personal judgement. For example, people tend to assign
characteristics to members of groups, without regard to individual differences (Aronson,
1999). National stereotypical images are cognitive prejudices about a nations political
economic, cultural artistic, advanced society, and social welfare development, and tend to
evoke emotional responses (Jeong, 2010; Martin and Eroglu, 1993) that impact consumers
judgment and behavior (Chew, 2006). Previous studies on national stereotypes have shown
that they fit into various categories and have great influence (Chattalas et al., 2008; Fiske et
al., 2002; Martin and Eroglu, 1993).
On the other hand, COO simply identifies where products are produced, but the
increasing reliance on global sourcing has made COO more complicated and further sub-
divided. COO now encompasses the country of design, of production, of assembly, of brand,
of service delivery, of the providers birth, and of the service providers training/education
(Usunier, 2011; Vianelli and Marzano, 2012). Yet when consumers recognize that a product
comes from a particular brand, they tend to emphasize the brands COO. For instance, Nike
shoes are produced in many countries, but are still considered an American product
(Balabanis and Diamantopoulos, 2008; Hamzaoui-Essoussi et al., 2011). Thus, brand COO,

2
 rather than location of production or assembly, has more effect on consumer attitude,
purchase behavior, and competitiveness (Lim and OCass, 2001). COO research naturally
gravitates toward brand COO (Zhuang et al., 2008). For instance, a comparative cultural
study on Chinese and Korean consumers purchase intentions toward sports shoes revealed
that Chinese consumers placed greater emphasis on COO (Ko et al., 2008).
Fashion collection shows are a gathering of fashion designers who present their fashion
designs for the next season. The events take place each spring and fall in major cities around
the world, as an elaborate strategic business event that provides an opportunity to sell a
countrys culture and sense of fashion to the global market and to generate great cultural,
Downloaded by University of Newcastle At 23:01 17 March 2017 (PT)

artistic, and business added value.

In this study, consistent with previous studies, COO image of fashion collection is
operationally defined as the COO image which fashion collection as a brand created. Fashion
cities displaying their fashion collections attract international attention and those are related
to their national images (Skov, 2011). In addition, brands that participate in a fashion
collection deliver COO image to consumers by promoting their own brand image that reflects
characteristics of the origin country, an important competitive factor against overseas brands.
Given the importance of COO image, there is a need to examine exactly how a COO image
of fashion collection and a fashion brands image affect purchase intention through brand
evaluation.
Brand image, on the other hand, captures perceptions about a brand as reflected by the
brand associations held in consumer memory (Keller, 1993). Brand image is associated with
the metaphor of brand-as-person (Aaker, 1996). Brand personality reflects feelings the brand
arouses and is often related to descriptive imagery (Keller, 1993). Thus, we define fashion
brands image as the brand personality that attendees of fashion shows attribute to a fashion
brand.

2.2 Brand evaluation, purchase intention

Simple numerical indexes cannot measure brand evaluation because it involves complicated
and varying assessments of brand value. Researchers have proposed different ways to set
brand value (Calderon et al., 1997), but much depends on the attributes considered
important for choice (Nedungadi, 1990). Previous research divided brand equity into
perceived quality and perceived value (Ahn, 2003; Lassar et al., 1995; Yoo and Donthu, 2001)
using Aakers (1991, 1996) and Kellers (1993, 2001) proposed brand equity factors and

3
 actual brand equity, and a study identifying elements that create fashion brand equity (Kim
and Lim, 2002; Kim and Rhee, 1999).
Consumers subjectively and abstractly evaluate overall product quality. Thus perceived
quality is similar to attitude in that it goes beyond objective and practical qualities (Zeithaml,
1988). In the apparel field, Kim and Kim (2003) claimed that generalized production
standards determine quality, but consumers perceptions are subjectively different (Kim and
Kim, 2003; Zeithaml, 1988). Thus, quality is important in purchase, planning, and marketing
research regarding customer satisfaction. Perceived value expresses consumers purchase
behavior rather than their specific trust, attitude, or interest (Kwon et al., 2003). Perceived
Downloaded by University of Newcastle At 23:01 17 March 2017 (PT)

value has multidimensional variables including consumers emotional reactions to experience

(Lee and Lim, 2000; Moliner et al., 2007).
Purchase intentions reflect consumers predicted or planned future behaviors, or the
possibility that belief and behavior will translate into buying behavior (Engel et al., 1990). In
addition, purchase intention reflects consumer intentions to buy products or services based on
their attitudes and emotions (Belk, 1975).

2.3 Research hypotheses

To reiterate: stereotypes influence consumer judgment and behavior. COO images may be
both cognitive and affective. Consumers form macro cognitive images regarding a nations
general political, economic, industrial, technical, cultural, and social development (Jeong,
2010), as shown in previous research (e.g., Chattalas et al., 2008; Hamzaoui-Essoussi, 2011;
Martin and Eroglu, 1993). On the other hand, micro-country image is relative to a nations
fashion brand and products image associated with fashion resources, craftsmanship, tradition,
and practicality (Jeong, 2010). Macro factors influence microscopic images and the latter has
a positive impact on a fashion brands equity. Macro-country images has a significant effect
on affective COO image and fashion brand equity (Jeong, 2010). These results indicate that a
national stereotype will affect a COO image and a fashion brands image. Information about
COO is usually provided by a made in label, or associated through a stereotype based on a
nations origin, culture, or recognized characteristics as perceive by people (Fiske et al.,
2002). In addition, national stereotypical attitudes towards a specific product or brand could
be substantially changed when the country of origin was revealed to the consumer (Bannister
and Saunders, 1978). Hamzaoui-Essoussi et al. (2011)s study showed macro image of brand
origin influenced positively brand image. Diamantopoulos et al. (2011)s study also showed

4
 that COO effect on brand image. The well-known fashion brands are very typical of their
countries. Typicality is the degree to which an object represents a category (Hamzaoui-
Essoussi et al., 2011). Hamzaoui-Essoussi et al. (2011) studied an effect of the brand
typicality in the relationship between brand origin and brand image. According to the
previous researches, we may infer fashion brands attending the fashion collection will show
typicality of brand origin. As such, there is a need to closely examine how a national
stereotype affect evaluation of a COO image of fashion collection and fashion brands image.
Therefore, we propose the following hypotheses:

H1. National stereotype (political economic image [1a], social welfare image [1b], and
Downloaded by University of Newcastle At 23:01 17 March 2017 (PT)

cultural artistic image [1c]) will positively influence the COO image of fashion
collection.
H2. National stereotype (political economic image [2a], social welfare image [2b], and
cultural artistic image [2c]) will positively influence a fashion brands image.
H3. COO image of fashion collection will positively influence the fashion brands image.

Information about COO and brand image are known to influence consumer awareness
about a product or brand (Cervio et al., 2005; Kotler and Gertner, 2002; Ming-Huei et al.,
2004). Han and Terpstra (1988) argue that both COO and brand image shape all consumers
awareness about a product. Ko et al. (2008)s research proved the relationships among COO,
brand image, perceived quality, and purchase intention. They showed that COO positively
influenced perceived quality, brand image influenced perceived quality positively, and
perceived quality influenced purchase intention. In addition, COO image will affect
consumers product evaluation to shape their product attitude (Erickson et al., 1984), and
provide inferential evidence about a consumers product choice (Huber and McCann, 1982).
Assael (2007) explains that once a consumer establishes a relationship with a brand,
consumer behavior leads to a purchase to attain satisfaction. In fact, Assael argues that
purchase intention is the final result from assessing a brand. In Lee and Lim (2000)s study
both perceived quality and perceived value was found to play an important role in influencing
purchase intention. Diamantopoulos et al. (2011) asserted that COO influenced powerfully on
brand perception and buying intention. Based on these findings, this paper thus proposes the
following hypotheses:

H4. COO image of fashion collection will positively influence the perceived quality [4a]

5
 and the perceived value [4b].
H5. Fashion brands image will positively influence the perceived quality [5a] and the
perceived value [5b].
H6. Brand evaluation (perceived quality [6a], perceived value [6b]) will positively
influence the purchase intention.

The city of Seoul is pursuing government support and aid to evolve the domestic fashion
industry as a new emerging market for the city. Since 2000, Seoul is continuously striving to
elevate its fashion weeks status and establish a solid identity. However, Seouls efforts face a
stumbling block amid other Asian countries aggressive efforts to enhance their own fashion
Downloaded by University of Newcastle At 23:01 17 March 2017 (PT)

events as well (Kang, April 3, 2014). In contrast, NY and Paris collections have cemented a
reputation for themselves through stable management and differentiated concepts. They
generate high added value for their fashion products, not only triggering internal and overseas
demand, but also attracting tourism. Hulland (1999) asserted that COO effect tended to be
different to consumers own country, and Ko et al. (2008)s study showed that the differences
of COO effect between the two countries. In Jeffe and Nebenzahl (1996)s research asserted
that consumer evaluation of branded product was influenced by countrys development stage.
As such, this research will conduct a comparative study of the developing fashion collection
(Seoul) vs. the developed fashion collection (NY and Paris) to analyze the relationship among
a national stereotype, COO image of fashion collection, brand image, brand evaluation, and
purchase intention. Therefore, we propose the following hypotheses:

H7. There are significant differences in the relationship of a national stereotype, COO
image of fashion collection, fashion brands image, brand evaluation, and purchase
intention between domestic fashion collection (Seoul) and overseas fashion collection
(NY and Paris).

3. Method
3.1 Measurement
Pre-surveys were conducted in Korean, English, and French people that indicated conceptual
equivalence of the constructs studied. The Korean-language questionnaire was translated into
English and French by two bilingually fluent experts (Korean and English, Korean and
French) and then back translated by another two bilingually fluent experts for consistency
with the original translated versions, and minor wording adjustments were made.

6
 For the quantitative research, a final survey consists of questions that fall into these
categories: national stereotype, COO image of fashion collection, fashion brands image,
brand evaluation, purchase intention, and respondents demographic characteristics (gender,
age, and education) and experience of participating in a collection. A total of three different
versions surveys (Korean, English, and French) were developed to compare a developing
fashion collection (Seoul) and developed fashion collection (NY and Paris). Survey
participants were asked to select one fashion brand most experienced. For example, Korean
participant assigned a survey of Seoul fashion collection was asked to select a fashion brand
most experienced among Korea fashion brands. Chattalas et al. (2008)s argues that a
Downloaded by University of Newcastle At 23:01 17 March 2017 (PT)

national stereotype is a special variable that affects COO image, from a marketing point of
view. Based on this opinion and taking Martin and Eroglu (1993), Phau and Prendergast
(2000)s study into account, a total of 22 questions are designed in the following categories:
political economic image (10), social welfare image (4), cultural artistic image (5), and
advanced society image (3). Regarding a COO image of fashion collection, this paper uses
the measurement standard proposed by Parameswaran and Pisharodi (1994) to generate
questions about general country attributes towards fashion collections COO (7), and branded
product attributes towards fashion collections COO (9). Assessing for fashion brands image
comes from Aaker (1997)s brand personality research questions. A total of 26 questions,
including adjectives, are designed related to: sincerity (8), competence (4), excitement (5),
sophistication (6), and ruggedness (3). Brand evaluation is based on ten questions regarding
perceived quality, as proposed by Dodds and Monroe (1985), and eight questions regarding
perceived value, as proposed by Brady and Cronin (2001), and Eggert and Ulaga (2002). Last
but not least, purchase intention is measured by using the five questions from Bian and
Forsythe (2012)s research. We used seven-point Likert scale; seven is strongly agree, four
is neutral, and one is strongly disagree.

3.2 Data collection and analysis

To examine the research topic we recruited participants from fashion experts and those
involved in fashion, and who lived in Seoul, NY, and Paris with nationality. The respondents
were restricted to people who had the experience of fashion show during fashion week. The
survey was administrated online through Google Docs to people. The survey takes place
online using a separate URL link for each city, from April 7, 2014 to May 6, 2014. In order to
analyze the difference between domestic (Seoul) and overseas (NY and Paris) collections,

7
 selected survey participants include: Koreans with a Seoul collection experience, Americans
with a NY collection experience, and French with a Paris collection experience. NY and Paris
are ranked top two fashion cities by Global Language Monitor (GLM)s The Top Global
Fashion Capital Rankings (GLM, 2014). This results in 254 responses for the Seoul
collection, 142 for the NY collection, and 74 for the Paris collection, or a grand total of 470.
However, the authors excluded the questionnaires indirect experienced through the media,
such as a TV, Internet, or magazine, and inappropriate responses and incomplete surveys. We
selected the data that had the attendance experience of fashion show during fashion week for
the purpose of evaluating a COO image of fashion collection. A total of 273 responses are
Downloaded by University of Newcastle At 23:01 17 March 2017 (PT)

actually used (133 from Seoul, 90 from NY, and 50 from Paris).
Collected data is analyzed using a SPSS 21.0 program. A descriptive statistical analysis,
explanatory factor analysis (EFA), and reliability analysis are conducted. In addition, AMOS
21.0 was used to conduct confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) as well as convergent and
discriminant validity tests. Based on the CFA, the measurement model was estimated, and
through a two-step approach that estimated the structural model, structural equation model
(SEM) was carried out to evaluate the overall fit of the model and the relationship among the
structures. A multi-group analysis was done on AMOS 21.0. The cross-group equality
constraint model was applied to test whether the established parameter values were constant
across all groups, and if the group differences were significant. The 2 values of the model
whose path coefficient was applied with the equality constraint and the equality
unconstrained model were compared (Bae, 2009). If the difference between 2 values are
significant, this can be interpreted as that there is a difference between the two groups and the
hypothesis is supported.

4. Results
4.1 Sample characteristics
Statistical data on the surveyed population indicate that out of a total of 273 responses, 133
came from Seoul (48.7%), 90 from NY (33.0%), and 50 from Paris (18.3%). By gender, 193
are women (70.7%, with 97 from Seoul, 60 from NY, and 36 from Paris), and 80 are men
(29.3%, with 36 from Seoul, 30 from NY, and 14 from Paris). There are 13 people in their 10s
(4.8%), 155 in their 20s (56.8%), 94 in their 30s (34.4%), and 11 in their 40s (4.0%),
generating an average age of 27.8 years old.

8
 Among the 133 people with a Seoul collection experience, 125 people (94.0%)
experienced the collection less than 5 times, 8 people (6.0%) over 6 times. Turning to the 90
people with a NY collection experience, 84 people (93.3%) experienced the collection less
than 5 times, and 6 people (6.7%) over 6 times. As for 50 people with a Paris collection
experience, 35 people (70.0%) experienced the collection less than 5 times, and 15 people
(30.0%) over 6 times. As for type of attendance, by invitation was the most common form of
participation in all collections (see Table 1).
[Insert Table 1 here]

For the Seoul collection, the fashion shows actually attended the most are Steve J &
Downloaded by University of Newcastle At 23:01 17 March 2017 (PT)

Yoni P (37 people), followed by Lie Sang Bong (33 people). Lie Sang Bong is regarded as the
representative brand for the Seoul collection, as voted by 54 people. For the NY collection,
people are the most direct attendance with Ralph Lauren (18 people), followed by Anna Sui
(10 people). Ralph Lauren is chosen as the representative brand for the NY collection,
gathering 36 votes. For the Paris collection, Chanel ranks the highest (10 people), followed
by Dior and Louis Vuitton (6 people per each). In addition, Chanel is regarded as the
representative Paris collection brand, with 23 votes. These well-known brands are very
typical of their fashion collections.

4.2 Exploratory factor analysis and reliability test

To examine the effect of national stereotype, COO image of fashion collection, and fashion
brands image on brand evaluation and purchase intention, the present study obtained and
conducted EFA of 22 questions on national stereotype, 16 questions on COO image of
fashion collection, 26 questions on fashion brands image, 18 questions on brand evaluation,
and 5 questions on purchase intention. This study used Maximum Likelihood and Varimax
rotations, and only the factors that had an Eigen value of over 1.0 were selected. Eigen values
are used to measure the relative importance of each factor.
National stereotype resulted in three factors, political economic image (PE, 3 items),
social welfare image (SW, 3 items), and cultural artistic image (CA, 3 items), accounting for
53.53% of the total variance. The percentage of the variance explained by PE, SW, and CA
was 22.91, 16.70, and 13.92, respectively. The eigenvalue of each factor was 2.52, 1.84, and
1.53, and Cronbachs alpha () fell within a range of 0.70 to 0.84, indicating high internal
consistency. COO image of fashion collection resulted in two factors, general country

9
 attributes towards fashion collections COO (COO_C, 4 items), and general product attributes
towards fashion collections COO (COO_P, 3 items), accounting for 71.47% of the total
variance. The percentage of the variance explained by COO_C, and COO_P was 36.60, and
34.87, respectively. The eigenvalue of each factor was 2.56, and 2.44, and Cronbachs fell
within a range of 0.88 to 0.89, indicating high internal consistency. For fashion brands image,
three variables - excitement (BI_EXC, 4 items), sincerity (BI_SIN, 4 items), and
sophistication (BI_SOP, 3 items) - were extracted, accounting for 63.81% of the total
variance. The variance explained for factors in each category was 25.99%, 18.94%, and
18.90%. The eigenvalues of each factor were 2.86, 2.08, and 2.08, and the reliability
Downloaded by University of Newcastle At 23:01 17 March 2017 (PT)

assessment indicated a high reliability of 0.80 to 0.89. Brand evaluation resulted in two
factors, perceived quality (PQ, 8 items), and perceived value (PV, 6 items), accounting for
66.63% of the total variance. The percentage of the variance explained by PQ and PV was
39.50, and 27.13, respectively. The eigenvalue of each factor was 5.53, and 3.80, and
Cronbachs fell within a range of 0.89 to 0.95, indicating high internal consistency. The
percentage of variance explained in purchase intention as an individual factor (5 items) was
72.70, and Cronbachs was 0.93, showing high internal consistency.

4.3 Confirmatory factor analysis and validity test

In order to test the single dimensionality of each research variable, which was selected
through EFA and reliability tests, CFA and validity tests were conducted (see Table 2). First,
the values of 2, CMIN/DF, CFI, IFI, TLI, and RMSEA were used to test the suitability of the
data. Generally, CFI, IFI, TLI values over 0.90 are the recommended values to be accepted
(Hair et al., 2006). According to Steiger (1990), the data is a good fit with the research when
RMSEA is under 0.1, and very suitable when RMSEA is under 0.05. If the parameter
estimated values of the relationship between the latent variables and measured variables are
all over 0, their Critical Ratio (C.R.) values exceed 1.96, it is deemed that the measurement
of the variables are accurate.
For the present study, 2=993.345 (p=0.000, df=366), CFI revealed 0.935, exceeding the
0.90 criterion. IFI and TLI indicated 0.936 and 0.917, also exceeding the 0.90, while the
RMSEA indicator exhibited 0.079, and it was confirmed that the goodness-of-fit indices were
acceptable. Second, the values of standardized factor loading, Average Variance Extracted
(AVE), and Composite Reliability (CR) were used to test convergent validity. According to
Fornell and Larcker (1981), the standardized factor loading value of each item should exceed

10
 0.7 to achieve convergent validity. The AVE formula by Hair et al. (2006) says that the AVE
value should be over 0.5 to achieve convergent validity. The CR values must be over 0.7 to
be accepted as significant, and the results of this study all met these standards, thus achieving
convergent validity. Third, correlation analysis was administrated to test discriminant validity.
One of the methods to accurately evaluate discriminant validity is to see whether the AVE
value exceeds the squared value of the correlation coefficient (2) (Bae, 2009). In other
words, discriminant validity is achieved if AVE > 2. Results showed that all the values of
2 did not exceed the AVE value and therefore, discriminant validity was achieved (see
Table 3).
Downloaded by University of Newcastle At 23:01 17 March 2017 (PT)

[Insert Table 2 here]

[Insert Table 3 here]

4.4 Results of structural model test

Table 4 shows that the estimated value of the structural equation model of the proposed
model as shown in Figure 1. The values measured 2=993.345 (p=0.000, df=366), CFI=0.935,
IFI=0.936, TLI=0.917, and RMSEA=0.079. Thus, the structural equation model fell within
the acceptable range. The results of the hypothesis tests are as follows.
[Insert Table 4 here]
[Insert Figure 1 here]

First, testing the relationship between national stereotype and COO image of fashion
collection (H1) showed that the standardized path coefficient () of the relationship between
PE and COO image of fashion collection (H1a) was 0.302 at p<0.001, and CA and COO
image of fashion collection (H1c) was =0.998 at p<0.001. Results showed that PE and CA
had a positive influence on COO image of fashion collection, so H1a and H1c were supported.
However, SW ( =-0.424, p=0.072) did not have a direct influence on COO image of fashion
collection, so H1b was rejected.
Second, the results of test on H2, which predicted that national stereotype will positively
affect fashion brands image. Foremost, hypotheses H2a, H2b, and H2c that are about on the
relationships between PE, SW, CA and fashion brands image were tested. The results showed
that PE ( =0.016, p=0.880), SW ( =0.008, p=0.977), and CA ( =-0.807, p=0.073) had no
significant influence on fashion brands image. Thus, H2a, H2b, and H2c were not supported.
Third, the result of H3 revealed a standardized path coefficient of 0.952 at p<0.001 for

11
 the relationship between COO image of fashion collection and fashion brands image. Thus,
H3 was supported.
Fourth, the result of tests on H4, which predicted that COO image of fashion collection
will positively affect brand evaluation, showed that the standardized path coefficient of COO
image of fashion collection and PQ (H4a) was 0.801 at p<0.001, and the standardized path
coefficient of COO image of fashion collection and PV (H4b) was 0.518 at p<0.001, thus
exhibiting significance. Therefore, H4a and H4b were supported.
Fifth, the result of tests on H5, which predicted that fashion brands image will
positively affect brand evaluation, showed that the standardized path coefficient of fashion
Downloaded by University of Newcastle At 23:01 17 March 2017 (PT)

brands image and PQ (H5a) was 0.135 at p<0.05, and the standardized path coefficient of
fashion brands image and PV (H5b) was 0.181 at p<0.01, thus exhibiting significance.
Therefore, H5a and H5b were supported.
Lastly, the test results of hypothesis 6 (H6), which is about the positive influence of
brand evaluation has on purchase intention, are as followed. H6a was rejected because PQ (
=0.034, p=0.645) did not have a significant influence on purchase intention. However, PV (
=0.685, p<0.001) had a positive influence on purchase intention, so H6b was supported.

4.5 Results of multi-group analysis

Multi-group analysis was implemented to see if there were significant differences among
groups (domestic vs. overseas). The 2 variations and goodness-of-fit of the unconstrained
model and cross-group equality constrained model were examined. With the first model, all
paths were freely estimated, that is, the baseline model (2=1592.751, df=722). This model
was compared with a full structural invariance model (2=1625.025, df=735) that all paths
were constrained to be equal across groups. The difference between the groups was
significant (2/df=32.274/13, p<0.05; see Table 5). It means that it does not hold equal
across groups in every paths. Thus, according to Netemeyer et al. (2004)s and Yoo and
Donthu (2002)s study, we sequentially relaxed structural path equality constraints showing
partially invariant structural models until the difference of 2 was not significant between
baseline model and partial structural invariance model. In each test, we conducted a series of
invariance tests of the paths independently (see Table 6). As summarized in Table 6, the series
of tests revealed that eight of the 13 paths (i.e. 1, 2, 3, 4, 8, 9, 12, 13) were invariant
across collection groups. A model was not significantly different (2/df=10.980/5, p<0.05)
from the baseline model. The two models thus appeared to fit the data equally well. Thus,

12
 domestic (Seoul) and overseas (NY and Paris) collection groups had significant differences in
the relationship of a national stereotype, COO image of fashion collection, fashion brands
image, brand evaluation, and purchase intention within this model partially. Hypothesis 7 (H7)
was supported.
[Insert Table 5 here]
[Insert Table 6 here]

The direct paths of SW fashion brands image (5, 2=4.020, df=1), CA fashion
brands image (6, 2=4.143, df=1), COO image of fashion collection fashion brands
image (7, 2=6.018, df=1), fashion brands image PQ (10, 2=5.080, df=1), and
Downloaded by University of Newcastle At 23:01 17 March 2017 (PT)

fashion brands image PV (11, 2=5.104, df=1) were shown to have significant
differences (2=3.84, df=1, p<0.05) between the groups. The direct effects of fashion
brands image PQ (10) was shown to be significant in both groups. The direct influence
of fashion brands image on PQ (S=0.517 > O=0.137, p<0.01) was higher in the domestic
(Seoul) collection group.
Next, each of the 13 paths from all groups were estimated for closer analysis on group
differences (see Figure 2). The paths of SW fashion brands image, COO image of fashion
collection fashion brands image, COO image of fashion collection PQ, COO image of
fashion collection PV, fashion brands image PQ, fashion brands image PV, PQ
purchase intention, and PV purchase intention were found to positive influence in overseas
collection. However, in domestic collection, only 4 paths of PE fashion brands image,
fashion brands image PQ, fashion brands image PV, and PV purchase intention
were found to positive influence. Taken together, the results showed that COO image of
fashion collection had a direct effect on fashion brands image and an indirect effect (through
fashion brands image) on perceived quality in overseas collection, although the direct COO
effect didnt come out in domestic collection.
[Insert Figure 2 here]

5. Conclusions
This study aimed to examine the effects of national stereotype and COO image of fashion
collection on brand image, consumers brand evaluations, and purchase intention. Our
findings clearly vindicate that the relationship between a COO image of fashion collection
and brand image is of strategic importance to fashion collections and fashion brands

13
 marketers. Peoples stereotypes of a nations cultural artistic image and political economic
image have a positive influence over a COO image of fashion collection. Fashion is part of
the cultural industry and identity of a country. In fact, cultural artistic image has a substantial
impact on a COO image of fashion collection. Furthermore, COO effects are frequently
explained in term of the countrys environment of economic and politics. The results of
previous researches (Crawford and Lumpkin, 1993; Ko et al., 2008; Manrai et al., 1998;
Wang and Lamb, 1983) suggest the possibilities to supplement the results of this study.
Regarding COO effects linking fashion collection, there is a need to enhance and promote the
national images such as cultural heritage, stable politics, and stable economy. However, the
Downloaded by University of Newcastle At 23:01 17 March 2017 (PT)

influence of national stereotype on fashion brands image is predominately indirect. National

stereotype cues are deemed unimportant when consumers assess a fashion brands image.
Consumers use a COO image and brand image to evaluate the quality and value of fashion
products. A COO image of fashion collection and fashion brands image both have a positive
influence on brand evaluation. In particular, COO image of fashion collection is associated
with a strong increase in the perceived quality. Perceived value has an affirmative impact on
consumers purchase decision making. In other words, a better COO image of fashion
collection and fashion brands image lead to higher brand evaluation, which ultimately
creates a stronger purchase intention. Our results show the importance of perceived value for
purchase intention. Unlike the case for perceived value, however, there is little behavioral
effect directly from perceived quality as far as purchase intention is concerned. This
empirical evidence from this study supports Lee and Lim (2000)s concern about relationship
between perceived quality and purchase intention. Consumers are not always willing to buy
fashion products with best quality. In this context, marketers of fashion brand should pay
special attention to perceived value in the development and implementation of their
marketing strategy.
Moreover, there were significant differences between domestic and overseas collections.
When examining the path coefficient differences between groups, Korean people recognized
focusing on their fashion brands in this context, not just on COO image. SW has a negative
influence on fashion brands image for overseas collection. This is similar to Manrai et al.
(1998)s study that find the interactive effects of COO image and product category on product
evaluations. Highly-developed countries have high industrialized economic characteristics
that indicates fashion products are produced in developing countries. Consumers from highly-
developed countries believe that fashion products are not manufacturing in own countries.

14
 Thus, we should read of COO effect related to both fashion collection and fashion brands
image in cross-disciplinary and cross-cultural contexts.
This paper recognizing the importance of COO image, and provides basic information
that can be used to help design a COO image of fashion collection and brands image.
Understanding sectoral branding of fashion collection and how fashion collection can
function as brand platforms for cultural industries is important. As such, this research has the
following implications. First, this paper examines how a national stereotype can affect a COO
image of fashion collection. Stereotypes are broken down by nation, paving the way for a
strategic approach to the subject. As a result, each stereotype, such as political economic,
Downloaded by University of Newcastle At 23:01 17 March 2017 (PT)

social welfare, and cultural artistic, is recognized for the different influences they have on a
COO image of fashion collection. It is interesting to note that a national stereotype is not
directly carried over to a fashion brand. Thus, a fashion collection should be used as a
medium to develop cultural artistic events and additional efforts should be made to transfer
that effect to a brand. Second, this study goes beyond existing research on COO that focuses
on a product; instead, analysis takes place comparing domestic and overseas collections,
based on their COO image. Not only does this paper trace the importance of COO image, but
it also highlights the need to establish COO image to build a brand image. Third, research on
a COO image of fashion collection reveals that greater attention must be given to Koreas
fashion collection to develop the domestic fashion industry. The findings in this paper can
serve as a beginning foundation for the Seoul collection to establish a more effective
marketing strategy and attain its goal of becoming one of the top five fashion collections in
the world. A development of the positive stereotypes associated with Korea can be used in the
Seoul collection and promote the uniqueness of the nation. A more positive image of the
Seoul collection can be created through cultural openness and competitiveness of domestic
companies in the global market, plus stability in the political economic circle.
This paper recognizes these limitations and proposes the following for additional studies.
For the purpose of this research, survey includes professionals and laypeople with domestic
and overseas fashion collections. Yet it is important to note that a fashion week is actually a
very important business-to-business event. Therefore, in future studies, additional research of
fashion buyers, who are responsible for generating actual demand, may be useful. Research
that takes fashion buyers by nation and compares their recognition of COO image of fashion
collection will help to build a more solid foundation for Koreas own COO image of fashion
collection. Findings of this study suggest that to examine an indirect effect of fashion

15
 collection COO image in the relationship between national stereotype and fashion brands
image. Additionally, it will be valuable to conduct a more detailed study regarding fashion
collection. We hope this study can be taken as a starting point for future research endeavors.
Downloaded by University of Newcastle At 23:01 17 March 2017 (PT)

16
 References

Aaker, D.A. (1991), Managing Brand Equity: Capitalizing on the Value of a Brand Name, The Free
Press, New York, NY.
Aaker, D.A. (1996), Building Strong Brands, The Free Press, New York, NY.
Aaker, J.L. (1997), Dimensions of brand personality, Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 34 No. 3,
pp. 347-356.
Ahn, J.A. (2003), A study on the validity of consumer based brand equity, The Korean Journal of
Advertising, Vol. 14 No. 2, pp. 253-278.
Aronson, J.R. (1999), Estimates of the changing equity characteristics of the U.S. income tax with
international conjectures, Public Finance Review, Vol. 27 No. 2, pp. 138-159.
Downloaded by University of Newcastle At 23:01 17 March 2017 (PT)

Assael, H. (2007), Consumer Behaviour, 1st Asia-Pacific ed., John Wiley & Sons, Milton, Qld.
Bae, B. (2009), Amos 17.0 Structural Equation Modeling - Principle and Practices -, 2nd ed., Cheong
Ram, Seoul.
Bannister, J.P. and Saunders, J.A. (1978), UK consumers attitudes towards imports: The
measurement of national stereotype image, European Journal of Marketing, Vol. 12 No.8, pp.
562-570.
Balabanis, G. and Diamantopoulos, A. (2008), Brand origin identification by consumers: A
classification perspective, Journal of International Marketing, Vol. 16 No. 1, pp. 39-71.
Belk, R.W. (1975), Situational variables and consumer behavior, Journal of Consumer Research,
Vol. 2 No. 3, pp. 157-164.
Bian, Q. and Forsythe, S. (2012), Purchase intention for luxury brands: A cross cultural comparison,
Journal of Business Research, Vol. 65 No. 10, pp. 1443-1451.
Bilkey, W.J. and Nes, E. (1982), Country-of-origin effects on product evaluations, Journal of
International Business Studies, Vol. 13 No. 1, pp. 89-99.
Brady, M.K. and Cronin Jr, J.J. (2001), Some new thoughts on conceptualizing perceived service
quality: A hierarchical approach, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 65 No. 3, pp. 34-49.
Calderon, H., Cervera, A. and Molla, A. (1997), Brand assessment: A key element of marketing
strategy, Journal of Product & Brand Management, Vol. 6 No. 5, pp. 293-304.
Cervio, J., Joaqun, S. and Jos Mara, C. (2005), Made in effect, competitive marketing strategy
and brand performance: An empirical analysis for Spanish brands, Journal of American
Academy of Business, Vol. 6 No, 2, pp. 237-243.
Chattalas, M., Kramer, T. and Takada, H. (2008), The impact of national stereotypes on the country
of origin effect: A conceptual framework, International Marketing Review, Vol. 25 No. 1, pp.
54-74.
Chew, W.L. (2006), Whats in a national stereotype? An introduction to imagology at the threshold of
the 21st century, Language and Intercultural Communication, Vol. 6 No. 3-4, pp. 179-187.
17
 Chung, Y.S., Cho, J.Y. and Lee, Y.H. (2011), A study on the color characteristics of Emilio design by
Emilio Pucci -With a focus on milano collections from 2005 to 2009-, Journal of the Korean
Society of Fashion Design, Vol. 11 No. 3, pp. 1-14.
Crawford, J.C. and Lumpkin, J.R. (1993), Environmental influences on country-of origin bias, in
Papadopoulos, N. and Heslop, L.A. (Eds), Product-country Images: Impact and Role in
International Marketing, The Haworth Press, Binghamton, NY, pp. 341-356.
Darling, J.R. and Wood, V.R. (1990), A longitudinal study comparing perceptions of U.S. and
Japanese consumer products in a third/neutral country, Journal of International Business
Studies, Vol. 21 No. 3, pp. 427-450.
Diamantopoulos, A., Schlegelmilch, B. and Palihawadana, D. (2011), The relationship between
Downloaded by University of Newcastle At 23:01 17 March 2017 (PT)

country-of-origin image and brand image as drivers of purchase intentions: A test of

alternative perspectives, International Marketing Review, Vol. 28 No. 5, pp. 508-524.
Dodds, W.B. and Monroe, K.B. (1985), The effect of brand and price information on subjective
product evaluations, Advances in Consumer Research, Vol. 12 No.1, pp. 85-90.
Duncan, B.L. (1976), Differential social perception and attribution of intergroup violence: Testing
the lower limits of stereotyping of blacks, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, Vol.
34 No. 4, pp. 590-598.
Eggert, A. and Ulaga, W. (2002), Customer perceived value: A substitute for satisfaction in business
markets?, Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing, Vol. 17 No. 2/3, pp. 107-118.
Engel, J.F., Blackwell, R.D. and Miniard, P.W. (1990), Consumer Behavior, 6th ed., The Dryden Press,
Chicago.
Entwistle, J. and Rocamora, A. (2006), The field of fashion materialized: A study of London Fashion
Week, Sociology, Vol. 40 No. 4, pp. 735-751.
Erickson, G.M., Johansson, J.K. and Chao, P. (1984), Image variables in multi-attribute product
evaluations: Country-of-origin effects, Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 11 No. 2, pp.
694-699.
Fiske, S.T., Cuddy, A.J.C., Glick, P. and Xu, J. (2002), A model of (often mixed) stereotype content:
Competence and warmth respectively follow from perceived status and competition, Journal
of Personality and Social Psychology, Vol. 82 No. 6, pp. 878-902.
Fornell, C. and Larcker, D.F. (1981), Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable
variables and measurement error, Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 18 No. 1, pp. 39-50.
Friedman, A. (2015), NYFW economic impact close to $900M a year, Womens Wear Daily, 6
February, available at: http://wwd.com/business-news/government-trade/caroline-maloney-
surprised-by-report-on-nyfw-impact-8163039/ (accessed 6 February 2014)
Gilbert, D. (2006), From Paris to Shanghai: The changing geographies of fashions world cities, in
Breward, C. and Gilbert, D. (Eds), Fashions World Cities, Berg, Oxford, pp. 3-32.

18
 Global Language Monitor. (2014), New York takes top global fashion capital title from London,
edging past Paris, available at: http://www.languagemonitor.com/fashion/sorry-kate-new-
york-edges-paris-and-london-in-top-global-fashion-capital-10th-annual-survey/ (accessed 25
February 2014).
Hair, J.F., Black, B., Babin, B., Anderson, R.E. and Tatham, R.L. (2006), Multivariate Data Analysis,
6th ed., Prentice Hall International, Upper Saddle River, NJ.
Hamzaoui-Essoussi, L., Merunka, D. and Bartikowski, B. (2011), Brand origin and country of
manufacture influences on brand equity and the moderating role of brand typicality, Journal
of Business Research, Vol. 64 No. 9, pp. 973-978.
Han, C.M. and Terpstra, V. (1988), Country-of-Origin effects for uni-national and bi-national
Downloaded by University of Newcastle At 23:01 17 March 2017 (PT)

products, Journal of International Business Studies, Vol. 19 No.2, pp. 235-256.

Howard, D.G. (1989), Understanding how American consumers formulate their attitudes about
foreign products, Journal of International Consumer Marketing, Vol. 2 No. 2, pp. 7-24.
Huber, J. and McCann, J. (1982), The impact of inferential beliefs on product evaluations, Journal
of Marketing Research, Vol. 19 No. 3, pp. 324-333.
Hulland, J.S. (1999), The effects of country-of-brand and brand name on product evaluation and
consideration: A cross-country comparison, Journal of International Consumer Marketing,
Vol. 11 No. 1, pp. 23-40.
Jaffe, E.D. and Nebenzahl, I.D. (2006), National Image & Competitive Advantage: The Theory and
Practice of Place Branding, Copenhagen Business School Press, Copenhagen.
Jansson, J. and Power, D. (2010), Fashioning a global city: Global city brand channels in the fashion
and design industries, Regional Studies, Vol. 44 No. 7, pp. 889-904.
Jeong, H.J. (2010), (The) effect of country image on fashion brand equity, Doctoral thesis, Seoul
National University, Seoul.
Jeong, H-S. and Jeong, S-J. (2008), The analysis of characteristic design of hat and the fashion image
in fashion collection, Journal of the Korea Fashion & Costume Design Association, Vol. 10
No. 1, pp. 55-68.
Joo, B.R. (2009), Research on Korean collection as high added value fashion industry, Journal of
the Korean Society of Design Culture, Vol. 15 No. 4, pp. 520-531.
Kang, S.M. (2014), The worlds top five fashion shows? Seoul Fashion Week has a long way to go,
Korea JoongAng Daily, 3 April, available at:
http://jjlife.joins.com/club/club_article.asp?mode=&ctg_id=&page=60&total_id=14339987
(accessed 6 April 2014)
Keller, K.L. (1993), Conceptualizing, measuring, and managing customer-based brand equity,
Journal of Marketing, Vol. 57 No. 1, pp. 1-22.
Keller, K.L. (2001), Building customer-based brand equity: A blueprint for creating strong brands,

19
 Marketing Management, Vol. 10 No. July/August, pp. 15-19.
Kim, H.J. and Lim, S.J. (2002), The components of consumer-based fashion brand equity, The
Research Journal of the Costume Culture, Vol. 10 No. 6, pp. 680-696.
Kim, K.W. and Rhee, E.Y. (1999), Clothing brand equity based on consumer evaluation, Journal of
the Korean Society of Clothing and Textiles, Vol. 23 No. 8, pp. 1075-1085.
Kim, M.S. and Kim, M.S. (2003), The consumers evaluative criteria of quality on the clothing
products, The Research Journal of the Costume Culture, Vol. 11 No. 1, pp. 47-65.
Ko, E., Kim, K.H. and Zhang, H. (2008), A cross cultural study of antecedents of purchase intention
for sports shoes in Korea and China, Journal of Global Academy of Marketing Science, Vol.
18 No. 1, pp. 157-177.
Downloaded by University of Newcastle At 23:01 17 March 2017 (PT)

Kotler, P. and Gertner, D. (2002), Country as brand, products, and beyond: A place marketing and
brand management perspective, Journal of Brand Management, Vol. 9 No. 4-5, pp. 249-261.
Kwon, S., Kim, T.U. and Lee, Y. (2003), The roles of customers perceived value, satisfaction, trust
and their relationship with loyalty in internet shopping environment, Korean Management
Science Review, Vol. 20 No. 1, pp. 149-164.
Lassar, W., Mittal, B. and Sharma, A. (1995), Measuring customer-based brand equity, Journal of
Consumer Marketing, Vol. 12 No. 4, pp. 11-19.
Lee, H.S. and Lim, S.J. (2000), The effect of price and brand on the perceived quality, value and
purchase of clothing, Journal of the Korean Society of Clothing and Textiles, Vol. 24 No. 4,
pp. 498-509.
Lim, K. and OCass, A. (2001), Consumer brand classifications: An assessment of culture-of-origin
versus country-of-origin, Journal of Product & Brand Management, Vol. 10 No. 2, pp. 120-
136.
Manrai, L.A., Lascu, D.N. and Manrai, A.K. (1998), Interactive effects of country of origin and
product category on product evaluations, International Business Review, Vol. 7 No. 6, pp.
591-615.
Martin, I.M. and Eroglu, S. (1993), Measuring a multi-dimensional construct: Country image,
Journal of Business Research, Vol. 28 No. 3, pp. 191-210.
Ming-Huei, H., Shan-Ling, P. and Setiono, R. (2004), Product-, corporate-, and country-image
dimensions and purchase behavior: A multicountry analysis, Journal of the Academy of
Marketing Science, Vol. 32 No. 3, pp. 251-270.
Moliner, M.A., Snchez, J., Rodrguez, R.M. and Callarisa, L. (2007), Perceived relationship quality
and post-purchase perceived value: An integrative framework, European Journal of
Marketing, Vol. 41 No. 11/12, pp. 1392-1422.
Nebenzahl, I.D. and Jeffe, E.D. (1996), Measuring the joint effect of brand and country image in
consumer evaluation of global products, International Marketing Review, Vol. 13 No. 4, pp.

20
 5-12.
Nedungadi, P. (1990), Recall and consumer consideration sets: Influencing choice without altering
brand evaluations, Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 17 No. 3, pp. 263-276.
Netemeyer, R., Brashear-Alejandro, T. and Boles, J. (2004), A cross-national model of job-related
outcomes of work role and family role variables: A retail sales context, Journal of the
Academy of Marketing Science, Vol. 32 No. 1, pp. 49-60.
OByrne, R. (2009), Style City: How London Became a Fashion Capital, Frances Lincoln Limited,
London.
Parameswaran, R. and Pisharodi, R.M. (1994), Facets of country of origin image: An empirical
assessment, Journal of Advertising, Vol. 23 No. 1, pp. 43-56.
Downloaded by University of Newcastle At 23:01 17 March 2017 (PT)

Phau, I. and Prendergast, G. (2000), Conceptualizing the country of origin of brand, Journal of
Marketing Communications, Vol. 6 No. 3, pp. 159-170.
Rocamora, A. (2009), Fashioning the City: Paris, Fashion and the Media, IB Tauris, NY.
Skov, L. (2011), Dreams of small nations in a polycentric fashion world, Fashion Theory, Vol. 15
No. 2, pp. 137-156.
Steiger, J.H. (1990), Structural model evaluation and modification: An interval estimation approach,
Multivariate Behavioral Research, Vol. 25 No. 2, pp. 173-180.
Usunier, J.C. (2011), The shift from manufacturing to brand origin: Suggestions for improving COO
relevance, International Marketing Review, Vol. 28 No. 5, pp. 486-496.
Vianelli, D. and Marzano, F.C. (2012), LEffetto Country of Origin Sullintenzione Dacquisto del
Consumatore: Una Literature Review, EUT Edizioni, Trieste, Italy.
Wang, C-K. and Lamb, C.W. (1983), The impact of selected environmental forces upon consumers
willingness to buy foreign products, Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Vol. 11
No. 1-2, pp. 71-84.
Yoo, B. and Donthu, N. (2001), Developing and validating a multidimensional consumer-based
brand equity scale, Journal of Business Research, Vol. 52 No. 1, pp. 1-14.
Yoo, B. and Donthu, N. (2002), Testing cross-cultural invariance of the brand equity creation
process, Journal of Product & Brand Management, Vol. 11 No. 6, pp. 380-398.
Zeithaml,V.A. (1988), Consumer perceptions of price, quality, and value: A means-and model and
synthesis of evidence, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 52 No. 3, pp. 2-22.
Zhuang, G., Wang, X., Zhou, L. and Zhou, N. (2008), Asymmetric effects of brand origin confusion:
Evidence from the emerging market of China, International Marketing Review, Vol. 25 No. 4,
pp. 441-457.

21
 Downloaded by University of Newcastle At 23:01 17 March 2017 (PT)

<Figure 1> Results of structural model test

22
Downloaded by University of Newcastle At 23:01 17 March 2017 (PT)

<Figure 2> Results of multi-group comparison between domestic and overseas collection

23
 <Table 1> General characteristics of the sample

Characteristics N (%) Total (%)

Domestic Overseas
Seoul NY (N=90) Paris (N=50)
(N=133)
Gender Female 97 (72.9) 60 (66.7) 36 (72.0) 193 (70.7)
Male 36 (27.1) 30 (33.3) 14 (28.0) 80 (29.3)
Age* 27.0 (6.6) 28.8 (4.7) 27.9 (6.4) 27.8 (6.0)
Education High school graduate 2 (1.5) 0 (0.0) 0 (0.0) 2 (0.7)
Undergraduate 55 (41.3) 35 (38.9) 19 (38.0) 109 (39.9)
Graduate or higher 76 (57.2) 55 (61.1) 31 (62.0) 162 (59.4)
Frequency of 1-5 125 (94.0) 84 (93.3) 35 (70.0) 244 (89.4)
attendance at fashion
Downloaded by University of Newcastle At 23:01 17 March 2017 (PT)

collection 6 and over 8 (6.0) 6 (6.7) 15 (30.0) 29 (10.6)

Type of attendance VIP 13 (9.8) 0 (0.0) 2 (4.0) 15 (5.5)
at fashion collection
Buyer 7 (5.3) 5 (5.6) 3 (6.0) 15 (5.5)
Press 8 (6.0) 10 (11.1) 9 (18.0) 27 (9.9)
Invitation 68 (51.1) 46 (51.1) 21 (42.0) 135 (49.4)
Public 35 (26.3) 28 (31.1) 15 (30.0) 78 (28.6)
Staff 2 (1.5) 1 (1.1) 0 (0.0) 3 (1.1)
* Value represents means (Standard deviation)

24
 <Table 2> Results of CFA, convergent validity, and reliability test

Constructs Item Estimate S.E. t-value

N8: stable economy 0.813 - a
Political
N9: people positive thinking 0.684 0.103 10.448***
Economic
N10: stable politics 0.755 0.345 6.975***
Image (PE)
=0.803, AVE=0.566, CR=0.730
National N22: well managed hygiene 0.697 - a
Social
Stereotype N21: good healthcare system 0.836 0.146 9.613***
Welfare
(NS) N19: well-developed transportation 0.670 0.246 7.379***
Image (SW)
=0.783, AVE=0.545, CR=0.706
Cultural N15: beautiful natural environment 0.750 - a
Artistic N13: cultural heritage 0.639 0.141 9.271***
Image (CA) =0.701, AVE=0.504, CR=0.702
COO_C: artistic, prestige, achieving high standards,
0.746 - a
Downloaded by University of Newcastle At 23:01 17 March 2017 (PT)

COO Image of Fashion good service providing

Collection (COOF) COO_P: good workmanship, valuable, good design 0.879 0.087 13.101***
=0.792, AVE=0.665, CR=0.720
BI_SIN: naturalistic, honest, friendly, wholesome 0.887 - a
Fashion Brands Image
BI_EXC: unique, daring, imaginative, exciting 1.042 0.050 24.199***
(BI)
=0.960, AVE=0.936, CR=0.942
BE1: good quality compared to other brands 0.867 - a
BE2: overall excellent quality 0.907 0.035 30.003***
BE3: consistent quality to other brands 0.879 0.047 19.896***
BE4: equal quality 0.832 0.047 18.156***
Perceived
BE5: excellent material 0.859 0.050 19.064***
Quality (PQ)
BE8: reliable quality 0.808 0.050 16.220***
Brand BE9: high level of manufacturing technology 0.739 0.052 14.925***
Evaluation BE10: keep high quality 0.829 0.050 17.999***
(BE) =0.951, AVE=0.840, CR=0.923
BE12: products meet our expectation 0.801 - a
BE13: value-for-money 0.724 0.073 12.479***
Perceived BE15: better value compared to other brands 0.750 0.074 13.284***
Value (PV) BE16: enough value to use 0.790 0.069 14.100***
BE17: excellent value 0.921 0.076 14.983***
=0.890, AVE=0.797, CR=0.858
PI1: purchase intention to buy immediately 0.737 - a
PI2: purchase intention to buy in near future 0.905 0.071 17.559***
Purchase Intention PI3: high desire of possession 0.890 0.086 14.588***
(PI) PI4: confidence to buy regardless of time 0.869 0.087 14.258***
PI5: recommendation 0.837 0.082 12.669***
=0.928, AVE=0.848, CR=0.834
Model Fit: 2=935.045, df=356, p=.000, CFI=0.942, IFI=0.944, TLI=0.923, RMSEA=0.069
***
p<.001
a: Unstandardized estimate are fixed as 1, t-value is not generated.

25
 <Table 3> Results of discriminant validity

Constructs 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
1. PE 0.566a
2. SW 0.059b 0.545
3. CA 0.0002 0.457 0.505
4. COOF 0.189 0.014 0.315 0.665
5. BI 0.104 0.106 0.023 0.139 0.936
6. PQ 0.064 0.035 0.307 0.588 0.204 0.840
7. PV 0.055 0.025 0.075 0.267 0.156 0.424 0.797
8. PI 0.041 0.032 0.102 0.256 0.044 0.229 0.453 0.848
a: AVE (Average Variance Extracted)
b: Correlation coefficient squared value of the constructs (2)
Downloaded by University of Newcastle At 23:01 17 March 2017 (PT)

26
 <Table 4> Results of hypotheses test

Standard
Hypotheses t-value S.E. p Results
coefficients
H1a PECOOF 0.302 3.698 0.046 *** Supported
H1 (+)
H1b SWCOOF -0.424 -1.802 0.172 0.072 Not Supported
(NSCOOF)
H1c CACOOF 0.998 3.687 0.179 *** Supported
H2a PEBI 0.016 0.151 0.083 0.880 Not Supported
H2 (+)
H2b SWBI 0.008 0.029 0.280 0.977 Not Supported
(NSBI)
H2c CABI -0.807 -1.791 0.410 0.073 Not Supported
H3 (+) COOFBI 0.952 3.263 0.404 *** Supported
H4 (+) H4a COOFPQ 0.801 8.644 0.132 *** Supported
(COOFBE) H4b COOFPV 0.518 5.919 0.103 *** Supported
Downloaded by University of Newcastle At 23:01 17 March 2017 (PT)

H5 (+) H5a BIPQ 0.135 2.525 0.055 * Supported

(BIBE) H5b BIPV 0.181 2.897 0.053 ** Supported
H6 (+) H6a PQPI 0.034 0.461 0.093 0.645 Not Supported
(BEPI) H6b PVPI 0.685 7.951 0.133 *** Supported
2 2 2 2 2
COOF R =0.676, BI R =0.481, PQ R =0.745, PV R =0.375, PI R =0.502
***
p<.001, **p<.01, *p<.05

27
 <Table 5> Results of invariance test across collection groups

Model 2 df 2(df) p CFI IFI RMSEA

Baseline model (all paths free) 1592.751 722 0.00 0.920 0.923 0.067
Domestic (Seoul) 771.728 361 - 0.00 0.927 0.928 0.064
Overseas (NY & Paris) 821.101 361 0.00 0.911 0.912 0.076
Full structural invariance model 1625.025 735 32.274(13) 0.00 0.914 0.917 0.068
*
Partial structural invariance model 1603.731 727 10.980 (5) 0.00 0.917 0.920 0.067
*
p<.05
Downloaded by University of Newcastle At 23:01 17 March 2017 (PT)

28
 <Table 6> Results of multi-group analysis

Hypothesis Domestic (Seoul) Overseas (NY & Paris) 2

(H7) Est.a S.E. t-value Est. S.E. t-value (df=1)
PECOOF: 1 -0.006 0.011 -0.524 1.858 5.610 0.331 2.778
SWCOOF: 2 0.056 0.054 1.034 -4.010 12.426 -0.323 1.571
CACOOF: 3 0.033 0.037 0.894 3.937 10.968 0.359 0.857
*
PEBI: 4 0.156 0.069 2.271 0.128 0.101 1.277 0.062
***
SWBI: 5 0.042 0.125 0.338 -0.461 0.120 -3.838 4.020
CABI: 6 -0.157 0.147 -1.068 0.030 0.110 0.277 4.143
**
COOFBI: 7 0.415 1.000 0.415 0.644 0.250 2.575 6.018
***
COOFPQ: 8 3.376 3.218 1.049 2.785
Downloaded by University of Newcastle At 23:01 17 March 2017 (PT)

1.448 0.196 7.385

***
COOFPV: 9 1.805 1.812 0.996 0.552 0.138 4.016 0.854
*** **
BIPQ: 10 0.517 0.078 6.646 0.137 0.053 2.560 5.080
***
BIPV: 11 0.486 0.090 5.428 0.052 0.049 1.063 5.104
**
PQPI: 12 -0.821 0.427 -1.921 0.390 0.149 2.623 3.451
PVPI: 13 1.669 0.366 4.555*** 0.952 0.210 4.543*** 0.346
*** ** *
a: Unstandardized estimate , p<.001, p<.01, p<.05

29