Consumer Ethnocentrism Scale (CETSCALE)

Abstract

The Consumer Ethnocentrism Scale (CETSCALE) is an extensively utilized psychometric instrument developed by Terence A. Shimp and Subhash Sharma in 1987 to operationalize and measure the psychological construct of consumer ethnocentrism. Derived from the broader sociological and anthropological concept of ethnocentrism originally posited by William Graham Sumner, consumer ethnocentrism refers specifically to the beliefs held by consumers concerning the appropriateness, morality, and economic patriotism of purchasing foreign-made products versus domestic goods. Highly ethnocentric consumers view the acquisition of imported goods not merely as an economic calculation, but as an immoral act that inflicts direct economic harm on the domestic labor force, precipitates local job losses, and betrays national solidarity. The original CETSCALE comprises 17 items scored along a 7-point Likert scale ranging from 1 (Strongly Disagree) to 7 (Strongly Agree), yielding an aggregate score spanning 17 to 119, with a widely validated 10-item parsimonious subset available for condensed survey administrations. Psychometrically, the instrument exhibits remarkable internal consistency, consistently achieving Cronbach's alpha coefficients between .94 and .96 in its foundational American validation samples, and exceeding .85 across dozens of international cross-cultural replications. Factor analytic investigations historically endorse a robust unidimensional structure, although cross-national invariance research frequently explores dual-factor representations differentiating defensive economic preservation from offensive trade protectionism. This article provides a comprehensive academic analysis of the CETSCALE, delineating its historical emergence, theoretical underpinnings in Social Identity Theory and realistic group conflict, construct architecture, predictive validity across international consumer behavior, factor structure, psychometric reliability, and guidelines for administration and scoring.

Keywords

Consumer Ethnocentrism, CETSCALE, Country-of-Origin Effect, Economic Nationalism, In-Group Favoritism, Social Identity Theory, Import Substitution, Protectionism, Psychometrics, International Marketing

Authors

The Consumer Ethnocentrism Scale was conceived, psychometrically engineered, and validated by two prominent scholars in quantitative marketing and consumer psychology at the University of South Carolina:

• Terence A. Shimp, Ph.D.: Distinguished Professor Emeritus of Marketing and former Chair of the Department of Marketing at the Darla Moore School of Business, University of South Carolina, Columbia, South Carolina, United States. Dr. Shimp served as President of the Association for Consumer Research (ACR) and made seminal contributions to advertising theory, promotional psychology, attitude research, and country-of-origin evaluations.
• Subhash Sharma, Ph.D.: Distinguished Professor Emeritus of Marketing and former Associate Dean of Faculty and Research at the Darla Moore School of Business, University of South Carolina, Columbia, South Carolina, United States. An expert in applied multivariate statistics, psychometrics, and quantitative methodology, Dr. Sharma published extensively on structural equation modeling, measurement invariance, cluster analysis, and scale construction methodologies.

Correspondence regarding the foundational validation of the instrument was originally directed through the Journal of Marketing Research editorial archives and the Department of Marketing, College of Business Administration, University of South Carolina, Columbia, SC 29208.

Purpose

The development of the CETSCALE emerged from pressing macro-economic, political, and socio-psychological exigencies that characterized international commerce during the late 1970s and 1980s. Following World War II and the rapid rebuilding of industrial capacities in Western Europe and East Asia—most notably Japan and West Germany—the United States domestic market witnessed an unprecedented influx of manufactured consumer goods, ranging from automobiles and consumer electronics to apparel and steel. As domestic market shares eroded and structural unemployment in manufacturing regions intensified, public sentiment grew increasingly protectionist. The phrase "Buy American" evolved from an occasional political slogan into a prominent socio-political crusade.

Prior to the introduction of the CETSCALE, international marketing researchers investigated consumer preferences for foreign versus domestic merchandise primarily through the narrow lens of the Country-of-Origin (COO) effect. These classical models presumed that consumers acted as rational information processors who evaluated foreign products based strictly on cognitive perceptions of technological competence, craftsmanship, reliability, and price-quality ratios. Shimp and Sharma (1987) identified a critical theoretical deficit in this paradigm: traditional country-of-origin frameworks completely overlooked the intense moral, emotional, and normative dimensions that frequently govern purchasing decisions. Consumers do not evaluate imported products in a psychological vacuum; rather, purchases can trigger profound feelings of guilt, treason, civic duty, or social responsibility.

The primary purpose of the CETSCALE was therefore to create an empirically rigorous, standardized, and theoretically anchored measurement instrument capable of quantifying the degree to which individual consumers view the acquisition of foreign products as a moral transgression against their domestic peers and national economy. The scale was intentionally constructed to explain the behavioral gap between consumers who acknowledge the functional, aesthetic, or monetary superiority of a foreign brand, yet deliberately boycott or disparage it in favor of an inferior or more expensive domestic alternative.

In contemporary research and managerial applications, the CETSCALE serves multiple pivotal functions:

• Market Segmentation and Targeting: Global enterprises utilize the instrument to identify the prevalence of ethnocentric tendencies within specific regional, demographic, or cultural markets. High-ethnocentric segments represent high barriers to entry for foreign brands, requiring customized market-entry vehicles (such as joint ventures, local manufacturing subsidiaries, or multi-domestic brand identities) to blunt domestic consumer backlash.
• International Brand Positioning: Marketers assess whether domestic brands can successfully leverage patriotic appeals and "made in" labels as a primary competitive advantage, or whether an ethnocentric appeal will fall flat among cosmopolitan consumer cohorts.
• Public Policy and Economic Impact Modeling: Governmental and non-governmental agencies deploy the scale to anticipate consumer compliance with trade sanctions, domestic industrial subsidization policies, and domestic procurement campaigns designed to stimulate local employment during economic downturns.
• Theoretical Integration in Consumer Behavior: Academic researchers utilize the CETSCALE as a foundational covariate or mediating variable when modeling brand equity, willingness to pay, perceived product quality, global consumer culture orientation, and anti-globalization consumer resistance.

Psychological Construct

The psychological construct operationalized by the CETSCALE is consumer ethnocentrism. Shimp and Sharma (1987, p. 280) formally conceptualized consumer ethnocentrism as "the beliefs held by American consumers about the appropriateness, indeed morality, of purchasing foreign-made products." While initially contextualized within the United States, the construct has since been generalized worldwide to signify a consumer's universal propensity to view their domestic economic in-group as the central point of commercial allegiance, assessing all commercial transactions through a moral framework that prioritizes national economic sovereignty.

To fully grasp the psychological depth of the construct, it must be analyzed across its three interrelated psychological dimensions: cognitive, affective, and normative-behavioral.

1. The Cognitive Dimension

The cognitive dimension of consumer ethnocentrism involves an internalized belief system regarding the economic consequences of international trade. Highly ethnocentric consumers hold rigid cognitive schemas asserting that purchasing imported goods depletes the national treasury, diverts capital into foreign hands, causes domestic manufacturing plant closures, and directly deprives fellow citizens of employment. Conversely, non-ethnocentric or cosmopolitan consumers evaluate products objectively according to functional attributes, intrinsic product characteristics, technological sophistication, and economic value, regarding global competition as a positive mechanism that fosters innovation and market efficiency.

2. The Affective Dimension

Consumer ethnocentrism is heavily laden with affective intensity. For ethnocentric individuals, purchasing behavior is deeply intertwined with feelings of belongingness, national pride, and patriotic solidarity. When faced with the option of buying an imported product, these consumers experience emotional aversion, moral indignation, and anticipatory guilt. They view the transaction not as an innocuous exchange of currency for goods, but as a betrayal of domestic workers. Conversely, purchasing domestic products elicits an affective "warm glow," self-righteousness, and satisfaction derived from fulfilling a civic obligation. The domestic economy functions as an extension of the psychological self.

3. The Normative and Moral Dimension

Crucially, consumer ethnocentrism departs from conventional consumer preferences by incorporating an explicit moral imperative. As articulated in items such as "Purchasing foreign-made products is un-American" and "It is not right to purchase foreign products, because it puts Americans out of jobs," the construct frames buying choices as ethically right or wrong. To an ethnocentric consumer, individual consumer sovereignty must be subordinate to collective national welfare. Buying foreign goods is characterized as unpatriotic and antisocial, whereas supporting local industry is regarded as a moral duty. This moralizing tendency transforms everyday consumption into a socio-political litmus test.

Construct Differentiation

Consumer ethnocentrism must be rigorously delineated from related socio-psychological constructs:

• General Ethnocentrism: As conceptualized by Sumner (1906), general ethnocentrism is a broad sociological orientation where one's own ethnic or cultural group is seen as the center of everything, and all other out-groups are scaled and rated with reference to it. Consumer ethnocentrism is a domain-specific manifestation of this worldview, restricted strictly to economic exchanges and product acquisition decisions.
• Patriotism: Patriotism denotes an intense love for and attachment to one's country without necessary animosity toward out-groups. While patriotism is positively correlated with consumer ethnocentrism, a patriot may happily purchase foreign goods if they believe free trade enriches their home country. Ethnocentrism, by contrast, specifically incorporates economic protectionism and out-group product rejection.
• Nationalism: Nationalism involves the perception of national superiority and the assertion of national dominance over other nations. While nationalistic consumers are almost invariably high in consumer ethnocentrism, consumer ethnocentrism can emerge purely out of defensive empathy for local workers, without asserting that one's nation is culturally or racially superior to others.
• Consumer Animosity: Identified by Klein, Ettenson, and Morris (1998), consumer animosity refers to antipathy toward purchasing products produced by a specific foreign country due to past or ongoing military, political, or economic conflicts (e.g., historical anti-German or anti-Japanese sentiment). Consumer ethnocentrism, conversely, is a general, non-specific disposition directed against all foreign imports regardless of the country of origin.

Theoretical Framework

The CETSCALE is grounded in several well-established paradigms within social psychology, sociology, and behavioral economics, primarily William Graham Sumner's sociological treatise on in-groups and out-groups, Social Identity Theory (SIT), and Realistic Group Conflict Theory.

1. Sumner's Foundational Ethnocentrism Theory

The conceptual genesis of consumer ethnocentrism traces directly to Sumner's seminal work, Folkways (1906). Sumner posited that human societies are fundamentally divided into the "in-group" (the "we-group" with which an individual identifies) and the "out-group" ("they-groups" viewed with suspicion, competition, or disdain). Sumner defined ethnocentrism as:

"…the view of things in which one's own group is the center of everything, and all others are scaled and rated with reference to it. Each group nourishes its own pride and vanity, boasts itself superior, exists in its own divinities, and looks with contempt on outsiders." (Sumner, 1906, p. 13)

Shimp and Sharma adapted this macro-sociological principle to micro-economic consumer behavior. In this adaptation, domestic manufacturers and fellow working-class citizens represent the sacred "in-group," while foreign producers and international corporations are categorized as the external "out-group." Economic transactions become symbolic behaviors that either reinforce in-group cohesion or empower the competitive out-group.

2. Social Identity Theory (SIT)

Developed by Henri Tajfel and John Turner in the 1970s and 1980s, Social Identity Theory asserts that an individual's self-concept is substantially derived from their perceived membership in relevant social categories (e.g., nationality, ethnicity, social class). SIT articulates that individuals are intrinsically motivated to achieve and maintain a positive social identity, which is accomplished by establishing favorable in-group distinctiveness through intergroup social comparisons.

Within the theoretical architecture of the CETSCALE, national identity serves as the salient social category. Consumers high in consumer ethnocentrism exhibit pronounced in-group favoritism by systematically overvaluing domestic merchandise and conferring unwarranted quality premiums upon home-grown products. Simultaneously, they practice out-group derogation by devaluing imported alternatives, viewing them as existential threats to the in-group's socioeconomic stability. By purchasing domestic products, consumers reaffirm their allegiance to the national group, validate their moral standing as loyal citizens, and enhance collective self-esteem.

3. Realistic Group Conflict Theory (RGCT)

Formulated by Muzafer Sherif through landmark field experiments, Realistic Group Conflict Theory proposes that intergroup hostility, prejudice, and discrimination are sparked by real or perceived competition between groups for scarce, zero-sum resources (e.g., physical territory, political power, or economic wealth). When two groups vie for the same finite pool of resources, negative stereotypes and defensive antagonism inevitably intensify.

The CETSCALE operationalizes this exact psychological mechanism within the domain of consumer commerce. Ethnocentric consumers perceive international trade not as a positive-sum enterprise of mutual comparative advantage, but as an aggressive, zero-sum economic conflict. As embodied in item 8 ("We should purchase products manufactured in America instead of letting other countries get rich off us") and item 11 ("Americans should not buy foreign products, because this hurts American business and causes unemployment"), foreign goods are viewed as vehicles of economic predation that siphon jobs, wealth, and industrial self-sufficiency away from the domestic in-group.

Validity

Extensive psychometric investigations have established the robust construct, convergent, discriminant, and predictive validity of the CETSCALE across diverse geographic populations, demographic groups, and economic environments.

Construct and Convergent Validity

Construct validity was established in the original validation study by Shimp and Sharma (1987) across four distinct consumer samples:

• A localized probability sample of 877 household consumers in the Carolinas.
• A national probability sample of 1,535 American consumers.
• A regional replication sample of 660 consumers in the American Midwest.
• A targeted urban validation sample of 414 consumers in the American Southwest.

To demonstrate convergent validity, the authors evaluated correlations between the CETSCALE and related psychological dispositions. Across these initial samples, the CETSCALE demonstrated statistically significant positive correlations with:

• Patriotism: Positive correlations ranging from r = .38 to .48 (p < .001), indicating that strong emotional identification with the nation aligns with economic protectionist attitudes.
• Political and Cultural Conservatism: Positive correlations from r = .32 to .41 (p < .001), reflecting traditionalism and institutional defense.
• Dogmatism: Positive correlations from r = .24 to .35 (p < .01), demonstrating cognitive rigidity and in-group bias.
• Collectivism: Subsequent studies (e.g., Gurhan-Canli & Maheswaran, 2000; Sharma, 2015) demonstrated that collectivist orientations consistently correlate positively with consumer ethnocentrism (r > .40), as collectivists naturally prioritize group welfare over personal hedonic preferences.

Discriminant Validity

Discriminant validity was established by showing that the CETSCALE captures a distinct behavioral phenomenon separable from generalized xenophobia or broad racial prejudice. In Shimp and Sharma (1987), correlations between the CETSCALE and general racial prejudice scales were modest (r = .15 to .22), indicating that consumer ethnocentrism is not merely a manifestation of ethnic bigotry, but a focused economic and moral worldview centered on domestic employment preservation.

Furthermore, in extensive structural equation modeling by Netemeyer, Durvasula, and Lichtenstein (1991), the CETSCALE exhibited clear discriminant validity when modeled alongside constructs such as overall product quality evaluations, perceived product value, and generalized brand attitudes. In multi-trait multi-method matrices, the average variance extracted (AVE) for the CETSCALE consistently exceeded its squared correlations with other marketing constructs, satisfying the Fornell-Larcker criterion.

Predictive and Criterion-Related Validity

The ultimate test of the CETSCALE lies in its ability to predict real-world consumer preferences, product ratings, and purchase decisions. Numerous empirical investigations have confirmed its exceptional predictive efficacy:

• Product Quality Assessments: Highly ethnocentric consumers consistently downgrade the perceived quality of foreign merchandise across diverse categories, including automobiles, consumer electronics, footwear, wine, and food products, even when physical product specifications and blind-taste tests demonstrate foreign parity or superiority (Netemeyer et al., 1991; Luque-Martínez et al., 2000).
• Purchase Intentions and Choice: Across cross-national studies in the United States, France, Germany, Japan, Spain, and South Korea, CETSCALE scores consistently exhibit strong negative correlations with intentions to purchase imported goods (typically r = -.45 to -.62, p < .001) and strong positive correlations with domestic purchase intentions (r = .50 to .65, p < .001).
• Willingness to Pay Price Premiums: Ethnocentric consumers actively demonstrate a quantifiable willingness to pay higher prices for domestic goods. Empirical studies in agricultural and industrial markets show that consumers with high CETSCALE scores are willing to pay between 15% and 35% price premiums for domestic items over comparable imported goods to preserve local jobs.

Reliability

The CETSCALE demonstrates outstanding internal consistency reliability and temporal stability across a wide spectrum of demographic and cross-cultural contexts.

Internal Consistency Reliability

In the seminal psychometric development by Shimp and Sharma (1987), the 17-item CETSCALE achieved exceptional reliability estimates across all four primary validation cohorts:

• Carolinas Study (N = 877): Cronbach's alpha (α) = .94
• National Consumer Sample (N = 1,535): α = .96
• Midwest Probability Sample (N = 660): α = .95
• Southwest Consumer Sample (N = 414): α = .94

Corrected item-to-total correlations in the original 17-item instrument ranged between .60 and .82, with an average inter-item correlation exceeding .50, far surpassing standard psychometric thresholds recommended by Nunnally and Bernstein (1994).

Cross-National and International Reliability

Replication studies across dozens of international settings have confirmed the reliability of the scale, whether using direct language translations or culturally adapted equivalents:

• Western Europe: In a landmark cross-national replication across the United States, France, West Germany, and Japan, Netemeyer, Durvasula, and Lichtenstein (1991) reported Cronbach's alphas of .95 (USA), .92 (France), .91 (Germany), and .94 (Japan). Luque-Martínez, Ibáñez-Zapata, and del Barrio-García (2000) evaluated the scale in Spain, recording an alpha of .93.
• Asia-Pacific: Investigations in South Korea (Suh & Kwon, 2002), China (Wang & Chen, 2004), and India (Bawa, 2004) yielded alpha coefficients spanning .89 to .95.
• Abbreviated 10-Item Version: The condensed 10-item version (comprising items 1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 11, 13, and 17) routinely exhibits Cronbach's alpha values between .88 and .94, confirming that the scale sacrifices negligible psychometric reliability when reduced for survey parsimony.

Test-Retest Stability

Temporal stability assessments conducted over intervals of three to six weeks have documented test-retest correlation coefficients ranging from r = .78 to .86 (Sharma, Shimp, & Shin, 1995). These findings indicate that consumer ethnocentrism behaves as an enduring, stable psychological trait rather than a fleeting situational state, although macro-economic crises (such as global supply chain disruptions or military confrontations) can elevate baseline scores over longer historical epochs.

Factor Analysis

The internal dimensionality and factor structure of the CETSCALE have been subject to intense methodological examination via Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA) and Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) across numerous cross-national investigations.

Foundational Factor Structure (Unidimensionality)

In their initial development, Shimp and Sharma (1987) conducted an exploratory principal components analysis followed by confirmatory factor analysis across their validation samples. A single dominant factor emerged, accounting for over 58% of the total variance in the Carolinas sample and approximately 61% in the national sample. All 17 items loaded heavily on this primary factor, with standardized factor loadings ranging between .65 and .86.

Consequently, the authors concluded that consumer ethnocentrism represents a unidimensional construct, with all 17 items functioning as homogeneous indicators of a single underlying latent continuum of economic protectionist sentiment and moral duty.

International Confirmatory Factor Analyses (CFA)

When researchers began translating and cross-validating the CETSCALE internationally, methodological scrutiny turned toward structural equation modeling to verify whether this unidimensional structure held globally. Netemeyer, Durvasula, and Lichtenstein (1991) performed rigorous CFA across four nations, evaluating the fit of the single-factor model:

• United States: χ²(119) = 384.22, Goodness-of-Fit Index (GFI) = .91, Comparative Fit Index (CFI) = .93, Root Mean Square Residual (RMR) = .045
• France: χ²(119) = 412.10, GFI = .89, CFI = .91, RMR = .051
• Germany: χ²(119) = 445.88, GFI = .88, CFI = .90, RMR = .056
• Japan: χ²(119) = 399.15, GFI = .90, CFI = .92, RMR = .048

These findings provided strong statistical support for the cross-national validity of a unidimensional model, though error covariances between highly redundant items (e.g., items 11 and 17, which both mention domestic unemployment) were occasionally required to optimize fit.

Multidimensional Debates and Alternative Models

Despite the prevailing unidimensional paradigm, several psychometric scholars (e.g., Luque-Martínez et al., 2000; Douglas & Nijssen, 2003; Chryssochoidis et al., 2007) identified evidence of multidimensionality, arguing that the 17-item instrument conflates two conceptually distinct facets of economic nationalism:

1. Defensive Economic Preservation (Pro-Domestic In-Group Tendency): Centered on protecting the domestic economy, preserving jobs, and showing solidarity with fellow workers (typified by items 3, 6, 8, 11, and 17).
2. Offensive Trade Protectionism (Anti-Foreign Out-Group Hostility): Centered on enacting aggressive tariffs, punitive quotas, and institutional bans against foreign merchants (typified by items 12, 14, 15, and 16).

Empirical comparisons demonstrate that while a two-factor model sometimes yields marginally superior fit indices in specific developing or transitioning economies, the correlation between the two latent factors routinely exceeds Φ = .80, indicating high statistical collinearity. Most researchers conclude that unless specific public policy questions demand separating tariff advocacy from job preservation, treating the CETSCALE as an integrated unidimensional instrument remains psychometrically sound and methodologically parsimonious.

Measurement Invariance Across Cultures

Steenkamp and Baumgartner (1998) utilized the CETSCALE to illustrate multi-group confirmatory factor analysis procedures for establishing cross-national measurement invariance. Their findings established that the CETSCALE consistently achieves configural invariance (identical factor patterns across nations) and metric invariance (equal factor loadings across nations). This confirms that the construct has the same substantive meaning across cultures, enabling valid comparisons of regression relationships and structural path coefficients across international cohorts.

Instrument / Measurement Tool

The standard operational parameters and administrative characteristics of the CETSCALE are detailed below:

• Test Type: Psychometric self-report rating scale measuring domain-specific sociopsychological attitudes, economic nationalism, and consumer behavior.
• Format / Administration: Pen-and-paper, online questionnaire, or computer-assisted personal interviewing (CAPI). Can be administered individually or in large group settings. Self-administered.
• Number of Items:
  • Full Instrument: 17 items (standard comprehensive scale).
  • Abbreviated Instrument: 10 items (derived from items 1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 11, 13, and 17), recommended when survey brevity and participant fatigue are paramount.
• Response Format: 7-point Likert scale anchored by:
  • 1 = Strongly Disagree
  • 2 = Disagree
  • 3 = Somewhat Disagree
  • 4 = Neither Agree nor Disagree (Neutral)
  • 5 = Somewhat Agree
  • 6 = Agree
  • 7 = Strongly Agree
• Administration Time:
  • Full 17-item scale: Approximately 4 to 6 minutes.
  • Abbreviated 10-item scale: Approximately 2 to 3 minutes.
• Scoring Procedures:
  • Reverse-Scored Items: None. All 17 items are positively keyed toward consumer ethnocentrism.
  • Full Scale Scoring: Scores are calculated by summing the numerical ratings across all 17 items. Total scores range from a minimum of 17 to a maximum of 119. Alternatively, an average item score ranging from 1.0 to 7.0 may be computed to facilitate cross-study comparisons.
  • Abbreviated 10-Item Scoring: Summed scores range from a minimum of 10 to a maximum of 70 (or an item mean ranging from 1.0 to 7.0).
• Score Interpretation Guidelines:
  • Low Consumer Ethnocentrism (Full scale: 17 – 51; Mean: < 3.0): Cosmopolitan, globally oriented consumer. Evaluates products purely on functional, technological, and aesthetic merits; harbors no moral reservations about purchasing foreign products.
  • Moderate Consumer Ethnocentrism (Full scale: 52 – 85; Mean: 3.1 – 5.0): Pragmatic consumer. Holds moderate domestic loyalty and prefers domestic goods when price and quality are comparable, but exhibits willingness to switch to imports when substantial economic, technological, or quality advantages exist.
  • High Consumer Ethnocentrism (Full scale: 86 – 119; Mean: > 5.0): Highly ethnocentric, economically protectionist consumer. Views the purchase of foreign products as morally reprehensible and damaging to domestic workers. Actively avoids imported products and is willing to pay significant price premiums to support domestic industry.
• Cross-Cultural Adaptation Rule: When utilized outside the United States, researchers systematically substitute the national demonym and sovereign reference in the original items (e.g., replacing "American" with "French," "German," "Mexican," or "Japanese," and replacing "U.S." with "our country" or the relevant sovereign territory).

Permissions & Fee and Test Year

The Consumer Ethnocentrism Scale was formally published in August 1987 in the Journal of Marketing Research by the American Marketing Association (AMA):

• Copyright Ownership: The original copyright for the foundational article is owned by the American Marketing Association (AMA).
• Academic Research Access & Licensing: The CETSCALE is widely regarded within the international marketing and behavioral research community as an open psychometric instrument for non-commercial, academic, and scholarly research. Academic researchers, university faculty, and graduate students may utilize the scale items for educational and scientific investigations without payment of royalties, provided that full bibliographic attribution is granted to Shimp and Sharma (1987).
• Commercial and Proprietary Use: Corporations, commercial market research firms, and consulting enterprises seeking to reproduce, digitize, or deploy the scale within commercial platforms, syndicated consumer tracking databases, or profit-generating services should consult the permissions desk of the American Marketing Association or the Copyright Clearance Center (CCC) regarding formal corporate licensing guidelines.

References

The following peer-reviewed academic literature forms the foundational corpus of research on the conceptualization, validation, and international application of the CETSCALE:

• Bawa, A. (2004). Consumer ethnocentrism: CETSCALE validation and measurement of extent. Vikalpa: The Journal for Decision Makers, 29(3), 43–57. https://doi.org/10.1177/0256090920040304
• Chryssochoidis, G., Krystallis, A., & Perreas, P. (2007). Ethnocentric beliefs and country-of-origin (COO) effect: Impact of country, product and product attributes on Greek consumers' evaluation of food products. European Journal of Marketing, 41(11/12), 1518–1544. https://doi.org/10.1108/03090560710821288
• Douglas, S. P., & Nijssen, E. J. (2003). On the use of “borrowed” scales in cross-national research: A study of the CETSCALE in the Netherlands. International Marketing Review, 20(6), 621–642. https://doi.org/10.1108/02651330310505222
• Gurhan-Canli, Z., & Maheswaran, D. (2000). Cultural variations in country of origin effects. Journal of Marketing Research, 37(3), 309–317. https://doi.org/10.1509/jmkr.37.3.309.18778
• Klein, J. G., Ettenson, R., & Morris, M. D. (1998). The animosity model of foreign product purchase: An empirical test in the People's Republic of China. Journal of Marketing, 62(1), 89–100. https://doi.org/10.1177/002224299806200108
• Luque-Martínez, T., Ibáñez-Zapata, J. A., & del Barrio-García, S. (2000). Consumer ethnocentrism measurement: An assessment of the reliability and validity of the CETSCALE in Spain. European Journal of Marketing, 34(11/12), 1353–1373. https://doi.org/10.1108/03090560010348498
• Netemeyer, R. G., Durvasula, S., & Lichtenstein, D. R. (1991). A cross-national assessment of the reliability and validity of the CETSCALE. Journal of Marketing Research, 28(3), 320–327. https://doi.org/10.1177/002224379102800306
• Nunnally, J. C., & Bernstein, I. H. (1994). Psychometric theory (3rd ed.). McGraw-Hill.
• Saffu, K., & Walker, J. H. (2005). An assessment of the CETSCALE in a developing country: An empirical study in Ghana. Journal of African Business, 6(1-2), 167–181. https://doi.org/10.1300/J156v06n01_09
• Sharma, P. (2015). Consumer ethnocentrism: Reconceptualization and cross-cultural validation. Journal of International Business Studies, 46(3), 381–389. https://doi.org/10.1057/jibs.2014.42
• Sharma, S., Shimp, T. A., & Shin, J. (1995). Consumer ethnocentrism: A test of antecedents and moderators. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 23(1), 26–37. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02894611
• Shimp, T. A., & Sharma, S. (1987). Consumer ethnocentrism: Construction and validation of the CETSCALE. Journal of Marketing Research, 24(3), 280–289. https://doi.org/10.1177/002224378702400304
• Steenkamp, J. B. E., & Baumgartner, H. (1998). Assessing measurement invariance in cross-national consumer research. Journal of Consumer Research, 25(1), 78–90. https://doi.org/10.1086/209528
• Suh, T., & Kwon, I. W. G. (2002). Globalization and consumer ethnocentrism: Search for cultural representations. Asia Pacific Journal of Marketing and Logistics, 14(1), 30–47. https://doi.org/10.1108/13555850210764858
• Sumner, W. G. (1906). Folkways: A study of the sociological importance of usages, manners, customs, mores, and morals. Ginn and Company.
• Wang, C. X., & Chen, Z. X. (2004). Consumer ethnocentrism and willingness to buy domestic products in a developing country: An empirical test in the PRC. Journal of Consumer Marketing, 21(6), 391–400. https://doi.org/10.1108/07363760410558663

13. Items of the Scale (Questionnaire)