Measuring the Impact of Extrinsic Cues on Consumers’ Purchasing Decision for Food Products

Open access


The extrinsic product cues are becoming a very important aspect in product evaluation by consumers. Because of their importance many authors are exploring which extrinsic cues are considered more significant when evaluating the different kind of products. Therefore, the aim of this research is to investigate the impact of most researched extrinsic cues such as the country of origin (COO), brand, and price on a purchasing decision for food products among consumers in Kosova. To explore the domestic country bias, the impact of the additional cue labeled as “domestic product” is studied. Based on a quantitative survey, the main findings of this study revealed that the brand, the price, the country of origin, and domestic branded products have positive impact on a consumer’s purchasing decision, since consumers rely on those extrinsic cues when making their purchasing decisions. When multiple cues are presented, the country of origin is considered as the most important cue, while the “domestic product” is least important to Kosovar consumers. The findings of this study are useful to food producers and marketers of food products, since it can provide them with useful information on what consumers consider most important when purchasing food products.

If the inline PDF is not rendering correctly, you can download the PDF file here.

  • Acebrón L. B. & Dopico D. C. (2000). The importance of intrinsic and extrinsic cues to expected and experienced quality: an empirical application for beef. Food Quality and Preference 11(3) 229-238.

  • Agarwal S. & Teas R. K. (2001). Perceived value: mediating role of perceived risk. Journal of Marketing theory and Practice 9(4) 1-14.

  • Agrawal J. & Kamakura W. A. (1999). Country of origin: A competitive advantage?. International Journal of Research in Marketing 16(4) 255-267.

  • Ahmed Z. U. Johnson J. P. Yang X. Kheng Fatt C. Sack Teng H. & Chee Boon L. (2004). Does country of origin matter for low-involvement products?. International Marketing Review 21(1) 102-120.

  • Akinci S. Kaynak E. Atilgan E. & Aksoy Ş. (2007). Where does the logistic regression analysis stand in marketing literature? A comparison of the Market Positioning of Prominent Marketing Journals. European Journal of Marketing 41(5/6) 537-567.

  • Al-Sulaiti K. I. & Baker M. J. (1998). Country of origin effects: a literature review. Marketing Intelligence & Planning 16(3) 150-199.

  • Aqueveque C. (2006). Extrinsic cues and perceived risk: the influence of consumption situation. Journal of Consumer Marketing 23(5) 237-247.

  • Auger P. Devinney T. M. Louviere J. J. & Burke P. F. (2010). The importance of social product attributes in consumer purchasing decisions: A multi-country comparative study. International Business Review 19(2) 140-159.

  • Azen R. & Traxel N. (2009). Using dominance analysis to determine predictor importance in logistic regression. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics 34(3) 319-347.

  • Balabanis G. & Diamantopoulos A. (2004). Domestic country bias country-of-origin effects and consumer ethnocentrism: a multidimensional unfolding approach. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science 32(1) 80-95.

  • Bearden W. O. & Etzel M. J. (1982). Reference group influence on product and brand purchase decisions. Journal of consumer research 9(2) 183-194.

  • Bearden W. O. & Shimp T. A. (1982). The use of extrinsic cues to facilitate product adoption. Journal of marketing research 229-239.

  • Bilkey W. J. & Nes E. (1982). Country-of-origin effects on product evaluations. Journal of international business studies 13(1) 89-100.

  • Bredahl L. (2004). Cue utilisation and quality perception with regard to branded beef. Food quality and preference 15(1) 65-75.

  • Bryman A. (2006). Integrating quantitative and qualitative research: how is it done?. Qualitative research 6(1) 97-113.

  • Chu W. Choi B. & Song M. R. (2005). The role of on-line retailer brand and infomediary reputation in increasing consumer purchase intention. International Journal of Electronic Commerce 9(3) 115-127.

  • Cordell V. V. Wongtada N. & Kieschnick R. L. (1996). Counterfeit purchase intentions: role of lawfulness attitudes and product traits as determinants. Journal of Business Research 35(1) 41-53.

  • Czaja R. (1998). Questionnaire pretesting comes of age. Marketing Bulletin-Department of Marketing Massey University 9 52-66.

  • Darley W. K. Blankson C. & Luethge D. J. (2010). Toward an integrated framework for online consumer behavior and decision making process: A review. Psychology & marketing 27(2) 94-116.

  • Dinnie K. (2004). Country-of-origin 1965-2004: A literature review. Journal of Consumer Behaviour 3(2) 165-213.

  • Dodds W. B. Monroe K. B. & Grewal D. (1991). Effects of price brand and store information on buyers' product evaluations. Journal of marketing research 307-319.

  • Dornyei Z. (2007). Research Methods in Applied Linguistics: Quantitative Qualitative and Mixed Methodologies. Oxford University Press. Oxford.

  • Erdem T. & Swait J. (1998). Brand equity as a signaling phenomenon. Journal of consumer Psychology 7(2) 131-157.

  • Etikan I. Musa S. A. & Alkassim R. S. (2016). Comparison of convenience sampling and purposive sampling. American Journal of Theoretical and Applied Statistics 5(1) 1-4.

  • Gliem J. A. & Gliem R. R. (2003). Calculating interpreting and reporting Cronbach’s alpha reliability coefficient for Likert-type scales. Midwest Research-to-Practice Conference in Adult Continuing and Community Education.

  • Green S. B. (1991). How many subjects does it take to do a regression analysis. Multivariate behavioral research 26(3) 499-510.

  • Grewal D. Krishnan R. Baker J. & Borin N. (1998). The effect of store name brand name and price discounts on consumers' evaluations and purchase intentions. Journal of retailing 74(3) 331-352.

  • Hannerz U. (1990). Cosmopolitans and locals in world culture. Theory Culture & Society 7(2) 237-251.

  • Hopkins W. G. (2008). Quantitative research design. Sportscience 4(1)

  • Huang W. Y. Schrank H. & Dubinsky A. J. (2004). Effect of brand name on consumers' risk perceptions of online shopping. Journal of Consumer Behaviour 4(1) 40-50.

  • Idoko E. C. Nkamnebe A. D. Ireneus N. C. & Okoye V. I. (2013). Effects of intrinsic and extrinsic product cues on consumers’ purchase intention: a study of alcoholic beverage consumers in a developing country metropolitan city. Researchers World 4(3) 1.

  • Kardes F. R. Cronley M. L. Kellaris J. J. & Posavac S. S. (2004). The role of selective information processing in price-quality inference. Journal of Consumer Research 31(2) 368-374.

  • Kirmani A. & Zeithaml V. (1993). Advertising perceived quality and brand image (pp. 143-62). Hillsdale NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

  • Kotler P. & Gertner D. (2002). Country as brand product and beyond: A place marketing and brand management perspective. Journal of brand management 9(4) 249-261.

  • Kotler P. Keller K. L. Manceau D. & Hémonnet-Goujot A. (2015). Marketing management (Vol. 14). Englewood Cliffs NJ: Prentice Hall.

  • Lee M. & Lou Y. C. (1995). Consumer reliance on intrinsic and extrinsic cues in product evaluations: A conjoint approach. Journal of Applied Business Research 12(1) 21.

  • Li W. K. & Wyer R. S. (1994). The role of country of origin in product evaluations: Informational and standard-of-comparison effects. Journal of Consumer Psychology 3(2) 187-212.

  • Lin L. Y. & Chen C. S. (2006). The influence of the country-of-origin image product knowledge and product involvement on consumer purchase decisions: an empirical study of insurance and catering services in Taiwan. Journal of consumer Marketing 23(5) 248-265.

  • Malhotra N. K. (1988). A methodology for measuring consumer preferences in developing countries. International Marketing Review 5(3) 52-66.

  • Maxwell S. (2001). An expanded price/brand effect model-A demonstration of heterogeneity in global consumption. International Marketing Review 18(3) 325-343.

  • Milgrom P. & Roberts J. (1986). Price and advertising signals of product quality. Journal of political economy 94(4) 796-821.

  • Mitra A. (1995). Price cue utilization in product evaluations: the moderating role of motivation and attribute information. Journal of Business Research 33(3) 187-195.

  • Miyazaki A. D. Grewal D. & Goodstein R. C. (2005). The effect of multiple extrinsic cues on quality perceptions: A matter of consistency. Journal of consumer research 32(1) 146-153.

  • Monroe K. B. & Krishnan R. (1985). The effect of price on subjective product evaluations. Perceived quality 1 209-232.

  • Mueller S. & Szolnoki G. (2010). The relative influence of packaging labelling branding and sensory attributes on liking and purchase intent: Consumers differ in their responsiveness. Food quality and preference 21(7) 774-783.

  • Olson J. C. & Jacoby J. (1972). Cue utilization in the quality perception process. In SV-proceedings of the third annual conference of the association for consumer research.

  • Peterson R. A. & Jolibert A. J. (1995). A meta-analysis of country-of-origin effects. Journal of International business studies 26(4) 883-900.

  • Rao A. R. & Monroe K. B. (1988). The moderating effect of prior knowledge on cue utilization in product evaluations. Journal of consumer research 15(2) 253-264.

  • Rao A. R. & Monroe K. B. (1989). The effect of price brand name and store name on buyers' perceptions of product quality: An integrative review. Journal of marketing Research 351-357.

  • Richardson P. S. Dick A. S. & Jain A. K. (1994). Extrinsic and intrinsic cue effects on perceptions of store brand quality. The Journal of Marketing 28-36.

  • Santos J. R. A. (1999). Cronbach’s alpha: A tool for assessing the reliability of scales. Journal of extension 37(2) 1-5.

  • Sawyer A. G. Worthing P. M. & Sendak P. E. (1979). The role of laboratory experiments to test marketing strategies. The Journal of Marketing 60-67.

  • Shimp T. A. & Bearden W. O. (1982). Warranty and other extrinsic cue effects on consumers' risk perceptions. Journal of Consumer research 9(1) 38-46.

  • Shimp T. A. & Sharma S. (1987). Consumer ethnocentrism: construction and validation of the CETSCALE. Journal of marketing research 280-289.

  • Statistical Yearbook of the Republic of Kosovo for 2016. (2016). Kosovo Agency of Statistics. Retrieved 19 July 2017 from http://Kosovo Agency of Statistics.

  • Suen L. J. W. Huang H. M. & Lee H. H. (2014). A comparison of convenience sampling and purposive sampling. Hu Li Za Zhi 61(3) 105.

  • Sukamolson S. (2007). Fundamentals of quantitative research. Bangkok: EJTR.

  • Szybillo G. J. & Jacoby J. (1974). Intrinsic versus extrinsic cues as determinants of perceived product quality. Journal of Applied Psychology 59(1) 74-78.

  • Tavakol M. & Dennick R. (2011). Making sense of Cronbach's alpha. International journal of medical education 2 53.

  • Teas R. K. & Agarwal S. (2000). The effects of extrinsic product cues on consumers’ perceptions of quality sacrifice and value. Journal of the Academy of marketing Science 28(2) 278-290.

  • Tranmer M. & Elliot M. (2008). Binary logistic regression. Cathie Marsh for census and survey research paper 20.

  • VanVoorhis C. W. & Morgan B. L. (2007). Understanding power and rules of thumb for determining sample sizes. Tutorials in Quantitative Methods for Psychology 3(2) 43-50.

  • Veale R. Quester P. & Karunaratna A. (2006). The role of intrinsic (sensory) cues and the extrinsic cues of country of origin and price on food product evaluation. In 3rd International Wine Business and Marketing Research Conference Refereed Paper. Montpellier (pp. 6-8).

  • Verlegh P. W. & Steenkamp J. B. E. (1999). A review and meta-analysis of country-of-origin research. Journal of economic psychology 20(5) 521-546.

  • Vraneševic T. & Stančec R. (2003). The effect of the brand on perceived quality of food products. British Food Journal 105(11) 811-825.

  • Watson J. J. & Wright K. (2000). Consumer ethnocentrism and attitudes toward domestic and foreign products. European journal of Marketing 34(9/10) 1149-1166.

  • Zeithaml V. A. (1988). Consumer perceptions of price quality and value: a means-end model and synthesis of evidence. The Journal of marketing 2-22.

  • Zhou K. Z. Su C. & Bao Y. (2002). A paradox of price–quality and market efficiency: a comparative study of the US and China markets. International Journal of Research in marketing 19(4) 349-365.

Journal information
All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 0 0 0
Full Text Views 718 255 14
PDF Downloads 305 149 15