Product Placements in Movies: A Cross-Cultural Analysis of Austrian, French and American...

This paper reports on a cross-cultural study which tests the robustness of the approach developed by Gupta and Gould (1997) concerning use of product placements in movies. Using their American data as a comparison point, additional data using the same questionnaire were collected in Austria

and France. As an international medium in which movies freely cross borders, product placement is also a less adaptable one, relative to commercials since it remains in the movie regardless of the nation where it is shown. Applying a three-pronged framework which considered country, product and individual differences and their interactive effects, the results of this study indicate the ways in which all three have an impact on the acceptability of product placements and on potential purchase behavior. Finally, implications for managing and further researching product placements based on this framework are drawn.

Product placement in the movies, according to Gupta and Gould (1997, p. 37), "involves incorporating brands in movies in return for money or for some promotional or other consideration." Such placement (including that in other media such as television) has also been viewed as a hybrid of advertising and publicity (Balasubramanian 1994). Research has indicated the importance of product placement as an addition to the promotion mix although there remains a number of challenging issues concerning it. To date, such research has mainly centered on product placement's efficacy (Babin and Carder 1995, 1996; Gupta, Balasubramanian and Klassen 2000; Gupta and Lord 1998; Karrh 1994; Ong and Meri 1994; Vollmers and Mizerski 1994) and ethical acceptability (Gupta and Gould 1997; Nebenzahl and Secunda 1993). A review of these studies indicates a major gap in the literature: the previous studies of product placement were conducted in the U.S., and there has been little focus on it as a global phenomenon. However, the gene ral globalization of marketing communications, the interest in integrating them in Integrated and Globally Integrated Marketing Communications programs (DeLorme 1998; Grein and Gould 1996), and the fact that many movies play to and often are produced for multinational audiences raise the issue of how consumers in other countries perceive product placements.

Considering product placement on a cross-national or cultural basis is important from a marketing point of view in terms of the issue of standardization versus adaptation. (It should be noted that cross-national means across nations while cross-cultural may imply other distinctions as well, since cultures often do not follow national boundaries [cf. Dawar and Parker 1994]). Here, both terms may be used, but in general the study to be reported will be on a cross-national basis.) While it is not very likely that a movie would have multiple international versions based on different versions of product placement, a marketer could nonetheless make a decision as to how a globally marketed product would play in all the countries where the movie might be distributed. From this point of view, the product placement campaign is one of standardization by default. Still, as Karrh (1998a) points out, there are very likely to be cross-cultural differences with respect to attitudes toward product placement which should be c onsidered. However, a marketer cannot create local product placements in a global movie as easily as local commercials. Thus, although many American movies are widely exported, their product placements usually are not culturally adapted. Therefore, the result is generally either standardization or nothing. Reflecting this concern and the inflexibility of product placements relative to some other forms of promotion, this paper takes a first step in addressing the research gap in the international literature by investigating cross-national perceptions of the efficacy and acceptability of product placements. This study will also explore the robustness of the Gupta and Gould (1997) approach to product placements in other environments.

A Cross-Cultural Framework

In general, culture in general informs product meanings largely through the promotional system, and these meanings in turn are engaged and acted upon by the consumer (McCracken 1986). This approach may be extended both cross-culturally (Gould 1998) and to product placement (Russell 1998). These ideas suggest that a product's placement in a movie may vary in the effects it has in different countries. However, beyond the general idea of culture when considered in cross-national or cross-cultural terms is the issue of cultural versus individual differences as outlined by Dawar and Parker (1994). Advertisers in this regard must make decisions about segmentation based upon whether there are cross-national differences and/or there are within-nation differences which transcend national boundaries. For example, consider whether American and French consumers differ from each other in their attitudes toward product placement and/or whether men and women in both countries differ from each other in similar ways (e.g., A mericans could have more favorable attitudes toward product placement than French consumers, while [dis]similar patterns of male-female differences also coexist for both nationalities). If attitudes toward product placement vary by nationality, this would indicate theoretically that product meanings differ across countries and that those using product placement must employ very different strategies than where the attitudes and meanings are similar.

On the other hand, individual differences based on factors other than national culture may also play a role in consumer response to product placement. In Dawar and Parker's (1994) terms, these may be regarded as noncultural variables which, if improperly considered, might be confounded with cultural variables. In the product placement area, Gupta and Gould (1997), for instance, considered a number of variables of this type, including attitudes toward product placement; frequency of viewing movies, and gender. While these individual variables may certainly be influenced by or interact with culture, their effect may or may not vary on a cross-national or cross-cultural basis. Thus, as with other consumer phenomena, response to product placement should be investigated in terms of both cross-national and individual difference variables. If cross-national differences predominate, then the key segmentation variable for product placement would be country or ethnicity. Under such conditions, standardization strategi es would not work. However, if individual differences predominate, then these variables will serve as the key targeting-segmentation variables. Standardization strategies would be more feasible and they would aim at multi-local, regional or even global segments. If both types of variables (i.e., cross-national and individual differences) are found to have an effect on response to product placement or if an interaction between these types exists, then more complex, adaptational strategies would be required. All these possible effects will also reflect on the robustness of the Gupta and Gould (1997) approach in terms of variables applied and linked.

A still more intricate perspective blends in product effects. Wang (1996) provides a contingency approach for global strategy development which concerns three variables: country, product and consumer segment (individual differences). Wang's approach suggests that various interactions between any or all of these three would involve a modification of standardization strategies. For instance, a product x consumer segment interaction would mean that different strategies must be developed for each segment, and that products may appeal to certain segments across countries, but not others. A country x consumer segment interaction, on the other hand, indicates that a particular product appeals to many segments but that response patterns vary within them (e.g., heavy users respond differently across countries). A product x country interaction suggests that within country differences are not a major factor while cross-country differences are. A three-way interaction would lead to the formation of niche strategies.

On the basis of the foregoing, there are three general hypotheses which may be used to construct a framework for product placement effects: the cross-national difference hypothesis, the product difference hypothesis, and the individual difference hypothesis. Here, the product difference hypothesis is examined both in terms of within-category and brand differences (e.g., within the camera category) and between product category differences (e.g., camera versus alcohol). If there are no cross-national differences, product and/or individual differences, such as those found by Gupta and Gould (1997) in the U.S., should be similar across countries. However, if there are cross-country differences (i.e., the cross-national difference hypothesis), then it is very likely that some interactions will be found.

Product Placements in Movies

In considering how product placements function, DeLorme and colleagues (DeLorme, Reid and Zimmer 1994; DeLorme and Reid 1999) found that consumers connected the world of the film, including product placements, with their social world, as well as consumption-specific aspects of their own everyday life. Russell (1998) theorizes that transformational and affect transfer processes are at work in the establishment of linkages between a movie or television show and the product placed. These findings of linkages could be important for buying behavior since the decision to purchase a product is likely to be the result of such linkages. They could also be significant in another way: consumers will attach different ethical meanings to product placements in terms of their acceptability, i.e., consumers carry their ethical perceptions of marketing various products into how they perceive them as product placements. Thus, while product placement is still a relatively new area for study, we consider what research there is i n terms of two main but related and overlapping categories: (1) its efficacy and (2) its acceptability and perceived ethical standing.

Efficacy of Product Placements in Movies

It has been suggested that product placements may be made effective through positive positioning and/or linking with an attractive character (Karrh 1998b; McKee and Pardun 1998). Nonetheless, prior research results regarding the efficacy of products placed in movies are mixed. There is little support for brand attitude change resulting from product placement, but there is some evidence that people do recognize or recall brands so promoted (Babin and Carder 1995, 1996; Gupta and Lord 1998; Karrh 1994; Ong and Meri 1994; Vollmers and Mizerski 1994). It is also noteworthy that Gupta and Lord (1998) found that prominent placements could perform better than television advertising in inducing recall. However, based on these studies conducted to date, the research generally is based on recognition-recall and attitude factors and does not focus on purchasing behavior, although McKee and Pardun (1998) do link treating the product as "hero" to positive sales results. In the study to be reported below, we will more dire ctly consider purchase behavior as an indicator of efficacy.

Acceptability and Ethics of Product Placements in Movies

The acceptability and ethics of product placement may be viewed in terms of two aspects: (1) general ethical concerns and (2) ethical concerns about specific products. Regarding the general acceptability and ethics of product placement, Nebenzahl and Secunda (1993) found that generally such placement was acceptable although those who objected tended to do so for ethical reasons. For instance, some consumers felt that products placed in movies could be deceptive or even subliminal. For instance, they may be seen as "hidden but paid" messages (Balasubramanian 1994). On this basis, some people in the U.S. have gone so far as to suggest that product placements should be restricted or banned (Rothenberg 1991).

On the other hand, specific products have been targeted for ethical concern with respect to product placement. For example, the placement of cigarettes in movies which are shown on television have been viewed as a way to get around the ban on cigarette advertising (Balasubramanian 1994). Such placement is addressed to a captive TV audience which cannot or would not want to zip through this commercial intrusion since it would interfere with the overall viewing experience. Moreover, young people in particular can see these products used even though they are not supposed to see such advertising. Indeed, then, just as the marketing and advertising of cigarettes, along with other products such as alcohol and guns, are very controversial (Boddewyn 1993; Hill 1994; Kaskutas 1993), product placement, as well, will provoke strong criticism and opposition.

Gupta and Gould (1997) focused on these ethical issues and found that the consumers in their sample tended to differentiate product placements on the basis of both product category and individual differences. Ethically-charged products, namely cigarettes, alcohol and guns, were looked at less favorably in terms of product placement in movies than other products, such as soft drinks, automobiles and cameras. In addition, the acceptability of placing products was influenced by related attitudes, number of movies watched, and gender. Respondents who held favorable attitudes toward product placement in general and toward their ability to make movies seem realistic were more likely to hold favorable attitudes toward the specific products mentioned in the survey. On the other hand, those who favored restricting such product placement had a less favorable attitude. Males and those who watched a greater number of movies were also more accepting of product placements although all these differences were accounted for by the ethically-charged products of cigarettes, alcohol and guns. There were no differences for other products. Finally, while these results did not address ethical acceptability in relation to efficacy, they are suggestive of such a relationship and that the two are likely to be positively correlated (cf. Simpson, Brown and Widing 1998).

Potential Cross-Cultural Differences in Attitudes Toward Product Placement

We have already noted that product meanings are a cultural phenomenon which consumers apply and change in the act of consumption (McCracken 1986) and that product placements appear to act in similar ways (Russell 1998). At the same time, Dawar and Parker (1994) noted the pressing need for more empirical research which considered cultural versus individual differences in various marketing settings. Thus, meanings are likely to vary on a cross-cultural basis, although potential (dis)similarities should be considered, especially when thinking in strategic terms of standardization versus adaptation. In this regard, the intertextuality of meanings might also be considered (Gould 1998). Such intertextuality involves the movement and interactions of meaning across cultures and reflects both similarities and differences. Since product placements travel across cultures in movies as a media vehicle, they reflect this intertextuality since people in one culture are creating the movie and incorporating the placements, an d audience members from a different culture are seeing and interpreting them. In this process, these viewers are trying to comprehend what the movie is saying, while, on the other hand, they are making connections to their own lives which might vary quite a bit from those being cinematically intended or portrayed.

As noted earlier, we will report on a study involving the U.S., Austria and France. While there is little published research comparing these countries and none regarding product placements, there is enough to suggest that differences in meanings, perceptions and attitudes regarding product placements might exist, based on differences in economic and cultural socialization. Furthermore, we also consider the need to investigate product differences (Gupta and Gould 1997; Wang 1996). Therefore, to investigate this issue in an empirical study of product placements, as well as to test the robustness of the approach of Gupta and Gould (1997), the survey used in their U.S. study was administered in France and Austria and the results compared with the original data they had collected and previously reported on. Based on issues of substance, as well as accessibility to relevant and comparable samples, Austria and France were selected to test for similarities and differences within a sphere of at least some cultural co hesion, i.e., the Western/European domain. On the one hand, it is thought that European countries exhibit similar characteristics to each other, but, on the other hand, that the national characters of various countries may differ (cf. Saimee and Athanassiou 1998). In this regard, France and Austria represent two quite different European cultures, although both countries are members of the European Union. A cultural-historical reason for their dissimilarities can be found in the inheritance of the Roman empire that cuts through the middle of the European Union-France represents a country with a Romance language and a Latin mentality, whereas Austria belongs to the Germanic-speaking region (cf. Hofstede 1996). In a similar fashion, Schuster and Copeland (1999) in their Cultural Classification Model suggest that the U.S., France and Austria are generally parts of three separate cultural groups: North American, Mediterranean and Northwestern/Central European, respectively.

Perhaps these historical-cultural differences are captured in Hofstede's (1991) studies of IBM employees across various 53 countries, including the U.S., Austria and France. These studies involved four dimensions: masculinity-femininity, power distance, individualism-collectivism, and uncertainty avoidance. Masculinity was defined in terms of individual accomplishment in the job setting while femininity was viewed as concerning cooperation on the job and quality of life and relationship issues. Austria ranked second in masculinity while France was tied for 35th. On the other hand, France was tied for 15th in power distance (i.e., the idea of power inequality as expressed in terms of subordinate dependence upon bosses versus more independence) while Austria was dead last, 53rd in rank. The U.S. was in the middle between France and Austria for both dimensions, i.e., 15th on masculinity and 38th on power distance, but was first in individualism, while France was tied for tenth and Austria was 18th. France was t enth, Austria tied for 24th and the U.S. was 43rd in uncertainty avoidance which concerns the threat posed by uncertain situations. While we will not address these variables directly in our study, the results of the studies based on them suggest a rationale for the present study, i.e., that there are substantial cultural differences among all three countries and that Austria and France in particular differ along some important dimensions. Moreover, it is thought that these types of differences might influence ethical decision-making (Vitell, Nwachukwu and Barnes 1993).

In the next section, we consider two related areas from which we will infer potential cross-national differences with regard to product placements: (1) differences in attitudes toward advertising as a proxy for product placement and (2) differences in ethical attitudes.

Attitudes Toward Advertising as a Proxy for Attitudes Toward Product Placement

Since there are no cross-cultural studies of product placement to our knowledge at present, we consider the effects of advertising on consumers and their attitudes toward them as a proxy (i.e., both are characterized in terms of commercial communications addressed to a target audience). In doing so, we also recognize that product placement and advertising are not altogether equivalent but believe that there are enough similarities to warrant at least this initial consideration. In this regard, several general findings which might translate from advertising to product placement are relevant. First, there appear to be product differences pertinent to both advertising and product placement in that some products may be more susceptible to standardization across countries than others (Seitz and Johar 1993). Second, countries may vary in the products for which they restrict advertising as do Austria and France, although both have similarly restricted television advertising for alcohol and tobacco (Shao and Hill 199 4). Third, both advertising and product placement may be seen as intrusive. Fourth, both tools may involve similar ethical challenges, such as their promotion of ethically-charged products and alleged use of deception (cf. Gupta and Gould 1997). Finally, people in various countries may differ in their attitudes toward advertising (Beatson 1984) and likely in a similar fashion toward product placement as well.

There is very little published research on Austrian consumers' attitudes toward advertising. In one older study, they were found to be generally accepting of advertising although also agreeing at a very high level (88%) that it made people buy things they did not want (Beatson 1984). This may reflect differential economic socialization across various European nations (Beatson 1984; Leiser, Sevon and Levy 1990). A more recent study reports on a survey in which 90% of the respondents found it disturbing when films on TV are interrupted by advertisements (Mayerhofer 1995). However, at the same time, almost 90% of these Austrian consumers appreciate advertising's informative function, especially for new products, and 58% think that advertisements are "quite entertaining." Another indication of possible attitudes toward product placement is that ads are not allowed on TV programs with an informative character, such as reports or panels (Gemeinboeck and Wagner 1993).

There have been a number of studies which have reported differences in U.S. and French advertising (Appelbaum and Halliburton 1993; Biswas, Olsen and Carlet 1992; Cutler and Javalgi 1992; Cutler, Javalgi and Erramilli 1992; Zandpour, Chang and Catalano 1992) and one which reported on French-British differences (Whitelock and Chung 1989). Perhaps, most importantly, Biswas, Olsen and Carlet (1992) found that French magazine advertising contained more emotional appeals while American magazine advertising contained more informational appeals. The French preference for emotional appeals is said to be due to the fact that France is a high context country as opposed to the U.S., meaning that French people are more interested in general and aesthetic effects than Americans who are more direct (Biswas, Olsen and Carlet 1992). Taylor, Hoy and Haley (1996) confirmed these findings in their study of French advertising professionals and indicated that soft sell approaches work better for the French than the hard sell app roaches that work well in the U.S. They also emphasized that while the U.S. has tended to play a leading role in international advertising, it would be wrong to assume that what works well there will work elsewhere. Thus, there is good reason to suspect that consumers of different nationalities may have varying attitudes toward product placements and that how they work in one country may not work in another. One possible variant may be different ethical attitudes since product placements have often been viewed in terms of moral considerations.

Ethical Attitudes

Research regarding business ethics across countries, whether in marketing or other business contexts, seems to indicate that there are some ethical codes and beliefs that stretch across countries while there are others that are culture specific (Langlois and Schlegelmilch 1990). For example, U.S., British, German and Austrian managers were found to differ in what managerial issues they considered as possessing ethical importance (Schlegelmilich and Robertson 1995). However, there are few specific studies which consider consumers or compare them across the U.S., Austria and France. In one study, Rawwas (1996) assessed Austrian consumers' attitudes regarding consumer ethics and made some comparisons to Americans. He found (pp. 1012-1013) that Austrians viewed some behaviors such as benefitting from a questionable action (e.g., "breaking a bottle of salad dressing in a supermarket and doing nothing about it") as more acceptable than did U.S. consumers. Austrians also found Machiavellianism (i.e., exhibiting mor e detachment and relativism and less emotional involvement and idealism in making decisions) to be more acceptable than did Americans. These results indicate that possible ethical differences exist and therefore potential differences are likely to be found in the acceptability of ethically-charged products across the three countries in the present study.

Research Hypotheses

The focal comparison country of this study is the U.S., based on the prior study of Gupta and Gould (1997) and a review of other related literature. In this regard, we would expect that since product placement often is controversial and therefore likely to be perceived as intrusive and a hard sell, French consumers (who it is said generally prefer soft-sell promotional appeals in comparison to consumers in the U.S. [Taylor, Hoy and Haley 1996]) should indicate that they find it less acceptable than U.S. consumers and that they are also less likely to use them to help them make purchases. There is less evidence concerning the Austrians, although their apparent Machiavellian attitudes relative to Americans (Rawwas 1996) should make them more skeptical of product placements since they may view them in terms of someone trying to take advantage of them. They also may be more skeptical because at least in the Beatson (1984) study, Austrians strongly agreed that advert ising makes people buy things they do not want.

Based on prior research and particularly in the previous study of Gupta and Gould (1997), the main research question involves asking: How similar or different are nations in terms of the effectiveness and acceptability of product placements as they were applied in the Gupta and Gould study? In one respect, we expect there to be some aspects of these variables that are convergent and others that are divergent (Saimee and Athanassiou 1998). Thus, on the one hand, we expect all countries to be more concerned about the acceptability of ethically-charged products (e.g., alcohol, guns, cigarettes) being placed in movies (Gupta and Gould 1997) than they are about others. However, we also expect there will be country differences in the levels of this acceptability given the general differences in ethics reported above. Similarly, we expect there to be country differences in reported purchase behavior and see these as indicators of the effectiveness of product placement in general, as well as reflecting divergence in the explanatory variables accounting for them.

It is harder to make predictions concerning Austria and France, since there is less direct evidence, though we do expect differences based on culture (Hofstede 1996; Schuster and Copeland 1999). Therefore, we will explore potential differences between Austria and France on an exploratory basis. However, we can hypothesize that consumers in both of these countries will be less accepting of product placement and less inclined to use it as a purchase determinant than will U.S. consumers. To express the issues discussed here, we created two subhypotheses: one related to country differences in general and one related to the U.S. versus the other countries in particular.

H1A: There will be a country effect in the acceptability of ethically versus non-ethically-charged product placements.

H1B: U.S. consumers will be more accepting of product placement than will Austrian or French consumers.

In addition, we expect possible individual and product differences, both within and across countries, based on other variables used in the original study of Gupta and Gould (1997), including gender, number of movies seen, and attitudes toward product placement in general. In light of H1A and following Wang (1996), this would lead us to expect that there will be some interactions involving country. However, we formulate the hypotheses in terms of main effects as well, with the expectation that product and individual differences will manifest in terms of levels (Dawar and Parker 1994). For instance, this would mean that U.S. consumers might be more accepting of product placements (as stated in H1B), but that individual differences such as those based on gender would persist with males being more accepting than females across all three countries, albeit at different levels. Product differences likely function in the same way, i.e., Americans rate products more acceptable but consumers in all three countries wil l exhibit similar patterns of finding certain products (e.g., ethically-charged ones) less acceptable than others.

Gupta and Gould (1997) reported on gender differences in the U.S. with men and frequent movie watchers being more accepting of ethically-charged products than women and less frequent movie watchers, respectively. The gender issue is consistent with other research that finds women more sensitive to ethically-charged products than men (Milner, Fodness and Morrison 1991; van Roosmalen and McDaniel 1992). Such gender differences in this regard were found by Gupta and Gould (1997) in the form of a product x gender interaction which was due to males finding ethically-charged products more acceptable than did females. The frequency of movie watching issue is tied into self-congruity theory (Mundorf, Zilmann and Drew 1991), in which one's self-concept and aspects of consumption are seen to form consistent affect-attitude patterns and to engender personal relevance (Russell 1998), i.e., watching more movies and seeing the products placed in them is consistent with how one sees oneself or comes to see oneself as a con sumer. The reverse is also true: if one sees movies less frequently, one is also less likely to like them and aspects of them, such as product placement. These theoretical ideas were supported in the study of Gupta and Gould (1997). Finally, consistent with Gupta and Gould (1997), favorable attitudes toward product placement in general should result in greater acceptance of particular products placed.

H2A: Regardless of country, there will be a product x sex interaction regarding the acceptability of products placed in movies.

H2B: Given the product x sex interaction, males will accept ethically-charged products more readily than females but there will be no difference with respect to non-ethically-charged products.

H3: Regardless of country, frequent movie watchers will be more accepting of products placed than will less frequent movie watchers.

H4: Regardless of country, positive attitudes toward product placement in general will result in greater acceptance of particular products placed.

As a further test, we also consider the effects of these variables on possible effects on product purchase. H5 concerns country while H6-H8 concern individual differences. Product differences were not accessed directly here. It is expected that the effects will be similar regarding consumers' self-reports of purchases of brands which are seen in movies.

H5A: There will be country differences in the impact of the acceptability of product placement on claims by consumers that they would purchase a brand they had seen in the movies.

H5B: U.S. consumers will be more likely to claim they would purchase a brand they had seen in the movies than will Austrian or French consumers.

H6: Regardless of country, men will be more likely to claim that they would purchase a brand they had seen in the movies than will women.

H7: Regardless of country, people who watch more movies will be more likely to claim that they would purchase a brand they had seen in the movies than will those who watch fewer movies.

H8: Regardless of country, people who have favorable attitudes toward product placement in general will be more likely to claim that they would purchase a brand they had seen in the movies.

In summary, hypotheses 1 and 5 address country differences while the others deal with product or individual differences. Testing them will enable us to reach some provisional conclusions about all three types of effects on consumers' responses to product placements.

Method

Samples

The samples used in this study were chosen to be roughly comparable in terms of occupation (i.e., all were undergraduate students), gender and age. The U.S. sample was previously used by Gupta and Gould (1997) and was drawn from a student population at a large Midwestern university. There were 1012 respondents of whom 491 were males and 515 were females (6 did not indicate their gender). Most were 25 years of age or younger (89.1%). The French sample of 204 of whom 97 were male and99 were female. Of these, 99.5% were 25 years old or younger. The Austrian sample was drawn from a major Austrian university and included 240 respondents of whom 125 were male and 115 were female. With respect to age, 75.8% were 25 years or under.

Survey Instrument

The survey instrument was the same one reported in Gupta and Gould (1997). For the French sample, the English version of the survey was used since the students there were English-speaking. For the Austrian sample, the survey was translated into German by one of the co-authors who is Austrian. It was also backtranslated into English by an otherwise non-participating German speaker and no major discrepancies were found. The following items were included in the survey:

Product Placement Definition. We defined product placement on the front page of the questionnaire in the following terms: "The practice of placing brand name products in movies as props is called product placement." Two pictures with descriptions were used as illustrations. One showed the Tom Hanks character in the movie "Big" with his vending machine that had the name "PEPSI" on it. The other showed John Candy drinking Diet Coke in the movie "Who's Harry Crumb?"

Attitude / Psychographic Questions. Thirty general attitude questions about product placement and a few about television advertising in general as a possible product placement correlate (cf. Andrews [1989] for attitudes toward advertising in general) were included in the survey. A 5-point scale was used with poles of strongly agree (5) and strongly disagree (1). Such concerns were important for at least some consumers' attitudes toward product placement. One of these items, "I buy brands I see movie stars using or holding in movies," was used to represent purchase behavior.

Number of movies watched. Respondents were asked, "How many movies do you watch in theaters in a typical month?" and also "How many rented movies do you watch in a typical month?" The number of movies watched was the total of these two.

Product Placement Acceptability. Respondents were asked to rate 13 products for their acceptability as product placements in movies on a three-point scale (acceptable -- scored as a 3--to not acceptable -- scored as a 1). This use of a three-point scale was based on its prior use by Gupta and Gould (1997). Thus, although such scales may be potentially limited in terms of sensitivity, robustness, and variance explained (e.g., Givon and Shapira 1984; Jacoby and Matell 1971), applying such a scale here serves to provide a valuable benchmark comparison with the prior results of Gupta and Gould. Acceptability across the 13 products was used as a within-subjects variable since each study participant provided a rating for each product (13 ratings in all), a very common procedure in advertising research for dealing with multiple stimuli. For example, Tinkham and Weaver-Lariscy (1994) assessed the effects of ten test ads on a within-subjects basis with respect to attitude toward the ad. Likewise, Moore and Harris (199 6) dealt with emotional responses in relation to three different types of ads, all of which were seen by each respondent, (i.e., on a within-subjects basis). In a similar fashion, we provided the 13 product stimuli which were rated by our respondents in terms of acceptability. These were later rescaled into two categories, ethically-charged and non-ethically-charged products, in order to follow Gupta and Gould (1997) and also to facilitate the theory testing proposed in this paper (see below).

The products were chosen because they had been previously used in the study by Gupta and Gould (1997) and they in turn had generally selected these products on the basis of their previously being used in movie product placement (cf. Sapolsky and Kinney 1994). Moreover, these products likely are used by or could be used by the student consumers who comprised our samples. A few products were deliberately chosen as being controversial (i.e., cigarettes, alcohol and guns) or what Gupta and Gould (1997) called "ethically-charged products" (cf. Balasubramanian 1994; Kaskutas 1993; Rothenberg 1991). While alcohol and cigarettes have been deliberately placed in movies (Sapolsky and Kinney 1994), guns turn up in them quite frequently and were included as a reference point whether or not they are deliberately placed.

The other ten products were non-ethically-charged and were chosen because they could be seen as representing varying degrees of harm. Surfing equipment, race-cars, fatty foods, soft drinks and candy/snacks are all products which could be seen by some as possessing potential dangerous aspects although in the main they are not particularly controversial. Others that were added (including automobiles, healthy consumer products, sunglasses, cameras and stereo equipment) would be seen as even less controversial. In the Gupta and Gould (1997) study, the acceptability of ethically-charged products generally differed quite significantly from that of non-ethically-charged products.

Open-Ended Question About Views of Manufacturers Using Product Placement

Consumers were given several lines to respond to the following, "Please write your views about manufacturers placing their brands in the movies as props." This data was not analyzed further in this paper.

Demographics. The demographics included were: sex, marital status, student class status (i.e., freshman, sophomore, junior, senior, graduate student or other) and racial status. Only sex was a hypothesized variable to be tested while the others were collected for classification purposes to describe the sample.

Results

In this results section, we report on the following: (1) a repeated measure ANOVA for the acceptability of ethically-charged versus non-ethically-charged products (see Tabachnick and Fidell [1983]), (2) a regression assessment of acceptability of products placed, and (3) an ANOVA and regression for reported purchase behavior in response to product placement.

ANOVA for the Acceptability of Ethically-charged Versus Non-ethically-Charged Products

To assess the placement acceptability of ethically versus non-ethically-charged products (Table 3), a mixed between and within-subjects run was made (i.e., 3 [country] x 2 [sex] x 2 [movies watched] x 2 [product -- ethically vs. non-ethically-charged]). There was a significant country main effect (p[less than].0004) on the acceptability of ethically versus non-ethically-charged products. No country interaction effects were significant. This result supports H1A predicting that there would be a country effect. Regarding H1B which predicted that U.S. consumers would be more favorable to product placements, we looked at planned comparisons. Americans tended to respond that both ethically and non-ethically-charged products were more acceptable than did Austrians (p[less than].0026 and p[less than].0006, respectively), while the only significant difference between U.S. and French consumers was for non-ethically-charged products (p[less than].0l53), although the difference for ethically-charged products was in the predicted direction. These results support H1B on a qualified basis.

In addition, there were significant sex (p[less than].0002), movie (p[less than].0086), product (p[less than].000l), product x sex (p[less than].000l) and product x movie (p[less than].00l3) effects. Regarding H2A, there was a significant product x sex interaction as predicted. In this respect and on the basis of planned comparisons, males were more accepting of ethically-charged products (p[less than].000l), but not of non-ethically-charged products (p[less than].8446). This finding supports H2B. Considering H3 which predicted that frequent moviegoers would be more accepting of product placements than less frequent ones, there was a significant main effect, but again, this must be qualified by the product x movie interaction. Looking at this interaction, we find a pattern similar to that which pertained to gender. Frequent moviegoers were more accepting of ethically-charged product placements than were less frequent moviegoers (p[less than].00l8), hut there was no difference between the two groups for non-e thically-charged products (p[less than].95l4).

Regression Assessment of Acceptability of Product Placements

The acceptability of product placement was further investigated via regression. Following Gupta and Gould (1997), three new variables were constructed as sums: INDEX representing the total numbers of all products deemed acceptable for product placement, INDEX1 representing the total number of ethically-charged products deemed acceptable for product placement, and INDEX2 representing the total number of the non-ethically-charged products deemed acceptable for product placement. The reliabilities for these three using Cronbach's Alpha were .88, .78 and .92, respectively. Each of these three served as the dependent variable in three separate regression runs with dummy variables, U.S. and France with Austria which generally had the lowest scores serving as a base, movies watched (MOVIE), gender as a dummy variable (GENDER), and the four exploratory attitude measures emerging from the original factor analysis of Gupta and Gould (1997). These latter four included along with their reliabilities for the total sample : (1) Attitudes Toward Product Placement in General (ATT: liking or not liking product placements-alpha =.71), (2) Perceived Realism (PR: placement of brand name products add to the realism of movies--alpha=.71), (3) Restriction (RESTRICT: desiring to restrict the placement of some products such as cigarettes in movies--alpha=.72), and (4) Attitudes toward Television Advertising in General (ATTTV: general attitudes toward this form of advertising as a potential predictor for attitudes toward product placement--alpha=.67).

It should be noted that separate factor analyses were run for each country to investigate whether the factor structures were similar. The same four factors that resulted in the original U.S. exploratory study also were found for the Austrian and French samples, although for some a couple of variables were different. On the basis of this run and the reasonable strength of the alpha reliabilities for each of the original factors by country (all were greater than .61 and five exceeded .70), we stuck to the original structure so that regressions could be run with comparable variables. Thus, while the factors were not absolutely the same and more rigorous confirmatory tests might reveal still other differences, we continued to use the same factors from the Gupta and Gould study because they offer a reasonable solution for our main concern which is to explore and predict acceptability across the three countries. Were the factors substantially different, we would not be able to apply such a solution. However, using non-comparable factors, especially when the factors are largely comparable as is the present case, would reduce the applicability of our work and also make future cross-cultural comparisons much less feasible in general. Thus, we find that the factor analyses indicate that similar attitude constructs and measures apply while cross-cultural differences may be assessed by these attitudes. A summary of the regression results using these original factors as the independent variables is shown in Table 4.

For INDEX, there was a significant effect for France (p[less than].0041). In addition, there were significant positive attitude effects for ATT and negative effects for RESTRICT (i.e., people who had negative attitudes toward product placement and those who felt they should be restricted were less accepting of product placements than were others). There was also a significant positive effect for PR (i.e., people who found that product placements contributed to realism were more accepting of product placements). These attitude findings indicate support for H4, namely that positive attitudes toward product placement will result in greater acceptance of products placed (as represented by INDEX). There was also a significant France effect (p[less than].0041), i.e., the French were more positive toward product placement than were the Austrians. The overall regression was significant (p=.0000) and the R square was .222.

For INDEX1 (acceptability score based on ethically-charged products), the same attitude variables related to INDEX were also significant in the same directions (although for PR, p[less than].0042). Neither U.S. nor France was significant (p[greater than].05), but GENDER was significant here (p=.0000). The latter result was consistent with other gender effects found earlier, namely that women gave less favorable acceptability ratings to ethically-charged products than did men. The overall regression was also significant (p=.0000) and even more variance was explained than it was for INDEX (R square=.346). For INDEX2 (acceptability score based on non-ethically-charged products), the results were a bit different. In addition, only ATT and PR were among the significant attitudes (p=.0000). France was also significant (p[less than].0011). The explained variance was also lower (R square=.142), although the significance of the regression run was p=.0000. It should be noted that because of possible multicollinearity b etween the two dummy variables, U.S. and France (r=.61), we tested the U.S. by itself (without France but with all the other independent variables) and found marginally significant results for INDEX (p[less than].0798), INDEX1 (p[less than].0951), and INDEX2 (p[less than].0765), respectively. Overall, these results indicate support for H4 predicting the effect of favorable attitudes toward product placement in general on the acceptability of particular products.

ANOVA and Regression Tests of Reported Purchase Behavior Based on Product Placement

Purchase behavior (i.e., as measured by the item "I buy brands I see movie stars using or holding in movies") was used as a dependent variable in an analysis of variance (ANOVA) against country, sex and movies watched (divided at the median) as independent variables, a 3 x 2 x 2 design. There were significant country (p[less than].0044) and sex effects (p[less than].0002), but their interaction was not significant (p[less than].l215). No other effects were significant (p[greater than].05). Based on planned comparisons, U.S. respondents were more likely than either Austrian (p[less than].0036) or French (p[less than].0454) respondents to claim that they would purchase brands they see in movies. Thus, H5A predicting country differences and H5B predicting U.S. differences from the other two countries were supported. Males were more likely to claim that they purchase brands they have seen in movies than were females (M= 1.78 for males and 1.53 for females, p[less than].0002). H6 regarding males' greater likelihoo d of purchasing brands seen in movies is supported, but H7 regarding the impact of the number of movies watched is not supported.

To test H8 regarding the effect of attitudes toward product placement on claimed purchase, a regression (Table 5) was run and included ATT, PR, RESTRICT, ATTTV, INDEX1, INDEX2, gender, movies watched and dummy variables for country and gender as independent variables. There were significant effects for ATT (p[less than].000l) and PR (p[less than].0005), indicating that positive attitudes toward product placement affect reported purchase. H8 predicting such a relationship is supported. In addition, there was a significant gender effect (p[less than].0049), with males being more likely to claim purchase based on brands seen in movies than women. Thus, HG predicting such gender differences is further supported. A further finding was that French consumers were less likely to claim a purchase than others (p[less than].0151). This provides some additional support for H5 predicting higher U.S. purchase claims although no effect was found for Austria (p[less than].05). All other effects were not significant (p[great er than].05).

Discussion

Summary and Limitations

This study indicates support for the robustness of the approach of Gupta and Gould (1997) to product placement in relation to three hypotheses of difference: the two based on their paper, product differences and individual differences, as well as the additional dimension added here, country differences. First, there is support for the cross-national difference hypothesis, namely that consumers in the three countries of the U.S., Austria and France differ in the likelihood of responding positively to product placement in terms of acceptability and purchase behavior. U.S. consumers tended to be more accepting of and more likely to purchase products shown in movies. At the same time, there was some evidence for convergence as well. Thus, some products tended to be less acceptable across all three countries (i.e., the ethically-charged products of cigarettes, alcohol and guns). This supports the product difference hypothesis. In addition, there were significant gender differences (i.e., women are less positive) t hat persist across all three countries with respect to some or all of the ethically-charged products as evidenced by the ANOVA, regression and t-test analyses. There was also a movies-watched effect in terms of an interaction with product. Moreover, general attitudes toward product placement had an impact on acceptability and purchase behavior. Thus, the individual difference hypothesis is also supported. The data reveal, therefore, support for differences in all three aspects: nation, product and individual. To some degree, there are similar perceptions cross-nationally but major differences in intensity. Overall, these results suggest that both domestic and international marketers of products, as well as global film makers and distributors, must be aware of these types of differences and consider them in designing their marketing programs.

These results have their limitations. One limitation concerns the scaling of the product acceptability items. While this paper used the three-point acceptability scale of Gupta and Gould (1997) as a benchmark, other scaling approaches might yield different results. Another limitation concerns the international flavor and scope of this study in that it represents only three countries. The inclusion of other countries might change or broaden the results. In this respect, one reviewer suggested that a possible limitation of the study was that the pictures and brands portrayed in the survey booklet may have been too widely known (e.g., Diet Coke, Pepsi) or that they conveyed different messages to one national audience as opposed to another. For example, Diet Coke was called Coke Light in Japan because the word "diet" has bad connotations (Cateora 1990). However, while other props may be tested in future studies, it may not be easy to predict or explain cross-cultural differences found in this respect.

How should these results be used in the formulation of product placement strategy? To some degree, based on the three-way interaction, they suggest that a niche strategy is best (Wang 1996). This means that specific segments, involving country, product and individual differences, must be identified. However, taken literally, this type of strategy may be too fragmenting and impractical considering that movies are usually more broadly targeted. Fortunately, the data are also more forgiving in this regard. First, ethically-charged products differed across countries in similar ways although at different levels. Second, as evidenced in the regression runs, similar attitudes toward both acceptability and purchase were easily identified across countries. On an overall basis, the most compelling variables for managerial strategy remain the product and individual difference variables, despite the country differences. In particular, the greatest caution should be taken with regard to ethically-charged products, although there also still needs to be a careful approach to cross-national standardization. Nonetheless, standardization does appear feasible for product placements if applied judiciously.

Managerial Implications

The results of this study do not mean that marketers must always follow an adaptive-localization strategy, especially since this is most difficult in the face of the structural inflexibility of adapting product placements across nations. Instead, they must be aware of what products will work on this structural basis and thus which ones can safely operate in this necessarily standardized environment. Integrating product placement with other media across countries will also be required (Grein and Gould 1996) so that global decisions as to whether to use product placement at all and if so, how, are made in a broader light. For example, where a standardized strategy is desirable, product placement might be emphasized relative to advertising. On the other hand, where an adaptive strategy is required, general reliance on advertising which is far more flexible than product placement should be considered. In this case, product placement may be used only if it is judged not to detract from the other adaptive aspects o f the promotional campaign (i.e., it is general enough to extend cross-nationally and does not go against the grain of the more fine-segmented advertising messages addressed to various distinct national audiences).

Managers should also be aware when paying for product placements that countries' acceptance for a particular product or brand may vary and thus that they should not overpay for a product placement on that basis. Movies may well extend across countries in both physical and meaning transfer, but the placements in them may not carry the same quantity or quality of meaning transfer. In a similar vein as with international advertising, they should also be aware of the stronger misconceptions or negative feelings a product placement might engender in one cultural setting versus another. This is especially true for ethically-charged products where regulations and attitudes may vary sharply so that they could even impact film viewership or distribution in some countries. Media considerations might also enter the picture. For example, we did not assess TV watching or product placement on television nor did we consider how a product is placed within a movie (e.g., passively on a billboard versus being actively used by a consumer). Such factors should be considered in future studies.

The persistence of product and individual differences found in the original Gupta and Gould (1997) study are particularly germane for the marketer wishing to use product placement. They suggest, at least in the countries studied here, that there is some commonality in these differences although the interactions involving country suggest a great deal of complexity. Gender differences stand out and managers placing products in these countries should consider the less favorable attitudes of women toward product placements, especially toward ethically-charged products. Such segmentation has a natural base to follow since many movies themselves tend to be gender-targeted. However, in movies targeted to both sexes, care should be taken as to which products are placed in them for fear of alienating part of the audience. Attitudes toward product placement and frequency of movie watching also are noteworthy and managers should consider these, irrespective of the country involved.

Research Implications

This study is a first in terms of assessing product placement on a cross-national or cultural basis. While one study, particularly an initial one, may provide a great deal of insight, it must at the same time necessarily stand both as a benchmark and a research spur. In those roles, the present study suggests not only that extensions of its approach should be made in future studies, but also that other studies exploring a wide range of related topics within the country, product and individual differences framework be conducted. A few suggestions follow below.

Cross-National (Cultural) Differences. As revealed by the combined presence of cross-national, product and individual difference effects, as well as complex interactions between them, the major research implication for product placement research concerns investigating and untangling these effects. A major aspect of this research should be to avoid confounding cultural and noncultural factors (Dawar and Parker 1994). In the case of product placement, this may mean focusing on finding common individual and product differences across nations since by nature product placements (at least in movies) are relatively inflexible. The possible convergent effects and trends in globalization should be considered. If or where cultural differences beyond these persist, further explanations rooted in cross-cultural theory should be sought.

This study looked at Western countries. Future research should look at a variety of other countries outside the West, as well as other Western countries. For example, differences found between Western and Asian countries with respect to advertising indicate the possibility of differences in attitudes toward product placement (e.g., Gould and Minowa 1994; Taylor, Miracle and Chang 1994). Japanese advertising, for instance, tends to be soft sell as opposed to American advertising (Gould and Minowa 1994), and it may be that in Japan too much overt or explicit product placement may be perceived unfavorably while product placement which blends in well and is unobtrusive (soft sell) would be quite acceptable. We would also suggest considering other types of trait and attitude measures which would address both cross-national and within-nation differences, including measures concerning ethical values, attitudes toward advertising in general, and attitudes toward materialism, to name but a few.

While this study did not assess country-of-origin effects, it is likely that some of the variables we studied might be impacted by them. For instance, it is possible that cross-national product placement may be subject to country-of-origin effects with some countries being more attractive to consumers or otherwise contributing to the overall effect, such as in terms of perceived realism. Country-of-origin can be a complex variable in that it could reflect or embody all three sets of differences considered in this study: country differences (e.g., some countries perceive the products of others in more or less favorable light), product differences (e.g., some products from a specific country are perceived more favorably than others), and individual differences (e.g., international travellers to a country perceive its country-of-origin in a different light than non-travellers to that country). Again, complex interactions like the ones found in this study are likely. In addition, it is possible there will be cou ntry-of-origin x brands interaction effects which reflect the idea that brands in the global marketplace often carry with them country associations that are hard to disentangle. Furthermore, a new country-of-origin variable should also be considered: the country-of-origin of the movie or other product placement medium. Similar to brands, movies also carry country connotations which are often easily identifiable in terms of origin. These may have a strong effect on the perceptions of and attitudes toward product placement. For example, some countries' movies may enhance a product's or brand's image or perceived realism while others may detract. In addition, the support for a frequency of watching movies effect in the present study, although weak, nonetheless suggests that frequency of watching a particular country's movies may also have an effect on product placements.

Products, Services and Brand Differences. The present study focused on a particular set of products with an emphasis on differences between ethically-charged and non-ethically-charged products. However, a different assortment of products might produce different results and/or provide new insights. Future studies might also consider services which have been neglected to date. Variations in products and services, if they exist, would be of particular interest. Moreover, we did not consider specific brands but these also should be studied. For instance, it might be of interest to consider the global efficacy of the placement of various brands within a product category (cf. Babin and Carder 1995; Karrh 1994). Brand and movie ambience congruence would be another related topic to consider.

Linked to the brand issue is the fact that companies have different names for the same or similar brands across countries (e.g., Diet Coke and Coke Light). This may mean that some product placements from one country would be perceived differently or may not even be recognized by consumers in another. An interesting question is whether this name issue will be another standardizing factor. In some ways, the effect is similar to the cross-border movement of goods and meaning except that movies stretch the borders in a virtual fashion, making the cinema screen as much a type of zone or a border crossing as is a physical or geographical one where two countries are contiguous and their marketplaces interact (Clark 1994). Thus, while product placements are not a particularly adaptive promotional tool because movies are not changed across countries for the sake of possible versions of placements, it does appear that products, brands and their names would be more likely to change, if anything does. In other words, th e relatively inflexible nature of product placements could eventually lead to induced changes in how products are perceived on a transnational basis.

Another product-related variable concerns the congruence of product use condition (i.e., how consumers use and perceive products in particular categories) with promotional appeal and product life cycle stage (Dibb, Simkin and Yuen 1994; Zhang and Gelb 1996). For example, consider placing a product in a movie shown in both developed and developing countries. In the former, the product may be widely used, while in the latter, it may be relatively new in the product life cycle and thus may require quite different placement strategies. This perspective could be particularly important for product placement as a promotional tool relative to others because it may involve using culturally-specific elements in a way that is even more pronounced than it would be in a more generic commercial designed for global use. An interesting question for future research is to look at how transnational consumers perceive product placement, advertising and other forms of promotion relative to each other in terms of such things as po sition on the hard/soft-sell continuum and what effect, if any, these perceptions have on their attitudes and purchase behavior. In the present data, there was a correlation between attitudes toward product placement in general and attitudes toward television advertising in general (r=.29, p=.000) which suggests that attitudes toward product placements are not isolated from those of other promotional types. Nonetheless, there still exists room for differences (e.g., it may be more acceptable to advertise tobacco products in targeted magazines than to place them in movies).

Individual Differences. Gender differences as one type of individual difference effect persisted in this study and supported those found in the Gupta and Gould (1997) paper. These results suggest that segmenting by gender is important for product placement, especially for ethically-charged products. The general theoretical approach is that men and women possess different gender identities which lead them to relate in differing ways to many things, including product placements (cf. Russell 1998). Similarly, there were effects for movies watched and general attitudes toward product placement. These and other potential individual difference effects should be examined in terms of: (1) the possible differences regarding other products and/or brands, (2) differences related to other countries and the possible interaction with these variables, and (3) possible variations in meanings drawn by different types of consumers regarding particular product placements.

Conclusion

The framework studied in this paper, based on the prior approach of Gupta and Gould (1997), proved both useful and robust in revealing and explaining country, product and individual differences in response to product placement. Country differences exist and while they are not prohibitive to following a standardization strategy, they nonetheless suggest that caution should be taken when the global marketplace is considered. Caution is also urged, based on our data, for the placement of ethically-charged products which seem to generate similar concerns across countries, especially in contrast to non-ethically-charged products. Individual differences also persist although often in the form of complex interactions. Thus, both the differences and similarities across countries and those among individual consumers and products are important in developing global marketing strategies involving product placements. Therefore, although much more research is needed, we can begin to see how product placement may be assesse d, gauged and utilized on a global basis.

Stephen J. Gould (Ph.D., The Graduate Center of the City University of New York), Professor of Marketing, Baruch College, The City University of New York.

Pola B. Gupta (Ph.D., State University of New York at Buffalo), Associate Professor of Marketing, University of Northern Iowa.

Sonja Grabner-Krauter (Ph.D., University of Graz, Austria), Associate Professor of Marketing and International Management, University of Klagenfurt, Austria.

References

Andrews, J. Craig (1989), "The Dimensionality of Beliefs toward Advertising in General," Journal of Advertising, 18 (1), 26-35.

Appelbaum, Ulrich and Chriss Halliburton (1993), "How to Develop International Advertising Campaigns that Work: The Example of the European Food and Beverage Sector," International Journal of Advertising, 12 (3), 223-241.

Babin, Laurie A. and Sheri Thompson Carder (1995), "Advertising via the Box Office: Is Product Placement Effective?" Journal of Promotion Management, 3 (1/2), 31-51.

----- and----- (1996), "Viewers Recognition of Brands Placed within a Film," International Journal of Advertising, 15 (2), 140-151.

Balasubramanian, Siva K. (1994), "Beyond Advertising and Publicity: Hybrid Messages and Public Policy Issues," Journal of Advertising, 23 (December), 29-46.

Beatson, Ronald (1984), "The Image of Advertising in Europe," International Journal of Advertising, 3 (1), 361-367.

Biswas, Abhijit, Janeen E. Olsen and Valerie Carlet (1992), "A Comparison of Print Advertisements from the United States and France," Journal of Advertising, 21 (December), 73-82.

Boddewyn, Jean J. (1993), "Where Should Articles on the Link Between Tobacco Advertising and Consumption Be Published?" Journal of Advertising, 22 (December), 105-107.

Cateora, Philip R. (1990), International Marketing, Boston: Richard Irwin.

Clark, Terry (1994), "National Boundaries, Border Zones, and Marketing Strategy: A Conceptual Framework and Theoretical Model of Secondary Control Boundary Effects," Journal of Marketing, 58 (July), 67-80.

Cutler, Bob D. and Rajshekhar G. Javalgi (1992), "A Cross-Cultural Analysis of the Visual Components of Print Advertising," Journal of Advertising Research, 32 (1), 71-80.

-----, ----- and M. Krishna Erramilli (1992), "The Visual Components of Print Advertising: A Five-Country Cross-Cultural Analysis," European Journal of Marketing, 26 (4), 7-20.

Dawar, Niraj and Philip Parker (1994), "Marketing Universals: Consumers' Use of Brand Name, Physical Appearance, and Retailer Reputation as Signals of Product Quality," Journal of Marketing, 58 (April), 81-95.

DeLorme, Denise E. (1998), "Brand Placement: A Historical Overview," in Proceedings of the 1998 Conference of the American Academy of Advertising, Darrel D. Muehling, ed., Pullman, WA: American Academy of Advertising, 305-306.

-----, Leonard N. Reid and Mary R. Zimmer (1994), "Brands in Films: Young Moviegoers' Experiences and Interpretations," in Proceedings of the 1994 Conference of the American Academy of Advertising, Karen Whitehill King, ed., Cincinnati: American Academy of Advertising, 60.

----- and -----(1999), "Moviegoers' Experiences and Interpretations of Brands in Films Revisited," Journal of Advertising, 28 (Summer), 71-95.

Dibb, Sally, Lyndon Simkin and Rex Yuen (1994), "Pan-European Advertising: Think Europe--Act Local," International Journal of Advertising, 13 (2), 125-136.

Gemeinboeck, G. and U. Wagner (1993), "Rechtliche Aspekte des Product Placement in Oesterreich," Werbeforschung & Praxis, 4, 145-149.

Givon, Moshe M. and Zur Shapira (1984), "Response to Rating Scales: A Theoretical Model and Its Application to the Number of Categories Problem," Journal of Marketing Research, 21 (November), 410-419.

Gould, Stephen J. (1998), "Deconstructing and Inscribing Cross-Cultural Consumption through Drinking Tahitian Tikis Tea: Is It Too Late or Never Too Late to Experience the Authentic Culture of Polynesia?" in Advances in Consumer Research, Vol. 25, Joseph W. Alba and J. Wesley Hutchinson, eds., Provo, UT: Association for Consumer Research, 31-36.

----- and Yuko Minowa (1994), "'Are They Saying the Same Thing?' An Exploratory Study of Japanese and American Automobile Advertising," in Global and Multinational Advertising, Basil G. Englis, ed., Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum, 193-204.

Grein, Andreas F. and Stephen J. Gould (1996), "Globally Integrated Marketing Communications," Journal of Marketing Communications, 3 (September), 141-158.

Gupta, Pola B., Siva K. Balasubramanian and Michael L. Klassen (2000), "Viewers' Evaluations of Product Placements in Movies: Public Policy Issues and Managerial Implications," Journal of Current Issues and Research in Advertising (in press).

----- and Stephen J. Gould (1997), "Consumers' Perceptions of the Ethics and Acceptability of Product Placements in Movies: Product Category and Individual Differences," Journal of Current Issues and Research in Advertising, 14 (Spring), 37-50.

----- and Kenneth R. Lord (1998), "Product Placement in Movies: The Effect of Prominence and Mode on Audience Recall," Journal of Current Issues and Research in Advertising, 20 (Spring), 47-59.

Hill, Ronald Paul (1994), "A Consumer Perspective on Handgun Control in the U.S.," Advancing the Consumer Interest, 6 (Spring), 10-14.

Hofstede, Geert H. (1991), Cultures and Organizations: Software of the Mind, New York: McGraw-Hill.

----- (1996), "Images of Europe: Past, Present, and Future," in Managing Across Cultures: Issues and Perspectives, Pat Joynt and Malcolm Warner, eds., London: International Thomson Business Press, 147-165.

Jacoby, Jacob and Michael S. Matell (1971), "Three-Point Likert Scales Are Good Enough," Journal of Marketing Research, 8 (November), 495-500.

Karrh, James A. (1994), "Effects of Brand Placements in Motion Pictures," in Proceedings of the 1994 Conference of the American Academy of Advertising, Karen Whitehill King, ed., Athens, GA: American Academy of Advertising, 182-188.

----- (1998a), "Brand Placement: A Review," Journal of Current Issues and Research in Advertising, 20 (Fall), 31-50.

----- (1998b), "Why (Some) Brand Placements are Effective: Insights from Impression Management Research," in Proceedings of the 1998 Conference of the American Academy of Advertising, Darrel D. Muehling, ed., Pullman, WA: American Academy of Advertising, 306.

Kaskutas, Lee Ann (1993), "Changes in Public Attitudes Toward Alcohol Control Policies Since the Warning Label Mandate of 1988," Journal of Public Policy and Marketing, 12 (Spring), 30-37.

Langlois, Catherine C. and Bodo B. Schlegelmilch (1990), "Do Corporate Codes of Ethics Reflect National Character? Evidence from Europe and the United States," Journal of International Business Studies, 21 (First Quarter), 519-539.

Leiser, David, Guje Sevon and Daphna Levy (1990), "Childrens' Economic Socialization: Summarizing the Cross-Cultural Comparison of Ten Countries," Journal of Economic Psychology, 11 (December), 591-614.

Mayerhofer, W. (1995), "Einatellung der Oesterreicher zur Werbung," Werbeforschung & Praxis, 5, 182-183.

McCracken, Grant (1986), "Culture and Consumption: A Theoretical Account of the Structure and Movement of the Cultural Meaning of Consumer Goods," Journal of Consumer Research, 13 (June), 71-84.

McKee, Kathy Brittain and Carol J. Pardun (1998), "Product as Hero: Product Placements as Effective Advertising," in Proceedings of the 1998 Conference of the American Academy of Advertising, Darrel D. Muehling, ed., Pullman, WA: American Academy of Advertising, 307.

Milner, Laura M., Dale Fodness and Joy Morrison (1991), "Women's Images of Guns: An Exploratory Study," in Gender and Consumer Behavior, Janeen Arnold Costa, ed., Salt Lake City: University of Utah Printing Press, 199-208.

Moore, David J. and William D. Harris (1996), "Affect Intensity and the Consumer's Attitude Toward High Impact Emotional Appeals," Journal of Advertising, 25 (Summer), 37-50.

Mundorf, Norbert, Dolf Zilmann and Dan Drew (1991), "Effects of Disturbing Televised Events on the Acquisition of Information from Subsequently Presented Commercials," Journal of Advertising, 20 (1), 46-53.

Nebenzahl, Israel D. and Eugene Secunda (1993), "Consumers' Attitudes toward Product Placement in Movies," International Journal of Advertising, 12(1) 1-11.

Ong, Beng Soo and David Meri (1994), "Should Product Placement in Movies be Banned?" Journal of Promotion Management, 2 (3/4), 159-175.

Rawwas, Mohammed Y.A. (1996), "Consumer Ethics: An Empirical Investigation of the Ethical Beliefs of Austrian Consumers," Journal of Business Ethics, 15 (September), 1009-1019.

Rothenberg, Randall (1991), "Critics Seek F.T.C. Action on Products as Movie Stars," New York Times, 140 (May 31), D1.

Russell, Cristel A. (1998), "Toward a Framework of Product Placement: Theoretical Propositions," in Advances in Consumer Research, Vol. 25, Joseph W. Alba and J. Wesley Hutchinson, eds., Provo, UT: Association for Consumer Research, 357-362.

Saimee, Saeed and Nicholas Athanassiou (1998), "International Strategy Research: CrossCultural Methodology Implications," Journal of Business Research, 43 (October), 79-96.

Sapolsky, Barry S. and Lance Kinney (1994), "You Ought a Be in Pictures: Product Placements in the Top-Grossing Films of 1991," in Proceedings of the 1994 Conference of the American Academy of Advertising, Karen Whitehill King, ed., Athens, GA: American Academy of Advertising, 89.

Schlegelmilch, Bodo B. and Diana C. Robertson (1995), "The Influence of Country and Industry on Ethical Perceptions of Senior Executives in the U.S. and Europe," Journal of International Business Studies, 26 (Fourth Quarter), 859-881.

Schuster, Camille P. and Michael J. Copeland (1999), "Global Business Exchanges-Similarities and Differences Around the World," Journal of International Marketing, 7(2), 63-80.

Seitz, Victoria A. and J. S. (Vic) Johar (1993), "Advertising Practices for Self-Image Projective Products in the New Europe: A Print Advertising Content Analysis," Journal of Consumer Marketing, 10 (4), 15-26.

Shao, Alan T. and John S. Hill (1994), "Global Television Advertising Restrictions: The Case of Socially Sensitive Products," International Journal of Advertising, 13 (4), 347-366.

Simpson, Penny M., Gene Brown and Robert E. Widing II (1998), "The Association of Ethical Judgment of Advertising and Selected Advertising Effectiveness Response Variables," Journal of Business Ethics, 17 (January II), 125-136.

Tabachnick, Barbara G. and Linda S. Fidell (1983), Using Univariate Statistics, New York: Harper & Row.

Taylor, Charles R, Gordon E. Miracle and Kyu Yeol Chang (1994), "The Difficulty of Standardizing International Advertising: Some Propositions and Evidence from Japanese, Korean, and U.S. Television Advertising," in Global and Multinational Advertising, Basil G. Englis, ed., Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum, 171-191.

Taylor, Ronald E., Mariea Grubbs Hoy and Eric Haley (1996), "How French Advertising Professionals Develop Creative Strategy," Journal of Advertising, 25 (Spring), 1-14.

Tinkham, Spencer F. and Ruth Ann Weaver-Lariscy (1994), "Ethical Judgments of Political Television Commercials as Predictors of Attitude Toward the Ad," Journal of Advertising, 23 (September), 43-58.

van Roosmalen, Erica H. and Susan A. McDaniel (1992), "Adolescent Smoking Intentions: Gender Differences in Peer Context," Adolescence, 27 (Spring), 87-105.

Vitell, Scott J., Saviour L. Nwachukwu and James H. Barnes (1993), 'The Effects of Culture on Ethical Decision-Making: An Application of Hofstede's Typology," Journal of Business Ethics, 12 (October), 753-760.

Vollmers, Stacy and Richard Mizerski (1994), "A Review and Investigation into the Effectiveness of Product Placements in Films," in Proceedings of the 1994 Conference of the American Academy of Advertising, Karen Whitehill King, ed., Athens, GA: American Academy of Advertising, 97-102.

Wang, Cheng Lu (1996), "The Degree of Standardization: A Contingency Framework for Global Marketing Strategy Development," Journal of Global Marketing, 10 (1), 89-107.

Whitelock, Jeryl and Djamila Chung (1989), "Cross-Cultural Advertising: An Empirical Study," International Journal of Advertising, 8 (3), 291-310.

Zandpour, Fred, Cypress Chang and Joelle Catalano (1992), "Stories, Symbols, and Straight Talk: A Comparative Analysis of French, Taiwanese and U.S. TV Commercials," Journal of Advertising Research, 32, 25-38.

Zhang, Yung and Betsy D. Gelb (1996), "Matching Advertising Appeals to Culture: The Influence of Products' Use Condition," Journal of Advertising, 25 (Fall), 29-46.

                     Means of Acceptability of Product
                     Placement in All Three Countries
                              (Total Sample)
                          U.S.      Austria      France
Product                    N    M      N     M     N     M
Cigarettes                1004 2.04   240   1.95  199   2.14
Soft Drinks               1004 2.93   240   2.87  204   2.84
Surfing equipment         1003 2.86   239   2.90  204   2.87
Alcohol                   1002 2.36   239   2.20  204   2.22
Fatty foods               1004 2.83   240   2.28  203   2.78
Autos                     1004 2.90   240   2.90  203   2.87
Race cars                 1004 2.84   237   2.65  203   2.79
Healthy consumer products 1003 2.91   238   2.91  204   2.74
Guns                      1003 1.94   238   1.58  204   1.66
Candy/snacks              1004 2.87   240   2.73  204   2.74
Sunglasses                1005 2.86   242   2.89  203   2.85
Cameras                   1005 2.86   240   2.82  203   2.87
Stereo equipment          1005 2.86   241   2.83  203   2.86
Ethically-charged          984 2.11   217   1.92  196   1.99
Non-ethically-charged      984 2.88   217   2.79  196   2.83
                     Means of Acceptability of Product
                Placement in All Three Countries by Gender
                          U.S. Males      U.S. Females      Aus. Males
Product                       N       M        N        M       N       M
Cigarettes                   489     2.21     513      1.88    123     2.02
Soft Drinks                  489     2.93     513      2.94    124     2.89
Surfing equip.               488     2.86     513      2.87    124     2.90
Alcohol                      490     2.48     510      2.23    124     2.30
Fatty foods                  489     2.83     513      2.84    122     2.30
Autos                        489     2.91     513      2.90    124     2.89
Race cars                    489     2.86     513      2.82    123     2.68
Healthy consumer products    489     2.90     512      2.93    124     2.87
Guns                         487     2.22     514      1.68    122     1.79
Candy/snacks                 490     2.86     512      2.89    123     2.69
Sunglasses                   490     2.87     513      2.87    125     2.85
Cameras                      489     2.86     514      2.87    123     2.79
Stereo equip.                490     2.87     513      2.87    124     2.81
Ethically-charged            486     2.31     509      1.93    122     2.01
Non-ethically-charged        485     2.88     506      2.88    119     2.77
                          Aus. Females
Product                        N        M
Cigarettes                    115      1.89
Soft Drinks                   114      2.84
Surfing equip.                113      2.91
Alcohol                       113      2.07
Fatty foods                   115      2.23
Autos                         114      2.91
Race cars                     112      2.61
Healthy consumer products     112      2.96
Guns                          115      1.45
Candy/snacks                  115      2.77
Sunglasses                    115      2.94
Cameras                       115      2.84
Stereo equip.                 115      2.84
Ethically-charged             113      1.81
Non-ethically-charged         105      2.80
                          Fr. Males      Fr. Females
Product                       N      M        N       M
Cigarettes                   97     2.20     99      2.07
Soft Drinks                  97     2.88     99      2.86
Surfing equip.               97     2.88     99      2.89
Alcohol                      97     2.31     99      2.10
Fatty foods                  97     2.85     99      2.75
Autos                        97     2.85     99      2.89
Race Cars                    97     2.80     99      2.82
Healthy consumer products    97     2.72     99      2.75
Guns                         97     1.75     99      1.51
Candy/snacks                 97     2.77     99      2.78
Sunglasses                   97     2.87     99      2.83
Cameras                      97     2.86     99      2.88
Stereo equip.                97     2.86     99      2.87
Ethically-charged            97     2.09     99      1.89
Non-ethically-charged        97     2.83     99      2.83
                    ANOVA Results for Ethically-Charged
                    Vs. Non-Ethically-Charged Products
Source                          DF F Value Pr[greater than]F
Country                         2    7.82        .0004
Sex                             1   14.23        .0002
Movie                           1    6.93        .0086
Country x Sex                   2    1.32        .2683
Country x Movie                 2    0.61        .5429
Sex x Movie                     1    1.04        .3071
Country x Sex x Movie           2    0.94        .3925
Product                         1  933.76        .0001
Product x Country               2    1.34        .2618
Product x Sex                   1   23.81        .0001
Product x Movie                 1   10.44        .0013
Product x Country x Sex         2    1.98        .1385
Product x Country x Movie       2    1.23        .2935
Product x Country x Sex x Movie 2    0.01        .9856
                 Regression Analyses for Acceptability of
                            Product Placements
                    A. Regression Run For INDEX: Total
                     Number of All Acceptable Products
Variable [*] Beta Significance
ATT           .23    .0000
PR            .21    .0000
RESTRICT     -.22    .0000
ATTTV        -.02    .5473
MOVIETOT      .01    .6889
U.S.          .05    .1313
FRANCE        .10    .0041
GENDER       -.01    .4269
                B. Regression Run for INDEX1: Total Number
                   Acceptable Ethically-Charged Products
Variable [*] Beta Significance
ATT           .11    .0000
PR            .07    .0042
RESTRICT     -.50    .0000
ATTTV        -.01    .7693
MOVIETOT      .02    .3377
U.S.          .04    .1695
FRANCE        .03    .2924
GENDER       -.12    .0000
                C. Regression Run for INDEX 2: Total Number
               of Acceptable Non-Ethically-Charged Products
Variable [*] Beta Significance
ATT           .23    .0000
PR            .22    .0000
RESTRICT     -.02    .3245
ATTTV        -.01    .6211
MOVIETOT     -.01    .8158
U.S.          .05    .1080
FRANCE        .11    .0011
GENDER        .04    .1089

(*.)ATT=attitudes toward product placement in general, PR=perceived realism, RESTRICT=the attitude toward restricting product placements, ATTTV=attitudes toward television advertising in general and MOVIETOT=the total number of movies watched. U.S., FRANCE and GENDER are dummy variables for U.S., France and gender, respectively.

                     Regression Analysis for Purchase
                    Claims Based on Product Placements
Variable [*]  Beta Significance
ATT           .13     .0001
PR            .11     .0005
RESTRICT      .05     .1587
ATTTV         .03     .2140
MOVIETOT      .02     .5197
U.S.          .01     .7186
FRANCE       -.06     .1019
GENDER       -.08     .0049

(*.)ATT= attitudes toward product placement in general,

PR = perceived realism,

RESTRICT = the attitude toward restricting product placements,

ATTTV = attitudes toward television advertising in general and

MOVIETOT = the total number of movies watched. U.S., FRANCE and GENDER are dummy variables for the U.S., France and gender, respectively.