4. Discussion and theoretical implications
4.1. General discussion From a theoretical point of view, our findings lead to a more comprehensive understanding of preferences for domestic products. We have provided empirical evidence that domestic psychological ownership acts as a strong predictor of consumer behavior towards domestic products. In other words, consumers hold shared beliefs (emotions) about the “our-ness” of domestic goods and regard domestic products as more as their “own” than foreign products. Furthermore, DomOwn has a greater explanatory power than consumer ethnocentrism and this effect holds for domestic product judgment, willingness to pay more, as well as for domestic products ownership. DomOwn and national identification serve as equally strong predictors of domestic product judgment; however, the influence of DomOwn on domestic products purchases is stronger compared to national identification. Our research also indicates that consumers scoring high on the DomOwn scale have a positive domestic product bias without denigrating foreign products. Indeed, DomOwn is positively related to both to domestic and to foreign product judgment and purchases. This finding is in line with in-group preferences and out-group bias distinctiveness (e.g., Bizumic & Duckitt, 2012; Brewer, 1999; Kosterman & Feshbach, 1989) and higher possession-self links for the in-group goods literature (Dommer & Swaminathan, 2013). Another interpretation of these results may be based on Strahilevitz and Loewenstein (1998) study: valuation of objects increases with the duration of ownership and domestic products in many cases have a longer history of past ownership. The implication of our research indicates that individuals scoring high on outgroup bias cannot automatically be assumed to also score high on ingroup favoritism. Similar ideas are expressed by Cannon and Yaprak (2002), who demonstrate that cosmopolitan and local orientations are independent dimensions.
