See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/327176025

The relationship between country-of-origin image, corporate reputation,

corporate social responsibility, trust and customers’ purchase intention:
Evidence from Vietnam

Article in Journal of Applied Economic Sciences · April 2018

CITATIONS READS

11 1,952

2 authors, including:

hien nguyen ngoc

Industrial University of Ho Chi Minh city
27 PUBLICATIONS 117 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by hien nguyen ngoc on 28 November 2018.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Volume XIII
Issue 2 (56) Spring 2018

ISSN-L 1843 - 6110

ISSN 2393 - 5162
 Journal of Applied Economic Sciences
Journal of Applied Economic Sciences is a young economics and interdisciplinary research
journal, aimed to publish articles and papers that should contribute to the development of both the
theory and practice in the field of Economic Sciences.
The journal seeks to promote the best papers and researches in management, finance,
accounting, marketing, informatics, decision/making theory, mathematical modelling, expert systems,
decision system support, and knowledge representation. This topic may include the fields indicated
above but are not limited to these.
Journal of Applied Economic Sciences be appeals for experienced and junior researchers, who
are interested in one or more of the diverse areas covered by the journal. It is currently published
quarterly in 2 Issues in Spring (30th March), Summer (30th June), Fall (30th September) and Winter (30th
December).
Journal of Applied Economic Sciences is indexed in SCOPUS www.scopus.com, CEEOL
www.ceeol.org, EBSCO www.ebsco.com, and RePEc www.repec.org databases.
The journal will be available on-line and will be also being distributed to several universities,
research institutes and libraries in Romania and abroad. To subscribe to this journal and receive the on-
line/printed version, please send a request directly to [email protected].
 Journal of Applied Economic Sciences
ISSN-L 1843 - 6110
ISSN 2393 – 5162

Table of Contents

Halil Dincer KAYA

1 The Financial Crises of the 1990s and Environmental Sustainability: A Comparison of Developed
versus Less Developed Countries ...293

Tolulope F. OLADEJI, Ochei A. IKPEFAN, Philip O. ALEGE

2 Stock Market Volatility and Non-Macroeconomic Factors: A Vector Error Correction Approach …303

Elena Vadimovna SEMENKOVA, Almaz Aidarbekovich EDILBAEV

3 Behavioral Aspects in Calculating the Cost of Risk in the Russian Stock Market …316

Imane EL WAHLI, Radouane EL KHCHINE, Zine Elabidine GUENNOUN, Youness LAAROUSSI

4 Hurst Parameter Estimation Methods: Comparative Study and Application …326

Samuel I. EGWUNATUM
5 Interpolating Construction Projects Escalations from Egwunatum’s Time-Cost Equilibrial …337

Victoria Volodymyrivna ZHURYLO, Olga Yuriivna PRYGARA

6 International Positioning Strategy of Ukrainian Advertising Service Companies on European
Media Market ….357

Silvia MEGYESIOVA, Anna ROZKOSOVA

7 Success of Visegrad Group Countries in the Field of Labour Market …369

Muhammad Faraz RIAZ, Nataliia І. CHERKAS, João LEITÃO

8 Corruption and Innovation: Mixed Evidences on Bidirectional Causality …378

Oleg Yurievich PATLASOV

9 Economic Modernization of BRICS Countries the Background of the Formation of a New
Geopolitical Reality ...385
 Ravinder RENA, Auchalie J. MOTHUPI
10 Case Study on the Patterns of Irregular Expenditure in Tswaing Local Municipality of North West
Province in South Africa …394

Marina Alekseevna IZMAYLOVA, Nasrulla Abdurahmanovich ADAMOV, Arseniy Valerievich

11 BRYKIN, Vasiliy Vladimirovich SINIAEV, Lyudmila Bogdanovna LUCHITSKAYA
Assessing the State of Logistics and Ways to Improve the Logistics Management in the
Corporate Sector of the Russian Economy ...414

Imane Naseer KHAN, Abdel Moneim AHMED

12 Investment Behaviour and Alternatives among Indian Expatriates in Dubai …425

Loredana VĂCĂRESCU HOBEANU

13 The Elaboration, Adoption and Application of the Decisions in the Management Process …433

Violetta V. ROKOTYANSKAYA, Oksana V. MOSHCHENKO, Nikoli V. VALUISKOV,

14 Gamlet Ya. OSTAEV, Natalia S. TARANOVA
Control and Analytical Management Aspects of Debtor and Credit Deposit of Enterprises …446

Viktoriya Valeryevna MANUYLENKO, Lubov Anatolevna KABARDAKOVA,

15 Mariia Nikolaevna KONIAGINA, Viktor Nikolaevich GLAZ, Tatyana Andreyevna SADOVSKAYA
Modification of Universal Toolset for Evaluation of Financial Sustainability of Corporations in
their Strategic Planning …454

Nazmul HOSSAIN, Raju Mohammad Kamrul ALAM, Galina GAVLOVSKAYA

16 Effective Microcredit Banking for Growth and Development of Small Business and Improve the
Poverty Condition in Bangladesh …465

Martina ŽWAKOVÁ
17 The Conditions for Digitalization and Industry 4.0 Development in Selected European States …484

Hien Ngoc NGUYEN, Lan Xuan PHAM

18 The Relationship between Country-of-Origin Image, Corporate Reputation, Corporate Social
Responsibility, Trust and Customers’ Purchase Intention: Evidence from Vietnam …498
 Silvia PARUSHEVA
19 A Study on Adoption of Internet Banking and New Direct Banking Channels with Reference
to Young Bulgarian Consumers ...510

Keulana ERWIN, Erwin ABUBAKAR, Iskandar MUDA

20 The Relationship of Lending, Funding, Capital, Human Resource, Asset Liability Management to
Non-Financial Sustainability of Rural Banks (BPRs) in Indonesia …520

Aekkachai NITTAYAGASETWAT, Jiroj BURANASIRI

21 Evaluation of the Investment in Combined Stock Markets under Co-Integration and Diversification
Benefit: The Case of Southeast Asian Markets ...543

Imang Dapit PAMUNGKAS, Imam GHOZALI, Tarmizi ACHMAD, Muammar KHADDAFI,

22 Retnoningrum HIDAYAH
Corporate Governance Mechanisms in Preventing Accounting Fraud: A Study of
Fraud Pentagon Model …549

Beby Karim Bux Shah SYED,, Bin Zainir FAUZI, Mansor ISA, Naveeda K. KATPER
23 Integrating Reputational Considerations in the Empirical Analysis of Dividend Smoothing Policy of
Emerging Market Firms - A Quantile Regression Approach …561

Evans OSABUOHIEN, Ekene OBIEKWE, Ese URHIE, Romanus OSABOHIEN

24 Inflation Rate, Exchange Rate Volatility and Exchange Rate Pass-Through Nexus: the Nigerian
Experience …574

Bona Doni GIDEON, Evita PUSPITASARI, Erlane K. GHANI, Ardi GUNARDI

25 Earnings Quality: Does Principles Standards versus Rules Standards Matter? …586
 The Relationship between Country-of-Origin Image, Corporate Reputation,
Corporate Social Responsibility, Trust and Customers’ Purchase Intention:
Evidence from Vietnam
Hien Ngoc NGUYEN
Faculty of Business Administration
Industrial University of Ho Chi Minh City, Ho Chi Minh, Vietnam
[email protected]
Lan Xuan PHAM
School of Management
University of Economics Ho Chi Minh City, Ho Chi Minh, Vietnam
[email protected]
Suggested Citation:
Nguyen, H.N., Pham, L.X. 2018. The relationship between country-of-origin image, corporate reputation, corporate social
responsibility, trust and customers’ purchase intention: Evidence from Vietnam. Journal of Applied Economic Sciences,
Volume XIII, Spring 2(56): 498 – 509.
Abstract:
This study proposes and tests the impact of Country-of-origin image on corporate reputation and corporate reputation on
perceived corporate social responsibility, in which customer trust plays the mediating role and purchase intention is
considered as the final result. Data were collected through a customer survey targeting car customers in 2 largest city in
Vietnam. Cronbach’s alpha, Factor analysis and Structural equation modeling were used to analyze the data collected. By
using the sample of 1,027 customers, who own and use passenger cars in Vietnam, the results show that country-of-brand
image and country-of-manufacture image have a positive impact on the corporate reputation and purchase intention of
customers, in which the country-of-brand image has stronger impact than the later. Besides, corporate reputation has a
positive, direct influence on perceived corporate social responsibility. It creates and nurtures customer trust. Under that
manipulation, the customer will perceive corporate social responsibility in a positive way. And the effect is found to be
partially mediated by customer trust. In addition, both customer trust and perceived corporate social responsibility present
their influences on the purchase intention.
Keywords: country-of-brand image; country-of-manufacture image; corporate reputation; corporate social responsibility;
customer trust; purchase intention
JEL Classification: M14; M31
Introduction
There is a common perception that corporate reputation is an important intangible asset that contributes to the
organization's long-term competitive advantage. However, due to the invisible nature, complexity and ambiguity in
causality, there are still unresolved issues related to what makes corporate reputation, as well as business
performance (Fombrun, Ponzi and Newburry 2015).
The study of the country-of-origin is increasingly complex due to the emergence of bi-national brands.
Although the impact of the country-of-origin has been extensively studied in marketing literature as a major factor
affecting product evaluation, but it is still relatively new under consideration as a determinant of organizational
evaluation (Vidaver-Cohen, Gomez and Colwell 2015).
In addition, businesses have attempted to carry out CSR activities aimed at increasing public awareness
of the business (Bae and Cameron 2006). However, Yoon et al. (2006) believe that public consider social
responsibility activities as self-interested activities and have suspicion that CSR could lead to a reduction in
corporate reputation in the future. Many studies indicate that good reputation can be a buffer to minimize the
negative reaction of customers for businesses (Bae and Cameron 2006, Shim and Yang 2016). In additional,
corporate social responsibility has a positive influence on customers' attitudes and buying intentions (Ellen, Webb
and Mohr 2006). However, some studies suggest that customers do not care about corporate social responsibility
or concern only when it is beneficial to them (Tian, Wang and Yang 2011). Thus, there are many different views
on corporate social responsibility, so more exploratory research is needed to clarify this topic. In particular, this
issue is still relatively new in the context of developing countries (Fatma and Rahman 2015).
Finally, the nature of the relationship between corporate reputation and customer trust is still vague. Some
authors believe that customer trust is viewed merely as one of the attributes or antecedents to measure corporate

498
Journal of Applied Economic Sciences

reputation (Fombrun 1996, Ponzi, Fombrun and Gardberg 2011). On the contrary, some studies examine
customer trust as a result of corporate reputation (Keh and Xie 2009, Walsh, Schaarschmidt and Ivens 2017).
Therefore, reviewing this relationship is necessary. The study also considers the purchase intention as the end
result because it represents actual behavior (Ajzen and Madden 1986).
From the background information, this study aims to explain the mechanism of interaction between the
country-of-origin image, corporate reputation, corporate social responsibility, customer trust and customers’
purchase intention.
1. Literature Review
Corporate reputation (CR): CR is considered differently based on different research fields. In economics, CR is
considered as a reflection of a company's past actions. It provides signals to stakeholders about possible future
activities of the business (Davies et al. 2003). In strategic management, CR is seen as a unique intangible asset,
hard to imitate (Agarwal, Osiyevskyy and Feldman 2015). In marketing, a link that individuals establish with the
business is considered as CR (Fombrun, Galdberg and Barnett 2000a) which is the power to attract customers
(Davies et al. 2003). Fombrun (1996) defined corporate reputation as “a perceptual representation of a
company’s past actions and future prospects that describes the firm’s overall appeal to all of its key constituents
when compared with other leading rivals” (72). Fombrun's (1996) study was the first to systematically identify CR
and was cited most extensively (Walker 2010).
Country-of-origin image (COI): According to Roth & Romeo (1992), the COI is the overall perceptions of
customer formed from products of a particular country, based on their prior experience of production, marketing,
strengths and weaknesses of the product. Globalization has accelerated the emergence of bi-national/hybrid
products and brands (Prendergast, Tsang and Chan 2010). A bi-national/hybrid product may be designed in
another country, manufactured in a second country, assembled in a third country, while origin-of-brand is from a
fourth country (Saeed et al. 2013). In this study, the two main considered components are the country-of-brand
image (COBI) and the country-of-manufacture image (COMI), because they strongly influence the perception,
evaluation and purchase intention of customers (Guercini and Ranfagni 2013).
Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR): Berger et al. (2007) argue that there are two perspectives on the
subject of CSR found: According to the management theory, the main focus are normative questions such:
should businesses be involved in CSR activities and how CSR activities affect financial performance. While
studies from marketing literature focus on how customers perceive CSR activities. Specifically, testing a CSR
related action and considering its effects on perception of customers. Both perspectives are considered in many
years. This study examines how CSR impacts on customer perceptions, attitudes and behaviors.
Friedman (1970) argues that businesses do not need to care about CSR. They only have one sole
responsibility which is maximize profits, increase shareholder’s value within the honest and fair rules of market
competition. Managers should not just focus on the needs of shareholders, but meet the stakeholders or those
who are influenced by achieving goals of organization, such as employees, customers, suppliers, and local
community organizations.
Carroll and Buchholtz (2011) have pointed out the term "Corporate social responsibility" which means an
enterprise not only carries out its economic and legal obligations but also has other responsibilities related to
protect and improve society. Carroll (1991) classified CSR into four dimensions: economic responsibility, legal
responsibility, ethical responsibility, and philanthropic responsibility.
Customer trust: According to Thomas (2009), customer trust is “an expectancy of positive outcomes,
outcomes that one can receive based on the expected action of another party” (346). Trust reduces uncertainty in
an environment where the customer feels vulnerable, so they rely on trustworthy organizations (Aydin and Özer
2006). Therefore, trust is belief in an organization which has no harmful actions and beneficial activities for both
sides. Customer trust is seen as a link between past experiences and predictions of future action.
Purchase Intention: Purchase intention represents the likelihood that a customer plans or is ready to buy a
particular product or service in the future. Actual actions can only be taken when they are interested and
motivated, because people tend to engage in the behaviors that they are going to perform (Schiffman and Kanuk
2007). When consumers intend to buy positively, this creates a positive brand promise and motivates consumers
to take actual action (Fishbein and Ajzen 1975, Schiffman and Kanuk 2007). Therefore, reviewing purchase
intentions is a good basis for predicting future behavior.
Research hypotheses: Although the impact of COI has been extensively studied as the main factor
influencing product evaluation COI is still relatively new under consideration as a decisive factor for organizational
evaluation. Vidaver-Cohen et al. (2015) conducted a study, which explored the relationship of country-of-origin

499
and public perception of multinational corporations, operating in Latin America. Research shows that Country-of-
origin is associated with both perceived reputation and behavioral predisposition to support the business.
However, the data used for the study is enterprise level data used to answer questions pertaining to personal
level perception, so there can be many biases. To accurately interpret the impact of the Country-of-origin, it is
necessary to know the country-of-origin. Therefore, collecting personal information is crucial (Diamantopoulos
and Zeugner-Roth 2010). And the hypotheses are given as follows:
H1: A country-of-brand image has a positive effect on corporate reputation.
H2: A country-of-manufacture image has a positive effect on corporate reputation.
Lyon and Cameron (2004) argue that during a crisis, a business may have a broader response strategy if
it has a good reputation because consumers tend to believe that the response of such business is better than any
others. Bae and Cameron (2006) assert that the public tends to deduce philanthropy in favor of having good CR.
Shim and Yang (2016) argue that the corporate hypocrisy mediates the impact of CR on customer attitudes
toward a business during a crisis. Pérez (2015) also suggested that the relationship between perceived CSR and
CR could be a two-way relationship. The hypothesis is given as follows:
H3: Corporate reputation has a positive effect on perceived corporate social responsibility.
CR and customer trust are inter-related and inter-dependent, but the nature of the relationship between
them is still unclear (Van Der Merwe and Puth 2014). In the measurement model of Fombrun (1996) and Ponzi et
al. (2011), trust is viewed merely as one of the attributes or preconditions for CR measurement. Meanwhile,
Rindova et al. (2005) suggested that CR has an important role in reducing the uncertainty of the stakeholders as
they assess the business. Van Der Merwe and Puth (2014) proposed a conceptual framework in which CR is
considered as the premise of customer trust. In addition, Walsh et al. (2017) found that, in the German retail
industry, gender played a regulatory role in the relationship between corporate reputation and consumer trust.
The hypothesis is given as follows:
H4: Corporate reputation has a positive effect on customer trust
Ellen et al. (2006) suggested that there is a positive link between CSR activities and customer attitudes
towards firms. However, no study on the impact of customer trust to perceived CSR had been performed. Kim et
al. (2009) suggested that customer trust has a positive influence on customer perceived CSR. When customers
trust a business, they will have a good sense of corporate social responsibility. With the same manner, when
customers have a belief in the business, they will assume that the business compliances with ethical principles
and concerns for social welfare (McKnight, Choudhury and Kacmar 2002). Therefore, the hypothesis is given as
follows:
H5: The customer trust has a positive effect on perceived corporate social responsibility.
Current research has demonstrated the strong impact of COI on purchase intention of customers (Bruwer
and Buller 2012). Pecotich and Ward (2007) believe that COI is one of the most influential factors to consumers'
decision of buying a product, because the COI combines brand image with country image where the products are
manufactured. Kumara and Canhua (2010) found that COI is one of the most important phenomena affecting the
evaluation of foreign products. The hypothesis is given as follows:
H6: A country-of-brand image has a positive effect on customers’ purchase intention.
H7: A country-of-manufacture image has a positive effect on customers’ purchase intention.
Mohr and Webb (2005) have identified environmental factors and charitable activities that have a positive
impact on purchase intention. Sen et al. (2006) argue that CSR initiatives lead to increased puschase intention of
consumers, but only when they are aware of specific initiatives.
In contrast, Carrigan and Attalla (2001) argued that responsible corporate behavior does not affect
customer choice for purchase. Thus, the relationship between CSR and purchase intention is not clear. However,
there is evidence that CSR creates positive results for business. Therefore, it can be hypothesized that:
H8: Perceived corporate social responsibility has a positive effect on customers’ purchase intention.
Brown (1998) found that CR had a positive influence on the purchase intention and actual buying behavior
of customers. Helm (2007) also proved that good CR allows businesses to sell at high prices, attracts investors

500
Journal of Applied Economic Sciences

and lowers costs. A good CR can also lead to higher sales, as it starts the repetition of business due to customer
satisfaction. So the development of high-level CR is an important premise to ensure competitiveness and creates
positive behavior.
H9: Corporate reputation has a positive effect on customers’ purchase intention.
Hennig-Thurau and Klee (1997) hypothesized that customer trust plays an important role in customer
buying decisions. Ha et al. (2010) also confirmed the relationship between those two concepts. Customer trust
based on previous experience is essential in promoting the purchase intention of buyers. Hajli et al. (2016) argue
that customer trust influences the purchase intention directly and indirectly through the intermediary of social
commerce information seeking. From the above discussion, it can be hypothesized:
H10: The customer trust has a positive effect on customers’ purchase intention.
CSR activities are highly appreciated if firms have good reputation. On the other hand, they are
considered self-interested if there is bad reputation (Yoon, Gürhan-Canli and Schwarz 2006). Furthermore,
businesses with good reputation are expected to behave well and less engage in negative actions. As a result,
the customer trust is enhanced (Walsh, Schaarschmidt and Ivens 2017). Besides, when customers have
confidence in the business, they will assume that the business adheres to ethical principles, concerns with social
welfare and leads to positive perception of CSR (McKnight, Choudhury and Kacmar 2002). Based on this point of
view, the hypothesis is given as following:
H11: Customer trust mediates the effect of corporate reputation to corporate social responsibility.
Conceptual model: Country-of-origin image, which is considered as a signal of reliability and product
quality, affects corporate reputation (Thorne, Mahoney and Manetti 2014). In the same manner, corporate
reputation is known as a signal of information about past and future activities of the business. It changes the way
customers perceive and treat businesses (Fombrun 1996). In addition, the theory of reasoned action, proposed
by Fishbein and Ajzen (1975), explains the relationship between attitude, intention and behavior. This study uses
the signal theory and theory of reasoned action to support the interpretation of the model (Figure 1).
Figure 1. The proposed model

Origin-of-
brand image

Purchase
Origin-of- Intention
manufacture
image Corporate
Reputation

H11

Customer Percived
Trust CSR

2. Methodology
This study employs qualitative research and quantitative research method. Qualitative approach uses group
discussion techniques to develop appropriate scales in the Vietnamese market. Quantitative method uses the
cronbach's alpha coefficient to measure the reliability of the scale, exploratory factor analysis, confirmatory factor
analysis, and structural equation modeling to test the scale and test the hypothesis.

501
 Scales: The COBI measurement scale, using the scale of Mohd Yasin et al. (2007), consists 7 items.
Whereas, the COMI scale, using the scales of Pisharodi and Parameswaran (1992) and Chen and Su (2011),
consists of 4 items. The corporate reputation scale is developed from RepTrak ™ Pulse scale of Ponzi et al.
(2011). Perceived CSR is developed from the scale of Singh et al. (2008). This scale is chosen because it is
based on customer perception and covers all components in a multidimensional approach. Since these concepts
are new in Vietnam and there are many different views about measurement. Therefore, the authors conducted a
focus group discussion with eight customers who owned and used passenger cars in Vietnam. The results show
that the perceived CSR scale should add some more items: COMR2, COMR4, COMR6. In addition, they argue
that additional public reviews of businesses (CR5) should be included (Table 2). The results of a perceived CSR
scale consisted three components: commercial responsibility, ethical responsibility, social responsibility, and 14
items. The scale of corporate reputation consisted of 5 items (Table 2). Five items, which are synthesized from
the scale of Sirdeshmukh et al. (2002), Selnes and Sallis (2003), are used to measure customer trust. Finally, the
Purchase intention uses items from the Lam et al. (2004) scale for measuring repurchase intentions. All scales
are the seven points Likert scale from 1 (totally disagree) to 7 (totally agree).
Sample: In this study, we selected the automotive industry to test the hypotheses, because the potential
for automobile sales in Vietnam is high. It is forecasted that in the next five years, the industry's average growth
rate will be around 15% (BMI research report). Since cars are a valuable commodity, customers carefully
consider the factors before buying. Therefore, the automotive industry clearly shows the relationship between the
research concepts.
We carried out the survey in Ho Chi Minh City which is the largest cities in Vietnam. It is located in the
south with a population of over 10 million people who mainly come from other provinces in Vietnam. In addition,
we also surveyed in Da Nang city, the largest city in Central Vietnam.
To survey the relatively homogeneous market, the authors conducted direct interview to individual
customers who owned and used passenger cars in Vietnam. The formal study was carried out from 15/02/2017 to
20/04/2017, in 9 districts in Ho Chi Minh City and 4 districts in Da Nang City. There was a total number of 1,215
answers collected after delivering 1,300 questionnaires. During the data entry process, 188 votes were
eliminated. Finally, the number of 1,027 valid votes was selected as the official study data for this study.
3. Results and Discussion
3.1. Research results
Statistics characteristics: Out of 1,027 respondents, people from central and southern Vietnam accounted for
more than 80%. Respondents were mainly characterized as: gender is male, aged between 26 and 55 years,
popular education from high school to graduate and monthly income from 500 to 1,250 USD. The most surveyed
car brand was Toyota, and the country-of-brand most surveyed were Japan and Korea. Automobiles
manufactured and assembled in Vietnam are accounted for the highest proportion.
Analysis the reliability of the scales: Results of testing the reliability of scales in studied model show that
all component scales have Cronbach’s alpha coefficients greater than 0.6 (Garson 2008). However, the COMR4
variable has a corrected item – total correlation of 0.249 which is less than 0.3 and ER1 with a corrected item –
total correlation of 0.279 less than 0.3 (table 2), thus eliminating these variables (Peterson 1994). The remaining
scale research models have achieved the necessary reliability (Table 1).
Table 1. The reliability of scales
Components Variables Total correlation Cronbach’s Alpha Note
Country-of-brand image 7 ≥ 0.409 0.874
Country-of-manufacture image 4 ≥ 0.604 0.835
Corporate reputation 5 ≥ 0.642 0.867
Commercial responsibility 5 ≥ 0.703 0.893 Reject COMR4
Ethical responsibility 3 ≥ 0.681 0.846 Reject ER1
Social responsibility 4 ≥ 0.592 0.822
Customer trust 5 ≥ 0.647 0.880
Purchase intention 3 ≥ 0.793 0.902
Source: Own development
Principal Axis Factoring (PAF) and the un-perpendicular rotation (Promax) are used. Analysis of the EFA
shows that KMO = 0.892 > 0.5 and Sig (Bartlett’s Test) = 0.00 < 0.05. The results provide an appropriate EFA
test.

502
Journal of Applied Economic Sciences

Table 2. Factor of the scale

Contrust Factor loading
Country-of-brand image
COBI1. A country that is innovative in manufacturing 0.748
COBI2. A country that has high level of technological advance 0.885
COBI3. A country that is good in designing 0.661
COBI4. A country that is creative in its workmanship 0.723
COBI5. A country that has high quality in its workmanship 0.676
COBI6. A country that is prestigious 0.710
COBI7. A country that has an image of advanced country 0.796
Country-of-manufacture image
COMI1. Excellent workmanship 0.825
COMI2. Reliable 0.872
COMI3. Durable 0.908
COMI4. High quality 0.889
Commercial responsibility
COMR1. Is an innovator and launches new products into the market continuously? 0.809
COMR2. Makes efforts to improve products and services for customers 0.874
COMR3. Its products always maintain good quality 0.816
COMR4. Informs in a correct and truthful way about the characteristic/properties of its products Reject
COMR5. This firm settles customers’ complaint quickly 0.840
COMR6. Corporate advertising/promotion activities honesty 0.847
Ethical responsibility
ER1. Is concerned to fulfil its obligations vis-a`-vis its shareholders, suppliers, distributors and other Reject
agents with whom it deals
ER2. Is concerned to respect the human rights when carrying out its activities 0.837
ER3. Always respects the norms defined in the law when carrying out its activities 0.909
ER4. Respecting ethical principles in its relationships has priority over achieving superior economic 0.842
performance
Social responsibility
SR1. Is concerned about protecting natural environment 0.658
SR2. Directs part of its budget to donations and social works favouring the disadvantaged 0.806
SR3. Supports the development of the society financing social and/or cultural activities 0.906
SR4. Is concerned to improve general well-being of the society 0.785
Corporate reputation
CR1. Is a company I have a good feeling about 0.858
CR2. Is a company that I trust 0.858
CR3. Is a company that I admire and respect 0.756
CR4. Has a good overall reputation 0.793
CR5. The public appreciates this business well 0.688
Customer trust
TRUST1. Company is competent at what they are doing 0.836
TRUST2. Company is trustworthy 0.866
TRUST3. Company is of very high integrity 0.815
TRUST4. Company is very responsive to customers 0.802
TRUST5. Company will respond with understanding in the event of problems 0.544
Purchase intention
PI1. I consider this business as the first choice 0.888
PI2. I will buy this car brand in the future 0.896
PI3. I am willing to recommend this company to other people 0.919
TOTAL variance explained: 69.160%
Source: Own development
Table 2 shows that the variables in the researched model are extracted into 8 factors and have variance
extracted of 69.160% > 50% factors loading of the measurement variables are greater than 0.5. The difference
between the weights is greater than 0.3. Therefore, the variables are convergent.
Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA): The results show that there are 559 degrees of freedom and this
model is appropriate for market data (Chi-square/df = 2.471 < 3; 0.962 > 0.9; GFI = 0.929 > 0.9; TLI = 0.957 > 0.9
and RMSEA = 0.038 < 0.08) (Hair 2010). Scales of social responsibility, purchase intention, ethical responsibility

503
do not correlate the measurement errors, so the observed variables are unidimensional. On the other hand, the
remaining scales are not unidimensional. The standardized regression weights of the observed variables ranged
from 0.642 to 0.936 (greater than 0.5) and the unstandardized weights were statistically significant (p < 0.05).
Studied variables were used to measure concepts reaching convergent validity. Correlation coefficients for each
pair of concepts were different from one. Those were statistically significant, so the components had discriminant
validity. The results of the reliability verification and the average variance extracted test of the concepts showed
that the Cronbach’s alpha coefficient and the composite reliability of the components were greater than 0.6.
Whereas, the average variance extracted was greater than 0.5. Consequently, the scales are highly reliable (Hair
2010).
Estimate the structural relationships: The results of the structural equation modeling test (Figure 2)
showed that the theoretical model was consistent with market data such as, Chi-square = 1457.892, df = 574,
Chi-square/df = 2.540 < 3, GFI = 0.925 > 0.9, TLI = 0.955 > 0.9, CFI = 0.959 > 0.9, RMSEA = 0.039 < 0.08.
Figure 2. SEM analysis results of the theoretical model (Standardized)

.65 .72
.64 .77 .70 .75 .69 .67
.75

.76 .66 (H1)

COBI CR
.64
.64 .09 (H6)
-0.03 (H9)

.19 (H2)
.94 .53 .85 .89
.90 (H .86
4) .07 (H7)
.73 COMI
PI
.66
.32 (H3)

.24 (H10)
.77 .51 (H8)
.73
.79
TRUST .61 (H5)
.78 Perceived
.72 CSR

.23 .74
.73

COMR ER
.90 SR
.73 .78 .68 .76
.78 .81 .84
.70 .78 .76 .72

Chi-square = 1457.982; df = 574; P = 0.000

Chi-square/df = 2.540; GFI = 0.925; TLI = 0.955
CFI = 0.959; RMSEA = 0,03
Source: Own development
Estimates of the main parameters of the model (Table 3) showed that the direct relationships in the model
were statistically significant (p <0.05), except for the relationship between corporate reputation and purchase
intention (p = 0.641> 0.05).
Table 3. Regression coefficients of relationships in the theoretical model
Unstandardized Standardized Test
Hypothesis Relationships SE CR P-value
coefficients coefficients hypothesis
H1 COBI →CR 0.814 0.659 0.050 16.412 0.000 Support
H2 COMI →CR 0.120 0.194 0.018 6.696 0.000 Support
H3 CR →Perceived CSR 0.258 0.320 0.036 7.258 0.000 Support
H4 CR →Customer Trust 0.561 0.530 0.040 13.939 0.000 Support
Customer trust
H5 0.463 0.607 0.038 12.272 0.000 Support
→Perceived CSR

504
Journal of Applied Economic Sciences

COBI →Purchase
H6 0.178 0.095 0.077 2.314 0.021 Support
intention
COMI →Purchase
H7 0.067 0.071 0.026 2.609 0.009 Support
intention
Perceived CSR →
H8 0.964 0.512 0.182 5.312 0.000 Support
Purchase intention
CR →Purchase
H9 0.041 0.027 0.088 0.466 0.641 Rejected
intention
Customer trust →
H10 0.338 0.236 0.099 3.141 0.000 Support
Purchase intention
Source: Own development
Intermediate Analysis: To determine meaningful intermediate impact, four conditions need to be fulfilled:
(1) CR has a significant impact on Customer trust; (2) Customer trust has a significant impact on Perceived CSR;
(3) CR has a significant impact on Perceived CSR; and (4) The impact of CR on Perceived CSR decreases when
calculating the effect of intermediate variables (Andrews et al. 2004).
The first two conditions were examined by estimating model 1 (Table 4). The results provided that the
model was matched (Chi-square/df = 2.542; CFI = 0.927; GFI = 0.892; TLI = 0.917 and RMSEA = 0.064), so
conditions 1 and 2 were met. Condition 3 was tested in model 2 with the perfectly fitted results. Therefore,
condition 3 was satisfied. Finally, the comparison between model 2 and model 3 (Table 4) proved that CR impact
on Perceived CSR decreased with the effect of Customer trust (normalized coefficient was 0.524 versus 0.466).
Condition 4 was met.
Table 4. Models of relationship estimation
Unstandardized Standardized
Relationships SE CR P-value
coefficients coefficients
Model 1: Condition 1 and 2
CR →Customer trust 0.477 0.394 0.075 6.378 0.000
Customer trust →Perceived CSR 0.317 0.465 0.047 6.776 0.000
Model 2: Condition 3
Corporate reputation →Perceived CSR 0.524 0.614 0.061 8.661 0.000
Model 3: Condition 4
Corporate reputation →Customer trust 0.432 0.343 0.077 5.579 0.000
Customer trust →Perceived CSR 0.170 0.246 0.041 4.172 0.000
Corporate reputation →Perceived CSR 0.466 0.534 0.060 7.818 0.000
Source: Own development
In addition to the direct impact of CR on Perceived CSR, Customer trust was considered as an
intermediate factor to the indirect impact of CR on Perceived CSR.
3.2. Discussion
The Perceived CSR scale is a second-order scale that measures three components (commercial responsibility,
ethical responsibility, and social responsibility). The COBI, COMI, corporate reputation, customer trust, and
purchase intention are first-order scales and statistical significance in Vietnam market.
Considering the relationship between concepts, COBI direct impacts on corporate reputation. When a
brand comes from a country that is well appreciated by the customer, the corporate reputation will be evaluated
positively. The results also point out that COMI also influences the corporate reputation. This finding is consistent
with the study by Vidaver-Cohen et al. (2015). Thus, if a brand comes from a country that is well-regarded by the
consumer, but country-of-manufacture with a poor image may affect the reputation of the business.
The results also show that corporate reputation direct impacts on perceived CSR. If customers evaluate
good CR, they will perceive CSR under a positive direction. This result is consistent with research by Yoon et al.
(2006) who believed that customers tend to perceive philanthropy motivation as sincere, trustworthy if they
evaluate positively on the business. The results also show that customer trust is partly mediated on the impact of
CR on perceived CSR. Thus, in addition to direct impact of CR on Perceived CSR, CR will indirectly partly-impact
through the customer trust. When the business has good CR, it will lead customers to trust the business and trust
will lead the customer to good perception about CSR activities.

505
 Finally, COBI, COMI, Perceived CSR and customer trust have a direct impact on customers' purchase
intentions. However, CR does not affect purchase intention, opposing to Brown's (1998) study. This result was
discussed in depth with 05 customers owned and used passenger cars in Vietnam. All customers agreed with this
result, because the re-purchasing intention in the automotive industry depends on many factors (price, quality,
psychological discovery ...), corporate reputation will impact more for the first time buying intention.
In terms of impact level, COBI affects on CR stronger than COMI (Standardized coefficients are 0.659 and
0.194 respectively). CR directly impacts on Perceived CSR without the mediating role of customer trust with a
standardized coefficient of 0.614 (p-value = 0.00) and when mediated by customer trust, the standardized
coefficient is 0.534 (p-value = 0.00). In addition, Perceived CSR has the strongest impact, followed by customer
trust and, finally, COBI and COMI (Standardized coefficients are 0.512, 0.236, 0.095 and 0.071, respectively).
Conclusion
The results show that, firstly, after adjusting the words and adding some items through focus group, the
components scale reach high reliability. Secondly, the COBI has a positive impact on CR, in turn CR has a
positive impact on Perceived CSR. On the other hand, the customer trust has an intermediary role in the
relationship between CR and Perceived CSR. The COI, customer trust and Perceived positively influence the
customer’s purchase intention. However, corporate reputation does not affect customer intention.
To raise awareness of customers about CSR activities, companies need to focus on commercial
responsibility with customers. Besides, businesses should concentrate on doing business legally and supporting
social and charitable activities. The COBI is related to the CR. Therefore, if the business originates from an
impressive nation, it will positively affect the corporate reputation. Furthermore, car brands manufactured in highly
valued countries will have a positive impact on corporate reputation. Thus, if a brand comes from a country that
highly valued by customers but products are produced in an underestimated country, it’s reputation may be
reduced.
This study finds the reverse relationships, which are the CR directly affects on perceived CSR and
indirectly affects through the customer trust. When a business has a good reputation, part of it will make
customers trust and evaluate the CSR activities in a good way. On the other hand, corporate reputation directly
affect the perceived CSR of customers. Thus, for customers to evaluate the CSR activities in a favorable
direction, businesses need to focus on building the corporate reputation and trust of customers.
This study supports that COI influences the consumer's purchase intention. Customer ratings of global
brands are influenced by outside information. Besides, buyers, who are well aware about the COBI and the
COMI, will have a good attitude and intend to buy those brands.
Finally, when customers feel good about CSR activities, as well as having confidence in the business, they
will deliver support through their purchase intentions. Therefore, businesses need to spend money to support
corporate social responsibility activities and build customer trust by developing their reputation.
Acknowledgement
Researches would like to express our gratitude to all those who gave us the possibility to complete this study
especially to Industrial University of Ho Chi Minh City, University of Economics Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam for
providing research grant for this study.
References
[1] Agarwal, J, Osiyevskyy, O., and Feldman, P. M. 2015. Corporate reputation measurement: Alternative factor
structures, nomological validity, and organizational outcomes. Journal of Business Ethics, 130 (2): 485-506.
DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10551-014-2232-6
[2] Ajzen, I, and Madden, T.J. 1986. Prediction of goal-directed behavior: Attitudes, intentions, and perceived
behavioral control. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 22(5): 453-474.
[3] Andrews, J. C. et al. 2004. Understanding adolescent intentions to smoke: An examination of relationships
among social influence, prior trial behavior, and antitobacco campaign advertising. Journal of Marketing,
68(3): 110-123. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1509/jmkg.68.3.110.34767
[4] Aydin, S., and Özer, G. 2006. How switching costs affect subscriber loyalty in the Turkish mobile phone
market: An exploratory study. Journal of Targeting, Measurement and Analysis for Marketing, 14(2): 141-
155. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1057/palgrave.jt.5740176

506
Journal of Applied Economic Sciences

[5] Bae, J., and Cameron, G. T. 2006. Conditioning effect of prior reputation on perception of corporate giving.
Public Relations Review, 32 (2): 144-150. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pubrev.2006.02.007
[6] Berger, I. E, Cunningham, P. H., and Drumwright, M. E. 2007. Mainstreaming corporate social responsibility:
Developing markets for virtue. California Management Review, 49(4): 132-157.
DOI:https://doi.org/10.2307/41166409
[7] Brown, T. J. 1998. Corporate associations in marketing: Antecedents and consequences. Corporate
Reputation Review, 1(3): 215-233. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1057/palgrave.crr.1540045
[8] Bruwer, J., and Buller, C. 2012. Country-of-origin (COO) brand preferences and associated knowledge levels
of Japanese wine consumers. Journal of Product & Brand Management, 21(5): 307-316.
DOI:https://doi.org/10.1108/10610421211253605
[9] Carrigan, M, and Attalla, A. 2001. The myth of the ethical consumer-do ethics matter in purchase behaviour?
Journal of Consumer Marketing, 18 (7): 560-578. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1108/07363760110410263
[10] Carroll, A., and Buchholtz, A. 2011. Assessing Ethics Education in a Business, Government and Society
Course Context. Information Age Publishing (Iap): 263-276.
[11] Carroll, A.B. 1991. The pyramid of corporate social responsibility: Toward the moral management of
organizational stakeholders. Business Horizons, 34(4): 39-48. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/0007-
6813(91)90005-G
[12] Chen, Y. M, and Su, Y. F. 2011. Do country-of-manufacture and country-of-design matter to industrial brand
equity? Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing, 27(1): 57-68.
DOI:https://doi.org/10.1108/08858621211188966
[13] Diamantopoulos, A., and Zeugner-Roth, K. P. 2010. Country of Origin as Brand Element. Wiley international
encyclopedia of marketing. DOI: 10.1002/9781444316568.wiem06004
[14] Ellen, P. S, Webb D.J., and Mohr, L.A. 2006. Building corporate associations: Consumer attributions for
corporate socially responsible programs. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 34 (2): 147-157.
DOI:https://doi.org/10.1177/0092070305284976
[15] Fatma, M., and Rahman, Z. 2015. Consumer perspective on CSR literature review and future research
agenda. Management Research Review, 38(2): 195-216. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1108/MRR-09-2013-0223
[16] Fishbein, M., and Ajzen, I. 1975. Belief. Attitude, Intention and Behavior: An Introduction to Theory and
Research Reading. MA: Addison-Wesley.
[17] Fombrun, C.J, Galdberg, N.A., and Barnett, M.L. 2000a. Opportinity platforms and safety nets: corporate
citizenship and reputational risk. Business and Society Review, 105 (1): 85-105. DOI: 10.1111/0045-
3609.00066
[18] Fombrun, C. J. 1996. Reputation: Realizing Value from the Corporate Image. Cambridge: MA: Harvard
Business School Press.
[19] Fombrun, C. J., Ponzi, L.J., and Newburry, W. 2015. Stakehoder Tracking and Analysis: The RepTrak
System for measuring Corporate Reputation. Corporate Reputation Review, 18 (1): 3-24.
DOI:https://doi.org/10.1057/crr.201
[20] Friedman, H. 1970. Social Responsibility of Business is to increase its profits. The New York Times
Magazine, 13: 32-33, 122-124.
[21] Garson, D G. 2008. Factor analysis: statnotes. Retrieved March 22.
[22] Guercini, S., and Ranfagni, S. 2013. Integrating country-of-origin image and brand image in corporate
rebranding: the case of China. Marketing Intelligence & Planning, 31 (5): 508-521.
DOI:https://doi.org/10.1108/MIP-04-2013-0058
[23] Ha, H.Y, Janda, S., and Muthaly, S.K. 2010. A new understanding of satisfaction model in e-re-purchase
situation. European Journal of Marketing, 48 (7/8): 997-1016.
DOI:https://doi.org/10.1108/03090561011047490

507
[24] Hair, J. F. 2010. Multivariate data analysis. Pearson College Division.
[25] Hajli, N., Sims, J., Zadeh, A. H., and Richard, M.-O. 2016. A social commerce investigation of the role of trust
in asocial networking site on purchase intention. Journal of Business Research, 71: 133-141.
DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2016.10.004
[26] Helm, S. 2007. The role of corporate reputation in determining investor sactisfaction and loyalty. Corporate
Reputation Review, 10 (1): 22-37. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1057/palgrave.crr.1550036
[27] Hennig-Thurau, T., and Klee, A. 1997. The impact of customer satisfaction and relationship quality on
customer retention: A critical reassessment and model development. Psychology & Marketing, 14 (8): 737-
764. DOI:10.1002/(SICI)1520-6793(199712)14:8<737AID-MAR2>3.0.CO;2-F
[28] Keh, H.T., and Xie, Y. 2009. Corporate reputation and customer behavioral intentions: The roles of trust,
identification and commitment. Industrial Marketing Management, 38 (7): 732-742.
DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indmarman.2008.02.005
[29] Kim, D.J., Ferrin, D. L., and Rao, H. R. 2009. Trust and satisfaction, two stepping stones for successful e-
commerce relationships: A longitudinal exploration. Information systems research, 20 (2): 237-257.
[30] Kumara, P. S., and Canhua, K. 2010. Perceptions of country of origin: An approach to identifying
expectations of foreign products. Journal of Brand Management, 17 (5): 343-353.
DOI:https://doi.org/10.1057/bm.2009.28
[31] Lam, S., Shankar, V., Erramilli, M., and Murthy, B. 2004. Customer Valur, Satisfaction, Loyalty, and
Switching Costs: An Lllustration from a Business-to-Business Service Context. Journal of the Academy of
Marketing Science, 32 (3): 293-311. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1177/0092070304263330
[32] Lyon, L., and Cameron, G. T. 2004. A Relational Approach Examining the Interplay of Prior Reputation and
Immediate Response to a Crisis. Journal of Public Relations Research, 16 (3): 213-241.
DOI:https://doi.org/10.1080/1532-754X.2004.11925128
[33] McKnight, D. H, Choudhury, V., and Kacmar, C. 2002. Developing and validating trust measures for e-
commerce: An integrative typology. Information Systems Research, 13 (3): 334-359.
[34] Mohd Yasin, N., Nasser Noor M., Mohamad, O. 2007. Does image of country-of-origin matter to brand
equity? Journal of Product & Brand Management, 16 (1): 38-48.
DOI:https://doi.org/10.1108/10610420710731142
[35] Mohr, L.A., and Webb, D.J. 2005. The Effects of Corporate Social Responsibility and Price on Consumer
Responses. Journal of Consumer Affairs, 39 (1): 121-147. DOI:10.1111/j.1745-6606.2005.00006.x
[36] Pecotich, A., Ward, S. 2007. Global branding, country of origin and expertise: An experimental evaluation.
International Marketing Review, 24 (3): 271-296. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1108/02651330710755294
[37] Pérez, A. 2015. Corporate reputation and CSR reporting to stakeholders: Gaps in the literature and future
lines of research. Corporate Communications: An International Journal, 20 (1): 11-29.
DOI:https://doi.org/10.1108/CCIJ-01-2014-0003
[38] Peterson, R. A. 1994. A meta-analysis of Cronbach's coefficient alpha. Journal of Consumer Research, 21
(2): 381-403. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1086/209405
[39] Pisharodi, R.M., and Parameswaran, R. 1992. Confirmatory factor analysis of a country-of-origin scale: Intial
results. NA-Advances in Consumer Research 19.
[40] Ponzi, L.J., Fombrun, C. J., and Gardberg, N.A. 2011. RepTrak™ pulse: Conceptualizing and validating a
short-form measure of corporate reputation. Corporate Reputation Review, 14(1): 15-35.
DOI:https://doi.org/10.1057/crr.2011.5
[41] Prendergast, G. P, Tsang, A. S., and Chan, C. N. 2010. The interactive influence of country of origin of brand
and product involvement on purchase intention. Journal of Consumer Marketing, 27 (2): 180-188.
DOI:https://doi.org/10.1108/07363761011027277

508
Journal of Applied Economic Sciences

[42] Rindova, V.P, Williamson, I.O., Petkova, A.P., and Sever, J.M. 2005. Being Good or Being Known: An
Empirical Examination of the Dimensions, Antecedents, and Consequences of Organizational Reputation.
Academy of Management Journal, 48(6): 1033-1049.
[43] Roth, M. S., and Romeo, J. B. 1992. Matching product catgeory and country image perceptions: A framework
for managing country-of-origin effects. Journal of International Business Studies, 23 (3): 477-497.
DOI:https://doi.org/10.1057/palgrave.jibs.8490276
[44] Saeed, R., et al. 2013. Country-of-Origin (COO) Effect on Pakistani Consumers’ Evaluation of French
Cosmetic Products. Journal of Basic and Applied Scientific Research, 3 (6): 988-1000.
[45] Schiffman, L. G, Kanuk, L. L. 2007. Purchasing Behavior. Upper Saddle River: NJ: Pearson Prentice Hall.
[46] Selnes, F., and Sallis, J. 2003. Promoting relationship learning. Journal of Marketing, 67 (3): 80-95.
DOI:https://doi.org/10.1509/jmkg.67.3.80.18656
[47] Sen, S., Bhattacharya, C.B., and Korschun, D. 2006. The Role of Corporate Social Responsibility in
Strengthening Multiple Stakeholder Relationships: A Field Experiment. Journal of the Academy of Marketing
Science, 34 (2): 158-166. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1177/0092070305284978
[48] Shim, K, and Yang, S. U. 2016. The effect of bad reputation: The occurrence of crisis, corporate social
responsibility, and perceptions of hypocrisy and attitudes toward a company. Public Relations Review, 42 (1):
68-78. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pubrev.2015.11.009
[49] Singh, J, de los Salmones Sanchez, M.d.M.G, and del Bosque, I.R. 2008. Understanding Corporate Social
Responsibility and Product Perceptions in Consumer Markets: A Cross-Cultural Evaluation. Journal of
Business Ethics, 80 (3): 579-611. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-007-9457-6
[50] Sirdeshmukh, D., Singh, J., and Sabol, B. 2002. Consumer trust, value, and loyalty in relational exchanges.
Journal of Marketing, 66 (1): 15-37. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1509/jmkg.66.1.15.18449
[51] Thomas, J. 2009. Trust in customer relationship: addressing the impediments in research. In Proceedings of
Asia-Pacific Conference on Advances in Consumer Research 346-349.
[52] Thorne, L., Mahoney, L. S., and Manetti, G. 2014. Motivations for issuing standalone CSR reports: a survey
of Canadian firms. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 27 (4): 686-714.
DOI:https://doi.org/10.1108/AAAJ-07-2013-1393
[53] Tian, Z., Wang, R., and Yang, W. 2011. Consumer responses to corporate social responsibility (CSR) in
China. Journal of Business Ethics, 101 (2): 197-212. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-010-0716-6
[54] Van Der Merwe, A. W., and Puth, G. 2014. Towards a conceptual model of the relationship between
corporate trust and corporate reputation. Corporate Reputation Review, 17 (2): 138-156.
DOI:https://doi.org/10.1057/crr.2014.4
[55] Vidaver-Cohen, D., Gomez, C., and Colwell, S. R. 2015. Country-of-Origin Effects and Corporate Reputation
in Multinational Firms: Exploratory Research in Latin America. Corporate Reputation Review, 18 (3): 131-
155. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1057/crr.2015.7
[56] Walker, K. 2010. A systematic review of the corporate reputation literature: Definition, measurement, and
theory. Corporate Reputation Review, 12 (4): 357-387. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1057/crr.2009.26
[57] Walsh, G., Schaarschmidt, M., and Ivens, S. 2017. Effects of customer-based corporate reputation on
perceived risk and relational outcomes: empirical evidence from gender moderation in fashion retailing.
Journal of Product & Brand Management, 26 (3): 227-238. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1108/JPBM-07-2016-1267
[58] Yoon, Y., Gürhan-Canli, Z., and Schwarz, N. 2006. The effect of corporate social responsibility (CSR)
activities on companies with bad reputations. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 16 (4): 377-390.
DOI:10.1207/s15327663jcp1604_9

509
 Volume XII, Issue 2 (48), Spring 2017

ISSN 2393 – 5162 ISSN - L 1843-6110

View publication stats