Italian Sounding—i. e., the Italian appearance of a product or service brand irrespective of its country of origin—represents a global market phenomenon affecting a wide range of economic sectors, particularly the agro-food sector. Although its economic impact has been repeatedly stressed from different points of view, systematic scientific knowledge regarding its social–psychological bases is lacking. Three studies carried out in three different countries address this literature gap. Different consumer groups are targeted regarding major product categories pre-selected categories, which are the (...) major Italian food goods within the specific country according to piloting. In each study, the main independent variable has been manipulated by presenting real product images, whose “Italianness” degree is effectively manipulated by the main study variable across three or four levels. Main hypotheses are tested via a survey with the specific product images administered to samples in Italy, China, and the USA. Across the three studies, results show that Made in Italy products, compared to the other ones, are advantaged in terms of the main dependent variables: reputation profile, general reputation, attitude, and willingness to pay. Moreover, Italian Sounding products are endowed with corresponding significant advantages when compared to the Generic Foreign by non-Italian samples. Results reveal the specific social–psychological profile of Italian Sounding products in terms of either weaknesses or strengths when compared to both Made in Italy products and Generic Foreign ones, differently in the eyes of Italian and non-Italian consumers across different countries. Finally, consistently across the three studies, the extent to which a food product is perceived to be Italian increases consumers' WTP for that product, and this effect is consistently mediated by the product's reputation. (shrink)

Given the food challenges that society is facing, we draw upon recent developments in the study of how food reputation affects food preferences and food choices, providing here a starting standard point for measuring every aspect of food reputation in different cultural contexts across the world. Specifically, while previous attempts focused either on specific aspects of food or on measures of food features validated in one language only, the present research validates the Food Reputation Map (FRM) in Italian, English and (...) Chinese over 2250 participants worldwide. Here we successfully measure food reputation across twenty-three specific indicators, further grouped into six synthetic indicators of food reputation. Critically, results show that: a) the specific measurement tool of food reputation can vary across cultural contexts, and that b) people’s reputation of food products or categories changes significantly across different cultural contexts. Therefore, in order to understand people’s food preferences and consumption, it is important to take into account the repertoire of cultural differences that underlies the contexts of analysis: the three context-specific versions of the FRM presented here effectively deal with this issue and provide reliable context-specific insights on stakeholders’ interests, perspectives, attitudes and behaviors related to food perceptions, assessment and consumption, which can be effectively leveraged to foster food sustainability. (shrink)

The Context Comparison Model provides a promising avenue to guide persuasive communication development by highlighting the features of the communication context that require consideration, including source, target, and task variables. The model was tested in a study of global climate change. American participants read a text outlining scientific evidence for global climate change and a policy proposal to mitigate future climate change. Prior to reading the text, participants’ completed measures of their political affiliation to render their group memberships salient. They (...) were randomly assigned to one of four source conditions: ingroup minority; ingroup majority; outgroup minority; or outgroup minority. Participants completed pre- and post-measures of attitudes and the plausibility of climate change. Pretest scores revealed that global climate change attitudes were held less strongly by Republicans than Democrats. In line with expectations, participants’ subjective attitudes were more influenced by ingroup sources, and larger persuasive effects were obtained for ingroup minorities. For the plausibility of climate change, participants were more persuaded by an outgroup source, and larger effects were evident for outgroup majorities. Results were precisely predicted by the CCM. Their implications for science communication were discussed. (shrink)