Can nationalism and religious approaches be harmonized? Three-way interaction effects on small business consumer brand identification

Figures & data

Figure 1. Proposed structural model.

Table 1. Variables and indicators.

Variables	Definition	Indicators	Mean	SD
Consumer brand identification (CBI)	The degree to which the brand expresses and enhances consumers identity	I feel a strong sense of belonging to this brand	3.87	0.81
		I identify strongly with this brand
		This brand embodies what I believe in
		This brand is like a part of me
		This brand has a personal meaning for me
National identity (NI)	A set of cognitions and emotions that express an individual’s relationship with a nation	The nation I belong to is an important reflection of who I am	3.67	0.78
		I am a worthy member of the nation I belong to
		I am a cooperative participant in the nation I belong to
		I feel good about the nation I belong to
		In general, I’m glad to be a member of the nation I belong to
		Overall, my nation is considered good by others
		In general, others respect the nation that I am a member of
		In general, belonging to this nation is an important part of my self-image
Purchase intention (PI)	Consumers’ desire to purchase the brand	I am likely to buy some of the products that are promoted	4.02	0.91
		I plan to purchase the products that are advertised
		I desire to buy products that are promoted
		I will buy the brands that are advertised
		The brand advertisement has a positive influence on my purchase decisions

Table 2. Respondents’ demographic profile.

	Num	Percentage (%)
Religion
Islam	320	77.67
Christian	40	9.71
Catholic	43	10.44
Age
<18	18	4.37
18–25	148	35.92
26–35	95	23.06
36–45	90	21.84
46–55	46	11.17
55<	6	1.46
Sex
Male	190	46.12
Female	213	51.70
Monthly spending
<IDR 3,000,000	97	23.54
IDR 3,000,000–6,000,000	163	39.56
IDR 6,000,000–10,000,000	123	29.85
IDR 10,000,000<	20	4.85
Education
Elementary	9	2.18
Junior High School	15	3.64
Senior High School	89	21.60
Diploma	56	13.59
Bachelor	203	49.27
Master	27	6.55
Doctoral	4	0.97
Occupation
Student	129	31.31
Government employees	86	20.87
Private	134	32.52
Entrepreneur	47	11.41
Others	7	1.70

Table 3. Convergent validity.

Variables	Items	Loadings	Composite reliability (CR)	Average variance extracted (AVE)
CBI	CBI1	0.868	0.768	0.670
	CBI2	0.745
	CBI3	0.514
	CBI4	0.69
	CBI5	0.533
NI	NI1	0.824	0.855	0.753
	NI2	0.841
	NI3	0.78
	NI4	0.791
	NI5	0.843
	NI6	0.802
	NI7	0.658
	NI8	0.654
PI	PI1	0.640	0.802	0.815
	PI2	0.539
	PI3	0.564
	PI4	0.804
	PI5	0.838

Table 4. Discriminant validity.

Variables	CBI	NI	PI
CBI	0.785
NI	0.287	0.804
PI	0.454	0.305	0.812

Note: the square root of AVE is italicized.

Table 5. Hierarchical multiple regression.

Predictor	Model 1		Model 2		Model 3		Model 4
	β	SE	β	SE	β	SE	β	SE
Control
Age	0.033	0.02	0.013	0.017	0.011	0.022	0.04	0.08
Religion	0.210*	0.260*	0.260*	0.340*	0.19	0.27	0.09	0.11
Sex	0.02	0.01	0.015	−0.01	0.03	0.01	0.05	−0.02
Monthly spending	0.180*	0.220*	0.013	0.02	0.22	0.33	0.018	−0.04
Education	0.05	0.045	0.031	0.01	0.095	0.022	0.075	0.09
Occupation	0.05	0.02	0.04	0.022	0.01	0.03	0.03	0.03
Constant	3.45	4.13	4.22***	4.17***	3.45***	3.05***	4.08**	4.15**
Main effects
CBI--->PI			0.320***	0.351***
Two-way interactions
CBI*NI ---> PI					0.328***	0.362***
Three-way interaction
CBI*NI*RBP							0.203**	0.229**
r^2	0.03		0.145		0.167		0.179
r^2 change			0.115		0.022		0.012

* Significant at p < 0.05 (two-tailed). **Significant at p < 0.05 (one-tailed). ***Significant at p < 0.001(one-tailed).

Figure 2. Moderation effect of NI on the relationship between CBI and PI.

Figure 3. Three-way interaction graph.