Do product category and consumers’ motivations profiles matter regarding counterfeiting?

Roux, André Le; Thébault, Marinette; Roy, Yves

doi:10.1108/jpbm-06-2018-1923

Cited by 14 publications

(23 citation statements)

References 46 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…One of the measures used in this context is the Havocscope ranking (Havocscope, 2018), which lists the black market potential in a country, based on several indicators like GTRIC-e, which “indicates the relative propensity of importing infringing goods from different and […] accurately depicts actual counterfeiting and piracy export intensities across different economies” (OECD, 2008, p. 106f), overall attitude towards counterfeits, damage reported from counterfeits and pirated goods and Internet penetration rate. The literature suggests that price is a critical driver for the purchase of counterfeit and pirated goods (Gabrielli et al , 2012; Le Roux et al , 2019). The control variable, price consciousness, was included in our theoretical model to eliminate or neutralize its effects on the dependent variable.…”

Section: Theoretical Framework and Hypothesesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Towards a general model explaining physical and digital counterfeits

Molina-Castillo

Penz

Stöttinger

2021

MIP

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

PurposeDemand for fake physical and digital products is a global phenomenon with substantive detrimental effects on companies and consumers. This raises various questions and issues, such as whether there are generalizable explanations of purchase intentions.Design/methodology/approachThis research is based on consumer samples from three different countries. This paper develops and tests a model based on the theory of planned behavior (TPB) to explain both the demand for counterfeits and digital piracy. Respondents were questioned about physical products (e.g. clothing, accessories) from well-known brands and digital products (e.g. software, music).FindingsSocially oriented motives such as embarrassment potential, ethical concerns and social norms explain the intention to purchase fake physical and digital products, while personally oriented motives (e.g. self-identity) have indirect effects but not a direct impact on purchase intention.Research limitations/implicationsAs our results show, we find evidence for a general model – contributing and supporting our first and primary research goal of providing a theoretically robust model that bridges the gap between two streams of literature.Practical implicationsThe fact that drivers of buying counterfeit physical and digital goods are similar across countries provides justification for companies and international organizations to bundle their efforts and thus leverage them more strongly on a global scale.Originality/valueWe provide a basis for consolidating future research on demand for counterfeits and pirated goods because underlying factors driving demand are similar across the three countries studied herein.

show abstract

Section: Theoretical Framework and Hypothesesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Towards a general model explaining physical and digital counterfeits

Molina-Castillo

Penz

Stöttinger

2021

MIP

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In non-deceptive (secondary) market, consumers knowingly and deliberately buy lookalike products, such as personal accessories, pirated music CDs, movie DVDs or software (Wang, et al, 2005;Penz, Schlegelmilch and Stöttinger, 2009;Penz and Stöttinger, 2008). Knowing that a product is a counterfeit can also influence the behaviour of potential buyers (Baghi et al, 2016;Le Roux et al, 2019). Although these different categories exist, the market data does not always differentiate between the different categories of lookalikes and classifies them all as counterfeits and pirated goods.…”

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The contemporary view understands brands as holders of the identity and meanings that are co-created in a stakeholder network (Brodie et al , 2017) and manufacturing firms are only the owners of the trademark (Evans et al , 2019). Recent research explored the equity of luxury brands (Nia and Zaichkowsky, 2000), consumer perceived risk (Veloutsou and Bian, 2008), counterfeit ownership (Bian and Moutinho, 2011), customer confusion (Falkowski, Olszewska and Ulatowska, 2014), the spotlight effect (Zhan et al , 2015), purchase intention (Le Roux et al , 2019) and conceptualizations of collaborative processes (Evans et al , 2019). Copycats are products that have a different brand name but look very similar to an existing brand and therefore they confuse consumers (Coelho do Vale and Verga Matos, 2015; Le Roux et al , 2016).…”

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…These five manuscripts use diverse methodological approaches and measurement methods. Specifically, this special issue contains a conceptual article (Evans et al , 2019), two articles using qualitative methodologies, including an ethnographic study (Cova and Cova, 2019) and semi-structured interviews (Cekirdekci and Latif, 2019) and two articles using experimental studies (Pathak et al , 2019; Le Roux et al , 2019).…”

Section: Special Issuementioning

confidence: 99%

“…Finally, Le Roux et al (2019) study the effects of product category and consumers’ motivations profiles on the factors that drive consumer preferences and purchase intentions towards counterfeits and genuine products for different types of product attributes and purchase situations. The authors use an experimental study with a sample of 170 respondents and use a tradeoff model to manipulate three attributes: product type (genuine vs counterfeit), price (high vs low) and place of purchase (regular shop, Internet and market) for two product categories to gauge their impact on consumers’ motivations to purchase counterfeits.…”

Section: Special Issuementioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

An introduction to the special issue on the past, present and future research on deliberate lookalikes

Davcik

Sharma

Chan

et al. 2019

JPBM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to present the contemporary thinking on deliberate lookalikes and to provide a better understanding of its key forms (counterfeits, copycats and no-name imitations) and markets (deceptive and non-deceptive). Design/methodology/approach This editorial contains a review of current and past literature on deliberate lookalikes along with summaries of all the articles accepted for publication in the special issue on deliberate lookalikes. The guest editors used academic databases such as Web of Science to find the most representative scholarly work on deliberate lookalikes literature. Findings This editorial identifies pertinent research gaps in the literature on deliberate lookalikes. The five selected articles address some of these research gaps and provide useful insights on the purchase and usage of deliberate lookalikes along with directions for future research and ways to apply different research methods that could have important implications for scholars and managers. Originality/value The editorial and special issue extends the knowledge about the deliberate lookalikes and their effects on firms, brands and consumers. This work opens new avenues for the research about different forms and markets in the context of lookalikes.

show abstract

A study on the influence of the characteristics of key opinion leaders on consumers’ purchase intention in live streaming commerce: based on dual-systems theory

Jin

2022

Electron Commer Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Drawing on the dual-systems theory (DST), this study proposes a research model that focuses on how the characteristics of the key opinion leader influence consumers’ purchase intention in live streaming commerce (LSC). We collected data through questionnaire surveys from samples of consumers in China ( N = 467), which indicated that key opinion leader’s characteristics (i.e., attractiveness, trustworthiness, expertise) are all positively related to purchase intention. Importantly, the mediator analyses indicated that the effect of systems 1 on the relationship between attractiveness and purchase intention persisted is persistent, regardless of the type of goods purchased by the consumers (utilitarian or hedonic). This finding highlights the importance of attractiveness and reveals unconscious thought (UT) of consumers when shopping in LSC. This study provides a new theoretical perspective (i.e., DST) to identify attractiveness as a determinant of purchase intention in LSC and influence purchase intention by activating systems 1, thus solving the problem of identifying key factors in stimulus–organism–response theory. Besides, our results identify and test UT in LSC. The practical implications of these findings are to provide guidance for the selection of key opinion leaders in LSC and the development of live streaming industry.

show abstract

Do product category and consumers’ motivations profiles matter regarding counterfeiting?

Cited by 14 publications

References 46 publications

Towards a general model explaining physical and digital counterfeits

Towards a general model explaining physical and digital counterfeits

An introduction to the special issue on the past, present and future research on deliberate lookalikes

A study on the influence of the characteristics of key opinion leaders on consumers’ purchase intention in live streaming commerce: based on dual-systems theory

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About