Self‐concept, individual characteristics, and counterfeit consumption: Evidence from an emerging market

Abstract

The study draws on a sample of over 350 consumers from 10 department stores in an emerging market where counterfeit products are available in abundance and there is a huge demand for such goods. The findings reveal that interdependent and independent self traits significantly affect individual characteristics, that is, susceptibility to normative influence, readiness to take social risk, and status acquisition (SA), which in turn influences counterfeit purchase intention. It was discovered that such individual characteristics play a mediating effect on the self‐concept—purchase intention relationship and that high degrees of interdependent self traits positively affect consumers' purchase intention. The study adds to the theory of reasoned action (TRA) by incorporating SA variables into the TRA framework and discovers their significant influence on purchase intention. Some novel insights surrounding counterfeit consumption in an emerging economy context are presented and several implications are extracted to help practitioners appeal to such individual characteristics for combating counterfeit consumption.

Cultural differences in deliberate counterfeit purchase behavior

“…Despite growing attention on the cultural differences in deliberate counterfeit purchase behavior (e.g., Eisend, 2019;Khandeparkar and Motiani, 2018;Li et al, 2018;Molina-Castillo et al, 2021;Tunçel, 2021;Wu et al, 2019), there are fewer studies on the role of individual-level cultural factors (e.g., Eisend et al, 2017;Kim and Johnson, 2014;Malik et al, 2020;Xiao et al, 2018). For example, Kim and Johnson (2014) examine the moderating role of individuals' independent (vs. interdependent) self-view in the relationship between moral emotions and judgments about the counterfeit purchase.…”

How perfectionism reduces positive word‐of‐mouth: The mediating role of perceived social risk

“…In these circumstances, the communicator is afraid the recipient will feel they have been given poor advice. Research has also found that communicating things that diverge from social norms entails social risk, such as displaying unusual product choices (Campbell & Goodstein, 2001), buying counterfeit products (Malik et al, 2020), or expressing unpopular opinions in face-to-face contexts (Schlosser, 2009). However, these results contradict Lin and Fang's (2006) study, which found that as the social risk of a product increases, there is more WOM about it.…”

Consumer ethics: A review and research agenda

“…Apart from the above 8 dominant theories that have been applied, there are 31 other theoretical lenses such as complexity theory , regulatory focus theory , just world theory , social bonding theory , socio intuitionist theory , and so forth, that have been employed in consumer ethics research. While most of the research have tested these theories in isolation (e.g., Gamma et al, 2020; Leischnig & Woodside, 2019; Peloza et al, 2013), but some studies have integrated two or more theories in their research framework (e.g., Malik et al, 2020; Wirtz & McColl‐Kennedy, 2010; Zollo et al, 2018). Finally, 34% (36/106) studies did not mention the application of any theory in their research.…”

“…Additionally, Escadas et al (2020), examined how postdecision emotions mediate the relationship between ethical decision‐making and “future ethical behavioural intentions.” Firm‐related mediating factors include relationship quality and outcome (Chang & Lu, 2019), trust in ethical advertising (Osburg et al, 2020), trust in product information (Osburg et al, 2020). Likewise, social and interpersonal factors such as benefits from the FB community (Gummerus et al, 2017), susceptibility to normative influence (Malik et al, 2020) coping factors like moral disengagement (Chowdhury & Fernando, 2014), deterrence factors like perceived risk (Zhao et al, (2020) and other factors like perceived justice (Septianto et al, 2020), implementation plans (Grimmer et al, 2016) have also been investigated as mediators. Overtime a rise in exploring mediation mechanisms is evident, as 66% of the mediation‐related studies were conducted in the last 3 years.…”

“…For instance, perceived unfairness and perceived benefits enhance unethical intentions such as piracy intentions and intentions to buy counterfeit (Fukukawa & Ennew, 2010; Koay et al, 2020). Moreover, readiness to take social risk, status acquisition, and susceptibility to normative and interpersonal influences (Koklic et al, 2016; Malik et al, 2020) and past behaviour (Zhao et al, 2020) also escalate unethical intentions. The review also revealed the factors that have a diminishing impact on unethical intentions.…”