Counterfeiting is a major issue for companies, public institutions and consumers. Despite extensive literature on the subject in marketing, an instrument for measuring the wide variety of the determinants of attitude towards and intention to purchase counterfeit products is missing. A second-order model comprising 13 determinants, grouped into three latent constructs, is validated. This model includes a dimension related to the societal consequences of counterfeiting and two dimensions representing individual factors’ motivations and deterrents. This research pinpoints the most relevant motivations for and deterrents of counterfeit purchases. Results show that societal economic factors do not impact attitude towards and intention to purchase counterfeits, whereas individual motivations are crucial. Individual motivations and deterrents are the only antecedents of attitude towards counterfeits, with motivations being the most important determinant. Second-order factors indirectly influence intention to purchase counterfeits, through the mediation of attitude towards the purchase.
AjzenIFishbeinM (1977) Attitude-behavior relations: A theoretical analysis and review of empirical research. Psychological Bulletin84: 888–918.
2.
Albers-MillerND (1999) Consumer misbehavior: Why people buy illicit goods. Journal of Consumer Marketing16(3): 273–87.
3.
AndersonJCGerbingDW (1988) Structural modelling in practice: A review and recommended two steps approach. Psychological Bulletin103(3): 411–423.
4.
AngSHChengPSLim E.ACTambyahSK (2001) Spot the difference: Consumer responses towards counterfeits. Journal of Consumer Marketing18(3): 219–235.
5.
AvivSRuvioA.DavidowM (2008) (Un)ethical consumer behavior: Robin Hoods or plain hoods. Journal of Consumer Marketing25(4): 200–210.
6.
BagozziRPYiY (2012) Specification, evaluation, and interpretation of structural equation models. Journal of the Academy Marketing Science40: 8–34.
7.
BamossyGScammonDL (1985) Product counterfeiting, consumers and manufacturers beware. In: HirschmanECHolbrookMB (eds) Advances in Consumer Research, Vol. 12. Provo, UT: Association for Consumer Research, pp.334–339.
8.
BeckerJ-MKleinKWetzelsM (2012) Hierarchical latent variable models in PLS-SEM: Guidelines for using reflective-formative type models. Long Range Planning45: 355–394.
9.
BianX.MoutinhoL (2011) The role of brand image, product involvement, and knowledge in explaining consumer purchase behaviour of counterfeits: Direct and indirect effects. European Journal of Marketing45(1/2): 191–216.
10.
BlochPHBushRFCampbellL (1993) Consumer accomplices in product counterfeiting: A demand-side investigation. Journal of Consumer Marketing10(4): 27–36.
11.
BushRFBlochPHDawsonS (1989) Remedies for product counterfeiting. Business Horizons32(1): 59–65.
12.
ChakrabortyGAllredATBristolT (1996) Exploring consumers’ evaluations of counterfeits: The roles of country of origin and ethnocentrism. In: CorfmanKLynchJ (eds) Advances in Consumer Research, 23. Provo, UT: Association for Consumer Research, pp.379–384.
13.
ChakrabortyGAllredATSukhdialASBristolT (1997) Use of negative cues to reduce demand for counterfeit products. In: BrucksMMacInnisDJ (eds) Advances in Consumer Research, 24. Provo, UT: Association for Consumer Research, pp.345–349.
14.
ChapaSMinorMSMaldonadoC (2006) Product category and origin effects on consumer responses to counterfeits: Comparing Mexico and the US. Journal of International Consumer Marketing18(4): 79–99.
15.
ChaudhryPEStumpfSA (2009) Consumer complicity with counterfeit products. Journal of Consumer Marketing28(2): 139–151.
16.
CheungW-LPrendergastG (2006) Exploring the materialism and conformity motivations of Chinese pirated products buyers. Journal of International Consumer Marketing18(3): 7–31.
17.
CommuriS (2009) The impact of counterfeiting on genuine-item consumers’ brand relationships. Journal of Marketing73(3): 86–98.
18.
CordellVVWongtadaNKieschnickRL (1996) Counterfeit purchase intentions: Role of lawfulness attitudes and product traits as determinants. Journal of Business Research35(1): 41–53.
19.
ChurchillGA (1979) A paradigm for developing better measures of marketing constructs. Journal of Marketing Research16: 64–73.
20.
DanandC (2009) Contrefaçon de marques: De quoi parle-t-on ? Comment s’en protéger ?Décisions Marketing53,: 53–61.
21.
De MatosCATrindade ItuassuCVargas RossiCA (2007) Consumer attitudes towards counterfeits: A review and extension. Journal of consumer Marketing24(1): 36–47.
22.
Douane.fr (2011) Bilan 2011 de la Douane. Available at: www.douane.gouv.douane.fr (accessed May 2012).
23.
DowlingGRStaelinR (1994) A model of perceived risk and intended risk-handling activity. Journal of Consumer Research21(1): 119–134.
24.
EisendM.Schuchert-GülerP (2006) Explaining counterfeit purchases: A review and preview. Academy of Marketing Science Review6(12): 1–25.
EvrardYPrasBRouxE (2003) MARKET, Etudes et Recherches en Marketing, 3rd edition.Paris: Dunod.
27.
FornellC.LarckerDF (1981) Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of Marketing Research18(1): 39–50.
28.
FurnhamA.ValgeirssonH (2007) The effect of life values and materialism on buying counterfeit products. Journal of Socio-Economics36(5): 677–685.
29.
GentryJWPutrevuSShultzCJ (2006) The effects of counterfeiting on consumer search. Journal of Consumer Behaviour5(3): 245–256.
30.
GentryJWPutrevuSShultzCJCommuriS (2001) How about Ralph Lauren? The separation of brand and product in counterfeit culture. In: GillyMCMeyers-LevyJ (eds) Advances in Consumer Research, 28. Valdosta, GA: Association for Consumer Research, pp.49–59.
31.
GerbingDWAndersonJC (1988) An updated paradigm for scale development incorporating unidimensionality and its assessment. Journal of Marketing Research25(2): 186–192.
32.
GistriGRomaniSPaceSGabrielliVGrappiS (2008) Consumption practices of counterfeit luxury goods in the Italian context. Brand Management16(5/6): 364–374.
33.
GonzalezCKorchiaM (2008) Les antécédents et les conséquences de l’attitude par rapport aux soldes. Recherche et Applications en Marketing23(4): 37–61.
34.
GreenRTSmithT (2002) Executive insights: Countering brand counterfeiters. Journal of International Marketing10(4): 89–106.
35.
GrossmanGMShapiroC (1988a) Foreign counterfeiting of status goods. Quarterly Journal of Economics103(1): 79–100.
36.
GrossmanGMShapiroC (1988b) Counterfeit-product trade. The American Economic Review, March, 59–75.
37.
HairJFBlackWCBabinBJAndersonRE (2010) Multivariate Data Analyses. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
38.
HarveyPJWallsWD (2003) Laboratory markets in counterfeit goods: Hong Kong versus Las Vegas. Applied Economics Letters10: 883–37.
39.
HiekeS (2010) Effects of counterfeits on the image of luxury brands: An empirical study from the customer perspective. Brand Management18(2): 159–173.
40.
HoeLHoggG.HartS (2003) Fakin’ It: Counterfeiting and consumer contradictions. In: TurleyDBrownS (eds) European Advances in Consumer Research, 6. Provo, UT: Association for Consumer Research, pp.60–67.
41.
HoltDB (1995) How consumers consume: A typology of consumption practices. Journal of Consumer Research22(1): 1–16,
42.
HuLTBentlerPM (1998) Fit indices in covariance structure modelling: Sensitivity to underparameterized model misspecification. Psychological Methods3(4): 424–453.
43.
HullandJS (1999) Use of partial least squares (PLS) in strategic management research: A review of four recent studies. Strategic Management Journal 20, 21: 95–204.
44.
JacobyJKaplanLB (1972) The components of perceived risk. In VenkatesanM (ed.) Advances in Consumer Research, Vol. 3, Chicago: Association for Consumer Research, pp.382–393.
45.
JarvisCBMacKenzieCB.PodsakoffPM (2003) A critical review of construct indicators and measurement model misspecification in marketing and consumer research. Journal of Consumer Research30(2): 199–218.
46.
JennerTArtunE (2005) Determinanten des Erwerbs gefälschter Markenprodukte – Ergebnisse einer empirischen Untersuchung. Der Markt44(3/4): 142–150.
47.
JolibertAJourdanP (2006) Marketing Research: Méthodes de recherche et d’études en marketing. Paris: Dunod.
48.
JöreskogKG (1971) Statistical analysis of sets of congeneric tests. Psychometrika36(2): 109–133.
49.
KaikatiJGLaGarceR (1980) Beware of international brand piracy. Harvard Business Review, 58(2): 52–58.
50.
KatzD (1960) The functional approach to the study of attitudes. Public Opinion Quarterly24: 163–204.
51.
KoklicMK (2011) Non deceptive counterfeiting purchase behavior: Antecedents of attitude and purchase intention. Journal of Applied Business Research27(2): 127–137.
52.
KwongKKYuWYPLeungJWKWangK (2009) Attitude towards counterfeits and ethnic groups: Comparing Chinese and Western consumers purchasing counterfeits. Journal of Euromarketing18(3): 157–168.
LeisenBNillA (2001) Combating product counterfeiting: An investigation into the likely effectiveness of a demand-oriented approach. In: TaylorCR (ed.) American Marketing Association Conference Proceedings, 12. Chicago, IL: AMA 2001 Winter Educators’ Conference: Marketing Theory and Applications, pp.271–77.
56.
MarckettiSBShelleyMC (2009) Consumer concern, knowledge and attitude towards counterfeit apparel products. International Journal of Consumer Studies33(3): 327–337.
MichaelidouN.ChristodoulidesG (2011) Antecedents of attitude and intention towards counterfeit symbolic and experiential products. Journal of Marketing Management27(9–10): 976–991.
59.
NiaA.ZaichkowskyJL (2000) Do counterfeits devalue the ownership of luxury brands?Journal of Product and Brand Management9(7): 485–497.
60.
NillAShultzI (1996) The scourge of global counterfeiting. Business Horizons39(6): 37–42.
61.
NorumPSCunoA (2009) Analysis of the demand for counterfeit goods. Journal of Fashion Marketing and Management15(1): 27–40.
62.
O’ShaughenessyJ (1987) Why People Buy. New York: Oxford University Press.
63.
PenzEStöttingerB (2005) Forget the ‘real’ thing – take the copy! An explanatory model for the volitional purchase of counterfeit products. In: MenonGRaoAR (eds) Advances in Consumer Research, 32. Duluth, MN: Association for Consumer Research, pp.568–575.
64.
PetersonRA (1994) A meta-analysis of Cronbach’s coefficient alpha. Journal of Consumer Research21(3): 381–391.
65.
PerezMECastanoRQuintinillaC (2010) Constructing identity through the consumption of counterfeit luxury goods. Qualitative Market Research: An International Journal13(3): 219–235.
66.
PhauITeahM (2009) Devil wears (counterfeit) Prada: A study of antecedents and outcomes of attitudes towards counterfeit of luxury brands. Journal of Consumer Marketing26(1): 15–27.
67.
PhauISequeiraMDixS (2009) Consumers’ willingness to knowingly purchase counterfeit products. Direct Marketing: An International Journal3(4): 262–281.
68.
PhauITeahMLeeA (2009) Targeting buyers of counterfeits of luxury brands: A study on attitudes of Singaporean consumers. Journal of Targeting, Measurement and Analysis for Marketing17(1): 3–15.
ViotCLe RouxAKremerF (2006) Les déterminants de l’achat de produits de contrefaçon: une exploration du côté obscur du comportement du consommateur. In: AndréaniJ-CTrinquecosteJ-F (eds) 5th International Marketing Trends Congress, Venice, 20 and 21January2006. Available at: www.marketing-trends-congress.com/read_paper/2006) (accessed 14 April 2014).
77.
WangC.-C (2005) Factors that influence the piracy of DVD/VCD motion pictures. Journal of American Academy of Business6(2): 231–237.
78.
WangFZhangHZangHOuyangM (2005) Purchasing pirated software: An initial examination of Chinese consumers. Journal of Consumer Marketing22(6): 340–351.
79.
WeeC-HTanS-JCheokK-H (1995) Non-price determinants of intention to purchase counterfeit goods: An exploratory study. International Marketing Review12(6): 19–46.
80.
WilkeRZaichkowskyJL (1999) Brand imitation and its effects on innovation, competition, and brand equity. Business Horizons42(6): 9–18.
