IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v13y2021i3p1194-d485856.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Determinants of Consumers’ Willingness to Buy Counterfeit Luxury Products: An Empirical Test of Linear and Inverted U-Shaped Relationship

Author

Listed:
  • Qiong Wu

    (School of Management, Jilin University, Changchun 130022, China)

  • Shukuan Zhao

    (School of Management, Jilin University, Changchun 130022, China)

Abstract

The proliferation of counterfeit luxury goods poses a great threat to the sustainable development of the luxury goods industry; it also disturbs the order of economic development, causes the aggravation of environmental pollution, and is contrary to the principle of global sustainable development. How to effectively weaken consumers’ willingness to buy counterfeit luxury products has become a focal issue. This research explores the impact of value consciousness, social risk perception, and face consciousness on the purchase intention of counterfeit luxury. In addition, this study explores the different mediating roles played by attitude. The results show that value consciousness has a significant positive impact on the counterfeit luxury purchase intention through the full mediation of attitudes. Perceived social risk not only exerts a direct negative impact on the purchase intention of counterfeit luxury products but can also indirectly influence intention through the partial mediation of attitudes. Besides, there is an inverted U-shaped relationship between face consciousness and counterfeit luxury purchase intention, and attitudes play a partially mediating role in this inverted U-shaped path. This research also has certain management implications for the government and luxury products companies to formulate relevant policies and marketing strategies to curb consumers’ willingness to purchase counterfeit luxury products.

Suggested Citation

  • Qiong Wu & Shukuan Zhao, 2021. "Determinants of Consumers’ Willingness to Buy Counterfeit Luxury Products: An Empirical Test of Linear and Inverted U-Shaped Relationship," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(3), pages 1-19, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:13:y:2021:i:3:p:1194-:d:485856
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/3/1194/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/3/1194/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Ajzen, Icek, 1991. "The theory of planned behavior," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 50(2), pages 179-211, December.
    2. Cordell, Victor V. & Wongtada, Nittaya & Kieschnick, Robert Jr., 1996. "Counterfeit purchase intentions: Role of lawfulness attitudes and product traits as determinants," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 35(1), pages 41-53, January.
    3. Chechen Liao & Hong-Nan Lin & Yu-Ping Liu, 2010. "Predicting the Use of Pirated Software: A Contingency Model Integrating Perceived Risk with the Theory of Planned Behavior," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 91(2), pages 237-252, January.
    4. Julia Pueschel & Cécile Chamaret & Béatrice Parguel, 2016. "Coping with copies: The influence of risk perceptions in luxury counterfeit consumption in GCC countries," Post-Print hal-01489482, HAL.
    5. Yoo, Boonghee & Lee, Seung-Hee, 2012. "Asymmetrical effects of past experiences with genuine fashion luxury brands and their counterfeits on purchase intention of each," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 65(10), pages 1507-1515.
    6. Fraedrich, John Paul & Ferrell, O. C., 1992. "The impact of perceived risk and moral philosophy type on ethical decision making in business organizations," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 24(4), pages 283-295, June.
    7. Kaufmann, Hans Ruediger & Petrovici, Dan Alex & Filho, Cid Gonçalves & Ayres, Adriano, 2016. "Identifying moderators of brand attachment for driving customer purchase intention of original vs counterfeits of luxury brands," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 69(12), pages 5735-5747.
    8. Mullet, Etienne, 1992. "The probability + utility rule in attractiveness judgments of positive gambles," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 52(2), pages 246-255, July.
    9. Haksin Chan & Lisa C. Wan & Leo Y. M. Sin, 2009. "The Contrasting Effects of Culture on Consumer Tolerance: Interpersonal Face and Impersonal Fate," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 36(2), pages 292-304.
    10. Bian, Xuemei & Wang, Kai-Yu & Smith, Andrew & Yannopoulou, Natalia, 2016. "New insights into unethical counterfeit consumption," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 69(10), pages 4249-4258.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Ma. Janice J. Gumasing & Renée Hannah A. Niro, 2023. "Antecedents of Real Estate Investment Intention among Filipino Millennials and Gen Z: An Extended Theory of Planned Behavior," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(18), pages 1-35, September.
    2. Weiting Wang & Yi Liao & Wenjing Shen, 2023. "The Impact of Online Anti-Counterfeiting on Channel Structure and Pricing Decisions," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(10), pages 1, May.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Song, Lei & Meng, Yan & Chang, Hua & Li, Wenjing & Tan (Frank), Kang, 2021. "How counterfeit dominance affects luxury fashion brand owners’ perceptions: A cross-cultural examination," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 130(C), pages 1-13.
    2. Dongxiao Gu & Jingjing Guo & Changyong Liang & Wenxing Lu & Shuping Zhao & Bing Liu & Tianyue Long, 2019. "Social Media-Based Health Management Systems and Sustained Health Engagement: TPB Perspective," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(9), pages 1-15, April.
    3. Sharma, Amalesh & Soni, Mauli & Borah, Sourav Bikash & Haque, Tanjum, 2022. "From silos to synergies: A systematic review of luxury in marketing research," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 139(C), pages 893-907.
    4. Chun-Hsiung Liao & I Hsieh, 2013. "Determinants of Consumer’s Willingness to Purchase Gray-Market Smartphones," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 114(3), pages 409-424, May.
    5. Jiahan Li & Mahsa Ghaffari & Lin Su, 2020. "Counterfeit luxury consumption strategies in a collectivistic culture: the case of China," Journal of Brand Management, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 27(5), pages 546-560, September.
    6. Xuemei Bian & Yanisa Tantiprapart & George Chryssochoidis & Kai-Yu Wang, 2022. "Counterfeit patronage: human values, counterfeit experience and construal level," Marketing Letters, Springer, vol. 33(4), pages 645-658, December.
    7. Mateja Kos Koklic & Monika Kukar-Kinney & Irena Vida, 2016. "Three-Level Mechanism of Consumer Digital Piracy: Development and Cross-Cultural Validation," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 134(1), pages 15-27, March.
    8. Orth, Ulrich R. & Hoffmann, Stefan & Nickel, Kristina, 2019. "Moral decoupling feels good and makes buying counterfeits easy," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 98(C), pages 117-125.
    9. Ismail Tamer Toklu & Salih Baran, 2017. "Attitude towards Counterfeit of Luxury Brands: A Research on Consumers in Turkey," International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences, Human Resource Management Academic Research Society, International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences, vol. 7(11), pages 618-632, November.
    10. Xuemei Bian & Sadia Haque, 2020. "Counterfeit versus original patronage: Do emotional brand attachment, brand involvement, and past experience matter?," Journal of Brand Management, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 27(4), pages 438-451, July.
    11. Islam, Tahir & Pitafi, Abdul Hameed & Akhtar, Naeem & Xiaobei, Liang, 2021. "Determinants of purchase luxury counterfeit products in social commerce: The mediating role of compulsive internet use," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 62(C).
    12. Martin Eisend, 2019. "Morality Effects and Consumer Responses to Counterfeit and Pirated Products: A Meta-analysis," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 154(2), pages 301-323, January.
    13. Yang-Im Lee & Peter R. J. Trim, 2019. "Refining brand strategy: insights into how the “informed poseur” legitimizes purchasing counterfeits," Journal of Brand Management, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 26(5), pages 595-613, September.
    14. Feng, Wenting & Yang, Morgan X. & Yu, Irina Y., 2023. "From devil to angel: How being envied for luxury brand social media word of mouth discourages counterfeit purchases," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 165(C).
    15. Borja, Karla & Dieringer, Suzanne, 2016. "Streaming or stealing? The complementary features between music streaming and music piracy," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 32(C), pages 86-95.
    16. Pueschel, Julia & Chamaret, Cécile & Parguel, Béatrice, 2017. "Coping with copies: The influence of risk perceptions in luxury counterfeit consumption in GCC countries," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 77(C), pages 184-194.
    17. Shan, Juan & Jiang, Ling & Cui, Annie Peng, 2021. "A double-edged sword: How the dual characteristics of face motivate and prevent counterfeit luxury consumption," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 134(C), pages 59-69.
    18. Ian Phau & James Ng, 2010. "Predictors of Usage Intentions of Pirated Software," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 94(1), pages 23-37, June.
    19. Juan Carlos Londono Roldan, 2015. "Intending to shop in single versus multi-channels: A Theory of Planned Behaviour-based explanation," Working Papers 11, Faculty of Economics and Management, Pontificia Universidad Javeriana Cali.
    20. Jonathan Dörr & Thomas Wagner & Alexander Benlian & Thomas Hess, 2013. "Music as a Service as an Alternative to Music Piracy?," Business & Information Systems Engineering: The International Journal of WIRTSCHAFTSINFORMATIK, Springer;Gesellschaft für Informatik e.V. (GI), vol. 5(6), pages 383-396, December.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:13:y:2021:i:3:p:1194-:d:485856. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.