Documenti di Didattica
Documenti di Professioni
Documenti di Cultura
Kelly Gamble
2011
Approved by
Advisory Committee
L. Vince Howe
Chair
Accepted by
Digitally signed by Robert Roer
DN: cn=Robert Roer, o=UNCW,
ou=Graduate School and Research,
email=roer@uncw.edu, c=US
Date: 2012.05.22 09:53:38 -04'00'
ABSTRACT................................................................................................................................................ iv
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ........................................................................................................................ v
LIST OF TABLES ..................................................................................................................................... vi
LIST OF FIGURES .................................................................................................................................. vii
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS .................................................................................................................. viii
1.0 INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................................ 1
2.0 BACKGROUND AND RATIONAL ................................................................................................... 1
2.1 Definitions and Classifications ................................................................................................. 2
2.2 Impacts of Counterfeiting ........................................................................................................ 4
2.3 Historical Brand Aspects ......................................................................................................... 6
2.4 Inadequacies of Anti-Counterfeit Legislation ......................................................................... 8
2.5 Structural Overview .............................................................................................................. 12
3.0 LITERATURE REVIEW ................................................................................................................... 13
3.1 Scope and Reduction of Information Biases ......................................................................... 13
3.2 Search Method ...................................................................................................................... 14
3.3 Content Analysis ................................................................................................................... 16
3.3.1 Consumers are more willing to Purchaser Counterfeit Fashion Items .................... 16
3.3.2 Unique Characteristics of Counterfeit Fashion ........................................................ 18
3.3.3 Variables that Influence Counterfeit Purchase Decisions ....................................... 19
3.3.3.1 Demographic Variables ............................................................................ 20
3.3.3.2 Values and Attitudes Variables .................................................................. 22
3.3.3.3 Consumption Variables .............................................................................. 28
4.0 METHODOLOGY ............................................................................................................................. 32
4.1 Quantitative Analysis ............................................................................................................. 33
4.2 Advantages and Disadvantages of Internet Survey Analysis ................................................. 34
4.3 Research Process .................................................................................................................... 36
5.0 FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION ........................................................................................................ 42
5.1 Representative Sampling ....................................................................................................... 43
5.2 Demographic Correlations ..................................................................................................... 46
5.2.1 Age ......................................................................................................................... 47
5.2.2 Income ................................................................................................................... 48
5.2.3 Education ................................................................................................................ 50
ii
5.2.4 Other Demographic Findings ................................................................................. 51
5.3 Attitudes and Values Correlations ......................................................................................... 52
5.3.1 Materialism ............................................................................................................ 52
5.3.2 Personal Values ..................................................................................................... 55
5.3.23 Attitudes ................................................................................................................ 57
5.4 Consumption Correlations ...................................................................................................... 58
5.4.1 Product Knowledge ............................................................................................... 60
5.4.2 Product Involvement ............................................................................................. 62
5.4.3 Brand Personality .................................................................................................. 63
5.4.4 Product Attributes ................................................................................................. 64
5.4.5 Product Benefits .................................................................................................... 65
5.4.6 Financial Risk ........................................................................................................ 66
5.4.7 Social Risk ............................................................................................................ 67
5.4.8 In-Style .................................................................................................................. 69
6.0 CONCLUSION .................................................................................................................................... 70
6.1 Managerial Implications ........................................................................................................ 71
6.2 Limitations and Further Research .......................................................................................... 72
7.0 APPENDICES .................................................................................................................................... 76
8.0 REFERENCES ................................................................................................................................... 94
iii
ABSTRACT
consumer counterfeit purchase decisions but severely lacked relevant research directed toward one of the
most commonly victimized industries of counterfeiting: fashion merchandise. In order to fill this hole in
existing literature, this study transferred the components of past research to the relatively unexplored
world of fashion counterfeiting. In doing so, the objective was to determine what variables influence a
consumers willingness to purchase non-deceptive counterfeit fashion items. This allowed for a
comparative analysis about how the influence factors differ from those that influence consumers to
purchase general counterfeit items. In order to test 30 variables that were hypothesized to influence
consumer willingness to purchase counterfeit fashion items, an internet survey was published and
Nineteen hypotheses were formed based on two components. The first is how the selected
variables correlated in past studies with consumer willingness to purchase general counterfeit items. The
second component is how logic and existing literature suggests those relationships may differ with
fashion counterfeit items due to the unique characteristics of the fashion industry. A quantitative analysis
determined that twelve of the tested variables either correlated, or showed a relationship with, consumer
willingness to purchase counterfeit fashion items. Demographic variables age, income, and education
negatively correlated with the control questions suggesting that younger consumers with lower income
and less education are more likely to purchase counterfeit fashion items. Materialism, respect for
tradition, and a need for an exciting life all showed positive correlations with one or both of the control
questions in the survey. Attitudes toward counterfeit law and order, value, and past experiences showed
the strongest connection with consumers willingness to purchase counterfeit fashion items and the
consumption variables social risk and product attributes showed the highest tendency to influence the
counterfeit fashion purchase decision. The results of this study have implications for fashion designers
and legitimate fashion companies that are losing business due to a growing counterfeiting industry.
iv
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
I would like to express my appreciation and gratitude to everyone that supported me in this
project. It has been a long journey since I began the writing process and I am very proud of the work and
commitment that I dedicated to this final step in completing my International Master of Business
Administration.
First I would like to thank my thesis advisor Professor Doctor Alexis Papathanasis. Without his
undying enthusiasm and commitment to challenging my way of thinking this thesis would never have
received the intellectual depth and consideration it deserved. I am especially grateful to him for taking the
time to teach me the right way to approach research and for giving me so many tools, for not just my
education and career, but for many other aspects of life as well.
I also would like to thank Professor Helga Meyer for dedicating her time and attention to being
my second reader. She has been very flexible and readily available to support me with any questions or
Lastly, I would like to thank my friends and family for all of their support. A special thanks goes
to my father who has been my financial, mental, and emotional support system throughout this program.
Without him none of this would have been possible and I am extremely grateful for his encouraging
words and commitment to my education. I am also deeply indebted to my mother for putting a roof over
my head while I complete this laborious process and for believing in my strengths and abilities. Last but
not least, I would like to express my sincerest appreciation for my amazing friends all around the world
whose patience and love have supported me each step of the way.
v
LIST OF TABLES
Table Page
1. Variables and corresponding survey questions ............................................................................ 36
2. Respondent profile.. ...................................................................................... 43
3. Demographic variables with significant correlations ................................................................... 46
4. Values and attitudes variables with significant correlations ........................................................ 51
5. Consumption variables and survey questions .............................................................................. 58
6. Control question errors . ....................................................................................................... 72
7. Survey data: Demographic variables control questions (respondents 1-58) ................................ 82
8. Survey data: Demographic variables control questions (respondents 58-117) ............................ 83
9. Survey Data: Variables 6-19 (respondents 1-58) ......................................................................... 84
10. Survey Data: Variables 6-19 (respondents 58-117) ...................................................................... 85
11. Survey Data: Variables 20-30 (respondents 1-58) ........................................................................ 86
12. Survey Data: Variables 20-30 (respondents 58-117) .................................................................... 87
vi
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure Page
1. List of items on the willingness to buy counterfeit goods scale and their ratings 17
2. Willingness to buy different counterfeit products ..17
3. Factor derived model. ........................................................................................... 41
4. Demographic histograms44
5. Product knowledge responses ...................................................................................................... 60
6. Product involvement responses..................................................................................................... 61
7. Brand personality responses. ........................................................................................................ 62
8. Product attributes responses ..63
9. Product benefits responses ............................................................................................................ 64
10. Financial risk responses ............................................................................................................... 65
11. Social risk A: Q35 responses ........................................................................................................ 66
12. Social risk B: Q36 responses ........................................................................................................ 66
13. In-style responses . ........................................................................................................ 68
14. Survey . ......................................................................................................... 75
vii
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS
viii
1.0 INTRODUCTION
It can be assumed that nearly every consumer has come across counterfeited products in one
way or another, even if they were not aware of it at the time. Tourist destinations, the internet, and
even mainstream distribution channels all over the world have become prime markets for knock-off
products and consumer demand continues to grow. Whether it is termed knock-off, replica,
counterfeit, or even the most obvious of terms: fake; it is all referring to the same rising phenomenon
of imitated products. The issue of counterfeiting has spread in recent years across many industries.
Sports equipment, computer software, car parts, and even prescription drugs are being imitated and
sold at a fraction of the price of the originals. This is causing legitimate manufacturing companies and
genuine brand marketers a great deal of frustration. In 2009, the United States government seized
over $260 million in counterfeited products, a figure that has been on the rise for many years (Ellis,
2011). Among those most impacted by counterfeiting are companies in the fashion industry,
particularly high end fashion brands such as Louis Vuitton, Gucci, and Prada (Mavlanova &
Benbunan-Fich, 2010). Due to the relative ease of manufacturing imitated clothing, bags, shoes, and
accessories, combined with the prestige and exclusivity achieved through expensive brand marketing
campaigns, the fashion industry has become a viable target for counterfeiters all over the world
This study focuses on non-deceptive counterfeiting in the fashion industry. In 2010, fashion
items including footwear, apparel, and accessories were all among the most commonly counterfeited
merchandise seized in the US (Ellis, 2011). Because this industry has been victimized by
counterfeiters for many years, a significant amount of research aims to statistically evaluate the
monetary damage that has been caused to individual companies and to the industry as whole. Further
research in the field analyzes the effect of anti-counterfeit legislation in various countries, pointing out
that utilitarian designs, such as clothing, have been left largely unprotected by trademark and
copyright laws in the United States (Tu, 2010). Now that counterfeiting has reached new heights in
many industries, the focus of relevant literature has shifted to some degree toward understanding the
driving consumer behavior, aiming to tackle the root of the problem: consumer demand for counterfeit
merchandise. Following such logic, this study aims to understand why consumers choose to buy
fashion counterfeit goods in the fashion industry. This industry offers different insights into the
problem of counterfeiting than other types of products because fashion items have a unique set of
characteristics that make them particularly susceptible to counterfeiters. Fashion items are relatively
easy to imitate at a low cost to the counterfeiter, they often have globally recognized name brands that
appeal to many consumer segments, and there is a limited time period in which these items are
considered fashionable. Because of the unique characteristics of fashion items this study is predicted
to yield different results than previous studies that focus on other industries or counterfeit products in
general.
Past research highlights price savings as a key determinant in the consumers counterfeit
purchase decision (Bian & Moutinho, 2009), however there are many other variables that can
influence that decisions and this study intends to find out what some of those variables are in terms of
fashion items. Having an understanding of the variables that influence counterfeit purchase decisions
is the first step toward addressing the issue from the demand side. Anti-counterfeit legislation
attempts to control the supply of counterfeit goods, but unless the demand for imitated fashion items
is better controlled, the issue of counterfeiting and the associated costs will continue to grow. Gaining
an understanding of the variables that increase the likeliness of a counterfeit purchase decision is
crucial information for marketers of authentic brands. The results of this study will aid companies in
the fight against fashion counterfeiting by allowing them to set up more effective marketing strategies
and most importantly to understand what market segments to focus and how to meet the needs of their
The term counterfeits can be defined as any unauthorized product that infringes upon
intellectual property rights (brand names, patents, trademarks, or copyrights) (Swami, Chamorro-
Premuzic, & Furnham, 2009, p. 820). However, there are different types of counterfeiting and several
2
terms that existing literature uses to refer to counterfeits. The two most general categories of
counterfeiting can be differentiated by whether or not the consumer knows they are buying a
counterfeit product or not. Non-deceptive counterfeits refer to products that are not intended to
deceive the consumer into believing that they are purchasing an original product (Bian, & Moutinho,
2009, p. 369). The consumer is fully aware that the product they are purchasing is not manufactured
by, marketed by, nor profiting the company that the product is imitating. Deceptive counterfeits, on
the other hand, are intended to fool the consumer into believing that they are buying the genuine
brand when they are buying a counterfeited product (Mavlanova & Benbunan-Fich, 2010, p. 80). The
differentiating factor between the two types is the intention of the consumer to buy the real product or
to buy the imitated one. This is an important point to grasp in this study about why consumers buy
counterfeit products, because if they are not knowingly purchasing a counterfeit product, i.e. they are
purchasing a deceptive counterfeit, and then the influence factors affecting their purchase decision are
limited to the fashion and apparel industry which is referred to as designer-inspired (Tu, 2010, p.
420). This type of counterfeit profits off of the notion that the product consumers are purchasing is
related to and/or similar to the original fashion design (Tu, 2010, p. 420). While the imitator is not
trying to pass off the product as the original, and is therefore a non-deceptive counterfeiter, the
product is nonetheless taken from another persons design. Tu (2010, p. 420) refers to this in his
research as style piracy, in which imitators seek to capitalize on the popularity or desirability of a
designers original creative work. The study suggests that the growth of the fashion industry and the
increasing public awareness of designer brands have led to an upsurge of this style-piracy category
Berry Berman (2008, p 191-192) classifies counterfeits into four different categories. He
refers to the first type as a knock-off, look alike, or a sound alike. This first type of counterfeit
is distinguished by the fact that consumers are aware they are buying a counterfeit good for one or
3
several of three reasons: (1) the price is significantly lower than that of an original, (2) the packaging
does not compare to the packaging of the authentic good, and/or (3) the distribution channel is
unusual. This type of counterfeiting is very typical with fashion, apparel, and accessory products and
can often be bought in street vendors, online, or in many tourist shopping destinations. The second
type of counterfeit category, according to Berman (2008, p. 191-192), is deceptive and is often
referred to as reverse engineering or tear down counterfeiting. These products are produced either
by a reverse analysis of the way the product was put together or through stolen blueprints or masters.
This type of counterfeiting is common with software, CDs, and DVDs. The third category occurs
when outsourced suppliers continue to manufacture a product during a third shift that the outsourcing
company is unaware of. Often referred to as third shift counterfeiting, this type is often very
difficult to distinguish from the original as it was produced with the same machinery. The fourth and
last category occurs when substandard products produced by outsourced manufactures are supposed
to be disposed of or destroyed but instead are reclaimed and sold as legitimate up to par products
Regardless of how the counterfeit came into existence or whether or not the consumer is
aware they are buying a counterfeit product, the societal impacts cannot be denied. In 2005, it was
estimated by the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) that
infringement of intellectual property rights worldwide caused a loss of $200 billion in jobs, taxes, and
sales (Swami et al., 2009, p820). By 2006, the International Chamber of Commerce estimated that
world-wide sales of counterfeited products could reach $650 billion per year (Berman, 2008, p. 192).
These figures alone are disturbing but it is difficult to attach realistic values to the underlying costs of
counterfeiting because many of the costs cannot be quantitatively measured. While one can generally
measure a companys loss in sales or money spent on controlling counterfeiting activity, it is difficult
to measure such things as the loss of brand distinctiveness. Counterfeiting has costs for consumers
and legitimate manufacturers on many levels. For authentic producers, one of the main concerns about
a growing counterfeit culture is that when consumers have bad experiences with knock-off products,
4
and they do not know their product is a fake, the value of the genuine brand declines in the eyes of
consumers (Berman, 2008). Another main concern is that counterfeiters have an unfair advantage
because they do not have any expenses related to: promotion, trademark licensing, research and
development, design and engineering costs, quality control, test marketing, customer support,
While many people may not care about the petty cash that multibillion dollar corporations
are losing because of counterfeiters, there are many impacts that affect society as a whole. Losses of
employment and government tax revenues as well as a significant amount of safety issues all come
along with a growing counterfeit industry (Berman, 2008). As counterfeiting begins to spill over into
pharmaceuticals and automotive parts, buying knock-off products can cost consumers their lives and
is no longer just an issue of hurting companies sales targets. Counterfeit medicines seized at
European customs borders increased from 2005 to 2006 by nearly 400% (Cabezas, 2010, p. 180). The
seizure of illegal counterfeit medicines became such a concern in the early 2000s that in 2006 the
World Trade Organization (WTO) established the International Medical Products Anti-Counterfeiting
Taskforce (IMPACT) specifically to combat this growing health concern (Cabezas, 2010, p. 182). US
government bodies are not taking the safety threat of counterfeits lightly.
Another issue, recently appearing more often in literature on counterfeiting, is where the
money generated by counterfeited product sales is ending up. Research shows that terrorists and
criminal organizations such as Al-Qaeda and the Mafia are being funded in part by sales of
counterfeited merchandise (Furnham & Valgeirsson, 2007, p. 678). This is growing concern,
especially because counterfeits are becoming more difficult to detect and because the internet is
making it so much easier for counterfeit transactions to take place (Berman, 2008; Mavlonava &
Benbunan-Fich, 2010). As the industry matures and anti-counterfeit bodies increase legislation,
counterfeiters are becoming cleverer and are finding new ways to avoid detection (Berman, 2008).
For example, cargo coming in from countries that are known to be red flags for counterfeiting, such as
China, is being shipped first to a third country that is less likely to do rigorous inspections, before they
5
enter the country in which they are intended to be sold. This reduces the chance of inspection and the
cargo appears to be coming from a country not known for counterfeiting and is therefore deemed less
The internet is a popular distribution channel for counterfeit merchandise because it allows
sellers to be anonymous and because products can be easily disguised as authentic brands as the
consumer cannot physically inspect the product before purchasing (Mavlanova & Benbunan-Fich,
2010). There are many deception schemes used by internet counterfeiters and common merchandise
illegitimately sold in this way includes designer goods, electronics, and pharmaceutical products
(Mavlanova & Benbunan-Fich, 2010). Auction sites such as E-bay are fueling internet counterfeit
sales (Berman, 2008, p.193). Although many such sites have policies against selling replicas it is
extremely difficult to enforce and many sites rely solely on allowing buyers to post negative feedback
on sellers profiles when such instances occur (Berman, 2008, p. 193). Unfortunately, this does not
prevent counterfeit sellers from simply starting a new account under a different name and continuing
to sell fake merchandise until they are reported again (Berman, 2008, p. 193). According to Berman
(2008, p. 193) a study conducted in 2006 showed that out of 300,000 Dior products and 150,000
Louis Vuitton products offered on E-bay within a six month period, ninety percent of them were
counterfeits.
According to Juggessur and Cohen (2009, p. 384), the idea of identifying with or
distinguishing oneself through clothing brands dates back to the mid-nineteenth century when a
couturier by the name of Worth designed garments in Paris for the Empress Eugine, the wife of
Napoleon III. At the time, designers would often copy gowns worn by royalty that they saw in
paintings or sketches. In order to show that royal families were wearing authentic garments made by
the prestigious designer, Worth began branding his designs. As the industrial revolution reached new
heights and competition increased, designers realized the importance of protecting and differentiating
their designs through branding (Juggessur & Cohen, 2009, 384-385). Today, brands continue to create
6
value which also encourages the demand for imitated brands or designs. Many studies fail to consider
these underlying brand aspects that essentially create the platform for counterfeiting (Bian &
Moutinho, 2009) Therefore, it is important to understand why consumers value brand names the way
that they do. Consumers buy into brands mostly because it is a way of defining their identity and
expressing their desirability (Juggesur & Cohen, 2008). Because of the growing global recognition of
fashion brands they hold social meaning and allow people to express certain characteristics through
the material possessions they consume. High fashion brands for example, offer value through their
image of being at the forefront of design, quality, status, and fashion (Juggesur, & Cohen, 2008, p.
383). Wearing particular brands can also be a way for people to identify with certain groups or to do
exactly the opposite, by expressing ones individuality (Juggesur & Cohen, 2008).
According to a study by Juggessur and Cohen (2008, p. 389), it is only recently that dress
has been treated as a language. In a time before civilization people identified themselves and
expressed their desirability in different ways. Take, for example, hunter-gatherer societies of the
Mesolithic period over ten thousand years ago. Social status and desirability were defined then by
ones ability to contribute resources to the community and provide for a family, which required
strength, speed, or fertility (Hamilton, Milne, Walker, Burger & Brown, 2007). These physical
characteristics in ancient societies defined ones social status. Today, ones ability to provide no
longer depends on physical strength, but more so on mental capacity which cannot be physically
expressed. So instead people show their ability to provide by what they consume. From a purely
human nature point of view, buying expensive brands such as Rolex or Gucci is societys way of
expressing ones ability to provide. From an evolutionary stand point, ability to provide translates into
desirability. In other words, Juggessur and Cohen (2008, p.389) say in their article that the display,
purchase, use and consumption of goods acts as a social status cue for many individuals.
Understanding the concept of brand consumption as a way to express ones desirability sheds light on
what may be driving consumers to purchase counterfeit goods, particularly fashion goods which are
constantly acting as status cues. They allow consumers to identify themselves with groups they
perceive to be elite, without the exclusivity created by the high prices and restricted distribution
7
channels offered by genuine brands. While many aspects of consumer purchasing behavior can be
hypothesized to have certain theoretical evolutionary explanations, the conscious decision process by
which consumers choose to buy counterfeit products requires further empirical research.
Anti-counterfeit legislation has slowly progressed over recent decades. Internationally there
are still many flaws in anti-counterfeiting enforcement and past research has repeatedly suggested a
need to address the inadequacies. The United States instituted the Tariff Act in 1930 to address
concerns about trademark infringement by overseas manufacturers (Chaudhry & Walsh, 1996, p. 38).
It outlawed the importation of identical or deceptively similar (Chaudhry & Walsh, 1996, p.38)
merchandise. Unfortunately, it only granted victims of trademark infringement the right to receive
monetary damages, which were rarely awarded because of the prohibitive costs of pursuing
international enforcement (Chaudhry & Walsh, 1996, p.38). In 1946, the Lahnam Act was passed
giving courts the power to order violators to pay damages and destroy their merchandise (Chaudhry &
Walsh, 1996, p.38). It wasnt until 1984, when the Trademark Counterfeiting Act was passed that
criminal penalties were established for importers of illegal counterfeits (Chaudhry & Walsh, 1996,
p.38). More specifically, violators could be fined up to $2 million and face up to 10 years in prison
As United States legislation intensified, government bodies pressured the rest of the world to
get on board to ensure competitive market forces. The WTO instituted the Trade Related Aspects of
Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS) agreement obligating all WTO members to have domestic laws
and enforcement mechanisms that comply with international intellectual property rights standards
(Sutherlin, 2009). Leas (2008) research claims that many global issues with intellectual property
rights began with the establishment of the TRIPS agreement. The US claimed that the policies of the
agreement were not being properly enforced in many developing nations and that the result was that
their intellectual property was being stolen, pirated, counterfeited, and infringed (Lea, 2007, p.49).
India and China had long been regarded as the worst intellectual property rights violators on the
8
planet (Sutherlin, 2009, p. 404) according to an editorial in 1989 in the Christian Science Monitor.
The editorial estimated that piracy by these nations was costing the US more than $60 billion
annually, a significant portion of which is due to fashion replicating. The US, Europe, and Japan have
been the main advocates of intellectual property rights over the last two decades, particularly within
industries (Lea, 2007, p. 48). They continue to pressure the WTO for global enforcement and
sanctions.
Part of the problem with stricter global enforcement of intellectual property rights and anti-
counterfeit legislation is that huge emerging economies such as China and India are generating
significant income through their counterfeiting industries. The concept of counterfeiting is deeply
ingrained in Asian cultures as a completely acceptable form of business (Swift, 2003). A writer of a
US magazine was quoted in his article about counterfeit trade stating: Counterfeiting is so ingrained
in the Chinese business culture that the perpetrators seldom feel they're doing anything wrong. They
make and sell products--CDs, clothing, toys, electronics, golf clubs--more cheaply than the brand-
name guys, offering consumers a comparable product at a lower cost. What's wrong with that?
(Swift, 2003, p.66).This is the attitude that many Asian counterfeit product business owners have and
it is creating an uproar in Western societies who consider counterfeiting to be a very serious crime.
Awokuse and Yin published an article (2009) examining Chinas intellectual property rights
progression. According to the article, after establishing Chinas first patent laws in 1985, trading
nations labeled their efforts insufficient due to a lack of enforcement. China amended its patent
system in 1992 and then again in 2000. These amendments were made in order to comply with the
TRIPS agreement so that China could become the newest member of the WTO in 2002 (Awokuse &
Yin, 2009). While China has been repeatedly accused of failing to enforce intellectual property rights
standards, it is important to keep in mind the novelty of this concept in Chinese culture. Significant
strides are being made by the Chinese government to improve intellectual property rights
enforcement. The government has established the Compendium of China National Intellectual
Property specifically to develop a five year plan to drastically raise the level of intellectual property,
9
make intellectual property rights utilization further effective, prominently improve intellectual
property rights protection, and greatly enhance public awareness about intellectual property
There is an ongoing debate in current literature regarding the future hopes for better
enforcement of anti-counterfeit legislation not only in China, but around the world. Some would argue
that recent changes in global policies are looking more promising while others maintain that legal
protection against counterfeiting is far from acceptable. It is clear however, that counterfeiting
continues to grow and that it is currently at an all-time high, particularly in the fashion industry. Tus
research (2010) claims that part of the underlying cause for this is that fashion and apparel
manufacturers in the US are strongly lacking adequate protection against counterfeiters. According to
Tu (2010), despite the progressive global anti-counterfeit legislation, the United States offers very
limited protection under US copyright and trademark laws for utilitarian works. His article states that
copyright laws are generally limited only to non-utilitarian designs (Tu, 2010, p. 423). This means
that anyone who wants to protect a design that falls under the category of utilitarian, which includes
such things as clothing, must seek protection through other means (Tu, 2010, p. 423). Many clothing
designers have therefore turned to trademark laws which have also provided them limited protection
(Tu, 2010). Trademark laws, although they are extended to utilitarian designs, only offer protection
for those designs that have reached a certain level of brand recognition (Tu, 2010, p. 423). Tu (2010)
maintains that neither of these means of protection is sufficient and that there is a need for greater
protection of utilitarian designs in order to provide adequate rights for fashion designers. The purpose
of copyright protection is to promote the progress of science and useful arts (Tu, 2010, p. 423)
while the purpose of trademark protection is to protect against unfair competition (Tu, 2010, p.
423). Tu (2010) argues that neither one of these goals is being sufficiently met by copyright nor
trademark laws in the fashion and apparel industry and that a more comprehensive plan is needed. On
the other hand, reports released by the U.S. Customs and Border Protection and U.S. Immigration and
Customs Enforcement (ICE) claim that, while in the past most apparel brand companies have been
left to handle their own counterfeit measures by taking civil action in courts, the US government is
10
contributing new levels of commitment by increasing protection at US borders (Ellis, 2010). The
article quotes ICE director, John T. Morton stating that 2010 was a very successful year. The
counterfeit products represent a triple threat by delivering shoddy and sometimes dangerous goods
into commerce, by funding organized criminal activities and by denying Americans good-paying
In summary, there are several main points that are necessary for a complete understanding of
this research, who it impacts, and how the results of this study could potentially provide solutions.
Until recently there is a lack of research in this field that focuses on solutions to counterfeiting from
the perspective of understanding what variables are driving the consumer demand for counterfeit
products. The research that does exist in this area is not specific to the fashion industry which offers a
unique set of characteristics and predictably has different purchase decision influence factors than
other types of counterfeited products. Considering that fashion items are globally among the most
counterfeited products, this study fills a hole in existing literature and the results of this study will
provide practical implications for genuine fashion brand companies, manufacturers and marketers as
well as original fashion designers all over the world. Furthermore, this research is important to
society as a whole because of the negative impacts that counterfeiting has on the economy. Losses in
employment and government tax revenues are a major concern, particularly in the United States, and
fashion counterfeiting accounts for a significant portion of the problem. Government anti-counterfeit
legislation, although it is reaching new heights, is not sufficiently solving the problem. Issues of
global enforcement agencies and differences in cultural business norms around the world are standing
in the way of any viable supply side solutions. Therefore, this study offers an alternative approach to
stricter anti-counterfeit enforcement by offering insights about consumer demand for counterfeit
products in an industry infamous for knockoffs: the fashion industry. By understanding and being able
to manipulate the variables that influence consumers counterfeit fashion purchase decisions,
legitimate fashion companies will be better equipped to tackle the issue by understanding their
11
consumers and setting up more effective marketing strategies that reduce consumer demand for
This study is divided into five main sections. The Background and Rational, concludes with
this structural overview, and is intended to summarize all relevant background information.
Additionally it explains the relevance of the research question primarily to legitimate fashion brand
companies but also to consumers. This research is of significant importance for legitimate brand
companies because it offers an explanation for the consumer behavior which results in a significant
loss of their sales. It also offers marketers of legitimate brands information on which to build
marketing techniques to address the issue of counterfeiting. For consumers, this research highlights
the extent of the damages that counterfeit products cause the community, economy, and even personal
safety. Section three is comprised of the Literature Review which summarizes what other research has
concluded about the research topic. This helps establish the hypotheses for the results of this study.
Unlike the Background and Rational section which encompasses more general information about the
topic of counterfeiting, branding and fashion, the Literature Review only discusses information found
in existing literature that is directly relevant to the research question. It should be noted that a
systematic approach to the Literature Review has been conducted, which identifies and lists all
databases, key words, and methods that were chosen to be used to explore the existing literature.
Section four follows with a description of the Methodology. Due to the amount of relevant literature
found during the Literature Review process this study is conducted from an explanatory approach in
which the hypothesized variables are tested for a correlation with consumer willingness to purchase a
counterfeit fashion good. These hypotheses are tested in the form of a survey from which the data is
quantitatively analyzed. The Methodology section describes step by step exactly how the research
aspect of this study is carried out. Section five, Findings and Discussion, gives an analysis of the
results of this research. It refers back to the literature found on this topic and compares and contrasts
the results with that of other studies. This is an important section because it explains and interprets the
findings of the study. This study comes to a close with the Conclusion section in which the limitations
12
and any weaknesses of the study are discussed and suggests any further research that should be done
relevant literature in the field of counterfeited products in the fashion industry. Counterfeiting has
been an ongoing issue for legitimate manufacturers since the 1970s (Bian, & Moutinho, 2009, p.
368). Since then, many companies have invested millions of dollars into developing their brand image
only to have their profits reduced by copycat designers and knockoff enthusiasts. This has encouraged
scholars to research the underlying causes behind this growing phenomenon. A significant portion of
the research in this field focuses on the economic burden of counterfeiting as well as global
intellectual property rights policies and how they apply to various products and industries. More
recently researchers have shifted some of their focus to gaining an understanding of consumer
behavior that is driving the demand for counterfeited goods. No industry can exist without consumer
demand. This applies to the counterfeited goods industry just as it does to any other. Consumers are
willing and able to purchase counterfeit goods and the demand is being met by suppliers all over the
world. While government policies and anti-counterfeit legislation are at on all time high to combat the
revenue losses faced by legitimate companies, an alternative approach to this issue can only be
decisions.
Due to the fact that there is a considerable amount of research about counterfeiting, the
systematic literature review has two main purposes for this study. First, it helps to define the scope of
the readings. There are many disciplines that cover different aspects of this topic including issues of
law, ethics, global enforcement institutions, and various other industries being damaged by
counterfeited trade. While all aspects of counterfeiting are indirectly relevant to the research, a full
13
review of all surrounding literature is neither feasible nor necessary for a better understanding of why
consumers choose to buy counterfeit fashion items. Therefore, for the purpose of this study, the only
sources used are sources directly related to the topics included in my outline or used to find
appropriate research methods. This allows for a more selective process of searching for relevant
information. The second purpose of the systematic literature review is to help reduce biases in the
research process by first establishing my research question and defining inclusion criteria based on the
sub topics of the outline. Literature reviews lacking a systematic approach often result in irrelevant
Two online search databases were used to find relevant literature about counterfeiting in the
fashion industry: Science Direct and EBSCO Host. EBSCO Host offers access to Academic Search
Premier, Business Source Premier and several other databases. These two online search programs
enable access to multidisciplinary academic texts. Because of the broad scope and encompassing
variety of literature available through these databases the search was limited to these two search
engines. Following the topics and subtopics of the outline of this study the search was conducted by
Counterfeits Copyright
Counterfeiting Trademark
14
Once a full investigation of the literature associated with the key words mentioned above was
complete, a careful consideration of each articles relevance to the topic of this research was
conducted and all relevant information was sorted into pages of notes organized by references.
Additionally, certain periodicals were used to research appropriate data collection methods for this
type of study. All articles are drawn from the following journals, publications, and government web
pages:
Business
In addition to these academic texts, two magazine articles were accessed in order to use
quotations that illustrate a point. Two of the sources above are online dictionaries from which certain
15
elements were drawn to define terms used in this study. Some articles were found by viewing the
reference list of other relevant articles. It should also be noted that there are several articles that are
cited in other relevant studies that may have provided additional information about this topic but
The primary purpose of this study is to determine what variables influence a consumers
decision to purchase a non-deceptive fashion counterfeit good. In order to strategically test for the
correct variables it is important first to define what is meant by a fashion counterfeit good. There are
several definitions from which this study draws certain components. Websters Online Dictionary
defines the fashion industry as the makers and sellers of fashionable clothing (Fashion Industry,
2006). However, it is important to note that clothing is not the only type of fashion item to be
considered in this study. As defined in an online encyclopedia fashion is any mode of dressing or
adornment that is popular during a particular time or in a particular place (Fashion, 2007).
Therefore, for the purpose of this study, a counterfeit fashion item is defined as any dress or
adornment item that infringes upon intellectual property rights including but not limited to footwear,
apparel, and accessories. Using this definition this study can test if certain variables influence a
The amount of literature in this field that pertains specifically to the fashion industry is
surprisingly low considering that studies show that consumers are more willing to purchase
counterfeit fashion items than many other types of products. Shown below are the results of two
surveys conducted in two different studies that show peoples willingness to buy different kinds of
counterfeit goods. In both studies, clothes rank among the highest of counterfeit items consumers are
willing to buy. Handbags, watches, and shoes all rank among the top items consumers are willing to
purchase (Swami et al., 2009, p. 822; Furnham & Valgeirsson, 2007, p. 680).
16
Figure 1: List of items on the willingness to buy counterfeit goods scale and their ratings (Swami, et
al, 2009, p. 822)
Figure 2: Willingness to buy different counterfeit products (Furnham, & Valgeirsson, 2007, p. 680)
17
Existing literature clearly shows that consumers are generally more willing to purchase
counterfeit fashion items than other types of counterfeit items. This is a red flag for legitimate fashion
companies. What this means, is that there is something unique about fashion items that influence
consumers willingness to purchase counterfeits. What those variables are and how they differ from
those that influence consumers decisions to purchase other types of counterfeit goods is of significant
importance.
The majority of relevant research in this field applies to general counterfeit products.
However, research by Juggessur and Cohen (2008) focuses specifically on counterfeiting in the high-
end fashion industry. The article draws several conclusions that are relevant to this study. The authors
explore non-deceptive counterfeiting of high-end fashion brands which they define as brands that
hold considerable intangible worth and have enduring positive brand images deemed as being at the
forefront of design, quality, status and fashion (Juggessur & Cohen, 2008, p. 384). While this study
is not limited only to high-end fashion brands, some of the findings of Juggessur and Cohen are
applicable to the entire fashion industry. For example, the authors point out that consumers are
attracted to certain fashion brands because of what they refer to as the theory of lifestyle branding.
This theory suggests that brands are associated with images of certain lifestyles with which various
consumer segments identify or aspire to identify (Juggessur & Cohen, 2008, p. 382). Because of this
association, counterfeit fashion goods are able to offer the same value. Consumers can appear to have
the lifestyles associated with certain brands by purchasing a counterfeit version. This points to the
logical conclusion that consumers are more likely to purchase a counterfeit good if the brand it is
imitating is one associated with the lifestyle the consumer lives or aspires to live (Juggesuer & Cohen,
2008).
This article also points out a very important aspect of the fashion industry that does not apply
to other industries. They define fashion as a result of ever-changing cultural shifts in preferences,
tastes, and choices (Juggesuer & Cohen, 2008, p. 384). Due to these rapidly changing shifts in what
18
is considered fashionable, items that are at one point sought after and highly valued have only a
limited time before they are deemed out of style and lose value. Once a fashion is first introduced to a
market the process of adoption begins. With high-end fashion this typically starts with upper class
consumer segments and then trickles down, as people who want to appear to have the upper class
lifestyle that the brand portrays begin to imitate (Juggessur & Cohen, 2008, p. 384). As more people
begin to imitate, the more common and non-exclusive the fashion becomes which deteriorates its
value (Juggessur & Cohen, 2008). This offers an interesting opportunity for fashion counterfeiters.
Consumers know that fashion goods will only be fashionable for a limited amount of time. For most
people who cannot afford to buy legitimate brands every time the new in-style product changes,
counterfeit prices allow them to appear to have the exclusively of expensive fashionable brands at all
times which they can afford to never wear again once the style is no longer in fashion. This
counterfeit imitation of new fashions occurs so quickly now that the entire process of mass adoption
and value deterioration happens in constant waves keeping legitimate brand manufacturers on their
toes and pressuring them to constantly create new innovative designs that have not yet been adopted
by the general public and imitated by counterfeiters (Juggessur & Cohen, 2008). This aspect of
fashion brands is the foundation for the first hypothesis of the study. It suggests that the amount of
time that has expired since the fashion good was introduced to the market or whether or not the
fashion is still considered to be in style, could impact a consumers willingness to purchase the
There have been several studies that are not specific to the fashion industry that aim to
determine what variables influence consumers to purchase general counterfeit items. Comparing the
results of these studies to the variables that influence fashion counterfeit purchase decisions may add
interesting insights. Several studies have focused on which demographic groups are most likely to
19
purchase counterfeit merchandise. Other studies have determined certain personality traits that
determine the likeliness that a consumer would purchase a counterfeit good. Apart from demographics
and personality traits several influence factors have been discovered in past research including
personal values, attitudes toward counterfeiting and various consumption variables. It is also
important to note that several scales have been created in past studies to measure such things as
consumer attitudes toward counterfeits, consumers material values, and consumers personality
characteristics. It is essential to understand the influence that each of these variables has had on
consumers counterfeit purchase decisions in past studies, so that it can be applied and compared to
items of the fashion industry. The scales that have been constructed in past research are useful tools
on which to build the research methods of this study. Using these scales may prove helpful by
drawing conclusions about the relationships between participants scores and their willingness to
As previously stated, demographic influences have been the primary focus of several studies.
While some research has determined that certain demographic groups are no more likely to purchase
counterfeit goods than others, other studies reveal different results. Bian and Moutinhos research
(2009) explores the effects of four demographic variables on the likeness to consider the purchase of a
counterfeit branded product. Their study determined that neither age, sex, income, nor educational
attainment influenced their subjects willingness to purchase counterfeit goods (Bian and Moutinho,
2009, p. 375). The authors disclose that their findings directly contradict the findings of other studies
which found that people of higher educational attainment are more likely to purchase counterfeit
merchandise (Bian and Moutinho, 2009, p. 375). Their findings also contradict studies in the early
2000s that determined that men and women are more likely to buy certain types of counterfeited
goods such as CDs versus clothing (Swami et al., 2009, p. 820). It has also been reported in several
studies that younger demographic groups are more likely to purchase counterfeit items (Swami et al.,
2009, p. 821). Bian and Moutinhos findings are questionable considering that other studies found
20
correlations age, sex, income, and educational attainment and consumer likeliness to purchase
counterfeit goods.
The question then is whether or not this applies to fashion counterfeit items as well. Younger
demographic groups have already been shown to be more likely to purchase general counterfeit
goods. Some reasons for this could be that younger demographics do not have the financial means to
afford genuine brands and second or perhaps that younger age groups have less traditionalist values
and do not see anything wrong with purchasing counterfeit goods. Both of these assumptions can be
applied to fashion counterfeit items as well and if true, would suggest younger generations are more
likely to purchase counterfeit fashion items as well. Furthermore, one might assume that younger
generations are more likely to buy counterfeit fashion items because they are still trying out different
identities which ties into the concept of lifestyle branding (Juggessur and Cohen, 2008). This idea
deserves further exploration because it seems to go hand in hand with the fact that younger
generations are more dynamic with their shifts in fashion styles. As they grow up and develop more of
a concrete self-image their desire to try different fashions decreases which lowers their need for low
cost, disposable fashion. For these reasons it can be hypothesized that younger demographic groups
Based on the amount of fashion advertising effort targeting females the fashion industry
appeals more to women than to men. Bian and Moutinho (2009) found that women are more likely
than men to purchase counterfeit fashion items when compared with other types of counterfeit items
such as CDs and DVDs. Following such logic it is hypothesized that females are more likely to
purchase counterfeit fashion items than men. Consumer income has obvious implications on ones
likeliness to purchase counterfeit fashion items. Authentic fashion brands can be very expensive, often
prohibitively expensive for consumers with lower incomes. Therefore one can conclude that
consumers with lower income are more likely to purchase counterfeit fashion items because they
cannot afford to buy the authentic brands. Educational attainment has many latent variables to be
considered such as what a person is educated in, if they are educated because they come from a
21
wealthy background, or if they are older because they have spent many years in school. Some or all of
these latent variables could influence the counterfeit purchase decision. For this reason, making a
hypothesis about whether or not education level and consumer likeliness to purchase counterfeit
fashion items has a correlation is difficult. Higher levels of education are typically associated with
higher income and therefore if people with more income are less likely to purchase counterfeit fashion
then it can be hypothesized that people with higher education are also less likely to purchase
Hypothesis 2: There is a negative correlation between consumer age and consumer willingness to
Hypothesis 3: Females are more willing to purchase counterfeit fashion items than men.
Hypothesis 4: There is a negative correlation between consumer income and consumer willingness to
Hypothesis 5: There is a negative correlation between level of education and consumer willingness to
These variables can be grouped into three subcategories: materialistic values, other personal
values, and attitudes and beliefs. Furnham and Valgeirsson (2007) studied how materialistic values
and other personal values influence a persons willingness to buy counterfeit products. In order to
evaluate an individuals materialistic values their study makes use of the Richins and Dawson
Materialism Scale created in 1992. It measures the value an individual places on materialism by
inquiring about three dimensions of their personality: happiness, success, and centrality (Richins &
Dawson, 1992). Furnham and Valgeirsson (2007, p. 678) define materialism as the preoccupation
with the pursuit of material objects while neglecting mental and spiritual aspects of life. In order to
evaluate their subjects other personal values they used the Schwarz Value Model created in 1994,
22
which ranks individuals on ten aspects of personal values: power, achievement, hedonism,
1994). The hypotheses of their study estimated that materialism and the conformity and universalism
for the welfare of all people and for nature, and conformity as involves restraints of actions that
violate social expectations or norms (Furnham and Valgeirsson, 2007, p. 679). The results of the
study half support and half contradict the hypotheses of the researchers. The centrality aspect of
materialism proved to have a negative relationship with ones willingness to purchase a counterfeit
good (Furnham and Valgeirsson, 2007, p. 682). In other words, those who score high on the centrality
factor of materialism are generally less likely to purchase a counterfeit good. This confirmed the
aspect of their hypothesis that materialism does influence willingness to buy counterfeits and the
authors explained this relationship by assuming this could be related to the fact that people who are
more materialistic may be more inclined to own an authentic brand than a fake one. Universalism and
conformity aspects of personal values both proved to have no relationship with an individuals
willingness to purchase a counterfeit good which contradicts the hypothesis of their study (Furnham
and Valgeirsson, 2007, p. 683). The tradition aspect of personal values however, defined as respect,
commitment, and acceptance of customs and ideas that traditional culture and religion provide, has a
negative correlation with willingness to buy counterfeit goods (Furnham and Valgeirsson, 2007, p.
683). In summary the results of their study show that materialistic and traditional values have an
Each of the three aspects of materialism (centrality, happiness, and success) taken from the
Richins and Dawson Scale (1992), has certain implications for this study and how it relates to fashion
counterfeit items. The centrality aspect of materialism reflects the extent to which material things and
possessions are placed in the center of ones life (Furnham & Valgeirsson, 2007, p. 678). People
whose values reflect high levels of centrality materialism have been shown in past studies to be less
likely to purchase general counterfeit goods (Furnham & Valgeirsson, 2007, p. 678). Their lifestyle,
23
behavior, and goals are all driven by a desire to own material possessions (Richins & Dawson, 1992,
p. 304). Such people are more susceptible to advertising and desire exclusivity and brand names
(Furnham & Valgeirsson, 2007, p. 682). According to Furnham and Valgeirsson (2007, p. 682) it
matters to them that they possess items that are authentic, desirable and exclusive. The fashion
industry is heavily advertised and brand names carry connotations of desirability and exclusivity.
Therefore it is hypothesized that centrality materialism has a negative correlation with a consumers
willingness to purchase counterfeit fashion items, just as it does with general counterfeit items.
The happiness aspect of materialism reflects how much the material possessions that one
consumes impact ones personal satisfaction and wellbeing (Furnham & Valgeirsson, 2007, p. 678).
For such consumers, their material possessions are the greatest source of both satisfaction and
dissatisfaction. They measure their personal happiness and social progress by what they own and
rarely pursue happiness through other means (Richins & Dawson, 1992, p. 304). However, according
to Furnham & Valgeirsson (2007, p. 682) their happiness in consuming is relatively unrelated to
quality or brand names. For some, buying counterfeit products makes them happy while for others
buying authentic brands makes them happy (Furham & Valgeirsson, 2007, p. 682). Furnham and
Valgeirssons (2007, p. 682) findings suggest that there is no relationship between the happiness
aspect of materialism and a consumers likeliness to purchase counterfeit goods. If this aspect of
materialism is independent of quality and name brands then this is predicted to be true for fashion
items as well. Therefore this study hypothesizes that there is no correlation between happiness
People whose values reflect success materialism judge success by the quantity and quality of
possessions that one owns (Furnham and Valgeirsson, 2007, p. 678). They feel that people are
successful if the possessions that they own project a desirable self-image and they value possessions
for the money they cost rather than by the satisfactions they yield (Richins & Dawson, 1992, p. 304).
For this reason Furnham and Valgierssons (2007) results are surprising. Their data revealed that
such people are no more or less likely to purchase counterfeit items (Furnham and Valgeirsson, 2007,
24
p. 683). With fashion counterfeit goods however this study hypothesizes different results. People with
high levels of success materialism are concerned with their self-image which they project by
consuming expensive material possessions. Following such logic they would want to own expensive
authentic fashion brands and would therefore is less willing to purchase counterfeit fashion items.
Therefore this study hypothesizes that success materialism is negatively correlated with consumer
Hypothesis 8: Success materialism has a negative correlation with consumer willingness to purchase
In addition to materialistic values, Furnham and Valgeirsson (2007) explore how other
personal values influence consumers counterfeit purchase decisions. They use the Schwarz Value
Scale to correlate consumer willingness to purchase counterfeit goods with an individuals rank on ten
different aspects of their personal values: power, achievement, hedonism, stimulation, self-direction,
universalism, benevolence, tradition, conformity, and security (Schwartz, 1994). They found that
tradition is the only one of the Schwartz Value Scales ten aspects of personal values that predicts
consumer willingness to purchase counterfeit items (Furnham & Valgeirsson, 2007, p. 684). Those
with little commitment to traditional customs and religious ideas are more inclined to purchase
counterfeit merchandise (Furnham & Valgeirsson, 2007, p. 684). This study hypothesizes this applies
to all counterfeit items including fashion. The following personal values, which act as indicators as to
how high an individual scores on each of the ten categories of personal values in the Schwartz Value
Scale (Schwartz, 1994), are hypothesized to influence a consumers counterfeit fashion purchase
25
decision: need to belong, need for an exciting life, need for wealth, spirituality, respect for tradition,
need for social recognition, honesty, desire to preserve public image, obedience, self-indulgence, and
observing social norms. How these values were chosen is explained in further detail in the
Methodology section.
Hypothesis 9: Need to belong, need for an exciting life, need for wealth, spirituality, respect
for tradition, need for social recognition, honesty, desire to preserve public image, obedience, self-
indulgence, and observing social norms all influence consumer likeliness to purchase counterfeit
fashion items.
Another study explores the relationship between personality traits and willingness to purchase
emotional stability, openness, and extraversion (Swami et al., 2009). Participants of their study were
given a score for each of their personality traits based on their answers to a survey. They were then
given a second survey in which they rated their willingness to purchase various counterfeit goods. The
findings indicate that regardless of personality type, individuals scores very similarly on their
willingness to purchase counterfeit goods, with the exception of a slightly higher score for individuals
with high openness personalities (Swami et al., 2009). This points to the conclusion that Big Five
personality traits have little influence over an individuals decision to buy counterfeit goods.
This can likely be attributed to the fact that Big Five personality traits lack stability (John &
Naumann, 2010). To claim that someone has a certain personality and be able to test that against their
likeliness to do anything is very subjective. One might show indications of being extraverted one
environment and completely introverted in another. The criticisms associated with the Big Five
personality tests have been documented for many years. Some argue that ones personality is highly
dynamic over a persons life span and that there are much more than five aspects of ones personality
to consider (John & Naumann, 2010). For these reasons and because the results of Swami, Chamorro-
Premuzic and Furnhams (2009) study indicate no relationship between the Big Five framework and a
26
consumers willingness to purchase counterfeit merchandise, this element will not be examined in this
study.
Furnham and Valgeirsson (2007) explored consumers attitudes toward law and order, beliefs
about the value of counterfeit goods, and attitudes toward their past experiences with counterfeit
goods. As with the other variables they tested each of these for a correlation with consumer
willingness to purchase counterfeit items. The results of the study show that the attitudes and beliefs
variables do predict willingness to purchase counterfeit goods (Furnham and Valgeirsson, 2007, p.
684). Each variable revealed fairly predictable results. People who feel that counterfeit law and order
is insufficient and that it is dangerous to society are typically not willing to purchase counterfeit items.
People who feel that counterfeit goods offer good value are usually willing to purchase counterfeit
items and people who have had positive experiences with counterfeits in the past are also more likely
to purchase counterfeit items. While these results seem fairly predictable they are important as they
indicate that people who can be convinced that counterfeiting laws should be strengthened or that
counterfeits typically offer lower quality will be less likely to consider purchasing a counterfeit good.
They also indicate that if a consumer has a bad experience with counterfeits they will be less likely to
purchase one again. This has implications for genuine brand companies suggesting they focus some of
(2009) replicated this portion of Furnham and Valgierssons (2007) study which yielded similar
results; attitudes toward law and order having the most impact. It is hypothesized that these variables
will show the same relationship with consumer willingness to purchase counterfeit fashion items
because if an individual feels strongly that counterfeits do not offer better value, or that anti-
counterfeiting laws should be strengthened then they are unlikely to purchase any type of counterfeit
Hypothesis 10: Attitudes toward the inadequacies of counterfeit law and order has a negative
27
Hypothesis 11: Attitudes toward the value of counterfeits has a positive correlation with willingness
Hypothesis 12: Attitudes toward experiences with counterfeits has a positive correlation with
In addition to demographic variables, Bian and Moutinhos research (2009) explores several
other influence factors including consumer perceived brand image, perceived risk, product
knowledge, and product involvement. Their study focuses on characteristics of the purchasing
process, the product itself and how those influence consumers counterfeit purchase decisions. There
is high product knowledge when consumers have more information about the product itself and the
alternative products available to them allowing them to easily compare and make well informed
evaluations (Bian & Moutinho, 2009, p. 369). The authors hypothesized that a negative relationship
between product knowledge and willingness to purchase the counterfeit item exists but their results
fail to confirm the hypothesis (Bian & Moutinho, 2009). Their discussion suggests that it really
depends on the type of counterfeit brand or product. In their study, for example, they test this
relationship for both Rolex and Gucci watches. In the case of the Gucci watches, which are valued
more for their fashion connotation than for top notch quality and features, consumers with greater
product knowledge know that watch technology is far enough advanced that a counterfeit Gucci
watch would offer just as accurate of time telling as any other watch, while still obtaining the value
offered by the brand name. Therefore the consumer, in the case of the Gucci watches, is more likely to
buy the counterfeit version when product knowledge is high (Bian & Moutinho, 2009, p. 373).
However, in the case of the Rolex watches, consumers with high product knowledge are aware of the
top quality and high performance offered by Rolex watches, which is extremely difficult to imitate.
Therefore, in this case, the more product knowledge the consumer has, the less likely the consumer is
to buy a counterfeit version (Bian & Moutinho, 2009, p. 373). Because this study is about fashion
28
items it can be linked to the findings in the Gucci watch case. Gucci watches are not valued for high
performance and its image value can easily be imitated by counterfeiters. Therefore it is hypothesized,
like in the case of the Gucci watches, that high product knowledge positively influences consumer
Hypothesis 13: High product knowledge positively influences consumer likeliness to purchase
Product involvement is defined as the depth, complexity and extensiveness of cognitive and
behavioral processes during the consumer choice process (Bian & Moutinho, 2009, p. 369). Products
or brands have high product involvement when consumers carefully weigh their alternatives and
examine their features (Bian & Moutinho, 2009, p. 369). Although the authors hypothesized that
goods with higher product involvement would have a negative relationship with a consumers
willingness to buy a counterfeit good their results showed that product involvement had very little
influence (Bian & Moutinho, 2009, p. 373). These results were surprising and the researchers attribute
them to limitations of the study suggesting that they should have controlled for different uses or
purposes to get their expected results (Bian & Moutinho, 2009, p. 373). Logically speaking, if a
consumer is going to invest time and energy into evaluating and analyzing the pros and cons of a
product, they are likely to conclude that authentic brands, which offer higher quality, would be a
better investment. This holds true for fashion items as well. If a consumer is highly involved in a
purchasing decision then it is likely that they are not looking for a cheap low quality alternative. After
careful analysis, authentic fashion brands clearly possess higher quality and better features and would
therefore be chosen over the counterfeit version. Therefore, it is hypothesized that purchasing
decisions which receive a high degree of product involvement are likely to result in purchasing
authentic fashion brands over the knockoff and therefore high product involvement would have a
29
Hypothesis 14: High product Involvement negatively influences consumer likeliness to purchase
According to Bian and Moutinho (2009, p. 369-370) there are three different aspects of brand
image: brand personality, perceived product attributes, and perceived benefits. The first aspect, brand
personality, is about the consumers ability to identify with the brand either by differentiating oneself
or by being part of, or aspiring to be a part of, a group of people associated with the brand (Bian &
Moutinho, 2009, p. 369). This is related to a concept discussed earlier about lifestyle branding, in
which brands portray a certain lifestyle or typical user with which consumers chose to identify
(Juggessur & Cohen, 2008, p. 382). The authors correctly hypothesized that a positive brand
personality increases a consumers likeliness to buy the counterfeit product and, in fact, this factor had
one of the highest influences both for Gucci and Rolex watches in their study (Bian, & Moutinho,
2009, p. 374). The second aspect, perceived product attributes is rather self-explanatory. The more
features a product is perceived to have, the higher its perceived product attributes (Bian & Moutinho,
2009, p. 370). The authors correctly hypothesized that there is a positive relationship between
willingness to buy a counterfeit product and perceived product attributes (Bian & Moutinho, 2009). It
should be noted, however, that this factor has less of an influence on the counterfeit purchase decision
than brand personality and perceived benefit (Bian & Moutinho, 2009, p. 374). With counterfeit
fashion items, if it fits comfortably or is versatile enough to wear in different environments then those
attributes are likely to positively influence the consumer to purchase it. The third aspect, perceived
benefit, involves the previous two aspects of brand image and can be summarized simply as the
perception the consumer has on what the product can do for them (Bian, & Moutinho, 2009, p.
370). In the case of fashion items, consumers may seek certain benefits such as improved popularity,
appearing to have money and style, fitting in with a certain crowd, looking attractive, etc. Bian and
Moutinho state (2009, p. 370) that consumers who buy counterfeits, believe that they are getting the
same benefits for a fraction of the price. In the case of each aspect of brand image, it is hypothesized
that the consumption variables will show the same relationship with consumer willingness to purchase
30
Hypothesis 15: Positive brand personality positively influences consumer likeliness to purchase
counterfeit fashion items.
Hypothesis 16: High perceived product attributes positively influences consumer likeliness to
purchase counterfeit fashion items.
Hypothesis 17: High perceived benefit positively influences consumer likeliness to purchase
counterfeit fashion items.
The last influence factor explored in Bian and Moutinhos study (2009, p. 370) is perceived
risk. Perceived risk is broken down into financial and social risk. Financial risk is when a consumer
bears a financial burden if, for example, he or she cannot return the product or if there is uncertainty
that the product will perform. The social risks involve the risk of damaging ones image, for example
if ones peers might look down on them for purchasing a counterfeit good (Bian & Moutinho, 2009, p.
370). In the case of the Gucci watches, which are a fashion item and therefore assumed to be a better
predictor of the counterfeit fashion results, both financial risk and social risk are negative predictors
of the influence factors of a consumers willingness to purchase a counterfeit good (Bian & Moutinho,
2009, p. 375). This means that if there is high financial or social risk, consumers are less likely to
purchase a counterfeit. For example, if consumers cannot check to see if a counterfeit product works
before they purchase it, there is high financial risk and the consumer is less likely to buy it. In terms
of social risk, if a counterfeit item poorly imitates the original brand, a consumer will be less likely to
purchase it because it is more obvious to ones peers that they have purchased a fake. In the case of
fashion items it is hypothesized that financial risk will negatively influence consumer likeliness to
purchase fashion counterfeit items because there is the risk that it may not fit or look how the
consumer expects and if one is unable to return it, it is likely to influence to consumer not to purchase
it. In most counterfeit purchasing channels returning the product is not an option and therefore
financial risk is high which would reduce a consumers willingness to purchase a fashion counterfeit
item. Social risk is hypothesized to have a significantly negative relationship with a consumers
31
likeliness to purchase a counterfeit fashion item because counterfeit fashion items lose value if other
Hypothesis 18: High perceived financial risk negatively influences consumer likeliness to purchase
counterfeit fashion items.
Hypothesis 19: High perceived social risk negatively influences consumer likeliness to purchase
counterfeit fashion items.
consumer counterfeit purchase decisions but severely lacks relevant research directed toward one of
the most commonly victimized industries of counterfeiting: fashion merchandise. In order to fill this
hole in existing literature, this study transfers the components of past research to the relatively
unexplored world of fashion counterfeiting. This allows for a comparative analysis with past studies
and a thorough examination of the influence factors of fashion counterfeit purchase decisions. The
nineteen hypotheses are formed based on two components. The first is how the selected variables
correlate in past studies with consumer willingness to purchase general counterfeit items. The second
component is how logic and existing literature suggests those relationships may differ with fashion
4.0 METHODOLOGY
specific topic and a research question, the study commenced with an exploration of the available
literature in the field about counterfeit goods. Once it was established that there is an ample amount of
concluded that the quantitative/exploratory approach was an appropriate method. Certain independent
variables were extracted from past studies after a systematic review of the existing literature. These
variables, which were tested in the past for a correlation with consumer willingness to purchase
32
general counterfeit goods, were tested in this study for a correlation with consumer likeliness to
purchase counterfeit fashion goods. Because counterfeit fashion items possess certain unique
characteristics, hypotheses were formed about whether or not the variables correlate with consumer
willingness to purchase fashion counterfeit items the same way that they correlate with consumer
counterfeit fashion items correlates with the variables drawn from past studies, a fifty-one question
Likert Scale internet survey was designed and published for online submission. There were 117
subjects who participated in the survey and were able to access the link either by email, Facebook, or
an internet search. The subjects were briefed on the intention of the research and given a definition
and examples of counterfeit fashion items in order to clarify certain terms in the questionnaire. This
was achieved through a short introduction paragraph at the beginning of the survey. The paragraph
also ensured subjects that all information and data collected for the purpose of this research is
completely confidential in order to guarantee truthful and accurate responses. Each statement could be
answered on a scale of 1 to 5 ranging either from Strongly Disagree to Strongly Agree or Not
Important to Extremely Important. Not Applicable was a sixth option on certain questions where
necessary. Four demographic questions were also included in the questionnaire for two purposes. The
first is to establish that the subjects of the survey are representative of the population and the second is
to establish a correlation between demographic variables and the control questions. Three control
questions were included to establish the subjects willingness to purchase fashion counterfeit items.
One of the three control questions was thrown out after careful consideration due to its lack of clarity.
This method of data collection is appropriate because this study tested the correlations
between two variables. It allows one to compare the subjects willingness to purchase counterfeit
fashion items with each of the independent variables in order to establish if certain variables have a
positive or negative relationship with the control questions. It also allows one to test that the subjects
33
of the survey appropriately represent the population by including demographic questions. By being
able to test the correlations between the variables drawn from past studies and the control questions,
one can see what variables are commonly present in consumers who are willing to purchase
counterfeit fashion items. For example, Bian and Moutinho discovered (2009, p. 375) in their research
that subjects with higher levels of education strongly correlate with subjects who are willing to
purchase counterfeit goods. From this one can draw conclusions that consumers who buy counterfeit
goods are often also highly educated. It is important to note however that these are correlations and
not causal relationships. Referring back to the example above, such a correlation does not mean that
people purchase counterfeit goods because they are highly educated. It merely suggests that where
one variable is present, the other variable is often also present. From the correlations found between
the variables tested in the survey one can draw conclusions about why certain variables are often
associated with consumers who are willing to purchase counterfeit fashion items.
As with any type of data collection, internet surveys have both advantages and disadvantages.
There are four key characteristics to consider when evaluating quantitative data collection methods:
response rates, timeliness, quality, and cost (Fricker & Schonlau, 2002, p. 3). One disadvantage to
using online surveys as a data collection method is that response rates are not particularly high
(Fricker & Schonlau, 2002, p. 3). In order to address this issue one can contact personal acquaintances
and ask them to fill out the questionnaire and to forward the questionnaire to as many people as
possible with a personal request to do the same. People are more likely to fill out a survey as a favor
to a friend than to fill it out simply for the purpose of research. However, this increases the risk that
the subjects that fill out the survey do not reflect a representative sample. Therefore it is important to
be aware of the demographic variables of survey participants and to reach subjects that represent the
population appropriately. In order to do so for this study, IBMs Statistical Package for the Social
Sciences software (SPSS) was utilized to continuously monitor the representativeness of the sample
and if certain demographic groups were lacking, specific effort was made to reach more subjects of
34
Internet surveys have the obvious advantage of timeliness (Fricker & Schonlau, 2002, p. 9).
Being able to instantaneously publish the survey for public access and receive responses the moment a
subject clicks on the Submit button at the bottom of the page, allows for a speedy data collection
process. Compared to postal surveys in which one must calculate several days for the time it takes to
reach the subject and be returned, the internet is a much more advantageous survey portal (Fricker &
Schonlau, 2002, p. 9). It does not however, offer any advantage in terms of getting subjects to fill out
the survey on the spot. Surveys conducted on site, for example at malls and public places, offer the
advantage of requiring the subject to fill out and return the survey immediately (Fricker & Schonlau,
2002, p. 9). Subjects may feel less inclined to immediately fill out and submit online surveys because
there is no one in front of them waiting for them to complete it. This could delay the timeliness of
Quality is the most important aspect of data collection. Responses are useless unless they are
accurate, truthful, and reflect a representative sample (Fricker & Schonlau, 2002, p. 10). In order to
ensure that all subjects answer truthfully, a statement was included at the beginning of the survey
explaining the purpose of the study, listing examples of counterfeit fashion items and defining the
term counterfeit. There are also instructions throughout the questionnaire explaining how to go about
responding to the statements correctly. It is common for surveys to contain errors or unclear questions
that subjects may not know how to answer (Fricker & Schonlau, 2002, p. 11). In order to address this
issue the survey was reviewed by two outside parties who knew nothing about the study. They were
asked to carefully read through each question and to write down anything that needed clarifying or
needed to be reworded. Changes were made to ensure complete comprehension. Quality of data is
also at risk because of coverage errors (Fricker & Schonlau, 2002, p. 11). Not everyone has access to
the internet and this may interfere with maintaining a representative sample. The survey may lack
access to older age groups who may not be comfortable using the internet. In order to ensure the
sample is representative of the population certain respondents were contacted directly by email with
35
The last key characteristic to consider when evaluating data collection methods is cost. The
low cost of internet surveys is another key advantage to this method (Fricker & Schonlau, 2002, p.
14). The only real cost involved in designing, publishing, and collecting internet survey responses is
time. Financially, internet surveying is the optimal data collection method (Fricker & Schonlau, 2002,
p. 14). Postal surveys require money for postage, paper, and ink while internet and on-site surveys
have paper and ink costs as well as transportation costs to and from the survey site. Choosing an
internet survey for the research methodology is not only appropriate for the quantitative analysis
needed to answer the research question, but it also saves time and money while obtaining sufficient
The process of designing, publishing, collecting responses, and analyzing data took
approximately five weeks. The survey questions were designed based on the variables that were to be
tested for a correlation to consumer willingness to purchase counterfeit fashion items. Below is a list
of all variables organized into three categories: demographic variables, values and attitudes variables,
and consumption variables. Each variable was drawn from one of several previously conducted
studies that tested the relationships between these variables and consumer likeliness to purchase
general (not fashion) counterfeit items. These variables were then translated into survey questions so
that the variables could be quantitatively analyzed for their relationship with a consumers willingness
36
Table 1: Variables and corresponding survey questions (Source: Own elaboration)
Correlation Variables
Demographic Variables Variable # and Survey Question
Age V1: Question 2
Gender V2: Question 3
Yearly Income V3: Question 4
Education Level V4: Question 5
Country V5: Automatically recorded by
Surveygizmo.com
Values and Attitudes Variables
Materialism: Centrality V6: Questions 6-12 (Averaged)
Materialism: Happiness V7: Questions 13-17 (Averaged)
Materialism: Success V8: Questions 18-23 (Averaged)
Spirituality V9: Question 41
37
Table 1 cont.
Consumption Variables
Product Knowledge V23: Question 30
Product Involvement V24: Question 31
Brand Personality V25: Question 32
Perceived Product Attributes V26: Question 33
Perceived Benefits V27: Question 34
Social Risk V28: Question 35 & 36
Financial Risk V29: Question 37
Fashionable/In-style V30: Question 38
Control Question 1 Question 1
Control Question 2 Question 40
Control Question 3 Eliminated
The variables used are appropriate for several reasons. Determining if certain demographic
variables strongly correlate with a consumers willingness to purchase counterfeit fashion items has
very useful implications for authentic fashion companies and designers. It allows them to have an idea
of what demographic groups are driving the demand for counterfeit fashion and shape their marketing
and anti-counterfeiting efforts accordingly. The attitudes and values variables have similar
implications for marketing and anti-counterfeiting efforts. By knowing the attitudes and values that
many consumers who are willing to purchase fashion counterfeit goods often have in common, it
allows fashion companies to know how to reach these consumers and how to make them understand
and care about the issue of fashion counterfeiting. The consumption variables tell more about the
process and the value that counterfeit fashion offers consumers. If authentic fashion companies can
somehow offer the same value with legitimate fashion brands then consumers would have no reason
consumers to purchase counterfeit fashion is extremely useful information for such companies.
Once these test variables were established, the designing process of the survey questions
could begin. The online software Surveygizmo.com allowed for simple step by step construction of
the survey and once published provided a link which could be sent to potential respondents to fill out
38
the survey. In order to ensure that at least one control question was answered in every survey taken,
the first control question was placed as the very first question of the survey. Because the survey is
fifty-one questions long, placing both of the control questions at the end would have invalidated any
survey that was not fully completed. The second and third control questions were placed in the middle
of the survey and the third was later eliminated after careful consideration determined that the
question was phrased in a contradictory manner by combining two statements in one. The
demographic questions (variables 1-5) were designed to be very straight forward, asking respondents
to pick one of five categories which applied to them. The country from which the respondent was
taking the survey was automatically recorded by Surveygizmo.com and was therefore added to the
demographic data collected from each respondent. Eighteen of the questions were designed to gauge
the respondents level of three different aspects of materialism: centrality, success, and happiness
(variables 6-8). These eighteen questions were drawn directly from Richins and Dawsons
Materialism Scale (Richins &Dawson, 1992). By taking an average of the respondents scores on
questions for each category of materialism, one can determine a consumers level of centrality
materialism, success materialism, and happiness materialism. A similar process went into the attitudes
toward counterfeiting variables. Furnam and Valgierssons (2007) study created a set of survey
questions to gauge consumers attitudes toward law and order, beliefs about the value of counterfeit
goods, and attitudes toward their past experiences with counterfeit goods. The survey questions in this
study were based on the questions created by Furnam and Valgierson (2007, p. 681) for their own
study and again each respondents scores on the questions related to each of those three variables
were averaged together to determine their attitudes toward counterfeit law and order, beliefs about the
value of counterfeit goods, and attitudes toward their past experiences with counterfeit goods.
The personal values in the second category (variables 9-19) were extracted from the Schwartz
Value Scale. Rather than use the exact scale, as Furnham and Valgeirsson (2007) chose to do, this
study draws on certain pieces of the value model by gauging how the following personal values act as
a guiding principle in each participants life: need to belong, need for an exciting life, need for wealth,
spirituality, respect for tradition, need for social recognition, honesty, desire to preserve public image,
39
obedience, self-indulgence, and observing social norms (Schwartz, 1994). This difference in approach
was instituted for two reasons. First, the Schwarz Value Scale requires participants to answer a very
lengthy questionnaire. The survey for this study is already fifty-one questions and research shows that
the amount of completed survey responses declines as the amount of questions and time required
increases (Hoerger, 2010). The other reason for only partially using the Schwarz Value Scale is that
many of the personal values it addresses have very little to do a consumers willingness to purchase
counterfeit items. Therefore it is more efficient to use only certain values which could have a
connection to the research question and only those personal values are used in this study.
The remainder of the questions was based on the consumption variables (variables 20-30) and
was not designed to be correlated with the control questions. Instead the questions were set up in a
way that directly asks the respondent if they would be more likely to purchase a counterfeit fashion
item if the consumption variable is present. For example if product knowledge is high when a
consumer is considering buying a counterfeit fashion item then that means the consumer knows a lot
about the product and the alternative products available to them. The corresponding survey question
therefore asks if the respondent would be more likely to purchase a counterfeit fashion item if they
know a lot about the product and the alternative products available to them. Each of the consumption
After the first draft of the questions was created it was reviewed by two outside parties for any
unclear wording, misunderstandings, or biased questions. Several small changes were made before the
survey was published on the internet and made accessible to respondents. Collecting responses was
made possible primarily through email and Facebook posts. The survey link provided through
Surveygizmo.com was emailed to both personal acquaintances and to all students on the graduate
student list at UNC Wilmington. Each person who received this email was also asked to forward the
survey link to as many people they know in order to exponentially reach a large audience. A similar
process was integrated with Facebook software by posting the survey link and asking people to post
the link on their own page requesting their own friends to fill out the survey. In this way not only were
40
personal acquaintances reached but also friends of friends. Within three weeks 117 people had
responded to the survey and a relatively representative sample had been reached.
The data provided by the survey responses was entered into the SPSS software in order to
determine which variables correlated with the two control usable questions. They were also tested for
correlations with other categories of variables and within like categories in order to help clarify any
underlying latent variables. The figure below shows each category of variables with the lines
After the survey data was entered into SPSS two of the softwares functions were utilized.
The first function used was the descriptive statistics analysis in which the frequencies of the
respondents were plotted into histograms in order to analyze their bell curve shaped tendencies. This
function allows one to determine how representative the demographic variables of the sample are.
41
The second function of SPSS used was the two tailed Pearson correlation function in which all
significant correlations between variables were analyzed. Significant correlations were marked by
SPSS with either one or two stars. One star indicated the correlation is significant at the 0.05 level and
two stars indicated even stronger correlation significance at the 0.01 level. Each correlation was also
specified as either positive or negative indicating the relationship between the variables. The findings
The findings are discussed in the following section organized by category of variables. In
order to understand the significance of these results it is important to first note the differences
between control question one and control question two. In the survey control question one reads as
follows: I would consider purchasing a counterfeit fashion item. Control question two states: I like to
purchase counterfeit fashion items. The difference between these two statements is rather significant
which was done purposefully in order to approach the question of whether or not the respondent is
willing to purchase counterfeit fashion items from different directions. It is important also to note that
control question one and control question two have a very strong positive correlation meaning that
nearly every respondent who agreed with control question one also agreed with control question two,
suggesting that these two control questions gauged the respondents willingness to purchase
counterfeit fashion items rather well. The difference between the two control questions is that in the
first case, the respondent is stating that they are willing to consider purchasing counterfeit fashion
items. This means that they are not entirely against the concept of purchasing counterfeit fashion
items whereas in the second control question the respondent is admitting to having purchased
counterfeit fashion items in the past and furthermore suggests that they had a positive experience and
42
5.1 Representative Sampling
Gender
Male 51.8%
Female 48.2%
Age
Under 18 0.9%
18-24 30.7%
25-34 40.4%
35-54 21.9%
55+ 6.1%
Income
$25,000-$49,999 28.7%
$50,000-$99,999 25.2%
$100,000-$149,000 6.1%
Education
Each demographic variable was plotted into a histogram. This allows one to visualize the data
in a way that makes it easier to interpret. Normal curves are often used in statistical analyses because
43
the bell shaped curve is a common distribution shape naturally found in many populations
(Histograms, 2011). If the shape of the distribution is comparable with a normal bell curve one can
conclude that the variable being analyzed is relatively representative of the population. It is important
to have a representative sample when conducting studies if the results are to have any real life
applications. This is the case because one can only make generalizations about a larger population if
the sample correctly represents it. Unfortunately this can be extremely difficult to achieve, especially
in survey studies where respondents are being reached based on personal acquaintances. The first
demographic variable extracted from the data into a histogram was age. Following the normal
distribution curve, this variable is pleasingly representative. The largest age group in the sample
accounts 40.4 percent of the sample size and is comprised of the 25-35 year old age group. Gender,
although it does not follow the bell curve, since there are only two options for this variable, is fairly
evenly divided between male and female respondents. This is ideal for comparing male and female
Unfortunately the income histogram is positively skewed meaning that the majority of the
respondents (thirty-five percent) fall in the lowest income bracket and each higher income bracket is
represented less than the previous. Only 5.1 percent of the respondents claim to have more than
$150,000 in yearly income and nearly ninety percent of the sample makes less than $100,000 a year.
Although this does not follow a normal distribution curve, according to the US Census Bureau the
average household income in 2010 was $49,445 (U.S. Census Bureau, 2011). This is consistent with
the sample in this study in which the mean of respondents falls in the $25,000-$49,999 category. It
should be noted however that this sample consists of respondents not only in the United States.
Although the country from which the respondent filled out the survey was not originally a
demographic variable considered in this study, Surveygizmo.com automatically recorded that data.
This shows that there are respondents from the United States, Germany, Spain, and Russia. Having
several countries represented in the sample suggests that the results of the data have global
44
Figure 4: Demographic histograms (Source: SPSS data)
The education histogram is negatively skewed and also does not follow the normal
distribution curve. Most populations one might consider do not typically have more people with post
graduate degrees than lower levels of education. This is slightly surprising considering that the age
distribution so closely follows the normal bell curve. According the U.S. Census Bureau, only 10.4
percent of Americans over the age of twenty-five have graduate or professional degrees (U.S. Census
Bureau, 2011). In this sample, seventy-two percent of the respondents are over twenty-five years old
and a surprisingly high 45.7 percent of the respondents have a post graduate degree. The reason for
this is most likely due to the data collection process in which an entire list of UNC Wilmington
45
graduate students were contacted via email and asked to fill out the survey. Because the survey was
published for responses near the end of the UNC Wilmington graduate semester, most of the graduate
students contacted most likely already consider themselves to fall within the post graduate degree
category.
Although not every demographic variable follows a normal distribution curve the respondents
are never-the-less fairly representative of larger populations to which the results of this study have
hopeful implications. The findings of this study are divided into three sections based on the type of
variables that are being analyzed and discussed. Section 5.2 discusses how the demographic
characteristics of the respondents correlate with their willingness to purchase counterfeit fashion items
and what might be the reasoning behind such results. The second category of variables gauges the
values and attitudes of the survey respondents and correlates those with their willingness to purchase
counterfeit fashion items. These results are discussed and analyzed in section 5.3. The last part of the
Results and Discussion section discusses the third category of variables, consumption variables. These
variables are not correlated with the control questions as the previous two variable categories are.
Instead these variables are discussed based solely on the responses of the subjects of the study and
Each demographic variable was entered into SPSS and tested for a correlation with control
questions one and two separately. Out of the five demographic variables that were measured in the
survey, three show a strong correlation significance of 0.05 with either control question one or control
question two. Variable one (Age) shows a negative 0.05 level correlation significance with control
question one but an insignificant correlation with control question two. Variable three (Income) also
shows a negative 0.05 level correlation significance with control question one, but an insignificant
correlation with control question two. Variable four (Education) however, shows a significant
negative correlation only with control question two, and none with control question one. Variable two
46
(Gender) and variable five (Country) show no significant correlation with control question one or
5.2.1 Age
The fact that age has a significant negative correlation with control question one, suggests that
younger age groups are more likely to consider purchasing counterfeit fashion items. Age has a less
significant correlation with control question two, which this suggests that although many younger
respondents, would consider purchasing counterfeit fashion items, fewer of them have actually done
These results have interesting implications when compared to past studies that have been
conducted on consumer purchasing decisions toward general counterfeit items. Swami, Chamorro-
Premuzic, and Furnhams research (2009, p. 821) found several instances in past studies where age
negatively correlated with consumers likeliness to purchase general counterfeit items. This study
shows that consumers decision to purchase counterfeit fashion items and general counterfeit items
correlate similarly with age suggesting that younger age groups are more likely to purchase all types
of counterfeit items including fashion. These results confirm hypothesis two that there is a negative
correlation between consumer age and consumer willingness to purchase counterfeit fashion items.
This hypothesis was formed under three assumptions. The first was that younger demographic
groups may be more likely to purchase counterfeit items because they typically have less income. The
47
second assumption was that younger demographic groups may have less traditionalist values and the
last assumption was that younger age groups may buy into the concept of lifestyle branding more than
older age groups because they are still trying out different identities with which they chose to
associate themselves. The first of these three assumptions is confirmed by a significantly positive
correlation between age and income of 0.01. This suggests, as one would assume, that older age
groups typically make more money. Therefore, the fact those younger age groups are shown to be
more likely to purchase counterfeit fashion items could have something to do with the fact that they
have lower income and cannot afford authentic brands. The second assumption in the hypothesis that
younger age groups have less traditionalist values cannot be confirmed because there is no significant
correlation between variable one (Age) and variable thirteen (Respect for Tradition). While
traditionalist values may find counterfeiting unethical, it is not necessarily the case that younger age
groups are less likely to have traditionalist values according to the responses to the survey. The last
assumption of the first hypothesis, that younger age groups are more susceptible to lifestyle branding
can also not be confirmed with the available data. Out of the three assumptions only one can be
confirmed in this study which is that younger age groups typically have less income. Therefore the
data suggests that younger people are more likely to purchase counterfeit fashion items and that a
reason for this could be that younger age groups have lower income. For authentic fashion brand
companies seeking to address the issue of counterfeiting, this tells them that their target offenders are
younger age groups who also typically have lower income. This is important because it helps to
narrow down the target market that anti-counterfeiting efforts should try to reach.
5.2.2 Income
As with variable one (Age), variable three (Income) shows a strong negative correlation with
control question one and not with control question two, confirming hypothesis four that there is a
negative correlation between income and consumer willingness to purchase counterfeit fashion items.
Because authentic fashion items can be prohibitively expensive this outcome was fully expected. The
concept of lifestyle branding involves consumers who purchase fashion brands that portray a lifestyle
that they either identify with or seek to identify with (Juggessur & Cohen, 2008). People with lower
48
income who seek to identify with certain lifestyles that are outside of their price range often turn to
counterfeit fashion brands to achieve the image regardless (Juggessur & Cohen, 2008). This allows
them to appear to belong to certain social classes or appear to have an elite lifestyle at affordable
prices. This is the most obvious answer to why people buy counterfeit fashion items: it is more
affordable and therefore is available to a much larger population. The problem is that although this is
the most obvious answer it could also be the most difficult problem for authentic fashion brand
companies to fix. By reducing the price of authentic brands, brands lose their exclusivity which is
often why people buy them in the first place. High-end fashion brands such as Juicy Couture or Louis
Vuitton are set at prices that make them exclusively available to a small high-class high-income
market segment. Unfortunately, this makes them prime targets for counterfeiters because people want
Past research has confirmed that higher income levels negatively influence a consumers
likeliness to purchase fashion items such as Gucci watches (Bian & Moutinho, 2009, p. 375). The data
of this study confirms this claim with the significantly negative correlation between income and
control question one. The concept value added could be an underlying cause of this relationship.
Authentic fashion items are often much more expensive than other types of goods that are frequently
counterfeited, for example CDs or DVDs. A typical recently released CD might sell for around fifteen
dollars and counterfeit versions of that same CD could sell for as low as one or two dollars. That is a
savings of about fourteen dollars at most. Authentic fashion items often cost hundreds of dollars and
the counterfeited versions can sell for as low as ten to twenty dollars. Therefore the value added by
purchasing counterfeit versions of fashion items is much greater than the value added by purchasing
other types of counterfeit items such as CDs and DVDs. If the value added by getting counterfeit CDs
or DVDs is enough to make money conscious consumers buy them, then the value added by buying
expensive fashion items must be more than enough. For consumers with lower income, such savings
49
5.2.3 Education
Variable four (Education) has a strong negative correlation with control question two but not with
control question one. This could have several meanings. and reveals flaws with control question two
because there is no way of determining what the respondent was implying. Again, control question
two reads: I like to purchase counterfeit fashion items. Stating Strongly Disagree to this statement
could mean that the respondent has never purchased counterfeit fashion items or it could mean that
they did not like it when they did or it could mean that they do not generally like to purchase
counterfeit fashion items, which does not mean that they would not do so under certain circumstances.
Therefore control question three, although it was thrown out because it combines two statements, may
offer some insights into what the respondents were implying. According to the data, control question
two and control question three have a very strong positive correlation. Control question three reads: I
have purchased counterfeit fashion items in the past and I would do it again. Because control question
two and three so strongly correlate it means that in most cases when respondents answered in favor of
one, they also answered in favor of the other. This rules out the option that the respondents were
implying that they had never purchased counterfeit fashion items. Therefore, the most conclusive
statement that the data implies is that people with higher levels of education are less likely to enjoy
purchasing counterfeit fashion items, which implies they are therefore less likely to do so, and vice
versa: people with lower levels of education are more likely to enjoy purchasing counterfeit fashion
Hypothesis five, that there is a negative correlation between level of education and consumer
willingness to purchase counterfeit fashion items, is therefore confirmed. Bian and Moutinhos (2009)
research indicated that education has no effect on counterfeit purchase decisions but this is one area
where fashion items reveal different results. There are countless latent variables that could be
underlying the reasoning of such a statement. It could be the case that people with less education are
also younger and that age (not education) is the real reason for this relationship. The data confirms
this is a possibility because there is a significant positive relationship between age and education. It
cannot be explained with the assumption that people with less education have lower income because
50
the data shows no relationship between education and income for this sample. One might even assume
the possibility that less educated people are more likely to buy counterfeits because they are unaware
of the negative impacts counterfeiting has on society. But the data shows that more educated
respondents are no more or less likely to answer positively to the statement Counterfeiting has
negative impacts on our society. Therefore there is either a direct connection between education level
and willingness to purchase counterfeits, or the age variable is creating this relationship.
Out of 117 respondents, fifty-nine are male, fifty-five are female, and three did not indicate
their sex. Of those fifty-nine males, 52.5 percent indicated either Agree or Strongly Agree to control
question one stating they would consider purchasing counterfeit fashion items. Of the fifty-four
females, 54.5 percent indicated they either Agree or Strongly Agree to the same control question.
These are fairly equal percentages suggesting that males and females are equally willing to consider
purchasing counterfeit fashion items. Past studies have shown that men are more likely to buy
counterfeit CDs and women are more likely to buy counterfeit clothing (Swami et al., 2009, p. 820).
Although the findings of this study suggest women are no more likely than men to buy counterfeit
clothing disproving hypothesis five, it could be due to the limited sample size and the fact that no
Thus far, the demographic variables which correlate with consumer willingness to purchase
counterfeit fashion items are low age, low income, and little education. Fashion marketers and
authentic fashion brand companies can use this information to better target the types of consumers
that are more likely to purchase counterfeit versions of their brands or alternatively to focus on the
consumers who are more willing to buy the authentic fashion brands. Any anti-counterfeiting efforts
should be targeting young, low income, uneducated consumers. Older, wealthier, and more educated
consumers are those who are more likely to buy authentic brands and should therefore be the focus of
marketing efforts.
51
5.3 Values and Attitudes Correlations
Of the seventeen variables in the Values and Attitudes category, seven show a strong
correlation either with control question one, control question two, or both. Out of the materialism
subcategory, happiness and success aspects of materialism significantly correlate with one or both of
the control questions. The success aspect of materialism is the only variable (besides the attitudes
variables) that shows a highly significant correlation with both control questions. In the second
subcategory only two personal values variables show significant correlations with one or both of the
control questions. In the third subcategory, all three attitudes variables show extremely significant
correlations with both control question one and two. The table below shows the variables that
Table 4: Values and attitudes variables with significant correlations (Source: Own elaboration)
5.3.1 Materialism
The three aspects of materialism drawn from the Richins and Dawson Scale (1992) are
happiness, success and centrality. Every respondents level of materialism was gauged from all three
of these aspects by asking a series of questions drawn directly from the survey used in Furham and
52
Valgiersons study (2007) which was also based on the Richins and Dawson Scale (1992). The only
aspect of materialism that does not show any significant correlation with either of the control
questions is centrality. Centrality materialism is the extent to which material possessions are placed at
the center of ones life (Furnham and Valgierson, 2007, p. 678). Past studies have shown that people
with high levels of centrality materialism are less likely to purchase general counterfeit items; they are
more inclined to own authentic brands (Furnham and Valgierson, 2007, p. 682). In the case of fashion
counterfeits however, no such conclusions can be drawn. According to the data of this study, a
persons level of centrality materialism has no effect on their likeliness to purchase fashion counterfeit
items. Hypothesis six, that there would be a negative correlation between centrality materialism and
This outcome is surprising when considering how this aspect of materialism is defined. Richins
and Dawson (1992) and Furnham and Valgiersson (2007) clearly state that people with centrality
materialism values are highly susceptible to advertising and desire brand name items. This could have
been affected by the limited sample size or the lack of representativeness with certain demographic
variables. On the other hand, these results could be attributed to the fact that this study centers on
fashion counterfeit items and not general counterfeit items. Future studies should test this correlation
again to confirm if there actually is a relationship between centrality materialism and consumer
willingness to purchase counterfeit fashion items and explore the reasons behind this inconsistency.
Happiness and success aspects of materialism both show strong correlations with consumers
willingness to purchase counterfeit fashion items, disproving hypothesis seven and eight. Hypothesis
seven predicted that the happiness aspect of materialism would show no correlation with consumer
willingness to purchase counterfeit fashion items because according to Furnham and Valgiersons
study (2007, p. 682), happiness in consuming is unrelated to authentic versus counterfeit. For this
sample this is not true regarding fashion items. This variables significant correlation with control
question two implies that the people with higher levels of happiness materialism enjoy purchasing
counterfeit fashion items more than people with lower levels. Happiness materialism reflects how
53
much ones material possessions impact their personal satisfaction and wellbeing (Furnham and
Valgierson, 2007, p. 678). Although Furnham and Valggierson (2007) argue that happiness
materialism is independent of quality and brand names, this may not apply to counterfeit fashion
items because they allow a consumer to feel better about themselves by portraying even if they cannot
afford to do so legitimately. This could explain why counterfeit fashion items correlate differently
than general counterfeit items in this case. In this sample, the majority of respondents who showed
high levels of happiness materialism also reported having lower income which has already been
established to reflect willingness to purchase counterfeit fashion items. This offers another
explanation for why the data does not support hypothesis seven.
The results for the success aspect of materialism deserve a significant analysis due to the
significant correlation it shows with both control questions. Richins and Dawson (1992, p. 304)
plainly state that people whose values reflect success materialism value possessions based on what
they cost rather than the satisfactory they receive from it. This clearly suggests that such people would
be more inclined to purchase expensive authentic fashion items. But the results show the exact
opposite. This variable is one of the strongest positive predictors of consumer willingness to purchase
counterfeit fashion items. Past research has indicated no relationship between the two (Furnham &
Valgeirsson, 2007) which is less contradictory that the current results but still lacks logic.
One characteristic of success materialism that might offer some explanation is that people
with high levels of success materialism judge success by the quantity and quality of the material
possessions one owns. By this definition, quantity is the key word that might indicate why there is
such a strong correlation. It appears that with fashion items, if one owns a large quantity, even if they
are not authentic brands, then people with high levels of success materialism interpret this as success.
Furnham and Valgierson state that such people feel successful not only if they own legitimate quality
objects, but also by getting good value for money when buying a number of counterfeit products
(Furnham and Valgierson, 2007, p. 683). According to this data quantity outweighs quality in terms of
judging success by ones fashion possessions. People with high success materialism values are more
54
willing to buy counterfeit fashion items either because they allow them to portray themselves as
successful, or because they feel they are getting good value for their money by being able to afford
The implication of the materialism variables is that it allows brand marketers to better
understand what drives their consumers. It also allows them to better understand those consumers who
would rather buy the fake version of their brand. By understanding what drives people to buy fashion,
companies can not only better focus their marketing campaigns but can also seek to meet the needs of
the consumers who might not normally buy the real product. For example, the results show that the
same market segment that the demographic variables point out to be more likely to purchase fashion
counterfeits (young, low income, uneducated) also scored fairly high on happiness materialism values.
Consequently, if this market segment seeks personal satisfaction through the fashion items they
consume then marketing campaigns should send the message that people who buy this fashion brand
have personal satisfaction and well-being. They could do so by associating the brand with images of
people who live in expensive homes, drive nice cars, and appear to be part of an elite class of people
who are well off and satisfied with their self-image. The results of the success materialism variable
suggest that consumers who typically would buy counterfeit fashion brands value quantity and getting
good value for their money is important and interpreted as success ones money are things they
interpret as success. This advocates promotional offers such as two for the price of one that allow
consumers to end their shopping experience with large quantities of fashion items.
Ten personal values were drawn from the Schwarz Value Scale (Schwartz, 1994) and
correlated with both of the control questions. Of those personal values only two show a significant
correlation. The first personal value gauges ones need for an exciting life (stimulating experiences). It
shows an almost equally significant positive correlation with both control questions. In the survey,
respondents were asked to rate the items on how important each value is for them as a guiding
principle in their life. Of the 117 respondents sixty-three stated that an exciting life is either a Very
55
Important or an Extremely Important guiding principle in their life. The variable positively correlates
with whether or not one would consider purchasing a counterfeit fashion item (CQ1) and with
whether or not one enjoys purchasing counterfeit fashion items (CQ2). This means that people who
strongly value having an exciting life typically are also willing to purchase counterfeit fashion items
and would typically agree that they enjoy purchasing them. The connection between the variables
could be several things. People might find purchasing counterfeit items to be exciting because they
know it is illegal. Or they may just get a thrill out of owning fashionable brands, regardless of their
authenticity.
The second variable that correlates with one of the control questions is respect for tradition. It
has a negative correlation with control question one: I would consider purchasing a counterfeit
fashion item. Past research shows that people with traditionalist values are less likely to purchase
customs and ideas that traditional culture and religion provide (Furnham and Valgierson, 2007, p.
683). Counterfeiting is illegal and has negative impacts on society. Therefore traditionalists are likely
to find counterfeiting to be immoral. This correlation makes sense because if buying general
counterfeit items is immoral for people with traditionalist values then there is no reason why buying
counterfeit fashion items would be any less immoral. The fact that this variable did not have a
significant negative correlation with the second control question can be attributed to the fact that in
many of the cases where the respondent scaled high on traditional values they also answered Not
Applicable to control question two: I like to purchase counterfeit fashion items. This most likely
means that the respondent had never purchased counterfeit fashion items in the past, and therefore,
The correlations found in this category of variables have noted two personal values which
have an impact on a consumers willingness to purchase counterfeit fashion items: need for an
exciting life, and respect for tradition. Conversely the correlations of the data show that the remainder
of the personal values have no impact ones willingness to purchase counterfeit fashion items:
56
spirituality, need to belong, need for wealth, need for social recognition, honesty, desire to preserve
public image, obedience, self-indulgence, and observant of social norms. While all of these personal
values could logically have an influence on a consumers counterfeit fashion purchase decisions the
data clearly shows that they do not in this given sample. But the two personal values which do impact
this decision have implications for authentic fashion brand companies and marketers. Counterfeit
fashion consumers correlate with consumers who have a need for excitement in their life. A wise
strategy then would be for fashion brands to create marketing campaigns which associate their brand
with an exciting lifestyle. Drawing on images of danger and adrenaline evoking activities could draw
in such consumers. Lifestyle branding is a very powerful marketing tool as it creates associations in
the consumers mind between the brand and the lifestyle the consumer desires (Juggesuer & Cohen,
2008, p. 384). The respect for tradition variable, which correlates significantly with consumers who
are not willing to purchase counterfeit fashion items, advocates conservative brands and designs. The
data implies that brands and designers who sell to more traditional and conservative consumers are at
5.3.3 Attitudes
All three of the attitudes variables showed the most significant correlations both control
questions. Variable twenty gauges the respondents attitudes toward law and order. People who score
high on this variable believe that counterfeit laws should be strengthened and that it has negative
impacts on society. The data shows a negative 0.01 level significant correlation between peoples
attitudes toward law and order and consumer willingness to purchase counterfeit fashion items
meaning that consumers who strongly believe in strengthening laws, increasing punishments, and
believe in the negative impacts it has on our society are less likely to purchase counterfeit fashion
items. Variable twenty-one gauges the respondents attitudes toward the value of counterfeit goods.
This variable also shows a 0.01 level significant correlation with consumer willingness to purchase
counterfeit fashion. In this case, however, the correlation is positive meaning that consumers who
have a positive attitude toward the value of counterfeits are more likely to purchase counterfeit
fashion items. Variable twenty-two gauges the respondents attitudes toward their experiences with
57
counterfeits in the past. As with the other two attitudes variables, this one shows a 0.01 level
significant correlation with consumer willingness to purchase counterfeit fashion items. Since it is a
positive correlation this data can be interpreted to say that consumers who have had positive
experiences with counterfeit goods in the past are more likely to purchase counterfeit fashion items.
Due to the extremely significant correlations that all three of these attitudes variables show with both
control questions it can be concluded, as one might expect, that consumers attitudes toward
counterfeiting are the best predictors of whether or not a consumer would purchase counterfeit fashion
items.
These three variables have been studied in past studies with very similar results. Both
Furnham and Valgiersons study (2007) and Swami, Chamorro-Premuzic and Furnhams study (2009)
concluded that these variables significantly predict willingness to purchase counterfeit goods. This
study now establishes that the variables predict willingness to purchase counterfeit fashion goods just
as well. Looking back at hypotheses ten through twelve, it was predicted that these variables would
behave the same way with fashion counterfeit as they did with general counterfeit items because a
consumers attitudes toward law and order, value, and experiences with counterfeits include but are
not limited to, fashion counterfeit items. These results are important for all victims of counterfeiting
because they indicate that people who can be convinced of the negative realities of counterfeiting will
be less likely to purchase counterfeit goods. Such a statement encourages the thought that consumer
awareness campaigns about the impacts that counterfeiting has on society and the economy would
have positive results, molding consumers attitudes toward counterfeiting, and in doing so would
The consumption variables were analyzed differently than the other two categories of
variables because they were phrased in a way that asked the respondent directly if they would be more
likely to purchase a counterfeit fashion item if the variable was present. For a better understanding of
how these variables were tested in the survey, the questions are shown below with their corresponding
58
Table 5: Consumption variables and survey questions (Source: Own elaboration)
I am more likely to buy a counterfeit fashion item if it appears Variable 28- Social RiskA
to be authentic.
I am more likely to buy a counterfeit fashion item if it looks Variable 28- Social RiskB
authentic enough that my peers will not know it is fake.
I am more likely to buy a counterfeit fashion item if I can Variable 29- Financial Risk
return it for a full refund if I decide I do not want it for any
reason.
I will only purchase counterfeit fashion items that I know are Variable 30- In style
currently in-style.
Product attributes and social riskA have the highest percent of respondents that replied either
Agree or Strongly Agree to the statement. In both cases 52.1 percent of 117 respondents answered
positively. This means that out of the consumption variables product attributes and social risk are the
two highest positive influences on a consumers willingness to purchase counterfeit fashion items.
Product benefits had the highest percentage of respondents that answered either Disagree or Strongly
Disagree, fifty-nine percent. This variable shows only 19.76 percent of respondents would be more
likely to purchase counterfeit fashion items if the item can do a lot for them which is defined in the
questionnaire with the examples: improve popularity, appear to have money and style, fit in with a
59
certain crowd, look attractive or other such benefits. In-style followed closely with 51.3 percent of
respondents answering negatively to the statement, which again is a surprising result. Product
involvement and brand personality have relatively high neutrality rates of more than twenty percent
and their percentages of negative and positive responses are relatively even suggesting that these two
variables have little impact on a consumers willingness to purchase counterfeit fashion items. The
variables show an average NA (either did not answer or selected Not Applicable) rate of 12.7 percent.
Most of the questions that received an NA followed a series of unanswered questions suggesting that
the respondent skipped several questions in a row or did not complete the survey. Product knowledge,
product involvement, and in-style variables all show a slightly higher NA rate than average of about
14.5 percent. The results for each variable are discussed in further detail below.
Product Knowledge
18.8%
Neutral
30.0% No Answer
Product Knowledge yielded fairly neutral results. The percentage of positive and negative
responses is within seven percentage points of one another which is relatively insignificant. The
percentage of respondents who did not answer this question is slightly higher than average but not
alarming enough to suggest the statement was particularly confusing or difficult to answer. The
neutrality rate, while slightly higher than average, is not alarmingly high either. These results suggest
60
that product knowledge has little impact on a consumers willingness to purchase counterfeit fashion
items disproving hypothesis thirteen that product knowledge would have a positive influence on
consumer likeliness to purchase counterfeit fashion items. This hypothesis was made considering the
fact that fashion items are valued more for their intangible image than their tangible functions and that
the more knowledgeable one is about fashion items and the counterfeit alternatives, the more likely he
or she would be to purchase the counterfeit because it can be so similar to the original and offer nearly
Bian and Moutino (2009, p. 373) hypothesized with similar reasoning in their study and their
results revealed that product knowledge does positively influence consumers to buy fake Gucci
watches. The image benefit of Gucci watches, as with other fashion items, can be easily imitated by
counterfeits, therefore persuading consumers who are knowledgeable of this, that it would be a smart
purchase (Bian and Moutino, 2009, p. 373). While the results of this study are fairly neutral, the
positive responses do outnumber the negative responses to the corresponding survey question by
about seven percent, suggesting that there may be some positive impact of product knowledge on
consumer willingness to purchase fashion counterfeits, but very little. A larger sample size might have
61
5.4.2 Product Involvement
Figure 6: Product involvement responses
Product Involvement
Strongly Agree or
Agree
Neutral
29.9%
No Answer
19.7%
Product involvement has a high percentage of neutral respondents and it also has the highest
percentage of respondents who did not answer this question. This could mean that the question was
difficult to understand or that many people were not sure how to respond and therefore skipped the
question or answered neutrally as they were not sure how they felt about the statement. The statement
was phrased differently than the others in that it began with I am less likely to rather than I am
more likely to as most of the others are phrased. This could have thrown off respondents who were
impatient or in a hurry to finish. Despite the large percentage of NA and neutral responses there were
16.6 percent more positive answers than negative answers which means that more people agree that
high product involvement purchase decisions do not result in counterfeit fashion purchases. This
confirms hypothesis fourteen that product involvement has a negative relationship with consumer
willingness to purchase counterfeit fashion items. This is due to the fact that purchase decisions that
are significant enough to dedicate time and effort into evaluating pros and cons and analyzing
alternatives, are likely to result in a larger investment to achieve higher quality (Bian and Moutinho,
2009, p. 369). While Bian and Moutinhos (2009, p. 373) results revealed that product involvement is
not an influence factor in the purchasing decision, they attribute this result to not being able to control
usage situations.
62
5.4.3 Brand Personality
Figure 7: Brand personality responses
Brand Personality
23.9% Neutral
No Answer
36.8%
While the previous two variables had more positive responses than negative ones, brand
personality has approximately ten percent more participants that answered Strongly Disagree or
Disagree than Strongly Agree or Agree. A ten percent difference is not all that significant when
compared with the other variables and especially considering the high neutrality rate revealed of 23.9
percent. These respondents did not have a positive or negative response to this statement which is
nearly as high as the positive responses. In summary, 73.5 percent of all respondents answered
Neutral, Disagree, or Strongly Disagree to the statement I am more likely to buy counterfeit fashion
brands that I associate with a lifestyle I have or aspire to have. This suggests that brand personality
These findings directly contradict hypothesis fifteen and the results of Bian and Moutinhos
study (2009). According to their study, a positive brand personality of a brand name product
positively influences consumers likeliness to purchase a counterfeit version of the brand (2009, p.
374). When comparing research methods of how these two results were reached, Bian and Moutinhos
results appear to be more reliable for several reasons. Their resources allowed for a much more
extensive research process which included focus groups to help devise the correct way to measure the
63
brand image concept (Bian & Moutinho, 2009, p. 374). In this survey respondents were directly asked
if they believe a positive brand personality would influence them to buy a counterfeit version of the
brand as opposed to the much more complex method used by Bian and Moutinho (2009).
Unfortunately the results of this study only conclude that consumers are not consciously and
admittedly any more or less likely to purchase counterfeit fashion items because the imitated brand
has a positive brand personality. More extensive research and survey question development is
Product Attributes
19.7%
No Answer
Product attributes scored the highest positive percentage in the consumption variables category of
52.1 percent. The neutrality rate and no answer rate is comparable and within the same range as the
other variables. This suggests that consumers are more likely to purchase counterfeit fashion items if
they have positive attributes such as practicality or comfort. This makes sense especially in the case of
fashion items which have to be worn. Features such as comfort, practicality, or versatility have
obvious advantages. For example, if a consumer must decide between an authentic fashion item and a
knockoff, holding all other variables constant, if the counterfeit is more comfortable or is a certain
color, those attributes would influence him or her to purchase the counterfeit version. Bian and
64
Moutinho (2009, p. 374) found the same results in their data on this variable for both Rolex and Gucci
watches.
Product Benefits
10.3% 19.6%
Strongly Disagree or
11.1% Disagree
Neutral
59.0% No Answer
The results of the product benefits variable are also inconsistent with hypothesis seventeen and
again this can be attributed to the research method and the way that this variable is measured. As with
the brand personality variable, the survey question directly asks the respondent if they believe a high
degree of this variable would make them more likely to purchase a counterfeit fashion item, which in
retrospect lacks validity. It does not make sense that sixty percent of the participants would not be
more likely to buy a product if it offers certain benefits such as improved popularity, appearing to
have money and style, fitting in with a certain crowd, or looking attractive. Bian and Moutinho (2009,
p. 374) broke product benefits down into three categories: satisfactory benefit, image benefit, and
functional benefit. Their study found that with Gucci watches, the image benefit factor has the most
impact on consumers willingness to purchase a counterfeit (Bian & Moutinho, 2009, p. 374). The
benefit of brand image can easily be transferred to counterfeits simply by imitating the brand name or
logo and, holding other variables constant; at a lower price consumers would be more likely to
purchase the counterfeit because the image benefit is still present. These are the types of benefits that
consumers seek when they buy fashion items and therefore these results seem misleading. The issue
65
here could be that people do not want to admit that they buy fashion items for that reason or again that
they do it subconsciously.
Financial Risk
12.8%
Strongly Disagree or
Disagree
16.2% 41.9%
Neutral
29.1% No Answer
Financial risk was hypothesized to have a negative relationship with consumer willingness to
purchase counterfeit fashion items and the data of the associated survey question confirms this
hypothesis. The positive responses to the question are more than eleven percent higher than the
negative responses. Bian and Moutinhos (2009, p. 375) results showed that financial risk was an
influential factor in their study as well. Financial risk was measured in this survey by asking if
consumers would be more willing to buy counterfeit fashion items if they could return it for a full
refund for any reason. This eliminates the financial risk and is therefore an appropriate way to gauge
this variable. Although in many counterfeit distribution channels, being able to return the item is
highly clothing items are easy to try on and the financial investment in counterfeit fashion is relatively
low. Therefore financial risk is typically low in fashion counterfeit purchase decisions, which would
66
5.4.7 Social Risk
Figure 10: Social riskA Q35 responses
52.1% Neutral
25.6%
No Answer
12.0%
Strongly Disagree or
9.4% Disagree
39.3%
Neutral
39.3% No Answer
Social risk with fashion items involves the risks associated with the social status one portrays
through the fashion one wears. Fashion items give off social cues such as status, class, wealth, or
lifestyle (Furnham & Valgeirsson, 2007). There is social risk involved if wearing a particular item
could give off undesired social cues (Bian & Moutinhos, 2009, p. 370). In the case of counterfeited
fashion, social risk is higher if the counterfeit does not imitate the authentic brand well enough that
people will believe it is authentic. Wearing an obviously fake fashion item sends a message that many
people would find undesirable. Questions thirty-five and thirty-six of the survey both gauged the
67
Social Risk variable but were phrased in different ways. Question thirty-five states I am more likely to
buy a counterfeit fashion item if it appears to be authentic. This question draws on the aspect of Social
Risk that people do not want others to know that they are wearing a fake fashion item. Question
thirty-six draws on this aspect as well but it does so more directly. The statement reads I am more
likely to buy a counterfeit fashion item if it looks authentic enough that my peers will not know that it
is a fake.
What is most interesting about these two questions is the difference in the responses. Question
thirty-five which did not mention the intent to deceive ones peers received a significantly higher
positive response rate than question thirty-six, which did. This indicates either that people want their
counterfeit fashion brands to appear authentic for their own sake, or that people dont like to admit
that they want their fashion brands to appear to be authentic for the purpose of deceiving their peers
about their social status. Bian and Moutinho (2009, p. 375) found that Social risk is an influential
factor in the counterfeit purchase decision for Rolex and Gucci watches. Hypothesis nineteen was
based on those findings and is confirmed by the amount of positive responses in question thirty-five,
although question thirty-six reflected fairly neutral responses. Question thirty-five had the highest
percent of Agree or Strongly Agree responses, tied with the product attributes variable, 51.2 percent
indicating that lower social risk is one of the highest positive influence factors of consumer
68
5.4.8 In-Style
Figure 13: In-style responses
In-Style
14.5% 15.4%
Strongly Disagree or
Disagree
18.8% Neutral
No Answer
51.3%
The last consumption variable, In-Style, was not drawn from any past studies and was added to
the study due to the unique characteristics of fashion items. According to Juggesur and Cohens
research (2008) as fashion items enter the market there is a limited amount of time that they
considered fashionable or in-style, after which time their value deteriorates. Therefore, a statement
was added to the survey to gauge whether or not being in-style would make the consumer more likely
to purchase counterfeit fashion items. Unfortunately, the question contains a survey error that may
have skewed the results. While all other consumption variables asked whether or not the variable
would make the consumer more or less likely to purchase the counterfeit fashion item, question thirty-
eight stated I will only purchase counterfeit fashion items that I know are currently in-style. The
statement should have been phrased as the other ones were stating I am more likely to purchase
counterfeit fashion items that I know are currently in-style. Because of this survey error the positive
responses are much lower than they likely otherwise would have been. Just because people will not
only buy fashion items that are currently in-style do not mean that they would not be more likely to
purchase the item if it is currently in-style. The results of this variable are therefore deemed invalid.
69
6.0 CONCLUSION
The results of this study offer some unique insights into the issue of counterfeiting in the
fashion industry. Demographic variables age, income, and education negatively correlate with
consumer willingness to purchase counterfeit fashion items suggesting that the main perpetrators
belong to a relatively young marketing segment, typically with lower income levels and less
education. The attitudes and values variables were broken down into three sub-categories: materialism
values, personal values, and attitudes toward counterfeiting. Materialism values revealed very
unexpected results disproving all three materialism hypotheses. Centrality materialism showed no
relationship, happiness materialism showed a positive relationship, and success materialism showed a
very high positive relationship with consumer willingness to purchase counterfeit fashion items. The
only two personal values variables that showed any relationship with the control questions were the
need for an exciting life (positive) and respect for tradition (negative). The remaining nine personal
values showed no relationship with consumer willingness to purchase counterfeit fashion items and
therefore do not influence the counterfeit purchase decision. All three attitudes toward counterfeiting
variables showed significant correlations at the 0.01 level to both control questions. Attitudes toward
the law and order of counterfeiting showed the only negative relationship out of the three. This
indicates that people who believe the laws on counterfeiting are insufficient despite its negative
impacts on society are highly unwilling to purchase counterfeit fashion items. Alternatively, people
who believe that counterfeits offer good value and have had positive experiences with counterfeits in
the past are highly willing to purchase such items. This section of the study showed results that are
consistent with past research and with the associated hypotheses. The results of the last category,
consumption variables, revealed product attributes and social risk as the two highest predictors of
counterfeit fashion purchase decisions. Product knowledge, product involvement, and financial risk
showed indications of having a slightly less significant influence on the purchasing decision as well.
6.1 Managerial Implications
Overall the findings of this study support and contradict findings in past research. However those
findings cannot be directly compared because this is the first study in which each of these variables
were tested for a correlation with fashion counterfeit purchase decisions. Because this is the first
fashion industry specific study with this variety of variables, the results of this study have useful
implications for authentic fashion brand companies. The demographic variables define a market
segment that is being lost to counterfeit competitors. With the knowledge that the primary offender of
counterfeit fashion purchases is a young consumer with lower income and less education, there are
several approaches one might take to address the issue. One thing legitimate fashion companies could
do is offer a less expensive spin off brand that people know is associated with the much more
expensive and exclusive brand. This way they profit off of the expensive brands reputation and
exclusivity by having a less expensive brand that people associate with it. It would be wise to offer
this brand at locations where younger age groups with low to average income consumers do their
shopping, such a malls or discount department stores. Another recommendation considering the
income variable result would be to develop a marketing campaign targeting younger and lower/
middle class consumers that educates people about the societal consequences of counterfeiting. Issues
such as unemployment and lost tax revenues due to counterfeiting are likely to be of real concern for
this market segment. The results of the attitudes toward counterfeiting variables further suggest that
convincing consumers of the inadequacies of law and order and the negative societal impacts would
The attitudes and values variables show how to reach those who are purchasing counterfeits and
with those who are not. The results of this study generalize the values and attitudes that are common
among these two groups. This has extremely useful marketing implications for targeting both groups.
Consumers who would normally be inclined to purchase counterfeits are people with less traditional
values, who seek excitement in their life, and do not grasp the impacts that counterfeiting has on
society. They also believe that counterfeits offer relatively good value and have had good experiences
purchasing counterfeits in the past. Knowing this information about a segment that a marketing
campaign is trying to reach shows ways to connect with these consumers and draw on things that they
71
value in order to win their loyalty. Likewise, the group that is less likely to purchase counterfeit
fashion is a legitimate fashion companys primary target market and understanding their attitudes and
The results of the consumption variables show that product attributes and social risk are the two
most substantial influences on a consumers fashion counterfeit purchase decision. This means that
legitimate fashion companies should attempt to make their features and their logo as difficult to
imitate as possible. If consumers value certain product attributes that a counterfeit cannot imitate they
will be less likely to settle for the counterfeit version. Likewise, if a logo or brand name is difficult to
imitate then counterfeiters will have a hard time making their product look authentic. If it doesnt look
authentic, the data shows that consumers are less likely to buy a counterfeit because of the increased
This is an important area of exploration and further research is necessary to correct some of the
errors of this study and confirm some of its underlying assumptions. It is recommended that this study
is replicated with more advanced statistical analyses and survey question formulation in order to
address some of the limitations of this study. As with any study achieving a representative sample is
important but can be rather difficult. The income and education distributions are fairly skewed in the
sample and could have impacted the results and implications of the study. An imitation of this study
with a new sample to see if the data shows similar results would help confirm the validity of the
results.
The questionnaire contained several errors and made it difficult to correctly interpret the data.
Control question three was rendered useless after careful consideration determined that the question
combined two statements to which the respondent might have answered differently. A high
percentage of the respondents did not answer this question or selected Not Applicable which
suggested there may have been some lack of clarity. Control question two could also have been
worded more precisely because it incorporates the underlying assumption that the respondent has
purchased counterfeit fashion items in the past. It might have been a better approach to ask if the
72
respondent has ever knowingly purchased counterfeit fashion items in the past and to then include
control question two as a sub question if the answer was yes. In future research careful
Control Question 3 I have purchased counterfeit fashion items in the past and I would
(eliminated) do it again.
Gauging respondents personal values could have been done more precisely by using the
entire Schwartz Value Model questionnaire. However, this would have significantly added to the
length of the survey. In the case of internet surveys it is important not to overextend the amount of
time required to finish filling it out because this increases the risk of incomplete responses. Therefore,
this study simplified the model measuring only how important certain values are as a guiding
principal in the respondents life. For future research, using the entire Schwartz Value Model
questionnaire is recommended if the data collection process allows for a more lengthy survey. This
would allow for a more precise exploration of the respondents personal values and result in a score
for each of the ten primary values of the model, which could then be tested for correlations with the
control questions.
The consumption variables were difficult to measure correctly. Each statement of this
category directly asked the respondent if they would be more likely to purchase a counterfeit fashion
item if the variable was present. After analyzing the findings in this category it became clear that in
some cases respondents either did not want to admit to some of their self-indulging consumer habits
or that they do not consciously consider some of these variables in the purchase decision process. By
making use of focus groups and having more time and resources, better survey questions could be
73
formulated that achieve more honest responses and that have a way of measuring influence factors
that may not be consciously obvious to the consumer during the purchase decision.
After speaking with several respondents about their opinions regarding the survey, there were
two additional things that could improve the quality of the data for future replications of this study.
The first would be to include in the introduction paragraph of the survey that this study is about non-
deceptive counterfeiting. One respondent admitted to some confusion because he/she believes there
have been times when he/she unknowingly purchased a counterfeit fashion item in which case that
person could not say for example if they had a positive experience or not. It should have been clearly
stated in the survey introduction that these questions are regarding non-deceptive counterfeit purchase
decisions in which the consumer is fully aware they are buying an imitated product. Another
respondent admitted to answering Neutral to several questions because he/she felt there were no
options that best reflected his/her opinion. This is often the case in surveys and future researchers may
address this issue by creating parallel questions that address both sides of opposing values such as
spirituality and materialism or conservative and liberal. This way the respondent feels that the survey
There are two areas which require additional research to fully understand and confirm the
results of this study and its implications. The results of the materialism values not only disproved the
corresponding hypotheses but also seem illogical based on the definitions of the three aspects of
materialism offered by Furnham and Valgeirsson (2007) and Richins and Dawson (1992). These
aspects of materialism have never been applied directly to fashion counterfeit purchase decisions and
it would be wise to test this relationship again, with revised control questions, to confirm the
correlations and explain the reasoning behind the inconsistencies between the results and the
definitions. The other area of interest is the relationship between age and lifestyle branding. This
study predicts that part of the reason for younger age groups being more willing to purchase
counterfeit fashion items is that during ones teenage and twenties years people tend to have more
dynamic and rapidly changing taste in fashion because they are still trying out different identities. As
74
people get older and are more stable in their beliefs, values, and consequently their self-image, they
tend to become more static in their taste in fashion. Therefore younger generations have a greater need
for affordable and disposable fashion that still carry the identity with which they want to be
associated, a need which is met by counterfeits. This is an interesting concept that would help explain
the relationship between age and willingness to purchase counterfeit fashion items and should be
further explored.
75
7.0 APPENDICES
2. Age
under 18 18-24 25-34 35-54 55+
3. Gender
Male Female
5. Education Level
Graduated high
school or Post-graduate
12th grade or less equivalent Associate degree Bachelor's degree degree
Strongly Not
disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly agree Applicable
12. I put less emphasis on material things than most people I know.
Strongly Not
disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly agree Applicable
13. I have all the material things I really need to enjoy life.
Strongly Not
disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly agree Applicable
77
17. It sometimes bothers me quite a bit that I can't afford to buy all the things I'd like.
Strongly Not
disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly agree Applicable
18. I admire people who own expensive homes, cars, and clothes.
Strongly Not
disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly agree Applicable
19. Some of the most important achievements in life include acquiring material possessions.
Strongly Not
disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly agree Applicable
20. I don't place much emphasis on the amount of material objects people own as a sign of
success.
Strongly
disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly agree Not Applicable
21. The things I own say a lot about how well I am doing in life.
Strongly Not
disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly agree Applicable
23. I don't pay much attention to the material objects other people own.
Strongly Not
disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly agree Applicable
78
26. Counterfeiting has negative impacts on our society.
Strongly Not
disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly agree Applicable
27. Most counterfeit goods offer the same value as the originals.
Strongly Not
disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly agree Applicable
28. So many branded goods are rip offs; counterfeits are better value.
Strongly Not
disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly agree Applicable
29. I have had good experiences with counterfeit goods in the past.
Strongly Not
disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly agree Applicable
30. I am more likely to buy a counterfeit fashion item if I know a lot about the product and
alternative products available to me.
Strongly
disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly agree Not Applicable
31. I am less likely to buy a counterfeit fashion item if it requires I spend time and effort
weighing my alternatives and examining its features.
Strongly Not
disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly agree Applicable
32. I am more likely to buy counterfeit fashion brands that I associate with a lifestyle I have or
aspire to have.
Strongly Not
disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly agree Applicable
33. I am more likely to buy counterfeit fashion items if they are practical or comfortable.
Strongly Not
disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly agree Applicable
79
34. I am more likely to buy a counterfeit fashion item if I believe it can "do a lot for me." (such
as improve popularity, appear to have money and style, fit in with a certain crowd, look
attractive, etc.)
Strongly Not
disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly agree Applicable
36. I am more likely to buy a counterfeit fashion item if it looks authentic enough that my peers
will not know that it is a fake.
Strongly Not
disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly agree Applicable
37. I am more likely to buy a counterfeit fashion item if I can return it for a full refund if I
decide I do not want it for any reason.
Strongly Not
disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly agree Applicable
38. I will only purchase counterfeit fashion items that I know are currently "in style."
Strongly Not
disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly agree Applicable
39. I have purchased counterfeit fashion items in the past and I would do it again.
Strongly Not
disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly agree Applicable
Please rate numbers 41 through 51 on how important each value is for you as a guiding principle in
YOUR life.
80
42. Sense of belonging (feeling that other people care about me)
Slightly Extremely
Not Important important Important Very Important Important
81
Table 7: Survey data: Demographic variables and control questions (respondents 1-58)
82
Table 8: Survey data: demographic variables and control questions (respondents 58-117)
83
Table 9: Survey data: Variables 6-19 (respondents 1-58)
# V6 V7 V8 V9 V10 V11 V12 V13 V14 V15 V16 V17 V18 V19
1 3.4 2.8 2.4 4.0 3.0 1.0 4.0 3.0 3.0 5.0 3.0 2.0 4.0 2.0
2 3.0 2.8 2.8 4.0 3.0 4.0 3.0 2.0 3.0 2.0 2.0 4.0 2.0 4.0
3 2.4 3.0 2.6 5.0 1.0 3.0 2.0 1.0 4.0 4.0 1.0 1.0 3.0 5.0
4 2.3 2.8 2.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 2.0 2.0 3.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 3.0 4.0
5 3.3 2.8 2.0 2.0 1.0 NA 3.0 2.0 3.0 3.0 2.0 3.0 3.0 5.0
6 3.4 3.2 2.8 2.0 3.0 2.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 2.0 1.0 2.0 3.0
7 3.3 3.6 2.8 4.0 3.0 2.0 4.0 3.0 4.0 4.0 3.0 4.0 3.0 5.0
8 2.3 2.2 3.0 3.0 4.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 4.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 4.0
9 2.6 3.8 2.2 4.0 1.0 2.0 1.0 2.0 1.0 3.0 1.0 1.0 2.0 5.0
10 2.1 3.2 3.2 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 5.0 4.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0
11 3.6 3.4 2.6 4.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 5.0
12 3.3 3.0 1.8 3.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 3.0 4.0 3.0 2.0 4.0 4.0 5.0
13 2.7 3.2 2.4 5.0 1.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 5.0 4.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 5.0
14 2.9 3.4 2.2 4.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 3.0 5.0 5.0 4.0 2.0 5.0 5.0
15 3.1 2.6 1.0 3.0 2.0 2.0 3.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 3.0 5.0 3.0 5.0
16 3.7 2.8 1.6 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0
17 2.2 3.4 1.8 3.0 2.0 3.0 NA 2.0 4.0 5.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 5.0
18 2.8 2.0 2.0 5.0 2.0 3.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 4.0 2.0 2.0 3.0 5.0
19 3.3 3.2 2.8 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
20 3.0 3.6 4.4 2.0 2.0 3.0 5.0 1.0 5.0 4.0 3.0 3.0 4.0 5.0
21 2.3 2.8 3.6 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0
22 3.7 3.2 3.2 3.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 2.0 4.0 4.0 3.0 2.0 3.0 4.0
23 2.7 3.4 2.2 5.0 1.0 3.0 3.0 1.0 3.0 2.0 2.0 3.0 1.0 5.0
24 3.0 3.2 2.4 4.0 2.0 2.0 3.0 2.0 4.0 2.0 2.0 4.0 2.0 4.0
25 2.1 3.6 3.6 5.0 3.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 5.0 5.0 3.0 5.0 3.0 5.0
26 2.6 2.8 2.0 2.0 2.0 3.0 2.0 3.0 3.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 3.0 3.0
27 3.3 2.8 1.6 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 5.0 4.0 3.0 4.0 4.0 5.0
28 2.6 2.8 2.0 4.0 2.0 2.0 3.0 1.0 4.0 3.0 1.0 4.0 2.0 5.0
29 2.6 3.2 3.2 5.0 2.0 2.0 3.0 1.0 2.0 5.0 3.0 4.0 3.0 5.0
30 1.6 2.6 1.0 4.0 1.0 1.0 3.0 1.0 5.0 4.0 1.0 5.0 3.0 4.0
31 2.4 3.6 3.2 3.0 2.0 3.0 3.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 2.0 4.0 3.0 5.0
32 2.7 3.4 3.4 2.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 1.0 3.0 4.0 2.0 1.0 2.0 4.0
33 2.0 3.4 3.4 1.0 2.0 2.0 4.0 1.0 3.0 5.0 3.0 1.0 3.0 5.0
34 3.4 3.6 3.2 4.0 3.0 1.0 3.0 2.0 4.0 5.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 4.0
35 3.7 3.4 3.4 2.0 3.0 1.0 3.0 4.0 3.0 4.0 3.0 2.0 3.0 5.0
36 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 1.0 3.0 2.0 2.0 3.0 3.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 3.0
37 2.6 2.4 2.4 1.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 4.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 5.0
38 3.4 3.6 3.2 2.0 3.0 4.0 4.0 3.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 5.0
39 1.9 3.2 3.2 4.0 2.0 2.0 3.0 2.0 2.0 4.0 3.0 2.0 2.0 4.0
40 2.6 3.8 3.0 1.0 3.0 2.0 4.0 3.0 2.0 4.0 4.0 1.0 3.0 5.0
41 2.9 3.6 3.6 1.0 3.0 2.0 3.0 2.0 2.0 3.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 3.0
42 4.3 3.0 3.8 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0
43 3.3 2.6 2.6 3.0 1.0 2.0 4.0 1.0 1.0 4.0 3.0 2.0 1.0 5.0
44 1.9 3.4 2.6 2.0 2.0 2.0 3.0 2.0 4.0 3.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 5.0
45 2.7 2.8 1.2 5.0 3.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 3.0 4.0 2.0 5.0
46 2.6 2.8 2.4 3.0 3.0 1.0 4.0 3.0 4.0 3.0 2.0 1.0 2.0 4.0
47 3.4 2.8 2.8 3.0 3.0 4.0 3.0 2.0 3.0 5.0 3.0 4.0 3.0 5.0
48 4.1 3.0 2.6 2.0 1.0 3.0 2.0 1.0 1.0 5.0 4.0 4.0 1.0 5.0
49 2.7 2.8 2.0 2.0 2.0 3.0 2.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 4.0
50 1.3 2.8 2.0 1.0 1.0 NA 3.0 2.0 3.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 4.0 4.0
51 3.0 3.2 2.8 3.0 3.0 2.0 3.0 3.0 4.0 4.0 2.0 3.0 3.0 4.0
52 1.4 3.6 2.8 5.0 3.0 2.0 4.0 3.0 5.0 4.0 2.0 2.0 3.0 4.0
53 3.1 2.2 3.0 3.0 4.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 4.0 3.0 3.0 4.0 3.0 4.0
54 2.3 3.8 2.2 2.0 1.0 2.0 1.0 2.0 2.0 3.0 2.0 4.0 2.0 3.0
55 2.6 3.2 3.2 1.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 1.0 2.0 3.0
56 1.9 3.4 2.6 4.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 2.0 4.0 4.0 2.0 5.0 2.0 5.0
57 3.7 3.0 1.8 4.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 5.0
58 2.7 3.2 2.4 5.0 1.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 4.0 4.0 3.0 4.0 2.0 5.0
84
Table 10: Survey data: Variables 6-19 (respondents 58-117)
# V6 V7 V8 V9 V10 V11 V12 V13 V14 V15 V16 V17 V18 V19
59 1.9 3.6 3.2 4.0 4.0 1.0 4.0 3.0 4.0 4.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 5.0
60 2.0 3.0 2.2 4.0 3.0 3.0 2.0 2.0 4.0 3.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 4.0
61 2.6 3.2 2.4 1.0 4.0 3.0 2.0 4.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 2.0 3.0 4.0
62 2.0 3.2 4.0 1.0 3.0 1.0 4.0 3.0 NA NA 2.0 3.0 4.0 4.0
63 1.9 3.4 3.8 4.0 2.0 2.0 3.0 2.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 2.0 4.0 4.0
64 2.6 3.2 2.4 4.0 3.0 4.0 2.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 2.0 3.0 3.0 4.0
65 2.6 3.6 4.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 4.0 3.0 4.0 4.0
66 3.3 4.2 3.4 3.0 2.0 2.0 3.0 2.0 4.0 4.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 4.0
67 2.6 2.6 2.6 3.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 2.0 4.0 3.0 1.0 3.0 2.0 4.0
68 2.3 2.8 2.0 1.0 3.0 1.0 2.0 2.0 NA 4.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 3.0
69 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
70 3.6 2.6 3.0 1.0 4.0 4.0 3.0 4.0 2.0 4.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 4.0
71 2.0 3.0 2.2 2.0 3.0 2.0 3.0 1.0 NA 2.0 3.0 2.0 NA 5.0
72 1.9 2.6 1.8 3.0 2.0 3.0 2.0 2.0 3.0 3.0 2.0 2.0 1.0 4.0
73 2.4 2.4 1.2 3.0 2.0 3.0 3.0 2.0 3.0 2.0 2.0 3.0 2.0 3.0
74 1.6 3.0 2.6 1.0 3.0 3.0 2.0 NA 3.0 4.0 2.0 3.0 3.0 5.0
75 1.7 3.8 3.0 4.0 1.0 2.0 1.0 1.0 5.0 3.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 5.0
76 2.1 2.6 1.8 1.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 1.0 3.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 4.0
77 1.4 4.2 2.6 5.0 3.0 4.0 3.0 2.0 4.0 4.0 2.0 5.0 3.0 5.0
78 3.9 3.6 3.6 5.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 3.0 5.0 3.0 5.0
79 3.0 3.6 2.8 2.0 2.0 2.0 3.0 2.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 5.0
80 2.0 3.8 3.0 4.0 4.0 3.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 5.0 3.0 3.0 4.0 5.0
81 2.6 2.4 2.4 1.0 2.0 2.0 1.0 1.0 3.0 2.0 2.0 3.0 3.0 3.0
82 3.1 2.8 4.0 4.0 3.0 2.0 4.0 2.0 4.0 2.0 3.0 2.0 4.0 4.0
83 3.0 3.2 3.2 3.0 3.0 3.0 2.0 3.0 3.0 2.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0
84 2.1 2.8 2.8 4.0 3.0 3.0 4.0 2.0 2.0 4.0 3.0 2.0 3.0 4.0
85 2.6 2.8 2.8 5.0 2.0 3.0 2.0 2.0 3.0 2.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 4.0
86 3.4 3.8 4.6 3.0 4.0 3.0 3.0 2.0 3.0 3.0 4.0 3.0 4.0 4.0
87 3.1 3.4 3.8 3.0 2.0 3.0 2.0 2.0 5.0 3.0 2.0 3.0 2.0 5.0
88 2.4 2.8 2.0 3.0 2.0 3.0 2.0 2.0 3.0 2.0 2.0 3.0 2.0 3.0
89 3.9 2.4 2.4 5.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 5.0
90 2.3 3.4 3.0 3.0 2.0 3.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 4.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 4.0
91 2.4 2.8 2.4 1.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 1.0 3.0 3.0 2.0 2.0 2.0
92 3.6 3.2 2.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 5.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 3.0 4.0 5.0
93 4.3 3.0 2.6 1.0 2.0 2.0 3.0 1.0 3.0 4.0 2.0 1.0 3.0 5.0
94 2.7 3.8 3.0 4.0 3.0 4.0 2.0 4.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 5.0 5.0 5.0
95 2.9 2.6 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 3.0 2.0 1.0 2.0 4.0 2.0 3.0
96 2.4 2.8 2.0 4.0 3.0 4.0 4.0 3.0 4.0 3.0 2.0 3.0 3.0 4.0
97 2.6 3.2 2.8 3.0 2.0 3.0 2.0 2.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 2.0 4.0
98 2.4 3.2 3.6 2.0 2.0 4.0 4.0 2.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 2.0 5.0
99 2.6 3.4 2.6 5.0 3.0 2.0 3.0 2.0 4.0 4.0 2.0 2.0 4.0 5.0
100 2.9 3.8 2.6 4.0 3.0 3.0 2.0 2.0 4.0 4.0 3.0 NA 3.0 3.0
101 2.0 2.4 2.4 4.0 2.0 3.0 3.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 2.0 2.0 3.0 5.0
102 3.4 1.8 1.8 5.0 1.0 5.0 2.0 2.0 3.0 5.0 2.0 5.0 1.0 5.0
103 3.3 3.2 4.0 5.0 5.0 3.0 4.0 4.0 5.0 5.0 4.0 4.0 5.0 5.0
104 3.3 3.2 2.4 1.0 2.0 2.0 3.0 2.0 2.0 4.0 3.0 2.0 2.0 3.0
105 2.9 3.2 2.4 5.0 3.0 1.0 3.0 2.0 4.0 5.0 2.0 4.0 4.0 5.0
106 3.4 3.4 3.4 3.0 3.0 3.0 4.0 3.0 3.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 5.0
107 2.0 3.6 2.0 4.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 1.0 2.0 1.0 1.0 3.0 2.0 5.0
108 3.7 3.6 4.4 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0
109 2.8 3.4 1.8 3.0 1.0 1.0 4.0 1.0 5.0 5.0 2.0 3.0 3.0 5.0
110 4.3 4.0 3.2 2.0 2.0 3.0 3.0 2.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 4.0 4.0 4.0
111 2.9 3.2 4.0 5.0 3.0 5.0 3.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 3.0 5.0 5.0 5.0
112 2.3 3.8 3.4 4.0 3.0 5.0 4.0 3.0 4.0 3.0 3.0 4.0 4.0 4.0
113 2.1 3.4 2.6 1.0 1.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 3.0 2.0 3.0 2.0 4.0
114 3.6 2.8 2.4 3.0 1.0 1.0 2.0 1.0 3.0 4.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 4.0
115 1.0 2.6 1.0 2.0 5.0 5.0 1.0 1.0 5.0 5.0 1.0 1.0 5.0 5.0
116 2.4 3.2 3.2 1.0 3.0 2.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 5.0 2.0 2.0 3.0 4.0
117 2.3 3.2 2.4 5.0 4.0 3.0 2.0 2.0 3.0 1.0 3.0 3.0 2.0 4.0
85
Table 11: Survey data: Variables 20-30 (respondents 1-58)
# V20 V21 V22 V23 V24 V25 V26 V27 V28A V28B V29 V30
1 2.0 4.0 4.0 NA 4.0 4.0 5.0 4.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 3.0
2 2.0 3.0 NA 3.0 4.0 3.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 2.0 4.0 2.0
3 4.0 2.5 2.0 4.0 4.0 2.0 4.0 1.0 3.0 3.0 4.0 1.0
4 3.0 1.5 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
5 3.7 1.5 NA 1.0 NA NA NA 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0
6 4.3 3.0 3.0 NA 3.0 2.0 3.0 2.0 4.0 4.0 1.0 4.0
7 5.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 4.0 2.0 4.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 3.0 2.0
8 3.7 1.5 2.0 NA NA 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 NA 1.0
9 5.0 1.5 NA 1.0 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
10 3.0 3.5 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 1.0 2.0 2.0 3.0 1.0
11 3.3 4.0 4.0 4.0 3.0 4.0 4.0 2.0 5.0 4.0 4.0 2.0
12 4.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 3.0 2.0 4.0 2.0 4.0 4.0 2.0 2.0
13 2.0 2.5 2.0 2.0 2.0 3.0 3.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 3.0 2.0
14 5.0 5.0 4.0 3.0 5.0 3.0 4.0 2.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 2.0
15 3.7 3.5 4.0 2.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0
16 5.0 1.0 3.0 1.0 NA 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 NA
17 4.5 2.5 2.0 4.0 4.0 2.0 5.0 1.0 2.0 NA 4.0 1.0
18 3.0 2.0 4.0 NA NA 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 2.0
19 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
20 1.0 3.0 4.0 3.0 2.0 4.0 4.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 3.0
21 2.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 2.0 2.0 4.0 2.0 4.0 4.0 2.0 4.0
22 2.3 2.0 2.0 5.0 2.0 5.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 4.0
23 3.7 4.0 4.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 1.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 1.0
24 4.7 2.0 3.0 2.0 4.0 3.0 4.0 2.0 4.0 2.0 4.0 3.0
25 2.0 4.0 3.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0
26 3.0 2.5 3.0 3.0 3.0 2.0 4.0 2.0 3.0 2.0 4.0 3.0
27 3.3 1.5 2.0 2.0 2.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0
28 4.0 2.0 3.0 2.0 3.0 5.0 2.0 1.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0
29 2.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 2.0 4.0 5.0 2.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 2.0
30 2.7 3.0 NA 3.0 3.0 1.0 3.0 1.0 3.0 1.0 3.0 3.0
31 2.7 4.0 NA 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 5.0 5.0 5.0
32 2.3 3.0 4.0 2.0 4.0 2.0 4.0 2.0 4.0 2.0 2.0 2.0
33 1.0 2.5 3.0 5.0 2.0 4.0 5.0 4.0 2.0 2.0 5.0 1.0
34 2.3 3.5 3.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 2.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 3.0
35 3.3 2.0 3.0 4.0 3.0 NA 4.0 5.0 5.0 4.0 1.0 4.0
36 3.7 2.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0
37 4.0 2.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 2.0 4.0 2.0 4.0 2.0 4.0 4.0
38 3.3 3.5 2.0 2.0 4.0 3.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0
39 4.7 1.5 3.0 4.0 4.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 5.0 3.0 4.0 3.0
40 2.7 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 2.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 2.0
41 3.3 1.5 3.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 5.0 3.0 3.0
42 2.0 3.5 3.0 NA 3.0 4.0 2.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 3.0 2.0
43 2.0 3.0 3.0 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
44 3.3 3.0 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
45 5.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 3.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0
46 3.0 2.5 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
47 4.3 1.0 2.0 1.0 4.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 2.0 2.0 1.0 1.0
48 4.7 3.0 NA NA NA 1.0 1.0 1.0 2.0 2.0 3.0 NA
49 3.3 2.5 2.0 4.0 4.0 3.0 4.0 2.0 4.0 3.0 4.0 2.0
50 2.0 3.0 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
51 2.0 4.0 4.0 3.0 3.0 4.0 4.0 2.0 4.0 4.0 3.0 4.0
52 4.0 3.0 4.0 4.0 NA 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 NA NA 2.0
53 3.0 4.0 NA 4.0 3.0 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
54 4.0 2.0 NA 2.0 4.0 2.0 3.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0
55 2.0 2.5 3.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0
56 4.0 3.0 3.0 4.0 2.0 4.0 4.0 2.0 4.0 5.0 4.0 4.0
57 4.3 1.5 3.0 2.0 4.0 3.0 4.0 2.0 4.0 4.0 5.0 4.0
58 3.3 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0
86
Table 12: Survey data: Variables 20-30 (respondents 58-117)
# V20 V21 V22 V23 V24 V25 V26 V27 V28A V28B V29 V30
59 2.3 4.0 3.0 4.0 3.0 NA 4.0 3.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0
60 5.0 1.5 3.0 2.0 4.0 1.0 2.0 1.0 3.0 2.0 2.0 2.0
61 3.7 2.0 2.0 2.0 3.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 3.0 2.0 2.0 2.0
62 4.3 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0
63 3.0 3.5 NA 4.0 3.0 3.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 3.0
64 3.3 2.5 4.0 3.0 5.0 3.0 3.0 2.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 3.0
65 4.3 1.5 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0
66 4.7 4.5 3.0 4.0 4.0 3.0 2.0 2.0 4.0 2.0 2.0 2.0
67 4.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 3.0 3.0 2.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 2.0 1.0
68 3.7 2.0 3.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 3.0 4.0
69 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
70 4.0 1.5 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 NA 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0
71 3.3 2.0 3.0 3.0 4.0 2.0 4.0 2.0 3.0 3.0 4.0 2.0
72 2.7 2.0 2.0 4.0 2.0 1.0 4.0 1.0 4.0 4.0 2.0 2.0
73 3.7 1.5 3.0 4.0 4.0 3.0 3.0 1.0 3.0 2.0 2.0 2.0
74 3.3 2.0 2.0 2.0 4.0 4.0 NA 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0
75 2.7 2.5 NA 4.0 3.0 2.0 4.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 4.0 1.0
76 3.7 2.0 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
77 3.0 5.0 5.0 4.0 2.0 3.0 5.0 1.0 5.0 4.0 1.0 2.0
78 1.7 1.0 3.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 3.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0
79 4.7 1.5 2.0 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
80 1.7 2.0 4.0 5.0 2.0 3.0 5.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 5.0 2.0
81 4.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 4.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 2.0
82 2.0 2.5 4.0 2.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 3.0 4.0 2.0 2.0 2.0
83 2.3 3.0 2.0 2.0 3.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0
84 3.3 3.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 2.0 3.0 2.0 5.0 2.0
85 3.7 1.5 2.0 3.0 2.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 4.0 4.0 3.0 3.0
86 3.0 2.0 4.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 3.0 4.0 3.0
87 3.3 3.0 3.0 4.0 3.0 2.0 4.0 2.0 4.0 3.0 3.0 3.0
88 3.3 3.0 2.0 3.0 3.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0
89 2.0 2.0 3.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0
90 3.3 3.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 2.0 4.0 2.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 2.0
91 3.0 2.0 2.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 4.0 4.0 3.0 3.0
92 3.0 NA NA 3.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 3.0 5.0 4.0 5.0 3.0
93 4.7 2.0 NA 1.0 5.0 1.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 2.0 4.0 2.0
94 2.7 2.0 3.0 4.0 2.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 4.0 2.0 4.0 3.0
95 2.0 3.5 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
96 3.3 2.0 4.0 2.0 3.0 2.0 3.0 2.0 4.0 3.0 3.0 2.0
97 2.7 3.5 3.0 4.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0
98 5.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 NA 2.0 4.0 2.0 2.0 4.0 4.0 NA
99 2.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 2.0 5.0 2.0 3.0 1.0
100 2.3 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 3.0 3.0
101 2.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 2.0 2.0 4.0 2.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 2.0
102 2.7 2.5 NA NA 3.0 3.0 4.0 1.0 3.0 1.0 NA
103 3.3 2.5 2.0 3.0 3.0 2.0 4.0 2.0 3.0 2.0 4.0 3.0
104 2.3 4.0 4.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 4.0 3.0 4.0 3.0 4.0 3.0
105 3.0 4.0 4.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 4.0 2.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 2.0
106 4.3 2.5 NA 2.0 4.0 2.0 4.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 4.0 NA
107 5.0 2.0 NA 1.0 2.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0
108 3.7 3.5 4.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 4.0 2.0 4.0 2.0 5.0 4.0
109 5.0 2.0 2.0 4.0 5.0 2.0 3.0 1.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0
110 2.7 3.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 5.0 5.0 2.0 5.0 4.0 4.0 2.0
111 3.0 3.0 3.0 4.0 4.0 3.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 3.0
112 4.3 4.0 NA 3.0 5.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 5.0 4.0 2.0 4.0
113 4.3 1.5 2.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 2.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0
114 3.0 2.5 NA 4.0 2.0 4.0 4.0 3.0 5.0 4.0 5.0 2.0
115 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0
116 2.7 4.0 5.0 4.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 5.0 5.0 4.0 3.0 4.0
117 2.0 3.5 3.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 3.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 1.0
87
8.0 REFERENCES
Awokuse, T., Yin, H. (2010). Does stronger intellectual property rights protection induce more
bilateral trade? Evidence from Chinas imports. World Development, 38 (8), 1094-1104.
Retrieved from http://0-web.ebscohost.com.uncclc.coast.uncwil.edu
Berman, B. (2008). Strategies to detect and reduce counterfeiting activity. Business Horizons, 51,
191-199. Retrieved from http://www.sciencedirect.com/science
Cabezas, M. (2010). Counterfeit medicines as global treat. Pharmaceutical Policy and Law, 12, 179-
192. Retrieved from http://0-web.ebscohost.com.uncclc.coast. uncwil.edu
Chaudry, P., & Walsh, M. (1996). An assessment of the impact of counterfeiting in international
markets: The piracy paradox persists. The Columbia Journal of World Business, 34-48.
Retrieved from http://0-web.ebscohost.com.uncclc.coast.uncwil. edu
Ellis, K. (2011, March 17). Counterfeit seizures up but value down in '10.Women's Wear
Daily, 201(55), 6-11. Retrieved from http://0-search.ebscohost.com.uncclc.coast. uncw
Fashion. (2007). In The Free Dictionary by Farflex. Retrieved August 21, 2011, from
http://encyclopedia2.thefreedictionary.com/fashion+industry
Fashion Industry. (2006). In Webster's Online Dictionary. Retrieved August 14, 2011, from
http://www.websters-online-dictionary.org/
Fricker, R., & Schonlau, M. (2002). Advantages and disadvantages of internet research surveys:
Evidence from the literature. Field Methods, 14 (4) 347-367. Retrieved from http://0-
web.ebscohost.com.uncclc.coast.uncwil.edu
Furnham, A, & Valgeirsson, Halldor. (2007). the effect of life values and materialism on buying
counterfeit products. The Journal of Socio-Economics, 36(5), 677-685. Retrieved from
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science
Hamilton, M., Milne, B., Walker, R., Burger, O., Brown, J. (2007) the complex structure of hunter-
gatherer social networks. The Royal Society, 274, 2195-2202. Retrieved from
http://www.unm.edu/~marcusj/Hamilton%20et%20al%202007b.pdf
John, O., & Naumann, L. (2010) Surviving two Critiques by block? The resilient big five have
emerged as the paradigm for personality trait psychology. Psychological Inquiry, 21, 44-49.
Retrieved from http://0-web.ebscohost.com.uncclc.coast. uncwil.edu
Juggessur, J, & Cohen, G. (2008). Is fashion promoting counterfeit brands? Journal of Brand
Management, 16, 383-394. Retrieved from http://0-web.ebscohost.com.uncclc.coast.uncwil.edu
Lea, D. (2008). The Expansion and Restructuring of Intellectual Property and Its Implications for the
Developing World. Ethical Theory & Moral Practice, 11(1), 37-60. Retrieved from
Mavlanova, T., & Benbunan-Fich, R. (2010). Counterfeit products on the internet: The role of seller-
level and product-level information. International Journal of Electronic Commerce, 15(2), 79-
104. Retrieved from http://www.sciencedirect.com/science
Richins, M., & Dawson, S. (1992). Materialism and its measurement: Scale development and
validation. Journal of Consumer Research, 19, 303-316. Retrieved from http://0-
web.ebscohost.com.uncclc.coast.uncwil.edu
Sutherlin, J. (2009). Intellectual Property Rights: The West, India and China. Perspectives on Global
Development & Technology, 8 (2/3), 399-413. Retrieved from http://0-
web.ebscohost.com.uncclc.coast.uncwil.edu
Swami, V., Chamorro-Premuzic, T., & Furnham, A. (2009). Faking it: Personality and individual
difference predictors of willingness to buy counterfeit goods. The Journal of Socio-Economics,
38, 820-825. Retrieved from http://0-web.ebscohost.com. uncclc.coast.uncwil.edu
89
Swift, E. (2003, May 26). Pssst...wanna buy some clubs? Sports Illustrated, 98(21), 66. Retrieved
from http://0-search.ebscohost.com.uncclc.coast.uncwil.edu
Schwartz, S. (1994). Are there universal aspects in the structure and contents of human values?
Journal of Social Issues, 50 (4), 19-45. Retrieved from
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1540-4560.1994.tb01196.x/pdf
Tu, K. (2010). Counterfeit fashion: the interplay between copyright and trademark law in original
fashion designs and designer knockoffs. Texas Intellectual Property Law Journal, 18(3), 419-
449. Retrieved from http://0-ehis.ebscohost.com.uncclc.coast. uncwil.edu
U. S. Census Bureau. (2011). School enrollment by age. Retrieved October 2, 2011, from
http://www.census.gov/compendia/statab/2011/tables/12s0223.pdf
U. S. Census Bureau. (2011). Income, expenditures, poverty, & wealth: Household income. Retrieved
October 2, 2011, from http://www.census.gov/compendia /statab/2010/tables/12s0693.pdf
90