What effect consumers intention to buy counterfeit luxury brands the moderating role of product involvement and product knowledge evidence from vietnam

UNIVERSITY OF ECONOMICS HO CHI MINH CITY
International School of Business
------------------------------

Nguyễn Hạo Nhiên

WHAT EFFECT CONSUMERS’ INTENTION TO BUY
COUNTERFEIT LUXURY BRANDS? THE MODERATING ROLE
OF PRODUCT INVOLVEMENT AND PRODUCT KNOWLEDGE:
EVIDENCE FROM VIETNAM

MASTER OF BUSINESS (Honours)

Ho Chi Minh City – Year 2015


UNIVERSITY OF ECONOMICS HO CHI MINH CITY
International School of Business
------------------------------

Nguyễn Hạo Nhiên

WHAT EFFECT CONSUMERS’ INTENTION TO BUY
COUNTERFEIT LUXURY BRANDS? THE MODERATING ROLE
OF PRODUCT INVOLVEMENT AND PRODUCT KNOWLEDGE:
EVIDENCE FROM VIETNAM

ID: 22130049

MASTER OF BUSINESS (Honours)
SUPERVISOR: Dr. Ngô Viết Liêm

Ho Chi Minh City – Year 2015


WHAT EFFECT CONSUMERS‘ INTENTION TO BUY COUNTERFEIT LUXURY BRANDS?

i

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
Firstly, I would like to specially thank my supervisor, Dr. Ngo Viet Liem, for his
guidance. Without him, this thesis would not have been finished.
Secondly, I would also like to thank my thesis committee, Dr. Nguyen Dinh Tho, Dr.
Nguyen Thi Mai Trang, Dr. Nguyen Thi Nguyet Que, and Dr. Tran Ha Minh Quan, for their
insightful comments. Their advices helped me improve this thesis significantly.
Thirdly, I would like to acknowledge all the professors and staffs of International
School of Business, University of Economics Ho Chi Minh City for providing me the best
opportunities to study and develop deep understanding about research and business.
Finally, I would like to express my gratitude to my dear family and friends. This
thesis would have never come true without their encouragements and supports.


WHAT EFFECT CONSUMERS‘ INTENTION TO BUY COUNTERFEIT LUXURY BRANDS?

ii

TABLE OF CONTENTS
ABSTRACT ...................................................................................................................................................... 1
CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION ...................................................................................................................... 3
1.1.

Research background......................................................................................................................... 3

1.1.1.

The emerging luxury market ..................................................................................................... 3

1.1.2.

Counterfeiting ............................................................................................................................ 4

1.2.

Existing studies on counterfeiting ..................................................................................................... 5

1.3.

Research objectives ........................................................................................................................... 6

1.4.

Scope of the study ............................................................................................................................. 6

1.5.

Research significance ........................................................................................................................ 7

1.6.

Research structure ............................................................................................................................. 7

CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW ........................................................................................................... 9
2.1.

Luxury brands .................................................................................................................................... 9

2.2.

Counterfeits ....................................................................................................................................... 9

2.3.

Counterfeit purchase intention......................................................................................................... 10

2.4.

Value-expressive and social-adjustive function .............................................................................. 10

2.5.

Product involvement ........................................................................................................................ 12

2.6.

Product knowledge .......................................................................................................................... 13

2.7.

Summary.......................................................................................................................................... 14

CHAPTER 3: RESEARCH METHODOLOGY ............................................................................................. 17

3.1.

Data collection ................................................................................................................................. 17

3.2.

Measurement ................................................................................................................................... 18

3.3.

Luxury brands .................................................................................................................................. 20

3.4.

Measurement validation .................................................................................................................. 20

3.5.

Hypotheses tests .............................................................................................................................. 22

3.6.

Summary.......................................................................................................................................... 24

CHAPTER 4: DATA ANALYSIS .................................................................................................................. 26


WHAT EFFECT CONSUMERS‘ INTENTION TO BUY COUNTERFEIT LUXURY BRANDS?

iii

4.1.

Pilot study ........................................................................................................................................ 26

4.2.

Data collection result and demographics ......................................................................................... 28

4.3.

Measurement validation .................................................................................................................. 28

4.3.1.

Cronbach‘s alpha ..................................................................................................................... 28

4.3.2.

Exploratory factor analysis ...................................................................................................... 32

4.3.3.

Confirmatory factor analysis ................................................................................................... 33

4.3.4.

Composite reliability and average variance extracted ............................................................. 36

4.3.5.

Divergent reliability and Pearson correlation .......................................................................... 36

4.3.6.

Final scales .............................................................................................................................. 37

4.4.

Hypotheses tests .............................................................................................................................. 39

4.4.1.

Model A ................................................................................................................................... 39

4.4.2.

Model B ................................................................................................................................... 41

4.4.3.

Model C ................................................................................................................................... 42

4.5.

Discussion........................................................................................................................................ 43

4.6.

Summary.......................................................................................................................................... 45

CHAPTER 5: CONCLUSION ........................................................................................................................ 47
5.1.

Overview ......................................................................................................................................... 47

5.2.

Managerial implications .................................................................................................................. 47

5.3.

Limitations and future research ....................................................................................................... 48

References ....................................................................................................................................................... 51
Appendix A ..................................................................................................................................................... 55
Appendix B...................................................................................................................................................... 56
Appendix C...................................................................................................................................................... 57
Appendix D ..................................................................................................................................................... 60
Appendix E ...................................................................................................................................................... 61
Appendix F ...................................................................................................................................................... 67
Appendix G ..................................................................................................................................................... 68


WHAT EFFECT CONSUMERS‘ INTENTION TO BUY COUNTERFEIT LUXURY BRANDS?

iv

LIST OF TABLES
Table 2.1: Summary of definitions ......................................................................................... 14

Table 2.2: Summary of hypotheses ........................................................................................ 15
Table 3.1: Measurement scales .............................................................................................. 19
Table 3.2: Summary of research criteria ................................................................................24
Table 4.1: In-depth interview results...................................................................................... 26
Table 4.2: Demographics .......................................................................................................28
Table 4.3: Cronbach‘s alpha...................................................................................................29
Table 4.4: Item-total statistics for product knowledge scale ..................................................29
Table 4.5: Item-total statistics for counterfeit purchase intention scale ................................ 30
Table 4.6: Cronbach‘s alphas after item reduction ................................................................ 31
Table 4.7: KMO and Bartlett‘s test ........................................................................................ 32
Table 4.8: Promax rotation with Kaiser Normalization, k=4 .................................................33
Table 4.9: Modification indices covariances .........................................................................34
Table 4.10: Composite score and average variance extracted ...............................................36
Table 4.11: Square root of average variance extracted and correlations ............................... 37
Table 4.12: Modified scales ...................................................................................................37
Table 4.13: Summary of research criteria results ...................................................................38
Table 4.14: Hierarchical multiple regression – Model A ....................................................... 40
Table 4.15: Hierarchical multiple regression – Model B ....................................................... 41
Table 4.16: Hierarchical multiple regression – Model C ....................................................... 42
Table 4.17: Hypothesis test results ......................................................................................... 45


WHAT EFFECT CONSUMERS‘ INTENTION TO BUY COUNTERFEIT LUXURY BRANDS?

v

LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 2.1: Conceptual model ................................................................................................ 16
Figure 3.1: Research process ..................................................................................................17
Figure 4.1: Modified confirmatory factor analysis model .....................................................35

Figure 4.2: Moderation effect of product involvement on the relationship between valueexpressive function and counterfeit purchase intention ......................................................... 40
Figure 4.3: Moderation effect of product knowledge on the relationship between socialadjustive function and counterfeit purchase intention ........................................................... 43


WHAT EFFECT CONSUMERS‘ INTENTION TO BUY COUNTERFEIT LUXURY BRANDS?

1

ABSTRACT
In recent years, luxury market is growing fast worldwide—particularly in Asia.
However, along with the growth is the emerging threat from counterfeits. Despite many
works on counterfeiting, more works are needed to investigate the impacts of psychological
aspects on counterfeit purchasing intention. Furthermore, the interaction effects of the
psychological factors and two important constructs in consumer behavioral studies—
product involvement and product knowledge—were also examined to further understand the
problem.
In order to achieve the research objectives, five respondents took part in in-depth
interviews to check the wordings of a 25-item questionnaire. The revised questionnaire was
used in the main survey. 248 respondents participated in the survey, and 201 usable answers
were retained. Tests were conducted to examine the validity and reliability of the
measurement scales, which resulted in the elimination of an item. The hypotheses were then
tested with hierarchical multiple regression method.
The results from the tests indicated that social-adjustive function significantly
affected counterfeit purchase intention (p < .001). On the contrary, the effect of valueexpressive function was found to be positive (β = .078) but insignificant (p = .271).
Regarding to the moderation effects, the interaction between product involvement and
value-expressive function negatively and significantly affected counterfeit purchase
intention (p = .029), while the impacts of the interaction between product involvement and
social-adjustive function turned out to be insignificant (p = .268). The results also claimed
that social-adjustive function was found to be negatively moderated by product knowledge
(p = .042).

It can be inferred from the findings that luxury brands focusing on communicating
the social-adjustive functions are more likely to face the risk of counterfeiting than those
focusing on the value-expressive functions. In order to reduce customers‘ intention to buy
counterfeits, two marketing combinations—value-expressive function focused combined
with campaigns strengthening product involvement, and social-adjustive focused combined


WHAT EFFECT CONSUMERS‘ INTENTION TO BUY COUNTERFEIT LUXURY BRANDS?

2

with campaigns strengthening product knowledge—are advised to be taken into
consideration seriously, while other combinations have not been proven to be effective yet
and require further investigation.


WHAT EFFECT CONSUMERS‘ INTENTION TO BUY COUNTERFEIT LUXURY BRANDS?

3

Chapter 1
INTRODUCTION
This chapter tends to introduce the situation and characteristics of luxury brands, as
well as their war against counterfeits. Chapter 1 also summarizes previous studies on the
subject, as well as the gaps should be filled. Research objectives, research questions and
research scope are stated. Research structure is also described.
1.1. Research background
This section investigates the growing market of luxury brands and products
worldwide, especially in Asian countries. It also gives an overview of battle against
counterfeiting of luxury brands.

1.1.1. The emerging luxury market
In recent years, the market for luxury products is expanding faster and faster. Though
there are still disagreements in estimating luxury market size due to different methods,
researchers all agree on the fast increase of the market (Heine & Phan, 2011; Ho, Moon,
Kim, & Yoon, 2012; Truong, McColl, & Kitchen, 2008). According to Truong et al (2008),
this fast increase of the luxury market is due to two main reasons: Firstly, the economy has
been better recently with improved business environment, resulting in lower unemployment
rates (which lead to higher income and consumption) and lower production costs (which
understandably lead to production expansion). Secondly, the market of luxury products now
does not contain only wealthy consumers, but also lower-class ones. Truong et al (2008)
summarize that the low-class consumers nowadays tend to purchase luxury products to
imitate the high-class, to gain good feelings for the purpose of self-rewarding, or simply due
to the high-quality. This results in a new kind of luxury brand—which Truong et al (2008)
call the masstige—a portmanteau of mass market and prestige market, indicating that the
luxury market is now open to the mass. Moreover, Cavender and Kincade (2013) also state
the role of lower entry barriers. Thanks to globalization, the level of managing and
conducting business raises consequently, which enables potential players to join the luxury-


WHAT EFFECT CONSUMERS‘ INTENTION TO BUY COUNTERFEIT LUXURY BRANDS?

4

brand game—a game used to be available to a limit number of companies who possess the
best technologies and resources to produce luxury products.
The emerging market of luxury products does not solely happen in Western
countries, but also in the East, for example China (Langlois & Barberio, 2013), India
(Gupta, 2009), Korea (Ho et al, 2012) and many other Asian countries. Therefore, the need
of conducting researches on luxury products, especially in Asian countries, is never ceased
to grow.

However, rapid growth has its own flip side. It creates new serious challenges for the
luxury brands. Hennigs, Wiedmann, Behrens, and Klarmann (2013) raise the question about
the balance between the brand expansion and its rarity, since as the brand grows, it becomes
more common to the mass, reducing its ―luxury‖ state. Furthermore, luxury brand managers
do not only have to balance their own quality and quantity, but also have to struggle with a
special competitor: the counterfeits. Hennigs et al (2013) point out the threat of counterfeits
to luxury brands, as the costs to produce counterfeits are getting lower and lower recently.
Counterfeits threaten the brands‘ revenue, profit, and especially flood the market with
products, lowering brands‘ rarity and make them less ―luxury.‖
1.1.2. Counterfeiting
Counterfeiting has become a critical issue in branding, especially studies of luxury
brands as mentioned in the previous section. According to Hardy (2014), the value of
counterfeit market will increase to 1.7 million USD in 2015, ranging from casual goods to
luxury brands. Despite many efforts to enforce intellectual laws as well as anticounterfeiting activities, counterfeiting is still an international problem in various regions—
China, Sub-Saharan African, Southeast Asian, and Western Balkans (Meiring, 2014;
Mijatovic, Marenovic, Kliska, & Kompari, 2014; Phau & Teah, 2009; Vachanavuttivong et
al, 2014).
In luxury categories, brands have to face bigger threats from counterfeits, as they are
easily produced with low costs (Phau & Teah, 2009). Staake, Thiesse and Fleisch (2009)
claim that companies in many categories experience sharp decreases in revenue, which in


WHAT EFFECT CONSUMERS‘ INTENTION TO BUY COUNTERFEIT LUXURY BRANDS?

5

turn puts great pressure on the company financial situation and sets high entry barriers to the
industry. Furthermore, consumers of highly-counterfeited brands consider the brands less
attractive (Staake et al, 2009). To make it worse, many luxury brand consumers
intentionally buy counterfeits as an inexpensive alternative to real products, despite the risks

they may face, as well as the efforts brands have made to distinguish their products from
counterfeits (Perez, Castaño, & Quintanilla, 2010). Therefore, it is essential to investigate
counterfeit consumers‘ motivations, in order to minimize the threats of luxury brand
counterfeits.
1.2. Existing studies on counterfeiting
According to the review of Staake et al (2009), many researches have tried to figure
out the factors affecting consumers‘ intention to buy counterfeits in many aspects—
especially supply-side. However, little has been done to investigate demand-side reasons, as
many researchers expect counterfeit purchasing activities to be the results of untruthful
sellers (Penz & Stöttinger, 2005). Nonetheless, as stated above, in many cases, consumers
knowingly buy counterfeits (Perez et al, 2010), hence demand-side aspects must be
investigated more carefully.
Among the works examining demand-side aspects of counterfeit purchasing, little
has been done focusing on the psychological aspects of intentional counterfeit purchasing—
particularly value-expressive and social-adjustive aspects of the activities (also called selfexpressing and self-presenting)—the most important values of luxury brands (Nia &
Zaichkowsky, 2000). Wilcox, Kim and Sen (2009) have conducted research on the valueexpressive and social-adjustive function, however, their research does not focus on
investigating the significance of the impacts of the two functions on counterfeit purchase
intention.
Furthermore, although works have been done on the psychological aspect of
counterfeit purchasing, little examines the moderating effects of many important factors—
specifically product involvement and product knowledge, two widely recognized variables
in predicting consumers‘ behaviors (Bian & Moutinho, 2011). Bian and Moutinho (2011)


WHAT EFFECT CONSUMERS‘ INTENTION TO BUY COUNTERFEIT LUXURY BRANDS?

6

even state the importance of product involvement as follow: ―product involvement is a
central framework, vital to understanding consumer decision-making behavior and

associated communications‖ (p.195). Hence, it is worth studying what are the effects of
these two important concepts in consumer behavior study in our model of counterfeit
purchase intention.
1.3. Research objectives
Due to the need of researches examining psychological aspect of counterfeit
purchasing intentions, this research aims to study the effects of value-expressive function
and social-adjustive function on counterfeit purchase intentions. Furthermore, this paper
also tries to investigate the moderating effects of product involvement on the relationships
among value-expressive function, social-adjustive function and luxury counterfeit purchase
intention; and the moderating effect of product knowledge on the relationship between
social-adjustive function and luxury counterfeit purchase intention.
Hence the research questions:
1. To what extent do value-expressive function and social-adjustive function
influence counterfeit purchase intention in the cases of luxury brands?
2. To what extent does product involvement moderate the relationships among
value-expressive function, social-adjustive function, and luxury counterfeit
purchase intention?
3. To what extent does product knowledge moderate the relationship between
social-adjustive function and luxury counterfeit purchase intention?
1.4. Scope of the study
This research focuses on investigating the impact of psychological function on
counterfeit purchase intention, as well as the moderation effects of product involvement and
product knowledge of the consumers. Please be well informed that this research studies
consumers in Ho Chi Minh City and in fashion-related luxury field only due to resource
limitations.


WHAT EFFECT CONSUMERS‘ INTENTION TO BUY COUNTERFEIT LUXURY BRANDS?

7

1.5. Research significance
This study contributes to the understandings of luxury market and its struggle against
counterfeits, especially in the Vietnamese context. Moreover, the findings will help luxury
brand managers to wisely choose better marketing combinations to reduce the intention to
purchase counterfeits of their customers.
1.6. Research structure
This paper contains five chapters, including introduction, literature review, research
methodology, data analysis, and discussion and conclusion. Specifically:
Chapter 1: Introduction
Chapter 1 presents the struggles luxury brands have to face against counterfeits, as
well as points out previous important works on the issues. This chapter also figures out
specific research objectives, research questions and research scope. The structure of this
paper is also fully presented.
Chapter 2: Literature review
Chapter 2 defines clearly the constructs (value-expressive function, social-adjustive
function, product knowledge, product involvement and counterfeit purchase intention) as
well as other definitions (counterfeits, luxury brands) and digs deeper into previous works.
Hypotheses and conceptual model are also developed in this chapter with detail
justifications.
Chapter 3: Research methodology
Chapter 3 describes the method to conduct the research, including data collection
(method and measurement) and data analysis. Details of the process of building the
questionnaire, as well as the collection methods and tools of testing the data reliability and
validity are also given in this chapter.


WHAT EFFECT CONSUMERS‘ INTENTION TO BUY COUNTERFEIT LUXURY BRANDS?

8

Chapter 4: Data analysis
Chapter 4 includes the results and findings inferred from the collected data.
Measurement and hypothesis tests are run and presented in details, using Statistical Package
for Social Science (SPSS) 16.0 and AMOS 20.0 of International Business Machines
Corporation (IBM). The results of the tests are also summarized for further discussion in
Chapter 5.
Chapter 5: Conclusion
Chapter 5 discusses further the results and findings from Chapter 4 to draw out
managerial implications applicable in real life. Limitations of this paper are also clearly
stated to suggest further researches in the future.


WHAT EFFECT CONSUMERS‘ INTENTION TO BUY COUNTERFEIT LUXURY BRANDS?

9

Chapter 2
LITERATURE REVIEW
This chapter gives a clear view about the important constructs of the paper, including
the definition of luxury brand, counterfeit, counterfeit purchase intention, value-expressive
and social-adjustive function, product knowledge and product involvement. Five hypotheses
are also proposed after being argued based on previous works.
2.1. Luxury brands
The concept of luxury has been defined in various works, however, there is no clear
criteria to distinguish luxury from non-luxury brands, as ‗luxury‘ concept is subjective
(Wiedmann, Hennigs, & Siebels, 2007) and strongly depends on the context (Vigneron &
Johnson, 2004)—for example, a brand may appear to be luxurious to this consumer, but not
to another one. However, there are common characteristics that different works agree on,
including high level of rarity or uniqueness, high-quality, high-price and high level of selfexpressing as well as social meaning (Miller & Mills, 2012; Vigneron & Johnson, 2004;

Wiedmann et al, 2007). Furthermore, Nia and Zaichkowsky (2000) state that the main
difference between luxury and non-luxury brands is the role of psychological in comparison
to functional value. In luxury brands, the psychological value is relatively high, and is the
most important factor affecting purchasing decision.
Therefore, in this research, luxury brands are defined as brands bought mainly to
serve consumers‘ psychological needs—specifically self-expressing and self-presenting—
that are rare or unique, high-quality and highly priced.
2.2. Counterfeits
Counterfeits can be defined as products that bear a fake or indistinguishable
trademark, logo, name or design of another product, in order to illegally take advantage of
the brand value of the real product (Bian & Moutinho, 2009; Phau & Teah, 2009; Staake et
al, 2009; Wilcox et al, 2009). Wilcox et al (2009) also state that the quality of counterfeits is


WHAT EFFECT CONSUMERS‘ INTENTION TO BUY COUNTERFEIT LUXURY BRANDS?

10

usually low, however, it has been rising gradually and in some cases, has reached the same
level of that of the real products.
Counterfeits are categorized into deceptive and non-deceptive (Bian & Moutinho,
2009; Wilcox et al, 2009). Deceptive counterfeits are products that are designed to
intentionally confuse the buyers, and buyers buy them without knowing that they are
counterfeits. On the contrary, non-deceptive counterfeits are products that can be
distinguished from the real products easily by the buyers—based on various types of
differences, for example in product appearances, in trademarks, or in distribution
channels—and consumers purchase them intentionally. This research focuses on the second
type.
2.3. Counterfeit purchase intention
A behavioral intention is the willingness and the effort of an individual to perform

that behavior (Ajzen, 1991). Based on Ajzen‘s suggestions, counterfeit purchase intention
can be defined as the willingness and the effort of an individual to purchase counterfeits—in
this case counterfeits of luxury brands. Ajzen (1991) also states behavioral intention is good
indicator of actual action, hence, counterfeit purchase intention is a good proxy of
counterfeit purchase action in the model.
Furthermore, The Theory of Planned Behavior (Ajzen, 1991) claims that people
cannot have the intention to perform any action without being able to control that action.
Therefore, counterfeit purchase intention cannot exist in the case of deceptive counterfeits.
That is the reason why this research focuses on the intention to purchase non-deceptive
counterfeits only.
2.4. Value-expressive and social-adjustive function
According to Grewal, Mehta, & Karrdes (2004), Katz (1960), Wilcox et al (2009), in
a consuming context, a person holds attitudes toward something in order to serve one of
several psychological functions that they may benefit from, including knowledge function
(easing the decision making process), utilitarian function (maximizing received value from
products), value-expressive function (communicating or expressing one‘s values), and


WHAT EFFECT CONSUMERS‘ INTENTION TO BUY COUNTERFEIT LUXURY BRANDS?

11

social-adjustive function (presenting oneself and interacting with other people). On the other
hand, various works applying the theory of planned behavior have proved that attitudes
toward counterfeit purchasing have significant impacts on counterfeit purchase intention
(Chiu, Lee, & Won, 2014; Koklic, 2011; Phau, Teah, & Lee, 2009). Therefore, the functions
of the products should affect consumers‘ counterfeit purchase intention.
This research aims to investigate the social-side functions of the luxury products
only—which mean value-expressive function and social-adjustive function. Wilcox et al
(2009) suggest that people who are driven by value-expressive function tend to buy because

they want to express their values, beliefs or personalities. On the other hand, socialadjustive-function-driven consumers purchase products because they help them to fit in
social situations. In order words, value-expressive function satisfies the need of selfexpressing—i.e. dealing with self-judgments, whereas social-adjustive function serves the
need of self-presenting—i.e. dealing with social judgments. Hence, in this study, valueexpressive function is defined as function of a product that helps consumers to communicate
or express their values. Social-adjustive function is defined as function of a product that
helps consumers to fit in social situations, present themselves and interact with other people.
Many works suggest that value-expressive function affect consumer‘s decisions to
purchase counterfeits. Wiedmann, Hennigs and Klarmann (2012) propose that this influence
is negative. Due to the nature of the function, consumers who are driven by valueexpressive function cannot enjoy the same level of satisfaction buying and using
counterfeits, since they themselves are able to fully perceive the differences. Respondents of
Perez et al (2010) also find themselves uncomfortable purchasing counterfeits. One of them,
whose name is Cristina, says: ―You don‘t feel the same way that you do with the original,
you‘re always going to know that‖ (Perez et al, 2010, p. 226).
Similarly, social adjustive function is proposed to have impacts on counterfeit
purchase intention (Wiedmann et al, 2012). Perez et al (2010) find out that counterfeits—
especially super-non-deceptive counterfeits, i.e. non-deceptive counterfeits that cannot be
easily distinguished from real products by other people—provide the same social effects.


WHAT EFFECT CONSUMERS‘ INTENTION TO BUY COUNTERFEIT LUXURY BRANDS?

12

Consumers tend to purchase counterfeits, especially those of trendy brands—brands
containing high level of social-adjustive function (Perez et al, 2010). Hence, our hypotheses
are stated as follows:
H1: Value-expressive function has a negative effect on counterfeit purchase
intention.
H2: Social-adjustive function has a positive effect on counterfeit purchase intention.
2.5. Product involvement
Product involvement can be defined as the perceived level of importance of a

particular product category in consumer‘s life, because it meets the needs or values of the
consumer (Bian & Moutinho, 2011; Quester & Ai, 2003; Te'eni-Harari & Homik, 2010). In
other words, consumer‘s response to products that meet their needs or values creates high
product involvement.
The level of product involvement reflects two aspects: (1) the importance of the
product in consumer‘s life, and (2) the interest of the consumer in the product, or the
amount of pleasure the consumer gains from the product (McQuarrie & Munson, 1992;
Vaughn, 1986; Zaichkowsky, 1987). Therefore, the higher the product involvement, the
more benefit the consumer gains from choosing the right product. This makes consumers
tend to put more effort in choosing high-involvement products (Bian & Moutinho, 2011).
As a result, in the case of high-involvement products, the risk of choosing wrong product
devalues the benefits that counterfeits may bring to its consumers. Furthermore, the
importance of high-involvement products may strengthen the effect of self-deceiving feeling
on the counterfeit purchase intention. Snyder and DeBono (1985, as cited in Wilcox et al,
2009) also found that value-expressive-function-driven consumers care more about qualityrelated problems—one of the main disadvantages of counterfeits (Wilcox et al, 2009). The
higher the product involvement, the more important the product is to the consumer, and the
quality-related problems would appear to be of bigger concern than those in the case of lowinvolvement products.


WHAT EFFECT CONSUMERS‘ INTENTION TO BUY COUNTERFEIT LUXURY BRANDS?

13

Besides, as proposed by Bian and Moutinho (2011), when the product involvement is
high, consumers think more carefully before making the purchase, which means they have
to bring into consideration the social-adjustive benefit that real products may bring in
comparison to counterfeits. Moreover, the risk of being discovered consuming counterfeits
has more impacts in the case of high-involvement products, hence making the social
benefits of counterfeits less appealing.
Hence, it can be proposed that:

H3: High level of product involvement strengthens the relationship between valueexpressive function and counterfeit purchase intention.
H4: High level of product involvement weakens the relationship between socialadjustive function and counterfeit purchase intention.
2.6. Product knowledge
Marks and Olson (1981) define product knowledge as information relating to the
product stored in the memory. The information is collected directly or indirectly. Marks and
Olson (1981) also suggest that consumers who possess high level of product knowledge
maintain more complex decision making procedure while purchasing, as they have more
infomation to consider.
As consumers with high level of product knowledge understand more about the
product, they are better aware that the counterfeits are low-quality products (Bian &
Moutinho, 2011). Because of that, they are able to figure out the differences between
counterfeits and real products. Due to the fact that knowledgeable consumers can easily
distinguish counterfeits, they perceive the risk of being discovered using counterfeits more
seriously. When the risk of being unmasked is high, the self-presenting benefit effect is
weakened, which leads consumers towards real products (Perez et al, 2010).
H5: High level of product knowledge weakens the relationship between socialadjustive function and counterfeit purchase intention.


WHAT EFFECT CONSUMERS‘ INTENTION TO BUY COUNTERFEIT LUXURY BRANDS?

14

2.7. Summary
This chapter deals with the definition of main concepts—luxury, counterfeit,
counterfeit purchase intention, value-expressive function, social-adjustive function, product
involvement and product knowledge. The definitions employed in this paper are
summarized in Table 2.1.
Table 2.1: Summary of definitions
Concept
Luxury brands

Definition

Based on

Brands bought mainly to serve consumers‘ Miller & Mills (2012);
psychological needs—specifically self-expressing

Nia & Zaichkowsky (2000);

and self-presenting—that are rare or unique, highquality and highly priced

Vigneron & Johnson (2004);
Wiedmann et al (2007).

Counterfeits

Products that bear a fake or indistinguishable Bian & Moutinho (2009);
trademark, logo, name or design of another

Phau & Teah (2009);

product, in order to illegally take advantage of the
brand value of the real product

Staake et al (2009);
Wilcox et al (2009).

Counterfeit

The willingness and the effort of an individual to

Ajzen (1991).

purchase

purchase counterfeits—in this case counterfeits of

intention

luxury brands

Value-expressive

The function of a product that helps consumers to Grewal et al (2004);

function

communicate or express their values.

Katz (1960);
Wilcox et al (2009).

Social-adjustive

The function of a product that helps consumers to Grewal et al (2004);

function

fit in social situations, present themselves and

Katz (1960);

interact with other people.
Wilcox et al (2009).
Product

The perceived level of importance of a particular

Bian & Moutinho (2011);


WHAT EFFECT CONSUMERS‘ INTENTION TO BUY COUNTERFEIT LUXURY BRANDS?

involvement

15

product category in consumer‘s life, because it Quester & Ai (2003);
meets the needs or values of the consumer.

Te'eni-Harari

&

Homik

(2010).
Product

Information relating to the product stored in the

knowledge

memory.

Marks & Olson (1981).

The relationships among concepts are also investigated to form the following
hypotheses as in Table 2.2
Table 2.2: Summary of hypotheses
Hypothesis

Content

H1

Value-expressive function has a negative effect on
counterfeit purchase intention.

H2

Social-adjustive function has a positive effect on
counterfeit purchase intention.

Based on
Perez et al (2010);
Wiedmann et al (2012).
Perez et al (2010);
Wiedmann et al (2012).

Bian & Moutinho (2011);

H3

High level of product involvement strengthens the
relationship between value-expressive function and
counterfeit purchase intention.

Perez et al (2010);
Snyder and DeBono
(1985, as cited in Wilcox
et al, 2009);
Wiedmann et al (2012).

H4

H5

High level of product involvement weakens the
relationship between social-adjustive function and
counterfeit purchase intention.
High level of product knowledge weakens the relationship
between social-adjustive function and counterfeit purchase
intention.

The conceptual model of this research is presented below:

Bian & Moutinho (2011);
Perez et al (2010);
Wiedmann et al (2012).

Bian & Moutinho (2011);
Perez et al (2010).


WHAT EFFECT CONSUMERS‘ INTENTION TO BUY COUNTERFEIT LUXURY BRANDS?

Product involvement

H4 (-)

H3 (+)

Value-expressive
function
H1 (-)

Counterfeit purchase
intention
H2 (+)

Social-adjustive
function
H5 (-)

Product knowledge

Figure 2.1: Conceptual model.

16

WHAT EFFECT CONSUMERS‘ INTENTION TO BUY COUNTERFEIT LUXURY BRANDS?

17

Chapter 3
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
This chapter describes the method of conducting the research in each stage, including
the data collection method (item generation to build the questionnaire, clarification of
luxury brands chosen in this research, and data collection) and the data analysis method
(measurement validation as well as hypothesis tests). The complete research process is also
given.
3.1. Data collection
The data collecting process included two separate phases: a pilot study and a main
study.
Pilot study

Main study

Literature

Survey (n=201)

Draft questionnaire

Cronbach‘s alpha
test

In-depth interview
(n=5)

Exploratory factor
analysis

Revision

Confirmatory factor
analysis

Final questionnaire

Hierarchical multiple
regression

Figure 3.1: Research process


WHAT EFFECT CONSUMERS‘ INTENTION TO BUY COUNTERFEIT LUXURY BRANDS?

18

The pilot study included five in-depth interviews. The questionnaire was translated
into Vietnamese. Five customers were chosen to participate in in-depth interviews in order
to revise the Vietnamese questionnaire to avoid any difficulties in understanding the
questions.
After the pilot study, the main study with a larger scale survey was conducted.
Respondents—chosen by using convenient sampling method—were asked to answer the
revised questionnaire in Vietnamese. Every fifth customer that walked through the main
entrance of Diamond Plaza (District 1, Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam) was asked to answer
the self-administered questionnaire. The data collected in the main study was analyzed to

test the reliability as well as the validity of the model.
3.2. Measurement
The questionnaire contained 25 items measuring five constructs: value-expressive
function, social-adjustive function, counterfeit purchase intention, product involvement and
product knowledge.
Both value-expressive function and social-adjustive function were measured by four
items each. The items—adopted from Wilcox et al (2009)—were seven-point Likert-type
questions, ranging from 1 – ―completely disagree‖ to 7 – ―completely agree.‖
Counterfeit purchase intention construct was measured by the three items adopted
from (Hung et al, 2011). The items were seven-point Likert-type questions, ranging from 1
– ―completely disagree‖ to 7 – ―completely agree.‖
Product involvement construct was measured using the Revised Personal
Involvement Inventory of McQuarrie and Munson (1992), which consisted of 10 items, as
this was a widely used scale measuring product involvement. All the items were 7-point
bipolar evaluative adjective pairs.
Product knowledge construct was measured using the four items developed by Smith
and Park (1992). The four items were seven-point Likert-type questions, ranging from 1 –
―completely disagree‖ to 7 – ―completely agree.‖