Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

A comparative study of consumers' intention to purchase counterfeit outdoor products in Taiwan and Hong Kong

A comparative study of consumers' intention to purchase counterfeit outdoor products in Taiwan... Purpose – This study aims to compare the purchase intention of counterfeit outdoor products between Taiwan and Hong Kong consumers. Design/methodology/approach – A total of 584 respondents from Hong Kong (n 5 247, 42%) and Taiwan (n 5 337, 58%) were recruited for the study. Data analysis was performed by using structural equation modelling techniques. Findings – The results showed that consumers’ perceived risk had a negative influence on attitude and intention to purchase counterfeit outdoor products. Moreover, attitude towards buying counterfeit outdoor products, perceived behavioural control and subjective norm had positive impacts on purchase intention. Brand consciousness, however, had a negative influence on purchase intention. The multi-group analysis identified significant differences between Hong Kong and Taiwanese respondents. Originality/value – This study provides a better understanding of how these factors affect purchase intention of counterfeit outdoor products across different cultures. Keywords Outdoor products, Counterfeit, Theory of planned behavior, Perceived risk, Brand consciousness Paper type Research paper Introduction Because of an increasing interest in a healthy and active lifestyle, the outdoor recreation industry has been growing in recent years (Duff and Phelps, 2016). This worldwide growth in the industry has witnessed the establishment of various outdoor-related organisations, including the Outdoor Industry Association (OIA) in the USA, the European Outdoor Group (EOG) in Europe and the Scandinavian Outdoor Group (SOG) in Scandinavia. In China, the China Outdoor Association (COA) and China Outdoor Commerce Alliance (COCA) represent the industry. In an OIA report in 2017, it was noted that outdoor recreation was one of JEL Classification — E21, M10, M31 © Wen-Yung Tseng, Weisheng Chiu and Ho Keat Leng. Published in Journal of Asian Business and Economic Studies. Published by Emerald Publishing Limited. This article is published under the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY 4.0) licence. Anyone may reproduce, distribute, translate and create derivative works of this article (for both commercial and non-commercial purposes), subject to full attribution to the original publication and authors. The full terms of this licence may be seen at http:// Journal of Asian Business and Economic Studies creativecommons.org/licences/by/4.0/legalcode The authors would like to thank the Institute of International Business and Governance, established pp. 162-176 Emerald Publishing Limited with the substantial support of a grant from the Research Grants Council of the Hong Kong Special 2515-964X DOI 10.1108/JABES-02-2020-0011 Administrative Region, China (UGC/IDS16/17), for its support. the largest economic sectors in the USA, generating US$887bn in consumer spending. Counterfeit The primary component was in travel spending, although the amount spent on outdoor outdoor recreation products, including gear, apparel, footwear, equipment and services, was still products significant, amounting to US$184.5bn. This was a significant increase from the US$120.7bn reported in 2012 (Outdoor Industry Association, 2017). The outdoor recreation markets in both Hong Kong and Taiwan have developed much earlier when compared to China. Hong Kong, as one of the major cities and transportation hubs in Asia, is home to many outdoor recreation brands. Companies in the outdoor recreation industry set up their subsidiaries and distribution networks in Hong Kong to strategically manage and promote their businesses in the region. Consequently, consumers in Hong Kong are familiar with many outdoor brands and can easily purchase outdoor recreation equipment. According to a government survey, the retail sales in travel and sporting goods, household goods and other goods was US$8.7bn in 2016 (Census and Statistics Department of Hong Kong SAR, 2016). Over in Taiwan, the outdoor recreation industry is characterised by its established supply chains linking suppliers of raw materials, intermediaries, manufacturers, distributors and retailers. According to the Taiwan Outdoor Group (TOG), the retail value of the outdoor recreation market is about US$1bn in 2014. The above discussion highlights the value of the outdoor recreation industry in both Hong Kong and Taiwan. However, because of the popularity of outdoor products, it has become one of the primary targets for counterfeiting (Transcrime, 2010). Many outdoor recreation companies are located in China, where a grey market exists. Counterfeits of popular outdoor recreation brands are common in both brick-and-mortar and online stores, and this has led to considerable losses to companies in the industry (Anti-Counterfeiting Group, 2003). Some of the companies have taken steps to prevent the purchase of counterfeits and protect authentic products. For example, Arc’Teryx, a leading Canada outdoor recreation brand, used its website to educate its customers to distinguish genuine products from counterfeits. Moncler, an Italian–France luxury outdoor brand, used radio frequency identification (RFID) chips in their products to counter counterfeit goods. There are many different outdoor activities, each requiring different types of equipment and outdoor products to protect users and enhance their experiences. Compared to other product categories, consumers are more likely to value functionality, safety and environmentally friendly features in outdoor recreation products. Consequently, such features will result in higher prices for these products. This creates an opportunity for counterfeits to offer lower prices to attract consumers. However, using counterfeit outdoor recreation products can be risky for consumers. When the products do not perform in the harsh outdoor environment, it may lead to physical harm to consumers. Although counterfeit purchases have been examined in many different product categories (Chiu et al., 2014; Chiu and Leng, 2016; Phau and Teah, 2009; Phau et al., 2009), the product category of outdoor recreation product has not received much interest. To address the research gap in the extant literature, the primary purpose of this study is to explore the factors influencing consumers’ purchase intention of counterfeit outdoor products using the theory of planned behaviour (TPB, Ajzen, 1991). The TPB is a widely used social-psychological model to explain consumers’ both volitional and non-volitional decision-making process (Ajzen, 1991) and deemed as an appropriate theory to explore consumers’ consumption of counterfeits. Moreover, to date, few studies have investigated differences in consumers’ attitudes and behaviour toward counterfeits across countries (Bian and Veloutsou, 2007; Chiu and Leng, 2016). It has been argued that more cross-cultural research in consumer behaviour is needed to gain a better understanding of the role of cultural differences in consumers’ decision-making process (De Mooij and Hofstede, 2011; Hassan et al.,2016). Cross-cultural research can also provide insights into consumer behaviour in countries or regions with different economic development and cultural norms (De Mooij and Hofstede, 2011). Accordingly, the secondary purpose of this study is to examine the purchase intention of counterfeit outdoor products JABES between Hong Kong and Taiwanese consumers. 28,3 Literature review Theory of planned behaviour The TPB posits that an individual’s purchase behaviour is determined by purchase intention, which is, in turn, determined by the attitude towards the behaviour, subjective norms and perceived behavioural control (Ajzen, 1991). In many studies across a spectrum of product categories, general support of the TPB in the purchase of counterfeit goods has been found. Specifically, it was established that intentions are predictive of actual behaviour. Also, attitude, subjective norm and perceived behavioural control are positively correlated with intention and behaviour. However, the relative importance of attitude, subjective norm and perceived behavioural control in predicting intention can vary across product categories (Ajzen, 1991; Armitage and Conner, 2001). The TPB has also been used to explain behaviour in the purchase of counterfeit goods (Phau et al.,2009; Chiu et al.,2014; De Matos et al.,2007; Penz and Stottinger, 2005; Chiu and Leng, 2015, 2016). The TPB is deemed an appropriate tool to understand consumer behaviour in the purchase of counterfeits, as it examines consumers’ both volitional and non-volitional decision-making process (Ajzen, 1991). Similar to other product categories, attitude, subjective norms and perceived behavioural control are positively correlated with intention in purchasing counterfeits. When consumers have a more favourable attitude towards the purchase of counterfeits, they are also more likely to purchase counterfeits (Swami et al.,2009; Tom et al., 1998; Phau et al., 2009; Ang et al.,2001; Chiu et al.,2014; Wee et al.,1995). In addition, subjective norms can affect consumer’s intention to purchase counterfeits (De Matos et al., 2007; Penz and Stottinger, 2005; Phau et al., 2009; Ang et al., 2001; Tom et al., 1998; Rahman et al., 2011; Prendergast et al., 2002; Huang et al., 2015; Chiu et al., 2014). When the behaviour of purchasing counterfeits is accepted by relatives and friends, the consumer is more likely to purchase counterfeits. Conversely, when the behaviour is not accepted by relatives and friends, the consumer is less likely to engage in such behaviour, especially when the product category is conspicuous (Lan et al., 2012; Tang et al., 2014; Lord et al., 2001). Due to their illicit nature, counterfeits are not openly available for sale to consumers in many markets. Consequently, consumers do not have complete control in their purchase of counterfeits, as this depends on access to information on the availability of counterfeits (Lan et al., 2012). With higher levels of access to counterfeit goods, consumers will have higher levels of perceived behavioural control, and this can lead to higher levels of intentions to purchase counterfeit goods (Prendergast et al., 2002; Chiu et al., 2014; Chiu and Leng, 2016; Armitage and Conner, 2001; Penz and Stottinger, 2005). Consequently, the following hypotheses are detailed as below: H1. Attitude towards purchasing counterfeit outdoor products will have a positive influence on purchase intention of counterfeit outdoor products. H2. Perceived behavioural control will have a positive influence on purchase intention of counterfeit outdoor products. H3. Subjective norm will have a positive influence on purchase intention of counterfeit outdoor products. Brand consciousness Brand consciousness refers to consumers’ psychological preference of brand-name products in their decision-making process to purchase (Nelson and Mcleod, 2005; Jiang and Shan, 2016). Extant literature suggests that brand consciousness may have a negative impact on Counterfeit consumers’ intention to purchase counterfeit outdoor products (Chiu and Leng, 2016). outdoor Consumers who have a higher brand consciousness tend to buy branded products to express products their ideal self-image and associate themselves with a higher level of social status (Wee et al., 1995; Bian and Moutinho, 2011). In particular, brand names can play an essential role in affecting consumer choice in the sports apparel category (Dickson and Pollack, 2000). They not only reflect consumer choice but also indicate membership and shared beliefs of the group (Chae et al., 2006; Dickson and Pollack, 2000; Bae, 2011). Counterfeit products often use authentic brand name and logo to confuse consumers particularly when they are not familiar with the product (Nelson and Mcleod, 2005; Jiang and Shan, 2016). This suggests that brand consciousness may be an essential factor in the study of counterfeits buying behaviour. As such, it is expected that consumers who are high in brand consciousness are less likely to purchase counterfeits (Gentry et al., 2006; Phau et al., 2009). This leads to the following hypothesis: H4. Brand consciousness will have a negative influence on purchase intention of counterfeit outdoor products. Perceived risk Perceived risk consists of consumers’ perceptions of the uncertainty and adverse consequences of purchasing a service/product (Park et al., 2005). The literature suggests that perceived risk can affect consumers’ attitudes and purchase intention (De Matos et al., 2007; Wee et al., 1995; Lobb et al., 2007). As counterfeits are not genuine products, consumers expect that there will be inherent risks when using the products (Ting et al., 2016). These risks include functional risks where the products do not perform as expected and social risks where the consumer is ostracised as a result of purchasing and using counterfeits (Veloutsou and Bian, 2008). There are potential risks in all outdoor activities. Consumers who are familiar with outdoor activities will be more aware of such risks when compared to general consumers (Grant et al., 1996). In particular, counterfeit outdoor recreation products may carry physical risks when the product causes physical harm to the consumer. Risk-averse consumers may be more concerned as to whether counterfeits goods will perform as expected, are safe or will affect them adversely in how others perceive them. As such, they are less likely to have a positive attitude towards purchasing counterfeits and an intention to purchase counterfeits (Ang et al., 2001; Tom et al., 1998; Chiu et al., 2014). Consequently, the hypotheses are as follows: H5. Perceived risk will have a negative influence on attitude towards purchasing counterfeit outdoor products. H6. Perceived risk will have a negative influence on purchase intention of counterfeit outdoor products. Cultural differences Consumers’ acceptance and purchase of counterfeits differ across countries (Eisend and Schuchert-Guler, € 2006; Gentry et al., 2006; Bian and Veloutsou, 2007). In part, this difference is explained by cultural and historical factors. As copyright protection legislation originated in western countries, it is a notion that has gained less acceptance and support in Asian countries. Consequently, Asian consumers are more accepting when it comes to purchasing and consuming counterfeits (Swinyard et al., 1990; Hamelin et al., 2013; Tang et al., 2014; Chang, 2004). However, even among Asian countries, there are differences in the consumption of JABES counterfeits. A study showed that although consumers in Hong Kong and China share many 28,3 cultural and demographic similarities, there were still differences in the attitudes towards the purchase of counterfeits and the availability of counterfeits in the two regions (Tang et al., 2014). Similarly, although the majority of consumers in Singapore and Taiwan are of Chinese ethnicity, there were differences between the two countries in attitudes and subjective norms towards counterfeits (Chiu and Leng, 2016)(Figure 1). Extant literature has identified a need to examine the cultural difference in consumers’ decision-making process (De Mooij and Hofstede, 2011). In this study, although both Taiwan and Hong Kong are predominantly Chinese societies with similar demographics and cultures, they have different histories. This may result in differences in consumers’ attitudes and behaviours. Therefore, consumers’ acceptance and purchase behaviour of counterfeits may still differ across the two regions. The final hypothesis for this study is as follows: H7. Relationships between the variables in the research model will be different between Taiwan and Hong Kong consumers. Method Participants and procedure The questionnaires were distributed to physical outdoor speciality shops in Taiwan and outdoor shops in Hong Kong over three months from November 2016 to February 2017. The products selected for this study were hiking products, as they are the most popular outdoor products amongst consumers. Respondents were provided with a small gift as a token of appreciation for completing the questionnaire. Of the total 584 valid questionnaires, 58% (n 5 337) were from Taiwan and 42% (n 5 247) were from Hong Kong. Among Taiwanese respondents, 58.2% (n 5 196) were male. The modal group of Taiwanese respondents was between 31 and 40 years of age (n5 128, 38%) with a university degree (n5 227, 67.4%). For the Hong Kong study, 55.1% (n 5 136) of the respondents were male. The modal group for Hong Kong respondents was between 21 and 30 years of age (n5 115, 46.6%). This is detailed in Table 1 below. H5 Perceived Attitude risk H1 H6 Perceived behaviour control H2 Purchase intention Subjective H3 norm H4 Brand consciousness Figure 1. Research model and H7: Relationship between the variables in the research model hypotheses will be different between Taiwan and Hong Kong consumers Counterfeit Taiwan (n 5 337) Hong Kong (n 5 247) outdoor n % n % products Gender Male 196 58.2 136 55.1 Female 141 41.8 111 44.9 Age (years) Below 20 5 1.5 41 16.6 21–30 77 22.8 115 46.6 31–40 128 38.0 70 28.3 Above 40 127 37.7 21 8.5 Education Senior high 25 7.4 89 36.0 University 227 67.4 89 36.0 Graduate school 84 25.2 69 28.0 Income* 1 24 7.1 19 7.7 2 39 11.6 177 71.7 3 83 24.6 32 12.9 4 191 56.7 19 7.7 Note(s): *Due to the different currencies in Hong Kong and Taiwan, the income level was labelled from 1 to 5 Hong Kong: 1 5 below HKD10,000; 2 5 HKD10,001–HKD25,000; 3 5 HKD25,001–HKD50,000; 4 over Table 1. HKD50,001 per month Respondents’ Taiwan: 1 5 below NTD20,000; 2 5 NTD20,001–NTD30,000; 3 5 NTD30,001–NTD40,000; 5 over NTD40,001 demographic per month characteristics Measures The survey instrument was based on earlier studies. The scales of purchase intention (three items), attitude towards counterfeit goods (five items), perceived behavioural control (four items), subjective norm (four items) and brand consciousness (four items) were adopted from Chiu and Leng (2016). Perceived risk scale was taken from De Matos et al. (2007). These items were originally written in English and translated into traditional Chinese, using back- translation (Brislin, 1970). All items were assessed on a seven-point Likert scale, ranging from strongly disagree (1) to strongly agree (7). Data analysis Data analysis proceeded in three phases using SPSS 20.0 and Amos 20.0. First, the scale reliability and validity were calculated by confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) with maximum likelihood (ML) estimation. A chi-square statistic index, comparative fit index (CFI), Tucker and Lewis index (TLI) and root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA) were used to test the adequacy of the research model. According to the criteria suggested by Hair et al., 2010, CFI and TLI values should be larger than 0.90, and the RMSEA value should be below 0.08. Second, structural equation modelling (SEM) analysis was used to examine the hypotheses in the proposed model. Finally, a multiple-group analysis was conducted to examine the differences between Taiwanese and Hong Kong samples in the conceptual model. Results Scale reliability and validity Scale reliability and validity were evaluated by conducting a CFA. However, it found that one item of subjective norm and one item of brand consciousness reported low factor loadings (< 0.50). Thus, it was determined that dropping these items would improve the model without JABES compromising the theoretical meaningfulness of the measure (Bentler and Chou, 1987; Byrne, 28,3 2016). The deletion of these item resulted in an appropriate model fit of measurement model, χ (174) 5 528.081, CFI 5 0.963, TLI 5 0.955, RMSEA 5 0.067. The reliability of the scale was calculated using composite reliability (De Matos et al., 2007) and Cronbach’s alpha. As shown in Table 2, the values of CR ranged from 0.856–0.972, fulfilling the recommended criterion of 0.70 (Fornell and Larcker, 1981). The values of Cronbach’s alpha all fulfilled the cut-off of 0.70 (Nunnally, 1978). The convergent validity was tested by factor loading and the average variance extracted (AVE) and revealed appropriate results (Hair et al., 2010). The factor loadings of the observable items were all above the criterion of 0.50, and AVE values of the construct were higher than the suggested value 0.50, except for perceived behavioural control (0.485). Moreover, discriminant validity was evaluated by the method proposed by Fornell and Larcker (1981). As reported in Table 3, the correlation coefficients between pairs of constructs were less than the square root of AVE for the individual variables, and as such, there was good discriminant validity of the constructs in this study. Hypothesis testing The goodness-of-fit indices showed that the proposed model fitted the data adequately, model fit: χ (183)5 626.227, CFI5 0.917, TLI5 0.903, RMSEA5 0.079 (Hu and Bentler, 1999). The results showed that purchase intention, attitude, perceived behavioural control and subjective norms have positive influences on purchase intention (p < 0.001), supporting H1, H2 and H3. Moreover, brand consciousness had a negative influence on purchase intention (p < 0.01), supporting H4. Finally, the paths from perceived risk to attitude and Construct Number of items Cronbach’s alpha Factor loadings CR AVE INT 3 0.971 0.947–0.983 0.972 0.920 ATT 5 0.941 0.793–0.923 0.944 0.770 PBC 4 0.884 0.667–0.919 0.889 0.670 SN 3 0.960 0.920–0.938 0.961 0.891 BC 3 0.851 0.685–0.921 0.856 0.668 PR 3 0.894 0.797–0.915 0.897 0.744 Table 2. Note(s): INT 5 purchase intention; ATT 5 attitude; PBC 5 perceived behavioural control; SN 5 subjective Summary results of measurement norm; BC 5 brand consciousness; PR 5 perceived risk Mean SD INT ATT PBC SN BC PR INT 2.784 1.459 0.959 ATT 2.678 1.296 0.825 0.878 PBC 4.226 1.552 0.466 0.476 0.818 SN 2.747 1.312 0.683 0.744 0.476 0.944 BC 4.289 1.173 0.289 0.215 0.153 0.164 0.817 Table 3. PR 5.057 1.304 0.497 0.465 0.156 0.417 0.458 0.862 Mean, SD, square roots Note(s): INT 5 purchase intention; ATT 5 attitude; PBC 5 perceived behavioural control; SN 5 subjective of AVE and norm; BC: brand consciousness, PR 5 perceived risk. Italic diagonal elements are the square root of AVE; correlations between constructs values below the diagonal are correlations purchase intention were statistically and negatively significant (p < 0.001), supporting H5 Counterfeit and H6. Table 4 shows the results of hypotheses testing in more detail. outdoor products Multi-group analysis Independent t-tests were conducted to measure differences between Taiwanese (n5 337) and Hong Kong (n5 247) respondents. The results are reported in Table 5. There were significant differences in the mean score of purchase intention, attitude, perceived behavioural control, subjective norm and perceived risk between Taiwanese and Hong Kong respondents. Compared to Taiwanese respondents, Hong Kong respondents reported significantly higher purchase intention (M 5 2.369, M 5 3.351; t5 8.294, p < 0.001), attitude Taiwanese Hong Kongese (M 5 2.242, M 5 3.273; t 5 10.326, p < 0.001), perceived behavioural Taiwanese Hong Kongese control (M 5 3.756, M 5 4.868; t 5 9.138, p < 0.001) and subjective Taiwanese Hong Kongese norm (M 5 2.267, M 5 3.402; t5 11.237, p < 0.001) towards purchasing Taiwanese Hong Kongese counterfeit outdoor products. However, Taiwanese respondents reported a higher level of perceived risk (M 5 5.379, M 5 4.618; t 5 7.266, p < 0.001) than Hong Taiwanese Hong Kongese Kong consumers. As a next step, the multi-group analysis was conducted for the proposed model to examine differences between Taiwanese and Hong Kong consumers. The data were split into Taiwanese (n5 337) and Hong Kongese (n5 247) sample sets for the multi-group analysis by using SEM. The overall model fit in each group was examined respectively. In both groups, the model fitted the data acceptably: χ (183) 5 609.447, CFI 5 0.918, TLI 5 0.904, RMSEA 5 0.063 for Taiwanese sample; χ (183) 5 703.738, CFI 5 0.897, TLI 5 0.881, RMSEA 5 0.091 for Hong Kong sample (Hu and Bentler, 1999). Therefore, the model was deemed plausible and stable across the two groups. The standardised coefficients of each path between Taiwanese and Hong Kong consumers are reported in Table 6. Next, to compare whether Taiwanese and Hong Kong consumers differ significantly with respect to any single path of the proposed model, the values of the critical ratio for differences Hypothesis Path Standardized coefficient (β) t-value H1 ATT → INT 0.693 19.073*** H2 PBC → INT 0.102 3.587*** H3 SN → INT 0.182 6.525*** H4 BC → INT 0.089 3.056** H5 PR → ATT 0.471 10.797*** Table 4. H6 PR → INT 0.123 0.3.704*** SEM results of the Note(s):**p < 0.01, ***p < 0.001 hypotheses Mean (SD) Construct Taiwanese (n 5 337) Hong Kongese (n 5 247) t-value INT 2.369 (1.273) 3.351 (1.508) 8.294*** ATT 2.242 (1.049) 3.273 (1.365) 10.326*** PBC 3.756 (1.596) 4.868 (1.233) 9.138*** SN 2.267 (1.134) 3.402 (1.256) 11.237*** BC 4.352 (1.247) 4.204 (1.061) 1.549 Table 5. PR 5.379 (1.305) 4.618 (1.170) 7.266*** Results of independent Note(s):*p < 0.01, **p < 0.001 t-tests were examined. As reported in Table 6, the significant differences were found in the paths JABES from perceived risk to attitude (critical ratio for difference 5 1.653, p < 0.10) and purchase 28,3 intention (critical ratio for difference 5 1.658, p < 0.10), indicating that perceived risk has stronger influences on attitude and purchase intention for Hong Kong consumers. Moreover, it found that the path from attitude to purchase intention was significantly different between Taiwanese and Hong Kong consumers (critical ratio for difference 5 1.903, p < 0.10), indicating attitude has a stronger influence on purchase intention for Taiwanese consumers. Therefore, the results support H7 that consumer behaviour towards counterfeit outdoor products is different across Taiwan and Hong Kong. Discussion Researchers have endeavoured to investigate the factors influencing the consumers’ purchase behaviour across various types of counterfeit products. In particular, TPB has been used as a critical framework to explain consumers’ attitude and purchasing behaviour towards counterfeit goods (Chiu et al., 2014; Chiu and Leng, 2015, 2016). To explore consumers’ purchasing behaviour of counterfeits in the outdoor recreation market, this study used the TPB as the theoretical base to examine consumers’ decision-making process of buying counterfeit outdoor products. In addition, brand consciousness and perceived risk were incorporated to examine as possible factors in this study. The results support the use of TPB in explaining the purchase intention of counterfeit outdoor recreation products. Specifically, it was found that subjective norms, perceived behavioural control and attitude had a positive influence on the intention to purchase counterfeits outdoor recreation products. This is consistent with the findings from earlier studies on the purchase of counterfeits in other product categories (Chiu et al., 2014; Chiu and Leng, 2016; Yoon, 2011). In particular, the role of attitude is the most influential among the three variables of TPB, indicating the critical role of individuals’ attitudes towards counterfeit outdoor products in purchase intention. Many studies have also found similar results that when individuals have a more favourable and positive attitude towards counterfeits, they are more likely to make a purchase of counterfeits (Sharma and Chan, 2017; Souiden et al., 2018). The additional factor of brand consciousness was found to have a negative influence on consumers’ attitudes towards the purchase of counterfeit outdoor recreation products. This relationship is consistent with the findings of previous studies (Chiu and Leng, 2016; Gentry et al., 2006; Phau et al., 2009; Jiang and Shan, 2016). Brands are essential in the purchase of outdoor recreation products, as it is a symbol of quality and elicits trust from consumers (Phau et al., 2009). Consumers who are high in brand consciousness are, thus, less likely to purchase counterfeits (Gentry et al., 2006; Chiu and Leng, 2016; Bhatia, 2018). Hong Kongese Taiwanese (n 5 337) (n 5 247) Path Estimate p Estimate p Critical ratio for difference ATT → INT 0.826 0.000 0.667 0.000 1.903y PBC → INT 0.084 0.001 0.130 0.004 0.893 SN → INT 0.217 0.000 0.158 0.000 0.985 BC → INT 0.104 0.022 0.147 0.027 0.536 PR → ATT 0.275 0.000 0.422 0.000 1.653y PR → INT 0.092 0.016 0.202 0.000 1.658y Table 6. Multi-group analysis Note(s): yp < 0.10 Moreover, perceived risk, as expected, had a negative influence on consumers’ attitude Counterfeit towards counterfeit outdoor recreation products and their purchase intention. These findings outdoor are in line with previous studies in the context of counterfeit products (Chiu et al., 2014; Huang products et al., 2004). It must be noted that role of perceived risk could be more salient in this study as outdoor recreation products are mostly used in an environment with many potential risks. Consumers depend on the products to protect them from danger and face the challenges of their surroundings. As such, it is not surprising that perceived risk significantly affects both consumers’ attitude and purchase intention. Further, it was found that Hong Kong consumers have higher levels of purchase intention, attitude, subjective norm and perceived behavioural control than Taiwanese consumers. These findings may be attributed to the availability and relatively low price of counterfeit products in Hong Kong (Chan et al., 1998). Thus, Hong Kong consumers are more likely to have a more favourable attitude towards counterfeit outdoor products and are less concerned about purchasing them. In addition, the multi-group analysis found that consumers in Hong Kong and Taiwan are different in their attitude and purchase intention of counterfeits outdoor recreation products. Hong Kong consumers are affected to a larger extent by the level of perceived risk on attitude and purchase intention when compared to consumers in Taiwan. Although Taiwan and Hong Kong share the same Chinese culture, this study suggests that consumer behaviour in the two countries is not similar. Practical implication The outdoor recreation product industry has taken many initiatives to prevent counterfeits at the stage of design, manufacture and marketing. This study examines the purchase of counterfeits from the consumer perspective. Applying the TPB, which is used in explaining the purchase of counterfeits in other product categories, this study suggests that consumers are aware of safety and functionality issues in the outdoor recreation product context. More risk-averse consumers are less likely to purchase counterfeits. They will prefer to buy authentic products, perhaps driven by the quality and perceived safety and functionality promised by the brands. As such, outdoor recreation product companies should focus on marketing the product attributes of their brand that emphasises their speciality or function that cannot be reproduced by other companies. In addition, the companies should also emphasise the risks in outdoor activities and how the use of quality and trusted brands can minimise such risks. This marketing strategy is especially important for consumers with higher perceived risk. It will create brand loyalty in this group of consumers. In particular, the study also suggests that different marketing anti-counterfeit strategies should be used in different geographic areas according to the different consumers’ attitudes toward counterfeits. Limitations and future research This study is not without limitations. First, respondents of this study were selected from consumers patronising brick-and-mortar retail stores selling authentic products. However, it must be noted that most counterfeit purchases occur on internet platforms. Studies found that consumers may have different behaviours purchasing outdoor products online (Chiu et al., 2018). Future research should investigate online purchasing behaviour, as it may differ from brick-and-mortar consumers. Moreover, this study did not explore consumers’ interest and involvement in outdoor activities, which could be influential factors in predicting purchase intention. Therefore, future research needs to comprehensively consider consumers’ demographic backgrounds to better understand their decision-making process in purchasing counterfeit outdoor products. Also, this study studied only hiking counterfeit products. Future studies should consider other different types of outdoor products to obtain a more holistic picture of counterfeit product purchasing behaviour. In addition, it should be JABES noted that the TPB has been criticised for ignoring emotional, habitual and motivational 28,3 factors in consumers’ decision-making process (Perugini and Bagozzi, 2001). Therefore, future studies may consider applying the model of goal-directed behaviour (Perugini and Bagozzi, 2001), which is another social-psychological model addressing the limitations of the TPB, to explore consumers’ purchase behaviour of outdoor counterfeits (Chiu et al., 2018; Chiu and Choi, 2018). Conclusion In sum, this study is one of the few to explore the factors affecting consumers’ intention to purchase counterfeit outdoor products and further compare the differences between Taiwan and Hong Kong. This study found that the TPB explained Taiwan and Hong Kong consumers’ behaviour of purchasing counterfeit outdoor products. Moreover, it was found that the influence of attitude on purchase intention was more substantial for Taiwan consumers. Meanwhile, the impact of perceived risk on consumers’ attitudes and purchase intention was more influential for Hong Kong consumers. References Ajzen, I. (1991), “The theory of planned behavior”, Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Vol. 50 No. 2, pp. 179-211. Ang, S.H., Cheng, P.S., Lim, E.A. and Tambyah, S.K. (2001), “Spot the difference: consumer responses towards counterfeits”, Journal of Consumer Marketing, Vol. 18 No. 3, pp. 219-235. Anti-Counterfeiting Group (2003), Why You Should Care about Counterfeiting, Author, London. Armitage, C.J. and Conner, M. (2001), “Efficacy of the theory of planned behaviour: a meta-analytic review”, British Journal of Social Psychology, Vol. 40 No. 4, pp. 471-499. Bae, S. (2011), “Decision-making styles in purchasing sport products: an international comparison between American and Korean college students”, in Dolles, H. and S€oderman, S. (Eds), Sport as a Business, Palgrave Macmillan, London, pp. 35-52. Bentler, P.M. and Chou, C.P. (1987), “Practical issues in structural modeling”, Sociological Methods and Research, Vol. 16 No. 1, pp. 78-117. Bhatia, V. (2018), “Examining consumers’ attitude towards purchase of counterfeit fashion products”, Journal of Indian Business Research, Vol. 10 No. 2, pp. 193-207. Bian, X. and Moutinho, L. (2011), “The role of brand image, product involvement, and knowledge in explaining consumer purchase behaviour of counterfeits: direct and indirect effects”, European Journal of Marketing, Vol. 45 Nos 1-2, pp. 191-216. Bian, X. and Veloutsou, C. (2007), “Consumers’ attitudes regarding non-deceptive counterfeit brands in the UK and China”, Journal of Brand Management, Vol. 14 No. 3, pp. 211-222. Brislin, R.W. (1970), “Back-translation for cross-cultural research”, Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, Vol. 1 No. 3, pp. 185-216. Byrne, B.M. (2016), Structural Equation Modeling with AMOS: Basic Concepts, Applications, and Programming, Lawrence Erlbaum, New York. Chae, M.H., Black, C. and Heitmeyer, J. (2006), “Pre-purchase and post-purchase satisfaction and fashion involvement of female tennis wear consumers”, International Journal of Consumer Studies, Vol. 30 No. 1, pp. 25-33. Chan, A., Wong, S. and Leung, P. (1998), “Ethical beliefs of Chinese consumers in Hong Kong”, Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 17 No. 11, pp. 1163-1170. Chang, H.H. (2004), “Fake logos, fake theory, fake globalization”, Inter-Asia Cultural Studies, Vol. 5 No. 2, pp. 222-236. Chiu, W. and Choi, H. (2018), “Consumers’ goal-directed behavior of purchasing sportswear products Counterfeit online: a case study of Chinese consumers”, Sport, Business and Management: An International outdoor Journal, Vol. 8 No. 2, pp. 118-133. products Chiu, W. and Leng, H.K. (2015), “Is that a Nike? The purchase of counterfeit sporting goods through the lens of the Theory of Planned Behavior”, Sports Management International Journal Choregia, Vol. 11 No. 1, pp. 79-94. Chiu, W. and Leng, H.K. (2016), “Consumers’ intention to purchase counterfeit sporting goods in Singapore and Taiwan”, Asia Pacific Journal of Marketing and Logistics, Vol. 28 No. 1, pp. 23-36. Chiu, W., Lee, K.Y. and Won, D. (2014), “Consumer behavior toward counterfeit sporting goods”, Social Behavior & Personality, Vol. 42 No. 4, pp. 615-624. Chiu, W., Kim, T. and Won, D. (2018), “Predicting consumers’ intention to purchase sporting goods online: an application of the model of goal-directed behavior”, Asia Pacific Journal of Marketing and Logistics, Vol. 30 No. 2, pp. 333-351. De Matos, C.A., Ituassu, C.T. and Rossi, C.A.V. (2007), “Consumer attitudes toward counterfeits: a review and extension”, Journal of Consumer Marketing, Vol. 24 No. 1, pp. 36-47. De Mooij, M. and Hofstede, G. (2011), “Cross-cultural consumer behavior: a review of research findings”, Journal of International Consumer Marketing, Vol. 23 Nos 3-4, pp. 181-192. Dickson, M.A. and Pollack, A. (2000), “Clothing and identity among female in-line skaters”, Clothing and Textiles Research Journal, Vol. 18 No. 2, pp. 65-72. Duff and Phelps (2016), “Outdoor products industry insights - 2016”, available at: https://www.duff andphelps.com/-/media/assets/pdfs/publications/mergers-and-acquisitions/outdoor-products- industry-insights-2016.pdf (accessed 1 October 2019). Eisend, M. and Schuchert-Guler, € P. (2006), “Explaining counterfeit purchases: a review and preview”, Academy of Marketing Science Review, Vol. 12 No. 6, pp. 1-25. Fornell, C. and Larcker, D.F. (1981), “Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error”, Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 18 No. 1, pp. 39-50. Gentry, J.W., Putrevu, S. and Shultz, C.J. (2006), “The effects of counterfeiting on consumer search”, Journal of Consumer Behaviour, Vol. 5 No. 3, pp. 245-256. Grant, B.C., Thompson, S.M. and Boyes, M. (1996), “Risk and responsibility: in outdoor recreation”, Journal of Physical Education, Recreation and Dance, Vol. 67 No. 7, pp. 34-35. Hair, J.F., Black, W.C., Babin, B.J. and Anderson, R.E. (2010), Multivariate Data Analysis, Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ. Hamelin, N., Nwankwo, S. and El Hadouchi, R. (2013), “‘Faking brands’: consumer responses to counterfeiting”, Journal of Consumer Behaviour, Vol. 12 No. 3, pp. 159-170. Hassan, L.M., Shiu, E. and Parry, S. (2016), “Addressing the cross-country applicability of the theory of planned behaviour (TPB): a structured review of multi-country TPB studies”, Journal of Consumer Behaviour, Vol. 15 No. 1, pp. 72-86. Hu, L.T. and Bentler, P.M. (1999), “Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: conventional criteria versus new alternatives”, Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, Vol. 6 No. 1, pp. 1-55. Huang, J.H., Lee, B.C. and Ho, S.H. (2004), “Consumer attitude toward gray market goods”, International Marketing Review, Vol. 21 No. 6, pp. 598-614. Huang, Y.A., Lin, C., Su, H.J., Tung, M.L. and Phau, I. (2015), “I worship, so I download? Idol worship, music purchase and piracy by young consumers in Taiwan”, Asia Pacific Journal of Marketing and Logistics, Vol. 27 No. 1, pp. 99-126. Jiang, L. and Shan, J. (2016), “Counterfeits or shanzhai? The role of face and brand consciousness in luxury copycat consumption”, Psychological Reports, Vol. 119 No. 1, pp. 181-199. Lan, M.Y., Liu, F., Fang, C.H. and Lin, T.M.Y. (2012), “Understanding word-of-mouth in counterfeiting”, Psychology, Vol. 3 No. 3, pp. 289-295. Lobb, A.E., Mazzocchi, M. and Traill, W.B. (2007), “Modelling risk perception and trust in food safety JABES information within the theory of planned behaviour”, Food Quality and Preference, Vol. 18 28,3 No. 2, pp. 384-395. Lord, K.R., Lee, M.S. and Choong, P. (2001), “Differences in normative and informational social influence”, Advances in Consumer Research, Vol. 28 No. 1, pp. 280-285. Nelson, M.R. and Mcleod, L.E. (2005), “Adolescent brand consciousness and product placements: awareness, liking and perceived effects on self and others”, International Journal of Consumer Studies, Vol. 29 No. 6, pp. 515-528. Nunnally, J.C. (1978), Psychometric Theory, McGraw-Hill, New York. Outdoor Industry Association (2017), “Outdoor recreation economy report”, available at: https://outdoor industry.org/resource/2017-outdoor-recreation-economy-report/ (accessed 1 September 2019). Park, J., Lennon, S.J. and Stoel, L. (2005), “On-line product presentation: effects on mood, perceived risk, and purchase intention”, Psychology and Marketing, Vol. 22 No. 9, pp. 695-719. Penz, E. and Stottinger, B. (2005), “Forget the ‘real’ thing-take the copy! an explanatory model for the volitional purchase of counterfeit products”, Advances in Consumer Research, Vol. 32, p. 568. Perugini, M. and Bagozzi, R.P. (2001), “The role of desires and anticipated emotions in goal-directed behaviours: broadening and deepening the theory of planned behaviour”, British Journal of Social Psychology, Vol. 40 No. 1, pp. 79-98. Phau, I. and Teah, M. (2009), “Devil wears (counterfeit) Prada: a study of antecedents and outcomes of attitudes towards counterfeits of luxury brands”, Journal of Consumer Marketing, Vol. 26 No. 1, pp. 15-27. Phau, I., Teah, M. and Lee, A. (2009), “Targeting buyers of counterfeits of luxury brands: a study on attitudes of Singaporean consumers”, Journal of Targeting, Measurement and Analysis for Marketing, Vol. 17 No. 1, pp. 3-15. Prendergast, G., Chuen, L.H. and Phau, I. (2002), “Understanding consumer demand for non-deceptive pirated brands”, Marketing Intelligence and Planning, Vol. 20 No. 7, pp. 405-416. Rahman, S., Haque, A. and Rahman, M. (2011), “Purchasing behavior for pirated products”, Journal of Management Research, Vol. 11 No. 1, pp. 48-58. Sharma, P. and Chan, R.Y. (2017), “Exploring the role of attitudinal functions in counterfeit purchase behavior via an extended conceptual framework”, Psychology and Marketing, Vol. 34 No. 3, pp. 294-308. Souiden, N., Ladhari, R. and Zarrouk Amri, A. (2018), “Is buying counterfeit sinful? Investigation of consumers’ attitudes and purchase intentions of counterfeit products in a Muslim country”, International Journal of Consumer Studies, Vol. 42 No. 6, pp. 687-703. Swami, V., Chamorro-Premuzic, T. and Furnham, A. (2009), “Faking it: personality and individual difference predictors of willingness to buy counterfeit goods”, The Journal of Socio-Economics, Vol. 38 No. 5, pp. 820-825. Swinyard, W.R., Rinne, H. and Kau, A.K. (1990), “The morality of software piracy: a cross-cultural analysis”, Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 9 No. 8, pp. 655-664. Tang, F., Tian, V.I. and Zaichkowsky, J. (2014), “Understanding counterfeit consumption”, Asia Pacific Journal of Marketing and Logistics, Vol. 26 No. 1, pp. 4-20. Ting, M.-S., Goh, Y.-N. and Isa, S.M. (2016), “Determining consumer purchase intentions toward counterfeit luxury goods in Malaysia”, Asia Pacific Management Review, Vol. 21 No. 4, pp. 219-230. Tom, G., Garibaldi, B., Zeng, Y. and Pilcher, J. (1998), “Consumer demand for counterfeit goods”, Psychology and Marketing, Vol. 15 No. 5, pp. 405-421. Transcrime (2010), Anti Brand Counterfeiting in the EU: Report on International and National Existing Standards, Joint Research Centre on Transnational Crime, Italy. Veloutsou, C. and Bian, X. (2008), “A cross-national examination of consumer perceived risk in the Counterfeit context of non-deceptive counterfeit brands”, Journal of Consumer Behaviour: International outdoor Research and Review, Vol. 7 No. 1, pp. 3-20. products Wee, C.H., Ta, S.J. and Cheok, K.H. (1995), “Non-price determinants of intention to purchase counterfeit goods: an exploratory study”, International Marketing Review, Vol. 12 No. 6, pp. 19-46. Yoon, C. (2011), “Theory of planned behavior and ethics theory in digital piracy: an integrated model”, Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 100 No. 3, pp. 405-417. Appendix 1 Survey instrument Purchase intention scale (1) I will purchase counterfeit outdoor products. (2) I will never consider buying counterfeit outdoor products. (3) The probability that I will consider buying counterfeit outdoor products is high. Attitude towards counterfeit goods (1) Generally speaking, buying counterfeit outdoor products is a better choice. (2) Considering the price, I prefer counterfeit outdoor products. (3) I enjoy shopping for counterfeit outdoor products. (4) Buying counterfeit outdoor products generally benefits the consumer. (5) There is nothing wrong with purchasing counterfeit outdoor products. Subjective norm (1) If I purchase counterfeit outdoor products, most of the people who are important to me will disapprove. (2) People who are important to me will look down on me if I purchase counterfeit outdoor products. (3) My family members will think it is okay to purchase counterfeit outdoor products. (4) My friends believe that buying counterfeit sporting goods is wrong.* Perceived behavioural control (1) It is easy to purchase counterfeit outdoor products. (2) I know where to purchase counterfeit outdoor products. (3) I can find counterfeit outdoor products if I wanted to. (4) Buying counterfeit outdoor products is entirely within my control. Brand consciousness (1) Well-known brands are best for me. (2) I usually choose more expensive brands. (3) I prefer buying best-selling brands. (4) The most advertised brands are usually better choices.* Perceived risk JABES (1) The risk that I take when I buy a counterfeit outdoor product is high. 28,3 (2) There is high probability that the counterfeit outdoor product does not work. (3) Spending money with a counterfeit outdoor product might be a bad decision. *Items were removed due to low factor loadings (< 0.50) Corresponding author Weisheng Chiu can be contacted at: weishengchiu@gmail.com For instructions on how to order reprints of this article, please visit our website: www.emeraldgrouppublishing.com/licensing/reprints.htm Or contact us for further details: permissions@emeraldinsight.com http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Journal of Asian Business and Economic Studies Emerald Publishing

A comparative study of consumers' intention to purchase counterfeit outdoor products in Taiwan and Hong Kong

Download PDF
15 pages

Loading next page...
 
/lp/emerald-publishing/a-comparative-study-of-consumers-intention-to-purchase-counterfeit-sCYbpipk4B

References (72)

Publisher
Emerald Publishing
Copyright
© Wen-Yung Tseng, Weisheng Chiu and Ho Keat Leng
ISSN
2515-964X
DOI
10.1108/jabes-02-2020-0011
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

Purpose – This study aims to compare the purchase intention of counterfeit outdoor products between Taiwan and Hong Kong consumers. Design/methodology/approach – A total of 584 respondents from Hong Kong (n 5 247, 42%) and Taiwan (n 5 337, 58%) were recruited for the study. Data analysis was performed by using structural equation modelling techniques. Findings – The results showed that consumers’ perceived risk had a negative influence on attitude and intention to purchase counterfeit outdoor products. Moreover, attitude towards buying counterfeit outdoor products, perceived behavioural control and subjective norm had positive impacts on purchase intention. Brand consciousness, however, had a negative influence on purchase intention. The multi-group analysis identified significant differences between Hong Kong and Taiwanese respondents. Originality/value – This study provides a better understanding of how these factors affect purchase intention of counterfeit outdoor products across different cultures. Keywords Outdoor products, Counterfeit, Theory of planned behavior, Perceived risk, Brand consciousness Paper type Research paper Introduction Because of an increasing interest in a healthy and active lifestyle, the outdoor recreation industry has been growing in recent years (Duff and Phelps, 2016). This worldwide growth in the industry has witnessed the establishment of various outdoor-related organisations, including the Outdoor Industry Association (OIA) in the USA, the European Outdoor Group (EOG) in Europe and the Scandinavian Outdoor Group (SOG) in Scandinavia. In China, the China Outdoor Association (COA) and China Outdoor Commerce Alliance (COCA) represent the industry. In an OIA report in 2017, it was noted that outdoor recreation was one of JEL Classification — E21, M10, M31 © Wen-Yung Tseng, Weisheng Chiu and Ho Keat Leng. Published in Journal of Asian Business and Economic Studies. Published by Emerald Publishing Limited. This article is published under the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY 4.0) licence. Anyone may reproduce, distribute, translate and create derivative works of this article (for both commercial and non-commercial purposes), subject to full attribution to the original publication and authors. The full terms of this licence may be seen at http:// Journal of Asian Business and Economic Studies creativecommons.org/licences/by/4.0/legalcode The authors would like to thank the Institute of International Business and Governance, established pp. 162-176 Emerald Publishing Limited with the substantial support of a grant from the Research Grants Council of the Hong Kong Special 2515-964X DOI 10.1108/JABES-02-2020-0011 Administrative Region, China (UGC/IDS16/17), for its support. the largest economic sectors in the USA, generating US$887bn in consumer spending. Counterfeit The primary component was in travel spending, although the amount spent on outdoor outdoor recreation products, including gear, apparel, footwear, equipment and services, was still products significant, amounting to US$184.5bn. This was a significant increase from the US$120.7bn reported in 2012 (Outdoor Industry Association, 2017). The outdoor recreation markets in both Hong Kong and Taiwan have developed much earlier when compared to China. Hong Kong, as one of the major cities and transportation hubs in Asia, is home to many outdoor recreation brands. Companies in the outdoor recreation industry set up their subsidiaries and distribution networks in Hong Kong to strategically manage and promote their businesses in the region. Consequently, consumers in Hong Kong are familiar with many outdoor brands and can easily purchase outdoor recreation equipment. According to a government survey, the retail sales in travel and sporting goods, household goods and other goods was US$8.7bn in 2016 (Census and Statistics Department of Hong Kong SAR, 2016). Over in Taiwan, the outdoor recreation industry is characterised by its established supply chains linking suppliers of raw materials, intermediaries, manufacturers, distributors and retailers. According to the Taiwan Outdoor Group (TOG), the retail value of the outdoor recreation market is about US$1bn in 2014. The above discussion highlights the value of the outdoor recreation industry in both Hong Kong and Taiwan. However, because of the popularity of outdoor products, it has become one of the primary targets for counterfeiting (Transcrime, 2010). Many outdoor recreation companies are located in China, where a grey market exists. Counterfeits of popular outdoor recreation brands are common in both brick-and-mortar and online stores, and this has led to considerable losses to companies in the industry (Anti-Counterfeiting Group, 2003). Some of the companies have taken steps to prevent the purchase of counterfeits and protect authentic products. For example, Arc’Teryx, a leading Canada outdoor recreation brand, used its website to educate its customers to distinguish genuine products from counterfeits. Moncler, an Italian–France luxury outdoor brand, used radio frequency identification (RFID) chips in their products to counter counterfeit goods. There are many different outdoor activities, each requiring different types of equipment and outdoor products to protect users and enhance their experiences. Compared to other product categories, consumers are more likely to value functionality, safety and environmentally friendly features in outdoor recreation products. Consequently, such features will result in higher prices for these products. This creates an opportunity for counterfeits to offer lower prices to attract consumers. However, using counterfeit outdoor recreation products can be risky for consumers. When the products do not perform in the harsh outdoor environment, it may lead to physical harm to consumers. Although counterfeit purchases have been examined in many different product categories (Chiu et al., 2014; Chiu and Leng, 2016; Phau and Teah, 2009; Phau et al., 2009), the product category of outdoor recreation product has not received much interest. To address the research gap in the extant literature, the primary purpose of this study is to explore the factors influencing consumers’ purchase intention of counterfeit outdoor products using the theory of planned behaviour (TPB, Ajzen, 1991). The TPB is a widely used social-psychological model to explain consumers’ both volitional and non-volitional decision-making process (Ajzen, 1991) and deemed as an appropriate theory to explore consumers’ consumption of counterfeits. Moreover, to date, few studies have investigated differences in consumers’ attitudes and behaviour toward counterfeits across countries (Bian and Veloutsou, 2007; Chiu and Leng, 2016). It has been argued that more cross-cultural research in consumer behaviour is needed to gain a better understanding of the role of cultural differences in consumers’ decision-making process (De Mooij and Hofstede, 2011; Hassan et al.,2016). Cross-cultural research can also provide insights into consumer behaviour in countries or regions with different economic development and cultural norms (De Mooij and Hofstede, 2011). Accordingly, the secondary purpose of this study is to examine the purchase intention of counterfeit outdoor products JABES between Hong Kong and Taiwanese consumers. 28,3 Literature review Theory of planned behaviour The TPB posits that an individual’s purchase behaviour is determined by purchase intention, which is, in turn, determined by the attitude towards the behaviour, subjective norms and perceived behavioural control (Ajzen, 1991). In many studies across a spectrum of product categories, general support of the TPB in the purchase of counterfeit goods has been found. Specifically, it was established that intentions are predictive of actual behaviour. Also, attitude, subjective norm and perceived behavioural control are positively correlated with intention and behaviour. However, the relative importance of attitude, subjective norm and perceived behavioural control in predicting intention can vary across product categories (Ajzen, 1991; Armitage and Conner, 2001). The TPB has also been used to explain behaviour in the purchase of counterfeit goods (Phau et al.,2009; Chiu et al.,2014; De Matos et al.,2007; Penz and Stottinger, 2005; Chiu and Leng, 2015, 2016). The TPB is deemed an appropriate tool to understand consumer behaviour in the purchase of counterfeits, as it examines consumers’ both volitional and non-volitional decision-making process (Ajzen, 1991). Similar to other product categories, attitude, subjective norms and perceived behavioural control are positively correlated with intention in purchasing counterfeits. When consumers have a more favourable attitude towards the purchase of counterfeits, they are also more likely to purchase counterfeits (Swami et al.,2009; Tom et al., 1998; Phau et al., 2009; Ang et al.,2001; Chiu et al.,2014; Wee et al.,1995). In addition, subjective norms can affect consumer’s intention to purchase counterfeits (De Matos et al., 2007; Penz and Stottinger, 2005; Phau et al., 2009; Ang et al., 2001; Tom et al., 1998; Rahman et al., 2011; Prendergast et al., 2002; Huang et al., 2015; Chiu et al., 2014). When the behaviour of purchasing counterfeits is accepted by relatives and friends, the consumer is more likely to purchase counterfeits. Conversely, when the behaviour is not accepted by relatives and friends, the consumer is less likely to engage in such behaviour, especially when the product category is conspicuous (Lan et al., 2012; Tang et al., 2014; Lord et al., 2001). Due to their illicit nature, counterfeits are not openly available for sale to consumers in many markets. Consequently, consumers do not have complete control in their purchase of counterfeits, as this depends on access to information on the availability of counterfeits (Lan et al., 2012). With higher levels of access to counterfeit goods, consumers will have higher levels of perceived behavioural control, and this can lead to higher levels of intentions to purchase counterfeit goods (Prendergast et al., 2002; Chiu et al., 2014; Chiu and Leng, 2016; Armitage and Conner, 2001; Penz and Stottinger, 2005). Consequently, the following hypotheses are detailed as below: H1. Attitude towards purchasing counterfeit outdoor products will have a positive influence on purchase intention of counterfeit outdoor products. H2. Perceived behavioural control will have a positive influence on purchase intention of counterfeit outdoor products. H3. Subjective norm will have a positive influence on purchase intention of counterfeit outdoor products. Brand consciousness Brand consciousness refers to consumers’ psychological preference of brand-name products in their decision-making process to purchase (Nelson and Mcleod, 2005; Jiang and Shan, 2016). Extant literature suggests that brand consciousness may have a negative impact on Counterfeit consumers’ intention to purchase counterfeit outdoor products (Chiu and Leng, 2016). outdoor Consumers who have a higher brand consciousness tend to buy branded products to express products their ideal self-image and associate themselves with a higher level of social status (Wee et al., 1995; Bian and Moutinho, 2011). In particular, brand names can play an essential role in affecting consumer choice in the sports apparel category (Dickson and Pollack, 2000). They not only reflect consumer choice but also indicate membership and shared beliefs of the group (Chae et al., 2006; Dickson and Pollack, 2000; Bae, 2011). Counterfeit products often use authentic brand name and logo to confuse consumers particularly when they are not familiar with the product (Nelson and Mcleod, 2005; Jiang and Shan, 2016). This suggests that brand consciousness may be an essential factor in the study of counterfeits buying behaviour. As such, it is expected that consumers who are high in brand consciousness are less likely to purchase counterfeits (Gentry et al., 2006; Phau et al., 2009). This leads to the following hypothesis: H4. Brand consciousness will have a negative influence on purchase intention of counterfeit outdoor products. Perceived risk Perceived risk consists of consumers’ perceptions of the uncertainty and adverse consequences of purchasing a service/product (Park et al., 2005). The literature suggests that perceived risk can affect consumers’ attitudes and purchase intention (De Matos et al., 2007; Wee et al., 1995; Lobb et al., 2007). As counterfeits are not genuine products, consumers expect that there will be inherent risks when using the products (Ting et al., 2016). These risks include functional risks where the products do not perform as expected and social risks where the consumer is ostracised as a result of purchasing and using counterfeits (Veloutsou and Bian, 2008). There are potential risks in all outdoor activities. Consumers who are familiar with outdoor activities will be more aware of such risks when compared to general consumers (Grant et al., 1996). In particular, counterfeit outdoor recreation products may carry physical risks when the product causes physical harm to the consumer. Risk-averse consumers may be more concerned as to whether counterfeits goods will perform as expected, are safe or will affect them adversely in how others perceive them. As such, they are less likely to have a positive attitude towards purchasing counterfeits and an intention to purchase counterfeits (Ang et al., 2001; Tom et al., 1998; Chiu et al., 2014). Consequently, the hypotheses are as follows: H5. Perceived risk will have a negative influence on attitude towards purchasing counterfeit outdoor products. H6. Perceived risk will have a negative influence on purchase intention of counterfeit outdoor products. Cultural differences Consumers’ acceptance and purchase of counterfeits differ across countries (Eisend and Schuchert-Guler, € 2006; Gentry et al., 2006; Bian and Veloutsou, 2007). In part, this difference is explained by cultural and historical factors. As copyright protection legislation originated in western countries, it is a notion that has gained less acceptance and support in Asian countries. Consequently, Asian consumers are more accepting when it comes to purchasing and consuming counterfeits (Swinyard et al., 1990; Hamelin et al., 2013; Tang et al., 2014; Chang, 2004). However, even among Asian countries, there are differences in the consumption of JABES counterfeits. A study showed that although consumers in Hong Kong and China share many 28,3 cultural and demographic similarities, there were still differences in the attitudes towards the purchase of counterfeits and the availability of counterfeits in the two regions (Tang et al., 2014). Similarly, although the majority of consumers in Singapore and Taiwan are of Chinese ethnicity, there were differences between the two countries in attitudes and subjective norms towards counterfeits (Chiu and Leng, 2016)(Figure 1). Extant literature has identified a need to examine the cultural difference in consumers’ decision-making process (De Mooij and Hofstede, 2011). In this study, although both Taiwan and Hong Kong are predominantly Chinese societies with similar demographics and cultures, they have different histories. This may result in differences in consumers’ attitudes and behaviours. Therefore, consumers’ acceptance and purchase behaviour of counterfeits may still differ across the two regions. The final hypothesis for this study is as follows: H7. Relationships between the variables in the research model will be different between Taiwan and Hong Kong consumers. Method Participants and procedure The questionnaires were distributed to physical outdoor speciality shops in Taiwan and outdoor shops in Hong Kong over three months from November 2016 to February 2017. The products selected for this study were hiking products, as they are the most popular outdoor products amongst consumers. Respondents were provided with a small gift as a token of appreciation for completing the questionnaire. Of the total 584 valid questionnaires, 58% (n 5 337) were from Taiwan and 42% (n 5 247) were from Hong Kong. Among Taiwanese respondents, 58.2% (n 5 196) were male. The modal group of Taiwanese respondents was between 31 and 40 years of age (n5 128, 38%) with a university degree (n5 227, 67.4%). For the Hong Kong study, 55.1% (n 5 136) of the respondents were male. The modal group for Hong Kong respondents was between 21 and 30 years of age (n5 115, 46.6%). This is detailed in Table 1 below. H5 Perceived Attitude risk H1 H6 Perceived behaviour control H2 Purchase intention Subjective H3 norm H4 Brand consciousness Figure 1. Research model and H7: Relationship between the variables in the research model hypotheses will be different between Taiwan and Hong Kong consumers Counterfeit Taiwan (n 5 337) Hong Kong (n 5 247) outdoor n % n % products Gender Male 196 58.2 136 55.1 Female 141 41.8 111 44.9 Age (years) Below 20 5 1.5 41 16.6 21–30 77 22.8 115 46.6 31–40 128 38.0 70 28.3 Above 40 127 37.7 21 8.5 Education Senior high 25 7.4 89 36.0 University 227 67.4 89 36.0 Graduate school 84 25.2 69 28.0 Income* 1 24 7.1 19 7.7 2 39 11.6 177 71.7 3 83 24.6 32 12.9 4 191 56.7 19 7.7 Note(s): *Due to the different currencies in Hong Kong and Taiwan, the income level was labelled from 1 to 5 Hong Kong: 1 5 below HKD10,000; 2 5 HKD10,001–HKD25,000; 3 5 HKD25,001–HKD50,000; 4 over Table 1. HKD50,001 per month Respondents’ Taiwan: 1 5 below NTD20,000; 2 5 NTD20,001–NTD30,000; 3 5 NTD30,001–NTD40,000; 5 over NTD40,001 demographic per month characteristics Measures The survey instrument was based on earlier studies. The scales of purchase intention (three items), attitude towards counterfeit goods (five items), perceived behavioural control (four items), subjective norm (four items) and brand consciousness (four items) were adopted from Chiu and Leng (2016). Perceived risk scale was taken from De Matos et al. (2007). These items were originally written in English and translated into traditional Chinese, using back- translation (Brislin, 1970). All items were assessed on a seven-point Likert scale, ranging from strongly disagree (1) to strongly agree (7). Data analysis Data analysis proceeded in three phases using SPSS 20.0 and Amos 20.0. First, the scale reliability and validity were calculated by confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) with maximum likelihood (ML) estimation. A chi-square statistic index, comparative fit index (CFI), Tucker and Lewis index (TLI) and root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA) were used to test the adequacy of the research model. According to the criteria suggested by Hair et al., 2010, CFI and TLI values should be larger than 0.90, and the RMSEA value should be below 0.08. Second, structural equation modelling (SEM) analysis was used to examine the hypotheses in the proposed model. Finally, a multiple-group analysis was conducted to examine the differences between Taiwanese and Hong Kong samples in the conceptual model. Results Scale reliability and validity Scale reliability and validity were evaluated by conducting a CFA. However, it found that one item of subjective norm and one item of brand consciousness reported low factor loadings (< 0.50). Thus, it was determined that dropping these items would improve the model without JABES compromising the theoretical meaningfulness of the measure (Bentler and Chou, 1987; Byrne, 28,3 2016). The deletion of these item resulted in an appropriate model fit of measurement model, χ (174) 5 528.081, CFI 5 0.963, TLI 5 0.955, RMSEA 5 0.067. The reliability of the scale was calculated using composite reliability (De Matos et al., 2007) and Cronbach’s alpha. As shown in Table 2, the values of CR ranged from 0.856–0.972, fulfilling the recommended criterion of 0.70 (Fornell and Larcker, 1981). The values of Cronbach’s alpha all fulfilled the cut-off of 0.70 (Nunnally, 1978). The convergent validity was tested by factor loading and the average variance extracted (AVE) and revealed appropriate results (Hair et al., 2010). The factor loadings of the observable items were all above the criterion of 0.50, and AVE values of the construct were higher than the suggested value 0.50, except for perceived behavioural control (0.485). Moreover, discriminant validity was evaluated by the method proposed by Fornell and Larcker (1981). As reported in Table 3, the correlation coefficients between pairs of constructs were less than the square root of AVE for the individual variables, and as such, there was good discriminant validity of the constructs in this study. Hypothesis testing The goodness-of-fit indices showed that the proposed model fitted the data adequately, model fit: χ (183)5 626.227, CFI5 0.917, TLI5 0.903, RMSEA5 0.079 (Hu and Bentler, 1999). The results showed that purchase intention, attitude, perceived behavioural control and subjective norms have positive influences on purchase intention (p < 0.001), supporting H1, H2 and H3. Moreover, brand consciousness had a negative influence on purchase intention (p < 0.01), supporting H4. Finally, the paths from perceived risk to attitude and Construct Number of items Cronbach’s alpha Factor loadings CR AVE INT 3 0.971 0.947–0.983 0.972 0.920 ATT 5 0.941 0.793–0.923 0.944 0.770 PBC 4 0.884 0.667–0.919 0.889 0.670 SN 3 0.960 0.920–0.938 0.961 0.891 BC 3 0.851 0.685–0.921 0.856 0.668 PR 3 0.894 0.797–0.915 0.897 0.744 Table 2. Note(s): INT 5 purchase intention; ATT 5 attitude; PBC 5 perceived behavioural control; SN 5 subjective Summary results of measurement norm; BC 5 brand consciousness; PR 5 perceived risk Mean SD INT ATT PBC SN BC PR INT 2.784 1.459 0.959 ATT 2.678 1.296 0.825 0.878 PBC 4.226 1.552 0.466 0.476 0.818 SN 2.747 1.312 0.683 0.744 0.476 0.944 BC 4.289 1.173 0.289 0.215 0.153 0.164 0.817 Table 3. PR 5.057 1.304 0.497 0.465 0.156 0.417 0.458 0.862 Mean, SD, square roots Note(s): INT 5 purchase intention; ATT 5 attitude; PBC 5 perceived behavioural control; SN 5 subjective of AVE and norm; BC: brand consciousness, PR 5 perceived risk. Italic diagonal elements are the square root of AVE; correlations between constructs values below the diagonal are correlations purchase intention were statistically and negatively significant (p < 0.001), supporting H5 Counterfeit and H6. Table 4 shows the results of hypotheses testing in more detail. outdoor products Multi-group analysis Independent t-tests were conducted to measure differences between Taiwanese (n5 337) and Hong Kong (n5 247) respondents. The results are reported in Table 5. There were significant differences in the mean score of purchase intention, attitude, perceived behavioural control, subjective norm and perceived risk between Taiwanese and Hong Kong respondents. Compared to Taiwanese respondents, Hong Kong respondents reported significantly higher purchase intention (M 5 2.369, M 5 3.351; t5 8.294, p < 0.001), attitude Taiwanese Hong Kongese (M 5 2.242, M 5 3.273; t 5 10.326, p < 0.001), perceived behavioural Taiwanese Hong Kongese control (M 5 3.756, M 5 4.868; t 5 9.138, p < 0.001) and subjective Taiwanese Hong Kongese norm (M 5 2.267, M 5 3.402; t5 11.237, p < 0.001) towards purchasing Taiwanese Hong Kongese counterfeit outdoor products. However, Taiwanese respondents reported a higher level of perceived risk (M 5 5.379, M 5 4.618; t 5 7.266, p < 0.001) than Hong Taiwanese Hong Kongese Kong consumers. As a next step, the multi-group analysis was conducted for the proposed model to examine differences between Taiwanese and Hong Kong consumers. The data were split into Taiwanese (n5 337) and Hong Kongese (n5 247) sample sets for the multi-group analysis by using SEM. The overall model fit in each group was examined respectively. In both groups, the model fitted the data acceptably: χ (183) 5 609.447, CFI 5 0.918, TLI 5 0.904, RMSEA 5 0.063 for Taiwanese sample; χ (183) 5 703.738, CFI 5 0.897, TLI 5 0.881, RMSEA 5 0.091 for Hong Kong sample (Hu and Bentler, 1999). Therefore, the model was deemed plausible and stable across the two groups. The standardised coefficients of each path between Taiwanese and Hong Kong consumers are reported in Table 6. Next, to compare whether Taiwanese and Hong Kong consumers differ significantly with respect to any single path of the proposed model, the values of the critical ratio for differences Hypothesis Path Standardized coefficient (β) t-value H1 ATT → INT 0.693 19.073*** H2 PBC → INT 0.102 3.587*** H3 SN → INT 0.182 6.525*** H4 BC → INT 0.089 3.056** H5 PR → ATT 0.471 10.797*** Table 4. H6 PR → INT 0.123 0.3.704*** SEM results of the Note(s):**p < 0.01, ***p < 0.001 hypotheses Mean (SD) Construct Taiwanese (n 5 337) Hong Kongese (n 5 247) t-value INT 2.369 (1.273) 3.351 (1.508) 8.294*** ATT 2.242 (1.049) 3.273 (1.365) 10.326*** PBC 3.756 (1.596) 4.868 (1.233) 9.138*** SN 2.267 (1.134) 3.402 (1.256) 11.237*** BC 4.352 (1.247) 4.204 (1.061) 1.549 Table 5. PR 5.379 (1.305) 4.618 (1.170) 7.266*** Results of independent Note(s):*p < 0.01, **p < 0.001 t-tests were examined. As reported in Table 6, the significant differences were found in the paths JABES from perceived risk to attitude (critical ratio for difference 5 1.653, p < 0.10) and purchase 28,3 intention (critical ratio for difference 5 1.658, p < 0.10), indicating that perceived risk has stronger influences on attitude and purchase intention for Hong Kong consumers. Moreover, it found that the path from attitude to purchase intention was significantly different between Taiwanese and Hong Kong consumers (critical ratio for difference 5 1.903, p < 0.10), indicating attitude has a stronger influence on purchase intention for Taiwanese consumers. Therefore, the results support H7 that consumer behaviour towards counterfeit outdoor products is different across Taiwan and Hong Kong. Discussion Researchers have endeavoured to investigate the factors influencing the consumers’ purchase behaviour across various types of counterfeit products. In particular, TPB has been used as a critical framework to explain consumers’ attitude and purchasing behaviour towards counterfeit goods (Chiu et al., 2014; Chiu and Leng, 2015, 2016). To explore consumers’ purchasing behaviour of counterfeits in the outdoor recreation market, this study used the TPB as the theoretical base to examine consumers’ decision-making process of buying counterfeit outdoor products. In addition, brand consciousness and perceived risk were incorporated to examine as possible factors in this study. The results support the use of TPB in explaining the purchase intention of counterfeit outdoor recreation products. Specifically, it was found that subjective norms, perceived behavioural control and attitude had a positive influence on the intention to purchase counterfeits outdoor recreation products. This is consistent with the findings from earlier studies on the purchase of counterfeits in other product categories (Chiu et al., 2014; Chiu and Leng, 2016; Yoon, 2011). In particular, the role of attitude is the most influential among the three variables of TPB, indicating the critical role of individuals’ attitudes towards counterfeit outdoor products in purchase intention. Many studies have also found similar results that when individuals have a more favourable and positive attitude towards counterfeits, they are more likely to make a purchase of counterfeits (Sharma and Chan, 2017; Souiden et al., 2018). The additional factor of brand consciousness was found to have a negative influence on consumers’ attitudes towards the purchase of counterfeit outdoor recreation products. This relationship is consistent with the findings of previous studies (Chiu and Leng, 2016; Gentry et al., 2006; Phau et al., 2009; Jiang and Shan, 2016). Brands are essential in the purchase of outdoor recreation products, as it is a symbol of quality and elicits trust from consumers (Phau et al., 2009). Consumers who are high in brand consciousness are, thus, less likely to purchase counterfeits (Gentry et al., 2006; Chiu and Leng, 2016; Bhatia, 2018). Hong Kongese Taiwanese (n 5 337) (n 5 247) Path Estimate p Estimate p Critical ratio for difference ATT → INT 0.826 0.000 0.667 0.000 1.903y PBC → INT 0.084 0.001 0.130 0.004 0.893 SN → INT 0.217 0.000 0.158 0.000 0.985 BC → INT 0.104 0.022 0.147 0.027 0.536 PR → ATT 0.275 0.000 0.422 0.000 1.653y PR → INT 0.092 0.016 0.202 0.000 1.658y Table 6. Multi-group analysis Note(s): yp < 0.10 Moreover, perceived risk, as expected, had a negative influence on consumers’ attitude Counterfeit towards counterfeit outdoor recreation products and their purchase intention. These findings outdoor are in line with previous studies in the context of counterfeit products (Chiu et al., 2014; Huang products et al., 2004). It must be noted that role of perceived risk could be more salient in this study as outdoor recreation products are mostly used in an environment with many potential risks. Consumers depend on the products to protect them from danger and face the challenges of their surroundings. As such, it is not surprising that perceived risk significantly affects both consumers’ attitude and purchase intention. Further, it was found that Hong Kong consumers have higher levels of purchase intention, attitude, subjective norm and perceived behavioural control than Taiwanese consumers. These findings may be attributed to the availability and relatively low price of counterfeit products in Hong Kong (Chan et al., 1998). Thus, Hong Kong consumers are more likely to have a more favourable attitude towards counterfeit outdoor products and are less concerned about purchasing them. In addition, the multi-group analysis found that consumers in Hong Kong and Taiwan are different in their attitude and purchase intention of counterfeits outdoor recreation products. Hong Kong consumers are affected to a larger extent by the level of perceived risk on attitude and purchase intention when compared to consumers in Taiwan. Although Taiwan and Hong Kong share the same Chinese culture, this study suggests that consumer behaviour in the two countries is not similar. Practical implication The outdoor recreation product industry has taken many initiatives to prevent counterfeits at the stage of design, manufacture and marketing. This study examines the purchase of counterfeits from the consumer perspective. Applying the TPB, which is used in explaining the purchase of counterfeits in other product categories, this study suggests that consumers are aware of safety and functionality issues in the outdoor recreation product context. More risk-averse consumers are less likely to purchase counterfeits. They will prefer to buy authentic products, perhaps driven by the quality and perceived safety and functionality promised by the brands. As such, outdoor recreation product companies should focus on marketing the product attributes of their brand that emphasises their speciality or function that cannot be reproduced by other companies. In addition, the companies should also emphasise the risks in outdoor activities and how the use of quality and trusted brands can minimise such risks. This marketing strategy is especially important for consumers with higher perceived risk. It will create brand loyalty in this group of consumers. In particular, the study also suggests that different marketing anti-counterfeit strategies should be used in different geographic areas according to the different consumers’ attitudes toward counterfeits. Limitations and future research This study is not without limitations. First, respondents of this study were selected from consumers patronising brick-and-mortar retail stores selling authentic products. However, it must be noted that most counterfeit purchases occur on internet platforms. Studies found that consumers may have different behaviours purchasing outdoor products online (Chiu et al., 2018). Future research should investigate online purchasing behaviour, as it may differ from brick-and-mortar consumers. Moreover, this study did not explore consumers’ interest and involvement in outdoor activities, which could be influential factors in predicting purchase intention. Therefore, future research needs to comprehensively consider consumers’ demographic backgrounds to better understand their decision-making process in purchasing counterfeit outdoor products. Also, this study studied only hiking counterfeit products. Future studies should consider other different types of outdoor products to obtain a more holistic picture of counterfeit product purchasing behaviour. In addition, it should be JABES noted that the TPB has been criticised for ignoring emotional, habitual and motivational 28,3 factors in consumers’ decision-making process (Perugini and Bagozzi, 2001). Therefore, future studies may consider applying the model of goal-directed behaviour (Perugini and Bagozzi, 2001), which is another social-psychological model addressing the limitations of the TPB, to explore consumers’ purchase behaviour of outdoor counterfeits (Chiu et al., 2018; Chiu and Choi, 2018). Conclusion In sum, this study is one of the few to explore the factors affecting consumers’ intention to purchase counterfeit outdoor products and further compare the differences between Taiwan and Hong Kong. This study found that the TPB explained Taiwan and Hong Kong consumers’ behaviour of purchasing counterfeit outdoor products. Moreover, it was found that the influence of attitude on purchase intention was more substantial for Taiwan consumers. Meanwhile, the impact of perceived risk on consumers’ attitudes and purchase intention was more influential for Hong Kong consumers. References Ajzen, I. (1991), “The theory of planned behavior”, Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Vol. 50 No. 2, pp. 179-211. Ang, S.H., Cheng, P.S., Lim, E.A. and Tambyah, S.K. (2001), “Spot the difference: consumer responses towards counterfeits”, Journal of Consumer Marketing, Vol. 18 No. 3, pp. 219-235. Anti-Counterfeiting Group (2003), Why You Should Care about Counterfeiting, Author, London. Armitage, C.J. and Conner, M. (2001), “Efficacy of the theory of planned behaviour: a meta-analytic review”, British Journal of Social Psychology, Vol. 40 No. 4, pp. 471-499. Bae, S. (2011), “Decision-making styles in purchasing sport products: an international comparison between American and Korean college students”, in Dolles, H. and S€oderman, S. (Eds), Sport as a Business, Palgrave Macmillan, London, pp. 35-52. Bentler, P.M. and Chou, C.P. (1987), “Practical issues in structural modeling”, Sociological Methods and Research, Vol. 16 No. 1, pp. 78-117. Bhatia, V. (2018), “Examining consumers’ attitude towards purchase of counterfeit fashion products”, Journal of Indian Business Research, Vol. 10 No. 2, pp. 193-207. Bian, X. and Moutinho, L. (2011), “The role of brand image, product involvement, and knowledge in explaining consumer purchase behaviour of counterfeits: direct and indirect effects”, European Journal of Marketing, Vol. 45 Nos 1-2, pp. 191-216. Bian, X. and Veloutsou, C. (2007), “Consumers’ attitudes regarding non-deceptive counterfeit brands in the UK and China”, Journal of Brand Management, Vol. 14 No. 3, pp. 211-222. Brislin, R.W. (1970), “Back-translation for cross-cultural research”, Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, Vol. 1 No. 3, pp. 185-216. Byrne, B.M. (2016), Structural Equation Modeling with AMOS: Basic Concepts, Applications, and Programming, Lawrence Erlbaum, New York. Chae, M.H., Black, C. and Heitmeyer, J. (2006), “Pre-purchase and post-purchase satisfaction and fashion involvement of female tennis wear consumers”, International Journal of Consumer Studies, Vol. 30 No. 1, pp. 25-33. Chan, A., Wong, S. and Leung, P. (1998), “Ethical beliefs of Chinese consumers in Hong Kong”, Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 17 No. 11, pp. 1163-1170. Chang, H.H. (2004), “Fake logos, fake theory, fake globalization”, Inter-Asia Cultural Studies, Vol. 5 No. 2, pp. 222-236. Chiu, W. and Choi, H. (2018), “Consumers’ goal-directed behavior of purchasing sportswear products Counterfeit online: a case study of Chinese consumers”, Sport, Business and Management: An International outdoor Journal, Vol. 8 No. 2, pp. 118-133. products Chiu, W. and Leng, H.K. (2015), “Is that a Nike? The purchase of counterfeit sporting goods through the lens of the Theory of Planned Behavior”, Sports Management International Journal Choregia, Vol. 11 No. 1, pp. 79-94. Chiu, W. and Leng, H.K. (2016), “Consumers’ intention to purchase counterfeit sporting goods in Singapore and Taiwan”, Asia Pacific Journal of Marketing and Logistics, Vol. 28 No. 1, pp. 23-36. Chiu, W., Lee, K.Y. and Won, D. (2014), “Consumer behavior toward counterfeit sporting goods”, Social Behavior & Personality, Vol. 42 No. 4, pp. 615-624. Chiu, W., Kim, T. and Won, D. (2018), “Predicting consumers’ intention to purchase sporting goods online: an application of the model of goal-directed behavior”, Asia Pacific Journal of Marketing and Logistics, Vol. 30 No. 2, pp. 333-351. De Matos, C.A., Ituassu, C.T. and Rossi, C.A.V. (2007), “Consumer attitudes toward counterfeits: a review and extension”, Journal of Consumer Marketing, Vol. 24 No. 1, pp. 36-47. De Mooij, M. and Hofstede, G. (2011), “Cross-cultural consumer behavior: a review of research findings”, Journal of International Consumer Marketing, Vol. 23 Nos 3-4, pp. 181-192. Dickson, M.A. and Pollack, A. (2000), “Clothing and identity among female in-line skaters”, Clothing and Textiles Research Journal, Vol. 18 No. 2, pp. 65-72. Duff and Phelps (2016), “Outdoor products industry insights - 2016”, available at: https://www.duff andphelps.com/-/media/assets/pdfs/publications/mergers-and-acquisitions/outdoor-products- industry-insights-2016.pdf (accessed 1 October 2019). Eisend, M. and Schuchert-Guler, € P. (2006), “Explaining counterfeit purchases: a review and preview”, Academy of Marketing Science Review, Vol. 12 No. 6, pp. 1-25. Fornell, C. and Larcker, D.F. (1981), “Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error”, Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 18 No. 1, pp. 39-50. Gentry, J.W., Putrevu, S. and Shultz, C.J. (2006), “The effects of counterfeiting on consumer search”, Journal of Consumer Behaviour, Vol. 5 No. 3, pp. 245-256. Grant, B.C., Thompson, S.M. and Boyes, M. (1996), “Risk and responsibility: in outdoor recreation”, Journal of Physical Education, Recreation and Dance, Vol. 67 No. 7, pp. 34-35. Hair, J.F., Black, W.C., Babin, B.J. and Anderson, R.E. (2010), Multivariate Data Analysis, Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ. Hamelin, N., Nwankwo, S. and El Hadouchi, R. (2013), “‘Faking brands’: consumer responses to counterfeiting”, Journal of Consumer Behaviour, Vol. 12 No. 3, pp. 159-170. Hassan, L.M., Shiu, E. and Parry, S. (2016), “Addressing the cross-country applicability of the theory of planned behaviour (TPB): a structured review of multi-country TPB studies”, Journal of Consumer Behaviour, Vol. 15 No. 1, pp. 72-86. Hu, L.T. and Bentler, P.M. (1999), “Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: conventional criteria versus new alternatives”, Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, Vol. 6 No. 1, pp. 1-55. Huang, J.H., Lee, B.C. and Ho, S.H. (2004), “Consumer attitude toward gray market goods”, International Marketing Review, Vol. 21 No. 6, pp. 598-614. Huang, Y.A., Lin, C., Su, H.J., Tung, M.L. and Phau, I. (2015), “I worship, so I download? Idol worship, music purchase and piracy by young consumers in Taiwan”, Asia Pacific Journal of Marketing and Logistics, Vol. 27 No. 1, pp. 99-126. Jiang, L. and Shan, J. (2016), “Counterfeits or shanzhai? The role of face and brand consciousness in luxury copycat consumption”, Psychological Reports, Vol. 119 No. 1, pp. 181-199. Lan, M.Y., Liu, F., Fang, C.H. and Lin, T.M.Y. (2012), “Understanding word-of-mouth in counterfeiting”, Psychology, Vol. 3 No. 3, pp. 289-295. Lobb, A.E., Mazzocchi, M. and Traill, W.B. (2007), “Modelling risk perception and trust in food safety JABES information within the theory of planned behaviour”, Food Quality and Preference, Vol. 18 28,3 No. 2, pp. 384-395. Lord, K.R., Lee, M.S. and Choong, P. (2001), “Differences in normative and informational social influence”, Advances in Consumer Research, Vol. 28 No. 1, pp. 280-285. Nelson, M.R. and Mcleod, L.E. (2005), “Adolescent brand consciousness and product placements: awareness, liking and perceived effects on self and others”, International Journal of Consumer Studies, Vol. 29 No. 6, pp. 515-528. Nunnally, J.C. (1978), Psychometric Theory, McGraw-Hill, New York. Outdoor Industry Association (2017), “Outdoor recreation economy report”, available at: https://outdoor industry.org/resource/2017-outdoor-recreation-economy-report/ (accessed 1 September 2019). Park, J., Lennon, S.J. and Stoel, L. (2005), “On-line product presentation: effects on mood, perceived risk, and purchase intention”, Psychology and Marketing, Vol. 22 No. 9, pp. 695-719. Penz, E. and Stottinger, B. (2005), “Forget the ‘real’ thing-take the copy! an explanatory model for the volitional purchase of counterfeit products”, Advances in Consumer Research, Vol. 32, p. 568. Perugini, M. and Bagozzi, R.P. (2001), “The role of desires and anticipated emotions in goal-directed behaviours: broadening and deepening the theory of planned behaviour”, British Journal of Social Psychology, Vol. 40 No. 1, pp. 79-98. Phau, I. and Teah, M. (2009), “Devil wears (counterfeit) Prada: a study of antecedents and outcomes of attitudes towards counterfeits of luxury brands”, Journal of Consumer Marketing, Vol. 26 No. 1, pp. 15-27. Phau, I., Teah, M. and Lee, A. (2009), “Targeting buyers of counterfeits of luxury brands: a study on attitudes of Singaporean consumers”, Journal of Targeting, Measurement and Analysis for Marketing, Vol. 17 No. 1, pp. 3-15. Prendergast, G., Chuen, L.H. and Phau, I. (2002), “Understanding consumer demand for non-deceptive pirated brands”, Marketing Intelligence and Planning, Vol. 20 No. 7, pp. 405-416. Rahman, S., Haque, A. and Rahman, M. (2011), “Purchasing behavior for pirated products”, Journal of Management Research, Vol. 11 No. 1, pp. 48-58. Sharma, P. and Chan, R.Y. (2017), “Exploring the role of attitudinal functions in counterfeit purchase behavior via an extended conceptual framework”, Psychology and Marketing, Vol. 34 No. 3, pp. 294-308. Souiden, N., Ladhari, R. and Zarrouk Amri, A. (2018), “Is buying counterfeit sinful? Investigation of consumers’ attitudes and purchase intentions of counterfeit products in a Muslim country”, International Journal of Consumer Studies, Vol. 42 No. 6, pp. 687-703. Swami, V., Chamorro-Premuzic, T. and Furnham, A. (2009), “Faking it: personality and individual difference predictors of willingness to buy counterfeit goods”, The Journal of Socio-Economics, Vol. 38 No. 5, pp. 820-825. Swinyard, W.R., Rinne, H. and Kau, A.K. (1990), “The morality of software piracy: a cross-cultural analysis”, Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 9 No. 8, pp. 655-664. Tang, F., Tian, V.I. and Zaichkowsky, J. (2014), “Understanding counterfeit consumption”, Asia Pacific Journal of Marketing and Logistics, Vol. 26 No. 1, pp. 4-20. Ting, M.-S., Goh, Y.-N. and Isa, S.M. (2016), “Determining consumer purchase intentions toward counterfeit luxury goods in Malaysia”, Asia Pacific Management Review, Vol. 21 No. 4, pp. 219-230. Tom, G., Garibaldi, B., Zeng, Y. and Pilcher, J. (1998), “Consumer demand for counterfeit goods”, Psychology and Marketing, Vol. 15 No. 5, pp. 405-421. Transcrime (2010), Anti Brand Counterfeiting in the EU: Report on International and National Existing Standards, Joint Research Centre on Transnational Crime, Italy. Veloutsou, C. and Bian, X. (2008), “A cross-national examination of consumer perceived risk in the Counterfeit context of non-deceptive counterfeit brands”, Journal of Consumer Behaviour: International outdoor Research and Review, Vol. 7 No. 1, pp. 3-20. products Wee, C.H., Ta, S.J. and Cheok, K.H. (1995), “Non-price determinants of intention to purchase counterfeit goods: an exploratory study”, International Marketing Review, Vol. 12 No. 6, pp. 19-46. Yoon, C. (2011), “Theory of planned behavior and ethics theory in digital piracy: an integrated model”, Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 100 No. 3, pp. 405-417. Appendix 1 Survey instrument Purchase intention scale (1) I will purchase counterfeit outdoor products. (2) I will never consider buying counterfeit outdoor products. (3) The probability that I will consider buying counterfeit outdoor products is high. Attitude towards counterfeit goods (1) Generally speaking, buying counterfeit outdoor products is a better choice. (2) Considering the price, I prefer counterfeit outdoor products. (3) I enjoy shopping for counterfeit outdoor products. (4) Buying counterfeit outdoor products generally benefits the consumer. (5) There is nothing wrong with purchasing counterfeit outdoor products. Subjective norm (1) If I purchase counterfeit outdoor products, most of the people who are important to me will disapprove. (2) People who are important to me will look down on me if I purchase counterfeit outdoor products. (3) My family members will think it is okay to purchase counterfeit outdoor products. (4) My friends believe that buying counterfeit sporting goods is wrong.* Perceived behavioural control (1) It is easy to purchase counterfeit outdoor products. (2) I know where to purchase counterfeit outdoor products. (3) I can find counterfeit outdoor products if I wanted to. (4) Buying counterfeit outdoor products is entirely within my control. Brand consciousness (1) Well-known brands are best for me. (2) I usually choose more expensive brands. (3) I prefer buying best-selling brands. (4) The most advertised brands are usually better choices.* Perceived risk JABES (1) The risk that I take when I buy a counterfeit outdoor product is high. 28,3 (2) There is high probability that the counterfeit outdoor product does not work. (3) Spending money with a counterfeit outdoor product might be a bad decision. *Items were removed due to low factor loadings (< 0.50) Corresponding author Weisheng Chiu can be contacted at: weishengchiu@gmail.com For instructions on how to order reprints of this article, please visit our website: www.emeraldgrouppublishing.com/licensing/reprints.htm Or contact us for further details: permissions@emeraldinsight.com

Journal

Journal of Asian Business and Economic Studies – Emerald Publishing

Published: Aug 9, 2021

Keywords: Outdoor products; Counterfeit; Theory of planned behavior; Perceived risk; Brand consciousness; E21; M10; M31

There are no references for this article.