ABSTRACT

The purpose of this study is to deepen the understanding of consumer psyche and to

explore consumer attitudes and intentions with respect to purchase of counterfeit fashion

products. The craze to own renowned brands has resulted in increased fake or counterfeit

products in the market. In order to be in tune with the latest fashion trends, consumers,

who otherwise cannot afford the original brands, are opting for counterfeit. Apart from

economic reasons, there are other reasons too that motivate consumers to buy counterfeit

product. The study focuses on examining the relationship of consumers attitude towards

counterfeit products with the purchase intension, to analyse the level of consumer

awareness and perception of consumers orientation towards counterfeit fashion products

and to evaluate dominant factors influencing the consumers attitude towards purchase of

counterfeit products. A Chi-Square test was carried out to analyse and interpret the results

of counterfeit fashion products.

1
 CHAPTER 1

1.1 INTRODUCTION

During the economic crisis, when consumers income dropped, a large proportion of

consumers began looking for ways to obtain the same or similar consumer goods at a lower

price. The resulting situation increased demand for illegal goods and therefore stimulated

the growth of shadow economy and demand for counterfeit and illegal goods. This is

causing manufacturing companies and genuine brand marketers a great deal of frustration.

Due to the ease of manufacturing imitated clothing, bags, shoes, and accessories, combined

with the prestige and exclusivity achieved through expensive brand marketing campaigns,

the fashion industry has become a viable target for counterfeiters all over the world, S.

Tamizhvani & Dr. A. S. Saranya (2016). 70 present of counterfeited goods belong to

fashion goods, such as handbags, watches, jewellery, shoes, clothes, hats, sunglasses, and

perfume.

It can be assumed that nearly every consumer has come across counterfeited products in

one way or another, even if they were not aware of it at the time. Tourist destinations, the

internet, and even mainstream distribution channels all over the world have become prime

markets for counterfeit products and consumer demand continues to grow. Whether it is

termed knock-off, replica, counterfeit, or even the most obvious of terms: fake; it is all

referring to the same rising phenomenon of imitated products. The most popular

counterfeit market is clothing, followed by shoes, watches, leather goods, and jewellery.

Louis Vuitton, Gucci, Burberry, Tiffany, Prada, Hermes, Chanel, Dior, Yves St Laurent,

and Cartier are frequently pirated. Knockoffs of fashion brands are usually manufactured

in China, South Korea, Taiwan, and South America Phau et al. (2009).

One thing for sure, it is now difficult to differentiate between imitation and genuine goods

as modern technology and sophisticated machines enable counterfeit goods to resemble the

2
genuine ones. Hence, it is difficult for the public to differentiate between these two groups

of products. The most obvious reason for people to buy counterfeit products is that the

counterfeit items are cheaper than the genuine items. It could also be because the

counterfeit products are easily accessible and available while genuine products are not.

Another factor that contributes to consumers demand for counterfeit products is the

pursuit of status goods and the desire of being in tune with fashions. These prestige

conscious individuals prefer to own branded items as they assume that these products

reflect their "status" in the society but of course it comes with a price and clearly not

everybody can afford the branded products in the retail shop. Hence, in order to quench the

thirst of such up-scale, high end products, these individuals are willing to buy counterfeit

or imitation goods that closely resemble aesthetics and functions of genuine items.

Consumers who are buying luxury brands products may be described as self-conscious and

they were especially concerned about the impression they make. Fashion counterfeit

products are believed to carry a high image and the prestige connected to a well-known

brand name. The similarities in appearance, quality, and image created by the counterfeited

version compared to the original product are important in determining consumers

purchase intention Phau et al. (2009).

Counterfeit consumer goods are goods, often of inferior quality, made or sold under

another's brand name without the brand owners authorization. Sellers of such goods may

infringe on either the trade mark, patent or copyright of the brand owner by passing off its

goods as made by the brand owner. The term knockoff is often used interchangeably with

"counterfeit," although their legal meanings are not identical. A "knockoff" is a term which

describes products that copy or imitate the physical appearance of other products, but

which do not copy the brand name or logo of a trademark. They may, or may not, be illegal

under trademark laws. Such products are considered illegal when they are intended to

3
confuse consumers. And someone can be a counterfeiter even if he doesnt make the

products, but knowingly sells them to others. Another overlapping term is pirated goods,

which generally refers to copying copyrighted products without permission, such as music,

movies and software. Exact definitions are determined by the laws of various countries.

Counterfeit products exist in virtually every area, including food, beverages, clothes, shoes,

cosmetics, perfumes, handbags, accessories, pharmaceuticals, electronics, auto parts, toys,

and currency. [1]

Among the leading industries that have been seriously affected by counterfeiting are

software, music recordings, motion pictures, luxury goods and fashion clothes, sportswear,

perfumes, toys, aircraft components, spare parts and car accessories, and pharmaceuticals.

Counterfeit clothes, shoes, jewelry and handbags from designer brands are made in varying

quality; sometimes the intention is only to fool the buyer who only looks at the label and

does not know what the real thing looks like, while others put some serious effort into

mimicking fashion details. Others realize that most consumers do not care if the goods they

buy are counterfeit and just wish to purchase inexpensive products.

According to Satich Agarwal and Savita Panwar (2016) In recent times, peoples attitude

towards investing and spending money are changing, and so is their fashion sense.

Consumer demand is also increasing due to the pursuit of status goods and the desire for

being in tune with fashion. While the financially disadvantaged consumers tend to buy

cheaper products, such as private labels, non-branded or even fake goods, the rich

consumers are investing more on products at the higher end of the price scale.

Many researchers have studied and discussed as to why consumers buy counterfeit luxury

brands and have listed five reasons that are primarily responsible for the sudden growth of

counterfeit products in the market:

4
 1. Availability of technology and easy access to internet that facilitates copying of

logos, designs and packaging of the original brands and provides various ways to

produce high-quality counterfeit products.

2. Globalization and integration of markets across the world that smoothens the flow

and distribution of counterfeit products from one geographic location to another.

3. Excess productions capacity in countries such as China, Vietnam, Egypt, and

Colombia resulting in the availability of counterfeit products that are sold to

consumers through improper channels.

4. Absence or lack of strict laws and legal penalties for counterfeiting in various

countries; and

5. Increased linking of counterfeiting to organized crime and terrorist activities.

In some transactions, consumers are deceived and wrongly believe that they are purchasing

the original branded product. However, in most cases, consumers knowingly purchase

counterfeit merchandise.

1.2 FACTORS INFLUENCING CONSUMERS TO PURCHASE COUNTERFEIT

FASHION PRODUCTS

Past Experience

Mostly decision based on experience, cultural background and beliefs make by people. A

person has experience gone through, important or not, will play a role in how a person

makes a decision today, in present time. It depends upon your approach; this concept may

use either in your favour or against you. Have you ever read something once and then

decided to read it a few more times, because you were so compelled to take action (AJ

Kumar). The experience indicates the benefits, which the consumers think the product can

5
do for them (Keller 1993). A consumer wishes to achieve or not the benefit on the bases on

experience these benefits lead to a certain end values. Previous research shows that

consumers who intentionally buy the counterfeit brands had experienced that they are

getting the esteem and quality of branded products for the fraction of its prices

Intention to Purchase Counterfeiting

According to Fishbein and Ajzen (1975), intending to buy is the decision to act or

psychological status representing the awareness of individual participants and a particular

behaviour. According to the Theory of Planned Behavior (TPB) of Ajzen (1991), the

purchasing behavior of consumers is measured by intentions of purchasing, whereas the

intention of buying is measured by the attitude of consumers according to the Theory of

Reasoned Action. Although performing an act of buying also need to have other elements

of the opportunities or resources such as money or the accessibility of goods, the intention

is the major measurement factors for purchasing behavior of consumers (Phau & Teah,

2009).

Brand Image and Attitudes

Brand image is the way the brand exists in consumers mind. Brand image significantly

contributed to the decision to buy or not to buy that brand personally (Bian & Moutinho,

2011). Phau et al. (2009) also indicate if luxurious goods on which consumers know about

its brand and reputation, they will tend to favour its counterfeiting. However the survey

data hasn't proved it yet. In high fashion field, the better the product image is, the more

helpful it would be to strengthen consumers willingness to purchase its counterfeiting.

Social Influence and Attitudes

Consumers often refer groups and consulting before making their purchase. Reference

groups have potential in forming personal attitudes or behaviour in goods and its brand

name. Social factors also impact the buying behaviour of consumers (Ang et al., 2001).

6
Consumer's choice is influenced by others whether they acknowledge about it or not, on

the other hand, consumers are interested in impressing or influencing others (Ang et al.,

2001). According Phau et al. (2009), consumers have supportive attitudes if their friends or

relationships around them supporting it and vice versa.

Price-Quality Inference and Attitudes

Consumers perceive that a higher price will reflect good materials and better skills, so in

this situation the price will play an important role for their purchasing intention. However,

when they feel that their high cost consuming expense is not as equal quality as they

expected, they accept other products with lower rates (Lichtenstein et al., 1988).

Consumers believe that high prices, good quality and low prices, poor quality, this is

precisely the inference of consumers from the price-quality (Huang et al., 2004). Huang et

al. (2004) proved that the more consumers understand the theory they will get exactly

what they paid, the less they supported counterfeit.

Status Consumption and Attitudes

Consumers buy products high fashion to express class and individual images. It is like

being shown how others see me (Yoo & Lee, 2009). The present status of consumer is

defined as a group of people to express their prestige, and to influence others by using

certain brands. When a person has a status, which means that the person has a certain

position in society, and may be jealous by someone else. Those consumers who have lower

status, they have an idea of buying counterfeit goods to present a higher position

(Budiman, 2012).

Attitudes and Intention to Purchase toward Counterfeiting Fashion Product

Attitude is a factor to predict intentions and behaviour of consumers. Although attitudes

toward behaviour are recognized as a predictor of consumer behaviour better than attitudes

toward the product, but the attitudes toward counterfeit goods is also seen as a factor has

7
an important influence to the idea of buying counterfeit goods (Phau & Teah, 2009).

Counterfeit is financial risk, however, if it meets the expectations and satisfies the needs of

consumers, it can also feel satisfied when using. So the attitudes toward counterfeit goods

are a vital factor to predict the intention of buying counterfeit goods, especially for

luxurious fashion brands (Nordin, 2009).

1.3 SCOPE FOR FUTURE STUDY

A number of recommendations that can be considered and done for future research:

The study can be conducted in whole of Goa and sample selection should be distributed

more evenly rather than concentrating on one particular area. The result will be more

representative and convincing. Other variables should be looked upon, as there is no finite

and definite measurement of determining consumers attitude towards counterfeit products.

Clear, specific indication of the product categories that can be constituted as counterfeit

products should be highlighted, thus taken into judgment and deliberation by the

consumers. However, to fully understand consumers perception and purchase intentions of

counterfeit goods, it is suggested that future studies further explore a wider range of

counterfeit products. This could then help in gaining a better understanding of the

perception of counterfeit goods. Future research needs to examine other factors to explain

counterfeit behaviours. Examples include marketing activities (advertising, pricing, store

image, warranty, and after-purchase services), brand characteristics (brand quality, brand

image, and market leadership), and environmental factors (regulations related to

counterfeiting activity, market availability of counterfeits, and national-level animosity

against the manufacturing country of the luxury brand).

8
 CHAPTER 2

REVIEW OF LITERATURE

1) Youn-Kyung Kim (2010), in their article titled The Effects of Consumer

Orientations on the Consumption of Counterfeit Luxury Brand the study was

designed to examine the influence of individuals characteristics or consumer

orientations, both social and personal, on that generate the demand for counterfeit

brands. The study employed four theoretical frameworks: (a) the Theory of Planned

behaviour, (b) Value-Attitude-Behavioural intention system, (c) Bandwagon effect in

the theory of consumer demand, and (d) Aberrant consumer behaviour. Specifically,

the study investigated consumers intention to purchase counterfeit brands based on

their social consumer orientation (social conformity, status seeking, fashion

consciousness, and price-quality schema) and personal consumer orientation (ethical

value, social responsibility, and integrity), attitudes toward the purchase of

counterfeit brands, subjective norm, and perceived control over the purchase of

counterfeit brands. Further, the study aimed to explore the role of price sensitivity as

a moderator in understanding the relationship between attitudes and intentions to

purchase counterfeit and original luxury brands. The study was conducted in the

context of fashion luxury brands that sell handbags and wallets. An online self-

administered survey methodology was employed to collect the data from 500

subjects. The data were analysed by maximum likelihood estimation (MLE)

procedure using structural equation model (SEM). Out of total 14 proposed

hypotheses, 10 were significant, as expected. However, the rest 4 were not found to

be significant. Status seeking was found to have an insignificant relationship with

subjective norm to purchase a counterfeit brand. Fashion consciousness was found to

have a negative influence on attitude while the relationship of price-quality schema

9
 with attitude was not found to be significant. Also, integrity was not found to

significantly influence subjective norm. Price sensitivity did not act as a moderator

due to non-significant relationships between attitude and intensions to purchase

counterfeit and original brands. Research and managerial implications, limitations,

and suggestions for future research were drawn based on the results.

2) Mathumita Mukherjee Basu, Sumit Basu & Jung Kook Lee (2015), in their

article titled Factors Influencing Consumer's Intention to Buy Counterfeit Products

identified potential improvements, and provided further insight into consumer

motives behind the purchase of counterfeits. Six primary factors that influence

counterfeit purchase were identified and the TRA was applied to investigate the

impact of these factors on consumer behavioural patterns. The factors were (1) social

motivation, (2) personal gratification, (3) perception, (4) value, (5) brand loyalty, and

(6) ethics. The influence of society and value for money were identified as the top

two reasons that motivate consumers to buy fake products based on a survey

conducted. A mathematical covariate interactions analysis as well as a Chi-square

regression analysis corroborated the same finding- identifying the top two factors

that most strongly influence a customers Intent to purchase. A logistic regression

analysis was run on the survey results that yielded a mathematical expression which

can predict how likely a customer is to buy a counterfeit [p(Y)]. The proposed

correlation matches the obtained survey data very well.

3) Carpenter, J. M. & Lear, K. (2011), in their article titled Consumer Attitudes

towards Counterfeit Fashion Products: Does Gender Matter? found that while

gender does not moderate the social cost and anti-big business components of

10
 consumer attitudes toward counterfeit fashion products, gender does affect beliefs

about ethicality of counterfeit. The data was collected from a sample of 50 U.S.

consumers through telephone survey method. The research uses hierarchical

structural equation modeling to examine gender as a moderator of attitudes toward

counterfeit fashion products.

4) Rizwan et al., (2013), in their article titled Purchase intention towards counterfeit

product found that the past experience, product knowledge, previous experience and

risk affect the purchase intention of counterfeit products. Through the self-

administered questionnaire the primary data was collected from convenient sample

of 150 respondents. The statistical experiment designed in this study involved use of

regression analysis and factor analysis to identify the purpose and factors which

affect the purchase intention of counterfeit products.

5) Nordin (2009), in the article titled A Study on Consumers Attitude towards

Counterfeit Products in Malaysia results that perceived risk, price consciousness,

novelty seeking and normative susceptibility are the independent variables that

strongly influence consumers attitude towards counterfeit product. Attitude towards

counterfeit product was also found significant in influencing purchase intention. A

survey of 270 respondents was conducted in the Malaysian market. Pearson

correlation, multiple regression and the Sobel test were used to test which of the

social and personality factors affects the attitude of the consumers towards

counterfeit products.

11
6) Budiman (2012), in the article titled Analysis of Consumer Attitudes to Purchase

Intentions of Counterfeiting Bag Product in Indonesia results that intrinsic factors

had positive influence on consumer attitudes towards pirated handbags addition, a

more positive attitude of consumers towards pirated bags will further strengthen the

purchasing intentions and conversely the higher the status of a consumer's

consumption will only further weaken the intention of purchasing the product bag

pirated. The data was collected using a questionnaire with 200 respondents of

employed women. The Structural Equation Modeling (SEM) data analysis technique

was used to identify the process of forming an intention to buy pirated bag products

that rest on the primary relationship of independent variables like attitudes towards

counterfeit, lawfulness attitudes and consumption status of the intention to buy

pirated products as well as test patterns bag relationship between variables.

7) Hidayat & Diwasasri (2013), in their article titled Factors Influencing Attitudes

and Intention to Purchase Counterfeit Luxury Brands among Indonesian Consumers

concluded that the more positive attitude of consumers towards counterfeit products

will further strengthen the purchasing intentions while the higher the status of a

consumers consumption will not affect any change to both their attitude and

willingness to purchase counterfeit products. The survey gathered from questionnaire

distribution to 250 respondents aged from 16-40years. Path coefficient analysis was

used in this research to identify the social and personality factors have mostly

significant impact towards attitudes.

8) Phau & Teah (2009), in their article titled Devil wears (counterfeit) Prada: A study

of antecedents and outcomes of attitudes towards counterfeits of luxury brands

12
 found that status, consumption and integrity are strong influencers of purchase

intention, whereas normative susceptibility, information susceptibility, personal

gratification, value consciousness, and novelty seeking had weaker influencing

relationships. Through a self-administered questionnaire, the primary data was

collected from a sample of 202 respondents. The statistical experiment designed in

this study involves the use of regression analysis and factor analysis to identify how

the social and personality factors influence Chinese consumers attitude toward

counterfeit of luxury brand.

9) Nguyen Minh Ha & Huynh Luong (2015), in their article titled Attitudes and

Purchase Intention towards Counterfeiting Luxurious Fashion Products in Vietnam

aimed to analyse factors affecting the attitudes toward counterfeiting luxurious

fashion products, and attitudes effect on the purchase intention of consumer. A

survey was conducted with 585 individuals in Vietnam. The research used the

method of EFA, multiple regressions and testing difference and found six factors,

such as brand image, social influence, price-quality inferences, Integrity, novelty

seeking, status consumption, influence to attitudes toward counterfeiting luxurious

fashion product. A positive correlation between attitudes and intention of purchase

counterfeiting luxurious fashion product was also found. In addition, the research

figured out the difference between attitude and purchasing intention of the consumer

in monthly income, genders and types of companies.

10) Azli Muhammad1, Abdullah Haji Abdul Ghani (2016), in their article titled The

Relationships between Attitude and Social Influence on Purchase Behaviour of

Counterfeit products among Malaysian Consumers examined how attitude and

13
 social influences influence Malaysian consumers purchase behaviour towards

counterfeit products. A mall intercept survey involving 390 respondents was

conducted in major shopping malls in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. A self-administered

questionnaire was designed using established scales. A variety of statistical

techniques were used to analyse the date. Analyses conducted shown that attitude

and social influences have positive influences on the purchase behaviour of

counterfeit products regardless of the level of purchase; i.e. high or low purchaser.

The findings were limited to Malaysian consumers in Kuala Lumpur and cannot be

generalized across the whole of Malaysia or other international markets. The

research provides an understanding of Malaysian consumers counterfeit product

purchase behaviour. The research findings can be used by policy makers and genuine

product producers to formulate strategies to curb counterfeiting activities.

11) Shah Ramlan et al., (2017), in their article Purchase Intention towards

Counterfeiting Luxuries Fashion Product among Undergraduate Student in

University Kuala Lumpur aimed to measure the factors that were affecting the

University Kuala Lumpur (UNIKL) undergraduate students attitudes toward

counterfeiting luxurious fashion products and attitudes effect on the purchase

intention. Self-administered questionnaires were distributed by online to individuals

in UNIKL. The findings focused on brand image, social influence, price-quality

inferences, Integrity, novelty seeking, status consumption that influence toward

purchase intention. Findings showed that the correlation between attitudes and

intention of purchase counterfeiting luxurious fashion products were significant. In

addition, the research also found that the difference between attitude and purchasing

intention of the consumer in monthly income and genders. Furthermore, elaborates

14
 the demand of counterfeit goods through the attitudes that effects of purchase

intention to consumer.

12) Christina S. Simmers et al., (2015), in their article titled Counterfeit luxury goods

purchase motivation: A cultural Comparison The widespread consumption of

counterfeit luxury goods is a global challenge. China and the United States are

presently the two largest purchasers of both genuine luxury goods and counterfeit

products. The motivation for the purchase of counterfeit luxury goods is proposed to

be different based on the collectivistic (China) or individualistic (United States)

culture of the consumer. Findings support this hypothesis. While young Chinese

consumers have higher expectations of the quality of counterfeit products than their

American counterparts, they are less likely to purchase them. Chinese consumers use

branded luxury goods as symbols to enhance their status, referred to as face

consumption, and do not want to risk damaging their reputation with counterfeit

product consumption. Whereas Americans are more willing to pretend their

counterfeit product is a genuine luxury good brand.

13) Kelly Gamble (2011), in their article titled Counterfeit Fashion: A Comprehensive

Study Determining The Influence Factors Of Fashion Counterfeit Purchase

Decisions did a thorough analysis of the existing literature established a relatively

concrete examination of consumer counterfeit purchase decisions but severely lacked

relevant research directed toward one of the most commonly victimized industries of

counterfeiting: fashion merchandise. In order to fill this hole in existing literature,

this study transferred the components of past research to the relatively unexplored

world of fashion counterfeiting. In doing so, the objective was to determine what

15
variables influence a consumers willingness to purchase non-deceptive counterfeit

fashion items. This allowed for a comparative analysis about how the influence

factors differ from those that influence consumers to purchase general counterfeit

items. In order to test 30 variables that were hypothesized to influence consumer

willingness to purchase counterfeit fashion items, an internet survey was published

and submitted by 117 respondents. Nineteen hypotheses were formed based on two

components. The first is how the selected variables correlated in past studies with

consumer willingness to purchase general counterfeit items. The second component

is how logic and existing literature suggests those relationships may differ with

fashion counterfeit items due to the unique characteristics of the fashion industry. A

quantitative analysis determined that twelve of the tested variables either correlated,

or showed a relationship with, consumer willingness to purchase counterfeit fashion

items. Demographic variables age, income, and education negatively correlated with

the control questions suggesting that younger consumers with lower income and less

education are more likely to purchase counterfeit fashion items. Materialism, respect

for tradition, and a need for an exciting life all showed positive correlations with one

or both of the control questions in the survey. Attitudes toward counterfeit law and

order, value, and past experiences showed the strongest connection with consumers

willingness to purchase counterfeit fashion items and the consumption variables

social risk and product attributes showed the highest tendency to influence the

counterfeit fashion purchase decision. The results of this study have implications for

fashion designers and legitimate fashion companies that are losing business due to a

growing counterfeiting industry.

16
 CHAPTER 3

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

3.1 IMPORTANCE OF STUDY

From the theoretical perspectives, this study will help to understand the Goan consumers

buying behaviour and their intentions of buying counterfeit products. It is an extension of

knowledge of consumers with regards to counterfeit products.

From the perspectives of marketers, this study would help to understand the consumers

attitudes; hence, the marketers can try to fulfil the consumers needs and wants by portraying

their products as what the consumer requires. By having a better understanding of the

consumers purchase intentions of buying counterfeit products, the marketers of the genuine

products can make better marketing strategies to entice the consumer to buy the original

products and not the imitations.

From the industry perspective, a better understanding of consumers attitude towards

counterfeit products can probably help overcome the illegal syndicate. Actions such as making

it compulsory for each manufacturer to support anti-counterfeiting firm which employ

investigators to carry out surveillance and raids against counterfeiters or push the government

and authorities to strengthen enforcement of respective laws and regulations or one of which

could be a penalty to the seller as well as the buyer to eradicate the illegal trading.

3.2 SCOPE

A study was conducted to examine the consumers orientation towards counterfeit fashion

products. The study will be confined in South Goa only. The data was collected from

different age group from different professions. The respondents are chosen from this age

group and different profession because it is believed that they have a considerable amount

17
of spending power and substantial exposure and knowledge of counterfeit products. The

sample size of 200 respondents was selected on random basis.

3.3 OBJECTIVE

To examine the relationship of consumers attitude towards counterfeit products

with the purchase intension.

To analyse the level of consumer awareness and perception of consumers

orientation towards counterfeit fashion products.

To evaluate dominant factors influencing the consumers attitude towards purchase

of counterfeit products.

3.4 METHODOLOGY

In order to collect the data, two methods i.e primary source and secondary sources was

considered. The primary data was collected by employing the survey method. The

questionnaires were distributed through many different channels, namely, via email, via

social networking sites, via whatsapp text message and via direct distribution to students,

professionals, executives, self-employees, retiree, managers, clerks and administrative

employees at public and private organisations. The data of the study was collected by

preparing the questionnaire keeping in mind the objectives of the study. For the survey a

sample of 200 respondents were considered.

Secondary data was collected by referring to various journals, research papers and articles

published online. Chi square test is employed for data analysis.

18
3.5 LIMITATIONS

The sample size is specified to 200 respondents only.

This study is confined only in South Goa.

The study focuses on different age group from different professions.

There might be errors in the expression of opinion of respondents due to their

personal bias.

19
 CHAPTER 4

DATA ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION

4.1 CHI- SQUARE TEST: TESTING OF HYPOTHESIS

4.1.1 H0: There is no relationship between the influence of value consciousness and

consumers attitude towards the purchase of counterfeit products.

H1: There is a relationship between the influence of value consciousness and

consumers attitude towards the purchase of counterfeit products.

Level of Significance 5%

Degree of Freedom 16

2 34.87101

P Value 0.004139

Table Value 26.296

Source: Authors Compilation

Since the 2 is more than the table value we reject H0 and accept H1. Therefore there is a

relationship between the influence of value consciousness and consumers attitude towards

the purchase of counterfeit products.

4.1.2 H0: There is no relationship between the influence of perceived risk and consumers

attitude towards the purchase of counterfeit products.

H1: There is a relationship between the influence of perceived risk and consumers

attitude towards the purchase of counterfeit products.

20
 Level of Significance 5%

Degree of Freedom 16

2 33.8441

P Value 0.005702

Table Value 26.296

Source: Authors Compilation

Since the 2 is more than the table value we reject H0 and accept H1. Therefore there is a

relationship between the influence of perceived risk and consumers attitude towards the

purchase of counterfeit products.

4.1.3 H0: There is no relationship between the influence of past experience and consumers

attitude towards the purchase of counterfeit products.

H1: There is a relationship between the influence of past experience and consumers

attitude towards the purchase of counterfeit products.

Level of Significance 5%

Degree of Freedom 16

2 59.76005

P Value 5.74E-07

Table Value 26.296

Source: Authors Compilation

Since the 2 is more than the table value we reject H0 and accept H1. Therefore there is a

relationship between the influence of past experience and consumers attitude towards the

purchase of counterfeit products.

21
4.1.4 H0: There is no relationship between the influence of social group and consumers

attitude towards the purchase of counterfeit products.

H1: There is a relationship between the influence of social group and consumers

attitude towards the purchase of counterfeit products.

Level of Significance 5%

Degree of Freedom 12

2 15.70998

P Value 0.204884

Table Value 21.026

Source: Authors Compilation

Since the 2 is less than the table value we accept H0 and reject H1. Therefore there is no

relationship between the influence of social group and consumers attitude towards the

purchase of counterfeit products.

4.1.5 H0: There is no relationship between the consumers attitude towards counterfeit

products and their purchase intension.

H1: There is a relationship between the consumers attitude towards counterfeit

products and their purchase intension.

Level of Significance 5%

Degree of Freedom 24

2 157.4729

P Value 1.34E-21

Table Value 36.415

Source: Authors Compilation

22
Since the 2 is more than the table value we reject H0 and accept H1. Therefore there is a

relationship between the consumers attitude towards counterfeit products with the purchase

intension.

4.1.6 H0: There is no relationship between the consumers attitude towards counterfeit

products and the consumers opinion towards counterfeit brands.

H1: There is a relationship between the consumers attitude towards counterfeit

products and the consumers opinion towards counterfeit brands.

Level of Significance 5%

Degree of Freedom 16

2 31.64551

P Value 0.011117

Table Value 26.296

Source: Authors Compilation

Since the 2 is more than the table value we reject H0 and accept H1. Therefore there is a

relationship between the consumers attitude towards counterfeit products with the

consumers opinion towards counterfeit brands.

4.1.7 H0: There is no relationship between consumers attitude and their opinion regarding

counterfeit brands in comparison with genuine brands.

H1: There is a relationship between consumers attitude and their opinion regarding

counterfeit brands in comparison with genuine brands.

23
 Level of Significance 5%

Degree of Freedom 16

2 146.6381

P Value 3.59E-23

Table Value 26.296

Source: Authors Compilation

Since the 2 is more than the table value we reject H0 and accept H1. Therefore there is a

relationship consumers attitude and their opinion regarding counterfeit brands in

comparison with genuine brands.

4.1.8 H0: There is no relationship between consumers attitude towards counterfeit product

and their projection towards counterfeit products.

H1: There is a relationship between consumers attitude towards counterfeit product

and their projection towards counterfeit products.

Level of Significance 5%

Degree of Freedom 16

2 146.5899

P Value 3.67E-23

Table Value 26.296

Source: Authors Compilation

Since the 2 is more than the table value we reject H0 and accept H1. Therefore there is a

relationship between consumers attitude towards counterfeit product and their projection

towards counterfeit products.

24
4.1.9 H0: There is no relationship between consumers preference level and their

perception towards counterfeit products.

H1: There is a relationship between consumers preference level and their perception

towards counterfeit products.

Level of Significance 5%

Degree of Freedom 12

2 104.8309

P Value 6.27E-17

Table Value 21.026

Source: Authors Compilation

Since the 2 is more than the table value we reject H0 and accept H1. Therefore there is a

relationship between consumers preference level and their perception regarding

counterfeit products.

4.1.10 H0: There is no relationship between consumers attitude towards counterfeit

product and their perception towards counterfeit products.

H1: There is a relationship between consumers attitude towards counterfeit product

and their perception towards counterfeit products.

Level of Significance 5%

Degree of Freedom 16

2 60.92506

P Value 3.65E-07

Table Value 26.296

Source: Authors Compilation

25
Since the 2 is more than the table value we reject H0 and accept H1. Therefore there is a

relationship between consumers attitude towards counterfeit product and their perception

towards counterfeit products.

4.1.11 H0: There is no relationship between consumers gender and the counterfeit product

purchased.

H1: There is a relationship between consumers gender and the counterfeit product

purchased.

Level of Significance 5%

Degree of Freedom 6

2 23.60501

P Value 0.000617

Table Value 12.592

Source: Authors Compilation

Since the 2 is more than the table value we reject H0 and accept H1. Therefore there is a

relationship between consumers gender and the counterfeit product purchased.

4.1.12 H0: There is no relationship between consumers monthly income and how likely

they are to purchase counterfeit products.

H1: There is a relationship between consumers monthly income and how likely they

are to purchase counterfeit products.

26
 Level of Significance 5%

Degree of Freedom 18

2 22.53015

P Value 0.209296

Table Value 28.869

Source: Authors Compilation

Since the 2 is less than the table value we accept H0 and reject H1. Therefore there is no

relationship between consumers monthly income and how likely they are to purchase

counterfeit products.

27
4.2 INTERPRETATION OF GRAPHS

TABLE 4.2.1: SHOWING THE GENDER OF THE RESPONDENTS

Gender Number of respondents Percentage of respondents

Male 98 49%

Female 102 51%

Total 200 100%

Source: Primary data

CHART 4.2.1: SHOWING THE GENDER OF THE RESPONDENTS

Gender of respondents

49% Male
51% Female

Source: Primary data

The above chart shows the gender of the respondents. Majority of the respondents i.e. 51%

are female respondents while 49% are male respondents.

28
TABLE 4.2.2: SHOWING THE AGE GROUP (IN YEARS) OF THE

RESPONDENTS

Age Group (In Years) Number of respondents Percentage of respondents

Below 21 31 15%

21-30 138 69%

31-40 18 9%

41-50 11 6%

51-60 2 1%

Above 60 0 0%

Total 200 100%

Source: Primary data

CHART 4.2.2: SHOWING THE AGE GROUP OF THE RESPONDENTS

Age of respondents (In Years)

Below 21 21-30 31-40 41-50 51-60 Above 60

1% 0%

6%
15%
9%

69%

Source: Primary data

The above chart shows that 69% fall in the age group of 21-30 years, which forms a major

part of the respondents. It is followed by the next group of below 21 years by 15%, from

29
31-40 years account for 9%, from 41-50 years accounting for 6% and the least number of

respondents that is 1% belong to the age group of 51-60 years.

TABLE 4.2.3: SHOWING THE CITIZENSHIP OF THE RESPONDENTS

Citizenship Number of respondents Percentage of respondents

Indians 195 97%

Others 5 3%

Total 200 100%

Source: Primary data

CHART 4.2.3: SHOWING THE CITIZENSHIP OF THE RESPONDENTS

Citizenship of Respondents

3%

Indian Others

97%
Source: Primary data

The above chart shows the citizenship of the respondents. Majority of the respondents i.e.

97% are Indian respondents while only 5% are not Indian respondents.

30
TABLE 4.2.4: SHOWING THE MARITAL STATUS OF THE RESPONDENTS

Marital Status Number of respondents Percentage of respondents

Single 160 80%

Married 37 18%

Others 3 2%

Total 200 100%

Source: Primary data

CHART 4.2.4: SHOWING THE MARITAL STATUS OF THE RESPONDENTS

Respondents marital status

Single Married Others
2%

18%

80%

Source: Primary data

The above chart shows the marital status of the respondents. Respondents, who are

married, account for 18% while single status has the highest number account for 80% and

only 2% of the respondents belong to others.

31
TABLE 4.2.5: SHOWING THE EDUCATION LEVEL OF THE RESPONDENTS

Education Level Number of respondents Percentage of respondents

Intermediate 14 7%

Bachelors Degree 87 43%

Post Graduate Degree 82 41%

Diploma 7 3%

PhD 1 1%

Others 9 5%

Total 200 100%

Source: Primary data

CHART 4.2.5: SHOWING THE EDUCATION LEVEL OF THE RESPONDENTS

Education level of respondent

3% 1%
5% 7% Intermediate

Bachelors degree

Post Graduate Degree

41% 43%
Diploma

PhD

Others

Source: Primary data

The above chart shows the education level of the respondents. Majority of the respondents

i.e. 43% are respondents having bachelors degree, 41% are respondents having post

graduate degrees, followed by 7% respondents who have done their intermediate, 3%

respondents with diploma, only 5% of the respondents holding other degrees and just one

respondent with PhD.

32
TABLE 4.2.6: SHOWING THE OCCUPATION OF THE RESPONDENTS

Occupation Number of respondents Percentage of respondents

Professional 48 24%

Executive 15 7%

Self-Employed 16 8%

Clerical/Admin 6 3%

Retiree 1 1%

Managers 7 4%

Student 90 45%

Others 17 9%

Total 200 100%

Source: Primary data

CHART 4.2.6: SHOWING THE OCCUPATION OF THE RESPONDENTS

Occupation of Respondents
Professional

9% Executive
24% Self-Employed
Clerical/Admin
Retiree
7%
45% Managers
8%
Student
3%
-1%
4%
Others

Source: Primary data

The above chart shows the occupation of the respondents. Majority of the respondents i.e.

45% are student respondents, while 24% are professional respondents, 9% are other

33
respondents, 8% respondents are self-employed, 7% respondents are executives and 4%

were managers, 3% who were clerical / admin respondents and just 1% retiree.

TABLE 4.2.7: SHOWING THE MONTHLY INCOME OF THE RESPONDENTS

Monthly Income Number of respondents Percentage of respondents

Not Earning 94 47%

Below `10,000/- 8 4%

`10,000/- to `15,000/- 14 7%

`16,000/- to `20,000/- 10 5%

`21,000/- to `25,000/- 9 4%

`26,000/- to `30,000/- 14 7%

Above `30,000 51 26%

Total 200 100%

Source: Primary data

CHART 4.2.7: SHOWING THE MONTHLY INCOME OF THE RESPONDENTS

Monthly Income of respondent

Not Earning
26% Below `10,000

`10,000/- to `15,000/-
47% `16,000/- to `20,000/-
7% `21,000/- to `25,000/-
4% `26,000/- to `30,000/-
5%
7% 4% Above `30,000/-

Source: Primary data

34
The above chart shows the monthly income of the respondents. Majority of the respondents

i.e. 47% are respondents who are not earning, while 26% are respondents earning above

`30,000/-, about 7% respondents who are earning `10,000/- to `15,000/- and `26,000/- to

`30,000/-, just 4% respondents having income of `21,000/- to `25,000/- and below

`10,000/-, and only 5% respondents earning `16,000/- to `20,000/-

TABLE 4.2.8: SHOWING RESPONDENTS COUNTERFEIT DISTINCTION

LEVEL

Particulars Number of respondents Percentage of respondents

Yes 166 83%

No 34 17%

Total 200 100%

Source: Primary data

CHART 4.2.8: SHOWING RESPONDENTS COUNTERFEIT DISTINCTION

LEVEL

Respondents counterfeit distinction level

17%

Yes

No
83%

Source: Primary data

35
The above chart shows the respondents counterfeit distinction level. Majority of the

respondents i.e. 83% say yes, that they can distinguish a counterfeit product from the

original one while 17% of the respondents are not able to distinguish a counterfeit product

from the original one.

TABLE 4.2.9: SHOWING RESPONDENTS AWARENESS LEVEL OF THE

ACTIONS TAKEN AGAINST COUNTERFEIT PRODUCTS.

Particulars Number of respondents Percentage of respondents

Yes 35 17%

No 165 83%

Total 200 100%

Source: Primary data

CHART 4.2.9: SHOWING RESPONDENTS AWARENESS LEVEL OF THE

ACTIONS TAKEN AGAINST COUNTERFEIT PRODUCTS.

RESPONDENTS AWARENESS LEVEL OF THE ACTIONS

TAKEN AGAINST COUNTERFEIT PRODUCTS

17%

Yes

No

83%

Source: Primary data

The above chart shows the respondents awareness level of the actions taken against

counterfeit product. Majority of the respondents i.e. 83% say no, that they are not aware of

36
the actions taken against counterfeit products while 17% of the respondents say that they

are aware of the actions taken against counterfeit products.

TABLE 4.2.10: SHOWING: WOULD MORE SEVERE CONSEQUENCES STOP

YOU FROM BUYING COUNTERFEIT PRODUCTS

Particulars Number of respondents Percentage of respondents

Yes 124 62%

No 76 38%

Total 200 100%

Source: Primary data

CHART 4.2.10: SHOWING: WOULD MORE SEVERE CONSEQUENCES STOP

YOU FROM BUYING COUNTERFEIT PRODUCTS

WOULD MORE SEVERE CONSEQUENCES STOP YOU FROM

BUYING COUNTERFEIT PRODUCTS

38%

Yes
62%
No

Source: Primary data

The above chart shows if more severe consequences would stop them from buying

counterfeit products. Majority of the respondents i.e. 62% say yes, that more severe

consequences would stop them from buying counterfeit products while 17% of the

37
respondents say that more severe consequences would not stop them from buying

counterfeit products.

38
 CHAPTER 5

FINDINGS, CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTIONS

5.1 FINDINGS OF THE STUDY

From this study it was found that there is a relationship between the influence of

value consciousness, perceived risk, past experience and consumers attitude

towards the purchase of counterfeit products.

It was found that there is no relationship between the influence of social group and

consumers attitude towards the purchase of counterfeit products.

It was found that there is a relationship between the consumers attitude towards

counterfeit products with reference to the purchase intension and also with

reference to consumers opinion towards counterfeit brands.

It was found that there is a relationship between consumers attitude towards

counterfeit product and their projection regarding counterfeit products.

It was found that there is a relationship between consumers attitude towards

counterfeit product and their perception regarding counterfeit products.

It was found that there is a relationship between consumers preference level and

their perception regarding counterfeit products.

From the personal aspect, buying a counterfeit may be a value-driven decision for

some. For some, buying a counterfeit fashion product was an exciting deal, while

for some it was a substandard practice. Severe consequences like imprisonment,

social stigma, monetary penalties, laws, and company initiatives are factors that

demotivated consumers from opting for counterfeits. These factors can be the key

strategic points to be taken care of while branding.

39
5.2 CONCLUSION

This study analyses some facts related to counterfeit fashion products and the consumers

orientation towards them. It explores the perception, attitude and intentions of consumers

towards counterfeit products. The study found that consumers perception, opinions and

projections towards counterfeit products have a relationship with the attitude towards the

purchase decision of counterfeit products. Health, group conformity, social rejection and

public shame, all have a major effect on consumers buying decisions. In order to be part of

a group, depending upon the characteristics of the group, a consumer may or may not opt

for counterfeit fashion products. One of the major reasons for buying counterfeits was that

the price was considerably less as compared to the original ones, it looked similar or

identical to the original brands. Over time, the quality of counterfeits has improved a lot

therefore it becomes difficult sometimes to differentiate between the original and the fake.

Social rejection and public shame, all have a major effect on consumers buying decisions.

In order to be part of a group, depending upon the characteristics of the group, a consumer

may or may not opt for counterfeit fashion products. Peer pressure has a powerful impact

on consumers psyche.

5.3 SUGGESTION

Brand managers could make more community activities, more social responsibility

programs, such as in order to attract more consumers.

At the moment, the brand managers can spread more information of penalty cases

to gain more supports from society against counterfeiting products.

Spreading more advertisements on how to differentiate genuine and counterfeiting

products it would probably be easier for consumers to differentiate between

original products and counterfeits.

40
 Manufacturer of origin branded products should design products containing rare

and high quality materials, associated with value and brand, thus making it more

difficult to counterfeit them.

Manufacturers should propose to law makers to penalize both suppliers and

consumers of counterfeiting products, thus prevent that type of product from

flowing in the market.

Recalculate the price base on adjusting their cost and profit, so the customer will

not feel that they are buying too expensive goods.

Conducting customer service which is impossible for counterfeit manufacturers to

copy, such as: life-time guarantee, exchanging new products with old products,

preference membership, etc.

Manufacturers, managers should create competitive advantages by focusing on

style, design, quality, and unique appearance.

41
 BIBLIOGRAPHY

Agarwal, S & Panwar, S. (2016). Consumer Orientation towards Counterfeit

fashion Products: A Qualitative Analysis. The IUP Journal of Brand Management.

Vol. XII No.3. September 2016

Azli Muhammad & Abdullah Haji Abdul Ghani (2016).The Relationships

between Attitude and Social Influence on Purchase Behaviour of Counterfeit

products among Malaysian Consumers. International Journal of Management

Sciences. Vol. 7, No. 2, 2016

Tamizhvani, S & Dr. Saranya, A. S. (2016). Antecedents and Consequences of

Consumer Attitude towards Counterfeit Products. International Journal of

Advanced Scientific Research & Development. Vol. 03, Spl. Iss. 03, Ver. I, Sep

2016, pp. 97 108

Minh Ha, N & Luong, H. (2015). Attitudes and Purchase Intention towards

Counterfeiting Luxurious Fashion Products in Vietnam. International Journal of

Economics and Finance; Vol. 7, No. 11; 2015

Musnaini & Yacob, S. (2015). Asian Buying Behaviour toward Counterfeit

Product. Journal of Social Sciences and Humanities, Vol. 1, No. 3, pp. 146-155

Simmers, S. C & Allen D (2015). Schaefer, PhD & R. Stephen Parker, DBA

(2015). Counterfeit luxury goods purchase motivation: A cultural comparison.

Journal of International Business and Cultural Studies Volume 9, January, 2015

Hidayat A & Ayu Hema Ajeng Diwasasri (2013). Factors Influencing Attitudes

and Intention to Purchase Counterfeit Luxury Brands among Indonesian

Consumers. International Journal of Marketing Studies; Vol. 5, No. 4; 2013

42
 Budiman, S. (2012). Analysis of Consumer Attitudes to Purchase Intentions of

Counterfeiting Bag Product in Indonesia. International Journal of Management,

Economics and Social Sciences 2012. Vol. 1(1), pp. 1 12.

NOTES:

1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Counterfeit_consumer_goods

WEB LINKS: DATA WAS RETRIVED FROM THE FOLLOWING LINKS

dl.uncw.edu/etd/2011-3/gamblek/kellygamble.pdf

http://article.sapub.org/10.5923.j.economics.20170701.04.html

http://lib.dr.iastate.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=4847&context=etd

http://library.ul.com/wpcontent/uploads/sites/40/2015/02/UL_WP_Draft_Mitigatin

g-the-Risk-of-Counterfeit-Products_2011_v7.pdf

http://repository.um.edu.my/846/1/CGA070109.pdf

http://repository.unja.ac.id/157/1/syahmardi_yacob03.pdf

http://repository.unja.ac.id/157/1/syahmardi_yacob03.pdf

http://s3.amazonaws.com/academia.edu.documents/33942648/1._Sales_-

_Counterfeit__Suvarna_Patil.pdf?AWSAccessKeyId=AKIAIWOWYYGZ2Y53UL

3A&Expires=1488826973&Signature=LXeyY02jUjb%2BTP0boho5wY1UmOw%

3D&responsecontentdisposition=inline%3B%20filename%3DCOUNTERFEIT_L

UXURY_BRANDS_SCENARIO_IN_IN.pdf

http://trace.tennessee.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1990&context=utk_graddiss

http://web.b.ebscohost.com/abstract?direct=true&profile=ehost&scope=site&authty

pe=crawler&jrnl=09729097&AN=119548847&h=%2bb9q%2b1d5orjtLY85pHigm

iyALk1QmlNF0Dygicx2eKLXxD5wPHuQN2dbw%2foSZDRa7isBg94%2b79nHe

43
 %2fxpTsJZhQ%3d%3d&crl=c&resultNs=AdminWebAuth&resultLocal=ErrCrlNo

tAuth&crlhashurl=login.aspx%3fdirect%3dtrue%26profile%3dehost%26scope%3d

site%26authtype%3dcrawler%26jrnl%3d09729097%26AN%3d119548847

http://www.aabri.com/manuscripts/152306.pdf

http://www.freepatentsonline.com/article/JournalInternationalBusinessEconomics/1

90616956.html

http://www.ijmess.com/volumes/volume-I-2012/issue-I-05-2012/full-1.pdf

http://www.iosrjournals.org/iosrjbm/papers/Vol16issue7/Version3/L016738797.pdf

http://www.journalofbusiness.org/index.php/GJMBR/article/viewFile/1757/1659

http://www.my3q.com/research/viviane320/24742.phtml

https://www.google.co.in/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=2&cad=ra

&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwi33aWeusLSAhWEto8KHSviDwgQFggoMAE&url=http

%3A%2F%2Fwww.ccsenet.org%2Fjournal%2Findex.php%2Fijms%2Farticle%2F

download%2F25723%2F17301&usg=AFQjCNFOpQ942iRfkjLKY1Mj7SRFCgw

Kmg&sig2=2DAcDkYCmrN2NhXM0VU7TQ

https://www.google.co.in/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=2&cad=ra

&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwjNwPn5vMLSAhXIRI8KHZPCAZQQFggmMAE&urlht

p%3A%2F%2Fwww.ecoman.ktu.lt%2Findex.php%2FEkv%2Farticle%2Fdownlod

%2F5739%2F3272&usg=AFQjCNH60TW68ORglCvOoytnT5DpYhH4bg&sig2=y

WOqgyJNbMIUhvCmMkc8yw

https://www.google.co.in/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=2&cad=ra

&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwjxnOfGvcLSAhVLQI8KHYb3CdQQFggiMAE&url=htp

%3A%2F%2Fojs.cnr.ncsu.edu%2Findex.php%2FJTATM%2Farticle%2Fdownloa

%2F993%2F910&usg=AFQjCNHRzVF1UgB_vWe8mFgZ6PeDPp6JJQ&sig2=Kr

KF3STxv0XYfsRGYQPnWA

44
 https://www.google.co.in/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=3&cad=rj

a&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwjri9wcLSAhUJXhoKHY5gBpoQFggoMAI&url=http%

3A%2F%2Fojs.cnr.ncsu.edu%2Findex.php%2FJTATM%2Farticle%2Fdownload%

2F993%2F910&usg=AFQjCNHRzVF1UgB_vWe8mFgZ6PeDPp6JJQ&sig2=MG

MjjT2v0KUk0_KJEUdbtg&bvm=bv.148747831,d.bGg

https://www.ijasrd.org/in/wp-content/uploads/2016/09/BBM112.pdf

https://www.questia.com/library/journal/1P34211214021/consumerorientationtowa

rds-counterfeit-fashion-products

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/271312930_Factors_Influencing_Attitude

s_and_Intention_to_Purchase_Counterfeit_Luxury_Brands_among_Indonesian_Co

nsumers

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/274715559_Counterfeiting_and_Culture_

Consumer_Attitudes_towards_Counterfeit_Products

https://www.scribd.com/doc/98389395/Asudyonconsumerbehaviourtowardsbrande

d-and-non-branded-readymade-garments-in-ludhiana

https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/9DBB379

journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/0887302X09332513

www.acrwebsite.org/volumes/v36/NAACR_v36_6.pdf

45