Antecedents of consumer attitude and purchase intention towards counterfeit products
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper aims to investigate the effect of information reliability, risk, and value consciousness on hedonic behaviour, attitude towards counterfeit products, and genuine store trustworthiness. Using a structured survey instrument, this paper gathered data from 449 respondents from three cities major cities (Kochi, Bangalore, and Chennai) in southern part of India. The hierarchical regression render support that: 1) information reliability is positively related to hedonic behaviour and attitude towards counterfeit products; 2) risk is negatively related to hedonic behaviour and attitude towards counterfeit products; 3) value consciousness is positively related to hedonic behaviour and genuine store trustworthiness; 4) hedonic behaviour and attitude towards products are related to purchase intention. In addition, the results also support the moderation hypotheses of materialism, value consciousness and social status. The study suggests that marketers need to understand the importance of non-deceptive counterfeiting is useful and consumers have tendency to prefer to use these products once they are satisfied with their utility. The conceptual model developed and tested in this research enables the marketing managers to understand the antecedents of consumers' purchase intention of counterfeit products.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".