MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4406596350 · doi:10.1108/imr-02-2024-0055

From purchase to regret: deterring counterfeit consumption through moral emotions and multicultural identity

2025· article· en· W4406596350 on OpenAlexaff
Linda Hui Shi, Annie Peng Cui, Stacey R. Fitzsimmons

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Marketing Review · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicEmotions and Moral Behavior
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRegretShameCounterfeitSocial psychologyPsychologyConsumption (sociology)Identity (music)MediationHumiliationValue (mathematics)DisgustAdvertisingBusinessSociologyPolitical scienceAnger

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Purpose This research examines whether conflicting multicultural identities may influence counterfeit consumption behavior by examining how monocultural and multicultural consumers process shame and guilt differently depending on their cultural identities. It explores how consumers’ moral emotions after buying counterfeit goods can lead to regret and reduce their likelihood of buying such goods in the future. Design/methodology/approach This research employs a multimethod, multi-sample approach with 1,694 respondents across multiple cultures to test our hypotheses. Study 1 is survey research with overseas Chinese consumers and monocultural Chinese consumers, and Study 2 is a randomized block experiment with a European multicultural sample. This design allowed us to test both mediation and moderation hypotheses, validating the effects of shame and guilt on post-purchase regret across diverse multicultural settings. Findings Study 1 shows that cultural identity conflict (CIC) weakens the main effects of shame and guilt on counterfeit post-purchase regret. Study 2 shows that under artificially high levels of shame and guilt, CIC no longer weakens the effects of either shame or guilt on post-purchase regret, further confirming these main effects on counterfeit post-purchase regret. Furthermore, Study 2 demonstrates that, in a natural setting without manipulation, CIC weakens the main effects of shame and guilt on post-purchase regret, further supporting CIC’s moderating effect. Originality/value This study develops a model to examine counterfeit purchasing, going beyond the point of purchase to also consider post-purchase regret and repurchase intentions. It also explores moral emotions and cultural identity factors that can discourage future counterfeit purchases by increasing post-purchase regret. Finally, it investigates how this process may vary between multicultural and monocultural consumers, given their different cultural identities.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.012
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.012
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.063
GPT teacher head0.416
Teacher spread0.352 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations4
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Marketing ReviewSame topicEmotions and Moral BehaviorFrench-language works237,207