Comparison of the Intention of Cyclists’ and Runners’ to Purchasing Counterfeit Sporting Goods

Abstract

The aim of this study is to compare the intentions of individuals who interested in cycling and running sports to purchase counterfeit sports products and try to explain the effect of low price, ethical concern, brand awareness, past experience, perceived risk and attitudes towards the counterfeit goods factors regarding previous study in the literature. The sample of the study consisted of 398 individuals (201 runners and 197 cyclists), who agreed to participate in the research with the non-probability easy sampling method. Data collection tool “Counterfeit Sporting Goods Purchase Intention Scale” was developed by researcher. For analysis of the data and test of the research hypotheses, structural equation model and independent t test were applied to the results which showed normal distribution. As the result of research, on the intentions of athletes to purchase counterfeit sporting goods; while perceived risk, previous experience, brand consciousness, ethical concern and attitude were seen to have significant effect, low price did not have statistically significant effect. It was also found that brand consciousness and perceived risk factors have a significant difference between cyclist and runners; in favor cyclist.

Keywords

• Counterfeit Sporting Goods,Purchasing Intention,Purchasing Attitude

Bisikletçilerin ve Koşucuların Taklit Spor Ürünleri Satın Alma Niyetlerinin Karşılaştırılması

Abstract

Bu çalışmanın amacı, bisiklet ve koşu sporuyla ilgilenen bireylerin taklit spor ürünü alma niyetlerini karşılaştırmak; literatürde yer alan ve daha önceki çalışmalarda ortaya çıkan taklit ürüne yönelik tutum, düşük fiyat, etik endişesi, marka bilinci, geçmiş deneyim ve algılanan risk faktörlerinin etkisini açıklamaya çalışmaktır. Araştırmanın örneklemini olasılığa dayalı olmayan kolayda örnekleme yöntemi ile ayrım yapılmaksızın çalışmaya katılmayı kabul eden 201’i koşu, 197’si bisiklet sporuyla ilgilenen (398) bireyler oluşturmuştur. Veri toplama aracı olan “Taklit Spor Ürünü Satın Alma Niyeti Ölçeği“ (TSÜSANÖ) araştırmacı tarafından geliştirilmiştir. Verilerin analizi ve araştırma hipotezlerinin testi için yapısal eşitlik modellemesi ile normal dağılım gösteren sonuçlara parametrik testlerden, bağımsız t testi uygulanmıştır. Araştırma sonucunda sporcuların taklit spor ürünü satın almaya yönelik niyetleri üzerinde; algılanan risk, geçmiş deneyim, marka bilinci, etik endişesi ve tutumun anlamlı etkisi olduğu görülürken, düşük fiyatın anlamlı etkisinin olmadığı görülmüştür. Bisiklet ve koşu sporcuları arasında da anlamlı farkın marka bilinci ve algılanan risk faktörlerinde bisiklet sporcuları lehine olduğu anlaşılmıştır.

Keywords

• Taklit Spor Ürünü,Satın Alma Niyeti,Satın Alma Tutumu

References

1. Ajzen, I., Fishbein, M. (1980). Understanding attitudes and predicting social behavior. NJ: Prentice-Hall.
2. Albarq, A.N. (2015). Counterfeit products and the role of the consumer in Saudi Arabia. American Journal of Industrial and Business Management, 5(12):819-827.
3. Alpar, R. (2014). Uygulamalı istatistik ve geçerlik-güvenirlik. Ankara: Detay Yayıncılık.
4. Alpar, R. (2001). Spor bilimlerinde uygulamalı istatistik. Ankara: Nobel Yayın Dağıtım.
5. Bae, S. (2011). Decision-making styles in purchasing sport products: An international comparison between American and Korean college students. London: Palgrave Macmillan.
6. Bian, X., 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, 45(2):191-216.
7. Bagozzi, R., Gurhan, C.Z., Priester, J. (2002). The social psychology of consumer behaviour. London: McGraw-Hill Education.
8. Cesareo, L. (2016). Counterfeiting and piracy, a comprehensive literature review. NY: Springer.

9. Chae, M.H., Black, C., Heitmeyer, J. (2006). Pre‐purchase and post‐purchase satisfaction and fashion involvement of female tennis wear consumers. International Journal of Consumer Studies, 30(1):25-33.
10. Chaudary, M.W.T., Ahmed, F., Gill, M.S., Rizwan, M. (2014). The determinants of purchase intention of consumers towards counterfeit shoes in Pakistan. Journal of Public Administration and Governance, 4(3):20-38.
11. Chaudhry, P.E., Zimmerman, A. (2009). The economics of counterfeit trade: Governments, consumers, pirates and intellectual property rights. NY: Springer Science & Business Media.
12. Cheng, S.I., Fu, H.H., Tu, L.T.C. (2011). Examining customer purchase intentions for counterfeit products based on a modified theory of planned behavior. International Journal of Humanities and Social Science, 1(10):278-284.
13. Chiu, W., Lee, K.Y., Won, D. (2014). Consumer behavior toward counterfeit sporting goods. Social Behavior and Personality, 42(4):615-624.
14. Chiu, W., Leng, H.K. (2016). Consumers’ intention to purchase counterfeit sporting goods in Singapore and Taiwan. Asia Pacific Journal of Marketing and Logistics, 28(1):23-36.
15. Delgado Ballester, E., Luis Munuera-Alemán, J. (2005). Does brand trust matter to brand equity? Journal of Product & Brand Management, 14(3):187-196.
16. De Matos, C.A., Ituassu, C. T., Rossi, C.A.V. (2007). Consumer attitudes toward counterfeits: A review and extension. Journal of Consumer Marketing, 24(1):36-47.
17. Eagly, A.H., Chaiken, S. (1993). The psychology of attitudes. NY: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich College Publishers.
18. Erdoğan, E ve Burucuoğlu, M. (2018). Taklit ürün satın alma davranışında bireysel caydırıcı olarak risk faktörleri: Aksesuar ürünleri üzerine bir araştırma. Hacettepe Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, 36(4):17-37.
19. Dickson, M.A., Pollack, A. (2000). Clothing and identity among female in-line skaters. Clothing and Textiles Research Journal, 18(2):65-72.
20. Gentry, J.W., Putrevu, S., Shultz, C.J. (2006). The effects of counterfeiting on consumer search. Journal of Consumer Behaviour, 5(3):245-256.
21. Gino, F., Norton, M. I., Ariely, D. (2010). The counterfeit self: The deceptive costs of faking it. Psychological Science, 21(5):712-720.
22. Gültekin, B. (2018). Influence of the love of money and morality on intention to purchase counterfeit apparel. Social Behavior and Personality: An International Journal, 46(9):1421-1436.
23. Gwinner, K., Swanson, S.R. (2003). A model of fan identification: Antecedents and sponsorship outcomes. Journal of Services Marketing, 17(3):275-294.
24. Hair, J.F., Black, W.C., Babin, B.J., Anderson, R.E. (2010). Multivariate data analysis. NY: Prentice Hall.
25. Harvey, P.J., Walls, W.D. (2003). Laboratory markets in counterfeit goods: Hong Kong versus Las Vegas. Applied Economics Letters, 10(14):883-887.
26. Karahan, M.O. ve Şahin, F. (2020). Tüketicilerin taklit ürün satın alma tutumlarını ve niyetlerini etkileyen faktörlerin belirlenmesi: Nicel bir araştırma. Gümüşhane Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Elektronik Dergisi, 11(1):154-170.
27. Karasar, N. (2014). Bilimsel araştırma yöntemleri: Kavramlar, teknikler ve ilkeler. Ankara: Nobel Yayınevi.
28. Kim, H., Karpova, E. (2010). Consumer qttitudes toward fashion counterfeits: Application of the theory of planned behavior. Clothing and Textiles Research Journal, 28(2):79-94.
29. Kline, R.B. (2011). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling. London: Guilford publications.
30. Kozar, J.M., Marcketti, S.B. (2011). Examining ethics and materialism with purchase of counterfeits. Social Responsibility Journal, 7(3):393-404.
31. Lai, K.K., Zaichkowsky, J.L. (1999). Brand imitation: Do the Chinese have different views? Asian Pacific Journal of Management, 16(2):179-192.
32. Leisen, B., Nill, A. (2001). Combating product counterfeiting: An investigation into the likely effectiveness of a demand-oriented approach. NY: American Marketing Association.
33. Le Roux, A., Bobrie, F., Thébault, M. (2016). A typology of brand counterfeiting and imitation based on a semiotic approach. Journal of Business Research, 69(1):349-356.
34. Lin, Y.T., Chen, S.C., Hung, C.S. (2011). The impacts of brand equity, brand attachment, product involvement and repurchase intention on bicycle users. African Journal of Business Management, 5(14):5910-5919.
35. Lysonski, S., Durvasula, S. (2008). Digital piracy of MP3s: Consumer and ethical predispositions. Journal of Consumer Marketing, 25(3):167-178.
36. Maldonado, C., Hume, E.C. (2005). Attitudes toward counterfeit products: An ethical perspective. Journal of Legal, Ethical and Regulatory Issues, 8(2):105-112.
37. Ocakoğlu, O. (2019). Sporda risk yönetimi: Bodrun ultra maratonu örneği. Spor Bilimleri Araştırmaları Dergisi, 4(1):113-123.
38. Ocakoğlu, O. (2020). Koşucularda yarış seçimini etkileyen faktörler. Gazi Beden Eğitimi ve Spor Bilimleri Dergisi, 25(2):77-92.
39. Park-Poaps, H., Kang, J. (2018). An experiment on non-luxury fashion counterfeit purchase: The effects of brand reputation, fashion attributes, and attitudes toward counterfeiting. Journal of Brand Management, 25(2):185-196.
40. Phau, I., Teah, M. (2009). Devil wears (counterfeit) Prada: A study of antecedents and outcomes of attitudes towards counterfeits of luxury brands. Journal of Consumer Marketing, 26(1):15-27.
41. Prendergast, G., Hing Chuen, L., Phau, I. (2002). Understanding consumer demand for non-deceptive pirated brands. Marketing Intelligence & Planning, 20(7):405-416.
42. Rizwan, M., Khan, H., Saeed, A., Muzaffar, A., Arshad, U., Hussain, M. (2012). Antecedents of purchase intention a study from Pakistan. Journal of Business and Management, 23(4):58-66.
43. Seyrek, İ.H., Sürme, M. (2016). Üniversite öğrencilerinin taklit ürün satın alma niyetlerine etki eden faktörler. Yönetim ve Ekonomi Araştırmaları Dergisi, 14(3):111-123.
44. Shaw, D., Shiu, E. (2002). The role of ethical obligation and self‐identity in ethical consumer choice. International Journal of Consumer Studies, 26(2):109-116.
45. Soenyoto, F.L. (2015). The impact of brand equity on brand preference and purchase intention in Indonesia's bicycle industry: A case study of Polygon. iBuss Management, 3(2):99-108.
46. Swami, V., Chamorro-Premuzic, T., Furnham, A. (2009). Faking it: Personality and individual difference predictors of willingness to buy counterfeit goods. The Journal of Socio-Economics, 38(5):820-825.
47. Tang, F., Tian, V.I., Zaichkowsky, J. (2014). Understanding counterfeit consumption. Asia Pacific Journal of Marketing and Logistics, 26(1):4-20.
48. Viot, C., Roux, L.A., Krémer, F. (2014). Attitude towards the purchase of counterfeits: Antecedents and effect on intention to purchase. Recherche et Applications en Marketing, 29(2):3-31.
49. Yoo, B., Lee, S.H. (2009). Buy genuine luxury fashion products or counterfeits? ACR North American Advances, 6(1):280-286.
50. Yoon, C. (2011). Theory of planned behavior and ethics theory in digital piracy: An integrated model. Journal of Business Ethics, 100(3):405-417.