Öz

Counterfeit products are important issues about which it is to be thought and to be solved all over the world today. Counterfeit products are harmful to the consumers with their use, to micro-level operations with their production and to the economies at macro-level. In this study, the effect of various risk factors and gender on purchasing the counterfeit product behavior of consumers who played an important role in the formation of supply for counterfeit products is examined. Accessory products that consumers can easily reach in many places are selected as a product category in the survey. Within the scope of the survey, 351 participants from Samsun/Turkey sample are reached by a questionnaire. A research model based on the relationship between intention of purchasing and physical, social, financial, psychological risk factors that are thought to be an obstacle to behavior of purchasing counterfeit product is established. As a result of the research, it is found that the financial risk has strongly reduced the behavior of purchasing the counterfeit accessory product. Other risk factors are not seem to have any effect on the intention of purchasing counterfeit accessory products. In the gender based model comparison, risk perceptions of male and female are not different at the model level. It can be said that it would be beneficial to emphasize the financial damages to be faced with the use of counterfeit products in the marketing programs and applications according to the results of the research.

TAKLİT ÜRÜN SATIN ALMA DAVRANIŞINDA BİREYSEL CAYDIRICI OLARAK RİSK FAKTÖRLERİ: AKSESUAR ÜRÜNLERİ ÜZERİNE BİR ARAŞTIRMA

Öz

Taklit ürünler bugün tüm dünyada üzerine düşünülen ve çözüm aranan önemli bir konudur. Taklit ürünler kullanımları ile tüketicilere, üretimi ile mikro düzeyde işletmelere makro düzeyde ise ekonomilere zarar vermektedir. Bu çalışmada, taklit ürünlere yönelik arzın oluşmasında önemli bir rol üstlenen tüketicilerin taklit ürün satın alma davranışına çeşitli risk faktörlerinin etkisi incelenmiştir. Araştırmada ürün kategorisi olarak tüketicilerin birçok noktada kolayca ulaşabildiği aksesuar ürünleri seçilmiştir. Araştırma kapsamında Türkiye örnekleminden 351 katılımcıya anket tekniği ile ulaşılmıştır. Taklit ürün satın alma davranışının önünde bir engel oluşturacağı düşünülen fiziksel, sosyal, finansal, psikolojik risk faktörleri ile satın alma niyeti arasındaki ilişkilere dayanan araştırma modeli oluşturulmuştur. Araştırma sonucunda finansal riskin taklit aksesuar ürünü satın alma davranışını güçlü bir şekilde azalttığı sonucuna ulaşılmıştır. Diğer risk faktörlerinin ise taklit aksesuar ürünü satın alma niyeti üzerinde bir etkisinin olmadığı görülmüştür. Bu bulgudan yola çıkarak pazarlama program ve uygulamalarında taklit ürün kullanımı ile karşılaşılacak finansal zararlara vurgu yapılmasının faydalı olacağı söylenebilir.  

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Taklit Ürün,Sosyal Risk,Psikolojik Risk,Finansal Risk,Fiziksel Risk

Kaynakça

1. 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.
2. Ang, S. H. , Cheng, S. P., Lim, A. C. E., Tambyah, K. S. (2001), "Spot the difference: consumer responses towards counterfeits", Journal of Consumer Marketing, 18(3), 219-235, https://doi.org/10.1108/07363760110392967
3. Bavar, A., Tahmasebifard, H., Kheiry, B. (2017), "Studying the Factors Affecting Consumers Complicity with Counterfeit Products." Business Management and Strategy, 8(1), 39-57.
4. Bian, X., Moutinho, L. (2011), “Counterfeits and branded products: effects of counterfeit ownership”. Journal of Product & Brand Management, 20(5), 379-393.
5. Bian, X., Wang, K. Y., Smith, A., Yannopoulou, N. (2016), “New insights into unethical counterfeit consumption”, Journal of Business Research, 69(10), 4249-4258, ISSN 0148-2963, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2016.02.038.
6. Bloch, P. H. , Bush, F. R., Campbell, L. (1993), "Consumer “accomplices” in product counterfeiting: a demand side investigation", Journal of Consumer Marketing, 10(4), 27-36, https://doi.org/10.1108/07363769310047374
7. Campbell, M. C., Goodstein, R. C. (2001), "The moderating effect of perceived risk on consumers' evaluations of product incongruity: Preference for the norm." Journal of consumer research 28(3), 439-449.
8. Cases, A. S. (2002), "Perceived risk and risk-reduction strategies in Internet shopping." The International Review of Retail, Distribution and Consumer Research 12(4), 375-394.

9. Cases, A. S. (2002), “Perceived Risk and Risk Reduction Strategies in Internet Shosing,” Distribution and Consumer Research, Cilt 12, Sayı 4, s. 375-394. Chaudhry, P. E., Chaudhry, S. S., Stumpf, S. A., Sudler, H. (2011). Piracy in cyber space: consumer complicity, pirates and enterprise enforcement. Enterprise Information Systems, 5(2), 255-271.
10. Chaudhry, P. E., Stumpf, S. A. (2011), "Consumer complicity with counterfeit products." Journal of Consumer Marketing 28(2), 139-151.
11. Chaudhry, P., Zimmerman, A. (2013), “The Global Growth of Counterfeit Trade.” In: Protecting Your Intellectual Property Rights. Management for Professionals. Springer, New York, NY.
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: an international journal, 42(4), 615-624.
14. de Matos, A., C., Trindade Ituassu, C., Vargas Rossi, C. A. (2007), "Consumer attitudes toward counterfeits: a review and extension." Journal of consumer Marketing 24(1), 36-47.
15. Ehrlich, A., Kucenic, M., & Belsito, D. V. (2001), “Role of body piercing in the induction of metal allergies.” Dermatitis, 12(3), 151-155.
16. Eisend, M., Schuchert-Guler, P. (2007), "Do Consumers Mind Buying Illicit Goods? The Case of Counterfeit Purchases." ACR European Advances, 124-125.
17. Eisend, M., Schuchert-Güler, P. (2006), "Explaining counterfeit purchases: A review and preview." Academy of Marketing Science Review, 1, 1-22.
18. Engı̇zek, N., Şekerkaya, A. (2015), "Tüketicilerin Lüks Markaların Taklitlerini Satın Alma Seviyeleri Açısından Farklılıklarının İncelenmesi Üzerine Bir Araştırma." Öneri Dergisi 11(43), 145-184.
19. Ergin, Elif Akagun (2010), "The rise in the sales of counterfeit brands: The case of Turkish consumers." African Journal of Business Management 4(10), 2181-2186.
20. Fornell, C., Larcker, D. F. (1981). Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of marketing research, 39-50.
21. Gentry, J. W. Putrevu, S., Shultz II, C., Commuri, S. (2001) ,"How Now Ralph Lauren? the Separation of Brand and Product in a Counterfeit Culture", in NA - Advances in Consumer Research 28, eds. Mary C. Gilly and Joan Meyers-Levy, Valdosta, GA : Association for Consumer Research, 258-265. http://www.acrwebsite.org/volumes/8485/volumes/v28/NA-28.
22. Grossman, G. M., Shapiro, C. (1988), "Foreign Counterfeiting of Status Goods." The Quarterly Journal of Economics 103(1), 79-100. http://www.jstor.org/stable/1882643.
23. Ha, H‐Y. (2002); “The Effects of Consumer Risk Perception on Pre-purchase Information in Online Auctions: Brand, Word-of-Mouth, and Customized Information,” Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 8(1), http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1083-6101.2002.tb00160.x/full, E.T. 27.07.2017
24. Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., Anderson, R. E., & Tatham, R. L. (2006). Multivariate data analysis (Vol.6.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson 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. Jacoby, J., Kaplan, L. B. (1972),"The Components of Perceived Risk", in SV - Proceedings of the Third Annual Conference of the Association for Consumer Research, eds. M. Venkatesan, Chicago, IL : Association for Consumer Research, Pages: 382-393.
27. Jirotmontree, A. (2013), "Business ethics and counterfeit purchase intention: a comparative study on Thais and Singaporeans." Journal of International Consumer Marketing 25(4), 281-288.
28. Kaplan, L. B., Szybillo, J. G., Jacoby, J. (1974), "Components of perceived risk in product purchase: A cross-validation." Journal of applied Psychology 59(3), 287-291.
29. Klarmann, C., Wiedmann, K. P., Hennigs, N. (2013), "Luxury longing and counterfeit complicity: a consumer typology based on the perception of luxury value and counterfeit risk." Luxury Marketing Luxury Marketing A Challenge for Theory and Practice (Eds. Klaus-Peter Wiedmann • Nadine Hennigs). Springer Gabler, DOI 10.1007/978-3-8349-4399-6.
30. Koklic, M. K. (2011), "Non-deceptive counterfeiting purchase behavior: Antecedents of attitudes and purchase intentions." Journal of Applied Business Research 27(2), 127-138.
31. Leisen, B., Nill, A. (2001), "Combating product counterfeiting: An investigation into the likely effectiveness of a demand-oriented approach." American Marketing Association. Conference Proceedings. Vol. 12. American Marketing Association.
32. Lim, N. (2003), "Consumers’ perceived risk: sources versus consequences." Electronic Commerce Research and Applications 2(3), 216-228.
33. Maldonado, C., Hume, E. C. (2005), “Attitudes toward counterfeit products: An ethical perspective.” Journal of Legal, Ethical and Regulatory Issues, 8(1/2), 105-117.
34. Michaelidou, N., Christodoulides, G. (2011). “Antecedents of attitude and intention towards counterfeit symbolic and experiential products.” Journal of Marketing Management, 27(9-10), 976-991.
35. Mir, A. I. (2013), “Examination of attitudinal and intentional drivers of non-deceptive counterfeiting in a South Asian context.” Journal of Business Economics and Management, 14(3), 601-615.
36. Mitchell, V. W. (1992), "Understanding consumers’ behaviour: can perceived risk theory help?." Management Decision, 30(3), 26-31.
37. Mitchell, V. W., & Greatorex, M. (1993), “Risk Perception and Reduction in the Purchase of Consumer Services,” The Services Industries Journal, Cilt 13, Sayı 4, s. 179-200.
38. Mitra, K., Michelle C. R., & Louis M. C. (1999), "An examination of perceived risk, information search and behavioral intentions in search, experience and credence services." Journal of Services Marketing 13(3), 208-228.
39. ODCE-OECD (1998). The Economic Impact of Counterfeiting, http://www.oecd.org/industry/ind/2090589.pdf, E.T. 26.07.2017
40. OECD, http://www.oecd.org/industry/global-trade-in-fake-goods-worth-nearly-half-a-trillion-dollars-a-year.htm, E.T. 26.07.2017
41. OECD/EUIPO (2016), Trade in Counterfeit and Pirated Goods: Mapping the Economic Impact, OECD Publishing, Paris. http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/9789264252653-en
42. Peter, J. P., Olson, C. J. (2008), Consumer Behavior and Marketing Strategy, Mcgraw-Internatinal Edition, New York.
43. Phau, I., Sequeira, M., Dix, S. (2009), "Consumers' willingness to knowingly purchase counterfeit products", Direct Marketing: An International Journal, 3(4), 262-281, https:// doi.org/10.1108/17505930911000865
44. Poddar, A., Foreman, J., Banerjee, S. S., Ellen, P. S. (2012), “Exploring the Robin Hood effect: Moral profiteering motives for purchasing counterfeit products”, Journal of Business Research, 65(10), 1500-1506, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2011.10.017.
45. Pueschel, J., Chamaret, C., & Parguel, B. (2017), "Coping with copies: The influence of risk perceptions in luxury counterfeit consumption in GCC countries." Journal of Business Research 77, 184-194.
46. Schiffman, L. G., Kanuk, L. L. (2004), Consumer Behavior, Eighth Edition, Pearson Edicaiton International, New Jersey.
47. 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.
48. Stone, R. N., Grønhaug, K. (1993), "Perceived risk: Further considerations for the marketing discipline." European Journal of marketing 27(3), 39-50.
49. Sullivan, B. A., Chermak, M. S. (2013), "Product counterfeiting and the media: examining news sources used in the construction of product counterfeiting as a social problem." International Journal of Comparative and Applied Criminal Justice, 37(4), 295-316.
50. Tang, F., Tian, V. I., Zaichkowsky, J. (2014), "Understanding counterfeit consumption." Asia Pacific Journal of Marketing and Logistics 26(1), 4-20.
51. Thaichon, P., Quach, S. (2016), "Dark motives-counterfeit purchase framework: Internal and external motives behind counterfeit purchase via digital platforms." Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 33, 82-91.
52. 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 (English Edition), 29(2), 3-31.
53. Wang, F., Zhang, H., Zang, H., Ouyang, M. (2005) "Purchasing pirated software: an initial examination of Chinese consumers", Journal of Consumer Marketing, 22(6), 340-351, https://doi.org/10.1108/07363760510623939
54. Wilson, J. M. (2017), "The future of brand protection: responding to the global risk." Journal of Brand Management, 24(3), 1-13.
55. Yoo, B., & Lee, S. H. (2009), “Buy Genuine Luxury Fashion Products Or Counterfeits?", in NA - Advances in Consumer Research Volume 36, eds. Ann L. McGill and Sharon Shavitt, Duluth, MN : Association for Consumer Research, 280-286.