Data Analysis

Demographical Analysis:
Gender:
Regarding demographical profile of the consumers, it is observed that by gender majority of the
respondents were male (59%) while rest of the sample represents female (42%)
Gender
Frequency

Percent

Valid Percent

Cumulative
Percent

Valid

Female

120

41.2

41.2

41.2

Male

171

58.8

58.8

100.0

Total

291

100.0

100.0

Age:
Majority of the consumers were between 31-40 years of age (36%) while the least number of
respondents were age group of above 50 years (6%)
Age
Frequency

Percent

Valid Percent

Cumulative
Percent

Valid

Under 20 Years

54

18.6

18.6

18.6

21 to 30 Years

92

31.6

31.6

50.2

31 to 40 Years

105

36.1

36.1

86.3

41 to 50 Years

23

7.9

7.9

94.2

Above 50 Years

17

5.8

5.8

100.0

291

100.0

100.0

Total

Education:
Most of respondents surveyed were having bachelors level academic qualification (40%)
followed by intermediate (35%), masters (14%), above masters (4%) and below metric (5%).
Hence majority of the sample can be claimed as well educated.
Education
Frequency

Percent

Valid Percent

Cumulative
Percent

Valid

Below Metric

16

5.5

5.5

5.5

Intermediate

103

35.4

35.4

40.9

Bachelors

118

40.5

40.5

81.4

Masters

42

14.4

14.4

95.9

Above Masters

12

4.1

4.1

100.0

291

100.0

100.0

Total

Employment Status:
A large proportion of sample respondents was full time employed while least number of
respondents belongs to full time students. It can be attributed that most representative part of our
sample is employed (67%)
Emp_Status
Frequency

Percent

Valid Percent

Cumulative
Percent

Valid

Student (Full Time)

2.4

2.4

2.4

Student (Part Time)

78

26.8

26.8

29.2

Employed (Full Time)

136

46.7

46.7

75.9

Employed (Part Time)

59

20.3

20.3

96.2

Unemployed

11

3.8

3.8

100.0

291

100.0

100.0

Total

Reliability Analysis:
In order to ensure the reliability of constructs, Cronbachs of dependent and independent
variables was calculated. Constructs having Cronbachs value 0.5 and above were retained. It
can observed that all constructs have Cronbachs value above 0.70.
Item Statistics
Mean

Cronbachs

Price

4.1604

.79

291

Quality

4.1363

.79

291

Hedonic_Means

4.1649

.76

291

Self_Image

4.3986

.70

291

Materialism

4.3528

.79

291

Social_Acceptance

4.3184

.76

291

Social_Mkt_Communication

4.1638

.78

291

Shopping_Exp

4.2646

.79

291

Attitude

4.0619

.72

291

Regression Analysis:
Linear regression technique was used to test the proposed hypotheses and the predictive power of
the given model. It has been found that the proposed model explains the consumers attitude
towards purchase of fashion counterfeits by concentration of 29%.
Model Summary
Model
R
R Square Adjusted R Std. Error of
Square
the Estimate
a
1
.539
.290
.270
.58702
a. Predictors: (Constant), Shopping_Exp, Price,
Materialism, Social_Mkt_Communication,
Hedonic_Means, Social_Acceptance, Quality, Self_Image

Model

(Constant)
Price
Quality
Hedonic_Means
Self_Image
1
Materialism
Social_Acceptance
Social_Mkt_Communi
cation
Shopping_Exp
a. Dependent Variable: Attitude

Coefficientsa
Unstandardized
Coefficients
B
Std. Error
.126
.414
.098
.039
.096
.045
.085
.056
-.025
.084
.125
.052
.262
.058

Standardized
Coefficients
Beta

Sig.

.131
.118
.098
-.019
.126
.237

.303
2.505
2.163
1.517
-.298
2.414
4.480

.762
.013
.031
.130
.766
.016
.000

.140

.045

.164

3.089

.002

.147

.051

.154

2.889

.004

Study found that price, quality, materialism, social acceptance, social marketing communication
and shopping experience are the significant predictors of consumers attitude towards purchase
of fashion counterfeits. On the other hand, hedonic means and self-image are insignificant
predictors of consumers attitude.
It is worth noted that social acceptance is the most powerful predictor of the subject matter by
magnitude which is then followed by social marketing communication, shopping experience,
materialism, price, and quality.