H1. A consumer who more strongly believes in the price quality inference has a more negative attitude toward counterfeits.H2. Consumers who are more (less) risk averse will have unfavorable (favorable) attitude toward counterfeits.H3. Consumers who perceive more (less) risk in counterfeits will have unfavorable (favorable) attitude toward counterfeits.H4. Consumers who attribute more (less) integrity to themselves will have unfavorable (favorable) attitude toward counterfeits.H5. Consumers sense of accomplishment will affect their attitude toward counterfeits.H6. Consumers perceiving that their friends/relatives approve (do not approve) their behavior of buying a counterfeit will have favorable (unfavorable) attitude toward counterfeits.H7A. Consumers who have already bought (have never bought) a counterfeit have more favorable (unfavorable) attitude toward counterfeits.H7B. Consumers who have already bought (have never bought) a counterfeit have more favorable (unfavorable)

Proposed Hypotheses Statement Based on the structure model and the above overview of previous researches on counterfeit purchasing, four hypotheses are proposed. H1: Intention to purchase counterfeit products increases with more positive customer attitude towards purchase H2: Intention to purchase counterfeit products increases with consumer perception of normative pressure from important others to support their own purchases of counterfeits. H3: Intention to purchase counterfeits increases with perceived behavioral control. H4: Intention to purchase counterfeits reduces with perceived behavioral control of purchasers of original products.

HypothesesDrawing on the previous research, this study attempts to develop a model of illicit consumption behavior. This study proposes that the decision to purchase an illicit product, instead of a legitimately offered product, can be explained by a combination of variables drawn from the study of criminal behavior and buyer behavior. The behavior is predictable based on threevariables:(1) the selling price;(2) the situation under which the purchase takes place; and(3) the risk associated with the purchase.The model is further complicated by the interaction of the product offered. A significant F-statistics, for the models estimated on the individual level, will indicate that, overall, the variables predict a willingness to buy illicit goods. Given a significant model, several hypotheses can be examined. The first of these is the obvious economic hypothesis regarding price.

H1: Willingness to buy is negatively associated with selling price.Significance of the price coefficient will support this hypothesis. It is expected, however, that the importance of price will not be the same for counterfeit and stolen goods. Because counterfeit goods are typically of lower quality than goods produced by the brand name manufacturer, priceshould be a more important variable in the consideration to purchase a counterfeit good.H1a: Price will provide a higher degree of influence in the decision to purchase counterfeit goods, compared to stolen goods.

This hypothesis will be supported if the mean interaction weight for price and counterfeit is significant and greater than the mean interaction weight for price and stolen. The social pressures exerted on the actual buying situation are also expected to affect willingness to buy. The perceived support or lack of support by others will affect the decision to participate in a criminal activity. Severalhypotheses follow from this train of thought. The literature suggests that people are likely to give in to social pressure when others are participating also; hence:

H2: A buyer is most willing to buy an illicit good when others present are buying illicit goods.Significant negative weights for the variables representing the two alternative buying situations will provide support for this hypothesis. Considering this a base level, two additional hypotheses, based on two other buying settings, are suggested. When a buyer is alone, they are no longerunder the social pressure to participate in the activity; hence: H2a: A buyer is less willing to buy an illicit good when they are alone, than when others are present and buying the illicit product.

A significant negative coefficient for the dummy variable representing the``alone'' buying situation will provide support for this hypothesis. A buyer, however, will not want people who might not support a decision to buy illicit goods to know about the purchase; therefore, the situation where the buyer is alone, should be preferred to a setting where people are present, but notbuying. This logic suggests that a buyer will want to avoid a situation where their behavior is outside of the group norm; hence:

H2b: A buyer is least willing to buy an illicit good when others are present and not buying the illicit product.

A significant negative coefficient for the dummy variable representing the ``friend present, but not making a purchase'' buying situation will provide support for this hypothesis. The literature suggests conflicting evidence regarding perceived criminal risk. Although evidence suggests that criminal risk is a deterrent to crime, the literature also suggests that people will participate in deviant acts if they can rationalize that the act really is not bad. While it is expected that the greaterthe level of perceived criminal risk, the less likely a person is to engage in illicit behavior, the ability to rationalize the behavior will moderate the effect.

H3: Willingness to buy illicit goods is negatively associated with the level of perceived criminal risk.Significance of the perceived criminal risk coefficient will support this hypothesis. However, the importance of perceived criminal risk is not expected to be the same for both counterfeit and stolen goods. Because counterfeit goods are likely to be explained away as not ``really illegal''more easily than stolen goods, perceived criminal risk should be a more important variable in the consideration to purchase a stolen good.

H3a: Perceived criminal risk will provide a higher degree of influence in the decision to purchase stolen goods, compared to counterfeit goods.

This hypothesis will be supported if a significant mean interaction weight for perceived criminal risk and stolen is greater than the mean interaction weight for perceived criminal risk and counterfeit.

The more positive the intentions towards purchasing fake products are, the more likely consumers will actually purchase them.H2: The more consumers defend counterfeiters, e.g., becauseof their more efficient business practices etc., the strongeris their intention to purchase counterfeits.H3: The stronger the belief of consumers that purchasingcounterfeits creates a smart image, the stronger theintention to purchase counterfeits.H4: The stronger the perceived embarrassment potential ofcounterfeits, the weaker the intention to purchase counterfeits.H5: The more consumers perceive a normative pressure fromimportant others on the decision to buy counterfeits, thestronger the intention to actually purchase them.H6: The higher the perceived behavioral control of purchasingcounterfeits, the stronger the intention to purchasecounterfeits.H7: The weaker the self identity of the consumer, the strongerthe intention to purchase counterfeits.H8a: Readiness to take risks has a positive impact on thedegree of defending counterfeiting due to e.g. efficientproduction and/or distribution.H8b: Readiness to take risks has a negative impact on theembarrassment potential of counterfeit goods.H8c: Readiness to take risks has a positive impact on theperception that purchasing counterfeits is a smart consumerbehavior.H9a: Fashion involvement has a positive impact on the degreeof defending counterfeiters due to e.g. efficientproduction and/or distribution.H9b: Fashion involvement has a positive impact on the embarrassmentpotential of counterfeit goods.H9c: Fashion involvement has a negative impact on theperception that purchasing counterfeits is a smart consumerbehavior.H10a: The higher the ethical predisposition the more embarrasseda consumer reacts when being detected buyingcounterfeits.H10b: A strong ethical predisposition weakens the normativepressure of important others.H10c: A strong ethical predisposition strengthens the socialidentity of the consumer.H11: Price consciousness is mediating the effect of intentionto purchase counterfeits on the actual behavior.H12: The effect of the intention to purchase counterfeits onthe actual behavior is moderated by the price differencebetween counterfeit and original product.