Skip to main content
Have a personal or library account? Click to login
Young Women’s Attitude Towards Counterfeiting Cosmetics: An Empirical Study Cover

Young Women’s Attitude Towards Counterfeiting Cosmetics: An Empirical Study

Open Access
|Dec 2023

Figures & Tables

Figure 1.

Basic model for PLS path modelling processing

Source: Elaboration by the authors. PLS, partial least squares.

Table 1.

Sociodemographic characteristics

Nb. cit.Freq. (%)
Age (years)18–2414461.3
25–296126.0
30–34198.1
35–39114.7
SalaryNo income13155.7
Less than 25,000 DA4920.9
Between 26,000 DA and 45,000 DA4519.1
Between 46,000 DA and 65,000 DA83.4
Between 66,000 DA and 85,000 DA10.4
More than 86,000 DA10.4
Socio professional categoryFarmer00.0
Employee5824.7
Trader20.9
Frame31.3
Student13858.7
Workwomen00.0
Unemployed104.3
Administrative198.1
Other52.1
Total235235

1 Source: Sphinx V5 Data.

Table 2.

Reliability of measures (CR and AVE)

Latent variableCRAVE
Threshold>0.7>0.5
Excessive0.890.73
Affective0.930.87
Attachment0.880.66
Low price0.890.80
Cognitive0.850.73
Past behaviour0.850.74
Differentiation0.810.68
Physical risk0.920.78
Psychological risk0.870.69
Rejection0.820.60

1 AVE, average of the variance extracted; CR, composite reliability; PLS, partial least squares.

Source: Smart PLS V3 data.

Table 3.

Discriminant validity √AVE > Cor

12345678910
Criterion validity√AVE > Cor
Excessive0.85
Affective0.090.93
Attachment–0.07–0.270.81
Low price0.340.35–0.070.90
Cognitive0.040.48–0.170.330.86
Past behaviour0.100.40–0.120.160.230.86
Differentiation0.04–0.160.25–0.18–0.24–0.030.83
Physical risk0.08–0.200.29–0.12–0.27–0.010.260.89
Psychological risk–0.07–0.250.410.01–0.06–0.210.090.220.83
Rejection0.05–0.270.43–0.02–0.21–0.170.300.150.370.78

1 AVE, average of the variance extracted; RMSEA, Root Mean Square Error of Approximation; SRMR, Standardized Root Mean Square Residual; PLS, partial least squares.

The diagonal of the bold table indicates the AVEs for each latent variable, the other values concern the squares of the correlations between the different latent variables.

Notes : Fit values ; RMSEA=0.043, SRMR = 0.07, NFI=0.95.

Source: Smart PLS V3 data.

Table 4.

Path coefficients and their significance

RelationStandard errorT-values
H1Insensitivity ⟹ Attitude0.0723.235
H2Attachment ⟹ Attitude0.0711.035
H3Economic Aspect ⟹ Attitude0.0634.097
H4Perceived Risk ⟹ Attitude0.0732.010
H5Attitude ⟹ Purchase Intention0.0760.617

1 PLS, partial least squares.

Source: Smart PLS V2 data.

VariablesItemsQuestionsReference
AttachmentAtt1• I have a lot of affection for this brand.Lacoeuilhe (2000)
Att2• I find some comfort in buying or owning this brand.
Att3• I relate to this brand very much.
Att4• I am very attracted to this brand.
DifferentiationDiff1• Counterfeiting is not solid.Mourad (2014)
Diff2• Counterfeiting can never match a luxury product.
Psychological riskRisP1• When I think about buying a product, I get anxious.Stone and Gronhung (1993)
RisP2• The purchase of a product makes me psychologically uncomfortable.
RisP3• Thinking about buying a product makes me feel tense.

1 Source: Elaboration by the authors.

DOI: https://doi.org/10.2478/minib-2023-0024 | Journal eISSN: 2353-8414 | Journal ISSN: 2353-8503
Language: English, Polish
Page range: 93 - 114
Submitted on: Apr 23, 2023
Accepted on: Nov 20, 2023
Published on: Dec 19, 2023
Published by: ŁUKASIEWICZ RESEARCH NETWORK – INSTITUTE OF AVIATION
In partnership with: Paradigm Publishing Services
JEL:

© 2023 Hela Diouani, Khadidja Bechelaghem, Amel Graa, published by ŁUKASIEWICZ RESEARCH NETWORK – INSTITUTE OF AVIATION
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 License.