SURVEY INSTRUMENT

The survey instrument consists of established scales and the only scale to be developed in this study would be the “presence of mimicry” scale. The scales for the various constructs within the study are all reliable with Cronbach’s alpha of above .8, which is deemed acceptable (Nunnally, 1970). The reliabilities of the scale items are available in Table 4.2.

133 Table 4.2: Scale reliabilities and sources

Scale Source No. of observed

items 

1. Presence of

Mimicry To be developed for this

study N/A N/A

The survey is structured with care by allowing the participants to have a chance to evaluate the brands through comparison of the stimuli provided. This intends to emulate a real life purchase decision where by comparisons between the model and the mimic brand can be made (Simonson, 1994; d’Astous and Gargouri, 2001). The sections within the survey will be discussed in the following sections. Please refer to Appendix F for the full survey. All the measures are described as follows:

Scale Measure 1: Presence of mimicry

To assess the presence of mimicry, part of this research is to develop a scale to measure each form of mimicry. Based on the literature review (Chapter 2) and existing theoretical

justification (Chapter 3), three brand mimicry scales are explicitly developed for this study. A thorough description of the scale development process established by Churchill (1979) and DeVellis (2003) is described in Chapter 5.

The measures compare key product features between the model and the mimic brand.

Therefore, based on past studies on product similarity and perception of similarity between products or brands (Lefkoff-Hagius and Mason, 1993; Wee et al. 1995; Tom et al. 1998;

Walsh and Mitchell, 2005; Penz and Stottinger, 2008a) and each form of mimicry would have specific scale items that pertain to measuring that specific form of mimicry. Previous

studies within the copying or product similarity literature have often used Likert scales (Loken et al., 1986; Bijmolt et al., 1998; Penz and Stottinger, 2008a).

Wicklerian-Eisnerian mimicry Scale: the scale has identified three attributes and consists of 11 items. These attributes are namely image characteristics, beneficial characteristics and physical characteristics. Respondents were asked to indicate on a 7 point Likert scale whether they perceive similarity between the model and the mimic brand.

Vavilovian mimicry Scale: the scale has identified three attributes. These attributes are namely physical characteristics, symbolic characteristics and beneficial characteristics consisting of 15 items. Respondents were asked to indicate on a 7 point Likert scale whether they perceive similarity between the model and the mimic brand.

Pouyannian mimicry Scale: the scale has identified three attributes. These attributes are namely image characteristics, intellectual characteristics and physical characteristics

consisting of 13 items. Respondents were asked to indicate on a 7 point Likert scale whether they perceive similarity between the model and the mimic brand.

Scale Measure 2: Perception of luxury

The measure to examine perception of luxury is adapted from Hagtvedt and Patrick (2008).

While the original 5-item scale used was a semantic scale, for this study we have adapted to a 7-point Likert scale. A negative worded item was also included in the scale. The respondents were posed with questions like “I perceive X brand to be luxurious”. These items are

presented at Appendix F.

Scale Measure 3: Product evaluation

The measure of product evaluation was based from the study by Hagtvedt and Patrick (2008).

The 5 item scale was adapted from a 7-point semantic scale to a 7-point Likert scale. To measure product evaluation, questions like “I like X very much”, “I have favourable

evaluations towards X” are posed to the respondents. The items can be seen at Appendix F.

135 Scale Measure 4: Brand familiarity

There are numerous brand familiarity scales. Most of the scales used in imitation studies are one item scales (Miceli and Pieters, 2010; van Horen and Pieters, 2012a, 2012b). However, for this study Kent and Allen’s (1994) scale is used as it measures experience, knowledge and familiarity. An example of the question is “I am familiar with the X brand”. The items can be seen in Appendix F.

Scale Measure 5: Consumers’ need for uniqueness

Based on Tian et al.’s (2001) 31 scale items, the consumers’ need for uniqueness is used in this study. Although there was a refined version of 9 items by Knight and Kim (2009), the original scale comprising of three dimensions, namely avoidance of similarity, unpopular choice counter-conformity and creative choice counter-conformity was used. The items are measured on a 7-point Likert scale. The respondents are posed with questions such as “I collect unusual products as a way of telling people I am different”, “I often look for one-of-a-kind product or brands so that I create a style that is all my own”, and “I often dress

unconventionally even when it is likely to offend others. The items can be seen in Appendix F.

Scale Measure 6: Status consumption

Status consumption is consistently measured in studies involving counterfeits or copying of luxury brands (Phau and Teah, 2009; Sharma and Chan, 2011). Numerous studies have validated the scale across numerous cultural backgrounds and contexts. The established scale is from Eastman et al.’s (1999) scale. The instrument consisted of five items in the form of a 7-point Likert scale. The items consist of “I would buy a product just because it has status”,

“I am interested in new products with status”, “The status of a product is irrelevant to me” to name a few. The items can be seen in Appendix F.

Demographics

The respondent’s gender, age, income, education and country of residence were collected to provide a clear profile of the respondents. Results of the analysis are shown in Chapter 6.