IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/oabmxx/v10y2023i3p2284814.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Four decades of counterfeit research: A bibliometric analysis

Author

Listed:
  • Irfan Butt
  • Maha Khamis Al Balushi
  • Seung Hwan (Mark) Lee
  • Myuri Mohan
  • Naseer Ahmad Khan
  • Shelley Haines

Abstract

This paper assesses the evolution of last 43 years in counterfeit research with respect to sources of knowledge (i.e. journals, authors, institutions, countries) and research themes. The oldest paper on this subject discovered in the Scopus database was published 43 years ago, yet a time frame was not specified. Sources of knowledge are assessed on research productivity (quantitative) as well as impact (qualitative). Research themes, key areas of focus within the counterfeit research landscape, are identified and discussed to conceptualize our understanding of the field. Via a systematic literature review, 713 peer-reviewed academic articles published in 282 journals from 1978 to 2021 were selected as the sample for this study. The systematic review technique was chosen as compared with narrative reviews of the literature it focuses on open, extensive, and detailed approaches to literature searches, in addition to conforming to the scientific criteria utilised in primary research, namely transparency, rigour, comprehensiveness, and reproducibility. A database of references and citations was created for analysis. The data was analyzed to prepare comparative tables. Further, the Leximancer software was used to generate lexical conceptual trends. This data was further analyzed to identify emerging themes. The Journal of Business Ethics had the highest number of articles and citations, followed by the Journal of Business Research and Business Horizons. Ian Phau (14 articles) and Michael D. Smith, (9 articles) were the most prolific authors. Joseph Nunes and Ian Phau attained the highest number of citations, cited 658 and 577 times respectively. Eight major research themes were identified: products, piracy, model, price, firms, digital, supply, and ethical. Each theme was analyzed over time. The major research areas analyzed across the articles over time were Technology (particularly “Technology” and “Software” topics) and Ethics (particularly “IP” and “Legislation”). The identification of these research area captures the essence of the paper’s uniqueness and contribution to this field of research. This is the first systematic literature review in counterfeit literature that captures multi-decade sources of knowledge in business journals.

Suggested Citation

  • Irfan Butt & Maha Khamis Al Balushi & Seung Hwan (Mark) Lee & Myuri Mohan & Naseer Ahmad Khan & Shelley Haines, 2023. "Four decades of counterfeit research: A bibliometric analysis," Cogent Business & Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 10(3), pages 2284814-228, December.
  • Handle: RePEc:taf:oabmxx:v:10:y:2023:i:3:p:2284814
    DOI: 10.1080/23311975.2023.2284814
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/23311975.2023.2284814
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/23311975.2023.2284814?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:taf:oabmxx:v:10:y:2023:i:3:p:2284814. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://cogentoa.tandfonline.com/OABM20 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.