Fakes and Science

A friend pointed out this article because we discussed fake watches a while back.

The Counterfeit Self: The Deceptive Costs of Faking It

Francesca Gino, Michael I. Norton, and Dan Ariely
Psychological Science, April 2010, 21 (4)

Abstract
Although people buy counterfeit products to signal positive traits, we show that
wearing counterfeit products makes individuals feel less authentic and
increases their likelihood of both behaving dishonestly and judging
others as unethical. In four experiments, participants wore purportedly
fake or authentically branded sunglasses. Those wearing fake sunglasses
cheated more across multiple tasks than did participants wearing
authentic sunglasses, both when they believed they had a preference for
counterfeits (Experiment 1a) and when they were randomly assigned to
wear them (Experiment 1b). Experiment 2 shows that the effects of
wearing counterfeit sunglasses extend beyond the self, influencing
judgments of other people’s unethical behavior. Experiment 3
demonstrates that the feelings of inauthenticity that wearing fake
products engenders—what we term the counterfeit self—mediate
the impact of counterfeits on unethical behavior. Finally, we show that
people do not predict the impact of counterfeits on ethicality; thus,
the costs of counterfeits are deceptive.

Interesting...

How do we know that you and this supposed "friend" didn't make this "article" up...

andrema wrote:

How do we know that you and this supposed "friend" didn't make this "article" up...

Oh, but when you have a doctorate what you say is, by definition, "expert". But in this case, I provided the citation to a real journal in which this article appears in the current issue.

Docrwm wrote:

andrema wrote:

How do we know that you and this supposed "friend" didn't make this "article" up...

Oh, but when you have a doctorate what you say is, by definition, "expert". But in this case, I provided the citation to a real journal in which this article appears in the current issue.

I smell something fishy here...

andrema wrote:

Docrwm wrote:

andrema wrote:

How do we know that you and this supposed "friend" didn't make this "article" up...

Oh, but when you have a doctorate what you say is, by definition, "expert". But in this case, I provided the citation to a real journal in which this article appears in the current issue.

I smell something fishy here...

Well, in that case, my advice to you is to wash more often.

Makes sense. Losers wear fake crap to impress with lies. They will do other things to advance themselves too.

Cheats and liars suck ballz.

PoliMalaka wrote:

Makes sense. Losers wear fake crap to impress with lies. They will do other things to advance themselves too.

Cheats and liars suck ballz.

Not how the authors in question described it but not a bad layman's summary either

Wow, that is something I honestly didn't think about. I guess there
could be a connection though ! Some pretty good theories there,
thanks !

and I would tend to suspend judgment on that article.....
I do own two replicas (again nomenclature factors in on one's perception of such items) and was curious about them, so I bought two Omega POs with Chinese good movements and sapphire crystals.
A friend in Spain had the same curiosity 7 years ago and ordered several replicas, did a teardown and found their build quality very good! Being in Europe, he told me there were many who had bought replicas...a real sub-culture of owners!
Morality, ethics, and legality are very gray areas IMO.....

A little OT, regarding the words "fake" and "replica." If a watch is manufactured using the registered trade marks and/or logos of another company, without that companies approval, that is a fake.
In the classic car world, a "replicar" is a legally authorized replica of a automobile, no longer in manufacture, using logos and trade marks of the original, after gaining legally, the rights and clearances. Such as Beck's looking exactly like Porsche 356's, and carrying Porsche logos.

The word "replica" seems to be too easily switched out for "fake" sometimes.

There are too many fakes out there, hence one of the reasons leading to my unwillingness to buy from some dude selling a watch in a sales forum that I don't know. Wouldn't happen here, though.

PoliMalaka wrote:

Makes sense. Losers wear fake crap to impress with lies. They will do other things to advance themselves too.

Cheats and liars suck ballz.

Man, your holding back, tell it like you feel it

Interesting theories, it makes some sense on many levels. There are a lot of variables though as Tim said in regard to defining fake, replica, or a word I hate-homages. I think if someone wears a watch that is misrepresented as something it is not, then they are attempting to deceive or alter others perceptions. Everyone has a watch that resembles or shares some trait with another watch. A literal interpretation kind of throws everyone under one blanket, and thats too neat and tidy for any sociological conclusions.

merichar wrote:

Interesting theories, it makes some sense on many levels. There are a lot of variables though as Tim said in regard to defining fake, replica, or a word I hate-homages. I think if someone wears a watch that is misrepresented as something it is not, then they are attempting to deceive or alter others perceptions. Everyone has a watch that resembles or shares some trait with another watch. A literal interpretation kind of throws everyone under one blanket, and thats too neat and tidy for any sociological conclusions.

In a nutshell, I agree! but I refuse to get into intellectual arguments over the matter. Many watch forum rules state no discussio/photos of FAKES unless the post includes the real watch as a point of discussion.....well....what the hell....

There is no one right stance IMO. And I prefer to give myself the freedom to choose my own 'poison'...be it cigarettes, booze or watches! haha! let freedom of choice reign! ....

porschefan wrote:

A little OT, regarding the words "fake" and "replica." If a watch is manufactured using the registered trade marks and/or logos of another company, without that companies approval, that is a fake.
In the classic car world, a "replicar" is a legally authorized replica of a automobile, no longer in manufacture, using logos and trade marks of the original, after gaining legally, the rights and clearances. Such as Beck's looking exactly like Porsche 356's, and carrying Porsche logos.

The word "replica" seems to be too easily switched out for "fake" sometimes.

There are too many fakes out there, hence one of the reasons leading to my unwillingness to buy from some dude selling a watch in a sales forum that I don't know. Wouldn't happen here, though.

Most certainly, Porschefan, you would be congratulated for doing your due diligence and not buying an unknown watch. The point is that you are exercising your freedom and right to choose to buy or not buy.....
Pissing on fellows who consciously choose to buy a fake/replica watch or car or whatever is just not my position nor style of dealing with this topic....

thianwong wrote:

porschefan wrote:

A little OT, regarding the words "fake" and "replica." If a watch is manufactured using the registered trade marks and/or logos of another company, without that companies approval, that is a fake.
In the classic car world, a "replicar" is a legally authorized replica of a automobile, no longer in manufacture, using logos and trade marks of the original, after gaining legally, the rights and clearances. Such as Beck's looking exactly like Porsche 356's, and carrying Porsche logos.

The word "replica" seems to be too easily switched out for "fake" sometimes.

There are too many fakes out there, hence one of the reasons leading to my unwillingness to buy from some dude selling a watch in a sales forum that I don't know. Wouldn't happen here, though.

Most certainly, Porschefan, you would be congratulated for doing your due diligence and not buying an unknown watch. The point is that you are exercising your freedom and right to choose to buy or not buy.....
Pissing on fellows who consciously choose to buy a fake/replica watch or car or whatever is just not my position nor style of dealing with this topic....

Wasn't "pissing" on anyone thianwong, spend your money as you see fit. My comments were not personally directed at you or your choice of what watch to buy. You're taking it a bit too personal.
I was just stating my opinion (and I believe my understanding of the laws of copyright) that the words "fake" and "replica," by definition, are not inter-changeable.

porschefan wrote:

thianwong wrote:

porschefan wrote:

A little OT, regarding the words "fake" and "replica." If a watch is manufactured using the registered trade marks and/or logos of another company, without that companies approval, that is a fake.
In the classic car world, a "replicar" is a legally authorized replica of a automobile, no longer in manufacture, using logos and trade marks of the original, after gaining legally, the rights and clearances. Such as Beck's looking exactly like Porsche 356's, and carrying Porsche logos.

The word "replica" seems to be too easily switched out for "fake" sometimes.

There are too many fakes out there, hence one of the reasons leading to my unwillingness to buy from some dude selling a watch in a sales forum that I don't know. Wouldn't happen here, though.

Most certainly, Porschefan, you would be congratulated for doing your due diligence and not buying an unknown watch. The point is that you are exercising your freedom and right to choose to buy or not buy.....
Pissing on fellows who consciously choose to buy a fake/replica watch or car or whatever is just not my position nor style of dealing with this topic....

Wasn't "pissing" on anyone thianwong, spend your money as you see fit. My comments were not personally directed at you or your choice of what watch to buy. You're taking it a bit too personal.
I was just stating my opinion (and I believe my understanding of the laws of copyright) that the words "fake" and "replica," by definition, are not inter-changeable.

I didn't mean to imply you were 'pissing' hehe.....but in general ....there are those who really get their knickers in a knot about the patent laws etc. over fakes/replicas......tis like arguing politics IMO.....

Yeah, I am a tad sensitive to anyone who tries to tell me what I can/should buy/do with my own decisions (apart from robbing banks! hahaha!)

as for patent laws, I once last year researched photo usage rights etc and since about 3 years ago, in the USA it is no longer required to state on a photo that is it copyrighted...so much for me including that at the bottom of my photos haha!

Let me just weigh in here...

For XMT's purposes, Any watch that is not TRULY manufactured by the name of the company on the DIAL will be considered a FAKE/REPLICA and should not be discussed or supported/shown here.

I have no problem with homage watches or watches that may look JUST like a watch that is manufactured by another company but have a different name on the dial (i.e. "wow, that watch looks just like a ROLEX even though it says GETAT on the dial" or MM style watches) being shown or discussed here...

A report was posted, but as members and friends, let's try not to align purchasing decisions with character...

Just enjoy and have fun!

How do you think this research applies to fake boobs, and can we discuss replica boobs here ???...K

kelek wrote:

How do you think this research applies to fake boobs, and can we discuss replica boobs here ???...K

Nice thread jack!