簡易檢索 / 詳目顯示

研究生: 沈玨葳
Shen, Chueh-Wei
論文名稱: 雙重正價促發物對消費者產品態度轉變之影響:解釋範圍重疊模型之延伸
The Change of Consumer Attitude under The Impact of the Context Effect by Dual Positive Primes : An Extension Dimensional Range Overlap Model
指導教授: 蕭中強
Hsiao, Chung-Chiang
學位類別: 碩士
Master
系所名稱: 管理研究所
Graduate Institute of Management
論文出版年: 2017
畢業學年度: 105
語文別: 中文
論文頁數: 63
中文關鍵詞: 促發效果解釋範圍重疊模型同化效果對比效果相互假設理論雙重正向促發物
英文關鍵詞: Context Effect, Dimensional Range Overlap Model, Assimilation Effect, Contrast Effect, Reciprocity Hypothesis, Dual Positive Contexts
DOI URL: https://doi.org/10.6345/NTNU202201980
論文種類: 學術論文
相關次數: 點閱:126下載:9
分享至:
查詢本校圖書館目錄 查詢臺灣博碩士論文知識加值系統 勘誤回報
  • 本研究主要探討消費者在選擇商品時,這個商品稱之為目標物,會因為一些和商品無相關的因素而影響購物決策,這個無相關的因素稱之為促發物,使得消費者對於目標物產生不一樣的印象或是評價。在現今的市場上存在著非常多的品牌,當消費者在選擇商品時,品牌和品牌之間的行銷手法可能影響消費者的購買決策,而這樣互相影響的過程稱之為促發效果。
    Chien, Wegner, Hsiao, and Petty(2010)所提出的「解釋範圍重疊模型」中發現目標物會因為促發物的存在而受到影響,進而產生促發效果,促發效果又可以細分成兩種效果,分別是「同化效果」 (assimilation effect) 和「對比效果」(contrast effect);在Hsiao(2002)所提出的相互假設理論(Reciprocity Hypothesis)中發現,其實目標物和促發物之間其實會相互影響,而不是單向。在本研究中將進一步利用廣告的呈現來驗證假設。
     本研究將利用雙重正向促發物,探討消費者對目標物的態度及評價的變動。實驗分成四個主實驗,每位受測者須填答問卷3~4個階段,受測者不得重覆。實驗結果皆為部分成立,我們認為原因可能為樣本數不足夠、目標物被評價偏高、促發物廣告選擇等等,故未來應針對上述問題進一步做修改,希望實驗結果能夠更符合預期且更精確。

    This research is mainly about when the consumers are choosing the goods, or so called target, they would be effected by irrelevant elements. These irrelevant elements called context. Nowadays there are lots of different brands on the market, the marketing techniques among all the different brands would even influent the consumers’ purchase decision. This influence is called 「Context Effect」.
    The study of Dimensional Range Overlap Model (Chin, Wegner, Hsiao,&Petty,2010) found that the target would be effected by the context, even cause the Context Effect. There are two types of Context Effect, which are assimilation effect and contrast effect. The study makes further discussion on the Reciprocity Hypothesis (Hsiao, 2002). The study show that target and context would effect each other. In this research, we are going to prove this hypothesis by the presentation of commercials. This research would use double positive contexts to explore the consumers’ attitude toward the target and the change of evaluation.
    This experiment would be divided into four parts. Every participant would need to finish 3 to 4 stages of survey. The participant cannot answer the same survey twice. All the experiment results would be partially valid. We think the reasons might be not enough samples, overrated target, and the selection of the contexts’ commercial. Therefore, we should modify the problems above in the future, and hopefully the experiment results will be closer to our expectation and more accurately.

    中文摘要……………………………………………………………I 英文摘要……………………………………………………………II 目錄…………………………………………………………………III 表次…………………………………………………………………V 圖次…………………………………………………………………VI 第一章、緒論 第一節、研究背景……………………………………………………1 第二節、研究動機與目的……………………………………………2 第二章、文獻探討 第一節、推敲可能性模型……………………………………………4 第二節、促發效果……………………………………………………5 第三節、解釋範圍重疊模型…………………………………………6 第四節、相互假設……………………………………………………8 第三章、研究架構與研究假設 第一節、研究架構……………………………………………………9 第二節、假設…………………………………………………………10 第四章、研究方法 第一節、研究概述……………………………………………………13 第二節、受測者與研究設計…………………………………………14 第三節、研究流程……………………………………………………15 第五章、實驗結果 第一節、實驗一………………………………………………………34 第二節、實驗二………………………………………………………38 第三節、實驗三………………………………………………………42 第四節、實驗四………………………………………………………46 第六章、結論 第一節、總結…………………………………………………………54 第二節、研究限制與建議……………………………………………58 第三節、理論貢獻與實務意涵………………………………………59 第四節、未來發展……………………………………………………60 第五節、研究創新……………………………………………………60 參考文獻 ……………………………………………………………62

    陳力瑜(2016)。以解釋範圍重疊模型探討雙重正價促發物對消費者態度之影響。碩士論文。台北:國立台灣師範大學。
    蔡岳翰(2016)。衡量消費者在產品評價所產生態度上轉變的因素:正負向價促發物產生之週邊效果。台北:國立台灣師範大學。
    Chien, Y., Wegener, D.T., Hsiao, C., Petty, R.E., (2010). Dimensional Range Overlap and Context Effects in Consumer Judgments. Journal of Consumer Research, 37(3), 530-542.
    Higgins, E. Tory, William S. Rholes, & Carl R. Jones (1977). Category Accessibility and Impression Formation, Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 13 (2), 141-154.
    Higgins, E.T., and King, G. A. (1981), Accessibility of social constructs: Information processing consequences of individual and contextual variability. In N. Cantor &J.
    Kihlstrom (Eds.), Personality cognition, and social interaction (pp.69-121). Hillsdales, NJ: Erlbaum.
    Herr, Paul M., Sherman, S. J., & Fazio, R.H.(1983). On the consequence of priming: Assimilation and contrast effect. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology,19 , 323-340
    Higgins, E. Tory, Bargh, J. A., & Lombardi, W. J. (1985). Nature of priming effects on Categorization. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 11, 59-69
    Herr, Paul M. (1989). Priming price: Prior knowledge and context effects. Journal of Consumer Research, 16(1), 67-75.
    Hsiao, Chung-Chiang (2002). The Reciprocity Hypothesis as an Explanation of Perception Shifts in Product Judgment, Dissertation, Purdue University.
    Johnson, E. J. and Russo ,J. E.(1984) “Product Familiarity and Learning New Information”, Journal of Consumer Research, 11(1), 542-550
    Kelman, H. C. (1961), “Processes of Opinion Change”, Public Opinion Quarterly, 25(1), 57-78.
    Petty, R.E& Cacioppo, J.T. (1981). Personal Involvements as a Determinant of Argumentbased Persuasion. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 41 ,847-855
    Richard E. Petty, John T. Cacioppo & David Schumann (1983). Central and Peripderal Routes to Advertise Effectiveness: The Moderating Role of involvement. Jornal of Consumer Research, 10(2), 135-146

    下載圖示
    QR CODE