簡易檢索 / 詳目顯示

研究生: 林小鳳
Puntarik Panasawatwong
論文名稱: 主觀知識和客觀知識如何影響判斷修正量
How should Subjective Knowledge and Objective Knowledge Influence the Amount of Judgmental Correction
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: 2018
畢業學年度: 106
語文別: 英文
論文頁數: 31
中文關鍵詞: Elaboration Likelihood ModelFlexible Correction ModelBias CorrectionSubjective KnowledgeObjective KnowledgeJudgmental Attitudeevaluation
英文關鍵詞: Elaboration Likelihood Model, Flexible Correction Model, Bias Correction, Subjective Knowledge, Objective Knowledge, Judgmental Attitude, evaluation
DOI URL: http://doi.org/10.6345/THE.NTNU.GIM.024.2018.F08
論文種類: 學術論文
相關次數: 點閱:164下載:20
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
  • The Elaboration Likelihood Model (ELM) has been introduced in marketing researches for describing advertising persuasion since the 1980s. ELM defined that there are variables that resolve people’s emotion and have the effect on his or her evaluation. This study will apply the flexible correction to examine how the contrast degrees between subjective knowledge and objective knowledge affect attitude confidence and judgmental correction.
    In the present research, we define high involvement in all our participants and manipulate participants into two major groups. Half of the participants will be served as high subjective knowledge with low objective knowledge, and the remaining participants will be served as low subjective knowledge with high objective knowledge. The participants in this experiment are Thai people, and we collected the data from an online survey. The results of these analyses showed that participants with low subjective knowledge have more correction on attractive endorser than participants with high subjective knowledge. The attractive endorser has more effect when participants are served as a high subjective knowledge.
    Key words: elaboration likelihood Model, flexible correction model, bias correction, subjective knowledge, objective knowledge, judgmental attitude, evaluation.

    Table of Contents CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION 1 Motivations and Study Purpose 1 CHAPTER 2 LITERATURE REVIEWS 4 Elaboration Likelihood Model (ELM) 4 The Influence of Confidence 5 Self – Validation Hypothesis 6 Correction Models 7 Set – Reset Model 7 Inclusion – Exclusion Model 8 Flexible Correction Model (FCM) 8 Objective knowledge and Subjective knowledge 9 Knowledge miscalibration 9 CHAPTER 3 PROPOSED THEORY AND HYPOTHESES 11 Proposed Theory 11 Hypotheses 12 CHAPTER 4 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY 13 Overview 13 Main Experiment 13 Participants and Design 13 Experiment Procedure 14 Independent Variables 16 Dependent Variables 17 CHAPTHER 5 RESULTS 19 Manipulation Checks 19 Confidence 19 Involvement 20 Endorser 20 Argument Quality 21 Objective Knowledge 22 Dependent Measure 22 Attitude 22 CHAPTHER 6 GENERAL DISCUSSION 26 Conclusion 26 Academic Contribution and Managerial Implication 27 Limitations and Future Research 28 REFERENCE 29

    REFERENCE

    Alba, J., & Hutchinson, J. (1987). Dimensions of consumer expertise. Journal of Consumer Research, 13(4), 411. doi: 10.1086/209080
    Alba, J., & Hutchinson, J. (2000). Knowledge calibration: What consumers know and what they think they know. Journal of Consumer Research, 27(2), 123-156. doi: 10.1086/314317
    Bearden, W., Hardesty, D., & Rose, R. (2001). Consumer self-confidence: Refinements in conceptualization and measurement. Journal of Consumer Research, 28(1), 121-134. doi: 10.1086/321951
    Bless, H., & Schwarz, N. (2010). Mental construal and the emergence of assimilation and contrast effects: The inclusion/exclusion model. Experimental Social Psychology, 42, 319-373.
    Briñol, P., & Petty, R. (2009). Persuasion: Insights from the self-validation hypothesis. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 41, 69-118.
    Brucks, M. (1985). The effects of product class knowledge on information search behavior. Journal of Consumer Research, 12(1), 1. doi: 10.1086/209031
    Cacioppo, J., & Petty, R. (1984). The elaboration likelihood model of persuasion. NA - Advances in Consumer Research, Eds. Thomas C. Kinnear, Provo, UT : Association for Consumer Research, 11, 673-675.
    Chien, Y., Wegener, D., Petty, R., & Hsiao, C. (2014). The flexible correction model: Bias correction guided by naïve theories of bias. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 8(6), 275-286.
    Festinger, L. (1954). A theory of social comparison processes. Human Relations, 7(2), 117-140. doi: 10.1177/001872675400700202
    Forehand, M., & Perkins, A. (2005). Implicit assimilation and explicit contrast: A set/reset model of response to celebrity voice‐overs. Journal of Consumer Research, 32(3), 435-441. doi: 10.1086/497555
    Gross, Sharon, Rolf, H., & Norma, M. (1995). Attitude certainty,” in attitude strength: Antecedents and consequences, ed. Richard E. Petty and John. A. Krosnick, Mahwah. NJ: Erlbaum, 215-245.
    Hadar, L., Sood, S., & Fox, C. (2013). Subjective knowledge in consumer financial decisions. Journal of Marketing Research, 50(3), 303-316. doi: 10.1509/jmr.10.0518
    Johnson, E., & Russo, J. (1984). Product familiarity and learning new information. Journal of Consumer Research, 11(1), 542. doi: 10.1086/208990
    Martin, L. (1986). Set/reset: Use and disuse of concepts in impression formation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51(3), 493-504. doi: 10.1037//0022-3514.51.3.493
    Petty, R., & Cacioppo, J. (1986). Communication and persuasion: Central and peripheral routes to persuasion. New York: Springer - Verlag.
    Petty, R., & Wegener, D. (1999). The elaboration likelihood model: current status and controversies. New York: Guilford Press, 41-72.
    Petty, R., Briñol, P., & Tormala, Z. (2002). Thought confidence as a determinant of persuasion: The self-validation hypothesis. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 82(5), 722-741. doi: 10.1037//0022-3514.82.5.722
    Petty, R., Briñol, P., Tormala, Z., & Wegener, D. (2007). The role of meta-cognition in social judgment. E. T. Higgins & A. Kruglanski (Eds.). Social Psychology: Handbook of Basic Principles (2Nd Ed.). New York: Guilford Press.
    Petty, R., Wegener, D., & White, P. (1998). Flexible correction processes in social judgment: Implications for persuasion. Social Cognition, 16(1), 93-113. doi: 10.1521/soco.1998.16.1.93
    Razmdoost, K., Dimitriu, R., & Macdonald, E. (2015). The effect of overconfidence and underconfidence on consumer value. Psychology & Marketing, 32(4), 392-407. doi: 10.1002/mar.20787
    Wegener, D., & Petty, R. (1995). Flexible correction processes in social judgment: The role of naive theories in corrections for perceived bias. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 68(1), 36-51. doi: 10.1037//0022-3514.68.1.36

    下載圖示
    QR CODE