此篇論文主要延伸(Chien, Wegener, Hsiao, and Petty 2010)所提出的「解釋範圍重疊模型」(The Dimensional Range Overlap Model, DROM)，他們認為決定對比效果是否發生是在於促發物的解釋範圍和目標物的解釋範圍不重疊。而我們此篇研究主要操弄了促發物與目標物解釋範圍不重疊的三大因素: 促發物的解釋範圍大小、目標物的解釋範圍大小以及促發物與目標物的解釋範圍之間的距離。

因此，我們建立了三個假說模型，來驗證影響對比效果關鍵因素。假說一: 在固定促發物的解釋範圍和目標物的解釋範圍情況下，促發物與目標物的解釋範圍之間的距離越遠，對比效果越強。假說二: 在固定目標物的解釋範圍情況和促發物與目標物的解釋範圍之間的距離，促發物的解釋範圍越大，對比效果越強。假說三: 在固定目標物的解釋範圍和目標物與促發物的最適代表值，在促發物與目標物解釋範圍不重疊情況且寬促發物範圍可涵蓋窄促發物範圍，我們預期較寬的促發物可以產生更強的對比效果，並且促發物在對比效果後的解釋範圍會變寬。

而本研究經由實驗驗證了我們的假說一，具有顯著性效果，而假說二與假說三則是部分成立。此外，我們也發現促發物在對比效果後，促發物最適代表值產生了遠離目標物的現象，可以一併驗證相互假設的理論，促發物不僅會使目標物產生對比效果，且目標物也會給予促發物同等的對比效果，類似於牛頓第三運動定律，其效果相等，方向相反。

未來可以再進一步探討比較促發物與目標物解釋範圍的不重疊範圍和促發物的解釋範圍對於對比效果之影響，期許藉由本研究的貢獻，更進一步延伸與推廣解釋範圍重疊模型之理論。

People evaluate various things in their daily life, although they believe their judgments to be generally rational, the contest in which their judgments take place nevertheless impacts the choices they make which is so-called context effects. Many researchers have since concentrated on the issue of non-overlap of target and context will lead to contrast effects. However, we want to know more detail about people who form their judgments under different non-overlap range of target and context. Therefore, we are interested in how the target width, context width and non-overlap range lead to differential contrast effects.

The present study based on the foundation of Dimensional Range Overlap Model (Chien, 2010) and Reciprocity Hypothesis (Hsiao, 2002) to extend the contrast effects under different target width, context width and non-overlap range. The effects of non-overlap range under same range of target and context are also examined to better know the mechanism of people evaluation.

In this study, we tried to further explore the Dimensional Range Overlap Model and Reciprocity Hypothesis (Hsiao, 2002), under the condition that fixes the target width and non-overlap range, will wider or narrower context width lead to stronger contrast effect? Will the context width or target width change after contrast effect? What if we switch the target and context but set the other variables fixed? We’ll go through the experiments and try to create the scenario and verify the Reciprocity Hypothesis.

Fortunately, the results support the hypotheses we proposed, we are able to demonstrate wider non-overlap range will lead to stronger contrast effect; under the condition that fixes the target width and non-overlap range, wider context width will lead to stronger contrast effects; despite switch the target and context, the contrast effect is same; the context width will change after contrast effect.

In conclusion, the thesis offers a special view to better understand different contrast effect under the differential target width, context width and non-overlap range, also, extend the Reciprocity Hypothesis: despite switch the target and context, the contrast effect is same.

Brown, D. R. (1953). Stimulus-similarity and the anchoring of subjective scales. The American Journal of Psychology, 66, 199-214.

Bassili, John N. (1996), Meta-judgmental versus Operative Indexes of Psychological Attributes: The Case of Measures of Attitude Strength, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,71 (4), 637–53.

Chien, Y. and Hsiao, C. (2001), Dimensional Range Overlap Model for Explanation of Contextual Priming Effects, Proceedings of the Association for Consumer Research 2000 Annual Conference.

Chien, Y. (2002). Dimensional range overlap model for explanation of contextual priming effects on product judgments. A thesis submitted to the faculty of Purdue University.

Chien, Y., Wegener, D., Hsiao, C., and Petty, R., (2010), Dimensional Range Overlap and Context Effects in Consumer Judgments, Journal of Consumer Research, 37(3), 530-542

Fazio, R. H., Powell, M.C., and Herr, P. M. (1983). Toward a process model of the attitude-behavior relation: Accessing one’s attitude upon more observation of the attitude object. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 44, 723-735

Herr, P. M., Sherman, S. J., and Fazio, R. H. (1983). On the consequences of priming: Assimilation and contrast effects. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 19, 232-340

Herr, P. M. (1986). Consequences of priming: Judgment and behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51, 1106-1115.

Herr, P.. M. (1989). Priming price: Prior knowledge and context effects. Journal of Consumer Research, 16, 67-75

Hsiao, C. (2002). The Reciprocity Hypothesis As an Explanation of Perception Shifts in Product Judgment. Dissertation, Purdue University.

Joan Meyers-Levy, B. S. (1993). A two-factor explanation of assimilation and contrast effects. Journal of Marketing Research, 30(3), 359-368.

Kruglanski, Arie W. (1975), The Human Subject in the Psychology Experiment: Fact and Artifact. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, Vol. 8, ed. L. Berkowitz, Orlando, FL: Academic Press, 101-147

Meyers-Levy, J., (1989). Priming Effects on Product Judgements: A Hemispheric Interp. Journal of Consumer Research, 16, 76-86.
Meyers-Levy, J., & Sternthal, B. (1993). A two-factor explanation of assimilation and contrast effects. Journal of Marketing Research, 30, 359-368.

Petty, Richard E., John T. Cacioppo and David Schumann (1983), “Central and Peripheral Routes to Advertising Effectiveness: The Moderating Role of Involvement,” Journal of Consumer Research, 10(September), 2, 135-146.

Petty, Richard E. and Duane T. Wegener (1993), Flexible Correction Processes in Social Judgment: Correcting for Context-Induced Contrast, Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 29(March), 137-165.

Russell H. Fazio, M. C. P., and Paul M. Herr. (1983). Toward a process model of the attitude-behavior relation: accessing one's attitude upon mere observation of the attitude object. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 44, 723-725.

Shimp, Terence A., Eva M. Hyatt, and David J. Snyder (1991a), A Critical Appraisal of Demand Artifacts in Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research, 18 (December), 273-283

Stapel, D. A., Koomen, W., & Velthuijsen, A. S. (1998). Assimilation or contrast?: Comparison relevance, distinctness, and the impact of accessible information on consumer judgments. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 7(1), 1-24.

Yi, Y. (1990). The effects of contextual priming in print advertisements. Journal of Consumer Research, 17, 215-222.

Yi, Y. (1993). Contextual priming effects in print advertisements: The moderating role of prior knowledge. Journal of Advertising, 22, 1-10.