臺灣博碩士論文加值系統

在琳瑯滿目的容器產品中，因為不同的用途而有不同的包裝，也產生了不同的重量。過去的研究指出，包裝外型會影響消費者的容量評估，然而鮮少由重量的角度來探討，本研究將根據內具認知的觀點，探討重量的不同對於消費者容量評估的影響效果，以及觸摸需求對其關係之干擾效果。

本研究採用實驗法，共有兩個實驗。實驗一目的在討論重量對容器評估的影響，而重量源包含兩種，實驗一A是探討產品重量，結果發現，產品重量對於容量評估是有正面影響的，重量越重，容量評估越高。實驗一B是探討身體負重，結果發現，身體負重越重，所知覺的容量則越多，實驗一證實了身體重量感知越重，對容器容量的評估越高。實驗二則加入觸摸需求，探討其對重量與容量評估之間的干擾效果，採用2(重量感：輕&重) × 2(觸摸需求：低&高)的雙因子實驗設計。結果發現，高觸摸需求者進行容量評估時，對於輕重量感的容器，知覺容量較多，而重重量感的容器，反而知覺容量越少，低觸摸需求者則不存在容器重量對知覺容量的影響效果。

In many purpose of various containers, the packaging will cause different weight. Research has shown that packaging appearance can affect consumers' volume judgment. However, research rarely consider to discussing the role of container weight in volume judgment. This study explored the effect of weight on volume judgment within the viewpoint of the embodied cognition. Also, the mediate effect of need for touch is included.

This research adopted the experimental method. There are two STUDIES in the research. Firstly, the STUDY 1 is designed to explore the effect of perceived weight on volume judgment. Two kinds of weight, product weight and carrying weight, were included. STUDY 1A was to explore effect of the product weight on volume judgment. The results indicated that the product weight had a significant influence on product judgment. Participants who hold a heavy container perceived more volume than those who hold a light container. STUDY 1B examined the effect of the carrying weight experience on volume judgment. The results showed that participants who carry a heavy shopping bag perceived more volume than those who carry a light shopping bag. Secondly, STUDY2 added NFT to explore the interference of weight on volume judgment. By adopting a 2 (weight: heavy vs. light) x 2 (NFT: high vs. low) experimental design, the results indicated that, high NFT participants, they perceived more volume when they carried a light bag than when carried a heavy bag. And, there is no significant effect of carrying weight on volume judgment for participants who with low NFT.

中文摘要 i
英文摘要 ii
誌 謝 iii
目 錄 iv
表目錄 vi
圖目錄 vii
第一章 緒論 1
1.1 研究背景與動機 1
1.2 研究問題 3
1.3 研究流程 3
第二章 文獻探討 5
2.1容量評估 5
2.2觸覺 7
2.3形重錯覺 8
2.4內具認知 10
2.5觸覺需求 12
2.6假說建立 13
2.6.1假說一 13
2.6.2假說二 14
第三章 研究方法 16
3.1 實驗一 16
3.1.1實驗一A 16
3.1.2受測者 16
3.1.3變數操弄與衡量 16
3.1.4實驗流程 18
3.2 實驗一B 19
3.2.1受測者 19
3.2.2變數操弄與衡量 19
3.2.3實驗流程 21
3.3 實驗二 22
3.3.2受測者 22
3.3.3變數操弄與衡量 22
3.3.4實驗流程 24
第四章 研究結果 25
4.1實驗一A分析結果 25
4.2實驗一B分析結果 26
4.3實驗二分析結果 27
第五章 結論與建議 29
5.1研究結果與討論 29
5.2實務意涵 32
5.3後續研究方向與研究限制 32
參考文獻 34

一、中文部分
1.曾晴雲(2007) ，包裝視覺設計與購買行為之研究-以酒類包裝為例，萬能科技大學經營管理研究所，未出版碩士論文。
二、英文部分
1.Ackerman, J. M., Nocera C. C., & Bargh J. A. (2010). Incidental haptic sensations influence social judgments and decisions, Science, 328, 1712-15.
2.Amazeen, E. L. (1997). The effects of volume on perceived heaviness by dynamic touch: With and without vision. Ecological Psychology, 9, 245-263.
3.Amazeen, E. L., & Turvey, M. T. (1996). Weight perception and the haptic size-weight illusion are functions of the inertia tensor. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 22, 213-232.
4.Anastasi, A. (1936). The estimation of area. Journal of General Psychology, 14, 201-225.
5.Anderson, N. H. (1970). Averaging model applied to the size-weight illusion. Perception & Psychophysics, 8, 1-4.
6.Bargh, J. A. (1989). Conditional automaticity: Varieties of automatic influence in social perception and cognition. In James S. Uleman & John A. Bargh, (Eds.), Union-tended thought (3-51). New York: Guilford Press
7.Bargh, J. A., & Thein, R. D. (1985). Individual construct accessibility, person memory, and the recall-judgment link: The case of information overload. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 49, 1129-1146.
8.Barsalou, L. W. (1999). Perceptual symbol systems. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 22, 577-660.
9.Barsalou, L. W. (2008). Grounded cognition. Annual Review of Psychology, 59, 617-645.
10.Been, R. T., Braunstein, M. L., & Piazza M. H. (1964). Judgment of volume reduction in distorted metal containers. Journal of Engineering Psychology, 3, 23-27.
11.Cacioppo, J. T., Priester, J. R., & Bernston, G. G. (1993). Rudimentary determination of attitudes: II. Arm flexion and extension have differential effects on attitudes. Journal of Personal and Social Psychology, 65, 5-17
12.Charpentier, A. (1891). Analyse experimentale de quelques elements de la sensation de poids [Experimental study of some aspects of weight perception], Archives de Physiologie Normales et Pathologiques, 3, 122-135.
13.Cross, D. V., & Rotkin, L. (1975). The relation between size and apparent heaviness. Perception & Psychophysics, 18, 79-87.
14.Dickson, P. R., & Sawyer A. G. (1986). Point of purchase behavior and price perceptions of supermarket shoppers. Marketing Science Institute (Report No. 86-102). Cambridge, MA: Marketing Science Institute.
15.Ellis, R. R., & Lederman, S. J. (1993). The role of haptic vs visual volume cues in the size-weight illusion. Perception & Psychophysics, 55, 315-324.
16.Fisher, G. H., & Foster, J. J. (1968). Apparent sizes of different shapes and the facility with which they can be identified. Nature, 219, 653-654.
17.Flanagan, J. R., & Beltzner, M. A. (2000). Independence of perceptual and sensorimotor predictions in the size-weight illusion. Nature Neuroscience, 3, 737-741.
18.Flanagan, J. R., & Beltzner, M. A. (2000). Independence of perceptual and sensorimotor predictions in the size-weight illusion. Nature Neuroscience, 3, 737-741.
19.Folkes, V., & Matta, S. (2004). The effect of package shape on consumers’ judgments of product volume: Attention as a mental contaminant. Journal of Consumer Research, 31, 390-401.
20.Frayman, B. J., & Dawson W. E. (1981). The effect of object shape and mode of presentation on judgments of apparent volume. Perception and Psychophysics, 29, 56-62
21.Gundlach, C., & Macoubrey, C. (1931). The effect of color on apparent size. American Journal of Psychology, 43, 109-11
22.Holmberg, L. (1975). The influence of elongation on the perception of volume of geometrically simple objects. Psychological Research Bulletin, 15, 1-18.
23.Hong, J., & Sun, Y. (2012) Warm it up with love: The effect of physical coldness on liking of romance movies. Journal of Consumer Research, 39, 293 -306
24.Ijzerman, H., & Semin, G. R. (2009). The thermometer of social relations: Mapping social proximity on temperature. Psychological Science, 20, 1214-20.
25.Joann, P., & Suzanne, B. S. (2009). The effect of mere touch on perceived ownership. Journal of Consumer Research, 36, 434-447.
26.Jones, L. A., (1986), Perception of force and weight: Theory and research. Psychological Bulletin, 100, 29-42.
27.Jostmann, N. B., Lakens, D., & Schubert T. W. (2009). Weight as an embodiment of importance. Psychological Science, 20, 1169-1174.
28.Kahrimanovic, M., Tiest, W. M. B., & Kappers, A. M. L. (2010). The shape-weight illusion. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, 6191, 17-22.
29.Klatzky, R. L., & Lederman, S. J. (1992). Stages of manual exploration in haptic object identification. Perception and Psychophysics, 52, 661-670.
30.Klatzky, R. L., & Lederman, S. J. (1993). Toward a computational model of constraint-driven exploration and haptic object identification. Perception, 22, 597-621.
31.Krishna, A. (2006). Interaction of senses: The effect of vision versus touch on the elongation bias. Journal of Consumer Research, 32, 557-566.
32.Krishna, A., & Morrin, M. (2008). Does touch affect taste? the perceptual transfer of product container haptic cues. Journal of Consumer Research, 34, 807-818.
33.Krider, R. E., Raghubir, P., & Krishna, A. (2001). Pizzas: π or square? Psychophysical biases in area comparisons. Marketing Science, 20, 405-425.
34.Landau, M. J., Meier, B. P., & Keefer, L. A. (2010). A metaphor-enriched social cognition. Psychological Bulletin, 136, 1045-67.
35.Lederman, S. J., & Klatzky, R. L. (1987). Hand movements: A window into haptic object recognition. Cognitive Psychology, 19, 342-368.
36.Lin, H.-M. (in press). Does container weight influence judgments of volume? International Journal of Research in Marketing.
37.Masin, S. C., & Crestoni, L. (1988). Experimental demonstration of the sensory basis of the size-weight illusion. Perception and Psychophysics, 44, 309-312.
38.Meyers-Levy, J., Zhu, R., & Jiang, L. (2010). Context effects from bodily sensations: Examining bodily sensations induced by flooring and the moderating role of product viewing distance. Journal of Consumer Research, 37, 1-14.
39.Niedenthal, P. M., Barsalou, L.W., Winkielman, P., Krauth-Gruber. S., & Ric, F. (2005). Embodiment in attitudes, social perception, and emotion. Personality and Social Psychology, 9 , 184-211
40.Pearson, R. G. (1964). Judgment of volume from photographs of complex shapes. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 18, 889-900.
41.Peck, J., & Childers, T. L. (2003a). To have and to hold: The influence of haptic information on product judgments. Journal of Marketing, 67, 35-48.
42.Peck, J., & Childers, T. L. (2003b). Individual differences in haptic information processing: The“need for touch”scale. Journal of Consumer Research, 30, 430-442.
43.Peck, J., & Childers, T. L. (2004). Self-reported and behavioral measures in product evaluation and haptic information: Is what I say how I feel? Advances in Consumer Research, 32, 247.
44.Peck, J., & Wiggins, J. (2006). It just feels good: Customers’ affective response to touch and its influence on persuasion. Journal of Marketing, 70, 56-69.
45.Petty, R. E., & Wegener, D. T. (1999). The elaboration likelihood model: Current status and controversies. In S. Chaiken & Y. Trope (Eds.), Dual process theories in social psychology(41-72). London: Guilford.
46.Piaget, J. (1968). Quantification, conservation, and nativism. Science, 162, 976-979.
47.Pick, H. L., & Pick, A. D. (1967). A developmental and analytic study of the size-weight illusion. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 5, 362-371.
48.Raghubir, P., & Krishna, A. (1999). Vital dimensions in volume perception: Can the eye fool the stomach ? Journal of Marketing Research, 36, 313-326
49.Semin, G. R., & Smith, E. R. (2008). Embodied grounding: Social, cognitive, affective, and neuroscientific approaches. In G. R. Semin & Eliot R. Smith, (Eds.), England: Cambridge University Press.
50.Strack, F., Martin, L. L., & Stepper, S. (1988). Inhibiting and facilitating conditions of the human smile: A nonobtrusive test of the facial feedback hypothesis. Journal of Personal and Social Psychology, 54, 768-77
51.Wansink, B. (1996). Can package size accelerate usage volume? Journal of Marketing, 60, 1-14.
52.Wansink, B., & Van Ittersum, K. (2003). Bottoms up! The influence of elongation on pouring and consumption volume. Journal of Consumer Research, 30, 455-463.
53.Wells, G. L., & Petty, R. E., (1980). The effects of overt head movements on persuasion: Compatibility and incompatibility of responses. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 1, 219-30
54.Williams, L. E., & Bargh, J. A. (2008). Experiencing physical warmth promotes interpersonal warmth. Science, 322, 606-607.
55.Yang, S., & Raghubir, P. (2005). Can bottles speak volumes? The effect of package shape on how much to buy. Journal of Retailing, 81, 269-281.
56.Zhang, M., & Li, X. (2012). From physical weight to psychological significance: The contribution of semantic activations. Journal of Consumer Research, 38, 1063-1075.
57.Zhong, C. B., & Leonardelli, G. J. (2008). Cold and lonely: Does social exclusion literally feel cold? Psychological Sciences, 19, 838-42.