臺灣博碩士論文加值系統

由於網際網路的快速成長，使得網路廣告成為網路行銷重要的訊息傳遞及溝通工具。有越來越多的傳統媒體轉往網際網路上發展，在這激烈的競爭環境下，如何透過網路廣告來有效地影響消費者，是目前企業所關心的焦點。
本研究嘗試整合網路廣告效果的相關影響因素，並討論各因素間的互動及相關程度，利用結構方程模式(Structural Equation Modeling, SEM)來建立相關因素與網路廣告效果的關係模式。本研究以電腦產品的網路廣告為例，選擇網站型態偏好、廣告內容表現方式偏好、產品涉入程度以及網路使用程度為外生變數(exogenous variable)來探討其對內生變數(endogenous
variable)網路廣告效果的影響，並建構影響網路廣告效果的因果模式，另利用中介變數（網路廣告態度）來探討其如何影響網路廣告效果。此外，以個人背景為干擾變項，來探究自變數與網路廣告效果的關係。並以產品涉入程度來區隔群體以比較不同涉入群體在網路廣告效果模式上之差異。
研究結果顯示：廣告內容表現方式偏好、產品涉入程度、網路使用程度等三個構面對網路廣告效果有顯著的影響。而個人背景中只有教育程度與廣告內容表現方式偏好、及網路使用程度二個構面的交互作用會對廣告點選與記憶效果產生顯著影響。不同產品涉入程度群體在網站型態偏好程度、網路使用程度等二個構面對網路廣告效果的影響上有不同的關係強度。

Due to the quick development of Internet, online advertisement has become the important tool for message transmission and communication in online marketing. More and more traditional media turn to develop at Internet;
therefore, how to influence consumers effectively through onlineadvertisement under the keen competition environment has been concerned by all enterprises. This research attempts to integrate relevant influential factors of the
effect of online advertisement, discusses the interaction and correlation between each factor, and uses Structural Equation Modeling (SEM) to establish the causal modeling of relevant factors and effect of online advertisement. The examination of this research is the online advertisement of
computer products, and selects the preference of web type, preference of advertisement content, product involvement degree and the access degree of web as exogenous variable to discuss its influence on endogenous variable of the effect of online advertisement, and construct the causal modeling thatinfluence the effect of online advertisement. Furthermore, mediator variable “attitude toward online advertisement”is used to discuss how it influences the
effect of online advertisement. Moreover, use personal background as the intervening variable to discuss the relation between independent variable and effect of online advertisement. Finally use product involvement degree to
discriminate groups in order to compare the difference of different involvement group in the effect modeling of online advertisement.It is shown that preference of advertisement content, product involving degree and access degree of web has significant influence on the effect of
online advertisement. As for the personal background, only the interaction between education background and preference of advertisement content have significant influence on the selection and memory effect of advertisement. Different product involvement degree groups have different relation strength on the influence of the effect of online advertisement in the preference of web type and access degree of web.

中文摘要----------------------------------------------Ⅰ
英文摘要----------------------------------------------Ⅱ
誌謝--------------------------------------------------Ⅳ
目錄-------------------------------------------------Ⅴ
圖目錄------------------------------------------------Ⅶ
表目錄------------------------------------------------Ⅷ
第一章緒論--------------------------------------------1
1.1 研究背景------------------------------------------1
1.2 研究動機------------------------------------------2
1.3 研究目的------------------------------------------3
1.4 研究步驟------------------------------------------3
第二章文獻探討-----------------------------------------6
2.1 網站型態偏好--------------------------------------10
2.2 廣告內容表現方式偏好-------------------------------13
2.3 產品涉入程度--------------------------------------14
2.4 個人背景與廣告效果的關係---------------------------18
2.5 廣告態度-----------------------------------------20
2.6 廣告效果的衡量------------------------------------23
2.7 網路廣告效果的衡量---------------------------------26
第三章研究設計----------------------------------------31
3.1 研究架構-----------------------------------------31
3.2 研究假說-----------------------------------------32
3.3 研究範圍與對象------------------------------------36
3.4 變數的操作化定義與問卷設計-------------------------36
3.5 樣本與資料蒐集方法--------------------------------41
3.6 分析方法-----------------------------------------42
第四章研究結果分析------------------------------------44
4.1 問卷之信度與效度分析------------------------------44
4.2 樣本結構分析-------------------------------------51
4.3 各構面在網路廣告效果上之差異分析--------------------56
4.4 結構關係模式分析----------------------------------67
第五章結論與建議--------------------------------------87
5.1 研究結論-----------------------------------------87
5.2 研究限制與建議------------------------------------92
參考文獻---------------------------------------------94
附錄------------------------------------------------102

中文部份：
1. 台灣網路資訊中心，2005.01，台灣地區寬頻網路使用狀況調查，財團
法人台灣網路資訊中心，
http://www.twnic.net.tw/download/200307/0502c.doc。
2. 吳心恬，民86，媒體特性對說服效果之影響-www 媒體之實驗室研究，
國立中央大學資管研究所，碩士論文。
3. 吳萬益，林清河，民91，行銷研究，華泰文化事業公司。
4. 林岳田，民85，以廣告態度中介模式探討比較廣告、產品涉入程度、
訊息負荷量對廣告效果之影響，東吳大學企業管理學系碩士論文。
5. 邱皓政，民93，結構方程模式，雙葉書廊有限公司。
6. 周志勳，民87，網路標題廣告效果衡量與行為影響模式之探討，國立
台灣科技大學管理技術研究所碩士論文。
7. 姜佩德，民91，網路互動程度與訊息涉入度對商業網站廣告效果的影
響，世新大學傳播研究所碩士論文。
8. 許世育，民87，網路廣告效果之研究-對不同使用者類型與不同網站類
型之探討，國立台灣科技大學管理研究所企業管理學程碩士論文。
9. 陳名璋，民87，網站廣告呈現方式對廣告效果之影響，國立中央大學
資訊管理研究所碩士論文。
10. 張若怡，民89，網頁的廣告環境對廣告效果之影響，東吳大學企業管
理學系碩士論文。
11. 張德儀，民87，WWW 使用者之瀏覽行為與心理探究，國立中正大學
企業管理學系碩士論文。
12. 張紹勳，民92，研究方法，滄海書局。
13. 黃妙如，民90，網路使用者之媒體使用習慣與網路使用動機對網路廣
告效果之影響研究，國立交通大學管理科學系碩士論文。
14. 黃俊嘉，民89，網路廣告互動功能對廣告效果影響之研究－以標題式
廣告為例，國立台灣科技大學管理研究所企業管理學程碩士論文。
15. 黃馨瑤，民89，內容網站型態與橫幅廣告表現方式對廣告效果之影響，
國立政治大學資訊管理學系碩士論文。
16. 經濟部，民92，2003 年我國家庭資訊通訊技術應用概況，財團法人資
訊工業策進會電子商務研究所（ AIE-FIND ） ，
http://www.find.org.tw/0105/howmany/howmany_disp.asp。
17. 經濟部，民93，電子商務環境整備及企業對個人電子商務推動計畫，
商業司。
18. 樊志育，1980，廣告學新論，三民書局有限公司。
19. 樊志育，1990，廣告效果研究，三民書局有限公司。
20. 樊志育，2000，廣告效果測定技術，三民書局有限公司。
21. 劉樹澤，2002，廣告管理，華泰文化事業公司。
22. 蕃薯藤，民89，2000 年台灣網路使用調查，http://survey.yam.com/。
23. 戴軒廷，民93，網路廣告效果之因果模式，中華大學科技管理研究所
博士論文。
24. iThome 電腦報， 2005.2.25 ， 臺灣網路廣告市場將成長35% ，
http://www.ithome.com.tw/。
25. 聯合線上， 2005.6.9 ， udn.com 最快今年底前興櫃掛牌，
http://city.udn.com/v1/forum/article.jsp?no=51593&aid=1276716。
英文部分：
1. Arens, W. F., 1999, Contemporary Advertising, 7th, McGraw-Hill, New York.
2. Bauer, R. A. & S. A. Greyser, 1968, Advertising in America: TheConsumer View, Boston: Harvard University, Graduate School of Business Administration, Division of Research.
3. Bayles, M. E. & B. Chaparro, 2001, Recall and Recognition of Static vs.Animated Banner Advertisements, Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society 45th Annual Meeting, pp.1201-1204.
4. Bentler, P. M., 1982, “Confirmatory Factor Analysis Via Noniterative Estimation: A Fast, Inexpensive Method,” Journal of Marketing Research, Vol.19, No.4, pp.417-425.
5. Bentler, P. M., 1990, “Comparative Fit Indexes in Structural Models,”Psychological Bulletin, Vol.1107, No.2, pp.238.
6. Bezjian-Avery, A., B. Calder, & D. Iacobucci, 1998,“New Media Interactive Adverting vs. Traditional Advertising”, Journal of Adverting Research, Vol.38, No.4, pp.23-32.
7. Carmines, E. & J. Mclver, 1981, “Analyzing Models with Unobserved Variables: Analysis of Covariance Structures,”in G. Bohrnstedt and E.Borgatta (eds.), Social Measurement: Current Issues, Beverly Hills:Sage.
8. Chau, P. Y. K., 1997, “Reexamining a Model forEvaluating
Information Center Success Using a Structural Equation Modeling Approach,” Decision Sciences, Vol.28, pp.309-334.
9. Cohen, J. B., 1983, “Involvement and You: 1000 Great Ideas,”Advances in Consumer Research, pp.325-328, Ann Arbor: Association for Consumer Research.
10. comScore Networks，2004，網路電子商務模範生，資策會ACI-FIND
譯，資策會電子商務研究所。
11. Cho, C., 1999, “How Advertising Works on the World Wide Web :Modified Elaboration Likelihood Model,” Journal of Current Issues and Research in Advertising, pp.33-49.
12. Danes, J. E., 1984, “Unidimensional Measurement and Structural Equation Models with Latent Variables,” Journal of Business Research,New York, Vol.12, No.3, pp.337-363.
13. Donthu, Naveen, Cherian, Joseph, Bhargava, Mukesh, 1993, “Factors Influencing Recall of Outdoor Advertising,”Journal of Advertising Research, Vol. 33, pp.64-72.
14. Ducoffe, R. H., 1996, “Advertising Value and Advertising on the Web,”Journal of Advertising Research, Vol. 36, No. 5, pp.21-35.
15. Elliott, M.T. & P.S. Speck, 1998, “Consumer Perceptions of Advertising Clutter and Its Impact Across Various Media,” Journal of Advertising Research, Vol.38, No.1, pp.29-41.
16. Fishbein, Martin & Icek Ajzen, 1975, Belief, Attitude, Intention and Behavior: An Introduction to Theory and Research Reading, MA:Addison-Wesley.
17. Gefen, D., D. W. Straub, & M. C. Boudeau, 2000, “Structural Equation Modeling and Regression: Guidelines for Research Practice,”Communications of the Association for Information System, Vol.4,No.7, pp.1-70.
18. GVU, 1998, The GVU Center’s 9th WWW User Survey. Retrived March 4,2003,from the World Wide Web:
http://www.gvu.gatech.esu/user_survey/surverys/suvey-1998-04/
19. Ha, Louisa, 1996, “Observations: Advertising Clutter in Consumer Magazines: Dimensions and Effects,”Journal of Advertising Research,Vol.36, No.4, pp.76-84.
20. Hoffman, D. L., T. P. Novak, & Chatterjee Patrali, 1995, “Commercial Secnarious for the Web: Opportunities and Challenges,”
http://shum.huji.ac.il/jcmc/voll/issue3/hoffman.html.
21. Ha, Louisa & B. R. Litman, 1997, “Does Advertising Clutter HaveDiminishing and Negative Returns?,” Journal of Advertising, Vol.26,No.1, pp.32-24.
22. Hirschman, E. C., 1986, “The Experiential Aspects of Consumption :Consumer Fantasies, Feeling and Fun,” Journal of Consumer Research,Vol.9, pp.132-140.
23. Hoffman, D. L., & T. P. Novak, 1996, “Marketing in Hypermedia Computer- Mediated Environments: Conceptual Foundations,” Journal of Marketing, Vol.60, pp.50-68.
24. Internet Advertising Bureau, 2005, “Ad Inter Advertising Revenue Report 2004 Full-Year Results,”
http://www.iab.net/resources/ad_revenue.asp.
25. Joreskog, K. G. & D. Sorbom, 1982, “Recent Developments in Structural Equation Modeling,” Journal of Marketing Research, Vol.14, pp.404-416.
26. Johnson, R. L., & Cobb-Walgren, 1994, “Aging and the Problem of Television Clutter,” Journal of Advertising Research, Vol.32, No.4,pp.54-62.
27. Keller, K. L., 1987, “Memory Factors in Advertising: The Effects of Advertising Retrieval Cues on Brand Evaluations,” Journal of Consumer Research, Vol.14, pp.316-333.
28. Korgaonkar, P. K. & P. G. Moschis, 1982, “An Experimental Study of Cognitive Dissonance, Product Involvement, Expectations, Performance and Consumer Judgement of Product Performance,”Journal of Advertising, Vol.11, No.3, pp.32-44.
29. Leong, S. M., S. H. Ang & L. L. Tham, 1996,“Increasing Brand Name Recall in Print Advertising among Asian Consumers,” Journal of Advertising, Vol.25, No.2, pp.65-82.
30. Lohr, M., T. C. Rakow, 1995,”Audio Support for an Object-Oriented Database Management System,” Multimedia Systems Journal, 3(5-6).
31. Lohse, Gerald L., 1997, “Consumer Eye Movement Patterns on Yellow Pages Advertising,” Journal of Advertising, Vol. 26, pp.61-74.
32. Lutz, J. Richard, 1985, “Affective and Cognitive Antecedents of Attitude Toward the Ad: A Conceptual Framework,” In Linda F. Alwittand Andrew A. Mitchell, Psychological Processes and Advertising Effects, New York: Erlbaum, pp.45-63.
33. MacKenzie, Scott B. & Richard J. Lutz, 1989, “An Empirical Examination of the Structural Antecedents of Attitude Toward the Ad in an Advertising Pretest Context,”Journal of Marketing, Vol.53,pp.48-65, April.
34. MacKenzie, Scott B., Richard J. Lutz, & George E. Belch, 1986, “The Role of Attitude Toward the Ad as a Mediator of Advertising Effectiveness: A Test of Competing Explanations,” Journal of Marketing Research, Vol.23, pp.130-143, May.
35. MacKenzie, Scott B., Richard J. Lutz, & George E. Belch, 1983,“Attitude Toward the ad as a Mediator of ad Effectiveness : Determinates and Consequences,”In Advance in Consumer Research,10ed., Richard P., Bagozzi and Alice M. Tybouy, eds, Ann Arbor, MI :Association for Consumer Research , pp.532-539.
36. Michael Dahlen, Alexandra Rasch, Sara Rosengren, 2003, “Love at Frist Site? A Study of Website Advertising Effectiveness,”Journal of Advertising, Vol.43, No.1, p.25.
37. Mitchell, A. A. & J. C. Olson, 1981, “Are Product Attribute Beliefs the only Mediator of Advertising Effects on Brand Attitude?,”Journal of Marketing, Vol.18, No.3, pp.318-343.
38. Mord, M. S. & E. Gilson, 1985, “Shorter Units:
Risk-Responsibility-Reward,” Journal of Advertising Research, Vol.25,No.3, pp.9-19.
39. Nielsen Media Research & CommerceNet, 1999, “TV Viewing in Internet Households,” http://www.rich media
advertisingnielsenmedia.com/
40. Norris, Claire E. & Andrew M. Colman, 1992, “Context Effects on Recall and Recognition of Magazine Advertisements,” Journal of Advertising, Vol.21, No.3, pp.37-46, September.
41. Nunnally, J., 1978, Psychometric Theory, 2d ed., New York: McGraw-Hill.
42. Peter, J. P. & J. C. Olson, 1993, Consumer Behavior and Marketing Strategy, New York: McGraw-Hill Book Co.
43. Petty, R. E. & J. T. Cacioppo, 1983, “Central and Peripheral Routes to Advertising Effectiveness: The Moderating Role of Involvement,”Journal of Consumer Research, Vol.10, pp.135-146, September.
44. Ray, M. K., 1973, “Marketing Communication and The
Hierarchy-of-Effects.” In Peter Clarke (eds.), New Models for Mass Communication Research, pp.147-176.
45. Shimp, Terence A., 1981, “Attitude Toward the Ad as a Mediator of Consumer Brand Choice,” Journal of Advertising, Vol.10, No.2,pp.9-15.
46. Shimp, Terence A. & J. Thomas Yokum, 1980, “The Influence of Deceptive Advertising on Repeat Purchase Behavior,” University of South Carolina Working Paper.
47. Singh, Surendra N., Michael L. Rothschild and Gilbert A. JR. Churchill,1988, “Recognition Versus Recall as Measures of Television Commercial Forgetting,” Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 25, No. 1,p. 72.
48. Soldow, G., & V. Principe, 1981, “Response to Commercials as A Function of Program Context,” Journal of Advertising Response,Vol.21, pp.59-65.
49. Wang, N., 1997, “Researchers Find Banners Boost Product
Awareness,” Web Week,
http://www.webweek.com/current/news/19970929-banners.html.
50. Webb, P. H., 1979, “Consumer Initial Processing in a Difficult Media Enviroment,” Journal of Consumer Research, Vol.6, No.4, pp.225-236.
51. Wenyu D., U. Nielsen & Chee Ming Tan, 2002, “Using Corporate Websites for Export Marketing,”Journal of Advertising Research,Vol.42, No.5, pp.105-116.
52. Zeff, Robbin Lee, Brad Aronson, 1999, Advertising on the Internet, New York: John Wiley, Wiley Computer Publishing.
53. Zaichkowsky, J. L., 1985, “Measuring the Involvement Construct,”Journal of Consumer Research, Vol.12, pp.119-121, December.
54. Zaichkowsky, J. L., 1986, “Conceptualizing Involvement,” Journal of Advertising, Vol.15, No.2, pp.4-14.
55. Zaichkowsky, J. L., 1994, “Research Notes: The Personal Involvement Inventory: Reduction, Revision, and Application to Advertising,”Journal of Advertising, Vol. 23, No. 4, pp.59-70, Dec.