臺灣博碩士論文加值系統

隨著越來越多的同質化產品出現，廠商期望憑藉產品包裝上的標示信息吸引消費者，改變其價格敏感度。特別是在民生用品的上，這樣的手法屢見不鮮，最常見的是使用效果倍數和成分倍數來標榜自身產品。面對激烈的市場競爭，這樣的標示是否能夠有效改變消費者的價格敏感度，本研究将针对这一現象進行深入研究。
本研究發現，濃縮是一種搜尋屬性，強效是一種經驗屬性，前者的可驗證性較高，容易被消費者信任。標示濃縮信息，可以有效降低消費者對產品的價格敏感度。反之，因為強效可驗證性低，標示強效信息並不能對價格敏感度產生影響。
基於解釋水平理論，具體信息具有較短心理距離，抽象信息具有較遠心理距離，所以當強效搭配具體成分信息時，價格敏感度將降低，且低於強效搭配抽象成分信息時。

With the emergence of more and more homogeneous products, manufacturers expect to attract consumers and change their price sensitivity by information on product packaging. Especially in the Peoples Daily necessities, such methods are common, the most common is to use the effect multiple and component multiple to advertise products. In the face of fierce market competition, this study will conduct an in-depth study on whether such labeling can effectively change the price sensitivity of consumers. This study explores whether such labeling about the effect multiple and component multiple can change the price sensitivity effectively.
This study found that concentration is a search attribute, while strong effect is an experience attribute. The former is highly verifiable and easy to be trusted by consumers. Labeling concentrated information can effectively reduce the price sensitivity of consumers to products. Conversely, labeling strong information does not affect price sensitivity because of its low verifiability.
Based on the construal level theory, the specific information has a shorter psychological distance and the abstract information has a longer psychological distance. Therefore, when the specific component information is strongly combined with, the price sensitivity will be reduced, which is lower than when the abstract component information is strongly combined with.

第一章 緒論 1
第一節 研究背景與問題 1
第二節 研究目的 3
第二章 文獻探討 4
第一節 價格敏感度 4
第二節 產品屬性 7
第三節 具體描述與抽象描述 11
第三章 研究方法 13
第一節 研究假設 13
第二節 實驗一 17
第三節 實驗二 31
第四節 資料分析方法 40
第四章 研究結果 41
第一節 實驗1a 41
第二節 實驗1b 47
第三節 實驗二 56
第五章 研究結論與建議 65
第一節 研究結論 65
第二節 研究貢獻與建議 66
第三節 研究限制與未來方向 68
附錄 69
一、前測問卷 69
二、正式問卷 73
參考文獻 145

1.Dick , A. , Chakravarti , D. , & Biehal , G. (1990). Memory-based inferences during consumer choice. Journal of Consumer Research，17(1) , 82-93.
2.Andrews , J. C. , Netemeyer , R. G. , & Burton , S. (1998). Consumer generalization of nutrient content claims in advertising. Journal of Marketing，62(4) , 62-75.
3.Brown , C. L. , & Carpenter , G. S. (2000). Why is the trivial important? a reasons‐based account for the effects of trivial attributes on choice. Journal of Consumer Research，26(4) , 372-385.
4.Bucklin , R. E. (1995). A brands eye view of response segmentation in consumer brand choice behavior. Journal of Marketing Research，32(1) , 66-74.
5.Carpenter , G. S. , Glazer , R. , & Nakamoto , K. (1994). Meaningful brands from meaningless differentiation: the dependence on irrelevant attributes. Journal of Marketing Research，31(3) , 339-350.
6.Cliff , M. A. , & Green , B. G. . (1994). Sensory irritation and coolness produced by menthol: evidence for selective desensitization of irritation. Physiology and Behavior，56(5) , 0-1029.
7.Cox , S. R. , Coney , K. A. , & Ruppe , P. F. (1983). The impact of comparative product ingredient information. Journal of Public Policy & Marketing，2 , 57-69.
8.Darby , M. R. , & Karni , E. (1973). Free competition and the optimal amount of fraud. Journal of Law & Economics , 16(1) , 67-88.
9.Degeratu , A. M. , Rangaswamy , A. , & Wu , J. (2000). Consumer choice behavior in online and traditional supermarkets: the effects of brand name , price , and other search attributes. International Journal of Research in Marketing，17(1) , 55-78.
10.Dhar , R. , & Kim , E. Y. (2007). Seeing the forest or the trees: implications of construal level theory for consumer choice. Journal of Consumer Psychology，17(2) , 96-100.
11.Diehl , K. , Kornish , L. J. , & Lynch , J. G. (2003). Smart agents: when lower search costs for quality information increase price sensitivity. Journal of Consumer Research，30(1) , 56-71.
12.Maheswaran , D. (1994). Country of origin as a stereotype: effects of consumer expertise and attribute strength on product evaluations. Journal of Consumer Research，21(2) , 354-365.
13.Ekelund , R. B. , Mixon , F. G. , & Ressler , R. W. (1995). Advertising and information: an empirical study of search , experience and credence goods. Journal of Economic Studies，22(2) , 33-43.
14.Erdem , T. , Swait , J. , & Louviere , J. (2002). The impact of brand credibility on consumer price sensitivity. International Journal of Research in Marketing , 19(1) , 1-19.
15.Goldsmith , R. E. , & Newell , S. J. (1997). Innovativeness and price sensitivity: managerial , theoretical and methodological issues. Journal of Product & Brand Management , 6(3) , 163-174.
16.Goldsmith , R. E. , Kim , D. , Flynn , L. R. , & Kim , W. M. (2005). Price sensitivity and innovativeness for fashion among Korean consumers. The Journal of social psychology , 145(5) , 501-508.
17.Huber , J. , Holbrook , M. B. , & Kahn , B. (1986). Effects of competitive context and of additional information on price sensitivity. Journal of Marketing Research，23(3) , 250-260.
18.Jacoby , J. , Olson , J. C. , & Haddock , R. A. (1971). Price , brand name , and product composition characteristics as determinants of perceived quality. Journal of Applied Psychology，55(6) , 570-579.
19.Kahn , B. . (1986). Effects of competitive context and of additional information on price sensitivity. Journal of Marketing Research , 23(3) , 250-260.
20.Kim , H. , & John , D. R. . (2008). Consumer response to brand extensions: construal level as a moderator of the importance of perceived fit. Journal of Consumer Psychology , 18(2) , 116-126.
21.Liberman , N. , & Trope , Y. (1998). The role of feasibility and desirability considerations in near and distant future decisions: a test of temporal construal theory. Journal of Personality & Social Psychology，75(1) , 5-18.
22.Liberman , N. , Trope , Y. , & Wakslak , C. . (2007). Construal level theory and consumer behavior. Journal of Consumer Psychology , 17(2) , 113-117.
23.Lynch , J. G. , Marmorstein , H. , & Weigold , M. F. (1988). Choices from sets including remembered brands: use of recalled attributes and prior overall evaluations. Journal of Consumer Research，15(2) , 169-184.
24.Lynch Jr , J. G. , & Ariely , D. (2000). Wine online: Search costs affect competition on price , quality , and distribution. Marketing science , 19(1) , 83-103.
25.Malhotra , N. K. (1982). Information load and consumer decision making. Journal of Consumer Research , 8(4) , 419-430.
26.Monroe , Kent B. (1973). Buyers’ subjective perceptions of price. Journal of Marketing , 10 , 70–80.
27.Mukherjee , Ashesh & Hoyer，Wayne D , 2001.(2001). The effect of novel attributes on product evaluation. Journal of Consumer Research，28(3) , 462-472.
28.Nelson , P. (1970). Information and consumer behavior. Journal of Political Economy，78(2) , 311-329.
29.Nelson , P. (1974). Advertising as information. Journal of Political Economy , 82(4) , 729--754.
30.Nti , C. A. , & Larweh , P. M. (2010). Production and sensory characteristics of flavoured soymilk samples. International Journal of Consumer Studies，27(3) , 181-184.
31.Parker , B. J. (2003). Food for health: the use of nutrient content , health , and structure/function claims in food advertisements. Journal of Advertising，32(3) , 47-55.
32.Park , C. , & Lee , T. M. (2009). Information direction , website reputation and ewom effect: a moderating role of product type. Journal of Business Research，62(1) , 61-67.
33.Petty , Richard E , Cacioppo , John T , & Schumann , David. (1983). Central and peripheral routes to advertising effectiveness: the moderating role of involvement. Journal of Consumer Research，10(2) , 135-146.
34.Roy , R. , & Naidoo , V. (2017). The impact of regulatory focus and word of mouth valence on search and experience attribute evaluation. European Journal of Marketing，51(7/8).
35.Stock , R. M. (2005). Can customer satisfaction decrease price sensitivity in business-to-business markets?. Journal of Business-to-Business Marketing，12(3) , 59-87.
36.Sela , A. , & Berger , J. (2011). How attribute quantity influences option choice. Journal of Marketing Research，49(6) , 942-953.
37.Srinivasan , S. S. , & Till , B. D. (2002). Evaluation of search , experience and credence attributes: role of brand name and product trial. Journal of Product & Brand Management，11(7) , 417-431.
38.Tsai , C. I. , & Mcgill , A. L. (2011). No pain , no gain? how fluency and construal level affect consumer confidence. Journal of Consumer Research，37(5) , 807-821.
39.Trope Y , & Liberman N. (2010). Construal-level theory of psychological distance. Psychological Review , 117(2) , 440-463.
40.Wakefield , K. L. , & Inman , J. J. (2003). Situational price sensitivity: the role of consumption occasion , social context and income. Journal of Retailing , 79(4) , 199-212.
41.White , K. , MacDonnell , R. , & Dahl , D. W. (2011). Its the mind-set that matters: The role of construal level and message framing in influencing consumer efficacy and conservation behaviors. Journal of Marketing Research , 48(3) , 472-485.
42.Wright , A. A. , & Lynch , J. G. (1995). Communication effects of advertising versus direct experience when both search and experience attributes are present. Journal of Consumer Research，21(4) , 708-718.
43.Yan , D. , Sengupta , J. , & Jr , R. S. W. (2014). Package size and perceived quality: the intervening role of unit price perceptions. Journal of Consumer Psychology , 24(1) , 4-17.
44.Yi-Ching , H. , Hung-Chang , C. , & Mei-Yi , C. (2005). Maintaining a committed online customer: a study across search-experience-credence products. Journal of Retailing，81(1) , 75-82.