臺灣博碩士論文加值系統

本研究以科技性術語的用法為基礎，旨在探討調節焦點與品牌信譽是否會干擾消費者對含有科技性術語的新商品的評價。主要討論三項議題：(1)消費者面對含有不熟悉科技性術語的新商品時，調節焦點是否會影響其行為。(2)調節焦點與科技性術語的用法是否會產生交互作用，進而影響消費者行為。(3)品牌信譽與科技性術語的用法間是否存在交互作用，進而影響消費者行為。本研究採2 (目標導向：促進焦點與預防焦點) x 2 (品牌信譽：高品牌信譽與低品牌信譽) x 2 (科技性術語數量：2個術語與5個術語) x 2 (科技性術語解釋：有術語解釋與無術語解釋)的組間實驗設計。

研究結果發現，面對含有不熟悉科技性術語的新商品時，由於知覺風險的程度不同，相較於預防焦點的消費者，促進焦點的消費者確實擁有較高的購買意願與品牌態度。其次，科技性術語的解釋能提升消費者的購買意願與品牌態度，此效果於促進焦點消費者身上更能彰顯，相較於預防焦點的消費者，促進焦點的消費者較偏好有術語解釋的商品；但預防焦點與促進焦點的消費者對科技性術語的數量皆無顯著偏好。最後，品牌信譽高的商品適合搭配較少的科技性術語，避免太多術語造成資訊過剩的困境，可一旦術語數量增加，則需添加術語解釋，方能減少消費者的知覺風險與品牌形象的不符，進而提升消費者的購買意願和品牌態度；反之，品牌信譽低的商品適合搭配較多的科技性術語，以增加消費者對獲益的感受且與其品牌形象較相符，當術語數量少時，則需添加術語解釋，方能降低消費者的知覺風險與不滿，進而導致較高的消費者購買意願和品牌態度。本研究結果大致符合預期，且結論於學術和實務上均有貢獻。

Based on the usage of technological terminology, this research investigates whether regulatory focus and brand credibility moderate consumers’ evaluations toward new product with technological terminologies. Empirically examining three main topics: (a) When consumers face the new product with unfamiliar terminologies, whether regulatory focus affects their consuming behaviors; (b) Whether the different usages of terminology interact with different regulatory focuses; (c) Whether the different usages of terminology interact with the level of brand credibility.

Empirical results show that due to different levels of perceived risk, when facing new products with unfamiliar technological terminologies, relative to prevention-focused consumers, promotion-focused consumers own higher purchase intentions and brand attitudes. Second, explanation for technological terminology can enhance consumers’ purchase intentions and brand attitudes, especially for promotion-focused consumers, but both prevention- and promotion-focused consumers have no preference for number of terminology. Finally, fewer technological terminologies are suitable for high credible brand, once the number of terminology increases, should add explanation for terminology in the ad to decrease consumers’ perceived risk, whereas fewer terminologies match with high credible brand and induce higher consumers’ evaluation; reversely, more technological terminologies are suitable for low credible brand, producers should add explanation when there is fewer terminologies to decrease consumers’ unsatisfaction, whereas more terminologies can increase benefits and induce higher consumers’ evaluations. These findings contribute to academic developments and marketing implications.

Chinese Abstract ……………………………………………… Ⅰ
English Abstract ……………………………………………… Ⅱ
Contents ………………………………………………………… Ⅲ
Figure Contents ……………………………………………… Ⅴ
Table Contents ………………………………………………… Ⅵ

Chapter 1 Introduction ……………………………………… 1

Chapter 2 Literature Review ……………………………… 4
2.1 Benefits and Drawbacks of Using Technological Terminology …………………………………………………… 4
2.2 The Role of Risk in Consumer Behavior …………… 8
2.3 Brand Credibility ……………………………………… 11
2.4 Regulatory Focus Theory ……………………………… 13

Chapter 3 Research Hypotheses …………………………… 21
3.1 Conceptual Framework ………………………………… 21
3.2 Research Hypotheses …………………………………… 21

Chapter 4 Methodology ……………………………………… 27
4.1 Target Product …………………………………………… 27
4.2 Pretest: Brand Credibility …………………………… 28
4.3 Main Experiment ………………………………………… 30

Chapter 5 Research Results ………………………………… 33
5.1 Descriptive Statistics ………………………………… 33
5.2 Manipulation Check ……………………………………… 34
5.3 Reliability Analysis …………………………………… 34
5.4 Hypotheses Testing ……………………………………… 35

Chapter 6 General Discussion ……………………………… 47
6.1 Conclusions ……………………………………………… 47
6.2 Discussions ……………………………………………… 48
6.3 Marketing Implications ………………………………… 49
6.4 Research Limitations …………………………………… 51
6.5 Further Research ………………………………………… 52

References ……………………………………………………… 53

Appendices ……………………………………………………… 57
Appendix 1: Questionnaire – Pretest ……………… 57
Appendix 2: Questionnaire - Manipulations ………… 63
Appendix 3: Questionnaire – Scenario ……………… 65
Appendix 4: Questionnaire – Advertisements ……… 66
Appendix 5: Questionnaire – Items of Dependent
Variables, Manipulation Check and Demographic
Information ………………………………………………… 75

洪崇時 (2002)，「技術性術語對消費者態度及購買意向之影響—產品創新性之干擾效果」，輔仁大學管理學研究所碩士論文。

趙梓羽 (2003)，「科技性術語之廣告溝通效果研究」，長庚大學企業管理研究所碩士論文。

謝秉鈞 (2004)，「科技性術語使用個數、解釋程度與產品類型對廣告效果之影響」，長庚大學企業管理研究所碩士論文。

Anderson, Lee K., James R. Taylor and Robert J. Holloway (1966). The Consumer and His Alternatives: An Empirical Approach. Journal of Marketing Research, 3(Feb), 62-67.

Avnet, Tamar and E. Tory Higgins (2006). How Regulatory Fit Affects Value in Consumer Choices and Opinions. Journal of Marketing Research, 63(Feb), 1-10.

Bless, Herbert, Gerald L. Clore, Norbert Schwarz, Verena Golisano, Christina Rabe and Marcus Wolk (1996). Mood and the Use of Scripts: Does a Happy Mood Really Lead to Mindlessness? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 71(4), 665-679.

Brunel, Olivier and Paul-Emmanuel Pichon (2004). Food-related Risk-reduction Strategies: Purchasing and Consumption Processes. Journal of Consumer Behavior, 3(4), 360-374.

Chang, Tung-Zong and Albert R. Wildt (1994). Price, Product Information, and Purchase Intention: An Empirical Study. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 22(1), 16-27.

Chernev, Alexander (2004). Goal Orientation and Consumer Preference for the Status Quo. Journal of Consumer Research, 31, 557-565.

Cox, Donald F. and Stuart U. Rich (1964). Perceived Risk and Consumer Decision-Making—The Case of Telephone Shopping. Journal of Marketing Research, 1(Nov), 32-39.

Crowe, Ellen and E. Tory Higgins (1997). Regulatory Focus and Strategic Inclinations: Promotion and Prevention in Decision-Making. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 69(2), 117-132.

Derbaix C. (1983). Perceived Risk and Risk Relievers: An Empirical Investigation. Journal of Economic Psychology, 3, 19-38.

Dodds, William B., Kent B. Monroe and Dhruv Grewal (1991). Effects of Price, Brand, and Store Information on Buyers’ Product Evaluations. Journal of Marketing Research, 18(Aug), 307-319.

Dowling, Grahame R. and Richard Staelin (1994). A Model of Perceived Risk and Intended Risk-handling Activity. Journal of Consumer Research, 21(1), 119-134.

Erdem, Tulin and Joffre Swait (1998). Brand Equity as a Signaling Phenomenon. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 7(Apr), 131-157.

Erdem, Tulin and Joffre Swait (2004). Brand Credibility, Brand Consideration, and Choice. Journal of Consumer Research, 31(1), 191-198.

Frey, Kurt P. and Alice H. Eagly (1993). Vividness Can Undermine the Persuasiveness of Messages. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 65(1), 32-44.

Friedman, Ronald S. and Jens Forster (2001). The Effects of Promotion and Prevention Cues on Creativity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 81(6), 1001-1013.

Grewal, Dhruv, R. Krishnan, Julie Baker and Norm Borin (1998). The Effect of Store Name, Brand Name and Price Discounts on Consumers’ Evaluations and Purchase Intentions. Journal of Retailing, 74(3), 331-352.

Herzenstein, Michal, Steven S. Posavac and J. Josko Brakus (2007). Adoption of New and Really New Products: The Effects of Self-Regulation Systems and Risk Salience. Journal of Marketing Research, 44(May), 251-260.

Higgins, E. Tory (1997). Beyond Pleasure and Pain. American Psychologist, 52(12), 1280-1300.

Higgins, E. Tory (2002). How Self-Regulation Creates Distinct Values: The Case of Promotion and Prevention Decision Making. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 12(3),
177-191.

Hoyer, Wayne D. and Steven P. Brown (1990). Effects of Brand Awareness on Choice for a Common, Repeat-Purchase Product. Journal of Consumer Research, 17(2), 141-148.

Idson, Lorraine Chen, Nira Liberman and E. Tory Higgins (2000). Distinguishing Gains from Nonlosses and Losses from Nongains: A Regulatory Focus Perspective on Hedonic Intensity. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 36, 252-274.

Jacoby, Jacob, Donald E. Speller and Carol A. Kohn (1974). Brand Choice Behavior as a Function of Information Load. Journal of Marketing Research, 11(1), 63-69.

Jacoby, Jacob (1984). Perspectives on Information Overload. Journal of Consumer Research, 10, 432-435.

Laroche, Michel, Gordon H. G. McDougall, Jasmin Bergeron and Zhiyong Yang (2004). Exploring How Intangibility Affects Perceived Risk. Journal of Service Research, 6(4), 373-389.

Lawson, Robert (1997). Consumer Decision Making within a Goal-Driven Framework. Psychology & Marketing, 14(5),
427-449.

Newell, Stephen J. and Ronald E. Goldsmith (2001). The Development of a Scale to Measure Perceived Corporate Credibility. Journal of Business Research, 52, 235-247.

Pham, Michel Tuan and Tamar Avnet (2004). Ideals and Oughts and the Reliance on Affect versus Substance in Persuasion. Journal of Consumer Research, 30(4), 503-518.

Roselius, Ted (1971). Consumer Rankings of Risk Reduction Methods. Journal of Marketing, 35(Jan), 56-61.

Scammon, Debra L. (1977). “Information Load” and Consumers. Journal of Consumer Research, 4(3), 148-155.

Stewart, David W. and Scott Koslow (1989). Executional Factors and Advertising Effectiveness: A Replication. Journal of Advertising, 18(3), 21-32.

Taylor, James W. (1974). The Role of Risk in Consumer Behavior. Journal of Marketing, 38(Apr), 54-60.

Tsai, Chia-Ching and Shin-Chieh Chuang (2006). The Impact of Launch Products (New and Established Products) on the Effect of Terminology in Advertising. Journal of American Academy of Business, Cambridge, 9(1), 220-223.

Wood, Charles M. and Lisa K. Scheer (1996). Incorporating Perceived Risk into Models of Consumer Deal Assessment and Purchase Intent. Advances in Consumer Research, 23, 399-404.

Zhou, Rongrong and Michel Tuan Pham (2004). Promotion and Prevention across Mental Accounts: When Financial Products Dictate Consumers’ Investment Goals. Journal of Consumer Research, 31(Jun), 125-135.