跳到主要內容

臺灣博碩士論文加值系統

(100.28.2.72) 您好!臺灣時間:2024/06/13 13:37
字體大小: 字級放大   字級縮小   預設字形  
回查詢結果 :::

詳目顯示

我願授權國圖
: 
twitterline
研究生:曾慈惠
研究生(外文):Tseng Tzu-Hui
論文名稱:產品微關屬性,產品知識對消費者行為影響之實驗研究
論文名稱(外文):Experiment Study of Product Trivial Attributes,Influence of Product Knowledge on Consumer Behavior
指導教授:王又鵬王又鵬引用關係
學位類別:碩士
校院名稱:實踐大學
系所名稱:企業管理研究所
學門:商業及管理學門
學類:企業管理學類
論文種類:學術論文
論文出版年:1999
畢業學年度:87
語文別:中文
論文頁數:94
中文關鍵詞:微關屬性產品知識推敲評價
外文關鍵詞:trivial attributesproduct knowledgeelaborationevaluation
相關次數:
  • 被引用被引用:10
  • 點閱點閱:214
  • 評分評分:
  • 下載下載:0
  • 收藏至我的研究室書目清單書目收藏:0
論文提要
廠商在面對激烈的競爭下,常採用產品差異化策略進行商品行銷。近年來,有些廠商更以產品微關屬性為訴求,於是,提供產品微關屬性,便使成為產品差異化另一種可能的做法。不過現有文獻對於消費者對擁有微關屬性品牌選擇的影響,卻顯現出正反兩面不同的實證結果。因此本研究欲透過實證研究,以瞭解不同產品知識的消費者在面對可供選擇的品牌個數不同時,其對於擁有微關屬性品牌之評價、推敲與選擇行為。
本研究為2×2=4實驗設計,以實踐大學服裝設計學系與非服裝設計學系221人為樣本,採便利抽樣,有效問卷173人,資料分析方法為單因子變異數、單一母體比例推論與區別分析。
本研究經實證結果分析,其結論為:
一、高產品知識的消費者面對兩個或三個同類產品品牌選擇時,均對擁有微關屬性的品牌產生正面的評價。
二、低產品知識的消費者面對兩個或三個同類產品品牌選擇時,均對擁有微關屬性的品牌產生正面的評價。
三、高產品知識的消費者面對兩個或三個同類產品品牌選擇時,均對擁有微關屬性的品牌產生高推敲。
四、低產品知識的消費者面對兩個或三個同類產品品牌選擇時,會對擁有微關屬性的品牌產生高推敲。
五、對擁有微關屬性品牌選擇上,當消費者對該品牌的推敲為低推敲,而評價為較高的評價時,則對該品牌選擇的可能性較高。
關鍵字:微關屬性、產品知識、推敲、評價
Abstract
A supplier, under keen competition, normally applies product differential policy to engage in product sales. Recently, some suppliers further appeal to product trivial attributes. Therefore, the supply of product trivial attributes forms another possible practice of product differentiation. However, the existing journals concerning the consumers influence on the brands with trivial attributes, demonstrate different positive and negative empirical results. Therefore, the study intends to, through empirical study, understand the evaluation, elaboration and selection behavior concerning brands with trivial attributes of the consumers with different product knowledge while encountering different brand number for selection.
This research is a 2 X 2 = 4 experimental design, by selecting 221 people of the fashion design department and non- fashion design department of Shih Chien University as sample, in adopting convenient sampling, with effective questionnaire of 173 people. The data analysis method is an one-way analysis of variance, single parent population proportion and discriminant analysis.
This study, through analysis of empirical result, with the conclusions as:
1. While consumers with high product knowledge encounter the brand selection of 2 or 3 similar product types, they tend to produce positive evaluation about the brands with trivial attributes.
2. While consumers with low product knowledge encounter the brand selection of 2 or 3 similar product types, they tend to produce positive evaluation about the brands with trivial attributes.
3. While consumers with high product knowledge encounter the brand selection of 2 or 3 similar product types, they tend to produce high elaboration about the brands with trivial attributes.
4. While consumers with low product knowledge encounter the brand selection of 2 or 3 similar product types, they tend to produce high elaboration about the brands with trivial attributes.
5. On the selection of the brands with trivial attributes, as consumers have low elaboration about the elaboration for the said brand, yet with higher evaluation, then the possibility of selecting the said brand is higher.
Key words: trivial attributes, product knowledge,elaboration,
evaluation
目 錄
頁次
目錄…………………………………………………….…………Ⅰ
表目次…………………………………………………………….Ⅲ
圖目次……………………….……………………………………Ⅴ
第一章 緒論………………………………..……………………1
第一節 研究動機………………………………………..…1
第二節 研究目的………………………………………..…4
第三節 研究流程………………………………………..…5
第二章 文獻探討…………………………………………………6
第一節 產品微關屬性理論………….………………………6
第二節 推敲可能性模式……………….…….……………13
第三節 產品知識……………………………………………17
第三章 研究方法…………….…………………………………23
第一節 研究架構……………………………………………23
第二節 研究假設……………………………………………24
第三節 研究變數的定義與衡量……………………………27
第四節 研究設計……………………………………………29
第五節 正式實驗之問卷設計………………………………37
第六節 資料收集……………………………………………38
第七節 資料處理與分析方法………………………………40
第四章 研究結果…………………………………………………42
第一節 樣本結構……………………………………………42
第二節 變數一致性測試……………………………………43
第三節 產品知識操弄檢定…………………………………44
第四節 消費者對擁有微關屬性品牌的評價………………48
第五節 消費者對擁有微關屬性的推敲……………………52
第六節 消費者對產品品牌的推敲與評價
對購買選擇的關係…………………………………55
第七節 假設檢定結果………………………………………58
第五章 結論與建議………………………………………………60
第一節 研究結論與討論……………………………………60
第二節 行銷實務上的意涵與理論上的貢獻………………63
第三節 研究限制與建議……………………………………65
參考文獻……………………………………………………………67
附錄一:預試問卷內容-品牌命名與產品屬性….…………….75
附錄二:預試問卷內容-產品屬性重要程度與品牌比較………78
附錄三:預試問卷內容-客觀產品知識…………………………81
附錄四:正式問卷內容-兩個品牌………………………………83
參考文獻
一、中文部份
1. 王志剛、謝文雀編譯,消費者行為,台北:華泰書局,民國84年11月初版。
2. 林奎佑,產品利益無關屬性、產品類別及訊息負荷量與廣告效果及產品評價之關係,台灣大學商學研究所未出版碩士論文,民國85年6月。
3. 吳統雄,態度與行為研究的信度與效度:理論、應用、反省,民意學術專刊,民國74年夏季號。
4. 吳柏青,國家刻板印象、參考價格與產品知識對產品評價的影響以大學生評價汽車產品為例,成功交通管理研究所未出版碩士論文,民國85年6月。
5. 唐士祥,幽默廣告在不同情境下對不同涉入程度產品的說明效果,政治大學心裡研究所未出版碩士論文,民國82年6月。
6. 許益彰,產品利益無關屬性、訊息涉入程度、產品類別與廣告效果及產品評價之關係,台灣大學商學研究所未出版碩士論文,民國85年6月。
7. 陳仲熙,產品知識及來源國形象對顧客滿意度之影響,政治大學國際貿易研究所未出版碩士論文,民國87年6月。
8.張雅惠,論點品質、周邊線索、及涉入程度對廣告效果之研究,東吳大學企業管理研究所未出版碩士論文,民國87年6月。
9.黃俊英,企業研究方法,台北:東華書局,民國83年10月。
二、英文部份
1. Alba , Joseph W. and Howard Marmorstein (1987), “The Effects
of Frequency Knowledge on Consumer Decision Making,” Journal
of Consumer Research, 14(June),pp.14-25.
2. Alba , Joseph W. and J. Wesley Hutchinson(1987),”Dimensions
of Consumer Expertise,” Journal of Consumer Research, 13
(March),pp.411-454.
3. Anderson,Rolph E.and Marvin A.Jolson(1980),”Technical
Wording in Advertising:Implications for Market Segmentation,
” Journal of Marketing,44(Winter),pp.57-66.
4. Anderson,Ronald D.,Jack L. Engledow,and Helmut Becker
(1979),”Evaluating the Relationships Among Attitude Toward
Business,Product Satisfaction, Experience,and Search
Effort,” Journal of Marketing Research,16(August),pp.394-
400.
5. Bettman , James R.(1975),”Issues in Designing Consumer
Information Environments, ” Journal of Consumer Research ,
Vol.2(December), pp.169-177.
6. Broniarczyk,Susan M. and Andrew Gershoff (1996),”Meaningless
Differentiation Revisited,” working paper, University of
Texas at Austin.
7. Brown, Christina L. and Gregory S. Carpenter (1996),“When Are
Irrelevant Attributes Relevant ?A Strategic Inference Model,”
working paper, New York University.
8.Brown, Christina L. and Gregry S. Carpenter(1998),“Why is the
Trivial Important? :A Reasons-Based Account for the Effects
of Trivial Attributes on Choice”, working paper, New York
University.
9.Brucks,Merrie(1985),”The Effects of Product Class Knowledge
on Information Search Behavior,” Journal of Consumer
Research, 12(June),pp.1-16.
10.Calder,Bobby J.,Lynn W.Phillips and Alice M.Tybout(1981)
,”Designing Research for Application,” Journal of Consumer
Research,8(September),pp.197-207.
11.Carpenter, Gregory S., and Kent Nakamoto (1989), “Consumer
Preference Formation and Pioneering Advantage,” Journal of
Marketing Research,.26 (August),pp.285-298.
12.Carpenter, Gregory S., and Kent Nakamoto (1990), “Compet-
-itive Strategies for Late Entry into a Market with a Dominant
Brand,”Management Science,36,pp.1268-1278.
13.Carpenter, Gregory S., Rashi Glazer, and Kent Nakamoto
(1994), “Meaningful Brands from Meaningless Differentiation
: The Dependence on Irrelevant Attributes,” Journal of
Marketing Research,.31 (August),pp.339-350.
14.Cook ,Thomas,and Donald Campbell(1975),”The Design and
Conduct of Experiments and Quasi-experiment in Field
Settings, ”in Handbook of Industrial and Organizational
Research,ed.Martin Dunnette,Chicago :Rand Mcnally&Co.
15.Deighton,John(1984),”The Interaction of Advertising and
Evidence,” Journal of Consumer Research ,11(December),pp.
763-770.
16.Einhorn,Hillel J. and R. M. Hogarth (1986),”Judging Probable
Cause,”Psychological Bulletin ,99,pp.3-9.
17.Engle,James F.,Roger D. Blackwell,and Pual W.Miniard(1993),
Consumer Behavior. Goldstein,William M., and Jerome Busem-
-eyer(1992),”The Effect of Irrelevant Variables on Decision
Making:Criterion Shifts in Preferential Choice?,”Organiza-
-tional Behavior and Human Decision Process,52 (August),
pp.425-454.
18.Furse,D.H.,Punj,G.,and Stewart,D. W.(1984),”A Typology of
Individual Search Strategies Among Purchases of New
Automobiles,” Journal of Consumer Research ,10(March),pp.
417-431.
19.Goodwin, Stephen & Michael Etgar(1980),“An Experimental
Investigation of Comparative Advertising:Impact of Message
Appeal , Information Load , and Utility of Product Class,
“Journal of Marketing Research , Vol. 17(May),pp.187-202.
20.Ha ,Young-Won and Stephen J.Hoch(1989),”Ambiguity,
Processing Strategy, Advertising-Evidence Interactions,”
Journal of Consumer Research ,16(December),pp.354-360.
21.Harris,R.J.and G. E. Monaco(1978),”Psychology of Pragmatic
Implications:Information Processing Between the Lines,”
Journal of Experimental Psychology:General,107,pp.1- 27.
22.Hoch , Stephen J.and John Deighton(1989),”Managing What
Consumers Learn from Experience,” Journal of Marketing,.53
(February),pp1-20.
23.Hoch , Stephen J.and Young-Won Ha (1986),”Consumer
Learning:Advertising and Ambiguity of Product Experience,”
Journal of Consumer Research ,13,pp.221-233.
24.Hsee,Christopher(1995),”Elastic Justification : How
Tempting but Task- Irrelevant Factors Influence Decisions,”
Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Process,62
(August),pp.330-337.
25.Hutchinson, J. Wesley and Joseph W. Alba (1991),“Ignoring
Irrelevant Information: Situational Determinants of
Consumer Learning,”Journal of Consumer Research, Vol.18
(December),pp.325-345.
26.Johnson,Eric and J.Edward Russo(1984),”Product Familiarity
and Learing New Information,” Journal of Consumer Research,
11(June),pp.542-550.
27.Kardes,Frank R.. and David M., Sanbonmatsu(1993),”Direction
of Comparison,Expected Feature Correlation, and Set-size
Effect in Preference Judgment,” Journal of Consumer
Psychology,2,(January),pp.39-54.
28.King,Maryon F.and Siva K.Balasubramanian(1994),”The
Effects of Expertise End Goal,and Product Type of Preference
Formation Strategy,” Journal of the Academy of Marketing
Science,pp.146-159.
29.McGill,Ann L.(1989),”Context Effects in Judgments of
Causation ,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology
,57,pp.189-200.
30.Miyake,Naomi and Donald A.Norman(1979),”To Ask a
Question,One Must Know Enough to Know What Is Not Know,”
Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior,18(June),
pp.357-364.
31.Muthukrishnan, A. V. and Barton A.Weitz(1991),”Role of
Product Knowledge in Evaluation of Brand Extension,”Advances
in Consumer Research, 18,pp.407-413.
32.Park,C. and V. Parker Lessig(1981),”Familiarity and its
Impact on Consumer Decision Biases and Heuristics,” Journal
of Consumer Research,8(September),pp.223-230.
33.Petty R.E.,and Cacioppo,J.T.(1984),“The Effects of
Involvemtnt on Responses to Argument Quantity and Quality :
Central and Peripheral Routes of Persuasion,” Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology, Vol.46(June),pp.69-81.
34.Petty,Richard E. and John T. Cacioppo(1981), Attitude and
Persuasion: Classic and Contemporary Approaches, Dubuque,
Iowa:Wm.C.Brown Co.
35.Porter , Michael E.(1985),Competitive Advantage .New York:
The Free Press.
36.Punj, Girish N.and Richard Staelin(1983),”A Model of
Consumer Information Search Behavior for New Automobiles,”
Journal of Consumer Research, 9(March),pp.366-380.
37.Rudell,Fredrica(1979),Consumer Food Selection and Nutrition
Information,New York:Prageger.
38.Sanbonmatsu,David M.,Frnk R.Kardes,and Paul M. Herr (1992),
”Yhe Role of Prior Knowledge and Missing Information in
Multiattribute Evaluation,” Organizational Behavior and
Human Decision Processes, 51,pp.76-91.
39.Sanbonmatsu, David M., Frank R. Kardes, Steren S. Posavac,
and David C.Houghton (1997),”Contextual Influences on
Judgment Based on Limited Information,”Organizational
Behavior and Human Decision Processes,69,3,(March),pp.251
-264.
40.Shafir, Eldar(1993),”Choosing versus Rejecting:Why Some
Options are Both Better and Worse Than Others,”Memory and
Cognition,21(April),pp.546-556.
41.Shafir, Eldar, Itamar Simonsom,and Amos Tversky(1993),”
Rease-Based Choice,”Cognition ,49 ,pp.11-36.
42.Simonsom ,Itamar, Ziv Carmon, and Suzanne O’Curry (1994),
“Experimental Evidence on the Negative Effect of Product
Features and Sales Promotions on Brand Choice,” Marketing
Science,13,1, (Winter),pp.23-40.
43.Simonsom ,Itamar and Amos Tversky (1992),”Choice in Context
:Tradeoff Contrast and Extremeness Aversion,”Journal
of Consumer Research,29(August),pp.281-295.
44.Simonsom ,Itamar,Stephen M. Nowlis,and Yael Simonsom(1993)
,”The Effect of Irrelevant Preference Argumentss on Consumer
Choice,” Journal of Consumer Psychology, 2(March),pp.287-
306.
45.Sujan, Mita(1985),”Consumer Knowledge:Effects on
Evaluation Strategies Mediating Consumer Judgments,”
Journal of Consumer Research,12(June),pp.31-46.
46.Wright,Peter L.(1975),”Consumer Choice Strategies:
Simplifying vs.Optimizing,” Journal of Marketing Research
,11(February),pp.60-67.
47.Wright,Peter L.and Peter D.Rip(1980),”Product Class
Advertising Effect on First-Time Buyers’ Decision Strategies
,” Journal of Consumer Research,52(July),pp.2-22.
連結至畢業學校之論文網頁點我開啟連結
註: 此連結為研究生畢業學校所提供,不一定有電子全文可供下載,若連結有誤,請點選上方之〝勘誤回報〞功能,我們會盡快修正,謝謝!
QRCODE
 
 
 
 
 
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               
第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁 top
1.  2. 尹章華,「論兩岸交流之法理結構」,法令月刊,第四十五卷,第一期。
2.  1. 尹章華,「海峽兩岸海事案件法律適用之探討-應答汪鵬南司玉琢『論海峽兩岸區際海事法衝突』」,中興法學,第三十八期。
3.  16. 李子文,「國際法上之承認與中華民國」,東吳法律學報,第七卷,第一期(民國八十年二月)。
4.  15. 李子文,「由羅德西亞案例討論國際法上之承認與不承認」,法學叢刊,第二十九卷,第一期。
5.  10. 王志文,「港澳地位之相關法律問題」,法令月刊,第四十四卷,第四期。
6.  9. 王志文,「海峽兩岸法律衝突規範之發展比較」,華岡法粹,第二十一期(民國八十一年七月)。
7.  8. 王志文,「海峽兩岸之管轄界線」,法令月刊,第四十五卷,第三期。
8.  7. 王志文,「香港基本法與九七過渡問題」,法令月刊,第四十六卷,第十一期。
9.  6. 王志文,「析論海峽兩岸法律問題及其處理規範」,華岡法粹,第十九卷,第二十期(民國七十九年二月)。
10.  4. 王志文,「兩岸關係法朝野版本之比較評析」,法令月刊,第四十二卷,第一期。
11.  3. 王志文,「中國大陸法律衝突規範評析」,法令月刊,第四十八卷,第四期。
12.  14. 吳坤山,「未經承認國家之法律在內國的法律地位」,法律評論,第五十六卷,第一期。
13.  13. 王志文,「論國際與區際民事司法協助」,法令月刊,第四十七卷,第六期。
14.  12. 王志文,「港澳問題與兩岸法律衝突」,法令月刊,第四十三卷,第一期。
15.  11. 王志文,「港澳地位問題之法律評析」,華岡法粹,第二十二期(民國八十三年十月)。