(3.238.7.202) 您好!臺灣時間:2021/03/03 23:11
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:許分贏
研究生(外文):Hsu Fen Ying
論文名稱:網路口耳相傳訊息特性對線上集體購物群體決策行為分析
論文名稱(外文):The Effect of Word-of-Mouth Message Characteristics on On-line Group-Buying Behavior.
指導教授:留淑芳留淑芳引用關係
指導教授(外文):Dr.Shu-Fang Liu
學位類別:碩士
校院名稱:國立高雄應用科技大學
系所名稱:國際企業研究所
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:2008
畢業學年度:96
語文別:中文
論文頁數:93
中文關鍵詞:線上集體購物口耳相傳訊息特性群體極端化資訊性從眾
外文關鍵詞:On-Line Group BuyingWOM Message CharacteristicsGroup PolarizationInformation Conformity
相關次數:
  • 被引用被引用:3
  • 點閱點閱:302
  • 評分評分:系統版面圖檔系統版面圖檔系統版面圖檔系統版面圖檔系統版面圖檔
  • 下載下載:0
  • 收藏至我的研究室書目清單書目收藏:0
群體決策應用於消費行為領域的相關研究如鳳毛麟角,主要因原在於群體決策過程及成員間的互動不易觀察,但放眼實體與虛擬網路的交易情境中,個體消費者行為與群體決策結果相互影響的實例卻顯而易見,例如:線上集體購物,消費者藉由網路平台集結彼此之力量以獲取較優惠的價格,並且於集體購買過程中受他人留言訊息影響而產生群體決策中的群體極端化(group polarization)與資訊性從眾(information conformity)行為。
本研究以虛擬網路環境中的群體決策行為為其切入點,並進一步探討線上集體購物平台中口耳相傳所傳達的訊息特性,對個別買家形成的態度及群體決策行為的影響。本研究採行巢式三因子實驗設計,三因子分別為訊息數量(多vs 少)、訊息論點(強vs 弱)及訊息方向性(正向vs負向),探討三個自變項對線上集體購物群體決策行為的影響效果。
研究結果發現,網路口耳相傳訊息方向性對說服效果具主導性(dominate)影響,且再探討本研究另兩個自變項訊息數量與訊息方向性時,則顯著形成集體購物的資訊性從眾與群體極端化行為,反之,當留言板中只提供訊息數量或訊息論點之留言時,因訊息方向性主導效果影響,促使訊息留言無法對消費者造成訊息說服效果,而無法提高消費者的購買意願。本研究結果將於實務上提供網路業者瞭解消費者於線上集體購物行為與作為線上集體購物機制設計之參考依據。
Because of an invisible interaction process between group members, the related research about group decision on the consumer behavior was rare. However, no matter in real entity or virtual network environment, individual behavior is influenced exactly on the result of group decision, for example, on-line group buying. Consumer would permeate online trading platform to concertrate each other’s power to draw better price and on this process consumer would be influenced by other buyers purchase experience and accrued group polarization and information conformity of group decision.
This thesis according to group decision behavior of virtual network environment and further trated as the WOM on Web affect individual buyer’s attitude and group decision behavior of online group buying. The nested factor design manipulates the three independent variables of number of messages, the magnitude of argument, valence to study investigated three independents variables to affect group decision behavior of online group buying.
The results find that valence dominate persuasion effect and treated independent variables of number of messages that detected interaction of number of messages and valence could significantly become information conformity and group polarization of on-line group buying. On the other hand, because of valence domination when bulletin board system just provided number of messages and the magnitude of argument that wouldn’t make consumer produce persuasion effect and enhance purchase intention. This study result will provide consumer behavior of group buying for network operators in real-life and regard as network operators design consultation of group buying mechanism.
目錄
摘 要 I
Thesis Abstract II
致謝辭 III
目錄 IV
表目錄 VI
圖目錄 VII
第一章 緒論 1
第一節 研究背景與動機 1
第二節 研究目的 5
第三節 研究流程與方法 6
第二章 文獻探討 8
第一節 線上集體購物現況 8
第二節 線上集體購物群體決策 9
第三節 網路口耳相傳訊息說服效果 11
第四節 網路口耳相傳訊息特性對訊息說服效果之影響 13
第五節 訊息說服效果對群體決策行為之影響 16
第三章 研究方法 20
第一節 研究架構與研究假設建立 20
第二節 實驗架構 23
第三節 預試實驗設計與預試結果分析 25
第四節 變數定義與操作 29
第五節 實驗建構及流程與問卷設計 34
第六節 資料分析方法 42
第四章 資料分析結果 43
第一節 敘述性統計分析 44
第二節 信度分析 45
第三節 研究假設驗證 47
第四節 研究檢定總整理 65
第五章 研究結論與建議 66
第一節 研究結論 66
第二節 行銷理論意涵 69
第三節 實務建議 71
第四節 研究限制與未來研究方向 73
參考文獻 76
附錄 1預試問卷(1) 80
附錄2 預試問卷(2) 81
附錄3 研究問卷 84
附錄4 實驗網站介紹 85
參考文獻
1.林震岩,「多變量分析:SPSS的操作與應用」,台北:智勝文化出版,2007, 再版。
2.李明,「收買與出賣的秘密」,台北:大塊文化出版,2003,初版。
3.邱建智(2000),負面口碑訊息對於消費者購買決策影響之探討,國立台灣科技大學企業管理所碩士論文。
4.鄭佩玲(2001),口耳相傳效果對消費者態度形成之影響-以網路留言板為例,國立政治大學國際貿易研究所碩士論文。
5.練乃華,留淑芳(2003),“口耳相傳訊息之傳播及對消費者購買行為之影響:文獻回顧與評論”,中山管理評論,11(2),p.283-307。
6.台灣網路資訊中心(TWNIC)-資策會(MIC),台灣寬頻網路使用調查報告:
http://www.twnic.net.tw/download/200307/200307index.shtml
http://cpro.com.tw/channel/news/content/index.php?news_id=55460
http://cpro.com.tw/channel/news/content/index.php?news_id=55211
7.Anand, K. S., and Aron, R. (2003), “Group Buying on the Web: A Comparison of Price-Discovery Mechanisms”, Management Science, 49(11), pp.1546-1562.
8.Arndt, Johann (1967), “Role of Product-Related Conversations in the Diffusion of a New Product”, Journal of Marketing Research, 4, pp.291-295.
9.Baron, R. A., and Byrne, D. (1997), “Social psychology,” Boston : Allyn and Bacon.
10.Biehal, G. and Chakravarti, D. (1986), “Consumers' Use of Memory and External Information in Choice: Macro and Micro Perspectives”, Journal of Consumer Research, 12, pp.382-405.
11.Bickart, Barbara and Robert M. Schindler (2001), “Internet Forums as Influential Sources of Consumer Information”, Journal of Interactive Marketing, 15, pp.31-40.
12.Bone, Paula Fitzgerald (1995), “Word-of-Mouth Effects on Short-Term and Long-Term Product Judgments”, Journal of Business Research, 32, pp.213-223.
13.Bristor, J. M. (1990), “Enhanced Explanations of Word of Mouth Communications: The Power of Relationships”, Research in consumer Behavior, 4, pp.51-83.
14.Burzynski, M. H. and Bayer, D. J. (1977), “The Effect of Positive and Negative Prior Information on Motion Picture Appreciation”, Journal of Social Psychology, 101, pp.215-218.
15.Cox, Donald and Raymond A. Bauer (1964), “Self-Confidence and Persuasibility in Women”, Public Opinio Quarterly, 28, pp.453-466.
16.d’Astous, Alain and Nadia Touil (1999), “Consumer Evaluations of Movies on the Basis of Critics’ Judgments”, Psychology and Marketing, 16, pp.667-694.
17.Deutsch, M. and Gerard, H. B. (1955), “A study of normative and Information Social Influences Upon Individual Judgment”, Journal of Abnormal social Psychology, 51, pp.629-636.
18.Eagly, A. H. and Warren, R. (1976), “Intelligence, comprehension, and opinion change”, Journal of Personality, 44(2), pp.226-242.
19.Feldman, Jack M. and John G. Lynch, Jr. (1988), “Self-Generated Validity and Other Effects of Measurement on Belief, Attitude, Intention and Behavior”, Journal of Applied Psychology, August, pp.421-435.
20.Frenzen, Jonathan and Kent Nakamoto (1993), “Structure, Cooperation, and the Flow of Market Information”, Journal of Consumer Research, 20, pp.360-375.
21.Granovetter, Mark. (1973), “The Strength of Weak Ties”, American Journal of Sociology, 78, pp.1360-1380.
22.Herr, Paul M., Frank R. Kardes and John Kim. (1991), “Effects of word-of-Mouth and product-Attribute information on persuasion: An Accessibility-Diagnosticity Perspective”, Journal of Consumer Research, 17, pp.454-462.
23.Hovland, C. I., Janis, I. L., and Kelley, H. H. (1953), “Communication and persuasion. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press Influences Upon Individual Judgment”, Journal of Abnormal Social Psychology, 51, pp.629-636.
24.Krackhardt, D. (1992), “The Strength of Strong Ties: The Importance of Philos.” In Nitin Nohria and Robert G. Eccles (eds.), Networks and Organizations: Structure, Form, and Action. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.
25.Kauffman, R. J., and Wang, B. (2001), “New Buyers’ Arrival under Dynamic Pricing Market Microstructure: The Case of Group-Buying Discounts on the Internet”, Journal of Management Information System, 18(2), pp.157-188.
26.Kauffman, R. J., and Wang, B. (2002), “Bid Together, Buy Together: On the Efficacy of Group-Buying Business Models in Internet-Based Selling”, In Lowry, P. B., Cerrington, J. O. and Watson, R. R. ed., Handbook of Electronic Commerce in Business and Society, Baca Raton: FL: CRC Press.
27.Maddux, J.E. and Rogers, R.W. (1980), “Effects of Source Expertness, Physical Attractiveness, and Supporting Arguments on Persuasion: A Case of Brains over Beauty”, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 38, pp.235-244.
28.Mizerski, R.W. (1982), “An Attribution Explanation of the Disproportionate Influence of Unfovorable Information”, Journal of Consumer Research, 9, pp.301-310.
29.Myers, D. G. and Lamm, H. (1976), “The Group Polarization Phenomenon”, Psychological Bulletin, 83(4), pp.602-627.
30.Nordhoy, F. (1962), “Group Interaction in Decision-Making under Risk”, Unpublished master’s thesis, School of Industrial Management, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, MIT.
31.Petty, R. E., and Caciopo, J. T. and Schumann, D. (1983), “Central and Peripheral Routes to Advertising Effectiveness: The Moderating Role of Involvement”, Journal of Consumer Research, 10, pp.135-146.
32.Petty, R. E. and Cacippo, J. T. (1984), “The Elaboration Likelihood Model of Persuasion”, Advances in Consumer Research, 11, pp.673-675.
33.Petty, R. E. and Cacioppo, J. T. (1986), “The Elaboration Likelihood Model of Persuasion”, Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 19, pp.123-205.
34.Richins, M. L., and Root-Shaffer, Terri (1988), “The Role of Involvement and Opinion Leadership in Consumer Word-of-Mouth: An Implicit Model Made Explicit”, Advances in Consumer Research, 15, pp.32-36.
35.Swasy John, L. and Arno Rethans, J. (1986), “Knowledge Effects on Curiosity and New Product Advertising”, Journal of Advertising, 15(4), pp.28-34.
36.Wilkie, W. L. (1994), “Consumer Behavior”, 3rd ed, New York: John Wiley and Sons Inc., pp.380-381.
QRCODE
 
 
 
 
 
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               
第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁 top
系統版面圖檔 系統版面圖檔