(44.192.112.123) 您好!臺灣時間:2021/02/28 05:28
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:嚴靖婷
研究生(外文):Ching-Ting Yen
論文名稱:產品類型與消費者認知需求對隱喻廣告的影響
論文名稱(外文):Impacts of Types of Product and Need For Cognition on Metaphor Advertising
指導教授:張純端張純端引用關係
指導教授(外文):Chun-Tuan Chang
學位類別:碩士
校院名稱:國立中山大學
系所名稱:企業管理學系研究所
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:2010
畢業學年度:98
語文別:中文
論文頁數:86
中文關鍵詞:產品類型認知需求隱喻廣告內隱式隱喻廣告外顯式隱喻廣告
外文關鍵詞:metaphor advertisingneed for cognitionimplicit metaphorexplicit metaphorproduct type
相關次數:
  • 被引用被引用:2
  • 點閱點閱:400
  • 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
現代的消費者面臨蜂擁而至的大量廣告,導致消費者對廣告訊息缺乏興趣,因此如何引起消費者對廣告訊息的投入是廣告商目前的挑戰。從過去的文獻中,修辭學偏離的應用相當廣泛,也可以鼓舞閱聽者。特別是修辭學中的隱喻,採納隱喻於廣告中可以延伸多面向的思考,增強廣告的回應率。本研究試圖了解消費者對面對不同的產品類型時,其所偏好的隱喻廣告類型為何,並延伸探討個人差異之認知需求程度對隱喻廣告效果之影響。
本研究以實驗設計法進行,操弄隱喻廣告類型(無隱喻廣告vs.外顯式隱喻廣告vs.內隱式隱喻廣告)與產品類型(實用性產品vs.享樂性產品)兩個自變數,為3X2因子設計,認知需求的程度則是透過直接測量,透過研究者所設計之不同的隱喻廣告類型與產品類型建構6種不同的實驗情境,觀察消費者在面對不同的產品類型對不同的隱喻廣告之下的態度與購買意圖。
研究結果顯示,如同過去學者之驗證,有採納隱喻之廣告效果確實比未採納隱喻之廣告效果好;加入產品類型的考量,研究顯示,消費者在面對實用性產品時,偏好將產品放置隱喻圖片內之外顯式隱喻廣告;反之,消費者在面對享樂性產品時,偏好需要較多思考的內隱式隱喻廣告;最後,本研究也發現,認知需求高之消費者對隱喻廣告的廣告態度較好,而且認知需求對外顯式隱喻廣告的調節較內隱式隱喻廣告佳。
Contemporary consumers are deluged by advertising. Their lack of interest and defense has challenge advertisers to motivate consumers to process ads. From the advertising literature, rhetorical devices can be attention getting, arousing, affect inducing and memorable. Specifically, the use of metaphors expends dimensional thinking and enhances ad responses. This research proposes two types of metaphors (explicit vs. implicit) and examines the effects of product type and need for cognition on metaphor advertising.
The present study uses experimental design with a 3(metaphor advertising: non-metaphoric vs. explicit-metaphoric vs. implicit-metaphoric) x 2(product type: utilitarian vs. hedonic) factorial design. Need for cognition is measured. Six different scenarios are established through fictitious product ads, and the ad effects are measures by attitude toward the brand and purchase intention to observe the response under different scenarios.
The results indicate that the metaphor advertising is more effective than the non-metaphor advertising, which is consistent with previous studies. There is an interaction effect between the type of metaphor and product type. The explicit metaphor is more effective than implicit metaphor in promoting an utilitarian product. On the contrary, the implicit metaphor is more effective than the explicit metaphor in promoting a hedonic product. High need of cognition enhances the effects of metaphor advertising. Compared with those who have lower level of need for cognition, the individuals who have higher level have more favorable attitudes toward the product and stronger purchase intention, especially on explicit metaphor.
目錄
頁數
中文摘要---------------------------------------------------------- 一
英文摘要---------------------------------------------------------- 二

第壹章 緒論---------------------------------------------------- 1
第一節 前言---------------------------------------------------- 1
第二節 研究背景------------------------------------------------ 1
第三節 研究動機------------------------------------------------ 2
第四節 研究目的與問題------------------------------------------ 3
第五節 研究架構與研究流程-------------------------------------- 4
第貳章 文獻回顧------------------------------------------------ 6
第一節 前言---------------------------------------------------- 6
第二節 隱喻廣告的概述------------------------------------------ 6
一、 修辭學與隱喻-------------------------------------------- 6
二、 隱喻與其在廣告的應用------------------------------------ 7
三、 隱喻廣告的分類------------------------------------------ 10
第三節 產品類型------------------------------------------------ 12
第四節 認知需求------------------------------------------------ 13
一、 認知需求的定義與基本意涵-------------------------------- 13
二、 認知需求與推敲可能模式---------------------------------- 14
第五節 小結---------------------------------------------------- 15
第参章 研究設計與方法------------------------------------------ 16
第一節 前言---------------------------------------------------- 16
第二節 研究架構與假設------------------------------------------ 16
一、 隱喻廣告對廣告效果的影響--------------------------------- 16
二、 隱喻廣告與產品類型對廣告效果的影響---------------------- 16
三、 認知需求對隱喻廣告效果的影響---------------------------- 18
四、 認知需求程度、產品類型對隱喻廣告效果的影響-------------- 19
第三節 前測---------------------------------------------------- 20
一、 前測問卷設計-------------------------------------------- 20
二、 前測分析結果-------------------------------------------- 20
第四節 研究變數操作型定義與衡量-------------------------------- 22
一、 自變數-------------------------------------------------- 22
二、 依變數-------------------------------------------------- 23
第五節 研究設計------------------------------------------------ 24
一、 問卷題項設計-------------------------------------------- 24
二、 抽樣方法------------------------------------------------ 26
第六節 小結---------------------------------------------------- 26
第肆章 研究結果分析-------------------------------------------- 27
第一節 前言---------------------------------------------------- 27
第二節 樣本背景資料分析---------------------------------------- 27
第三節 信度分析------------------------------------------------ 28
第四節 研究設計之檢驗------------------------------------------ 28
一、 隱喻類型操弄確認---------------------------------------- 28
二、 產品類型操弄確認---------------------------------------- 28
三、 潛在共變數檢定------------------------------------------- 29
第五節 研究假設之檢驗------------------------------------------ 30
一、 以對品牌態度為依變數進行研究假設檢驗--------------------- 31
二、 以對購買意圖為依變數進行研究假設檢驗--------------------- 34
第六節 小結---------------------------------------------------- 38
第伍章 結論與建議---------------------------------------------- 39
第一節 前言---------------------------------------------------- 39
第二節 研究結果討論-------------------------------------------- 39
第三節 研究貢獻------------------------------------------------ 41
一、 理論貢獻------------------------------------------------ 41
二、 實務貢獻------------------------------------------------ 42
第四節 研究限制------------------------------------------------ 42
一、 抽樣樣本為學生樣本-------------------------------------- 42
二、 實驗設計法---------------------------------------------- 43
第五節 未來研究建議-------------------------------------------- 43
一、 其它隱喻廣告類型---------------------------------------- 43
二、 產品分類的完整性---------------------------------------- 43
三、 其他產品分類-------------------------------------------- 44
四、 其他干擾變數的影響-------------------------------------- 44
第六節、 小結-------------------------------------------------- 44
參考文獻---------------------------------------------------------- 46

附錄一、前測問卷-------------------------------------------------- 51
附錄二、正式問卷-------------------------------------------------- 53
參考文獻
李昱欣,罪惡感訴求與產品類型對善因行銷效果的影響,國立高雄大學經濟管理
學研究所出版碩士論文,2008
胡壯麟,認知隱喻學,北京大學出版,2004
湯坤嶧,情緒訴求與品牌性別特質對善因行銷效果之影響,國立中山大學企業管理學系所出版碩士論文,2009
鄧育仁與孫武文,廣告裡圖像隱喻的構圖原則:一個認知取經的分析,廣告學研究所,1999,14,95-130。
鄧智元,當隱喻碰上廣告創意: 隱喻廣告創意實踐研究,私立世新大學傳播研究所碩士論文,2001
蕭安汝,不同隱喻廣告類型之廣告效果研究,銘傳大學設計管理研究所出版碩士論文,2006
Andrews, J. C., Durvauls, S. and Akhter, S. H. (1990), “A Framework for Conceptualizing and Measuring the Involvement Construct in Advertising Research,” Journal of Advertising, 19(4), 27-40.
Barthes, R. (1986), The Rhetorical of The Image, New York: Hill and Wang, 21-40.
Boozer, R. W. (1991), “Using Metaphor to Create More Effective Sales Messages,” Journal of Consumer Marketing, 8(1), 59-67.
Cacioppo, J. T. and Petty, R. E. (1982), “The Need of Cognition,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 42(1), 116-131.
Cacioppo, J. T., Petty, R. E. and Kao, C. F. (1984), “The Efficient Assessment of Need for Cognition,” Journal of Personality Assessment, 48(3), 306-317.
Copeland, M. T. (1923). “The Relation of Consumers’ Buying Habits to Marketing Methods,” Harvard Business Review, 1(April), 182-289
Corbett, E. (1990), Classical Rhetoric for the Modern Student (3rd ed), New York: Oxford University Press.
Chan, W. P. and Byeong J. M. (2003), “The Relationship Between Product Involvement and Product Knowledge,” Psychology and Marketing 20(11), 977-997.
Dingena, M. (1994), The Creation of Meaning in Advertising, Tinbergen Institute Research Series, No. 62. Amsterdam: Thesis Publishers.
Forceville, C. (1996), Pictorial Metaphor in Advertising, London and New York:Routledge.
Genette, G. (1982), Figures of Literary Discourse (tr. Alan Sheridan), New York: Columbia University Press.
Gentner, D. and Markman, A. B. (1997), “Structure Mapping in Analogy and Similarity,” American Psychologist, 52, 45-56.
Goodstein, R. C. (1993), “Category-Based Applications and Extensions in Advertising: Motivating More Extensive Ad Processing,” Journal of Consumer Research, 20(1), 87-100.
Gorn, G. J. and Weinberg, C. B. (1983), “Comparative Advertising: Some Positive Results,” Advances in Consumer Research, 10(6), Richard P. Bagozzi and Alice M. Tybout, eds. Ann Arbor, MI: Association for Consumer Research, 377-380.
Greenwald, A. G. and Leavitt, C. (1984), “Audience Involvement in Advertising: Four Levels,” Journal of Consumer Research, 11(1), 581-592.
Hirschman, E. C.(1980), “Attitudes and Layers of Meaning,” MI: Association for Consumer Research,101-118.
Hirschman, E. C.and Holbrook, M. B. (1982), “Hedonic Consumption: Emerging Concepts, Methods, and Propositions,” Journal of Marketing, 46 (Summer), 92–101.
Holbrook, M. B. (1986), “Emotion in the Consumption Experience: Toward a New Model of the Human Consumer,” in The Role of Affect in Consumer Behavior: Emerging theories and Applications, Robert A. Peterson, Wayne D. Hoyer, and William R. Wilson, eds., Lexington, MA: D.C. Heath.
Houston, M. J. and Rothschild, M. L. (1978), “Conceptual and methodological perspectives in involvement,” Research Frontiers in Marketing: Dialogues and Directions, In S. Jain(Ed.), Chicago: American Marketing Association.
Jeong, S. H.(2008), “Visual Metaphor in Advertising: Is the Persuasive Effect Attributable to Visual Argumentation or Metaphorical Rhetoric,” Journal of Marketing Communications, 14(1), 59-73.
Polyorat, K. and Alden, D. L. (2008), “The Moderating Roles of Product Category Types and Need for Cognition on Attitudes toward Comparative Advertising,” European Advances in Consumer Research, 8, 360-361.
Kardes, F. R. (1988), “Spontaneous Inference Processes in Advertising: The Effects of Conclusion Omission and Involvement on Persuasion,” Journal of Consumer Research, 15(September), 225-233.
Kardes, F. R. (1993), Consumer Inference: Determinants, Consequences, and Implications for Advertising, Advertising Exposure, Memory, and Choice, Andrew A. Mitchell, ed.,Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum, 163-191.
Khalil, E. L. (2000), “Symbolic Products: Prestige, Pride, and Identity Goods,” Theory and Decision, 49(1), 53-77.
Kotler, P. and Keller, K L.(2006), Marketing Management, 12e, New Jersey: Prentice Hall.
Lakoff, G. and Johnson, M. (1980), Metaphor We Live By, Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Lee, D. W. and Olshavsky, R. W. (1995), “Conditions and Consequences of Spontaneous Inference Generation: A Concurrent Protocol Approach,” Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 6l (2), 177-183.
Leiss, W., Stephen K, and Jhally, S. (1990), Social Communication in Advertising: Persons Products and Images of Well-being (2nd ed.), Scarborough, Ontatio: Nelson Canada.
Leigh, J. H. (1994), “The Use of Figures of Speech in Print Ad Headline,” Journal of Advertising, 23(June), 17-34.
McCabe, A.(1988), “Effect of Different Contexts on Memory for Metaphor,” Metaphor and Symbolic Activity, 3(2), 105-132.
MacCormac, E. R. (1985), A cognitive Theory of Metaphor, Cambridge: MIT Press
MacInnis, D. J.,Moorman, C. and Jaworski, B. J. (1991), “Enhancing and Measuring Consumers’ Motivation Opportunity, and Ability to Process Brand Information from ads,” Journal of Marketing, 55(October), 32-53.
MacInnis, D. J. (2004), “Crystal Clear Concepts: Using Metaphors to Expand Dimensional Thinking,” ACR News (Winter), 1-4.
Mano, H. and Oliver, R. L. (1993), “Assessing the Dimensionality and Structure of the Consumption Experience: Evaluation, Feeling, and Satisfaction,” Journal of Consumer Research, 20(December), forthcoming.
Mantal, S. P. and Kardes, F. R. (1999), “The Role of Direction of Comparison, Attribute-Based Processing, and Attribute-Based Processing in consumer Preference,” Journal of Consumer Research, 25(March), 109-213.
McGuire, W. (2000), “Standing on the Shoulders of Ancients: Consumer Research, Persuasion, and Figurative Language,” Journal of Consumer Research, 27 (June), pp. 109–114.
McQuarrie, E. F.and Mick, D. G. (1996), “Figures of Rhetoric in Advertising Language,” Journal of Consumer Research, 22(March), 37-54.
McQuarrie, E. F.and Phillip, B. J.(1999), “Indirect Persuasion in Advertising: How Consumer Process Metaphor Presented in Pictures and Words,” Journal of Advertising, 34(2), 7-20.
McQuarrie, E. and Mick, D. (2003), “Visual and Verbal Rhetorical Figures under Directed Processing versus Incidental Exposure to Advertising,” Journal of Consumer Research, 29 (March), 579–587.
McQuarrie, E. F.and Mick, D. G.(2005), “A Laboratory Study of The Effect of Verbal Rhetoric versus Repetition When Consumers Are Not Directed to Process Advertising,” Journal of Consumer Research, 28(2), 287-312.
Morgan, S. E. and Reichert, T. (1999), “The message is in the Metaphor: Assessing the Comprehension of Metaphor in Advertising.” Journal of Advertising, 28(4), 1-12.
Mothersbaugh, D., Huhmann, B. and Franke, G. (2002), “Combinatory and Reparative Effects of Rhetorical Figures on Consumers Effort and Focus in Ad Processing,” Journal of Consumer Research, 28 (March), 589–602.
Kaplan, D. (1990), “Evaluating and Modifying Covariance Structure Models: a Review and Recommendation” Multivariate Behavioral Research, 25, 137-155.
Ortony, A. (1979). “Metaphor: A multidimensional problem.” In A. Ortony (Ed.), Language and Thought. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
Phillips, B. J. (1997), “Thinking into It: Consumer Interpretation of Complex Advertising Images,” Journal of Advertising. 26(summer), 77-87.
Phillips, B. J. (2000), “The Impact of Verbal Anchoring on Consumer Response to Image Ads,” Journal of Advertising, 29(1), 15-24.
Phillips, B. J.and McQuarrie, E. F. (2004), “Beyond Visual Metaphor: A New Typology of Visual Rhetorical Style in Advertising,” Marketing Theory, 4(1-2), 113-136.
Proctor, T. et al.(2005), “Visual the Metaphor, ” Journal of Marketing Communication, 11(1), 55-72.
Putrevu, S., and Lord, K. R. (1994), “Comparative and Noncomparative Advertising: Attitudinal Effects Under Cognitive and Affective Involvement Conditions,” Journal of Advertising, 23(2), 77-91.
Read, S. J., Cesa, I. L., Jones, D. K., and Collins, N. L. (1990). “When is The Federal Budget Like A Baby? Metaphor in political rhetoric,” Metaphor and Symbolic Activity, 5(3), 125–149.
Rossiter, J. R. and Robert, J. D. (1991), “A Better Advertising Planning Grid,” Journal of Advertising Research, 3(October–November), 11–21.
Sawyer, A. G., and Daniel, J. H. (1991), “Effects of Omit-ting Conclusions in Advertisements to Involved and Uninvolved Audiences,” Journal of Marketing Research, 28(November), 467-474.
Slama, M. E. and Tashchian, A. (1985), “Selected Socioeconomic and Demographic Characteristics Associated with Purchasing Involvement,” Journal of Marketing, 49(winter), 72-82.
Smith, S. M. and Petty, R. F.(1996), “Message Framing and Persuasion: A message Processing Analysis,” Journal of personality and Social Psychology, 22(3), 257-268.
Sperber, D. and Diedre, W. (1986), Relevance: Communication and Cognition, Oxford: Basil Blackwell.
Spears, N. (2003), “On The of Time Expression in Prompting Product Benefits: The Metaphoric and The Literal,” Journal of Advertising, 32(2), 33-44.
Stern, B. (1990), “Pleasure and Persuasion in Advertising: Rhetorical Irony as A Humor Technique,” Current Issues and Research in Advertising, 12, 25–42.
Strahilevitz, M.(1998), “The Effects of Product Type and Donation Magnitude on Willingness to Pay More for a Charity-Linked Brand,” Journal of Consumer Psychology, 8(3), 215-241.
Swan, J. E. and Combs, L. J. (1976). “Product Performance and Consumer Satisfaction:A New Concept,” Journal of Marketing, Vol.40 (2), 25-33.
Swee, H. A. and Elison, A. C. L. (2006), “The Influence of Metaphor and Product Type on Brand Personality Perceptions and Attitudes,” Journal of Advertising, 35(2), 39-53.
Vivek, M. and Delonia, O. C. (2009), “How Did You Find Your Physician?: An Exploratory Investigation Into The Types of Information Sources Used to Select Physicians,” International Journal of Pharmaceutical and Healthcare Marketing, 3(1), 46 – 58.
Voss, K.E.,Spangenberg, E. R. and Grohamann, B. (2003), “Measuring the Hedonic and Utilitarian Dimensions of Consumer Attitude,” Journal of Marketing Research, 40(3), 310-320.
Todorov, T. (1982), Theories of the Symbol. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
Underwood, B. J. and Shaughnessy, J. J. (1975), Experimentation in Psychology, New York: Wiley.
Winner, E. (1982). Invented World’s: The Psychology of the Arts. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Woods, W. (1960), “Psychological Dimensions of Consumer Decision,” Journal of Marketing, 24(1), 15-19.
Ward, J. and William, G.(1990), “Metaphor in Promotional Communication: A Review of Research on Metaphor Comprehension And Quality,” In M. E. Goldberg, G. Gore & R. W. Pollay (eds.), Advances in Consumer Research, 17, Provo, UT: Association for Consumer Research, 636-642.
Zaltman,G. (1995), “Amid word, Anthropology, Metaphors, And Cognitive Peripheral Vision,” Contemporary Marketing and Consumer Behavior: An Anthropological Source Book, John F. Sherry, Jr., ed, Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, 282-304.
Zhang, Y. and Buda, R. (1999), “Moderating Effects of Need for Cognition on Responses to Positively versus Negatively Framed Advertising Messages,” Journal of Advertising, 28(2), 1-15.
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