(3.236.122.9) 您好!臺灣時間:2021/05/09 08:00
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:蔡明翰
研究生(外文):Ming-Ham Tsai
論文名稱:整合性產品利益、產品外觀與心像對行銷溝通之影響
論文名稱(外文):Convergent Products: Product Benefits, Product Form and Imagery on Communication
指導教授:周宇貞周宇貞引用關係
指導教授(外文):Yu-Jen Chou
學位類別:碩士
校院名稱:銘傳大學
系所名稱:企業管理學系碩士班
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:2012
畢業學年度:100
語文別:中文
論文頁數:77
中文關鍵詞:整合性產品產品外觀心像
外文關鍵詞:mental imageryproduct formconvergent products
相關次數:
  • 被引用被引用:1
  • 點閱點閱:185
  • 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:1
本研究目的為探討「主產品利益(功利性主產品/享樂性主產品)」、「新增產品利益(新增功利性產品/新增享樂性產品)」、「產品外觀一致性(一致/中度不一致)」、「消費者心像處理(記憶/想像力)」在行銷溝通效果上是否具有交互作用。研究結果除了獲得整合性產品的最佳組合外,也加入了消費者心像處理進行討論,使廠商在設計整合性產品時,能隨著產品利益的不同,選擇採用不同的產品外觀與心像廣告,以增加廣告溝通效果。
This research is to explore the role of forms and benefits in new convergent products. One 2 (base product: utilitarian vs. hedonic) x 2 (added product: utilitarian vs. hedonic) x 2 (product form: consistent vs. moderate inconsistency) x 2 (mental imagery: memory-focused vs. imagination-focused) between-subject design experiment was conducted. The findings have important implications for convergent product design and advertising strategies.
目錄Ⅰ
圖目錄IV
表目錄V
第一章 緒論1
1.1 研究背景與動機1
1.2 研究問題與目的4
1.3 研究流程5
第二章 文獻探討6
2.1整合性產品6
2.1.1產品屬性7
2.1.2小結8
2.2產品外觀一致性8
2.2.1產品外觀一致性之意義8
2.2.2產品外觀一致性在行銷上之應用9
2.2.3小結10
2.3 消費者心像處理10
2.3.1心像的意義10
2.3.2心像之效果10
2.3.3心像在廣告上的運用10
2.3.4心像在新產品研究的運用11
2.3.5小結12
2.4新產品廣告之溝通效果12
2.4.1產品理解度12
2.4.2產品態度13
2.4.3廣告態度13
2.4.4購買意願13
2.5 研究假說13
2.5.1整合性產品中,「主產品利益」與「新增產品利益」在行銷
溝通效果上之交互作用13
2.5.2整合性產品中,「主產品利益」與「產品外觀一致性」在行
銷溝通效果上之交互作用15
2.5.3整合性產品中,「整合性產品利益」與「產品外觀一致性」
在行銷溝通效果上之交互作用16
2.5.4整合性產品中,「整合性產品利益」、「產品外觀一致性」與
「消費者心像處理」在行銷溝通效果上之交互作用18
第三章 研究方法21
3.1 前測21
3.1.1確定主產品21
3.1.2確定新增產品21
3.1.3確定產品外觀22
3.2 正式實驗22
3.2.1以廣告訊息來操弄心像22
3.2.2實驗對象22
3.2.3實驗流程22
3.3 變數之操作性定義與衡量方式22
3.3.1自變數操作性定義與操弄檢驗題項22
3.3.2依變數之操作性定義與題項24
第四章 研究結果26
4.1 前測過程與分析26
4.1.1前測一:整合性產品之主產品選擇26
4.1.2前測二:新增產品之選擇27
4.1.3前測三:確定產品外觀29
4.2 正式問卷設計33
4.3 正式實驗:以廣告訊息來操弄心像34
4.3.1樣本分析34
4.3.2信度分析35
4.3.3操弄性檢驗35
4.3.4假說檢定36
4.4 實驗結果50
第五章 結論與建議52
5.1 研究意涵52
5.1.1與過去研究不同處52
5.1.2與過去研究相呼應與對照53
5.2 實務意涵54
5.2.1依據現有產品的利益來選擇新增產品利益54
5.2.2依據產品的利益來決定產品外觀設計54
5.2.3依據整合性產品利益來決定產品外觀設計54
5.2.4依據整合性產品的最佳組合與消費者心像處理來決定產品
外觀設計55
5.3 研究限制與未來研究55
參考文獻57
附錄一 功利性主產品*新增功利產品*外觀一致*記憶心像62
附錄二 功利性主產品*新增功利產品*外觀中度不一致*記憶心像63
附錄三 功利性主產品*新增功利產品*外觀一致*想像力心像64
附錄四 功利性主產品*新增功利產品*外觀中度不一致*想像力心像65
附錄五 問卷內容:以功利性主產品*新增功利性產品為例66
1.Adeyemo, S. A. (1990). Thinking Imagery and Problem-Solving. Psychological Studies, 35(3), 179-190.
2.Anderson, C. A. & Sechler, E. S. (1986). Effects of Explanation and Counter Explanation on the Development and Use of Social Theories. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 50(1), 24-34.
3.Ajzen, I. & Fishbein, M. (1980). Understanding Attitudes and Predicting Social Behavior. NJ: Prendice-Hall Inc.
4.Ayres J. & Wongprasert T. (2003). Using Images to Enhance the Impact of Visualization. Communication Reports, 16(1), 47-55
5.Babin, B. J., Darden, W. R., & Griffin, M. (1994). Work and/or Fun: Measuring Hedonic and Utilitarian Shopping Value. Journal of Consumer Research, 20(4), 644-656.
6.Babin, L. A. & Burns, A. C. (1997). Effects of Print Ad Pictures and Copy Containing Instructions to Imagine on Mental Imagery that Mediates Attitudes. Journal of Advertising, 26(3), 33-44
7.Batra, R. & Ahtola, O. T. (1990). Measuring the Hedonic and Utilitarian Sources of Consumer Attitudes. Marketing Letters, 2(2), 159-170.
8.Berlyne, D. E. (1974). The New Experimental Aesthetics. New Experimental Aesthetics, New York: John W. & Sons, 1-25.
9.Bloch, P. H. (1995). Seeking the Ideal Form : Product Design and Consumer Response. Journal of Marketing, 59(3), 16
10.Bone, Paula, F., & Pam, S. (1990). The Effect of Imagery Processing and Imagery Content on Behavorial Intentions. Advances in Consummer Research, 17, 449-454.
11.Burns, A. C., Biswas, A., & Babin, L. A. (1993). The Operation of Visual Imagery as a Mediator of Advertising Effects. Journal of Advertising, 22(2), 71-85
12.Chandon, P., Wansink, B., & Laurent, G. (2000). A Benefit Congruency Framework of Sales Promotion Effectiveness. Journal of Marketing, 64(4), 65-81
13.Chitturi, R., Raghunathan, R., & Mahajan, V. (2008). Delight by Design: The Role of Hedonic Versus Utilitarian Benefits. Journal of Marketing, 72(3), 48-63
14.Chang, C. C. & Chou, Y. J. (2008). Goal Orientation and Comparative Valence in Persuasion. Journal of Advertising, 37(1), 73-87
15.Dahl, D. W., Chattopadhyay, A., & Gorn, G. J. (1999). The Use of Visual Mental Imagery in New Product Design. Journal of Marketing Research, 36(1), 18-28.
16.Dodds, W. B., Kent, B. M., & Grewal, D. (1991). Effects of Price, Brand, and Store Information on Buyers'' Product Evaluations. Journal of Marketing Research, 28(3), 307-319
17.Feiereisen, S., Wong, V., & Broderick, A. J. (2008). Analogies and Mental Simulations in Learning for Really New Products: The Role of Visual Attention. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 25(6), 593-607.
18.Garbarino, E. & Johnson, M. S. (1999). The Different Roles of Satisfaction, Trust, and Commitment in Customer Relationships. Journal of Marketing, 63(2), 70-87.
19.Gill, T. (2008). Convergent Products What Functionalities Add More Value to the Base. Journal of Marketing, 72(2), 46-62.
20.Gregan-Paxton, J., Hoeffler S. & Zhao (2005). When Categorization is Ambiguous: Factors that Facilitate the Use of a Multiple Category Inference Strategy. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 15(2), 127-40..
21.Hirschman, E. C. & Holbrook, M. B. (1982), Hedonic Consumption: Emerging Concepts, Methods and Propositions. Journal of Marketing, 46(3), 92-101.
22.Hoeffler, S. (2003). Measuring Preferences for Really New Products. Journal of Marketing Research, 40(4), 406-420.
23.Hoegg, J. & Joseph, W. A. (2011), Seeing Is Believing (Too Much): The Influence of Product Form on Perceptions of Functional Performance. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 28, 346-359.
24.Holak, S. L. & Lehmann, D. R. (1990). Purchase Intentions and Dimensions of Innovation: An Exploratory Model. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 7(1), 59-73.
25.Jansson, D. G. & Smith, S. M. (1991). Product Familiarity and Learning New Information, Journal of Marketing Research, 28(3), 227-239.
26.Joan, M. L. & Tybout, A. M. (1989). Schema Congruity as a Basis for Product Evalations. Journal of Consumer Research, 16(1), 39-54

27.Lee, A. Y. & Aaker, J. L. (2004). Bringing the Frame into Focus: The Influence of Regulatory Fit on Processing Fluency and Persuasion. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 86(1), 205-218
28.Lutz, K. A. & Lutz R. J. (1997). Effects of Interactive Imagery on Learning: Application to Advertising. Journal of Applied Psychology, 62(4), 493-498
29.Lutz, J. R. (1985). Affective and Cognitive Antecedents of Attitude toward the Ad: A Conceptual Framework. Journal of Applied Psychology, 76(1), 45-63.
30.MacInnis, D. J. & Jaworski B. J. (1989). Information Processing from Advertisements: Toward an Integrative Framework. Journal of Marketing, 53(4), 1-23.
31.MacInnis, D. J. & Price L. L. (1987). The Role of Imagery in Information Processing: Review and Extension. Journal of Consumer Research, 13(4), 473-491.
32.MacKenzie, S. B. & Lutz, R. J. (1989). An Empirical Examination of the Structural Antecedents of Attitude toward the Ad in an Advertising Pretesting Context. Journal of Marketing, 53(2), 48-65.
33.Mandler, G. (1982). The Structure of Value: Accounting for Taste. Affect and Cognition: The Seventeenth Annual Carnegie Symposium on Cognition, 3-36.
34.Mano, H. & Oliver, R. L. (1993). Assessing the Dimensionality and Structure of the Consumption Experience: Evaluation, Feeling, and Satisfaction. Journal of Consumer Research, 20(3), 451-466.
35.Martin, B. S., Lang, B., &Wong, S. (2004). The Role of Sensation Seeking and Need for Cognition on Web-site Evaluation: A Resource-matching Perspective. Psychology and Marketing, 22(2), 109-126
36.McQuarrie & Phillips, B. J. (2005). Indirect Persuasion in Advertising: How Consumers Process Metaphors Presented in Pictures and Words. Journal of Advertising, 34(2), 7-20.
37.Miniard, P. W., Bhatla S. & Lord K. R. (1991). Picture-Based Persuasion Processes and the Moderating Role of Involvement Journal of Consumer Research,18(1), 92-107
38.Mitchell, A. A. & Olson, J. C. (1981). Are Product Attribute Beliefs the Only Mediator of Advertising Effects on Brand Attitude. Journal of Marketing Research, 18(3), 318-332
39.Moe, W. W. & Fader, P. S. (2001). Modeling Hedonic Portfolioproducts: A Joint Segmentation Analysis of Music CD Sales. Journal of Marketing Research, 38(3), 376-385.

40.Noseworthy, T. J. & Trudel, R. (2011). Looks Interesting But What Does It Do? Evaluation of Incongruent Product Form Depends on Positioning. Journal of Marketing Research, 48(6),1008-1019.
41.Peter, J. P., & Olson, J. C. (1986). Consumer Search: An Extended Framework, Journal of Consumer Research, 13(1), 119-126.
42.Perky, C. W. (1910). An Experimental Study of Imagination. American Journal of Psychology, 21(3), 422-452.
43.Phillips, D. M. (1996). Anticipating the Future: The Role of Consumption Visions in Consumer Behavior. Advances in Consumer Research, 23(1), 70-75.
44.Richardson, A. (1969). Mental Imagery, Cognitive Representations of Semtic Categories. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 104(3), 192-223.
45.Strahilevitz, M. & Myers, J. G. (1998). Donations to Charity as Purchase Incentives: How Well They Work May Depend on What You are Trying to Sell. Journal of Consumer Research, 24(4), 434-446.
46.Swan, J. E. & Combs, L. J. (1976). Product Performance and Consumer Satisfaction: A New Concept. Journal of Marketing, 40(2), 25-33.
47.Steenkamp, Jan-Benedict, E.M., & Baumgartner H. (1995). Development and cross-cultural validation of a short form of CSI as a measure of optimum stimulation level. Research in Marketing, 12(1), 97-104.
48.Thompson, D. V. & Hamilton, R. W. (2006). The Effects of Information Processing Mode on Consumers'' Responses to Comparative Advertising. Journal of Consumer Research, 32(4), 530-540.
49.Tversky, A. (1997). Features of Similarity. Psychological Review, 84(4), 327-352.
50.Venkatraman, Meera P., & Linda L. Price (1990). Differentiating Between Cognitive and Sensory Innovativeness – Concepts, Measurement, and Implications. Journal of Bussiness Research, 38(1), 293-315.
51.Voss, K. E., Spangenberg, E. R., & Grohmann, B. (2003). Measuring the Hedonic and Utilitarian Dimensions of Consumer Attitude. Journal of Marketing Research, 40(3), 310-320.
52.Yoon, S. G., & Choi, Y. G. (2005). Determinants of Successful Sports Advertisements: The Effects of Advertisement Type, Product type and Sports model. Journal of Brand Management, 12(3), 191-205.
53.Zhao, M., Hoeffler, S., & Dahl, D. W. (2009). The Role of Imagination-focused Visualization on New Product Evaluation. Journal of Marketing Research, 46(1), 46-55.
54.Zhao, M., Hoeffler, S. & Zauberman, G. (2009). Mental Simulation and the Evaluation of New Products: The Affective and Cognitive Dimensions of Process-versus Outcome-focused Thoughts. Advances in Consumer Research.
55.Zeithaml, V. A. (1988). Consumer Perceptions of Price, Quality, and Value: A Means-End Model and Synthesis of Evidence. Journal of Marketing, 52(3), 2-22.
1.周宇貞、楊弘溢 (2010,6月)。消費者心像處理模式與產品屬性對新產品訊息說服效果的影響,台北私立銘傳大學主辦,中華決策科學學會年會暨學術研討會,台北市。
2.邵靖惠(2004,6月)。產品新增屬性之特質與產品典型性對消費者評價之影響。國立台灣大學商學研究所碩士論文。
電子全文 電子全文(本篇電子全文限研究生所屬學校校內系統及IP範圍內開放)
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