(3.236.231.14) 您好!臺灣時間:2021/04/13 23:30
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:顏家盈
研究生(外文):Yen, Chia-Ying
論文名稱:以「解釋水平理論」來探討產品特徵、時間距離與消費者的產品知識對購買行為的影響
論文名稱(外文):Effects of Feasibility and Desirability Considerations, Temporal Distance, and Consumer Knowledge on Consumer Choice:The Implications of Construal Level Theory
指導教授:沈宗奇沈宗奇引用關係
指導教授(外文):Shen, Chung-Chi
學位類別:碩士
校院名稱:國立嘉義大學
系所名稱:行銷與運籌研究所
學門:商業及管理學門
學類:行銷與流通學類
論文種類:學術論文
畢業學年度:100
語文別:中文
中文關鍵詞:解釋水平理論時間距離可欲性與可行性產品知識適配理論
相關次數:
  • 被引用被引用:2
  • 點閱點閱:3047
  • 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
近年來已有許多研究認為心理距離對於人類的行為決策是一重要的決定因素,而「解釋水平理論」(Construal-Level Theory)主張人們在評估或形成態度時,心理距離會影響人們對事物的解釋水平,進而影響人們對事物的判斷、預測、評估、及行為。因此,本研究藉由「解釋水平理論」來探討產品可欲性搭配可行性之特徵、時間距離與消費者本身的產品知識三者之間對消費者購買行為的影響關係。
本研究採取2(產品特徵:可欲性高搭配可行性低/可行性高搭配可欲性低) x2(時間距離:長/短) x2(產品知識:高/低)的三因子受測者間的實驗設計。研究結果發現: 首先,當時間距離長,消費者對可欲性高搭配可行性低的產品之購買態度與意願皆較高,而當時間距離短,消費者對可行性高搭配可欲性低的產品之購買態度與意願皆較高。其次,當消費者的產品知識高,面對可欲性高搭配可行性低的產品之購買態度較高,而當消費者的產品知識低,對可行性高搭配可欲性低的產品之購買態度與意願皆較高。最後,對於產品知識高之消費者而言,當時間距離長同時又面對可欲性高搭配可行性低的產品時,購買態度會比產品知識低之消費者高,而對於產品知識低之消費者而言,購買態度並不會因時間距離與產品特徵之搭配關係而有所影響。

The current studies have suggests that psychological distance is one important determinant of human thoughts and behavior. Construal level theory (CLT) suggests that psychological distance will affect mental construal and that these construals, in turn, guide human prediction, evaluation, and behavior. In this study, we investigated effects of feasibility and desirability considerations, temporal distance, and consumer knowledge on consumer purchasing attitude and intensions in terms of CLT.
A 2(product features:high desirability and low feasibility vs. high feasibility and low desirability) x2(temporal distance:future vs. near) x2(consumer knowledge:high vs. low) between-subjects factorical experimental design was couducted. The finding show that:First, for the distant future, consumer tend to prefer product with high desirability and low feasibility features, whereas for the near future, consumer tend to prefer product with high feasibility and low desirability features. Second, when consumer’s product knowledge are high, they tend to prefer product with high desirability and low feasibility features, whereas when consumer’s product knowledge are low, they tend to prefer product with high feasibility and low desirability features. And the last, compared to the consumer who have low product knowledge, for the distant future, when consumer’s product knowledge are high, they tend to prefer product with high desirability and low feasibility features. However, when consumer’s product knowledge are low, impacts of product features and temporal distance on purchase preference are not significantly.

第一章、 緒論 1
第一節、 研究背景與動機 1
第二節、 研究目的 3
第二章、 文獻回顧與研究假說 3
第一節、 解釋水平理論 (Construal-Level Theory) 3
第二節、 時間解釋理論 (Temporal Construal Theory) 6
第三節、 可欲性與可行性 (Desirability and Feasibility) 9
第四節、 消費者對產品的知識 12
第五節、 研究架構 14
第六節、 研究假說建立 15
第三章、 研究方法 19
第一節、 研究變數之操作型定義 19
第二節、 研究設計 21
第四章、 資料分析 31
第一節、 樣本分析 31
第二節、 信度分析 33
第三節、 操弄檢測 33
第四節、 假說檢定 35
第五章、 結論與建議 43
第一節、 研究結果 43
第二節、 研究貢獻 46
第三節、 研究限制與未來研究建議 47
參考文獻 49
附錄 56





一、 中文參考文獻
1. 方世榮、駱少康、陳冠樺 (譯) 2010。行銷管理 (原作者: Philip Kotler and Kevin Keller)。東華書局。(原著出版年: 2010)
2. 周軒逸、練乃華 (2010)。 時間距離對負面競選廣告效果之影響。臺灣民主季刊,7(2),33-76。
3. 周軒逸、練乃華 (2010)。旅遊廣告圖文比例的廣告效果研究:時間和空間距離之干擾。戶外遊憩研究,23 (1),27-52。
4. 陳大任 (民99年8月9日)。複方茶賣翻了 新品紛搶市。中時電子報。取自http://news.chinatimes.com/

二、 英文參考文獻
1. Alba, JosephW. and J.Wesley Hutchinson (1987), “Dimensions of Expertise,” Journal of Consumer Research, 13 (March), 411–54.
2. Ainslie, G. (1975). Specious reward: A behavioral theory of impulsiveness and impulse control. Psychological Bulletin, 82, 463-496.
3. Ainslie, G., & Haslam, N. (1992). Hyperbolic discounting. In G. F. Loewenstein & J. Elster (Eds.), Choice over time (pp. 57-92). New York: Russel Sage Foundation.
4. Benzion, U., Rappoport, A., & Yagil, J. (1989). Discount rates inferred from decisions: An experimental study, Management Science, 35, 270- 284.
5. Bettman, James R. and C. Whan Park (1980), “Effects of Prior Knowledge and Experience and Phase of the Choice Process on Consumer Decision Processes: A Protocol Analysis,” Journal of Consumer Research, 7 (December), 234–48.
6. Baumeister, R. F., & Heatherton, T. F. (1996). Self regulation failure: An overview. Psychological Inquiry, 7(1), 1-15.
7. Brucks, Merrie (1985), “The Effects of Product Class Knowledge on Information Search Behavior,” Journal of Consumer Research, 12 (June), 1–16.
8. Cobb, C. J. and Hoyer, W. D. (1986), “Planned versus Impulse Purchase Behavior,” Journal of Retailing, 62(4), 384-409.
9. Dholakia, U. M. (2000), “Temptation and Resistance: An Integrated Model of Consumption Impulse Formation and Enactment,” Psychology and Marketing, 17(11), 955-982.
10. 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, Vol.28, pp.307-319.
11. Fishbein, M. and Ajzen, I. (1975), “Belief, attitude, intention and behavior: an introduction to theory and research.” Reading (MA): Addison-Wesley.
12. Forster, J. (2004). How body feedback influences consumer's evaluation of products. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 14, 415 – 425.
13. Freitas, Antonio L., Peter Salovey, and Nira Liberman (2001), “Abstract and Concrete Self-Evaluative Goals,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 80 (3), 410–24.
14. Fujita, Kentaro, Marlone D. Henderson, Juliana Eng, Yaacov Trope, and Nira Liberman (2006), “Spatial Distance and Mental Construal of Social Events,” Psychological Science, 17 (4), 278–82.
15. Higgins, E. T., & Trope, Y. (1990). Activity engagement theory: Implications of multiply identifiable input for intrinsic motivation. In R. M. Sorrentino & E. T. Higgins (Eds.), Handbook of motivation and cognition: Foundations of social behavior (pp. 229-264). New York: Guilford Press.
16. Hong, J. & Sternthal, B. (2010), “The Effects of Consumer Prior Knowledge and Processing Strategies on Judgments,” Journal of Marketing Research, 301-311.
17. Johnson, Eric and J. Edward Russo (1984), “Product Familiarity and Learning New Information,” Journal of Consumer Research, 11 (June), 542–51.
18. Kacen, J.J. & Lee, J.A., (2002), “The influence of culture on consumer impulsive buying behavior,” Journal of Consumer Psychology, 12 ( 2), 163-176.
19. Kardes, Frank R., Maria L. Cronley, and John Kim (2006), "Construal-Level Effects on Preference Stability, Preference-Behavior Correspondence, and the Suppression of Competing Brands," Journal of Consumer Psychology, 16 (2), 135-44.
20. Kim, Hakkyun, Akshay R. Rao, and Angela Y. Lee (2009). “It’s Time to Vote: The Effect of Matching Message Orientation and Temporal Frame on Political Persuasion.” Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 35, No. 6:877-89.
21. Kim, Hakkyun and Deborah Roedder John (2008), “Consumer Response to Brand Extensions: Construal Level as a Moderator of the Importance of Perceived Fit,” Journal of Consumer Psychology, 18 (2), 116–26.
22. Kruglanski, A. W. (1975). The endogenous-exogenous partition in attribution theory. Psychological Review, 82, 387-406.
23. Lewandowsky, Stephan and Kim Kirsner (2000), “Knowledge Partitioning: Context-Dependent Use of Expertise,” Memory and Cognition, 28 (March), 295–305.
24. Liberman, Nira and Yaacov Trope (1998), "The Role of Feasibility and Desirability Considerations in Near and Distant Future Decisions: A Test of Temporal Construal Theory," Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 75 (1), 5-18.
25. Liberman, N., Sagristano, M., & Trope, Y. (2002). The effect of temporal distance on level of construal. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 38, 523–535.
26. Loewenstein, G. F. (1987). Anticipation and the valuation of delayed consumption. The Economic Journal, 97, 666-684.
27. Pennington, G. L., & Roese, N. (2003). Regulatory focus and temporal distance. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 39(6), 563-576.
28. Petty, R. E., & Wegener, D. T. (1998). Matching versus mismatching attitude functions: Implications of scrutiny of persuasive messages. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 24(3), 227-240.
29. Mischel, W. (1974). Processes in delay of gratification. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 7, pp. 249- 292). New York: Academic Press.
30. Mischel, W., Gruesec, J., & Masters, J. C. (1969). Effects of expected delay time on the subjective value of rewards and punishments. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 11, 363-373.
31. Mitchell, Andrew A. and Peter A. Dacin (1996), “The Assessment of Alternative Measures of Consumer Expertise,” Journal of Consumer Research, 23 (December), 219–39.
32. Mogilner, Cassile, Jennifer L. Aaker, and Ginger L. Pennington (2008). “Time will Tell: The Distant Appeal of Promotion and Imminent Appeal of Prevention.” Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 34, No. 5:670-81.
33. Schraagen, Jan Maarten and Henk Leijenhorst (2001), “Searching for Evidence: Knowledge and Search Strategies Used by Forensic Scientists,” in Linking Expertise and Naturalistic Decision Making, Eduardo Salas and Gary Klein, eds. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 263–74.
34. Stern, H. (1962), “The Significance of Impulse Buying Today,” Journal of Marketing, 26(2), 59-62.
35. Thompson, Debora Viana and Rebecca W. Hamilton (2006), “The Effects of Information Processing Mode on Consumers’ Responses to Comparative Advertising,” Journal of Consumer Research, 32 (March), 530–40.
36. Trope, Yaacov and Nira Liberman (2000), "Temporal Construal and Time-Dependent Changes in Preference," Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 79 (6), 876-89.
37. Trope, Yaacov, Nira Liberman, and Cheryl Wakslak (2007), "Construal Levels and Psychological Distance: Effects on Representation, Prediction, Evaluation, and Behavior," Journal of Consumer Psychology, 17 (2), 83-95.
38. ─(2003), "Temporal Construal," Psychological Review, 110
(3), 403-21.
39. Wendy Liu (2008), “Focusing on Desirability: The Effect of Decision Interruption and Suspension on Preferences.” Journal of Consumer Research,35, 640-,652.
40. Yeung-Jo Kim , Jongwon, Park Roberts, & Wyer Jr. (2009), Effects of Temporal Distance and Memory on Consumer Judgments. Journal of Consumer Research
41. Read, D., Loewenstein, G., & Kalyanaraman, S. (1999). Mixing virtue with vice: Combining the immediacy effect and the diversification heuristic. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 12, 257-273.
42. Reber, Rolf, Norbert Schwarz, and PiotrWinkielman (2004), “Processing Fluency and Aesthetic Pleasure: Is Beauty in the Perceiver’s Processing Experience?” Personality and Social Psychology Review, 8 (4), 364–82.
43. Rachlin, H. (1995). Self control: Beyond commitment. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 18, 109-159.
44. Rook, D. W. and Fisher, R. J. (1985), Normative Influences on Impulsive Buying Behavior, Journal of Consumer Research, 22 (3), 1995, 305-313.
45. Rook, D. W., and Hoch, S. J. (1985), “Consuming Impulses,” Advances in Consumer Research, 12 (1), 23-27.
46. Rook, D. W. (1987), “The Buying Impulse,” Journal of Consumer Research, 14(2), 189-199.
47. Sherman, S. J. (1980). On the self-erasing nature of errors of prediction. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 39, 211-221.
48. Sujan, M.(1985),"Consumer knowledge: Effects on evaluation strategies mediating consumer judgments, “Journal of Consumer Research, 12, 31-46.
49. Thaler, R. (1992). Savings, fungibility, and mental accounting. In R. Thaler (Ed.), The winner's curse: Paradoxes and anomalies of economic life (pp. 81-100). New York: Free Press.
50. Thomas, M., Chandran, S., & Trope, Y. (2006). The effects of temporal distance on purchase construal. Unpublished manuscript, Cornell University.
51. Thompson, Debora Viana and Rebecca W. Hamilton (2006), “The Effects of Information Processing Mode on Consumers’ Responses to Comparative Advertising,” Journal of Consumer Research, 32 (March), 530–40.
52. Thunholm, Peter (2005), “Planning Under Time Pressure: An Attempt Toward a Prescriptive Model of Military Tactical Decision Making,” in How Experts Make Decisions, Henry Montgomery, Raanan Lipshitz, and Berndt Brehmer, eds. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 43–56.
53. Todorov, A., Goren, A., & Trope, Y. (2007). Probability as a psychological distance: Construal and preference. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology.
54. Echo Wen Wan, & Nidhi Agrawal (2011), Carryover Effects of Self-Control on Decision Making: A Construal-Level Perspective, Journal of Consumer Research,38(1), 199-214.
55. Zeithaml, Valarie A., (1988), “Consumer Perceptions of Price, Quality, and Value: A Means-End Model and Synthesis of Evidence,” Journal of Marketing, Vol.52, pp.2-22.
56. Zhang, Y. & Shrum, L.J., (2009), “The influence of self-construal on impulsive consumption,” Journal of Consumer Research, 35 ( 5), 838-850.
57. Zhu, P.-T. (2004), “The relationship among community identification, community trust, and purchase behavior- the case of RVs communities”, Masters degree thesis, Graduate School of International Business, National Dong Hwa University, Shoufeng.

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
系統版面圖檔 系統版面圖檔