跳到主要內容

臺灣博碩士論文加值系統

(35.172.136.29) 您好!臺灣時間:2021/07/29 07:07
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

: 
twitterline
研究生:蔡依璇
研究生(外文):Tsai, Yi-Hsuan
論文名稱:探討心理模擬與產品種類及廣告類型對廣告之說服效果
論文名稱(外文):Effects Of Mental Simulation, Product Type, And Advertisement Type On Persuasion
指導教授:邱光輝邱光輝引用關係
指導教授(外文):Chiu, Kuang-Hui
口試委員:邱光輝黃思明林我聰
口試委員(外文):Chiu, Kuang-Hui
口試日期:2012-05-26
學位類別:碩士
校院名稱:國立臺北大學
系所名稱:企業管理學系
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:62
中文關鍵詞:心理模擬享樂型產品功能型產品比較型廣告
外文關鍵詞:Mental SimulationHedonic ProductUtilitarian ProductComparative Advertising
相關次數:
  • 被引用被引用:5
  • 點閱點閱:655
  • 評分評分:
  • 下載下載:68
  • 收藏至我的研究室書目清單書目收藏:1
本研究主要探討心理模擬類型 (過程導向 vs. 結果導向)、產品種類 (功能型產品 vs. 享樂型產品) 及廣告類型 (比較型廣告 vs. 非比較型廣告) 三者對廣告說服效果 (廣告態度、品牌態度及購買意願) 之影響。本研究採用8個組間實驗設計。
本研究結果顯示,在心理模擬類型的過程導向比結果導向有更好的廣告效果。享樂型產品比功能型產品有更好的廣告效果。非比較型廣告比比較型廣告有較好的廣告效果。心理模擬類型與產品種類只有在廣告態度上具有交互作用。
本研究結論提出消費者心理學及行銷廣告設計呈現上提出實質建議,並且在學術領域及實務應用上有所幫助。

The objective of this research is to examine the effects of mental simulation (process-oriented vs. outcome-oriented), product type (utilitarian product vs. hedonic product), and advertisement type (comparative advertising vs. non-comparative advertising) on advertisement persuasion (advertisement attitude, brand attitude, and purchase willingness). This research conducts a 2 x 2 x 2 between-subject experiment design.

The results show that
1. Process-oriented mental simulation has better persuasive effectiveness than outcome-oriented mental simulation

2. Hedonic product has better persuasive effectiveness than utilitarian product

3. Non-comparative advertising type has better persuasive effectiveness than comparative advertising type

4. Mental simulation type has interaction with product type only on advertisement attitude. These results contribute to the theoretical development and marketing applications.

謝辭……………………………………………………………………………………….……I中文提要……………………………………………………………………………………....II英文提要……………………………………………………………………….………...…...III
目錄 IV
圖次 VI
表次 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 2
第三節 研究流程 3
第二章 文獻探討 5
第一節 心理模擬 5
第二節 產品種類 6
第三節 廣告類型 7
第四節 廣告說服效果 7
第五節 調節變數 8
第三章 研究方法 9
第一節 研究架構與假說推論 9
第二節 問卷設計與說明 11
第三節 研究變數之定義與衡量 12
第四章 資料分析 17
第一節 問卷樣本分析 17
第二節 信效與效度 19
第三節 假說檢定 21
第四節 小結 31
第五章 結論與建議 35
第一節 研究結論 35
第二節 管理意涵 38
第三節 研究限制與建議 39
參考文獻 39
附錄一 實驗一:功能型*結果導向*比較型 45
附錄二 實驗二:功能型*結果導向*非比較型 47
附錄三 實驗三:功能型*過程導向*比較型 49
附錄四 實驗四:功能型*過程導向*非比較型 51
附錄五 實驗五:享樂型*結果導向*比較型 53
附錄六 實驗六:享樂型*結果導向*非比較型 55
附錄七 實驗七:享樂型*過程導向*比較型 57
附錄八 實驗八:享樂型*過程導向*非比較型 59
附錄九 問卷內容 61

一、中文部分
杜岡陵 (2011),調節焦點訊息與心理模擬方式對廣告說服之效果—以健康食品為例,銘傳大學高階經理碩士學程在職專班未出版碩士論文。
楊緒永 (2009),品牌形象、知覺價值、口碑、產品知識與購買意願之研究—以手機為例,南華大學企業管理系未出版碩士論文。
二、英文部分
Alba, J. W., & Hutchinson, J. W. (1987). Dimensions of consumer expertise. Journal of Consumer Research, 13(4), 411-453.
Ajzen, I., & Fishbein, M. (1980). Understanding attitudes and predicting social behavior. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall Inc.
Batra, R., & Ahtola, O. T. (1990). Measuring the hedonic and utilitarian sources of consumer attitudes. Marketing Letters, 2(2), 159-170.
Beatty, S. E., & Smith, S. M. (1987). External search efforts: An investigation across several product categories. Journal of Consumer Research, 14(1), 83-95.
Belch, G. E. (1981). An examination of comparative and noncomparative television commercials: The effects of claim variation and repetition on cognitive response and message acceptance. Journal of Marketing Research, 18(3), 333-349.
Bettman, J., Luce, M. F., & Payne, J. (1998). Constructive consumer choice processes. Journal of Consumer Research, 25(3), 187-217.
Chitturi, R., Raghunathan, R., & Mahajan, V. (2007). From versus function: How the intensities of specific emotions evoked in functional versus hedonic trade-offs mediate product preferences. Journal of Marketing Research, 44(4), 702-714.
Clarke, K., & Belk, R. W. (1979). The effects of product involvement and task definition on anticipated consumer effort. Advances in Consumer Research, 6, 313-318.
Dahl, D. W., & Hoeffler, S. (2004). Visualizing the self: Exploring the potential benefits and drawbacks for new product evaluation. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 21(4), 259-267.
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.
Dhar, R., & Wertenbroch, K. (2000). Consumer choice between hedonic and utilitarian goods. Journal of Marketing Research, 37(1), 60-71.
Droge, C. (1989). Shaping the route to attitude change: Central versus peripheral processing through comparative versus noncomparative advertising. Journal of Marketing Research, 26(2), 193-204.
Engel, J. F., Blackwell, R. D., & Miniard, P. W. (1995). Consumer Behavior (8th ed.). Fort Worth, TX: Dryden Press.
Escalas, J. E., & Luce, M. F. (2003). Process versus outcome thought focus and advertising. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 13(3), 246-254.
Escalas, J. E., & Luce, M. F. (2004). Understanding the effects of process-focused versus outcome-focused thought in response to advertising. Journal of Consumer Research, 31(2), 274-285.
Garbarino, E., & Johnson, M. S. (1999). The different roles of satisfaction, trust, and commitment in customer relationships. Journal of Marketing, 63(2), 70-81.
Golden, L. L. (1979). Consumer reactions to explicit brand comparisons in advertisements. Journal of Marketing Research, 16(4), 517-32.
Goldsmith, R. E., & Emmert, J. (1991). Measuring product category involvement: A multitrait-multimethod study. Journal of Business Research, 23(4), 363-371.
Goodwin, S., & Etgar, M. (1980). An experimental investigation of comparative advertising: Impact of message appeal, information load, and utility of product class. Journal of Marketing Research, 17(2), 187-202.
Gorn, G., & Weinberg, D. (1984). The impact of comparative advertising on perception and attitude: Some positive findings. Journal of Consumer Research, 11(2), 719-727.
Gotlieb, J., & Sarel, D. (1991). Comparative advertising effectiveness: The role of involvement and source credibility. Journal of Advertising, 20(1), 38-45.
Greenwald, A. G., & Leavitt, C. (1984). Audience involvement in advertising: Four levels. Journal of Consumer Research, 11, 581-592
Grewal, D., Kavanoor, S., Fern, E.F., Costley, C., & Barnes, J. (1997). Comparative versus noncomparative advertising: A meta-analysis. Journal of Marketing, 61(October), 1-15.
Hair, J. E., Anderson, R. E., Tatham, R. L., & Black, W. C. (2006). Multivariate data analysis with reading (6th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Prentice Hall.
Hoeffler, S. (2003). Measuring preferences for really new products. Journal of Marketing Research, 40(4), 406-420.
John, H. A. (1984). Conceptualization and operationalization of involvement. Advances in Consumer Research, 11(1), 203-209.
Keller, K. L. (1993). Conceptualizing, measuring, and managing customer-based brand equity. Journal of Marketing, 57(1), 1-22.
Keller, P. A., & Block, L. G. (1997). Vividness effects: A resource-matching perspective. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 24(3), 295-304.
Lastovicka, J. L., & Gardner, D. M. (1978). Low involvement versus high involvement cognitive structures. Advances in Consumer Research, 5(1), 87-92.
Levine, P. (1976). Commercials that name competing brands. Journal of Advertising Research, 16(6), 7-14.
Lutz, J. R. (1985). Affective and cognitive antecedents of attitude toward the ad: A conceptual framework. Journal of Applied Psychology, 76(1), 45-63.
MacInnis, D., & Price, L. (1990). An exploratory study of the effects of imagery processing and consumer experience on expectations and satisfaction. Advances in Consumer Research, 17(1), 41-47.
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.
Martin, B. A. S., Lang, B., & Wong, S. (2003). Conclusion explicitness in advertising: The moderating role of Need for Cognition (NFC) and Argument Quality (AQ) on persuasion. Journal of Advertising, 32(4), 57-65.
Mick, D. G. (1992). Levels of subjective comprehension in advertising processing and their relations to ad perceptions, attitudes, and memory. Journal of Consumer Research, 18(4), 411-424.
Miniard, P. W., Rose, R. L., Barone, M. J., & Manning, K. C. (1993). On the need for relative measures when assessing comparative advertising effects. Journal of Advertising, 22(3), 41-57.
Nunnally, J. C. (1978). Psychometric Theory. New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company.
Pechmann, C., & Ratneshwar, S. (1991). The use of comparative advertising for brand positioning: association versus differentiation. Journal of Consumer Research, 18(2), 145-160.
Pechmann, C., & Stewart, D. (1991). How direct comparative ads and market share affect brand choice? Journal of Advertising Research, 31(6), 47-55.
Petty, R. E., & Cacioppo, J. T. (1981). Attitudes and persuasion: Classic and contemporary approaches. Dubuque, IA: William C. Brown.
Pham, L. B., & Taylor, S. E. (1999). From thought to action: Effects of process- versus outcome-based mental simulations on performance. Science for Personality and Social Psychology, 25(2), 250-260.
Rose, R. L., Miniard, P. W., Barone, M. J., Manning, K. C., & Till, B. D. (1993). When persuasion goes undetected: The case of comparative advertising. Journal of Marketing Research, 30(August), 315-330.
Shiv, B., & Huber, J. (2000). The impact of anticipating satisfaction on consumer choice. Journal of Consumer Research, 27(2), 202-216.
Swinyard, W. R. (1981). The interaction between comparative advertising and copy claim variation. Journal of Marketing Research, 18(2), 175-186.
Taylor, S. E., & Schneider, S. K. (1989). Coping and the simulation of events. Social Cognition, 7(2), 174-194.
Taylor, S. E., Pham, L. B., Rivkin, I.D., & Armor, D. A. (1998). Harnessing the imagination: Mental simulation, self-regulation and coping. American Psychologist, 53(4), 429-439.
Thompson, D. V., & Hamilton, R. W. (2006). The effects of information processing on consumers’ responses to comparative advertising. Journal of Consumer Research, 32(4), 530-540.
Zaichkowsky, J. (1985). Measuring the involvement construct. Journal of Consumer Research, 12(3), 341-352.
Zeithaml, V. A. (1998). Consumer perceptions of price, quality, and value: A means-end model and synthesis of evidence. Journal of Marketing, 52(3), 2-22.
Zhao, M., Hoeffler, S., & Dahl, D. (2009). The role of imagination-focused visualization on new product evaluation. Journal of Marketing Research, 46(1), 46-55.
Zhao, M., Hoeffler, S., & Zauberman, G. (2007). Mental simulation and preference consistency over time: The role of process-versus outcome-focused thoughts. Journal of Marketing Research, 44(3), 379-388.
Zhao, M., Hoeffler, S., & Zauberman, G. (2011). Mental simulation and product evaluation: The affective and cognitive dimensions of process versus outcome simulation. Journal of Marketing Research, 48(5), 827-839.

QRCODE
 
 
 
 
 
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               
第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁 top
無相關期刊