(3.236.122.9) 您好!臺灣時間:2021/05/12 18:12
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:劉妍妏
研究生(外文):LIU YENWEN
論文名稱:情緒與產品態度修正量 : 享樂型與效用型導向的產品判斷情緒修正量之不同影響
論文名稱(外文):Correction for Mood Bias in Product Judgment: Hedonic vs. Utilitarian based Product Attitude
指導教授:蕭中強蕭中強引用關係
指導教授(外文):Chung-Chiang Hsiao Ph.D.
學位類別:碩士
校院名稱:國立臺灣師範大學
系所名稱:管理研究所
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:2014
畢業學年度:102
語文別:英文
論文頁數:45
中文關鍵詞:心情偏誤高涉入偏誤察覺產品評價彈性修正模型享樂屬性效用屬性
外文關鍵詞:Mood BiasBias-AwarenessHigh InvolvementProduct JudgmentFlexible Correction ModelHedonic AttributesUtilitarian Attribute
相關次數:
  • 被引用被引用:0
  • 點閱點閱:237
  • 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:13
  • 收藏至我的研究室書目清單書目收藏:3
過去研究發現,心情因素與消費者對產品評價有顯著關係。本研究探討在不同心情狀態下,對於高涉入消費者而言,當消費者接收訊息並察覺到心情為偏誤時,是否會修正其對產品之評價。分為三部分進行探討:
(一)在受測者未感受到心情移動時,其在好心情狀態下對產品之評價會進行向下修正
(二)透過操弄及付予任務,試圖讓受測者察覺心情之移動,在其心情處於中立狀態下,對產品評價進行反向修正
(三)在受測者為中立心情狀態下且未感受到心情移動時,其對產品之評價沒有修正的可能性
  根據彈性修正模型(FCM),消費者須在有足夠動機和能力之情況下,才有足夠的認知資源進行察覺偏誤,並進而修正對產品之評價。本研究之實驗在目標廣告中加入廣告標語提示受測者,以提升其察覺偏誤之能力,結果顯示有提示之實驗組對產品評價有較多之修正量。
  另一方面,本研究亦探討不同產品屬性是否會影響心情與產品評價之關係,研究顯示,當受測者自享樂屬性構面給予評價時,其易將心情視為主要特徵(central merits),而不易察覺心情偏誤,修正量少於自效用數性構面思考下之受測者。

Past research which can be found that there are significant relation between mood and the judgment of customers. The objective of this study is to examine the likelihood of judgmental correction when customers with high involvement who receive message and sense mood bias. Three parts of this study are as follows:
(1)For participants in good mood who don't sense the mood shift, they would correct the judgment of product downward.
(2) For participants in bad mood who sense the mood shift by accomplishing a task , they would correct the judgment of product downward.
(3)For participants in neutral mood who don't sense the mood shift, they would not correct the judgment of product.
Base on the Flexible Correction Model, customers can't sense bias without enough motivation and ability. The target tagline are present in the ad would be a cue to promote the ability of bias awareness of customers. The results showed that there are greater amount of correction in the condition with tagline.
In addition, this study investigated whether attributes would influence the relationship between mood and judgment. The results of this study revealed that mood would be a central merits when participants evaluate hedonic attributes of the target. Thus, the amount of correction would be less than when participants evaluate utilitarian attributes of the target.

INTRODUCTION 1
LITERATURE REVIEW 3
PROPOSED HYPOTHESES 7
STUDY 1 11
METHODS 11
RESULTS FOR STUDY 1 16
DISCUSSION FOR STUDY 1 21
STUDY 2 22
PRETEST 22
METHODS 22
RESULTS FOR STUDY 2 25
DISCUSSION FOR STUDY 2 30
STUDY 3 31
METHODS 31
RESULTS FOR STUDY 3 33
DISCUSSION FOR STUDY 3 39
MANAGERIAL IMPLICATIONS 40
LIMITATION AND FUTURE RESEARCH 41
REFERENCE 42


Adaval, Rashmi (2001), "Sometimes It Just Feels Right: The Differential Weighting of Affect-Consistent and Affect-Inconsistent Product Information," Journal of Consumer Research, 28 (June), 1-17.
Baba, Shiv and Alexander Fedorikhin (1999), “Heart and Mind in Conflict: the Interplay of Affect and Cognition in Consumer Decision Making,” Journal of Consumer Research,Vol. 26, No. 3, 278-292.
Barry, J. Babin, William R. Darden and Mitch Griffin (1994), “Work and/or Fun:
Measuring Hedonic and Utilitarian Shopping Value,” Journal of Consumer Research,Vol. 20, No. 4 (March), 644-656.
Batra, Rajeev and Olli T. Ahtola (1991), “Measuring the Hedonic and Utilitarian Sources of Consumer Attitudes,” Marketing Letters. 2 (April), 159-170.
Bazerman, Max H., Ann E. Tenbrunsel and Kimberly A. Wade-Benzoni (1998),
"Negotiating with Yourself and Losing: Understanding and Managing Conflicting Internal Preferences," Academy of Management Review, 23, 225-241.
Berkowitz, Leonard (1983), “Aversively Stimulated Aggression: Some Parallels and
Differences in Research with Animals and Humans,” American Psychologist, 38,1135-1144.
Berkowitz, Leonard and Bartholomeu T. Troccoli (1990), “Feelings, Direction of Attention,and Expressed Evaluations of Others,” Cognition and Emotion, 4, 305-25.Bless, Herbert, Diane M. Mackie, and Norbert Schwarz (1992), “Mood Effects on Attitude Judgments: Independent Effects of Mood before and after Message Elaboration,”Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 63 (4), 585–95.
Bower, Gordon H. (1981), “Mood and Memory,” American Psychologist, 36, 129-148.
Bower, Gordon and Paul Cohen (1982), "Emotional Influences in Memory and Thinking:Data and Theory," in M. Clark and S. Fiske (eds.), Affect and Cognition: The 17thAnnual Carnegie Symposium on Cognition, Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Cacioppo, John T., Richard. E. Petty, and Katherine Morris (1983), “Effects of Need forCognition on Message Evaluation, Recall, and Persuasion,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 45, 805-818.
Carlson, Michael and Norman Miller (1987), "Explanation of the Relation between
Negative Mood and Helping," Psychological Bulletin, 102, 91–108.63
Clark, M. S. and Alice M. Isen (1982), “Toward Understanding the Relationship between Feeling States and Social Behavior,” In A. H. Hastorf & A. M. Isen (Eds.), Cognitive Social Psychology, Elsevier: New York, 73-108.
Crowley, Ayn E., Eric Spangenberg and Kevin R. Hughes (1992), “Measuring the Hedonic and Utilitarian Dimensions of Attitudes toward Product Categories,” Marketing Letters. 3 (3). 239-49.
Dhar, Ravi and Klaus Wertenbroch (2000), “Consumer Choice between Hedonic and
Utilitarian Goods,” Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 37, No.1 (Feb.), 60-71.
Finman, Rona and Leonard Berkowitz (1989), “Some Factors Influencing the Effect of Depressed Mood on Anger and Overt Hostility Toward Another,” Journal of Research in Personality, 23, 70-84.
Forgas, Joseph. P. (1992), “Affect in Social Judgments and Decisions: A Multiprocess
Model,” Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, Vol. 25. 227.
Forgas, Joseph. P. (1995a), “Mood and Judgment: The Affect Infusion Model (AIM),”Psychology Bulletin, Vol. 117(Jan), 39-66.
Gorn, Gerald J., Marvin E Goldberg and Kunal Basu (1993), “Mood, Awareness, and
Product Evaluation,” Journal of Consumer Psychology, Vol. 2, No. 3, 237-256.
Hirschman, Elizabeth C. and Morris B. Holbrook (1982), “Hedonic Consumption:
Emerging Concepts Methods, and Propositions,” Journal of Marketing, 46 (Summer),92-101
Isen, Alice M. (1984), “The Influence of Positive Affect on Decision Making and Cognitive Organization,” Advances in Consumer Research, Vol. 11, 534-537.
Isen, Alice M. (1993), “Positive Affect and Decision Making,” In M. Lewis and J.M.
Haviland (Eds.), Handbook of Emotions (pp. 261-277), New York/ London: Guilford Press, xiii, 653.
Irwin, Julie R. and Rajagopal Raghunathan (2001), “Walking the Hedonic Product
Treadmill: Default Contrast and Mood-Based Assimilation in Judgments of Predicted Happiness with a Target Product,” Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 28 (3),355-368
Lambert, Alan J., Saera R. Khan, Brian A. Lickel and Katja Fricke (1997), “Mood and theCorrection of Positive versus Negative Stereotypes,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, Vol. 72 (May), 1002-1016
Lin, Pei Y. (2011), “Correction for Positive Mood Bias in Product Judgment: Hedonic vs.Utilitarian based Product Attitude,” Unpublished master’s thesis, National Taiwan University, Taiwan.
Lingle, John H., Nehemia Geva, Thomas M. Ostrom and Michael R. Leippe (1979),
“Thematic effects of Person Judgments on Impression Organization,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, Vol. 37(5), 674-687.
Martin, Leonard L. (1986), “Set/Reset: Use and Disuse of Concepts in Impression
Formation,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51 (September), 493–504.
Martin, Leonard L., John J. Seta, and Rick A. Crelia (1990), "Assimilation and Contrast as a Function of People's Willingness and Ability to Expend Effort in Forming anImpression," Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 59 (January), 27-37.
Mayer, John D., Yvonne N. Gaschke, Debra L. Braverman and Temperance W. Evans
(1992). “Mood-Congruent Judgment is a General effect,” Journal of personality and Social Psychology, 63, 119-132.
Petty, Richard. E. and John T. Cacioppo (1984), “The Effects of Involvement on Responses to Argument Quantity and Quality: Central and Peripheral Routes to Persuasion,”Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 46, 69-81.
Petty, Richard. E. and John T. Cacioppo (1986b), “The Elaboration Likelihood Model of Persuasion,” In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in Experimental Social Psychology,Vol. 19, 123-205, San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
Pham, Michel T. (1998), "Representativeness, Relevance and the Use of Feelings in
Decision Making," Journal of Consumer Research, 25 (September), 144-60.
Rajeev, Batra and Douglas M. Stayman (1990), “The Role of Mood in Advertising
Effectiveness”, Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 17, No. 2, 203-214.
Schwarz, Norbert (1990), “Feelings as Information: Informational and Motivational
Functions of Affective States,” In E.T. Higgins and R. Sorrentino (Eds.), Handbook of motivation and cognition: Foundations of social behavior, Vol. 2, 527-561, NewYork: Guilford Press.
Schwarz, Norbert (1992), “Assimilation and Contrast Effects in Attitude Measurement: An Inclusion/Exclusion Model,” Advances in Consumer Research, Vol. 19, 72.65
Schwarz, Norbert and Gerald L. Clore (1983), “Mood, Misattribution, and Judgments ofWell Being: Informative and Directive Functions of Affective States,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 45 (September), 513–23.
Schwarz, Norbert and Gerald L. Clore (1988), “How Do I Feel about It? Informative
Functions of Affective States,” in Affect, Cognition, and Social Behavior, ed. Klaus Fiedler and Joseph Forgas, Toronto: Hofgrefe International, 44–62.
Vaughn, Richard (1986), "How Advertising Works: A Planning Model Revisited," Journal of Advertising Research, February/March, 57-66.
Voss, Kevin E., Eric R. Spangenherg and Bianca Grohmann (2003), "Measuring the
Hedonic and Utilitarian Dimensions of Consumer Attitude," Journal of Marketing Research, 40 (August), 310-320.
Wegener, Duane T. (1994), “The Flexible Correction Model: Using Naïve Theory of Bias to Correct Assessments of Targets.” Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Ohio State University, Columbus.
Wegener, Duane T. and Richard E. Petty (1995), “Flexible Correction Process in SocialJudgment: The Role of Naïve Theories in Corrections for Perceived Bias,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 68. No. 1 (Jan), 36-51.
Wegener, Duane T. and Richard E. Petty (1997), “The Flexible Correction Model: The Role of Naïve Theories of Bias in Bias Correction,” In M. P. Zanna (Ed.), Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, Vol. 29. 141-208, Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates
Wegener, Duane T. and Richard E. Petty (1994), “Mood Management across Affective States: The Hedonic Contingency Hypothesis,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, Vol. 66(6), 1034-1048.
Wegener, Duane T., Richard E. Petty and Stephen M. Smith (1995), “Positive Mood Can Increase or Decrease Message Scrutiny: The Hedonic Contingency View of Mood and Message Processing,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 69 (July),5–15.
Wyland, Carrie L. and Joseph P. Forgas (2007), “On Bad Mood and White Bears: The
Effects of Mood State on Ability to Suppress Unwanted Thoughts,” Cognition and Emotion, Vol. 21, Issue 7, 1513-1524
Yi, Youjae (1990), “The Effects of Contextual Priming in Print Advertisements,” Journal of Consumer Research, 17 (September), 215-22.

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
1. 魏澤民(2003),中國大陸網路社會圖像:發展與侷限,《遠景基金會季刊》,4卷4期,155-186。
2. 魏澤民(2000),〈山雨欲來風滿網:中國大陸網際網路發展析論〉,《共黨問題研究》,第26卷第2期,頁44-60。
3. 歐陽新宜(1998)。〈中共網際網路的發展及其管制困境〉。《中國大陸研究》,第41卷第8期,頁41-57。
4. 楊開煌(1991),〈大陸政體下的媒體角色變遷-解釋典範之探討〉,《東亞季刊》,23(2):20-38。
5. 楊家誠(2001),〈網際網路對中共統治的影響〉,《共黨問題研究》,27(10):85-92。
6. 寇健文(2001)。〈中共對網路資訊傳播的政治控制〉,《問題與研究》,140(2):33-54。
7. 陳懷林(2000)。〈試析中國媒體制度的漸進改革-以報業為例〉,《新聞學研究》,62:97-118。
8. 馮建三(1998)。〈政治經濟傳播:世紀末的中國、台灣與香港媒體〉,《新聞學研究》,57:1-3。
9. 梁正清(2003),〈中國大陸網路傳播的發展與政治控制〉,《資訊社會研究》,第四期,頁211-252。
10. 郝曉鳴、李展(2001)。〈傳播科技對中國大陸傳媒體制的挑戰〉,《新聞學研究》,69:95-112。
11. 袁易(1995)。〈中共威權政體轉型的政制動力〉,《中國大陸研究》,38:5-17。
12. 胡泳(2010)。〈中國政府對互聯網的管制〉,《新聞學研究》,103:261-287。
13. 洪敬富(2013)。〈科技時代下中國宣傳體系之嬗變與調適:以「甕安事件」中的網路評論員為例〉,《中國大陸研究》,56:2:1-24。
14. 林麗雲(2006)。〈威權主義下台灣電是資本的形成〉,《中華傳播學刊》,9:71-103。
15. 周翼虎(2009)。〈抗爭與入籠:中國新聞業的市場化悖論〉,《新聞學研究》,100:101-136
 
系統版面圖檔 系統版面圖檔