跳到主要內容

臺灣博碩士論文加值系統

(34.204.176.71) 您好!臺灣時間:2024/11/10 19:58
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:許月珍
研究生(外文):HSU, YUEH-CHEN
論文名稱:以房養老逆向抵押貸款產品知識與知覺風險對消費者申辦意願影響之研究
論文名稱(外文):Housing Pension: The Influence of Product Knowledge and Perceived Risk on Consumers’ Willingness to Apply for Reverse
指導教授:邱誌偉邱誌偉引用關係
指導教授(外文):CHIU, CHIH-WEI
口試委員:邱誌偉張秀惠藍俊雄
口試委員(外文):CHIU, CHIH-WEICHANG,HSIU-HUILAN,CHUN-HSIUNG
口試日期:2018-12-24
學位類別:碩士
校院名稱:崇右影藝科技大學
系所名稱:經營管理系
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:2019
畢業學年度:107
語文別:中文
論文頁數:69
中文關鍵詞:以房養老逆向抵押貸款產品知識知覺風險購買意願
外文關鍵詞:Pension by HousingReverse MortgageProducts KnowledgePerceived RiskPurchase Intention
相關次數:
  • 被引用被引用:7
  • 點閱點閱:318
  • 評分評分:
  • 下載下載:3
  • 收藏至我的研究室書目清單書目收藏:2
台灣已進入高齡少子化的社會結構,如何使老年經濟更有保障,生活品質提昇並活得有尊嚴已成為重要議題,自104年11月起銀行業陸續開辦協助年長者運用自有房產養老之商業型以房養老貸款業務,解決消費者有房無現金的窘境,本研究探討產品知識及知覺風險對「以房養老逆向抵押貸款」之消費者申辦意願及人口統計變項在各構面之差異性,希冀能提供相關單位參考。
本研究回收問卷425份,扣除無效問卷後得有效問卷406份,有效問卷回收率達 96%。並以敘述性分析、信度分析、迴歸分析、獨立樣本 t 檢定及單因子變異數分析驗證本研究之假說。
研究結果顯示:1.產品知識對知覺風險無顯著相關;2.知覺風險對消費者申辦意願有顯著正向影響;3.產品知識對消費者申辦意願具有顯著正向影響。

Taiwan has entered the Lower Birth Rate and Aging society. How to make the Economics of aging more guaranteed, improve the quality of life and live with dignity has becoming an important issue.
The banking industries have successively launched the commercial-type housing loan business helping the elders to use their own estate to handle the house-for-pension program avoiding the situation of lacking cash but having real estate since November 2015.
This study explores the difference between product knowledge and perceived risk for consumers’ willingness to apply and the demographic variables of the housing pensions mortgage loan in various aspects. We hope to provide our research for relevant unit as reference.
In this study, 425 questionnaires were issued, and 406 valid questionnaires were obtained after deducting invalid questionnaires. The effective recovery rate is up to 96%. Descriptive statistics, reliability analysis, regression analysis, independent samples t-test, one-way ANOVA were employed to validate the research hypotheses.
Research results show that 1. Product knowledge has no significant correlation with perceived risk. 2.Perceived risk has a significant positive impact on consumer’s willingness to apply. 3.Product knowledge has a significant positive impact on consumer’s willingness to apply.

中文摘要............................................................................................ i
Abstract.............................................................................................. ii

謝辭.................................................................................................... iv
目錄.................................................................................................... v

表目錄................................................................................................ vii

圖目錄................................................................................................ viii
第一章 緒論......................................................................................1
第一節 研究背景與動機............................................................1
第二節 研究目的........................................................................4
第三節 研究流程........................................................................5
第二章 文獻探討..............................................................................6
第一節 以房養老逆向抵押貸款................................................6
第二節 產品知識........................................................................8
第三節 知覺風險........................................................................14
第四節 購買(申辦)意願.............................................................21
第三章 研究方法..............................................................................28
第一節 研究架構........................................................................28
第二節 研究假設........................................................................29
第三節 研究構面之衡量............................................................29
第四節 研究對象與問卷設計....................................................33
第五節 資料分析與方法............................................................34
第四章 研究結果與分析...................................................................36
第一節 樣本結構分析................................................................36
第二節 信度分析........................................................................42
第三節 假說驗證........................................................................43
第四節 差異性分析....................................................................45
第五節 研究假說檢定................................................................49
第五章 結論與建議...........................................................................50
第一節 研究結論........................................................................50
第二節 研究限制及後續研究建議............................................53
第三節 管理意涵與研究建議....................................................55
參考文獻............................................................................................57
附錄 研究問卷..................................................................................66

一、中文部分
1.王俊欽 (2007)。產品知識,行銷通路對消費者態度及消費者購買意圖之影響-以台灣生技保健食品為例。國立成功大學企業管理學系碩士在職專班碩士論文,未出版。
2.王綉蘭 (2012)。臺灣地區推行以房養老方案評估研究。清華大學高階主管經營管理碩士在職專班學位論文。
3.王維鳴(2001)。虛擬社群與虛擬經驗、網路練達性、產品知識與產品資訊搜尋成本對消費者認知風險影響之研究—以電腦遊戲軟體為例。國立中央大學圖書館,未出版。
4.王蓉莉(2001)。消費者對組合產品的知覺評估-以產品知識,產品涉入為調節變數。義守大學管理研究所碩士論文,未出版。
5.任維廉、涂榮庭、呂明頴及呂堂榮(2009)。探討先進旅行者資訊系統相關商品的知覺風險,中華民國運輸學會98年學術論文研討會。
6.李忠儒(2010)。「網路購物知覺風險與知覺效益影響網路購物意願之探討」,樹德科技大學經營管理研究所碩士論文,未出版。
7.李貞昀(2016)。雇主責任保險購買意願之研究。碩士論文,朝陽科技大學保險金融管理系,台中市,未出版。
8.李朝枝(2010)。產品知識與知覺風險對消費者購買意圖關連之研究–以智慧型手持裝置為例。致理技術學院企業管理系暨服務業經營管理研究所碩士論文,未出版。
9.李嘉峯(2011)。從銀行業角度探討反向抵押貸款在臺灣實行之可行性研究。國立中央大學/財務金融學系碩士在職專班碩士,未出版。
10.林左裕(2007)。不動產投資管理,智勝文化。
11.林碧霞(2007)。 品牌形象及產品知識對購買意願之影響-價格折扣干擾效果之探討。大同大學事業經營研究所碩士論文。,未出版。
12.林隆儀、鄭君豪(2005)。產品品質外在屬性訊號、產品知識與顧客滿意度之整合性分析-以台北市筆記型電腦消費者為例,輔仁管理評論。12(1),65-91。
13.施沛廷(2004)。社群信任、社群認同與購買行為的關係之研討─以RV 休旅車社群為例,東華大學企業管理學系研究所碩士論文。,未出版。
14.財子學堂 https://www.moneydj.com/KMDJ/財經知識庫理財網
15.張幸惠、姚名麗、嚴秀容(2015)。反向房屋抵押貸款的影響因素之研究。輔仁管理評論 ; 22卷2期(2015 / 05 / 01), P95 - 114
16.張金鶚(2009)。台灣「以房養老」三方案模式提議,「以房養老」逆向抵押貸款方案研討會—美國經驗與台灣模式之探討。(12月16日-17日)。中華民國住宅學會、政大臺灣房地產研究中心、經濟日報主辦。頁壹28-71。
17.張金鶚(2010)。「以房養老制度施行的必要性」,台灣銀行家,54-56頁。
18.張桂霖、張金鶚(2010)。老人居住安排與居住偏好之轉換:家庭價值與交換理論觀點的探討《人口學刊》。
19.張朝棟(2016)。民眾申辦「以房養老」方案意願之探討。亞洲大學/經營管理學系碩士在職專班,未出版。
20.曹文盈(2013)。「大學生對運動品牌的品牌形象、消費者偏好及購買意願的影響」,朝陽科技大學,未出版。
21.許永昱(2017)。中高齡者知覺風險對行為意圖影響之研究。國立臺中科技大學/企業管理系碩士班,未出版。
22.許盟雪(2002)。網路產品評鑑訊息之有用性與模糊性對消費者消費決策之影響。碩士論文,元智大學管理研究所,中壢,未出版。
23.陳建興, 蔡倖宜, 簡郁庭(2016)。企業形象、服務品質、知覺風險對服飾網購意願之影響,Journal of the Hwa Gang Textile華岡紡織期刊 第二十三卷 第二期 ISSN 1025-9678
24.陳淑美、陳怡瑞(2011)。居住滿意度和遷移意願關係之研究, 2011中華民國住宅學會第二十屆年會暨論文研討會。
25.游欣霓(2006)。以房養老制度在台灣實施的可行性研究。東吳大學國際貿易學系碩士論文,未出版。
26.程新雨(2001)。產品屬性, 產品知識, 產認知需求對消費者反遞移律決策行為之影響: 國立台灣大學. 商學研究所碩士論文,未出版。
27.黃盈綺(2014)。寵物保險購買動機與購買意願之研究。觀光與休閒管理期刊,2,30-43。
28.潘秀菊、李智仁、徐汝怡(2009)。逆向抵押(反向抵押)制度- 以房養老之可行性探討,中華民國信託商業同業公會研究計畫。
29.衛生福利部中華民國 102 年老人狀況調查報告。2017 年 5 月 12 日 。
30.鄭君豪(2003)。產品品質外在屬性訊號、產品知識與顧客滿意之整合性分析─以台北市筆記型電腦消費者為例。真理大學管理科學研究所碩士論文,未出版。
31.鄭堯任、孫彰良(2010)。「以房養老」活躍老化《社區發展季刊》第132期,頁106-122。 (http://sowf.moi.gov.tw/19/quarterly/data/132/9.pdf)。
32.蕭富峰著(2008)。消費者行為=Consumer behavior,智勝文化,台北市。
33.賴世杰(2001)。產品知識及產品資訊對創新性產品消費者行為的影響—以數位相機為例,輔仁大學管理學研究所碩士論,未出版。

二、英文部分
1.Addison-Wesley. Treacy M. & Wiersema F. (1993). Customer intimacy and other Value disciplines. Harvard Business Review, 71, 84-93.
2.Alba and Hutchinson. (1987). J. W. Alba & J. W. Hutchinson, Dimensions of Consumer Ex-Pertise. ,” Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 13, March
3.Baird, I. S., & Thomas, H. (1985). Toward a Contingency Model of Strategic Risk Taking. Academy of Management Review, 10, 230-243.
4.Bauer, R. A. (1960). Consumer behavior as risk taking, in R. S. Hancock, Dynamic marketing for a Changing World, Chicago: American Marketing Association, 389-398.
5.Beatty, S. E., & Smith, S. M. (1987). External search effort: An investigation across several product categories. Journal of consumer research, 14(1), 83-95.
6.Bettman, J. R., (1973). Perceived risk and its components:A model and empirical test. Journal of MarketingResearch, 10(2), 184-190.
7.Brucks, M. (1985). “ The Effects of Product Class Knowledge on Information Search Behavior”Journal of Consumer esearch,Val. 12, Iss.1,pp. 1-16.
8.Cox, D. F. (1967). Risk Handling in Consumer Behavior-an Intensive Study of Two Harvard Business Press, Boston, MA, pp.23-3


9.Cunningham, S. M. (1967). The Major Dimensions of Perceived Risk, MA, Harvard Business Press, Boston.Dodds, W. B., Monroe, K. B. & Grewal D. (1991).
10. Dodds, W. B., Monroe, K. B. and Grewal, D. (1991). “Effects of Price, Brand, and Store Information on Buyers’ Product Evaluations” Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 28, No. 3, 307-319.
11. Dowling, G.R. and Staelin, R. (1994). A Model of Perceived Risk and Intended Risk-Handling Activity. Journal of Consumer Research, 21, 119-134.
12. Engel J. F., Blackwell R. D., and Miniard P. W. (1995).“Consumer Behavior”.8th, Forth Worth, Dryden Press, Texas
13. Fishbein, M. and Ajzen, I. (1975). “Belief, Attitude, Intention, and Behavior: An Introduction to Theory and Research,” Reading, MA: Addision-Wesley.
14. Hoover, R. J., Green, R. T., & Saegert, J. (1978). A cross-national study of perceived risk. Journal of Marketing, 42(3), 102-108.
15. Howard, J. A. (1989). Consumer behavior in marketing strategy. Englewood Cliffs,New Jersey: Prentice Hall International, Inc.
16. J. F. et al. (1993). Consumer ehavior, Chicago: Dryden Press.1994. “Reverse Mortgages and the Liquidity of Housing Wealth.” Journal of American Real Estate Urban Economics Association 22(2), 235–255.
17. Jacoby, J. and Kaplan, L.B. (1972). The Components of Perceived Risk. Advances in Consumer Research, 3, 382-383.
18. Johnson, E. J., & Russo, J. E. (1984). Product familiarity and learning new information. Journal of Consumer Research, 11(1), 542-550.
19. Kamins, M. A. & Marks L. J., (1991). The perception of kosher as a third party certification claim in advertising for familiar and unfamiliar brads. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 19(3), 177-185.
20. Liaw, G. F., Zhu, Z. W. & Lee, Y. H. (2005). The Effects of Risk Reduction Strategies on Consumers’ Risk Perceptions and Online Purchase Intention, Pan-Pacific Management Review, 8(1)pp. 1-37.
21. Lynch, J.G., Jr. & T.K. Sru l. (1982). Memory and Attentional Factors in Consumer Choice: Concepts and Research Methods, Journal of Consumer Research, 9, 18-37.
22. M Nakajima. (2012). Home Equity in Retirement“Analysis of Unemployment Benefit Extensions”Journal of Monetary Economics, 59(7), November 2012, pp. 686-702.
23. M Nakajima. (2012). Rising indebtedness and temptation: A welfare analysis Journal of Monetary Economics, Pages 257-288
24. Marks, L.J. and L.C. Olson. (1981). Toward a Cognitive Structure Conceptualization of Product
25. Malhotra. (1993).“Marketing Management Bases for International Market Segmentation: An Alternate Look at the Submit an article” Journal homepage. 1,267. Views. 87.
26.Mitchell V-W. (1999). Consumer perceived risk: conceptualizations and models.Eur J Mark 1999;33(1/2):163 – 96.
27. Moorman, C., Zaltman, G., & Deshpande, R. (1992). Relationships between providers and users of market research: The dynamics of trust within and between organizations. Journal of Marketing Research, 29, 314-29.
28.Moorthy, Sridhar, Brian T. Ratchford, and Debabrata Talukdar. (1997). “Consumer Information Search Revisited: Theory and Empirical Analysis,”Journal of Consumer Research, 23 (March), p.263-277.
29. Murray, K. B. (1991). A test of services marketing theory Consumer information acquisition activities. Journal of Marketing, 55, 10-25.
30. Park C. W., L. Feick and D. L. Mothersbaugh, (1992). “Consumer Knowledge Assessment -How Product Experience and Knowledge of Brands, Attributes, and Features Affects What We Think We Know,” Advances in Consumer Research 19 193-198.
31. Park, C. W., Mothersbaugh, D. L., & Feick, L. (1994).〝Consumer knowledge assessment〞. Journal of consumer research, 21(1)71-82.
32. Park, C.W. and Lessig, P.V.(1981)Familiarity and Its Impact on Consumer Decision Biases and Heuristics. Journal of Consumer Research, 8, 223-230.
33. Peter and Tarpey. (1975). A Comparative Analysis of Three Consumer Decision Strategies,Journal of Consumer Research,2,29-37。
34. Peter, J. P., & Ryan, M. J. (1976). An investigation of perceived risk at the brand level. Journal of Marketing Research, 13(2), 184-188.
35. Rao, Akshay R. and Kent B.Monroe. (1988).“The Monerating Effect of PriorKnowledge on Cue Utilization in Product Evaluations”Journal of Consumer Research 15(2):253-264.
36. Roselius, T. (1971). “Consumer Ranking of Risk Reduction Methods,” Journal of Marketing, Vol. 35, No. 1, 56-61.
37. Schiffman, L .G. and L. L. Kanuk. (2000). Consumer Behavior, Upper Saddle River, N.J: Prentice Hall。
38. Schmidt, J. B., & Spreng, R. A. (1996). A proposed model of external consumer information search. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 24(3), 246-256 。
39. Taylor, J. W. (1974). “The Role of risk in consumer behavior,” Journal of Marketing,Vol. 38, No. 2, 54-60.
40. Wood and Lisa K. Scheer. (1996). "Incorporating Perceived Risk Into Models of Consumer Deal Assessment and Purchase Intent", in NA - Advances in Consumer Research Volume 23, eds. Kim P. Corfman and John G. Lynch Jr., Provo, UT : Association for Consumer Research, Pages: 399-404.
41. Woodside, A. G., (1968). Group influence and consumer risk taking: an experimental study, Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation, The Pennsylvania State University.
42. Zeithaml, V. A. (1988). “Consumer Perception of Price, Quality and Value: A Means-End Model and Synthesis of Evidence,” Journal of Marketing, Vol. 52, No. 3, 2-22.

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