臺灣博碩士論文加值系統

本論文主旨在探討送禮者與收禮者之間，親密度與知覺風險之間，受到義務動機、社會規範、投入成本不同因素的影響之下，是否會有不一樣的關係變化。禮物產業規模逐漸擴大，競爭越來越激烈，在後疫情時代，有越來越多廠商加入這塊市場與競爭。若想要在高度競爭的環境中脫穎而出，了解消費者的特徵及挑選禮品的考量因素顯得更為重要。透過了解送禮消費者的決策模式，才能幫助企業設計設計有效且可行的商品及行銷策略，以滿足消費者的需求並創造更高的利潤。
禮物是指人們在社交場合，在具有社會關係的人互動場合中，負責乘載及傳遞象徵性符號意涵給他人的有形或無形物質(Sherry,1998)。送禮也是人與人之間常見的互動方式，由於禮品產業商機龐大，許多企業爭相進入市場，進而鑽研送禮方面的研究。近年來，世界各地的業者更是透過舉辦各式各樣的禮品貿易商展，來爭取消費者的喜愛。如：2012東京國際秋季禮品展、2013台北國際禮品暨文具展等。如何在經濟競爭中脫穎而出，成為業者的重要課題。(田家禎，2017)。
本研究採用問卷和文獻資料分析，探討送禮人際親密度與送禮知覺風險之間關聯性，研究結果表示，送禮者與收禮者之間的親密度，對於送禮知覺風險有著正向的影響，送禮者與收禮者間的了解程度、親密度越高，送禮的知覺風險越高。希望透過本文研究，讓禮品業者及學者對於送禮方面的發展及研究方向作個參考。

The purpose of this paper is to explore whether there will be different changes in the relationship between the giver and the recipient, between intimacy and perceived risk, under the influence of different factors such as obligation motivation, social norms, and input costs. The scale of the gift industry is gradually expanding, the competition is becoming more and more fierce, and in the post-epidemic era, more and more manufacturers are joining this market and competition. If you want to stand out in a highly competitive environment, it's even more important to understand the characteristics of consumers and the factors they consider when choosing gifts. By understanding the decision-making patterns of gift-giver consumers, we can help companies design effective and feasible product and marketing strategies to meet consumer needs and create higher profits.
Gifts refer to tangible or intangible substances that people are responsible for carrying and conveying symbolic meanings to others in social situations, in social interactions with people (Sherry, 1998). Gift-giving is also a common way of interaction between people, due to the huge business opportunities in the gift industry, many companies are vying to enter the market, and then delve into the research on gift-giving. In recent years, industry players around the world have been holding a variety of gift trade exhibitions to win the love of consumers. Such as: 2012 Tokyo International Autumn Gift Fair, 2013 Taipei International Gift and Stationery Fair, etc. How to stand out from the economic competition has become an important issue for the industry. (Tian Jiazhen, 2017).
The results showed that the intimacy between the giver and the recipient had a positive impact on the perceived risk of gift-giving, and the higher the level of understanding and intimacy between the giver and the recipient, the higher the perceived risk of gift-giving. It is hoped that through this research, gift industry practitioners and scholars can provide a reference for the development and research direction of gift-giving.

一、緒論…………………………………………………………………………13
1.1 研究背景…………………………………………………………………………13
1.2 研究動機…………………………………………………………………………15
1.3研究目的及問題…………………………………………………………………………17
二、文獻探討…………………………………………………………………………18
2.1 禮物…………………………………………………………………………18
2.1.1 禮物的定義…………………………………………………………………………18
2.1.2 禮物的分類…………………………………………………………………………18
2.1.3 禮物的價值…………………………………………………………………………19
2.1.4 驚喜禮物和完美禮物…………………………………………………………………………20
2.1.5 禮物需求和產業競爭現況…………………………………………………………………………22
2.2 送禮行為…………………………………………………………………………23
2.2.1 送禮行為的定義…………………………………………………………………………23
2.2.2 過去送禮行為相關研究…………………………………………………………………………27
2.2.3 義務性送禮及自願性送禮…………………………………………………………………………30
2.3 送禮動機…………………………………………………………………………31
2.3.1 送禮動機的分類…………………………………………………………………………31
2.3.2 本研究採用之「送禮動機」作為干擾變數…………………………………………………………………………35
2.4 送禮者的投入…………………………………………………………………………36
2.4.1 送禮者投入的分類…………………………………………………………………………36
2.4.2 本研究採用「送禮者投入」作為干擾變數…………………………………………………………………………38
2.5 情人間的送禮………………………………………………………………………… 39
2.5.1 戀愛關係………………………………………………………………………… 39
2.5.2 依賴理論………………………………………………………………………… 40
2.5.3 情人間的送禮………………………………………………………………………… 41
2.5.4 本研究採用情人間「親密度」作為本研究之自變項…………………………………………………………………………43
2.6 知覺風險…………………………………………………………………………44
2.6.1 知覺風險的定義…………………………………………………………………………44
2.6.2 知覺風險的種類…………………………………………………………………………46
2.6.3 知覺風險衡量…………………………………………………………………………46
2.6.4 本研究採用「知覺風險」作為本研究之依變項…………………………………………………………………………47
三、研究方法…………………………………………………………………………48
3.1 研究架構…………………………………………………………………………48
3.2 研究假說…………………………………………………………………………49
3.3 操作型定義與問卷設計…………………………………………………………………………52
3.3.1 操作定義…………………………………………………………………………52
3.3.2 問卷設計…………………………………………………………………………53
3.3.3 試測(Pretest)與問卷發展…………………………………………………………………………60
四、資料分析與研究結果…………………………………………………………………………63
4.1 樣本資料分析…………………………………………………………………………64
4.2 構面分析…………………………………………………………………………69
4.2.1 項目分析…………………………………………………………………………69
4.2.2 構面因素分析…………………………………………………………………………73
4.2.3 綜合因素分析…………………………………………………………………………77
4.3 信度分析…………………………………………………………………………79
4.4 迴歸分析…………………………………………………………………………80
4.4.1 調節效果分析…………………………………………………………………………80
五、研究結論與建議…………………………………………………………………………87
5.1 研究結論…………………………………………………………………………87
5.2 學術與管理意涵…………………………………………………………………………90
5.3 研究限制與未來建議…………………………………………………………………………91
中文參考文獻…………………………………………………………………………93
英文參考文獻…………………………………………………………………………94
網頁參考文獻…………………………………………………………………………100
附錄…………………………………………………………………………101
附錄一、測試問卷…………………………………………………………………………101
附錄二：測試問卷受測者基本資料…………………………………………………………………………108
附錄三：正式問卷…………………………………………………………………………110

中文文獻
1.許珮琪，2010，組織氣候對員工投入影響之研究—以統一超商為例，國立交通大學經營管理研究所
2.徐先駒，2016，送禮不確定性的前因與後果: 探索依賴程度的調節作用
3.田家禎，2017，探索知覺不確定性、風險、送禮動機(經驗、義務、實際) 與禮物選擇策略的因果關係—以情人送禮為例，私立東吳大學企業管理學系
4.鍾佳芸，2017，探索知覺不確定性、風險、送禮動機 (責任、享樂、利他、互惠) 與禮物選擇策略的因果關係—以情人送禮為例，私立東吳大學企業管理學系

英文文獻
1.Andrew G. P., 1993, Brand choice in gift‐giving: recipient influence. Journal of Product & Brand Management, 11(4), 237-249.
2.Areni, C. S., Kiecker, P., Palan, K. M., 1998, Is it better to give than to receive? Exploring gender differences in the meaning of memorable gifts. Psychology & Marketing, 15(1), 81-109.
3.Agnew, C. R., Loving, T. J., Le, B., & Goodfriend, W. (2004). Thinking Close: Measuring Relational Closeness as Perceived Self-Other Inclusion., Handbook of closeness and intimacy ,103–115.
4.Angeline G. C., George M. Z., 2009, Market-resistance and Valentine's Day events. Journal of Business Research, 62(2), 200-207.
5.Aknin, L. B., Broesch, T., Hamlin, J. K., & Van de Vondervoort, J. W. , 2015, Prosocial behavior leads to happiness in a small-scale rural society. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 144(4), 788–795.
6.Arnould, E. J., & Rose, A. S., 2016, Mutuality: Critique and substitute for Belk’s “sharing”. Marketing Theory, 16(1), 3-20.
7.Bagozzi, R. P., 1975, Social exchange in marketing. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 3, 314-327.
8.Belk R. W., 1976, It's the Thought that Counts: A Signed Digraph Analysis of Gift-Giving. Journal of Consumer Research, 3(3), 155-162.
9.Banks, S. K., 1979, Gift-giving: A review and an interactive paradigm. Advances in Consumer Research, 1979, 6(1), 319.
10.Belk R. W., 1979, Entwicklung produktspezifischer Klassifikationen von Verbrauchssituationen. Konsumentenverhalten und Information, 333-351.
11.Belk R. W., Bahn, K. D., Mayer, R. N., 1982, Developmental Recognition of Consumption Symbolism. Journal of Consumer Research, 9(1), 4-17.
12.Belk, R., W., Coon, G., S.,1991, Can't Buy Me Love: Dating, Money, and Gifts. Advances in Consumer Research, 18(1), 521.
13.Beatty, S. E., Kahle, L. R., Homer, P. 1991, Personal values and gift-giving behaviors: A study across cultures. Journal of Business Research, 22(2), 149-151.
14.Belk R. W., Coon G.S.,1993, Gift Giving as Agapic Love: An Alternative to the Exchange Paradigm Based on Dating Experiences. Journal of Consumer Research, 20(3), 393-417.
15.Belk R. W., GiJliz, G., Askegaard, S., 1996, Metaphors of Consumer Desire. Advances in Consumer Resear, 23, 368-373.
16.Bodur, H., Grohmann, B., 2005, Consumer responses to gift receipt in business-to-consumer contexts. Psychology & Marketing, 22(5), 441-456.
17.Braun, V., Clarke, V., 2006, Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77-101.
18.Caplow, 1982, Christmas Gifts and Kin Networks. JOURNAL ARTICLE, 47(3), 383-392.
19.Cheal, D., 1987, “Showing them you love them”: gift giving and the dialectic of intimacy. The Sociological Review, 35(1), 150-169.
20.Carrier, J, 1991, Gifts, commodities, and social relations: A Maussian view of exchange. Sociological Forum, 6, 119-136.
21.Cleveland, M., Babin, B. J., Laroche, M., Ward, P., Bergeron, J., 2003, Information search patterns for gift purchases: a cross-national examination of gender differences. Journal of Consumer Behaviour, 3(1), 20-47.
22.Chowdhury, Ratneshwar, & Desai, 2009. The role of exploratory buying behavior tendencies in choices made for others. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 19(3), 517-525.
23.Dunn, E.W., Aknin, L. B., Michael I. N., 2008, Spending Money on Others Promotes Happiness. SCIENCE, 319(5870), 1687-1688.
24.Dunn,E. W., Huntsinger, J., Lun, J., Sinclair, S. 2008, The Gift of Similarity: How Good and Bad Gifts Influence Relationships. Social Cognition, 26(4),379-400.
25.Hatfield, E., Sprecher, S., 1986, Measuring passionate love in intimate relationships. Journal of Adolescence, 9(4), 383–410.
26.Fischer, E., Arnold, S. J., 1990, More than a Labor of Love: Gender Roles and Christmas Gift Shopping. Journal of Consumer Research, 17(3), 333–345.
27.Freud, S., 2012, The Basic Writings of Sigmund Freud. Random House Publishing Group, 992.
28.Giesler, M., 2006, Consumer Gift Systems. Journal of Consumer Research, 33(2), 283–290.
29.Galak,J., Givi, J., Williams, E. F., 2016, Why Certain Gifts Are Great to Give but Not to Get: A Framework for Understanding Errors in Gift Giving. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 25(6), 375-379.
30.Givi, J., Galak, J., 2022, Gift Recipients’ Beliefs About Occasion-based and Nonoccasion-based Gifts: The Importance of Signaling Care and Meeting Expectations in Gift Giving. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 32(3), 445-465.
31.Huang, Y., Kwan, H. Y., Yao, X., 2000, Store-operated Calcium Entry in Vascular Endothelial Cells Is Inhibited by cGMP via a Protein Kinase G-dependent Mechanism. MECHANISMS OF SIGNAL TRANSDUCTION, 275(10), 6758-6763.
32.Homans, G. C., 1961, The Humanities and the Social Sciences. American Behavioral Scientist, 4(8), 2-36
33.Kelley, H. H., & Thibaut, J., 1978, The Proper Study of Social Psychology. Psychology, 63(1), 3-15
34.Low, G. S., Lamb, G. W., 2000, The measurement and dimensionality of brand associations. Journal of product & brand management, 9(6), 350-370
35.Larsen, D., Watson, J., 2001, A guide map to the terrain of gift value. Psychology & Marketing, 18(8), 889-906.
36.Lowrey, T. M., Otnes, C. C., Ruth, J. A., 2004, Social Influences on Dyadic Giving over Time: A Taxonomy from the Giver's Perspective. Journal of Consumer Research, 30(4), 547–558.
37.Ming-Hui Huang & Shihti Yu,2000, Gifts in a Romantic Relationship: A Survival Analysis. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 9(3), 179-188.
38.McCracken, G., 1986, Culture and Consumption: A Theoretical Account of the Structure and Movement of the Cultural Meaning of Consumer Goods. Journal of Consumer Research, 13(1), 71-84.
39.Mitrut, A., Nordblom, K., 2010, Social norms and gift behavior: Theory and evidence from Romania. European Economic Review 54(8), 998-1015.
40.Otnes C. C., Zayer, L. T., Arias, R.A., Sreekumar, A., 2018, The Roles of Extraordinary Beliefs in Consumption Rituals. Journal of the Association for Consumer Research. 3(4), 235-240
41.Othman, M. N., Ong, F. S., Teng, A. T.M. 2005, Occasions and motivations for gift-giving: A comparative study of Malay and Chinese consumers in urban Malaysia. Asia Pacific Management Review, 10 (3), 197-204.
42.Parsons A., G., Ballantine P., W., Kennedy A., M., Gift exchange: benefits sought by the recipient. International Journal of Sociology and Social Policy, 31(7/8), 411-423.
43.Schwartz, B., 1967, The Social Psychology of the Gift. American Journal of Sociology, 73(1), 1-11
44.Sternberg, 1986, A triangular theory of love. Psychological review,93(2), 119-135.
45.Sheth, J. N. , Newman, B. I., Gross, B. L., 1991, Why we buy what we buy: A theory of consumption values. Journal of Business Research, 22(2), 159-170.
46.Steidlmeier, P., Bass, B. M., 1999, Ethics, character, and authentic transformational leadership behavior. The Leadership Quarterly, 10(2), 181-217.
47.Joy, A., 2001, Gift Giving in Hong Kong and the Continuum of Social Ties. Journal of Consumer Research, 28(2), 239–256.
48.Kotler, Levy, 1969, Broadening the Concept of Marketing. Journal of Marketing, 33(1),3-9
49.Komter, A. E., 1996, Reciprocity as a Principle of Exclusion: Gift giving in the Netherlands. Sociology, 30(2),299-316
50.Komter, A., Vollebergh, W., Gift Giving and the Emotional Significance of Family and Friends. Journal of Marriage and Family, 59(3), 747-757.
51.John F. Sherry J., 1983, Gift Giving in Anthropological Perspective. Journal of Consumer Research, 10(2), 157–168.
52.John F. Sherry J., Mary A., Sidney J. L., 1993, The dark side of the gift. Journal of Business Research, 28(3), 225-244.
53.Sinardet, D., Mortelmans, D., 2009, The feminine side to Santa Claus. Women's work of kinship in contemporary gift-giving relations. The Social Science Journal, 46(1), 124-142.
54.Simpson, J. A., Griskevicius, V., & Rothman, A. J.,2012, Consumer decisions in relationships. Journal of Consumer Psychology,22(3),304-314
55.Vanhamme, J & Bont, Cees J. P. M.,2008, Surprise gift" purchases: Customer insights from the small electrical appliances market. Journal of Retailing, 84(3), 354-369.
56.Wolfinbarger, M. F., Yale, L. J., 1993, Three Motivations for Interpersonal Gift Giving: Experiental, Obligated and Practical Motivations. Advances in consumer research, 20(1), 520.
57.Zaichkowsky,1985, Measuring the Involvement Construct. Journal of Consumer Research, 12(3), 341-352.
58.Zaichkowsky,1994, The Personal Involvement Inventory: Reduction, revision, and application to advertising. Journal of advertising, 23(4), 59-70