臺灣博碩士論文加值系統

From previous research, we could know that because of subtraction principle, bigger number (original price) display to the left of the smaller number (sale price) caused better consumer evaluation(Biswas etal.,2013). Besides horizontal presence, we further want to investigate how vertical presence of a low-price appeal influence on price evaluation and buying intention.

Therefore, in study 1, we verified the result of horizontal direction is same as previous research, people would pretend better buying intention and think the discount cheaper when seeing sale price display to the right. But in another direction, vertical, instead of subtraction principle, anchoring effect is the main reason that affect consumers’ cognition. Reverse to horizontal direction, the result showed better buying intention and price evaluation when sale price display above the original price. In study 2, even when the design of number are hard to calculate between original price and sale price, the result still be the same as study 1. In study 3, we further reveal when there’s an obvious anchor, then the result of different direction and location would be the same, which means anchoring effect would weaken subtraction principle. Last, in study 4, we designed four subtraction math questions to know how the subtraction principle influenced the correct ratio and how the anchoring effect influenced the different answer after calculating in vertical direction.

After all, the result of buying intention and price evaluation showed significant when subtraction principle and anchoring effect influenced.

Ⅰ. INTRODUCTION 1
Ⅱ. THEORETICAL BACKGROUND 3
Ⅲ. EXPERIMENTS 8
Ⅳ. GENERAL DISCUSSION 25
Ⅴ. REFERENCES 30
Ⅵ. APPENDIX 35
Ⅵ.1 Study 1: Horizontal Direction-Original price to the left (Easy calculation) 35
Ⅵ.2 Study 1: Horizontal Direction-Original price to the right (Easy calculation) 36
Ⅵ.3 Study 1: Vertical Direction-Original price above (Easy calculation) 37
Ⅵ.4 Study 1: Vertical Direction-Original price below (Easy calculation) 38
Ⅵ.5 Study 2: Horizontal Direction-Original price to the left (Hard calculation) 39
Ⅵ.6 Study 2: Horizontal Direction-Original price to the right (Hard calculation) 40
Ⅵ.7 Study 2: Vertical Direction-Original price above (Hard calculation) 41
Ⅵ.8 Study 2: Vertical Direction-Original price below (Hard calculation) 42
Ⅵ.9 Study 3: Horizontal Direction-Original price to the left X Obvious anchor 43
Ⅵ.10 Study 3: Horizontal Direction-Original price to the right X Obvious anchor 44
Ⅵ.11 Study 3: Vertical Direction-Original price above X Obvious anchor 45
Ⅵ.12 Study 3: Vertical Direction-Original price below X Obvious anchor 46
Ⅵ.13 Study 3: Horizontal Direction-Original price to the left without Obvious anchor 47
Ⅵ.14 Study 3: Horizontal Direction-Original price to the right without Obvious anchor 48
Ⅵ.15 Study 3: Vertical Direction-Original price above without Obvious anchor 49
Ⅵ.16 Study 3: Vertical Direction-Original price below without Obvious anchor 50
Ⅵ.17 Study 4: Subtraction Task-Bigger number to the left 51
Ⅵ.18 Study 4: Subtraction Task-Bigger number to the right 52
Ⅵ.19 Study 4: Subtraction Task- Bigger number above 53
Ⅵ.20 Study 4: Subtraction Task- Bigger number below 54

Alba, Joseph W., Carl F. Mela, Terrence A. Shimp, and Joel E. Urbany (1999), “The Effect of Discount Frequency and Depth on Consumer Price Judgments,” Journal of Consumer Research, 26 (2), 99-114.

Baroody, Arthur (1984), “Children’s Difficulties in Subtraction: Some Causes and Questions,” Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 15 (3), 203-213.

Biswas, Abhijit and Edward A. Blair (1991), “Contextual Effects of Reference Prices in Retail Advertisements,” Journal of Marketing, 55 (July), 1-12.

Biswas, A., Bhowmick, S., Guha, A., & Grewal, D. (2013). Consumer evaluations of sale prices: role of the subtraction principle. Journal of Marketing, 77(4), 49-66.

Campbell, Jamie I.D. and Qilin Xue (2001), “Cognitive Arithmetic Across Cultures,” Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 130 (2), 299-315.

Chapman, G. B., & Johnson, E. J. (1994). The limits of anchoring. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 7(4), 223-242.
Coulter, Keith S. and Robin A. Coulter (2005), “Size Does Matter: The Effects of Magnitude Representation Congruency on Price Perceptions and Purchase Likelihood,” Journal of Consumer Psychology, 15 (1), 64-76.

Dehaene, Stanislas (1989), “The Psychophysics of Numerical Comparison: A Reexamination of Apparently Incompatible Data,” Perception and Psychophysics, 45 (6), 557-66.

Deng, Xiaoyan and Barbara E. Kahn (2009), “Is Your Product on the Right Side? The ‘Location Effect’ on Perceived Product Heaviness and Package Evaluation,” Journal of Marketing Research, 46 (December), 725-38.

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, 28 (August), 307-319

Dommermuth, W. P. (1989). Promotion: Analysis, creativity, and strategy. PWS-Kent Publishing Company.
Fuson, Karen C., Steven T. Smith, and Ana Maria LoCicero (1997), “Supporting Latino First Graders’ Ten-Structured Thinking in Urban Classrooms,” Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 28 (6), 738-66.

Grewal, D., Krishnan, R., Baker, J., & Borin, N. (1998). The effect of store name, brand name and price discounts on consumers' evaluations and purchase intentions. Journal of retailing, 74(3), 331-352.

Grewal, Dhruv, Howard Marmorstein, and Arun Sharma (1996), “Communicating Price Information Through Semantic Cues: The Moderating Effects of Situation and Discount Size,” Journal of Consumer Research, 23 (2), 148-55.

Hecht, Steven A. (1999), “Individual Solution Processes While Solving Addition and Multiplication Math Facts in Adults,” Memory & Cognition, 27 (6), 1097-1107

Imbo, Ineke, Ande Vandierendonck, and Yves Rosseel (2007), “The Influence of Problem Features and Individual Differences on Strategic Performance in Simple Arithmetic,” Memory & Cognition, 35 (3), 454-63.

Manning, K. C., & Sprott, D. E. (2009). Price endings, left-digit effects, and choice. Journal of Consumer Research, 36(2), 328-335.Leone and Srinivasan, 1996

Lichtenstein, Donald R. and Scot Burton, and Eric J. Karson (1991), “The Effect of Semantic Cues on Consumer Perceptions of Reference Price Ads,” Journal of Consumer Research, 18(3), 380-91.

Lohse, G. L. (1997). Consumer eye movement patterns on yellow pages advertising. Journal of Advertising, 26(1), 61-73.
Meier, Brain P. and Michael D. Robinson (2004), “Why the Sunny Sides Is Up: Associations Between Affect and Vertical Position,” Psychological Science, 15(4), 243-47.

Monroe, Kent B. (2003), “Behavioral Foundations for Pricing Management,” in Pricing: Making Profitable Decisions, 3d ed., Chap. 5. Burr Ridge, IL: McGraw-Hill/Irwin, 102-127.

Macé, S. (2012). The impact and determinants of nine-ending pricing in grocery retailing. Journal of Retailing, 88(1), 115-130.

Strack, F., & Mussweiler, T. (1997). Explaining the enigmatic anchoring effect: Mechanisms of selective accessibility. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 73(3), 437.

Ngobo, P. V., Legohérel, P., & Guéguen, N. (2010). A cross-category investigation into the effects of nine-ending pricing on brand choice. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 17(5), 374-385.

Nelson, Leif D. and Joseph P. Simmons (2009), “On Southbound Ease and Northbound Fees: Literal Consequences of the Metaphoric Link Between Vertical Position and Cardinal Direction,” Journal of Marketing Research, 46 (December), 715-24.

Puccinelli, Nancy M., Rajesh Chandrashekaran, Dhruv Grewal, and Rajineesh Suri (2013), “Are Men Seduced by Red? The Effect of Red Versus Black Prices on Price Perceptions,” Journal of Retailing, (published electronically February 22), [DOI: 10.1016/j.jretai.2013.01.002].

Schubert, Thomas W. (2005), “Your Highness: Vertical Positions as Perceptual Symbols of Power,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 89 (1), 1-21

Selter, Christoph (2001), “Addition and Subtraction of Three-Digit Numbers: German Elementary Children’s Success, Methods and Strategies,” Educational Studies in Mathematics, 47 (2), 145-73

Schindler, R. M., & Kirby, P. N. (1997). Patterns of rightmost digits used in advertised prices: implications for nine-ending effects. Journal of Consumer Research, 24(2), 192-201.

Siegler, R. S., & Shrager, J. (1984). Strategy choices in addition and subtraction: How do children know what to do. Origins of cognitive skills, 229-293.

Thomas, Manoj and Vicki Morwitz (2009), “The Ease-of-Computation Effect: The Interplay of Metacognitive Experiences and Naïve Theories in Judgments of Price Differences,” Journal of Marketing Research, 46 (February), 81-91.

Turnbull, A. T., & Baird, R. N. (1975). The Graphics of Communication: Typography--Layout--Design.

Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1974). Judgment under uncertainty: Heuristics and biases. science, 185(4157), 1124-1131.
Wansink, B., Kent, R. J., & Hoch, S. (1998). An anchoring and adjustment model of purchase quantity decisions. Journal of Marketing Research, 1998, 71-81.

Radach, R., Lemmer, S., Vorstius, C., Heller, D., & Radach, K. (2003). Eye movements in the processing of print advertisements. The mind’s eye: Cognitive and applied aspects of eye movement research, 609-632.

Wong, K. F. E., & Kwong, J. Y. Y. (2000). Is 7300 m equal to 7.3 km? Same semantics but different anchoring effects. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 82(2), 314-333.

Wynn, K. (1992). Addition and subtraction by human infants. Nature,358(6389), 749-750

Yip, Michael C.W. (2002), “Presentation Effects on Arithmetic Problem Solving,” Psychologia, 45 (2), 90-97.

Zbrodoff, N. J., & Logan, G. D. (2005). What everyone finds: The problem-size effect.