臺灣博碩士論文加值系統

本研究主要探討抗性產品的廣告說服效果，當消費者面對某些產品或服務具有負面初始態度時，行銷人員若能找出合適的說服方式，將能有效提高廣告傳播效果。因此，本研究以時間連結理論的廣告訴求做為研究基礎，將受測者的認知聯想做為連結，引導受測者從現在(current-self)連結到未來(temporal-self)，產生特定時間點的情境聯想，進而影響受測者對於抗性產品的喜好程度。
在抗性產品的選擇上，以台灣大學生中普遍缺乏學習動機的學習英文為例子。透過實驗法操弄，將廣告形式分為有、無時間連結理論兩種，本研究共募集130位受測者參與實驗，最後檢驗廣告訴求形式與認知需求程度對抗性產品說服效果產生何種影響。
研究結果發現，受測者對於抗性產品的態度會因時間連結理論的廣告訴求而有所改變，同時也受到受測者自身的認知需求程度有所影響，認知需求程度高者較不易被說服，而認知需求程度低者則較容易受到此種廣告手法被說服，並產生態度上的改變。由此可知，行銷人員可針對潛在顧客的認知需求特質，進行不同的廣告策略，藉此提升抗性產品的廣告說服效果。

This study focuses on the advertising persuasion effect of the resistant product. The ad-vertising strategy is playing a very important role when the people experience a products or services have a negative initial attitude. Therefore, this study is based on the Timeline Connection Theory which in leading of transfer with consumers cognitive then consum-er situation from now (current-self) to the future (temporal-self), affecting the consum-ers’ attitude from negative to positive.
Through the experimental design, the experimental treatment divided into Time-link commercial film and without Time-link commercial film. The subjects were collected from the students who lacks learning English motivation in Taiwan. 130 ques-tionnaires were distributed in north university’s students. Due to Advertisement content and need for cognition on advertising persuasion, data were analyzed by performing two-way ANOVA.
The finding is that consumers' attitude towards resistant products will be changed by the Timeline Connection Theory, and affected by the consumer's own cognitive needs. People who in high need for cognitive are less to be persuaded, and people who have in low need for cognitive are more likely to be persuaded by such advertising tech-niques and to change attitudes. Finally, the marketing staff could utility timeline con-nection theory to persuade people who have negative initial attitude and to enhance the advertising persuading effectiveness.

內容目錄
中文摘要．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．． iii
英文摘要．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．． iv
內容目錄．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．． vi
表目錄　．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．． viii
圖目錄　．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．． xii
第一章　　緒論．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．． 1
　　第一節　　研究背景．．．．．．．．．．．．．．． 1
　　第二節　　研究動機．．．．．．．．．．．．．．． 3
　　第三節　　研究目的．．．．．．．．．．．．．．． 3
第二章　　文獻探討與研究假說．．．．．．．．．．．． 5
　　第一節　　抗拒態度．．．．．．．．．．．．．．． 5
　　第二節　　說服理論．．．．．．．．．．．．．．． 6
　　第三節　　時間連結理論．．．．．．．．．．．．． 7
第四節 認知需求理論．．．．．．．．．．．．． 8
第五節 廣告效果．．．．．．．．．．．．．．． 9
第三章　　研究方法．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．． 11
　　第一節　　研究方法與流程介紹．．．．．．．．．． 11
　　第二節　　前導測試．．．．．．．．．．．．．．． 11
　　第三節　　正式實驗．．．．．．．．．．．．．．． 13
第四節 自變數操弄．．．．．．．．．．．．．． 14
第五節 應變數衡量．．．．．．．．．．．．．． 16
第六節 資料蒐集與分析方法．．．．．．．．．． 19
第四章　　實證結果．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．． 21
　　第一節　　受測者敘述性統計．．．．．．．．．．． 21
　　第二節　　假說檢定．．．．．．．．．．．．．．． 21
　　第三節　　研究假說總覽．．．．．．．．．．．．． 29
第五章　　結論與建議．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．． 31
　　第一節　　結果討論．．．．．．．．．．．．．．． 31
　　第二節　　實務意涵．．．．．．．．．．．．．．． 32
　　第三節　　研究限制及未來研究建議．．．．．．．． 33
參考文獻．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．． 34
附錄A　　前測問卷．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．． 40
附錄B　　問卷一．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．． 41
附錄C　　問卷二．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．． 43
附錄D　　實驗影片腳本分鏡圖．．．．．．．．．．．． 45

表目錄
表 3-1 前導測試操弄檢定之各組平均分數．．．．．．．． 12
表 3-2 實驗設計人數彙總表．．．．．．．．．．．．．． 14
表 3-3 受試者描述性統計表．．．．．．．．．．．．．． 14
表 3-4 認知需求量表．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．． 15
表 3-5 廣告態度量表．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．． 17
表 3-6 產品態度量表．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．． 18
表 3-7 品牌態度量表．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．． 18
表 4-1 信度分析表．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．． 21
表 4-2 成對樣本t檢定．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．． 22
表 4-3 獨立樣本t檢定．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．． 23
表 4-4 學習習慣獨立樣本t檢定．．．．．．．．．．．．． 24
表 4-5 交互作用之two-way ANOVA檢定表．．．．．．．． 25
表 4-6 學習習慣交互作用之two-way ANOVA檢定表．．．． 27
表 4-7 低認知需求情境下之t檢定表．．．．．．．．．．． 29
表 4-8 高認知需求情境下之t檢定表．．．．．．．．．．． 29
表 4-9 研究假說1、2總覽．．．．．．．．．．．．．．． 30
表 4-10 研究假說3總覽．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．． 30

圖目錄
圖 1-1 研究架構圖．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．． 4
圖 4-1 認知需求程度與學習意願交互作用．．．．．．．． 25
圖 4-2 認知需求程度與品牌態度交互作用．．．．．．．． 26
圖 4-3 認知需求程度與產品態度交互作用．．．．．．．． 26
圖 4-4 認知需求程度與廣告態度交互作用．．．．．．．． 27
圖 4-5 學習習慣與學習意願交互作用．．．．．．．．．． 28

參 考 文 獻
一、中文部份
李凰珠(1999)，涉入程度、情緒對說服效果之影響，政治作戰學校新聞研究所碩士論文，28-32。

林佩誼(2010)，廣告對網路口碑效果之影響，國立交通大學管理科學系碩士論文，11-19。

二、英文部份
Atkin Charles & Block Martin (1983). Effectiveness of Celebrity Endorsers. Journal of Advertising Research, 23(1), 57-61.

Brehm, J. W. (1966). Theory of Psychological Reactance, New York: Academic.

Cacioppo, J. T., Petty, R. E., & Kao, C. F. (1984). The efficient as-sessment of need for cognition. Journal of Personality As-sessment, 48, 306-307.

Cacioppo, J. T., Petty, R. E. (1982). The need for cognition. Journal of Personality and Personality, 42, 116-131.

Engel, J. E., Blackwell R. D. & Miniard, P. W. (1990). Consumer Behavior, Dryden Press: Chicago.

Fishbein, M. & Ajzen, I. (1975). Belief attitude intention and behav-ior: An introduction to theory and research (4rd ed.). Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.

Grewal, D., Krishnan, R. R., Baker, J., & Borin, N. (1998). The ef-fects of store name, brand name and price discounts on con-sumers' evaluations and purchase intentions. Journal of Re-tailing, 74(3), 331-352.

Hassanein, K., Head, M. (2007). Manipulating Social Presence through the Web Interface and its Impact on Attitude towards Online Shopping. International Journal of Human Computer Studies, 65(8), 689-708.

Haugtvedt, C. P., & Petty, R. E. (1992). Personality and persuasion: Need for cognition moderates the persistence and resistance of attitude changes. Journal of Personality and Social Psycholo-gy, 63, 308-319.

Hirsch, A. R. (1992). Nostalgia: A Neuropsychiatry Understanding. Advance in Consumer Research, 19, 390-395.

Hovland, Carl Iver, Irving L. Janis, & Harold H. Kelley. (1953). Communication and Persuasion: Psychological Studies of Opinion Change, Connecticut: Yale University.

Krugman, H. E. (1966). The measurement of advertising involve-ment. Public Opinion Quarterly, 30(4), 583-596.

Lang, A., Borse, J., Wise, K., & David, P. (2002). Captured by the World Wide Web: Orienting to structural and content features of computer presented information. Communication Research, 29(3), 215-245.

Lavidge, R. G. & Steiner, G. A. (1961). A Model for Predictive Measurement of Advertising Effectiveness. Journal of Mar-keting, 25, 59-62.
Levin, I. ＆ Gaeth, G. E. (1988). How Consumers are Affect by the Framing of Attribute Information Before and After Consuming the Product. Journal of Consumer Research, 15, 374-378.

MacKenzie, S. B., Lutz, R. J., & Belch, G. E. (1986). The Role of At-titude toward the Ad as a Mediator of Advertising Effective-ness: A Test of Competing Explanations. Journal of Marketing Research, 23(2), 130-143.

McQuarrie, Edward. F. & Phillips, Barbara. J. (2005). Indirect Per-suasion in Advertising: How Consumers Process Metaphors Presented in Pictures and Words. Journal of Advertising, 34(2), 70.

Mehta, A. (2000). Advertising attitudes and advertising effective-ness. Journal of Advertising Research, 40(3), 67-72.

Meng Zhang & Pankaj Aggarwal. (2015). Looking ahead or looking back: Current evaluations and the effect of psychological con-nectedness to a temporal self. Journal of Consumer Psycholo-gy, 25(3), 512-518.

Michael, D., & Mats E. (2007). When is Advertising. Comparing Responses to Non-Traditional and Traditional Advertising Media. Journal of Current Issues and Research in Advertising, 29(1), 33-43.

Miller, R.B. & Heiman, S.E. (1980) Conceptual selling. New York: Bantam Book.

Nunnally, J. C. (1978). Psychometric Theory (2rd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.

Parker. B.J. (1998). Exploring Life Themes and Myths in Alcohol Advertisements through a Meaning-Based Model of Advertis-ing Experiences. Journal of Advertising, 1, 98-112.

Park, L. W. & Hastak, M. (1976), Memory-Based Product Judge-ments: Effects of Involvement at Encoding and Retrieval. Journal of Consumer Research, 13(5), 144-151

Petty, R. E., Cacioppo, J. T., & Schumann, D. (1983). Central and Pe-ripheral Routers to Advertising Effectiveness: The Moderating Role of Involvement. Journal of Consumer Research, 10(2), 135-146.

Petty, R. E. & Cacioppo, J. T. (1986), Communication and Persua-sion: Central and Peripheral Route to Attitude Change, New York: Springer Verlag.

Petty, R. E., & Tormala, Z. L. (2002). What doesn’t kill me makes me stronger: The effects of resisting persuasion on attitude certainty. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 83(6), 1298-1313.
Perloff, R. M. (1993). The Dynamics of Persuasion (15rd ed.). New Jersey: L. Erlbaum.

Richins, M. L. (1997). Measuring emotions in the consumption expe-rience. Journal of Consumer Research, 24(2), 127-146.

Sagarin, B.J., & Serna, S.B. (2002). Dispelling the illusion of invul-nerability: The motivations and mechanisms of resistance to persuasion. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 83(3), 526-541.

Schiffman, L. G., & Kanuk, L. L. (2007). Upper Saddle River (9rd ed.), New Jersey: Prentice hall.

Tormala & Petty. (2002). Resistance to Persuasion and Attitude Cer-tainty: The Moderating Role of Elaboration. Journal of Per-sonality and Social Psychology, 83, 14-15.

Wise, K., Bolls, P. D., Kim, H., Venkataraman, A., & Meyer, R. (2008). Enjoyment of advergames and brand attitudes: The impact of thematic relevance. Journal of Interactive Advertis-ing, 9(1), 27–36.