臺灣人文及社會科學引文索引資料庫系統

:::

詳目顯示

回上一頁
第 1 筆 / 總合 1 筆   第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁
/1頁
題名：目標導向對非典型產品評價之影響
作者：簡雅嵐
作者(外文)：Ya-Lan Chien
校院名稱：國立臺灣大學
系所名稱：商學研究所
指導教授：張重昭
學位類別：博士
出版日期：2013
主題關鍵詞：自我調節焦點；典型性；產品使用情境；基模一致性；self-regulatory focus；typicality；product usage context；schema congruity theory
原始連結：連回原系統網址new window
相關次數：
  • 被引用次數被引用次數:期刊(0) 博士論文(0) 專書(0) 專書論文(0)
  • 排除自我引用排除自我引用:0
  • 共同引用共同引用:0
  • 點閱點閱:17
有些產品具有典型的產品使用情境，因此該產品在顧客有特定需求時容易被喚起，進而選擇使用。然而，具有典型使用情境的產品往往受限於特定的使用情境，而不利於其在市場上之擴展。有鑑於此，本研究的主要目的探討，具有使用情境典型性的產品如何延伸其使用性，尤其是具有何種特質的消費者能夠接受非典型性的使用情境之產品。
根據調節焦點與基模一致性理論，研究提出個體對產品使用情境的評估會依典型程度的不同而有所差異。其中促進焦點相較於預防焦點的消費者，重視可能獲得的利益以及所帶來的新穎性，對於可能造成的損失或不確定性較不在意，因此對於中度非典型使用情境的產品評價較佳；而對不同程度典型性產品使用情境的評價呈現倒U型。然而預防焦點的消費者，抗拒改變、傾向於維持現狀，因此對不一致產品的評估會隨者典型性減少而降低。本研究將採用兩項實驗設計以驗證假設。本研究之結果將有助於拓展典型性產品的使用情境，以達提升產品使用率、增加產品銷售量以及公司獲利力之效果。
Products like champagne are strongly associated with typical benefits or certain usage contexts. This usage typicality easily reminds people of the product on specific occasions, but may limit product versatility and growth potential in the marketplace. This research aims to explore the possibility that a product with typical usages can extend its usability to atypical usage occasions. By drawing from the theory of self-regulatory focus and schema congruity theory, it is posited that people’s evaluations toward usage context vary by the degree of atypicality of use occasions. Compared with a preventional person, the promotional one’s evaluations of the usage contexts become more favorable because he or she sees greater gains from novelty benefits and fewer losses to risks or uncertainty associated with the moderate increase of atypicality. The relationship between consumers’ evaluations and level of typicality may present an inverted-U shape. For preventional people, their evaluations decrease monotonically as the atypicality increases, which is in accordance with the traditional notion that people generally resist changes that imply more risks and uncertainty. The proposed hypotheses are supported by results from two experiments on product use occasions and complementary products. Our findings may offer directions for marketers to expand their product typical usage context and the expansion of typical product usage context would help sale volume, and give rise to higher profitability.
REFERENCE
Aaker, D. A., and Keller, K. L. (1990), “Consumer evaluations of brand extensions”, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 54 No. 1, pp. 27-41.
Aaker, J. L. and Lee, A. Y. (2001), ““I” seek pleasures and “We” avoid pains: The role of self-regulatory goals in information processing and persuasion”, Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 28 No. 1, pp. 33-49.
Babin, B. J. and Babin, L. (2001), “Seeking something different? A model of schema typicality, consumer affect, purchase intentions and perceived shopping value”, Journal of Business Research, Vol. 54 No. 2, pp. 89-96.
Bettman, J. R. and Sujan, M. (1987), “Effects of framing on evaluation of comparable and noncomparable alternatives by expert and novice consumers”, Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 14 No. 2, pp. 141-154.
Bock, T. D. and Kenhove, P. V. (2011), “Consumer ethics: The role of self-regulatory focus”, Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 97 No.2, pp. 241–255
Campbell, M. C. and Goodstein, R. C. (2001), “The moderating effect of perceived risk on consumers’ evaluations of product incongruity: Preference for the norm”, Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 28 No. 3, pp. 439-449.
Chang, C. C. and Lin, B. C. (2010), “Moderating effects of self-regulatory focus on source–content incongruity”, Journal of Business and Psychology, Vol. 25 No. 3, pp. 429-439.
Chernev, A. (2004), “Goal orientation and consumer preference for the status quo”, Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 31 No. 3, pp. 557-565.
Crowe, E. and Higgins, E. T. (1997), “Regulatory focus and strategic inclinations: Promotion and prevention in decision making”, Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Vol. 69 No. 2, pp. 117-132.
Day, G. S., Shocker, A. D., and Srivastava, R. K. (1979), “Customer-oriented approaches to identifying product-markets”, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 43 No. 4, pp. 8-19.
Delgado-Ballester, E., Navarro, A. and Sicilia, M. (2012), “Revitalising brands through communication messages: The role of brand familiarity”, European Journal of Marketing, Vol. 46 No. 1/2, pp 31-51.
Desai, K. K. and Gencturk, E. (1995), “Schema incongruity: A multidimensional perspective involving advertising schema, self-schema, and product schema”, Advances in Consumer Research, Vol. 22, p. 390.
Desai, K. K. and Hoyer, W. D. (2000), “Descriptive characteristics of memory&;#8208;based consideration sets: influence of usage occasion frequency and usage location familiarity”, Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 27 No. 3, pp. 309-323.
Desai, K. K. and Ratneshwar, S. (2003), “Consumer perceptions of product variants positioned on atypical attributes”, Journal of Academy of Marketing Science, Vol. 31 No. 1, pp. 22-35.
Fiske, S. T. and Linville, P. W. (1980), “What does the schema concept buy us?” Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, Vol.6 No. 4, pp. 543-557.
Fiske, S. T. and Pavelchak, M. A. (1986), “Category-based versus piecemeal-based affective responses: Developments in schema-triggered affect”, In The Handbook of Motivation and Cognition: Foundations of Social Behavior. Richard M. Sorrentino and E. Tory Higgins, New York: Guilford Press.
Fitzsimons, G. (2008), “Death to dichotomizing,” Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 35 No.1, pp. 5–8.
F&;ouml;rster, J. and Higgins, E. T. (2005), “How global versus local perceptions fits regulatory focus”, Psychological Science, Vol.16 No. 8, pp. 631-636.
F&;ouml;rster, J., Higgins, E. T. and Taylor Bianco, A. (2003), “Speed/accuracy decisions in task performance: Built-in trade-off or separate strategic concerns?” Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Vol. 90 No.1, pp.148-164.
Friedman, R. S. and F&;ouml;rster, J. (2001), “The effects of promotion and prevention cues on creativity”, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, Vol.81 No.6, pp. 1001-1013.
Gino, F. and Margolis, J. D. (2011), “Bringing ethics into focus: How regulatory focus and risk preferences influence (un)ethical behavior”, Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Vol.115 No.2, pp.145–156
Haber, R. N. (1958), “Discrepancy from adaptation level as a source of affect”, Journal of Experimental Psychology, Vol.56 No. 4, pp. 370-375.
Herzenstein, M., Posavac S. S. and Brakus, J. J. (2007), “Adoption of new and really new products: The effects of self-regulation systems and risk salience”, Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 44 No. 2, pp. 251-260.
Higgins, E. T. (1987), “Self-discrepancy: A theory relating self and affect”, Psychological Review, Vol. 94 No. 3, pp. 319-340.
Higgins, E. T. (1997), “Beyond pleasure and pain”, American Psychologist, Vol. 52 No. 12, pp. 1280-1300.
Higgins, E. T. (2000), “Making a good decision: Value from fit”, American Psychologist, Vol. 55 No. 11, pp. 1217-1230.
Higgins, E. T. (2002), “How self-regulation creates distinct values: The case of promotion and prevention decision making”, Journal of Consumer Psychology, Vol. 12 No.3, 177&;#8722;191.
Higgins, E. T., Shah, J. Y. and Friedman, R. (1997), “Emotional responses to goal attainment: Strength of regulatory focus as moderator”, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, Vol. 72 No.3, pp.515&;#8722;525.
Holden, S J. S. and Lutz, R. J. (1992), “Ask not what the brands can evoke; ask what can evoke the brand”, Advances in Consumer Research, Vol. 19, pp. 101-107.
Holden, S J. S. (1993), “Understanding brand awareness: Let me give you a c(1)ue!”, Advances in Consumer Research, Vol. 20, pp. 383-388.
Irwin, J. R. and McClelland, G. H. (2001), “Misleading heuristics and moderated multiple regression models”, Journal of Marketing Research, Vol.38 No.1, pp.100-109.
Kim, Yeung-Jo (2006), “The role of regulatory focus in message framing in antismoking advertisement for adolescents”, Journal of Advertising, Vol. 35 No.1, pp.143-151.
Lee, A.Y., Keller, P. A. and Sternthal, B. (2010), “Value from regulatory construal fit: The persuasive impact of fit between consumer goals and message concreteness”, Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 36 No.5, pp. 735-747.
Liberman, N., Idson, L. C., Camacho, C. J. and Higgins, E. T. (1999), “Promotion and prevention choices between stability and change”, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, Vol.77 No.6, pp.1135-1145.
Liberman, N., Molden,D. C., Idson, L. C. and Higgins, E. T. (2001), “Promotion and prevention focus on alternative hypotheses: Implications for attributional functions”, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, Vol.80 No.1, pp.5-18.
Lockwood, P., Jordan, C. H. and Kunda Z. (2002), “Motivation by positive or negative role models: Regulatory focus determines who will best inspire us”, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, Vol. 83 No. 4, pp. 854-864.
Mandler, G. (1982), “The structure of value: Accounting for taste, in affect and cognition: The seventeenth annual carnegie symposium on cognition”, Margaret S. Clark and Susan T. Fiske, Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum, pp. 3-36.
Maoz, E. and Tybout, A. M. (2002), “The moderating role of involvement and differentiation in the evaluation of brand extensions”, Journal of Consumer Psychology, Vol. 12 No. 2, pp. 119-131.
McClelland, D. C., Atkinson, J. W., Clark, R. A. and Lowell, E. L. (1953), The Achievement Motive, New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts.
Meyers-Levy, J. and Tybout, A. M. (1989), “Schema congruity as a basis for product evaluation”, Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 16 No. 1, pp. 39-54.
Meyers-Levy, J., Louie, T. A. and Curren, M. T. (1994), “How does the congruity of brand names affect evaluations of brand name extensions?”, Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 79 No. 1, pp. 46-53.
Miller, E. G. and Kahn, B. E. (2005), “Shades of meaning: The effect of color and flavor names on consumer choice”, Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 32 No. 1, pp. 86-92.
Mourali, M. and Pons, F. (2009), “Regulatory fit from attribute-based versus alternative-based processing in decision making”, Journal of Consumer Psychology, Vol.19 No.4, pp.643-651.
Nam, M. and Tybout, A. M. (2005), “The moderating role of goal compatibility on the schema congruity effect”, Advances in Consumer Research, Vol. 32, p. 397.
Navarro, A., Sicilia, M. and Delgado-Ballester, E. (2009), “Integrated marketing communications: Effects of advertising-sponsorship strategic consistency”, EuroMed Journal of Business, Vol. 4. No.3, pp. 223-236.
Navarro, A., Delgado-Ballester, E. and Sicilia, M. (2010), “Integrated marketing communications: A test for different levels of strategic consistency”, Advances in Advertising Research, Vol. 1. pp. 3-20.new window
Peracchio, L. A. and Meyers-Levy, J. (1994), “How ambiguous cropped objects in Ad photos can affect product evaluations”, Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 21 No. 1, pp. 190-204.
Peracchio, L. A. and Tybout, A. M. (1996), “The moderating role of prior knowledge in schema-based product evaluation”, Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 23 No. 3, pp. 177-192.
Pham, M. T. and Avnet, T. (2004), “Ideals and oughts and the reliance on affect versus substance in persuasion”, Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 30 No. 4, pp. 503-518.
Pimentel, R. W. and Heckler, S. E. (2003), “Changes in logo designs: Chasing the elusive butterfly curve”, in Linda M. Scott’s and Rajeev Batra’s Persuasive Imagery: A Consumer Response Perspective, Mahwah, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers, pp. 105-127.
Ratneshwar, S. and Shocker, A. D. (1991), “Substitution in use and the role of usage context in product category structures”, Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 28 No. 3, pp. 281-295.
Seibt, B. and F&;ouml;rster, J. (2004), “Stereotype threat and performance: How self-stereotypes influence processing by inducing regulatory foci”, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, Vol.87 No.1, pp. 38-56.
Semin, G. R., Higgins, E. T. Montes, L. G., Estourget, d. Y. and Valencia, J. F. (2005), “Linguistic signatures of regulatory focus: How abstraction fits promotion more than prevention”, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, Vol. 89 No.1, pp.36-45.
Seurat, R. (1999), “Sustained and profitable growth”, Business Strategy Review, Vol. 10 No. 1, pp. 53-56.
Srivastava, R. K., Leone, R. P. and Shocker, A. D. (1981), “Market structure analysis: Hierarchical clustering of products based on substitution-in-use”. Journal of Marketing, Vol.45 No.3, pp. 38-48.
Tichy, N. M. (1997), “The leadership engine”, New York: HarperCollins.
Uskul, A. K., Sherman, D. K., and Fitzgibbon, J. (2009), “The cultural congruency effect: Culture, regulatory focus, and the effectiveness of gain- vs. loss-framed health messages”, Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, Vol.45, pp.535-541.
Walchli, B. S. (2007), “The effects of between-partner congruity on consumer evaluation of co-branded products”, Psychology and Marketing, Vol. 24 No. 11, pp. 947-973.
Wansink, B. and Ray, M. L. (1996), “Advertising strategies to increase usage frequency”, Journal of Marketng, Vol. 60 No. 1, pp. 31-46.
Warlop, L. and Ratneshwar, S. (1993), “The role of usage context in consumer choice: A problem solving approach”, Advances in Consumer Research, Vol. 20, pp. 377-382.
Yeo, J. and Park, J. (2006), “Effects of parent-extension similarity and self regulatory focus on evaluations of brand extensions”, Journal of Consumer Psychology, Vol. 16 No. 3, pp. 272-282.
Zhou, R. and Pham, M. T. (2004), “Promotion and prevention across mental accounts: When financial products dictate consumers’ investment goals”, Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 31 No. 1, pp. 125-135.
Zhu, R. and Meyers-Levy, J. (2007), “Exploring the cognitive mechanism that underlies regulatory focus effects”, Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 34 No.1, pp.89-96.

 
 
 
 
第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁 top
:::
無相關期刊論文
 
無相關博士論文
 
無相關書籍
 
無相關著作
 
QR Code
QRCODE

臺灣人文及社會科學引文索引資料庫

目前上線人數：206（臺灣：198，外國：8） ／ 本年度總使用人次：2272939 ／ 訪客人次（自102年09月）：68065156
國家圖書館著作權聲明 Copyright © 2013 All rights reserved.
本館地址: 100201臺北市中山南路20號． 本館地圖及交通資訊．
總機：(02)23619132．最佳瀏覽解析度為1024x768以上