本研究結合競爭法法理及管理概念，藉由內容分析法探討比較廣告案件內容結構，符合未來跨領域研究之趨勢，有別於過去比較廣告之研究，專注於廣告行銷或法學領域。為達此一目的，首先藉由內容分析法建構類目，廣告類型、比較原則、比較內容及法律效應及其分析單位，其次，蒐集台灣公平交易委員會1992年至2011年間比較廣告案例作為樣本，經由統計檢定後發現：廣告類型傾向採用直接比較；比較原則以「客觀性」採用比率最高、「關聯性」採用比率最低；比較內容則傾向採用非價格比較；至於法律效應，涉及虛偽不實或引人錯誤之表示違反比率最高，損害營業信譽之違反比率最低。以上研究結果可提供競爭法主管機關及實務界處理比較廣告相關案例之參考。

This study combined the principle of Competition Law and a managerial concept to investigate the content construction of comparative advertising cases by a content analysis. It is a cross-field research and meets future research trends. Different from previous researches on comparative advertising that focus on advertising marketing or the domain of Competitive Law. It first constructs the categories using a content analysis, types of comparative advertising, comparative principle, comparative content, legal effect and the units of analysis of the categories, and then collects comparative advertising cases of Taiwan Fair Trade Commission to employ samples, from 1992 to 2011. The statistics validating results indicate that most of advertising is direct comparison; as to comparative approach, 'objectivity' is adopted the most and 'relationship' is adopted the least; and most of advertising is the non-price comparison; as to legal effects, false or misleading violation is the most common and violation of business reputation is rarely used. The finds can serve as a reference for the authority of Competition Law and businesses when dealing with comparative advertising related cases.