請用此 Handle URI 來引用此文件：
http://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/jspui/handle/123456789/88255完整後設資料紀錄
| DC 欄位 | 值 | 語言 |
|---|---|---|
| dc.contributor.advisor | 簡怡雯 | zh_TW |
| dc.contributor.advisor | Yi-Wen Chien | en |
| dc.contributor.author | 謝竣竤 | zh_TW |
| dc.contributor.author | Chun-Hung Hsieh | en |
| dc.date.accessioned | 2023-08-09T16:14:07Z | - |
| dc.date.available | 2023-11-10 | - |
| dc.date.copyright | 2023-08-09 | - |
| dc.date.issued | 2023 | - |
| dc.date.submitted | 2023-07-13 | - |
| dc.identifier.citation | Aaker, Jennifer L. (1997), “Dimensions of Brand Personality,” Journal of Marketing Research, 35 (August), 347–56.
Abramson, Lyn Y., Martin E. Seligman, and John D. Teasdale (1978), “Learned Helplessness in Humans: Critique and Reformulation,” Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 87 (February), 32–48. Anderson, Cameron, and Adam D. Galinsky (2006), “Power, Optimism, and Risk-Taking,” European Journal of Social Psychology, 36 (July), 511–36. Baron, Reuben M. and David A. Kenny (1986), “The Moderator Mediator Variable Distinction in Social Psychological Research: Conceptual, Strategic, and Statistical Considerations,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51 (December), 1173–182. Belk, Russell W. (1980), “Determinants of Consumption Cue Utilization in Impression Formation: An Association Derivation and Experimental Verification,” in Advances in Consumer Research, Vol. 8, ed. Kent B. Monroe, Provo, UT: Association for Consumer Research, 170–75. Belk, Russell W., Kenneth D. Bahn, and Robert N. Mayer (1982), “Developmental Recognition of Consumption Symbolism,” Journal of Consumer Research, 9 (June), 4–17. Blieszner, Rosemary and Rebecca G. Adams (1992), Adult Friendship, Newbury Park, CA: Sage. Blumberg, Paul (1974), “The Decline and Fall of the Status Symbol: Some Thoughts on Status in a Post-industrial Society,” Social Problems, 21, 480–98. Brehm, Jack W. (1966), A Theory of Psychological Reactance, New York: Academic Press. Brin ̃ol, Pablo, Richard E. Petty, Carmen Valle, Derek D. Rucker, and Alberto Becerra (2007), “The Effects of Message Recipients’ Power before and after Persuasion: A Self-Validation Analysis,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 93 (December), 1040–53. Buss, David M. (1996), “Social Adaptation and Five Major Factors of Personality,” in The Five-Factor Model of Personality: Theoretical Perspectives, ed. Jerry S. Wiggins, New York: Guilford, 180–207. Derek D. Rucker, Adam D. Galinsky (2008), “Desire to Acquire: Powerlessness and Compensatory Consumption,” Journal of Consumer Research Domhoff, G. William (1998), Who Rules America? Mountain View, CA: Mayfield Publishing. Dwyer, F. Robert (1984), “Are Two Better than One? Bargaining Behavior and Outcomes in an Asymmetrical Power Relationship,” Journal of Consumer Research, 11 (September), 680–83. Fiske, Susan T. and Jennifer L. Berdahl (2007), “Social Power,” in Social Psychology: A Handbook of Basic Principles, ed. Arie Kruglanski and E. Tory Higgins, New York: Guilford, 678–92. French, John R. P., Jr., and Bertram Raven (1959), “The Bases of Social Power,” in Studies in Social Power, ed. Dorwin Cartwright, Ann Arbor, MI: Institute for Social Research, 150–67. Galinsky, Adam D., Deborah H. Gruenfeld, and Joe C. Magee (2003), “From Power to Action,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 85 (September), 453–66. Hunt, Shelby D. and John R. Nevin (1974), “Power in a Channel of Distribution: Sources and Consequences,” Journal of Marketing Research, 11 (May), 186–93. Joris Lammers, Janka I. Stoker, Floor Rink, and Adam D. Galinsky (2016), “To Have Control Over or to Be Free From Others? The Desire for Power Reflects a Need for Autonomy,” The Society for Personality and Social Psychology. Joris Lammers, Janka I. Stoker, Jennifer Jordan, Monique Pollmann, and Diederik A. Stapel (2011), “Power Increases Infidelity Among Men and Women,” Psychological Science. Keltner, Dacher, Deborah H. Gruenfeld, and Cameron Anderson (2003), “Power, Approach, and Inhibition,” Psychological Review, 110 (April), 265–84. Keltner, Dacher and Robert J. Robinson (1997), “Defending the Status Quo: Power and Bias in Social Conflict,” Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 23 (October), 1066–77. Kemper, Theodore D. (1991), “Predicting Emotions from Social Relations,” Social Psychological Quarterly, 54 (December), 330–42. Lammers, Joris, Adam D. Galinsky, Ernestine H. Gordijn, and Sabine Otten (forthcoming), “Illegitimacy Moderates the Effects of Power on Approach,” Psychological Science. Lasswell, Thomas E. and Peter F. Parshall (1961), “The Perception of Social Class from Photographs,” Sociology and Social Research, 45 (July), 407–14. Levitt, Steven D. and Stephen J. Dubner (2006), Freakonomics: A Rogue Economist Explores the Hidden Side of Everything, New York: HarperCollins. Lusch, Robert F. and James R. Brown (1982), “A Modified Model of Power in the Marketing Channel,” Journal of Marketing Research, 19 (August), 312–23. Lynn, Michael and Judy Harris (1997), “The Desire for Unique Consumer Products: A New Individual Differences Scale,” Psychology and Marketing, 14 (September), 601–16. Magee, Joe C., Adam D. Galinsky, and Deborah H. Gruenfeld (2007), “Power, Propensity to Negotiate, and Moving First in Competitive Interactions,” Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 33 (February), 200–212. Mandel, Naomi, Petia K. Petrova, and Robert B. Cialdini (2006), “Images of Success and the Preference for Luxury Brands,” Journal of Consumer Psychology, 16 (1), 57–69. McAlister, Leigh, Max H. Bazerman, and Peter Fader (1986), “Power and Goal Setting in Channel Negotiations,” Journal of Marketing Research, 23 (August), 228–36. Munafo, Marcus R., Taane G. Clark, Lauren R. Moore, Elizabeth Payne, Robert Walton, and Jonathan Flint (2003), “Genetic Polymorphisms and Personality in Healthy Adults: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis,” Molecular Psychiatry, 8, 471–84. Operario, Don and Susan T. Fiske (2001), “Effect of Trait Dominance on Powerholders’ Judgments of Subordinates,” Social Cognition, 19 (April), 161–80. Raleigh, Michael J. and Michael T. McGuire (1991), “Bidirectional Relationships between Tryptophan and Social Behavior in Vervet Monkeys,” in Kynurenine and Serotonin Pathways: Progress in Tryptophan Research, Advances in Experimental Medicine and Biology, ed. Robert Schwarcz, Simon N. Young, and Raymond R. Brown, New York: Plenum, 289–98. Riger, Stephanie, Robert K. Lebailly, and Margaret T. Gordon (1981), “Community Ties and Urbanites’ Fear of Crimes: An Ecological Investigation,” American Journal of Community Psychology, 9 (December), 653–65. Schwartz, David, Kenneth A. Dodge, and John D. Coie (1993), “The Emergence of Chronic Peer Victimization in Boys’ Play Groups,” Child Development, 64 (December), 1755–72. Seligman, Martin E. (1975), Helplessness: On Depression, Development, and Death, San Francisco: Freeman. Shavitt, Sharon (1990), “The Role of Attitude Objects in Attitude Functions,” Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 26 (March), 124–48. Shavitt, Sharon and Michelle R. Nelson (1999), “The Social-Identity Function in Person Perception: Communicated Meanings of Product Preferences,” in Why We Evaluate: Functions of Attitudes, ed. Gregory Maio and James M. Olson, Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum, 37–57. Shrout, Patrick E. and Niall Bolger (2002), “Mediation in Experimental and Nonexperimental Studies: New Procedures and Recommendations,” Psychological Methods, 7 (December), 422–45. Smith, Pamela K., Nils B. Jostmann, Adam D. Galinsky, and Wilco W. van Dijk (forthcoming), “Lacking Power Impairs Executive Functions,” Psychological Science. Smith, Pamela K. and Yaacov Trope (2006), “You Focus on the Forest When You’re in Charge of the Trees: Power Priming and Abstract Information Processing,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 90 (April), 578–96. Thibaut, John W. and Harold H. Kelley (1959), The Social Psychology of Groups, New York: Wiley. Tiedens, Larissa Z. and Susan Linton (2001), “Judgment under Emotional Uncertainty: The Effects of Specific Emotions on Information Processing,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 81 (December), 973–88. Veblen, Thorstein (1899/1994), The Theory of the Leisure Class, New York: Dover. Weary, Gifford, Kerry L. Marsh, Faith Gleicher, and John Edwards (1993), “Depression and Social Information Processing,” in Control Motivation and Social Cognition, ed. Gifford Weary, Faith Gleicher, and Kerry L. Marsh, New York: Springer, 255–87. Whitney, Irene and Peter Smith (1993), “A Survey of the Nature and Extent of Bullying in Junior/Middle and Secondary Schools,” Educational Research, 35, 3–25. | - |
| dc.identifier.uri | http://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/jspui/handle/123456789/88255 | - |
| dc.description.abstract | 本研究欲探討權力地位的高低對於不同地位象徵的產品是否具有願付價格上的差異，因而提出四大研究假說。首先，當消費者面對到的產品象徵地位較高時，處於權力地位較低的消費者會相對於處在控制或是權力地位較高之消費者，對該產品有更高的願付價格。第二，當消費者面對到的產品象徵地位較低時，則無論消費者處於權力地位較低或是較高的狀態，其對於該商品的願付價格並不會有顯著差異。第三，當消費者面對到的產品象徵地位較高時，同樣面臨權力地位較低之狀態，則權力慾望程度較高之消費者相較於權力慾望程度較低之消費者，對該產品有更高的願付價格。而第四，當消費者面對到的產品象徵地位較高時，同樣面臨權力地位較高之狀態，則權力慾望程度較高之消費者與權力慾望程度較低之消費者，對該產品的願付價格並不會有顯著差異。而筆者透過操弄檢定以及假說檢定的驗證，成功驗證假說二及假說四，但由於樣本數不夠充分、產品與權力情境無有效關聯、產品樣式選擇上之因素以及問卷填答格式限制，使願付價格之假說未能成立。 | zh_TW |
| dc.description.abstract | The present study aims to examine whether variations in power status lead to differences in the willingness to pay for products representing distinct levels of status symbolism. To address this objective, four main research hypotheses were proposed. Firstly, when consumers are confronted with products symbolizing higher status, individuals in lower power positions are expected to demonstrate a higher willingness to pay compared to those in control or higher power positions. Secondly, when consumers encounter products symbolizing lower status, no significant differences in willingness to pay are anticipated between individuals in lower and higher power positions. Thirdly, when consumers are faced with products symbolizing higher status while simultaneously experiencing a lower power status, it is hypothesized that individuals with a higher desire for power will exhibit a higher willingness to pay compared to individuals with a lower desire for power. Lastly, when consumers are presented with products symbolizing higher status under a higher power status condition, it is expected that the willingness to pay will not significantly differ between individuals with a higher desire for power and those with a lower desire for power. Through manipulation checks and hypothesis testing, hypotheses two and four were supported. However, limitations in sample size, ineffective associations between products and power contexts, factors related to product selection, as well as constraints imposed by the questionnaire format, prevented the acceptance of the hypotheses related to willingness to pay. | en |
| dc.description.provenance | Submitted by admin ntu (admin@lib.ntu.edu.tw) on 2023-08-09T16:14:07Z No. of bitstreams: 0 | en |
| dc.description.provenance | Made available in DSpace on 2023-08-09T16:14:07Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 0 | en |
| dc.description.tableofcontents | 國立臺灣大學碩士學位論文口試委員會審定書 I
致謝 II 摘要 III Abstract IV 目錄 V 圖目錄 VII 表目錄 VIII 第一章 緒論 1 1.1 研究背景與動機 1 第二章 文獻探討 4 第三章 研究架構與假說 8 3.1 研究架構 8 3.2 研究假說 9 第四章 研究方法 12 4.1 研究對象 12 4.2 研究工具 13 4.2.1主問卷 13 4.2.1.1問卷設計 13 4.2.1.2問卷程序 14 4.3 研究變數 16 4.3.1自變數操作 16 4.3.2應變數測量 17 第五章 研究結果 18 5.1 信度分析 18 5.2操弄檢定 20 5.2.1權力地位感知 20 5.2.2產品地位感知 22 5.3假設檢定 24 5.3.1主效果檢定 24 5.3.2調節效果檢定 29 第六章 結論與建議 32 6.1研究結論 32 6.2管理應用 35 6.3研究限制 37 6.4未來研究方向 38 參考文獻 39 附錄一：主實驗問卷 45 | - |
| dc.language.iso | zh_TW | - |
| dc.subject | 權力地位 | zh_TW |
| dc.subject | 願付價格 | zh_TW |
| dc.subject | 地位象徵 | zh_TW |
| dc.subject | 操弄檢定 | zh_TW |
| dc.subject | 假說檢定 | zh_TW |
| dc.subject | Status symbolism | en |
| dc.subject | Willingness to pay | en |
| dc.subject | Manipulation checks | en |
| dc.subject | Power status | en |
| dc.subject | Hypothesis testing | en |
| dc.title | 權力地位剝奪下的補償行為：對地位象徵性產品願付價格的影響與調節機制 | zh_TW |
| dc.title | Compensatory Behavior in the Context of Power Deprivation: Effects and Moderating Mechanisms on the Willingness to Pay for Status Symbolic Products | en |
| dc.type | Thesis | - |
| dc.date.schoolyear | 111-2 | - |
| dc.description.degree | 碩士 | - |
| dc.contributor.oralexamcommittee | 蕭中強;林嘉薇 | zh_TW |
| dc.contributor.oralexamcommittee | Chung-Chiang Hsiao;Chia-Weo Lin | en |
| dc.subject.keyword | 權力地位,地位象徵,願付價格,操弄檢定,假說檢定, | zh_TW |
| dc.subject.keyword | Power status,Status symbolism,Willingness to pay,Manipulation checks,Hypothesis testing, | en |
| dc.relation.page | 49 | - |
| dc.identifier.doi | 10.6342/NTU202301554 | - |
| dc.rights.note | 同意授權(限校園內公開) | - |
| dc.date.accepted | 2023-07-14 | - |
| dc.contributor.author-college | 管理學院 | - |
| dc.contributor.author-dept | 商學研究所 | - |
| 顯示於系所單位： | 商學研究所 | |
文件中的檔案：
| 檔案 | 大小 | 格式 | |
|---|---|---|---|
| ntu-111-2.pdf 授權僅限NTU校內IP使用（校園外請利用VPN校外連線服務） | 3.77 MB | Adobe PDF |
系統中的文件，除了特別指名其著作權條款之外，均受到著作權保護，並且保留所有的權利。