Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
http://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/jspui/handle/123456789/97421Full metadata record
| ???org.dspace.app.webui.jsptag.ItemTag.dcfield??? | Value | Language |
|---|---|---|
| dc.contributor.advisor | 簡怡雯 | zh_TW |
| dc.contributor.advisor | Yi-Wen Chien | en |
| dc.contributor.author | 黃暐婷 | zh_TW |
| dc.contributor.author | Wei-Ting Huang | en |
| dc.date.accessioned | 2025-06-05T16:11:59Z | - |
| dc.date.available | 2025-06-06 | - |
| dc.date.copyright | 2025-06-05 | - |
| dc.date.issued | 2025 | - |
| dc.date.submitted | 2025-05-07 | - |
| dc.identifier.citation | 英文文獻
Baumeister, R. F. (1990). Suicide as escape from self. Psychological Review, 97(1), 90. Beck, J. T., Rahinel, R., & Bleier, A. (2020). Company worth keeping: Personal control and preferences for brand leaders. Journal of Consumer Research, 46(5), 871-886. Chen, R. P., Wan, E. W., & Levy, E. (2017). The effect of social exclusion on consumer preference for anthropomorphized brands. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 27(1), 23-34. Crocker, J., & Park, L. E. (2004). The costly pursuit of self-esteem. Psychological Bulletin, 130(3), 392–414. Crowe, E., & Higgins, E. T. (1997). Regulatory focus and strategic inclinations: Promotion and prevention in decision-making. Organizational behavior and human decision processes, 69(2), 117-132. Dalton, A. N., & Huang, L. (2014). Motivated forgetting in response to social identity threat. Journal of Consumer Research, 40(6), 1017-1038. Förster, J., Higgins, E. T., & Idson, L. C. (1998). Approach and avoidance strengthduring goal attainment: regulatory focus and the" goal looms larger" effect. Journal of personality and social psychology, 75(5), 1115. Galinsky, A. D., Whitson, J. A., Huang, L., & Rucker, D. D. (2012). Not so fluid and not so meaningful: Toward an appreciation of content-specific compensation. Psychological Inquiry, 23(4), 339-345. Goor, D., Keinan, A., & Ordabayeva, N. (2021). Status pivoting. Journal of Consumer Research, 47(6), 978-1002. Gronmo, S. (1997). Compensatory consumer behaviour: Elements of a critical sociology of consumption. In P. Otnes (Ed.), The sociology of consumption. New York: Solum Forag Norway: Humanities Press. Han, D., Duhachek, A., & Rucker, D. D. (2015). Distinct threats, common remedies: How consumers cope with psychological threat. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 25(4), 531–545. Heine, S. J., Proulx, T., & Vohs, K. D. (2006). The meaning maintenance model: On the coherence of social motivations. Personality and social psychology review, 10(2), 88-110. Higgins, E. T. (1987). Self-discrepancy; a theory relating self and affect. Psychological Review, 94(3), 319–340. Higgins, E. T. (1997). Beyond pleasure and pain. American psychologist, 52(12), 1280. Kim, S., & Rucker, D. D. (2012). Bracing for the psychological storm: Proactive versus reactive compensatory consumption. Journal of Consumer Research, 39(4), 815–830. Kivetz, R., Urminsky, O., & Zheng, Y. (2006). The Goal-Gradient Hypothesis Resurrected: Purchase Acceleration, Illusionary Goal Progress, and Customer Retention. Journal of Marketing Research, 43(1), 39–58. Lastovicka, J. L., & Fernandez, K. V. (2005). Three paths to disposition: The movement of meaningful possessions to strangers. Journal of consumer research, 31(4), 813-823. Lecky, P. (1945). Self-consistency; a theory of personality. Liberman, N., Molden, D. C., Idson, L. C., & Higgins, E. T. (2001). Promotion and prevention focus on alternative hypotheses: implications for attributional functions. Journal of personality and social psychology, 80(1), 5. Lins, S., Aquino, S., Costa, A. R., & Koch, R. (2022). From panic to revenge: Compensatory buying behaviors during the pandemic. International Journal of Social Psychiatry, 68(4), 921-922. Liu, Y., Li, X., & Yuen, K. F. (2023). Revenge buying: The role of negative emotions caused by lockdowns. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 75, 103523. Mandel, N., Rucker, D. D., Levav, J., & Galinsky, A. D. (2017). The compensatory consumer behavior model: How self-discrepancies drive consumer behavior. Journal of consumer psychology, 27(1), 133-146. Mourey, J. A., Olson, J. G., & Yoon, C. (2017). Products as pals: Engaging with anthropomorphic products mitigates the effects of social exclusion. Journal of Consumer Research, 44(2), 414-431. Murphy, M. C., Steele, C. M., & Gross, J. J. (2007). Signaling threat: How situational cues affect women in math, science, and engineering settings. Psychological science, 18(10), 879-885. Park, L. E., & Maner, J. K. (2009). Does self-threat promote social connection？ The role of self-esteem and contingencies of self-worth. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 96(1), 203. Pavey, L. J., & Sparks, P. (2008). Threats to autonomy: Motivational responses to risk information. European Journal of Social Psychology, 38(5), 852-865. Pham, M. T., & Avnet, T. (2004). Ideals and oughts and the reliance on affect versus substance in persuasion. Journal of consumer research, 30(4), 503-518. Stone, J., Wiegand, A. W., Cooper, J., & Aronson, E. (1997). When exemplification fails: hypocrisy and the motive for self-integrity. Journal of personality and social psychology, 72(1), 54. Swann Jr, W. B., & Read, S. J. (1981). Self-verification processes: How we sustain our self-conceptions. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 17(4), 351-372. Viney, W., Waldman, D. A., & Barchilon, J. (1982). Attitudes toward punishment in relation to beliefs in free will and determinism. Human Relations, 35(11), 939-949. Watson, G. (1987). Free action and free will. Mind, 96(382), 145-172. White, K., & Dahl, D. W. (2006). To be or not be? The influence of dissociative reference groups on consumer preferences. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 16(4), 404-414. Wrosch, C., Miller, G. E., Scheier, M. F., & De Pontet, S. B. (2007). Giving up on unattainable goals: Benefits for health?. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 33(2), 251-265. Wrosch, C., Scheier, M. F., Carver, C. S., & Schulz, R. (2003). The importance of goal disengagement in adaptive self-regulation: When giving up is beneficial. Self and identity, 2(1), 1-20. Yoon, S., & Kim, H. C. (2018). Feeling economically stuck: The effect of perceived economic mobility and socioeconomic status on variety seeking. Journal of Consumer research, 44(5), 1141-1156. Yoon, Y., Sarial-Abi, G., & Gürhan-Canli, Z. (2012). Effect of regulatory focus on selective information processing. Journal of Consumer Research, 39(1), 93-110. Zhou, R., & Pham, M. T. (2004). Promotion and prevention across mental accounts: When financial products dictate consumers& investment goals. Journal of consumer research, 31(1), 125-135. Zhu, R., & Meyers-Levy, J. (2007). Exploring the cognitive mechanism that underlies regulatory focus effects. Journal of Consumer Research, 34(1), 89-96. 中文文獻 馬慶玲（2011）。調節焦點影響廣告效果之研究。﹝碩士論文。國立政治大學﹞臺灣博碩士論文知識加值系統。 https://hdl.handle.net/11296/uemup5。 | - |
| dc.identifier.uri | http://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/jspui/handle/123456789/97421 | - |
| dc.description.abstract | 本研究奠基於前人補償性消費架構，欲探討領域替代性以及調節焦點對補償消費策略購買意願的影響，並且以調節焦點做為調節變數提出三個假說。首先，在個體為促進焦點的情況下，無論認為威脅領域是否可以被替代(彌補)，對於象徵性自我完成的購買意願皆會高於流動補償以及逃避策略。第二，在預防型焦點的情況下，若認為威脅領域可以被替代(彌補)，相對於認為不可以被替代(彌補)，對流動補償策略會有較高的購買意願。第三，在預防型焦點的情況下，若認為威脅領域不可以被替代(彌補)，相對於認為可以被替代(彌補)，則對逃避策略會有較高的購買意願。採用變異數分析、共變異數分析以及主要效果檢定，得以成功驗證假說一，然而由於調節焦點操弄困難、策略選擇受選項本身有趣程度干擾、特定族群樣本數不足，以及問卷長度影響專注力等限制，僅能部分驗證假說二與假說三。本論文證明調節焦點為影響不同補償消費策略的有效變數，但未發現領域替代性對補償消費策略的影響有主效果。 | zh_TW |
| dc.description.abstract | This study builds on previous frameworks of compensatory consumption to explore the impact of domain substitution and regulatory focus on the purchase intention of compensatory consumption strategies. Three hypotheses are proposed, using regulatory focus as a moderating variable. First, in the case of a promotion focus, the purchase intention of symbolic-self completion strategies will be higher than both fluid compensation and escapism strategies, regardless of whether the threatened domain is considered substitutable. Second, under a prevention focus, if the threatened domain is perceived as substitutable, the purchase intention of fluid compensation strategies will be higher compared to when it is perceived as non-substitutable. Third, in a prevention focus, if the threatened domain is perceived as non-substitutable, the purchase intention of escapism strategies will be higher compared to when it is perceived as substitutable. Analysis of variance (ANOVA), covariance analysis (ANCOVA), and simple main effect tests were used to successfully validate the first hypothesis. However, due to difficulties in regulatory focus manipulation, interference from the inherent interest of strategy options, insufficient sample size for specific cells, and the length of the questionnaire affecting concentration, only partial support was found for the second and third hypotheses. This study demonstrates that regulatory focus is an effective variable influencing different compensatory consumption strategies but does not find a main effect of domain substitution on compensatory consumption strategies. | en |
| dc.description.provenance | Submitted by admin ntu (admin@lib.ntu.edu.tw) on 2025-06-05T16:11:59Z No. of bitstreams: 0 | en |
| dc.description.provenance | Made available in DSpace on 2025-06-05T16:11:59Z (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 目次 V 圖次 VII 表次 VIII 一、 緒論 1 1.1 補償性消費 1 1.2 現存研究問題 1 二、 文獻探討 3 2.1 自我差異理論與補償性消費行為模型 3 2.2 調節焦點理論 4 2.3 補償消費策略選擇 5 2.4 自由、自由意志與自主性 7 三、 理論架構 8 四、 實驗設計 11 4.1 前測 11 4.1.1 實驗結果 11 4.2 主實驗 12 4.2.1 研究對象與設計 12 4.2.2 實驗流程 12 4.2.3 自變數 15 4.2.4 應變數 16 五、 主實驗結果 19 5.1 信度分析 19 5.2 調節焦點操弄檢定 20 5.3 自由/自主領域威脅操弄檢定 20 5.4 自由/自主領域重要性操弄檢定 21 5.5 補償策略購買意願 22 5.6 購買意願額外分析 29 5.7 策略補償程度 35 六、 結論與建議 39 6.1 研究結論 39 6.2 研究貢獻 40 6.3 實務意涵 40 6.4 研究限制 41 6.5 未來研究方向 43 參考文獻 45 附錄一、 威脅領域替代性問卷 49 附錄二、 調節焦點操弄與操弄檢查問卷 50 附錄三、 威脅操弄檢查量測問卷 51 附錄四、 補償程度量測問卷 52 附錄五、 平時電玩習慣量測問卷 53 | - |
| dc.language.iso | zh_TW | - |
| dc.subject | 威脅領域替代性 | zh_TW |
| dc.subject | 調節焦點 | zh_TW |
| dc.subject | 象徵性自我完成 | zh_TW |
| dc.subject | 流動補償 | zh_TW |
| dc.subject | 逃避策略 | zh_TW |
| dc.subject | 購買意願 | zh_TW |
| dc.subject | 補償性消費 | zh_TW |
| dc.subject | Purchase intention | en |
| dc.subject | Compensatory consumption behavior | en |
| dc.subject | Domain substitution | en |
| dc.subject | Regulatory focus | en |
| dc.subject | Symbolic-self completion | en |
| dc.subject | Fluid compensation | en |
| dc.subject | Escapism | en |
| dc.title | 領域替代性與調節焦點對補償性消費策略的影響 | zh_TW |
| dc.title | The Impact of Domain Substitution and Regulatory Focus on Compensatory Consumption Strategies | en |
| dc.type | Thesis | - |
| dc.date.schoolyear | 113-2 | - |
| dc.description.degree | 碩士 | - |
| dc.contributor.oralexamcommittee | 林嘉薇;蕭中強 | zh_TW |
| dc.contributor.oralexamcommittee | Chia-Wei Lin;Chung-Chiang Hsiao | en |
| dc.subject.keyword | 補償性消費,威脅領域替代性,調節焦點,象徵性自我完成,流動補償,逃避策略,購買意願, | zh_TW |
| dc.subject.keyword | Compensatory consumption behavior,Domain substitution,Regulatory focus,Symbolic-self completion,Fluid compensation,Escapism,Purchase intention, | en |
| dc.relation.page | 53 | - |
| dc.identifier.doi | 10.6342/NTU202500749 | - |
| dc.rights.note | 同意授權(全球公開) | - |
| dc.date.accepted | 2025-05-07 | - |
| dc.contributor.author-college | 管理學院 | - |
| dc.contributor.author-dept | 商學研究所 | - |
| dc.date.embargo-lift | 2025-06-06 | - |
| Appears in Collections: | 商學研究所 | |
Files in This Item:
| File | Size | Format | |
|---|---|---|---|
| ntu-113-2.pdf | 1.29 MB | Adobe PDF | View/Open |
Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.