請用此 Handle URI 來引用此文件：
http://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/jspui/handle/123456789/19086完整後設資料紀錄
| DC 欄位 | 值 | 語言 |
|---|---|---|
| dc.contributor.advisor | 許鉅秉 | |
| dc.contributor.author | Ying-Chen Chu | en |
| dc.contributor.author | 朱盈蓁 | zh_TW |
| dc.date.accessioned | 2021-06-08T01:44:36Z | - |
| dc.date.copyright | 2016-08-30 | |
| dc.date.issued | 2016 | |
| dc.date.submitted | 2016-08-15 | |
| dc.identifier.citation | 一、中文部分
[1]吳明隆（2009）。結構方程式-方法與實務應用。高雄市：麗文文化事業股份有限公司。 [2]李城忠、陳益壯（2005）。運動服務業關係品質對顧客忠誠度影響之探討—台中YMCA游泳俱樂部之實證研究。人文暨社會科學期刊，1（1），91-108。 [3]林麗真（2015年7月24日）。係”驚”?！全臺行動族群半年內激增170萬人 熟齡族躍升主力族群 hTC擊敗Samsung奪回手機愛牌美名 現逾1,600萬人每天滑滑滑！！！。資策會FIND。2016年6月5日，擷取自: http://www.find.org.tw/market_info.aspx?n_ID=8482。 [4]顧萱萱（2005）。產品資訊階段性比較、抵價深度與消費者產品置換決策：消費者知覺取向。管理學報，22（3），359-375。 二、英文部分 [1]Reuben, M. Baron., & 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 (6), 1173-1182. [2]StoneRobert, N., & Gronhaug, K. (1993). Perceived Risk: Further Considerations for the Marketing Discipline. European Journal of Marketing, 27 (3), 39 - 50. [3]Anderson, J. C., & Gerbing, D. W. (1988). Structural equation modeling in practice: A review and recommended two-step approach. Psychological Bulletin, 103(3), 411-423. [4]Armstrong, G., & Kotler, P. (2002). Marketing: An Introduction. NJ: Prentice Hall: Upper Saddle River. [5]Bagozzi, R. P. (1980). Performance and satisfaction in an industrial sales force: An examination of their antecedents and simultaneity. The Journal of Marketing. [6]Bauer, R. A. (1960). Consumer behavior as risk taking. in R. S. Hancock, Dynamic marketing for a Changing World, 389-398. [7]Bhuian, N. S. (1997). Marketing Cues and Perceived Quality: Perception of Saudi Consumers toward Products of the U.S., Japan, Germany, Italy, U.K. and France. Journal of Quality Management, 2(2), 217-235. [8]Blattberg, R. C., & Neslin, S. A. (1990). Sales promotion: Concepts, methods, and strategies. New Jersey: Prentice Hall. [9]Cadotte, R. E., Woodruff, R. B. , & Jenkins, R. L. (1987). Expectations and Norms in Models of Consumer Satisfaction. 24 (3), 305-314. [10]Campbell, M. C., & Goodstein, C. R. (2001). The Moderating Effect of Perceived Risk on Consumers' Evaluation of Product Incongruity; Preference of the Norm. Journal of Consumer Research., 28(3), 439-449. [11]Cooper Peter. (1969). The Begrudging Index and the Subjective Value of Money. in Pricing Strategy, Bernard Taylor and Gordon Wills, eds. London: Staples Press, Ltd. [12]Cox, D. F. (1967). Risk Taking and Information Handing in Consumer Behavior,. Boston: Harvard University Press. [13]Cunningham, S. M. (1967). The Major Dimensions of Perceived Risk, in Donald F. Cox(ed.),Risk Taking and Information Handling in Consumer Behavior,. Boston : Harvard University press. [14]Ding, L., Velicer, W., & Harlow, L. (1995). Effects of estimation methods, number of indicators per factor and improper solutions on structural equation modeling fit indices. In Structural Equation Modeling, 2, 119-143. [15]Dodds, W. B., Monroe, K. B., & Grewal, D. (1991). Effects of price, brand, and store information on buyers’ product evaluations. Journal of Marketing Research, 28 (3), 307-319. [16]Dowling, Grahame R. (1986). Perceived Risk: The Concept and Its Measurement. Psychology and Marketing, 193-210. [17]Fishbein, M., & Ajzen, I. (1975). Belief, attitude, intention, and behavior: An introduction to theory and research, Reading,. MA: Addison-Wesley. [18]Fornell, C, & Lacker, D. F. (1981). Evaluating Structural Equation Models with Unobservable Variables and Measurement Error. 25, 186-192. [19]Garretson, J. A., & Clow, K. E. (1999). The influence of coupon face value on service quality expectations, risk perceptions and purchase. Journal of Services Marketing, 13(1), 59-72. [20]Grewal, D., Krishnan, R., Baker, J., & Borin, N. (1998). The effects of store name, brand name and price discounts on consumers' evaluations and purchase intentions. Journal of Retailing, 74(3), 331-352. [21]Hair, Joseph et al. (1998). Multivariate Data Analysis 5th ed. Prentice-Hall International, Inc. [22]Hancock, G. R., & Nevitt, J. (1999). Bootstrapping and the identification of exogenous latent variables within structural equation models. Structural Equation Modeling, 6, 394-399. [23]Hirschman, E. C. (1980). Innovativeness, Novelty Seeking, and Consumer Creativity. Journal of Consumer Research, 7(3), 283-295. [24]Hoyer, D., & Macinnis, D. J. (2010). Consumer Behavior, 5th International ed. Cengage Learning Inc. [25]Jacoby & Kaplan. (1972). The Components of Perceived Risk. Chicago. [26]Jacoby, J., & Olson, J.C. (1970). An Attitude Model of Brand Loyalty: Conceptual Underpinnings and Instrumentation Research. New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons. [27]Jordan, P. W. (2000). Designing Pleasurable Products;An Introduction to New Human Factors. London: Taylor and Francis. [28]Kalyanaram, G., & Winer, R. (1995). Empirical Generalizations From Reference Price Research. Marketing Science, 14(3), 161-169. [29]Kalyanaram, G., & Little, J. D. C. (1994). An empirical analysis of latitude of price acceptance in household packaged goods. Journal of Consumer Research, 408-418. [30]Kaplan, L. B. (1974). Components of perceived risk in product purchase:A cross-validation. Joumal of Applied Psychology, 59, 287-291. [31]Kline, B. R. (1998). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling. New York: the Guilford Press. [32]Kosenko, R., & Rahtz, D. (1988). Buyer Market Price Knowledge Influence on Acceptable Price Range and Price Limits. Advances in consumer Research., 15, 328-333. [33]Kotler, P. (1988). Marketing Management; Analysis, Planning, Implementatiom and Control(6th ed.). NJ: Prentice Hall: Englewood Cliffs. [34]Lichtenstein, Donald R., Peter, H. Bloch, & William, C. Black. (1998). Correlates of Price Acceptability. Journal of Consumer Research, 15, 243-252. [35]Mardia, K.V., & Foster, K.J. (1983). Omnibus Tests of Multinormality Based on Skewness and Kurtosis. Comm.Stats, 12(2), 207-221. [36]Mayhew, G. E., & Winer, R. S. (1992). An Empirical Analysis of Internal and External Reference Prices Using Scanner Data. Journal of Consumer Research, 19, 62-70. [37]Mittal, B. (2001). Measuring purchase-decision involvement. Psychology and Marketing, 6(2), 147-162. [38]Monroe, K. B. (1979). Pricing; Making Profitable Decision. New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company. [39]Monroe, K. B., & Krishnan, R. (1985). The effect of price on subjective product evaluations. In Perceived Quality: How Consumers View Stores and Merchandise. 209-232. [40]Murray, K. B., & Schlacter, J. L. (1990). The impact of services versus goods on consumers’ assessment of perceived risk and variability. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 18(1), 51-65. [41]Okada, M. E. (2001). Trade-ins, mental accounting, and product replacement decisions, 27(4) . Journal of Consumer Research. [42]Oliver, R. L. (1997). Satisfaction: a behavioral perspective on the consumer. McGraw-Hill. New York: McGraw-Hill Company. [43]Parasuraman, A., & Grewal, D. (2000). The Impact of Technology on the Quality-Value-Loyalty Chain: A Research Agenda. 28 (4), 168-174. [44]Peattie, K. (1992). Green Marketing. London: Pitman. [45]Prus Amanda, & Brandt, D. Randall. (1995). Understanding Your Customers. Marketing Tools. [46]Reichheld, F. F., & Sasser, J.W. (1990). Zero defections: Quality comes to services. Harvard Business Review, 68(5), 105-111. [47]Sherif, C. (1963). Social categorization as a function of latitude of acceptance and series range. Journal of Abnormal Social Psychology, 67 (2), 148-156. [48]Sherif, M., & Hovland, C. I. (1961). Social Judgment: Assimilation and Contrast Effects in Communication and Attitude Change. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press. [49]Sheth, J. N., Newman, B. I., & Gross, B. L. (1991). Why We Buy What We Buy:A Theory of Consumption Values. Journal of Business Research, 22(2), 159-170. [50]Sheu, Jiuh-Biing. (2016). Trade-In-For-Upgrade Behavioral Pricing and Market Competition. Working paper. [51]Shimp, T. A., & Bearden, W. O. (1982). Warrant and other extrinsic cue effect on consumer risk perception. Journal of Consumer Research, 9(1), 38-46. [52]Steenkamp, J. B. (1990). Conceptual Model of the Quality Perception Process. Journal of Business Research, 21(4), 309-333. [53]Teas Kenneth R., & Sanjeev Agarwal. (2000). The Effect of Extrinsic Product Cues on Consumers’ Perceptions of Quality, Sacrifice, and Value. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 28(2), 278-290. [54]Thaler, R.H. (1985). Mental accounting and consumer choice. Marketing Science, 4, 199-214. [55]Thompson, B. (2000). Ten commandments of structural equation modeling. Washington, DC: APA: In L. G. Grimm & P. R. Yarnold(eds.), Reading and understanding more multivariate statistics. [56]Torkzadeh, G., Koufteros, X., & Pflughoeft, K. (2003). Confirmatory analysis of computer self-efficacy. Structural Equation Modeling, 10(2), 263-275. [57]Tversky Amos, & Kahneman Daniel. (1973). Availability: Heuristic for Judging Frequency and probability. Cognitive Psychology, 5, 207-232. [58]Williams, L. J., & Hazer, J. T. (1986). Antecedents and consequences of satisfaction and commitment in trunover models: A reanalysis rising latent variable structrual equation methods. 71(2). Journal of Applied Psychology. [59]Zeithaml, V. A. (1988). Consumer perceptions of price, quality and value: a means-end model and synthesis of evidence. Journal of Marketing, 52 (3), 2-22. | |
| dc.identifier.uri | http://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/jspui/handle/123456789/19086 | - |
| dc.description.abstract | 隨著科技的進步與發達，智慧型手機推陳出新的速度越來越快，除了在品質及功能的表現上愈加優異外，價格亦逐漸下滑，使消費者持有智慧型手機的比例與汰舊換新的速度隨之提升。而近年來多家手機品牌廠商推出舊機換新機的優惠方案，除給予消費者產品升級的誘因之外，亦從中落實智慧型手機的逆向物流，降低智慧型手機報廢後對環境所造成的危害。
本研究以智慧型手機相同品牌舊換新折抵優惠方案為例，探討影響消費者舊換新意願之因素，研究結果發現：(1)新產品評價與舊產品評價會正向影響比較價格接受度及折抵程度，而當比較價格接受度及折抵程度越高時，消費者舊換新的意願也會越高。(2)品牌知覺風險對消費者的品牌忠誠度會產生負向影響，而當品牌忠誠度越高時，舊換新意願也會越高。(3)綠色價值導向越高的消費者，對舊機換新機的意願也較高。 | zh_TW |
| dc.description.abstract | With advances in technology, the performance and quality of smartphones are better than before, and the price has gradually declined. Therefore, more and more people have a smartphone and replace it more frequently. In recent years, a lot of firms launch the trade-in program. It not only offers consumers incentives to upgrade their smartphones, but also protect the environment from pollution by reverse logistics.
This study takes the smartphone trade-in program for an example to discuss the affecting factors on consumers’ trade-in intention. The results are summarized as follow. First, both new-product valuation and used-product valuation have positive influence on price acceptability and extent of trade-in rebate; price acceptability and extent of trade-in rebate also positively affect trade-in for upgrade intention. Second, brand perception risk negatively affects brand loyalty. And when consumers have higher brand loyalty, trade-in for upgrade intention is higher. Last, Green value orientation has positive influence on trade-in for upgrade intention. | en |
| dc.description.provenance | Made available in DSpace on 2021-06-08T01:44:36Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 ntu-105-R03741050-1.pdf: 1721695 bytes, checksum: d5659846167f8a7c49444e1271da1564 (MD5) Previous issue date: 2016 | en |
| dc.description.tableofcontents | 口試委員審定書 I
誌謝 II 中文摘要 III Abstract IV 目錄 V 表目錄 VII 圖目錄 VIII 第一章 緒論 1 第一節 研究背景與動機 1 第二節 研究目的 3 第三節 研究範圍 3 第四節 研究程序 3 第二章 文獻探討 5 第一節 舊換新折抵策略 5 第二節 產品評價 6 第三節 價格接受度 7 第四節 綠色價值 8 第五節 知覺風險 9 第六節 品牌忠誠度 10 第三章 研究方法 13 第一節 研究架構 13 第二節 研究假設 14 第三節 研究變項設計與操作型定義 18 第四節 問卷設計 20 第五節 抽樣設計 21 一、研究對象與抽樣方法 21 二、樣本大小 21 第六節 問卷收集與回收情形 22 第七節 資料分析方法 22 一、敘述性統計分析 22 二、信度分析 23 三、效度分析 23 四、結構方程模式分析 24 五、模型配適度指標 25 第四章 研究結果 26 第一節 樣本資料分析 26 一、樣本結構分析 26 二、受訪者智慧型手機使用偏好與概況 28 第二節 測量模型分析 33 一、基本條件檢驗 33 二、信度分析 35 三、效度分析 36 第三節 結構方程模型分析 39 一、模型配適能力檢驗 39 二、各構面關係之假說驗證 41 第四節 修正後之結構方程模型分析 42 一、修正後結構方程模型之假設建立 42 二、模型配適能力 46 三、各構面關係之驗證結果 47 第五章 結論與建議 49 第一節 實證結果與討論 49 一、敘述性統計分析發現 49 二、整體架構驗證與假設檢定發現 50 第二節 管理意涵 52 第三節 研究限制與後續建議 54 參考文獻 55 一、中文部分 55 二、英文部分 55 附錄 60 一、問卷 60 | |
| dc.language.iso | zh-TW | |
| dc.title | 智慧型手機汰換決策影響因素之研究 | zh_TW |
| dc.title | A Study on Affecting Factors of Smartphone Replacement Decisions | en |
| dc.type | Thesis | |
| dc.date.schoolyear | 104-2 | |
| dc.description.degree | 碩士 | |
| dc.contributor.oralexamcommittee | 陳穆臻,盧宗成 | |
| dc.subject.keyword | 舊換新折抵,價格接受度,綠色價值,知覺風險,品牌忠誠, | zh_TW |
| dc.subject.keyword | Trade-in,Price acceptability,Green value,Perception risk,Brand loyalty, | en |
| dc.relation.page | 63 | |
| dc.identifier.doi | 10.6342/NTU201601691 | |
| dc.rights.note | 未授權 | |
| dc.date.accepted | 2016-08-16 | |
| dc.contributor.author-college | 管理學院 | zh_TW |
| dc.contributor.author-dept | 商學研究所 | zh_TW |
| 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-105-1.pdf 目前未授權公開取用 | 1.68 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。