請用此 Handle URI 來引用此文件:
http://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/jspui/handle/123456789/23798完整後設資料紀錄
| DC 欄位 | 值 | 語言 |
|---|---|---|
| dc.contributor.advisor | 黃麗君(Li-Chun Huang) | |
| dc.contributor.author | Sy-Woei Chen | en |
| dc.contributor.author | 陳思瑋 | zh_TW |
| dc.date.accessioned | 2021-06-08T05:10:15Z | - |
| dc.date.copyright | 2011-07-26 | |
| dc.date.issued | 2011 | |
| dc.date.submitted | 2011-07-15 | |
| dc.identifier.citation | 1. 台北市農會建國花市http://www.tfa.org.tw/flower.html,2009年1月。
2. 台灣柑橘產業資訊網http://agrapp.afa.gov.tw/,2009年6月。 3. 江世豪、石建佳(2007)。食品加工產業分析-以順泰蜜餞為例。國立虎尾大學工業工程與管理研究所學生研究報告,未出版。 4. 行政院農委會農糧署東區分署網站http://www.hlfd.gov.tw/Zh-tw/index.aspx?ModuleCode=CalendarShow&Season=spring&FD_ID=00000000-0000-0000-0000-000000000015,2009年6月。 5. 吳明隆(2001)。SPSS統計應用實務第二版。台北市:松崗。 6. 李金泉(1997)。如何精通SPSS for Windows統計分析。台北市:松崗。 7. 李國明(2005)。大陸進口金柑對國內產業之衝擊與因應。花蓮區農業專訊, 51,17-21。 8. 李德治、童惠玲(2008)。應用統計學。台北市:博碩文化。 9. 余嚴尊(2007)。金柑鮮食與加工產銷履歷系統建立之可行性探討。國立宜蘭大學96年度農業推廣計畫。 10. 希望廣場 http://www.ehope.org.tw/,2009年1月。 11. 周文賢、張欽富(2000)。聯合分析在產品設計之運用。台北市:華泰。 12. 周文賢(2004)。多變量統計分析。台北市:智勝文化。 13. 金棗文化協會 http://www.lanyangnet.com.tw/kumqat/html/link7.htm,2010年3月。 14. 宜蘭縣蘭陽金柑合作社http://www.lanyang-kumquat.com/,2010年5月。 15. 邱皓政(2010)。量化統計與研究。台北市:五南。 16. 陳宗志(2003)。消費者對創新產品購買意願因素之探討—以無線網路產品(WLAN)為例 (未出版之碩士論文)。國立中央大學,桃園縣。 17. 陳依婷、許惠珠、胡惟喻(2008)。以遊客住宿行前期望、滿意度及再宿意願為例。中華技術學院學報,39,167-179。 18. 陳順宇(2005)。多變量分析。台北市:華泰。 19. 彭作奎(1993)。大陸農產品走私對台灣農業衝擊之理論探討。農業經濟半年刊,53,33-64。 20. 彭克仲、林豐瑞(2000)。生鮮芭樂之消費者偏好行為與市場區隔之研究。農業金融論叢。43,295-313。 21. 彭克仲、林豐瑞、謝俊雄(1998)。生鮮蓮霧之消費者偏好行為與市場區隔研究。農業經濟論文,35,111-132。 22. 黃寶祚、陳麗貞(2003)。產業多角化經營之估測研究—以金棗為例。農業經營管理年刊,9,149-171。 23. 黃逸毅(2008)。鄉村農特產品的轉型與文化建構-以宜蘭金桔為例 (未出版之碩士論文)。國立台灣大學,台北市。 24. 黃麗君(2010)。國產金棗行銷策略之研究。行政院農委會農糧署99年度科技計畫研究。1-57。 25. 農糧署網站 http://www.afa.gov.tw/tenclassic_index.asp?CatID=95,2009年6月。 26. 榮泰生(2006)。SPSS與研究方法。台北市:五南圖書。 27. 魯 真、陳宏易(2001)。國產品牌水果知消費者認知研究。農業金融論叢,46,357-382。 28. 魯真、王策玄(2005)。台灣水果需求及消費型態分析。農業經濟叢刊,10,125-62。 29. 劉守成(2003)。宜蘭縣政府的行銷策略-以宜蘭國際童玩藝術節為例。研考雙週刊,27,3,50-55。 30. 鍾倫納(1994)。應用社會科學研究法。台北市:台灣商務。 31. 羅文輝(1994)。精確新聞報導。台北市:正中。 32. 顏碧吟(2002)。宜蘭縣礁溪鄉金棗產業商品鍊之初探。臺灣人文,7,137-163。 33. 謝佩吟(2006)。產品屬性對創新採用之影響-以網路通路為干擾變項 (未出版之碩士論文)。國立中正大學,嘉義縣。 34. Aaker, A. D. (1996). Building Strong Brands, New York:The Free Press. 35. Aaker, A. D. & Shansby, J. G. (1982). Positioning your product, Business Horizons, 25(3), 56-62. 36. Aiken, L. S., West, S. G. & Reno, R. R. (1991). Multiple regression: Testing and interpreting interactions, Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications Inc. 37. Arvola, A., Lähteenmäki, L. & Tuorila, H. (1999). Predicting the intent to purchase unfamiliar and familiar cheeses: The effects of attitudes, expected liking and food neophobia, Appetite, 32(1), 113-126. 38. Barnett, H. G. (1953). Innovation: The basic of cultural change, New York: McGraw-hill Book Company Inc. 39. Baron, R. M. & Kenny, D. A. (1986). The moderator–mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 5(6), 1173-1182. 40. Beatty, S. E. & Smith, S. M. (1987). External search effort: An investigation across several product categories, Journal of Consumer Research, 14(1), 83-95. 41. Blythe, J. (1999). Innovativeness and newness in high-tech consumer, Journal of Product & Brand Management, 8(5), 415-429 42. Bond, J. K., Thilmany, D. & Bond, C. A. (2006). Direct marketing of fresh produce: Understanding consumer purchasing decisions, American Agricultural Economics Association, 21(4), 229-236. 43. Bond, J. K., Thilmany, D. D. & Bond, C. A. (2008). Going local: Exploring consumer behavior and motivations for direct food purchases, American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 90(5), 1303-1309. 44. Booz, P. S., Alien, T. J. & Hamilton, G. (1982). New Product Management for the 1980’s, New York: Booz, Allen and Hamilton Inc. 45. Boyd,T. C. & Mason, C. H. (1999). The link between attractiveness of extrabrand attributes and the adoption of innovations, Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 27(3), 306-319. 46. Carlsson, F., Frykblom, P. & Lagerkvist, C. J. (2005). Consumer preferences for food product quality attributes from Swedish agriculture, Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences, 34(4), 366-370. 47. Cardello, V. A. (1995). Food quality: Relativity, context and consumer expectations, Food Quality and Preference, 6(3), 163-170. 48. Celsi, R. L. & Olson, J. C. (1988). The role of involvement in attention and comprehension processes, Journal of Consumer Research, 15(2), 210-224. 49. Cestre, G. & Darmon, R. (1998) Assessing concumer preferences in the context of new product diffusion, International Journal of Research in Marketing, 15(2), 123-135. 50. Cooper, R.G. & Kleinschmidt, E. J. (1991). The impact of product innovativeness on performance, Journal of Product Innovation Management, 8(4), 240-251. 51. Cronbach, L. J. (1951). Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of tests, Psychometrika, 16(3), 297-334. 52. Deliza, R., Rosenthal, A. & Silva, A. L. (2003). Consumer attitude towards information on non-conventional technology, Trends in Food Science & Technology, 14(1), 43-49. 53. Dhebar, A. (1995). Complementarity, compatibility, and product change: Breaking with the past? Journal Product Innovation Management, 12(2), 136-152. 54. Diker, A., Walters, L. M., Cunningham-Sabo, L. & Baker, S. S. (2011). Factors influencing adoption and implementation of cooking with kids: An experiential school-based nutrition education curriculum, Journal of Extension, 49(1), 1-13. 55. Earle, M. D. (1997). Innovation in the food industry, Trends in Food Science & Technology, 8(5), 166-175. 56. Eertmans, A., Victoira, A., Vansant, G. & Bergh, O. V. (2005). Food-related personality traits, food choice motives and food intake: Mediator and moderator relationships, Food Quality and Preference, 16(8), 714-726. 57. Gobeli, D. H. & Brown, D. J. (1987). Analyzing product innovation, Research of management, 30(4), 25-31. 58. Goldsmith, R. E. & Hofacker, C. F. (1991). Measuring consumer innovativeness, Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 19(3), 209-221. 59. Gregan-Paxton, J., Hoeffler, S. & Zhao, M. (2005). When categorization is ambiguous: Factors that facilitate the use of a multiple category inference strategy. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 15(2), 127-140. 60. Greenleaf, E. A. & Lehmann, D. R. (1995). Reasons for substantial delay in consumer decision making, Journal of Consumer Research, 22(2),186-199. 61. Guiltinan, J. P. (1999). Launch strategy, launch tactics, and demand outcomes, Journal Product Innovation Management, 16(6), 509-529. 62. Hair, J. F., Anderson, R. E., Tatham, R. E. Black, W. C. (1997). Multivariate data analysis: With readings, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall. 63. Henriques, S. A., King, S. C., & Meiselmana, H. L. (2009). Consumer segmentation based on food neophobia and its application to product development, Food Quality and Preference, 20(2), 83-91. 64. Heri, S. & Mosler, H. J. (2008). Factors affecting the diffusion of solar water disinfection: A field study in Bolivia, Health Education Behavior, 35(4), 541-560. 65. Holak, S. L. (1988). Determinants of innovative durables adoption an empirical study with implications for early product screening, Journal of Product Innovation Management, 59(1), 50-69. 66. Holak, S. L. & Lehmann, D. R. (1990). Purchase intentions and the dimensions of innovation: An exploratory model, Journal of Product Innovation Management, 7(1), 59-73. 67. Holbrook, B. M. & Hirschman, C. E. (1982). The experiential aspects of consumption: Consumer fantasies, feelings, and fun, The Journal of Consumer Research, 9(2), 132-140. 68. Jaeger, R. S., Rossiter, L. K. & Lau, K. (2005). Consumer perceptions of novel fruit and familiar fruit: A repertory grid application, Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture, 85(3), 480-488. 69. Jaeger, R. S., Rossiter, L. K., Wismer, W. V. & Harker, F. R. (2003). Consumer-driven product development in the kiwifruit industry, Food Quality and Preference, 14(3), 187-198. 70. Johnson, P. K., Lennon, J. S., Jasper, C., Damhorst, M. L. & Lakner, H. B. (2003). An application Rogers’s innovation model: Use of the internet to purchase apparel, food, and home furnishing products by small community consumers, Clothing and Textiles, 28(4), 185-196. 71. Kaiser, H. (1970). A second generation little jiffy, Psychomertrika, 35(4), 401-405. 72. Keller, K. L. (1993). Conceptualizing, measuring, and managing customer-based brand equity, The Journal of Marketing, 57(1), 1-22. 73. Kotler, P. (1994). Marketing Management, 8th ed., New Jersey, Prentice-Hall. 74. Kolter, p. & Armstrong, G. (1996). Marketing: An introduction, 4th ed., New Jersey: Prentice-Hall. 75. Kotler, P. & Keller, K. (2003). Marketing Management, 12th ed., New Jersey: Prentice-Hall. 76. Mantel, S. P. & Kardes, F. R. (1999). The role of direction of comparison, attribute-based processing, and attitude-based processing in consumer preference, Journal of Consumer Research, 25(4), 335-352. 77. Marascuilo, L. A., & Serlin, R. C. (1988). Statistical methods for the social and behavioral sciences. New York: W. H. Freeman. 78. Meiselmana, H. L., King, S.C. & Gillette, M. (2010). The demographics of neophobia in a large commercial US sample, Food Quality and Preference, 21(7), 893-897. 79. Moore, G. G. & Benbasat, I. (1991). Development of an instrument to measure the perceptions of adopting an information technology innovation, Information System Research, 2(3), 192-222. 80. Myers, J. H. & Shocker, D. A. (1981). The nature of product-related attributes, Research in Marketing, 5(1), 211-236. 81. Narayanan, V. K. (2001). Managing technology and innovation for competitive advantage, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall. 82. Nielsen, N.A., Bech-Larsen, T. B. & Grunert, K.G. (1998). Consumer purchase motives and product perceptions: A laddering study on vegetable oil in three countries, Food Quality and Preference, 9(6), 455-466. 83. Ophuis, A.M. & Trijp, C.M. (1995). Perceived quality: A market driven and consumer oriented approach, Food Quality and Preference, 6(3), 177-183. 84. Ostlund, E. L. (1974). Perceived innovation attributes as predictors of innovativeness, Journal of Consumer Research, 1(2), 23-29. 85. Peracchio, A. L. & Tybout, M. A. (1996). The moderating role of prior knowledge in schema-based product evaluation, The Journal of Consumer Research, 23(3), 177-192. 86. Pliner, P. & Hobden, K. (1992). Development of a scale to measure the trait of food neophobia in humans, Appetite, 19(2), 155-120. 87. Pliner, P., Pelchat, M. & Grabski, M. (1993). Reduction of neophobia in humans by exposure to novel foods, Appetite, 20(2), 111-123. 88. Ragaert, P., Verbeke, W., Devlieghere, F. & Debevere, J. (2003). Consumer perception and choice of minimally processed vegetables and packaged fruits, Food Quality and preference, 15(3), 259-270. 89. Raudenbush, B. & Frank, R. A. (1999). Assessing food neophobia: The role of stimulus familiarity, Appetite, 32(2), 261-271. 90. Reynolds, J. T. & Gutman, J. (1988). Laddering theory, method, analysis, and interpretation, Journal of Advertising Research, 28(1), 11-31. 91. Reynolds, J. T. & Olson, C. J. (2001). Understanding consumer decision making: The means-end approach to marketing and advertising strategy, New Jersey, Lawrence Erlbaum Associate. 92. Ritchey, P. N., Frank, R. A., Hursti, U. K. & Tuorila, H. (2003). Validation and cross-national comparison of the food neophobia scale (FNS) using confirmatory factor analysis, Appetite, 40(2), 163-173. 93. Robertson, T. S. (1967). The process of innovation and diffusion of innovation, Journal of Marketing, 36(1), 15-16. 94. Roberston, T. S. (1985). Consumer Behavior, Illinois : Scott and Freshman. 95. Rogers, E. M. (1962). Diffusion of Innovation, 1st ed., New York: Free Press. 96. Rogers, E. M. (1983). Diffusion of Innovation, 3rd ed., New York :Free Press. 97. Rogers, E. M. (1995). Diffusion of Innovation, 4th ed., New York: Free Press. 98. Rogers, E. M. (2003). Diffusion of Innovation, 5th ed., New York: Free Press. 99. Ronteltap, A., Trijp, J. C. M., Renes, R.J. & Frewer, L. J. (2007). Consumer acceptance of technology-based food innovations: Lessons for the future of nutrigenomics, Appetite, 49(1), 1-17. 100. Rozin, P. & Vollmecke, T. A. (1986). Food likes and dislikes, Annual Review of Nutrition, 6(1), 433-456. 101. Schmidt, J. B. & Spreng, R. A. (1996). A proposed model of external consumer information search, Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 24(3), 246-256. 102. Schiffman, L.G, & Kanuk, L.L. (2001). Consumer Behavior, 7th ed., New Jersey: Prentice-Hall Inc. 103. Strahilevitz, M. & Myers, J. G. (1998). Donations to charity as purchase incentives: How well they work may depend on what you are trying to sell, Journal of Consumer Research, 24(4), 434-446. 104. Stayman, M. D., Alden, L. D. & Smith, H. K. (1992). Some Effects of Schematic Processing on Consumer Expectations and Disconfirmation Judgments, The Journal of Consumer Research, 19(2), 240-255. 105. Taylor, S. & Todd, P. (1995). Decomposition and crossover effects in the theory of planned behavior: A study of consumer adoption intentions, International Journal of Research in Marketing, 12(2), 127-155. 106. Tornatzky, L. G. & Fleischer, M. (1990). The Processes of Technological Innovation, MA: Lexington Books. 107. Tornatzky, G. L. & Klein, J. K. (1982). Innovation characteristics and innovation adoption-implementation: A meta-analysis of findings, IEEE transactions on Engineering Management, 29(1), 28-43. 108. Tuorila, H., Andersson, A., Martikainen, A. & Salovaara, H. (1998). Effect of product formula, information and consumer characteristics on the acceptance of a new snack food, Food Quality and Preference, 9(5), 313-320. 109. Tuorila, H., Meiselman, H. L., Bell, R., Cardello, A.V. & Johnson, W. (1994). Role of sensory and cognitive information in the enhancement of certainty and linking for novel and familiar foods, Appetite, 23(3), 231-246. 110. Tuorila, H., Lähteenmäki, L., Pohjalainen, L. & Lotti, L. (2001). Food neophobia among the Finns and related responses to familiar and unfamiliar foods, Food Quality and Preference, 12(1), 29-37. 111. Tuorila, H., Meiselman, H. L., Cardello, V. A. & Lesher, L. L. (1998). Effect of expectations and the definition of product category on the acceptance of unfamiliar foods, Food Quality and Preference, 9(6), 421-430. 112. Urala, N. & Lähteenmäki, L. (2004). Attitudes behind consumers’ willingness to use functional foods, Food Quality and Preference, 15(7), 793-803. 113. Veryzer, R. W. & Hutchinson, J. W. (1998). The influence of unity and prototypicality on aesthetic responses to new product designs, Journal of Consumer Research, 24(4), 374-394. 114. Zaltman, G. & Burger, P. (1975). Marketing research: Fundamentals and dynamics, Hinsdale, Ill: Dryden Press. | |
| dc.identifier.uri | http://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/jspui/handle/123456789/23798 | - |
| dc.description.abstract | 金棗為宜蘭地區的重要產物,主要產品形式為加工品,如蜜餞。近年來由於消費者重視健康及飲食習慣的改變,屬醃漬品的蜜餞產品使用量逐漸減少,以及蜜餞廠商為降低成本而進口大陸金棗,因而影響金棗的產業經濟。農委會花蓮區農業改良場為輔導金棗產業之發展,經過不斷的改良金棗品質及酸甜度後,推出可被大眾接受直接食用的金棗鮮果,並且和礁溪鄉農會共同辦理金棗鮮食的推廣活動以拓展金棗產業的有效市場。
然而,金棗鮮食的推廣上有困難之處。首先為消費者仍將金棗定位為零食,而非水果;消費者對也金棗存有酸澀的刻板印象而畏懼不敢食用。因此農民未見金棗鮮食的市場成效,便不視金棗鮮食為市場銷售主力,而較無心思在金棗鮮果品質的提升。本研究解決金棗鮮食推廣上的困難,採用Rogers(1983)的創新採用理論來分析消費者對金棗鮮食的採用行為,找出影響消費者採用金棗鮮食的關鍵因素,以及各關鍵因素影響消費者採用金棗鮮食的權重比例。本研究調查台灣地區381位消費者的認知金棗鮮食屬性與新食品恐懼症,且利用集群分析區隔消費者,而能針對不同的消費者制定行銷策略。 研究利用因素分析將影響消費者金棗鮮食接受度的金棗鮮食認知屬性分為四個屬性,分別為飲食習慣符合度、功效屬性、可試用性與美觀性,且功效屬性為影響消費者金棗鮮食接受度的主要因素。研究結果也顯示新食品恐懼症對消費者可試用性與金棗鮮食接受度的關係具干擾作用。兩階段集群分析將消費者分為三群,分別為「鮮食認同者」,為推廣的目標族群,傾向於將金棗當作一般水果食用,金棗鮮食接受度高;「試吃參與者」,較知曉金棗鮮食的試吃活動以及較常參與試吃活動,金棗鮮食接受度為中等;「功效認同者」,對於金棗鮮食的功效屬性與美觀性認同度較高,而金棗鮮食接受度是最低,大多為青少年與學生。 本研究建議金棗鮮食推廣時可以強化金棗鮮食的優勢,而吸引消費者將金棗當作一般水果食用。此外,藉由增加金棗鮮食的試吃資訊與機會,可以增加消費者對於金棗鮮食的熟悉度,以增加高新食品恐懼症者採用金棗鮮食的意願。在市場區隔方面,針對「鮮食認同者」可以在包裝或販售處附上功效,「試吃活動者」與「功效認同者」可以將鮮果外觀分級,等級高的金棗以此兩群為主要銷售對象。 | zh_TW |
| dc.description.abstract | Kumquat is an important crop in Yi-Lan. 90 percent of kumquat products are processed foods such as preserves. However, consumers emphasize on eating healthy, sales of volume for kumquat preserves are reducing because thought unnatural and unhealthy. And manufacturers import cheap half dried kumquat from China to cost down. Therefore, kumquat industries are in a difficult position. To raise sales of volume for kumquat, farmers’ associations in Yi-Lan area improve taste and quality of kumquat, consumer can eat kumquat directly as fresh fruits for taste became sweeter.
But promotions for fresh kumquat fruits follow some difficulties. Consumers still categorize kumquat in snacks, and think kumquats tasted sour and mouth-puckering. Therefore, consumers are low-willing to try kumquat. In hence, kumquat farmers wouldn’t improve quality of kumquat because of low sales of kumquat fruits. To solve this problem, this study referred to Roger’s (1983) innovation adoption model to analyze key factor effecting consumer’s adoption of fresh Kumquat fruit, and compare weights among every key factor. This study surveyed 381 consumers for perceived Kumquat attributes and food neophobia by questionnaire in Taiwan. To effectively reach consumer segments to make different strategy, this study also used cluster analysis to segment consumers based on their perceived kumquat attributes. Results of factor analysis reveal four major factors influencing consumer’s acceptance of fresh Kumquat fruit: Compatibility, Functional Attributes, Accessibility and Appearance. Futhermore, compatibility influences consumer’s acceptance the most, and food neophobia has moderate effects to accessibility. 2-steps cluster analysis turns out to 3 clusters: “High compatibility consumer”, target consumer, high identity of compatibility and high acceptance; “High sampling involved consumer”, knowing and high involvement in kumquat sampling activities, and “High functional attributes identifier”, high identity on functional attribute and appearance, low acceptance, most are young consumers and students. This study suggests in kumquat fruit promotion enhancing advantages of kumquat to attract consumers take kumquats as fruits as usual. In addition, providing more kumquat sampling activities and information can promote consumers’ familiarity for high food neophobia consumers. In segmentation, emphasizing on kumquat package or selling place to attract “High compatibility consumer” purchasing, and classifying out better appearance of kumquat to attract “High sampling involved consumer” and “High functional attributes identifier” adopting kumquat fruits. | en |
| dc.description.provenance | Made available in DSpace on 2021-06-08T05:10:15Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 ntu-100-R98630006-1.pdf: 749129 bytes, checksum: 589b6a6f29a382ac34f60a8ff752692a (MD5) Previous issue date: 2011 | en |
| dc.description.tableofcontents | 口試委員會審定書……………………………………………………………… Ⅰ
謝誌……………………………………………………………………………… Ⅱ 中文摘要………………………………………………………………………… Ⅲ 英文摘要………………………………………………………………………… VI 圖目錄…………………………………………………………………………… IX 表目錄…………………………………………………………………………… IX 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 第二章 文獻回顧 ……………………………………………………………… 5 第一節 金棗產業簡介與金棗鮮食………………………………………… 5 第二節 創新產品採用過程 ……………………………………………… 11 第三節 產品屬性 ………………………………………………………… 18 第四節 新食品採用理論 ………………………………………………… 27 第三章 研究方法 …………………………………………………………… 33 第一節 研究變數定義與衡量 …………………………………………… 33 第二節 研究架構 ………………………………………………………… 35 第三節 問卷設計 ………………………………………………………… 35 第四節 抽樣設計 ………………………………………………………… 37 第五節 資料分析方法 …………………………………………………… 37 第四章 資料分析與結果……………………………………………………… 44 第一節 樣本結構分析 …………………………………………………… 44 第二節 因素分析與信、效度分析 ……………………………………… 47 第三節 迴歸分析 ………………………………………………………… 53 第四節 干擾作用檢測 …………………………………………………… 60 第五節 集群分析 ………………………………………………………… 64 第五章 結論與建議 ………………………………………………………… 69 第一節 研究結論與討論 ………………………………………………… 69 第二節 管理意涵 ………………………………………………………… 74 第三節 研究限制與未來建議 …………………………………………… 78 參考文獻………………………………………………………………………… 80 附錄 …………………………………………………………………………… 90 | |
| dc.language.iso | zh-TW | |
| dc.title | 消費者對農產品新食用方式之採用行為研究 | zh_TW |
| dc.title | Consumer Adoption of New Dietary Way for Agricultural Products | en |
| dc.type | Thesis | |
| dc.date.schoolyear | 99-2 | |
| dc.description.degree | 碩士 | |
| dc.contributor.oralexamcommittee | 邱玉蟬(Yu-Chan Chiu),黃文星(Wen-Shin Huang) | |
| dc.subject.keyword | 金棗,創新採用,屬性,新食品恐懼症, | zh_TW |
| dc.subject.keyword | Kumquat,Adoption,Attributes,Food Neophobia, | en |
| dc.relation.page | 94 | |
| dc.rights.note | 未授權 | |
| dc.date.accepted | 2011-07-15 | |
| dc.contributor.author-college | 生物資源暨農學院 | zh_TW |
| dc.contributor.author-dept | 生物產業傳播暨發展學研究所 | zh_TW |
| 顯示於系所單位: | 生物產業傳播暨發展學系 | |
文件中的檔案:
| 檔案 | 大小 | 格式 | |
|---|---|---|---|
| ntu-100-1.pdf 未授權公開取用 | 731.57 kB | 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。
