請用此 Handle URI 來引用此文件：
http://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/jspui/handle/123456789/34488完整後設資料紀錄
| DC 欄位 | 值 | 語言 |
|---|---|---|
| dc.contributor.advisor | 張重昭 | |
| dc.contributor.author | Yu-Jen Chou | en |
| dc.contributor.author | 周宇貞 | zh_TW |
| dc.date.accessioned | 2021-06-13T06:11:11Z | - |
| dc.date.available | 2007-06-26 | |
| dc.date.copyright | 2006-06-26 | |
| dc.date.issued | 2006 | |
| dc.date.submitted | 2006-03-30 | |
| dc.identifier.citation | REFERENCES
Aaker, J. L. (2000), “Accessibility or Diagnosticity? Disentangling the Influence of Culture on Persuasion Processes and Attitudes,” Journal of Consumer Research, 26(4), 340-357. Aaker, J. L. and Lee, A. Y. (2001), “`I' Seek Pleasures and `We' Avoid Pains: The Role of Self-Regulatory Goals in Information Processing and Persuasion,” Journal of Consumer Research, 28(1), 33-49. Agrawal, N. and Maheswaran, D. (2005), “Motivated Reasoning in Outcome-Bias Effects,” Journal of Consumer Research, 31(1), 798-805. Allport, G.. W. (1955), Becoming New Haven, CT: Yale University Press. Barrett, F. L.and Russell, James A. (1998), “Independence and Bipolarity in the Structure of Current Affect,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74(4), 967-984. Bettman, J. R., Luce, M. F. and Payne, J. W. (1998), “Constructive Consumer Choice Processes,” Journal of Consumer Research, 25(3), 187-217. Bosmans, A. and Baumgartner, H. (2005), “Goal-Relevant Emotional Information: When Extraneous Affect Leads to Persuasion and When It Does Not,” Journal of Consumer Research, 32(4), 424-434. Cantor, N., Markus, H., Hiedenthal, P., and Nurius, P. (1986), “On Motivation and the Self-Concept,” In R.M. Sorrentino and E.T. Higgins (Eds), Handbook of Motivation and Cognition: Foundations of Social Behavior, 96-121. Chen, S., Shechter, D. and Chaiken, S. (1996), “Getting at the Truth or Getting Along: Accuracy- versus Impression- Motivated Heuristic and Systematic Processing,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 71(2), 262-275. Chen, A. H., Ng, S. and Rao, A.(2005), “Cultural Differences in Consumer Impatience,” Journal of Marketing Research, 42(3), 291-301. Chernev, A. (2004a), “Goal-Attribute Compatibility in Consumer Choice,” Journal of Consumer Psychology, 14(1&2), 141-150. Chernev, A. (2004b), “Goal Orientation and Consumer Preference for the Status Quo,” Journal of Consumer Research, 31(3), 557-565. Colby, K. M. (1968), “A Programmable theory of cognition and affection in individual personal belief systems,” In R. P. Roseberg, and Tannenbaum, P. H. (Eds), Theories of Cognitive Consistency: A Source Book, Chicago: Rand McNally, 520-525. Cooley, C. H. (1964), Human Nature and the Social Order, New York: Schocken Books. (Original work published 1902). Crowe, E. and 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. Erikson, E. H. (1963), Childhood and Society, (2nd ed.), New York: Norton. (Original work published 1950). Fisher, G. W., and Hawkins, S. A. (1993), “Strategy Compatibility, Scale Compatibility, and the Prominence Effect,” Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 19(June), 580-597. Fisher, G. W., Carmon, Z., Ariely, D., and Zauberman, G. (1999), “Goal-Based Construction of Preferences: Task Goals and the Prominence Effect,” Management Science, 45(8), 1057-1075. Freud, S. (1961), The Ego and the Id. In J. Strachey (Ed & Trans.), Standard Edition of the Complete Psychological Works of Sigmund Freud, 19, 3-66. London: Hogarth Press. (Original work published 1923) Friedman, R. S. and Forster, J. (2001), “The Effects of Promotion and Prevention Cues on Creativity,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 81(6), 1001-1013. Grewal, D., Kavanoor, S., Fern, E. F., Costley, C., and Barnes, J. (1997), “Comparative Versus Non-Comparative Advertising: A Meta-Analysis,” Journal of Marketing, 61 (4), 1-15. Heath, C., Larrick, R. P. and Wu, G. (1999), “Goals as Reference Points,” Cognitive Psychology, 38(1), 79-109. Higgins, E. T. (1984), Self-Discrepancy: A Theory Relating Self and Affect, Unpublished Manuscript, New York: Cambridge University Press. Higgins, E. T. (1997), “Beyond Pleasure and Pain,” American Psychologist, 52(12), 1280-1300. Higgins, E. T. (2002), “How Self-Regulation Creates Distinct Values: The Case of Promotion and Prevention Decision Making,” Journal of Consumer Psychology, 12(3), 177-191. Higgins, E. T., Bond, R. N., Klein, R., and Strauman, T. (1986), “Self-Discrepancies and Emotional Vulnerability: How Magnitude, Accessibility and Type of Discrepancy Influence Affect,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51 (1), 515. Higgins, E. T., Harlow, R. E., Idson, L. C., Adyuk, O. N., and Taylor, A. (2001), “Achievement Orientations from Subjective Histories of Success: Promotion Pride versus Prevention Pride,” European Journal of Social Psychology, 31(1), 323. Higgins, E. T., Roney, C. J. R., Crowe E., and Hymes, C. (1994), “Ideal versus Ought Predilections for Approach and Avoidance: Distinct Self-Regulatory Systems,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 66 (2), 276-286. Idson, L. C. Liberman, N. and Higgins, E. T. (2000), Feeling good and Feeling Bad about Prospective Choices: Regulatory Focus and Motivational Strength as Moderators, Unpublished Manuscript, Columbia University, Department of Psychology. Jain , S. P. (1993), “Positive Versus Negative Comparative Advertising,” Marketing Letters, 4(4), 309-320. Jain, S. P. and Posavac, S. S. (2004), “Valenced Comparisons,” Journal of Marketing Research, 41(1), 46-58. James, W. (1948), Psychology, New York: World Publishing. (Original work Published 1890). Kahneman, D. Knetsch, J. L. and Thaler, R. H. (1991), “The Endowment Effect, Loss Aversion, and Status Quo Bias,” Journal of Economic Perspectives, 5 (December), 1325-1327. Kahneman, D. and Tversky, A. (1979), “Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision under Risk,” Econometrica, 47 (2), pp.263-291. Lecky, P. (1961), Self-Consistency: A theory of personality, New York: Shoe String Press. Lee, Angela Y. and Aaker, J. L. (2004), “Bringing the Frame Into Focus: The Influence of Regulatory Fit on Processing Fluency and Persuasion,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 86(2), 205-218. Lockwood, P., Jordan, C. H. and Kunda, Z. (2002), “Motivation by positive or negative role models: regulatory focus determines who will best inspire us,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 83(4), 854-864. Louro, M. J., Pieters P. and Zeelenberg M. (2005), “Negative Returns on Positive Emotions: The Influence of Pride and Self-Regulatory Goals on Repurchase Decisions,” Journal of Consumer Research, 31(4), 833-840. Manning, K. C., Miniard, P. W. Barone, M. J. and Rose, R. L. (2001), “Understanding the Mental Representations Created by Comparative Advertising,” Journal of Advertising, 30(2), 27-39. Martin, B. A. S., Lang, B., and Wong, S. (2004), “Conclusion Explicitness in Advertising,” Journal of Advertising, 32 (4), 57-65. Mead, G. H. (1934), Mind, Self, and Social structure, Glencoe, IL: Free Press. Meirick, P. (2002), “Cognitive Responses to Negative and Comparative Political Advertising,” Journal of Advertising, 31(1), 49-62. Merritt, S.(1984), “Negative Political Advertising: Some Empirical Findings,” Journal of Advertising, 13(2), 27-38. Mitchell, A. A. and Olson J. C. (1981), “Are Product Attribute Beliefs the Only Mediator of Advertising Effects on Brand Attitude?” Journal of Marketing Research, 18(3), 318-332. Nowlis, S.M. and Simonson, I.(1997), “Attribute-task Compatibility as a Determinant of Consumer Preference Reversals,” Journal of Marketing Research, 34(2), 36-46. Pechmann, C. (1996), “Do Consumers Overgeneralize One-Sided Comparative Price Claims, and Are More stringent Regulations Needed?” Journal of Marketing Research, 33 (2), 150-152. Pechmann, C. and Ratneshwar, S. (1991), “The Use of Comparative Advertising for Brand Positioning: Association Versus Differentiation,” Journal of Consumer Research, 18 (September), 145-160. Peter, J P., Churchill, G. A. J. and Brown, T. J. “Caution in the Use of Difference Scores in Consumer Research,” Journal of Consumer Research, 19 (1), 655-622. Pham, M. T. and Avnet T. (2004), “Ideals and Oughts and the Reliance on Affect Versus Substance in Persuasion,” Journal of Consumer Research, 30 (1), 503-518. Pinkleton, B. E., Um, N.-H. and Austin, E. W. (2002), “An Exploration of the Effects of Negative Political Advertising on Political Decision Making,” Journal of Advertising, 31(1), 14-25. Rogers, C. R. (1961), On Becoming a Person, Boston: Houghton Mifflin. Safer, D. A. (1998), Preferences for Luxurious or Reliable Products: Promotion and Prevention Focus as Moderators, Unpublished doctoral Dissertation, Columbia University, Department of Psychology. Schafer, R. (1967), Ideals, the Ego Ideal, and the Ideal Self, In R. R. Holt(Ed.), Motives and thought: Psychological Issues, 5(2-3), 131-174. Shah, J. and Higgins, E. T. (1997), “Expectancy x Value Effects: Regulatory Focus as Determinant of Magnitude and Direction,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 73(3), 447-458. Slovic, P., Griffin, D., and Tversky, A. (1990), “Compatibility Effects in Judgment and Choice,” In R. M. Horgarth (Ed.) Insights in Decision Making: A tribute to Hillel J. Einhorn (pp.5-27). Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Samuelson, W. and Zeckhauser, R. (1988), “Status Quo Bias in Decision Making,” Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 1(1), 7-59. Sorescu, Alina B. and Bestsy D. Gelb (2000), “Negative Comparative Advertising: Evidence Favoring Fine-Tuning,” Journal of Advertising, 29 (Winter), 25-40. Thorson, E., Christ, W.G. and Caywood, C. (1991), “Selling Candidates Like Tubes of Toothpaste: Is the Comparison Apt?” in Frank Biocca, ed., Television and Political Advertising, 1, Hillsdale, NJ: Lawarence Erlbaum, 1991, 145-172. Tversky, A., Sattath, S., and Slovic, P.(1988), “Contingent Weighting in Judgment and Choice,” Psychological Review, 95, 371-384. Zhou, R. and 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. | |
| dc.identifier.uri | http://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/jspui/handle/123456789/34488 | - |
| dc.description.abstract | 本研究以調節焦點理論為基礎，旨在探討消費者之目標導向與廣告之正負比較方式是否會在說服效果上產生交互作用。研究中所探討之說服效果有三：（1）消費者對目標品牌、競爭品牌二者間在品牌態度上的知覺差距；（2）廣告訊息之診斷性；（3）廣告態度。本研究採2 (目標導向：促進焦點、預防焦點) x 3（廣告比較方式：正面比較vs. 中度負面比較vs. 極度負面比較）之組間實驗設計。
研究結果發現，消費者之目標導向與廣告比較方式在說服效果上的確會產生交互作用。與被促發預防焦點的消費者相較，當廣告採取正面比較方式時，被促發促進焦點的消費者對目標品牌與競爭品牌在品牌態度上所產生之知覺差距較大、並知覺到較高的訊息診斷性及擁有較佳的廣告態度；與被促發促進焦點的消費者相較，當廣告採取極度負面的比較方式時，被促發預防焦點的消費者對目標品牌與競爭品牌在品牌態度上所產生之知覺差距較大、並知覺到較高的訊息診斷性；當廣告採取中度負面比較方式時，被促發促進焦點與預防焦點的消費者二者間之說服效果並無顯著差異。本研究之研究結果大致符合預期，且研究結論在學術及實務上均具有重要的意涵。 | zh_TW |
| dc.description.abstract | Using regulatory focus theory, this study investigates the interaction effects of goal orientation and comparison valence on persuasion. With three dependent variables—difference perceptions of attitudes toward target and competitive brands, perceived diagnosticity of ad message, and ad attitudes—the author uses a 2 (goal orientation: promotion-focused, prevention-focused) × 3 (comparison valence: positive, moderately negative, extremely negative) between-subjects factorial design.
The results show that when comparison valence is positive (excellent vs. good), promotion-focused consumers have higher difference perception of attitudes toward target and competitive brands, perceived diagnosticity and better ad attitudes than prevention-focused consumers; when comparison valence is extremely negative (fair vs. poor), prevention-focused consumers perceive higher difference perception of attitudes toward target and competitive brands and perceived diagnosticity than promotion-focused consumers; when comparison valence is moderately negative (good vs. fair), there is no difference between promotion-focused consumers and prevention-focused consumers. These findings have important implications in academic development and management. | en |
| dc.description.provenance | Made available in DSpace on 2021-06-13T06:11:11Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 ntu-95-D89741004-1.pdf: 4449387 bytes, checksum: ba2a8a66eebe010f64d7385c9e7eb2b5 (MD5) Previous issue date: 2006 | en |
| dc.description.tableofcontents | CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION 1
CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW 4 Regulatory Focus Theory 4 Anticipations of Regulatory Focus System 6 Consequence of Regulatory Focus System 11 Goal Orientation in Marketing Research 17 Effects of Goal Orientation on Consumer Choice 18 Effects of Goal orientation on Repurchase Intention 20 Effects of Goal Orientation on Persuasion 21 Comparison Valence 25 Prospect Theory and Comparison Valence 28 CHAPTER 3: HYPOTHESES 32 Difference Perception of Attitudes toward Target and Competitive Brands 32 Positive Comparison (excellent versus good) 33 Extremely Negative Comparison (fair versus poor) 34 Moderately Negative Comparison (good versus fair) 35 Perceived Diagnosticity of Ad Message 36 Ad Attitude.. 38 CHAPTER 4: METHODOLOGY 40 Pretests……. 40 Pretest 1: Target Product 41 Pretest 2: Target Attributes 43 Participants.. 45 Manipulation, Stimulus, and Procedure 46 Goal Orientation 46 Comparison Valence 47 Procedure 48 Measurements 48 CHAPTER 5: RESULTS 51 Manipulation Checks 51 Hypothesis Testing 52 Difference Perceptions of Attitudes toward Target and Competitive Brand 53 Perceived Diagnosticity of Ad Message 60 Ad Attitude 62 CHAPTER 6: GENERAL DISCUSSION 67 Contributions 67 Marketing Implications 69 Research Implications 72 REFERENCES 77 APPENDIX 84 Appendix 1: Questionnaire - Pretest 1 85 Appendix 2: Questionnaire - Pretest 2 86 Appendix 3: Questionnaire-Manipulations 87 3.1 Promotion-focused Condition 87 3.2 Prevention-focused Condition 88 3.3 Comparison Valence 89 Appendix 4: Questionnaire-Items of Dependent Variables, Manipulation Checks and Demographic Information 92 | |
| dc.language.iso | en | |
| dc.subject | 品牌態度 | zh_TW |
| dc.subject | 目標導向 | zh_TW |
| dc.subject | 調節焦點 | zh_TW |
| dc.subject | 比較方式 | zh_TW |
| dc.subject | 訊息診斷性 | zh_TW |
| dc.subject | 廣告態度 | zh_TW |
| dc.subject | goal orientation | en |
| dc.subject | ad attitudes | en |
| dc.subject | brand attitudes | en |
| dc.subject | perceived diagnosticity | en |
| dc.subject | regulatory focus | en |
| dc.title | 目標導向與廣告比較方式對說服效果之影響 | zh_TW |
| dc.title | Goal Orientation and Comparison Valence in Persuasion | en |
| dc.type | Thesis | |
| dc.date.schoolyear | 94-2 | |
| dc.description.degree | 博士 | |
| dc.contributor.oralexamcommittee | 洪順慶,林建煌,黃仁宏,邱志聖,練乃華,簡怡雯 | |
| dc.subject.keyword | 目標導向,調節焦點,比較方式,品牌態度,訊息診斷性,廣告態度, | zh_TW |
| dc.subject.keyword | goal orientation,regulatory focus,perceived diagnosticity,brand attitudes,ad attitudes, | en |
| dc.relation.page | 94 | |
| dc.rights.note | 有償授權 | |
| dc.date.accepted | 2006-03-30 | |
| 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-95-1.pdf 未授權公開取用 | 4.35 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。