請用此 Handle URI 來引用此文件:
http://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/jspui/handle/123456789/45469完整後設資料紀錄
| DC 欄位 | 值 | 語言 |
|---|---|---|
| dc.contributor.advisor | 練乃華 | |
| dc.contributor.author | Yu-Hsin Chung | en |
| dc.contributor.author | 鍾于心 | zh_TW |
| dc.date.accessioned | 2021-06-15T04:21:53Z | - |
| dc.date.available | 2015-02-24 | |
| dc.date.copyright | 2010-02-24 | |
| dc.date.issued | 2008 | |
| dc.date.submitted | 2009-10-14 | |
| dc.identifier.citation | 一、中文部分
1.徐心怡(2000),「消費者促銷知覺價值與促銷偏好程度之研究-產品類別干擾效果之探討」,元智大學管理研究所碩士論文。 2.羅雅薰(2002),「積點方案內容設計與消費者贈品選擇的關係」,臺灣大學商學研究所碩士論文 3.黃麗霞(2002),「贈品促銷型式對消費者的知覺價值與購買意願之影響」,臺灣大學商學研究所博士論文。 4.林怡君(2002),「贈品-主產品利益一致性與品牌權益對促銷效果影響之研究」,臺灣大學商學研究所碩士論文。 二、英文部分 1.Aaker David A., Douglas M. Stayman and Michael R. Hagerty (1986), “Warmth in Advertising: Measurement, Impact, and Sequence Effects,” Journal of Consumer Research, 12(March), 365-381. 2.Armstrong, Gary and Philip Kolter(2005),“Marketing: An introduction,” 7th ed., Englewood Cliffs N.J.: Prentice Hall, Inc. 3.Batra, Rajeev and Olli T. Ahtola (1990), “Measuring the Hedonic and Utilitarian Sources of Consumer Attitude,” Marketing Letters, 2(2), 159-170. 4.Baumeister, Roy F., Arlene M. Stillwell and Todd F. Heatherton (1994), “Guilt: An interpersonal approach,” Psychological Bulleti, 115, 243–267. 5.Blattberg, Robert C. and Scott A. Nesliln(1990), “Sales Promotion-Concepts, Methods, and Strategies,” Englewood Cliffs , N.J. Prentice Hall, Inc. 6.Block,Jack and Adam M. Kremen (1996), “IQ and ego-resiliency: Conceptual and empirical connections and separateness,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70(2), 349-361. 7.Burnett, Melissa S. and Dale A. Lunsford (1995), “Conceptualizing Guilt in the Consumer Decision-Making Process,” Journal of Consumer Marketing, 11, 33-43. 8.Campbell, Leland and William D. Diamond (1990), “Framing and Sales Promotion: The Characteristics of Good Deal,” Journal of Consumer Marketing, 7(4), 25-31. 9.Chandon, Pierre, Brian Wansin and Gilles Laurent (2000), “A Benefit Congruency Framework of Sales Promotion Effectiveness,” Journal of Marketing, 64(Oct.), 65-81. 10.Churchill, Gilbert A., Jr. and Carol Surprenant (1982), “An Investigation into the Determinants of Customer Satisfaction,” Journal of Marketing Research, 19(4), 491-504. 11.Dommermuth, William P. (1989), “Promotion : Analysis , Creativity and Strategy,” 2nd ed., Boston, Mass. PWS-Kent Publishing Company. 12.Hartmann, H. (1964), “Essays on ego psychology: Selected problems in psychoanalytic theory,” N.Y.:International Universities Press, Inc. 13.Herrnstein, Richard J. and Dražen Prelect, (1991), “Melioration: A Theory of Distributed Choice,” The Journal of Economic Perspectives, 5(3), 137-156. 14.Hirschman, Elizabeth C. and Morris B. Handbook (1982), “Hedonic Consumption: Emerging Concepts, Methods, and Propositions,” Journal of Marketing, 46 (Summer), 92-101. 15.Jacobsen, Teresa (1998), “Delay behavior at age six: Links to maternal expressed emotion,” Journal of Genetic Psychology, 159, 117-120. 16.June P. Tangney, Roy F. Baumeister and Angie Luzio Boone (2004), “High Self-Control Predicts Good Adjustment, Less Pathology, Better Grades, and Interpersonal Success,” Journal of Personality, 72(2), 271-324. 17.Keller, Kevin Lane (1993), “Conceptualizing, Measuring, and Managing Customer-Based Equity,” Journal of marketing, 57(1), 1-22. 18.Kim, Byung-Do, Mengze Shi, and Kannan Srinivasan (2001), “Reward Programs and Tacit Collusion,” Marketing Science, 20(2), 99-120. 19.Kivetz, Ran (1999), “Advances in Research on Mental Accounting and Reason-Based Choice,” Marketing Letters, 10(3), 249-266. 20.Kivetz, Ran and Itamar Simonson (2002), “Earning the Right to Indulge: Effort as a Determinant of Consumer Preferences toward Frequency Program Rewards,” Journal of Marketing Research, 39(May), 155-170. 21.Kivetz, Ran and Itamar Simonson (2002), “Self-Control for the Righteous: Toward a Theory of Precommitment to Indulgence,” Journal of Consumer Research, 29(Sep.), 199-217. 22.Lascu, Dana N. (1991), “Consumer Guilt: Examining the Potential of a New Marketing Construct,” Advances in Consumer Research, 18, 290-293. 23.Mela F. Carl , Sunil Gupta and Donald R. Lehmann(1997), “The Long-TermImpact of Promotion and Advertising on Consumer Brand Choice,” Journalof Marketing Research, 34(2), 248-261. 24.Mischel, Walter (1974), “Processes in delay of gratification,” Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 7, 249-292. 25.Nord, R. Walter and J. Paul Peter (1980), “A Behavior Modification Perspective on Marketing,” The Journal of Marketing, 44(2), 36-47. 26.O'Brien, Louise and Charles Jones (1995), “Do rewards really create loyalty,” Harvard Business Review, 73(3), 75-82. 27.Papatla, Purushottam and Lakshman Krishnamurthi (1996), “Measuring the dynamic effects of promotions on brand choice,” Journal of Marketing Research, 33(1), 20-35. 28.Park, C. Whan , Bernard J. Jaworski and Deborah J. MacInnis (1986), “Strategic Brand Concept-Image Management,” Journal of Marketing, 50(Oct.), 135-145. 29.Prelec, Drazen and Richard J. Herrnstein (1991), “Preferences or Principles: Alternative Guidelines for Choice,” Strategy and Choice Richard J Zeckhauser, eds Cambridge, ma: MIT Press, 319-340. 30.Quelch, John A. (1989) , “Sales Promotion Management”, Englewood Cliffs , N.J.: Prentice Hall, Inc. 31.Romal, Jane B. and Barbara J. Kaplan (1995), “Difference in Self‐Control among Spenders and Savers,” Psychology: A Quarterly Journal of Human Behavior, 32(2), 8–17. 32.Rothbaum, Fred, John R. Weisz and Samuel S. Snyder (1982), “Changing the world and changing the self: A two-process model of perceived control,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 42, 5–37. 33.Shimp, Terence A. (1997), “Advertising, Promotion, and Supplemental Aspects Integrated Marketing Communications,” 4th ed., Harcourt Brace Chicago, Dryden Press. 34.Silverman, Irwin W. (2003), “Gender Differences in Delay of Gratification: A Meta-Analysis,” Sex Roles, 49(Nov.), 451-463. 35.Somon, Dilip (1998), “The Illusion of Delayed Incentives: Evaluating Future Effort-Money Transactions,” Journal of Marketing Research, 35(Nov.), 427-437. 36.Strahilevitz, Michal and John G Myers (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), 436-446. 37.Wulfert, Edelgard, Jennifer A. Block, Elizabeth Santa Ana, Monica L. Rodriguez, Melissa Colsman(2002), “Delay of Gratification: Impulsive Choices and Problem Behaviors in Early and Late Adolescence,” Journal of Personality, 70(4), 533-552. | |
| dc.identifier.uri | http://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/jspui/handle/123456789/45469 | - |
| dc.description.abstract | 贈品促銷是行銷推廣策略中很重要的工具之一,為達到銷售目標或提升顧客的再購意願、維持與顧客間的關係,廠商常使用各種短期性(例如:買就送、滿額送)或持續性(例如:忠誠度方案)的贈品促銷手法來吸引消費者的注意。
觀察現今現實商業世界中的促銷活動可知,贈品促銷的形式千變萬化,方案設計稍有不同,就會影響到消費者的贈品選擇行為。但是國內外對於贈品促銷的研究,大多以設計非金錢性贈品、努力次數門檻的忠誠度方案等促銷內容為主,較少比較不同類型的贈品、不同遞延型態的促銷方案設計對消費者贈品選擇的影響。故本研究旨在探討不同的促銷方案內容設計與消費者贈品選擇之關係,並進一步檢視罪惡感以及自我控制對於贈品選擇可能產生的干擾效果。 本研究兼用組內受測者與組間受測者之混合因子實驗設計架構,操弄贈品類型(金錢性�非金錢性)、遞延類型(間接遞延─努力次數多寡�直接遞延─等待時間長短)以及主產品類型(享樂性�功能性)做為方案設計之自變數,功能性與享樂性贈品或立即獲得較少贈品價值與延後獲得較多贈品價值為應變數,發展出三組1×2的贈品促銷方案,並將受測者依其所填答的罪惡感總分與自我控制總分,以中位數區分為高低兩組,探討面對不同的方案設計時,罪惡感傾向與自我控制能力不同的消費者是否會有不同的贈品偏好。研究結果發現: 一、不論是直接或間接的遞延型態,當消費者需付出較多的努力或需等待較長的時間才能獲得贈品時,消費者會較偏好享樂性質的贈品。 二、不同罪惡感傾向的消費者會有不同類型的贈品偏好:在贈品類型為非金錢性的形式下,對於享樂消費罪惡感較高的消費者,當換取贈品所需花費的努力次數越多或等待時間越長時,會增加對於選擇享樂性贈品的偏好;在贈品類型為金錢性的形式下,罪惡感較高的消費者,能夠遞延滿足,願意等待較長的時間換取獲得較高價值的禮券價值。 三、不同自我控制能力的消費者會有不同類型的贈品偏好:在贈品類型為金錢性的形式下,自我控制能力較高的消費者較能夠遞延滿足,願意等待較長的時間換取獲得較高的禮券價值。 | zh_TW |
| dc.description.provenance | Made available in DSpace on 2021-06-15T04:21:53Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 ntu-97-R96741010-1.pdf: 4743400 bytes, checksum: b5e866794d83aedd84d08032f8d79eda (MD5) Previous issue date: 2008 | en |
| dc.description.tableofcontents | 謝辭 i
中文摘要 i 英文摘要 ii 目錄 iii 圖目錄 iv 表目錄 v 第一章 緒 論 1 第一節 研究動機 1 第二節 研究目的 3 第二章 文獻探討 4 第一節 遞延享受 4 第二節 產品分類 5 第三節 促銷活動利益 7 第四節 忠誠度方案 10 第五節 罪惡感 12 第六節 自我控制 14 第三章 研究方法 15 第一節 研究架構 15 第二節 研究假設 16 第三節 實驗設計 21 第四節 實驗變數之定義與衡量 30 第四章 資料分析 33 第一節 樣本結構 33 第二節 信度分析 34 第三節 罪惡感傾向、自我控制能力事後分組 35 第四節 假設檢定 36 第五節 檢定結果總結 43 第五章 結論與建議 44 第一節 研究結論 44 第二節 行銷意涵 45 第三節 研究限制 48 第四節 後續研究建議 50 參考文獻 51 附錄 55 | |
| dc.language.iso | zh-TW | |
| dc.subject | 遞延類型 | zh_TW |
| dc.subject | 贈品促銷 | zh_TW |
| dc.subject | 自我控制 | zh_TW |
| dc.subject | 罪惡感 | zh_TW |
| dc.subject | 金錢性贈品 | zh_TW |
| dc.subject | self control | en |
| dc.subject | premium | en |
| dc.subject | deferred types | en |
| dc.subject | guilty | en |
| dc.subject | monetary premium | en |
| dc.title | 促銷方案內容設計與消費者贈品選擇之關係─罪惡感與自我控制的干擾效果 | zh_TW |
| dc.title | The Moderating Effects of Guilty and Self Control on Relationships between Sales Promotion Design and Consumers’Preferences toward Reward Choices | en |
| dc.type | Thesis | |
| dc.date.schoolyear | 98-1 | |
| dc.description.degree | 碩士 | |
| dc.contributor.oralexamcommittee | 簡怡雯,陳建維 | |
| dc.subject.keyword | 贈品促銷,金錢性贈品,遞延類型,罪惡感,自我控制, | zh_TW |
| dc.subject.keyword | premium,monetary premium,deferred types,guilty,self control, | en |
| dc.relation.page | 68 | |
| dc.rights.note | 有償授權 | |
| dc.date.accepted | 2009-10-15 | |
| 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-97-1.pdf 未授權公開取用 | 4.63 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。
