由產品歡樂性和功利性價值的角度從事新品牌建立和現存品牌延伸策略之研究

簡易檢索 / 詳目顯示

回結果列表

研究生：	曹文琴 Wen-Chin Tsao
論文名稱：	由產品歡樂性和功利性價值的角度從事新品牌建立和現存品牌延伸策略之研究 An Exploration of Building a New Brand and Brand Extension Strategy in the View of Hedonic/Utilitarian Value
指導教授：	吳克振 Couchen Wu
口試委員:	林我聰 none 謝光進 none 黃思明 none 林炳輝 none 陳振祥 none
學位類別：	博士 Doctor
系所名稱：	管理學院 - 企業管理系 Department of Business Administration
論文出版年：	2006
畢業學年度：	95
語文別：	英文
論文頁數：	99
中文關鍵詞：	理性訴求、感性訴求、功利性價值、歡樂性價值、涉入度、品牌延伸、知覺品質、適配度、干擾項
外文關鍵詞：	Rational appeal, Emotional appeal, Utilitarian value, Hedonic value, Involvement, Brand extension, Perceived quality, Perceived fit, Moderator
相關次數：	點閱：436 下載：16
分享至:	分享至facebook 分享至twitter

查詢本校圖書館目錄查詢臺灣博碩士論文知識加值系統勘誤回報

　　本論文的研究重點乃在於品牌(Branding)之相關議題，分別為探討新品牌的建立，以及現存成功品牌延伸策略等研究。在第二章中的研究目的乃針對高涉入度產品推出新品牌的時候，如何在有限廣告經費的限制下，利用多重展露的機會，嚐試找出最適的廣告訴求排程，以求達到消費者的品牌信任和情感，並進一步誘發其對於新品牌的購買意願。
　　首先，在變數尋找方面，本研究利用探索性因素分析(EFA)剔除對三個主要構面—隱藏變數(Latent Variables)沒有貢獻的衡量指標(Indicators)，以確認最終23個的衡量指標歸分別歸屬於三個構面。接著，利用驗證性因素分析(CFA)進一步提供更嚴謹的資訊，分別再度驗證23個的衡量指標和該所歸屬之構面的相關性程度，以提供三個主要構面之信度和效度。
　　基於高涉入度產品特性，應用廣告快速地在競爭激烈的消費市場上建立新品牌，其廣告訴求變化的安排需要更多縝密的考量。因此，本研究引用學者Krugman (1975)所倡導的”三次廣告循序重複展露”的論點為整體理論基礎，試圖對於同屬於高涉入度產品中的歡樂性和功利性產品，在重複廣告訴求下找出較佳的訴求排程順序，並藉此提出增加消費者購買意願的廣告訴求策略。
　　因為針對兩個不同價值的產品類別，第二章分別以兩個研究(實驗一和實驗二)進行歡樂性和功利性產品廣告排程的實驗設計和分析。本研究結論重點如下:
　　1.對於高涉入度的歡樂性產品而言，連續兩次與產品價值一致性的訴求(感性訴求)展露，而在第三次消費者購買決策階段搭配理性訴求的廣告展露，不僅提升消費者對品牌信任，也提升了品牌情感。除此之外，研究更發現三次連續展露排序的組合中，組合一(感性+感性+感性)和組合二(感性+感性+理性)在引發消費者購買意願上相對優於其他兩種可能的訴求排列組合。
　　2.對於高涉入度的功利性產品而言，首先，藉由連續兩次與產品價值一致性的訴求(理性訴求)展露，以建立消費者對新品牌功利性認知的假設成立後，第三次訴求則為關鍵的策略。研究發現理性訴求將會加強品牌信任和購買意願的正向關係；而感性訴求則會強化品牌情感和購買意願的正向關係。其次，在消費者購買階段中，理性訴求能夠引起品牌信任，並進一步誘發消費者購買意願。
　　至於第三章仍以延伸產品所具有的歡樂性/功利性價值角度，探索產品價值在品牌延伸策略中所扮演的角色。主要發現有消費者對於母品牌的知覺價值、母品牌和其延伸產品適配度，以及消費者本身對於延伸產品的知識等三項因素對於品牌延伸的評價，會受到延伸產品所具備的歡樂性/功利性價值干擾(Moderated).

　　This article mainly focuses on branding of related issues, including a new brand building and existing brands’ extension. In chapter 2, the objective is to clarify the meaning of determining an optimal ad appeal arrangement over multiple exposures for building a new brand with high-involved products. In order to get the good indicators for three constructs, exploratory factor analysis (EFA) was employed to eliminate inefficient indicators. Furthermore, confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) was applied to assess the items of the constructs more rigorously and provided constructs validity and reliability before conducting main hypotheses testing.
　　Employing advertisements to build a new brand with high-involved products requires careful consideration of ad appeal arrangement. This study manipulates ad appeal over three repetitions to identify the effects of ad exposure sequence on effectiveness for brand building with high-involve hedonic and utilitarian products. With Krugman’s “three sequential advertising exposures” theory in mind, this research pays special attention to the effect of the third exposure and proposes a better appeal arrangement order over these three exposures when building the new brand.
　　According to two experiments in the chapter 2, these findings will be addressed bellow:
　　1.For high-involved hedonic products, two sequential congruent message persuasions—twin emotional appeals—with a rational appeal at the third exposure not only elicit brand trust, but also elicit affect. Besides the hypotheses, this study figures out that the two message appeal sequences of emotional-emotional-rational and emotional-emotional-emotional function better than the other two alternate message arrangements considered in this study.
　　2.For high-involved utilitarian products, premised upon on utilitarian brand recognition, a rational ad stimulus will strengthen the relationship between brand trust and purchase intension, and an emotional ad stimulus will strengthen the linkage between brand affect and purchase intention. Secondly, a rational appeal will elicit positive brand trust at the decision-making stage. From the results of Hypothesis 1 and 4, these finding shed new light on the effect of brand trust on purchase intention at consumers’ decision stages when consumers are exposed to a rational ad appeal.
　　3.This study employed two experiments using panel data to examine which one is the better alternative at the consumer’s decision-making stage toward two kinds of products, namely hedonic and utilitarian product respectively. These results may provide new insights for marketing researchers and brand managers.
　　With respect to the chapter 3, the evidence reveals that the effects of perceived quality, perceived fit, and consumer knowledge on brand extension evaluations will be moderated by the ratio of hedonic to utilitarian value.

Table of Contents
Chinese Abstract	Ⅰ
English Abstract	Ⅲ
Acknowledgements	V
Table of Contents	Ⅶ
List of Tables	Ⅸ
List of Figures	Ⅹ

Chapter　1　Introduction	                     1
Chapter　2　Determining an Optimal Ad Arrangement over Multiple Exposures for
Building a New Brand	                     7
2.1  Literature Review	                     7
2.1.1  Brand Attitude and Purchase Intention     7
2.1.2  Rational and Emotional Appeals            8
2.1.3  Hedonic/Utilitarian Value	            8
2.1.4  Utilitarian/Hedonic--Appeal Congruence	   9
2.1.5  Product Involvement and Utilitarian/Hedonic Values	10
2.1.6  Three Exposures Theory	            11
2.2  Experiment 1: Determining an optimal Arrangement over Multiple Exposures with Hedonic Products	                     12
2.2.1  Literature Review and Hypotheses	   13
2.2.2  Methodology for the Experiment 1	   20
2.2.3  Analysis and Hypothesis Testing	   26
2.3  Experiment 2: Determining an optimal Arrangement over Multiple Exposures with Utilitarian Products	                      31
2.3.1  Literature Review and Hypotheses	    31
2.3.2  Methodology for the Experiment 2	    37
2.2.3  Analysis and Hypothesis Testing	    40
Chapter　3　Exploring the Moderating Effect of the Hedonic/Utilitarian Value on
Brand Extension Evaluations	                      45
3.1  Background and Hypotheses	             45
3.1.1  Hedonic/Utilitarian Value	             46
3.1.2  Moderating Effect of the Hedonic/Utilitarian Value on Perceived Quality	                                        47
3.1.3  Moderating Effect of the Hedonic/Utilitarian Value on Perceived Fit	                                        49
3.1.4  Moderating Effect of Hedonic/Utilitarian Value on Consumer Knowledge	                                        50
3.1.5  Extension Evaluations and Purchase Intention	52
3.2  Methodology	                               52
3.2.1  Parent Brands and Extensions Selection	    52
3.2.2  Main Study Subjects	                      53
3.2.3  Main Experiment Design and Procedure	    54
3.2.4  Development of Measures	             54
3.3  Analysis and Results	                      57
3.3.1  Plan for Data Analysis	             57
3.3.2  Measurement of Properties of the Scales    58
3.3.3  Hypotheses Tests	                       59
Chapter　4　General Discussion	              62
4.1  Summary and Implications	              62
4.1.1  Summary and Implications for Chapter 2	     62
4.1.2  Summary for Implications for Chapter 3	     67
4.2  Limitations and Further Research	     69
4.2.1  Limitations and Further Research for Chapter 2	69
4.2.2  Limitations and Further Research for Chapter 3	72
Reference                                          74
Appendix A  Chinese Questionnaire of Pretest1	      84
Appendix B  Chinese Questionnaire for Brand Name and Product Involvement Survey—MP3	                                  86
Appendix C  Chinese Questionnaire for Brand Name and Product Involvement Survey—PC	                                  87
Appendix D  Chinese Questionnaire of MP3	       88
Appendix E  Chinese Questionnaire of PC	       91
Appendix F  Print Ads in Experiment 1                94
Appendix G  Print Ads in Experiment 2	       96
Appendix H  Chinese Questionnaire of XX Brand Extension	97
Author’s Introduction                               99

List of Tables
Table　1　　Message Persuasion Congruence Matrix     10
Table　2　　Print Ads Appeal	                 21
Table　3　　Message Exposure Sequence and Manipulation Check for Ad Appeal over Three Trials Exposure Level	                 23
Table　4　　Scale Items and Measurement Prosperities  29
Table　5　　Mean Score and Paired-Samples T-Test for Brand Trust, Brand Affect,
and Purchase Intension over Time	                  32
Table　6　　Print Ads Appeal	                  39
Table　7　　Message Exposure Sequence and Manipulation Check for Ad Appeal over Three Trials Exposure Level	                  42
Table　8　　Scale Items and Measurement Prosperities	44
Table　9　　The Effects of Brand Trust and Brand Affect on Purchase Intention	                                              45
Table　10　Mean Score and Paired-Samples T-Test for Brand Trust, Brand Affect,
and Purchase Intension over Time	                  46
Table　11　Scale Items and Measurement Prosperities    56
Table　12　Structural Parameter Estimates and Goodness-of-Fit Indices (Full Sample)	                                              61
Table　13　Structural Parameter Estimates and Goodness-of-Fit Indices for
Two-Group Comparison on Hedonic/Utilitarian Value      62

List of Figures
Figure 1  The Type of Products	                   12
Figure 2  Conceptual Model	                            60

                                

1.Aaker, D.A., Managing Brand Equity: Capitalizing on the Value of a Brand Name, New York: The Free Press (1991).
2.Aaker, D.A., “Measuring Brand Equity cross Products and Markets,” California Manage Review, Vol.38, pp.102-120 (1996).
3.Aaker, D.A.and, K.L. Keller, “Consumer Evaluations of Brand Extensions,” Journal of Marketing, Vol.54, No.1, pp.27-41(1990).
4.Addis, M. and M.B. Holbrook, “On the Conceptual Link between Mass Customisation and Experiential Consumption: an Explosion of Subjectivity,” Journal of Consumer Research, Vol.1, No.1, pp.50-66 (2001).
5.Albers-Miller, N.D. and M.R. Stafford, “International Services Advertising: an Examination for Variation in Appeal Use for Experiential and Utilitarian Services,” Journal of Service Marketing, Vol.13, No.4/5, pp. 390-406 (1999).
6.Anand, P. and B. Sternthal, “Ease of Message Processing as a Moderator of Repetition Effects in Advertising,” Journal of Marketing Research, Vol.27, No.3, pp. 345-353 (1990).
7.Anderson, J.C. and D.W. Gerbing, “Structural Equation Modeling in Practice: A Review and Recommended Two-Step Approach,” Psychological Bulletin, Vol.103, No.3, pp.411-423 (1988).
8.Babin, B.J., W.R. Darden, and M. Griffin, “Work and/or Fun: Measuring Hedonic and Utilitarian Shopping Value,” Journal of Consumer Research, Vol.20, No.4, pp.644-656 (1994).
9.Babin, B.J. and J.S. Attaway, “Atmospheric Affect as a Tool for Creating Value and Gaining Share of Customer,” Journal of Business Research, Vol. 49, pp.91-99 (2000).
10.Bagozzi, R.P., M. Gopinath, and P.U. Nyer, “The Role of Emotions in Marketing,” Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Vol.27, No.2, pp.184-206 (1999).
11.Bagozzi, R.P. and Y. Yi, “On the Evaluation of Structural Equation Models,” Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Vol.16, No.1, pp.74-94 (1988).
12.Barone, M. J., P.W. Miniard, and J.B. Romeo, “The Influence of Positive Mood on Brand Extension Evaluations,” Journal of Consumer Research, Vol.26, No.4, pp.386-400 (2000).
13.Baron, R.M. and D.A. Kenny, “The Moderator-Mediator Variable Distinction in Social Psychological Research: Conceptual, Strategic, and Statistical Considerations,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, Vol.51, No.4, pp.1173 (1985).
14.Barsalou, L. W., “Ad Hoc Categories,” Memory and Cognition, Vol.11, pp.211-227 (1983).
15.Batra, R. and M.L. Ray, “Situational Effects of Advertising Repetition: The Moderating Influence of Motivation, Ability and Opportunity to Respond,” Journal of Consumer Research, Vol.12, No.4, pp.432-445 (1986).
16.Batra, R. and O.T. Ahtola, “Measuring the Hedonic and Utilitarian Sources of Consumer Attitudes,” Marketing Letters, Vol.2, No.2, pp.159-170 (1990).
17.Bearden, W.O. and J.E. Teel, “Selected Determinants of Consumer Satisfaction and Complaint Reports,” Journal of Marketing Research, Vol.20, No.1, pp.21-28 (1983).
18.Bhat, S. and S.K. Reddy, “The Impact of Parent Brand Attribute associations and Affect on Brand Extension,” Journal of Business Research, Vol.53, pp.111-122 (2001).
19.Blair, M.H. and M.J. Rabuck, “Advertising Wearin and Wearout: Ten Years Later−More Empirical Evidence and Successful Practice,” Journal of Advertising Research, Vol.38, No. 5, pp.7-18 (1998).
20.Bottomley, P.A. and S.J.S. Holden, “Do We Really Know How Consumers Evaluation Brand extensions? Empirical Generalizations Based on Secondary Analysis of Eight Studies,” Journal of Marketing Research, Vol.38, No.4, pp.494-500 (2001).
21.Boush, D.M. and B. Loken, “A Pprocess-Tracing Study of Brand Extension Evaluation,” Journal of Marketing Research, Vol.28, No. 1, pp.16-28 (1991).
22.Broniarczyk, S.M. and J.W. Alba, “The Importance of the Brand in Brand Extension,” Journal of Marketing Research, Vol.31, No.2, pp.214-228 (1994).
23.Brucks, M., “The Effect of Product Class Knowledge on Information Search Behavior,” Journal of Consumer Research, Vol.12, No.1, pp.1-16 (1985).
24.Calder, B.J. and B. Sternthal, “Television Commercial Wearout: An Information Processing View,” Journal of Marketing Research, Vol.17, No.2, pp.173-187 (1980).
25.Campbell, M. and K.L. Keller, “Brand Familiarity and Advertising Repetition Effects,” Journal of Consumer Research, Vol.30, No.2, pp.292-304 (2003).
26.Celsi, R.L. and J.C. Olson, “The Role of Involvement in Attention and Comprehension Process,” Journal of Consumer Research, Vol.15, No.2, pp.210-224 (1988).
27.Chaudhuri, A. and, M.B. Holbrook, “The Chain of Effects from Brand Trust and Brand Affect to Brand Performance: the Role of Brand Loyalty,” Journal of Marketing, Vol.65, No.2, pp. 81-93 (2001).
28.Chaudhuri, A. and M.B. Holbrook, “Product-Class Effects on Brand Commitment and Brand Outcomes: The Role of Brand Trust and Brand Affect,” Brand Management, Vol.10, No.1, pp.33-57 (2002).
29.Cox, D.S. and A.D. Cox, “What Does Familiarity Breed? Complexity as a Moderator of Repetition Effects in Advertisement Evaluation,” Journal of Consumer Research, Vol.15, No.1, pp.111-116 (1988).
30.Delgado-Ballester, E., J.L. Munuera-Aleman, and M.J. Yague-Guillen, “Development and Validation of a Brand Trust Scale,” International Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 45, pp.35-53 (2003).
31.Delgado-Ballester, E. and J.L. Munuera-Aleman, “Brand Trust in the Context of Consumer Loyalty,” European Journal of Marketing, Vol.35, No.11/12, pp.1238-1258 (2001).
32.Dhar, R. and K. Wertenbroch, “Consumer Choice between Hedonic and Utilitarian Goods,” Journal of Marketing, Vol.37, No.1, pp.60-71 (2000).
33.Dholakia, U.M., “A Motivational Process Model of Product Involvement and Consumer Risk Perception,” European Journal of Marketing, Vol.35, No.11/12, pp.1340-1360 (2001).
34.Dodds, W.B., K.B. Monroe, and D. Grewal, “Effects of Price, Brand, and Store Information on Buyers’ Product Evaluations,” Journal of Marketing, Vol.28, No.3, pp.307-319 (1991).
35.Droge, C., “Shaping the Route to Attitude Change: Central Versus Peripheral Processing through Comparative Versus Noncomparative Advertising,” Journal of Marketing Research, Vol.26, No.2, pp.193-204 (1989).
36.Edell, J.A. and M.C. Burke, “The Power of Feelings in Understanding Advertising Effects,” Journal of Consumer Research, Vol.14, No.3, pp.421-433 (1987).
37.Faircloth, J.B., L.M. Capella, and B. Alford, “The Effect of Brand Attitude and Brand Image on Brand Equity,” Journal of Marketing Theory & Prctice, Vol.38, No.3, pp 61-74 (2001).
38.Flynn, L.R. and R.E. Goldsmith, “A Short Reliable Measure of Subjective Knowledge,” Journal of Business Research, Vol.46, No.1, pp.57-66 (1999).
39.Fornell, C. and D.F. Larcker, “Evaluating Structural Equation Models with Unobservable Variables and Measurement Error,” Journal of Marketing Research, Vol.18, No.1, pp.39-50 (1981).
40.Gorn, G.J. and M.E. Goldberg, “Children’s Responses to Repetition Television Commercials,” Journal of Consumer Research, Vol.6, No.4, pp.421-424 (1980).
41.Gronhaug, K., L. Hem, and R. Lines, “Exploring the Impact of Product Category Risk and Consumer Knowledge in Brand Extension,” Journal of Brand Management, Vol.9, No.6, pp.463-476 (2002).
42.Hetsroni A., “The Relationship between Values and Appeals in Israeli Advertising: A Smallest Space Analysis,” Journal of Advertising, Vol.29, No.3, pp.55-68 (2000).
43.Hirschman, E.C. and M.B. Holbrook, “Hedonic Consumption: Emerging Concepts, Methods, and Propositions,” Journal of Marketing, Vol.46, No.3, pp.92-101 (1982).
44.Holbrook, M.B. and R. Batra, “Assessing the Role of Emotion as Mediators of Consumer Responses to Advertising,” Journal of Consumers Research, Vol.14, No.4, pp.404-420 (1987).
45.Holbrook, M.B. and E.C. Hirschman, “The Experiential Aspects of Consumption: Consumer Fantasies, Feelings, and Fun,” Journal of Consumer Research. Vol.9, No.2, pp.132-140 (1982).
46.Holbrook M.B., “Beyond Attitude Structure: Toward the Informational Determinants of Attitude,” Journal of Marketing Research, Vol.15, No.4, pp.545-556 (1978).
47.Homer, M. P., “The Mediating Role of Attitude toward the Ad: some Additional,” Journal of Marketing Research, Vol.27, No.1, pp.78-86 (1990).
48.Hu, L. and P.M. Bentler, “Cutoff Criteria for Fit Indexes in Conventional Criteria Versus New Alternatives,” Structural Equation Modeling, Vol.6, No.1, pp.1-55 (1999).
49.Johar, J.S. and M.J. Sirgy, “Value-Expressive Versus Utilitarian Advertising Appeals: When And Why To Use Which Appeal,” Journal of Advertising, Vol.20, No.3, pp.23-33 (1991).
50.Jones, J.P., “What Does Effective Frequency Mean in 1997,” Journal of Advertising Research, Vol.37, No.4, pp.14-20 (1991).
51.Joreskog, K.G. and D. Sorbom, LISREL 8.02, Chicago: Scientific Software International (1993).
52.Keller, K.L., “Conceptualizing, Measuring, and Managing Customer-Based Brand Equity,” Journal of Marketing, Vol.57, No.1, pp.1-22 (1993).
53.Keller, K.L., Strategic Brand Management: Building, Measuring, and Managing Brand Equity’, Prentice-Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ (1998).
54.Klink, R.R. and D.C. Smith, “Threats to the External Validity of Brand Extension Research,” Journal of Marketing Research, Vol.38, No.3, pp.326-335 (2001).
55.Korgaonkar, P.K. and G.P. Moschis, “An Experimental Study of Cognitive Dissonance, Product Involvement, Expectations, Performance and Consumer Judgment of Product Performance,” Journal of Advertising, Vol.11, No.3, pp.32-44 (1982).
56.Kotler, P., S.H. Ang, S.M. Leong, and C.T. Tan, Marketing Management, Prentice-Hall, New York (1999).
57.Krugman, H.E., “Why Three Exposures May Be Enough,” Journal of Advertising Research, Vol.12, No.6, pp.11-14 (1972).
58.Krugman, H.E., “What Makes Advertising Effective,” Harvard Business Review, Vol.53, No.2, pp.96-103 (1975).
59.Lee, A.Y, and A.A. Labroo, “The Effect of Conceptual and Perceptual Fluency on Brand Evaluation,” Journal of Marketing Research, Vol.41, No.2, pp.151-165 (2004).
60.Light, L., “Brand Marketing Fables Lead to Loyalty Declines,” Advertising Age, Vol.65, No.2, pp.22 (1994).
61.Loken, B. and D.R. John, “Diluting Brand Beliefs: When Do Brand Extensions Have a Negative Impact?,” Journal of Marketing, Vol.57, No.3, pp.71-84 (1993).
62.Mano, H. and R.L. Oliver, “Assessing the Dimensionality and Structure of the Consumption Experience: Evaluation, Feeling, and Satisfaction,” Journal of Consumer Research, Vol.20, No.3, pp.451-466 (1993).
63.Martin, I.M. and D.W. Stewart, “The Differential Impact of Goal Congruency on Attitudes, Intentions, and the Transfer of Brand Equity,” Journal of Marketing Research, Vol.38, No.4, pp.471-484 (2001).
64.Meyvis, T. and, C. Janiszewski, “When are Broader Brands Stronger Brands? An Accessibility Perspective on the Success of Brand Extension,” Journal of Consumer Research, Vol.31, No.2, pp.346-357 (2004).
65.Miniard, P.W., S. Bhatla, and R.L. Rose, “On the Formation and Relationship of Ad and Brand Attitudes: An Experimental and Causal Analysis,” Journal of Marketing Research, Vol.17, No.3, pp.290-303 (1991).
66.Morris, J.D., C. Woo, J.A. Geason, and J. Kim, “The Power of Affect: Predicting Intention,” Journal of Advertising Research, Vol.42, No.3, pp.7-17 (2002).
67.Nunnally, J.C. and, I.H. Bernstein, Psychometric Theory, 3d ed., New York: McGraw-Hill (1994).
68.Obermiller, C. and E.R. Spangenberg, “Development of a Scale to Measure Consumer Skepticism toward Advertising,” Journal of Consumer Psychology, Vol.7, No.2, pp.159-186 (1998).
69.Okada, E.M., “Justification Effects on Consumer Choice of Hedonic and Utilitarian Goods,” Journal of Marketing Research, Vol.42, No.1, pp.43-53 (2005).
70.Olney, T.J., M.B. Holbrook, and R. Batra, “Consumer Responses to Advertising: The Effects of Ad Content, Emotions, and Attitude toward the Ad on Viewing Time,” Journal of Consumer Research, Vol.17, No.4, pp.440-445 (1991).
71.Park, C.W. and P.V. Lessig, “Familiarity and Its Impact on Consumer Decision Biases and Heuristics,” Journal of Consumer Research, Vol.8, No.2, pp.223-230 (1981).
72.Park, C.W., D.L. Mothersbaugh, and L. Feick, “Consumer Kowledge Assessment,” Journal of Consumer Research, Vol.21, No.1, pp.71-82 (1994).
73.Park, C.W, S. Milberg, and R. Lawson, “Evaluation of Brand Extensions: The Role of Product Feature Similarity and Brand Concept Consistency,” Journal of Consumer Research, Vol.18, No.2, pp.185-193 (1991).
74.Petty, R.E. and J.T. Cacioppo, Communication and Persuasion: Central and Peripheral Routes to Attitude Change, Spring-Verlag, New York (1986).
75.Pitta, D.A. and L.P. Katsanis, “Understanding Brand Equity for Successful Brand Extension,” The Journal of Consumer Marketing, Vol.12, No.4, pp.51-64 (1995).
76.Reber, R., P. Winkielman, and N. Schwarz, “Effects of Perceptual Fluency on Affective Judgments,” Psychological Science, Vol.29, No.1, pp.45-48 (1998).
77.Robertson, T.S. (1976) ‘Low-Commitment Consumer Behavior’,” Journal of Advertising Research, Vol.16, No. 2, pp. 19-24.
78.Rosch, E.H. and C.B. Mervis, “Family Resemblances: Studies in the Internal Structure of Categories,” Cognitive Psychology, Vol.7, pp. 573-605 (1975).
79.Simonin, B.L., “Transfer of Marketing Know-How in International Strategic Alliances: An Empirical Investigation of the Role and Antecedents of Knowledge Ambiguity,” Journal of International Business Studies, Vol.30, No.3, pp.463-490 (1999).
80.Smith, D.C., “Brand Extensions and Advertising Efficiency: What Can and Cannot be Expected,” Journal of Advertising Research, Vol.32, No.6, pp.11-20 (1992).
81.Smith, D.C, C.W. Park, “The Effects of Brand Extensions on Market Share and Advertising Efficiency,” Journal of Marketing Research, Vol.29, No.3, pp.296-313 (1992).
82.Smith, D.C, J. Andrews, “Rethinking the Effect of Perceived Fit on Customers’ Evaluations of New Products,” Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Vol.23, No.1, pp.115-121 (1995).
83.Spangenberg, E.R. and K.E. Voss, and A.E. Crowley, “Measuring the Hedonic and Utilitarian Dimensions of Attitude: A generally Applicable Scale,” Advances in Consumer Research, Vol.24, pp.235-241 (1997).
84.Stafford, M.R. and E. Day, “Retail Services Advertising: The Effects of Appeal, Medium, and Service,” Journal of Advertising, Vol.24, No.1, pp.57-71 (1995).
85.Strahilevitz, M. and J.G. Myers, “Donations to Charity as Purchase Incentives: How Well They Work May Depend on What You Are Trying to Sell,” Journal of Consumer Research, Vol.24, No. 4, pp.434-446 (1998).
86.Sweeney, J.C. and F. Wyber, “The Role of Cognitions and Emotions in the Music-Approach-Avoidance Behavior Relationship,” The Journal of Services Marketing, Vol.16, No.1, pp.51-69 (2002).
87.Tan, S.J., “Can Consumers’ Skepticism be Mitigated by Claim Objectivity and Claim Extremity?,” Journal of Marketing Communications, Vol.8, No.1, pp.45-64 (2002).
88.Voss, K.E., E.R Spangenberg., and B. Grohmann, “Measuring the Hedonic and Utilitarian Dimensions of Consumer Attitude,” Journal of Marketing Research, Vol.40, No.3, pp.310-320 (2003).
89.Wu, C. and W. Tsao. “The Effects of Advertising on Brand Trust, Brand Affect, and Purchase Intention over Time: The Accumulated Effect Observed on Changing Consumers’ Bramd Attude over Three Ad Exposure Trials,” working paper (2006).
90.Wright, P., “The Cognitive Processes Mediating Acceptance of Advertising,” Journal of Marketing Research, Vol.10, No.1, pp.189-202 (1973).
91.Yoo, B., N. Donthu, and S. Lee, “An Examination of Selected Marketing Mix Elements and Brand Equity,” Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Vol.28, No.2, pp.195-211(2000).
92.Zaichkowsky, J.L., “Measuring the Involvement Construct,” Journal of Consumer Research, Vol.12, No.3, pp.341-352 (1985).
93.Zaichkowsky, J.L., “Research Notes: Personal Involvement Inventory: Reduction, Revision, and Application to Advertising,” Journal of Advertising, Vol.23, No.1, pp.59-70 (1994).

簡易檢索 / 詳目顯示

相關論文