限量作為銷售線索是近年品牌行銷中常見的做法，且限量的產品通常代表企業本身的特色或理念。因此本研究以雙元訊息處理模型作為理論基礎，探討限量影響品牌形象。
捷思意旨人們仰賴過去的經驗與記憶以較為簡單、快速地思考思維，幫助事物的理解或解決眼前的困難。本研究以雙元訊息處理模型作為理論基礎，探討當消費者面臨限量場景時利用捷思思考模式影響品牌形象，並且以認知負荷作為中間變數衡量捷思。此外，本研究亦加入解釋水平與品牌涉入作為調節變數，欲探究不同的心理距離與涉入程度是否會影響限量與認知負荷之間的關係。本研究設計兩個實驗，並證實（1）限量作為銷售線索是否能夠影響品牌形象（2）消費者個體差異（認知負荷、解釋水平與品牌涉入）造成不同的結果。實驗一為線下購物情境，證明限量作為銷售線索成功被操弄並且影響品牌形象；以認知負荷作為中介變數證實受測者捷思的使用，並且中介效果相較於主效果有更高的解釋力。實驗二為線上購物情境，證實（1）個體採用不同的解釋水平（抽象與具體）會造成限量對認知負荷的效果不一，在高解釋水平（抽象）中限量對品牌形象產生影響比起低解釋水平（具體）更顯著（2）受測者在不同的品牌涉入程度影響會造成限量對認知負荷的效果不一，在高品牌涉入的情況下，限量對品牌形象產生影響比起低品牌涉入更顯著。
通過上述的施測，本研究以捷思法貫穿全文，並以不同心理距離的角度，消費者面對行銷策略時產生不同的認知負荷，解釋了個體差異產生不同的影響。

Limited edition has been used among sales cues, a common practice in brand marketing in recent years. In addition, limited products usually represent the characteristics or underlying concepts of a company. Therefore, this study explores the influence of limited quantity on brand image, and uses the dual-process model as the theoretical basis.
Heuristics means people use shortcuts, sample thinking systems which rely on their experience or memories to understand and solve questions. The present study explored consumers’ cognitive systems affecting brand image when they faced limited edition as a selling cue and cognitive loading as a mediating variable. Furthermore, this study used construal level and brand involvement as moderating variables and revealed the effect of limited edition and cognitive loading. This study designed two experiments to clarify if（1）limited edition could affect brand image.（2）Individual differences （cognitive loading, construal level and brand image）had different outcomes. Experiment one is an offline shopping scenario; the manipulation check of limited edition was successful, affecting brand image. Cognitive loading also successfully measured heuristics and provided a more powerful explanation than main effect did. Experiment two is an online shopping scenario. （1）In the high construal level (abstract), the effect of the limited edition on the cognitive loading is more significant than that in the low construal level (concrete). （2）In brand image, it was concluded that under the condition of high brand involvement, the impact of limited quantity on brand image is more significant than that of low brand involvement.
Through the above-mentioned tests, this study uses different psychological distances to impact cognitive loading., concluding that individual differences make different effects.

Andersen, P. H. (2005). Relationship marketing and brand involvement of professionals through web-enhanced brand communities: The case of Coloplast. Industrial marketing management, 34(3), 285-297.
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, 51(6), 1173.
Bian, X., & Haque, S. (2020). Counterfeit versus original patronage: Do emotional brand attachment, brand involvement, and past experience matter? Journal of brand management, 27(4), 438-451.
Breckler, S. J. (1984). Empirical validation of affect, behavior, and cognition as distinct components of attitude. Journal of personality and social psychology, 47(6), 1191.
Chae, H., Kim, S., Lee, J., & Park, K. (2020). Impact of product characteristics of limited edition shoes on perceived value, brand trust, and purchase intention; focused on the scarcity message frequency. Journal of Business Research, 120, 398-406.
Chaiken, S. (1980). Heuristic versus systematic information processing and the use of source versus message cues in persuasion. Journal of personality and social psychology, 39(5).
Chan, W. Y., To, C. K., & Chu, W. C. (2015). Materialistic consumers who seek unique products: how does their need for status and their affective response facilitate the repurchase intention of luxury goods? Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 27, 1-10.
Chang, C.-J. (2012). Conflict as a Decision Heuristic: A New Perspective on Framing Effect. (doctoral). National Chung Cheng University, Chiayi County. Retrieved from https://hdl.handle.net/11296/a89hb3
Chen, S., & Chaiken, S. (1999). The heuristic-systematic model in its broader context.
Cialdini, R. B., & James, L. (1985). Influence: Science and practice (Vol. 4): Pearson education Boston.
Drolet, A., & Frances Luce, M. (2004). The rationalizing effects of cognitive load on emotion-based trade-off avoidance. Journal of Consumer Research, 31(1), 63-77.
Edwards, K. (1990). The interplay of affect and cognition in attitude formation and change. Journal of personality and social psychology, 59(2), 202.
Fujita, K., Trope, Y., Liberman, N., & Levin-Sagi, M. (2006). Construal levels and self-control. Journal of personality and social psychology, 90(3), 351.
Ha, T. M. (2021). The impact of product characteristics of limited-edition shoes on perceived value, brand trust and purchase intention. Cogent Business & Management, 8(1), 1953680.
Heersmink, R. (2016). The internet, cognitive enhancement, and the values of cognition. Minds and Machines, 26(4), 389-407.
Kahneman, D. (2011). Thinking, fast and slow: Macmillan.
Kalyuga, S., Chandler, P., & Sweller, J. (1998). Levels of expertise and instructional design. Human factors, 40(1), 1-17.
Kapferer, J.-N. (1994). Strategic brand management: New approaches to creating and evaluating brand equity: Simon and Schuster.
Knox, S., & Walker, D. (2003). Empirical developments in the measurement of involvement, brand loyalty and their relationship in grocery markets. Journal of Strategic marketing, 11(4), 271-286.
Laurent, G., & Kapferer, J.-N. (1985). Measuring consumer involvement profiles. Journal of marketing research, 22(1), 41-53.
Lee, J. (2016). A study on desire embedded in shoes and eroticism based on Slavoj Zizek’s desire theory. Bulletin of Korean Society of Basic Design & Art, 17(6), 423-436.
Mittal, B., & Lee, M.-S. (1989). A causal model of consumer involvement. Journal of economic psychology, 10(3), 363-389.
Moll, J., De Oliveira‐Souza, R., & Zahn, R. (2008). The neural basis of moral cognition: sentiments, concepts, and values. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 1124(1), 161-180.
Paas, F. G. (1992). Training strategies for attaining transfer of problem-solving skill in statistics: a cognitive-load approach. Journal of educational psychology, 84(4), 429.
Park, C. W., Jaworski, B. J., & MacInnis, D. J. (1986). Strategic brand concept-image management. Journal of marketing, 50(4), 135-145.
Park, H. (2011). The effectiveness of scarcity message type on consumer attitude: Focused on moderating role of involvement and self-monitoring in online cosmetic advertising. Journal of Marketing Studies, 19(1), 29-47.
Roch, S. G., Lane, J. A., Samuelson, C. D., Allison, S. T., & Dent, J. L. (2000). Cognitive load and the equality heuristic: A two-stage model of resource overconsumption in small groups. Organizational behavior and human decision processes, 83(2), 185-212.
Rook, D. W., & Fisher, R. J. (1995). Normative influences on impulsive buying behavior. Journal of Consumer Research, 22(3), 305-313.
Rosch, E. (1975). Cognitive representations of semantic categories. Journal of experimental psychology: General, 104(3), 192.
Trope, Y., & Liberman, N. (2003). Temporal construal. Psychological review, 110(3), 403.
Trope, Y., & Liberman, N. (2010). Construal-level theory of psychological distance. Psychological review, 117(2), 440.
Trope, Y., Liberman, N., & Wakslak, C. (2007). Construal levels and psychological distance: Effects on representation, prediction, evaluation, and behavior. Journal of consumer psychology, 17(2), 83-95.
Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1974). Judgment under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases: Biases in judgments reveal some heuristics of thinking under uncertainty. science, 185(4157), 1124-1131.
Vallacher, R. R., & Wegner, D. M. (1989). Levels of personal agency: Individual variation in action identification. Journal of personality and social psychology, 57(4), 660.
Vigneron, F., & Johnson, L. W. (2004). Measuring perceptions of brand luxury. Journal of brand management, 11(6), 484-506.
Wang, S., Hurlstone, M. J., Leviston, Z., Walker, I., & Lawrence, C. (2019). Climate change from a distance: An analysis of construal level and psychological distance from climate change. Frontiers in psychology, 10, 230.
Wicaksono, A. I., & Ishak, A. (2022). Promoting online purchase intention through website quality, EWOM, receiver perspective, consumer satisfaction and brand image. International Journal of Research in Business and Social Science (2147-4478), 11(1), 12-23.
Wu, L., & Lee, C. (2016). Limited edition for me and best seller for you: The impact of scarcity versus popularity cues on self versus other-purchase behavior. Journal of Retailing, 92(4), 486-499.
Wu, Y., Xin, L., Li, D., Yu, J., & Guo, J. (2021). How does scarcity promotion lead to impulse purchase in the online market? A field experiment. Information & Management, 58(1), 103283.
Yoon, S., Lee, H., & Lee, C. (2014). The effects of limited quantity scarcity message and product type on the purchase intention: Focusing on the moderating role of regulatory focus and the mediating role of processing fluency. The Korean Journal of Advertising, 25(8), 241-268.
Zaichkowsky, J. L. (1985). Measuring the involvement construct. Journal of Consumer Research, 12(3), 341-352.