本研究主要探討消費者在選擇商品時，這個商品稱之為目標物，會因為一些和商品無相關的因素而影響購物決策，這個無相關的因素稱之為促發物，使得消費者對於目標物產生不一樣的印象或是評價。在現今的市場上存在著非常多的品牌，當消費者在選擇商品時，品牌和品牌之間的行銷手法可能影響消費者的購買決策，而這樣互相影響的過程稱之為促發效果。
Chien, Wegner, Hsiao, and Petty(2010)所提出的「解釋範圍重疊模型」中發現目標物會因為促發物的存在而受到影響，進而產生促發效果，促發效果又可以細分成兩種效果，分別是「同化效果」 (assimilation effect) 和「對比效果」(contrast effect)；在Hsiao(2002)所提出的相互假設理論(Reciprocity Hypothesis)中發現，其實目標物和促發物之間其實會相互影響，而不是單向。在本研究中將進一步利用廣告的呈現來驗證假設。
　本研究將利用雙重正向促發物，探討消費者對目標物的態度及評價的變動。實驗分成四個主實驗，每位受測者須填答問卷3~4個階段，受測者不得重覆。實驗結果皆為部分成立，我們認為原因可能為樣本數不足夠、目標物被評價偏高、促發物廣告選擇等等，故未來應針對上述問題進一步做修改，希望實驗結果能夠更符合預期且更精確。

This research is mainly about when the consumers are choosing the goods, or so called target, they would be effected by irrelevant elements. These irrelevant elements called context. Nowadays there are lots of different brands on the market, the marketing techniques among all the different brands would even influent the consumers’ purchase decision. This influence is called 「Context Effect」.
The study of Dimensional Range Overlap Model (Chin, Wegner, Hsiao,＆Petty,2010) found that the target would be effected by the context, even cause the Context Effect. There are two types of Context Effect, which are assimilation effect and contrast effect. The study makes further discussion on the Reciprocity Hypothesis (Hsiao, 2002). The study show that target and context would effect each other. In this research, we are going to prove this hypothesis by the presentation of commercials. This research would use double positive contexts to explore the consumers’ attitude toward the target and the change of evaluation.
This experiment would be divided into four parts. Every participant would need to finish 3 to 4 stages of survey. The participant cannot answer the same survey twice. All the experiment results would be partially valid. We think the reasons might be not enough samples, overrated target, and the selection of the contexts’ commercial. Therefore, we should modify the problems above in the future, and hopefully the experiment results will be closer to our expectation and more accurately.

陳力瑜(2016)。以解釋範圍重疊模型探討雙重正價促發物對消費者態度之影響。碩士論文。台北：國立台灣師範大學。
蔡岳翰(2016)。衡量消費者在產品評價所產生態度上轉變的因素:正負向價促發物產生之週邊效果。台北：國立台灣師範大學。
Chien, Y., Wegener, D.T., Hsiao, C., Petty, R.E., (2010). Dimensional Range Overlap and Context Effects in Consumer Judgments. Journal of Consumer Research, 37(3), 530-542.
Higgins, E. Tory, William S. Rholes, & Carl R. Jones (1977). Category Accessibility and Impression Formation, Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 13 (2), 141-154.
Higgins, E.T., and King, G. A. (1981), Accessibility of social constructs: Information processing consequences of individual and contextual variability. In N. Cantor &J.
Kihlstrom (Eds.), Personality cognition, and social interaction (pp.69-121). Hillsdales, NJ: Erlbaum.
Herr, Paul M., Sherman, S. J., & Fazio, R.H.(1983). On the consequence of priming: Assimilation and contrast effect. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology,19 , 323-340
Higgins, E. Tory, Bargh, J. A., & Lombardi, W. J. (1985). Nature of priming effects on Categorization. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 11, 59-69
Herr, Paul M. (1989). Priming price: Prior knowledge and context effects. Journal of Consumer Research, 16(1), 67-75.
Hsiao, Chung-Chiang (2002). The Reciprocity Hypothesis as an Explanation of Perception Shifts in Product Judgment, Dissertation, Purdue University.
Johnson, E. J. and Russo ,J. E.(1984) “Product Familiarity and Learning New Information”, Journal of Consumer Research, 11(1), 542-550
Kelman, H. C. (1961), “Processes of Opinion Change”, Public Opinion Quarterly, 25(1), 57-78.
Petty, R.E& Cacioppo, J.T. (1981). Personal Involvements as a Determinant of Argumentbased Persuasion. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 41 ,847-855
Richard E. Petty, John T. Cacioppo & David Schumann (1983). Central and Peripderal Routes to Advertise Effectiveness: The Moderating Role of involvement. Jornal of Consumer Research, 10(2), 135-146