簡易檢索 / 詳目顯示

研究生: 陳明輝
Ming-Huei Chen
論文名稱: 影評人發行商偏誤及評價方向對消費者評價接受度之影響:消費者發行商認同為干擾因素
The Impact of Critics’ Distributor Bias and Review Valence on Consumers’ Acceptance of Critiques: The Moderating Effect of Consumers’ Identification with the Movie Distributors.
指導教授: 王仕茹
Wang, Shih-Ju
學位類別: 碩士
Master
系所名稱: 大眾傳播研究所
Graduate Institute of Mass Communication
論文出版年: 2009
畢業學年度: 97
語文別: 中文
論文頁數: 220
中文關鍵詞: 影評電影評價電影評價方向性影評人發行商偏誤電影發行商認同
英文關鍵詞: Film Critic, Film Review, Review Valence, Distributor Bias, Distributor Identification
論文種類: 學術論文
相關次數: 點閱:213下載:0
分享至:
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
  • 在電影評價環境中,當電影發行商企圖控制或者收買電影影評人的現象屢見不鮮時,回顧電影評價的文獻,卻鮮少研究關注電影發行商與影評人之間的利益關係。遲至2006年,Ravid, Wald, and Bsuroy等研究者才以市場資料為基礎,在電影評價研究文獻中首度驗證並提出電影影評人存在發行商偏誤(distributor bias)——影評人評價明顯正面偏袒於特定的電影發行商——之現象;然而,該研究將影評人在「統計」上所顯露的發行商偏誤對應於電影發行商的控制力與操弄,除了此一因果推論的基礎不足之外,同時獲得頗令人疑惑的研究結論:消費者會更依賴偏袒電影發行商的影評人。

    為了瞭解電影影評人發行商偏誤在電影評價環境中的角色,以及檢驗「消費者—發行商組織認同」是否能夠干擾影評人發行商偏誤在消費者評價上的影響力,本研究以「影評人評價方向性」(正面/負面評價)、「影評人發行商偏誤」(無/有偏誤)以及「消費者發行商認同」(低/高認同) 為自變項,「消費者評價接受度」為因變數,進行實驗研究。研究結果顯示:在影評人提出正面評價的情境中,相較於有發行商偏誤影評人的評價接受度,無發行商偏誤影評人的評價接受度會顯著較高。因此,本研究獲得了和Ravid, Wald, and Bsuroy (2006)研究結論完全相反的結果——影評人發行商偏誤會顯著降低正面評價影響力,並不會讓消費者更依賴於有發行商偏誤的影評人。

    除此之外,研究結果亦顯示:相較於低發行商認同的消費者,高發行商認同消費者除了能夠降低影評人負面評價的影響力之外,亦能提高影評人正面評價的影響力。而且,消費者與電影發行商之間的組織認同會促使消費者容忍組織的缺失,或者使消費者回復負面資訊對組織的影響,因而:當有發行商偏誤影評人提出負面評價時,相較於低發行商認同消費者的負面評價接受度,高發行商認同消費者的負面評價顯著較低;另外,當無發行商偏誤影評人提出正面評價時,相較於低發行商認同消費者,高發行商認同消費者的正面評價接受度顯著較高。這表示:當影評人無發行商偏誤時,消費者的發行商認同可以提高影評人正面評價的影響力;另一方面,當影評人有發行商偏誤時,消費者的發行商認同可以降低影評人負面評價的影響力。

    整體而言,本研究認為:相較於控制或收買影評人評價,電影行銷人員策略性管理電影評價不可忽略甚至較佳的途徑為——發展並應用已存在於消費環境中的電影發行商認同,因為高發行商認同消費者可以提高無發行商偏誤影評人正面評價的影響力,此外,高發行商認同消費者可以降低有發行商偏誤影評人的負面評價影響力,而且在本研究中發現電影評價存在正向效果,因此,本研究建議電影發行商應該致力於發展消費者的電影發行商認同,提高低發行商認同消費者的組織認同程度,並降低或甚至不去收買或控制電影影評人,以維繫並強化電影影評人正面評價的影響力。

    When motion picture distributors try to control or bribe film critics with specific benefit for gaining or exchanging positive film reviews, the existent film critic researches apparently ignore the relationships between distributors and film critics which named “distributor bias” by Ravid, Wald, and Bsuroy’s study in 2006. Ravid et al. (2006) analyzed the market data and found that moviegoers relied more on the film critics with distributor bias than on the critics without bias. This confused result violates the presumption of attribution theories that people have the motivation of pursuing truth and accuracy, and cause the problem of why people relying more on the biased critics.

    In order to comprehend the role of critics’ distributor bias in film critic circumstance, and to test whether “customer-distributor identification” moderated the impact of distributor bias on customer acceptance of film critic’s reviews, this study conducted by using experimental approach. The independent variables were film critic’s review valence (positive/negative), critic’s distributor bias (biased/non-biased), customer-distributor identification (low/high), and dependent variable was customer acceptance of film critic’s review. The experimental analysis show that acceptance of critic’s positive film reviews was higher for the film critics without distributor bias than for the film critics with distributor bias. This finding was opposite to the result of Ravid et. al. (2006), and verified that customers actually relied less on critics with distributor bias than critics without distributor bias.

    The analysis also indicated that acceptance of critics’ positive film reviews was higher compared to negative film reviews, and acceptance of critics’ negative reviews was lower for the high distributor identification customers than for the low distributor identification customers. When film critics possessed distributor bias, the acceptance of biased critics’ negative film reviews was lower for the high distributor identification customers than for the low ones. On the other hand, when film critics didn’t have distributor bias, the acceptance of non-biased critics’ positive reviews was higher for the high distributor identification customers than for the low ones.

    Overall, the study considered that developing and applying customer-distributor identification was a way of film critic management and should not be disregarded by movie marketors, this way was also less controversial than bribing film critics. This is because high distributor identification customers could strengthen the impact of non-biased critics’ positive film reviews, and could resist the impact of the biased critics’ negative film reviews on customers, additionally this study found positivity effect of film critics’ review. Therefore this study suggest that distributors should try to develop customer-distributor identification to enhance the identification level of low distributor identification customers, and tried not to bribe film critics for maintaining and consolidating the impact of film critics’ positive film rating.

    第一章 緒論………………………………………………………………1 第一節 研究動機與背景………………………………………………1 第二節 研究問題與目的………………………………………………6 第二章 文獻探討…………………………………………………………8 第一節 電影影評人的發行商偏誤……………………………………8 一、電影發行商………………………………………………………8 二、電影發行商對影評人之控制…………..………………………10 三、影評人的發行商偏誤……………………..……………………12 ( 一 ) 影評人發行商偏誤的狀態…………………..……………13 ( 二 ) 影評人發行商偏誤之實務定義…………………..………15 四、影評人發行商偏誤之理論意涵…………………...……………16 ( 一 ) 影評人即影響者或意見領袖……………...………………16 ( 二 ) 影論人賦予電影發行商及其電影之正當性………………17 ( 三 ) 影評人發行商偏誤之理論性定義…………………………19 第二節 影評人發行商偏誤與可信度………………………….………21 一、區辨電影發行商偏誤的能力…………………….………………21 二、影評人發行商偏誤與可信度………………….…………………22 ( 一 ) 歸因過程 ………………………….……………………22 ( 二 ) 歸因與資訊信賴……………………………………………24 ( 三 ) 來源的資訊水準與來源可信度……………………………24 ( 1 ) 專業性……………………………………………………25 ( 2 ) 信賴感……………………………………………………25 ( 3 ) 偏誤………………………………………………………26 三、影評人發行商偏誤與評價接受度………………………………27 第三節 影評人發行商偏誤與評價方向性……………………………30 一、電影評價方向性…………………………………………………30 ( 一 ) 電影評價正向效果…………………………………………30 ( 二 ) 電影評價負向效果…………………………………………31 二、影評人發行商偏誤與評價正負向效果…………………………32 ( 一 ) 歸因判準 ………………………………………………32 ( 二 ) 影評人發行商偏誤與影評正向效果間的關係……………33 ( 三 ) 影評人發行商偏誤與影評負向效果間的關係……………35 第四節 消費者的電影發行商認同…………….………………………37 一、消費者的組織認同………………………………………………38 ( 一 ) 個體尋求組織認同的起因…………………………………39 ( 二 ) 社會類化……………………………………………………40 ( 三 ) 自我類化……………………………………………………42 1. 「自我類化」的認知與知覺面向……………………………42 2. 「自我類化」的關聯與比較面向……………………………43 3. 「自我類化」的功能意涵……………………………………43 ( 四 ) 社會認同與「消費者—組織認同」………………………43 1. 「消費者—組織認同」即消費者與組織的重疊……………44 2. 「消費者—組織認同」的認知面向…………………………45 3. 「消費者—組織認同」的價值面向…………………………45 4. 「消費者—組織認同」的情感面向…………………………46 5. 「消費者—組織認同」的關係面向…………………………46 6. 「消費者—組織認同」的信念面向…………………………47 二、影響「消費者—組織認同」的因素……………………………47 ( 一 ) 主體的相似性………………………………………………47 ( 二 ) 主體的特殊性………………………………………………48 ( 三 ) 主體的威望…………………………………….……………49 ( 四 ) 主體的信賴感………………………………………………50 ( 五 ) 主體的吸引力………………………………………………51 ( 六 ) 組織的象徵物………………………………………………51 三、電影發行商認同的理論性定義…………………………………52 四、「消費者—組織認同」的利益…………..………………………53 ( 一 ) 負面資訊的回復……………………………………………54 ( 二 ) 缺失容忍 ………………………………………………55 第三章 研究方法…………………………………………………………57 第一節 研究變項與定義………………………………………………57 一、自變項……………………………………………………………57 ( 一 ) 電影影評人發行商偏誤……………………………………57 ( 二 ) 電影影評人評價方向性……………………………………58 二、干擾變項…………………………………………………………58 ( 一 ) 消費者電影發行商認同……………………………………58 1. 消費者電影發行商認同的衡量:維恩圖衡量………………59 2. 消費者電影發行商認同的效果:情感承諾衡量……………60 ( 二 ) 潛在干擾變項:消費者潛在觀影興趣 …………60 三、依變項……………………………………………………………61 ( 一 ) 電影影評人的可信度………………………………………61 ( 二 ) 消費者對影評人評價的接受度……………………………61 ( 三 ) 「消費者—組織認同」的利益……………………………62 1. 缺失容忍………………………………....……………………62 2. 負面資訊的回復………………………………………………62 第二節 實驗設計與程序………………………………………………64 一、實驗刺激物發展…………………………………………………64 ( 一 ) 前測一:選擇正式實驗之電影發行商……………………64 1. 前測一刺激物…………………………………………………65 2. 前測一問卷設計………………………………………………67 3. 前測一程序……………………………………………………68 4. 前測一結果:米高梅影片公司………………………………68 ( 二 ) 前測二:正式實驗施測電影之選擇………………………69 1. 前測二:正式實驗施測電影的選擇標準……………………70 2. 前測二問卷設計………………………………………………70 3. 前測二結果……………………………………………………71 ( 三 ) 影評人及其電影評價方向性之操弄………………………72 1. 虛擬電影影評人………………………………………………72 2. 虛擬電影影評人的專業性……………………………………72 3. 電影評價方向性操弄…………………………………………73 ( 四 ) 電影影評人發行商偏誤之描述……………………………73 1. 有電影發行商偏誤的報導內文………………………………74 2. 無電影發行商偏誤的報導內文………………………………74 二、實驗程序…………………………………………………………74 第三節 分析工具………………………………………………………76 一、描述性統計分析…………………………………………………76 二、信度分析…………………………………………………………76 三、t檢定……………………………………..………………………76 四、三因子變異數分析 ( 3-way ANOVA ) …………………………76 第四章 研究結果與討論…………………………………………………78 第一節 樣本結構………………………………………………………78 第二節 變數操弄檢定…………………………………………………81 一、信度分析…………………………………………………………81 二、電影影評人評價方向性操弄檢定………………………………82 三、受測者電影發行商認同操弄檢定………………………………82 第三節 假說檢定………………………………………………………84 第五章 結論與建議…………………………………...…………………101 第一節 研究結論………………………………………………………101 第二節 學術貢獻與管理意涵…………………………………………103 一、學術貢獻…………………………………………………………103 二、管理意涵…………………………………………………………104 第三節 未來研究建議…………………………………………………108 參考文獻……………………………………………………………………111 附錄一~十

    TPBO台北票房情報網 ( 2008.12.31 )。〈2008台北市票房排行榜〉。上網日期:2009年1月8日,取自http://www.taipeibo.com/2008.htm。

    王慧倫(2008.12.08)。〈海角七號破五億 李安:恭喜也同情他〉,《聯合晚報》,A12版。

    史千 ( 1982 )。〈電影界「聲討」聯合報:五個影劇團體,抗議輿論裁判〉,《電影沙龍》,6:12-20。

    金琳 ( 1978.02.17 )。〈學生們看電影 圈選十大爛片〉,《聯合報》,09版。

    高山隼 ( 1978 )。《十大爛片風波》。台中:藍燈文化。

    梁良 ( 1993 )。《影評人的真面目》。台北:淑馨出版社。

    黃仁 ( 2004 )。《台灣影評六十年:台灣影評史話》。台北:亞太圖書。

    電影沙龍 ( 1982 )。〈「聲討聯合報」事件胎死腹中〉,《電影沙龍》,79-11。

    葛大維 (2008.12.09)。〈李安看魏德聖 挑戰才真正開始:應新聞局長邀請 談海角七號熱潮 如何衝奧斯卡?「看外國宣傳公司怎麼做」〉,《聯合報》,D2版。

    劉曉梅 ( 1978.02.17 )。〈十大爛片起風波:導演們認為選擇不公正,有人希望諷諫代嘲弄〉,《聯合報》,09版。

    盧非易 ( 1998 )。《台灣電影:政治、經濟、美學,1949-1994》。台北:遠流。

    謝仁昌主編 ( 2007 )。《2007年台灣電影年鑑》( 第1版 )。台北:行政院新聞局。

    Ahearne, M., Bhattacharya, C. B., and Gruen, T. (2005). Antecedents and consequences of Customer-company identification: Expanding the role of relationship marketing. Journal of Applied Psychology, 90(3), 574-585.

    Ahluwalia, R. (2000). Examination of psychological processes underlying resistance to persuasion. Journal of Consumer Research, 27(2), 217-232.

    Ahluwalia, R. (2002). How prevalent is the negativity effect in consumer environment? Journal of Consumer Research, 29(2), 270-279.

    Albert, S. A., Ashforth, B. E., and Dutton, J. E. (2000). Organizational identity and identification: Charting new waters and Building new bridges. Academy of Management, 25(1), 13-17.

    Artz, N and Tybout, A. M. (1999). The moderating impact of quantitative information on the relationship between source credibility and persuasion: A persuasion knowledge model interpretation. Marketing Letters, 10(1), 51-62.

    Ashforth, B. E. and Meal, F. (1989). Social identity theory and the organization. Academy of Management Review, 14(1), 20-39.

    Assael, H. C. (1998). Consumer behavior and marketing action. Ohio: South-Western College Pub.

    baltimoresun.com (2009.01.19). YouTube + MGM = More Full-Length Streaming Movie Options. baltimoresun.com. Retrieved January 19, 2009, from http://weblogs.baltimoresun.com/business/
    consuminginterests/blog/mgm-logo.jpg.

    Baron, R. M. and David, A. K. (1986). The moderator mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51(6), 1173–1182.

    Bartel, C. A. (2001). Social comparisons in boundary-spanning work: Effects of community outreach on members’ organizational identity and identification. Administrative Science Quarterly, 46(3), 379-413.

    Basuroy, S., Chatterjee, S., and Ravid, S. A. (2003). How critical are critical reviews? The box office effects of film critics, star power, and budgets. Journal of Marketing, 67(4), 103-117.

    Becker, H. S. (1984). Art World. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.

    Belk, R. W. (1988). Possessions and the extended self. Journal of Consumer Research, 15(2), 139-168.

    Bergami, M. and Bagozzi, R. P. (2000) . Self-categorization, affective commitment and group self-esteem as distinct aspects of social identity in the organization. British Journal of Social Psychology, 39(4), 555-577.

    Berlo, D. K., Lemert, J. B., and Mertz, R. J. (1969). Dimensions for Evaluating the Acceptability of Message Sources. Public Opinion Quarterly, 33(4), 563-576.

    Bhattacharya, C. B. and Sen S. (2003). Consumer-company identification: A framework for understanding consumers’ relationships with companies. Journal of Marketing, 67(2), 76-88.

    Birnbaum, M. H. and Stegner S. E. (1979). Source credibility in social judgment: Bias , Expertise , and the judge’s point of view. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 37(1), 48-74.

    Brewer, M. B. (1991). The social self: On being the same and different at the same time. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 17(5), 475-482.

    Buda, R. and Zhang, Y. (2000). Consumer product evaluation: The interactive effect of message framing, presentation order, and source credibility. Journal of Product & Brand Management, 9(4), 229-242.

    Burzynski, M. H. and Bayer, D. J. (1977). The effect of positive and negative prior information on motion picture appreciation. The Journal of Social Psychology, 101(2), 215-218.

    Business brief – Sony Corp.: Company says it completed Columbia Pictures purchase(1989.11.08) . Wall Street Journal(Eastern edition) , pg. 1 .

    Cardador, M. T. and Pratt, M. G. (2006). Identification management and its bases: Bridge management and marketing perspectives through a focus on affiliation dimension. Academy of Marketing Science, 34(2), 174-184.

    Cooney, J. (2004). Batman begins. License!, 7(5), 144-148.

    Copper-Martin, E. (1992). Consumers and movies: Information sources for experiential products. Advances in Consumer Research, 19(1), 756-761.

    d’Astous, A. and Touil, N. (1999). Consumer evaluations of movies on the basis of critics’ judgments. Psychology & Marketing, 16(8), 677-694.

    Desai, K. K. and Basuroy, S. (2005). Interactive influence of genre familiarity, star power, and critics’ reviews in the cultural goods industry: The case of motion pictures. Psychology & Marketing, 22(3), 203-223.

    Descartes, R. (1644/1984b). Principles of philosophy. In J. Cottingham, R. Stoothoff, and D. Murdoch (Eds. and Trans), The philosophical writings of Descartes ( Vol. 1 , p. 193-291). Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.

    Dholakia, R. R. and Sternthal, B. (1977). Highly credible sources: Persuasive facilitators or persuasive liabilities? Journal of Consumer Research, 3(4), 223-232.

    Donavan, D. T., Janda, S., and Suh J. (2006). Environmental influences in corporate brand identification and outcomes. Brand Management, 14(1/2), 125-136.

    Dukerich, J. M., Golden, B. R., and Shortell S. M. (2002). Beauty is in the eye of the beholder: The Impact of organizational identification, identity, and image on the cooperative behaviors of physicians. Administrative Science Quarterly, 47(3), 207-233.

    Dutton, J. E., Dukerich, J. M., and Harquail, C. V. (1994). Organizational images and member identification. Administrative Science Quarterly, 39(34), 239-263.

    Eagley, A. H. and Chaiken, S. (1975). An attribution analysis of the effect of communicator characteristics on opinion change: The case of communicator attractiveness. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 32(1), 136-144.

    Eagly, A. H., Wood, W., and Chaiken, S. (1978). Causal inferences about communicators and their effect on opinion change. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 36(4), 424-435.

    Einwiller, S. A., Fedorikhin, A., Johnson, A. R., and Kamins, M. A. (2006). Enough is enough! When identification no longer prevents negative corporate associations. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 34(2), 185-194.

    Eliashberg, J. and Sawhney, M. (1994). Modeling goes to Hollywood: Predicting individual diffirences in movie enjoyment. Management Science, 40(9), 1151-1173.

    Eliashberg, J. and Shugan, S. M. (1997). Film critics: Influencers or predictors? Journal of Marketing, 61(2), 68-78.

    Faber,R. J. and O’Guinn, T. C. (1984). Effect of advertising and other sources on movie selection. Journalism Quarterly, 61(2), 371-377.

    Fellman, D. R. (2006). Theatrical distribution. In Jasone E. Squire (Ed.), The movie business book (international 3rd ed., pp. 361-374). Maidenhead: Open University Press.

    Ferrell, O. C. (2004). Business ethics and customer stakeholder. The Academy of Management Executive, 18(2), 126-129.

    Fournier, S. (1998). Consumers and their brands: Developing relationship theory in consumer research. Journal of Consumer Research, 24(4), 343-373.

    Fragale, A. R. and Heath, C. (2004). Evolving informational credentials: The ( Mis )attribution of believable facts to credible sources. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 30(2), 225-236.

    Friedberg, A. (1990). A denial of differences: Theories of cinematic identification. In E. Ann Kaplan (Ed.), Psychoanalysis & Cinema (pp. 36-45). New York: Routledge.

    Geers, A. L., Handley, I. M., and McLarney, A. R. (2003). Discerning the role of optimism in persuasion: The valence-enhancement hypothesis. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 85(3), 554-565.

    Gershoff, A. D., Mukherjee, A., and Mukhopadhyay, A. (2003). Consumer acceptance of online agent advice: Extremity and Positivity effects. Journal of Consumer Pscyhology, 13(1&2), 161-170.

    Gershoff, A. D., Mukherjee, A., and Mukhopadhyay, A. (2006). “ I love it ” or “ I hate it ” ? The positivity effect in stated preferences for agent evaluation. Marketing Letters, 17(2), 103-117.

    Gilbert,D. T., Malone, P. S., and Krull D. S. (1990) . Unbelieving the unbelievable: Some problems in the rejection of false information. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 59(4), 601-613.

    Goldsmith, R. E. and Hofacker, C. F. (1991). Measuring consumer innovativeness. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 19(3), 209-221.

    Gotlieb, J. B. and Sarel D. (1991) . Comparative advertising effectiveness: The role of involvement and source credibility. Journal of Advertising, 20(1), 38-45.

    Gotlieb, J. B., Schlacter, J. L., and St. Louis, R. D. (1992). Consumer Decision Making: A model of the effects of involvement , source credibility , and location on the size of the price difference required to induce consumers to change suppliers. Psychology & Marketing, 9(3), 191-208.

    Graham, R. (2001.06.19). Big studios get creative with film promotion. Boston Globe, p. E1.

    Grewal,D., Gothlieb, J., and Marmorstein, H. (1994). The modeling effects of message framing price-perceived risk relationship. Journal of Consumer Research, 21(1), 145-153.

    Hannan, M. T. and Freeman, J. (1989). Organizational ecology. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Hardie, B. G. S., Johnson, E. J., and Fader, P. S. (1993). Modeling loss aversion and reference dependence effects on brand choice. Marketing Science, 12(4), 378-394.

    Harmon, R. R. and Coney, K. A. (1982). The persuasive effect of source credibility in buy and lease situations. Journal of Marketing Research, 19(2), 255-260.

    Hazlett, C. (2008.12.22). Cruise camp offered screening for ‘nice’ words. msnbc.com. Retrieved Jan. 10, 2009, from http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/28355166/

    Heider, F. (1958). The psychology of interpersonal relations. New York : Wiley.

    Hovland, C. I. and Weiss, W. (1951-1952). The influence of source credibility on communication effectiveness. Public Opinion Quarterly, 15(4), 635-650.

    Hsu, G. (2006). Evaluative schemas and the attention of critics in the US film industry. Industrial and Corporate Change, 15(3) , 467-496.

    Jones, E. E. and Davis, K. F. (1965). From acts to disposition. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol.2, pp. 219-266). New York: Academic Press.

    Kelly, H. H. (1967). Attribution theory in social psychology. In David Levine(Ed.), Nebraska symposium on motivation (pp. 192-238). NE: University of Nebraska Press.

    Kelly, H. H. (1972). Attribution in social interaction. In E.E. Jonse, D.E. Kanouse, H.H. Kelly, R.E. Nisbett, S. Valins, and B. Weiner (Eds.), Attribution: perceiving the causes of behavior. Norristown, NJ: General Learning Press.

    Kramer, R. M. (1991). Intergroup relations and organizational dilemmas: The role of categorization processes. Research in Organizational Behavior, 13, 191-207.

    Kunda, Z. (1990). The cases for motivated reasoning. Psychology Bulletin, 108(3), 480-498.

    Kunda, Z. (1999). Social cognition: Making sense of people. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.

    LaPorte, N (2005.08.08). Sony settles false critic. Video Business, 25(32), 9.

    Levin, A. M., Levin, I. P., and Heath, C. E. (1997). Movie stars and authors as brand names: Measuring brand equity in experiential products. Advances in Consumer Research, 24(1), 175-181.

    Lichtenstein, D. R., Drumwright, M. E., and Braig B. M. (2004). The effect of corporate social responsibility on customer donations to corporate-supported nonprofits. Journal of Marketing, 68(4), 16-32.

    Lippman, J. (2001.04.27). “ Town & Country “ publicity proves an awkward act. Wall Street Journal, p. B1.

    Litman, B. R. (1998). The motion picture Mega-industry. MA: Allyn & Bacom.

    Lovell, G. (1997). Movies and Manipulation: How Studios Punish Critics? Columbia Journalism Review, 35(5), 9-12.

    Maccoby, E. E. and Wilson W. C. (1957). Identification and observational learning from films. The Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 55(1) , 76-87.

    Maccoby, E. E. (1980). Social development: Psychological growth ant the parent-child relationships. New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.

    Mael, F. and Ashforth B. E. (1992). Alumni and Their Alma Mater: A Partial test of the reformulated model of organizational identification. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 13(2), 103-123.

    Merrilees, B. and Miller, D. (1999). Direct selling in the west and east: The relative roles of product and relationship ( Guanxi ) drivers. Journal of Business Research, 45(3), 267-273.

    Moorman, C., Zaltman, G., and Deshpande R. (1992). Relationships between providers and users of market research: The dynamics of trust within and between organizations. Journal of Marketing Research, 29(3), 314-328.

    Morris, J. S. (2007). Slanted objectivity? Perceived media bias, cable news exposure, and political attitudes. Social Science Quartely, 88(3), 707-728.

    Motion Picture Association of America (2007). Theatrical market statistics. Washington, DC: Motion Picture Association of America.

    Neelamegham, R. and Jain, D. (1999). Consumer choice process for experience goods: An econometric model and analysis. Journal of Marketing Research, 36(3), 373-386.

    Nunnally, J. C. (1978). Psychometric theory. New York: McGraw-Hill.

    Palmgreen, P. and Lawrence, P. A. (1991). Avoidances, gratification, and consumption of theatrical films: The rest of the story. In Bruce A. Austin (Ed.), Current research in film: Audiences, economics, and law (Vol.5, pp. 39-55). NJ: Ablex Publishing Co..

    Perry, D. G. and Perry, L. C. (1976). Identification with film characters, covert aggressive verbalization, and reactions to film violence. Journal of Research in Personality, 10(4), 399-409.

    Petty, R. E. and Cacioppo, J. T. (1986). The elaboration likelihood model of persuasion. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology(Vol. 19, pp. 123-205). New York: Academic Press.

    Petty, R. E., Cacioppo, J. T., and Goldman, Goldman (1981). Personal involvement as a determinant of argument-based persuasion. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 41(5), 847-855.

    Petty, R. E., Cacioppo, J. T., and Schumann D. (1983). Central and peripheral routes to advertising effectiveness: The moderating role of involvement. Journal of Consumer Research, 10(2), 135-146.

    Phantom menace.(2005.08.05). Financial Times( Asia Edition), p. 24.

    Piasentin, K. A. and Chapman, D. S. (2007). Perceived similarity and complemetarity as predictor of subjective person-organization fit. Journal of Occupational and Psychology, 80(2), 341-354.

    Pratt, M. G.(1998). To be or not to be : Central Questions in organizational identification. In David A. Whetten,and Paul C. Godfrey(Eds.), Identity in organizations : Building strategy through conversations(pp. 171-207). California: Sage Publication.

    Pratt, M. G. (2001). Social identity dynamics in modern organizations: An organizational psychology / Organizational behavior perspective. In Michael A. Hogg and Deborah J. Terry (Eds.), Social identity processes in organizational context (pp. 13-30). Philadelphia: Psychology Press.

    Ravid, S. A. (1999). Information, blockbusters, and stars: A study of the film industry. Journal of Business, 72(4), 463-492.

    Ravid, S. A., Wald, J. K., and Basuroy, S. (2006). Distributors and film critics: Does it take two to tango? Journal of Cultural Economics, 30(3), 201-218.

    Sanders, P. (2008.02.29). Time Warner to Merge Units; New Line to Fold Into Warner Bros.; Co-CEOs to Leave. Wall Street Journal, p. B5.

    Scott, S. G. and Lane, V. R. (2000). A stakeholder approach to organizational identity. The Academy of Management Review, 25(1), 43-62.

    Selnes, F. (1998). Antecedents and consequences of trust and satisfaction in buyer-seller relationships. European Journal of Marketing, 32(3/4), 305-322.

    Sen, S. and Bhattacharya, C. B. (2001). Does doing good always lead to doing better? Consumer reactions to corporate social responsibility. Journal of Marketing Research, 38(2), 225-243.

    Seth, G. (1996.02.17). Studios’ rebranding strategies gain heat. Billboard, 108(7), 5-7.

    Shapiro, E. (1996.07.19). After MGM deal, Hollywood hopefuls look hard at Turner's New Line unit. Wall Street Journal, p. B6.

    Shapiro, E. (1997.04.14). Time Warner to Keep New Line Cinema, Nears a Deal on Financing of New Films. Wall Street Journal, p. B10.

    Shockley-Zalabak, P., Ellis, K., and Winograd G. (2000). Organizational trust: What it means, why it matters. Organizational Development Journal, 18(4), 35-48.

    Shrum, W. M. (1996). Fringe and fortune: The role of critics in high and popular art. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

    Simmons, J. (1994.03.25). A “thumb up“ pulls in the audience . Wall Street Journal(Eastern edition), p. Section B.

    Skowronski, J. J. and Carlston, D. E. (1989). Negativity and extremity biases in impression formation: A review of explanations. Psychological Bulletin, 105(1), 131-142.

    Sony pictures to pay 1.5M dollars to settle fake review suit. (200508.04). Jiji Press English News Service, p. 1.

    Sparkman, R. M. and Locander, W. B. (1980). Attribution Theory and Advertising Effectiveness. Journal of Consumer Research, 7(3), 219-224.

    Spinoza, B. ( 1677/1982 ). The ethics and selected letters (S. Feldman, Ed., and S. Shirley, Trans.). Indianapolis, IN: Hacket.

    Steffy, L. (2005.08.05). Houston chronicle Loren Steffy column. Knight Ridder Tribune Business, p. 1.

    Sternthal, B. S., Dholakia, R., and Leavitt C. (1978). The persuasive effect of source credibility: Tests of cognitive
    response. Journal of Consumer Research, 4(4), 252-260.

    Suchman, M. C. (1995). Managing legitimacy: Strategic and institutional approach. Academy of Management Review, 20(3), 571-610.

    Swann, W. B. (1987). Identity negotiation: Where two roads meet. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 53 (6), 1038-1051.

    Swann, W. B., Stein-Seroussi, A., and Giesler, R. B. (1992). Why people self-verify. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 62(3), 392-401.

    Swartz, T. A. (1984). Relationship between source expertise and source similarity in an advertising context. Journal of Advertising, 13(2), 49-55

    Tajfel, H. (1982). Social psychology of intergroup relations. Annual Review of Psychology, 33, 1-39.

    Tajfel, H and Turner, J. C. (1985). The social identity theory of intergroup behaviors. In Steven Worchel and William G. Austin (Eds), Psychology of Intergroup Relations(pp. 6-24). Chicago: Nelson-Hall.

    Tannenbaum, P. H. and Gaer, E. P. (1965). Mood change as a function of stress of protagonist and degree of identification in a film-viewing situation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 2(4), 612-616.

    Tormala, Z. L., Briñol, P., and Petty, R. E. (2006). When credibility attacks: The reverse impact of source credibility on persuasion. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 42(5), 684-691.

    Tormala, Z. L. and Clarkson, J. J. (2007). Assimilation and contrast in persuasion: The effects of source credibility in multiple message situations. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 33(4), 559-571.

    Tormala, Z. L. and Petty, R. E. (2004). Source credibility and attitude certainty: A metacognitive analysis of resistance to persuasion. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 14(4), 427-442.

    Traiman, S. (1996.03.09). Videos jump into the toy chest. Billboard, 108(10), 61-62.

    Tropp, L. R. and Wright, S. C. (2001). Ingroup identification as the inclusion of ingroup in the self. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 27(2), 585-600.

    Turner, C. W. and Berkowitz, L. (1972). Identification with film aggressor ( covert role taking ) and reactions to film violence. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 21(2), 256-264.

    Tversky, A. and Kahneman, D. (1981). The framing of decisions and the psychology of choice. Science, 211(30), 453-458.

    Vogel, H. L. (1998). Entertainment industry economics: a guide for financial analysis(4th ed.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Wasko, J. (2003). How Hollywood works. London: SAGE.

    Weimann, G. (1991). The influentials: Back to the concept of opinion leaders? Public Opinion Quarterly, 55(2), 267-279.

    West, P. M. and Broniarczyk, S. M. (1998). Integrating multiple opinions: The role of aspiration level on consumer response to critic consensus. Journal of Consumer Research, 25(1), 38-51.

    Wu, W. Y. and Tsai, C. H. (2007) . The empirical study of CRM: Consumer-company identification and purchase intention in the direct selling industry . International Journal of Commerce & Management, 17(3), 194-210.

    Wyatt, R. O. and Badger, D. P. (1984) . How reviews affect film interest and evaluation. Journalism Quarterly, 61, 874-878.

    Wyatt, R. O. and Badger, D. P. (1987) . To toast, pan or waffle: How film reviews affect reader interest and credibility. Newspaper Research Journal, 8(4), 19-30.

    Xiang, Y. and Sarvary M. (2007). News consumption and media bias. Marketing Science, 26(5), 611-628.

    Zuckerman, E. W. (1999). The categorical imperative: Securities analysts and the legitimacy discount. American Journal of Sociology, 104(5), 1398-1438.

    無法下載圖示 本全文未授權公開
    QR CODE