簡易檢索 / 詳目顯示

研究生: 劉妍妏
LIU YENWEN
論文名稱: 情緒與產品態度修正量 : 享樂型與效用型導向的產品判斷情緒修正量之不同影響
Correction for Mood Bias in Product Judgment: Hedonic vs. Utilitarian based Product Attitude
指導教授: 蕭中強
Hsiao, Chung-Chiang
學位類別: 碩士
Master
系所名稱: 管理研究所
Graduate Institute of Management
論文出版年: 2014
畢業學年度: 102
語文別: 英文
論文頁數: 45
中文關鍵詞: 心情偏誤高涉入偏誤察覺產品評價彈性修正模型享樂屬性效用屬性
英文關鍵詞: Mood Bias, Bias-Awareness, High Involvement, Product Judgment, Flexible Correction Model, Hedonic Attributes, Utilitarian Attribute
論文種類: 學術論文
相關次數: 點閱:411下載:8
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
  • 過去研究發現,心情因素與消費者對產品評價有顯著關係。本研究探討在不同心情狀態下,對於高涉入消費者而言,當消費者接收訊息並察覺到心情為偏誤時,是否會修正其對產品之評價。分為三部分進行探討:
    (一)在受測者未感受到心情移動時,其在好心情狀態下對產品之評價會進行向下修正
    (二)透過操弄及付予任務,試圖讓受測者察覺心情之移動,在其心情處於中立狀態下,對產品評價進行反向修正
    (三)在受測者為中立心情狀態下且未感受到心情移動時,其對產品之評價沒有修正的可能性
      根據彈性修正模型(FCM),消費者須在有足夠動機和能力之情況下,才有足夠的認知資源進行察覺偏誤,並進而修正對產品之評價。本研究之實驗在目標廣告中加入廣告標語提示受測者,以提升其察覺偏誤之能力,結果顯示有提示之實驗組對產品評價有較多之修正量。
      另一方面,本研究亦探討不同產品屬性是否會影響心情與產品評價之關係,研究顯示,當受測者自享樂屬性構面給予評價時,其易將心情視為主要特徵(central merits),而不易察覺心情偏誤,修正量少於自效用數性構面思考下之受測者。

    Past research which can be found that there are significant relation between mood and the judgment of customers. The objective of this study is to examine the likelihood of judgmental correction when customers with high involvement who receive message and sense mood bias. Three parts of this study are as follows:
    (1)For participants in good mood who don't sense the mood shift, they would correct the judgment of product downward.
    (2) For participants in bad mood who sense the mood shift by accomplishing a task , they would correct the judgment of product downward.
    (3)For participants in neutral mood who don't sense the mood shift, they would not correct the judgment of product.
    Base on the Flexible Correction Model, customers can't sense bias without enough motivation and ability. The target tagline are present in the ad would be a cue to promote the ability of bias awareness of customers. The results showed that there are greater amount of correction in the condition with tagline.
    In addition, this study investigated whether attributes would influence the relationship between mood and judgment. The results of this study revealed that mood would be a central merits when participants evaluate hedonic attributes of the target. Thus, the amount of correction would be less than when participants evaluate utilitarian attributes of the target.

    INTRODUCTION 1 LITERATURE REVIEW 3 PROPOSED HYPOTHESES 7 STUDY 1 11 METHODS 11 RESULTS FOR STUDY 1 16 DISCUSSION FOR STUDY 1 21 STUDY 2 22 PRETEST 22 METHODS 22 RESULTS FOR STUDY 2 25 DISCUSSION FOR STUDY 2 30 STUDY 3 31 METHODS 31 RESULTS FOR STUDY 3 33 DISCUSSION FOR STUDY 3 39 MANAGERIAL IMPLICATIONS 40 LIMITATION AND FUTURE RESEARCH 41 REFERENCE 42

    Adaval, Rashmi (2001), "Sometimes It Just Feels Right: The Differential Weighting of Affect-Consistent and Affect-Inconsistent Product Information," Journal of Consumer Research, 28 (June), 1-17.
    Baba, Shiv and Alexander Fedorikhin (1999), “Heart and Mind in Conflict: the Interplay of Affect and Cognition in Consumer Decision Making,” Journal of Consumer Research,Vol. 26, No. 3, 278-292.
    Barry, J. Babin, William R. Darden and Mitch Griffin (1994), “Work and/or Fun:
    Measuring Hedonic and Utilitarian Shopping Value,” Journal of Consumer Research,Vol. 20, No. 4 (March), 644-656.
    Batra, Rajeev and Olli T. Ahtola (1991), “Measuring the Hedonic and Utilitarian Sources of Consumer Attitudes,” Marketing Letters. 2 (April), 159-170.
    Bazerman, Max H., Ann E. Tenbrunsel and Kimberly A. Wade-Benzoni (1998),
    "Negotiating with Yourself and Losing: Understanding and Managing Conflicting Internal Preferences," Academy of Management Review, 23, 225-241.
    Berkowitz, Leonard (1983), “Aversively Stimulated Aggression: Some Parallels and
    Differences in Research with Animals and Humans,” American Psychologist, 38,1135-1144.
    Berkowitz, Leonard and Bartholomeu T. Troccoli (1990), “Feelings, Direction of Attention,and Expressed Evaluations of Others,” Cognition and Emotion, 4, 305-25.Bless, Herbert, Diane M. Mackie, and Norbert Schwarz (1992), “Mood Effects on Attitude Judgments: Independent Effects of Mood before and after Message Elaboration,”Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 63 (4), 585–95.
    Bower, Gordon H. (1981), “Mood and Memory,” American Psychologist, 36, 129-148.
    Bower, Gordon and Paul Cohen (1982), "Emotional Influences in Memory and Thinking:Data and Theory," in M. Clark and S. Fiske (eds.), Affect and Cognition: The 17thAnnual Carnegie Symposium on Cognition, Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
    Cacioppo, John T., Richard. E. Petty, and Katherine Morris (1983), “Effects of Need forCognition on Message Evaluation, Recall, and Persuasion,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 45, 805-818.
    Carlson, Michael and Norman Miller (1987), "Explanation of the Relation between
    Negative Mood and Helping," Psychological Bulletin, 102, 91–108.63
    Clark, M. S. and Alice M. Isen (1982), “Toward Understanding the Relationship between Feeling States and Social Behavior,” In A. H. Hastorf & A. M. Isen (Eds.), Cognitive Social Psychology, Elsevier: New York, 73-108.
    Crowley, Ayn E., Eric Spangenberg and Kevin R. Hughes (1992), “Measuring the Hedonic and Utilitarian Dimensions of Attitudes toward Product Categories,” Marketing Letters. 3 (3). 239-49.
    Dhar, Ravi and Klaus Wertenbroch (2000), “Consumer Choice between Hedonic and
    Utilitarian Goods,” Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 37, No.1 (Feb.), 60-71.
    Finman, Rona and Leonard Berkowitz (1989), “Some Factors Influencing the Effect of Depressed Mood on Anger and Overt Hostility Toward Another,” Journal of Research in Personality, 23, 70-84.
    Forgas, Joseph. P. (1992), “Affect in Social Judgments and Decisions: A Multiprocess
    Model,” Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, Vol. 25. 227.
    Forgas, Joseph. P. (1995a), “Mood and Judgment: The Affect Infusion Model (AIM),”Psychology Bulletin, Vol. 117(Jan), 39-66.
    Gorn, Gerald J., Marvin E Goldberg and Kunal Basu (1993), “Mood, Awareness, and
    Product Evaluation,” Journal of Consumer Psychology, Vol. 2, No. 3, 237-256.
    Hirschman, Elizabeth C. and Morris B. Holbrook (1982), “Hedonic Consumption:
    Emerging Concepts Methods, and Propositions,” Journal of Marketing, 46 (Summer),92-101
    Isen, Alice M. (1984), “The Influence of Positive Affect on Decision Making and Cognitive Organization,” Advances in Consumer Research, Vol. 11, 534-537.
    Isen, Alice M. (1993), “Positive Affect and Decision Making,” In M. Lewis and J.M.
    Haviland (Eds.), Handbook of Emotions (pp. 261-277), New York/ London: Guilford Press, xiii, 653.
    Irwin, Julie R. and Rajagopal Raghunathan (2001), “Walking the Hedonic Product
    Treadmill: Default Contrast and Mood-Based Assimilation in Judgments of Predicted Happiness with a Target Product,” Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 28 (3),355-368
    Lambert, Alan J., Saera R. Khan, Brian A. Lickel and Katja Fricke (1997), “Mood and theCorrection of Positive versus Negative Stereotypes,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, Vol. 72 (May), 1002-1016
    Lin, Pei Y. (2011), “Correction for Positive Mood Bias in Product Judgment: Hedonic vs.Utilitarian based Product Attitude,” Unpublished master’s thesis, National Taiwan University, Taiwan.
    Lingle, John H., Nehemia Geva, Thomas M. Ostrom and Michael R. Leippe (1979),
    “Thematic effects of Person Judgments on Impression Organization,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, Vol. 37(5), 674-687.
    Martin, Leonard L. (1986), “Set/Reset: Use and Disuse of Concepts in Impression
    Formation,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51 (September), 493–504.
    Martin, Leonard L., John J. Seta, and Rick A. Crelia (1990), "Assimilation and Contrast as a Function of People's Willingness and Ability to Expend Effort in Forming anImpression," Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 59 (January), 27-37.
    Mayer, John D., Yvonne N. Gaschke, Debra L. Braverman and Temperance W. Evans
    (1992). “Mood-Congruent Judgment is a General effect,” Journal of personality and Social Psychology, 63, 119-132.
    Petty, Richard. E. and John T. Cacioppo (1984), “The Effects of Involvement on Responses to Argument Quantity and Quality: Central and Peripheral Routes to Persuasion,”Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 46, 69-81.
    Petty, Richard. E. and John T. Cacioppo (1986b), “The Elaboration Likelihood Model of Persuasion,” In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in Experimental Social Psychology,Vol. 19, 123-205, San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
    Pham, Michel T. (1998), "Representativeness, Relevance and the Use of Feelings in
    Decision Making," Journal of Consumer Research, 25 (September), 144-60.
    Rajeev, Batra and Douglas M. Stayman (1990), “The Role of Mood in Advertising
    Effectiveness”, Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 17, No. 2, 203-214.
    Schwarz, Norbert (1990), “Feelings as Information: Informational and Motivational
    Functions of Affective States,” In E.T. Higgins and R. Sorrentino (Eds.), Handbook of motivation and cognition: Foundations of social behavior, Vol. 2, 527-561, NewYork: Guilford Press.
    Schwarz, Norbert (1992), “Assimilation and Contrast Effects in Attitude Measurement: An Inclusion/Exclusion Model,” Advances in Consumer Research, Vol. 19, 72.65
    Schwarz, Norbert and Gerald L. Clore (1983), “Mood, Misattribution, and Judgments ofWell Being: Informative and Directive Functions of Affective States,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 45 (September), 513–23.
    Schwarz, Norbert and Gerald L. Clore (1988), “How Do I Feel about It? Informative
    Functions of Affective States,” in Affect, Cognition, and Social Behavior, ed. Klaus Fiedler and Joseph Forgas, Toronto: Hofgrefe International, 44–62.
    Vaughn, Richard (1986), "How Advertising Works: A Planning Model Revisited," Journal of Advertising Research, February/March, 57-66.
    Voss, Kevin E., Eric R. Spangenherg and Bianca Grohmann (2003), "Measuring the
    Hedonic and Utilitarian Dimensions of Consumer Attitude," Journal of Marketing Research, 40 (August), 310-320.
    Wegener, Duane T. (1994), “The Flexible Correction Model: Using Naïve Theory of Bias to Correct Assessments of Targets.” Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Ohio State University, Columbus.
    Wegener, Duane T. and Richard E. Petty (1995), “Flexible Correction Process in SocialJudgment: The Role of Naïve Theories in Corrections for Perceived Bias,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 68. No. 1 (Jan), 36-51.
    Wegener, Duane T. and Richard E. Petty (1997), “The Flexible Correction Model: The Role of Naïve Theories of Bias in Bias Correction,” In M. P. Zanna (Ed.), Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, Vol. 29. 141-208, Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates
    Wegener, Duane T. and Richard E. Petty (1994), “Mood Management across Affective States: The Hedonic Contingency Hypothesis,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, Vol. 66(6), 1034-1048.
    Wegener, Duane T., Richard E. Petty and Stephen M. Smith (1995), “Positive Mood Can Increase or Decrease Message Scrutiny: The Hedonic Contingency View of Mood and Message Processing,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 69 (July),5–15.
    Wyland, Carrie L. and Joseph P. Forgas (2007), “On Bad Mood and White Bears: The
    Effects of Mood State on Ability to Suppress Unwanted Thoughts,” Cognition and Emotion, Vol. 21, Issue 7, 1513-1524
    Yi, Youjae (1990), “The Effects of Contextual Priming in Print Advertisements,” Journal of Consumer Research, 17 (September), 215-22.

    下載圖示
    QR CODE