廣告模特兒的動作表情、產品互動性和廣告標語之影響研究

以作者查詢圖書館館藏

、以作者查詢臺灣博碩士

、以作者查詢全國書目

、勘誤回報

、線上人數：23

、訪客IP：18.221.185.58

姓名

張雅竹(Ya-Chu Chang) 查詢紙本館藏

畢業系所

企業管理學系

論文名稱

廣告模特兒的動作表情、產品互動性和廣告標語之影響研究
(The research about influences of models’ gestures, models’ facial expression, the interaction between models and products, advertising slogans.)

相關論文

★ 網頁背景圖片對消費者產品偏好的影響	★ 組合商品的定價模式對消費者的滿意度與價值知覺
★ KTV消費型態與消費者類型之關聯	★ 蘋果沉浸度研究
★ 女性業務人員的配飾、妝容、上衣對業務職能特質知覺之影響	★ 男性業務人員服飾配件對職能特質知覺之影響
★ 個人辦公桌擺設對員工工作投入與專業職能知覺之影響	★ 飯店房間內擺設對消費者知覺與金錢價值之影響 --- 以人格特質為干擾變數
★ 療癒著色本對情緒轉換與風險偏好的影響	★ 名片設計對業務人員的職能特質與工作績效之知覺影響
★ 美語補習班的創新服務	★ 台灣工具機製造商之策略構面、組織構面及財務績效之關係研究：五大廠商之個案分析
★ 服務花朵的創新與競爭優勢:以五家牙科診所的個案分析	★ 反向策略之廣告效果研究
★ 不同性刺激形式所引發的性幻想程度對廣告效果之影響	★ 情緒在消費者決策行為中的影響

檔案

[Endnote RIS 格式]

[Bibtex 格式]

[相關文章]

[文章引用]

[完整記錄]

[館藏目錄]

[檢視]

[下載]

本電子論文使用權限為同意立即開放。
已達開放權限電子全文僅授權使用者為學術研究之目的，進行個人非營利性質之檢索、閱讀、列印。
請遵守中華民國著作權法之相關規定，切勿任意重製、散佈、改作、轉貼、播送，以免觸法。

摘要(中)

在日常生活中，我們隨處都能看到許多的廣告，在廣告中經常有模特兒出現以吸引消費者，此外有時會搭配廣告詞使廣告更加豐富。因此本研究想探討廣告中的模特兒的動作表情(例如笑容、眼神、手勢等等)、廣告模特兒和產品的互動性、廣告標語會如何影響消費者的廣告態度、了解意願以及產品態度。本研究採實驗研究法進行四個實驗，以大學生為研究對象，主要研究結果如下：
一、證實在感性廣告訴求下有較高的廣告態度、了解意願以及產品態度，相對於理性廣告訴求時。
二、證實對於低風險知覺者，笑和眼神有交互作用，廣告模特兒在眼神直視時笑比不笑有較高的廣告態度、了解意願以及產品態度；對於高風險知覺者，笑和眼神沒有交互作用。
三、證實廣告模特兒手勢張開有較高的廣告態度和產品態度，相對於手勢交叉時。
四、證實在低涉入情境下，廣告模特兒笑比不笑有較高的廣告態度；在高涉入情境下，笑容沒有顯著差異。
五、證實廣告模特兒與產品互動有較高的廣告態度、了解意願以及產品態度，相對於廣告模特兒與產品無互動時。
六、證實在送禮的購買目的訴求下，廣告中模特兒與產品有互動會有較高的廣告態度、了解意願以及產品態度；在自用的購買用途訴求下，廣告中模特兒與產品有無互動對廣告態度、了解意願、產品態度沒有顯著差異。

摘要(英)

In our daily life, we see lots of advertisements everywhere. There are models in advertisements to attract consumers, sometimes appearing with advertising slogans to rich it.
Therefore, this research want to know how the model’s gesture, facial expression in advertisements (e.g. Smile, eye contact and arm gesture), the interaction between model and products, advertising slogan to influence consumers’ attitude toward advertisement, willing to know product, and attitude toward product. This research developed four experiments with experimental design, and used college students to be research subjects. The results indicate that:

1.The advertisement with emotional appeal has higher attitude toward advertisement, willing to know product, and attitude toward product.
2.For low-risk perceivers, smile and eye contact have interaction effect. When the model is direct eye contact, smile have higher attitude toward advertisement, willing to know product, and attitude toward product than model is not smile. For high-risk perceivers, smile and eye contact do not have interaction effect.
3.When the model in advertisement is open arm, there are a higher attitude toward advertisement, and attitude toward product, compare to the model with close arm.
4.In low-involvement situation, the model with smile has higher attitude toward product, compare to the model with no smile. In high-involvement situation, smile doesn’t have significant effect on attitude toward advertisement, willing to know product, and attitude toward product.
5.When the model has an interaction with products, there are higher attitude toward advertisement, willing to know product, and attitude toward product, comparing to the model doesn’t have an interaction with products.
6.For the advertisement with gift-giving appeal, when the model has an interaction with products, there are higher attitude toward advertisement, willing to know product, and attitude toward product. For the advertisement with self-use appeal, whether the model has an interaction with product or not, there are no significant influence on attitude toward advertisement, willing to know product, and attitude toward product.

關鍵字(中)

★ 廣告模特兒
★ 表情
★ 動作
★ 廣告訴求
★ 購買目的
★ 知覺風險
★ 涉入程度

關鍵字(英)

★ model
★ facial expression
★ body gesture
★ advertising appeal
★ purpose of buying
★ perceived risk
★ involvement

論文目次

摘要 i
Abstract ii
致謝 iii
目錄 iv
表目錄 vi
圖目錄 vii
第一章緒論 - 1 -
第一節研究動機 - 1 -
第二節研究目的 - 2 -
第三節研究問題 - 3 -
第四節研究程序 - 4 -
第二章文獻探討 - 5 -
第一節廣告態度、了解意願、產品態度 - 5 -
第二節笑容 - 6 -
第三節廣告訴求 - 6 -
第四節笑容和廣告訴求對廣告態度、了解意願、產品態度之影響 - 8 -
第五節眼神 - 9 -
第六節風險知覺程度干擾笑容、眼神對廣告態度、了解意願、產品態度之影響 - 10 -
第七節手勢 - 12 -
第八節涉入程度干擾笑容、手勢對廣告態度、了解意願、產品態度之影響 - 13 -
第九節產品互動性 - 15 -
第十節購買目的 - 16 -
第十一節自我控制程度干擾購買目的、互動性對廣告態度、了解意願、產品態度之影響 - 16 -
第三章研究方法 - 19 -
第一節實驗一研究方法 - 19 -
第二節實驗二研究方法 - 23 -
第三節實驗三研究方法 - 29 -
第四節實驗四研究方法 - 34 -
第五節統計方法之選擇 - 39 -
第四章研究結果 - 40 -
第一節實驗一 - 40 -
第二節實驗二 - 43 -
第三節實驗三 - 50 -
第四節實驗四 - 55 -
第五章研究結果與建議 - 60 -
第一節假說驗證 - 60 -
第二節研究結論 - 65 -
第三節研究貢獻 - 69 -
第四節研究限制 - 71 -
第五節後續研究建議 - 71 -
參考文獻 - 72 -
附錄一實驗一廣告圖 - 78 -
附錄二實驗二廣告圖 - 79 -
附錄三實驗三廣告圖 - 80 -
附錄四實驗四廣告圖 - 81 -
附錄五實驗一、二、三問卷 - 82 -
(笑、理性/笑、直視/高涉入情境、笑、張開手臂) - 82 -
附錄六實驗四問卷(有互動、送禮訴求) - 92 -

參考文獻

中文部分
1.林建煌，2014。行銷管理，六版，華泰文化事業有限公司。
2.祝鳳岡，1996。廣告理性訴求策略之策略分析，廣告學研究，第八集，國立政治大學廣告學系，1-26頁。
3.祝鳳岡，1995。廣告感性訴求策略之策略分析，廣告學研究，第五集，國立政治大學廣告學系，85-112頁。
英文部分
1. Aaker, D. A., & Norris, D. (1982),“ Characteristics of TV Commercials Perceived as Informative,”Journal of Advertising Research, 22(2), 61-70.
2.Adams, R. B., & Kleck, R. E. (2003), “Perceived Gaze Direction and the Trocessing of Facial Displays of Emotion,” Psychological Science, 14(6), 644–647.
3.Baudouin, J. Y., Gilibert, D., Sansone, S., & Tiberghien, G. (2000), “ When the Smile is a Cue to Familiarity,” Memory, 8(5), 285–292.
4. Bauer, R. A. (1960), “ Consumer Behavior as Risk Taking,” in Dynamic Marketing for a Changing World, ed. R. S. Hancock, Chicago:American Marketing Association, 389-398.
5. Belk, R. W. (1975), “Situational Variables and Consumer Behavior,” Journal of Consumer Research, 2(3), 157-164.
6. Belk, R. W. (1982), “Effects of Gift-giving Involvement on Gift Selection Strategies,” Advances in Consumer Research, 9(1), 408-412.
7. Burgoon, M. (1989), “Messages and Persuasive Effects,” in Message Effects in Communication Science, ed. J. J. Bradac, Newbury Park, CA: Sage, 129-164.
8. Campbell, M. C., & Goodstein, R. C. (2001), “The Moderating Effect of Perceived Risk on Consumers’ Evaluations of Product Incongruity: Preference for the Norm,” Journal of Consumer Research, 28(3), 439–449.
9. Celsi, R. L., & Olson, J. C. (1988), “The Role of Involvement in Attention and Comprehension Processes,” Journal of Consumer Research, 15(2), 210-224.
10. Cox, D. F., ed. (1967), “Risk Handling in Consumer Behavior - An Intensive Study of Two Cases,” in Risk Taking and Information Handling in Consumer Behavior ed. D. F. Cox, Boston: Harvard University Press, 34-81.
11. Caballero, M. J., & Pride, W. M. (1984), “Selected Effects of Salesperson Sex and Attractiveness in Direct Mail Advertisements,” The Journal of Marketing, 48(1), 94-100.
12. Chaiken, S. (1979), “Communicator Physical Attractiveness and Persuasion,”Journal of Personality and social Psychology, 37(8), 1387-1397.
13. Dowling, G. R., & Staelin, R. (1994), “A Model of Perceived Risk and Intended Risk-handling Activity,” Journal of Consumer Research, 21(1), 119-134.
14. Harrigan, J. A., & Rosenthal, R. (1983), “Physicians’ Head and Body Positions as Determinants of Perceived Rapport,” Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 13(6), 496–509.
15. Hayes, S. C., Gifford, E. V., & Ruckstuhl Jr., L. E. (1996),“ Relational Frame Theory and Executive Function: A Behavioral Approach,” in Attention, Memory, and Executive Function, ed. G. R. Lyon & N. A. Krasnegor, Baltimore, MD: Paul Brookes Publishing Co, 297-305.
16. Houston, M. J., & Rothschild, M. L. (1978), “Conceptual and Methodological Perspectives on Involvement,” in Research Frontiers in Marketing: Dialogues and Directions, ed. S. C. Jain, Chicago, IL: American Marketing Association, 184-187.
17. Johar, J. S., & Sirgy, M. J. (1991), “Value-expressive Versus Utilitarian Advertising Appeals: When and Why to Use Which Appeal,” Journal of Advertising, 20(3), 23–33.
18. Kanfer, F. H., & Karoly, P. (1972), “ Self-control: A Behavioristic Excursion into the Lion’s Den,” Behavior Therapy, 3(3), 398–416.
19. Knapp, M. L. (1978), Social Intercourse: From Greeting to Goodbye, Allyn & Bacon, Inc.
20.Kahle, L. R., & Homer, P. M. (1985), “ Physical Attractiveness of the Celebrity Endorser: A social Adaptation Perspective,” Journal of consumer research,11(4), 954-961.
21. Kotler, P., (2000), Marketing Management: Millenium Edition, 10th ed., New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, Inc.
22. Krugman, H. E. (1965), “The Impact of Television Advertising: Learning Without Involvement,” Public Opinion Quarterly, 29(3), 349-356.
23. Lau, S. (1982), “The Effect of Smiling on Person Perception,” The Journal of Social Psychology, 117(1), 63–67.
24. Lavidge, R. J., & Steiner, G. A. (1961), “A Model for Predictive Measurements of Advertising Effectiveness,” Journal of Marketing, 25(6), 59-62.
25. Lobmaier, J. S., Tiddeman, B. P., & Perrett, D. I. (2008), “Emotional Expression Modulates Perceived Gaze Direction,” Emotion, 8(4), 573–577.
26. Lutz, R. J. (1991), “The Role of Attitude Theory in Marketing,” in Perspectives in Consumer Behavior, ed. H.H. Harold & T.S Robertson , Scott Foresman and Company, Glenview, IL, 317-339.
27. Lutz, K. A., & Lutz, R. J. (1977), “ Effects of Interactive Imagery on Learning: Application to Advertising,”Journal of Applied Psychology, 62(4), 493–498.
28. MacKenzie, S. B., & Lutz, R. J. (1989), “An Empirical Examination of the Structural Antecedents of Attitude toward the Ad in an Advertising Pretesting Context,”Journal of Marketing, 53(2), 48-65.
29. Mick, D. G., & Demoss, M. (1990), “Self-gifts: Phenomenological Insights from Four Contexts,” Journal of Consumer Research, 17(3), 322-332.
30. Mitchell, A. A., & Olson, J. C. (1981), “Are Product Attribute Beliefs the Only Mediator of Advertising Effects on Brand Attitude ? ” Journal of Marketing Research, 18(3), 318-332.
31. Moore, F., Sandage, C. H., & Fryburger, V. (1976), “Advertising Theory and Practice,” Journal of Marketing, 40(1), 113-123.
32. Mueller, B. (1987), “Reflections of Culture: An Analysis of Japanese and American Advertising Appeals, ” Journal of Advertising Research, 27(3), 51-59.
33. Muraven, M., & Baumeister, R. F. (2000), “ Self-regulation and Depletion of Limited Resources: Does Self-control Resemble a Muscle,” Psychological Bulletin, 126(2), 247–259.
34. Otta, E., Lira, B. B. P., Delevati, N. M., Cesar, O. P., & Pires, C. S. G. (1994), “ The Effect of Smiling and of Head Tilting on Person Perception,” The Journal of Psychology, 128(3), 323–331.
35. Petty, R. E., Cacioppo, J. T., & Schumann, D. (1983), “Central and Peripheral Routes to Advertising Effectiveness: The Moderating Role of Involvement,” Journal of Consumer Research, 10(2), 135-146.
36. Petroshius, S. M., & Crocker, K. E. (1989), “An Empirical Analysis of Spokesperson Characteristics on Advertisement and Product Evaluations,”Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 17(3), 217-225.
37. Poor, M., Duhachek, A., & Krishnan, H. S. (2013), “How Images of Other Consumers Influence Subsequent Taste Perceptions,” Journal of Marketing, 77(6), 124–139.
38. Pönkänen, L. M., & Hietanen, J. K. (2012), “Eye Contact with Neutral and Smiling Faces: Effects on Autonomic Responses and Frontal EEG Asymmetry,”Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 6, 475-484.
39. Reece, M. M., & Whitman, R. N. (1962), “Expressive Movements, Warmth, and Verbal Reinforcement, ” The Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 64(3), 234–236.
40. Reis, H. T., Wilson, I. M., Monestere, C., Bernstein, S., Clark, K., Seidl, E. Radoane, K. (1990), “What is Smiling is Beautiful and Good,” European Journal of Social Psychology, 20(3), 259–267.
41. Severson, H. H., Slovic, P., & Hampson, S. (1993), “Adolescents Perception of Risk: Understanding and Preventing High Risk Behavior,” Advances in Consumer Research, 20(1), 177-182.
42. Sherry, J. F. (1983), “ Gift Giving in Anthropological Perspective,”Journal of Consumer Research, 10(2), 157-168.
43. Stone, R. N., & Grønhaug, K. (1993), “Perceived Risk: Further Considerations for the Marketing Discipline,” European Journal of Marketing, 27(3), 39–50.
44. Zaichkowsky, J. L. (1985), “Measuring the Involvement Construct,”Journal of Consumer Research, 12(3), 341-352.
45. Zaichkowsky, J. L. (1986), “Conceptualizing Involvement,” Journal of Advertising, 15(2), 4–34.

指導教授

林建煌

審核日期

2016-7-18

推文