服務業不同廣告型式的效果如何受消費者性別及代言人類型而改變

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：37

、訪客IP：3.149.25.162

姓名

吳詩強(Shih-Chiang Wu) 查詢紙本館藏

畢業系所

資訊管理學系

論文名稱

服務業不同廣告型式的效果如何受消費者性別及代言人類型而改變
(How the Advertising Form Effectiveness Varies by Consumer Gender and Endorser Type in Service Ads)

相關論文

★ 網站設計探討—以國內外連鎖飯店集團為例	★ 智慧型手機使用者介面與消費者態度之關聯
★ 零售業全通路策略分析 -以Family Mart為例	★ 應用服務藍圖及顧客旅程優化汽車租賃業之服務流程: 以某汽車租賃業為例
★ 顧客對折扣促銷的評價－探討商店定價策略、促銷語意線索與折扣深度對消費者認知的影響	★ 網路拍賣中外部線索的一致性:在不同的資訊不對稱程度下，起始價格以及賣方聲譽對於拍賣結果影響之探討。
★ 影響金融服務業之多重通路使用者評估通路整合性的因素	★ 影響網路口碑行為意圖之因素分析
★ 在多通路環境中，實體通路的存在如何影響顧客決策	★ 混合情緒操控與間接體驗產品途徑對消費者之影響－以創新產品為主
★ 消費者於多通路環境下之跨通路搭便車行為之決定因素	★ 如何撰寫較好的網路口碑
★ 探討線上環境中互動與故事對廣告效果之影響	★ 不同決策特質與搜尋時間壓力下部落格設計與使用者滿意度之探討
★ 主購社群關係與主購經驗分享對網路合購行為因素影響之探討	★ 使用者產生內容：展新的比較式廣告手法

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]

至系統瀏覽論文 ( 永不開放)

摘要(中)

在行銷溝通裡，廣告是不可獲缺的重要角色。因此，如何有效的傳達廣告中產品的訊息、讓接收者感到正向態度並且產生消費的意願，一直是廣告行銷者最大的挑戰。近年來越來越多的廣告使用敘述型式，也就是用說故事的方法傳達訊息給消費者，這代表著故事型廣告能夠有效的傳達訊息給消費者。然而，這卻並不代表條列型式廣告的效果較為無效，因為目前仍有許多使用條列型式的成功廣告。因此本研究以廣告代言人類型以及消費者性別作為干擾變項，試圖找出此二變項是否會與廣告型式產生交互作用，進而對消費者產生不同的效果。
本研究採用準實驗設計的研究方法，將廣告型式分為故事型式及條列型式兩種，代言人類型部份分為名人及專家，另外用性別將消費者區隔成兩群。並以餐廳作為本實驗的產品，採用多變量變異數分析來檢定假設。
研究結果發現，消費者為女性時，故事型廣告比條列式廣告有更好的效果；而消費者是男性時，則是條列式廣告比故事型廣告有效；在代言人類型方面，當代言人為名人時，故事型廣告比條列式廣告產生較高的購買意願；當代言人為專家時，則此兩種類型廣告的效果無明顯差異。

摘要(英)

In marketing, advertising always plays a very important role. How to effectively convey the product’s or service’s message in the ad to the consumers is really a challenge. Recently, more and more service ads use the narrative, that is, to convey the service’s message to consumers in a story-based form. This represents that story-based form advertisements are more and more popular and being capable to communicate effectively with consumers. However, we can not judge that an attribute-based form advertisement is less effective than a story-based form advertisement, because there are still many successful service advertisements conveying the product’s message to consumers in an attribute-based form nowadays. Hence, this study uses endorser type and consumer gender as the moderating variables. We try to find out if there are interactions between the two moderating variables and advertisement form, and how it affects the consumers’ attitude toward ad and purchase intention in service ads.
This study uses a quasi-experiment employing a between-subjects design with two levels of gender (female versus male). The other two experimental treatments include advertisement form (attribute-based versus story-based), and endorser type (celebrity versus expert). A French restaurant is recommended in the experimental ads. MANOVA and univariate ANOVA are used to test our hypotheses.
The results show that when the consumer are females, the story-based form ad is more effective than the attribute-based ad; when the consumer are males, the attribute-based ad is significant more effective than the story-based ad. In addition, endorser type also affects purchase intention.

關鍵字(中)

★ 性別
★ 代言人
★ 故事型廣告
★ 廣告型式
★ 敘述型式

關鍵字(英)

★ narrative
★ Ad form
★ endorser
★ story-form ad
★ gender

論文目次

Contents i
List of Tables ii
List of Figures iii
1. Introduction 1
2. Literature Review 4
2.2 Story-Based Process 5
2.3 Gender 7
2.4 Endorsers 9
2.4.1 The Source Credibility Model 10
2.4.2 The Source Attractiveness Model 11
3. Method 13
3.1 Theoretical Framework 13
3.2 Stimulus Materials and Dependent Measures 13
3.3 Experiment Design 17
3.4 Sample and Data Collection 17
4. Analysis and Result 19
4.1 Reliability 19
4.2 Hypotheses Test 20
4.2.1 MANOVA Test and Univariate ANOVA Test 20
4.2.2 Simple Main Effect Test of Advertisement Form by Gender 22
4.2.3 Simple Main Effect Test of Advertisement Form by Endorser Type 25
4.3 Summary of Hypothesis 28
5. Discussion and Managerial Implication 29
5.1 Discussion 29
5.2 Managerial implications 30
5.3 Limitation and Future Research 31
中文文獻 33
References 34
Appendix 42
I. Questionnaire 42
II. Experimental Advertising 1: Attribute-based Form with a Celebrity Endorser 43
III. Experimental Advertising 2: Story-based Form with a Celebrity Endorser 44
IV. Experimental Advertising 3: Attribute-based Form with an Expert Endorser 45
V. Experimental Advertising 4: Story-based Form with an Expert Endorser 46

參考文獻

1. Adaval, R. and Jr. R. S. Wyer, (1998), “The Role of Narratives in Consumer Information Processing.” Journal of Consumer Psychology, 7 (3), 207-245.
2. Alba, J. and W. Hutchinson (1987), “Dimensions of Consumer Expertise.” Journal of Consumer Research, 13, 411-454.
3. Albers-Miller, N. D. and M. R. Stafford (1999), “An International Analysis of Emotional and Rational Appeals in Services vs. Goods Advertising.” Journal of Consumer Marketing, 16, 1, 42-57.
4. Adelson, B. (1984), “When Novices Surpass Experts: The Difficulty of a Task May Increase with Expertise.” Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition, 10, 483-495.
5. Anderson, N. H. (1971), “Integration Theory and Attitude Change.” Psychological Review, 78, 171-206.
6. Anderson, N. H. (1974), “Information Integration Theory: A Brief Survey.” in Contemporary Developments in Mathematical Psychology, Vol. 2, eds. David H. Krantz, R. Duncan Luce, Richard C. Atkinson, and Patrick Suppes, San Francisco: W. H. Freeman, 236-305.
7. Anderson, N. H. (1981), Foundations of information integration theory. New York: Academic.
8. Biswas, D., A. Biswas and N. Das (2006), “The Differential Effects of Celebrity and Expert Endorsements on Consumer Risk Perceptions: The Role of Consumer Knowledge, Perceived Congruency, and Product Technology Orientation.” Journal of Advertising, 35, 2, 17-31.
9. Bleich, D. (1988), “Gender Interests in Reading and Language.” in Gender and Reading: Essays on Readers, Texts and Contexts. Editors: E. A. Flynn and P. P. Schweickart. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press, 234-266.
10. Broverman, D. M., Klaiber E. L.,Kobayashi Y. and W. Vogel (1968), “Roles of Activation and Inhibition in Sex Differences in Cognitive Abilities.” Psychological Review, 75, 23-50.
11. Brunel, Frederic F. and Michelle R. Nelson (2000), “Explaining Gendered Responses to ‘Help-Self’ and ‘Help-Others’ Charity Ad Appeals: The Mediating Role of World-Views.” Journal of Advertising, 29 (Fall), 15-28.
12. Burstein, B., B. Lew and J. Lissy (1980), “Sex Differences in Cognitive Functioning: Evidence, Determinants, Implications.” Human Development, 23 (August), 289-313.
13. Clore, G., N. Schwarz and M. Conway (1994), “Affective Causes and Consequences of Social Information Processing.” in Handbook of Social Cognition, R. Wyer and T. Srull, eds. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum, 323-417.
14. Corstjens, M. L. and D. Gautschi (1983), “Formal Choice Models in Marketing.” Marketing Science, 2, 19-56.
15. Deaux, K. and M. E. Kite (1987), “Thinking about Gender.” in Analyzing Gender: A Handbook of Social Science Research. B. B. Hess and M. M. Ferree, eds. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications, 92-117.
16. Deighton, John, Daniel Romer and Josh McQueen (1989), “Using Drama to Persuade.” Journal of Consumer Research, 16 (December), 335-343.
17. Dressler, W.U., R. Wodak and C. Pleh (1990), Gender-specific discourse differences in aphasia. In Y. Joanette & H. H. Brownell (Eds.), Discourse ability and brain damage. Theoretical and empirical perspectives (pp. 236–245). New York: Springer.
18. Durgee, Jeffrey F. (1988), “Product Drama.” Journal of Advertising Research, 28, 42-49.
19. Eagly, Alice H. (1987), Sex Differences in Social Behavior: A Social-Role Interpretation, Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
20. Eagly, Alice H. and Wendy Wood (1991), “Explaining Sex Differences in Social Behavior: A Meta-analytic Perspective.” Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 17 (June), 306-315.
21. Edell, J. E. and R. Staelin (1983), “The Information Processing of Pictures in Print Advertisements.” Journal of Consumer Research, 10, 45–61.
22. Entwisle, D. R. and C. Garvey (1972), “Verbal Productivity and Adjective Usage.” Language and Speech, 15, 288-298.
23. Escalas, Jennifer Edson (1998), “Advertising Narratives: What Are They and How Do They Work?” in B. Stern (Ed.), Representing consumers: Voices, Views, and Vi¬sions (267-289). New York: Routledge & Kegan Paul.
24. Escalas, Jennifer Edson (2004), “Narrative Processing: Building Consumer Connections to Brands.” Journal of Consumer Psychology, 14(1&2), 168-180.
25. Escalas, Jennifer Edson (2007), “Self-Referencing and Persuasion: Narrative Transportation versus Analytical Elaboration.” Journal of Consumer Research, 33, 421-429.
26. Everhart, D. E., J. L. Shucard, T. Quatrin and D. W. Shucard (2001), “Sex-related Differences in Event-related Potentials, Face Recognition and Facial Affect Processing in Prepubertal Children.” Neuropsychology, 15 (3), 329-341.
27. Fischer, Eileen and Stephen J. Arnold (1994), “Sex, Gender Identity, Gender Role Attitudes, and Consumer Behavior.” Psychology and Marketing, 11 (March/April), 163-182.
28. Fishbein, M. and I. Ajzen (1975), Belief, Attitude, Intention, and Behavior:
An Introduction to Theory and Research Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
29. Fishbein, Martin (1963). “An Investigation of the Relationships between Beliefs about an Object and the Attitude toward That Object.” Human Relations, 16 (August), 233-240.
30. Fiske, S. and M. Pavelchak (1986), “Category versus Piecemeal-based Affective Responses: Developments in Schema-Triggered Affect.” in Handbook of Motivation and Cognition, E. Higgins and T. Sorrentino, eds. New York: Guilford, 167-203.
31. Fiske, Susan T. (1982), “Schema-triggered Affect: Applications to Social Perception.” in Affect and Cognition: The 17tth Annual Carnegie Symposium on Cognition, eds. Margaret S. Clark and Susan T. Fiske, Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum, 55-78.
32. Flynn, E. A. (1988), “Gender and Reading.” In Gender and Reading: Essays on Readers, Texts and Contexts. Editors: E. A. Flynn and P. P. Schweickart. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press, 267-288.
33. Forgas, J. (1998), “On Being Happy and Mistaken: Mood Effects on the Fundamental Attribution Error.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 75 (2), 318-331.
34. Freiden, Jon B. (1984), “Advertising Spokesperson Effects: An Examination of Endorser Type and Gender on Two Audiences.” Journal of Advertising Research, 24 (October), 33-41.
35. Friedman, H. H. and L. Friedman (1979), “Endorser Effectiveness by Product Type.” Journal of Advertising Research, October, 19, 5, 63-71.
36. Gilligan, Carol (1982), In a Different Voice: Psychological Theory and Women’s Development, Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
37. Gleser, G. C., L. A. Gottschalk and J. Watkins (1959), “The Relationship of Sex and Intelligence to Choice of Words: A Normative Study of Verbal Behavior.” Journal of Clinical Psychology, 15, 182-191.
38. Green, Melanie C. and Timothy C. Brock (2000), “The Role of Transportation in the Persuasiveness of Public Narratives.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 79 (5), 701-721.
39. Green, Paul and Yoram Wind (1973), Multiattribute Decisions in Marketing: A Measurement Approach, Hinssdale, IL: Dryden.
40. Haas, A. (1979), “Male and Female Spoken Language Difficulties: Stereotypes and Evidence.” Psychological Bulletin, 86, 616-626.
41. Helgeson, Vicki S., and Heidi L. Fritz (1998), “A Theory of Unmitigated Communion.” Personality and Social Psychology Review, 2 (July), 173-183.
42. Holbrook, M. (1986), “Aims, Concepts and Methods for the Representation of Individual Differences in Esthetics Responses to Design Features.” Journal of Consumer Research, 13, (December), 337-347.
43. Hovland, C. I. and W. Weiss (1951), “The Influence of Source Credibility of Communication Effectiveness.” Public Opinion Quarterly, 15, 635-650.
44. Hovland, Carl I., Irving L. Janis, and Harold H. Kelly (1953), Communication and Persuasion, New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
45. Kamins, M. A. (1990), “An Investigation into the ‘Match-up’ Hypothesis in Celebrity Advertising: When Beauty May be Only Skin Deep.” Journal of Advertising, 19, 1, 4-13.
46. Kelman, H. C. (1961), “Processes of Opinion Change.” Public Opinion Quarterly, 25, winter, 57-78.
47. Kiecker, Pamela, Kay M. Palan and Charles S. Areni (2000), “Different Ways of ‘Seeing’: How Gender Differences in Information Processing Influence the Content Analysis of Narrative Texts.” Marketing Letters, 11, 1, 49- 65.
48. Kotler, P. and Armstrong, G. (1994), Principles of Marketing, 6th ed., Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ.
49. Lynch, James and Drue Schuler (1994), “The Match-up Effect of Spokesperson and Product Congruency: A Schema Theory Interpretation.” Psychology and Marketing, 11 (5), 417-445.
50. Mattila, S. Anna (2000), “The Role of Narratives in the Advertising of Experiential Services.” Journal of Service Research, 3 (1). 35-45.
51. McGuire, W. J. (1985), “Attitudes and Attitude Change.” in Handbook of Social Psychology, 2, G. Lindsey and E. Aronson etc., NY: Random House, 233-346.
52. Meyers-Levy, John (1988), “Influence of Sex Roles on Judgment.” Journal of Consumer Research, 14 (March), 522-530.
53. Meyers-Levy, John (1989), “Gender Differences in Information Processing: A Selectivity Interpretation.” in Cognitive and Affective Responses to Advertising. Patricia Cafferata and Alice Tybout, eds., Lexington, MA: Lexington Books, 219-260.
54. Meyer, Robert J. and Arvind Sathi (1985), “A Multiattribute Model of Consumer Choice during Product Learning.” Marketing Science, 4, 1, 45-65.
55. Mittal, B. (1999), “The Advertising of Services: Meeting the Challenge of Intangibility.” Journal of Service Research, 1 (2), 98-116.
56. Moschis, George P. (1985), “The Role of Family Communication in Consumer Socialization of Children and Adolescents.” Journal of Consumer Research, 11 (March), 898-913.
57. Ohanian, Roobina (1991), “The Impact of Celebrity Spokespersons’ Perceived Image on Consumers’ Intention to Purchase.” Journal of Advertising Research, New York, February/March, 31, 1, 46-54.
58. Petty, Richard E. and John T. Cacioppo (1984), “Source Factors and the Elaboration Likelihood Model of Persuasion.” Advances in Consumer Research, 11, eds. Thomas C. Kinnear, Provo, UT: Association for Consumer Research, 668-672.
59. Petty, Richard E. and John T. Cacioppo and David Schumann (1983), “Central and Peripheral Routes to Advertising Effectiveness: The Moderating Role of Involvement.” Journal of Consumer Research, 10 (September), 135-146.
60. Poole, M. E. (1977), “Social Class and Sex Contrasts in Patterns of Cognitive Style.” Australian Journal of Education, 21, 233-255.
61. Poole, M. E. (1977), “Social Class-Sex Contrasts in Patterns of Cognitive Style: A Cross-cultural Replication.” Psychological Reports, 50, 19-26.
62. Saucier D. M. and L. J. Elias (2001), “Lateral and Sex Differences in Manual Gesture during Conversation.” Laterality, 6 (3), 239-245.
63. Schank, R. and R. Abelson (1995), “Knowledge in Memory: The Real Story.” in Advances in Social Cognition, 8, R. Wyer, ed. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum, 1-85.
64. Shocker, Alan D. and V. Srinivasan (1979), “Multiattribute Approaches for Product Concept Evaluation and Generation: A Critical Review.” Journal of Marketing Research, 16 (May), 159-180.
65. Stafford, M. R., Thomas F. Stafford and Ellen Day (2000), “A Contingency Approach: The Effects of Spokesperson Type and Service Type on Service Advertising Perceptions.” Journal of Advertising, 31, 2, 17-34.
66. Stafford, M. R. and E. Day (1995), “Retail Services Advertising: the Effects of Appeal, Medium and Service.” Journal of Advertising, 26, 1, 57-71.
67. Stern, Barbara B. (1994), “Classical and Vignette Television Advertising Dramas: Structural Models, Formal Analysis, and Consumer Effects.” Journal of Consumer Research, 20 (4), 601-615.
68. Sujan, Mita (1985), “Consumer Knowledge: Effects on Evaluation Strategies Mediating Consumer Judgments.” Journal of Consumer Research, 12, 1, 31-46.
69. Till, Brian D. and Michael Busier (1998), “Matching Products with Endorsers: Attractiveness versus Expertise.” Journal of Consumer Marketing, 15 (6), 576-586.
70. Till, Brian D. and Michael Busier (2000), “The Match-up Hypothesis: Physical Attractiveness, Expertise, and the Role of Fit on Brand Attitude, Purchase Intent and Brand Beliefs.” Journal of Advertising, 29 (3), 1-1.3.
71. Wilkie, William L. and Edgar A. Pessemier (1973), “Issues in Marketing’s Use of Multiple-Attribute Attitude Models.” Journal of Marketing Research, 10 (November), 428-441.
72. Wodak, R. (1981), “Women Relate, Men Report.” Journal of Pragmatics, 5, 261–285.
73. Wodak, R. (1986), Language Behavior in Therapy Groups. Los Angeles: University of California Press.
74. Wood, M. M. (1966), “The Influence of Sex and Knowledge of Communication Effectiveness on Spontaneous Speech.” Word, 22, 112-137.

指導教授

謝依靜(Yi-Ching Hsieh)

審核日期

2008-6-13

推文