消費者特徵與產品屬性對同化與對比效果的影響

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：41

、訪客IP：3.141.41.187

姓名

郭素蕙(Su-Hui Kuo) 查詢紙本館藏

畢業系所

企業管理學系

論文名稱

消費者特徵與產品屬性對同化與對比效果的影響
(Impacts of Consumer Characteristics and Product Attributes on Assimilation and Contrast Effects)

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]

至系統瀏覽論文 ( 永不開放)

摘要(中)

本研究主要目的是探討消費者特徵與產品屬性是否干擾脈絡與定錨對同化與對比效果的影響，本研究透過六個實驗，並採用特定的脈絡（正面脈絡與負面脈絡）以及定錨（相似定錨與不相似定錨）以探討此議題。
實驗一至實驗三探討消費者特徵（產品熟悉度、產品知識與心情）是否干擾脈絡與定錨對同化與對比效果的影響。實驗一目的在探討產品熟悉度是否會干擾脈絡與定錨對同化與對比的效果，結果指出產品熟悉度會干擾脈絡與定錨對同化與對比的效果；當消費者對目標產品而言是完全不熟悉時，在相似定錨下，消費者比較目標產品易受到脈絡影響而產生同化的效果，然而，當消費者對目標產品相當熟悉且具有堅固的概念時，在不相似定錨下會激發消費者進一步比較目標產品與脈絡之間的不相似性而產生對比的效果。
實驗二目的在探討產品知識是否會干擾脈絡與定錨對同化與對比的效果，結果指出產品知識會干擾脈絡與定錨對同化與對比的效果；當消費者對特定產品種類擁有較高的產品知識時，他們已擁有堅定的概念與參考點，在不相似定錨下會激發他們進一步比較目標產品與脈絡之間的不相似而產生對比的效果，然而，當消費者對特定產品種類的知識較不充足時，因本身無充足的知識與參考點，因此，無論在相似或不相似定錨下，他們皆容易受到脈絡的影響而產生同化的效果。
實驗三目的在探討消費者心情是否會干擾脈絡與定錨對同化與對比的效果，結果顯示消費者心情會干擾脈絡與定錨對同化與對比的效果；當消費者在正面心情的狀態下，在相似定錨下，消費者比較目標產品易受到脈絡影響而產生同化的效果，然而，當消費者在負面心情的狀態下，他們會較正面情緒更著重異質性，在不相似定錨下會激發他們進一步比較目標產品與脈絡之間的不相似而產生對比的效果。
實驗四至實驗六探討產品屬性（產品設計師、產品來源國與產品來源）是否干擾脈絡與定錨對同化與對比效果的影響。實驗四目的在探討產品設計師是否會干擾脈絡與定錨對同化與對比的效果，雖然本實驗具有三因子的交互作用，但結果並未支持本研究原先的假設，本實驗研究結果指出，當產品是由專業設計師設計時，在不相似定錨下，消費者會比較目標產品與脈絡之間的不相似性而產生同化的效果，然而，當產品是由非專業設計師設計時，在相似定錨下，消費者會比較目標產品與脈絡之間的相似性而產生對比的效果。
實驗五目的在探討產品來源國是否會干擾脈絡與定錨對同化與對比的效果，結果顯示產品來源國會干擾脈絡與定錨對同化與對比的效果；當產品的原物料來源是當地原物料時，在相似定錨下，消費者比較目標產品易受到脈絡影響而產生同化的效果，然而，當產品的原物料來源是進口原物料時，在不相似定錨下，消費者會比較目標產品與脈絡之間的不相似性而產生對比的效果。
實驗六目的在探討產品來源是否會干擾脈絡與定錨對同化與對比的效果，結果指出產品來源會干擾脈絡與定錨對同化與對比的效果；當產品的來源是國際飯店時，因消費未有充足的概念，在相似定錨下，消費者比較目標產品易受到脈絡影響而產生同化的效果，然而，當產品的來源是當地飯店時，消費者對目標飯店相當熟悉且具有堅固的概念時，因此在不相似定錨下會激發消費者進一步比較目標產品與脈絡之間的不相似性而產生對比的效果。

摘要(英)

This dissertation sought to reveal whether consumer characteristics and product attributes moderate the influences of context valence and anchors for assimilation and contrast effects. Specific context valence (positive and negative) and anchors (similarity and dissimilarity) were manipulated in six different experiments to investigate this issue.
The Study 1 to 3 explore whether assimilation and contrast effects are present depending on consumer characteristics (product familiarity, product knowledge, and mood state). The results of Study 1 suggest that product familiarity moderates the influences of context valence and anchors for assimilation and contrast effects. When an object was completely novel to the individual, perception of it assimilated to context valence in the similarity condition, which generated an assimilation effect. When an object was completely familiar to individuals, they had firm ideas about the object which activated a perception of dissimilarity in the comparative process and generated a contrast effect in the dissimilarity condition.
Study 2 explores the effect of product knowledge on the relationships among context valence, anchors and assimilation and contrast effects. The results indicate that individuals possessing high product knowledge will challenge the prime knowledge structure and further compare dissimilarities between the target and contexts, resulting in a contrast effect in the dissimilarity condition. Individuals with low product knowledge are susceptible to context effects, resulting in an assimilation effect regardless of whether they were exposed to the similarity or dissimilarity condition.
Study 3 investigates the effect of an individual’s mood state, context valence, and anchors for assimilation and contrast effects. The results indicate that when individuals experiencing positive moods compare an object with the context, they are susceptible to the context valence, and thereby generate an assimilation effect. However, when individuals are experiencing negative moods, they tend to focus on dissimilarities and demonstrate a contrast effect.
Study 4 to 6 investigate how assimilation and contrast effects differ depending on product attributes (product designer, product country-of-origin, and product origin). Study 4 investigates the influence of product designer on context valence and anchors for assimilation and contrast effects. The results were significant; however, they did not support the original hypotheses. The results indicated that when a product is created by a professional designer, people tend to assimilate the product with the context under the dissimilarity condition. However, when a product is created by a non-professional, people tend to contrast the product with the context under the similarity condition.
Study 5 tests the effects of product country-of-origin, context valence, and anchors for assimilation and contrast effects. The results indicate that when the ingredients of the product are from a local source, individuals demonstrate an assimilation effect in the similarity condition, whereas when the ingredients of the product are imported, individuals tend to make further comparisons which lead to contrast effects under the dissimilarity condition.
Study 6 investigated whether context valence and anchors lead to assimilation or contrast effects, employing product origin as a moderator. The results suggest that when the product came from an international hotel, individuals demonstrated assimilation effects in the similarity condition, while when the product came from a domestic hotel, they instead made additional comparisons and demonstrated contrast effects under the dissimilarity condition. Based on these results, implications are outlined and suggestions for future research are made.

關鍵字(中)

★ 同化與對比效果
★ 脈絡
★ 定錨
★ 消費者特徵
★ 產品屬性

關鍵字(英)

★ assimilation and contrast effects
★ context valence
★ anchors
★ consumer characteristics
★ product attributes

論文目次

TABLE OF CONTENTS
ABSTRACT I
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS V
TABLE OF CONTENTS VI
LIST OF TABLES IX
LIST OF FIGURES X
CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION 1
1.1 RESEARCH MOTIVATION 1
1.2 RESEARCH PURPOSES AND QUESTIONS 4
1.3 STRUCTURE OF THE DISSERTATION 8
CHAPTER 2 LITERATURE REVIEW AND HYPOTHESES 9
2.1 THE EFFECTS OF CONTEXT VALENCES AND ANCHORS FOR ASSIMILATION AND CONTRAST EFFECTS 9
2.2 MODERATING ROLE OF PRODUCT FAMILIARITY ON CONTEXT VALENCES AND ANCHORS FOR ASSIMILATION AND CONTRAST EFFECTS 13
2.3 MODERATING ROLE OF PRODUCT KNOWLEDGE ON CONTEXT VALENCES AND ANCHORS FOR ASSIMILATION AND CONTRAST EFFECTS 16
2.4 MODERATING ROLE OF MOOD STATES ON CONTEXT VALENCES AND ANCHORS FOR ASSIMILATION AND CONTRAST EFFECTS 19
2.5 MODERATING ROLE OF PRODUCT DESIGNER ON CONTEXT VALENCES AND ANCHORS FOR ASSIMILATION AND CONTRAST EFFECTS 22
2.6 MODERATING ROLE OF PRODUCT COUNTRY-OF-ORIGIN ON CONTEXT VALENCES AND ANCHORS FOR ASSIMILATION AND CONTRAST EFFECTS 24
2.7 MODERATING ROLE OF PRODUCT ORIGIN ON CONTEXT VALENCES AND ANCHORS FOR ASSIMILATION AND CONTRAST EFFECTS 27
2.8 CONCLUDING REMARKS 29
CHAPTER 3 RESEARCH DESIGN AND RESULTS 30
3.1 OVERVIEW OF SIX STUDIES 30
3.2 STUDY 1 34
3.2.1 Method 34
3.2.2 Results 36
3.2.3 Discussion 40
3.3 STUDY 2 41
3.3.1 Method 41
3.3.2 Results 43
3.3.3 Discussion 47
3.4 STUDY 3 48
3.4.1 Method 48
3.4.2 Results 50
3.4.3 Discussion 53
3.5 STUDY 4 54
3.5.1 Method 54
3.5.2 Results 55
3.5.3 Discussion 58
3.6 STUDY 5 59
3.6.1 Method 59
3.6.2 Results 61
3.6.3 Discussion 64
3.7 STUDY 6 65
3.7.1 Method 65
3.7.2 Results 67
3.7.3 Discussion 70
3.8 CONCLUDING REMARKS 71
CHAPTER 4 CONCLUSION 72
4.1 SUMMARY AND GENERAL DISCUSSION 72
4.2 THEORETICAL IMPLICATIONS 76
4.3 PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS 81
4.4 LIMITATIONS AND FUTURE RESEARCH 84
REFERENCES 88
APPENDIX A: PRETEST QUESTIONNAIRE OF STUDY 1 97
APPENDIX B: QUESTIONNAIRES OF STUDY 1 98
APPENDIX C: PRETEST QUESTIONNAIRE OF STUDY 2 106
APPENDIX D: QUESTIONNAIRES OF STUDY 2 108
APPENDIX E: PRETEST QUESTIONNAIRES OF STUDY 3 116
APPENDIX F: QUESTIONNAIRE OF STUDY 3 120
APPENDIX G: QUESTIONNAIRES OF STUDY 4 144
APPENDIX H: PRETEST QUESTIONNAIRE OF STUDY 5 152
APPENDIX I: QUESTIONNAIRES OF STUDY 5 153
APPENDIX J: PRETEST QUESTIONNAIRE OF STUDY 6 161
APPENDIX K: QUESTIONNAIRES OF STUDY 6 162

LIST OF TABLES
Table 3-1 Tests of between-subjects effects: Study 1 37
Table 3-2 Tests of within-subjects effects: Study 1 37
Table 3-3 Tests of within-subjects contrasts: Study 1 38
Table 3-4 Mean similarity by condition: Study 1 39
Table 3-5 ANOVA statistics: Study 2 45
Table 3-6 Mean similarity by condition: Study 2 46
Table 3-7 ANOVA statistics: Study 3 51
Table 3-8 Mean similarity by condition: Study 3 52
Table 3-9 ANOVA statistics: Study 4 56
Table 3-10 Mean similarity by condition: Study 4 57
Table 3-11 ANOVA statistics: Study 5 62
Table 3-12 Mean similarity by condition: Study 5 63
Table 3-13 ANOVA statistics: Study 6 68
Table 3-14 Mean similarity by condition: Study 6 69

LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 3-1 Research framework 33
Figure 3-2 The moderating effect of product familiarity on context valence and anchor on similarity 39
Figure 3-3 The moderating effect of product knowledge on context valence and anchor on similarity 47
Figure 3-4 The moderating effect of mood state on context valence and anchor on similarity 53
Figure 3-5 The moderating effect of product designer on context valence and anchor on similarity 58
Figure 3-6 The moderating effect of product COO on context valence and anchor on similarity 64
Figure 3-7 The moderating effect of product origin on context valence and anchor on similarity 70

參考文獻

Ahmed, S. A., & d’Astous, A. (1995). Comparison of country of origin effects on household and organizational buyers’ product perceptions. European Journal of Marketing, 29(3), 35-51.
Alba, J. W. (1983). The effects of product knowledge on the comprehension, retention, and evaluation of product information. Advances in Consumer Research, 10(1), 577-580.
Alba, J. W., & Hutchinson, J. W. (1987). Dimensions of consumer expertise. Journal of Consumer Research, 13(4), 411-454.
Bargh, J. A., Chen, M., & Burrows, L. (1996). Automaticity of social behavior: Direct effects of trait construct and stereotype activation on action. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 71(2), 230-244.
Barone, M. J., Miniard, P. W., & Romeo, J. B. (2000). The influence of positive mood on brand extension evaluations. Journal of Consumer Research, 26(4), 386-400.
Bettman, J. R., & Park, C. W. (1980). Effects of prior knowledge and experience and the phase of the choice process on consumer decision processes: A protocol analysis. Journal of Consumer Research, 7(3), 234-248.
Bilkey, W. J. (1982). Country-of-origin effects on production evaluations. Journal of International Business Studies, 13(1), 89-95.
Brown, D. R. (1953). Stimulus-similarity and the anchoring of subjective scales. American Journal of Psychology, 66(2), 199-214.
Brucks, M. (1985). The effects of product class knowledge on information search behavior. Journal of Consumer Research, 12(1), 1-16.
Carlson, J. P., Bearden, W. O., & Hardesty, D. M. (2007). Influences on what consumers know and what they think they know regarding marketer pricing tactics. Psychology & Marketing, 24(2), 117-142.
Chartrand, T. L., & Bargh, J. A. (1999). The chameleon effect: The perception–behavior link and social interaction. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 76(6), 893-91.
Chien, Y. W., Wegener, D. T., Hsiao, C. C., & Petty, R. E. (2010). Dimensional range overlap and context effects in consumer judgments. Journal of Consumer Research, 37(3), 530-542.
Cowley, E., & Mitchell, A. A. (2003). The moderating effect of product knowledge on the learning and organization of product information. Journal of Consumer Research, 30(3), 443-454.
Dijksterhuis, A., Spears, R., Postmes, T., Stapel, D., Koomen, W., Knippenberg, A. V., & Scheepers, D. (1998). Seeing one thing and doing another: Contrast effects in automatic behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 75(4), 862-871.
Edell, J. A., & Burke, M. C. (1987). The power of feelings in understanding advertising effects. Journal of Consumer Research, 14(3), 421-433.
Englich, B. & Soder, K. (2009). Moody experts–How mood and expertise influence judgmental anchoring. Judgment and Decision Making, 40(1), 41-50.
Epstude, K., & Mussweiler, T. (2009). What you feel is how you compare: How comparisons influence the social induction of affect. Emotion, 9(1), 1-14.
Fiske, S. T., Kinder, D. R., & Larter, W. M. (1983). The novice and the expert: Knowledge-based strategies in political cognition. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 19(4), 381-40.
Forgas, J. P. (1991). Affective influences on partner choice: Role of mood in social decisions. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 61(5), 708-72.
Forgas, J. P. (1992). On mood and peculiar people: Affect and person typicality in impression formation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 62(5), 863-875.
Forgas, J. P., & Bower, G. H. (1987). Mood effects on person-perception judgments. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 53(1), 53-60.
Förster, J., & Dannenberg, L. (2010a). GLOMOsys: A system account of global versus local processing. Psychological Inquiry, 21(3), 175-197.
Förster, J., & Dannenberg, L. (2010b). GLOMOsys: Specifications of a global model on processing styles. Psychological Inquiry, 21(3), 257-269.
Förster, J., Liberman, N. & Kuschel, S. (2008). The effect of global versus local processing styles on assimilation versus contrast in social judgment. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 94(4), 579-599.
Gardner, M. P. (1985). Mood states and consumer behavior: A critical review. Journal of Consumer Research, 12(3), 281-300.
Gardner, M. P., & Hill, R. P. (1988). Consumers’ mood states: Antecedents and consequences of experiential versus informational strategies for brand choice. Psychology & Marketing, 5(2), 169-182.
Gorn, G. J., Goldberg, M. E., & Basu, K. (1993). Mood, awareness, and product evaluation. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 2(3), 237-256.
Hansen, F. (1972). Consumer Choice Behavior. New York: Free Press.
Herr, P. M. (1989). Priming price: Prior knowledge and context effects. Journal of Consumer Research, 16(1), 67-75.
Herrmann, A., Heitmann, M., Morgan, R., Henneberg, S. C., & Landwehr, J. (2009). Consumer decision making and variety of offerings: The effect of attribute alignability. Psychology & Marketing, 26(4), 333-358.
Higgins, E. T., Rholes, W. S., & Jones, C. R. (1977). Category accessibility and impression formation. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 13(2), 141-154.
Hill, R. P., & Ward, J. C. (1989). Mood manipulation in marketing research: An examination of potential confounding effects. Journal of Marketing Research, 26(1), 97-104.
Hong, J., & Sternthal, B. (2010). The effects of consumer prior knowledge and processing strategies on judgments. Journal of Marketing Research, 47(2), 301-311.
Howard, D. J., & Barry, T. E. (1994). The role of thematic congruence between a mood-inducing event and an advertised product in determining the effects of mood on brand attitudes. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 3(1), 1-27.
Howard, J. A. (1977). Consumer Behavior: Application of Theory. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Howard, J. A. and J. N. Sheth (1969). The Theory of Buyer Behavior. New York: John Wiley.
Hsiao, C. C. & Chien, Y. W. (2004). On the biasing judgment of innovation: Context effect of existent brand. Taiwan Academy of Management Journal, 4(3), 339-356.
Isen, A. M., Daubman, K. A., & Nowicki, G. P. (1987). Positive affect facilitates creative problem solving. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 52(6), 1122-1131.
Isen, A. M., Shalker, T. E., Clark, M., & Karp, L. (1978). Affect, accessibility of material in memory, and behavior: A cognitive loop? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 36(1), 1. 1-12.
Jewell, R. D., & Saenger, C. (2014). Associative and dissociative comparative advertising strategies in broadening brand positioning. Journal of Business Research, 67(7), 1559-1566.
Johnson, E. J., & Russo, J. E. (1984). Product familiarity and learning new information. Journal of Consumer Research, 11(1), 542-55.
Kenrick, D. T., & Gutierres, S. E. (1980). Contrast effects and judgments of physical attractiveness: When beauty becomes a social problem. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 38(1), 131-14.
Lee, B. K., & Lee, W. N. (2011). The impact of product knowledge on consumer product memory and evaluation in the competitive ad context: The item‐specific‐relational perspective. Psychology & Marketing, 28(4), 360-387.
Lee, M. P., & Suk, K. (2010). Disambiguating the role of ambiguity in perceptual assimilation and contrast effects. Journal of Consumer Research, 36(5), 890-897.
Lien, N. H. (2001). Elaboration likelihood model in consumer research: A review. Proceedings of the National Science Council, 11(4), 301-31.
Lin, C. H. & Kuo, S. H. (2012). Approach the reference product or against it? The moderating roles of product familiarity and product knowledge. Journal of Business Administration, 95, 1-37.
Lin, L.W., & Sternquist, B. (1994). Taiwanese consumers’ perceptions of product information cues: Country of origin and store prestige. European Journal of Marketing, 28(1), 5-18.
Liu, F., Marphy, J., Li, J., & Liu, X. (2006). English and Chinese? The role of consumer ethnocentrism and country of origin in Chinese attitudes towards store signs. Australasian Marketing Journal, 14(2), 5-16.
Lynch Jr, J. G., Chakravarti, D., & Mitra, A. (1991). Contrast effects in consumer judgments: Changes in mental representations or in the anchoring of rating scales? Journal of Consumer Research, 18(3), 284-297.
Maheswaran, D., & Sternthal, B. (1990), The effects of knowledge, motivation, and type of message on ad processing and product judgments. Journal of Consumer Research, 17(1), 66-73.
Markman, K. D., & McMullen, M. N. (2003). A reflection and evaluation model of comparative thinking. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 7(3), 244-267.
Marks, L. J., & Olson, J. C. (1981). Toward a cognitive structure conceptualization of product familiarity. Advances in Consumer Research, 8(1), 145-15.
Miniard, P. W., Bhatla, S., & Sirdeshmukh, D. (1992). Mood as a determinant of postconsumption product evaluations: Mood effects and their dependency on the affective intensity of the consumption experience. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 1(2), 173-195.
Miniard, P. W., Rose, R. L., Manning, K. C., & Barone, M. J. (1998). Tracking the effects of comparative and noncomparative advertising using relative and nonrelative measures: A test of the framing correspondence hypothesis. Journal of Business Research, 41(3), 137-144.
Mussweiler, T. (2001). Seek and ye shall find: antecedents of assimilation and contrast in social comparison. European Journal of Social Psychology, 31(5), 499-509.
Mussweiler, T. (2003). Comparison processes in social judgment: mechanisms and consequences. Psychological Review, 110(3), 472-489.
Mussweiler, T. (2007). Assimilation and contrast as comparison effects: a selective accessibility model. In Stapel, D. A., & Sulu, J. (Eds). Assimilation and Contrast in Social Psychology. New York: Psychology Press, pp.165-185.
Mussweiler, T., & Damisch, L. (2008). Going back to Donald: How comparisons shape judgmental priming effects. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 95(6), 1295-1315.
Mussweiler, T., Rüter, K., & Epstude, K. (2004). The ups and downs of social comparison: Mechanisms of assimilation and contrast. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 87(6), 832-844.
Nagashima, A. (1970). A comparison of Japanese and US attitudes toward foreign products. Journal of Marketing, 34(1), 68-74.
Nam, M., & Sternthal, B. (2008). The effects of a different category context on target brand evaluations. Journal of Consumer Research, 35(4), 668-679.
Park, C. W. (1976). The effect of individual and situation-related factors on consumer selection of judgmental models. Journal of Marketing Research, 13(2), 144-151.
Park, C. W., & Lessig, V. P. (1981). Familiarity and its impact on consumer decision biases and heuristics. Journal of Consumer Research, 8(2), 223-231.
Petty, R. E., & Cacioppo, J. T. (1983). Central and peripheral routes to advertising effectiveness: The moderating role of involvement. Journal of Consumer Research, 10(2), 135-146.
Petty, R. E., & Wegener, D. T. (1993). Flexible correction processes in social judgment: correcting for context induced contrast. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 29(2), 37-165.
Pierro, A., Giacomantonio, M., Pica, G., Mannetti, L., Kruglanski, A. W., & Higgins, E. T. (2013). When comparative ads are more effective: Fit with audience’s regulatory mode. Journal of Economic Psychology, 38, 90-103.
Raju, P. S., & Reilly, M. D. (1980). Product familiarity and information processing strategies: An exploratory investigation. Journal of Business Research, 8(2), 187-212.
Rao, A., & Monroe, K. B. (1988). The moderating effect of prior knowledge on cue utilization in product evaluations. Journal of Consumer Research, 15(2), 253-264.
Rose, R. L., Miniard, P.W., Barone, M. J., Manning, K. C., & Till, B.D. (1993). When persuasion goes undetected: The case of comparative advertising. International Journal of Market Research, 30(3), 315-33.
Ruys, K. I., Spears, R., Gordijn, E. H., & de Vries, N. K. (2006). Two faces of (dis) similarity in affective judgments of persons: Contrast or assimilation effects revealed by morphs. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 90(3), 399-411.
Schooler, R. D. (1965). Product bias in the Central American common market. Journal of Marketing Research, 2(4), 394-397.
Schwarz, N. & Bless, H. (1992). Constructing reality and its alternatives: An inclusion/exclusion model of assimilation and contrast effects in social judgment. In: Martin, L. L. & Tresser, A. (eds) The Construction of Social Judgments. NJ: Erlbaum, pp.217-245.
Schwarz, N., & Clore, G. L. (1983). Mood, misattribution, and judgments of well-being: informative and directive functions of affective states. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 45(3), 513-523.
Selnes, F., & Gronhaug, K. (1986). Subjective and objective measure of product knowledge contrasted. Advance in Consumer Research, 13(1), 67-71.
Shanahan, K. J., & Hyman, M. R. (2007). An exploratory study of desired hotel attributes for American tourists vacationing in China and Ireland. Journal of Vacation Marketing, 13(2), 107-118.
Sharma, S., Shimp, T. A., & Shin, J. (1995). Consumer ethnocentrism: A test of antecedents and moderators. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 23(1), 26-37.
Sherman, S. J., Ahlm, K., & Berman, L. (1978). Contrast effects and their relationship to subsequent behavior. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 14(4), 340-350.
Shimp, T. A., & Sharma, S. (1987). Consumer ethnocentrism: Construction and validation of the CETSCALE. Journal of Marketing Research, 24(3), 280-289.
Srinivasan, N., & Ratchford, B. T. (1991). An empirical test of a model of external search for automobiles. Journal of Consumer Research, 18(2), 233-242.
Srull, T. K. (1983). The role of prior knowledge in the acquisition, retention, and use of new information. Advances in Consumer Research, 10(1), 572-576.
Stapel, D. A., & Koomen, W. (1997). Short note: Using primed exemplars during impression formation: interpretation or comparison? European Journal of Social Psychology, 27(3), 357-367.
Stapel, D. A., Koomen, W., & Ruys, K. I. (2002). The effects of diffuse and distinct affect. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 83(1), 60-74.
Stapel, D. A., Koomen, W., & Van der Pligt, J. (1997). Categories of category accessibility: The impact of trait concept versus exemplar priming on person judgments. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 33(1), 47-76.
Stapel, D., & Winkielman, P. (1998). Assimilation and contrast as a function of context-target similarity, distinctness, and dimensional relevance. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 6(24), 634-646.
Sujan, M. (1985). Consumer knowledge: Effects on evaluation strategies mediating consumer judgments. Journal of Consumer Research, 12(1), 31-46.
Sumer, H. C., & Knight, P. A. (1996). Assimilation and contrast effects in performance ratings: Effects of rating the previous performance on rating subsequent performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 81(4), 436-442.
Supphellen, N., & Rittenburg, T. L. (2001). Consumer ethnocentrism: When foreign products are better., Psychology & Marketing, 18(9), 907-927.
Walker, B., Celsi, R., & Olson J (1987). Exploring the structural characteristics of consumers’ knowledge. Advance in Consumer Research, 14(1), 17-21.
Wegener, D. T., & Petty, R. E. (1995). Flexible correction processes in social judgment: The role of naive theories in corrections for perceived bias. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 68(1), 36-51.
Wood, W., & Kallgren, C. A. (1988). Communicator attributes and persuasion: Recipients access to attitude-relevant information in memory. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 14(1), 172-182.
Yi, Y. (1990). The effects of contextual priming in print advertisements. Journal of Consumer Research, 17(2), 215-222.
Yi, Y. (1993). Contextual priming effects in print advertisements: The moderating role of prior knowledge. Journal of Advertising, 22(1), 1-10.

指導教授

林建煌(Chien-Huang Lin)

審核日期

2016-5-17

推文