跳到主要內容

臺灣博碩士論文加值系統

(44.200.196.38) 您好!臺灣時間:2024/03/29 17:51
字體大小: 字級放大   字級縮小   預設字形  
回查詢結果 :::

詳目顯示

我願授權國圖
: 
twitterline
研究生:李珮寧
研究生(外文):Pei-Ning Li
論文名稱:探討涉入程度與網路書評對偏好穩定性的影響:以奇幻小說為例
論文名稱(外文):Testing the intermediary effect of product involvement on the influence of online book review: a case study of mystery readers
指導教授:唐牧群唐牧群引用關係
指導教授(外文):Muh-Chyun Tang
口試委員:吳怡瑾林頌堅
口試日期:2012-05-17
學位類別:碩士
校院名稱:國立臺灣大學
系所名稱:圖書資訊學研究所
學門:傳播學門
學類:圖書資訊檔案學類
論文種類:學術論文
論文出版年:2012
畢業學年度:100
語文別:中文
論文頁數:78
中文關鍵詞:涉入偏好穩定正負書評
外文關鍵詞:involvementpreference stabilitybook review
相關次數:
  • 被引用被引用:5
  • 點閱點閱:1130
  • 評分評分:
  • 下載下載:0
  • 收藏至我的研究室書目清單書目收藏:4
偏好可分成內在穩定以及受外界資訊刺激所建構出的兩種型態。不同情境刺激,或是顧客對於產品的涉入程度,也就是熟悉瞭解程度,皆有可能影響顧客對於產品選擇的偏好穩定性。過去對於涉入程度及偏好穩定的研究較少針對愉悅閱讀書籍此類文化性商品;因此本研究希望能藉由實驗情境的操弄,瞭解讀者對於愉悅閱讀書籍的不同涉入程度,是否會因網路書評所傳達的口碑資訊,進而影響偏好穩定性。
本研究採用實驗法,並以學者所提出的涉入量表作為愉悅閱讀讀者的涉入程度測量。在實驗選書情境中,請讀者依平時閱讀喜好形成不同閱讀興趣,區別出具正、負面初始印象的奇幻小說。稍後給予讀閱讀與其初始印象相衝突的書評。藉由直接與認知相衝突的形成,瞭解正負書評對於偏好穩定性的影響程度。並藉由問卷填答,分析面對正負書評及其他相關訊息時,不同涉入程度讀者所考量的資訊是否有所不同。
研究結果如下:一、讀者涉入程度影響偏好穩定性,又以高涉入者偏好穩定性較佳;但本次所招募的低涉入者非全無閱讀經驗者,部分低涉入者是其他文學作品的高度涉入者,在實驗時可能會套用其個人閱讀經驗。二、正負書評對閱讀前後評分具影響力,尤以負評易形成損害趨避想法,評分變動大。三、高衝突較低衝突書評易造成偏好穩定性變動,低涉入者變動較為明顯。四、涉入程度影響選書資訊的考量:高涉入者以文字資訊為主,低涉入者偏重圖像式資訊。
進一步研究建議上,未來在不同涉入程度受試者招募可配合閱讀的頻率、興趣,再搭配涉入量表的涉入程度分數,利用多元面向瞭解受試者間高低涉入程度,使兩個族群間差異更明顯。此外,影響受試者資訊的選擇可以高低強度進行資料收集,以瞭解不同階段受試者所考量到各資訊的影響及重要程度。


The judgment of readings for leisure inevitably involves certain degree of uncertainty as it is difficult to determine the quality of a work before its consumption. Potential readers often have to rely on decision cues such as reviews and word of mouths for judgment. The influence of reviews is arguably more salient for readers who have a less degree of involvement with a certain genre of leisure reading. The study set out to explore the influence of genre readers’ degree of involvement on their preference stability. To test our hypothesis that highly involved readers has a more stable preference, an experiment was conducted where 41 high and low involvement readers in fantasy novels were exposed to online book reviews opposite to their own. Preference stability was then measured by the extent to which the participants’ opinions of a set of eight previously unknown titles vary before and after they were exposed to contradictory reviews. Major findings are as following: firstly, high involvement readers had a higher degree of preference stability; secondly, negative reviews had a more significant impact on readers’ judgment. Furthermore, it was also found that readers with high and low involvement relied on different decision cues for judgment; while highly involved readers relied more on introductory texts and editorial reviews, readers with low involvement tended to rely heavily on star rating, which demands less cognitive effort.

圖表目次 VII
第一章、緒論 1
第一節 研究動機 1
第二節 研究目的與問題 4
第二章、文獻回顧 5
第一節、正負書評 5
第二節 涉入 8
一、定義 8
二、涉入的衡量 10
三、涉入與知識之關係 11
第三節 偏好穩定性 13
一、偏好的意涵 13
二、愉悅閱讀中的偏好 18
第四節 研究架構 22
第三章、研究方法 24
第一節 研究對象 25
第二節 研究工具 25
一、涉入程度量表 25
二、書評 26
三、奇幻小說 27
第三節 實驗設計與分析 28
一、實驗設計與流程 28
二、實驗結果分析 32
第四節 研究步驟 33
第四章 研究結果分析 35
第一節 受試者分析 35
第二節 涉入程度與正負初始印象閱讀書評之影響 36
一、涉入程度與正負書評影響評分之差異 38
二、涉入程度與四次正負書評閱讀前後之評分差異 41
三、涉入程度與正負評星等衝突差異比較 45
四、多元迴歸分析 50
第三節 涉入程度與影響評分之資訊選擇差異 53
一、高、低涉入者第一階段於正、負初始印象影響資訊勾選比較 53
二、高、低涉入者第二階段於正、負初始印象影響資訊勾選比較 55
三、涉入程度、正負書評影響資訊選擇的情況 58
第四節、綜合討論 60
一、正負書評與評分差異 60
二、涉入程度與評分差異之變化比較 61
三、高強度衝突書評影響力大 62
四、讀者書評、內容簡介與評分星等 63
第五章、結論與建議 65
第一節 結論 65
一、涉入程度影響偏好穩定性 65
二、正負讀者書評對閱讀前後評分具影響力 66
三、高強度衝突書評易造成偏好穩定變動 66
四、不同涉入程度選書所依賴線索有異 67
第二節 研究貢獻 67
一、利用產品涉入問卷帶入經驗性商品,特別是文化書籍閱讀 67
二、製造認知衝突,瞭解不同涉入程度的偏好穩定性 68
第三節 進一步研究建議 69
第四節 研究限制 70
參考文獻 73
附錄一 78


李莉伶(2008)。網路書評與借閱意願之研究。未出版之碩士論文,國立臺灣科技大學企業管理碩士班,臺北市。
林珊如、劉應琳(2001)。休閒閱讀找書策略與影響因素之探討:以台大BBS Books版愛書人為例。資訊傳播與圖書館學,8(2),23-37。
林家儀、邱銘心(2010)。網路讀者書評文類分析研究:以科學普及類書評為例。教育資料與圖書館學,48(2),269-298。
理查‧考夫(Caves, R.)(2003)。文化創意產業:以契約達成藝術與商業的媒合(Creative Industries Contracts Between Art and Commerce)。(仲曉玲、徐子超譯)。臺北市:典藏。(原作2000年出版)
陳宜琦(2009)。奇幻小說迷閱讀行為研究。未出版之碩士論文,國立臺灣大學圖書資訊學系,臺北市。
賀恩溢(2008)。正負面電子口碑組合與先前品牌印象及虛擬社群感對廣告效果之影響。未出版之碩士論文,國立臺北科技大學商業自動化與管理研究所,臺北市。
詹姆士‧布萊恩‧史提夫(Stiff, J. B.)(1996)。說服傳播(Persuasive Communication)。(蔡幸佑、彭敏慧譯)。臺北市:五南。(原作1993年出版)
潘莉娟(2006)。網路書評與購書意願之關聯性研究。未出版之碩士論文,國立臺灣大學圖書資訊學研究所,臺北市。
蔡文碩(2004)。負面口碑對消費者購買決策之影響。未出版之碩士論文,大同大學事業經營研究所,臺北市。
簡妙如(1996)。過度的閱聽人─「迷」之初探。未出版之碩士論文,國立中正大學電訊傳播研究所,嘉義縣。
Bansal, H. S., & Voyer, P. A. (2000). Word-of-mouth processes within a services purchase decision context. Journal of Services Research, 3(2), 166-177.
Baudrillard, J. (1968). Le systeme des objets. Paris: Galli-mard, Collection Tel
Beatty, S. E., Kahle, L. R., & Homer, P. (1988). The involvement-commitment model: theory and implications. Journal of Business Research, 16, 149-167.
Bettman, J. R., Luce, M. F., & Payne, J. W. (1998). Constructive consumer choice processes. Journal of Consumer Research, 25( 3), 187–217.
Bettman, J. R., Luce, M. F., and Payne, J. W. (2008). Preference construction and preference stability: putting the pillow to rest. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 18, 170-174.
Buda, R. & 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.
Celsi, R. L., & Olson, J. C. (1988). The role of involvement in attention and comprehension processes. Journal of Consumer Research, 15(2), 210-224.
Crowley, A. E., & Hoyer, W. D. (1994). An integrative framework for understanding two-side persuasion. Journal of Consumer Research, 20(4), 561-574.
Dellarocas, C. (2003). The digitization of word-of-mouth: promise and challenges of online feedback mechanism. Management Science, 49(10), 1407-1424.
Festinger, L. (1957) A theory of cognitive dissonance. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
Fischhoff, B., Slovic, P., & Lichtenstein, S. (1980). Knowing what you want: measuring labile values. In T. S. Wallsten (Eds.), Cognitive Processes in Choice and Decision Behavior (pp. 117-141). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaurm.
Fiske, J. (1989). Moments of Television: Neither the Text nor the Audience. In E. Seiter et al (Ed.). London & NY: Routledge.
Fiske, J. (1992). The cultural economy of fandom. In Lisa A. Lewis. (Ed.), The Adoring Audience: Fan and Popular Media (pp.30-49). London: Routledge.
Fiske, S. T. (1980). Attention and weight in person perception: The impact of negative and extreme behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 38(6), 889-906.
Freeman, A. M. (1993). The Measurement of Environmental and Resource Values: Theory and Methods. Washington: RFF Press.
Greenwald, A. G., & Leavitt, C. (1984). Audience involvement in advertising: Four levels. Journal of Consumer Research, 11, 581–592.
Hammond, K. R., McClelland, G. H., & Mumpower, J. (1980). Human judgment anddecision making: Theories, methods, and procedures. New York: Praeger.
Hennig-Thurau, T., Gwinner, K. P., Walsh, G., & Gremler, D. D. (2004). Electronic word-of-mouth via consumer opinion platforms: what motivates consumer to articulate themselves on the Internet? Journal of Interactive Marketing, 18(1), 38-52.
Herr, P. M., Kardes, F. R., & Kim, J. (1991). Effects of word-of-mouth and product-attribute information on persuasion: An accessibility-diagnosticity perspective. Journal of Consumer Research, 17, 454-462.
Hoeffler, S., & Ariely, D. (1999). Constructing stable preferences: A look into dimensions of experience and their impact on preference stability. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 8(2), 113-139.
Hoeffler, S., Ariely, D., & West, P. (2006). Path dependent preferences: the role of early experience and biased search in preference development. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 101(2), 215–229.
Holbrook, M. B., & Hirschman, E. C. (1982). The Experiential Aspects of Consumption: Consumer Fantasies, Feelings, and Fun. The Journal of Consumer Research, 9(2), 132-140.
Holden, J. (2004). Creative Reading: Young People, Reading and Public Libraries. Demos.
Hosseini, H. (1997) Cognitive dissonance as a means of explaining economics of irrationality and uncertainty. Journal of Socio-Economics, 26, 181-189.
Johnson, E. J., Steffel, M., & Goldstein, D. G. (2005). Making better decisions: from measuring to constructing preferences. Health Psychology, 24( 4), S17–S22.
Kamphuis, J. (1991). Satisfaction with books: Some empirical findings. Poetics, 20(5-6), 471-485.
King, M. F. & Balasubramanian, S. K. (1994). The effects of expertise, end goal, and product type on adoption of preference formation strategy. Journal of the Academic Marketing Science, 22(2), 146-159.
Krugman, H. E. (1965). The impact of television advertising: learning without involvement. Public Opinion Quarterly, 29, 349-356.
Kwon, K., Cho, J., & Park, Y. (2009). Influences of customer preference development on the effectiveness of recommendation strategies. Electronic Commerce Research and Applications, 8(5), 263-275.
Laurent, G., & Kapferer, J. N. (1985). Measuring Consumer Involvement Profiles. Journal of Marketing Research, 22(1), 41-53.
Lichtenstein, M., & Stull, T. K. (1987). Processing objectives as a determinant of the relationship between recall and judgment. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 23, 93-118.
Lutz, R. J., MacKenzie, S. B., & Belch, G. E. (1983). Attitude toward the ad as a mediator of advertising effectiveness: Determinants and consequences. Advances in Consumer Research, 10, 532–539.
MacInnis, D. J., & Jaworski, B. J. (1989). Information processing from advertisements: toward an integrative framework. Journal of Marketing, 53(4), 1-23.
Nell, V. (1988). The Psychology of Reading for Pleasure: Needs and Gratifications. Reading Research Quarterly, 23(1), 6-50.
Newby-Clark, I. R., Zanna, M. P., & McGregor, I.(2002). Thinking and caring about cognitive inconsistency: When and for whom does attitudinal ambivalence feel uncomfortable? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 82(2), 157-166.
Ostrom, T. M., Brock, T. C. (1968). A cognitive model of attitude involvement. In R. P. Abelson et al. (Eds.), Theories of Cognitive Consistency: A Sourcebook (pp.378-383). Chicago: Rand McNally.
Payne, J. W., Bettman, J. R., & Johnson, E. J. (1993). The adaptive decision maker. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
Petty, R. E., Cacioppo, J. T., & Goldman, R. (1981). Personal involvement as a determinant of argument-based persuasion. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 41(5), 847-855.
Petty, R., Cacioppo, J., & Schumann, K. (1983). Central and Peripheral routes to advertising effectiveness: the moderating role of involvement. Journal of Consumer Research, 10, 135-146.
Rabin, M. (1998). Psychology and economics. Journal of Economic Literature, 36( 1), 11–46.
Ray, M. L. (1973). Marketing communication and the hierarchy-of effects. In P. Clarke(ed.), Mew Models for Communication Research. Beverly Hills, CA:Sage.
Reeder, G. D., & Fulks, J. L. (1980). When actions speak louder than words: Implicational schemata and the attribution of ability. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 16, 33-46.
Reeder, G. D., Henderson, D. J., & Sullivan, J. J. (1982). From dispositions to behaviors: The flip side of attribution. Journal of Research Personality, 16, 355-375.
Ross, C. S. (1999). Finding without seeking: the information encounter in the context of reading for pleasure. Information Processing and Management, 35, 783-799.
Sanders, M. (2009). Popular Reading Collections in Public University Libraries: A Survey of Three Southeastern States. Public Services Quarterly, 5(3), 174.
Schiffman, L.G. & Kanuk, L.L.(1997). Consumer Behavior (6th). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Sherif, M., & Cantril, H. (1947). The Psychology of Ego-involvements: Social Attitudes and Identifications. New York: Wiley.
Simonson, I. (2005). Determinants of customers’ responses to customized offers: conceptual framework and research propositions. Journal of Marketing, 69( 1), 32–45.
Simonson, I. (2008). Will I like a "medium" pillow? Another look at constructed and inherent preferences. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 18(3), 155-169.
Skowronski, J. J., & Carlston, D. E. (1989). Negativity and extremity biases in impression formation: A review of the explanation. Psychological Bulletin, 105(1), 131-142.
Slovic, P., Griffin, D., & Tversky, A. (1990). Compatibility effects in judgment and choice. In R. M. Hogarth (Ed.), Insights in decision making (pp. 5-27). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Somasundaram, T. N. (1989). An Investigation of Alternative Consumption Evaluation Processes Explaining Consumer Satisfaction Judgments. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee, USA.
Sujan, M. (1985). Consumer knowledge: effects on evaluation strategies mediating consumer judgments. Journal of Consumer Research, 12, 31-46.
Tversky, A. & Kahneman, D. (1991). Loss Aversion in Riskless Choice: A Reference Dependent Model. Quarterly Journal of Economics 106, 1039-1061.
Tversky, A., Sattath, S., & Slovic, P. (1988). Contingent weighting in judgment and choice. Psychological Review, 95, 371-384.
West, P. M., Brown, C. L., & Hoch, S. J. (1996). Consumption vocabulary and preference formation. Journal of Consumer Research, 23, 120-135.
Westbrook, R. A. (1987). Product/consumer-based affective responses and postpurchase process. Journal of Marketing Research, 24(3), 258-270.
Ying, H. L., & Chung, C. M. Y. (2007). The effects of single-message single-source mixed word-of-mouth on product attitude and purchase intention. Asia Pacific Journal of Marketing and Logistics, 19(1), 75-86.
Zaichkowsky, J. L. (1985). Measuring the involvement construct. Journal of Consumer Research, 12, 341-352.
Zaichkowsky, J. L. (1986). Conceptualizing involvement. Journal of Advertising, 15(2), 4-14.

QRCODE
 
 
 
 
 
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               
第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁 top