科技性術語對消費者評價之影響：調節焦點與品牌信譽的干擾效果

Effects of Technological Terminology on Consumers’ Evaluation of Products: The Moderating Roles of Regulatory Focus and Brand Credibility

余歆嫻(Hsin-Hsien Yu)

指導教授 ： 張重昭

國立臺灣大學/管理學院/商學研究所/碩士(2008年)

https://doi.org/10.6342/NTU.2008.10091

摘要

本研究以科技性術語的用法為基礎，旨在探討調節焦點與品牌信譽是否會干擾消費者對含有科技性術語的新商品的評價。主要討論三項議題：(1)消費者面對含有不熟悉科技性術語的新商品時，調節焦點是否會影響其行為。(2)調節焦點與科技性術語的用法是否會產生交互作用，進而影響消費者行為。(3)品牌信譽與科技性術語的用法間是否存在交互作用，進而影響消費者行為。本研究採2 (目標導向：促進焦點與預防焦點) x 2 (品牌信譽：高品牌信譽與低品牌信譽) x 2 (科技性術語數量：2個術語與5個術語) x 2 (科技性術語解釋：有術語解釋與無術語解釋)的組間實驗設計。

研究結果發現，面對含有不熟悉科技性術語的新商品時，由於知覺風險的程度不同，相較於預防焦點的消費者，促進焦點的消費者確實擁有較高的購買意願與品牌態度。其次，科技性術語的解釋能提升消費者的購買意願與品牌態度，此效果於促進焦點消費者身上更能彰顯，相較於預防焦點的消費者，促進焦點的消費者較偏好有術語解釋的商品；但預防焦點與促進焦點的消費者對科技性術語的數量皆無顯著偏好。最後，品牌信譽高的商品適合搭配較少的科技性術語，避免太多術語造成資訊過剩的困境，可一旦術語數量增加，則需添加術語解釋，方能減少消費者的知覺風險與品牌形象的不符，進而提升消費者的購買意願和品牌態度；反之，品牌信譽低的商品適合搭配較多的科技性術語，以增加消費者對獲益的感受且與其品牌形象較相符，當術語數量少時，則需添加術語解釋，方能降低消費者的知覺風險與不滿，進而導致較高的消費者購買意願和品牌態度。本研究結果大致符合預期，且結論於學術和實務上均有貢獻。

關鍵字

科技性術語 ； 調節焦點 ； 品牌信譽 ； 消費者評價

並列摘要

Based on the usage of technological terminology, this research investigates whether regulatory focus and brand credibility moderate consumers’ evaluations toward new product with technological terminologies. Empirically examining three main topics: (a) When consumers face the new product with unfamiliar terminologies, whether regulatory focus affects their consuming behaviors; (b) Whether the different usages of terminology interact with different regulatory focuses; (c) Whether the different usages of terminology interact with the level of brand credibility.

Empirical results show that due to different levels of perceived risk, when facing new products with unfamiliar technological terminologies, relative to prevention-focused consumers, promotion-focused consumers own higher purchase intentions and brand attitudes. Second, explanation for technological terminology can enhance consumers’ purchase intentions and brand attitudes, especially for promotion-focused consumers, but both prevention- and promotion-focused consumers have no preference for number of terminology. Finally, fewer technological terminologies are suitable for high credible brand, once the number of terminology increases, should add explanation for terminology in the ad to decrease consumers’ perceived risk, whereas fewer terminologies match with high credible brand and induce higher consumers’ evaluation; reversely, more technological terminologies are suitable for low credible brand, producers should add explanation when there is fewer terminologies to decrease consumers’ unsatisfaction, whereas more terminologies can increase benefits and induce higher consumers’ evaluations. These findings contribute to academic developments and marketing implications.

並列關鍵字

Technological Terminology ； Regulatory Focus ； Brand Credibility

參考文獻

Anderson, Lee K., James R. Taylor and Robert J. Holloway (1966). The Consumer and His Alternatives: An Empirical Approach. Journal of Marketing Research, 3(Feb), 62-67.

Avnet, Tamar and E. Tory Higgins (2006). How Regulatory Fit Affects Value in Consumer Choices and Opinions. Journal of Marketing Research, 63(Feb), 1-10.

Bless, Herbert, Gerald L. Clore, Norbert Schwarz, Verena Golisano, Christina Rabe and Marcus Wolk (1996). Mood and the Use of Scripts: Does a Happy Mood Really Lead to Mindlessness? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 71(4), 665-679.

Brunel, Olivier and Paul-Emmanuel Pichon (2004). Food-related Risk-reduction Strategies: Purchasing and Consumption Processes. Journal of Consumer Behavior, 3(4), 360-374.

Chang, Tung-Zong and Albert R. Wildt (1994). Price, Product Information, and Purchase Intention: An Empirical Study. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 22(1), 16-27.