Title

Zeithmal知覺價值模型之認知分析

Translated Titles

A Cognitive Analysis for Zeithmal’s Model of Perceived Value

DOI

10.6343/ISU.2014.00243

Authors

郭佳琳

Key Words

資訊整合理論 ; 知覺價值 ; 外部效度 ; 購買意願 ; Information Integration Theory (IIT) ; Perceived Value ; External Validity ; Purchase Intention

PublicationName

義守大學企業管理學系學位論文

Volume or Term/Year and Month of Publication

2014年

Academic Degree Category

碩士

Advisor

張寧

Content Language

繁體中文

Chinese Abstract

以往購買行為的研究較多在探討影響消費者購買意願的因素及程度,對消費者知覺價值與購買決策過程的研究較少。Zeithmal的知覺價值模型符合一般人的直覺,是相當有力的觀點,但是否符合消費者內隱的心理認知架構仍待驗證。本研究因此採用資訊整合理論(Information Integration Theory, IIT)的實驗方法驗證Zeithmal的模型。 在Zeithmal的模型中,內部屬性、外部屬性、知覺品質、知覺犧牲及高層次概念等變項會影響知覺價值。本研究以品牌代表外部屬性,以購買時間代表知覺非貨幣價格,連同價格等三項因素的關連作為自變項,以及與知覺價值間為正相關的購買意願做為依變項,對Zeithmal的模型進行局部的驗證。 本研究以資訊整合理論為實驗方法,採2×2×2之實驗設計,操弄變項為品牌、價格及時間,每個變項各有2個水準。為提升外部效度,本研究實驗設計採真實產品及水準,具備外部效度之知覺價值實驗。藉由變項水準間不同組合的假設情境,測量受測者購買意願的變化,以探討受測者的資訊整合結合模式。 研究結果顯示大部分的受測者對於上述三項影響乳品購買意願的因素,多數以相加模式個別整合在「品牌與價格」、「價格與時間」及「品牌與時間」等三組資訊的結合模式,均以相加模式最多,同時也顯示Zeithmal的模型具有心理認知的效度。若將多數受測者的整體模式視為平均模式,進行權重分析,不論在等權重或不等權重模式分析,均呈現時間權重值高於價格權重值,價格權重值高於品牌權重值的趨勢。在人口統計變項的分析方面,職業與每月可支配所得對乳品的購買意願有顯著差異,從事服務業與學生的受測者,以及每月可支配所得20,000以下之受測者相對有較高購買乳品的意願。因此業者可以推出高品質高價格的乳品,吸引高可支配所的消費者購買乳品意願。另外,不同品牌偏好的受測者,對品牌、價格及時間權重等三項因素的權重值皆有顯著差異。因此業者可針對不同品牌偏好之消費者做不同的行銷策略,偏好S牌之消費者相對受價格影響較大,因此可針對偏好S牌之消費者做價格促銷;偏好K牌之消費者相對受時間與品牌的影響較大,因此減少消費者的購買時間或提升品牌價值,可能可以提升消費者的購買意願。

English Abstract

Previous studies on purchase behavior discussed the factors and degree influencing consumer purchase intention more, while explored consumer perceived value and purchase decision-making less. Zeithmal’s perceived value model conforms to ordinary people’s intuition, which makes it a strong point of view, but it is still need to be verified that whether it conforms to consumers’ implicit psychology cognitive architecture. Therefore, experimental method of information integration theory (IIT) was used to validate Zeithmal’s model in this study. In Zeithmal’s model, the variables such as intrinsic attributes, extrinsic attributes, perceived quality, perceived sacrifice, and high-level abstractions will affect perceived value. In this study, with the correlation among the three factors which were extrinsic attributes represented by brand, perceived non-monetary price represented by purchase time, and price as independent variables, and purchase intention which was positively correlated with perceived value serves as dependent variable, partial validation on Zeithmal’s model was conducted. Taking information integration theory as experimental method, this study adopted 2 × 2 × 2 experimental design and manipulated variables as brand, price, and time, with each variable having two standards. To enhance external validity, the study adopted real products and standards for experimental design as well as the experiment of perceived value with external validity. Through the hypothetical scenarios of different combinations between variable standards, the changes of the subjects’ purchase intention were measured to explore the subjects’ information integration binding mode. The results showed that most of the subjects, for these three factors affecting purchase intention of dairy products, mostly integrated the three groups binding mode of “brand and price”, “price and time” and “brand and time” by combined mode, showing that Zeithmal’s model has the validity of mental cognition. If the majority of the subjects’ overall patterns were considered as average model to conduct weight analysis, whether in equal or unequal weight model, time weigh value will be higher than price weight value and price weight value will be higher than brand weight value. In the analysis of demographic variables, subjects with different occupations and monthly disposable income had significant differences on purchase intention of dairy products, and subjects working in services and being students as well as subjects with less than $ 20,000 of monthly disposable income had relatively high purchase intention of dairy products. So, dairy industry can deliver high-quality and high-priced dairy products to attract consumers with high disposable income to buy dairy products. In addition, subjects with different brand preferences had significant differences on the weight values of the three factors - brand, price, and time. Therefore, dairy industry can make different marketing strategies for consumers with different brand preferences. For instance, if consumers with preference for S brand are greatly influenced by price, price promotion can be made for consumers with for preference for S brand; if consumers with preference for K brand are greatly influenced by time and brand, consume purchase time can be reduced or brand value can be enhanced, so as to enhance consumer purchase intention.

Topic Category 管理學院 > 企業管理學系
社會科學 > 管理學
Reference
  1. 王明元、李明聰、徐慧嫻(2011)。感知價值、滿意度與忠誠度之研究-以高雄市打狗英國領事官邸餐廳為例。商業現代化學刊,6(1),73-92。
    連結:
  2. 甘美玲(2006)。知覺價格、知覺品質與知覺價值對購買意願之關係研究-以消費者購買數位內容產品為實證。國立成功大學未出版碩士論文,台南市。
    連結:
  3. 李奇勳(2007)。知覺風險對消費者知覺價值之形成所扮演角色的探討。管理學報,24(2),167-190。
    連結:
  4. 吳長生(2011)。外部線索對私有品牌知覺品質與知覺風險之影響。行銷評論,8(3),385-404。
    連結:
  5. 何宥緯(2011)。服務品質、知覺價值與顧客滿意度、顧客忠誠度之關聯性研究。國立政治大學未出版碩士論文,台北市。
    連結:
  6. 林素吟(2007)。影響消費者購買意願的外部線索策略之研究。行銷評論,4(1),103-126。
    連結:
  7. 張寧、汪明生、黃國忠(2011)。交通案例與廢棄伍清理案例之量刑因素資訊整合實驗:以犯後態度與犯罪所生之所害為例。管理學報,28(6),565-577。
    連結:
  8. 黃于恬、汪明生(2012)。以公平衡量探討台灣社會階層之資訊整合實驗。高雄師大學報:教育與社會科學類,33,61-79。
    連結:
  9. 楊仁壽、俞慧芸、李怡穎、李瑞敏(2010)。情緒浸染之資訊整合行爲:理論建構與實證。臺大管理論叢,20(2),97-133。
    連結:
  10. 陳正料、汪明生、陳建寧(2006)。多元社會下政策績效公平衡量之資訊整合研究。公共行政學報,20,69-128。
    連結:
  11. 陳厚耕(2013)。乳品製造業基本資料。台灣經濟研究院產經資料庫(代碼:20574)。http://tie.tier.org.tw/db/content/index.asp?sid=0E121579713243033029&keyword=%a8%c5%ab%7e%b7%7e。2014年6月20日。
    連結:
  12. Anderson, N. H. (1965). Averaging Versus Adding As A Stimulus Combination Rule In Impression Formation. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 70(4), 394-400.
    連結:
  13. Anderson, N. H. (2005). Unified Social Cognitio. NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associate.
    連結:
  14. Bettman, J. R., Capon, N., & Lutz, R. J. (1975). Multiattribute Measurement Models and Multiattribute Attitude Theory: A Test of Construct Validity. Journal of Consumer Research, 1(4), 1-15.
    連結:
  15. Calder, B. J., Phillips, L. W., & Tybout, A. M. (1982). The Concept of External Validity. Journal of Consumer Research, 9(3), 240-244.
    連結:
  16. Cohen, J. B., Miniard, P. W., & Dickson, P. R. (1980). Information Integration: An Information Processing Perspective. Advances in Consumer Research,7, 161-170.
    連結:
  17. Dodds, W. B., & Monroe, K. B. (1985). The Effect of Brand and Price Information on Subjective Product Evaluation. Advances in Consumer Research, 12, 85-90.
    連結:
  18. Dodds, W. B., Monroe, K. B., & Grewal, D. (1991). Effects of Price, Brand, and Store Information on Buyers’ Product Evaluation. Journal of Marketing Research, 28(3), 307-319.
    連結:
  19. Ferber, R. (1977). Research by Convenience. Journal of Consumer Research, 4(1), 57-58.
    連結:
  20. Hammond, K. R., McClelland, G. H., & Mumpower, J. (1980). Human Judgment and Decision Making: Theories, Methods, and Procedures. New York, NY: Praeger.
    連結:
  21. Kaplan, M. F., & Miller, L. E. (1978). Reducing the Effects of Juror Bias. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 36(12), 1443-1455.
    連結:
  22. Kotler, P. (2003). Marketing Management. Prentice Hall, USA.
    連結:
  23. Levin, I. P., Louviere, J. J., Schepanski, A. A. (1983). External Validity Tests of Laboratory Studies of Information Integration. Organizational Behaviour and Human Performance, 31(2), 173-193.
    連結:
  24. Louviere, J. J., & Meyer, R. J. (1981). A Composite Attitude-Behavior Model of Traveler Decision Making. Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, 15(6), 411-420.
    連結:
  25. Lynch, J. G. (1982). On the External Validity of Experiments in Consumer Research. Journal of Consumer Research, 9(3), 225-239.
    連結:
  26. Norman, K. L. (1977). Attributes in Bus Transportation: Importance Depends on Trip Purpose. Journal of Applied Psychology, 62(2), 164-170.
    連結:
  27. Norman, K. L., & Louviere, J. J. (1978). Integration of Attributes in Bus Transportation: Two Modeling Approaches. Journal of Applied Psychology, 59(6), 753-758.
    連結:
  28. Olson, J. C. & Jacoby, J. (1972). Cue Utilization in the Quality Perception Process. in Proceedings of the Third Annual Conference of the Association for Consumer Research. M. Venkatesan (eds.), College Park, MD: Association for Consumer Research, 167-179.
    連結:
  29. Parasuraman, A., & Grewal, D. (2000). The Impact of Technology on the Quality-Value-Loyalty Chain: A Research Agenda. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 28(1), 168-174.
    連結:
  30. Smead, R. J., Wilcox, J. B., & Wilkes, R. E. (1981). How Valid Are Product Descriptions and Protocols in Choice Experiments? Journal of Consumer Research, 8(1), 37-42.
    連結:
  31. Taylor, S., & Todd, P. (1995). An Integrated Model of Waste Management Behavior: A Test of Household Recycling and Composting Intentions. Environment and Behavior, 27(5), 603-630.
    連結:
  32. Thaler, R. (1985). Mental Accounting and Consumer Choice. Marketing Science, 4(3), 199-244.
    連結:
  33. Troutman, C. M., & Shanteau, J. (1976). Do Consumers Evaluate Products By Adding or Averaging Attribute Information. Journal of Consumer Research, 3(2), 101-106.
    連結:
  34. Zeithaml, V. A. (1988). Consumer Perceptions of Price, Quality and Value: A Means-End Model and Synthesis of Evidence. Journal of Marketing, 52(3), 2-22.
    連結:
  35. 吳淑鶯、彭康達(2010)。消費者對航空公司的品牌知曉、認知品質與知覺價值在品牌態度及購買意願上之影響。中華管理評論,13(2),1-17。
  36. 汪明生(1992)。環境決策與管理。高雄:復文書局。
  37. 汪明生、張寧(1998)。環境汙染案例與交通過失案例之量刑因素結合。管理學報,15(4),665-682。
  38. 林福榮(2002)。消費者衝動性購買之資訊整合模式研究。高雄第一科技大學行銷與流通管理系未出版碩士論文,高雄市。
  39. 孫偉哲(2007)。高雄地區人力資源流動研究-資訊整合模式之應用。國立中山大學未出版碩士論文,高雄市。
  40. 黃淑琴、林雅嵐(2006)。知覺價值評估來源模式之建構。台灣商管與資訊研討會論文集,台北大學。
  41. 楊鎮維、蘇子炘(2008)。外部效度在行銷研究之重要性。遠東學報, 25(2),221-278。
  42. 管浩宇(2012)。需求層級理論之認知分析。義守大學碩士論文未出版碩士論文,高雄市。
  43. 陳碧珍(2001)。集體決策中的社會決策基模及社會平均定理。公共事務評論,2(1),183-207。
  44. 蔡璞、蔡青姿(2006)。網路購物在知覺風險模式之建構。國立虎尾科技大學學報,25(3),31-44。
  45. 光泉牧場企業網站(2013)。企業概況。光泉牧場企業網站。取自http://www.kuangchuan.com/。2014年6月20日。
  46. 統一企業網站(2013)。企業簡介。光泉牧場企業網站。取自http://www.uni-president.com.tw/。2014年6月20日。
  47. Anderson, N. H. (1974). Algebraic Models in Perception. in Handbook of Perception, Vol.II, Psychophysical Judgement and Measurement, Edward C Carterette and Morton P. Friedman (eds), New York: Academic Press, 215-298.
  48. Anderson, N. H. (1981). Foundations of Information Integration Theory. New York, NY: Academic Press.
  49. Anderson, N. H. (1982). Methods of Information Integration Theory. New York, NY: Academic press.
  50. Anderson, N. H. (1996). A Functional Theory of Cognition. NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associate.
  51. Cook, T. D., & Campbell, D. T. (1979). Quasi-experimentation: Design and Analysis Issues for Field Setting. Chicago: Rand McNally.
  52. Doyle, M. (1984). New Ways of Measuring Value. Progressive Grocer-Value, Executive Report, 15-19.
  53. Ebbersen, E. B., & Konecni, V. J. (1980). On the External Validity of Decision-Making Research: What Do We Know About Decisions In The Real World. in Cognitive Processes In Choice And Decision Behaviour, Thomas S. Wallsten (ed), Hillsdale, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers, 21-45.
  54. Lanning, M. J., & Michaels E. G. (1988). A Business is a Value System. McKinsey Staff Paper, 41.
  55. Lerman, S. R., & Louviere, J. J. (1978). Using Functional Measurement to Identify the Form of Utility Functions in Travel Demand Models. Transportation Research Record, 673, 78-86.
  56. Levin, I. P., Dueker, K. J., Rufolo, A. M., & Strathman, J. (1981). Strathman, Spatial and Economic Trade offs in Residential Choice. Portland: Center for Urban Studies, Portland State University.
  57. Marshall, R., Lee, K. C., & Sum, J.Y. (1995).Toward the External Validity of the Information Integration Paradigm. Advances in Consumer Research, 22, 78-83.
  58. Meyer, R. J., Levin, I. P., & Louviere, J. J. (1978). Functional Analysis of Mode Choice. Transportation Research Record, 673, 1-7.
  59. Shanteau, J., & Ptacek, C. H. (1983). Role and Implications of Averaging Processes in Advertising. in Advertising and Consumer Psychology, Larry Percy and Arch G. Woodside (eds), Massachusetts: Lexington Books, 149-167.
  60. Shanteau, J. (1984). Functional Measurement Number One Manual for Program FM#1, Manhattan: Kansas State University.
  61. Woodruff, R. B., & Gardial, S. F. (1996). Know Your Customer: New Approaches to Customer Value and Satisfaction, Blackwell Publishers, Cambridge, MA.
Times Cited
  1. 朱家靚(2017)。卡通圖像聯名行銷的視覺吸引力、感知享受、感知價值與產品視覺美感中心性關係之研究。義守大學管理碩博士班學位論文。2017。1-75。