探討高涉入與極端高涉入對偏誤修正效果之差異

Abstract

基於人們有動機持有正確的產品態度，在面對廣告資訊時，將盡可能排除偏誤因子或其他影響因素，以達到態度修正之精準判斷。 在行銷領域中，推敲可能性模型(ELM)時常用來衡量消費者的產品態度，本研究欲探討Kang and Herr於2006年發表文獻中之假說，在ELM與偏誤修正架構下，加入論證充足性作為一干擾變數，代言人作為偏誤因子，透過高與極端高涉入程度以及四種產品論證之操弄，進一步證實高涉入者在產品論證不充足的情況下，會如同Kang and Herr文獻中提及的極端高涉入者，皆以中央路徑處理廣告資訊，並且察覺代言人為無相關的產品核心資訊，視之為偏誤因子並做出偏誤修正行為，得以證實Kang and Herr於2006年文獻假說之矛盾。

In general, people like to hold correct attitude of the product. In order to achieve the goal of subjective correction, people will take effort to process the information about the target product, and remove the bias. In this study, we discuss the argument sufficiency as a moderator under the theory of ELM and bias correction model, and try to explain the inappropriate hypotheses in Kang and Herr’s study in 2006. We set up an endorser as a bias, and manipulate different levels of high involvement, and compare argument quality under different conditions. Kang and Herr’s study mentioned that people only with extremely high involvement can identify issue-irrelevant source as a bias, and make the correction of attitude. In this study, we verify that there is no different with high involvement. The bias correction would be triggered under argument insufficient situation for both high and extremely high involvement individuals.