廣告論點如何影響高涉入消費者之產品態度

Abstract

學生因有感於近年來企業社會責任與企業永續發展等議題受到廣泛關注，而當今許多企業或品牌因渴求其帶來的正面效益，因此，無不爭相往自己的品牌及產品貼上保護環境、成分天然、社會友善的標籤。我們可以看到在實務上，愈來愈多的產品使用近似，甚至完全相同的廣告詞，作為產品核心論點，使得消費者難以透過這些論點判讀出與重要評量標準有關的正確資訊。本研究正是從消費者心理與行為促成機制的角度，整合推敲可能性模型(ELM)，探討企業或品牌提出與善因行銷相關之廣告論點，分析其在不同情境下，如何影響高涉入程度消費者對產品評價的態度。本研究嘗試歸納並提出四種假設的類型，在消費者為高涉入的前提下，探討四種自變數，分別是(1)假設一：廣告訊息中非論點之產品資訊與廣告訊息中之強論點一致/不一致性；(2)假設二：有/沒有中立消費者評論；(3)假設三：高/低客觀知識；(4) 假設四：有/沒有與重要評量標準無關之正向論點，三種干擾變數，分別是(1)假設一：高/低客觀知識；(2)假設二：有/沒有與重要評量標準無關之正向論點；(3)假設四：有/沒有購買時間的壓力，與應變數皆為受測者對產品評價態度之間是否存在差異。本研究共有四個主實驗，使用實驗設計的研究方法，並將主實驗分成九組不同的問卷情境，針對320位受測者進行組間因子的操弄，採用SPSS統計軟體作為分析工具。

在經歷嚴謹的學術研究鞭策，透過文獻探討、問卷設計與統計分析後，研究結果顯示，假設一：H1a-1其假設成立、H1a-2其假設成立、H1a-3其假設不成立、H1a-4其假設成立；假設二：H2a-1其假設不成立、H2a-2其假設成立、H2a-3其假設成立、H2a-4其假設成立；假設三：H3其假設不成立；假設四：H4a-1其假設不成立、H4a-2其假設不成立、H4a-3其假設不成立、H4a-4其假設成立，詳細研究結果請參見第陸章說明。

In recent years, there has been widespread attention towards corporate social responsibility and sustainable development. Many companies seek to capitalize on the positive benefits brought by these initiatives by labeling their brands and products as environmentally friendly, naturally sourced, and socially responsible. In practice, more and more products use similar or even identical advertising slogans as their central arguments, making it difficult for the consumer to process accurate information related to true merit from these arguments. This study integrates the Elaboration Likelihood Model (ELM) to explore, from the perspective of consumer psychology and behavior, how advertisements related to cause-related marketing promoted by companies affect the product evaluation attitudes of high-involvement consumers in different contexts.This study attempts to summarize and propose four types of hypotheses. Under the premise that consumers are highly involved, the four independent variables explored are: (1) Hypothesis One: consistency/inconsistency between non-argument product information and strong arguments in advertising messages; (2) Hypothesis Two: presence/absence of neutral consumer reviews; (3) Hypothesis Three: high/low objective knowledge; (4) Hypothesis Four: presence/absence of positive arguments unrelated to truemerit. The three moderating variables are: (1) Hypothesis One: high/low objective knowledge; (2) Hypothesis Two: presence/absence of positive arguments unrelated to true merit; (3) Hypothesis Four: presence/absence of time pressure for purchasing, and the dependent variable is whether there is a difference in participants' product evaluation attitudes. This study comprises four main experiments, using experimental design methods, divided into nine scenarios, manipulating between-group factors for 320 participants, and using SPSS statistical software for analysis.

After rigorous academic research, through literature review, questionnaire design, and statistical analysis, the research results show the following: Hypothesis One: H1a-1 is supported, H1a-2 is supported, H1a-3 is not supported, H1a-4 is supported; Hypothesis Two: H2a-1 is not supported, H2a-2 is supported, H2a-3 is supported, H2a-4 is supported; Hypothesis Three: H3 is not supported; Hypothesis Four: H4a-1 is not supported, H4a-2 is not supported, H4a-3 is not supported, H4a-4 is supported. For detailed research results, please refer to Chapter 6.