1. NCCU Academic Hub
  2. Publications
  3. College of Communication
  4. Theses
  5. Item

Publications-Theses

Article View/Open

Publication Export

Google ScholarTM

NCCU Library

Citation Infomation

Related Publications in TAIR

題名 視覺誇飾法的廣告效果─從產品利益結合與否來探討
The Effectiveness of Visual Hyperbole in Advertising
作者 楊雅嵐
貢獻者 張卿卿
楊雅嵐
關鍵詞 視覺修辭
視覺誇飾
產品利益
資訊性
理解度
廣告態度
品牌態度
品牌回憶度
日期 2012
上傳時間 13-Jul-2015 11:03:52 (UTC+8)
摘要 視覺誇飾（visual hyperbole）廣告在實務上相當常見，這樣的廣告表現方式，又可被分為兩種，一種是結合產品利益表現的視覺誇飾廣告，另一種則為未結合產品利益表現的視覺誇飾廣告。然而，這樣的不同，對於品牌態度，以及品牌回憶度又會有什麼不一樣的影響呢？
      本研究採用實驗法，檢視了三種視覺誇飾廣告策略：「有使用視覺誇飾並結合產品利益的廣告」、「有使用視覺誇飾但無結合產品利益的廣告」，以及「沒有使用視覺誇飾僅表現產品利益的廣告」，以釐清何種策略會有最好的廣告效果。此外，更聚焦於探究「視覺誇飾有無結合產品利益」之差異，為本研究的重點項目。
      研究結果指出，視覺誇飾有無結合產品利益來做表現，會影響到廣告的「資訊性」，並且也會影響到閱聽眾對廣告的「理解度」。有結合產品利益的視覺誇飾廣告，可能因為可以提供產品相關訊息，所以帶來較高的資訊性；有結合產品利益的視覺誇飾廣告，也可能因為表現明確的「產品利益」，對於解讀廣告有提示的作用在，而有較好的理解度。但可惜的是，「資訊性」與「理解度」的中介效果並不成立，因此無法證明是影響「品牌態度」與「品牌回憶度」的重要因素，且由於操弄檢定部分未符合預期結果，故在詮釋上應有所保留。
      另外，在「有無使用視覺誇飾廣告」比較「廣告態度」的差異，有使用視覺誇飾的廣告並未能如預期獲得較好的反應，與先前學者研究相反，其可能的原因為實驗製作物的諸多限制，導致過度刻意安排，引起負面的感受。
參考文獻 一、中文部分
     李培蘭（2003）。《幽默廣告機制與形式分類之初探─以1997～2001年時報廣告獎平面類作品為例》，國立政治大學廣告研究所碩士論文。
     李美華等譯，Earl Babbie著（1998）。《社會科學研究方法》。台北：時英。
     吳岳剛（2008）。〈廣告創意、處理經驗與溝通效果〉，《廣告學研究》，30：63-84。
     林恒如（2005）。《產品置入對品牌回憶度、品牌辨識度、品牌態度及購買意願之影響─以台灣電視台偶像劇為例》，國立台灣大學國際企業學研究所碩士論文。
     蕭颯、王文欽、徐智策合著（1999）。《幽默心理分析》，吳氏圖書有限公司出版。
     
     二、英文部分
     Colston, H., & Keller, S. (1998). You`ll never believe this: Irony and hyperbole in expressing surprise. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 27, 499-513.
     Catanescu, C., & Tom, G. (2001). Types of humor in television and magazine advertising. Review of Business. 22, 92-95.
     Chang, C. (2007). The relative effectiveness of comparative and noncomparative advertising: Evidence for gender differences in information-processing strategies. Journal of Advertising, 36(1), 21-35.
     Callister, M. A., & Stern, L. A. (2007). The Role of Visual Hyperbole in Advertising Effectiveness. Journal of Current Issues & Research in Advertising, 29(2), 1-15
     Duncan, C. P. (1979). Humor in advertising: A behavioral perspective. Journal of Academy of Marketing Science, 7(4), 285-306.
     Ducoffe, R. H. (1995). How consumers assess the value of advertising. Journal of Current Issues and Research in Advertising, 17(1), 1-18.
     Ducoffe, R. H. (1996). Advertising value and advertising on the web. Journal of
      Advertising Research, 3(5), 21-35.
     Fyock, J. (2011). The persuasiveness of visual hyperbole. Unpublished master’s thesis, The Pennsylvania State University.
     Gkiouzepas, L., & Hogg, M. (2011). Articulating a new framework for visual metaphors in advertising. Journal of Advertising, 40(1), 103-120.
     Graeff, T. R., & Olson, J. C. (1994). Consumer inference as part of product comprehension. In C. T. Allen & D. R. John (Eds.), Advances in Consumer Research (pp. 201-207). Association for Consumer Research.
     Jaffe, L. J., Berger, P.D., & Jamieson, L.F. (1992). Comprehension, positioning, segmentation and purchase probability. International Journal of Management Science, 20(1), 51-57.
     Keller, K. L. (1993). Conceptualizing, measuring, and managing customer-based brand equity. Journal of Marketing, 57(1), 1-22.
     Lutz, R. J. (1985). Affective and cognitive antecedent of attitude toward the ad: A conceptual framework. In, L. Alwitt & A. Mitchell (Eds.), Psychological process and advertising effects. (pp.45-65). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
     Laskey, H. A., Day, E., & Crask, M. R. (1989). Typology of main message strategies
     for television commercials. Journal of Advertising, 18(1), 36-41.
     Mitchell, A. A., & Olson, J. C. (1981). Are product a beliefs the only mediator of advertising effects on brand attitude? Journal of Marketing Research, 18(3), 318-332.
     Madden T. J., & Weinberger M. G. (1984). Humor in advertising: A practitioner view. Journal of Advertising Research, 24(4), 23-29.
     MacInnis, D. J., & Jaworski, B. J. (1989). Information processing from advertisements: Toward an integrative framework. Journal of Marketing, 55(4), 1-23.
     Mackenzie, S. B., & Spreng, R. A. (1992). How does motivation moderate the impact of central & peripheral processing on brand attitudes & intentions? Journal of Consumer Research, 18(4), 519–529.
     McQuarrie, E. F., & Mick, D. G. (1992). On resonance: A critical pluralistic inquiry into advertising rhetoric. Journal of Consumer Research, 19(3), 180-197.
     Mick, D. G. (1992). Levels of subjective comprehension in advertising processing and their relations to ad perceptions, attitude, and mmemory. Journal of Consumer Research, 18 (4), 411-424.
     McQuarrie, E. F., & Mick, D. G. (1996). Figures of rhetoric in advertising language. Journal of Consumer Research, 22(3), 424-437
     McQuarrie, E. F., & Mick, D. G. (1999). Visual rhetoric in advertising: Text interpretive, experimental and reader-response analyses. Journal of Consumer Research, 26(6), 37-54.
     Meyvis, T., & Janiszewski, C. (2002). Consumers` beliefs about product benefits: The effect of obviously irrelevant information. Journal of Consumer Research, 28(3), 618-636.
     Macias, W. (2003). A preliminary structural equation model of comprehension and persuasion of interactive advertising brand web sites. Journal of Interactive Advertising, 3(2), 36-48.
     McQuarrie, E. F., & Mick, D. G. (2003). Visual and verbal rhetorical figures under directed processing versus incidental exposure to advertising. Journal of Consumer Research, 29, 579-587.
     McQuarrie, E. F., & Phillips, B. J. (2005). Indirect persuasion in advertising: how consumers process metaphors presented in pictures and words. Journal of Advertising, 34(2), 7-20.
     Mzoughi, N., & Abdelhak, S. (2011). Impact of visual and verbal rhetoric in advertising on mental imagery and recall. International Journal of Business & Social Science, 2(9), 257-267.
     Puto, C. P., & Wells, W. D. (1984). Informational and transformational advertising: the differential effects of time. In T. C. Kinnear (Ed.), Advances in Consumer Research (pp. 638-643).
     Roberts, R., & Kreuz, R. (1994). Why do people use figurative language. Psychological Science, 5, 159-163.
     Stewart, D. W. (1986). The moderating role of recall, comprehension, and brand differentiation the persuasiveness of television advertising. Journal of Advertising Research, 26(2), 43-47.
     Scott, D., Klein, D. M., & Bryant, J. (1990). Consumer response to humor in advertising: A series of field studies using behavioral observation, Journal of Consumer Research, 16, 498-501.
     Scott, L. (1994). Images in advertising: The need for a theory of visual rhetoric. Journal of Consumer Research, 21, 252-273.
     Smith, R. E., Chen. J., & Yang, X. (2008). The impact of advertising creativity on the hierarchy of effects. Journal of Advertising, 37(4), 47–61.
     Tom, G., & Eves, A. (1999). The use of rhetorical devices in advertising. Journal of Consumer Research, 39(4), 39-43.
     Toncar, M. & Munch, J. (2001). Consumer responses to tropes in print advertising. Journal of Advertising, 30(1), 55-65.
描述 碩士
國立政治大學
廣告研究所
100452014
101
資料來源 http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G1004520141
資料類型 thesis
dc.contributor.advisor 張卿卿zh_TW
dc.contributor.author (Authors) 楊雅嵐zh_TW
dc.creator (作者) 楊雅嵐zh_TW
dc.date (日期) 2012en_US
dc.date.accessioned 13-Jul-2015 11:03:52 (UTC+8)-
dc.date.available 13-Jul-2015 11:03:52 (UTC+8)-
dc.date.issued (上傳時間) 13-Jul-2015 11:03:52 (UTC+8)-
dc.identifier (Other Identifiers) G1004520141en_US
dc.identifier.uri (URI) http://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/76399-
dc.description (描述) 碩士zh_TW
dc.description (描述) 國立政治大學zh_TW
dc.description (描述) 廣告研究所zh_TW
dc.description (描述) 100452014zh_TW
dc.description (描述) 101zh_TW
dc.description.abstract (摘要) 視覺誇飾（visual hyperbole）廣告在實務上相當常見，這樣的廣告表現方式，又可被分為兩種，一種是結合產品利益表現的視覺誇飾廣告，另一種則為未結合產品利益表現的視覺誇飾廣告。然而，這樣的不同，對於品牌態度，以及品牌回憶度又會有什麼不一樣的影響呢？
      本研究採用實驗法，檢視了三種視覺誇飾廣告策略：「有使用視覺誇飾並結合產品利益的廣告」、「有使用視覺誇飾但無結合產品利益的廣告」，以及「沒有使用視覺誇飾僅表現產品利益的廣告」，以釐清何種策略會有最好的廣告效果。此外，更聚焦於探究「視覺誇飾有無結合產品利益」之差異，為本研究的重點項目。
      研究結果指出，視覺誇飾有無結合產品利益來做表現，會影響到廣告的「資訊性」，並且也會影響到閱聽眾對廣告的「理解度」。有結合產品利益的視覺誇飾廣告，可能因為可以提供產品相關訊息，所以帶來較高的資訊性；有結合產品利益的視覺誇飾廣告，也可能因為表現明確的「產品利益」，對於解讀廣告有提示的作用在，而有較好的理解度。但可惜的是，「資訊性」與「理解度」的中介效果並不成立，因此無法證明是影響「品牌態度」與「品牌回憶度」的重要因素，且由於操弄檢定部分未符合預期結果，故在詮釋上應有所保留。
      另外，在「有無使用視覺誇飾廣告」比較「廣告態度」的差異，有使用視覺誇飾的廣告並未能如預期獲得較好的反應，與先前學者研究相反，其可能的原因為實驗製作物的諸多限制，導致過度刻意安排，引起負面的感受。		zh_TW
dc.description.tableofcontents 第壹章
     緒論.......................................................1
     第一節
     研究背景與動機...........................................1
     第二節
     研究目的.................................................2
     第貳章
     文獻探討...................................................4
     第一節 誇飾（hyperbole / exaggeration）的歸類與定義.................4
     第二節 視覺修辭（visual rhetoric）與視覺誇飾（visual hyperbole）......10
     第三節 視覺誇飾之廣告效果......................................13
     第四節 是否結合產品利益之廣告效果..............................17
     第參章 研究架構..................................................23
     第肆章 研究方法..................................................25
     第一節 研究方法─實驗法........................................25
     第二節 實驗設計................................................25
     第三節 變項定義與測量..........................................27
     第四節 實驗刺激物與前測說明....................................33
     第伍章 研究結果與分析..........................................43
      第一節 實驗受試者..............................................43
      第二節 量表信度................................................44
      第三節 操弄檢定................................................45
      第四節 假設檢定................................................47
     第陸章 結論....................................................60
      第一節 發現與討論..............................................60
      第二節 學術貢獻與實務貢獻......................................64
      第三節 未來研究建議與研究限制..................................66
     參考文獻...........................................................68
     附錄...............................................................73
     附錄一：前測問卷...............................................73
     附錄二：正式施測問卷...........................................74
     
     
     
     表目錄
     表2-1-1：誇張的五種形式.............................................5
     表2-1-2：誇飾定義整理...............................................8
     表2-4-1：「視覺誇飾」與「有無結合產品利益」交互後之廣告類型.........17
     表4-1-1：本研究實驗設計............................................25
     表4-3-1：廣告具備「視覺誇飾」之題項設計.............................28
     表4-3-2：廣告具備「產品利益」之題項設計.............................28
     表4-3-3：廣告資訊性之題項設計......................................29
     表4-3-4：廣告理解度之題項設計......................................30
     表4-3-5：廣告態度之題項設計........................................31
     表4-3-6：品牌態度之題項設計........................................31
     表4-3-7：品牌回憶度之題項設計......................................32
     表4-4-1：前測實驗刺激物選訂標準....................................34
     表4-4-2：前測廣告圖稿..............................................35
     表4-4-3：前測量表題項..............................................37
     表4-4-4：因素分析─「視覺誇飾程度」各題項因素負荷量................38
     表4-4-5：因素分析─「產品利益程度」各題項因素負荷量................38
     表4-4-6：牙膏─版本一(構想1)、版本二，與版本三之比較..............40
     表4-4-7：牙膏─版本一(構想2)、版本二，與版本三之比較..............41
     表4-4-8：正式施測之三版廣告圖稿....................................42
     表5-1-1：實驗受測者樣本分布........................................43
     表5-2-1：正式實驗 量表信度結果總覽.................................44
     表5-3-1：操弄檢定─「版本一、版本二，與版本三比較」................46
     表5-4-1：主效果檢定：使用視覺誇飾否與對廣告態度的主效果............49
     表5-4-2：使用視覺誇飾與否與廣告理解度..............................50
     表5-4-3：品牌回憶度(未提示回憶度)版本比較..........................50
     表5-4-4：品牌回憶度(品牌再認)版本比較..............................51
     表5-4-5：結合產品利益與否的視覺誇飾廣告與廣告資訊性................53
     表5-4-6：結合產品利益與否的視覺誇飾廣告與品牌態度..................53
     表5-4-7：結合品利益與否與廣告理解度................................55
     表5-4-8：品牌回憶度(未提示回憶度)兩版廣告比較......................55
     表5-4-9：品牌回憶度(品牌再認)兩版廣告比較..........................56
     表5-4-10：假設檢定總表.............................................57
     圖目錄
     圖3-1-1：架構一：有無使用視覺誇飾之比較.............................24
     圖3-1-2：架構二：有無結合產品利益之比較............................24
     圖4-2-1：實驗流程圖................................................26
     圖5-4-1：架構一：有無使用視覺誇飾之比較............................47
     圖5-4-2：主效果檢定：廣告態度......................................48
     圖5-4-3：中介效果檢定：廣告理解度(有無使用視覺誇飾之比較) .........49
     圖5-4-4：架構二：有無結合產品利益之比較............................52
     圖5-4-5：中介效果檢定：廣告理解度(有無結合產品利益之比較) .........54		zh_TW
dc.source.uri (資料來源) http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G1004520141en_US
dc.subject (關鍵詞) 視覺修辭zh_TW
dc.subject (關鍵詞) 視覺誇飾zh_TW
dc.subject (關鍵詞) 產品利益zh_TW
dc.subject (關鍵詞) 資訊性zh_TW
dc.subject (關鍵詞) 理解度zh_TW
dc.subject (關鍵詞) 廣告態度zh_TW
dc.subject (關鍵詞) 品牌態度zh_TW
dc.subject (關鍵詞) 品牌回憶度zh_TW
dc.title (題名) 視覺誇飾法的廣告效果─從產品利益結合與否來探討zh_TW
dc.title (題名) The Effectiveness of Visual Hyperbole in Advertisingen_US
dc.type (資料類型) thesisen
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 一、中文部分
     李培蘭（2003）。《幽默廣告機制與形式分類之初探─以1997～2001年時報廣告獎平面類作品為例》，國立政治大學廣告研究所碩士論文。
     李美華等譯，Earl Babbie著（1998）。《社會科學研究方法》。台北：時英。
     吳岳剛（2008）。〈廣告創意、處理經驗與溝通效果〉，《廣告學研究》，30：63-84。
     林恒如（2005）。《產品置入對品牌回憶度、品牌辨識度、品牌態度及購買意願之影響─以台灣電視台偶像劇為例》，國立台灣大學國際企業學研究所碩士論文。
     蕭颯、王文欽、徐智策合著（1999）。《幽默心理分析》，吳氏圖書有限公司出版。
     
     二、英文部分
     Colston, H., & Keller, S. (1998). You`ll never believe this: Irony and hyperbole in expressing surprise. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 27, 499-513.
     Catanescu, C., & Tom, G. (2001). Types of humor in television and magazine advertising. Review of Business. 22, 92-95.
     Chang, C. (2007). The relative effectiveness of comparative and noncomparative advertising: Evidence for gender differences in information-processing strategies. Journal of Advertising, 36(1), 21-35.
     Callister, M. A., & Stern, L. A. (2007). The Role of Visual Hyperbole in Advertising Effectiveness. Journal of Current Issues & Research in Advertising, 29(2), 1-15
     Duncan, C. P. (1979). Humor in advertising: A behavioral perspective. Journal of Academy of Marketing Science, 7(4), 285-306.
     Ducoffe, R. H. (1995). How consumers assess the value of advertising. Journal of Current Issues and Research in Advertising, 17(1), 1-18.
     Ducoffe, R. H. (1996). Advertising value and advertising on the web. Journal of
      Advertising Research, 3(5), 21-35.
     Fyock, J. (2011). The persuasiveness of visual hyperbole. Unpublished master’s thesis, The Pennsylvania State University.
     Gkiouzepas, L., & Hogg, M. (2011). Articulating a new framework for visual metaphors in advertising. Journal of Advertising, 40(1), 103-120.
     Graeff, T. R., & Olson, J. C. (1994). Consumer inference as part of product comprehension. In C. T. Allen & D. R. John (Eds.), Advances in Consumer Research (pp. 201-207). Association for Consumer Research.
     Jaffe, L. J., Berger, P.D., & Jamieson, L.F. (1992). Comprehension, positioning, segmentation and purchase probability. International Journal of Management Science, 20(1), 51-57.
     Keller, K. L. (1993). Conceptualizing, measuring, and managing customer-based brand equity. Journal of Marketing, 57(1), 1-22.
     Lutz, R. J. (1985). Affective and cognitive antecedent of attitude toward the ad: A conceptual framework. In, L. Alwitt & A. Mitchell (Eds.), Psychological process and advertising effects. (pp.45-65). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
     Laskey, H. A., Day, E., & Crask, M. R. (1989). Typology of main message strategies
     for television commercials. Journal of Advertising, 18(1), 36-41.
     Mitchell, A. A., & Olson, J. C. (1981). Are product a beliefs the only mediator of advertising effects on brand attitude? Journal of Marketing Research, 18(3), 318-332.
     Madden T. J., & Weinberger M. G. (1984). Humor in advertising: A practitioner view. Journal of Advertising Research, 24(4), 23-29.
     MacInnis, D. J., & Jaworski, B. J. (1989). Information processing from advertisements: Toward an integrative framework. Journal of Marketing, 55(4), 1-23.
     Mackenzie, S. B., & Spreng, R. A. (1992). How does motivation moderate the impact of central & peripheral processing on brand attitudes & intentions? Journal of Consumer Research, 18(4), 519–529.
     McQuarrie, E. F., & Mick, D. G. (1992). On resonance: A critical pluralistic inquiry into advertising rhetoric. Journal of Consumer Research, 19(3), 180-197.
     Mick, D. G. (1992). Levels of subjective comprehension in advertising processing and their relations to ad perceptions, attitude, and mmemory. Journal of Consumer Research, 18 (4), 411-424.
     McQuarrie, E. F., & Mick, D. G. (1996). Figures of rhetoric in advertising language. Journal of Consumer Research, 22(3), 424-437
     McQuarrie, E. F., & Mick, D. G. (1999). Visual rhetoric in advertising: Text interpretive, experimental and reader-response analyses. Journal of Consumer Research, 26(6), 37-54.
     Meyvis, T., & Janiszewski, C. (2002). Consumers` beliefs about product benefits: The effect of obviously irrelevant information. Journal of Consumer Research, 28(3), 618-636.
     Macias, W. (2003). A preliminary structural equation model of comprehension and persuasion of interactive advertising brand web sites. Journal of Interactive Advertising, 3(2), 36-48.
     McQuarrie, E. F., & Mick, D. G. (2003). Visual and verbal rhetorical figures under directed processing versus incidental exposure to advertising. Journal of Consumer Research, 29, 579-587.
     McQuarrie, E. F., & Phillips, B. J. (2005). Indirect persuasion in advertising: how consumers process metaphors presented in pictures and words. Journal of Advertising, 34(2), 7-20.
     Mzoughi, N., & Abdelhak, S. (2011). Impact of visual and verbal rhetoric in advertising on mental imagery and recall. International Journal of Business & Social Science, 2(9), 257-267.
     Puto, C. P., & Wells, W. D. (1984). Informational and transformational advertising: the differential effects of time. In T. C. Kinnear (Ed.), Advances in Consumer Research (pp. 638-643).
     Roberts, R., & Kreuz, R. (1994). Why do people use figurative language. Psychological Science, 5, 159-163.
     Stewart, D. W. (1986). The moderating role of recall, comprehension, and brand differentiation the persuasiveness of television advertising. Journal of Advertising Research, 26(2), 43-47.
     Scott, D., Klein, D. M., & Bryant, J. (1990). Consumer response to humor in advertising: A series of field studies using behavioral observation, Journal of Consumer Research, 16, 498-501.
     Scott, L. (1994). Images in advertising: The need for a theory of visual rhetoric. Journal of Consumer Research, 21, 252-273.
     Smith, R. E., Chen. J., & Yang, X. (2008). The impact of advertising creativity on the hierarchy of effects. Journal of Advertising, 37(4), 47–61.
     Tom, G., & Eves, A. (1999). The use of rhetorical devices in advertising. Journal of Consumer Research, 39(4), 39-43.
     Toncar, M. & Munch, J. (2001). Consumer responses to tropes in print advertising. Journal of Advertising, 30(1), 55-65.		zh_TW