1. NCCU Academic Hub
  2. 學術產出
  3. 傳播學院
  4. 學位論文
  5. Item

學術產出-學位論文

文章檢視/開啟

書目匯出

Google ScholarTM

政大圖書館

引文資訊

TAIR相關學術產出

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 13-七月-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？\r\n 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。\r\n 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。\r\n 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\r\n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。\r\n李美華等譯，Earl Babbie著（1998）。《社會科學研究方法》。台北：時英。\r\n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。\r\n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。\r\n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。\r\n\r\n二、英文部分\r\nColston, H., & Keller, S. (1998). You`ll never believe this: Irony and hyperbole in expressing surprise. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 27, 499-513.\r\nCatanescu, C., & Tom, G. (2001). Types of humor in television and magazine advertising. Review of Business. 22, 92-95.\r\nChang, 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.\r\nCallister, 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\r\nDuncan, C. P. (1979). Humor in advertising: A behavioral perspective. Journal of Academy of Marketing Science, 7(4), 285-306.\r\nDucoffe, R. H. (1995). How consumers assess the value of advertising. Journal of Current Issues and Research in Advertising, 17(1), 1-18.\r\nDucoffe, R. H. (1996). Advertising value and advertising on the web. Journal of \r\n Advertising Research, 3(5), 21-35.\r\nFyock, J. (2011). The persuasiveness of visual hyperbole. Unpublished master’s thesis, The Pennsylvania State University.\r\nGkiouzepas, L., & Hogg, M. (2011). Articulating a new framework for visual metaphors in advertising. Journal of Advertising, 40(1), 103-120.\r\nGraeff, 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.\r\nJaffe, L. J., Berger, P.D., & Jamieson, L.F. (1992). Comprehension, positioning, segmentation and purchase probability. International Journal of Management Science, 20(1), 51-57.\r\nKeller, K. L. (1993). Conceptualizing, measuring, and managing customer-based brand equity. Journal of Marketing, 57(1), 1-22.\r\nLutz, 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.\r\nLaskey, H. A., Day, E., & Crask, M. R. (1989). Typology of main message strategies \r\nfor television commercials. Journal of Advertising, 18(1), 36-41.\r\nMitchell, 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.\r\nMadden T. J., & Weinberger M. G. (1984). Humor in advertising: A practitioner view. Journal of Advertising Research, 24(4), 23-29.\r\nMacInnis, D. J., & Jaworski, B. J. (1989). Information processing from advertisements: Toward an integrative framework. Journal of Marketing, 55(4), 1-23.\r\nMackenzie, 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.\r\nMcQuarrie, E. F., & Mick, D. G. (1992). On resonance: A critical pluralistic inquiry into advertising rhetoric. Journal of Consumer Research, 19(3), 180-197.\r\nMick, 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.\r\nMcQuarrie, E. F., & Mick, D. G. (1996). Figures of rhetoric in advertising language. Journal of Consumer Research, 22(3), 424-437\r\nMcQuarrie, 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.\r\nMeyvis, T., & Janiszewski, C. (2002). Consumers` beliefs about product benefits: The effect of obviously irrelevant information. Journal of Consumer Research, 28(3), 618-636.\r\nMacias, 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.\r\nMcQuarrie, 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. \r\nMcQuarrie, 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.\r\nMzoughi, 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.\r\nPuto, 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).\r\nRoberts, R., & Kreuz, R. (1994). Why do people use figurative language. Psychological Science, 5, 159-163.\r\nStewart, 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.\r\nScott, 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.\r\nScott, L. (1994). Images in advertising: The need for a theory of visual rhetoric. Journal of Consumer Research, 21, 252-273.\r\nSmith, R. E., Chen. J., & Yang, X. (2008). The impact of advertising creativity on the hierarchy of effects. Journal of Advertising, 37(4), 47–61.\r\nTom, G., & Eves, A. (1999). The use of rhetorical devices in advertising. Journal of Consumer Research, 39(4), 39-43.\r\nToncar, 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 (作者) 楊雅嵐zh_TW
dc.creator (作者) 楊雅嵐zh_TW
dc.date (日期) 2012en_US
dc.date.accessioned 13-七月-2015 11:03:52 (UTC+8)-
dc.date.available 13-七月-2015 11:03:52 (UTC+8)-
dc.date.issued (上傳時間) 13-七月-2015 11:03:52 (UTC+8)-
dc.identifier (其他 識別碼) G1004520141en_US
dc.identifier.uri (URI) https://ah.lib.nccu.edu.tw/item?item_id=85233-
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？\r\n 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。\r\n 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。\r\n 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 \r\n緒論.......................................................1\r\n第一節 \r\n研究背景與動機...........................................1\r\n第二節 \r\n研究目的.................................................2\r\n第貳章 \r\n文獻探討...................................................4\r\n第一節 誇飾（hyperbole / exaggeration）的歸類與定義.................4\r\n第二節 視覺修辭（visual rhetoric）與視覺誇飾（visual hyperbole）......10\r\n第三節 視覺誇飾之廣告效果......................................13\r\n第四節 是否結合產品利益之廣告效果..............................17 \r\n第參章 研究架構..................................................23\r\n第肆章 研究方法..................................................25\r\n第一節 研究方法─實驗法........................................25\r\n第二節 實驗設計................................................25\r\n第三節 變項定義與測量..........................................27\r\n第四節 實驗刺激物與前測說明....................................33\r\n第伍章 研究結果與分析..........................................43\r\n 第一節 實驗受試者..............................................43\r\n 第二節 量表信度................................................44\r\n 第三節 操弄檢定................................................45\r\n 第四節 假設檢定................................................47\r\n第陸章 結論....................................................60\r\n 第一節 發現與討論..............................................60\r\n 第二節 學術貢獻與實務貢獻......................................64\r\n 第三節 未來研究建議與研究限制..................................66\r\n參考文獻...........................................................68\r\n附錄...............................................................73\r\n附錄一：前測問卷...............................................73\r\n附錄二：正式施測問卷...........................................74\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n表目錄\r\n表2-1-1：誇張的五種形式.............................................5\r\n表2-1-2：誇飾定義整理...............................................8\r\n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\r\n表4-1-1：本研究實驗設計............................................25\r\n表4-3-1：廣告具備「視覺誇飾」之題項設計.............................28\r\n表4-3-2：廣告具備「產品利益」之題項設計.............................28\r\n表4-3-3：廣告資訊性之題項設計......................................29\r\n表4-3-4：廣告理解度之題項設計......................................30\r\n表4-3-5：廣告態度之題項設計........................................31\r\n表4-3-6：品牌態度之題項設計........................................31\r\n表4-3-7：品牌回憶度之題項設計......................................32\r\n表4-4-1：前測實驗刺激物選訂標準....................................34\r\n表4-4-2：前測廣告圖稿..............................................35\r\n表4-4-3：前測量表題項..............................................37\r\n表4-4-4：因素分析─「視覺誇飾程度」各題項因素負荷量................38\r\n表4-4-5：因素分析─「產品利益程度」各題項因素負荷量................38\r\n表4-4-6：牙膏─版本一(構想1)、版本二，與版本三之比較..............40\r\n表4-4-7：牙膏─版本一(構想2)、版本二，與版本三之比較..............41\r\n表4-4-8：正式施測之三版廣告圖稿....................................42\r\n表5-1-1：實驗受測者樣本分布........................................43\r\n表5-2-1：正式實驗 量表信度結果總覽.................................44\r\n表5-3-1：操弄檢定─「版本一、版本二，與版本三比較」................46\r\n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\r\n表5-4-2：使用視覺誇飾與否與廣告理解度..............................50\r\n表5-4-3：品牌回憶度(未提示回憶度)版本比較..........................50\r\n表5-4-4：品牌回憶度(品牌再認)版本比較..............................51\r\n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\r\n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\r\n表5-4-7：結合品利益與否與廣告理解度................................55\r\n表5-4-8：品牌回憶度(未提示回憶度)兩版廣告比較......................55\r\n表5-4-9：品牌回憶度(品牌再認)兩版廣告比較..........................56\r\n表5-4-10：假設檢定總表.............................................57\r\n圖目錄\r\n圖3-1-1：架構一：有無使用視覺誇飾之比較.............................24\r\n圖3-1-2：架構二：有無結合產品利益之比較............................24\r\n圖4-2-1：實驗流程圖................................................26\r\n圖5-4-1：架構一：有無使用視覺誇飾之比較............................47\r\n圖5-4-2：主效果檢定：廣告態度......................................48\r\n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\r\n圖5-4-4：架構二：有無結合產品利益之比較............................52\r\n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) .........54zh_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\r\n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。\r\n李美華等譯，Earl Babbie著（1998）。《社會科學研究方法》。台北：時英。\r\n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。\r\n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。\r\n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。\r\n\r\n二、英文部分\r\nColston, H., & Keller, S. (1998). You`ll never believe this: Irony and hyperbole in expressing surprise. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 27, 499-513.\r\nCatanescu, C., & Tom, G. (2001). Types of humor in television and magazine advertising. Review of Business. 22, 92-95.\r\nChang, 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.\r\nCallister, 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\r\nDuncan, C. P. (1979). Humor in advertising: A behavioral perspective. Journal of Academy of Marketing Science, 7(4), 285-306.\r\nDucoffe, R. H. (1995). How consumers assess the value of advertising. Journal of Current Issues and Research in Advertising, 17(1), 1-18.\r\nDucoffe, R. H. (1996). Advertising value and advertising on the web. Journal of \r\n Advertising Research, 3(5), 21-35.\r\nFyock, J. (2011). The persuasiveness of visual hyperbole. Unpublished master’s thesis, The Pennsylvania State University.\r\nGkiouzepas, L., & Hogg, M. (2011). Articulating a new framework for visual metaphors in advertising. Journal of Advertising, 40(1), 103-120.\r\nGraeff, 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.\r\nJaffe, L. J., Berger, P.D., & Jamieson, L.F. (1992). Comprehension, positioning, segmentation and purchase probability. International Journal of Management Science, 20(1), 51-57.\r\nKeller, K. L. (1993). Conceptualizing, measuring, and managing customer-based brand equity. Journal of Marketing, 57(1), 1-22.\r\nLutz, 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.\r\nLaskey, H. A., Day, E., & Crask, M. R. (1989). Typology of main message strategies \r\nfor television commercials. Journal of Advertising, 18(1), 36-41.\r\nMitchell, 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.\r\nMadden T. J., & Weinberger M. G. (1984). Humor in advertising: A practitioner view. Journal of Advertising Research, 24(4), 23-29.\r\nMacInnis, D. J., & Jaworski, B. J. (1989). Information processing from advertisements: Toward an integrative framework. Journal of Marketing, 55(4), 1-23.\r\nMackenzie, 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.\r\nMcQuarrie, E. F., & Mick, D. G. (1992). On resonance: A critical pluralistic inquiry into advertising rhetoric. Journal of Consumer Research, 19(3), 180-197.\r\nMick, 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.\r\nMcQuarrie, E. F., & Mick, D. G. (1996). Figures of rhetoric in advertising language. Journal of Consumer Research, 22(3), 424-437\r\nMcQuarrie, 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.\r\nMeyvis, T., & Janiszewski, C. (2002). Consumers` beliefs about product benefits: The effect of obviously irrelevant information. Journal of Consumer Research, 28(3), 618-636.\r\nMacias, 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.\r\nMcQuarrie, 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. \r\nMcQuarrie, 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.\r\nMzoughi, 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.\r\nPuto, 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).\r\nRoberts, R., & Kreuz, R. (1994). Why do people use figurative language. Psychological Science, 5, 159-163.\r\nStewart, 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.\r\nScott, 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.\r\nScott, L. (1994). Images in advertising: The need for a theory of visual rhetoric. Journal of Consumer Research, 21, 252-273.\r\nSmith, R. E., Chen. J., & Yang, X. (2008). The impact of advertising creativity on the hierarchy of effects. Journal of Advertising, 37(4), 47–61.\r\nTom, G., & Eves, A. (1999). The use of rhetorical devices in advertising. Journal of Consumer Research, 39(4), 39-43.\r\nToncar, M. & Munch, J. (2001). Consumer responses to tropes in print advertising. Journal of Advertising, 30(1), 55-65.zh_TW