Loading...
|
Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
https://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/48843
|
| Title: | 閱聽人對電視新聞創「議」置入產品訊息接收之研究
A study on audience’s reception of product placement on tv news a study on audience’s reception of product placement on tv news |
| Authors: | 許臻耘
Hsu, Tseng Yun |
| Contributors: | 郭貞
許臻耘
Hsu, Tseng Yun |
| Keywords: | 置入性行銷
訊息論點品質
產品置入型態
產品涉入度
溝通效果
Product Placement
Argument Qualities
Types of Product Placement
Product Involvement
Communication effect |
| Date: | 2009 |
| Issue Date: | 2010-12-08 01:51:36 (UTC+8) |
| Abstract: | 電視新聞置入性行銷雖是新興現象，但在新聞界蔓延已成為普遍現象，成為影響新聞產製的重要力量。電視新聞置入性行銷，以較為迂迴、精心設計，與新聞內容融合一體，使消費者難以區辨到底是新聞，還是為商品廣告的行銷訊息。國內目前研究，多是探討此種行銷方式，對新聞專業與新聞工作者的影響，尚未見對閱聽人接收與影響面向的研究。是故，本研究欲探究閱聽人對於產品置入性新聞之接收評價，在溝通效果中扮演的角色。
本研究以實驗法進行，採取三因子實驗設計，為2(置入型態：顯性/隱性)*2(論點品質：強論點/弱論點)*2(產品涉入度：高涉入/低涉入)*2=8個產品置入策略組合，為避免受試者觀看不同產品的效果差異，故讓每位受試者觀看分別看高低二種產品涉入度的實驗影片，形成4個實驗組別，共邀集185位受測者參與，回收有效問卷164份，有效回收率為88.65%。
研究結果發現，「產品置入型態」對置入性新聞溝通效果未有顯著影響。「訊息論點品質」是影響產品置入性新聞的關鍵因素，對產品置入性新聞之溝通效果影響最為顯著；採取強論點訊息，能引發閱聽人較正向的接收評價，不論是訊息接受度、可信度與資訊性皆有較佳的評價，進而影響消費者對品牌的態度，對訊息的記憶程度亦有相對較佳的表現。閱聽人對「置入性行銷的既存態度」影響閱聽人接收不同論點品質的溝通效果：即置入性行銷持以高既存態度者，暴露於強論點品質之產品置入性新聞，比暴露於弱論點品質時產生更多支持性的想法、較高的記憶效果與較佳的訊息態度。
Although being an emerging phenomenon, the product placement on TV News has spread into an universal phenomenon in the News circles, and become an important force influencing News production. With relatively roundabout and meticulous design, the Product Placement on TV News is well integrated with the News content, making consumers difficult to distinguish it from News and Marketing message of product. Present domestic researches are mainly investigating the impact of such marketing method on journalism and the News workers, but still haven’t focused on the reception and the influence of the audience. Therefore, this study is to investigate the audience’s reception comments on the Product Placemen on TV News and their roles in communication effect.
This study adopts the experimentation of three-factor experimental design, which are 2 Placement Types (prominent/subtle) *2 Argument Qualities (strong /weak) *2 Product involvements (High /Low). A total of 185 participants were invited and all of them were randomized to watch the experimental films, and required to fill out the questionnaires after watching. A total of 164 effective questionnaires were returned, with a valid return rate of 88.65%.
The results of this study show that the “Type of PPL” has no significant impact on the communication effect of the Product Placement on TV News. The “Message Argument Quality” is the key factor influencing the Product Placement on TV News. Using strong argument messages can trigger the audience’s relatively positive reception comments in message acceptability, News credibility and message informativeness and then impact the consumers’ attitudes towards brands. Also, it has relatively better performance on the recall degree towards messages.The audience’s existing attitudes towards the Placement Marketing impact their communication effects in receiving different argument qualities. The Placement Marketing with high existing attitudes will produce more supportive thoughts, higher recall effect and better message attitude when exposed in Product Placement on TV News of strong argument quality than that exposed in product placement news of weak argument quality. |
| Reference: | 一. 中文部份
1. 蔡念中 (1999年11月)。〈提升電視新聞品質－電視社會新聞羶色腥現象之探討〉，《廣播與電視》，14：167-187。
2. 劉美琪、許安琪、漆梅君、于心如等著。(2000)。《當代廣告:概念與操作》。台北：學富文化。
3. 賴其勛譯 (2001)。《消費者行為》。台中：滄海。(原著Peter, J. P. and Olson, J. C.﹝2000﹞Consumer Behavior and Marketing Strategy. 5th ed., Boston, MA: McGraw-Hill)。
4. 丁源宏 (2000)。《不同媒介特性、廣告訴求與產品涉入度對於廣告效果影響之探討-比較平面媒體與網際網路》。國立中山大學傳播管理研究所碩士論文。
5. 馬岳琳 (2000)。《解讀報紙消費新聞的產製過程：台灣地區中文報紙消費版的質化研究初探》。輔仁大學大眾傳播研究所碩士論文。
7. 黃君慧、辛一力、張哲綱、潘佳玟譯 (2002)。《消費者行為概論》。台北：培生教育。(原著Mowen, J. C. and Minor, M. S. ﹝2001﹞Consumenr Behavior:A Framwork. 1st ed., New Jersey: Prentice-Hall Inc)。
8. 徐詩思譯 (2003)。《NO LOGO》。台北：時報出版。(原著Klein, N. ﹝2002﹞ No Logo. New York: Picador Press)。
9. 戚栩僊 (2003) 。〈廣告效果展現：資訊處理與意義解釋二模式之初探〉，《廣告學研究》，20：77-95。
10. 翁曉玲 (2003年3月15日) 。〈節目廣告化 政府帶頭偷渡〉，《聯合報》，第二版。
11. 林敬殷 (2003年3月11日)。<置入行銷>，之影響》。《聯合報》，第二版。
12. 葉日武譯 (2004)。《消費者行為：建立行銷策略》。台北：前程企管。(原著Hawkins, D. I., Roger, J. B.and Kenneth A. C.﹝2004﹞Consumer Behavior, Buildig Marketing Strategy. 9th ed., New York: McGraw-Hill)。
13. 王殊琇 (2004)。《新聞專業與商業利益的衝突與妥協 - 以自由時報消費版新聞為例》。世新大學傳播研究所碩士論文。
14. 江定宇、盧邦祥、陳至芸等譯 (2004)。《消費者心理學》。新加坡：亞洲湯姆生國際。(原著Foxall, G., Goldsmith, R. and Brown S. ﹝1998﹞Consumner Psychology for Marketing. 2nd ed., London: Thompson Learning)。
15. 潘中道、郭俊賢譯 (2005)。《行為科學統計學》。台北：雙葉書廊。(原著Pagan, R. R. ﹝2003﹞Understanding Statistics in the Behavioral Sciences. 7th ed., London: Thompson Learning)。
16. 曹君逸 (2005)。《雜誌置入式行銷效果研究：閱聽人涉入度和置入情境適切性之探討》。世新大學傳播研究所碩士論文。
17. 王毓莉 (2005)。〈政府運用「置入性行銷」從事菸害防制工作之初探性研究〉，《中華傳播學刊》，8：115-159。
18. 徐振興、黃甄玉 (2005)。〈產品訊息疑似置入電視偶像劇之研究〉，《中華傳播學刊》，8：65-114。
19. 徐振興 (2005)。〈媒體內容或是廣告? 置入性行銷之探討〉，《廣告學研究》， 23：151-155。
20. 許安琪 (2005)。〈置入？植入？製入？智入？從多元面向觀點檢視置入性行銷〉，《中華傳播學刊》，8：161-178。
21. 陳炳宏 (2005)。〈探討廣告商介入電視新聞產製之新聞廣告化現象：兼論罝入性行銷與新聞專業自主〉，《中華傳播學刊》，8：209-246。
22. 蔡樹培 (2005)。〈電視新聞罝入性行銷：行銷視野之探討〉，《中華傳播學刊》，8：3-15。
23. 劉蕙苓 (2005)。〈新聞置入性行銷的危機〉，《中華傳播學刊》，8：179-207。
24. 林照真 (2005)。〈「置入性行銷」：新聞與廣告倫理的雙重崩壞〉，《中華傳播學刊》，8：27-40。
25. 黃國師 (2005)。 〈「置入性行銷」是電視媒體的甜點還是雞肋?〉。《中華傳播
26. 蔡季綾 (2005)。《產品置入型態與置入效果、品牌態度間關係之研究－以產品涉入度與年齡為干擾變數》。國立成功大學國際企業研究所碩士論文。
27. 王泰俐 (2005)。〈電視新聞感官主義對閱聽人接收新聞的影響〉，《新聞學研究》，86：91-133。
28. 袁千雯 (2006)。《時尚消費、名人效應的閱聽人接收分析》。國立台灣大學新聞研究所碩士論文。
29. 周瓊惠 (2006)。《新聞專業與置入性行銷-記者的心理調適》。台灣大學新聞研究所碩士論文。
30. 羅文輝、劉蕙苓 (2006)。〈置入性行銷對新聞記者的影響〉，《新聞學研究》，89：81-125。
31. 翁淳宏 (2007)。《廣播廣告說服效果研究-以推敲可能性模式(ELM)分析》。中山大學傳播管理研究所碩士論文。
32. 動腦雜誌編輯部 (2006)。〈「置入性行銷」行不行?〉。《動腦雜誌》，367：38-43。
33. 鄭自隆 (2008)。《電視置入-型式、效果與倫理》。台北：正中書局。
34. 蘇蘅、王泰俐 (2008)。《電視新興現象與社會影響-電視新聞商業置入訊息的接收與影響》，(國科會專題研究計畫成果報告，NSC 95-2412-H-004-018-KGS)。台北：政治大學新聞學系。
35. 蘇蘅、王泰俐 (2009)。〈電視新聞商業置入廠商身份揭露、產品類型以及置入策略對新聞可信度的影響〉，《廣告學研究》，32: 27-53。
36. 劉蕙苓 (2009)。〈習以為常? 置入性行銷對電視新聞常規的影響〉，《2009中華傳播學會年會論文》。台北：玄奘大學。
二. 英文部份
37. Ajzen, I. & Fishbein, M.(1981). Acceptance Yielding and Impact. In Petty, R. E., Strom, T. M. and Brock, T. C.(Eds.), Cognitive Process in Persuasion (pp. 339-359). Mahwah, NJ: LEA.
38. Balasubramanian, S. K. (1991). Beyond advertising and publicity: The domain of hybrid messages, Report No. 91-131. Cambridge, MA: Marketing Science Institute.
39. Balausbramanan, S. K. (1994). Beyond advertising and publicity: Hybrid messages and public policy issues. Journal of Advertising, 23, 29-46.
40. Balausbramanan, S. K., Karrh, J. A. and Patwardhan, H.(2006). Audience Response to Product Placements: An Integrantive Framwork and Future Research Agenda. Journal of Advertising, 35(3), 115-141.
41. Babin, L. A. and Carder, S. T.(1996a). Viewers’ Recognition of Brnads placed within a film. International Journal of Advertising, 15, 140-151.
42. Babin, L. A. and Carder, S. T.(1996b). Advertising via the box office: Is product
43. Belch, E. G.. (1981). An Examination of Comparatove and Noncomparative television commercial: The effects of Clain variation and recepton on Cognitive reponse and message accepltance. Journal of Marketing Research, 18, 333-349.
44. Belch, E. G. (1982). The Effects of Commerical Reptiition on Cognitive Response and Message Acceptance. Journal of Consumer Research, 9, 56-65.
45. Blackwell, R. D., Miniard, P. W. and Engel, J. F.(2001). Consumer Behavior, 9th ed., Orlando, FL: Harcourt College Publishers.
46. Cacioppo, J. T., Petty, R. E. & Sidera, J.(1982). The Effects of Salient Self-Schema on the Evaluation of Proattitudinal Editorials: Top-down versus bottom-up message processing. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 18, 324-338.
47. d’Astous A. and Séguin, N.(1999). Consumer reactions to product placement strategies in Television sponsorship. European Journal of Marketing, 33, 896-910.
48. d’Astous, A. and Chartier, F.(2000). A study of affecting consumer evaluations and memory of product placement in movies. Journal of Curent Issues and Research in Advertising, 22, 31-40.
49. Engel, J. F., Kollat, D. T. & Blackwell, R. D.(1990). Consumer Behavior, 3rd ed., (pp. 60). Hinsdale, IL: The Dryden Press.
50. Fishbein, M. and Ajzen, I.(1974). Attitudes towards objects as predictors of single and multiple behavioral criteria. Psychological Review, 81, 59-74.
51. Fishbein, M. and Ajzen, I.(1975). Belief, Attitude, Intention and Behavior: An Introduction to Theory and Research Reading (pp. 453). MA: Addison-Wesley.
52. Fishbein, M. and Ajzen, I.(1980). Understanding Attitudes and Predicting Social Behavior. Enggwood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
53. Friestad Marian and Peter Wright (1994). The Persuasion Knowledge Model: How People Cope with Persuasion Attempts. Journal of Consumer Research, 21(June), 1-31.
54. Gould, S. J., Gupta, P. B., and Crabner-Krauter S.(2000). Product placement in movies: A cross-cultural analysis of Austrian, French and American consumers’ attitudes toward this energin, international promotion medium. Journal of Advertising, 29(4), 41-58.
55. Gupta, P. B. and Gould, S. J.(1997). Consumers’ perception of the ethics and acceptability of product placements in movies: Product category and individual differences. Journal of Current Issues and Research in Advertising, 19(1), 37-50.
56. Gupta, P. B. and Lord, K. R.(1998). Product Placement in Movies: The Effect of Prominence and Mode on Audience Recall. Journal of Cirrent Issues and Research in Advertising, 20(1), 47-49.
57. Gupta, P. B., Balasubramanian, S. K., & Klassen, M. L.(2000). Viewers` Evaluations of Product Placements in Movies: Public Policy Issues and Managerial Implications. Journal of Current Issues and Research in Advertising, 22(2), 41-52.
58. Hawkins, D. I., Best, R. J. and Coney, K. A.(2001). Consumer Behavior: Building Marketing Strategy, 8th ed., The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc.
59. Howard, J. A. and Sheth, J. N.(1969). The Theory of Buyer Behavior. NY: John Willey and Sons Inc.
60. Karrh, J. A.(1994). Effects of brand placements in motion pictures. In Karen Whitehill King (Ed.), Proceeding of the 1994 Conference of American Acadmy of Advertising (pp. 90-96). Athens, GA: The University of Georiga.
61. Karrh, J. A. (1995). Brand placements in feature film: the practitioners’ view. In Madden, C. S.(Ed.), Proceeding of the 1995 Conference of American Academy of Advertising (pp. 182-188). Waco, TX: American Academy of Advertising.
62. Karrh, J. A. (1998). Brand placement: A review. Journal of Current Issues and Research in Advertising, 20(Fall), 31-49.
63. Karrh, J. A., Frith, K. T., and Callison, C.(2001). Audience attitudes towards Brand (product) placement: Singapore and United States. International Journal of Advertising, 20, 3-24.
64. Kolter, P and Armstrong, G.. (2003). Principles of Marketing, 10th ed., (pp. 170-180).NJ: Prentice-Hall, Inc.
65. Krasnoff, R. (1986). Focus on product placement: from a simple idea to a complex marketing tool. The Hollywood Reporter, 292(June 10), 8-23
66. Krugman, Herbert E. (1965). The impact of television advertising, learning without involvement. Public Opinion Quarterly, 29(Fall), 349-356.
67. Lavidge, R. J. and Steiner, G. A.(1961). A Model for Predictive Measurements of Advertising Effectiveness. Journal of Marketing, 25(October), 59-62.
68. Lord, K. R., Lee, Myung-Soo, Sauer, P. L.(1995). The Combined Influence Hypothesis: Central and Peripheral Antecedents of Attitude toward the Ad. Journal of Advertising, 24(Spring), 73-85.
69. Lutz, R. J., MacKenzie, S. B. and Belch, G. E.(1983). Attitude toward the Ad as a Mediatior of Advertising Effetiveness: Determine and Consequences. Advences in Consumer Reserch, 10, 532-539.
70. Lutz, R. J. (1985). Affective and cognitive antecedents of attitude toward the ad: A conceptual framework”, In Alwitt, L. F. and Mitchell, A. A. (Eds.), Psychological processes and advertising effects: Theory, research, and application (pp. 45-63). Hillsdale, NJ: LEA.
71. Mackenzie, S. B., Lutz, R. J., and Belch, G. E.(1986). The role of attitude toward the ad as a mediator of advertising effectiveness: A test of competing explanations. Journal of Marketing Researc, 23(2), 130-143.
72. MacKenzie, S. B. and Lutz, R. J.(1989). An empirical examination of affective and cognitive antecedents of attitude toward the ad. Journal of Marketing, 53(2), 48-65.
73. Menon, A. M., Deshpande, A. D., Zinkhan, G. M. and Perri III, M.(2004). A Model Assessing the Effectiveness of Direct-To-Consumer Advertising: Integration of Concepts and Measures from Marketing and Healthcare. International Journal of Advertising, 23(1), 91-118.
74. Mitchell, A. A. and Olson, J.C.(1981). Are product attribute beliefs the only mediator of advertising effects on brand attitude? Journal of Marketing Research, 18, 318-332.
75. Muehling, Darrel D. and Laczniak, Russell N.(1988). Advertising’s immediate and delayed influence on brand attitude: Considations across message- involvement levels. Journal of Advertising, 17(4), 23-34.
76. Neer, K. (2004). How product placement works. Retrieved November 20, 2005, from http://money.howstuffworks.com/product-placement.htm/ printable
77. Percy, L. (2006). Are product placement effective? International Journal of Advertising, 25(1), 112-114.
78. Petty, R. E. and Cacioppo, J. T.(1981a). Attitude and Persuasion：Classic and Contemporary Approaches, Iowa: Wm. C. Brown.
79. Petty, R. E., Cacioppo, J. T. amd Goldman, R. (1981b). Personal involvement as a determinant of argument-based persuasion. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 41(5), 847-855.
80. Petty, R. E. and Cacioppo, J. T.(1981c). Issue Involvement and a Moderator of the Effects on Attitude of Advertising Content and Context. Advences in Consumer Research, 8(2), 20-24.
81. Petty, R. E. and Cacioppo, J. T.(1983a).Central and Peripheral Routes to persuasion: Application to advertising. In Percy, L. (Ed.), Advertising and Consumer Psychology (pp. 3-23). DC: Health and Company.
82. Petty, R. E., Cacioppo, J. T. and Schumann, D. (1983b).Central and Peripheral Routes to Advertising Effectiveness: The Moderating Role of Involvement. Journal of Consumer Research, 14(September), 135-146.
83. Petty, R. E. and Cacioppo, J. T.(1984). Source factors and the Elaboration Likelihood model of persuasion. Advances in Consumer Research, 11, 668-672.
84. Petty, R. E. and Cacioppo, J. T.(1986a). Communication and Persuasion: Central and Peripheral Routes to Attitude Change. NY: Springer-Verlag.
85. Petty, R.E. and Cacioppo, J.T. (1986b). The Elaboration Likelihood Model of persuasion. In Berkowitz, L. (Ed.), Advances in Experimental Social Psychology. SanDiego, CA: Academic Press.
86. Petty, R.E., and Cacioppo, J.T.(1990). Involvement and Persuasion: Tradition versus Integration. Psychological Bulletin, 107, 367-374.
87. Petty, R.E., & Cacioppo, J.T.(1996). Attitude and persuasion: Classic and contemporary approaches. Boulder, Colorado: Westview Press, Inc.
88. Richins, M. and Bolch, P.(1986). After the New Wears off: The Temporal Context of Product Involvement. Journal of Consumer Research, 13(September), 280-285.
89. Russell, C. A. (1998). Toward a Framework of Product Placement: Theoretical Promotions. Advences in Consumner Researh, 25, 357-362.
90. Russell, C.A. (2002). Investigation the effectiveness of product placements in Television show: The role of modality and plot connection congruence on brand memory and attitude. Journal of Consumer Research, 29(3), 306-318.
91. Russell, C. A., & Stern, B. B.(2006). Consumers, Characters, And Products: A Balance Model of Sitcom Product Placement Effects. Journal of Advertising, 35(1), 7-21.
92. Scott, L. M. (1994). Images in advertising: The need for a theory of visual rhetoric. Journal of Consumer Research, 21(December), 252-273.
93. Shavitt, S. and Brock, T. C.(1990). Delayed recall of copytest responses: The temporal stability of listed thoughts. Journal of Advertising, 19(4), 6-17.
94. Swasy, L. J. (1985). Examining the Target of Receiver Elaborations︰Rhetorical Question Effects on Source Processing and Persuasion. Journal of Consumer Research, 11, 877-886.
95. Szczepanski, C. M.(2006). General and special interest magazine advertising and the Elaboration Likelihood Model: A comparative content analysis and investigation of the effects of differential route processing excution strategies. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, NY: Department of Communication of Buffalo University. http://sunzi1.lib.hku.hk/ER/detail/hkul/3833962
96. Wells, W. D., Clifford, S. J. and Chen, Q.(2002). Attitude toward the site II: new information. Journal of Advertising Research, 42(2), 33-45.
97. Wenner, L. A. (2004). On the ethics of product placement in media entertainment. In Galician, M.(Ed.), Handbook of product placement in the mass media: New strategies in marketing theory, practice, trends, and ethics (pp. 101-132), 78.
98. Zaichkowsky, Judith Lynne (1994). The personal involvement inventory: Reduction, revision, and application to advertising. Journalof Advertising, 23, 4.
99. Zaichkowsky, Judith Lynne (1996). Attitude Important and Rdistance to Persuasion: It’s not just the thought that conuts. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70, 931-994. |
| Description: | 碩士
國立政治大學
傳播學院碩士在職專班
93941010
98 |
| Source URI: | http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0093941010 |
| Data Type: | thesis |
| Appears in Collections: | [傳播學院碩士在職專班] 學位論文
|
Files in This Item:
There are no files associated with this item.
|
All items in 政大典藏 are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved.
|
