Responsive image
博碩士論文 etd-0211121-123227 詳細資訊
Title page for etd-0211121-123227
論文名稱
Title
你準備好被捲入敘事世界了嗎? 探討募款廣告的增益和減損敘事框架對捐款意願之影響
Are you Ready to Get Swept up into the Narrative World? The Impact of Gain and Loss Narrative Frames of Fundraising Advertisements on Donation Intention.
系所名稱
Department
畢業學年期
Year, semester
語文別
Language
學位類別
Degree
頁數
Number of pages
106
研究生
Author
指導教授
Advisor
召集委員
Convenor
口試委員
Advisory Committee
口試日期
Date of Exam
2021-02-19
繳交日期
Date of Submission
2021-03-11
關鍵字
Keywords
捐款意願、內疚感、意向運輸、減損框架、敘事框架、增益框架、敘事説服、故事行銷、募款廣告、非營利組織
intentions to donate, guilt, transportation-imagery model, loss frames, gain frames, narrative frames, narrative persuasion, non-profit organizations, fundraising advertisements, storytelling
統計
Statistics
本論文已被瀏覽 222 次,被下載 92
The thesis/dissertation has been browsed 222 times, has been downloaded 92 times.
中文摘要
為了補足公部門所提供的社會服務,民間往往自發性成立非營利組織,以向企業或社會大眾募款的方式維持組織的運作。然而募款的不穩定性卻容易使非營利組織所提供的服務受影響,以台灣立案之社會福利基金會為例,個數從2011年至2018年成長13%,但募款收入卻減少6%,且多數的募款集中於少數幾家非營利組織,造成資源排擠與分配不均的情況,因此,爭取社會大眾的募款成了組織運作的首要目標。在諸多募款廣告中如何脫穎而出受到閱聽者青睞,瞭解閱聽者的認知和情感如何運作,便是影響募款結果的重要因素。
本研究採用準實驗設計法來驗證六個假設,以意向運輸與內疚感作為中介,探討募款廣告的敘事框架所引發的增益與減損感知對捐款意願的影響。準實驗結果發現:(1)敘事框架所引發的增益感知或減損感知越高,閱聽者經歷的意向運輸程度就越高;(2)增益框架所引發的增益感知可透過意向運輸間接正向顯著影響捐款意願,但減損框架所引發的減損感知則無此效果;(3)敘事框架所引發的減損感知越高,閱聽者所感受的內疚感程度就越高,但增益感知則無此效果;(4)無論閱聽者接收增益或減損敘事框架後,所產生的內疚感程度越高,則捐款意願越高;(5)增益感知和減損感知都可以直接增強捐款意願;且(6)減損框架搭配內疚感的說服效果比增益框架搭配意向運輸的說服效果更好。
本研究的理論貢獻在於提出如何將敘事框架、意向運輸與內疚感等相關概念,應用在非營利組織募款的領域,並指出三者與捐款意願之間的關聯性;而在實務意涵上可提供募款人員如何有效利用敘事框架,操弄閱聽者的增益或減損感知,來提升閱聽者的意向運輸或內疚感,進而提升廣告效果。
Abstract
In order to increase the social services provided by the public sector, non-profit organizations are often established willingly to maintain the operation of the organization by raising funds from enterprises or the general public. However, the instability of fundraising can easily affect the services provided by non-profit organizations. Taking he cases of the legal Social Welfare Foundations in Taiwan as examples, the number has grown by 13% from 2011 to 2018, but the fundraising income has decreased by 6%. Most of the fundraising was gathered only in a few non-profit organizations, resulting in crowding out other smaller organizations and uneven distribution of resources. Therefore, striving for fundraising from the public has become the primary goal of the organization’s operations. Understanding how to stand out among many fundraising advertisements and to make it favored by readers, and how readers’ cognition and emotion work is thus the essence of the fundraising process.
This study uses a quasi-experimental method to verify six hypotheses, and explores the effect of the perception of gain and loss caused by the narrative frames in fundraising advertisements on the intentions to donate, and the effect of transportation-imagery and guilt as an intermediary. In particular, the analytical results reveal the followings: (1) The higher the gain or loss perception caused by the narrative frames, the higher the degree of transport will be experienced by the readers. (2) The gain perception caused by the gain frame influence indirectly and positively the intentions of donation through the transportation. But on the contrary, the loss perception caused by the loss frame has no such effect. (3) The higher the loss perception caused by the narrative frame, the higher is the degree of guilt by the reader. But the gain perception has no such effect. (4) Whether the reader receives the gain or loss perception caused by the narrative frames, as long as the degree of guilt is higher, the intentions of donation will be higher. (5) Both gain and loss perception enhance the intentions of donation directly; and (6) the persuasive effect of loss frame with guilt is better than gain frame in advertising transportation.
The theoretical contribution of this study is to propose how to apply related concepts such as narrative frames, transportation-imagery model and guilt to the field of fundraising by non-profit organizations, and to point out the correlation between the three and the intentions to donate. In addition, they provide fundraisers with how to use the narrative frames to manipulate the audience’s perception of gain or loss effectively, so as to promote the audience’s transportation-imagery or guilt, and thereby enhance the effect of advertising.
目次 Table of Contents
目錄
論文審定書 i
致謝 ii
摘要 iii
Abstract iv
第一章 緒論 1
第一節 研究背景 1
第二節 研究動機 4
第三節 研究問題 7
第四節 研究目的 8
第二章 文獻探討 9
第一節 非營利組織的募款現況 9
第二節 捐款意願 10
第三節 訊息框架 12
第四節 敘事說服與意向運輸模型 14
第五節 內疚感 19
第三章 研究方法 21
第一節 研究架構與假說 21
第二節 樣本與實驗設計 22
第三節 實驗刺激 28
第四節 實驗程序 29
第五節 變數衡量 30
第四章 資料分析 34
第一節 增益感知研究樣本 34
第二節 減損感知研究樣本 42
第三節 假說檢定結果 50
第四節 小結 51
第五章 結論與建議 52
第一節 研究發現 52
第二節 理論貢獻 53
第三節 實務意涵 55
第四節 研究限制與未來研究方向 56
參考文獻 57
中文文獻 57
英文文獻 61
附錄 68
前測問卷─增益 68
前測問卷─減損 74
正式問卷─兒童增益 80
正式問卷─兒童減損 84
正式問卷─長者增益 88
正式問卷─長者減損 92



圖目錄

圖3-1 研究架構圖 21
圖4-1 SPSS PROCESS套件中的模型四(平行中介) 37
圖4-2 SPSS PROCESS套件中的模型四(平行中介)套用圖 38
圖4-3 SPSS PROCESS套件中的模型四(平行中介) 45
圖4-4 SPSS PROCESS套件中的模型四(平行中介)套用圖 46


表目錄

表3-1 增益感知的問項 23
表3-2 減損感知的問項 24
表3-3 文案內容 24
表3-4 敘事框架結語 29
表3-5 增益敘事框架衡量問項 30
表3-6 減損敘事框架衡量問項 31
表3-7 捐款意圖評量題項 31
表3-8 意向運輸程度量表 32
表3-9 內疚感的評量問項 33
表4-1 人口敘述性統計表 34
表4-2 信度分析表 36
表4-3 各變量測量題項之敘述性統計及相關分析表 37
表4-4 增益感知、意向運輸、內疚感、捐款意願直接效果表 38
表4-5 意向運輸和內疚感的間接效果表 39
表4-6 增益感知與中介意向運輸對捐款意願之影響 40
表4-7 增益感知與中介內疚感對捐款意願之影響 41
表4-8 人口敘述性統計表 42
表4-9 信度分析表 43
表4-10 各變量測量題項之敘述性統計及相關分析表 45
表4-11 減損感知、意向運輸、內疚感、捐款意願直接效果表 46
表4-12 意向運輸和內疚感的間接效果表 47
表4-13 減損感知與中介意向運輸對捐款意願之影響 48
表4-14 減損感知與中介內疚感對捐款意願之影響 49
表4-15 實驗假說驗證彙整表 50
參考文獻 References
中文文獻
內政部統計處。107年第12週內政統計通報。取自https://www.moi.gov.tw/
cp.aspx?n=3829
內政部統計處。108年第44週內政統計通報。取自https://www.moi.gov.tw/
cp.aspx?n=3914
王明鳳(2006)。行銷在非營利組織的運用之探討(碩士論文)。取自臺灣博碩士論文系統。(系統編號097FCU05131009)。
田祖武、林怡潁(2015)。品牌態度與品牌依附對於消費者手機品牌選擇的重要性比較-心理抗拒與自我建構的調節角色。 Electronic Commerce Studies,13(4),461-479。
江明修(1994)。非營利組織領導行為之研究。問題與研究,34(10),77-98。
何素秋(2011)。策略性行銷於非營利組織與企業合作勸募之運用。非營利組織管理學刊,11,80-104。
吳岱儒、戴萬平、鄭安娜(2011)。非營利組織捐款行為,品牌認同與購買意願之研究:以喜憨兒烘焙坊為例。資訊與管理科學刊,4(1),69-96。
汪志堅、楊運秀、李明倩(2013)。拒菸廣告的恐懼訴求對年輕族群的說服效果:調控焦點與訊息框架之影響。台灣公共衛生雜誌, 32(1),62-74。
周穆謙、林以容(2015)。癌症篩檢宣導海報之說服效果探討。資訊傳播研究, 6(1),1-27。
姚健劍(2014)。微電影廣告敘事說服效果之研究(碩士論文)。 取自臺灣博碩士論文系統。(系統編號102NTPU0121064)。
洪久雅(2004)。産業化對非營利組織之影響:以我國社福類基金會為例。研考雙月刊,28(2),88-99。
孫仲山、蘇美蓉、施文玲(2005)。慈善捐贈行為之研究分析。臺灣社會工作學刊,3,99-143。
財團法人陽光社會福利基金會官方網站。取自https://www.sunshine.org.tw/about/
index/story
財團法人董氏基金會華文戒菸網。取自https://www.e-quit.org/CustomPage/
HtmlEditorPage.aspx?MId=1067&ML=3
財團法人董氏基金會華文戒菸網。取自https://www.e-quit.org/CustomPage/
HtmlEditorPage.aspx?MId=917&ML=3
張正(2019)。捐款人報告:女勝男,少勝老,純純的善。取自CSR@天下名家專欄。取自https://csr.cw.com.tw/article/40888
張玉成、張瀞文(2014)。抗性產品之廣告與說服效果之間的關係研究。圖文傳播藝術學報,788-820。
粘嘉宇(2008)。責信認知對捐款意向之影響(碩士論文)。取自臺灣博碩士論文系統。(系統編號097FCU05131009)。
陳定銘、陳彥蓉(2014)。從募款策略的理性選擇析探台灣公益勸募制度。法治與公共治理學報,2,1-28。
陳怡伶(2010)。敘事廣告效果之研究(碩士論文)。臺灣大學商學研究所學位論文。取自臺灣博碩士論文系統。(系統編號098NTU05318072)。
陳婉玲(2014)。國際經驗與人格特質對非營利組織捐款意願之影響(碩士論文)。取自臺灣博碩士論文系統。(系統編號102CJU05321005)。
曾榮梅(2016)。慈善社福廣告中之人物圖像的效益研究。設計學報(Journal of Design),21(2),65-82。
黃沛然(2015)。廣告策略對慈善捐款行為之影響探討(碩士論文)。取自臺灣博碩士論文系統。(系統編號103NCU05121068)。
黃凱盈(2013)。溫水裡的青蛙─你我的責任,啟動社會福利機制。台北:商周出版。
黃惠萍(2003)。媒介框架之預設判準效應與閱聽人的政策評估-以核四案為例。新聞學研究,77,67-105。
黃鵬飛、郭倩華(2009)。對非營利組織捐款意願影響因素之研究-以財團法人社會福利基金會爲例。 服務業行銷研討會論文集,562-581。
楊東震、歐文祥、楊淑椀(2018)。宗教體驗行銷活動對遊客滿意度,重遊與捐款意願影響之研究-以台南市噶瑪寺為例。 經營管理學刊,16,39-56。
萬育維(1994)。 影響捐款行為之相關因素探究實證資料的發現與回應。臺灣期刊,32(4),197-217。
達賢、司徒(1999)。 非營利組織的經營管理。台北:天下遠見。
劉玉萱(2016)。對公益廣告捐款意願的影響(碩士論文)。取自臺灣博碩士論文調節焦點,代言人類型與涉入程度系統。(系統編號104FCU05131009)。
劉佳盈(2010)。社會福利非營利組織的關係行銷策略與持續捐贈行為意向之相關性研究─ 以財團法人老五老基金會為例。(碩士論文)。取自臺灣博碩士論文系統。(系統編號098THU00201018)。
劉財龍、郭嘉珍(2016)。量販店價格促銷對購買意願之影響。大仁學報,49,83-107。
衛生福利部統計處。財團法人社會福利慈善事業基金會經費基本資料與經費來源。取自https://dep.mohw.gov.tw/dos/cp-1721-9459-113.html
鄭安妮(2016)。非營利組織故事行銷之研究-以道德情緒作為中介變數(碩士論文)。取自臺灣博碩士論文系統。(系統編號104FGU00375016)。
鄭雲(2017)。公益廣告中感性訴求,同理心及心理模擬的廣告效果研究(碩士論文)。取自臺灣博碩士論文系統。(系統編號105NSYS5691010)。
盧鈺均(2016)。慈善廣告圖片呈現方式對廣告溝通效果的影響(碩士論文)。取自臺灣博碩士論文系統。(系統編號104NCHU5402043)。
蕭新煌(2000)。非營利部門:組織與運作。台北:巨流圖書公司。
魏霞、王德辉(2011)。植入式廣告的说服效果-基於叙事思想的魔力。今傳媒, 2011(8),70-71。
羅郁倫(2017)。情感訴求與產品善因配適度對善因行銷廣告效果之影響(碩士論文)。取自臺灣博碩士論文系統。(系統編號105NCKU5121074)。
鐘文、田寒光(2018)。探究抗性產品之有效說服策略:以免費成人健康檢查為例。行銷科學學報,14(1),1-22。

英文文獻
Appel, M., & Richter, T. (2010). Transportation and need for affect in narrative persuasion: A mediated moderation model. Media Psychology, 13(2), 101-135.
Bagozzi, R. P., & Moore, D. J. (1994). Public service advertisements: Emotions and empathy guide prosocial behavior. Journal of Marketing, 58(1), 56-70.
Basil, D. Z., Ridgway, N. M., & Basil, M. D. (2006). Guilt appeals: The mediating effect of responsibility. Psychology & Marketing, 23(12), 1035-1054.
Basil, D. Z., Ridgway, N. M., & Basil, M. D. (2008). Guilt and giving: A process model of empathy and efficacy. Psychology & Marketing, 25(1), 1-23.
Batson, C. D., & Powell, A. A. (2003). Altruism and prosocial behavior. Handbook of psychology, 463-484.
Batson, C. D., Duncan, B. D., Ackerman, P., Buckley, T., & Birch, K. (1981). Is empathic emotion a source of altruistic motivation. Journal of personality and Social Psychology, 40(2), 290.
Bennett, R. (1998). Shame, guilt & responses to non-profit & public sector ads. International Journal of Advertising, 17(4), 483-499.
Brehm, J. W. (1966). A theory of psychological reactance. New York, NY: Academic Press.
Buda, R., & Zhang, Y. (2000). Consumer product evaluation: the interactive effect of message framing, presentation order, and source credibility. Journal of Product & Brand Management.
Burgoon, M., Alvaro, E., Grandpre, J., & Voulodakis, M. (2002). Revisiting the theory of psychological reactance. The persuasion handbook, 213-232.
Cacioppo, J. T., & Petty, R. E. (1981). Electromyograms as measures of extent and affectivity of information processing. American Psychologist, 36(5), 441.
Charities Aid Foundation. (2018). CAF World Giving Index 2018: a Global View of Giving Trends.
Cameron, L. D., & Leventhal, H. (Eds.). (2003). The self-regulation of health and illness behaviour.
Cao, X. (2016). Framing charitable appeals: The effect of message framing and perceived susceptibility to the negative consequences of inaction on donation intention. International Journal of Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Marketing, 21(1), 3-12.
Carlsmith, J. M., & Gross, A. E. (1969). Some effects of guilt on compliance. Journal of personality and social psychology, 11(3), 232.
Chang, C. T., & Lee, Y. K. (2009). Framing charity advertising: Influences of message framing, image valence, and temporal framing on a charitable appeal 1. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 39(12), 2910-2935.
Chang, C. T., & Lee, Y. K. (2010). Effects of message framing, vividness congruency and statistical framing on responses to charity advertising. International Journal of Advertising, 29(2), 195-220.
Cialdini, R. B., Schaller, M., Houlihan, D., Arps, K., Fultz, J., & Beaman, A. L. (1987). Empathy-based helping: Is it selflessly or selfishly motivated?. Journal of personality and social psychology, 52(4), 749.
Cohen, J. (2001). Defining identification: A theoretical look at the identification of audiences with media characters. Mass communication & society, 4(3), 245-264.
Cotte, J., Coulter, R. A., & Moore, M. (2005). Enhancing or disrupting guilt: The role of ad credibility and perceived manipulative intent. Journal of Business Research, 58(3), 361-368.
Correa, K. A., Stone, B. T., Stikic, M., Johnson, R. R., & Berka, C. (2015). Characterizing donation behavior from psychophysiological indices of narrative experience. Frontiers in neuroscience, 9, 301.
Coulter, R. H., & Pinto, M. B. (1995). Guilt appeals in advertising: what are their effects?. Journal of applied Psychology, 80(6), 697.
De Wit, J. B., Das, E., & Vet, R. (2008). What works best: objective statistics or a personal testimonial? An assessment of the persuasive effects of different types of message evidence on risk perception. Health Psychology, 27(1), 110.
Dillard, J. P., & Peck, E. (2000). Affect and persuasion: Emotional responses to public service announcements. Communication Research, 27(4), 461-495.
Eisenberg, N., & Miller, P. A. (1987). The relation of empathy to prosocial and related behaviors. Psychological bulletin, 101(1), 91.
Engel, J. F., Blackwell, R. D., & Miniard, P. W. (1995). Consumer Behavior. 8th, Forth Worth.
Gerrig, R. J. (1993). Experiencing Narrative Worlds: On the Psychological Activities of. Reading. New Haven: Yale University Press.
Goffman, E. (1974). Frame analysis: An essay on the organization of experience. Harvard University Press.
Granzin, K. L., & Olsen, J. E. (1991). Characterizing participants in activities protecting the environment: A focus on donating, recycling, and conservation behaviors. Journal of Public Policy & Marketing, 10(2), 1-27.
Green, M. C. (2004). Transportation into narrative worlds: The role of prior knowledge and perceived realism. Discourse processes, 38(2), 247-266.
Green, M. C., & Brock, T. C. (2000). The role of transportation in the persuasiveness of public narratives. Journal of personality and social psychology, 79(5), 701.
Green, M. C., & Brock, T. C. (2002). In the mind's eye: Transportation-imagery model of narrative persuasion.
Green, M. C., Brock, T. C., & Kaufman, G. F. (2004). Understanding media enjoyment: The role of transportation into narrative worlds. Communication Theory, 14(4), 311-327.
Hansmann, H. B. (1980). The role of nonprofit enterprise. The Yale law journal, 89(5), 835-901.
Highhouse, S., & Paese, P. W. (1996). Problem domain and prospect frame: Choice under opportunity versus threat. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 22(2), 124-132.
Hinyard, L. J., & Kreuter, M. W. (2007). Using narrative communication as a tool for health behavior change: a conceptual, theoretical, and empirical overview. Health Education & Behavior, 34(5), 777-792.
Huhmann, B. A., & Brotherton, T. P. (1997). A content analysis of guilt appeals in popular magazine advertisements. Journal of Advertising, 26(2), 35-45.
Jeong, E. S., Shi, Y., Baazova, A., Chiu, C., Nahai, A., Moons, W. G., & Taylor, S. E. (2011). The relation of approach/avoidance motivation and message framing to the effectiveness of charitable appeals. Social Influence, 6(1), 15-21.
Lee, Y. J., Zhao, W., & Chen, H. (2021). Consumer Response to Virtual CSR Experiences. Journal of Current Issues & Research in Advertising, 42(1), 102-122.
Levin, I. P., Schneider, S. L., & Gaeth, G. J. (1998). All frames are not created equal: A typology and critical analysis of framing effects. Organizational behavior and human decision processes, 76(2), 149-188.
Liberman, N., & Trope, Y. (1998). The role of feasibility and desirability considerations in near and distant future decisions: A test of temporal construal theory. Journal of personality and social psychology, 75(1), 5.
Massi Lindsey, L. L. (2005). Anticipated guilt as behavioral motivation: An examination of appeals to help unknown others through bone marrow donation. Human Communication Research, 31(4), 453-481.
Merchant, A., Ford, J. B., & Sargeant, A. (2010). Charitable organizations' storytelling influence on donors' emotions and intentions. Journal of Business Research, 63(7), 754-762.
Merchant, K. A. (1985). Organizational controls and discretionary program decision making: A field study. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 10(1), 67-85.
Merchant, K. A. (1985). Budgeting and the propensity to create budgetary slack. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 10(2), 201-210.
Moyer-Gusé, E. (2008). Toward a theory of entertainment persuasion: Explaining the persuasive effects of entertainment-education messages. Communication theory, 18(3), 407-425.
Moyer‐Gusé, E., & Dale, K. (2017). Narrative persuasion theories. The international encyclopedia of media effects, 1-11.
Moyer-Gusé, E., Jain, P., & Chung, A. H. (2012). Reinforcement or reactance? Examining the effect of an explicit persuasive appeal following an entertainment-education narrative. Journal of communication, 62(6), 1010-1027.
Nabi, R. L. (2017). Emotion in Media Persuasion. The International Encyclopedia of Media Effects, 1-8.
Nabi, R. L., & Green, M. C. (2015). The role of a narrative's emotional flow in promoting persuasive outcomes. Media Psychology, 18(2), 137-162.
O'Keefe, D. J., & Nan, X. (2012). The relative persuasiveness of gain-and loss-framed messages for promoting vaccination: A meta-analytic review. Health communication, 27(8), 776-783.
Ortony, A., Clore, G. L., & Collins, A. (1988). The cognitive structure of emotions Cambridge. UK: Cambridge University Press9.
Quick, B. L., Kam, J. A., Morgan, S. E., Montero Liberona, C. A., & Smith, R. A. (2015). Prospect theory, discrete emotions, and freedom threats: An extension of psychological reactance theory. Journal of Communication, 65(1), 40-61.
Reinhart, A. M., Marshall, H. M., Feeley, T. H., & Tutzauer, F. (2007). The persuasive effects of message framing in organ donation: The mediating role of psychological reactance. Communication Monographs, 74(2), 229-255.
Riet, J. V. T., Ruiter, R. A., Werrij, M. Q., & De Vries, H. (2008). The influence of self‐efficacy on the effects of framed health messages. European Journal of Social Psychology, 38(5), 800-809.
Saxton, G. D., & Wang, L. (2014). The social network effect: The determinants of giving through social media. Nonprofit and voluntary sector quarterly, 43(5), 850-868.
Slater, M. D., & Rouner, D. (2002). Entertainment—education and elaboration likelihood: Understanding the processing of narrative persuasion. Communication theory, 12(2), 173-191.
Small, D. A., & Simonsohn, U. (2007). Friends of victims: Personal experience and prosocial behavior. Journal of Consumer Research, 35(3), 532-542.
Small, D. A., & Verrochi, N. M. (2009). The face of need: Facial emotion expression on charity advertisements. Journal of Marketing Research, 46(6), 777-787.
Smith, S. M., & Petty, R. E. (1996). Message framing and persuasion: A message processing analysis. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 22(3), 257-268.
Spears, N., & Singh, S. N. (2004). Measuring attitude toward the brand and purchase intentions. Journal of current issues & research in advertising, 26(2), 53-66.
THMAN, A. J. R., & LY, K. M. K. (2012). Message frames and illness representations: Implications for interventions to promote and sustain healthy behavior. In The self-regulation of health and illness behaviour (pp. 292-310). Routledge.
Trope, Y., & Liberman, N. (2003). Temporal construal. Psychological review, 110(3), 403.
Tugrul, T. O., & Lee, E. M. (2018). Promoting charitable donation campaigns on social media. The Service Industries Journal, 38(3-4), 149-163.
Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1979). Prospect theory: an analysis of decision under risk. Econometrica, 47(2), 263-292.
Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1981). The framing of decisions and the psychology of choice. Science, 211(4481), 453-458.
Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1991). Loss aversion in riskless choice: A reference-dependent model. The quarterly journal of economics, 106(4), 1039-1061.
Van Laer, T., De Ruyter, K., Visconti, L. M., & Wetzels, M. (2013). The extended transportation-imagery model: A meta-analysis of the antecedents and consequences of consumers' narrative transportation. Journal of Consumer research, 40(5), 797-817.
Wolf, T. (1999). Managing a nonprofit organization in the twenty-first century.
Yan, C., Dillard, J. P., & Shen, F. (2012). Emotion, motivation, and the persuasive effects of message framing. Journal of Communication, 62(4), 682-700.
Zwaan, R. A., & Radvansky, G. A. (1998). Situation models in language comprehension and memory. Psychological bulletin, 123(2), 162.
電子全文 Fulltext
本電子全文僅授權使用者為學術研究之目的,進行個人非營利性質之檢索、閱讀、列印。請遵守中華民國著作權法之相關規定,切勿任意重製、散佈、改作、轉貼、播送,以免觸法。
論文使用權限 Thesis access permission:校內校外完全公開 unrestricted
開放時間 Available:
校內 Campus: 已公開 available
校外 Off-campus: 已公開 available


紙本論文 Printed copies
紙本論文的公開資訊在102學年度以後相對較為完整。如果需要查詢101學年度以前的紙本論文公開資訊,請聯繫圖資處紙本論文服務櫃台。如有不便之處敬請見諒。
開放時間 available 已公開 available

QR Code