智慧型手機為近幾年來竄起的產品，所以對於智慧型手機的文獻相對較少，大部分是以「科技接受模式」（Technology Acceptance Model，TAM）為主要的研究架構去探討，影響消費者的行為意圖是以認知的概念去探討（認知有用性、認知易用性），進而影響到後面的購買行為，但對於產品本身具有什麼樣的產品特性去影響到消費者的認知，較少去深入探討。
本研究是以「涉入-品牌忠誠度」模型（Involvement - Brand Loyalty Model）為理論基礎，用「涉入」的概念來探討智慧型手機使用者的品牌忠誠度。涉入前因方面本研究著重於「產品效用」，從過去文獻整理歸納可能影響產品效用的因素，配合社會影響來對於智慧型手機做探討。最後本研究也將「擁有智慧型手機」與「無擁有智慧型手機」兩個族群做綜合分析，來提供後續研究建議。
最後結果顯示出使用者的涉入程度確實會影響智慧型手機的品牌忠誠度，而如果使用者屬於高度涉入時，不管有無使用經驗，產品涉入均會影響到品牌涉入。從前面研究可以發現兩個不同群體之間的相同與相異之處，相同點在於都對智慧型手機涉入程度高，而相異在於使用經驗的有無，這部分確實影響到使用者對於產品特性的需求，而在社會影響上也有差異。本研究從過去文獻中整理出的三種產品特性「整合性」、「創新性」與「網路外部性」確實會影響擁有智慧型手機使用者感受到的產品效用，另一方面，在分析無智慧型手機的族群中，可以發現使用者體驗的有無會對「整合性」產生影響，對無智慧型手機的族群而言，整合性是較難以衡量的價值，所以在研究中顯示整合性在影響產品效用上並不顯著，而其餘兩項產品特性（創新性、網路外部性）皆對產品效用顯著影響。在社會影響上，有使用經驗的族群會直接受到社會影響而改變自己對於品牌的判斷，而無經驗的族群在社會影響上是透過產品涉入，再去影響到品牌涉入。

In recent years, smartphone has become the most popular products, the literature for smartphone is relatively less, most of using Technology Acceptance Model （TAM） as the main research framework to explore. Influencing the consumer intension is concept of cognition （perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use）, thereby affecting subsequent behavioral intentions, but what kind of product characteristics affect consumer’s perceiving are seldom addressed.
This study proposes "Involvement - Brand Loyalty Model" as the theoretical basis, with the "involvement" concept applied to smartphone users in order to explore the brand loyalty. Involvement antecedent focuses on "product utility", and explores what kind of product characteristics affect the product utility from the past literature, and then is combined with the social influence to investigate smartphone usage. Finally, the study will also compare different groups based on with or without owning a smartphone, and then provide the final analysis of the research results.
The final results show that user involvement does affect the brand loyalty of the smartphone, and if the users are highly involved, regardless of whatever the user experience may be, product involvement will affect the brand involvement. Comparison with previous studies finds the similarity and the differences between those two groups. The common is the high involvement of smartphone. The differences lie in the user experience that does affect the user for the demand of products characteristics, and the impact of the social influence. The three products characteristics: convergence, innovation and network externality will definitely affect the product utility for someone who has smartphone, but we can understand that the

user experience will impact convergence by analyzing the groups without smartphone. It is difficult to measure the value of convergence for someone who doesn’t have smartphone, so in the study show that the convergence does not significantly affect the product utility, while the other two product characteristics （innovation, network externalities） are significant impact the product utility. For people who have usage experience, the social influence can directly affect their brand judgment, nevertheless without the usage experience, the social influence has impact on the brand involvement only through the product involvement.

論文審定書--I
摘要-- II
Abstract-- IV
第一章、緒論--1
第一節、研究背景--1
第二節、研究動機與目的 -- 2
第三節、研究範圍--3
第四節、研究流程--4
第二章、文獻探討--5
第一節、涉入--5
第二節、產品效用--8
第三節、社會影響特性--13
第三章、研究方法--16
第一節、研究假說與研究模型--16
第二節、操作性定義與研究變項--20
第三節、研究設計--28
第四章、資料分析與研究結果--32
第一節、敘述性統計--32
第二節、驗證模型與假說--33
第三節、研究討論--44
第五章、結論與建議--48
第一節、研究結論--48
第二節、研究貢獻--49
第三節、研究限制與後續研究建議 --51
參考文獻--53
附錄、研究問卷-- 56

Ajzen, I. （1991）. The theory of planned behavior. Organizational behavior and human decision processes, 50（2）, 179-211.
Allen, V. L. （1966）. Situational factors in conformity. Advances in experimental social psychology, 2, 133-175.
Arruda-Filho, E. J. M., & Lennon, M. M. （2011）. How iPhone innovators changed their consumption in iDay2: Hedonic post or brand devotion. International Journal of Information Management.
Bandura, A. （1977）. Self-efficacy: toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. Psychological review, 84（2）, 191.
Bandura, A. （1986）. Social foundations of thought and action. Englewood Cliffs, NJ.
Banerjee, A. V. （1992）. A simple model of herd behavior. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 107（3）, 797-817.
Batra, R., & Ahtola, O. T. （1991）. Measuring the hedonic and utilitarian sources of consumer attitudes. Marketing Letters, 2（2）, 159-170.
Bearden, W. O., & Etzel, M. J. （1982）. Reference group influence on product and brand purchase decisions. Journal of Consumer Research, 183-194.
Beharrell, B., & Denison, T. J. （1995）. Involvement in a routine food shopping context. British Food Journal, 97（4）, 24-29.
Bennett, R. （2005）. Experience as a moderator of involvement and satisfaction on brand loyalty in a business-to-business setting 02-314R. Industrial Marketing Management, 34（1）, 97-107.
Bennett, R. （2007）. Involvement, satisfaction, and brand loyalty in a small business services setting. Journal of Business Research, 60（12）, 1253-1260.
Bhattacherjee, A., & Premkumar, G. （2004）. Understanding changes in belief and attitude toward information technology usage: A theoretical model and longitudinal test. MIS quarterly, 28（2）, 229-254.
Bloemer, J. M. M., & Kasper, H. D. P. （1995）. The complex relationship between consumer satisfaction and brand loyalty. Journal of Economic Psychology, 16（2）, 311-329.
Burnkrant, R. E., & Cousineau, A. （1975）. Informational and normative social influence in buyer behavior. Journal of Consumer Research, 206-215.
Deutsch, & Gerard. （1995）. Distinguishing among Multiple Mechanisms of Social Contagion: Social Learning versus Normative Legitimation in New Product Adoption.
54
Dowling, M., Lechner, C., & Thielmann, B. （1998）. Convergence–innovation and change of market structures between television and online services. Electronic Markets, 8（4）, 31-35.
Fishbein, M., & Ajzen, I. （1975）. Belief, attitude, intention and behaviour: An introduction to theory and research: Addison-Wesley.
Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. （1981）. Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of marketing research, 39-50.
Gill, T., & Lei, J. （2009）. Convergence in the high-technology consumer markets: Not all brands gain equally from adding new functionalities to products. Marketing Letters, 20（1）, 91-103.
Hsu, C. L., & Lu, H. P. （2004）. Why do people play on-line games? An extended TAM with social influences and flow experience. Information & Management, 41（7）, 853-868.
Jacoby, J., & Chestnut, R. W. （1978）. Brand loyalty measurement and management: Wiley New York.
Jacoby, J., & Olson, J. C. （1970）. An attitudinal model of brand loyalty: conceptual underpinnings and instrumentation research. Purdue Papers in Consumer Psychology, 159, 14-20.
Katz, M. L., & Shapiro, C. （1985）. Network externalities, competition, and compatibility. The American economic review, 75（3）, 424-440.
Kiesler, C. A., & Kiesler, S. B. （1969）. Conformity: Addison Wesley Publishing Company.
Knox, & Walker. （1994）. Measuring consumer involvement with grocery brands: Model validation and scale‐reliability test procedures. Journal of Marketing Management, 10（1-3）.
Knox, & Walker. （2003）. Empirical developments in the measurement of involvement, brand loyalty and their relationship in grocery markets. Journal of Strategic marketing, 11（4）, 271-286.
Kotler, P., & Keller, K. （2011）. Marketing Management （14th Edition）.
Krugman, H. E. （1965）. The impact of television advertising: Learning without involvement. Public opinion quarterly, 29（3）, 349-356.
Lascu, D. N., & Zinkhan, G. （1999）. Consumer conformity: review and applications for marketing theory and practice. Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice, 1-12.
Laurent, G., & Kapferer, J. N. （1985）. Measuring consumer involvement profiles. Journal of marketing research, 41-53.
Mas-Colell, A., Whinston, M. D., & Green, J. R. （1995）. Microeconomics Theory
Mittal, B., & Lee, M. S. （1989）. A causal model of consumer involvement. Journal of Economic Psychology, 10（3）, 363-389.
55
Pae, J. H., & Hyun, J. S. （2002）. The impact of technology advancement strategies on consumers' patronage decisions. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 19（5）, 375-383.
Park, C. W., & Lessig, V. P. （1977）. Students and housewives: Differences in susceptibility to reference group influence. Journal of Consumer Research, 102-110.
Pincus, S., & Waters, L. （1977）. Informational social influence and product quality judgments. Journal of Applied Psychology; Journal of Applied Psychology, 62（5）, 615.
Quester, P., & Lim, A. L. （2003）. Product involvement/brand loyalty: is there a link? Journal of product & brand management, 12（1）, 22-38.
Rochford, L., & Rudelius, W. （1997）. New product development process: stages and successes in the medical products industry. Industrial Marketing Management, 26（1）, 67-84.
Rogers, E. （2003）. Diffusion of Innovations, 5th Edition.
Ross, G., Bruner, J. S., & Wood, D. （1976）. THE ROLE OF TUTORING IN PROBLEM SOLVING*. Journal of child psychology and psychiatry, 17（2）, 89-100.
Sengupta, S. （1998）. Some approaches to complementary product strategy. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 15（4）, 352-367.
Sherif, M., & Cantril, H. （1947）. The Psychology of Ego Involvements, Social attitudes and Identifications.
Venkatesh, V., & Morris, M. G. （2003）. User acceptance of information technology: Toward a unified view. MIS quarterly, 425-478.
Veryzer, J., R.W., & Hutchinson, J. W. （1998）. The influence of unity and prototypicality on aesthetic responses to new product designs. Journal of Consumer Research, 24（4）, 374-385.
Warrington, P., & Shim, S. （2000）. An empirical investigation of the relationship between product involvement and brand commitment. Psychology and Marketing, 17（9）, 761-782.
Wertenbroch, K., & Dhar, R. （2000）. Consumer choice between hedonic and utilitarian goods. Journal of marketing research, 60-71.
Wilkie, W. L. （1994）. Consumer Behavior 3ed.
林伯齊. （2009）. 因勢制宜－從智慧型行動電話裝置產業分析與發展趨勢. 資訊工業策進會MIC.
潘貴鈺. （2010）. 以從眾行為及交易成本理論探討線上合購之行為.