Responsive image
博碩士論文 etd-0715103-170128 詳細資訊
Title page for etd-0715103-170128
論文名稱
Title
框架理論應用於電子議價之研究
A Study of Applying Framing Theory on Electronic Bargaining
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
85
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
2003-07-07
繳交日期
Date of Submission
2003-07-15
關鍵字
Keywords
讓步策略、談判模式、框架理論、電子議價
Electronic Bargaining, Concession, Framing Theory, Negotiation Model
統計
Statistics
本論文已被瀏覽 5798 次,被下載 47
The thesis/dissertation has been browsed 5798 times, has been downloaded 47 times.
中文摘要
在日常生活中的議價過程中,決策者常因對手將提議利用不同的描述陳述出來而實際損益未更動時,改變對於議價的結果議價結果的評估。這就是談判學者俗稱的「框架效果」(framing effect)。框架理論首先由Kahneman & Tversky(1982)提出,經過學者二十幾年的研究,發現有多種框架類型影響議價結果,框架效果並且已驗證於談判的各種領域之中。另外在電子議價的發展上,均假設人類決策為理性行為提出議價機制,尚無人研究以非理性的框架理論應用於網際網路上,因此引發本研究探討框架是否能改變電子議價績效的動機。
本研究採用Levin等人(Levin et al. 1998)提出的屬性與目標兩種框架類型,以賣方角度切入,套用議價模式開發出虛擬網路商店,招募實際網路使用者進行實地實驗,據此收集實驗結果並以統計方法分析。結果發現框架效果對於電子議價績效確實有影響,利用框架與讓步策略的配合,將影響賣方的獲利。整體而言,屬性框架在電子議價上的效果比目標框架好,並且加入讓步策略因素後,則屬性框架效果將突顯,而目標框架的正負面效果的差異將減少。
Abstract
In daily negotiation, decision maker often affected to change the evalution of negotiation results by the offers which the opponent brought up in either positive or negative description. This is what the negotiation researcher callled “framing effect”. Framing theory first poposed by Kahneman & Tversky (1982) and researchers found there are many framing types and the framing effects proofed in many negotiation areas. On the other hand, the development of electronic bargainging is ofthen based on the assumption that human decision making is rational behavior, and there is no research applying framing theory on internet. Therefore this research would like to discuss whether framing could change electronic bargaining results.
This research adopts attribute framing and goal framing proposed by Levin et al. (1998) and apply it with negotiation model to develop a virtual bargin store, then we play a role as seller to do field experiment. After collecting the experiment data and analyze them, we found framing do affect electronic bargining. Framing match concession will influence the seller’s gain. General speaking, attribute framing effect is better than goal framing, and the difference between positive and negative attribute framing effect looms larger when it corporates with concession. However the difference between positive and negative goal framing looms less when it ties up with concession.
目次 Table of Contents
第一章 緒論 1
第一節 研究背景與動機 1
第二節 研究目的 2
第三節 研究流程 3
第四節 論文結構 4
第二章 文獻探討 6
第一節 框架理論(FRAMING THEORY) 6
第二節 議價行為 12
第三節 網路消費行為 17
第四節 小結 22
第三章 研究架構與實驗設計 24
第一節 研究架構 24
第二節 實驗變數 25
第三節 研究假說 29
第四節 實驗設計 31
第五節 實驗程序 35
第六節 資料分析方法 37
第四章 資料分析 40
第一節 實驗對象之基本資料分析描述 40
第二節 假說檢定 42
第五章 結論與建議 63
第一節 研究結論 63
第二節 研究貢獻 64
第三節 研究限制 65
第四節 未來發展 66
參考文獻 68
附錄 75
附錄一 個人基本資料問卷 75
附錄二 框架描述 76
附錄三 議價滿意度問卷 79
附錄四 活動促銷廣告 80
附錄五 實驗系統畫面 81
參考文獻 References
中文文獻
黃鈴媚,「提議語藝策略與讓步行為之研究」,世新學報,第十一期 第225~264頁,2001年
邱毓蘋,「資訊豐富度對網路購物意願之研究」,國立交通大學傳播管理研究所碩士論文,1999年
楊正瑀,「不同程度產品知識及多重外在提示對網路購物意願之影響」,國立交通大學管理科學研究所碩士論文,2002年。
沈建良,「影響網路購物行為的因素-從理性與非理性觀點探討」,私立東吳大學企業管理研究所碩士論文,2001年。
吳靜宜,「購買過程中運用網際網路與實體商店之比較研究」,國立成功大學國際企業研究所碩士論文,2000年
尤松文,「網路商店中消費者議價行為之研究」,國立中山大學資訊管理研究所碩士論文,2000年。
吳文華,「讓步策略與談判結果之影響」,國立台灣科技大學工程技術研究所碩士論文,1992 年。
王如芬,「電子商務中議價代理人讓步策略之研究」,國立中山大學資訊管理研究所碩士論文,2000年
財團法人資訊工業策進會執行編輯,電子商業答客問,初版,經濟部商業司,1997年6月
呂明光,電子商店經營管理指引,財團法人資訊工程策進會,1997年
財團法人資訊工業策進會執行編輯,「全球上網人口」,from http://www.find.org.tw,2002年
創市際市場研究顧問公司、資策會電子商務應用推廣中心,「台灣網友網路生活行為研究」,from http://www.find.org.tw,2003年6月
英文文獻
Aronson, E., Brewer, M. B., & Carlsmith, J., “Experimentation in social psychology,“ The handbook of Social Psychology, 3rd ed., New York: Random House, 1985, pp. 481-483.
Baranowski, T. A., & Summers, D. A., “Perceptions of response alternatives in a prisoner’s dilemma game,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology (21), 1972, pp. 35-40.
Bazerman, M. H., & Neale, M. A., Negotiating rationally, New York: The Free Press., 1985.
Beach, L. R., Puto, C. P., Heckler, S. E., Naylor, G., & Marble, T. A., “Differential versus unit weighting of violations, framing, and the role of probability in image theory’s compatibility test,” Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes (65), 1996, pp. 77–82.
Bazerman, M.H., Magliozzi, T., & Neale, M., “Integrative Bargaining in a Competitive Market,” Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes (35), 1985, pp.294-313.
Bettman, James R., “An Information Processing Theory of Consumer Choice,” Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley, 1979
Bichler M., Kersten G. E., & Strecker S., “Towards a Structured Design of Electronic Negotiations,” InterNeg, Ottawa IN 07/02, 2002.
Bottom W. P., & Studt A., “Framing effects and the distributive aspect of integrative bargaining,” Organizational behavior and human decision processes (56), 1994, pp. 459-474.
Chang, T. Z., & Wildt, A. R., “Price, Product Information and Purchase Intention: An Empirical Study,” Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science (22:1), 1994, pp. 16- 27.
Crumbaugh, C. M., & Evans, G. W., “Presentation format, other persons’ strategies and cooperative behavior in the prisoner’s dilemma,” Psychological Reports (20), 1967, pp. 195-202.
Deutsch, M., The resolution of conflict, New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1973.
Dickson, P. R., & Sawyer A. G., "The Price Knowledge and Search of Supermarket Shoppers," Journal of Marketing (54), 1990, pp. 42-45.
Fagley, N. S., & Miller, P. M., “The effect of framing on choice: Interactions with risk-taking propensity, cognitive style, and sex,” Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin (16:3), 1990, pp. 496-510.
Ganzach, Y., & Karsahi, N., “Message framing and buying behavior: A field experiment,” Journal of Business Research (32), 1995, pp. 11–17.
Gruder, C. L., & Duslak, R. J., “Elicitation of cooperation by retaliatory and nonretaliatory strategies in a mixed motive game,” Journal of Conflict Resolution (17), 1973, pp. 162-174
Hutchinson, J. W., & Alba J. W., “Ignoring Irrelevant Information: Situational Determinants of Consumer Learning,” Journal of Consumer Research (18), 1991, pp. 325-344.
Jacoby, J., & Olson J. C., “Consumer Response to Price: An Attitudinal Information Processing Perspective,” Moving Ahead in Attitude Research, IL: American Marketing Association, 1977, pp. 73-86
Homer, P. M., & Yoon, S. G.., “Message framing and the interrelationships among ad-based feelings, affect, and cognition,” Journal of Advertising (XXI), 1992, pp. 19–32.
Howell, D. C., Statistical methods for psychology (4th ed.), Stamford, CN: Wadsworth Publishing Company, 1997, pp. 323-329.
Kahneman, D. & Tversky, A., “Prospect theory: an analysis of decision under risk,” Econometrica (47:2), 1979, pp. 263-291.
Kahneman, D., & Tversky, A., “The psychology of preferences,” Scientific American (247), 1982, pp. 160-173.
Kahneman, D., & Tversky, A., “Choices, values, and frames,” American Psychologist (39), 1984, pp. 341-350.
Kahneman, D. & Tversky, A., “Loss aversion in riskless choice: A reference-dependent model,” Quarterly Journal of Economics (107), 1991, pp. 1039–1061.
Kersten, G. E., “The science and engineering of e-negotiation: An introduction,” HICSS, January 6-9, 2003.
Kotler, P., Marketing Management (8th ed.), Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1997.
Krishnamurthy P., Carter P., & Blair E. “Attribute Framing and Goal Framing Effects in Health Decisions,” Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes (85:2), July 2001, pp. 382–399.
Kristensen H., & Gärling T., “Adoption of Cognitive Reference Points in Negotiations,” Göteborg Psychological Reports (26:5), 1996.
Levin, I. P., Jasper, J. D., & Gaeth, G. J., “Measuring the effects of framing country-of-origin information: A process tracing approach,” Advances in consumer research, Vol. XXIII, 1996, pp. 385–389.
Levin, I. P., & Gaeth, G. J., “How consumers are affected by the framing of attribute information before and after consuming the product,” Journal of Consumer Research (15:3), 1988, pp. 374–378.
Levin, I. P., Schneider, S. L., & Gaeth, G. J., “All frames are not created equal: A typology and critical analysis of framing effects,” Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes (76:2), 1998, pp. 149–188.
Liang, T. P., and Doong, H. S., “Effects of Bargaining in Electronic Commerce," Proceedings of the International Workshop on Advance Issues of E-Commerce and Web-Based Information Systems, 1998
Maes, P., & Guttman, R. H., “Cooperatives. Competitive Multi-agent Negotiations in Retail Electronic Commerce,” MIT Media Lab Paper, Forth coming Proceedings of the Second International Workshop on Cooperative Information Agents, Paris, July 1998.
Malim, T., & Birch, A., Research methods and statistics, Macmillan Press LTD, 1997.
McNeil, B. J., Pauker, S. G., Sox, H. D., & Tversky, A., “On the elicitation of preferences for alternative therapies,” New England Journal of Medicine (306), 1982, pp. 1259-1262.
Meyerowitz, B. E., & Chaiken, S., “The effect of message framing on breast self-examination attitudes, intentions, and behavior,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology (52), 1987, pp. 500–510.
Neale, M. A., & Bazerman, M. H., “The effects of framing and negotiator overconfidence on bargaining behaviors and outcomes,” Academy of Management Journal (28), 1985, pp. 34–49.
Neale, M. A., & Bazerman, M. H., “Cognition and rationality: The Power and Impact of the negotiator’s frame,” New York: Free Press., 1991.
Neale, M., Huber, V., & Bazerman, M. H., “The Framing of Negotiations: Contextual vs. task Frames,” Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes (39), 1987, pp. 228-241.
Malim, T. & Birch, A., Research methods and statistics, Macmillan Press LTD., 1997.
Olson, J. C., “Price as an Information Cue: Effects in Product Evaluations,” Consumer and Industrial Buying Behavior, 1977, NY: North Holland, pp. 267-286
Peter, J. P., & Olson, J. C., “Consumer Behavior: Marketing strategy perspective,” Illinois: Irwin, 1987.
Puto, C. P., “The Framing of Buying Decisions,” Journal of Consumer Research (14), December 1987, pp. 301-315.
Raiffa, H., The Art and Science of Negotiation, Mass: the Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, 1982.
Richardson, P. S., Alan S. D., & Arun K. J., “Extrinsic and Intrinsic Cue Effects on P erceptions of Store Brand Quality,” Journal of marketing (58), Oct. 1994, pp. 28-36.
Rothman, A. J., & Salovey, P., “Shaping perceptions to motivate healthy behavior: The role of message framing,” Psychological Bulletin (121:1), 1997, pp. 3-19
Lewicki, R. J., Saunders, D. M., & Minton J. W., Essentials of negotiation (2nd ed.), McGraw-Hill Companies. Inc., 2001.
Schiffman, L. G., & Kanuk, L. L., Consumer Behavior (6th ed.), Prentice Hall, 1997.
Fischer, S., Kießling, W., & Holland, S., “The COSIMA Prototype for multi-objective bargaining”. AAMAS, 2002, pp. 1364-1371.
Walton, R. E., & McKersie, R. B., A behavioral theory of labor negotiations: An analysis of a social interaction system, New York: McGraw Hill, 1965.
Winer, R. S., “A Reference Price Model of Brand Choice for Frequently Purchased Products,” Journal of Consumer Research (13), September 1986, pp. 250-256.
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:自定論文開放時間 user define
開放時間 Available:
校內 Campus: 已公開 available
校外 Off-campus:永不公開 not available

您的 IP(校外) 位址是 3.89.116.152
論文開放下載的時間是 校外不公開

Your IP address is 3.89.116.152
This thesis will be available to you on Indicate off-campus access is not 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