擬人化被廣泛地運用在廣告當中，從生活常見的產品廣告乃至於與綠色議題及社會議題有關的廣告當中，都可以看見以擬人化呈現廣告內容的方式。過去的研究發現，使用擬人化有助於提升消費者對於廣告的態度，然而過去研究並未延伸觸角討論擬人化臉部情緒的分類，也尚未討論到擬人化臉部情緒與不同訊息框架應如何互相搭配會產生比較好的廣告效果。因此本研究透過實驗設計的方式，進行兩個3x2的實驗，透過操弄擬人化臉部情緒(快樂臉vs.悲傷臉vs.無擬人化表情) 和訊息框架(距離近vs.距離遠)兩個自變數，討論在綠色廣告中使用擬人化臉部情緒—快樂臉與悲傷臉，將如何影響不同訊息框架之下的廣告效果。其中，廣告效果的衡量使用三個依變數，分別為：對綠色產品的產品態度、對綠色產品的購買意圖，以及捐款金額等三個依變數來衡量廣告效果，並且檢驗其背後的機制。
本研究結果指出，當綠色廣告的訊息包裝方式為空間或時間距離人們感覺比較近的時候，使用擬人化臉部情緒為悲傷臉比起使用快樂臉會有較佳的廣告效果，也就是會讓人產生較佳的綠色產品態度、較高的購買意圖及較高的捐款金額；而當綠色廣告訊息包裝方式為距離人們感覺較遠的時候，使用擬人化表情為快樂臉，則會有較佳的廣告效果。其中，影響擬人化臉部情緒與訊息框架搭配之交互作用的機制，為對擬人化物體所產生的預期罪惡感。

Marketers frequently use anthropomorphization in advertising and previous research supports the notion that consumers form more favorable attitudes when anthropomorphization is used. However, prior research is largely silent how anthropomorphization can be categorized based on facial emotion and how anthropomorphization with different facial emotions work when contextual factors are considered. This research focuses on anthropomorphization in green advertising and examines when happy face or sad face is more effective under certain message framing circumstances. Two experiments are conducted with various dependent measures (i.e., attitude toward the green product, purchase intentions, and donation amount). Results indicate that a sad face is more effective when the green issue is framed as more proximal (i.e., feeling closer with shorter physical distance or near future). However, a happy face works better when the green issue is perceived as less proximal (i.e., feeling far away in physical or temporal distance). Anticipatory guilt serves as the underlying mechanism to explain the interaction between type of facial emotion and message framing.

目錄
第壹章 緒論 1
第一節 前言 1
第二節 研究背景 1
第三節 研究動機 4
第四節 研究目的與問題 5
第五節 研究流程 6
第貳章 文獻回顧 8
第一節 前言 8
第二節 擬人化 8
第三節 擬人化與預期罪惡感 12
第四節 訊息框架 13
第五節 小結 16
第參章 研究假設推導 17
第一節 前言 17
第二節 研究假設與架構 17
第三節 小結 20
第肆章 實驗一設計與分析 21
第一節 前言 21
第二節 變數的操作型定義與測量指標 21
第三節 實驗題項和流程說明 27
第四節 實驗結果分析 28
第五節 小結 41
第伍章 實驗二設計與分析 42
第一節 前言 42
第二節 變數的操作型定義與測量指標 42
第三節 實驗題項和流程說明 46
第四節 實驗結果分析 47
第五節 小結 55
第陸章 結論與建議 56
第一節 前言 56
第二節 研究結果討論 56
第三節 研究貢獻 57
第四節 研究限制 58
第五節 未來研究建議 59
第六節 結論 61
參考文獻 62
附錄一實驗一正式問卷(無擬人化表情x 空間距離近) 70
附錄二實驗一正式問卷(無擬人化表情x 空間距離遠) 76
附錄三 實驗一正式問卷(擬人化快樂臉x 空間距離近) 82
附錄四實驗一正式問卷(擬人化快樂臉x 空間距離遠) 88
附錄五 實驗一正式問卷(擬人化悲傷臉x 空間距離近) 93
附錄六實驗一正式問卷(擬人化悲傷臉x 空間距離遠) 99
附錄七實驗二正式問卷(無擬人化表情x 時間距離近) 104
附錄八實驗二正式問卷(無擬人化表情x 時間距離遠) 108
附錄九 實驗二正式問卷(擬人化快樂臉x 時間距離近) 112
附錄十實驗二正式問卷(擬人化快樂臉x 時間距離遠) 117
附錄十一 實驗二正式問卷(擬人化悲傷臉x 時間距離近)
121
附錄十二實驗二正式問卷(擬人化悲傷臉x 時間距離遠) 126

參考文獻
Adaval, R., & Wyer, R. S. (1998). The role of narratives in consumer information
processing. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 7(3), 207-245.
Aggarwal, P., & McGill, A. L. (2007). Is that car smiling at me? Schema congruity as
a basis for evaluating anthropomorphized products. Journal of Consumer
Research, 34(4), 468-479.
Aggarwal, P., & McGill, A. L. (2012). When brands seem human, do humans act like
brands? Automatic behavioral priming effects of brand
anthropomorphism. Journal of Consumer Research, 39(2), 307-323.
Ahn, H. K., Kim, H. J., & Aggarwal, P. (2013). Helping fellow beings
anthropomorphized social causes and the role of anticipatory guilt.
Psychological Science, 25(1), 224-229.
Aron, A., Aron, E. N., Tudor, M., & Nelson, G. (1991). Close relationships as
including other in the self. Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology, 60(2), 241-253.
Banerjee, S., Gulas, C. S., & Iyer, E. (1995). Shades of green: A multidimensional
analysis of environmental advertising. Journal of Advertising, 24(2), 21-31.
Berkowitz, L., & Lutterman, K. G. (1968). The traditional socially responsible
personality. Public Opinion Quarterly, 32(2), 169-185.
Bornstein, R. F., & D'Agostino, P. R. (1994). The attribution and discounting of
perceptual fluency: Preliminary tests of a perceptual fluency/attributional
model of the mere exposure effect. Social Cognition, 12(2), 103-128.
Callcott, M. F., & Lee, W. N. (1994). A content analysis of animation and animated
spokes-characters in television commercials. Journal of Advertising, 23(4),1-12.
Cavanaugh, L. A., Bettman, J. R., & Luce, M. F. (2015). Feeling love and doing more
for distant others: Specific positive emotions differentially affect prosocial
consumption. Journal of Marketing Research, 52 (5), 657-673.
Chandon, P., Morwitz, V. G., & Reinartz, W. J. (2005). Do intentions really predict
behavior? Self-generated validity effects in survey research. Journal of
Marketing, 69(2), 1-14.
Chandran, S., & Menon, G. (2004). When a day means more than a year: Effects of
temporal framing on judgments of health risk. Journal of Consumer
Research, 31(2), 375-389.
Chang, C. (2013). Imagery fluency and narrative advertising effects. Journal of
advertising, 42(1), 54-68.
Chang, C. T. (2012). Are guilt appeals a panacea in green advertising? The right
formula of issue proximity and environmental consciousness. International
Journal of Advertising, 31(4), 741-771.
Chang, C. T., & Lee, Y. K. (2009). Framing charity advertising: Influences of message
framing, image valence, and temporal framing on a charitable appeal. 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.
Chang, H., Zhang, L., & Xie, G. X. (2015). Message framing in green advertising:
The effect of construal level and consumer environmental concern.
International Journal of Advertising, 34(1), 158-176.
Cone, R. (2000). Cone corporate citizenship study, available at
www.coneinc,com/pr_13.html.
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.
Ellemers, N., Spears, R., & Doosje, B. (2002). Self and social identity. Annual Review
of Psychology, 53(1), 161-186.
Epley, N., Akalis, S., Waytz, A., & Cacioppo, J. T. (2008). Creating social connection
through inferential reproduction loneliness and perceived agency in gadgets,
gods, and greyhounds. Psychological Science, 19(2), 114-120.
Epley, N. & Waytz A. (2009), “Mind perception.” In The Handbook of Social
Psychology, 5th ed., S. T. Fiske, D.T. Gilbert. and G. Lindzey, eds. News York:
John Wiley & Sons, 498-541.
Epley, N., Waytz, A., & Cacioppo, J. T. (2007). On seeing human: a three-factor
theory of anthropomorphism. Psychological Rreview, 114(4), 864-886.
Fujita, K., Henderson, M. D., Eng, J., Trope, Y., & Liberman, N. (2006). Spatial
distance and mental construal of social events. Psychological Science, 17(4),
278-282.
Gardner, M. P. (1985). Does attitude toward the ad affect brand attitude under a brand
evaluation set? Journal of Marketing Research, 22(2), 192-198.
Gneezy, U., & Rustichini, A. (2000). A fine is a price. Journal of Legal Studies., 29,
1-13.
Gray, H. M., Gray, K., & Wegner, D. M. (2007). Dimensions of mind perception.
Science, 315(5812), 619-619.
Grau, S. L., & Folse, J. A. G. (2007). Cause-related marketing: the influence of donation proximity and message-framing cues on the less-involved 66
consumer. Journal of Advertising, 36(4), 19-33.
Hayes, A. F. (2013). Introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process
analysis: A regression-based approach. Guilford Press.
Higgins, E. T., 1987. Self Discrepancy: A Theory Relating Self and Affect,
Psychological Review, 94(3), 319-340.
Hou, J., Du, L., & Li, J. (2008). Cause's attributes influencing consumer's purchasing
intention: Empirical evidence from China. Asia Pacific Journal of Marketing
and Logistics, 20(4), 363-380.
Hur, J. D., Koo, M., & Hofmann, W. (2015). When temptations come alive: How
anthropomorphism undermines self-control. Journal of Consumer
Research,42(2), 340-358.
Kwak, H., Puzakova, M., & Rocereto, J. F. (2015). Better not smile at the price: The
differential role of brand anthropomorphization on perceived price
fairness. Journal of Marketing, 79(4), 56-76.
Kim, Y. J. (2006). The role of regulatory focus in message framing in antismoking
advertisements for adolescents. Journal of Advertising, 35(1), 143-151.
Johnson, S., Slaughter, V., & Carey, S. (1998). Whose gaze will infants follow? The
elicitation of gaze‐following in 12‐month‐olds. Developmental Science, 1(2),
233-238.
Lafferty, B. A., & Goldsmith, R. E. (2005). Cause–brand alliances: Does the cause
help the brand or does the brand help the cause? Journal of Business
Research, 58(4), 423-429.
Landwehr, J. R., McGill, A. L., & Herrmann, A. (2011). It's got the look: The effect of
friendly and aggressive “facial” expressions on product liking and
sales. Journal of Marketing, 75(3), 132-146.
Laroche, M., Bergeron, J., & Barbaro-Forleo, G. (2001). Targeting consumers who are
willing to pay more for environmentally friendly products. Journal of
Consumer Marketing, 18(6), 503-520.
Latané, B. (1981). The psychology of social impact. American Psychologist, 36(4),
343-356.
Latane, B., and Bourgeois M. J. (2001). Dynamic social impact and the consolidation,
and continuing diversity of culture, in Blackwell Handbook of Social
Psychology: Group Processes, Hogg, M. A. and Tindale, R. S., eds., Oxford:
Blackwell, 235-358.
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., Sagristano, M. D., & Trope, Y. (2002). The effect of temporal distance
on level of mental construal. Journal of Experimental Social
Psychology, 38(6), 523-534.
Liberman, N., Trope, Y., McCrea, S. M., & Sherman, S. J. (2007). The effect of level
of construal on the temporal distance of activity enactment. Journal of
Experimental Social Psychology, 43(1), 143-149.
May, F., & Monga, A. (2014). When time has a will of its own, the powerless don't
have the will to wait: Anthropomorphism of time can decrease
patience. Journal of Consumer Research, 40(5), 924-942.
McGuire, W. J. (1969). The nature of attitudes and attitude change. The Handbook of
Social Psychology, 3(2), 136-314.
Miner, M., & Petocz, A. (2003). Moral theory in ethical decision making: Problems,
clarifications and recommendations from a psychological perspective. Journal
of Business Ethics, 42(1), 11-25.
Morewedge, C. K., Preston, J., & Wegner, D. M. (2007). Timescale bias in the
attribution of mind. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 93(1), 1-11.
Morwitz, V. G., & Schmittlein, D. (1992). Using segmentation to improve sales
forecasts based on purchase intent: Which" intenders" actually buy? Journal
of Marketing Research, 29(4), 391-405.
Nass, Clifford, Isbister, Katherine & Lee, E. J. (2000). Truth is beauty: Researching
embodied conversational agents, in Embodied Conversational Agents,
374-402.
Nielsen, J. H., & Escalas, J. E. (2010). Easier is not always better: the moderating role
of processing type on preference fluency. Journal of Consumer
Psychology, 20(3), 295-305.
Petty, R. E. (1997). The evolution of theory and research in social psychology: From
single to multiple effect and process models of persuasion. The Message of
Social Psychology: Perspectives on Mind in Society, 39(14), 268-290.
Pfattheicher, S., Sassenrath, C., & Schindler, S. (2015). Feelings for the suffering of
others and the environment compassion fosters proenvironmental
tendencies. Environment and Behavior, 48(7), 929-945.
Puzakova, M., Kwak, H., & Rocereto, J. F. (2013). When humanizing brands goes
wrong: the detrimental effect of brand anthropomorphization amid product
wrongdoings. Journal of Marketing, 77(3), 81-100.
Ricoeur, P. (1977). The rule of metaphor: multi-disciplinary studies of the creation of
meaning in language, R. Czerny, K. McLaughlin & J. Costello, Trans., eds.,
Toronto: University of Toronto Press.
Schuhwerk, M. E., & Lefkoff-Hagius, R. (1995). Green or non-green? Does type of
appeal matter when advertising a green product? Journal of Advertising,24(2),
45-54.
Spears, N. E., Mowen, J. C., & Chakraborty, G. (1996). Symbolic role of animals in
print advertising: Content analysis and conceptual development. Journal of
Business Research, 37(2), 87-95.
Stafford, L., Dainton, M., & Haas, S. (2000). Measuring routine and strategic
relational maintenance: Scale revision, sex versus gender roles, and the
prediction of relational characteristics. Communication Monographs, 67(3),
306-323.
Tam, K. P. (2015). Are anthropomorphic persuasive appeals effective? The role of the
recipient's motivations. British Journal of Social Psychology, 54(1), 187-200.
Tam, K. P., Lee, S. L., & Chao, M. M. (2013). Saving Mr. nature: Anthropomorphism
enhances connectedness to and protectiveness toward nature. Journal of
Experimental Social Psychology, 49(3), 514-521.
Touré-Tillery, M., & McGill, A. L. (2015). Who or what to believe: Trust and the
differential persuasiveness of human and anthropomorphized messengers.
Journal of Marketing, 79(4), 94-110.
Trope, Y., & Liberman, N. (2003). Temporal construal. Psychological Review,110(3),
403-421.
Trope, Y., & Liberman, N. (2010). Construal-Level theory of Psychological
Distance. Psychological Review, 117(2), 440-463.
Waytz, A., Gray, K., Epley, N., & Wegner, D. M. (2010a). Causes and consequences
of mind perception. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 14(8), 383-388.
Waytz, A., Morewedge, C. K., Epley, N., Monteleone, G., Gao, J. H., & Cacioppo, J.
T. (2010b). Making sense by making sentient: Effectance motivation increases
anthropomorphism. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 99(3),
410-435.
Webster, F. E. (1975). Determining the characteristics of the socially conscious
consumer. Journal of Consumer Research, 2(3), 188-196.
White, K., MacDonnell, R., & Dahl, D. W. (2011). It's the mind-set that matters: The
role of construal level and message framing in influencing consumer efficacy
and conservation behaviors. Journal of Marketing Research, 48(3), 472-485.
Williams, L. A., Masser, B., & Sun, J. (2015). Revisiting the effect of
anthropomorphizing a social cause campaign. PloS one, 10(9), e0138886.