拟人化对品牌犯错的影响研究

发布时间：2018-05-30 00:43

本文选题：拟人化 + 品牌犯错　；参考：《武汉大学》2014年博士论文

【摘要】：市场竞争日益激烈,企业和消费者对差异性品牌和产品的需求愈发明显。在这样的大环境下,许多企业采用创新性、网络性的营销手段,为自己的品牌增添附加价值。拟人化营销便是这些手段中最为奇特的一种。拟人化被过往的学者定义为：为非人类的事物或事件赋予人类所特有的属性,并让外界将其感知为人。这是基于我们人类与生俱来的拟人化倾向所致。相关理论指出,我们乐意,并且很容易产生拟人化的联想。因此,作为企业,让消费者产生拟人化的联想并不是一件难事。但是,拟人化究竟有怎样的作用? 从实践角度来看,拟人化的确在很多情况下都能够为企业带来种种收益。比如美国著名的MM's品牌巧克力以及Trakinas鬼脸嘟嘟饼干,都是通过为产品添加人类的属性,如四肢、面容、个性和声音等,来引导消费者以看待人的方式来看待品牌。这些品牌在全世界范围,尤其是在年轻人之中享有非常高的欢迎度。另外,许多采用在线消费者沟通平台的品牌也纷纷采用了拟人化的表述方式。比如百度助手(一款在线资源的搜索软件)在用户退出前会“说”：“亲,真的要离开我了吗?”对于消费者来说,这款软件就好像拥有自己的情感,消费者甚至会认为自己有必要去照顾“他”的感受。从理论角度看,许多学者选择关注了拟人化对消费者态度以及行为上的直接影响。比如Delbaere, McQuarriePhillips(2011)的研究指出,拟人化能够为品牌带来更高的消费者喜好和选择可能；AggarwalMcGill(2007)认为拟人化在构建完整的情况下能够让消费者产生更好的态度；KimMcGill(2011)发现,对于高社会能力感知的个体,拟人化的对象能够降低风险,并从而提升这些个体进行高风险行为的可能性。可见,已有的文献大多关注了拟人化的效用,尤其是对品牌或产品产生的种种正面效用。而随着拟人化相关理论的逐渐丰富和完善,在近几年里也逐渐有学者开始关注拟人化的潜在风险。比如Puzakova, KwakRocereto(2013)就是关注了拟人化可能为品牌犯错带来的负面作用。该研究认为,拟人化品牌更有可能让消费者认为产品应当为错误负责。但是却并没有对错误进行分类。而本研究认为,对错误进行分类的必要性体现在两个层面：首先,Kim, et al.(2004)认为,品牌犯下与道德相关的错误,或是与能力相关的错误,消费者对其进行评判的标准是不同的,因此必须分别加以讨论；其次,消费者容易对“人”(拟人化品牌)产生低能力相关的期待,以及高道德相关的期待。因此,当“人”犯下不同的错误,消费者的评价标准也应当是不同的。所以,本研究的目的在于解决以下两个问题： (1)将拟人化品牌犯错的结论进行进一步的拓展,并讨论当拟人化在犯下不同类型错误的时候,消费者的态度会有怎样的变化? (2)道歉是品牌犯错后常用的回应手段。对于拟人化品牌来说,犯下不同错误后道歉是否会同样有效? 为了给出答案,本文将分为4个主要部分对研究结论进行阐述：第一部分为绪论。在这个部分中,研究者将针对现有的理论以及现象进行初步的规整,并以此为基础鉴别理论空缺,发展研究问题。本文的主旨在于,拟人化对消费者看待以及评价品牌的方式和标准都有着深刻的改变。这种改变体现在拟人化品牌犯错情境下会带来怎样的不同。更重要的是,当拟人化品牌犯下不同类型的错误时,这种不同会有怎样的体现。第二部分为文献综述和假设推演。在这个部分中,研究者会对于拟人化以及犯错类别的相关文献进行收集和整理,最终推演出本文的核心研究假设。第三部分为研究方法。通过两个独立实验,研究者对前文所提出的核心假设进行了证明：由于人类所独有的“低能力”以及“高道德”控制能力随着其它的拟人化要素被赋予给品牌,因此当拟人化品牌犯下能力相关的错误时,消费者的负面态度会有所缓和；而当拟人化品牌犯下道德相关的错误时,消费者的负面态度反而会上升。在这一结论的基础上,遵循着类似的逻辑,研究者将结论拓展至犯错后道歉补救之上。在第三个实验中,研究者着重关注了在拟人化品牌犯下不同类型错误的情况下,道歉会有怎样不同的效用。结论显示,对于犯下能力相关错误的拟人化品牌来说,道歉并不会有很好的效果；而对于犯下道德相关错误的拟人化品牌来说,道歉则相比前者更加有效。这是由消费者对拟人化品牌在道德以及能力层面的未来潜力评估差异所致。第四部分是结论和讨论。本章为全文内容总结,并概括研究结论以及管理、理论贡献和启示,阐述研究的不足并指明未来可能的研究方向。总而言之,在营销学界,拟人化仍有着比较大的理论空缺。本文首次指出了拟人化品牌与普通品牌根本上的不同,并印证了其在犯错情境下的不同体现,拓展了拟人化相关研究的基础逻辑。对企业的实际拟人化操作以及拟人化相关理论发展作出了一定的贡献。
[Abstract]:The market competition is becoming increasingly fierce, and the demand for different brands and products is becoming more and more obvious by enterprises and consumers. In such a big environment, many enterprises use innovative and network marketing means to add additional value to their own brands. Personification marketing is the strangest of these means.
Anthropomorphic scholars have been defined as the attributes that are endowed to human beings for non human things or events, and let the outside world perceive them as human beings. It is based on the anthropomorphic tendency of our human beings. The relevant theories point out that we are willing, and easily produce personified associations. As a result, as an enterprise, let consumers produce. It is not a difficult task to associate human beings with personification. But what is the role of personification?
From a practical point of view, personification can indeed bring a variety of benefits to enterprises in many cases, such as the famous MM's brand chocolate in the United States and the Trakinas beep biscuit, to guide the consumer to look at the brand by adding human attributes, such as limbs, face, personality, and sound. These brands are very popular around the world, especially among young people. In addition, many brands that use online consumer communication platforms have also adopted anthropomorphic expressions. For example, Baidu aides (an online resource search software) will "say" before users quit: "pro, really want to leave me." "For consumers, this software seems to have its own emotions, and consumers even think they need to take care of" him ".
From a theoretical point of view, many scholars have chosen to pay attention to the direct impact of personification on consumer attitudes and behavior. For example, the study of Delbaere, McQuarriePhillips (2011) points out that personification can bring higher consumer preferences and choices for brands; and AggarwalMcGill (2007) believes that personification can be completed in a complete situation. Let consumers have a better attitude; KimMcGill (2011) found that personified objects can reduce risks to individuals perceived by high social competence, and thus enhance the possibility of high-risk behaviors of these individuals. Most of the existing literature focuses on the effectiveness of personification, especially the positive effects on brands or products. With the gradual enrichment and perfection of anthropomorphic theory, some scholars have begun to pay attention to the potential risks of anthropomorphization in recent years. For example, Puzakova, KwakRocereto (2013) is concerned with the negative effects of personification on brand error. Products should be responsible for errors. However, there is no classification of errors. In this study, the necessity of classifying errors is reflected in two aspects:
First, Kim, et al. (2004) believes that the brand makes the moral related mistakes, or the errors related to the ability, and the consumer's criteria for judging them are different, so they must be discussed separately.
Second, consumers are easily expected to produce low abilities related to "human" (personified brand), as well as high moral expectations. Therefore, when "people" make different mistakes, the standard of consumer evaluation should be different.
Therefore, the purpose of this study is to solve the following two problems:
(1) to further expand the conclusion of the personified brand error, and discuss how the attitude of the consumer will change when the personification is made in different types of mistakes.
(2) apology is often used as a means of responding to a brand's mistake. Is it equally effective for an anthropomorphic brand to make an apology after making different mistakes?
In order to give an answer, this paper will be divided into 4 main parts:
The first part is the introduction. In this part, the researchers will make preliminary rules and regularization of existing theories and phenomena, and take this as the basis to identify theoretical vacancies and develop research issues. The main purpose of this article is that personification has a profound change in the way and criteria for consumers to look at and evaluate the brand. What's the difference in the situation of human branding? What's more, what is the difference when the personified brand makes different types of mistakes?
The second part is the literature review and hypothesis deduction. In this part, the researchers will collect and collate the related literature of anthropomorphization and error categories, and finally give the core research hypothesis of this article.
The third part is the research method. Through two independent experiments, the researchers have proved the core hypothesis proposed in the previous article: because human's unique "low ability" and "high moral" control ability are given to the other personified elements, so when the personified brand makes the ability related errors, the consumer The negative attitude will be eased; while the personification brand makes a moral error, the negative attitude of the consumer will rise. On the basis of this conclusion, the researchers follow the similar logic, and the researchers extend the conclusion to the post making mistakes. In the third tests, the researchers focus on the personification brand. The apology can have different effects in the case of different types of mistakes. The conclusion shows that the apology does not have a good effect on the personified brand that makes the ability related errors; and the apology is more effective for the personified brand that makes the moral related mistakes. The difference between brand's future potential assessment at the moral and capability level is due to differences.
The fourth part is the conclusion and discussion. This chapter summarizes the full text content, and summarizes the research conclusions and management, the theoretical contribution and the inspiration, expounds the shortcomings of the research and points out the possible future research direction.
In a word, there are still a lot of theoretical gaps in anthropomorphization in the field of marketing. This paper first points out the difference between the personified brand and the ordinary brand, and confirms its different embodiment in the wrong situation, expands the basic logic of the anthropomorphization related research, the practical humanization operation and the anthropomorphization related theory of the enterprise. The development has made a certain contribution.
【学位授予单位】：武汉大学
【学位级别】：博士
【学位授予年份】：2014
【分类号】：F274

【共引文献】