第五章 結論與建議
第五節 後續研究建議
國
立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
第五節 後續研究建議
1. 本研究第一階段以 Brunk(2010)的企業社會責任作為台灣地區消費者的初探 性研究，建議後續研究者可以擴大樣本數，將台灣消費者認知的企業社會責 任做更精準的分類，或者擴大地理範圍比較不同區域的消費者認知，藉此確 認此架構是否適用於不同地理區。
2. 本研究實驗部分最初假設不同調節焦點的消費者對於企業社會責任會有不 同的認知，但此研究結果不成立，建議後續研究可擴大樣本、改變公司的所 屬產業，並深入探討其對消費者對企業社會責任認知之影響。
3. 本研究實驗部分最初假設不同構念階層的消費者對於企業社會責任會有不 同的認知，但此研究結果不成立，建議後續研究可持續進一步研究，並深入 探討其對消費者對企業社會責任認知之影響。
4. 本研究實驗部分最初假設不同構念階層的消費者對於不同社會距離的代言 人會對企業社會責任有不同的認知，但此研究結果部分不成立，建議後續研 究可持續進一步探討，並深入了解其對消費者對企業社會責任認知之影響。
5. 本研究共分為兩實驗，調節焦點與構念階層。建議後續研究可進一步了解調 節焦點與構念階層是否有交互作用的產生，進而影響消費者對企業社會責任 認知。
‧ 國
立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
參考文獻
一、中文部分
林宜諄、高希均(2008)。企業社會責任入門手冊。台灣:天下文化出版。
林怡萱(2011)。企業社會責任表現對消費者知覺及購買意向之研究。國立台灣中 山大學公共事務管理研究所碩士論文。
涂金堂(2011)。SPSS 與量化研究。台北：五南文化出版
馬慶玲(2011)。調節焦點影響廣告之研究。國立政治大學心理學研究所碩士論 文。
張懷予(2009)。企業社會責任與行銷溝通工具、企業特徵對購買態度影響之研究
－以食品業為例。東吳大學國際經營與貿易學系碩士班國際企業組碩士論 文。
陳文姿(2011)。從企業社會責任與綠色智慧資本探討台灣銀行業的永續經營效益。
國立東華大學企業管理學系碩士論文。
簡以潔(2011)。以消費者－公司認同為中介變數探討企業社會責任認知與購買意 願之關係。國立政治大學企業管理學系碩士論文。
二、外文部分
Aaker, J. L., & Lee, A. Y. (2001). ‘I’ seek pleasures and ‘We’ avoid pain: The role of self-regulatory goal in information processing and persuasion. Journal of
Consumer Research, 28 (1), 33-49.
Aaker, J. L., & Maheswaran, D. (1997). The effect of cultural orientation on persuasion. Journal of Consumer Research, 24 (3), 315-328.
Aaker, J. L., & Williams, P. (1998). Empathy versus pride: The influence of emotional appeals across cultures. Journal of Consumer Research, 25 (3), 241-261.
Agerstrom, J., Bjo¨rklund, F., & Allwoodm, C. M. (2009). The influence of temporal distance on justice and care morality. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology, 51(1), 46-p55.
‧
Alcaniz, E. B., Caceres, R. C., & Perez, R. C. (2010). Alliances between brands and social causes: The influence of company credibility on social responsibility image. Journal of Business Ethics, 96, 169-186.
Amaeshi, K. M., Osuji, O. K., & Nnodim, P.(2008). Corporate social responsibility in supply chains of global brands: A boundaryless responsibility? Clarifications, exceptions, and implications. Journal of Business Ethics, 81, 223–234.
Ambady, N., Koo, JF., & Rosenthal, R. (1996). More than words: Longuistic and nonlinguistic politeness in two cultures. Journal of Personaality and Social
Psychology, 70, 996-1011
Becker-Olsen, K. L., Cudmore, B. A., & Hill, R. P. (2006). The impact of perceived corporate social responsibility on consumer behavior. Journal of Business
Research, 59(1), 46–53
Berens, G., Riel, C. B. M., & Bruggen, G. H. (2005). Corporate associations and consumer product responses: The moderating role of corporate brand dominance.
Journal of Marketing, 69(3), 35-48.
Berger, C. P. H., & Drumwright, M. E. (2006). Identity, identification, and relationship through social alliances. Journal of the Academy of Marketing
Science, 34(2), 128-137.
Bhattacharya, C. B., & Sen, S. (2003). Consumer-company identifican: A framework for understanding consumers' relationships with companies. Journal of Market
-ing, 67(2), 76-88.
Bornemann, T., & Homburt, C. (2011). Psychological distance and the dual role of price. Journal of Consumer Research, 38, 490-504.
Bowen, H. R. (1953). Social responsibilities of the businessman. N.Y.: Harper and Brothers.
Brown, T. J., Dacin, P. A., Pratt, M. G., & Whetten, D. A. (2006). Identity, intended image, construed image, and reputation: An interdisciplinary framework and suggested terminology. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 34(2), 99.
Brunk, K. H. (2010). Exploring origins of ethical company/brand perceptions: A consumer perspective of corporate ethics. Journal of Business Research, 63(3), 255-262.
Brunk, K.H., & Blümelhuber, C. (2011). One strike and your're out: Qualitative insights into the formation of consumers' ethical company or brand perceptions.
Journal of Business Research, 64 (2), 134-141
Carroll, A. B. (1978). Linking business ethics to behavior in organizations. SAM
Advanced Management Journal, 43(3), 4-11.
Carroll, A. B. (1991). The pyramid of corporate social responsibility: Toward the moral management of organizational stakeholders. Business Horizons, 34(4),
‧
commitment. Business Ethics: A European Review, 16(1), 19-33.Creyer, E. H. (1997). The influence of firm behavior on purchase intention: Do consumers really care about business ethics? Journal of Consumer Marketing,
14(6), 421-432.
Darigan, K. H., & Post, J. E. (2009). Corporate citizenship in China. The Journal of
Corporate Citizenship, 35(3), 39-52.
Douglas, L., & Medin, H. G. (2012). Construal levels and moral judgment：Some complications. Judgment and Decision Making ,7(5),630.
Ebert, J. E. J. (2005). Self-sympathy in the short term: Self-other differences in long term benefits and short term costs. Advances in Consumer Research, 32, 182-183.
Elkington, J. (1997). Cannibals with forks: The triple bottom line of twenty first century business. Oxford: Capstone.
Freitas, A. L., Gollwitzer, P., & Trope, Y. (2004). The influence of abstract and concrete mindsets on anticipating and guiding others’ self-regulatory efforts.
Journal of Experimental Social psychology, 40 (6), 739–52.
Freitas, A., Salovey, P., & Liberman, N. (2001). Abstract and concrete self-evaluation goals. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 80 (3), 410-424
Gardberg, N. A., & Fombrun, C. J. (2006). Corporate citizenship: Creating intangible assets across institutional environments. Academy of Management Review, 31(2), 329-346.
Guenster, N., Bauer, R., Derwall, J., & Koedijk, K. (2011). The economic value of corporate eco-efficiency. European Financial Management, 17(4), 679-704 . Hakkyun, K., Akshay, R. R., & Angela, Y. L. (2009). It’s time to vote: The effect of
matching message orientation and temporal frame on political persuasion.
Journal of Consumer Research, 35, 877-889.
Haws, K. L., Dholakia, M. U., & Bearden, W. O. (2010). An assessment of chronic regulatory focus measures. Journal of Marketing Research,47(2),p.967-982.
Heslin, P. A., & Ochoa, J. D. (2008). Understanding and developing strategic corporate social responsibility. Organizational Dynamics, 37(2), 125-144.
Higgins, E. T. (1997). Beyond pleasure and pain. American Psychologist, 52(12), 1280-1300.
Higgins, E. T. (2000). Making a good decision: Value from fit. American
Psychologist, 55(11), 1217-1230.
Higgins, E. T. (2002). How self-regulation creates distinct values: The case of promotion and prevention decision making. Journal of Consumer Psychology,
‧
12(3), 177-191.
Higgins, E. T. (2006). Value from hedonic experience and engagement. Psychological
Review, 113, 439-460
Higgins, E. T., & Mark, P. Z. (1998). Promotion and prevention: Regulatory focus as a motivational principle. In Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 30, 1-46.
Higgins, E. T., Idson, L. C., Freitas, A. L., Spiegel, S., & Molden, D. C. (2003).
Transfer of value from fit. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 84(6), 1140-1153.
Higgins, E. T., Roney, C. J. R., Crowe, E., & Hymes, C. (1994). Ideal versus ought predilections for approach and avoidance: Distinct self-regulatory systems.
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 66(2), 276-286.
Idson, L. C., Liberman, N., & Higgins, E. T. (2000). Distinguishing gains from nonlosses and losses from nongains: A regulatory focus perspective on hedonic intensity. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 36(3), 252-274.
Joireman, J., David, E. S.,& Spangenberg, E. R. (2005). Fiscal responsibility and the consideration of future consequences. Personality and Individual Differences, 39 (6), 1159–1168
Lee, A. Y., & Aaker, J. L. (2004). Bringing the frame into focus: The influence of regulatory fit on processing fluency and persuasion. Journal of Personality and
Social Psychology, 86 (2), 205-218.
Lee, A. Y., Aaker, J. L., & Gardner, W. L. (2000). The pleasures and pains of distinct self-construals: The role of interdependence in regulatory focus. Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology, 78 (6), 1122-1134.
Liberman, N., & Trope Y. (2008). The psychology of transcending the here and now.
Science, 322, 1201-1205.
Liberman, N., Y., & Stephan, E. (2007). Psychological distance. In A. W. Kruglanski
& E. T. Higgins (eds.), Social psychology: Handbook of basic principles(pp.
353-383),, N. Y.: Guilford Press.
Liberman, N. I., & Camacho, C. J., & Higgins, E. T. (1999). Promotion and prevention choices between stability and change. Journal of Personality and
Social Psychology, 77 (12), 1135-1145.
Lin, C. P. (2010). Modeling corporate citizenship, organizational trust, and work engagement based on attachment theory. Journal of Business Ethics, 94(4), 517-531.
Liviatan, I., Trope, Y., & Liberman, N. (2008). Interpersonal similarity as a social distance dimension: Implications for perception of others’ actions. Journal of
Experimental Social Psychology, 44, 1256-1269.
Marin, L., & Ruiz, S. (2007). I need you too! Corporate identity attractiveness for
‧
consumers and the role of social responsibility. Journal of Business Ethics, 71(3), 245-260.
Mark, D. G., Pronschinske, M. R., & Matthew, W. (2011). Perceived organizational motives and consumer responses to proactive and reactive CSR. Journal of
Business Ethics, 102, 639-652.
McGuire, J. W. (1963). Business and society: McGraw-Hill Companies.
Mohr, L. A., Webb, D. J., & Harris, K. E. (2001). Do consumers expect companies to be socially responsible? The impact of corporate social responsibility on buying behavior. Journal of Consumer Affairs, 35(1), 45-72.
O’Connor, A., Shumate, M., & Meister, M. (2008). Walk the line: Active moms defines corporate social responsibility. Public Relations Review, 34(4), 343- 350.
Perez, R. C. (2009). Effects of perceived identity based on corporate social responsibility: the role of consumer identification with the company. Corporate
Reputation Review, 12(2), 177-191.
Porter, E. M., & Kramer, R. M. (2002). The competitive advantage of corporate philanthropy. Harvard Business Review, 80(12), 56-69.
Porter, E. M., & Kramer, R. M. (2006). Strategy and society: The link between competitive advantage and corporate social responsibility and environmental management. Harvard Business Review, 84(12), 78-92.
Ricks, J. M. Jr. (2005). An assessment of strategic corporate philanthropy on perceptions of brand equity variables. Journal of Consumer Marketing, 22(3), 121– 134.
Sethi, S. P. (1975). Dimensions of corporate social performance: An analytical framework. California Management Review, 17(3), 58-64.
Sharma, D., Borna, S., & Stearns, J. M. (2009). An investigation of the effects of corporate ethical values on employee commitment and performance: Examining the moderating role of perceived fairness. Journal of business ethics, 89(2), 251-260.
Singh, J., de los Salmones Sanchez, M. M. G., & del Bosque, I. R. (2008).
Understanding corporate social responsibility and product perceptions in consumer markets: A cross-cultural evaluation. Journal of business ethics, 80(3), 597-611.
Smith, P. K.,, & Trope, Y. (2006). You focus on the forest when you’re in charge of the trees: Power priming and abstract information processing. Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology, 90(4), 578–596.Stephan, E., Liberman, N., &
Trope, Y. (2010). Politeness and psychological distance: A construal level perspective. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 98, 268-280.
Stephan, E., Liberman, N., & Trope, Y. (2011). The effects of time perspective and
‧ 國
立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
level of construal on social distance. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology,
47, 397-402.
Sweller,J.,Van Merrienboer,J. G., & Paas, F. G.W. C. (1998). Cognitive architecture and instructional design. Educational Psychology Review,10(3),251-297.
Tangari, A., Heintz, J. A. Garretson, F., Scot, B., & Jeremy, K. (2010). The moderating influence of consumers’ temporal orientation on the framing of societal needs and corporate responses in cause-related marketing campaigns.
Journal of Advertising, 39(2), 35–50.
Tumasjan, C., Christopher, J., Higgins E. T., & Lugar, L. (2003). Moral value transfer from regulatory fit: What feels right is right and what feels wrong is wrong.
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 84 (3), 498-510
Tumasjan, A., Strobel, M., & Welpe, I. (2011). Ethical leadership evaluations after moral transgression: social distance makes the difference. Journal of Business
Ethics, 99, 609–622
Vallacher, R. R., & Daniel, M. (1987). What do people think they’re doing? Action identification and human behavior. Psychological Review, 94 (1), 3–15.
Vilanova, M., Lozano, J. M., & Arenas, D. (2009). Exploring the nature of the relationship between CSR and competitiveness. Journal of Business Ethics, 87, 57-69.
‧
‧
‧ 國
立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
13. 公司積極改善產品的品質 1 2 3 4 5 14. 公司採行公平交易與採購 1 2 3 4 5 Part III：基本資料
性別：○男生 ○女生
年齡：○16~20 歲 ○21~25 歲 ○26~30 歲 ○31~35 歲 ○36~40 歲 ○41~45 歲
○46~50 歲 ○51 歲以上
職業：○軍公教人員 ○ 製造業 ○ 服務業 ○ 商業 ○ 自由業 ○家管
○專業人員（律師、醫師、會計師…） ○ 學生 ○其他_______
收入：○10000 元以下 ○10001~20000 元 ○20001~30000 元 ○30001~40000 元 ○40001 元以上
附錄二 企業社會責任活動溝通之消費者認知
親愛的受訪者：
這是一份有關「企業社會責任活動溝通之消費者認知」的學術問卷，請惠予協 助填寫。本問卷不具名，所有資料僅供研究分析之用，絕對不會個別對外公開，
請您放心作答。
您的意見對本研究非常重要，懇請撥冗作答。
祝您填答愉快，並祝平安。
國立政治大學企業管理研究所碩士班 指導教授: 張愛華 博士 研究生: 鄭佩蓉敬上
Part I：此部分想了解消費者對於蔡依林的看法
‧
http://news.sina.com/sinacn/502-104-103-107/2009-05-03/1336741246.html
事項
‧
‧
‧ 國
立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
2. 永續發展 1 2 3 4 5
3. 保護地球 1 2 3 4 5
4. 回饋社會 1 2 3 4 5
5. 引導部屬 1 2 3 4 5
6. 水汙染 1 2 3 4 5
7. 改正造成污染的製造過程 1 2 3 4 5
8. 遵守環保規範 1 2 3 4 5
9. 設立汙水排放檢驗室 1 2 3 4 5
10. 不會排放汙染環境的水 1 2 3 4 5
Part VI：基本資料
性別：○男生 ○女生
年齡：○16~20 歲 ○21~25 歲 ○26~30 歲 ○31~35 歲 ○36~40 歲 ○41~45 歲
○46~50 歲 ○51 歲以上
職業：○軍公教人員 ○ 製造業 ○ 服務業 ○ 商業 ○ 自由業 ○家管
○專業人員（律師、醫師、會計師…） ○ 學生 ○其他_______
平均個人月收入：○10000 元以下 ○10001~20000 元 ○20001~30000 元
○30001~40000 元 ○40001 元以上
‧
‧
‧ 國
立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
Part III：請您以您主觀認知回答以下事項
1.為「公司積極研發改善環境之科技與產品」，此企業社會責任活動偏向下列何 者(創造利益簡稱興利&消除弊害簡稱除弊)?
○興利 ○除弊 ○不興利也不除弊
2.興福公司不濫用當地自然資源，我對此活動的關心程度?
○非常關心 ○關心 ○普通 ○不關心 ○非常不關心 3.您依您記憶來勾選興福公司主要販賣的商品(複選)
○沙發 ○床組 ○櫥櫃 ○手機 ○配件
Part IIII：基本資料 性別：○男生 ○女生
年齡：○20 歲以下 ○21~30 歲 ○31~40 歲 ○41~50 歲 ○51~60 歲 ○61~70
○71 歲以上
教育程度：○小學或小學以下 ○國中 ○高中職 ○大學專科 ○研究所以上 職業：○軍公教人員 ○製造業 ○服務業 ○商業 ○自由業 ○家管
○農業 ○學生 ○其他_______
個人每月平均收入：○9999 元以下 ○10000~29999 元 ○30000~49999 元
○50000~69999 元 ○70000 元以上
‧
‧
‧ 國
立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
Part III：請您以您主觀認知回答以下事項
1.為「公司不濫用當地自然資源」，此企業社會責任活動偏向下列何者 (創造利益簡稱興利&消除弊害簡稱除弊)?
○興利 ○除弊 ○不興利也不除弊
2.興福公司不濫用當地自然資源，我對此活動的關心程度?
○非常關心 ○關心 ○普通 ○不關心 ○非常不關心 3.您依您記憶來勾選興福公司主要販賣的商品(複選)
○沙發 ○床組 ○櫥櫃 ○手機 ○配件
Part IIII：基本資料 性別：○男生 ○女生
年齡：○20 歲以下 ○21~30 歲 ○31~40 歲 ○41~50 歲 ○51~60 歲 ○61~70
○71 歲以上
教育程度：○小學或小學以下 ○國中 ○高中職 ○大學專科 ○研究所以上 職業：○軍公教人員 ○製造業 ○服務業 ○商業 ○自由業 ○家管
○農業 ○學生 ○其他_______
個人每月平均收入：○9999 元以下 ○10000~29999 元 ○30000~49999 元
○50000~69999 元 ○70000 元以上
‧
‧
‧ 國
立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
Part III：請您以您主觀認知回答以下事項
1.為「公司政策確保女性及弱勢團體之工作權利」，此企業社會責任活動偏向下 列何者(創造利益簡稱興利&消除弊害簡稱除弊)?
○興利 ○除弊 ○不興利也不除弊
2.興福公司確保女性及弱勢團體之工作權利，我對此活動的關心程度?
○非常關心 ○關心 ○普通 ○不關心 ○非常不關心 3.您依您記憶來勾選興福公司主要販賣的商品(複選)
○沙發 ○床組 ○櫥櫃 ○手機 ○配件
Part IIII：基本資料 性別：○男生 ○女生
年齡：○20 歲以下 ○21~30 歲 ○31~40 歲 ○41~50 歲 ○51~60 歲 ○61~70
○71 歲以上
教育程度：○小學或小學以下 ○國中 ○高中職 ○大學專科 ○研究所以上 職業：○軍公教人員 ○製造業 ○服務業 ○商業 ○自由業 ○家管
○農業 ○學生 ○其他_______
個人每月平均收入：○9999 元以下 ○10000~29999 元 ○30000~49999 元
○50000~69999 元 ○70000 元以上
‧
‧
‧ 國
立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
Part III：請您以您主觀認知回答以下事項
1.為「公司政策確保女性及弱勢團體之工作權利」，此企業社會責任活動偏向下 列何者(創造利益簡稱興利&消除弊害簡稱除弊)?
○興利 ○除弊 ○不興利也不除弊
2.興福公司確保女性及弱勢團體之工作權利，我對此活動的關心程度?
○非常關心 ○關心 ○普通 ○不關心 ○非常不關心
○非常關心 ○關心 ○普通 ○不關心 ○非常不關心