橫幅標題式網路廣告表現方式對品牌印象影響之研究

Abstract

自從1994年網路廣告問世以來，許多的行銷研究人員與廣告業主都在詢問探討著同樣的問題：到底網際網路廣告的效果是否真的有效？目前評估網路廣告的廣告效果是以網路廣告被看到的次數、網路廣告被點選的次數.....等等方式為主。但是，以這些方式來評量網路廣告的廣告效果，在事實上並不周延，因為從網路廣告被看到後，一直到真正被點選之前，還有一種叫做「品牌印象」的因素在左右。到底網際網路廣告的效果如何？在沒有點選進入的情況下，Banner廣告的表現方式和廣告曝光次數對品牌印象記憶與廣告態度的影響如何？ 本研究以實地實驗法進行，以1998年台灣地區網路上的Banner廣告為研究對象，藉由KJ法群島化的方式將Banner廣告的表現方式分類，並探討瀏覽者對「品牌印象」的記憶與廣告態度，是否會因不同的Banner廣告表現方式、廣告曝光次數的不同而有所差異。在研究分析後提出在幾點建議，提供學術和實務上的參考。研究結果如下： （一）廣告表現方式：藉由KJ法群島化的方式將Banner廣告的表現方式分類為下述五種：（1）贈品、優惠式。（2）公告式。（3）故弄玄虛式。（4）特色訴求式。（5）惡作劇式。 （二）在相同的曝光次數下，五種廣告表現方式的Banner廣告在「品牌印象」記憶與廣告態度上的差異不大。而個別在3、5、7次曝光次數時，在「品牌印象」記憶上以5、7次的曝光次數下效果較佳。而在廣告態度上則無顯著性差異。 （三）廣告的表現方式對「品牌印象」記憶與廣告態度上的差異不大，而廣告曝光次數對「品牌印象」記憶則有顯著性的差異影響，其中以5次的廣告曝光次數的效果最佳。較多次的廣告曝光次數在品牌印象記憶（品牌回憶與再認）、廣告態度之間出現的倒 U 字型關係並不明顯。 （四）瀏覽者對WWW上Banner廣告的看法與態度，對「品牌印象」記憶與廣告態度上的影響不大。五種廣告表現方式的Banner廣告在廣告態度上有差異，但是未達顯著的差異水準，其中以「故弄玄虛式」最佳。

Ever since net advertisement (web ad) was introduced to the public in 1994, many sales researchers and advertisers keep asking the same question: Does net advertisement really works? Until now, the approaches of evaluating potential effects of net advertisements merely include counting how many times the ad was seen, chosen or clicked through. However, it’s neither cautious nor objective to evaluate the effect by using those mentioned methods. As a matter of fact, before the Ad is clicked through, the so-called “ Brand Impact” starts functioning to influence the viewers immediately after the ad has been seen. Several questions then arise: What is the indeed effect of web advertisement? And how does approach of Banner Ad and its exposure frequency influence brand impact and viewers’ attitude toward web ads? The research was conducted via Field Experiment technique, taking the ads in the web of Taiwan in 1998 for the studying subject. K.J. cluster method was used to classify the approaches of various Banner Ads. The study also examined, in terms of various Banner Ads approaches and exposure times, if there will be any difference between the viewers’ brand impact and attitudes toward ads. Several suggestions were made after the analysis had been done.Therefore, the study could provide references for academic and practical purposes. Results of study are listed as follow: 1. Ad approach: 5 types of Banner Ad approach were cataloged according to K.J. cluster method. They are (1) Prize offering (2) Announcement (3) Suspicious (4) Featuring (5) Tricking. 2. Under the same exposure frequency, five types of approach presented no obvious difference in brand impact. However, in terms of three, five and seven times of exposure, each type showed better brand impact with five and seven times, and no significant difference in respect to attitude toward ads. 3. All types of ad approach had no influence on brand impact and attitude toward ads, while exposure times of ad had significant effect on brand impact. Among the above exposure frequencies, 5-exposure time had the best effect. The relationship of invert U-shape between brand impact (brand recall and recognition) and attitude in increasing exposure frequency toward ads was not significant. 4. The opinions and attitudes of viewrs had nothing to do with brand impact. There was a difference between the five types of Banner Ad approach, however, the difference didn`t reach the significant level statistically. Among them, the suspicious type was the best approach of all.