觀察現今餐飲業，在餐點外觀設計方面有更多元、精緻的趨勢，除了幾何圖形、 藝術意象的設計之外，隨著卡通主題餐廳的興起，在餐點造型上也紛紛出現以動物、 卡通造型主題的設計。然而過去研究多著重於探討餐點擺盤之視覺藝術程度、食材 擺放於餐盤的位置，如中心或邊緣之差異或食材擺放的集中程度，雖然上述研究為 餐點擺盤、造型帶來許多重要的貢獻，卻多是以探討單一造型美感種類為主，並多 探究餐點美感在消費前對於消費者感受之影響，未能提供目前同時充斥著多樣造 型之市場現況對於餐點造型在消費前、後情境中所造成的影響更深入的建議。故鑒 於此缺口，本研究同時將藝術意象造型及卡通動物造型之餐點美感類型納入研究 探討，並結合刺激-機制-反應模型(Stimulus-Organism-Response Model; S-O-R)， 探討並驗證不同類型之餐點造型美感之差異，是否會因為食用前後外觀上的變化 而影響消費者情緒，進而造成較為負面的行為。
本研究透過兩項實驗，以混合實驗設計之方式，驗證餐點造型美感對於消費者 情緒及行為之影響，同時進一步探討消費者性別及知覺努力對此一效果之影響。研 究發現，擬人化動物之餐點造型相較於抽象藝術圖樣及無任何設計之餐點造型雖 在消費前能引發消費者較佳的情緒及行為，然而隨著食用過程中餐點外觀破壞程 度漸增，反而會造成消費者正向情緒下降進而導致行為上之差異。本研究的發現也 將能提供給相關的業者許多實用且具有價值的實務建議。

When looking into the current catering industry, we have noticed that there’s the trends of design and decorate the dishes in a more sophisticated and exquisite way. In addition to those appearances inspired by geometric figures and artistic images, with the blooming of cartoon-themed restaurants, people engaged in the catering industry use lots of animals and cartoon modeling theme to decorate food. However, most of the studies focused on the degree of visual art of the food decoration, the position of the ingredients on the plates, such as the difference between placing food in the center or on the edge of the plate. Although these studies had made lots of important contributions, these studies focus mainly on a single type of food decoration, and most of them concern about the impact of food aesthetics on consumer experience only before consumption. Therefore, in view of this gap, this study uses the Stimulus-Organism-Response Model (SOR model) to discuss whether different types of decorations affect the consumers’ emotional response due to changes in food appearance pre- and post- consumption, and which in turn causes the negative behavioral response. Study 1 conducted a 3 x 2 mixed design experiment and Study 2 conducted a 2 x 2 x 2 mixed design experiment. This study has found that the type of animal food appearance, compared to art designs and the food without any decoration, may cause consumers to have better emotional and behavioral responses before consumption. However, with destruction of food appearance gradually, consumers perceive negative emotion and then causes the negative behavioral responses. The findings of this study could provide several useful and valuable implications for practitioners.

目錄
論文審定書 i
誌謝 ii
摘要 iii
Abstract iv
第壹章、緒論 1
第一節、研究背景 1
第二節、研究動機 4
第三節、研究問題 6
第四節、研究目的 7
第貳章、文獻探討 8
第一節、產品外觀 8
第二節、美感 9
第三節、餐點造型美感 11
一、無生命之造型美感 13
二、有生命之造型美感 14
三、小結 16
第四節、情緒喚起 17
一、S-O-R 模型 17
第五節、消費者性別 20
第六節、知覺努力 22
第參章、研究假說 24
第一節、假說推論 24
一、餐點造型美感對消費者情緒之效果 24
二、消費者情緒對餐點造型美感與消費者行為之中介效果 26
三、性別對於餐點造型與消費者情緒之干擾效果 28
四、知覺努力對餐點造型與消費者情緒之干擾效果 29
第肆章、研究方法與架構 31
第一節、實驗一 31
一、樣本與實驗設計 31
二、實驗刺激及程序 32
三、變數衡量 33
第二節、實驗二 36
一、樣本與實驗設計 36
二、實驗刺激及程序 37
三、變數衡量 39
第伍章、研究結果 41
第一節、實驗一之分析結果 41
一、研究樣本組成 41
二、變數平均值、標準差及量表信度分析 43
三、操弄性檢定 44
四、假說驗證 46
五、討論 51
第二節、實驗二之分析結果 53
一、研究樣本組成 53
二、變數平均值、標準差及量表信度分析 55
三、操弄性檢定 56
四、假說驗證 58
五、討論 71
第陸章、結論與建議 73
第一節、研究發現與討論 73
一、餐點造型之選擇 73
二、消費者性別之影響 74
三、消費者知覺努力之影響 74
四、消費者情緒之中介效果 75
第二節、理論意涵 76
一、探討多樣餐點造型美感 76
二、探討餐點造型美感在消費前後外觀變化對消費者之影響 76
三、以 S-O-R 模型為基礎，探討餐點外觀類型對消費者情緒及行為之影響 77
第三節、實務意涵 78
一、對期間限定之主題餐廳而言 78
二、對計畫長期經營之餐廳而言 78
第四節、研究限制與未來研究方向 80
第柒章、參考文獻 81
附錄 88

中文文獻
自由時報（2018年1月7日）。開業僅一年多 宇宙人主題餐廳明起停業【網路新聞】。取自http://news.ltn.com.tw/news/life/breakingnews/2305094
林俊昇、林政佑、周恩頤(2016)。服務體驗管理：亞洲文獻回顧與未來研究方向。臺大管理論叢，26(2)，303-352。
張瑀庭（2013年2月27日）。中菜西吃 更有色香味。商業週刊。取自https://www.businessweekly.com.tw/article.aspx?id=3081&type=Blog
網路溫度計（2015年4月11日）。超療癒的卡哇伊美食！全台最夯卡通主題餐廳大集合【線上調查】。取自 https://dailyview.tw/Daily/2015/04/11
聯合新聞網（2017年5月3日）。美日台韓主題餐廳大對決 台式餐廳竟然只有這一家上榜！【網路新聞】。取自 https://udn.com/news/story/7187/2479762
英文文獻
Alba, J. W., & Williams, E. F. (2013). Pleasure principles: A review of research on hedonic consumption. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 23(1), 2-18.
Allen, M. W., Gupta, R., & Monnier, A. (2008). The interactive effect of cultural symbols and human values on taste evaluation. Journal of Consumer Research, 35(2), 294-308.
Auvray, M., & Spence, C. (2008). The multisensory perception of flavor. Consciousness and cognition, 17(3), 1016-1031.
Babin, B. J., Darden, W. R., & Griffin, M. (1994). Work and/or fun: measuring hedonic and utilitarian shopping value. Journal of Consumer Research, 20(4), 644-656.
Bagozzi, R. P. (1986). Principles of marketing management. Chicago: Science Research Associates.
Belk, R. W. (1988). Possessions and the extended self. Journal of Consumer Research, 15(2), 139-168.
Bem, D. J. (1972). Self-perception theory. In Advances in experimental social psychology Vol. 6. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
Berkowitz, M. (1987). Product shape as a design innovation strategy. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 4(4), 274-283.
Berlyne, D. E. (1974). The new experimental aesthetics. Studies in the new experimental aesthetics, 1-25.
Bitner, M. J. (1992). Servicescapes: The impact of physical surroundings on customers and employees. Journal of Marketing, 56(2), 57-71.
Bloch, P. H. (1995). Seeking the ideal form: Product design and consumer response. The Journal of Marketing, 59(3), 16-29.
Calder, B. J., Phillips, L. W., & Tybout, A. M. (1981). Designing research for application. Journal of Consumer Research, 8(2), 197-207.
Carver, C. S., & White, T. L. (1994). Behavioral inhibition, behavioral activation, and affective responses to impending reward and punishment: the BIS/BAS scales. Journal of personality and social psychology, 67(2), 319-333.
Chang, H.-J., Eckman, M., & Yan, R.-N. (2011). Application of the Stimulus-Organism-Response model to the retail environment: the role of hedonic motivation in impulse buying behavior. The International Review of Retail, Distribution and Consumer Research, 21(3), 233-249.
Childers, T. L., Carr, C. L., Peck, J., & Carson, S. (2001). Hedonic and utilitarian motivations for online retail shopping behavior. Journal of retailing, 77(4), 511-535.
Csikszentmihalyi, M., & Robinson, R. E. (1990). The art of seeing: An interpretation of the aesthetic encounter. Los Angeles, CA: Getty Publications.
Cunningham, J., & Roberts, P. (2012). Inside Her Pretty Little Head: A new theory of female motivation and what it means for marketing: Marshall Cavendish International Asia Pte Ltd.
DeVellis, R. F. (1991). Scale development: Theory and applications. Newbury Park, CA: Sage publications.
Dutton, D. (2009). The art instinct: Beauty, pleasure, & human evolution. New York: Oxford University Press.
Elliott, C. (2008). Marketing fun foods: a profile and analysis of supermarket food messages targeted at children. Canadian Public Policy, 34(2), 259-273.
Festinger, L. (1957). A Theory of Cognitive Dissonance. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
Franck, K., & Rosen, E. (1949). A projective test of masculinity-femininity. Journal of Consulting Psychology, 13(4), 247.
Gilboa, S., & Rafaeli, A. (2003). Store environment, emotions and approach behaviour: applying environmental aesthetics to retailing. The International Review of Retail, Distribution and Consumer Research, 13(2), 195-211.
Gombrich, E. H. (1979). The sense of order: a study in the psychology of decorative art Phaidon. Phaidon, London: Oxford.
Hagtvedt, H., & Patrick, V. M. (2008). Art infusion: The influence of visual art on the perception and evaluation of consumer products. Journal of Marketing Research, 45(3), 379-389.
Hayes, A. F. (2017). Introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process analysis: A regression-based approach: Guilford Publications.
Hilgard, E. R. (1962). Impulsive versus realistic thinking: An examination of the distinction between primary and secondary processes in thought. Psychological Bulletin, 59(6), 477-488.
Hirschman, E. C., & Holbrook, M. B. (1982). Hedonic consumption: emerging concepts, methods and propositions. The Journal of Marketing, 46(3), 92-101.
Holbrook, M. B., & Hirschman, E. C. (1982). The experiential aspects of consumption: Consumer fantasies, feelings, and fun. Journal of Consumer Research, 9(2), 132-140.
Holbrook, M. B., & Zirlin, R. B. (1985). Artistic creation, artworks, and aesthetic appreciation: Some philosophical contributions to nonprofit marketing. Advances in nonprofit marketing, 1(1), 1-54.
Hollins, B., & Pugh, S. (1990). Successful product design: what to do and when. London: Butterworth-Heinemann.
Hurling, R., & Shepherd, R. (2003). Eating with your eyes: effect of appearance on expectations of liking. Appetite, 41(2), 167-174.
Isen, A. M. (1984). Toward understanding the role of affect in cognition. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Johnson, O., & Knapp, R. H. (1963). Sex differences in aesthetic preferences. The Journal of social psychology, 61(2), 279-301.
Jones, P. L. (1991). Taste today. New York: Pergamon Press.
Kelley, H. H. (1967). Attribution theory in social psychology. Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press.
Khan, U., & Dhar, R. (2006). Licensing effect in consumer choice. Journal of Marketing Research, 43(2), 259-266.
Kim, J., & Forsythe, S. (2007). Hedonic usage of product virtualization technologies in online apparel shopping. International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management, 35(6), 502-514.
Kirmani, A. (1990). The effect of perceived advertising costs on brand perceptions. Journal of Consumer Research, 17(2), 160-171.
Kivetz, R., & Simonson, I. (2002). Self-control for the righteous: Toward a theory of precommitment to indulgence. Journal of Consumer Research, 29(2), 199-217.
Kotler, P., & Alexander Rath, G. (1984). Design: A powerful but neglected strategic tool. Journal of business strategy, 5(2), 16-21.
Kruger, J., Wirtz, D., Van Boven, L., & Altermatt, T. W. (2004). The effort heuristic. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 40(1), 91-98.
Lin, Y.-C., & I, B. (2011). Generation and gender differences in aesthetic responses to popular illustrations. Visual Arts Research, 37(1), 30-41.
Maritain, J. (1966). Beauty and imitation. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.
Martins, Y., & Pliner, P. (2005). Human food choices: An examination of the factors underlying acceptance/rejection of novel and familiar animal and nonanimal foods. Appetite, 45(3), 214-224.
Martins, Y., & Pliner, P. (2006). “Ugh! That's disgusting!”: Identification of the characteristics of foods underlying rejections based on disgust. Appetite, 46(1), 75-85.
McManus, I., & Furnham, A. (2010). " Fun, fun, fun": Types of fun, attitudes to fun, and their relation to personality and biographical factors. Psychology, 1(3), 159-168.
Mehrabian, A., & Russell, J. A. (1974). An approach to environmental psychology. Cambridge, MA: the MIT Press.
Michel, C., Velasco, C., Fraemohs, P., & Spence, C. (2015). Studying the impact of plating on ratings of the food served in a naturalistic dining context. Appetite, 90, 45-50.
Michel, C., Velasco, C., Gatti, E., & Spence, C. (2014). A taste of Kandinsky: assessing the influence of the artistic visual presentation of food on the dining experience. Flavour, 3(7), 1-11.
Morales, A. C. (2005). Giving firms an “E” for effort: Consumer responses to high-effort firms. Journal of Consumer Research, 31(4), 806-812.
Moreau, C. P., Bonney, L., & Herd, K. B. (2011). It's the thought (and the effort) that counts: How customizing for others differs from customizing for oneself. Journal of Marketing, 75(5), 120-133.
Moss, G. (1995). Differences in the design aesthetic of men and women: implications for product branding. Journal of Brand Management, 3(1), 51-61.
Moss, G., & Gunn, R. W. (2009). Gender differences in website production and preference aesthetics: preliminary implications for ICT in education and beyond. Behaviour & Information Technology, 28(5), 447-460.
Muehling, D. D., Sprott, D. E., & Sprott, D. E. (2004). The power of reflection: An empirical examination of nostalgia advertising effects. Journal of Advertising, 33(3), 25-35.
Mukhopadhyay, A., & Johar, G. V. (2009). Indulgence as self‐reward for prior shopping restraint: A justification‐based mechanism. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 19(3), 334-345.
Nadiri, H., & Gunay, G. N. (2013). An empirical study to diagnose the outcomes of customers’ experiences in trendy coffee shops. Journal of Business Economics and Management, 14(1), 22-53.
Nasar, J. L. (1989). Perception, cognition, and evaluation of urban places. In Public places and spaces Vol. 10, pp. 31-56. Boston, MA: Springer.
Nenkov, G. Y., & Scott, M. L. (2014). “So cute I could eat it up”: Priming effects of cute products on indulgent consumption. Journal of Consumer Research, 41(2), 326-341.
Norman, D. A. (2004). Emotional design: Why we love (or hate) everyday things. New York, NY: Basic Civitas Books.
Norton, M. I., Mochon, D., & Ariely, D. (2012). The IKEA effect: When labor leads to love. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 22(3), 453-460.
Nussbaum, B. (1993). Hot products. Business Week, 7, 54-57.
Nussbaum, B., & Port, O. (1988). Smart design. Business Week, 1.
Osborne, H. (1979). Some theories of aesthetic judgment. The journal of aesthetics and art criticism, 38(2), 135-144.
Page, C., & Herr, P. M. (2002). An investigation of the processes by which product design and brand strength interact to determine initial affect and quality judgments. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 12(2), 133-147.
Papanek, V. (1984). Design for the real world: human ecology and social change. New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold Co.
Parasuraman, A., Zeithaml, V. A., & Berry, L. L. (1988). Servqual: A multiple-item scale for measuring consumer perceptions of service quality. Journal of retailing, 64(1), 12.
Pease, A., & Pease, B. (2001). Why men don't listen & women can't read maps: How we are different and what to do about it. Buderim: Pease International Pty.
Raghubir, P., & Greenleaf, E. A. (2006). Ratios in proportion: what should the shape of the package be? Journal of Marketing, 70(2), 95-107.
Reber, R., Schwarz, N., & Winkielman, P. (2004). Processing fluency and aesthetic pleasure: Is beauty in the perceiver's processing experience? Personality and social psychology review, 8(4), 364-382.
Reimann, M., Zaichkowsky, J., Neuhaus, C., Bender, T., & Weber, B. (2010). Aesthetic package design: A behavioral, neural, and psychological investigation. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 20(4), 431-441.
Robert, D., & John, R. (1982). Store atmosphere: an environmental psychology approach. Journal of retailing, 58(1), 34-57.
Roy, R. (1994). Can the benefits of good design be quantified? Design Management Review, 5(2), 9-17.
Santayana, G. (1896/1955). The Sense of Beauty Vol. 1. New York: Dover.
Sherman, E., Mathur, A., & Smith, R. B. (1997). Store environment and consumer purchase behavior: mediating role of consumer emotions. Psychology and Marketing, 14(4), 361-378.
Solomon, M. R. (1983). The role of products as social stimuli: A symbolic interactionism perspective. Journal of Consumer Research, 10(3), 319-329.
Spence, C., & Piqueras-Fiszman, B. (2014). The perfect meal: the multisensory science of food and dining. Oxford, UK: John Wiley & Sons.
Takahashi, K., Fukuda, H., Watanabe, K., & Ueda, K. (2018). Psychological influences of animal-themed food decorations. Food Quality and Preference, 64, 232-237.
Townsend, C. (2017). The Price of Beauty: Differential Effects of Design Elements with and without Cost Implications in Nonprofit Donor Solicitations. Journal of Consumer Research, 44(4), 794-815.
Valentine, C. W. (1962). The experimental psychology of beauty. London: Methuen.
Veryzer Jr, R. W., & Hutchinson, J. W. (1998). The influence of unity and prototypicality on aesthetic responses to new product designs. Journal of Consumer Research, 24(4), 374-394.
Wada, Y., Arce-Lopera, C., Masuda, T., Kimura, A., Dan, I., Goto, S.-i., . . . Okajima, K. (2010). Influence of luminance distribution on the appetizingly fresh appearance of cabbage. Appetite, 54(2), 363-368.
Wu, F., Samper, A., Morales, A. C., & Fitzsimons, G. J. (2017). It’s Too Pretty to Use! When and How Enhanced Product Aesthetics Discourage Usage and Lower Consumption Enjoyment. Journal of Consumer Research, 44(3), 651-672.
Zellner, D. A., Lankford, M., Ambrose, L., & Locher, P. (2010). Art on the plate: Effect of balance and color on attractiveness of, willingness to try and liking for food. Food Quality and Preference, 21(5), 575-578.
Zellner, D. A., Loss, C. R., Zearfoss, J., & Remolina, S. (2014). It tastes as good as it looks! The effect of food presentation on liking for the flavor of food. Appetite, 77, 31-35.