近年來高 SPF 防曬商品熱賣，各家廠商競逐防曬效能，以期能以效能提升銷
量，本研究認為廠商如此之舉對消費者有很大的傷害，其一，高 SPF 產品對肌膚
傷害很大，但大部分的消費者其實不需要用到超高防曬效能的產品，其二，廠商只
生產高 SPF 產品、通路商也只上架高 SPF 產品，讓有低 SPF 產品需求的人無從選
擇及購買適合自己的產品，其三，廠商隱惡揚善的行銷方法使消費者知識扭曲，不
正當的使用習慣及防曬知識，促使高 SPF 防曬戰爭無止無境的持續惡化。
本研究期望廠商開啟與消費者的雙向構通，但單純的呼籲沒有辦法推動廠商，
故希望能以無損廠商利益甚至是增加利益的方式來促使廠商行動，以此建立消費
者的正確觀念及良好完整的防曬商品市場，因此，本研究將探討同時列舉產品優缺
點的雙面俱陳的行銷方式如何在防曬商品上做使用，第一部分探討雙面俱陳訊息
如何造成訊息可信度、產品態度的影響，第二部分檢視訊息可信度的中介效果，探
討雙面俱陳訊息藉由何種媒介影響產品態度。第三部分以產品涉入、調節焦點作為
干擾效果，研究適合對何種消費者做雙面俱陳的行銷。最後針對研究結果給予防曬
商品的行銷建議供廠商參考。
本研究經由 Facebook 各學校社團收集 301 份有效之成對樣本，以多元線性迴
歸檢定中介效果，並以成對樣本 T 檢定驗證干擾效果，結果顯示雙面俱陳訊息顯
著提升訊息可信度，且增加的訊息可信度會扮演中介角色，提升消費者的產品態度。
對總體消費者而言，單面陳述仍較有優勢，但依不同消費者特徵分眾後，發現對於
高主觀知識且高產品涉入的消費者雙面俱陳效果較好，但對於低主觀知識或低產
品涉入的消費者則相反；對於預防型調節焦點性格的人，使用何種陳述方式無顯著
差異，但對具有促進型調節焦點性格的人，仍使用單面陳述較果較好，若廠商能透
過分眾傳播工具如 youtuber、blog 等，或在不同場合針對特定群眾使用雙面俱陳的
行銷方式，將可提高行銷效益、提升消費者的使用經驗。

In recent years, high SPF sunscreen products are hot. Various manufacturers compete for
sunscreen performance in order to increase sales with sunscreen performance. This study
believes that manufacturers are doing a lot of harm to consumers. First, high SPF products
are very harmful to the skin, but most consumers do not need to use ultra-high sunscreen
products. Second, manufacturers only produce high SPF products, and distributors only
sell high SPF products, so that people with low SPF products cannot choose and purchase
products that suit them. Third, the shortcomings of manufacturers using one-sided
message hiding products will distort consumer knowledge. Improper use habits and sun
protection knowledge have contributed to the endless deterioration of high SPF sunscreen
products.
Study how the two-sided message can be used in the marketing of sunscreen products.
The first part will explore how the two-sided message can cause information credibility
and product attitude. The second part will examine the mediation effect of the credibility
of the message and explore whether the two-sided message affects the product's attitude
through the credibility of the message. The third part will use product involvement and
adjustment focus as the interference effect to study which consumers are suitable for
marketing with two-sided information. Finally, according to the research results, give
advice on marketing of sunscreen products to manufacturers.
This study collected 301 valid pairs of samples from various school communities in
Facebook. The mediation effect was determined by multiple linear regression, and the
interference effect was verified by paired sample T test. The results show that the twosided message significantly improves the credibility of the message, and the increased
credibility will play an intermediary role in enhancing the consumer's product attitude.
One-sided messages are still superior to the overall consumer. However, after different
consumer characteristics, it was found that for consumers with high subjective knowledge
and high product involvement, the two-sided message has better effects. But we have
opposite conclusion for consumers with low subjective knowledge or low product
involvement. For people with prevent focus, there is no significant difference, but for
those with promotion focus, one-sided messages are still better. If the manufacturer can
use the modern segmentation communication tools such as youtuber, blog, etc., to use the
two-sided marketing method for specific people, it will improve marketing efficiency and
enhance consumer experience.

論文審定書…………………………………………………………………………i
公開授權書
誌謝………………………………………………………………………....…………ii
摘要…………………………………………………………………………....………iii
Abstract ………..………………………………………………………………..…iv
目錄………………………………………………………………………………....…v
表次…………………………………………………………………………………....vi
圖次…………………………………………………………………………………....vii
第一章 緒論………………………………………………………………………...01
第一節 研究背景與動機…………………………………………………….01
第二節 研究目的…………………………………………………………….....02
第三節 研究流程…………………………………………………………….....03
第四節 研究範圍與限制…………………………………………………….03
第二章 文獻探討…………………………………………………………………04
第一節 防曬商品產業現況 ………………..……………………………..04
第二節 雙面俱陳訊息 ..……………………………………………………..05
第三節 歸因理論 ………………………………………………………….......07
第四節 推敲可能性模型 …………………………………………………...08
第五節 產品涉入 ………………………………………………………….......10
第六節 調節焦點與調節適配理論 ………..……………………...….10
第三章 研究設計…………………………………………………………………11
第一節 研究結構…………………………………………………………….....11
第二節 研究模式…………………………………………………………….....11
第三節 研究方法…………………………………………………………….....14
第四章 實證分析…………………………………………………………………19
第一節 樣本基本資料分析 ……..………………………………………..19
第二節 雙面俱陳訊息對產品態度及訊息可信度之影響…21
第三節 訊息可信度對產品態度的中介效果 ……………………24
第四節 產品涉入、主觀知識、調節焦點的干擾效果….…31
第五章 結論與建議……………………………………………………….……39
第一節 結論………………………………………………………………….......39
第二節 建議………………………………………………………………….......41
第三節 管理意涵……………………………………………………………....42
參考文獻 ..………………………………………………………………………….44
附錄 調查問卷 …………………………….…………………………………….48

一、英文
Aaker, J. and Lee, A. (2006). Understanding Regulatory Fit. Journal of Marketing
Research, 43(1), pp.15-19.
Andrews, D., Bonta, J. and Hoge, R. (1990). Classification for Effective Rehabilitation.
Criminal Justice and Behavior, 17(1), pp.19-52.
Andrews, J., Netemeyer, R. and Durvasula, S. (1991). Effects of Consumption
Frequency on Believability and Attitudes Toward Alcohol Warning Labels. Journal of
Consumer Affairs, 25(2), pp.323-338.
Avnet, T. and Higgins, E. (2006). Response to Comments on “How Regulatory Fit
Affects Value in Consumer Choices and Opinions”. Journal of Marketing Research,
43(1), pp.24-27.
Avnet, T. and Pham, M. (2004). Metacognitive and Nonmetacognitive Reliance on
Affect as Information in Judgment. SSRN Electronic Journal.
Baron, R. and Kenny, D. (1986). The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social
psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology, 51(6), pp.1173-1182.
Belch, G. (1981). An Examination of Comparative and Noncomparative Television
Commercials: The Effects of Claim Variation and Repetition on Cognitive Response
and Message Acceptance. Journal of Marketing Research, 18(3), p.333.
Bohner, G., Einwiller, S., Erb, H. and Siebler, F. (2003). When Small Means
Comfortable: Relations Between Product Attributes in Two-Sided Advertising. Journal
of Consumer Psychology, 13(4), pp.454-463.
Brehm, J. and Jones, R. (1970). The effect on dissonance of surprise
consequences. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 6(4), pp.420-431.
Cacioppo, J. and Petty, R. (1979). Attitudes and cognitive response: An
electrophysiological approach. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 37(12),
pp.2181-2199.
Crowley, A. and Hoyer, W. (1994). An Integrative Framework for Understanding TwoSided Persuasion. Journal of Consumer Research, 20(4), p.561.
Domzal, T., Hunt, J. and Kernan, J. (1995). Achtung! The Information Processing of
Foreign Words in Advertising. International Journal of Advertising, 14(2), pp.95-114.
Eisend, M. (2006). Source Credibility in Marketing Communication. Marketing ZFP,
28(JRM 1), pp.43-62.
45
Eisend, M. (2006). Two-sided advertising: A meta-analysis. International Journal of
Research in Marketing, 23(2), pp.187-198.
Eisend, M. (2007). Understanding two-sided persuasion: An empirical assessment of
theoretical approaches. Psychology and Marketing, 24(7), pp.615-640.
Etgar, M. and Goodwin, S. (1982). One-Sided Versus Two-Sided Comparative Message
Appeals for New Brand Introductions. Journal of Consumer Research, 8(4), p.460.
Florack, A., Scarabis, M. and Gosejohann, S. (2005). The Effects of Self-Image Threat
on the Judgment of Out-Group Targets. Swiss Journal of Psychology, 64(2), pp.87-101.
Flynn, L. and Goldsmith, R. (1999). A Short, Reliable Measure of Subjective
Knowledge. Journal of Business Research, 46(1), pp.57-66.
Golden, L. and Alpert, M. (1987). Comparative Analysis of the Relative Effectiveness
of One- and Two- Sided Communication for Contrasting Products. Journal of
Advertising, 16(1), pp.18-68.
Hass, R. and Linder, D. (1972). Counterargument availability and the effects of message
structure on persuasion. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 23(2), pp.219-
233.
Higgins, E. (1998). Promotion and Prevention: Regulatory Focus as A Motivational
Principle. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, pp 1-46
Higgins, E. (2000). Making a good decision: Value from fit. American Psychologist,
55(11), pp.1217-1230.
Higgins, E., Friedman, R., Harlow, R., Idson, L., Ayduk, O. and Taylor, A. (2001).
Achievement orientations from subjective histories of success: Promotion pride versus
prevention pride. European Journal of Social Psychology, 31(1), pp.3-23.
Holmbeck, G. (2002). Post-hoc Probing of Significant Moderational and Mediational
Effects in Studies of Pediatric Populations. Journal of Pediatric Psychology, 27(1),
pp.87-96.
Hovland, C., Janis, I. and Kelley, H. (1953). Communication and Persuasion:
Psychological Studies of Opinion Change. American Sociological Review, 19(3),
p.355..
Hovland, C., Lumsdaine, A. and Sheffield, F. (1950). Experiments on Mass
Communication. (Studies in Social Psychology in World War II, Vol. III). American
Sociological Review, 15(3), p.448.
Insko, C. (1962). One-sided versus two-sided communications and
countercommunications. The Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 65(3),
pp.203-206.
Jones, D. and Davis, P. (1965). Cephaloridine in Chronic Bronchitis. BMJ, 1(5432),
pp.448-449.
46
Kamins, M. and Assael, H. (1987). Moderating disconfirmation of expectations through
the use of two-sided appeals: A longitudinal approach. Journal of Economic Psychology,
8(2), pp.237-253.
Kamins, M. and Assael, H. (1987). Two-Sided versus One-Sided Appeals: A Cognitive
Perspective on Argumentation, Source Derogation, and the Effect of Disconfirming
Trial on Belief Change. Journal of Marketing Research, 24(1), p.29.
Kamins, M. and Marks, L. (1987). Advertising Puffery: The Impact of Using Two-Sided
Claims on Product Attitude and Purchase Intention. Journal of Advertising, 16(4), pp.6-
15.
Kamins, M. and Marks, L. (1988). An Examination into the Effectiveness of Two-Sided
Comparative Price Appeals. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 16(2),
pp.64-71.
Lockwood, P., Jordan, C. and Kunda, Z. (2002). Motivation by positive or negative role
models: Regulatory focus determines who will best inspire us. Journal of Personality
and Social Psychology, 83(4), pp.854-864.
Lumsdaine, A. and Janis, I. (1953). Resistance to "Counterpropaganda" Produced by
One-Sided and Two-Sided "Propaganda" Presentations. Public Opinion Quarterly,
17(3), p.311.
Mazis, M. and Adkinson, J. (1976). An Experimental Evaluation of a Proposed
Corrective Advertising Remedy. Journal of Marketing Research, 13(2), pp.178-183.
McCroskey, J., Young, T. and Scott, M. (1972). The effects of message sidedness and
evidence on inoculation against counterpersuasion in small group
communication. Speech Monographs, 39(3), pp.205-212.
O’Keefe, D. (1999). How to Handle Opposing Arguments in Persuasive Messages: A
Meta-Analytic Review of the Effects of One-Sided and Two-Sided Messages. Annals of
the International Communication Association, 22(1), pp.209-249.
Pechmann, C. (1992). Predicting When Two-Sided Ads Will Be More Effective than
One-Sided Ads: The Role of Correlational and Correspondent Inferences. Journal of
Marketing Research, 29(4), p.441.
Petty, R., Cacioppo, J. and Goldman, R. (1981). Personal involvement as a determinant
of argument-based persuasion. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 41(5),
pp.847-855.
Schneider, W. and Shiffrin, R. (1977). Controlled and automatic human information
processing: I. Detection, search, and attention. Psychological Review, 84(1), pp.1-66.
Sherif, M. and Cantril, H. (1947). The Psychology of Ego-Involvements; Social
Attitudes and Identifications. The American Journal of Psychology, 61(1), p.139.
Smith, R. and Hunt, S. (1978). Attributional Processes and Effects in Promotional
Situations. Journal of Consumer Research, 5(3), p.149.
47
Sobel, M. (1982). Asymptotic Confidence Intervals for Indirect Effects in Structural
Equation Models. Sociological Methodology, 13, p.290.
Spears, N. and Singh, S. (2004). Measuring Attitude toward the Brand and Purchase
Intentions. Journal of Current Issues & Research in Advertising, 26(2), pp.53-66.
Sternthal, B., Phillips, L. and Dholakia, R. (1978). The Persuasive Effect of Source
Credibility: A Situational Analysis. Public Opinion Quarterly, 42(3), p.285.
Zaichkowsky, J. (1985). Measuring the Involvement Construct. Journal of Consumer
Research, 12(3), p.341.
Zaichkowsky, J. (1994). The Personal Involvement Inventory: Reduction, Revision, and
Application to Advertising. Journal of Advertising, 23(4), pp.59-70.
二、網路
KJ Preacher. (2010). Sobel test calculator - Quantpsy.org. Retrieved November 10,
2018, from http://quantpsy.org/sobel/sobel.htm
米卡（2017）。《不實廣告的啟示》Smart 汽車為什麼要拍廣告狂打自己的臉？
Oath 看見數位行銷力。西元 2018 年 11 月 10 日取自：http://yahooemarketing.tumblr.com/post/166774258131/%E4%B8%8D%E5%AF%A6%E5%B
B%A3%E5%91%8A%E7%9A%84%E5%95%9F%E7%A4%BAsmart%E6%B1%
BD%E8%BB%8A%E7%82%BA%E4%BB%80%E9%BA%BC%E8%A6%81%E
6%8B%8D%E5%BB%A3%E5%91%8A%E7%8B%82%E6%89%93%E8%87%A
A%E5%B7%B1%E7%9A%84%E8%87%89。