The Effect of Taiwan-made Product “MIT” Smile Logo on the Perceived Quality, Perceived Risk, and...
-
Upload
alisha-brockman -
Category
Documents
-
view
219 -
download
0
Transcript of The Effect of Taiwan-made Product “MIT” Smile Logo on the Perceived Quality, Perceived Risk, and...
The Effect of Taiwan-made Product “MIT” Smile Logo on the Perceived Quality, Perceived
Risk, and Purchase Intention of Consumers
YE4B 1101100062 Una Chen
Outline :
Introduction
Literature Review
Methodology
Result
Conclusion
Introduction
Sign the contract of ECFA
(Economic Cooperation Framework
Agreement)
Be a serious impact on the
traditional industry
Decide to promote the MIT (Made
in Taiwan) Smile Label
Literature Review
MIT Smile Label
By propelling MIT Smile Label, it tends to
build up an image of high quality Taiwan-
made products. Moreover, it also expects
to make consumers more favourable of
products that are made in Taiwan.
Literature Review Perceived Quality
Perceived quality was defined as the consumers’ judgment of overall excellence or superiority of products (Zeithaml, 1988; Petrick, 2002; Tsiotsou, 2006).
Perceived RiskCreditable official certificated labels would comparatively decrease consumers’ perceived risk towards products.
Hypothesis
Perceived Quality
Perceived Risk
PurchaseIntention
MIT Smile Label
ResearchResearch Question Question
(1) if the perceived quality of MIT Smile Logo would impact on consumers’ purchase intention
(2) if the perceived risk of MIT Smile Logo will impact on consumers’ purchase intention
MethodologyWeb-based questionnaire : 81
Paper-based questionnaire : 21
Likert scale: 1-5
Section1&2: background & basic knowledge
Section 3&4: perceived quality / risk
Section 5: purchase intention SPSS
P. Quality VS. Purchase Intention
Correlations
Quality_1 PearsonSig.(2-tailed)
N
.434**.000101
Quality_7 PearsonSig.(2-tailed)
N
.496**.000101
Quality_2 PearsonSig.(2-tailed)
N
.486**.000101
Quality_8 PearsonSig.(2-tailed)
N
.496**.000101
Quality_3 PearsonSig.(2-tailed)
N
.414**.000101
Quality_9 PearsonSig.(2-tailed)
N
.636**.000101
Quality_4 PearsonSig.(2-tailed)
N
.191
.055101
Quality_10 PearsonSig.(2-tailed)
N
.581**.000101
Quality_5 PearsonSig.(2-tailed)
N
.205*.040101
Quality_11 PearsonSig.(2-tailed)
N
.592**.000101
Quality_6 PearsonSig.(2-tailed)
N
.537**.000101
(Pr > F > 0.05) ***(Pr > F < 0.001)
P. Risk VS. Purchase Intention
Correlations
Risk_1 PearsonSig.(2-tailed)
N
-.231*.020101
Risk_8 PearsonSig.(2-tailed)
N
-.265**.008101
Risk_2 PearsonSig.(2-tailed)
N
-.267**.007101
Risk_9 PearsonSig.(2-tailed)
N
-.225*.023101
Risk_3 PearsonSig.(2-tailed)
N
-.290**.003101
Risk_10 PearsonSig.(2-tailed)
N
-.292**.003101
Risk_4 PearsonSig.(2-tailed)
N
-.175.080101
Risk_11 PearsonSig.(2-tailed)
N
-.321**.001101
Risk_5 PearsonSig.(2-tailed)
N
.200*.045101
Risk_12 PearsonSig.(2-tailed)
N
-.297**.003101
Risk_6 PearsonSig.(2-tailed)
N
-.340**.001101
Risk_13 PearsonSig.(2-tailed)
N
-.359**.000101
Risk_7 PearsonSig.(2-tailed)
N
-.226*.023101
(Pr > F > 0.05)
**(Pr > F < 0.05)
ConclusionTsiotsou indicates consumers’ perceived product quality can be used as a predictor of purchase intention, and even has the direct impact on purchase intention (Tsiotsou, 2006).
Agarwal and Teas describes that the higher consumers’ perceived risk is, the lower their purchase intention is; similarly, the lower consumers’ perceived risk is, the higher their purchase intention is (Agarwal and Teas, 2001).
Thank you for your listening !!