本文關(guān)鍵詞：地位品牌的污名化-消費(fèi)者相對(duì)剝奪的影響研究　出處：《武漢大學(xué)》2017年碩士論文　論文類型：學(xué)位論文

  更多相關(guān)文章： 相對(duì)剝奪 污名化 地位品牌 地位差距感知 去污名化

【摘要】：在當(dāng)今的消費(fèi)文化下,人們的價(jià)值觀也發(fā)生了很大的變化。消費(fèi)者購買商品不僅僅是為了追求它的功能價(jià)值,有時(shí)還是為了尋求一種象征價(jià)值。因此,很多地位品牌由于其對(duì)消費(fèi)者地位身份的象征意義,受到了人們的追捧。然而,在這些品牌受到歡迎的消費(fèi)文化下,卻出現(xiàn)了一些不同的聲音,許多著名的地位品牌都在廣泛的消費(fèi)者輿論中受到了污名化的攻擊。例如,寶馬在中國市場被稱為"暴發(fā)戶的車"、"小三車"已經(jīng)有許多年了;而中國本土的白酒高端品牌——茅臺(tái)和五糧液,也在消費(fèi)者的評(píng)論中被貼上了"腐敗酒"、"暴利"等負(fù)面的標(biāo)簽。這些已普遍出現(xiàn)和存在的地位品牌被污名化現(xiàn)象,迄今卻并沒有引起營銷學(xué)者的重視,相關(guān)研究尚屬空白。我們可以發(fā)現(xiàn),這些地位品牌被污名化并不是因?yàn)槠放票旧矸噶耸裁村e(cuò)誤。因此,我們似乎有理由相信,這種污名化是與污名施加者有關(guān)。在當(dāng)今互聯(lián)網(wǎng)特別是社交媒體盛行的條件下,隨著人們更自由的觀點(diǎn)互動(dòng),很多時(shí)候普通大眾階層成為了污名現(xiàn)象的制造者,而現(xiàn)實(shí)中的上層群體反倒成為了被標(biāo)簽化的群體,比如生活中耳熟能詳?shù)?富二代"、"磚家(專家)",其實(shí)都是針對(duì)某一特定優(yōu)勢(shì)群體的的污名化標(biāo)簽,而實(shí)施這類污名化行為的群體有一個(gè)共同特征——對(duì)優(yōu)勢(shì)群體的嫉妒以及對(duì)自己目前狀態(tài)的不滿。地位品牌的被污名化現(xiàn)象亦是如此,很多時(shí)候是源于人們"吃不到葡萄說葡萄酸"的心理。而究竟哪類群體更傾向于"說葡萄酸",本研究認(rèn)為與消費(fèi)者的相對(duì)剝奪感有關(guān)。因此,本研究提出假設(shè):(1)消費(fèi)者的相對(duì)剝奪感越強(qiáng),越傾向于對(duì)地位品牌實(shí)施污名化行為;(2)消費(fèi)者的相對(duì)剝奪感越強(qiáng),地位品牌越容易激發(fā)出其與品牌使用者之間的地位差距感知;(3)消費(fèi)者與品牌使用者之間的地位差距感知越大,越容易引起對(duì)地位品牌的污名化行為;(4)地位差距感知在相對(duì)剝奪和品牌地位對(duì)于品牌污名化行為的交互影響中具有中介作用;(5)比起對(duì)強(qiáng)勢(shì)群體的捐贈(zèng),對(duì)弱勢(shì)群體的捐贈(zèng)更能顯著地有效幫助企業(yè)減輕污名化影響。最后,本文就研究結(jié)論的理論貢獻(xiàn)和管理啟示進(jìn)行了探討,并提出了本研究的不足之處和未來的研究方向,希望對(duì)企業(yè)的品牌形象管理具有一定的參考價(jià)值。
[Abstract]:In today's consumer culture, people's values have also undergone great changes. Consumers buy goods not only to pursue its functional value, sometimes to seek a symbolic value. Many status brands have been sought after because of their symbolic significance to consumer status. However, in the popular consumer culture, there are some different voices. Many prominent brands have been stigmatized by widespread consumer opinion. BMW, for example, has been known in China as a "nouveau riche car" and a "small three-car" for many years; Maotai and Wuliangye, the high-end brands of Chinese liquor, have also been labeled "corrupt wines" in consumer comments. "profiteering" and other negative labels. These status brands have appeared and existed in the phenomenon of stigmatization, but so far has not attracted the attention of marketing scholars, the relevant research is still blank. We can find. These status brands are not stigmatized because of the brand's own mistakes. Therefore, we seem to have reason to believe. This stigma is related to the perpetrators. In today's Internet, especially social media, as people interact with freer views, many times the general public becomes the maker of stigma. In reality, the upper class has become a tagged group, such as the familiar "rich second generation" in life, "brick (expert)", in fact, are targeted at a specific advantage of the stigmatization of groups. And the groups that carry out such stigmatization have a common characteristic-envy of superior groups and dissatisfaction with their current status. So is the stigmatization of status brands. Most of the time it comes from the psychology of people who "can't eat grapes and say sour grapes." which group is more likely to say "sour grape"? this study suggests that this study is related to the relative deprivation of consumers. This study suggests that the stronger the relative deprivation of consumers is, the more likely they are to stigmatize status brands; 2) the stronger the sense of relative deprivation of consumers, the easier it is to stimulate the perception of the status gap between consumers and brand users; 3) the greater the perception of the status gap between the consumer and the brand user, the more likely it is to cause the stigmatization behavior of the status brand; (4) the perception of status gap plays an intermediary role in the interaction between relative deprivation and brand status on brand stigmatization behavior; 5) compared with the donation to the strong group, the donation to the weak group can help enterprises to reduce the stigma more significantly. Finally, this paper discusses the theoretical contribution and management inspiration of the research conclusions. At the same time, this paper puts forward the deficiency of this research and the future research direction, hoping to have certain reference value to the brand image management of the enterprise.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：武漢大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2017
【分類號(hào)】：F426.82

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 張慧;;嫉妒與“感知的不平等”——對(duì)“紅眼病”和“仇富心態(tài)”官方話語的研究[J];學(xué)海;2014年05期

2 陶鵬;;公眾污名、自我污名和媒介污名:虛擬社會(huì)泛污名化現(xiàn)象的三維解讀[J];廣東行政學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);2014年01期

3 韓曉燕;遲毓凱;;自發(fā)社會(huì)比較中的威脅效應(yīng)及自我平衡策略[J];心理學(xué)報(bào);2012年12期

4 盧長寶;;消費(fèi)特權(quán)引致的嫉妒效應(yīng)及對(duì)品牌關(guān)系的影響[J];廣東商學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);2012年04期

5 董小玉;胡楊;;風(fēng)險(xiǎn)社會(huì)視域下媒介污名化探析[J];當(dāng)代傳播;2011年03期

6 胡榮;林本;;影響公民對(duì)污名對(duì)象態(tài)度的諸因素分析[J];中共天津市委黨校學(xué)報(bào);2010年05期

7 張書維;王二平;周潔;;相對(duì)剝奪與相對(duì)滿意:群體性事件的動(dòng)因分析[J];公共管理學(xué)報(bào);2010年03期

8 李建新;丁立軍;;“污名化”的流動(dòng)人口問題[J];社會(huì)科學(xué);2009年09期

9 谷子菊;;為“留守兒童”去污名化——關(guān)注“留守兒童”的心理健康[J];牡丹江教育學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);2009年03期

10 王培剛;;當(dāng)前各社會(huì)階層對(duì)貧富差距狀況的動(dòng)態(tài)認(rèn)知研究[J];社會(huì)科學(xué)研究;2008年06期

相關(guān)博士學(xué)位論文 前1條

1 樊建鋒;污名行業(yè)的企業(yè)社會(huì)責(zé)任行為研究[D];華中科技大學(xué);2011年

相關(guān)碩士學(xué)位論文 前5條

1 陶欣龍;網(wǎng)絡(luò)新聞中高校教師媒介形象的污名化研究[D];湘潭大學(xué);2013年

2 殷曉芬;城市居民不平等感知現(xiàn)狀及影響因素研究[D];南京大學(xué);2013年

3 向玲;群際威脅情境下弱勢(shì)群體的外群體偏愛研究[D];西南大學(xué);2013年

4 黃雨晴;群際威脅背景中低社會(huì)經(jīng)濟(jì)地位群體的注意偏好研究[D];西南大學(xué);2012年

5 肖強(qiáng);我國企業(yè)公益捐贈(zèng)行為研究[D];青島科技大學(xué);2008年

，

本文編號(hào)：1371174