運動鞋是一項大眾化的產品，在日常生活中扮演著極為重要的角色，目前市面上的運動鞋產品種類繁多，到底具備什麼樣屬性或功能的運動鞋才能在市場上脫穎而出，獲得消費者青睞，是一項重要的課題。
本研究以台南、高雄兩地的年輕族群為研究對象，共135份有效樣本，使用聯合分析法探討消費者對於運動鞋產品屬性的重視程度。研究發現:
1.整體而言，消費者最重視的六項運動鞋產品屬性依序為「球鞋款式｣、「球鞋價格｣、「舒適透氣性｣、「球鞋品牌｣、「避震功能｣、｢球鞋材質｣。
2.依據消費者對各產品屬性的偏好程度(效用值)，進行偏好分群(Preferential Segmentation)，得到三個集群，分別為 「款式注重群｣、「價格與舒適重視群｣、「款式與品牌注重群｣。其中，「款式注重群｣最喜歡的產品屬性組合為：款式為鞋帶式、品牌為Adidas、價格1000元、舒適透氣性佳的運動鞋。｢價格與舒適重視群｣最喜歡的產品屬性組合為：品牌Nike、價格1000元、透氣性佳、避震性佳的運動鞋。「款式與品牌注重群｣最喜歡的產品屬性組合為：款式為鞋帶式、Nike、透氣性佳，材質為皮革的運動鞋，
3.依據不同的購買動機將消費者分為三群後，發現不同動機的消費者會有屬性重視的差異.例如「流行搭配需求｣群的消費者，只重視運動鞋的｢款式｣和｢價格｣，此兩項屬性的重視程度分別為71.76%和28.24%。而「運動需求｣群的消費者對各屬性都有一定的重視程度，不會有特別偏重某一屬性的現象。

Abstract
The choice of the sneaker products has thousand kinds on the market，but have what kind of terms, can let sneakers outshone others on the current market, would be the main research purpose of this research.
This research uses the Conjoint analysis to investigate the importance of sneaker product attributes, and 135 usable questionnaires from Tainan and Kaohsiung were collected。
The major findings of this research include:
1. The five most important sneaker attributes to all sampled in an ascending order are: style, price, comfort and breathability, brand , shock absorption Fabrication Materials
2. Cluster analysis is used by individual’s part-worth to identify market segments to establish 3 distinct preference-based sneaker segments, which are:
“emphasizing the style segment”、”emphasizing the price and comfort segment” and ”emphasizing the style and brand segment”. The best product attributes combination in the “emphasizing the style segment” is：shoelace style、Adidas、NT$1000、good comfort . The best product attributes combination in the ”emphasizing the price and comfort segment” is：Nike、NT$1000、good comfort、good shock absorption. The best product attributes combination in the “emphasizing the style and brand segment” is：shoelace style 、Nike、good comfort、and leather.
3. We also segment the customers by 3 different buying purpose to identify the product attributes in each groups .We discover for those customers who buy sneakers for fashion and dressing, they only concern the style and price of a sneaker。The importance of style and price are respectively 71.76% and 28.24%。And for those who buy sneakers for exercise, they concern almost every attribute of a sneaker.

一、中文部分

江啟明(1989)，模組化行銷偵測系統，交通大學管理科學研究所未出版之碩士論文，34-44。

吳金宗(2004)，MP3 數位隨身聽消費者行為之研究，中華大學科技管理研究所未出版之碩士論文，22-24。

林哲文(2004)，公理設計原則於消費性電子產品使用性問題確認之實
證研究-以MP3 播放器為例，國立台北科技大學工業工程與管
理系未出版之碩士論文，25-28。

周文賢，李宏達(1992)，市場調查與行銷策略研擬，台北：華泰，28-37。

姚政宏(1999)，數位壓縮音樂檔的使用與滿足-以MP3 為例，元智大學資訊工程研究所未出版之碩士論文，68-73。

袁志宏，「運用聯合分析法探討影響觀賞表演藝術付費意願因素之研究」，大葉大學休閒事業管理研究所碩士論文，2002。

梁憲初，「行銷管理」，復文書局，1997。

莊逸哲，「產品成本與利益屬性對消費者行為之影響－以信用卡之聯合分析

張欽富(1998)，聯合分析於產品設計之應用-以機車為例，淡江大學管理科學所未出版之碩士論文，55-87。

顏承章，「大學生生活型態及其購買行為之研究－以運動鞋產品為例」，中國文化大學資訊傳播研究所碩士論文，2003。

二、英文部分

Assael, H. & Marvin, J. A. (1976). Approach to market segmentation analysis. Journal of Marketing, 40(3), 67-76.

Auger, P., Burke, P., Devinney, T. M., and Louviere, J. J.( 2003). What will consumers pay for social product features?. Journal of Business Ethics 42(3), 281-304.

Belk, R. W. (1979). gift-giving behavior. In Research in Marketing,12(2), 95-126.

Bloch, H. P. & Richins, L. M. (1983). A theoretical model for the studyof product importance perceptions, Journal of Marketing,47(13), 69-81.

Bryan S, Gold L, Sheldon R et al (2000). Preference measurement using conjoint methods: an empirical investigation of reliability. Health Econ; 9: 385–395

Celsi, L. R. & Olson, C. J. (1988). The role of involvement in attention and comprehension processes, Journal of Consumer Research,15(8), 210-214.

Douglas Sorenson & Joe Bogue. (2006). Modelling soft drink purchasers’ preferences for stimulant Beverages. International Journal of Food Science and Technology, 41, 704–711

Engel, J. F., Blackwell, R. D., & Miniard, P. W. (1986). Consumer behavior.New York: The Dryden Press.

Green, P.E. & Wind, Y. (1973). Multiattribute decision in marketing:a measurement approach. Ohio: The Dryden Press.

Green, P.E. & Mila, M.(1981) . A Hybrid Utility Estimation Model for Conjoint Analysis,” Journal of Marketing, 45(Winter ), 1981, pp. 33-41.

Haley, R. I. (1968). Benefit segmentation: A decision-oriented research tool, Journal of Marketing, 32(2), 30-35.

Houston, M. & Rothschild, M. (1978). Conceptual and methodological perspectives on involvement, Research frontiers in marketing dialogues and directions, 16(3), 184-187.

Jose M. Gil. (1997). Consumer preference for wine attributes：a conjoint approach
, British Food Journal 99/1 [1997] 3–11

José Tomás Gómez Arias.(1996) Conjoint-based preferential segmentation in the design of a new financial service, International Journal of Bank Marketing
14/3 [March 1996] 30–32

Kotler, P. (1980). Principles of marketing. New Jersey: Prentice-Hall.

Kotler, P. (1994). Marketing management: Analysis, planning, implementation,and control. New Jersey: Prentice-Hall.

Krugman, H. E. (1965). The impact of television advertising learning without involvement, Public Opinion Quarterly, 29(14),349-356.

Lastovica, J. L. & Gardner, D. M. (1979). Components of involvement, in attitude research plays for high stakes, Journal of Marketing Research,27(7), 53-73.

Laurent, G. & Kapferer, J. N. (1985). Measuring consumer involvement profiles, Journal of Marketing Research, 22(6), 41-53.

Laczniak, R. N., Darrek, D. M., & Grossbart, S.(1989).Manipulatingmessage involvement in advertising research, Journal of Advertising, 18(2), 28-38.

Lonial, S., Menezes, D.& Zaim, S. (2003). Identifying Purchase Driving Attributes and Market Segments For PCs Using Conjoint and Cluster Analysis, In, Journal of Economic and Social Research 2 (2), 19-37

Koo, L.C., Fredrick K.C. Tao ., & John H.C. Yeung.(1999). Preferential segmentation ofrestaurant attributes through conjoint analysis, International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 11(5), 242-250

McCarthy, E. J. (1981), Basic Marketing: A Managerial Approach, Illinois:
Irwin.

Moore, W. L. (1980), Levels of aggregation in conjoint analysis: An em pirical pomparison, Journal of Marketing Research, 17(7), 516-523.

Plummer, J. T. (1974), The Concept and Application of Life Style Segmentation,Journal of Marketing, 38(7), 33-37.

Phillips KA, Maddala T, Johnson FR. (2002), Measuring preferences for health care interventions using conjoint analysis: an application to HIV testing. Health Serv Res; 37: 1681–1705.

Rothschild, M. L. (1984). Perspectives in involvement : Current problem and future directions, advances in consumer research, 8(11),216-217.

Ryan, M., E. McIntosh, and P. Shackley. (1998). ‘‘Methodological Issues in the
Application of Conjoint Analysis in Health Care.’’ Health Economics 7 (4): 373–80

Smith, W. R. (1956), Product differentiation and market segmentation as
alternative marketing strategies, Jourrnal of Marketing, 21(3), 3-8.

Silayoi, P., & Speece, M. (2005). The importance of packaging attributes: a conjoint analysis approach, gEuropean Journal of Marketing, 11(12),. 1495-1517.

Wind, Y. (1978). Issues and advances in segmentation research, Journal of Marketing Research, 15(14), 317-337.

Wilson-Jeanselme, M , Reynolds, & Jonathan. (2006) The advantages of preference-based segmentation: An investigation of online grocery retailing . Journal of Targeting, Measurement and Analysis for Marketing, Volume 14, Number 4, 7, pp. 297-308(12)

Zaichkowsky, J. L. (1985). Measuring the involvement construct, Journal of Consumer Research, 8(12), 341-352.