本研究旨在探討產品技術層級、技術相似性，與品牌來源國形象對消費者品牌延伸評價的影響。當原產品與延伸產品在技術層級上有所差異時，此差異對於不同類別的產品在進行品牌延伸時會有何影響？並以產品的技術相似性與品牌來源國形象為調和變數，探討當消費者面對分屬不同技術層級的產品時，其對品牌延伸的評價是否會受技術相似性與來源國形象的影響而有所差異。在過去的研究中，針對高科技產品進行與上述變數相關的探討較少，因此，本研究以消費性電子產品為主要的受測產品進行問卷設計，以探討變數之間的關係。
　　本研究主要以消費者為抽樣對象，透過網際網路以便利抽樣的方式進行問卷發放，並採用實驗設計法，根據各個變數不同的高低水準進行2x2x2組間差異的實驗設計，共8個情境，以探討當原產品屬於不同水準的技術層級時，消費者對品牌延伸的評價是否有所差異，以及不同水準的技術相似性與品牌來源國形象所產生的影響。

本研究主要以多變量變異數進行分析，結果如下：

(1)當原產品具有相對較高的技術層級時，消費者會產生較佳的品牌評價。
(2)在不同水準的產品技術相似性下，原產品與延伸產品的技術層級差異對品牌延伸的評價有顯著影響。
(3)在不同水準的品牌來源國形象下，原產品與延伸產品的技術層級差異對品牌延伸的評價有顯著影響。
(4)在實驗情境下，不同水準的產品技術層級對消費者的母品牌評價並未產生顯著的影響。

　　The purpose of this study is to examine that when the difference of technology hierarchy exists between the parent product and the extension product, how technological similarity and country-of-origin influence consumers’ brand extension evaluations. Although the researches about brand extension have been extensively discussed, few studies referred to technological characteristics for high-tech products. Moreover, under the trend of global marketing, country-of-origin has become increasingly important in brand extension evaluation. Consequently, this study takes consumer electronics products for example and investigates the effects of technology hierarchy, technological similarity and country-of-origin on brand extension evaluations.
　　This study adopts random sampling to collect data and selects end users as the subject. Then it conducts an experiment design of each component with two treatment levels, resulting in 2×2×2 eight different conditions, and uses ANOVA to analyze the data. The results are showed as follows.

(1)When the parent product is perceived to be at a　relatively higher level of technology, consumers will have superior brand extension evaluations.
(2)Under different technological similarity conditions, the level of technology hierarchy between the parent and the extension product has a significant influence on brand extension evaluations.
(3)Under different country-of-origin conditions, the level of technology hierarchy between the parent and the extension product has a significant influence on brand extension evaluations.
(4)There is no significant difference of the evaluations toward the parent brand after exposing to the brand extension.

A. Chinese
1.吳文村 (2001)，「產品製造來源國之國家形象、價格折扣與品牌知名度對於消費者產品評價之影響」，成功大學國企所碩士論文。
2.李奇勳 (2000)，「價格、保證及來源國形象對產品評價與購買意願的影響」，成功大學企研所博士論文。
3.李孟慈 (2003)，「產品種類相似度與產品國家契合度資訊不一致對跨國品牌延伸評價之影響」，暨南國際大學國企所碩士論文。

B. English
1.Aaker, David A. and Keller, Kevin Lane (1990), “Consumer Evaluations of Brand Extensions,” Journal of Marketing, 54 (January), 27-41.
2.Aaker, David A. and Keller, Kevin Lane (1991), Managing Brand Equity. New York:The Free Press.
3.Aaker, David A. (1990), “Brand Extensions: The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly,”
Sloan Management Review, (summer), 47-56.
4.Barone, Michael J., Miniard, Paul W., and Romeo, Jean B. (2000), “The
influence of postive mood on brand extension evaluations,” Journal of Consumer
Research, 26 (March), 386-401.
5.Bhat, Subodh and Reddy, Srinivas K. (1998), “Symbolic and functional
positioning of brands,” The Journal of Consumer Marketing, 15, 32.
6.Bhat, Sobodh and Reddy, Srinivas K. (2001), “The impact of parent brand
attribute associations and affect on brand extension evaluation,” Journal of
Business Research, 53(September), 111-122.
7.Bilkey, Warren J., and Nes, Erik (1986), “Country-of-origin effects on product
evaluations,” Journal of International Business Studies, 13(Spring-Summer),
89-100.
8.Bousch, David M. and Loken, Barbara (1991), “A Process-Tracing Study of Brand
Extension Evaluation,” Journal of Marketing Research, 28 (February), 16-28.
9.Bridges, Sheri (1990), “A Schema Unification Model of Brand Extensions,”
unpublished PhD dissertation, Graduate School of Business, Stanford University.
10.Bridges, Sheri, Keller, Kevin Lane, and Sood, Sanjay (2000), “Communication
strategies for brand extensions: Enhancing perceived fit by establishing
explanatory links,” Journal of Advertising, 29 (winter) 2000, 1-11.
11.Cohen, Joel B. and Basu, Kunal (1987), “Alternative Models of Categorization:
Toward a Contingent Processing Framework,” Journal of Consumer Research, 13
(March), 455-472.
12.Chakravarti, Dipankar, MacInnis, Deborah J. and Nakamoto, Kent (1990): Product
Category Perceptions, Elaborative Processing, and Brand Name Extension
Strategies, in Advances in Consumer Research, 17, Marvin E. Goldberg, Gerald
Gorn, and Richard W. Pollay, eds., Association for Consumer Research, Provo,
UT., 910-916.
13.Dacin, Peter A., and Smith, Daniel C. (1994), “The effect of brand portfolio
characteristics on consumer evaluations of brand extensions,” Journal of
Marketing Research, 31 (May), 229-243.
14.Deborah, Roedder John, Loken, Barbara and Christopher, Joiner (1998), “The
Negative Impact of Extensions: Can Flagship Products Be Diluted?” Journal of
Marketing, 62 (January), 19-32.
15.Dick, Alan, Dipanker, Chakravarti, and Gavriel, Biehal (1990), “Memory-Based
Inferences During Consumer Choice,” Journal of Consumer Research, 17 (June),
82-93.
16.Farquhar, Peter H. (1989), “Managing Brand Equity,” Marketing Research, 1
(September), 24-33.
17.Garvin, David A. (1984), “Product Quality: An Important Strategic Weapon,”
Business Horizons, 27 (May-June), 40-43.
18.Han, Jin K. (1998), “Brand Extension in a Competitive Context: Effects of
Competitive Targets and Product Attribute Typicality on Perceived Quality,”
Academy of Marketing Science Review, 1-14.
19.Herr, Peter H., and Farquhar, Fazio (1990), “Extending Brand Equity to New
Categories,” Working Paper, Graduate School of Business, Indiana University.
20.Holbrook, Morris B. and Corfman, Kim P. (1985), “Quality and Value in the
Consumption Experience: Phaedrus Rides Again,” in Perceived Quality, Jacob
Jacoby and Jerry Olson, eds. Lexington, MA: Lexington Books, 31-57.
21.Jacobson, Robert and Aaker, David A. (1987), “The Strategic Role of Product
Quality,” Journal of Marketing, 51 (October), 31-44.
22.Jun, Sung Youl, Mazumdar, Tridib and Raj, S. P. (1999) “Effects of
Technological Hierarchy on Brand Extension Evaluations,” Journal of Business
Research, 46(September), 31-43.
23.Kapferer, Jean-Noel (1994), Strategic Brand Management, The Free Press, New
York.
24.Keller, Kevin Lane and Aaker, David A. (1992), “The Effects of Sequential
Introduction of Brand Extensions,” Journal of Marketing Research, 29, 35-50.
25.Kim, Chung K., Lavack, Anne M. and Smith, Margo (2001), “Consumer Evaluation
of Vertical Brand Extensions and Core Brand”, Journal of Business Research,
52, 211-222.
26.Kirmani, Amna, Sood, Sanjay, and Bridges, Sheri (1999), “The ownership effect
in consumer responses to brand line stretches,” Journal of Marketing, 63
(January), 88-102.
27.Kotler, Philip (1997), Marketing Management: Analysis, Planning,
Implementation, and Control, 9th Ed, Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ.
28.Kotler, Philip, Ang Swee Hoon, Leong Siew Meng and Tan Chin Tiong (1996),
Marketing Management：An Asian Perspective, Prentice Hall.
29.Lane, Vicki R. (2000), “The Impact of AD Repetition and AD Content on
Consumer Perceptions of Incongruent Extensions,” Journal of Marketing, 64
(April), 80-92.
30.Lassar, Walfried, Banwari, Mittal, and Arun, Sharma (1995), “Measuring
Customer-Based Brand Equity,” Journal of Consumer Marketing, 12, 11-19.
31.Leuthesser, Lance ed. (1988), “Defining, Measuring and Managing Brand Equity:
A Conference Summary,” Report #88-104. Cambridge, MA: Marketing Science
Institute.
32.Loken, Barbara and Deborah, Roedder John (1993), “Diluting brand beliefs:
When do brand extensions have a negative impact?” Journal of Marketing, 57
(January), 71-84.
33.Meyers-Levy, Joan, and Tybout, Alice M. (1989), “Schema Congruity as a Basis
for Product Evaluation,” Journal of Consumer Research, 16 (June) 39-54.

34.Oshavsky, Richard W. (1985), “Perceived Quality in Consumer Decision Making:
An Integrated Theoretical Perspective,” in Perceived Quality, Jacob Jacoby
and Jerry Olson, eds. Lexington, MA: Lexington Books, 3-29.
35.Papadopoulos, Nicolas and Heslop, Louise A. (1993), Product-Country Images：
Impact and Role in International Marketing, The Haworth Press, Inc.
36.Park, C. Whan, Jun, Sung Youl, and Schocker, Alan D. (1996), ”Composite
Branding Alliances: An Investigation of Extension and Feedback Effects,”
Journal of Marketing Research, 33 (November), 453-466.
37.Park, C., McCarthy, Michael S., and Milberg, Sandra J. (1993): An Examination
of the Negative Reciprocity Effects Associated with Direct and Sub-Branding
Extension Strategies, Working Paper, University of Pittsburgh, PA.
38.Park, C., Milberg, Sandra, and Lawson, Robert (1990), “Evaluation of Brand
Extensions: The Role of Product Level Similarity and Brand Concept
Consistency,” Journal of Consumer Research, 18 (September), 185-193.
39.Park, C., Milberg, Sandra, and Lawson, Robert (1991), “Evaluation of Brand
Extensions: The Role of Product Feature Similarity and Brand Concept
Consistency,” Journal of Consumer Research, 18 (September), 185–193.
40.Pryor, Kevin, and Brodie, Roderick J. (1998), “How advertising slogans can
prime evaluations of brand extensions: further empirical results,” The
Journal of Product and Brand Management, 7,497.
41.Raghubir, Priya, and Corfman, Kim (1999), “When do price promotions affect
pretrial brand evaluations?” Journal of Marketing Research, 36(May), 211-223.
42.Reddy, Srinivas K., Holak, Susan L., and Bhat, Subodh (1994), “To Extend or
Not to Extend: Success Determinants of Line Extensions,” Journal of Marketing
Research, 31, 243-262.
43.Romeo, Jean B. (1991), “The Effect of Negative Information on the evaluations
of Brand Extensions and the Family Brand,” in Advances in Consumer Research,
18, Rebecca H. Holman and Michael R. Solomon, eds. Association for Consumer
Research, 399-406.
44.Rumelhart, David E., and Norman, Donald A. (1978): Accretion, Tuning, and
Restructuring: Three Models of Learning, in Schematic Factors in Cognition,
J.W., Cotton and R.L. Klatzky, eds., Lawrence Erlbaum, Hillsdale, NJ.
45.Sandor, Czellar, “Consumer attitude toward brand extensions: an integrative
model and research propositions (2003), “International Journal of Research in
Marketing,” 20 (March), 97-115.
46.Singh, Kulwant (1997), “The impact of technological complexity and interfirm
cooperation on business survival,” Academy of Management Journal, 40 (April),
339-368.
47.Smith, Daniel C. and Whan, Park (1990), “An Examination of the Effects of
Shared Brand names on Marketing Costs and Sales,” Working Paper, Graduate
School of Business, University of Wisconsin at Madison.
48.Swaminathan, Vanitha (2003), “Sequential brand extensions and brand choice
behavior,” Journal of Business Research, 56(June), 431-442.
49.Tauber, Edward (1988), “Brand Leverage：Strategy for growth in a Cost
Controlled world,” Journal of Advertising Research, 28 (Augest/September),
26-30.
50.Swaminathan, Vanitha, Fox, Richard J., and Reddy, Srinivas K. (2001), “The
impact of brand extension introduction on choice,” Journal of Marketing, 65
(October), 1 -15.
51.Zeithaml, Valarie A. (1988), “Consumer Perceptions of Price, Quality, and
Value: A Means-End and Synthesis of Evidence,” Journal of Marketing, 52
(July), 2-22.