當消費者有過選購與使用手機品牌的經驗之後，下次在選購手機品牌時，消費者就會受到上次的選擇影響，此稱為選擇行為的狀態相依(State Dependence)現象。
於本研究中，假設消費者選購手機品牌行為的狀態相依現象是來自於消費者對於各品牌品質感受的學習行為。消費者在初次選購手機品牌時，對於各手機品牌的品質都有不同程度的感受與不確定性感，不過，經由各方面訊息來源(例如：過去的使用經驗、廣告、口傳等)的學習，消費者會不斷更新(update)過去對於手機品牌品質的感受，原本對於手機品牌的品質不確定性就會逐漸降低，本研究假設此一過程符合貝氏學習(Bayesian Learning)，並納入個體偏好異質與學習異質，以此建構一貝氏學習模式，研究與分析消費者選購手機品牌時之學習行為。
品牌品質感受除了會影響消費者的選擇行為外，應亦會影響消費者之選擇集合(choice set)，例如：消費者所接受之訊息來源皆顯示某一手機品牌的品質不佳，此品牌就可能不會納入消費者的選擇集合之中；為驗證此一假設，本研究將同時考量手機品牌品質感受對於消費者學習行為與選擇集合的影響。
綜合來說，本研究內容是建立一消費者選購手機行為之動態結構模式，模式中考量消費者選購手機品牌時的學習行為、選擇集合、偏好異質與學習異質等，除此之外，本研究還分別嘗試消費者遺忘與手機創新兩因素對於消費者在學習品牌品質感受過程中的影響。
最後，經由模式的校估結果證明消費者在選購手機品牌確有學習行為，學習過程中，品牌品質感受亦會影響消費者之選擇集合；模式結果亦顯示不同的族群有不同程度的學習能力(學習異質)，以及手機創新確實會為品牌帶來正面效益。藉此結果可提供給手機製造商在差別行銷時，選擇行銷對象與行銷管道之建議，以及評估創新的投資報酬率。

This research focuses on how consumer learning about brand attributes affects choice behavior, using a dynamic structure demand model. Consumer choice behavior may exhibit dynamics because there may be state dependence, choices made in previous periods may causally affect a consumer’s current choice. This research attempts to explain the behavioral source of state dependence as learning and assumes that consumers are Bayesians and thus the model of this research is based on a Bayesian learning process whereby update consumers’ beliefs about the quality of the brand.
Consumers learn about quality of the mobile phone brands, and thus reduce the uncertainty of the brands, by sampling from many information sources, such as use experience, advertisements, articles in specific publications and word-of-mouth. Moreover, as the recent studies, the learning model of this research is extended to account for forgetting behavior of consumers where the rate of forgetting depends upon the duration from the last signal received, and consumers’ choice set affected by the quality beliefs of the brand.
The empirical study is the analysis of consumer choice behavior of mobile phone brands, like Nokia, Motorola, Samsung and so on. For the characteristic of mobile service market, this research also considers how the new technology (or innovation) affects the quality of the brand. The final results can give the suggestions in marketing strategy for the mobile phone companies.

第一部份 中文文獻
施鴻志、段良雄、凌瑞賢，都市交通計畫：理論、實務，台北：國立編譯館出版，民73年。
洪琴淑，品牌可信度與消費者知覺因素對二階段品牌選擇之研究，淡江大學企業管理學系碩士論文，民國94年。
陳順宇、鄭碧娥，統計學，台北：華泰書局，民國93年。
楊志文，考慮選擇集合、市場定位及個體異質性之城際客運選擇模式，國立成功大學交通管理科學系博士論文，民91年。
第二部份 英文文獻
Ackerberg, D.A. (2003), “Advertising, Learning, and Consumer Choice in Experience Good Markets: an Empirical Examination,” International Economic Review, 44(3), 1007-1040.
Akcura, M.T., Gonul, F.F., and Petrova, E. (2004), “Consumer Learning and Brand Valuation: An Application on Over-the-Counter Drugs,” Marketing Science, 23(1), 156-169.
Andrews, R. L. and Srinivansan, T. C. (1995), “Studying consideration effects in empirical choice models using scanner panel data,” Journal of Marketing Research, 32, 30-41.
Ching, A.T. (2002), “Consumer Learning and Heterogeneity: Dynamics of Demand for Prescription Drugs After Patent Expiration,” Working Paper, The Ohio State University.
Chintagunta, P., Erdem, T., Rossi, P. and Wedel M. (2006), “Structural Modeling in Marketing: Review and Assessment,” Marketing Science, 25(6), 604-616.
Coscelli, A. and Shum, M. (2004), “An Empirical Model of Learning and Patient Spillovers in new Drug Entry,” Journal of Econometrics, 122, 213-246.
Dixit A. and Chintagunta, P.K. (2007) “Learning and Exit Behavior of New Entrant Discount Airlines from City-Pair Markets,” Journal of Marketing, 71, 150-168.
Erdem, T. and Keane, M.P. (1996), “Decision-making Under Uncertainty: Capturing Dynamic Brand Choice Processes in Turbulent Consumer Goods Markets,” Marketing Science, 15(1), 1-20.
Erdem, T. and Swait, J. (2004), “Brand Credibility, Brand Consideration, and Choice,” Journal of Consumer Research, 31, 191-197.
Erdem, T., Keane, M.P., and Sun B. (2008), “A Dynamic Model of Brand Choice When Price and Advertising Signal Product Quality,” Marketing Science, 27(6), 1-15.
Erdem, T., Keane, M.P., Oncu, T.S., and Strebel, J. (2005), “Learning About Computers: An Analysis of Information Search and Technology Choice,” Quantitative Marketing and Economics, 3(3), 207-246.
Fotheringham, A. S. (1988), “Consumer Store Choice and Choice Set Definition,” Marketing Science, 7(3), 299-310.
Hamilton, J. (1994), Time Series Analysis, Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ.
Kotler, P. (1997) Marketing Management: Analysis, Planning, Implementation and Control, 9th ed., Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice Hall.
Manski, C.F. (2004), “Measuring Expectations,” Econometrica, 72(5), 1329-1376.
McFadden, D. (1984) Econometric analysis of qualitative response models. in Griliches, Z. and Intriligator, M.D. (eds.) Handbook of Econometrics, vol. 11.
Mehta, N., Rajiv, S., and Srinivasan, K. (2004), “Role of Forgetting in Memory-Based Choice Decisions: A Structural Model,” Quantitative Marketing and Economics, 2, 107-140.
Narayanan, S. and Manchanda P. (2006) ‘Heterogeneous Learning and the Targeting of Marking Communication for New Products’, Working Paper, University of Stanford.
Narayanan, S., Manchanda, P. and Chintagunta, P.K. (2005) ‘Temporal Differences in the Role of Marking Communication in New Product Categories’, Journal of Marketing Research, August, 278-290.
Sung, Y-C (2010), “Consumer learning behavior in choosing electric motorcycles,” Transportation Planning and Technology, 33(2), 139-155.
Swait, J. D. and Ben-Akiva, M. (1987), “Incorporation random constraints in discrete models of choice set generation,” Transportation Research B, 21, 91-102.
Train, K.E. (2003), Discrete choice methods with simulation, New York: Cambridge University Press.