Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://hdl.handle.net/11455/96414
標題: 制度信任、知覺風險、購買意圖之研究-以新食安制度下豬肉加工品為例
Institutional Trust, Perceived Risk, and Purchase Intention - An Example of Processed Pork Products under the New Food Safety Initiative
作者: 簡謙任
Chien-Jen Chien
關鍵字: 食安制度;知覺風險;購買意圖;Food Safety Initiative;Perceived Risk;Purchase Intention
引用: 中文文獻 余祁暐、劉依蓁(2014)。養豬王國的轉化與再興-我國畜產加工品發展策略建議。臺灣經濟研究月刊,37(3),49-57。 吳明隆、張毓仁(2010)。 結構方程模式-實務應用秘笈。台北:五南圖書。 吳姿儀(2009)。農會推廣人員的產銷履歷制度信任之研究。中興大學生物產業推廣暨經營學系所學位論文,1-137。 吳萬益、林清河(2005)。企業研究方法。台北:華泰書局。 李河水、王素梅(2008)。台灣消費者對加工肉品之購買行為。財團法人食品工業發展研究所,彙編 05-9711 祝道松、盧正宗、徐雅培(2007)。制度型信任機制與知覺風險影響網路消費者購物意圖之研究-以 Yahoo! 奇摩購物為例。電子商務學報,9(2),291-320。 張正明(2014)。如何正確看待國內的食品安全事件與水產業者的因應對策,海大漁推,(43),23-31。 張苙雲(2000)。制度信任及行爲的信任意涵。臺灣社會學刊,(23),179-222。 張苙雲、譚康榮(2005)。制度信任的趨勢與結構:多重等級評量的分析策略。臺灣社會學刊,(35),75-126。 梁漢偉(2013)。制度信任、知覺品質與購買意圖之研究-以產銷履歷驗證商品之消費者為例。中興大學生物產業推廣暨經營學系所學位論文,1-137。 陳政忻(2011)。全球食品安全發展趨勢。農業生技產業季刊,(27),7-10。 陳清美、許朝凱、鄭維智、馮潤蘭、蔡淑貞(2012)。食品技師政策推動與未來發展。食品藥物研究年報,(3),185-191。 鄭維智(2015)。回顧我國食品管理之演進及精進。臺灣臨床藥學雜誌,23(3),163-180。 蕭文龍(2009)。多變量分析最佳入門實用書: SPSS+ LISREL。第二版, 台北市:碁峰資訊. 謝蕙如、白金安(2011)。制度信任、知覺風險、滿意度及行為意圖關係之研究-以成屋履約保證為例。國立屏東商業技術學院學報,( 13),149-162。   英文文獻 Ajzen, I., & Fishbein, M. (1977). Attitude-behavior relations: A theoretical analysis and review of empirical research. Psychological bulletin, 84(5), 888. Atkinson, S., & Butcher, D. (2003). Trust in managerial relationships. Journal of managerial psychology, 18(4), 282-304. Bauer, R. A. (1960). Consumer behavior as risk taking. Dynamic marketing for a changing world, 398. Bosona, T., & Gebresenbet, G. (2013). Food traceability as an integral part of logistics management in food and agricultural supply chain. Food control, 33(1), 32-48. Bowen, N. K., & Guo, S. (2011). Structural equation modeling: Oxford University Press. Commission, C. A. (2005). 15th procedural manual. Geneva: Codex Alimentarius Commission. Cox, D. F. (1967). Risk taking and information handling in consumer behavior. Cunningham, S. (1967). The major dimensions of perceived risk, Risk Taking and Information Handling in Consumer Behavior, Graduate School of Business Administration: Harvard University Press, Boston, MA. Dodds, W. B., Monroe, K. B., & Grewal, D. (1991). Effects of price, brand, and store information on buyers' product evaluations. Journal of marketing research, 307-319. Dowling, G. R., & Staelin, R. (1994). A model of perceived risk and intended risk-handling activity. Journal of consumer research, 21(1), 119-134. Fisher, R. A. (1950). Statistical methods for research workers. Statistical methods for research workers.(llth ed. revised). Gefen, D., Karahanna, E., & Straub, D. W. (2003). Trust and TAM in online shopping: An integrated model. MIS quarterly, 27(1), 51-90. Hong, I. B., & Cho, H. (2011). The impact of consumer trust on attitudinal loyalty and purchase intentions in B2C e-marketplaces: Intermediary trust vs. seller trust. International Journal of Information Management, 31(5), 469-479. Jacoby, J., & Kaplan, L. B. (1972). The components of perceived risk. ACR Special Volumes. James, C. (1990). Foundations of social theory. Cambridge, MA: Belknap. Karlsen, K. M., & Senneset, G. (2006). Traceability: Simulated recall of fish products. Seafood research from fish to dish. Quality, safety and processing of wild and farmed fish. Wageningen: Wageningen Academic Publisher, 251-261. Kim, J., & Lennon, S. J. (2013). Effects of reputation and website quality on online consumers' emotion, perceived risk and purchase intention: Based on the stimulus-organism-response model. Journal of Research in Interactive Marketing, 7(1), 33-56. Law, G. F. (2002). Regulation (EC) No. 178/2002 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 28 January 2002, laying down the general principles and requirements of food law, establishing the European Food Safety Authority, and laying down procedures in matters of food safety. OJ L, 31(1.2). Lewis, J. D., & Weigert, A. (1985). Trust as a social reality. Social forces, 63(4), 967-985. Luhmann, N. (1982). Trust and power. McKnight, D. H., Choudhury, V., & Kacmar, C. (2002). Developing and validating trust measures for e-commerce: An integrative typology. Information systems research, 13(3), 334-359. Mirabi, V., Akbariyeh, H., & Tahmasebifard, H. (2015). A study of factors affecting on customers purchase intention. Journal of Multidisciplinary Engineering Science and Technology (JMEST), 2(1). Morgan, R. M., & Hunt, S. D. (1994). The commitment-trust theory of relationship marketing. The journal of marketing, 20-38. Mullet, G. M., & Karson, M. J. (1985). Analysis of purchase intent scales weighted by probability of actual purchase. Journal of marketing research, 93-96. Olsen, P., & Borit, M. (2013). How to define traceability. Trends in food science & technology, 29(2), 142-150. P. Becerra, E., & Badrinarayanan, V. (2013). The influence of brand trust and brand identification on brand evangelism. Journal of Product & Brand Management, 22(5/6), 371-383. Pavlou, P. A. (2002). Institution-based trust in interorganizational exchange relationships: the role of online B2B marketplaces on trust formation. The Journal of Strategic Information Systems, 11(3), 215-243. Peter, J. P., & Ryan, M. J. (1976). An investigation of perceived risk at the brand level. Journal of marketing research, 184-188. Ramchurn, S. D., Huynh, D., & Jennings, N. R. (2004). Trust in multi-agent systems. The Knowledge Engineering Review, 19(1), 1-25. Randrup, M., Stor?y, J., Lievonen, S., Margeirsson, S., Árnason, S. V., í Ólavsstovu, D., . . . Frederiksen, M. T. (2008). Simulated recalls of fish products in five Nordic countries. Food control, 19(11), 1064-1069. Regattieri, A., Gamberi, M., & Manzini, R. (2007). Traceability of food products: General framework and experimental evidence. Journal of food engineering, 81(2), 347-356. Roselius, T. (1971). Consumer rankings of risk reduction methods. The journal of marketing, 56-61. Rousseau, D. M., Sitkin, S. B., Burt, R. S., & Camerer, C. (1998). Not so different after all: A cross-discipline view of trust. Academy of management review, 23(3), 393-404. Schiffman, L. G., & Kanuk, L. L. (2000). Consumer behavior, 7th. NY: Prentice Hall. Schreiber, J. B., Nora, A., Stage, F. K., Barlow, E. A., & King, J. (2006). Reporting structural equation modeling and confirmatory factor analysis results: A review. The Journal of educational research, 99(6), 323-338. Shakeel, A. (2015). The Role of Brand Credibility on Purchase Intention on Fast Food Sector in Pakistan. International Journal of Information, Business and Management, 7(4), 158. Shapiro, S. P. (1987). The social control of impersonal trust. American journal of Sociology, 93(3), 623-658. Spears, N., & Singh, S. N. (2004). Measuring attitude toward the brand and purchase intentions. Journal of Current Issues & Research in Advertising, 26(2), 53-66. Standardization, I. O. f. (1994). ISO 8402: 1994: Quality Management and Quality Assurance-Vocabulary: International Organization for Standardization. Sweeney, J. C., Soutar, G. N., & Johnson, L. W. (1999). The role of perceived risk in the quality-value relationship: a study in a retail environment. Journal of retailing, 75(1), 77-105. Tam, M. (1997). Part-time employment: A bridge or a trap? : Avebury. Taylor, J. W. (1974). The role of risk in consumer behavior. The journal of marketing, 54-60. Zhu, D. S., Chih, Z., O'Neal, G. S., & Chen, Y. H. (2011). Mr. Risk! Please trust me: Trust antecedents that increase online consumer purchase intention. Journal of Internet Banking and Commerce, 16(3), 1. Zucker, L. G. (1986). Production of trust: Institutional sources of economic structure, 1840–1920. Research in organizational behavior.   網路資料 天下雜誌。台灣社會信任度調查。檢索日期:2016年10月6日。網址:http://www.cw.com.tw/article/article.action?id=5076475 台灣農產品安全追溯資訊網。產銷履歷Q&A。檢索日期:2016年2月27日。網址:http://taft.coa.gov.tw/lp.asp?CtNode=302&CtUnit=95&BaseDSD=7&xq_xCat=B&role=C 台灣農產品安全追溯資訊網。認識產銷履歷。檢索日期:2016年2月27日。網址:http://taft.coa.gov.tw/ct.asp?xItem=4&CtNode=296&role=C 台灣優良農產品發展協會。檢索日期: 2016年3月6日。網址:http://www.cas.org.tw/cas%E8%A6%8F%E7%AF%84 吉園圃安全蔬果資訊網。檢索日期 : 2016年3月6日。網址:http://gap.afa.gov.tw/ 考試院考選部。技師考試應考資格。檢索日期:2017年2月22日。網址:http://wwwc.moex.gov.tw/main/ExamLaws/wfrmExamLaws.aspx?kind=3&menu_id=320&laws_id=106 考試院考選部。近20年各種考試報考與錄取或及格人數統計。檢索日期: 2017年2月22日。網址:http://wwwc.moex.gov.tw/main/content/wfrmContentLink.aspx?menu_id=268 行政院農業委員會。畜禽產品生產量值統計。檢索日期:2017年3月2日。網址:http://agrstat.coa.gov.tw/sdweb/public/inquiry/InquireAdvance.aspx 行政院農業委員會。糧食供需年報。檢索日期:2017年3月2日。網址:http://agrstat.coa.gov.tw/sdweb/public/book/Book.aspx 行政院農業委員會畜產加工主題網。休閒食品之開發-乳化絲肉絲。陳文賢。檢索日期:2016年3月6日。網址: https://kmweb.coa.gov.tw/subject/ct.asp?xItem=274334&ctNode=6533&mp=339&kpi=0&hashid= 行政院衛生福利部食品藥物管理署。103年度食品業者登錄查核手冊。檢索日期:2016年2月25日。網址:www.fda.gov.tw/upload/133/2015020611064553826.pdf 行政院衛生福利部食品藥物管理署。包裝食品之內容物及食品添加物名稱標示原則。檢索日期:2016年9月17日。網址: www.tpchem.tworg.net/q/20140121190926.pdf 行政院衛生福利部食品藥物管理署。包裝食品營養標示應遵行事項問答集Q&A。檢索日期:2016年9月17日。網址: http://www.fda.gov.tw/TC/siteList.aspx?sid=4190 行政院衛生福利部食品藥物管理署。食品法規條文查詢。肉類加工食品業應符合食品安全管制系統準則之規定。檢索日期:2016年2月25日。網址:https://consumer.fda.gov.tw/Law/Detail.aspx?nodeID=518&lawid=40 行政院衛生福利部食品藥物管理署。食品業者專門職業或技術證照人員設置及管理辦法Q&A。檢索日期:2016年9月23日。網址: www.fda.gov.tw/TC/siteContent.aspx?sid=2865 行政院衛生福利部食品藥物管理署。食品業者應置專門職業人員規定預告草案說明會。檢索日期:2016年10月27日。網址: http://www.fda.gov.tw/TC/newsContent.aspx?id=21404&chk=8c88c72c-0180-4401-a84a-d27198eb2b68¶m=pn&cid=462&cchk=4d6c4875-2ebb-44b3-adae-a46bbd2b69f0#.WG2x7xt97IU 行政院衛生福利部食品藥物管理署公告。應建立食品追溯追蹤系統之食品業者。檢索日期: 2017年2月25日。網址:http://www.fda.gov.tw/TC/newsContent.aspx?id=13912&chk=d48da747-fee0-40cf-9351-55aa60142b4f 行政院衛生福利部食品藥物管理署公告。檢索日期:2016年2月25日。網址:http://www.fda.gov.tw/TC/newsContent.aspx?id=13648&chk=d13fd84d-67c0-437d-914b-2d112e1aacc9#.VtSVxpx97IU 食品及其相關產品追溯追蹤系統管理辦法。檢索日期:2016年2月24日。網址:http://www.fda.gov.tw/tc/includes/GetFile.ashx?mID=19&id=26600
摘要: 
食品安全一直是社會大眾困擾許久的問題,近幾年國內食安問題層出不窮,自2013年頂新黑心油事件至今仍影響國人對食安的信心;因此政府為重振民眾對臺灣食安的信心,訂定新的食安制度,以期能達到食安控管的效果,然而新的食安制度是否真能有效提升民眾的信賴感,則是須進一步探討的。
文內新的食安制度主要包含:「聘用食品技師」、「標明添加物」、「追溯追蹤」和「提高罰則」,本研究依據這四大領域分別探討制度信任程度對知覺風險以及購買意圖的影響,尤其豬肉加工品所涉及食物與食品的範圍最廣,本研究透過問卷調查國內豬肉加工食品市場,共收集407份有效樣本,採用結構方程模型驗證本研究的架構,並以複迴歸分析解釋其四個制度對知覺風險及購買意圖之的影響力。
在結構方程模型配適度上皆達到標準情況下,研究結果發現四個食安制度之制度信任對於其購買意圖和知覺風險的路徑分析均有顯著影響力;而在迴歸分析「聘用食品技師」、「標明添加物」和「追溯追蹤」是顯著負向影響知覺風險。
由於提高罰則往往被認為是食安控管程度的指標,然本研究發現民眾對四大制度更為關心食品成分與標示,由於食品科技日新月異,唯有採取更加透明的食品規範才能確保國人對食品安全的信心。

Food safety is often an issue that has puzzled to the public for recent years. Food safety issues have emerged endlessly in Taiwan since the Ting Hsin cooking oil scandal in 2013, and it is still impacting the citizens' confidence in food safety in Taiwan. In order to restore the confidence of the public in food safety in Taiwan, the government made a new food safety system in hope of achieving the desired effect of food safety control. Nevertheless, whether the new food safety system can effectively improve the trust of the public needs to be further explored.
The new food safety system mainly consists of four domains: 'Hairing Food Technologist', 'Labeling Additive Composition', 'Tracing and Tracking' and 'Increasing Penalties'. Based on these four domains, this study respectively explored the influence of the institutional trust degree on perceived risk and purchase intention. Particularly, processed pork products involve in the broadest scope of food and foodstuffs. Through questionnaire survey on the processed pork food market in Taiwan, this study collected totally 407 effective samples, using the Structural Equation Model to set up the model of this study and multiple regression analysis to examine the influence of the four institution on perceived risk and purchase intention.
Under the circumstance of meeting the criteria for suitability of the Structural Equation Model, the study findings showed that the trust on the four food safety initiative had a significant influence from the Path Analysis of purchase intention and perceived risk. But in the regression analysis on 'Hairing Food Technologist', 'Labeling Additive Composition' and 'Tracing and Tracking', there existed remarkable negative effect on perceived risk.
Increasing penalties are often regarded as the index for the food safety control degree, but this study found that among the four food safety systems, the public are more concerned about food composition and labeling. The food technologies progress rapidly, only the utilization of more transparent food norms can guarantee Taiwanese's confidence in food safety.
URI: http://hdl.handle.net/11455/96414
Rights: 不同意授權瀏覽/列印電子全文服務
Appears in Collections:生物產業管理學系

Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormat Existing users please Login
nchu-106-7103045021-1.pdf1.49 MBAdobe PDFThis file is only available in the university internal network   
Show full item record
 

Google ScholarTM

Check


Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.