限量策略是操弄稀少性效果的一種行銷策略，藉由限量商品來加強商品的不可獲得性，增加消費者擁有該產品的慾望。然而，對於有關產品稀少性如何增進消費者知覺價值、衝動性購買與購買意願仍不甚清楚，較少研究整合不同的中介機制來驗證稀少性效果，故本研究擬填補此一研究空缺，進一步整合相關之理論來推導出比較完整之觀念性架構。此外，本研究旨在探討商品稀少性、知覺價值、衝動性購買以及購買意願這四個構面之間的關係。本研究採取問卷調查法及量化分析法。問卷主要是以測量不同構面間之關係為目標來設計。在正式問卷調查前，先進行一個前測來調查問卷的信度與效度。在刪除了不具良好信度效度的題項以後，開始進行正式問卷調查。本研究以蒐集到的282份有效樣本及SPSS 22.0和AMOS 21.0進行分析。本研究使用了敘述性分析、信效度檢定、相關分析以及結構模式分析進行檢定，以驗證本研究所推導的研究假設。

A limited strategy is a marketing strategy that manipulates the scarcity effect of enhancing the unavailability of a product by limiting the quantity of the product and increasing the desire of the consumer to own the product.However, little is known about impulsive buying and buying intentions regarding how product scarcity enhances consumer perceived value, and few studies have examined the integration of different intermediaries to validate sparse outcomes. Therefore, this study attempts to fill this research gap and further integrate related theories to derive a more complete conceptual framework. In addition, the purpose of this study is to explore the relationship between the four facets of commodity scarcity, perceived value, impulsive buying and purchase intention. This study adopts questionnaire and quantitative analysis. The questionnaire is mainly designed to measure the relationship between different facets. Before a formal survey, a pretest is conducted to test the reliability and validity of the questionnaire. After deleting the item that does not have good reliability and validity, a formal questionnaire was started. In this study, 282 valid samples were collected and SPSS 22.0 and AMOS 21.0 were analyzed. This study used descriptive analysis, reliability and validity testing, correlation analysis and structural pattern analysis to verify the research hypothesis.

第一章 緒論 1
第一節 研究背景 1
第二節 研究動機 2
第三節 研究目的 3
第四節 研究範圍 3
第五節 研究流程 4
第二章 文獻探討 5
第一節 愛迪達公司現況 5
第二節 商品稀少性 7
第三節 知覺價值 10
第四節 衝動性購買 15
第五節 購買意願 19
第三章、研究方法 23
第一節 研究架構 23
第二節 研究假設 24
第三節 變數操作性定義與衡量 28
第四節 研究對象與抽樣方法 31
第五節 資料分析方法 32
第四章 研究結果 35
第一節 敘述性統計分析 35
第二節 問卷量表分析 39
第三節 結構方程模式分析 47
第四節 討論 54
第五章 結論與建議 57
第一節 學術意涵 57
第二節 管理意涵 58
第三節 研究限制與建議 59
參考文獻 60
壹、 中文部分 60
貳、 英文部分 61

1.許士軍 (1987)，〈管理學〉，台北：東華書局。
2.匠英一（2006）。圖解行銷心理學。台北縣：世茂。
3.杜瑞澤 & 陳敘蓓 (2014)，百貨飢餓行銷策略對顧客消費行為之影響，文化創意產業研究學報；4卷1期， P7 – 12。
4.鄭岱昀（2012），限量策略的稀少性效果對消費者購買意願之影響。
5.張重昭、謝千之 (2000)，「產品資訊、參考價格與知覺品質對消費者行為之影響」，企業管理學報 ，P161-190。
6.吳瑛茵 (2009). 產品稀少性和消費者獨特性需求對購買意願之影響,，國立成功大學。
7.邢姍姍 (2005)，產品稀少性與消費者初始態度對知覺價值的影響，國立台灣科技大學企業管理研究所未出版之博士論文。
8.林子傑(2012)。碩士論文(碩士論文)。國立高雄第一科技大學行銷與流通管理研究所。
9.孫資輝(2012)。碩士論文(碩士論文)。義守大學資訊管理學系。
10.楊雅棠、邱美惠、翁郁權(2011)。獨特性需求、限量策略之消費知覺價值與購買意圖關係之研究：以中式白酒產品為例。商學學報，19，55-67。
11.駱韋綱(2013)。產品稀少性透過獨特性需求和從眾行為對知覺價值與購買意願之影響，真理大學企業管理研究所碩士論文。
12.吳立偉、林呈昱、林瑋琳（2015）。自有品牌之名人代言：品牌熟悉度，知覺風險，知覺價值與品牌關係。管理研究學報，15(1)，85-116。
13.吳淑鶯、蕭雅如、林婉婷、何雅琳、黃詩莤、紀伯融（2012）。綠色行銷對知覺品質、知覺價格、知覺風險、知覺價值及購買意願的影響－以有機食品為例。創新與經營管理學刊，3(1)，19-41。
14.謝錦堂（2013）。消費者知覺風險與知覺價值對購買意圖之影響：社群網站服務之實證研究。電子商務研究，11(4)，431-451。
15.林佳燕（2005）。交易成本對網路購買意願影響之研究。臺北商業技術學院
商學研究所企業管理組碩士論文。
16.林忠勳（2004）。品牌聯想、知覺風險對企業經理人購買意願之影響研究。
南華大學管理科學研究所碩士論文。
17.Lynn, M. (1992). The Psychology of Unavailability：Explaining Scarcity and Cost Effects on Value. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 13(1), pp.3‐7
18.Debo, L., & Van Ryzin, G. (2009). "Creating Sales with Stock-outs,78(2): pp.163-174
19.Brannon, L. A., & McCabe, A. E. (2001). Time-restricted sales appeals: The importance of offering real value. Cornell Hotel & Restaurant Administration Quarterly, 42(4), pp.47-52.
20.Lynn, M. & Bogert, P. (1996). Journal of Applied Social Psychology：The Effect of scarcity on anticipated price appreciation., 26(22), pp.1978‐1984.
21.Gierl Heribert, Michael Plantsch & Janine Schweidler. (2008). Scarcity effects on sales volume in retail. The International Review of Retail, Distribution and Consumer Research, 18(1), pp.45–61.
22.Cialdini, R. B. (1985). Influence: Science and Practice. Glenview IL: Scott, Foresman,28(4),pp.74-86
23.Cronin, Brady & Hult (2000). “Assessing the Effect of Quality, Value, and Customer Satisfaction on Consumer Behavioral Intentions in Service Environments.” Journal of Retailing. 76(2): pp.193-218.
24.Fornell, C., M. D. Johnson, E. W. Anderson, J. Cha, & B. E. Bryant. (1996). The American customer satisfaction index: nature, purpose, and findings. Journal of Marketing, 60(1), pp.7-18.
25.Brock, T. C. (1968). In Greenwald, A.G., Brock, T. C., & Ostrom, T. M. (Eds.), Psychological Foundations of Attitude. Implications of commodity theory for value change,12(2),pp.25-32.
26.Lynn, M. (1989). Scarcity effects on desirability‐mediated by assumed expensiveness. Journal of Economic Psychology,10(2), pp.257‐274.
27.Dodds, W. B., Monroe, K. B., and Grewal, D. (1991), “Effects of price, brand, and store information on buyers’ product evaluations”, Journal of Marketing Research, 28(3), pp.307-319.
28.Parasuraman, A. (1997). Reflections on Going Competitive Advantage Through CustomerValue. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 25(2),pp.154-161.
29.Salter, S. F. (1997). Developing a Customer Value-Based Theory of The Firm. Jurnal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 25(2), pp.162-167
30.Zeithaml, V. A. (1988). Consumer perceptions of price, quality, and value: A means-end model and synthesis of evidence. Journal of Marketing,26(2),pp.203-208
31.Dodds, B.W., Monroe, K. B., & Grewal, D. (1985). The Effect of Brand and PriceInformation on Subjective Product Evaluation,10(3),pp.137-145
32.Fisher ,R.J., & Wakefield, K.(1998),” Factors leading to group identification：A field study of winners and losers,” Psychology & Marketing,15 (1), pp. 23-40
33.Fishbein, M., & Ajzen, I. (1975). Belief, Attitude, Intention, and Behavior: An Introduction to Theory and Research. Reading,24(1),pp.243-256
34.Robben, H.S.J. and T.M.M. Verhallen(1991). Behavioral costs as determinants of cost perception and preference for gifts to receive and gifts to give. Unpublished manuscript, Tilburg University,8(1),pp.87-93
35.Olson, J. C. & Jacoby, J. (1977) Consumer response to price: an attitudinal,information processing perspective, in Yoram Wind and Marshall G.Grenbergeds. Moving Ahead With Attitude Research.Chicago: America MarketingAssociation 6(2),pp.73-86.
36.Zeithaml, V. A. (1982),Consumer response to in-store price information environments.” Journal of Consumer Research, 8(4), pp. 357-369.
37.Verhallen, T. M. M.(1982).Scarcity and consumer choice behavior.Journal of Economic Psychology,2(2),pp.299-322.
38.Verhallen, T. M. M.,Robben, H. S. J.(1994).Scarcity and preference: An experiment on unavailability and product evaluation.Journal of Economic Psychology,15(2),pp.315-331.
39.Swami, S.,Khairnar, P. J.(2003).Diffusion of products with limited supply and known expiration date.Marketing Letters,14(1),pp.33-46.
40.Jung, J. M., & Kellaris, J. J.(2004)“Cross-national differences in proneness to scarcity effects：The moderating roles of familiarity, uncertainty avoidance, and need for cognitive closure.”Psychology and Marketing, 21(9), 739-753.
41.Gierl, H.,Huettl, V.(2010).Are scarce products always more attractive? The interaction of different types of scarcity signals with products' suitability for conspicuous consumption ,International Journal of Research in Marketing,27(3),pp.225-235.
42.Chi, C., Lin, C.S. and Chin, S.P. (2011), “Optimizing Time Limits for Maximum Sales Response in Internet Shopping Promotions,” Expert Systems with Applications, 38(1), pp.520–526.
43.Strack, F., Werth, L. and Deutsch, R.(2006).“Reflective and Impulsive Determinants of Consumer Behavior,” Journal of Consumer Psychology, 16(3),pp.203-214.