[[alternative]]寵物與飼主關係和服務品質影響寵物旅館消費者行為之研究

碩士[[abstract]]近年來，在台灣飼養寵物的數量逐漸增加。加上由於現代人生活忙碌，寵物旅館的需求也漸漸上升。因此本研究主要目的為：一、探討飼主與寵物之情感依附關係與飼主行為之影響；二、寵物旅館之服務品質對於飼主態度與行為之影響。首先本研究建構｢寵物情感量表｣來探討寵物和飼主之檢的情感依附關係，並以模型一來加以驗證寵物情感量表示是否會對於飼主的行為意圖會有所影響。模型二則是探討寵物旅館的服務品質，包含互動性品質和實體環境品質對於飼主的態度和行為意圖之影響。而模型一和模型二皆進一步探討以飼養貓或狗的飼主作為干擾變數，以了解飼養貓或狗的飼主對於寵物旅館之服務品質與態度之影響。 本研究共計分成兩次問卷發放，以實際街頭和網路問卷的方式發放，皆以目前或曾經飼養過貓狗，並實際去過寵物旅館或接收過寵物旅館相關資訊為研究對象。第一次回收的有效樣本數共計為401份，而第二次的有效樣本數共計為901份。首先以SPSS 20.0統計軟體進行探索性因素分析，萃取出三個因子：喜悅、保護、擬人。此外，以AMOS 20.0統計軟體進行相關信、效度分析，並以結構方程式進行假設檢定。實證結果如下：一、喜悅、保護、擬人皆對飼主的行為意圖具有正向影響；二、寵物旅館員工的態度對飼主的實用性與享樂性態度具有正面影響；三、寵物旅館員工的行為對於飼主的實用性態度具有負向顯著影響；四、寵物旅館員工的行為對於飼主的享樂性態度無正向顯著影響；五、寵物旅館員工的專業與寵物旅館的周遭環境對飼主的實用性與享樂性態度皆無正向顯著影響；六、寵物旅館的環境設計對飼主實用性態度具有負向顯著影響；七、寵物旅館的環境設計對飼主的享樂性態度無正向顯著影響；八、寵物旅館的社交因素對於飼主的實用性與享樂性態度皆具有正向顯著影響；九、飼主的實用性與享樂性態度對於他們的行為意圖皆具有正向顯著影響；十、飼養貓或狗的飼主在模型一和模型二皆具有干擾效果。最後，本研究提出理論與管理意涵，並提供給予寵物旅館業者和後續相關研究者建議與未來研究方向之參考。[[abstract]]The number of pet owners has recently increased in Taiwan. Because of busy daily life, the need for pet hotels has risen. This study developed the Pet Affection Scale (PAS) comprising 3 subdimensions (joy, protection, and anthropomorphism) to explore the relationship between pets and their owners. Furthermore, this study proposed Model 1 to examine the influence of the PAS on behavioral intention of owners, and Model 2 to discuss the effect of interaction quality (employee attitude, behavior, and expertise) and physical environment quality (ambient conditions, design, and social factors) on utilitarian and hedonic attitudes toward behavioral intention. Both Models 1 and 2 explore the moderating effects of pet owners who are currently or have ever raised dogs or cats. The distribution of questionnaires is divided into 2 waves. The target populations are the owners who have ever or currently raised dogs or cats and have ever been to or heard of the information of the pet hotels. The questionnaires of the first and second wave were collected by the street survey/interview and online questionnaires. SPSS 20.0 statistical software was used to analyze the exploratory factor analysis (EFA) results of the PAS. Moreover, AMOS 20.0 statistical software was employed to analyze the reliability and validity of the measurements. Structural equation modeling (SEM) was used to discuss the research hypotheses. In Model 1, joy, protection, and anthropomorphism all have significant effects on behavioral intention. In Model 2, employee attitude has positive effects on both utilitarian and hedonic attitude. Employee behavior negatively affects utilitarian attitude, but has a nonsignificant effect on hedonic attitude. The influence of employee expertise and ambient conditions on utilitarian and hedonic attitude is unsupported. Environmental design has a negative effect on utilitarian attitude, but has a nonsignificant effect on hedonic attitude. Social factors significantly affect both utilitarian and hedonic attitude. The effects of customer utilitarian and hedonic attitudes on behavioral intention are positively supported. Owners raising dogs or cats have moderating effects in Models 1 and 2. Finally, the theoretical and managerial implications of this study and its limitations and suggestions are discussed for future research.[[tableofcontents]]Table of Contents Table of Contents I List of Tables IV List of Figures VI Chapter 1 Introduction 1 1.1 Overview 1 1.2 Research Purpose 5 1.3 Research Process 5 Chapter 2 Literature Review 7 2.1 Attachment (Pet Affection Scale, PAS) 7 2.2 Behavioral Intention 9 2.3 Interaction Quality 10 2.4 Physical Environment Quality 11 2.5 Utilitarian and Hedonic Attitude 12 2.6 Pet Affection Scale on Behavioral Intention 14 2.7 Interaction Quality on Utilitarian and Hedonic Attitude 15 2.8 Physical Environment Quality on Utilitarian and Hedonic Attitude 17 2.9 Utilitarian and Hedonic Attitude on Behavioral Intention 19 2.10 Moderating Effect of Raising Dogs or Cats 20 Chapter 3 Research Methodology 22 3.1 Research Setting 23 3.2 Measurement Development 24 3.3 Questionnaire Design and Pre-test 25 3.4 Sampling and Data Collection 26 3.5 Data Analysis Methods 28 3.5.1 Descriptive Statistics Analysis 28 3.5.2 Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA) 29 3.5.3 Reliability and Validity Analysis 30 3.5.4 Structural Equation Model (SEM) 30 Chapter 4 Data Analysis and Results 31 4.1. Respondents’ profiles 31 4.1.1. First Wave (EFA) 31 4.1.2. Second Wave (The Model 1 and Model 2) 32 4.2. Scale Development Results (the 1st Wave) 35 4.2.1 Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin (KMO) and Bartlett’s Test of Sphericity 35 4.2.2 Communality 35 4.2.3 CFA Results and Model Fit 37 4.2.4 Scale Reliability 38 4.2.5 Scale Validity 38 4.3 Measurement Model Results (the 2nd Wave) 41 4.3.1. CFA Results and Model Fit 41 4.3.2. Reliability Analysis 42 4.3.3. Validity Analysis 45 4.4. Structural Equation Model Results 50 4.4.1. Overall Model Validation 50 4.4.2. Structural Equation Model Evaluation Hypothesis Test 51 4.5 Moderating Effect 55 4.5.1 The Moderating Role of Raising Dogs or Cats 55 Chapter 5 Conclusion 61 5.1 Discussion 61 5.2 Theoretical Implications 65 5.3 Managerial Implications 66 5.4 Limitations and Future Research 67 Reference 69 Appendix 81 List of Tables Table 1.1 The Population of Pets in the USA 2 Table 3.1 Source of Measure Items 25 Table 3.2 Questionnaire and Return of the First Wave 27 Table 3.3 Questionnaire and Return of the Second Wave 28 Table 4.1 Descriptive Statistics of the Respondent’s Profiles of EFA 33 Table 4.2 Descriptive Statistics of the Respondent’s Profiles of Model 1 and Model 2 34 Table 4.3 KMO and Bartlett’s Test of EFA 35 Table 4.4 EFA Results of Dimensions 36 Table 4.5 Varimax Rotated Loading Matrix 37 Table 4.6 CFA Model Fits of the Scale 38 Table 4.7 Measurement Accuracy Analysis Statistics of EFA 40 Table 4.8 Chi-Square Difference Results of the Scale 40 Table 4.9 Confidence Interval of the Scale 41 Table 4.10 CFA Model Fits of Model 1 41 Table 4.11 CFA Model Fits of Model 2 42 Table 4.12 Measurement Accuracy Analysis Statistics of Model 1 43 Table 4.13 Measurement Accuracy Analysis Statistics of Model 2 44 Table 4.14 Chi-Square Difference Results of Model 1 46 Table 4.15 Chi-Square Difference Results of Model 2 46 Table 4.16 Confidence Intervals of Model 1 47 Table 4.17 Confidence Intervals of Model 2 48 Table 4.18 Goodness-of-fit of Model 1 50 Table 4.19 Goodness-of-fit of Model 2 51 Table 4.20 Hypothesis Test Analysis of Model 1 52 Table 4.21 Hypothesis Test Analysis of Model 2 53 Table 4.22 Invariance Tests across Raising Dogs or Cats of Model 1 59 Table 4.23 Invariance Tests across Raising Dogs or Cats of Model 2 60 Table 5.1 Analysis of Hypothesis Test 64 List of Figures Figure 1.1 Research Process 6 Figure 3.1 Research Framework of Model 1 22 Figure 3.2 Research Framework of Model 2 23 Figure 4.1 Structural Equation Modeling Analysis of Model 1 54 Figure 4.2 Structural Equation Modeling Analysis of Model 2 54[[note]]學號: 601620064, 學年度: 10