+ All Categories
Home > Documents > Ùü öÿ döó× Üø é îí Üö ÿ a ÿ øêø ÿîÙïÖ ø ð Ö ï Wéø ï ...€¦ ·  ·...

Ùü öÿ döó× Üø é îí Üö ÿ a ÿ øêø ÿîÙïÖ ø ð Ö ï Wéø ï ...€¦ ·  ·...

Date post: 17-May-2018
Category:
Upload: truongminh
View: 213 times
Download: 0 times
Share this document with a friend
18
BU ACADEMIC REVIEW 122 ÙüćöÿĆöóĆîíŤ×ĂÜøąéĆïÖćøđðŗéøĆïđÙøČęĂÜöČĂÿČęĂÿćøêøćÿĉîÙšćÖĆï øąéĆïÖćøøĆïøĎšïčÙúĉÖõćóêøćÿĉîÙšć "ēÙÙć-ēÙúćThe Correlations of Brand Communication Tools’ Exposure Level and “Coca Cola” Brand Personality’s Perception Level ðåöćóø đîêĉîĆîìîŤ 1 Patamaporn Netinant ïìÙĆé÷ŠĂ Ĕîðøąđìýĕì÷ ēÙÙć-ēÙúć đðŨîñĎšîĞćĂĆîéĆïĀîċęÜ×ĂÜđÙøČęĂÜéČęöðøąđõìēÙúć ēé÷ĔîðŘ 2555 ēÙÙć-ēÙúć Ĕßš ÜïðøąöćèÖćøēÛþèćÿĎÜìĊęÿčéđóČęĂìĞćĔĀšđðŨîêøćÿĉîÙšćĔîĔÝ×ĂÜñĎšïøĉēõÙđðŜćĀöć÷ đîČęĂÜÝćÖđÙøČęĂÜéČęöðøąđõìēÙúć öĊöĎúÙŠćÖćøêúćéÿĎÜ ÿëćîÖćøèŤÖćøĒ׊Ü×ĆîøčîĒøÜ øüöìĆĚÜöĊñĎšðøąÖĂïÖćøøć÷ĔĀöŠđךćöćĒ÷ŠÜßĉÜÿŠüîĒïŠÜÖćøêúćé Ēúąìšćìć÷ÙüćöđðŨîñĎšîĞćêúćé×ĂÜêøćÿĉîÙšć ēÙÙć - ēÙúć ÝċÜđðŨîìĊęöć×ĂÜÖćøýċÖþćüĉÝĆ÷đßĉÜðøĉöćèîĊĚ ēé÷ üĆêëčðøąÿÜÙŤÖćøüĉÝĆ÷ĕéšîĞćöćÖĞćĀîéđðŨîÿööêĉåćîÖćøüĉÝĆ÷ 2 ךà ÙČĂ 1) öĊÙüćöÿĆöóĆîíŤ×ĂÜÖćøøĆïøĎšïčÙúĉÖõćó×ĂÜ êĆüñĎšïøĉēõÙđĂÜÖĆïÖćøøĆïøĎšïčÙúĉÖõćóêøćÿĉîÙšć ēÙÙć-ēÙúć Ēúą 2) öĊÙüćöÿĆöóĆîíŤ×ĂÜÖćøđðŗéøĆïđÙøČęĂÜöČĂÖćø ÿČęĂÿćøêøćÿĉîÙšćêŠćÜė ×ĂÜđÙøČęĂÜéČęöðøąđõìēÙúć ÖĆïÖćøøĆïøĎšïčÙúĉÖõćóêøćÿĉîÙšć ēÙÙć - ēÙúć êćööćêøüĆé ïčÙúĉÖõćóêøćÿĉîÙšć×ĂÜ Jennifer Aaker đÖĘïךĂöĎúéšü÷ĒïïÿĂïëćöÝĞćîüî 400 ßčé ÝćÖñĎšïøĉēõÙđÙøČęĂÜéČęö ðøąđõìēÙúć àċęÜĂćýĆ÷Ă÷ĎŠĔîđ×êÖøčÜđìóĄ ÿëĉêĉìĊęĔßšđóČęĂÖćøüĉđÙøćąĀŤ×šĂöĎú ÙČĂ Pearson’s Correlations ñúÖćø ìéÿĂïÿööêĉåćîÖćøüĉÝĆ÷ĒÿéÜĔĀšđĀĘîüŠć êĆüĒðøĔîÿööčêĉåćîÖćøüĉÝĆ÷ìĆĚÜ 2 ÿööêĉåćîöĊÙüćöÿĆöóĆîíŤÖĆîđßĉÜïüÖĔî øąéĆïêęĞć ìĊęøąéĆïîĆ÷ÿĞćÙĆâìĊę 0.01 đîČęĂÜÝćÖÙŠć p < 0.01 ĒúąÙŠćÿĆöðøąÿĉìíĉÿĀÿĆöóĆîíŤ (r) öĊÙŠćđìŠćÖĆï 0.309 Ēúą 0.254 êćöúĞćéĆï ÙĞćÿĞćÙĆâ: ÖćøđðŗéøĆï ÖćøøĆïøĎš đÙøČęĂÜöČĂÖćøÿČęĂÿćøêøćÿĉîÙšć ïčÙúĉÖõćóêøćÿĉîÙšć đÙøČęĂÜéČęöðøąđõìēÙúć ēÙÙć-ēÙúć ABSTRACT In Thailand, Coca Cola is the brand leader of Cola Drinking. In 2012 Coca Cola invested the highest amount of advertising budget to establish the brand in target consumer’s mind. This is due to the fact that Cola drink market has very high market value, high competitive situation, with new brand comers trying to take market share in this industry and thus challenging the market leader like Coca Cola. The aims of research therefore, turn into 2 hypothesized are following; 1) there are correlations between consumer self-personality perception and Coca Cola brand's personality perception, 2) there are correlations between brand communication tools exposure and Coca Cola brand's personality perception by using Jennifer Aaker’s brand personality scale. Data were collected using a questionnaire from 400 Cola drinking consumers who live in Bangkok. Statistics used for 1 ĂćÝćø÷ŤðøąÝĞćõćÙüĉßćÖćøēÛþèć ÙèąîĉđìýýćÿêøŤ öĀćüĉì÷ćúĆ÷ÖøčÜđìó Instructor of Advertising department, Communication Arts faculty, Bangkok University, e-mail: [email protected]
Transcript
Page 1: Ùü öÿ döó× Üø é îí Üö ÿ a ÿ øêø ÿîÙïÖ ø ð Ö ï Wéø ï ...€¦ ·  · 2017-07-21are correlations between consumer self-personality perception and Coca

BU ACADEMIC REVIEW

122

" - ”

The Correlations of Brand Communication Tools’ Exposure Level and “Coca Cola” Brand Personality’s Perception Level

1

Patamaporn Netinant

- 2555 -

- 2 1)

- 2) -

Jennifer Aaker 400 Pearson’s Correlations

2 0.01 p < 0.01 (r) 0.309

0.254

: -

ABSTRACT In Thailand, Coca Cola is the brand leader of Cola Drinking. In 2012 Coca Cola invested the

highest amount of advertising budget to establish the brand in target consumer’s mind. This is due to the fact that Cola drink market has very high market value, high competitive situation, with new brand comers trying to take market share in this industry and thus challenging the market leader like Coca Cola. The aims of research therefore, turn into 2 hypothesized are following; 1) there are correlations between consumer self-personality perception and Coca Cola brand's personality perception, 2) there are correlations between brand communication tools exposure and Coca Cola brand's personality perception by using Jennifer Aaker’s brand personality scale. Data were collected using a questionnaire from 400 Cola drinking consumers who live in Bangkok. Statistics used for

1 Instructor of Advertising department, Communication Arts faculty, Bangkok University, e-mail: [email protected]

Page 2: Ùü öÿ döó× Üø é îí Üö ÿ a ÿ øêø ÿîÙïÖ ø ð Ö ï Wéø ï ...€¦ ·  · 2017-07-21are correlations between consumer self-personality perception and Coca

123

Vol. 13, No.2, July - December 2014

analyses the data is Pearson’s correlations. The results show; there were positive low level correlations correlations between variables within both of hypothesis at 0.01 significant level. Because of p value < 0.01, Pearson’s correlations (r) = 0.309 and 0.254 order by order.

Keywords: Media Exposure, Consumer Perception, Brand Communication Tool, Brand Personality, Cola Drinking, Coca Cola

2555 –

(“ ” “ ”

12 , 2556)

- 2 2554

- 10 (“ ” “ ” 12

, 2556) -

( “ ” “ ” 2 1 , 2556) -

-

(“ ” “ ” 12 , 2556)

4

-

2556 ( “ ”

“ ” 2 1 , 2556)

AC Nielsen -

3 2555 –

2554

(Advertising) (Integrated Brand Communication)

(Marketing Promotion)

(Brand of Mind)

(O'Guinn, Allen, & Semenik, 2012)

(Brand Personalities)

(Tangible)

(Aaker, 2012) (Relevant)

Page 3: Ùü öÿ döó× Üø é îí Üö ÿ a ÿ øêø ÿîÙïÖ ø ð Ö ï Wéø ï ...€¦ ·  · 2017-07-21are correlations between consumer self-personality perception and Coca

BU ACADEMIC REVIEW

124

(Engagement) (Brand Loyalty) (Sugiyama & Angdree, 2011)

-

6 1)

2)

3) 4)

- 5) (Correlations)

- 6)

-

3 1 2

3

“Big 5” 5 Jennifer Aaker “Building Strong

Brand” Aaker (2012)

7 “Advertising and Integrate Brand Promotion” (O’ Guinn, Allen, & Semenik, 2012) “Advertising and Promotion” (Belch & Belch, 2012) “Advertising and Promotion” (Hackley, 2011) “Marketing Communications: Integrating Offline and Online with Social Media” (Smith & Zook, 2011) “Convergence Marketing; Strategies for Reaching The New Hybrid Consumer” (Wind, Mahajan & Gunthur, 2002) “An Integrated Communication Planning in The Digital Era” (Young, 2010) “Advertising Promotion, and Others Aspects of Integrated Marketing Communications” (Shimp, 2010)

17 4 1 (Mass Media)

2 (Internet)

(Social Media Networking) (Online Community)

3 (Influencer)

4 (Give Away)

2 “Consumer Behavior” (Schiffman,

Kanuk, & Hansen, 2012). “Consumer Behavior: Buying, Having, and Being” (Solomon, 2012) “Advertising and Promotion: An Integrated

Page 4: Ùü öÿ döó× Üø é îí Üö ÿ a ÿ øêø ÿîÙïÖ ø ð Ö ï Wéø ï ...€¦ ·  · 2017-07-21are correlations between consumer self-personality perception and Coca

125

Vol. 13, No.2, July - December 2014

Marketing Communication Perspective 7/e” (Belch & Belch, 2012) 10

1

-

2

-

400 (Purposive Sampling) ( , 2554)

10 – 60

2556

5 3 4 4

5 5 1 6

(Nominal Scale) (Ordinal Scale) ( , 2554) 2

(Consumers' Personality) 5 3

(Brand Communication Tools' Exposure) 17

4 - 10 5

- (Brand Personalities' Perception) 5

2 – 5

(Interval Scale) 5 Likert ( , 2554)

1 – 5

5 0.8 1.00 – 1.80

1.81 – 2.61 2.62 – 3.42 3.43 – 4.23 4.24 – 5.00

(Frequency) (Percentage) (Mean) (Standard deviation: S.D.)

(Pearson’s Correlations) 0.05 ( = 0.05)

400 184 ( 46.0) 216 ( 54.0) 21 – 30 1 96 ( 24.0)

2 31 – 40 83 ( 20.8) 3 10 -20 77 ( 19.3)

4 50 – 60 75 ( 18.8 ) 5 41 – 50 69 (

17.3) 1

Page 5: Ùü öÿ döó× Üø é îí Üö ÿ a ÿ øêø ÿîÙïÖ ø ð Ö ï Wéø ï ...€¦ ·  · 2017-07-21are correlations between consumer self-personality perception and Coca

BU ACADEMIC REVIEW

126

1

Frequency Valid Percent

Cumulative Percent

10 - 20 77 19.3 19.3 21 - 30 96 24.0 43.3 31 - 40 83 20.8 64.0 41 - 50 69 17.3 81.3 51 75 18.8 100.0

Total 400 100.0

1 205 ( 51.3) 2 94 ( 23.5)

3 67 ( 16.75)

4 30 ( 7.5) 5

4 ( 10) 2

2

Frequency Valid Percent

Cumulative Percent

94 23.5 23.5 30 7.5 31.0 205 51.2 82.3

67 16.8 99.0 4 1.0 100.0 Total 400 100.0

1 130 ( 32.5) 2 74

( 18.5) 3 65 (

16.3) 4 56 ( 14.0) 5 50 ( 12.5) 6

25 ( 6.3) 3

3

Frequency Valid Percent

Cumulative Percent

2 0.5 0.5 23 5.8 6.3

50 12.5 18.8 56 14.0 32.8

130 32.5 65.3 65 16.3 81.5

74 18.5 100.0 Total 400 100.0

Page 6: Ùü öÿ döó× Üø é îí Üö ÿ a ÿ øêø ÿîÙïÖ ø ð Ö ï Wéø ï ...€¦ ·  · 2017-07-21are correlations between consumer self-personality perception and Coca

127

Vol. 13, No.2, July - December 2014

8,000 1 93 ( 23.3) 2

8,000 – 16,000 91 ( 22.8) 3 40,000 71 (

17.8) 4 16,000 – 24,000 57

( 14.3) 5 2 24,000 – 32,000 32,000 – 40,000

2 44 ( 11.0) 4

4 (Income per Month)

Frequency Percent Valid

Percent Cumulative

Percent 8,000 93 23.3 23.3 23.3

8,001 - 16,000 91 22.8 22.8 46.0 16,001 - 24,000 57 14.2 14.2 60.3 24,001 - 32,000 44 11.0 11.0 71.3 32,001 - 40,000 44 11.0 11.0 82.3 40,001 71 17.8 17.8 100.0

Total 400 100.0 100.0

255 ( 63.8) 145

( 36.3)

(Selves – Personalities’ Perception) 5 “Big Five” Jennifer Aaker (Aaker, 2012)

(Mean = 3.5720 S.D. = 0.5876)

5

1 – 5

“ ” 1 (Mean = 4.0950 S.D. = 0.7985) 2

“ ” (Mean = 3.6525 S.D. = 0.9076) 3

“ ” (Mean = 3.6225 S.D. = 0.8871) 5

Page 7: Ùü öÿ döó× Üø é îí Üö ÿ a ÿ øêø ÿîÙïÖ ø ð Ö ï Wéø ï ...€¦ ·  · 2017-07-21are correlations between consumer self-personality perception and Coca

BU ACADEMIC REVIEW

128

5 5 “Big Five” Jennifer Aaker (Aaker, 2012)

5

(Mean)

(S.D.)

1 (Sincerity) (Down – To – Earth) (Honest) (Wholesome) (Cheerful)

4.0950 0.7985

2 (Cheerful) (Daring) (Spirited) (Imaginative) (Up-To-Date)

3.6525 0.9076

3 (Competence) (Considered) (Reliable) (Intelligent) (Successful)

3.6225 0.8871

4 (Sophisticate) (Upper Class) (Charming)

3.0650 0.9343

5 (Ruggedness) (Tough) (Outdoorsy)

3.4250 1.0330

5

3.5720 0.5876

(Brand Communication

Tools’ Exposure) 17

(Mean = 3.5720 S.D. = 0.7701) 1 – 5

1

(Mean = 4.5250 S.D. = 0.6523) 2 (Mean =

3.6700 S.D. = 0.9943) 3 (Mean = 3.3500 S.D. = 1.1601)

4 1

(Mass Media) 2 (Internet)

3 (Influencer) 4 (Give Away)

1 (Mean = 3.2222 S.D. = 0.6539) 2

(Mean = 2.9908 S.D. = 0.9845) 3

(Mean = 2.9700 S.D. = 0.9110) 4 (Give Away)

(Mean = 2.9075 S.D. = 1.1345)

9

1 (Mean = 4.5250 S.D. = 0.6523) 2

(Mean = 3.6700 S.D. = 0.9943) 3

(Mean = 3.3500 S.D. = 1.1601)

(Mean = 2.1125 S.D. = 1.0760) 9

Page 8: Ùü öÿ döó× Üø é îí Üö ÿ a ÿ øêø ÿîÙïÖ ø ð Ö ï Wéø ï ...€¦ ·  · 2017-07-21are correlations between consumer self-personality perception and Coca

129

Vol. 13, No.2, July - December 2014

4

Facebook Instagram Twitter 1

(Mean = 2.5975 S.D. = 1.2588) 2

(Mean = 2.5175 S.D. = 1.1670) 3 YouTube, Pantip

Sanook (Mean = 2.4850 S.D. = 1.2097)

3

1

(Mean = 3.2225 S.D. = 1.1385) 2

(Mean = 2.9650 S.D. = 1.1968) 3

(Mean = 2.7850 S.D. = 1.2339) 6

6 17

(Mean)

(S.D.) 1 (Television) 4.5250 0.6523 2 (radio) 3.0275 1.0885 3 (Film) 3.3500 1.1601 4 (Newspaper) 3.0925 1.0709 5 (Magazine) 2.9975 1.1071 6 (Out of Home / Out Door Media) 3.6700 0.9943 7

(Transit Media) 3.3450 1.0067

8 (Building Wrap) 2.8800 1.1828 9 2.1125 1.0760

1 (Mass Media)

3.2222 0.6539

10 2.5175 1.1697 11 (Social Media) Facebook Instagram Twitter 2.5975 1.2588

12 (Social Media Communities) YouTube Pantip

Sanook 2.4850 1.2097

Page 9: Ùü öÿ döó× Üø é îí Üö ÿ a ÿ øêø ÿîÙïÖ ø ð Ö ï Wéø ï ...€¦ ·  · 2017-07-21are correlations between consumer self-personality perception and Coca

BU ACADEMIC REVIEW

130

6 17 ( )

(Mean)

(S.D.) 13 e-mail 1.8600 1.0669

2 (Internet)

2.9700 0.9110

14 (Brand Ambassador / Presenter / Endorsement)

3.2225 1.1385

15 2.9650 1.1968 16 2.7850 1.2339

3 (Influencer)

2.9908 0.9845

17 4 (Give Away)

2.9075 1.1345

17 4

3.5720 0.77012

(Brand Awareness)

10

Mean = 3.3923 S.D. = 1.0292

1 – 5

1

(Mean = 4.2800 S.D. = 0.8300) 2 (Mean = 4.0625

S.D. = 0.8863) 3 (Mean = 3.6500 S.D. = 1.01493)

10

(Mean = 2.9325 S.D. = 1.1118) 7

7

(Black Carbonate Drinking Brand Awareness)

(Mean)

(Standard Deviation)

1 (Brand Name) 4.2800 0.8297 2 (Brand Logo) 4.0625 0.8863 3 (Brand Slogan) 3.2775 1.0622

Page 10: Ùü öÿ döó× Üø é îí Üö ÿ a ÿ øêø ÿîÙïÖ ø ð Ö ï Wéø ï ...€¦ ·  · 2017-07-21are correlations between consumer self-personality perception and Coca

131

Vol. 13, No.2, July - December 2014

7 ( )

(Black Carbonate Drinking Brand Awareness)

(Mean)

(Standard Deviation)

4

(Sale Promotion) 2.9325 1.1118

5 3.6500 1.01493

6

(Brand Ambassador / Brand Presenter / Brand Endorsement)

3.2150 1.1144

7 (Public Relations) 3.2625 1.0253

8

(Marketing Event) 3.0725 1.02707

9

(Sponsorship) 3.1750 1.1124

10

(Social Responsibility) 2.9950 1.1082

10 3.3923 1.0292

- (Brand Personalities’ Perception)

5 “Big Five” Jennifer Aaker (Aaker, 2012)

(Mean = 3.7005 S.D. = 0.6302) 1 – 5

- -

“ ” 1 (Mean = 3.8850 S.D. = 0.8267) 2

“ ” (Mean = 3.8200 S.D. = 0.8272) 3 “

” (Mean = 3.7600 S.D. = 0.8118) 4 “ ”

(Mean = 3.5650 S.D. = 0.9634) 5 “ ”

(Mean = 3.4725 S.D. = 0.9308) 8

Page 11: Ùü öÿ döó× Üø é îí Üö ÿ a ÿ øêø ÿîÙïÖ ø ð Ö ï Wéø ï ...€¦ ·  · 2017-07-21are correlations between consumer self-personality perception and Coca

BU ACADEMIC REVIEW

132

8 - “Big Five” Jennifer Aaker (Aaker, 2012)

- 5

(Mean)

(Standard Deviation)

1 (Sincerity) (Down – To – Earth) (Honest) (Wholesome)

(Cheerful) 3.8200 0.8272

2 (Cheerful) (Daring) (Spirited) (Imaginative) (Up-To-Date) 3.8850 0.8267

3 (Competence) (Considered) (Reliable) (Intelligent) (Successful)

3.7600 0.8118

4 (Sophisticate) (Upper Class) (Charming) 3.4725 0.9308

5 (Ruggedness) (Tough) (Outdoorsy) 3.5650 0.9634

- 5 3.7005 0.6302

-

1 Pearson’s Correlations 0.05

(r) Bartz (1999, , 2554) 5 r 0.20

r = 0.21 - 0.40 r = 0.41 - 0.60

r = 0.61 - 0.80 r 0.81

0.01 (r = 0.309, p < 0.01) 9

9

- Pearson’s Correlations

(r) - 1 0.309**

- 0.309** 1 ** Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2 – tailed).

-

2

Pearson’s Correlations

0.01 (r = 0.254, p < 0.01) 10

Page 12: Ùü öÿ döó× Üø é îí Üö ÿ a ÿ øêø ÿîÙïÖ ø ð Ö ï Wéø ï ...€¦ ·  · 2017-07-21are correlations between consumer self-personality perception and Coca

133

Vol. 13, No.2, July - December 2014

10 - Pearson’s Correlations

(r)

-

1 0.254**

- 0.254** 1

** Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2 – tailed).

“ ” “ ”

“ ” 5

“Big Five” Jennifer Aaker (Aaker, 2012)

-

17 4

4

4

1 2 3 4

Wind, Mahajan, Gunthur (2002) “Convergent Marketing”

1

(Brand Presenter) Drewniary Jewler (2014)

Vollmer Precourt (2008) “Always On; Advertising, Marketing, and Media in The New Era of Consumer Control (Strategy + Business)”

(Film)

(Out of Home / Out Door Media)

(Transit Media) Lifestyle

Page 13: Ùü öÿ döó× Üø é îí Üö ÿ a ÿ øêø ÿîÙïÖ ø ð Ö ï Wéø ï ...€¦ ·  · 2017-07-21are correlations between consumer self-personality perception and Coca

BU ACADEMIC REVIEW

134

– Kelley, Jugenheimer Sheehan

(2012)

(Give Away)

Imbriale (2007)

(Free and Cheap)

17 Vollmer Precourt (2008)

Campbell, Martin Fabos,

(2012) (Interactive Media)

(Social Media) (Social

Community) e- mail Intelligent Media

(Cited in; Bowdery, 2008) 40

(Intrusive Advertising)

(New Media)

Roezter (2012)

(2554, , 2556)

16 – 31

31 – 48

(The

Fragmented Consumer) Solomon (2012)

(Brand Name) - 1 2

(Brand Logo) 3

Moolla Bisschoff

(2012, , 2557)

Kapferer (2013)

(Graphic)

Vollmer Precourt (2008)

Page 14: Ùü öÿ döó× Üø é îí Üö ÿ a ÿ øêø ÿîÙïÖ ø ð Ö ï Wéø ï ...€¦ ·  · 2017-07-21are correlations between consumer self-personality perception and Coca

135

Vol. 13, No.2, July - December 2014

- (Brand Personality’s Perception) -

“ ” “ ” “ ”

- 5

“Big Five” Aaker (2012)

- 1

- 2

- 0.01 Aaker (2012)

(Brand Personality)

(Brand Relevant)

1 -

Walters (1978, , 2556)

2

-

Kotler, Kartajaya Setiawan (2011)

(Globalization)

“Multitasking” Wertime Fenwick

(2008)

Solomon (2012)

2

(Gralpois, 2010)

(Electronic Catalog)

Page 15: Ùü öÿ döó× Üø é îí Üö ÿ a ÿ øêø ÿîÙïÖ ø ð Ö ï Wéø ï ...€¦ ·  · 2017-07-21are correlations between consumer self-personality perception and Coca

BU ACADEMIC REVIEW

136

(Bowdery, 2008)

(Roetzer, 2012)

(Bowdery, 2008)

(Bowdery, 2008)

(Calder & Kotler, 2008)

“Through the Line Media”

(Clow & Baack, 2012)

“ ” (Brand Value Chain)

(Vollmer & Precourt, 2008)

(Emotional Satisfaction Associations)

(Jones, 2006)

“ ” “ ” 12 .

(2556, 5 ). . 27 2556, http://www.prachachat. net/ news_detail.php?newsid=1362457739

“ ” / 50%. (2556, 6-8 ). . 1.

. (2556). . BU Academic Review, 12(1), 34-45.

. (2556). . BU Academic Review, 12(1), 72-85. “ " " " " 2 1 , (2556, 18 ). . 27 2556, http://www.bangkok biznews.com/home/media/2013/03/15/image s/news_img_495348_1.jpg

Page 16: Ùü öÿ döó× Üø é îí Üö ÿ a ÿ øêø ÿîÙïÖ ø ð Ö ï Wéø ï ...€¦ ·  · 2017-07-21are correlations between consumer self-personality perception and Coca

137

Vol. 13, No.2, July - December 2014

. (2557). : 2 . BU Academic Review, 13(1), 119-137.

. (2554). ( 22). : . Aaker, D. A. (2012). Building strong brands. (4th ed.). London, LON: RocketBooks. Belch, G. E., & Belch, M. A. (2012). Advertising and p romot ion : An i n teg ra ted marke t i n g communication perspective 7/e (7th ed.). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill. Bowdery, R. (2008). Copywriting: The creative process of writing text for advertisements or publicity material. Singapore, SG: An AVA Book. Calder, B. J., & Kotler, P. (2008). Kellogg on Advertising & Media. New Jersey, NJ: John Wiley & Son. Campbell, R., Martin, C. R. & Fabos, E. (2012). Media and culture with 2013 update: An introduction to mass communication. (8th ed.). New York, NY: Bedford/St. Martin's. Clow, K. E., & Baack, D. E. (2012). Integrated advertising, promotion, and marketing communications. Ohio, OH: Pearson. Drewniany, B. L., & Jewler, A. J. (2014). Creative strategy in advertising (12th ed.). Boston, MI: WADAWORTH. Fisk, P. (2009). Customer genius. Chichester, UK.: Capstone. Gralpois, B. (2010). Agency mania: Harnessing the madness of client/agency relationships for high-Impact results. New York, NY: SelectBooks. Hackley, C. (2010). Advertising and promotion; An Integrated marketing communication approach (2nd ed.). London: Sage.

Imbriale, R. (2007). Motivational marketing: How to effects Your prospects to buy now, buy more, and tell Their friends too! New Jersey, NJ: John Wiley & Son. Jones, J. P. (2006). When ads work: New proof that advertising triggers sales. New York, NY: M.E. Sharp. Kapferer, J.N. (2013). The New strategic brand management: advanced insights and strategic thinking (new strategic brand management: creating & sustaining brand equity) (5th ed.). London: Kogan Page. Kelley, L. D., Jugenheimer, D. W., & Sheehan, K. B. (2012). Advertising media planning; A brand management approach (3rd ed.). London: M.E.Shape. Kotler, P., Kartajaya, H., & Setiawan, I. (2011). Marketing 3.0. New Jersey, NJ: John Wiley & Sons. O'Guinn, T., Allen, C., & Semenik R. J. (2012). Advertising and integrated brand promotion. (6th ed.). Ohio, OH: South-Western. Roetzer, P. (2012). The marketing agency blueprint: The handbook for building hybrid PR, SEO, content, advertising, and web firms. New Jersey, NJ: John Wiley & Sons. Schiffman, L. G., Kanuk, L. & Hansen, H. (2012). Consumer behaviour: A European outlook (2nd ed.). New Jersey, NJ: Prentice Hall. Shimp, T. A. (2010). Advertising, promotion, and other aspects of integrated marketing communications (9nd ed.). Ohio, OH: South-Western. Smith, P. R. & Zook, Z. (2011). Marketing communications; integrating offline and online with social media (5th ed.). London: Kogan Page. Solomon, M. R. (2012). Consumer behavior: buying, having, and being (10th ed.). Boston, MI: Pearson Education.

Page 17: Ùü öÿ döó× Üø é îí Üö ÿ a ÿ øêø ÿîÙïÖ ø ð Ö ï Wéø ï ...€¦ ·  · 2017-07-21are correlations between consumer self-personality perception and Coca

BU ACADEMIC REVIEW

138

Sugiyama, K., & Andree T. (2011). The dentsu way: secrets of cross switch marketing from the world’s most innovative advertising agency. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill. Vollmer, C., & Precourt, G. (2008). Always on: Advertising, marketing and media in an era of consumer. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill. Wertime, K., & Fenwick, I. (2008). DigiMarketing: The essential guide to new media and digital marketing. London: Wiley & Son. Wind, Y. R., Mahajan, V., & Gunthur, R. E. (2002). Convergence marketing: strategies for reaching the new hybrid consumer (2nd ed.). Boston, MI: Prentice Hall. Young, A. (2010). Brand media strategy; An integrated communication planning in the digital era. New York, NY: PALGRAVE MACMILLAN.

. . . (

) . . ( ) . . (

)

(iMobile)

-

(AIS)

( ),

( ) ( ),

( ) ( . . 100) 1) "

:

(Core Factors of Brand Communication Tools Effect to Black Carbonate Drinking Brand Awareness Level, Case Study: Black Carbonate Drinking Consumers who live in Bangkok Cosmopolitan)

" 4

"

9 2557

2) “

3 :

(Core Factors of Political Marketing Communication Tools Effect to 3 Political Parties Personality Perception Level, Case Studies of Thai Rak Thai, Plalang Pra Cha Chon and Pue Thai Political Party)

2556

“Green ASIA and Sustainability ” 8 2557 8.30-17.30 .

3) “ ” (2556). :

4) “

6 : ”

Page 18: Ùü öÿ döó× Üø é îí Üö ÿ a ÿ øêø ÿîÙïÖ ø ð Ö ï Wéø ï ...€¦ ·  · 2017-07-21are correlations between consumer self-personality perception and Coca

139

Vol. 13, No.2, July - December 2014

25 2555 5) “

6 : ”

25 2555 6) “

” 2554 5) “ 3

” BU Academic Review 2553

7) “

” BU Academic Review 2553 8) “

: ” BU Academic Review

2553 9) “ ”

2552 10)

“Brand Communication Process of Thai Political Parties” “SPICE 2009”

2552


Recommended