【正文】 (b)處理有關(guān)信息的能動(dòng)水平 。 相對(duì)于目前的研究背景 ， 據(jù)推斷當(dāng)對(duì)同類別的感知相似時(shí) ， 品牌被當(dāng)前類別同化 ， 而 當(dāng)其描述與種類不同時(shí) ， 被比較 。因此 ， 同化帶 來了一些基于類別過程的評(píng)價(jià)結(jié)果 。 Hovland, 1961。 Nelson, 1991。 據(jù)說兩者 都可能使用于不同的階評(píng)估過程段 。 而零星的過程 ， 被使用于信息不一致時(shí) 。 Omoto, 1986。 Sujan, 1985)， 另一組倡導(dǎo)感官的動(dòng)機(jī)水平 ， 作為一種決定因素 (Borgida amp。 Fiske amp。 Sujan, 1985。 Ajzen, 1975)。 Herr, 1983。 第一種過程 ， 稱為基于種類的過程 ， 是由分類研究人員斷定的 (Burnstein amp。 Mandler amp。 具體地說 ， 就某一特定類別來說 ， 人們不僅發(fā)展了對(duì)范疇成員的知識(shí) ， 還包括典型范疇成員屬性的期望 ， 稱為種類知識(shí)或模式 ， 和對(duì)種類的情感的反應(yīng) ， 稱為類別影響 (Fiske amp。 Fiske amp。 根據(jù)分類文學(xué) (Cohen amp。 因此 ， 他們關(guān)于原品牌的知識(shí)和期望 ， 在他們對(duì)延伸品牌的評(píng)價(jià)認(rèn)知過程中 ， 有實(shí)質(zhì)性的影響 。 Shocker amp。 Fiske amp。 findings are encouraging for this hypothesis of a contrast process (Herr, 1986, 1989。 Sujan amp。 current perceptions of the brand, it is hypothesized that: HI: Regardless of the motivation level, when evaluating an original brand, consumers will engage in a categorybased (or an assimilation) process. Evaluations of Line Extensions A line extension strategy modifies some features of attributes of an original brand. Thus, from a consumer39。 Pavelchak, 1989。 Boush amp。 Neuberg, 1990。 Fiske amp。 Pavelchak, 1986). That is, it is assumed that (a) unless the ining brand information satisfies the minimum level of interest and relevance to the consumers who have an evaluation goal, no further processing occurs, and (b) a spontaneous attempt to categorize the target brand es first. Suppose consumers find the brand information sufficiently interesting and relevant to their goal. Under this condition, the case where they obtain brand information without any category expectations is considered extremely rare (Wilson, Lisle, Kraft, amp。s position when they are acceptable to begin with (., when they fall within the latitude of acceptance), whereas they are contrasted away when they are distant and unacceptable to begin with (., when they fall within the latitude of rejection). In relation to the present research context, it is inferred that a brand is assimilated to the current category when perceived to be similar to the category, whereas it is contrasted when described to be different from the category. To date, however, few studies in consumer behavior have examined the simultaneous effects of two factors, ., similarity of a target stimulus to the category schema and involvement. Furthermore, the assimilationcontrast theory does not take into consideration the possible occurrence of piecemeal processes. In summary, based on the existing literature discussed thus far, it is conceptualized that there are at least three types of process consumers can use in evaluating a brand: (a) categorybased (or assimilation), (b) contrast, and (c) piecemeal process. It is expected that these alternative types of process are determined by the two factors: (a) consistency of brand information with the category schema and (b) level of motivation to process the information. More specific predictions concerning consumer reactions to original brands and their extensions are developed in the next section. Research hypotheses A set of hypotheses is developed and tested in this study in order to understand different information processing strategies consumers use when evaluating line/brand extensions and to predict final evaluations. These hypotheses are built upon the same basic premises that past theoretical models are based upon (see Brewer, 1988。 Hovland, 1961。s evaluation of that stimulus. That is, in the present research context, evaluations of extensions are affected not only by their own characteristics but also by the characteristics of the original brand category retrieved from memory (Biernat, Manis, amp。 Borgida, 1988).The first group argues and demonstrates that perceived characteristics of a target stimulus (., availability of a fitting schema) trigger different modes of processing。 Brewer, 1988。 Pavelchak, 1986。 Bettman, 1989). Then,when do people use a categorybased, and when do they use a piecemeal process? In regards to this question, the existing literature can be largely placed into two groups: one group arguing for information consistency with category knowledge as a primary determinant of the two types of processing (Fiske, 1982。 MeyersLevy amp。 Lingle amp。 Schul, 1982, 1983。 Pavelchak, 1986。 Smith amp。 Fiske amp。 Basu, 1987。 Pavelchak, 1986。 Fiske amp。 other times they piece together their judgment on the basis of their evaluations of the individual attributes of the object. These two processes of evaluation have formed the basis of two separate streams of research in social and cognitive psychology. The first type of process,