此研究主要探討使用者心理因素及其行為意向的關係，根據之前的研究，針對科技自尊對智慧型手機使用者的威脅導致使用者對於另一個替代的智慧型手機產生對立的行為表現(態度)進行更深入的探討，利用兩種不同的分析方式：(1) 最小平方路徑分析法(PLS-PM)；(2) 模糊集質性比較分析(fs/QCA)。我們各別地探索此兩種不同的分析方式來解釋智慧型手機使用者的一些心理因素導致對他牌智慧型手機的排斥。在方法面，我們描述模糊集質性比較研究(fs/QCA)的應用是最小平方(PLS-PM)在管理面應用的替代性方案。在實質面，我們探索科技自尊威脅和其他心理因素影響對替代手機對立性的程度。
我們基於之前的研究採用當中的300個有效樣本針對科技自尊威脅影響對立態度進行再次分析，利用兩種不同的分析方式找出其他可能影響對立行為的心理因素。然而，我們得出以下幾點結論。首先，科技自尊威脅(TTSE)對於逆反心理(OPPOSING)是必要且充分的，此論證也支持了fs/QCA以及PLS-PM在解釋對稱關係上的互補性。然而，基於以下兩點論證，fs/QCA可以讓我們對於非對稱關係有更深入的了解。第一，BIDEN*~SEFF*USC*~HABIT是另一個組態可以解釋使用者對智慧型手機的逆反行為。接著，BIDEN*~SEFF*USC*~HABIT表示充分的影響逆反行為，此論證無法在PLS-PM中得出。這三點發現重新詮釋並給予我們對智慧型手機使用者的心理因素與其對替代手機的逆反心理的關係有更深入的描述。

This paper, whose purpose is to explore psychological factor to users’ behavioral intention with applying two distinct methodologies: Partial Least Squares Path Modelling (PLS-PM) and Fuzzy Set Qualitative Comparative Analysis (fs/QCA), on a theoretical question about smartphone perceptions. We compare how these two analytic perspectives differ by examining psychological factors that lead smartphone users to oppose alternative branded phones. To contribute to methodology, we illustrate how recently developed fs/QCA approach can provide an alternative way to analyze outcomes from PLS in management. To contribute substantively, we explore the extent to which threats to technological self-esteem which we are interested in and other cognitive factors affect opposition to the alternative technologies.
This study focuses on figuring out other psychological possibilities based on the relationship of threats to tech self-esteem and opposing with different analytic methods by adopting 300 qualified questionnaires based on the previous research. After applying the two distinct techniques on the same study dataset, we summarized the results and conclude some findings. First, TTSE is necessary and sufficient to OPPOSING while it supported that fs/QCA and PLS-PM are complementary in explaining symmetric relationships. However, fs/QCA can extend our domain understanding with asymmetric relationships based on the other two findings. One is the second combinations of antecedents, BIDEN*~SEFF*USC*~HABIT, is an alternative explanation to the opposition behavior on rival smartphone. The other is BIDEN*~SEFF*USC*~HABIT is sufficient for opposition that can’t be found in PLS-PM. The three findings reinterpreted and gave deeper description of the relationship between psychological factors for smartphone users and their opposition on alternative phone.

Chapter 1: Introduction 1
Chapter 2: Fuzzy Set Qualitative Comparative Analysis 3
2.1 Calibration 3
2.2 Combinations of Antecedents: Truth Table 5
2.3 Minimization: Boolean algebra 6
2.4 Set Relations: Necessity and Sufficiency 7
2.5 Parameters of Fit: Consistency and Coverage 9
2.6 Differences of PLS-PM and fs/QCA 10
Chapter 3: Theoretical Framework 14
3.1 Factors that could influence OPPOSING 14
3.2 Data 16
3.2.1 Participants 17
Chapter 4: Data Analysis 19
4.1 Partial Least Squares Path Modelling (PLS-PM) Approach 20
4.1.1 Reliability and Validity 20
4.1.2 PLS-PM Results 21
4.2 Fuzzy Set Qualitative Comparative Analysis (fs/QCA) Approach 22
4.2.1 Data Calibration Process 22
4.2.2 Analysis of Necessary Conditions 26
4.2.3 Analysis of Sufficient Conditions 27
4.2.4 fs/QCA Results 30
Chapter 5: Findings and Implications 33
5.1 TTSE is necessary and sufficient to OPPOSING 33
5.2 BIDEN*~SEFF*USC*~HABIT is an alternative explanation 34
5.3 BIDEN*~SEFF*USC*~HABIT is sufficient for the opposition 34
Chapter 6: Conclusions 37
Reference 38
Appendix 41

Bagozzi, Richard P, & Yi, Youjae. (1988). On the evaluation of structural equation models. Journal of the academy of marketing science, 16(1), 74-94.
Bandura, Albert. (1977). Self-efficacy: toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. Psychological review, 84(2), 191.
Baumeister, Roy F, Smart, Laura, & Boden, Joseph M. (1996). Relation of threatened egotism to violence and aggression: the dark side of high self-esteem. Psychological review, 103(1), 5.
Box-Steffensmeier, Janet M, Brady, Henry E, & Collier, David. (2008). The Oxford handbook of political methodology (Vol. 10): Oxford University Press on Demand.
Compeau, Deborah R, & Higgins, Christopher A. (1995). Computer self-efficacy: Development of a measure and initial test. MIS quarterly, 189-211.
Crocker, Jennifer, & Major, Brenda. (1989). Social stigma and self-esteem: The self-protective properties of stigma. Psychological review, 96(4), 608.
Enderton, Herbert, & Enderton, Herbert B. (2001). A mathematical introduction to logic: Academic press.
Fiss, Peer C. (2011). Building better causal theories: A fuzzy set approach to typologies in organization research. Academy of Management Journal, 54(2), 393-420.
Fleming, James S, & Courtney, Barbara E. (1984). The dimensionality of self-esteem: II. Hierarchical facet model for revised measurement scales. Journal of Personality and Social psychology, 46(2), 404.
Fleming, James S., & Courtney, Barbara E. (1984). The dimensionality of self-esteem: II. Hierarchical facet model for revised measurement scales. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 46(2), 404-421. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.46.2.404
Greckhamer, Thomas, Misangyi, Vilmos F, Elms, Heather, & Lacey, Rodney. (2008). Using QCA in strategic management research: An examination of combinations of industry, corporate, and business unit effects. Organizational Research Methods, 11(4), 695-726.
Heide, Jan B, & Weiss, Allen M. (1995). Vendor consideration and switching behavior for buyers in high-technology markets. The Journal of Marketing, 30-43.
Huang, Yu Shuan. (2014). Yelling When You’re Aware: Evoked Threats to Tech Self-Esteem and Unthoughtful Inertia of Technology Adoption. 清華大學服務科學研究所學位論文, 1-77.
Igbaria, Magid, & Iivari, Juhani. (1995). The effects of self-efficacy on computer usage. Omega, 23(6), 587-605.
Jeuland, Abel P. (1979). Brand choice inertia as one aspect of the notion of brand loyalty. Management Science, 25(7), 671-682.
Kent, Ray. (2008). Using fsQCA A Brief Guide and Workshop for Fuzzy-Set Qualitative Comparative Analysis.
Kim, Chung K, Han, Dongchul, & Park, Seung‐Bae. (2001). The effect of brand personality and brand identification on brand loyalty: Applying the theory of social identification. Japanese Psychological Research, 43(4), 195-206.
Klemperer, Paul. (1995). Competition when consumers have switching costs: An overview with applications to industrial organization, macroeconomics, and international trade. The review of economic studies, 62(4), 515-539.
Kuenzel, Sven, & Vaux Halliday, Sue. (2008). Investigating antecedents and consequences of brand identification. Journal of Product & Brand Management, 17(5), 293-304.
Lam, Shun Yin, Shankar, Venkatesh, Erramilli, M Krishna, & Murthy, Bvsan. (2004). Customer value, satisfaction, loyalty, and switching costs: an illustration from a business-to-business service context. Journal of the academy of marketing science, 32(3), 293-311.
Lieberson, Stanley. (1985). Making it count: The improvement of social research and theory: Univ of California Press.
Limayem, Moez, Hirt, Sabine Gabriele, & Cheung, Christy MK. (2007). How habit limits the predictive power of intention: The case of information systems continuance. Mis Quarterly, 705-737.
McGregor, Ian, Nash, Kyle A, & Inzlicht, Michael. (2009). Threat, high self-esteem, and reactive approach-motivation: Electroencephalographic evidence. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 45(4), 1003-1007.
Meuter, Matthew L, Bitner, Mary Jo, Ostrom, Amy L, & Brown, Stephen W. (2005). Choosing among alternative service delivery modes: An investigation of customer trial of self-service technologies. Journal of Marketing, 69(2), 61-83.
Nadler, Arie, & Jeffrey, D. (1986). The role of threat to self-esteem and perceived control in recipient reaction to help: Theory development and empirical validation. Advances in experimental social psychology, 19, 81-122.
Polites, Greta L, & Karahanna, Elena. (2012). Shackled to the Status Quo: The Inhibiting Effects of Incumbent System Habit, Switching Costs, and Inertia on New System Acceptance. MIS quarterly, 36(1), 21-42.
Ragin, Charles. (1987). The comparative method: Moving beyond qualitative and quantitative methods. Berkeley: University of California.
Ragin, Charles C. (2006). Set relations in social research: Evaluating their consistency and coverage. Political Analysis, 14(3), 291-310.
Ragin, Charles C. (2008). Redesigning social inquiry: Fuzzy sets and beyond (Vol. 240): Wiley Online Library.
Ragin, Charles C. (2007). Qualitative Comparative Analysis Using Fuzzy Sets (fsQCA). Configurational Comparative Analysis, Sage Publications, 2007.
Ray, Soumya, Kim, Sung S, & Morris, James G. (2012). Research Note-Online Users' Switching Costs: Their Nature and Formation. Information Systems Research, 23(1), 197-213.
Rumelt, Richard P. (1995). Inertia and transformation Resource-based and evolutionary theories of the firm: Towards a synthesis (pp. 101-132): Springer.
Samuelson, William, & Zeckhauser, Richard. (1988). Status quo bias in decision making. Journal of risk and uncertainty, 1(1), 7-59.
Schneider, Carsten Q, & Wagemann, Claudius. (2010). Standards of good practice in qualitative comparative analysis (QCA) and fuzzy-sets. Comparative Sociology, 9(3), 397-418.
Tuškej, Urška, Golob, Urša, & Podnar, Klement. (2013). The role of consumer–brand identification in building brand relationships. Journal of business research, 66(1), 53-59.
Verplanken, Bas. (2006). Beyond frequency: Habit as mental construct. British Journal of Social Psychology, 45(3), 639-656.
Verplanken, Bas, & Orbell, Sheina. (2003). Reflections on Past Behavior: A Self‐Report Index of Habit Strength1. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 33(6), 1313-1330.
Wang, Cheng, Harris, Jennifer, & Patterson, Paul. (2013). The roles of habit, self-efficacy, and satisfaction in driving continued use of self-service technologies a longitudinal study. Journal of Service Research, 16(3), 400-414.
Woodside, Arch G. (2013). Moving beyond multiple regression analysis to algorithms: Calling for adoption of a paradigm shift from symmetric to asymmetric thinking in data analysis and crafting theory. Journal of Business Research, 66(4), 463-472. doi: 10.1016/j.jbusres.2012.12.021
Wu, Li-Wei. (2011). Satisfaction, inertia, and customer loyalty in the varying levels of the zone of tolerance and alternative attractiveness. Journal of Services Marketing, 25(5), 310-322.