簡易檢索 / 詳目顯示

研究生: 沈姿岐
Zi-Qi Shen
論文名稱: 影響Facebook塗鴉牆分享行為因素之探討-以社會資本理論和印象管理理論
The Research of Sharing Behavior on Facebook: Based on Social Capital Theory and Impression Management Theory
指導教授: 欒斌
Pin Luarn
口試委員: 陳正綱
none
吳宗成
none
學位類別: 碩士
Master
系所名稱: 管理學院 - 企業管理系
Department of Business Administration
論文出版年: 2014
畢業學年度: 102
語文別: 中文
論文頁數: 103
中文關鍵詞: Facebook分享行為社會資本印象管理
外文關鍵詞: Facebook, Sharing Behavior, Social Capital Theory, Impression Management Theory
相關次數: 點閱:408下載:1
分享至:
查詢本校圖書館目錄 查詢臺灣博碩士論文知識加值系統 勘誤回報
  • 隨著 Web 2.0 的時代來臨,網路上有了更多「互動、分享和關係」的概念,
    人們不僅單方面地從網路上獲得資訊,同時扮演資訊傳遞、創造的角色,並透過
    互動創造更多討論和交換、發展社交關係。從 email 郵件、部落格到現今的社群
    網站,其中又以 Facebook 最為流行,使用者高達九億多人。人們透過 Facebook
    能夠獲得來自全球的消息,也能分享和表達發生在自己周遭的事情。
    過去研究多以使用者為主體探討其 Facebook 使用行為,或是 Facebook 中單
    一類型的分享行為。隨著網路上分享類型和分享訊息的轉變,Facebook 中包含
    更多元的分享內容(例如:生活經歷、個人想法、新奇事物、資訊)和分享形式(例
    如:照片、影片、連結),Facebook 中不同類型分享行為分別受那些因素影響?
    又各因素分別於何種分享類型中影響最顯著?是本研究探討的課題。
    本研究根據社會資本理論和印象管理理論整理出八個影響變數:社會連結、
    信任分享訊息、信任分享對象、增進人際關係、期望獲得回應、個人隱私顧慮、
    個人行為顧慮和印象管理,並將 Facebook 塗鴉牆上的分享行為分為五種類型:
    自我揭露、知識分享、影音分享、口碑分享和其他資訊分享,個別探討五種分享
    行為的影響因素。將所蒐集的 232 份有效問卷,使用多元迴歸分析、單因子變異
    數分析和多重比較法等統計方法,以 SPSS 17.0 進行分析。
    根據研究結果,分別整理出五種分享類型的影響因素,並且比較出各因素影
    響最大的分享類型。在學術上符合網路發展趨勢,完整探討各種分享類型並且互
    相比較;在實務上提供各種類型訊息的設計方向,以使訊息能夠被有效分享與傳
    遞。


    With the era of Web 2.0, the Internet has gained the concept of "interaction, sharing and relationship." People not only obtain information on the Internet passively but also play the role of information creating and communicating. By interacting and sharing with others on the Internet, we have more exchanges and develop relationships. From email, blog to Social Network Site, we have multichannel to share on the Internet. Among all of these, Facebook is the most common-used. People use Facebook to obtain news all over the world. Also, users can share their life on Facebook.
    Most researches dig on the Facebook users, their behavior on Facebook or focus on one kind of sharing behavior on Facebook. However, the content shared on Facebook becomes multiple, including daily life, personal taste or something new. There are also different ways to share on Facebook, including pictures, videos or links. By what is the different type of sharing on Facebook affected respectively? What type of sharing on Facebook does each factor influence the most? We will focus on these topics in this research.
    Based on Social Capital Theory and Impression Management Theory, we use eight variables: Social Ties, Trust in Shared Message, Trust in Friends, Improving Relationship, Being Responded, Personal Private Concern, Personal Behavior Concern, and Impression Management. Also, we classify all of the sharing behaviors on News Feed into five types: Self Disclosure, Knowledge Sharing, Video Sharing, Word-of-Mouth Sharing, and Information Sharing. Data are collected from 232 questionnaires. The statistic methods we use are Regression Analysis, One-way ANOVA, and Multiple Comparison Method.
    According to the result, we find out the influential factors of each type of sharing behavior on Facebook and the sharing behavior each factor affects the most. In academic standpoint, this study follows the trend of the Internet, observing every kind of sharing behavior and comparing each other. In practice, this study provides the design suggestion of each type of sharing on Facebook so that the message could be shared more often.

    摘要 ............................................................... I Abstract ............................................................ II 謝誌 ............................................................. III 目錄 .............................................................. IV 表目錄 ........................................................... VII 圖目錄 ............................................................ IX 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 一、 探討影響使用者於 Facebook 中分享行為的因素 ........... 3 二、 探討各因素分別於何種分享類型中影響最顯著............ 3 第四節 研究流程................................................ 4 第二章 文獻探討 ................................................... 5 第一節 網路分享媒介發展........................................ 5 一、 電子郵件............................................ 5 二、 部落格.............................................. 6 三、 社群網站............................................ 7 第二節 社群網站之分享行為...................................... 8 一、 自我揭露............................................ 8 二、 知識分享............................................ 8 三、 影音分享........................................... 10 四、 口碑分享........................................... 10 五、 其他資訊分享....................................... 11 第三節 分享相關理論........................................... 12 一、 社會資本理論(Social Capital Theory) .................... 12 二、 社會資本理論與社群網站分享行為..................... 14 三、 印象管理理論(Impression Management Theory) ........... 17 四、 印象管理理論與社群網站分享行為..................... 18 第三章 研究方法 .................................................. 20 第一節 研究架構............................................... 20 第二節 研究假說............................................... 20 第三節 研究變數與操作型定義................................... 26 第四節 問卷設計............................................... 27 一、 問卷前測........................................... 27 二、 正式問卷........................................... 28 第五節 實驗程序............................................... 30 一、 研究對象........................................... 30 二、 資料蒐集........................................... 30 第六節 分析方法............................................... 30 一、 敘述性統計分析..................................... 30 二、 信效度分析......................................... 30 三、 多元迴歸分析....................................... 31 四、 單因子變異數分析................................... 31 第四章 研究結果 .................................................. 32 第一節 敘述性統計分析......................................... 32 一、 人口統計變項....................................... 32 二、 Facebook 使用情況 .................................. 32 第二節 信效度分析............................................. 34 一、 信度分析........................................... 34 二、 效度分析........................................... 35 第三節 迴歸分析............................................... 41 一、 自我揭露........................................... 41 二、 知識分享........................................... 45 三、 影音分享........................................... 49 四、 口碑分享........................................... 53 五、 其他資訊分享....................................... 57 第四節 假說驗證............................................... 61 一、 研究假說一:自我揭露............................... 61 二、 研究假說二:知識分享............................... 63 三、 研究假說三:影音分享............................... 64 四、 研究假說四:口碑分享............................... 66 五、 研究假說五:其他資訊分享........................... 67 第五節 多重比較法............................................. 68 一、 分享行為........................................... 69 二、 信任分享訊息....................................... 70 三、 信任分享對象....................................... 71 四、 增進人際關係....................................... 72 五、 期望獲得回應....................................... 73 六、 個人隱私顧慮....................................... 74 七、 個人行為顧慮....................................... 75 八、 印象管理........................................... 77 第五章 結論與建議 ................................................ 79 第一節 研究結論............................................... 79 一、 影響 Facebook 分享行為之因素 ........................ 79 二、 多重比較法......................................... 84 第二節 研究貢獻............................................... 86 一、 理論貢獻........................................... 86 二、 實務貢獻........................................... 87 第三節 研究限制............................................... 88 第四節 未來研究建議........................................... 89 參考文獻 .......................................................... 90 附錄 .............................................................. 99

    一、中文部分
    林怡君(2010)。網路影音分享網站之使用者檢索行為研究。國立臺灣師範大學圖書資訊學系碩士論文。
    吳欣純(2012)。社群網站使用者使用動機、資訊驗證態度、資訊可信度感知與資訊分享行為之研 究-以Facebook網站為例。國立交通大學教育學系碩士論文。
    吳俊宏(2012)。以理性行動理論觀點探討社群網站成員知識分享行為之研究—以Facebook社團為 例。中原大學資訊管理系碩士論文。
    許雅茹(2013)。Facebook的電影知識分享、使用者人格特質、電影觀賞行為的關聯性探討。國立臺灣藝術大學廣播電視學系碩士論文。
    傅珮雯(2011)。Facebook網站上口碑行為之研究。國立中山大學企業管理學系碩士論文。
    蔣佩真(2002)。虛擬社群的知識分享:認知與行為間的關係。國立中山大學資訊管理學系碩士論文。
    二、 英文部分
    (一) Journal
    Allen, T. J. (1970). Communication networks in R & D laboratories. R & D Management, 1(1), 14-21.
    Amichai-Hamburger, A. & Vinitzky, G. (2010). Social network use and personality. Computers in Human Behavior, 26 (2010), 1289–1295.
    Awad, N.F., and Krishnan, M. The personalization privacy paradox: An empirical evaluation of information transparency and the willingness to be profiled online for personalization. MIS Quarterly, 30, 1 (2006), 13–28.
    Bock, G.W., Zmud, R.W., Kim, Y.G., & Lee., J.N. (2005). Behavioral intention formation in knowledge sharing: Examining the roles of extrinsic motivators, social-psychological forces, and organizational climate. MIS Quarterly, 29, 1, 87–111.
    Boyd, D. M. & Ellison, N. B., (2008)Social Network Sites: Definition, History, and Scholarship, Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 13(1), pp. 210–230.
    Chai,S., Das, S., and Rao, H.R. (2012). Factors Affecting Bloggers’ Knowledge Sharing: An Investigation Across Gender. Journal of Management Information System.Winter 2011-12, Vol. 28, No. 3, pp. 309-341.
    Chellappa, R.K., & Sin, R.G. (2005). Personalization versus privacy: An empirical examination of the online consumer’s dilemma. Information Technology and Management, 6, 2, 181–202.
    Chiu, C.M.; Hsu, M.H.; & Wang, E.T.G. (2006). Understanding knowledge sharing in virtual communities: An integration of social capital and social cognitive theories. Decision Support Systems, 42, 3, 1872–1888.
    Choudhury, V., & Karahanna, E. (2008). The relative advantage of electronic channels: A multidimensional view. MIS Quarterly, 32, 1, 179–200.
    Chow, W.S., & Chan, L.S. (2008). Social network, social trust and shared goals in organizational knowledge sharing. Information & Management, 45, 7, 458–465.
    Cialdini, R. B., & Richardson, K. D. (1980). Two indirect tactics of image management: Basking and blasting. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 39(3), 406-415.
    Constant, D., Sproull, L., & Kiesler, S. (1996). The kindness of strangers: The usefulness of electronic weak ties for technical advice. Organization Science, 7(2), 119-135.
    Culnan, M.J., & Armstrong, P.K. (1999). Information privacy concerns, procedural fairness, and impersonal trust: An empirical investigation. Organization Science, 10, 1, 104–115.
    Donath, J., & boyd, d. (2004). Public displays of connection. BT Technology Journal, 22(4), 71–82.
    Doney, P.M., Cannon, J.P., & Mullen, M.R. (1998). Understanding the influence of national culture on the development of trust. Academy of Management Review, 23, 3, 601–620.
    Eagly, A., & Wood, W. (1991). Explaining sex differences in social behavior: A meta-analytic perspective. Personality & Social Psychology Bulletin, 17, 3, 306–315.
    Ellison, N., Heino, R. & Gibbs, J. (2006). Managing Impressions Online: Self-Presentation Processes in the Online Dating Environment. Journal of Computer- Mediated Communication, 11, 2.
    Ellison, N. B., Steinfield, C., & Lampe, C. (2007). The benefits of Facebook “friends:”Social capital and college students’ use of online social network sites. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 12(4), 1143–1168.
    Ellison, N. B., Steinfield, C., & Lampe, C. (2011). Connection Strategies Social Capital Implications of Facebook-enabled Communications Practices. New Media & Society.
    Erdelez, S., & Rioux, K. (2000). Sharing information encountered for others on the Web. New Review of Information Behaviour Research 1(1), 2000, 219-233.
    Fahey, L. & Prusak, L. (1998). The Eleven Deadliest Sins of Knowledge Management. California Management Review, 40(3), 265-276.
    Granovetter, M. S. (1973). The strength of weak ties. American Journal of Sociology, 78(6), 1360-1380.
    He, W., Qiao, Q., & Wei, K.K. (2009). Social relationship and its role in knowledge management systems usage. Information & Management, 46, 3, 175–180.
    Hendriks, P.(1999). Why Share Knowledge? The Influence of ICT on Motivation for Knowledge Sharing. Knowledge and Process Management, 6(2), 91-100.
    Hennig-Thurau, T., Gwinner, K. P., Walsh, G. & Gremler, D. D. (2004). Electronic Word-of-Mouth via Consumer-Opinion Platforms: What Motivates Consumers to Articulate Themselves on the Internet? Journal of Interactive Marketing, 18 (1): 38-52.
    Herr, P.M., Kardes, F. R., & Kim, J. (1991). Effects of word-of-mouth and product attribute information on persuasion: An accessibility-diagnosticity perspective. Journal of Consumer Research, 17, 454–462.
    Hsu, C.L., & Lin, J.C.C. (2008). Acceptance of blog usage: The roles of technology acceptance, social influence and knowledge sharing motivation. Information & Management, 45, 1, 65–75.
    Hsu, M.H., Ju, T.L., Yen, C.H., & Chang, C.M. (2007). Knowledge sharing behavior in virtual communities: The relationship between trust, self-efficacy, and outcome expectations. International Journal of Human–Computer Studies, 65, 2, 153–169.
    Kraus, R. (2001). Recreation and leisure in modern society. (6th ed.). Canada : Jones and Bartlett.
    Laczniak, R. N., DeCarlo, T. E. & Ramaswami, S. N. (2001). Consumers’ Responses to Negative Word-of-Mouth Communication: An Attribution Theory Perspective. JOURNAL OF CONSUMER PSYCHOLOGY, 11(1), 57–73.
    Lane, P. J., & Lubatkin, M. (1998). Relative Absorptive Capability and Inter-organizational Learning, Strategic Management Journal, 19(5), pp.461-477.
    Lasica, J. D. (2001). Blogging as a form of journalism. USC Annenberg Online Journalism Review.
    Lau, G. T. & Ng, S. 2001. Individual and Situational Factors Influencing Negative Word-of-Mouth Behavior. Canadian Journal of Administrative Sciences, 18(3): 63–178.
    Lee, M. & Youn, S. (2009). Electronic Word of Mouth (eWOM): How eWOM Platforms Influence Consumer Product Judgement. International Journal of Advertising, 28(3): 473–499.
    Lu, H., and Hsiao, K. (2009). Gender differences in reasons for frequent blog posting. Online Information Review, 33, 1, 135–156.
    McKnight, D.H., & Chervany, N. (2002). What trust means in e‑commerce customer relationships: An interdisciplinary conceptual typology. International Journal of Electronic Commerce,6, 2, 35– 59.
    Malhotra, N.K., Kim, S.S., & Agarwal, J. (2004). Internet users’ information privacy concerns (IUIPC): The construct, the scale, and a causal model. Information Systems Research, 15, 4, 336–355.
    McKenna, K.Y.A., Green, A. S., & Gleason, M. E. J. (2002). Relationship formation on the Internet: What’s the big attraction? Journal of Social Issues, 58(1), 9–31.
    Mehdizaden, S. (2010). Self-Presentation 2.0: Narcissism and Self-Esteem on Facebook. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking Volume 13, Number 4, 2010
    Metzger, M.J. (2007). Communication privacy management in electronic commerce. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 12, 2, 335–361.
    Mikulincer, M. & Nachshon, O. (1991). Attachment Styles and Patterns of Self-Disclosure. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology.1991. Vol. 61, No. 2.321-331.
    Nahapiet, J., & Ghoshal, S.(1998), Social Capital, Intellectual Capital, and the Organizational Advantage, Academy of Management Review, 23(2), pp.242-266.
    Nardi, B., Schiano, D., Gumbrecht, M., & Swartz, L. (2004). “I’m blogging this”: A closer look at why people blog. Forthcoming in Communications of the ACM. December, 2004.
    Nicolaou, A.I., and McKnight, D.H. (2006). Perceived information quality in data exchanges: Effects on risk, trust, and intention to use. Information Systems Research, 17, 4, 332–351.
    Nonaka, I.(1994). A Dynamic Theory of Organizational Knowledge Creation. Organization Science, 5(1), 14-37.
    Parameswaran, M., & Whinston, A.B. (2007). Research issues in social computing. Journal of the Association for Information Systems, 8, 6, 336–350.
    Pavlou, P. (2002). Institution-based trust in interorganizational exchange relationships: The role of online B2B marketplaces on trust formation. Journal of Strategic Information Systems, 11, 3–4, 215–243.
    Phelps, J. E., Lewis, R., Mobilio, L., Perry, D., & Raman, N. (2004). Viral Marketing or Electronic Word-of-Mouth Advertising: Examining Consumer Responses and Motivations to Pass Along Email. Journal of Advertising Research.
    Ring, P.S., Van de Ven, A.H. (1994). Development processes of cooperative interorganizational relationships, Academy of Management Review 19 (1) 90–118.
    Pollach, I. (2008). Media Richness in Online Consumer Interactions: An Exploratory Study of Consumer-Opinion Web Sites. Information Resources ManagementJournal, 21(4): 49-65.
    Rogers, Everett M. (2000). Reflections on News Event Diffusion Research. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly 77, 3: 561-76
    Ross, C., Orr, E.S., Sisic, M., Arseneault, J.M., Simmering, M.G., Orr, R.R. (2009). Personality and motivations associated with Facebook use. Computers in Human Behavior, 25, 578–586.
    Sen, S. & Lerman, D. (2007). Why are you telling me this? An examination into negative consumer reviews on the Web. Journal of Interactive Marketing, 21(4): 76-94.
    Senge, P.(1997). Sharing Knowledge: the leader's role is key to a learning culture. Executive Excellence, 14(11), 17-18.
    Schneider, D. J. (1981). Tactical self-presentations: Toward a broader conception,” In J.T. Tedeschi(Ed.). Impression management theory and social research, 23-40. New York: Academic Press.
    Schlenker, B. R., & Weigold, M. F. (1992). Interpersonal processes involving impression regulation and management. Annual Review of Psychology, 43, 133-168.
    Skog, D. (2005). Social interaction in virtual communities: The significance of technology. International Journal of Web Based Communities, 1(4), 464–474.
    Strand, J.L. (2011). Facebook: Trademarks, Fan Pages and Community Pages, Intellectual Property & Technology Law Journal, 23(1), pp.10-13.
    Talja, S. (2002). Information sharing in academic communities: Types and levels of collaboration in information seeking and use. New Review of Information Behavior Research, 3, 143-159.
    Tidwell, L. C., & Walther, J. B. (2002). Computer-mediated communication effects on disclosure, impressions, and interpersonal evaluations: Getting to know one another a bit at a time. Human Communication Research, 28(3), 317–348.
    Tsai, W., & Ghoshal, S. (1998). Social capital and value creation: The role of intrafirm networks. Academy of Management Journal, 41, 4, 464–476.
    Turnley, W. & Bolino, C. (2001). Achieving Desired Images While Avoiding Undesired Images: Exploring the Role of Self-Monitoring in Impression Management. Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 86, No. 2, 351-360.
    Wasko, M.M., & Faraj, S. (2005). Why should I share? Examining social capital and knowledge contribution in electronic networks of practice. MIS Quarterly, 29, 1, 35–57.
    Weenig, M.W. (1999). Communication networks in the diffusion of innovation in an organization. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 29(5), 1072-1092.
    Wilson, T.D. (2000). Human information behavior. Informing Science, 3(2) (special issue on information science research), 49-55.
    Worthy, M., Gary, A. L., & Kahn, G. M. (1969). Self-disclosure as an exchange process. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 13, 59-63.
    Xue, F. & Phelps, J.E. (2004). Internet-facilitated consumer-to-consumer communication: the moderating role of receiver characteristics. International Journal of Internet Marketing and Advertising, 1(2): 121–136.
    Ye, S., Chen, H., & Jin, X. (2006). An Empirical Study of What Drives Users to Share Knowledge in Virtual Communities, Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pp. 563-575.
    Yli-Renko, H., Autio, E., & Sapienza, H.J. (2001). Social capital, knowledge acquisition, and knowledge exploitation in young technology‐based firms. Strategic Management Journal, Strat. Mgmt. J., 22: 587–613.
    (二) Books
    Allen, T. J. (1977). Managing the flow of technology: Technology transfer and the dissemination of technical information within the R & D organization. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
    Altman, I., & Taylor, D. A. (1973). Social penetration: The development of interpersonal relationships. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winsto.
    Archer JL. (1980). Self-disclosure. In Wegner D, Vallacher R (Eds), The Self in Social Psychology. Oxford University Press: London; 183±204.
    Arrow, K. (1974). The limits of organization. New York: Norton.
    Berg, J. H. (1987). Responsiveness and self-disclosure. In Derlega, Y J., & Berg, J. H. (Eds.), Sef disclosure (pp. 101-130). New York: Plenum Press.
    Berg, J. H., & Derlega, V J. (1987). Themes in the study of self-disclosure. In Derlega, V J., & Berg, J. H. (Eds.), Self-disclosure (pp. 1-8). New York: Plenum Press.
    Berscheid, E., & Walster, E. H. (1978). Interpersonal attraction. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
    Bickart, B. & Schindler, R.M. (2005). Word of Mouth: referable, consumergenerated information on the internet, in Haugtvedt, C.P., Machleit, K.A. and Yalch, R. (eds) Online Consumer Psychology: Understanding and Influencing Consumer Behavior in the Virtual World. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 35–61.
    Blood, R. (2002). The Weblog Handbook: Practical Advice on Creating and Maintaining Your Blog. Cambridge MA: Perseus Publishing.
    Bourdieu, P. (1986). The forms of capital, in Handbook of Theory and Research for the Sociology of Education, Richardson, J. G. (Ed.), Westport Connecticut: Greenwood press, pp.241-258.
    Burt, R. S.(1992), Structural Holes:The Social Structure of Competition, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
    Cavanaugh, T. (2002). Let slip the blogs of war. In J. Rodzvilla (Ed.), We've Got Blog: How Weblogs are Changing Our Culture (pp. 188-197). Cambridge, MA: Perseus.
    Chelune, G. J. (1979). Self-disclosure. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
    Cicourel, A. V. (1973). Cognitive sociology. Harmondsworth, England: Penguin Books.
    Coleman, S.(1990), Foundations of Social Theory, Cambridge, MA: The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.
    Davenport, T.H., & Prusak, L. (2000).Working Knowledge: How Organizations Manage What They Know. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.
    Derlega, V X, & Grzelak, J. (1979). Appropriateness of self-disclosure. In G. J. Chelune (Ed.), Self-disclosure (pp. 151 -176). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
    Fishbein, M., & Ajzen, I. (1975). Belief, Attitude, Intention, and Behavior: An Introduction to Theory and Research. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley
    Fishbein, M., & Ajzen, I. (1980).Understanding attitudes and predicting social behaviour.
    Ganzeboom, H. B. & Flap, H. (Eds.). (1989). New Social Movements and Value Change: Theoretical Developments and Empirical Analysis, Amsterdam, the Netherlands: SISWO.
    Goffman, E. (1959). The presentation of self in everyday life. New York: Doubleday.
    Granovetter, M. S.(1992), “Problems of Explanation in Economic Sociology,” In N.Nohria and R. Eccles(Eds.), Networks and Organizations: Structure, Form, and Action, pp.25-26, Boston: Harvard Business School Press.
    Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. New York: Cambridge University Press.
    Meadows, A.J. (1998). Communicating research. San Diego: Academic Press,.
    Monteverde, L. (1995). Applying resource-based strategic analysis: Making the model more accessible to practitioners. Working Paper No. 95-1, Department of Management and Information Systems, St. Joseph’s University, Philadelphia.
    Orr, J. (1990). Sharing knowledge, celebrating identity: Community memory in a service culture. In
    Middleton, D. & Edwards, D. (Eds.), Collective remembering: 169-189. London: Sage.
    Putnam, R. D.(1993), Making Democracy Work: Civic Traditions in Modern Italy. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
    Rheingold, H. (1993). The virtual community: Homesteading on the electronic frontier, HaperPerennial, New York.
    Rioux, K. S. (2004). Information acquiring-and-sharing theory in internet-based environments: An exploratory study of individual user behaviors. The University of Texas at Austin.
    Romm, C. & Clarke, R. (1995). A preliminary draft for a comprehensive model.
    Sprotdl, L. & Kiesler, S. (1991). Connections MIT Press, Cambridg. Mass.,.
    Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of practice. New York: Cambridge University Press.
    (三) Magazines Cozby, P. C (1973). Self-disclosure: A literature review. Psychological Bulletin, 79,73-91.
    Dichter, E. (1966). How Word-of-Mouth Advertising Works. Harvard Business Review.
    Leary, M. R., & Kowalski, R. (1990). Impression management: A literature review and two-component model. Psychological Bulletin, 107, 34-47.
    Markus H, Nurius P. (1986). Possible selves. American Psychologist 1986; 41:954–69.
    Priore, T. (2000, September). The Fall, Rise of Email Response Rates. Direct Marketing News.
    (四) Conference
    Cheng, Xu & Liu, Jiang-Chuan. (2009). NetTube: Exploring Social Networks for Peer-to-Peer Short Video Sharing. INFOCOM 2009, IEEE.
    Dwyer, C., Hiltz, S. & Passerini, K. (2007). Trust and Privacy Concern within Social Networking Sites: A Comparison of Facebook and myspace, Americas Conference on Information Systems.
    Gross, R. & Acquisti, A. (2005). Information Revelation and Privacy in Online Social Networks. Proceedings of the 2005 ACM workshop on Privacy in the electronic society.
    Gumbrecht, M. (2004). Blogs are “Protected Space”. Submitted to World Wide Web Conference.
    Herring, S., Scheidt, L., Bonus, S. & Wright, E. Bridging the gap: A genre analysis of weblogs. Proceedings 37th Annual HICSS Conference, 2004. Big Island, Hawaii.
    Madden, M. (2003). America’s Online Pursuits: The Changing Picture of Who’s Online and What They Do. Pew Internet & American Life Project
    Marwick, A. (2005). I’m a lot more interesting than a Friendster profile: Identity presentation, authenticity, and power in social networking services. Paper presented at Internet Research 6.0, Chicago, IL.
    Nardi, B., Schiano, D., Gumbrecht, M. (2004). Blogging as Social Activity, or, Would You Let 900 Million People Read Your Diary?. ACM conference on Computer supported cooperative work.
    Rioux, K. S. (2000). Sharing information found for others on the World Wide Web: A preliminary examination. Proceedings of the 63rd Annual Meeting of the American Society for Information Science, 68-77.
    Schiano, D., Nardi, B., Gumbrecht, M., & Swartz, L. (2004, April). Blogging by the Rest of Us. Forthcoming in Proceedings CHI 2004. Vienna.
    Snyder, J., Carpenter, D., & Slauson, G.J. (2006). Myspace.com—A social networking site and social contract theory. Paper presented at the 2006 Information Systems Education Conference, Dallas, November 2–5, 2006.
    Tuomi, I. (1999). Data is more than Knowledge: Implications of the Reversed Knowledge Hierarchy to Knowledge Management and Organizational Memory. In the Proceedings of the 32nd Hawaii International Conference on Systems Sciences, IEEE Computer Society Press,
    Zinman, A., & Donath, J. (2007, August). Is Britney Spears spam? Paper presented at the Fourth Conference on Email and Anti-Spam, Mountain View, CA.
    (五) Website
    Festa, P. (2003, February 25). Blogging comes to Harvard. Retrieved from http://news.cnet.com/Blogging-comes-to-Harvard/2008-1082_3-985714.html
    Fernback, J, & Thompson, B. (1995). Virtual Communities: Abort, Retry, Failure? Retrieved November 7, 2011, from http://www.rheingold.com/texts/techpolitix/VCcivil.html
    O’Reilly, T. (2005, September 30). What Is Web 2.0 -O’Reilly Media. Retrieved November 7, 2011, from http://tim.oreilly.com/news/2005/09/30/what-is-web-20.html

    無法下載圖示 全文公開日期 2019/01/27 (校內網路)
    全文公開日期 本全文未授權公開 (校外網路)
    全文公開日期 本全文未授權公開 (國家圖書館:臺灣博碩士論文系統)
    QR CODE