本研究旨在透過TAM科技接受模式易用性、有用性因素與Servqual可靠性、反應性、保證性與關懷性因素探討目前證券公司業務同仁透過社群媒體Line服務客戶的使用態度。本研究使用問卷調查法，於2016年11月針對H證券營業同仁、銀行證券櫃檯與分公司經理人進行網路問卷調查，共取得有效樣本139份。
研究結果經路徑分析、t檢定進行實證分析後發現：(1)Line客戶服務的易用性 (Perceived Ease of Use, PEOU) 會正向影響有用性 (Perceived Usefulness， PU) 及使用態度(Attitude， ATT)，有用性會正向影響使用者態度及傾向。(2)Line客戶服務的可靠性 (Reliability，RLI)、反應性(Responsiveness，RES)、保證性(Assurance，ASS)與關懷性(Empathy，EMP)會正向影響使用態度。
依據本研究樣本分析顯示，在各變數平均值比較上，反應性有著最高的平均值，可推論Line客戶服務對於客戶的反應性最直接；而易用性則有著較低的平均值，表示Line介面的容易使用與否對於受訪者來說，有一些使用上的困擾存在。所以對於欲導入Line服務客戶的業者而言，本研究可做為企業研擬行銷服務策略之參考。

The purpose of this study was to investigate the relationship between perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, SERVQUAL model reliability, responsiveness, assurance, and the empathy factor. This paper analyzes the behaviors of security firms’ business associates through LINE social media client services using a questionnaire survey on securities business colleagues, bank counters, and branch managers in November. A total of 139 valid samples were obtained.
Results show that (1) the perceived ease of use positively affect perceived usefulness and attitude, and the usefulness of LINE customer service significantly improved with a positive effect on user attitudes and tendencies. (2) Reliability, responsiveness, assurance, and empathy of LINE customer service positively affected the attitude of use.
The study’s sample analysis show that the reactivity has the highest average in comparison with the mean of the variables. Thus, the LINE customer service has a direct influence on the customer, while the ease of use has a low average, easy to use interface for the respondents. Several problems occur with the use of existing methods. Therefore, this study can serve as a reference for enterprises who want to import LINE service customers and to develop marketing service strategies.

中文
1. 2016 年google「消費者洞察報告」2016數據(Consumer Barometer with Google)
2. Line官網(https://line.me)
3. 中華民國證券商業同業公會(http://www.csa.org.tw)
4. 王淑美(2014) ，馴化 IM:即時通訊中的揭露、協商與創造。中華傳播學刊 25 期 161-192
5. 吳欣亭(2016)，即時通訊軟體—LINE使用意圖之前因變數探討：社會影響理論與科技接受模式之觀點
6. 李芳欣(2016)，行動即時通訊軟體對個人工作績效的影響
7. 周政嘉(2016)，國小教師班級經營、學生學習狀況與親師關係之研究-以通訊軟體LINE為中介變項
8. 林怡伶(2016)，以人格特質探討使用行動通訊軟體對組織溝通與創新績效之影響以LINE為例
9. 林素蓮(2013)，結合科技接受模式及社會資本理論探討即時通訊App之持續使用意圖
10. 金融監督管理委員會網站 (http://www.fsc.gov.tw/ch/index.jsp)
11. 徐憶珊(2015)，社群軟體溝通訊息的使用傾向-以Facebook社群軟體為例
12. 國家教育研究院(http://terms.naer.edu.tw/detail/1308317/)
13. 崔本亨(2016)，數位金融對證券業經營管理的關鍵因素 -以M證券為例
14. 張馨云(2014)，以科技接受模式探討中高齡者使用行動即時通訊軟體行為之研究
15. 莊子誠(2016)，探討人格特質、工作價值觀和通訊軟體使用對工作滿意度的影響
16. 莊文彬(2016)，國際即時通訊軟體使用行為意向研究-以LINE 、 FB Messenger為例
17. 郭衍吟(2014)，顧客關係管理、服務品質、企業形象對顧客行為意圖之關聯性研究-以證?業為例
18. 陳玉芬(2016)，即時通訊軟體的應用偏好度對工作壓力及組織溝通效能之影響－以自我效能為調節變項
19. 陳美樺(2016)，以TAM (科技接受模式) 探討國小教師及國小高年級學童使用即時通訊軟體之研究
20. 創市際市場研究顧問公司(http://www.insightxplorer.com/news/news_04_09_14.html)
21. 游騏良(2013)，以科技接受模式探討行動即時通訊平台LINE使用意願之研究
22. 黃音霓、陳星沐(2015) ，即時通訊軟體的使用行為之研究—以 LINE 為例。
23. 楊士弘(2014) ，探討沉浸經驗對青年使用通訊軟體的使用者行為研究-以通訊軟體LINE為例
24. 董子鳳(2016)，以沉浸理論與科技接受模式探討LINE使用意願
25. 資策會FIND(http://www.find.org.tw) (2016)
26. 維基百科(https://zh.wikipedia.org)
27. 蔡雯婷(2014)， 使用者感知互動程度影響持續使用意願之研究-以行動即時通訊軟體為例
28. 蔡瑋哲(2013)，應用整合性科技接受模式探討手機即時通訊軟體使用之研究
29. 鄭依依(2014)，證券經紀商市場佔有率及獲利率之影響因素分析
30. 賴春鍀(2015)，國內證券商競爭策略發展機會之研究~以Y券商為例
31. 鮑立人(2015)，使用LINE對人際關係和學習態度之影響－以高雄市某國中為例
32. 證交所(http://www.twse.com.tw)
 
英文
1. Ajzen, I. and M. Fishbein, (1980), Understanding Attitudes and Predicting Social Behavior., NJ: Prentice Hall.
2. Ajzen, I., (1985), From Intentions to Actions: A Theory of Planned Behavior,Action-Control: From Cognition to Behavior, Heidelberg: Springer.
3. Ajzen, I., (1991), “The Theory of Planned Behavior”, Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 50, 179-211.
4. Arnould, E.J., Price, L., & Zinkhan, G.M. (2004). Consumers: McGraw-Hill/Irwin. Davis, F. D., “A Technology Acceptance Model for Empirically Testing New End-User
5. Bagozzi, R. P., and K. H. Lee, (2002), “Multiple routes for social influence: The role of compliance, internalization, and social identity”, Social Psychology Quarterly, 65(3), 226-247.
6. Cronbach, L. J. (1951). Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of tests. Psychometrika, 16(4), 297-334
7. Davis, F. D. (1989). Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Quarterly, 13(3), 319-339.
8. Davis, F. D., Bagozzi, R. P., & Warshaw, P. R. (1989). User acceptance of computer technology: A comparison of two theoretical models. Management Science, 35(8), 982-1003.
9. DeVellis(1991) Davis, F. D. (1986). A technology acceptance model for empirically testing new end-user information systems: Theory and results. (Doctoral dissertation, Sloan School of Management, Massachusetts Institute of Technology).
10. Fishbein, Ajzen., 1975.Belief, “Attitude, Intention, and Behavior : An Introduction to Theory and Research Reading. ” Addison- Wesley Pub.
11. Garrett, R. K., & Danziger, J. N. (2008). IM=Interruption management? Instant messaging and disruption in the workplace, Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 13(1), article 2.
12. Hagel, J., & Armstrong, A. (1997). Net Gain: Expanding Markets Through Virtual Communities: Harvard Business School Press.
13. Lee, Y., Kozar, K.A. and Larsen, K.R.T. (2003) The Technology Acceptance Model: Past, Present, and Future. Communications of the Association for Information Systems, 12(50), 752-780.
14. Mathieson, K., (1991), “Predicting User Intentions: Comparing the Technology Acceptance Model with the Theory of Planned Behavior”, Information Systems Research, 2(3),173-191.
15. McClea, M., Yen, C. D., & Hung. A. (2004). An Analytical Study Towards the Development of a Standardized IM Application, Computer standards and interfaces, 26, 343-355.
16. Moon, J. W.,& Kim ,Y.G. (2001). Extending the TAM for a world-wide-web context. Information & Management, 38,217-230.
17. Nunnally, J. C. (1978). Psychometric theory (2nd ed.).New York: McGraw-Hill.
18. Parasuraman A., Zeithaml, V. A., & Berry, L. L. (1991). Refinement and Reassessment of the SERVQUAL Scale. Journal of Retailing,67(4), 420-450.
19. Parasuraman, A., Zeithaml, V. A., & Berry, L. L. (1985). A Conceptual Model of Service Quality and Its Implication for Future Research.Journal of Marketing. 49, 41-50.Hwang, Y. (2011). Is communication competence still good for interpersonal media?:Mobile phone and instant messenger. Computers in Human Behavior, 27(2),924-934.
20. Parasuraman, A., Zeithaml, V. A., & Berry, L. L. (1988). SERVQUAL: A Multiple-Item Scale for Measuring Consumer Perceptions ofService Quality. Journal of Retailing, 64(1), 12-40.
21. Pavlou, P. A. and M. Fygenson, (2006), “Understanding and Predicting Electronic Commerce Adoption: An Extension of the Theory of Planned Behavior”, MIS Quarterly, 30(1), 115-134.
22. Rivera, J. (2014). What to expect at MWC 2014-consumer applications [Press release]. Retrieved from http://www.gartner.com/newsroom/id/2661116
23. Simon, A. F..(2006), “Computer-mediated Communication：task performance and satisfaction,” Journal of Social Psychology, Jun,146 (3), pp.349-379.
24. Taylor, S. and P. A. Todd (1995), “Understanding information technology usage: A test of competing models”, Information Systems Research, 6(2), 144-175.
25. Wright, S. (1921). Correlation and causation. Journal of agricultural research, 20(7), 557-585.