Responsive image
博碩士論文 etd-0601121-172156 詳細資訊
Title page for etd-0601121-172156
論文名稱
Title
面對「限時」,跨出同溫層:Instagram限時動態對強弱連結互動之影響
Step Out of Your Echo Chamber with Instagram Stories : The Influence of Instagram Stories on the Interaction of Social Ties
系所名稱
Department
畢業學年期
Year, semester
語文別
Language
學位類別
Degree
頁數
Number of pages
107
研究生
Author
指導教授
Advisor
召集委員
Convenor
口試委員
Advisory Committee
口試日期
Date of Exam
2021-06-24
繳交日期
Date of Submission
2021-07-01
關鍵字
Keywords
弱/強連結論、Instagram 限時動態、知覺尷尬、社會隱私顧慮、社交抑制
Weak/Strong Ties Theory, Instagram Stories, Embarrassment, Social Privacy Concern, Social Inhibition
統計
Statistics
本論文已被瀏覽 257 次,被下載 0
The thesis/dissertation has been browsed 257 times, has been downloaded 0 times.
中文摘要
弱連結有助於人們獲取及流通更多元的資源,隨著網路社群近用成本降低,社群媒體成為與弱連結互動的極佳樞紐,然而,過去調查指出,大多數人依舊選擇與強連結在社群媒體進行互動,捨棄維繫弱連結社會資本的機會,而在雜揉強連結與弱連結社群特性的新興限時性社群媒體―Instagram 限時動態出現後,如何改變此一現象?過去研究鮮少針對弱/強連結在社群媒體的低度互動情況進行討論,因此,本研究將以 Instagram 為研究主體,由回覆貼文者的角度出發,探討Instagram 不同的發文模式(公開貼文及限時動態)、發文者的連結強度及回文者個人特質如何影響回文者的心理歷程?回文者的心理歷程如何影響與發文者的互動?
本研究採實驗法,實驗一以「美食」為發文主題,進行2(發文者連結強度:強連結 vs. 弱連結) x 2(發文模式:公開貼文 vs. 限時動態)組間實驗設計,確認變數間的關係,實驗二則以「室內活動」及「室外活動」為發文主題,採混合實驗設計,發文者連結強度與發文模式為組間實驗設計,發文主題為組內實驗設計,以拓展研究研究範疇。主要研究發現,發文者連結強度為弱連結 (相較於強連結)會使回文者產生較高的知覺尷尬及社會隱私顧慮;發文模式為限時動態 (相較於公開貼文)會使回文者產生較低的知覺尷尬及社會隱私顧慮;當發文者為弱連結者時,發文模式為限時動態(相較於公開貼文)會使回文者產生較低的知覺尷尬;當發文者為強連結時,不同發文模式對回文者產生的知覺尷尬無顯著差異;知覺尷尬及社會隱私顧慮會負向影響回覆意願,而回覆意願會正向影響持續互動。透過本研究結果,除了能拓展限時性社群媒體相關研究,並能作為優化社群媒體之建議,也期望在社群媒體近用成本降低的現在,人們可以善用科技,把握得來不易的弱連結社會資本及人與人互動的珍貴片刻。
Abstract
Weak Ties contribute to information flow and people also can obtain diverse resources from them. With the cost of social media access declining, social media has become the terrific hub access the weak ties; nevertheless, according to the past studies, most people still interact with strong ties in the social media, instead of weak ties, which means they abandon the chance to connect with bridging social capital. However, how the emergence of Instagram Stories, an ephemeral social media integrating the characteristics of weak ties and strong ties may change the way people communicate with their social ties has not been fully explored yet. Consequently, this research explores how different Instagram posts (feed or stories), users’ social ties, and respondent’s personality may affect respondent’s psychological mechanicism and interaction.
There were two experiments executed in this study. In Experiment 1, the 2(Instagram posts: feed vs. stories) x 2(strength of ties: weak ties vs. strong ties) between-participant design was used to clarify the causal relationship and the “food topic” photo was selected as the stimulus. To broaden the research implications, this study adopted “indoor topic” and “outdoor topic” photos to conducted a mixed design in Experiment 2, which is Instagram model and author’s ties as between-participant design and photo topic as within-participant design. The main results indicate the following. First, the weak ties authors (compared to strong ties) make respondents have more embarrassments and social privacy concerns. Also, Replying Instagram Stories (compared to feed) make respondents have less embarrassment and social privacy concern. Furthermore, when responding to the weak ties authors, respondents' replies on Instagram Stories (compared to feed) make them have less embarrassment and social privacy concern; however, when responding to the weak ties authors, there are no differences between feeds and stories on embarrassment and social privacy concern. In addition, embarrassment and social privacy concern negatively affect reply intention. And reply intention positively affects continuous interaction. The findings not only expand the relative studies in ephemeral social media but also offer some implications to optimize social media.
目次 Table of Contents
論文審定書 i
致謝 ii
摘要 iii
Abstract iv
第一章 緒論 1
第一節 研究背景與動機 1
第二節 研究問題 5
第三節 研究目的 6
第二章 文獻探討 7
第一節 Instagram限時動態 7
第二節 弱/強連結論 10
第三節 知覺尷尬 11
第四節 社會隱私顧慮 14
第五節 社交抑制 16
第三章 假說推論與研究方法 18
第一節 研究架構 18
第二節 假說推論 18
第三節 研究方法 26
第四節 實驗一 27
第五節 實驗二 36
第四章 資料分析 38
第一節 實驗一 38
第二節 實驗二 45
第五章 結論與建議 56
第一節 研究結果與討論 56
第二節 學術意涵 59
第三節 實務意涵 61
第四節 研究限制與未來研究建議 62
參考文獻 64
附錄 78
參考文獻 References
一、 中文文獻
KOL Radar (2020)。2020 網紅行銷趨勢報告書。取自: https://www.kolradar.com/reports/2020-influencer-marketing-trend
OpView社群口碑資料庫(2019)。2019 Instagram熱門#Hashtag分析。取自:
https://www.opview.com.tw/wp-content/file/OpView-Social-Watch-Vol.95.pdf
王紹蓉、梁定澎、賴誼禎(2016)。揭露與隱藏之拉鋸:人氣需求與隱私顧慮對
臉書隱私管理行為之影響。中華民國資訊管理學報,23(4),445-472。
創市際市場顧問研究團隊 (2019) 。2019台灣網路報告。財團法人網路資訊中
心。取自 https://report.twnic.tw/2019/
二、 英文文獻
Adelman, M. B., Parks, M. R., & Albrecht, T. L. (1987). Beyond close relationships: Support in weak ties. Communicating Social Support, 126-147.
Ajzen, I. (1985). From intentions to actions: A theory of planned behavior. In Action control (pp. 11-39). Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg.
Ajzen, I. (2002). Constructing a TPB questionnaire: Conceptual and methodological considerations. Retrieved from http://people.umass.edu/aizen/pdf/tpb.measurement.pdf
Amichai-Hamburger, Y. (2002). Internet and personality. Computers in Human Behavior, 18(1), 1-10.
Amichai-Hamburger, Y., & Vinitzky, G. (2010). Social network use and personality. Computers in Human Behavior, 26(6), 1289-1295.
Bayer, J. B., Ellison, N. B., Schoenebeck, S. Y., & Falk, E. B. (2016). Sharing the small moments: ephemeral social interaction on Snapchat. Information, Communication & Society, 19(7), 956-977.
Belanche, D., Cenjor, I., & Pérez-Rueda, A. (2019). Instagram Stories versus Facebook Wall: an advertising effectiveness analysis. Spanish Journal of Marketing-ESIC. 23(1), 69-94.
Bellman, S., Johnson, E. J., Kobrin, S. J., & Lohse, G. L. (2004). International differences in information privacy concerns: A global survey of consumers. The Information Society, 20(5), 313-324.
Bhattacherjee, A. (2001). Understanding information systems continuance: an expectation-confirmation model. MIS quarterly, 25(3) 351-370.
Bright, L. F., Kleiser, S. B., & Grau, S. L. (2015). Too much Facebook? An exploratory examination of social media fatigue. Computers in Human Behavior, 44, 148-155.
Brown, B. R. (1970). Face-saving following experimentally induced embarrassment. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 6(3), 255-271.
Buck, R., Losow, J. I., Murphy, M. M., & Costanzo, P. (1992). Social facilitation and inhibition of emotional expression and communication. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 63(6), 962-968.
Burgoon, J. K. (1976). The unwillingness‐to‐communicate scale: Development and validation. Communications Monographs, 43(1), 60-69.
Burke, M., & Kraut, R. (2013). Using Facebook after losing a job: Differential benefits of strong and weak ties. In Proceedings of the 2013 conference on Computer supported cooperative work (pp. 1419-1430).
BuzzSumo, (2019, January). How To Increase Facebook Engagement: The 2019 Guide .Retrieved from https://buzzsumo.com/blog/facebook-engagement-guide/#type
Chellappa, R. K., & Sin, R. G. (2005). Personalization versus privacy: An empirical examination of the online consumer’s dilemma. Information Technology and Management, 6(2-3), 181-202.
Choi, B. C., Jiang, Z., Xiao, B., & Kim, S. S. (2015). Embarrassing exposures in online social networks: An integrated perspective of privacy invasion and relationship bonding. Information Systems Research, 26(4), 675-694.
Choi, T. R., & Sung, Y. (2018). Instagram versus Snapchat: Self-expression and privacy concern on social media. Telematics and Informatics, 35(8), 2289-2298.
Coelho, R. L. F., de Oliveira, D. S., & de Almeida, M. I. S. (2016). Does social media matter for post typology? Impact of post content on Facebook and Instagram metrics. Online Information Review.40(4),458-471
Coleman, J. S. (1988). Social capital in the creation of human capital. American Journal of Sociology, 94, S95-S120.
Corr, P. J., DeYoung, C. G., & McNaughton, N. (2013). Motivation and personality: A neuropsychological perspective. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 7(3), 158-175.
Correa, T., Hinsley, A. W., & De Zuniga, H. G. (2010). Who interacts on the Web?: The intersection of users’ personality and social media use. Computers in Human Behavior, 26(2), 247-253.
Cottrell, N. B., Wack, D. L., Sekerak, G. J., & Rittle, R. H. (1968). Social facilitation of dominant responses by the presence of an audience and the mere presence of others. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 9(3), 245.
Dahl, D. W., Manchanda, R. V., & Argo, J. J. (2001). Embarrassment in consumer purchase: The roles of social presence and purchase familiarity. Journal of Consumer Research, 28(3), 473-481.
Debatin, B., Lovejoy, J. P., Horn, A. K., & Hughes, B. N. (2009). Facebook and online privacy: Attitudes, behaviors, and unintended consequences. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 15(1), 83-108.
Denollet, J. (2005). DS14: standard assessment of negative affectivity, social inhibition, and Type D personality. Psychosomatic Medicine, 67(1), 89-97.
Denollet, J. (2013). Interpersonal sensitivity, social inhibition, and Type D personality: How and when are they associated with health? Comment on Marin and Miller (2013). Psychological Bulletin, 139(5), 991-997
Denollet, J., Gidron, Y., Vrints, C. J., & Conraads, V. M. (2010). Anger, suppressed anger, and risk of adverse events in patients with coronary artery disease. The American Journal of Cardiology, 105(11), 1555-1560.
Dinev, T., & Hart, P. (2006). An extended privacy calculus model for e-commerce transactions. Information Systems Research, 17(1), 61-80.
Dinev, T., Hart, P., & Mullen, M. R. (2008). Internet privacy concerns and beliefs about government surveillance–An empirical investigation. The Journal of Strategic Information Systems, 17(3), 214-233.
Dunbar, R. I. (1992). Neocortex size as a constraint on group size in primates. Journal of human evolution, 22(6), 469-493.
Dunbar, R. I. (2016). Do online social media cut through the constraints that limit the size of offline social networks?. Royal Society Open Science, 3(1), 150292.
Edunov, S., Diuk, C., Filiz, I. O., Bhagat, S., & Burke, M. (2016). Three and a half degrees of separation. Research at Facebook.
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 communication practices. New media & society, 13(6), 873-892.
Ellison, N. B., Vitak, J., Gray, R., & Lampe, C. (2014). Cultivating social resources on social network sites: Facebook relationship maintenance behaviors and their role in social capital processes. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 19(4), 855-870.
Gerson, J., Plagnol, A. C., & Corr, P. J. (2016). Subjective well-being and social media use: Do personality traits moderate the impact of social comparison on Facebook?. Computers in Human Behavior, 63, 813-822.
Gilbert, E., & Karahalios, K. (2009). Predicting tie strength with social media. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on human factors in computing systems (pp. 211-220).
Gittell, R., & Vidal, A. (1998). Community organizing: Building social capital as a development strategy. Sage publications.
Goffman, E. (1959). The presentation of self in everyday life. New York: Anchor.
Goffman, E. (1963). Embarrassment and Social Organization. In N. J. Smelser & W. T. Smelser (Eds.), Personality and social systems (p. 541–548).
Grainge, P. (2012). Ephemeral media: Transitory screen culture from television to YouTube. British Film Institute.
Granovetter, Mark S. (1973). The strength of weak ties. American Journal of Sociology, 78(6), 1360-1380.
Hamburger, Y. A., & Ben-Artzi, E. (2000). The relationship between extraversion and neuroticism and the different uses of the Internet. Computers in Human Behavior, 16(4), 441-449.
Hayes, A. F. (2018). Introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process analysis: A regression‐based approach. New York, NY: Guilford Press.
Hair, Joseph F. Jr., Rolph E. Anderson, Ronald L. Tatham, and William C. Black. (1998). Multivariate Data Analysis (5th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Highfield, T., & Leaver, T. (2015). A methodology for mapping Instagram hashtags. First Monday, 20(1), 1-11.
Hoyt, C. L., Blascovich, J., & Swinth, K. R. (2003). Social inhibition in immersive virtual environments. Presence: Teleoperators & Virtual Environments, 12(2), 183-195.
Hu, Y., Manikonda, L., & Kambhampati, S. (2014). What we instagram: A first analysis of instagram photo content and user types. In Proceedings of AAAI International Conference on Web and Social Media.
Ichau, E., Frissen, T., & d'Haenens, L. (2019). From# selfie to# edgy. Hashtag networks and images associated with the hashtag# jews on Instagram. Telematics and Informatics, 44, 101275.
Johnson, M., Egelman, S. and Bellovin, S.M. (2012), Facebook and privacy: it's complicated, In Proceedings of the Eighth Symposium on Usable Privacy and Security (SOUPS 2012), Washington, DC, July 11-13, Article. 9.
Joinson, A. N., & Paine, C. B. (2007). Self-disclosure, privacy and the internet. In A. N. Joinson, K. Y. A. McKenna, T. Postmes, & U. Reips (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of Internet psychology (pp. 237-252). Great Britain: Oxford University Press
Joinson, A. N., Reips, U. D., Buchanan, T., & Schofield, C. B. P. (2010). Privacy, trust, and self-disclosure online. Human–Computer Interaction, 25(1), 1-24.
Karapanos, E., Teixeira, P., & Gouveia, R. (2016). Need fulfillment and experiences on social media: A case on Facebook and WhatsApp. Computers in Human Behavior, 55, 888-897.
Keltner, D., & Buswell, B. N. (1997). Embarrassment: its distinct form and appeasement functions. Psychological Bulletin, 122(3), 250.
Kim, E., Lee, J. A., Sung, Y., & Choi, S. M. (2016). Predicting selfie-posting behavior on social networking sites: An extension of theory of planned behavior. Computers in Human Behavior, 62, 116-123.
Koch, R., & Lockwood, G. (2010). Superconnect: How the Best Connections in Business and Life Are the Ones You Least Expect. Hachette UK.
Krasnova, H., Günther, O., Spiekermann, S., & Koroleva, K. (2009). Privacy concerns and identity in online social networks. Identity in the Information Society, 2(1), 39-63.
Ku, Y. C., Chu, T. H., & Tseng, C. H. (2013). Gratifications for using CMC technologies: A comparison among SNS, IM, and e-mail. Computers in Human Behavior, 29(1), 226-234.
Kupper, N., Pedersen, S. S., Höfer, S., Saner, H., Oldridge, N., & Denollet, J. (2013). Cross-cultural analysis of Type D (distressed) personality in 6222 patients with ischemic heart disease: A study from the International HeartQoL Project. International Journal of Cardiology, 166(2), 327-333.
Li, Y., & Xie, Y. (2020). Is a picture worth a thousand words? An empirical study of image content and social media engagement. Journal of Marketing Research, 57(1), 1-19.
Lee, E., Lee, J. A., Moon, J. H., & Sung, Y. (2015). Pictures speak louder than words: Motivations for using Instagram. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking, 18(9), 552-556.
Levine, M., & Crowther, S. (2008). The responsive bystander: How social group membership and group size can encourage as well as inhibit bystander intervention. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 95(6), 1429.
Levine, M., Cassidy, C., Brazier, G., & Reicher, S. (2002). Self‐categorization and bystander non‐intervention: Two experimental studies . Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 32(7), 1452-1463.
Levine, M., Prosser, A., Evans, D., & Reicher, S. (2005). Identity and emergency intervention: How social group membership and inclusiveness of group boundaries shape helping behavior. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 31(4), 443-453.
Lewis, M. (2008). Self-conscious emotions: Embarrassment, pride, shame, and guilt. In M. Lewis, J. M. Haviland-Jones, & L. F. Barrett (Eds.), Handbook of emotions (pp. 742-756). The Guilford Press.
Lin, N. (2002). Social capital: A theory of social structure and action (No. 19). Cambridge University Press.
Lin, J. H. (2016). Need for relatedness: A self-determination approach to examining attachment styles, Facebook use, and psychological well-being. Asian Journal of Communication, 26(2), 153-173.
Lin, R., & Utz, S. (2015). The emotional responses of browsing Facebook: Happiness, envy, and the role of tie strength. Computers in Human Behavior, 52, 29-38.
Ljepava, N., Orr, R. R., Locke, S., & Ross, C. (2013). Personality and social characteristics of Facebook non-users and frequent users. Computers in Human Behavior, 29(4), 1602-1607.
MacDonald, L. M., & Davies, M. F. (1983). Effects of being observed by a friend or stranger on felt embarrassment and attributions of embarrassment. The Journal of psychology, 113(2), 171-174.
MacIntyre, P. D. (1994). Variables underlying willingness to communicate: A causal analysis. Communication Research Reports, 11(2), 135-142.
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.
Marlow, C., Byron, L., Lento, T., & Rosenn, I. (2009). Maintained relationships on Facebook. Retrieved from https://overstated.net/2009/03/09/maintained-relationships-on-facebook/
Marsden, P. V. (1987). Core discussion networks of Americans. American sociological review, 52(1), 122-131.
McCarty, M. K., & Karau, S. J. (2017). Social inhibition. In S. G. Harkins, K. D. Williams, & J. M. Burger (Eds.), Oxford library of psychology. The Oxford handbook of social influence (pp. 165–181). Oxford University Press.
McCroskey, J. C. (1992). Reliability and validity of the willingness to communicate scale. Communication Quarterly, 40(1), 16-25.
McCroskey, J. C., & Baer, J. E. (1985). Willingness to communicate: The construct and its measurement. Paper presented at the annual convention of the Speech Communication Association, Denver, CO.
Mesch, G. S. (2012). Is online trust and trust in social institutions associated with online disclosure of identifiable information online?. Computers in Human Behavior, 28(4), 1471-1477.
Milgram, S. (1967). The small world problem. Psychology today, 2(1), 60-67.
Mill, J.,S. (1848) The Principles of Political Economy, reissued as Principle Economy and Chapters on Socialism (2008), Oxford World's Classics, Oxford Paperbacks, Oxford.
Miller, R. S., & Leary, M. R. (1992). Social sources and interactive functions of emotion: The case of embarrassment. In M. S. Clark (Ed.), Review of personality and social psychology, Vol. 14. Emotion and social behavior (p. 202-221). Sage Publications, Inc.
Miller, R. S., (1996), Embarrassment: Poise and peril in everyday life, New York: Guilford Press.
Modiglianai, A. (1968). Embarrassment and embarrassability. Sociometry, 31(3), 313-326.
Modigliani, A. (1971). Embarrassment, facework, and eye contact: Testing a theory of embarrassment. Journal of Personality and social Psychology, 17(1), 15.
Mortensen, C. D., Arntson, P. H., & Lustig, M. (1977). The measurement of verbal predispositions: Scale development and application. Human Communication Research, 3(2), 146-158.
Nunnally, J.C. and Bernstein, I.H. (1994) The Assessment of Reliability. Psychometric Theory, 3, 248-292.
Oeldorf-Hirsch, A., Birnholtz, J., & Hancock, J. T. (2017). Your post is embarrassing me: Face threats, identity, and the audience on Facebook. Computers in Human Behavior, 73, 92-99.
Pew Reserch Center, (2014, Faburary 3). What people like and dislike about Facebook. Retrieved from https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2014/02/03/what-people-like-dislike-about-facebook/
Phua, J., Jin, S. V., & Kim, J. J. (2017). Uses and gratifications of social networking sites for bridging and bonding social capital: A comparison of Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, and Snapchat. Computers in Human Behavior, 72, 115-122.
Pliner, P., & Mann, N. (2004). Influence of social norms and palatability on amount consumed and food choice. Appetite, 42(2), 227-237.
Puntoni, S., & Tavassoli, N. T. (2007). Social context and advertising memory. Journal of Marketing Research, 44(2), 284-296.
Quan-Haase, A., & Young, A. L. (2010). Uses and gratifications of social media: A comparison of Facebook and instant messaging. Bulletin of Science, Technology & Society, 30(5), 350-361.
Ravn, S., Barnwell, A., & Barbosa Neves, B. (2020). What Is “publicly available data”? Exploring blurred public–private boundaries and ethical practices through a case study on Instagram. Journal of Empirical Research on Human Research Ethics, 15(1-2), 40-45.
Reis, H. T., & Clark, M. S. (2013). Responsiveness. In J. A. Simpson & L. Campbell (Eds.), Oxford library of psychology. The Oxford handbook of close relationships (pp. 400–423). Oxford University Press.
Robinson, E., Thomas, J., Aveyard, P., & Higgs, S. (2014). What everyone else is eating: a systematic review and meta-analysis of the effect of informational eating norms on eating behavior. Journal of the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics, 114(3), 414-429.
Rogers, E. M. (2003). Diffusion of innovations (5th ed.). New York, NY: Free Press.
Rutkowski, G. K., Gruder, C. L., & Romer, D. (1983). Group cohesiveness, social norms, and bystander intervention. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 44(3), 545.
Sabini, J., Siepmann, M., Stein, J., & Meyerowitz, M. (2000). Who is embarrassed by what? Cognition and Emotion, 14(2), 213–240.
Sadella, E. and J. Burroughs (1981), Profiles in Eating: Sexy Vegetarians and Other Diet-based Stereotypes, Psychology Today, 51–7.
Smith, H.J., Milberg, J.S., & Burke, J.S. (1996). Information privacy: Measuring individuals' concerns about organizational practices. MIS Quarterly, 20(2), 167-196.
Statista (2020a, August 7). Attack of the Clones. Retrieved from https://www.statista.com/chart/10558/daus-instagram-stories-whatsapp-status-snapchat/
Statista, (2020b, July 24). Distribution of Instagram users worldwide as of July 2020, by age and gender .Retrieved from https://www.statista.com/statistics/248769/age-distribution-of-worldwide-instagram-users/
Statista (2020c, August 21). Most popular social networks worldwide as of July 2020, ranked by number of active users .Retrieved from https://www.statista.com/statistics/272014/global-social-networks-ranked-by-number-of-users/
Stutzman, F., Capra, R., & Thompson, J. (2011). Factors mediating disclosure in social network sites. Computers in Human Behavior, 27(1), 590-598.
Stutzman, F., & Kramer-Duffield, J. (2010). Friends only: examining a privacy-enhancing behavior in facebook. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on human factors in computing systems (pp. 1553-1562).
Tangney, J. P., Miller, R. S., Flicker, L., & Barlow, D. H. (1996). Are shame, guilt, and embarrassment distinct emotions?. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70(6), 1256
Tiggemann, M., & Barbato, I. (2018). “You look great!”: The effect of viewing appearance-related Instagram comments on women’s body image. Body Image, 27, 61-66.
Tong, S., & Walther, J. B. (2011). Relational maintenance and CMC. In K. B. Wright and L. M. Webb (Eds.), Computer-mediated communication in personal relationships (pp. 98–118). New York: Peter Lang Publishing.
Trieu, P., & Baym, N. K. (2020, April). Private responses for public sharing: Understanding self-presentation and relational maintenance via stories in social media. In Proceedings of the 2020 CHI conference on human factors in computing systems (pp. 1-13).
van Nimwegen, C., & Bergman, K. (2019). Effects on cognition of the burn after reading principle in ephemeral media applications. Behaviour & Information Technology, 38(10), 1060-1067.
Vázquez-Herrero, J., Direito-Rebollal, S., & López-García, X. (2019). Ephemeral journalism: News distribution through Instagram stories. Social Media+ Society, 5(4), 2056305119888657.
Vitak, J. (2012). The impact of context collapse and privacy on social network site disclosures. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 56(4), 451-470.
Wang, Y., Norcie, G., Komanduri, S., Acquisti, A., Leon, P. G., & Cranor, L. F. (2011, July). I regretted the minute I pressed share : a qualitative study of regrets on Facebook. In Proceedings of the seventh symposium on usable privacy and security (pp. 1-16).
Weng, C. Y., Denollet, J., Lin, C. L., Lin, T. K., Wang, W. C., Lin, J. J., Wong, S. S., & Mols, F. (2013). The validity of the Type D construct and its assessment in Taiwan. BMC Psychiatry, 13(1), 1-9.
Whiting, A., & Williams, D. (2013). Why people use social media: a uses and gratifications approach. Qualitative Market Research: An International Journal, 16, 362–369.
Williams, L., & Wingate, A. (2012). Type D personality, physical symptoms and subjective stress: The mediating effects of coping and social support. Psychology & Health, 27(9), 1075-1085.
Wright, K. (2012). Similarity, network convergence, and availability of emotional support as predictors of strong-tie/weak-tie support network preference on Facebook. Southern Communication Journal, 77(5), 389-402.
Wright, K. B., & Miller, C. H. (2010). A measure of weak-tie/strong-tie support network preference. Communication Monographs, 77(4), 500-517.
Xu, H., Dinev, T., Smith, J., & Hart, P. (2011). Information privacy concerns: Linking individual perceptions with institutional privacy assurances. Journal of the Association for Information Systems, 12(12), 1.
Yang, C. C., & Lee, Y. (2020). Interactants and activities on Facebook, Instagram, and Twitter: Associations between social media use and social adjustment to college. Applied Developmental Science, 24(1), 62-78.
Yoon, S. J. (2014). Does social capital affect SNS usage? A look at the roles of subjective well-being and social identity. Computers in Human Behavior, 41, 295-303.
Zaichkowsky, J. L. (1994). The personal involvement inventory: Reduction, revision, and application to advertising. Journal of Advertising, 23(4), 59-70.
電子全文 Fulltext
本電子全文僅授權使用者為學術研究之目的,進行個人非營利性質之檢索、閱讀、列印。請遵守中華民國著作權法之相關規定,切勿任意重製、散佈、改作、轉貼、播送,以免觸法。
論文使用權限 Thesis access permission:自定論文開放時間 user define
開放時間 Available:
校內 Campus: 已公開 available
校外 Off-campus: 已公開 available


紙本論文 Printed copies
紙本論文的公開資訊在102學年度以後相對較為完整。如果需要查詢101學年度以前的紙本論文公開資訊,請聯繫圖資處紙本論文服務櫃台。如有不便之處敬請見諒。
開放時間 available 已公開 available

QR Code