臺灣人文及社會科學引文索引資料庫系統

:::

詳目顯示

回上一頁
第 1 筆 / 總合 1 筆   第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁
/1頁
題名：以Goffman劇場理論探究虛擬工作社群參與者的情境定義、認同和行為展現
作者：游雅筑
作者(外文)：Yu, Ya-Chu
校院名稱：國立交通大學
系所名稱：教育研究所
指導教授：陳昭秀
學位類別：博士
出版日期：2020
主題關鍵詞：劇場理論；虛擬工作社群；情境定義；認同；自我呈現策略；符號呈現方式；自我揭露行為；Dramaturgy theory；virtual work-group；situation definition；identity；self-presentation strategy；symbol presentation；self-disclosure behavior
原始連結：連回原系統網址new window
相關次數：
  • 被引用次數被引用次數:期刊(0) 博士論文(0) 專書(0) 專書論文(0)
  • 排除自我引用排除自我引用:0
  • 共同引用共同引用:0
  • 點閱點閱:3
人際互動一直是人文社會科學領域重要的研究議題。受益於科技的進步及軟硬體設備的提升，網路幾近零延遲的特性帶動虛擬社群的蓬勃發展，讓互動情境由線下真實世界延伸到線上虛擬空間，有越來越多的使用者透過虛擬社群進行與工作有關的交流互動。本研究運用Goffman的劇場理論來解讀虛擬網路空間的互動，視虛擬工作社群為特定區域、特定戲劇表演的地方，探討虛擬工作社群參與者對虛擬工作社群情境的情境定義、認同與在此空間的行為展現之間的關係。
Goffman的劇場理論將社會比擬為劇場的縮影，個人在不同的情境會扮演不同的社會角色，從角色之間的互動中逐漸發展出自我，產生對個人及對社會的認同，並據此有不同的行為展現。個人在劇場前台的行為展現是為了符合其所扮演社會角色應該呈現給他人的印象，而後台則是可以放心卸下扮演的角色、展現自我或讓自己喘息的地方。過往研究將虛擬社群直接視為前台或後台，忽略Goffman對於情境定義是依據區域、時間或意義的不同來詮釋，非特定的前台或後台區域。因此，本研究認為虛擬工作社群的空間可能兼具前台與後台的特性，個人對於虛擬工作社群情境的定義傾向會影響其認同和行為展現。
本研究先參考相關文獻，建立研究的理論架構，並編製「虛擬工作社群參與者的情境定義、認同和行為展現」問卷，問卷當中的情境定義是測量研究對象將虛擬工作社群定義為前台區域的傾向程度；認同變項包含個人認同、社會認同；行為展現包含自我呈現策略、符號呈現方式、自我揭露行為等。透過線上匿名問卷收集資料，共計回收問卷614份，有效問卷585份。資料分析以描述性統計、卡方考驗、獨立樣本t考驗、單因子變異數分析、皮爾森積差相關分析、結構方程模式等統計方法進行。
本研究分析後所得之主要研究發現：1.虛擬工作社群參與者感知情境定義傾向能負向預測自我呈現策略中的迎合性策略、炫耀性策略及示弱性策略；2.情境定義傾向能負向預測符號呈現方式中的符號使用目的；3.情境定義傾向能負向預測自我揭露行為中的自我揭露廣度及自我揭露深度；4.虛擬工作社群參與者的個人認同能正向預測自我呈現策略中的迎合性策略，但對示弱性策略則為負向預測，而社會認同能正向預測自我呈現策略中的迎合性策略、炫耀性策略、示弱性策略及協助性策略；5.個人認同與社會認同皆對符號呈現方式中的符號使用目的及符號使用形式具顯著正向預測；6.個人認同對自我揭露行為中的自我揭露深度具顯著負向預測，而社會認同對自我揭露行為中的自我揭露廣度及自我揭露深度具顯著正向預測。本研究結果可供企業組織、員工或後續研究者作為於虛擬工作社群工作交流與溝通互動之參考。
Social interaction is always an important research issue in humanities and social sciences. Owing to the development of technology and equipment and the zero-delay network, various virtual communities flourish, and social interaction has spread from the real world to the virtual space. More and more people participate in work-related communication via online communities. This study applies Goffman's dramaturgy theory to investigate the interaction in virtual work groups, and virtual work groups are viewed as certain spaces for performing certain roles. This study focuses on the relationships of virtual work-group participants’ situation definitions, identities, and behavior.
Goffman's dramaturgy theory uses the theatre analogy to describe the social occasions. Under different social contexts, individuals play different social roles to interact with others. Gradually, individuals shape the self, identities, and behavior presentation from the experiences of social interaction. Individuals perform appropriate behavior for their social roles to make appropriate impression on the audience in the front of the house, while in the back of the house they could put the social roles away, freely present the self, and have a break. Previous studies often viewed virtual communities as either the front of the house or the back of the house, but they neglect the fact that Goffman suggested individuals define situations based on various aspects such as space, time, and meanings. Therefore, this study considers virtual work groups possess characteristics of both the front and the back of the house. Also, individuals’ situation definitions could affect their identities and behavior presentation.
The author firstly reviewed relevant literature to build the theoretical framework for this study and then developed an instrument to measure the virtual work-group participants’ situation definitions, identities, and behavior presentation. The situation-definition scale measures virtual work-group participants’ agreement levels on how they consider virtual work groups as the front of the house. The identity scale includes constructs of individual identity and social identity, and the behavior-presentation scale measures variables including self-presentation strategy, symbol presentation, and self-disclosure behavior. Online anonymous questionnaires were distributed, and 614 responses were collected including 585 valid responses. The collected data were analyzed by the statistical methods such as descriptive statistics, chi-square tests, t-tests, one-way ANOVA, Pearson’s correlation, and SEM analysis.
The findings are as follows. First, virtual work-group participants’ perceived situation definition can negatively predict “ingratiate strategy”, “self-enhancement strategy”, and “supplication strategy” in the self-presentation strategy. Second, situation definition can negatively predict “symbol-use purpose” in the symbol presentation. Third, situation definition can negatively predict “breadth of self-disclosure” and “depth of self-disclosure” in the self-disclosure behavior. Fourth, virtual work-group participants’ perceived individual identity can positively predict “ingratiate strategy” but negatively predict “supplication strategy”; Social identity can positively predict “ingratiate strategy”, “self-enhancement strategy”, “supplication strategy,” and “assistance strategy.” Fifth, both individual identity and social identity can positively predict “symbol-use purpose” and “symbol-use style” in the symbol presentation. Sixth, individual identity can positively predict “depth of self-disclosure” while social identity can positively predict both “breadth of self-disclosure” and “depth of self-disclosure” in the self-disclosure behavior. The findings should provide organizations, employees, and researchers with suggestions about interaction and communication in virtual work groups.
中文文獻
王新月、王兴超、雷雳、王鹏程、周浩（2018）。社交网站在社会认同发展中的作用。心理科学进展，26（11），2024-2034。
刘庆奇、孙晓军、周宗奎、牛更枫（2015）。社交网站中的自我呈现对青少年自我认同的影响：线上积极反馈的作用。中国临床心理学杂志，23（6），1094-1097。
朱家瑩（2016）。行動社群參與者社交動機與自我呈現策略之研究。國立臺灣師範大學圖文傳播學系碩士論文，未出版，台北市。
江宜樺（1997）。自由民主體制下的國家認同。台灣社會研究季刊，25，83-121。
余淑吟（2019）。以PLS-SEM模式探討中高齡者在社群網路的使用強度與自我揭露對網路社會支持與自尊感的關係。國立臺灣科技大學人文社會學報，15（1），1-29。
吳明隆（2006）。結構方程模式：SIMPLIS的應用。臺北市：五南圖書出版股份有限公司。
张梅（2010）。从角色表演到角色外活动―对戈夫曼《日常生活中的自我呈现》的框架性分析。東南傳播，2010（7），70-72。
张莹瑞、佐斌（2006）。社会认同理论及其发展。心理科学进展，14（3），475-480。
李秝萓、陳怡嘉、蘇靖婷、林佳旻（2017）。通訊軟體貼圖風格選擇偏好與使用者人格特質之關聯性-以 LINE 為例。圖文傳播藝術學報，111-122。
尚榮安、陳禹辰、周季穎（2007）。電腦中介傳播對消費者口碑行為的影響。電子商務學報，9（1），27-48。
林雅容（2009）。自我認同形塑之初探：青少年、角色扮演與線上遊戲。資訊社會研究，16，197-229。
邱皓政（2010）。量化研究與統計分析：SPSS (PASW)資料分析範例解析。臺北市：五南圖書出版股份有限公司。
施伯燁（2014）。社群媒體-使用者研究之概念、方法與方法論初探。傳播研究與實踐，4（2），207-227。
施嵐芳（2005）。虛擬社群認同及網路社會支持對主觀幸福感的影響。國立臺灣大學心理學研究所碩士論文，未出版，台北市。
范懿文、方毓賢、吳政杰、劉昌輝（2011）。虛擬社群持續參與因素之探討。電子商務學報，13（2），413-434。
孫中興（2015a）。廿世紀美國社會學理論第十六講高夫曼（一）。取自 http://ocw.aca.ntu.edu.tw/ocw_files/103S202/103S202_AA16L01.pdf
孫中興（2015b）。廿世紀美國社會學理論第十七講高夫曼（二）。取自 http://ocw.aca.ntu.edu.tw/ocw_files/103S202/103S202_AA17L01.pdf
孫雪萌、謝傳崇（2018）。偏鄉校長角色扮演的個案研究：以Goffman劇場理論為導向。學校行政雙月刊，114，63-80。
苏泉仁、秦宏大（2008）。研究生 “认同”困境的破解。遼寧師範大學學報（社會科學版），31（3），70-72。
財團法人台灣網路資訊中心（2019）。2018台灣網路報告。取自https://report.twnic.tw/2018/TWNIC_TaiwanInternetReport_2018_CH.pdf
張玉琳、李秋滿（2014）。以媒介豐富與社會臨場感理論探討 LINE 貼圖價值、流行涉入、網路外部性對虛擬社群意識與黏著度之影響。電子商務研究，12（4），419-449。
張守中、李宜玲、鄭國泰（2011）。團員關鍵性、忠誠行爲與團體動能的關聯。人文及社會科學集刊，23（2），37-71。
許殷宏（2006）。E. Goffman當代戲劇理論的思想巨擘。載於譚光鼎、王麗雲（主編），教育社會學：人物與思想（202-233）。臺北市：高等教育。
陳坤虎、雷庚玲、吳英璋（2005）。不同階段青少年之自我認同內容及危機探索之發展差異。中華心理學刊，47（3），249-268。
陶蓓麗、廖則竣、葉有興、黃奕禎（2016）。社群網站使用強度及自我揭露對社會資本之研究。電子商務研究，14（4），527-557。
游依庭（2015，7月）。在社群網站中來去自如的秘訣？情境崩解下的印象管理與隱私顧慮研究：分群行為。載於中華傳播學會舉辦之「從高雄出發：跨文化與新媒體想像」中華傳播學會2015年年會，高雄市。
游雅筑、陳昭秀（2020）。探究企業員工在工作上使用社交媒體之自我揭露行為。人文社會學報，16（1），35-64。
游雅筑、陳昭秀（印製中）。電信服務企業員工參與LINE工作群組所感知的媒體可供性、組織權力與感知使用價值的關係。人文社會科學研究。
黃芳銘（2015）。結構方程模式-理論與應用。臺北市：五南圖書出版股份有限公司。
黃厚銘（2001）。真實的謊言：虛擬社區中的身分認同與信任。載於中央研究院社會學研究所所舉辦之第四屆資訊科技與社會轉型研討會會議論文集，臺北市。
黃厚銘（2002）。網路上探索自我認同的遊戲。教育與社會研究，3，65-106。
黃瓊德（2016）。老闆、同事、下屬別再已讀我！回覆延遲對組織溝通與工作滿足影響之研究。資訊社會研究，31，37-70。
楊亨利、孫曉雅（2016）。影響社群網站自我揭露的社會需求因素。中華民國資訊管理學報，23（1），33-62。
楊美雪、朱家瑩（2016）。行動社群參與者社交動機與自我呈現策略之研究。藝術學報，99，89-108。
楼天阳、陆雄文（2011）。虚拟社区与成员心理联结机制的实证研究：基于认同与纽带视角。南开管理评论，14（2），14-25。
董晶晶（2016）。基於符號互動理論的社交媒體表情符號使用分析。新媒体研究，3，6-7。
廖小雯、程景琳（2011）。成年初顯期的自我認同狀態、自我定義記憶之解釋歷程與心理幸福感之關係探討。應用心理研究，51，79-110。
劉信妤、黃莉婷（2011）。社群網站中使用者自我揭露行為之研究。載於國立高雄大學資訊管理學系主辦之第二十三屆國際資訊管理學術研討會（ICIM 2012）論文集， 高雄市。
歐貞延（2002年，12月15日）。臺前臺後，線上線下。網路社會學通訊期刊，27。取自http://www.nhu.edu.tw/~society/e-j/27/social/27-16.htm
蔡至欣、賴玲玲（2011）。虛擬社群的資訊分享行為。圖書資訊學刊，9（1），161-196。
蔡宗宏、王湘茹、池文海（2016）。以社會交換理論探討社群網站互動與自我揭露前因與結果變數之研究-以 Facebook 為例。電子商務學報，18（1），1-46。
蕭文龍（2016）。統計分析入門與應用：SPSS中文版+SmartPLS 3 (PLS_SEM)。臺北市：碁峰資訊股份有限公司。
顏亦敏、李峻德（2018）。對話情境、貼圖類型與社會臨場感研究：以 LINE 貼圖為例。 教育傳播與科技研究，119，1-13。
Winston（2016年，12月30日）。emoji 的時代的 9 個豆知識。立場新聞，取自https://www.thestandnews.com/culture/emoji-的時代的-9-個豆知識/
英文文獻
Akar, E., & Mardikyan, S. (2018). User roles and contribution patterns in online communities: A managerial perspective. SAGE Open, 8(3), 1-19.
Akar, E., Mardikyan, S., & Dalgic, T. (2019). User roles in online communities and their moderating effect on online community usage intention: An integrated approach. International Journal of Human–Computer Interaction, 35(6), 495-509.
Altheide, D. L. (2000). Identity and the definition of the situation in a mass-mediated context. Symbolic Interaction, 23(1), 1-27. doi:10.1525/si.2000.23.1.1
Anderson, J. C., & Gerbing, D. W. (1988). Structural equation modeling in practice: A review and recommended two-step approach. Psychological Bulletin, 103(3), 411.
Aresta, M., Pedro, L., Santos, C., & Moreira, A. (2015). Portraying the self in online contexts: Context-driven and user-driven online identity profiles. Contemporary Social Science, 10(1), 70-85.
Ashforth, B. E., & Mael, F. (1989). Social identity theory and the organization. Academy of Management Review, 14(1), 20-39.
Attrill, A. (2012). Sharing only parts of me: Selective categorical self-disclosure across internet arenas. International Journal of Internet Science, 7(1), 55-77.
Azar, S. L., Machado, J. C., Vacas-de-Carvalho, L., & Mendes, A. (2016). Motivations to interact with brands on Facebook–Towards a typology of consumer–brand interactions. Journal of Brand Management, 23(2), 153-178.
Bacev-Giles, C., & Haji, R. (2017). Online first impressions: Person perception in social media profiles. Computers in Human Behavior, 75, 50-57. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2017.04.056
Bagozzi, R. P., & Yi, Y. (1988). On the evaluation of structural equation models. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 16(1), 74-94.
Bak, J. Y., Kim, S., & Oh, A. (2012, July). Self-disclosure and relationship strength in Twitter conversations. In Proceedings of the 50th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics: Short Papers-Volume 2 (pp. 60-64). Association for Computational Linguistics.
Bareket-Bojmel, L., Moran, S., & Shahar, G. (2016). Strategic self-presentation on Facebook: Personal motives and audience response to online behavior. Computers in Human Behavior, 55, 788-795. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2015.10.033
Bergami, M., & Bagozzi, R. P. (2000). Self‐categorization, affective commitment and group self‐esteem as distinct aspects of social identity in the organization. British Journal of Social Psychology, 39(4), 555-577.
Boyd, D. M., & Ellison, N. B. (2007). Social network sites: Definition, history, and scholarship. Journal of Computer‐Mediated Communication, 13(1), 210-230.
Brandtzaeg, P. B., & Heim, J. (2011). A typology of social networking sites users. International Journal of Web Based Communities, 7(1), 28-51.
Brandtzæg, P. B. (2012). Social networking sites: Their users and social implications - A longitudinal study. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 17(4), 467-488.
Bullingham, L., & Vasconcelos, A. C. (2013). ‘The presentation of self in the online world’: Goffman and the study of online identities. Journal of information science, 39(1), 101-112.
Cahill, S. (1979). Erving Goffman. In Symbolic interactionism: An introduction, an interpretation, an integration (pp. 191-205). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Chen, B., & Marcus, J. (2012). Students’ self-presentation on Facebook: An examination of personality and self-construal factors. Computers in Human Behavior, 28(6), 2091-2099. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2012.06.013
Chin, C. P. Y., Choo, K. K. R., & Evans, N. (2015, August). Enterprise social networks: A successful implementation within a telecommunication company. In Proceedings of the 21st Americas Conference on Information Systems (AMCIS) (pp. 1-11).
Çiçek, M., & Eren-Erdogmus, I. (2013). Social media marketing: Exploring the user typology in Turkey. International Journal of Technology Marketing, 8(3), 254-271.
Dellwing, M. (2012). Little dramas of discomposure: On doing face‐work with disaligning actions. Symbolic Interaction, 35(2), 146-161.
Derks, D., Bos, A. E., & Von Grumbkow, J. (2008). Emoticons in computer-mediated communication: Social motives and social context. CyberPsychology & Behavior, 11(1), 99-101.
Ernst, C. P., & Huschens, M. (2018, January). The effects of different emoticons on the perception of emails in the workplace. In Proceedings of the 51st Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences.
Füller, J., Hutter, K., Hautz, J., & Matzler, K. (2014). User roles and contributions in innovation-contest communities. Journal of Management Information Systems, 31(1), 273-308. doi:10.2753/MIS0742-1222310111
Foote, N. N. (1951). Identification as the basis for a theory of motivation. American Sociological Review, 16(1), 14-21.
Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981). Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of Marketing Research, 18(1), 39-50.
Franklin, J. C., Mainelli, M., & Pay, R. (2014). Measuring the value of online communities. Journal of Business Strategy, 35(1), 29-42.
Gacey, H. J., & Richard, E. M. (2013, January). Influence of emoticons on perceived negative affect and professionalism in work-related email. In Proceedings of the Academy of Management Proceedings.
Gerber, M., Grund, S., & Grote, G. (2008). Distributed collaboration activities in a blended learning scenario and the effects on learning performance. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 24(3), 232-244.
Glaser, B. G., & Strauss, A. L. (1964). Awareness contexts and social interaction. American Sociological Review, 29(5), 669-679. doi:10.2307/2091417
Glikson, E., Cheshin, A., & van Kleef, G. A. (2017). The dark side of a smiley: Effects of smiling emoticons on virtual first impressions. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 9(5), 614-625.
Goffman, E. (1959). The presentation of self in everyday life. New York, NY: Anchor Books.
Goffman, E. (1967). Interaction ritual: Essays in face-to-face behavior. New York, NY: Routledge.
Goffman, E. (1992). 日常生活的自我表演（The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life）（徐江敏、李姚軍譯）。 臺北：桂冠圖書。（原著出版年1959）。
Guohua, Z., Yanying, D., Li, L., & Xianliang, Z. (2012). The development and application of the scale of adolescents’ online self-presentation. Procedia Engineering, 29, 1651-1655. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.proeng.2012.01.189
Hacker, J., Bodendorf, F., & Lorenz, P. (2017, February). Helper, sharer or seeker? A concept to determine knowledge worker roles in enterprise social networks. In Proceedings of the 13th International Conference on Wirtschaftsinformatik (pp. 668-682).
Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., Anderson, R. E., & Tatham, R. L. (1998). Multivariate data analysis (Vol. 5, No. 3, pp. 207-219). Upper Saddle River, N.J.: Prentice hall.
Hall, P. M. (1997). Meta‐power, social organization, and the shaping of social action. Symbolic Interaction, 20(4), 397-418.
Hogan, B. (2010). The presentation of self in the age of social media: Distinguishing performances and exhibitions online. Bulletin of Science, Technology & Society, 30(6), 377-386.
Hogan, R., Cheek, J. M. (1983). Identity, authenticity, and maturity. In Sarbin, T. R., Scheibe, K. E. (Eds.), Studies in social identity (pp. 339-357). New York, NY: Praeger.
Hogg, M. A., & Terry, D. I. (2000). Social identity and self-categorization processes in organizational contexts. Academy of Management Review, 25(1), 121-140.
Hsu, C. W., Wang, C. C., & Tai, Y. T. (2011). The closer the relationship, the more the interaction on Facebook? Investigating the case of Taiwan users. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking, 14(7-8), 473-476.
Hu, L. t., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Eequation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 6(1), 1-55.
Jiang, L., Bazarova, N. N., & Hancock, J. T. (2011). The disclosure–intimacy link in computer‐mediated communication: An attributional extension of the hyperpersonal model. Human Communication Research, 37(1), 58-77.
Junior, J. H., Joseph, F., Anderson, R. E., & Tatham, R. L. (1992). Multivariate data analysis with readings. London, England: Macmillan Education.
Kashian, N., Jang, J. W., Shin, S. Y., Dai, Y., & Walther, J. B. (2017). Self-disclosure and liking in computer-mediated communication. Computers in Human Behavior, 71, 275-283. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2017.01.041
Kelly. (2020). Digital Report 2020 台灣報告，台灣網路生態大解析！ Retrieved from https://www.breaktime.com.tw/archives/6293
Koohikamali, M., French, A. M., & Kim, D. J. (2019). An investigation of a dynamic model of privacy trade-off in use of mobile social network applications: A longitudinal perspective. Decision Support Systems, 119, 46-59.
Krasnova, H., Spiekermann, S., Koroleva, K., & Hildebrand, T. (2010). Online social networks: why we disclose. Journal of Information Technology, 25(2), 109-125. doi:10.1057/jit.2010.6
Laghi, F., Pallini, S., D’Alessio, M., & Baiocco, R. (2011). Development and validation of the efficacious self-presentation scale. The Journal of genetic psychology, 172(2), 209-219.
Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation: Cambridge university press.
Lee-Won, R. J., Shim, M., Joo, Y. K., & Park, S. G. (2014). Who puts the best “face” forward on Facebook?: Positive self-presentation in online social networking and the role of self-consciousness, actual-to-total Friends ratio, and culture. Computers in Human Behavior, 39, 413-423. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2014.08.007
Lee, D. H., Im, S., & Taylor, C. R. (2008). Voluntary self‐disclosure of information on the Internet: A multimethod study of the motivations and consequences of disclosing information on blogs. Psychology & Marketing, 25(7), 692-710.
Lee, S. J., Quigley, B. M., Nesler, M. S., Corbett, A. B., & Tedeschi, J. T. (1999). Development of a self-presentation tactics scale. Personality and Individual Differences, 26(4), 701-722.
Leftheriotis, I., & Giannakos, M. N. (2014). Using social media for work: Losing your time or improving your work? Computers in Human Behavior, 31, 134-142. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2013.10.016
Leonardi, P. M. (2015). Ambient awareness and knowledge acquisition: using social media to learn “who knows what” and “who knows whom”. MIS Quarterly, 39(4), 747-762.
Lewis, M. A., & Neighbors, C. (2005). Self-determination and the use of self-presentation strategies. The Journal of Social Psychology, 145(4), 469-490.
Lin, H. F. (2017). A preliminary exploration of the development of mobile communication research. Journal of Cyber Culture and Information Society, 33, 1-16.
Marriott, T. C., & Buchanan, T. (2014). The true self online: Personality correlates of preference for self-expression online, and observer ratings of personality online and offline. Computers in Human Behavior, 32, 171-177.
Mead, G. H. (1934). Mind, self and society (Vol. 111). Chicago, Illinois: University of Chicago Press.
Miller, L. C., Berg, J. H., & Archer, R. L. (1983). Openers: Individuals who elicit intimate self-disclosure. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 44(6), 1234.
Muller, M., Shami, N. S., Millen, D. R., & Feinberg, J. (2010, November). We are all lurkers: Consuming behaviors among authors and readers in an enterprise file-sharing service. In Proceedings of the 16th ACM international conference on Supporting group work (pp. 201-210).
Ollier-Malaterre, A., Rothbard, N. P., & Berg, J. M. (2013). When worlds collide in cyberspace: How boundary work in online social networks impacts professional relationships. Academy of Management Review, 38(4), 645-669.
Phillips, K. W., Rothbard, N. P., & Dumas, T. L. (2009). To disclose or not to disclose? Status distance and self-disclosure in diverse environments. Academy of Management Review, 34(4), 710-732.
Pluempavarn, P., Panteli, N., Joinson, A., Eubanks, D., Watts, L., & Dove, J. (2011, October). Social roles in online communities: Relations and trajectories. In Proceedings of the 6th Mediterranean Conference on Information Systems (MCIS). Retrieved from https://aisel.aisnet.org/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1042&context=mcis2011
Pornsakulvanich, V., Haridakis, P., & Rubin, A. M. (2008). The influence of dispositions and Internet motivation on online communication satisfaction and relationship closeness. Computers in Human Behavior, 24(5), 2292-2310. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2007.11.003
Posey, C., Lowry, P. B., Roberts, T. L., & Ellis, T. S. (2010). Proposing the online community self-disclosure model: the case of working professionals in France and the U.K. who use online communities. European Journal of Information Systems, 19(2), 181-195. doi:10.1057/ejis.2010.15
Proudfoot, J. G., Wilson, D., Valacich, J. S., & Byrd, M. D. (2018). Saving face on Facebook: Privacy concerns, social benefits, and impression management. Behaviour & Information Technology, 37(1), 16-37.
Rehman, A. U., Jiang, A., Rehman, A., Paul, A., & Sadiq, M. T. (2020). Identification and role of opinion leaders in information diffusion for online discussion network. Journal of Ambient Intelligence and Humanized Computing, 1-13.
Reiser, R. A., & Dempsey, J. V. (Eds.). (2012). Trends and issues in instructional design and technology. Boston: Pearson.
Rosenberg, J., & Egbert, N. (2011). Online impression management: Personality traits and concerns for secondary goals as predictors of self-presentation tactics on Facebook. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 17(1), 1-18. doi:10.1111/j.1083-6101.2011.01560.x
Rui, J., & Stefanone, M. A. (2013). Strategic self-presentation online: A cross-cultural study. Computers in Human Behavior, 29(1), 110-118. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2012.07.022
Scott, J. (2007). Fifty key sociologists: The contemporary theorists. London, England: Routledge.
Sharrock, W., Hughes, J. A., & Martin, P. J. (2003). Understanding modern sociology. London, England: Sage.
Sherwin, A. (2015, November 17). 'Face with tears of joy' emoji named word of the year by Oxford Dictionaries. Retrieved from https://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/books/news/emoji-named-word-of-the-year-by-oxford-dictionaries-a6737146.html
Short, J., Williams, E., & Christie, B. (1976). The social psychology of telecommunications. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons.
Tajfel, H. (1982). Social psychology of intergroup relations. Annual Review of Psychology, 33(1), 1-39.
Tajfel, H., & Turner, J. C. (1986). The social identity theory of intergroup behavior. Psychology of Intergroup Relations, 5, 7-24.
Tajfel, H., Turner, J. C., Austin, W. G., & Worchel, S. (1979). An integrative theory of intergroup conflict. Organizational identity: A reader, 56-65.
Tang, J. H., & Wang, C. C. (2012). Self-disclosure among bloggers: Re-examination of social penetration theory. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking, 15(5), 245-250.
Treem, J. W., & Leonardi, P. M. (2013). Social media use in organizations: Exploring the affordances of visibility, editability, persistence, and association. Annals of the International Communication Association, 36(1), 143-189.
Trepte, S., & Reinecke, L. (2013). The reciprocal effects of social network site use and the disposition for self-disclosure: A longitudinal study. Computers in Human Behavior, 29(3), 1102-1112. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2012.10.002
Van Kleef, G. A. (2009). How emotions regulate social life: The emotions as social information (EASI) model. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 18(3), 184-188.
Wall, H. J., Kaye, L. K., & Malone, S. A. (2016). An exploration of psychological factors on emoticon usage and implications for judgement accuracy. Computers in Human Behavior, 62, 70-78.
Walther, J. B., Van Der Heide, B., Kim, S.-Y., Westerman, D., & Tong, S. T. (2008). The role of friends’ appearance and behavior on evaluations of individuals on Facebook: Are we known by the company we keep? Human Communication Research, 34(1), 28-49.
Wang, T. (2017). Social identity dimensions and consumer behavior in social media. Asia Pacific Management Review, 22(1), 45-51. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apmrv.2016.10.003
Wang, Y., Li, C., Zhang, D., Wu, J., & Liu, Y. (2020). A deeper investigation of different types of core users and their contributions for sustainable innovation in a company-hosted online co-creation community. Journal of Cleaner Production, 256, 1-11.
Wheeless, L. R. (1978). A follow‐up study of the relationships among trust, disclosure, and interpersonal solidarity. Human Communication Research, 4(2), 143-157.
Wheeless, L. R., & Grotz, J. (1976). Conceptualization and measurement of reported self‐disclosure. Human Communication Research, 2(4), 338-346.
Wong, K. K. K. (2013). Partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM) techniques using SmartPLS. Marketing Bulletin, 24(1), 1-32.
Yeh, N. C., Lin, J. C. C., & Lu, H. P. (2011). The moderating effect of social roles on user behaviour in virtual worlds. Online Information Review, 35(5), 747-769.
Zhao, S., Grasmuck, S., & Martin, J. (2008). Identity construction on Facebook: Digital empowerment in anchored relationships. Computers in Human Behavior, 24(5), 1816-1836. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2008.02.012
 
 
 
 
第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁 top
QR Code
QRCODE

臺灣人文及社會科學引文索引資料庫

目前上線人數：1399（臺灣：1369，外國：30） ／ 本年度總使用人次：2488187 ／ 訪客人次（自102年09月）：68296210
國家圖書館著作權聲明 Copyright © 2013 All rights reserved.
本館地址: 100201臺北市中山南路20號． 本館地圖及交通資訊．
總機：(02)23619132．最佳瀏覽解析度為1024x768以上