Responsive image
博碩士論文 etd-0112116-105738 詳細資訊
Title page for etd-0112116-105738
論文名稱
Title
人正/帥真好?:探討Facebook人氣背後的秘密
What is beautiful/handsome is good?:The secret behind Facebook popularity
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
141
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
2015-06-22
繳交日期
Date of Submission
2016-02-15
關鍵字
Keywords
社交意願、社交吸引力、人氣、Facebook、印象形成、外表吸引力
willingness to initiate friendship, Popularity, Physical attractiveness, Impression formation, Facebook, Social impression
統計
Statistics
本論文已被瀏覽 5657 次,被下載 22
The thesis/dissertation has been browsed 5657 times, has been downloaded 22 times.
中文摘要
Facebook人際關係形成之初,使用者必然會根據線上有限的線索,如大頭貼照的視覺線索、大頭貼照之按讚數與留言數等,形成對他人的印象,並以此決定是否建立雙方的友誼關係與進行社交互動,因此,本研究旨在探討Facebook大頭貼照所給予的視覺線索與他人產製資訊對社交吸引力與社交意願的影響,試圖了解不同外表吸引力、性別與人氣,如何影響社交吸引力與社交意願,藉以釐清使用者對於印象形成與建立關係欲望的元素,並了解Facebook按讚數與留言數的實質意義。研究對象為Facebook的使用者,實驗方法以實驗法分兩組實驗檢驗五個假說,實驗一為2(外表吸引力:高vs.低) × 2(受測者性別:男vs.女)× 2(大頭貼照性別:男vs.女)的三因子組間實驗設計;實驗二為2(按讚數:多vs.寡)×2(留言數:多vs.寡)× 2(受測者性別:男vs.女)× 2(大頭貼照性別:男vs.女)的多因子組間實驗設計。本研究預期結果會對外表吸引力、社交吸引力、人氣與社交意願等相關研究領域,提供理論貢獻,並且提供SNSs使用者使用參考,並給予個人大頭貼照呈現上的建議,以及各式修圖軟體或修圖APP更多功能意見參考。
Abstract
Facebook users are driven by the limited-cues to form impression of each other when they initiate friendships. The goal of this study was to investigate how visual cues (e.g. physical attractiveness and gender) and other-generated information (e.g. likes and comments) of an individual’s personal profile on Facebook affect social attractiveness, impression formation and the willingness to initiate friendship, and to clarify the meaning of ‘Likes’ and ‘Comments’ on Facebook.
Participants are Facebook’s users, two experiments are employed to test five hypotheses. Experiment one examined both main and interaction effects for visual cues, profile owner’s gender, and evaluator’s gender; a 2(visual conditions: attractive, unattractive)× 2(stimulus gender: male and female)× 2(evaluator’s gender: male and female)three-factor experiment design is employed. Experiment two examined both main and interaction effects for popularity, profile owner’s gender, and evaluator’s gender; a 2(Likes:high, low)× 2(Comments:high, low)× 2(stimulus gender: male and female)× 2(evaluator’s gender: male and female)factorial experiment design is employed.
The results of this study extended the research on physical impression, social impression, popularity and willingness to initiate friendship and provided suggestions for SNSs’ users about how to display their own profile and functions of photo editing apps.
目次 Table of Contents
目錄
論文審定書 i
誌謝 ii
中文摘要 iii
英文摘要 iv
目錄 v
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 研究問題 4
第四節 研究目的 4
第二章 文獻探討 5
第一節 印象形成和社交網站 5
一、線上印象形成 5
二、保證理論 7
三、社會資訊處理論 10
四、小結 12
第二節 漂亮即是好 13
一、吸引力 13
二、月暈效果 14
三、FACEBOOK中的吸引力、性別與社交意願 16
四、小結 19
第三節 人氣 20
一、人氣 20
二、FACEBOOK中的人氣指標 21
三、人氣與吸引力 22
四、小結 24
第三章 研究架構與假說推論 25
第一節 研究架構 25
第二節 研究假說 26
第四章 研究方法 31
第一節 樣本與實驗設計 31
第二節 實驗刺激與前測 31
第三節 研究範圍 32
第四節 實驗程序 33
第五節 變數衡量 33
第五章 資料分析 35
第一節 前測分析 35
一、前測一 35
二、前測二 37
三、前測三 40
第二節 實驗一分析 43
一、樣本結構分析 45
二、問卷信效度 47
三、操弄檢測 48
四、假說驗證 48
第三節 實驗二分析 53
一、樣本結構分析 53
二、問卷信效度 56
三、假說驗證 57
第四節 按讚數VS.留言樹對社交吸引力之影響 64
第六章 結論與討論 68
第一節 研究結果與討論 68
第二節 研究貢獻 71
一、理論貢獻 71
二、實務貢獻 74
第三節 研究限制與未來建議 74
參考文獻 76
附錄 97


圖表目錄
表2-1:FACEBOOK中的行為殘留 22
圖3-1:實驗一研究架構圖 25
圖3-2:實驗二研究架構圖 25
表5-1:前測一問卷信度 35
表5-2:前測一問卷各衡量構面之因素分析摘要表 36
表5-3:前測一各衡量構面之負荷量及解釋變異量 36
表5-4:各大頭貼照外表吸引力平均數 37
表5-5:男性大頭貼照T-test 37
表5-6:女性大頭貼照T-test 37
表5-7:按讚數人氣代表意義 38
表5-8:留言數人氣代表意義 38
表5-9:男女大頭貼照常見留言 39
表5-10:前測三問卷信度 40
表5-11:前測三問卷各衡量構面之因素分析摘要表 41
表5-12:前測三各衡量構面之負荷量及解釋變異量 41
表5-13:男性大頭貼照T-test 42
表5-14:女性大頭貼照T-test 42
表5-15:實驗一樣本結構 43
表5-16:實驗一問卷信度 42
表5-17:實驗一問卷各衡量構面之因素分析摘要表 46
表5-18:實驗一各衡量構面之負荷量及解釋變異量 46
表5-19:實驗一男性大頭貼照T-test 47
表5-20:實驗一女性大頭貼照T-test 47
表5-21:外表吸引力與同異性單因子變異數分析摘要表 48
表5-22:實驗一T-test:外表吸引力與社交吸引力評價 49
表5-23:實驗一T-test:外表吸引力與社交吸引力(異性) 50
表5-24:實驗一T-test:外表吸引力與社交吸引力(同性) 51
表5-25:實驗一T-test:異性與同性間外表吸引力與社交吸引力評價 52
表5-26:實驗一T-test:男性與女性間外表吸引力與社交吸引力評價 52
表5-27:實驗¬二樣本結構 53
表5-28:實驗二問卷信度 56
表5-29:實驗二問卷各衡量構面之因素分析摘要表 56
表5-30:實驗二各衡量構面之負荷量及解釋變異量 57
表5-31:人氣與同異性單因子變異數分析摘要表 58
表5-32:實驗二T-test:按讚數與社交吸引力評價 59
表5-33:實驗二T-test:留言數與社交吸引力評價 59
表5-34:實驗二T-test:按讚數多中異性與同性間之社交吸引力評價 61
表5-35:實驗二T-test:按讚數多中男性與女性間對異性之社交吸引力評價 61
表5-36:實驗二T-test:留言數多中異性與同性間之社交吸引力評價 62
表5-35:實驗二T-test:留言數多中男性與女性間對異性之社交吸引力評價 62
表5-38:實驗二迴歸分析:社交吸引力評價與社交意願 63
表5-39:人氣與同異性單因子變異數分析摘要表 65
表5-40:人氣同質子集 65
表5-41:假說檢定結果 66
參考文獻 References
中文文獻:
馮子純(2014年7月26日)。臉書實驗當正妹 果然「人正真好」。聯合新聞網。取自http://udn.com/news/story/7088/522013
黃淑琳(2012年7月)。行禮如儀―探討Facebook上的社交互動儀式。中華傳播學會年會研討會,台北市,國立政治大學。
吳明隆(2011)。《SPSS 統計應用學習實務問卷分析與應用統計》。新北市:易習圖書。
Ethan Wen(2014年6月30日)。[行銷人最愛數據]台灣人到底有多黏臉書?幾張圖讓你一看就明白~。BRAND in LABS。取自http://ppt.cc/jQ8D
英文文獻:
David Cohen(2013年8月28日)。Infographic:25 Facebook Statistics. Social Times.取自http://ppt.cc/8lL7
Adams, G. R. (1982). Physical attractiveness. In A. G. Miller (Ed.), In the eye of the beholder: Contemporary issues in stereotyping (pp. 253–304). New York: Praeger.
Afifi, W. A., & Faulkner, S. L. (2000). On being ‘just friends’: The frequency and impact of sexual activity in cross-sex friendships. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 17, 205-222.
Albada, K. F., Knapp, M. L., & Theune, K. E. (2002). Interaction appearance theory: Changing perceptions of physical attractiveness through social interaction. Communication Theory, 12, 8–40.
Alley, T. R. (1988). Physiognomy and social perception. In T. R. Alley (Ed.), Social and applied aspects of perceiving faces (pp. 167–186). Hillsdale: Erlbaum.
Alley, T. R., & Hildebrandt, K. A. (1988). Determinants and consequences of facial aesthetics. In T. R. Alley (Ed.), Social and applied aspects of perceiving faces (pp. 101–140). Hillsdale: Erlbaum.
Alley, T. R., & Cunningham, M. R. (1991). Averaged faces are attractive, but very attractive faces are not average. Psychological Science, 2, 123–125.
Ambady, N., & Rosenthal, R. (1992). Thin slices of behavior as predictors of interpersonal consequences: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 2, 256–274.
Andreoni, J., & Petrie, R. (2008). Beauty, gender and stereotypes: Evidence from laboratory experiments. Journal of Economic Psychology, 29, 73–93. doi:10.1016/j.joep.2007.07.008
Antheunis, M. L., Valkenburg, P. M., & Peter, J. (2010). Getting acquainted through social networking sites: Testing a model of online uncertainty reduction and social attraction. Computers in Human Behavior, 26, 100-109.
Antheunis, M. L., & Schouten, A. P. (2011) The effects of other-generated and system-generated cues on adolescents’ perceived attractiveness on social network sites. Journal of Computer Mediated Communication 16: 391–406
Argyle, M., & Dean, J. (1965). Eye-contact, distance and affiliation. Sociometry, 28, 289–304.
Babad, E. (2001). On the conception and measurement of popularity: more facts and some straight conclusions. Social Psychology of Education, 5, 3–30.
Bar-Tal D, Saxe L.(1976) Physical attractiveness and its relationship to sex-role stereotyping. Sex Roles. 2:123–133.
Bassili, J. N. (1981). The attractiveness stereotype: Goodness or glamour? Basic and Applied Social Psychology,2(4), 235–252.
Bell, R. (1981). Friendships of women and men. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 5, 402–417.
Berger, C., & Calabrese, R. (1975). Some explorations in initial interaction and beyond: Toward a developmental theory of interpersonal communication. Human Communication Research, 1, 99–112.
Berry DS, Zebrowitz-McArthur L.(1986) Perceiving character in faces: the impact of age-related craniofacial changes on so-cial perception. Psychological Bulletin,100:3–18.
Berry, DS. & Miller, K. M. (2001). When boy meets girl: Attractiveness and the five-factor model in opposite-sex interactions. Journal of Research in Personality, 35, 62–77.
Berscheid E, Dion K, Walster E, et al.(1971)Physical attractiveness and dating choice: a test of the matching hypothesis. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology.7:173–189.
Berscheid, E., & Walster, E. H. (1974). Physical attractiveness. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.). Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 7, pp. 158–215). New York: Academic Press.
Bleske-Rechek, A. L., & Buss, D. M. (2000). Can men and women be just friends? Personal Relationships, 7, 131–151.
Bleske-Rechek, A. L., & Buss, D. M. (2001). Opposite-sex friendships: Sex differences and similarities in initiation, selection, and dissolution. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 27, 1310-1323.
Bleske-Rechek, A., Somers, E., Micke, C., Erickson, L., Matteson, L., Stocco, C., ... & Ritchie, L. (2012). Benefit or burden? Attraction in cross-sex friendship. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 29(5), 569-596.
Boyd, D. (2004, April 24–29). Friendster and publicly articulated social networking. Paper presented at the Conference on Human Factors and Computing Systems, Vienna.
Brownmiller S. (1984) Femininity. New York: Ballantine.
Bukowski, W. M., & Newcomb, A. F. (1984). Stability and determinants of socio- metric status and friendship choice: A longitudinal perspective. Developmental Psychology, 20, 941-952.
Bukowski, W.M. & Hoza, B. (1989). Popularity and friendship: Issues in theory measurement, and outcome. In T.J. Berndt & G.W. Ladd (Eds.), Peer relationships in child development (pp. 15–45). New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
Bukowski, W. M., Pizzamiglio, M. T., Newcomb, A. F., & Hoza, B. (1996). Popular- ity as an affordance for friendship: The link between group and dyadic experi- ence. Social Development, 5, 189-202.
Buss, D. M. (1984). Evolutionary biology and personality psychology: Toward a conception of human nature and individual differences. American Psychologist, 39, 361–377.
Buss, D. M. (1989). Sex differences in human mate preferences: Evolutionary hypotheses tested in 37 cultures. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 12, 1–49. comScore (2009). Top 50 US Web Properties for August 2009. <http://www.comscore.com/Press_Events/Press_Releases/2009/9/comScore_ MediaMetrix_Ranks_Top_50_U.S._Web_Properties_for_August_2009comScore></http:> Retrieved 25.09.09.CA: Sage.
Byrne, D., London, O., & Reeves, K. (1968). The effects of physical attractiveness, sex, and attitude similarity on interpersonal attraction. Journal of Personality, 36, 259–271. doi:10.1111/j .1467-6494.1968.tb01473.x
Byrne, D., Ervin, C. R., & Lamberth, J. (1970). Continuity bet-ween the experimental study of attraction and real-life compu-ter dating. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 16, 157-165.
Cash TF, Gillen, B, Burns DS.(1977) Sexism and beautyism in personnel consultant decision making. Journal of Applied Psychology.62:301–310.
Clark, M. S. (1986). Evidence for the effectiveness of manipulations of communal and exchange relationships. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 12, 414-425.
Clifford, M. M. & Walster, E. (1973). The effect of physical attractiveness on teacher expectations. The Sociology of Education, 46, 248–258.
Collins, R. (2004). Interaction Ritual Chains, Princeton studies in cultural sociology.
Cooper, W. H. (1981). Ubiquitous halo. Psychological Bulletin, 90, 218–244.
Culnan, M. J., & Markus, M. L. (1987). Information technologies. In F. M. Jablin, L. L. Putnam, K. H. Roberts, & L. W. Porter (Eds.), Handbook of organizational communication: An interdisciplinary perspective (pp. 420-443). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
DeAndrea, D. C., & Walther, J. B. (2011). Attributions for inconsistencies between online and offline self-presentations. Communication Research, 38(6), 805-825.
Demir, M., & Urberg, K. A. (2004). Friendship and adjustment among adolescents. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 88, 68-82.
Derlega, V. J., Winstead, B., Wong, P., & Greenspan, M. (1987). Self-dislcosure and relationship development: An attributional analysis. In M. E. Roloff & G. R. Miller (Eds.), Interpersonal processes: New directions in communication research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Diener, E. (1980). Deindividuation: The absence of self-awareness and self-regulation in group members. In P. B. Paulus (Ed.), Psychology of group influence (pp. 209–242). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Dion, K. K. (1973). Young children’s stereotyping of facial attractiveness. Developmental Psychology, 9, 183-188.
Dion, K. K. (1981). Physical attractiveness, sex roles and heterosexual attraction. In M. Cook (Ed.), The bases of human sexual attraction (pp. 3–22). London: Academic Press.
Dion, K., Berscheid, E., & Walster, E. (1972). What is beautiful is good. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 24, 285–290.
Djamasbi, S., Siegel, M., & Tullis, T. (2010). Generation Y, web design, and eye tracking. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 68(5), 307-323.
Donath, J. (2007). Signals in social supernets. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 13, 231–251.
Donath, J. S., & Boyd, D. (2004). Public displays of connection. BT Technology Journal, 22(4), 71–82.
Dubrovsky, V. J., Kiesler, S., & Sethna, B. N. (1991). The equalization phenomenon: Status effects in computer-mediated and face-to-face decision-making groups. Human Computer Interaction, 6, 119–146.
Duck, S. W. (1982). Interpersonal communication in developing acquaintance. In G. R. Miller (Ed.), Explorations in interpersonal communication (pp. 127–148). Beverly Hills: Sage.
Dunbar, R. I. M. (1993). Coevolution of neocortical size, group size and language in humans. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 16, 681–735.
Eagly, A.H., Ashmore, R.D., Makhijani, M.G., & Longo, L.C. (1991). What is beautiful is good, but . . . : A meta-analytic review of research on the physical attractiveness stereotype. Psychological Bulletin, 110, 109–128.
Eastwick, P. W., & Finkel, E. J. (2008). Sex differences in mate preferences revisited: Do people know what they initially desire in a romantic partner? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 94, 245-264.
Ekman, P. (1992). Facial expression of emotion: New findings, new questions. Psychological Science, 3, 34–38.
Ellison, N., Heino, R., & Gibbs, J. (2006). Managing Impressions Online: Self-Presentation Processes in the Online Dating Environment. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 11, 415–441.
Ellison, N., Steinfield, C., & Lampe, C. (2007). The benefits of Facebook ‘‘friends’’: Exploring the relationship between college students’ use of online social friends networks and social capital. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication,12(4), 1143–1168.
Ellison, N., Hancock, J., & Toma, C. (2012) Profile as promise: a framework for conceptualizing veracity in online dating self-presentations. New Media & Society 14(1): 45–62.
Feingold, A. (1992). Good-looking people are not what we think. Psychological Bulletin, 111, 304–341.
Fiore, A., & Donath JS (2004) Online personals: An overview. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. New York: ACM, 1395–1398.
Fiore, A., Lindsay, S., Mendelsohn, G., & Hearst, M. (2008a). Assessing attractiveness in online dating profiles. In Proceeding of the 26 annual SIGCHI conference on human factors in computing systems (pp. 797–806), Italy.
Fiore, A. T., Shaw Taylor, L., Mendelsohn, G. A., & Hearst, M. (2008b). Assessing attractiveness in online dating profiles. In Paper presented at the ACM Computer-Human Interaction conference. Florence, Italy.
Fisicaro, S. A., & Lance, C. E. (1990). Implications of three causal models for the measure ment of halo error. Applied Psychological Measurement, 14, 419–429.
Forgas, J. P. (2011). She just doesn't look like a philosopher…? Affective influences on the halo effect in impression formation. European Journal of Social Psychology, 41(7), 812-817.
Gibbs, J. L., Ellison, N. B., & Heino, R. D. (2006). Self-presentation in online personals: The role of anticipated future interaction, self-disclosure, and perceived success in Internet dating. Communication Research, 33, 152-177.
Gladwell, M. (2000). The tipping point: How little things make a big difference. New York: Brown, Little, & Co.
Goffman, E. (1955). On face-work: An analysis of ritual elements in social interaction. Psychiatry, 18(3), 213-231.
Goffman, E. (1959). Presentation of self in everyday life. New York: Doubleday.
Goffman, E. (1963). Behavior in public places: Notes on the social organization of gathering. New York: Free Press.
Gosling, S. D., Ko, S. J., Mannarelli, T., & Morris, M. E. (2002). A room with a cue: Personality judgments based on offices and bedrooms. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 82, 379–398.
Grammer, K., & Thornhill, R. (1994). Human (Homo sapiens) facial attractiveness and sexual selection: The role of symmetry and averageness. Journal of Comparative Psychology, 108, 233–242.
Haas, A., & Gregory, S. W., Jr. (2005). The impact of physical attractiveness on women’s social status and interactional power. Sociological Forum, 20, 449–471. doi:10.1007/s11206-005- 6597-2
Hacker, H. M. (1981). Blabbermouths and clams: Sex differences in self-disclosure in same-sex and cross-sex friendship dyads. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 5, 385–401.
Hancock, J. T., & Dunham, P. J. (2001). Impression formation in computer-mediated communication revisited. Communication Research, 28, 325-347.
Hancock, J., & Toma, C. (2009). Putting your best face forward: The accuracy of online dating photographs. Journal of Communication, 59(2), 367–386.
Hassin, R, Trope, Y.(2000). Facing faces: studies on the cognitive aspects of physiognomy. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,78:837–852.
Hatfield, E, Sprecher, S. (1986) Mirror, mirror: the importance of looks in everyday life. New York: SUNY Press.
Heino, R., Ellisonm, N., & Gibbs, J. (2010) Relationshopping: Investigating the market metaphor in online dating. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships 27(4): 427–447.
Herring, S. C., & Martinson, A. (2004). Assessing gender authenticity in computer-mediated language-use: Evidence from an identity game. Journal of Languiage and Social Psychology, 23, 424–446.
Hian, L. B., Chuan, S. L., Trevor, T. M. K., & Detenber, B. H. (2004). Getting to know you: Exploring the development of relational intimacy in computer-mediated communication. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 9(3).
Hiltz, S. R., Johnson, K., & Turoff, M. (1986). Experiments in group decision-making communication process and outcome in face-to-face versus computerized conferences. Human Communication Research, 13, 225-252.
Huston, T. L., & Levinger, G. (1978). Interpersonal attractiveness and relationships. Annual Review of Psychology, 29, 115–156.
Jackson, L. A.,Hunter,J.E., &Hodge,C.N.(1995).Physical attractiveness and intellectual competence: A meta-analytic review. Social Psychological Quarterly, 58, 108–122.
Johanson, P.K., Raulston, T., & Rotolo, A. (2012). More than just a pretty face and a hot body: Multiple cues in mate-choice. Journal of Social Psychology, 152(2), 174–184.
Jones, E. E. (1990). Interpersonal perception. New York: W.H. Freeman and Company.
Kaplan, D. L., & Keys, C. B. (1997). Sex and relationship variables as predictors of sexual attraction in cross-sex platonic friendships between young heterosexual adults. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 14, 191-206.
Kaschak E. (1992) Engendered lives: a new psychology of women’s experience. New York: Basic Books.
Kenny, D. A. (1991). A general model of consensus and accuracy in interpersonal perception. Psychological Review, 98, 155–163.
Kiesler, Siegel, & McGuire, T. W. (1984). Social psychological aspects of computer-mediated communication. American Psychologist, 39, 1123–1134.
King, L. M., Hunter, J. E., & Schmidt, F. L. (1980). Halo in a multidimensional forced-choice performance evaluation scale. Journal of Applied Psychology, 65, 507–516.
Kleck, R. E., & Rubenstein, C. (1975). Physical attractiveness, perceived attitude similarity, and interpersonal attraction in an opposite-sex encounter. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 31, 107-114.
Kleck, C. A., Reese, C. A., Behnken, D. Z., & Sundar, S. S. (2007, May). The company you keep and the image you protect: Putting your best face forward in online social networks. Paper presented at the 57th Annual Conference of the International Communication Association, San Francisco, CA.
Kling. R.(1980) Social analyses of computing: Theoretical perspectives in recent empirical research. ACM Computing Surveys 12, 61-110
Kling, R.,& Scacchi,W.(1982)The web of computing: Computer technology as social organization. In Advances in Computers, M Yovits, Ed.Academic Press, Orlando, Fla., 1-89.
Krantz, M. (1987). Physical attractiveness and popularity: A predictive study. Psychological Reports, 60, 723–726.
Krebs, D., & Adinolfi, A. (1975). Physical attractiveness, social relations, andpersonality style. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 31(2), 245–253.
Landy, D., & Aronson, E. (1969). The influence of the character of the criminal and his victim on the decisions of simulated jurors. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 5, 141–152.
Landy, D., & Sigall, H. (1974). Beauty is talent: Task evaluation as a function of the performer’s physical attractiveness. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 29, 299–304.
Langlois, J. H., & Roggman, L. A. (1990). Attractive faces are only average. Psychological Sciences, 1, 115–121.
Langlois, J.H., Kalakanis, L., Rubenstein, A.J., Larson, A., Hallam, M., & Smoot, M. (2000). Maxims or myths of beauty? A meta-analytic and theoretic review. Psychological Bulletin, 26, 390–423.
Lea, M., & Spears, R. (1995). Love at first byte? Building personal relationships over computer networks. In J. T. Wood & S. Duck (Eds.), Understudied relationships: Off the beaten track (pp. 197-233). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
Lemay, E. P., Clark, M. S., & Greenberg, A. (2010). What is beautiful is good because what is beautiful is desired: Physical attractiveness stereotyping as projection of interpersonal goals. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin,36(3), 339-353.
Lenhart, A., & Madden, M. (2007). Teens, privacy, & online social networks. Pew Internet and American Life Project Report. <http://www.pewinternet.org/pdfs/PIP_Teens_Privacy_SNS_Report_Final.pdf></http:> Retrieved July 30.07.07.
Ling, S. C., Chuan, L., Yian, T. B. C., Yani, S., & Huaping, C. (2007). Getting to know websites through uncertainty reduction strategies: Which strategies are used more, and which are better? An empirical study of first-time visitors. Proceedings of 2007 International Conference on Wireless Communica-tions, Networking and Mobile Computing, WiCOM 2007 (Article No. 4340726, pp. 3840-3843).
Litwack, S. D., Aikins, J. W., & Cillessen, A. H. (2012). The Distinct Roles of Sociometric and Perceived Popularity in Friendship Implications for Adolescent Depressive Affect and Self-Esteem. The Journal of Early Adolescence, 32(2), 226-251.
Manago, A. M., Graham, M. B., Greenfield, P. M., & Salimkhan, G. (2008). Self-presentation and gender on MySpace. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 29, 446–458.
Maner JK, Kenrick DT, Becker D, et al.(2003) Sexually selective cognition: beauty captures the mind of the beholder. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology.85: 1107–1120.
Maner, J. K., Gailliot, M. T., & DeWall, C. N. (2007). Adaptive attentional attunement: Evidence Maner, J. K., Gailliot, M. T., & DeWall, C. N. (2007). Adaptive attentional attunement: Evidence
Margolin L, White L(1987)The continuing role of physical at-tractiveness in marriage. Journal of Marriage and the Family.49:21–27.
Marks, G., Miller, N., & Maruyama, G. (1981). Effect of targets’ physical attractiveness on assumptions of similarity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 41, 198-206.
Markus, M. L., & Robey, D.(1988)Information technology and organizational change: Casual structure in theory and research. Manage Set. 34, 5(May), 583-598
McCroskey, J. C., & McCain, T. A. (1972). The measurement of interpersonal attraction. Speech Monographs, 41, 261-266.
McCroskey, J. C., & McCain, T. A. (1974). The measurement of interpersonal attractiveness. Speech Monographs, 41, 261–266.
McCroskey, L. L., McCroskey, J. C., & Richmond, V. P. (2005). Applying organizational orientations theory to employees of profit and non-profit organizations. Communication Quarterly, 53, 21–40.
McKenna, K. Y., Green, A. S., & Gleason, M. E. (2002). Relationship formation on the internet: What’s the big attraction? Journal of Social Issues, 58, 9-31.
Murphy, K. R., & Reynolds, D. H. (1988). Does true halo affect observed halo? Journal of Applied Psychology, 73, 1–4.
Murphy, K. R., & Anhalt, R. L. (1992). Is halo error a property of the rater, ratees, or the specific behaviors observered? Journal of Applied Psychology, 77, 494–500.
Nangle, D. W., Erdley, C. A., Newman, J. E, Mason, C. A., & Carpenter, E. M. (2003). Popularity, friendship quantity, and friendship quality: Interactive influ-ences on children’s loneliness and depression. Journal of Clinical Child and Ado-lescent Psychology, 32, 546-555.
Nunnally, J. C. (1978). Psychometric theory (2nd ed.) New York: McGraw-Hill.
Nunnally, J. C., & Bernstein, I. H. (1994). Psychometric theory (3rd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.
Ohanian,R.(1990),Construction and validation of a scale to measure celebrity endorsers perceived expertise, trustworthiness, and attractiveness. Journal of Advertising,19(3),39-53.
Oldenburg, C. M., & Kerns, K. A. (1997). Associations between peer relationships and depressive symptoms: Testing moderator effects of gender and age. Journal of Early Adolescence, 17, 319-337.
Orlikowski, W., & Robey, D.(1991) Information technology and the structuring of organizations. Inf. Syst Res., 2, 2(June), 143-169
Patzer, G. L. (1985). The physical attractiveness phenomena. New York: Plenum Press.
Parkhurst, J. T., & Hopmeyer, A. (1998). Sociometric popularity and peer-perceived  popularity: Two distinct dimensions of peer status. Journal of Early Adolescence, 18, 125–144.
Parks, M. R. (2007). Personal networks and personal relationships. Mahwah, NJ:
Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Parks, M., & Roberts, L. (1998). Making MOOsic: The development of personal relationships on line and a comparison to their off-line counterparts. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 15, 517–537.
Petronio, S. (2002). Boundaries of privacy: Dialectics of disclosure. Albany: State University of New York Press.
Poole, M., & Desanctis, G.(1990) Understanding the use of group decision support systems: The theory of adaptive structuration. In Organizations and Communications Technology, J. Fulk and C. Steinfield, Eds. Sage Publication. Newbury Park, Calif., 173-193.
Poulsen, F. O., Holman, T. B., Busby, D. M., & Carroll, J. S. (2013). Physical attraction, attachment styles, and dating development. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 30(3), 301-319.
Prentice-Dunn, S., & Rogers, R. W. (1980). Effects of deindividuating situational cues and aggressive models on subjective deindividuation and aggression. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 39, 104–113
Prentice-Dunn, S., & Rogers, R. W. (1989). Deindividuation and the self- regulation of behavior. In P. B. Paulus (Ed.), Psychology of group influence (pp. 209–242). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Prestia, S., Silverston, J., Wood, K., & Zigarmi, L. (2002). The effects of attractiveness on popularity; an observational study of social interaction among college students. Perspectives in Psychology,Spring, 2002.
Ramirez, A. (2007). The effect of anticipated future interaction and initial impression valence on relational communication in computer-mediated interaction. Communication Studies, 58, 53- 70.
Ramirez, A., & Zhang, S. (2007). When online meets offline: The effect of modality switching on relational communication. Communication Monographs, 74, 287-310.
Ramirez, Jr., A., Walther, J. B., Burgoon, J. K., & Sunnafrank, M. (2002). Information seeking strategies, uncertainty, and computer-mediated communication: Toward a conceptual model. Human Communication Research, 28, 213–228.
Reeder, H. M. (2000). ‘I like you ... as a friend’: The role of attraction in cross-sex friendships. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 17, 329-348.
Rhodes, G., Proffitt, F., Grady, J. M., & Sumich, A. (1998). Facial symmetry and the perception of beauty. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 5(4), 659–669.
Riggio, R. E. (1986). Assessment of basic social skills. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51, 649–660.
Roney, J. R. (2003). Effects of visual exposure to the opposite sex: Cognitive aspects of mate attraction in human males. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 29(3), 393-404.
Rose, A. J., Swenson, L. P., & Carlson, W. (2004). Friendships of aggressive youth: Considering the influences of being disliked and of being perceived as popular. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 88, 25-45.
Russell M. (2005). Using eye-tracking data to understand first impressions of a website. Usability News ; 7:1–14.
Saal, F. E., Downey, R. G., & Lahey, M. A. (1980). Rating the ratings: Assessing the psychometric quality of rating data. Psychological Bulletin, 88, 413–428.
Sapadin, L. A. (1988). Friendship and gender: Perspective of professional men and women. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 5, 387–403.
Scott, Graham G.(2014)More than friends: Popularity on Facebook and its role in impression formation. Journal of Computer Mediated Communication 13:358-372.
Segal-Caspi, L., Roccas, S., & Sagiv, L. (2012). Don’t Judge a Book by Its Cover, Revisited Perceived and Reported Traits and Values of Attractive Women. Psychological science, 0956797612446349.
Siegel, J., Dubrovsky, V., Kiesler, S., & McGuire, T. W. (1986). Group processes in computer-mediated communication. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 37, 157-187.
Silke, A. (2003). Deindividuation, anonymity, and violence: Findings from Northern Ireland. Journal of Social Psychology, 143, 493–499.
Snyder, M., Tanke, E. D., & Berscheid, E. (1977). Social perception and interpersonal behavior: On the self-fulfilling nature of social stereotypes. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 35, 656–666. doi:10.1037//0022-3514.35.9.656.
Solomonson, A. L., & Lance, C. E. (1997). Examination of the relationship between true and halo error in performance ratings. Journal of Applied Psychology, 82, 665–674.
Sprecher, S. (1989). The importance to males and females of physical attractiveness, earning potential, and expressiveness in initial attraction. Sex Roles, 21, 591–607.
Sproull, L., & Kiesler, S. (1986). Reducing social context cues: Electronic mail in organizational communication. Management Science, 32, 1492–1512.
Stefanone, M. A., Lackaff, D., & Rosen, D. (2008). We’re all stars now: Reality television, Web 2.0, and mediated identities. In The proceedings of ACM’s nineteenth annual hypertext and hypermedia (pp. 107–112). Los Alamitos, CA.
Stone AR (1995) The War of Desire and Technology at the Close of the Mechanical Age. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Sunnafrank, M. (1986). Predicted outcome value during initial interactions: A reformulation of uncertainty reduction theory. Human Communication Research, 13(1), 3–33.
Swain, S. (1992). Men’s friendships with women: Intimacy, sexual boundaries, and the informant role. In P. Nardi (Ed.), Men’s friendships (pp. 153-171). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Tanis, M. (2003). Cues to identity in CMC: The impact on person perception and subsequent interaction outcomes. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Amsterdam.
Thornhill, R., & Gangestad, S. W. (1999). Facial attractiveness. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 3, 452–460.
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, 317-348.
Tolson, J. M., & Urberg, K. A. (1993). Similarity between adolescent best friends. Journal of Adolescent Research, 8, 274–288.
Toma, C. L., Hancock, J. T., & Ellison, N. B. (2008). Separating fact from fiction: An examination of deceptive self-presentation in online dating profiles. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 34, 1023-1036.
Toma, C. L., & Hancock, J. T. (2010). Looks and lies: The role of physical attractiveness in online dating self-presentation and deception. Communication Research, 37(3), 335-351.
Tong, S. T., Van Der Heide, B., Langwell, L., & Walther, J. B. (2008). Too much of a good thing? The relationship between the number of friends and interpersonal impressions on Facebook. Journal of Computer- Mediated Communication, 13, 531–549.
Udry, J. Richard (1966). The social context of marriage. Philadelphia: J.B. Lippincott.
Utz, S. (2010) Show me your friends and I will tell you what type of person you are: How one’s profile, number of friends , and type of friends influence impression formation on social network sites. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 15, 314–335.
Valente, T.W., Gallaher, P., & Mouttapa, M. (2004). Using social networks to understand and present substance use: A transdisciplinary perspective. Substance Use and Misuse, 39(10-12) 1685–1712.
Van Der Heide, B., D’Angelo, J.D, & Schumaker, E.M. (2012). The effect of verbal versus photographic self-presentation on impression formation in Facebook. Journal of Communication, 62, 98-116.
Vanden Boogart, M. R. (2006). Uncovering the social impact of Facebook on a college campus. Unpublished masters thesis, Kansas State University, Manhattan, Kansas. Retrieved July 5, 2007 from http://krex.k-state.edu/dspace/bitstream/2097/181/1/MatthewVandenBoogart2006.pdf
Wallston BS, O’Leary VE, (1981) Sex makes a difference: differential perceptions of women and men. In Wheeler L, ed. Review of personality and social psychology (Vol. 2). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage, pp. 9–41.
Walther, J. B. (1992). Interpersonal effects in computer-mediated interaction: A relational perspective. Communication Research, 19, 52–90.
Walther, J. B. (1996). Computer-mediated communication: Impersonal, interpersonal, and hyperpersonal interaction. Communication Research, 23, 3–43.
Walther, J. B. (2006). Nonverbal dynamics in computer-mediated communication, or: (and the net: (‘s with you, :) and you:) alone. In V. Manusov & M. L. Patterson (Eds.), Handbook of nonverbal communication (pp. 461–479). Thousand Oaks,
Walther, J. B. (2007). Selective self-presentation in computer-mediated communication: Hyperpersonal dimensions of technology, language, and cognition. Computers in Human Behavior, 23, 2538-2557.
Walther, J. B. & Burgoon, J. K. (1992). Relational communication in computer-mediated interaction. Human Research Communication, 19(1), 50–88.
Walther, J. B., Slovacek, C. L., & Tidwell, L. C. (2001). Is a picture worth a thousand words? Photographic images in long-term and short-term computer-mediated communication. Communication Research, 28(1), 105–134.
Walther J.B. and Parks M.R. (2002) Cues filtered out, cues filtered in: computer-mediated communication and relationships. In: Knapp ML and Daly JA (eds) Handbook of Interpersonal Communication. 3rd ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE, pp.529–563.
Walther, J. B., Van Der Heide, B., Kim, S., Westerman, D., & Tong, S. T. (2008). The role of friends’ behavior on evaluations of individuals’ Facebook profiles: Are we known by the company we keep? Human Communication Research, 34, 28–49.
Walther, J. B., Van Der Heide, B., Hamel, L., M., & Shulman, H. C. (2009). Self-generated versus other-generated statements and impressions in computer-mediated communication: A test of warranting theory using Facebook. Communication Research, 36, 229–253.
Walther, J. B., Liang, Y. J., DeAndrea, D. C., Tong, S. T., Carr, C. T., Spottswood, E. L., & Amichai-Hamburger, Y. (2011). The effect of feedback on identity shift in computer-mediated communication. Media Psychology, 14, 1, 1-26.
Wang SS, Moon S, Kwon KH, et al.(2010) Face off: implications of visual cues on initiating friendship on Facebook. Computers in Human Behavior.26:226–234.
Westerman D, Van Der Heide B, Klein KA, et al. (2008) How do people really seek information about others? Information seeking across internet and traditional communication channels. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication 13: 751–767
Whitty M (2008) Revealing the ‘Real’ me, searching for the ‘Actual’ you: Presentations of self on an internet dating site. Computers in Human Behavior 24(4): 1707–1723.
Wilson, J. M., Straus, S. G., & McEvily, W. J. (2006). All in due time: The development of trust in computer-mediated and FtF groups. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 99, 16–33.
Zimbler, Mattitiyahu, & Robert S. Feldman. (2011) "Liar, liar, hard drive on fire: How media context affects lying behavior." Journal of Applied Social Psychology 41.10: 2492-2507.
Zwicka, J., & Danowski, J. (2008). The Faces of facebookers: Investigating social enhancement and social compensation hypotheses; predicting FacebookTM and offline popularity from sociability and self-esteem, and mapping the meanings of popularity with semantic networks. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 14, 1-34.
Zywica, J., & Danowski, J. (2008). The faces of Facebookers: Investigating social enhancement and social compensation hypotheses; predicting Facebook and offline popularity from sociability and self-esteem, and mapping the meanings of popularity with semantic networks. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 14,1-34.
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