Responsive image
博碩士論文 etd-0701109-153210 詳細資訊
Title page for etd-0701109-153210
論文名稱
Title
影響使用者線上去抑制化行為之研究-以網際網路特性、使用者心理因素探討
Examing the Antecedents of Online Disinhibition - the Roles of Internet Attributes and Psychological Factors
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
71
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
2008-06-26
繳交日期
Date of Submission
2009-07-01
關鍵字
Keywords
去個人化、去抑制化、電腦中介溝通、社會臨場感、社會線索
Reduced Social Cue, Online Disinhibition, deindividuation, Computer-Mediated Communication, Social Presence Theory
統計
Statistics
本論文已被瀏覽 5907 次,被下載 0
The thesis/dissertation has been browsed 5907 times, has been downloaded 0 times.
中文摘要
「電腦中介溝通」改變以往溝通的方式,人際溝通的互動模式不再僅限於傳統直接面對面的溝通模式。跟現實生活比較起來,人們在網路世界中較不受拘束、限制去使用一些粗魯的字眼、威脅性的字眼、表達自己的憤怒、或是發表嚴厲的批評等,即是所謂的「去抑制化」行為。隨著藉由網路溝通為媒介的溝通模式盛行,「去抑制化」行為也經常發現在論壇、電子布告欄(BBS)等各種不同的虛擬社群中。因此,「去抑制化」是學術界及社會上重要且關切的研究議題。
本研究整合過去針對「去抑制化」理論的研究,並歸納出兩大觀點來探討線上去抑制化行為:(1).網際網路特性: 「社會臨場感理論」、「社會線索」、「控制能力」和「身分的流動性」;(2).心理因素: 「去個人化理論」。此外,與過去研究不同的是,我們認為「去個人化」在「網際網路的特性」和「去抑制化」行為間,扮演非常重要的中介角色,而不只是去抑制化行為的前因。因此本研究整合兩大觀點並且提出整合且更為完整的模式,來探討線上去抑制化行為的研究。
本研究以實證研究的方法來瞭解網際網路特性、使用者心理因素對線上去抑制化行為的影響。我們以六個研究假設來驗證研究的架構,並利用PLS進行檢驗。研究結果發現,我們發現「去個人化」除了是「去抑制化」行為重要的影響因素外,本研究也驗證「去個人化」的確是「網際網路特性」及「去抑制化」行為重要且關鍵的中介變數。我們也發現重要影響「去個人化」的重要影響因素,在網際網路特性,除了社會線索之外,「社會臨場感」、「控制能力」與「身分的流動性」對「去個人化」都具有顯著的影響,為「去個人化」提供實證性的研究。
總而言之,本研究整合了過去在網路「去抑制化」行為的研究,並且提出一個更為整合且容易了解的架構來解釋網際網路上「去抑制化」行為。本篇研究也提供給後續針對「去抑制化」行為一個研究參考的架構,也提供網路管理者一些實務上的建議。
Abstract
It can be observed that the anti-normative behaviors occur more frequently in Computer-Mediated-Communication than in face-to-face communication. Internet often let people feel less restraint to use rude or threatening language, leashing harsh criticisms, venting anger or hatred. Thus, the issues surrounding “Toxic Disinhibition” have attracted more and more concern from society and academia.
Our empirical study tries to get the whole picture and proposed a more comprehensive model integrating diverse factors and involving the synthesis of different viewpoints. Accordingly, this paper proceeds to examine and integrate the two important aspects, (1) Internet attributes in which reduced social cue, social presence, controllability, and the fluidity of the identity and (2) psychological state, especially theories of deindividuation.Moreover, different from most prior researches, we consider deindividuation as an important mediating role, not just an antecedent of toxic disinhibition.
An empirical survey methodology is applied to test the research model and six hypotheses are developed in this study, and then we use PLS to analyze it. Our empirical results showed that the essential mediating role of deindividuation, also confirming the highly significant with toxic disinhibition. Moreover, we identify major factors that may affect deindividuation. We find that except for reduced social cue, reduced social presence, controllability and fluidity of identity also has significant impact on deindividuation, and then cause toxic disinhibition.
In sum, unlike much prior research that has focused on only a limited aspect of toxic disinhibition, we take integrated view and proposed a more comprehensive model therefore be useful to a better understanding of the nature of toxic disinhibition. And this study provides some suggestions for the online disinhibition research.
目次 Table of Contents
Chapter1 Introduction ..................................................................................................................... 1 
1.1 Research Background and Motivation ................................................................................... 1 
1.2 Research Purpose ................................................................................................................... 3 
Chapter 2. Theoretical Foundation and ................................................................................................ 4 
Literature Review ................................................................................................................................ 4 
2.1 Disinhibition .......................................................................................................................... 4 
2.1.1 Toxic Disinhibition ..................................................................................................... 6 
2.2 Deindividuation Theory ......................................................................................................... 8 
2.3 Social Presence Theory ........................................................................................................ 12 
2.4 Seductive Properties of the Internet ..................................................................................... 14 
2.4.1 Controllability ........................................................................................................... 14 
2.4.2 Fluidity of identity .................................................................................................... 15 
2.5 Reduced Social Cues ............................................................................................................ 16 
2.6 Policy .................................................................................................................................. 18 
Chapter 3. The Research Method ....................................................................................................... 19 
3.1. Research model ................................................................................................................... 19 
3.2 Research Hypotheses ........................................................................................................... 20 
Chapter4. Data Analysis ..................................................................................................................... 25 
4.1 Subject ................................................................................................................................. 25 
4.1.1 Sampling ................................................................................................................... 25 
4.1.2 Demographic Analysis .............................................................................................. 25 
4.2 Measure Development ......................................................................................................... 26 
4.2.1 Pilot study ................................................................................................................. 29 
4.2.2 Questionnaire Internal Reliability ............................................................................. 30 
4.3 Measurement Model ............................................................................................................ 32 
4.3.1 Common Method Variance ....................................................................................... 32 
4.3.2 Second Order of deindividuation .............................................................................. 35 
4.3.3 Reliability and Validity ............................................................................................. 35 
4.4 Structural Model .................................................................................................................. 39 
4.4.1 Main model ............................................................................................................... 39 
4.4.2 Analysis of moderating effect ................................................................................... 41 
4.4.3 Analysis of mediating ............................................................................................... 42 
Chapter 5 Discussion and Implication ............................................................................................... 46 
5.1 Discussion ............................................................................................................................ 46 
5.2 Theoretical Contributions .................................................................................................... 48 
5.3 Implications for Practitioner ................................................................................................ 49 
5.4 Limitation and Suggestions for Future Study ...................................................................... 50 
5.5 Conclusion ........................................................................................................................... 51 
References ......................................................................................................................................... 55
參考文獻 References
1.
Avolio, B. J., Yammarino, F. J., & Bass, B. M. (1991). Identifying common methods variance with data collected from a single source: An unresolved sticky issue. Journal of Management, 17(3), 571.
2.
Bagozzi, R. P., Yi, Y., & Phillips, L. W. (1991). Assessing construct validity in organizational research. Administrative Science Quarterly, 36(3)
3.
Baron, R. M., & Kenny, D. A. (1986). The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51(6), 1173-1182.
4.
Bon, G. (1895). The crowd: A study of the popular mind. Reprint Available from Dover Publications.
5.
TA Carte, CJ Russell (2003). In pursuit of moderation: Nine common errors and their solutions. MIS Quarterly, 27(3), pp. 479-501.
6.
Chin, W. W. “Issues and Opinion on Structure Equation Modeling,” MIS Quarterly (22:1), 1998, pp. vii-xvi.
7.
Chin, W. W., Marcolin, B. L., and Newsted, P. N. (2003). A partial least squares latent variable modeling approach for measuring interaction effects: Results from a monte carlo simulation study and an electronic-mail emotion/ adoption study. Information Systems Research, 14(2):189–217.
8.
Chiou, W. B. (2006). Adolescents’sexual self-disclosure on the Internet: Deindividuation and impression management. Adolescence, 41(163), 547-561.
9.
Churchill Jr, G. A. (1979). A paradigm for developing better measures of marketing constructs. Journal of Marketing Research, 64-73.
10.
Cobanoglu, C., Warde, B., & Moreo, P. J. (2001). A comparison of mail, fax and web-based survey methods. International Journal of Market Research, 43(4), 441-452.
11.
Cochran, W. G. (1977). Sampling techniques Wiley New York.
12.
Coleman, L., Paternite, C., & Sherman, R. (1999). A reexamination of deindividuation in synchronous computer-mediated communication. Computers in Human Behavior, 15(1), 51-65.
13.
Crump, E., & Carbone, N. (1998). Writing online: A student's guide to the Internet and world wide web Houghton Mifflin.
14.
Culnan, M., & Markus, L. (1987). Information technologies: Electronic media and intraorganizational communication. Handbook of Organizational Communication, 420-444.
15.
Daft, R. L., & Lengel, R. H. (1983). Information richness. A new approach to managerial behavior and organization design.
16.
Detweiler, L. (1993). Identity, privacy, and anonymity on the Internet. Online Via Http://www.Intac.com//man/faq/net-privacy/pa
17.
Diener, E. (1976). Effects of prior destructive behavior, anonymity, and group presence on deindividuation and aggression. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 33(5), 497-507.
18.
Diener, E. (1977). Deindividuation: Causes and consequences. Social Behavior and Personality, 5(1), 143-155.
19.
Diener, E. (1979). Deindividuation, self-awareness, and disinhibition. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 37(7), 1160-1171.
20.
Diener, E. (1980). Deindividuation: The absence of self-awareness and self-regulation in group members. The Psychology of Group Influence, 209-242.
21.
Dillman, D. A. (1978). Mail and telephone surveys: The total design method Wiley New York.
22.
Duval, S., & Wicklund, R. A. (1972). A theory of objective self awareness Academic Press.
23.
FESTINGER, L., PEPITONE, A., & NEWCOMB, T. (1952). Some consequences of deindividuation in a group. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 47(2 Suppl.), 382-389.
24.
Fornell, C., & Bookstein, F. L. (1982). Two structural equation models: LISREL and PLS applied to consumer exit-voice theory. Journal of Marketing Research, 440-452.
25.
Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981). Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of Marketing Research, 39-50.
26.
Froming, W. J., Walker, G. R., & Lopyan, K. J. (1982). Public and private self-awareness: When personal attitudes conflict with societal expectations. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 18(5), 476-487.
27.
Fuller, C. H. (1974). Weighting to adjust for survey nonresponse. Public Opinion Quarterly, 38(2), 239-246.
28.
Glassman, J. (1998). ... Or a made-up menace? The Washington Post,
29.
Grayson, P. A., & Schwartz, V. (2000). Commentary on “Contrasting case studies of frequent Internet use:”. Journal of College Student Psychotherapy, 14(4), 19-22.
30.
Hiemstra, G. (1982). Teleconferencing, concern for face, and organizational culture. Communication Yearbook, 6, 874-904.
31.
Jessup, L. M., Connolly, T., & Tansik, D. A. (1990). Toward atheory of automated group work: The deindividuating effects of anonymity. Small Group Research, 21(3), 333.
32.
Joinson, A. (1998). Causes and implications of disinhibited behavior on the Internet. Psychology and the Internet: Intrapersonal, Interpersonal, and Transpersonal Implications, 43-60.
33.
Joinson, A. N. (2002). Understanding the psychology of Internet behaviour:Virtual worlds, real lives Palgrave Macmillan.
34.
Joinson, A., & Harris, P. (1995). Self-enhancement and self-protection on the Internet: A study of football fans on the WWW. BPS London Conference, Institute of Education, London,
35.
Kalyanaraman, S., & Sundar, S. S. (2006). The psychological appeal of personalized content in web portals: Does customization affect attitudes and behavior? Journal of Communication, 56(1), 110-132.
36.
Kiesler, S. (1986). The hidden messages in computer networks. Harvard Business Review, 64(1), 46-60.
37.
Kiesler, S., Siegel, J., & McGuire, T. W. (1988). Social psychological aspects of computer-mediated communication. Computer-Supported Cooperative Work: A Book of Readings, 657-682.
38.
Kiesler, S., Zubrow, D., Moses, A. M., & Geller, V. (1985). Affect in computer-meditated communication: An experiment in synchronous terminal-to-terminal discussion. Human-Computer Interaction, 1(1), 77-104.
39.
Kish, L., & Kish, J. L. (1995). Survey sampling Wiley New York.
40.
Kumar, N., Stern, L. W., & Anderson, J. C. (1993). Conducting interorganizational research using key informants. Academy of Management Journal, 1633-1651.
41.
Lea, M., O'Shea, T., Fung, P., & Spears, R. (1992). Flaming in computer-mediated communication: Observations, explanations, implications. Contexts of Computer-Mediated Communication, 89-112.
42.
Lea, M., O'Shea, T., Fung, P., & Spears, R. (1992). Flaming in computer-mediatedcommunication: Observations, explanations, implications. Contexts of Computer-Mediated Communication, 89-112.
43.
Lea, M., & Spears, R. (1991). Computer-mediated communication, de-individuation and group decision-making. International Journal ofMan-Machine Studies, 34(2), 283-301.
44.
Lea, M., & Spears, R. (1992). Paralanguage and social perception in computer-mediated communication. Journal of Organizational Computing, 2(3 U 0026 4), 321-341.
45.
Leung, L. (2003). Impacts of net-generation attributes, seductive properties of the Internet, and gratifications-obtained on Internet use. Telematics and Informatics, 20(2), 107-129.
46.
Leung, L. (2004). Net-generation attributes and seductive properties of the Internet as predictors of online activities and Internet addiction. CyberPsychology & Behavior, 7(3), 333-348.47.
Levi, M. (1988). Of rule and revenue University of California Press.
48.
McKenna, K. Y. A., & Bargh, J. A. (2000). Plan 9 from cyberspace: The implications of the Internet for personality and social psychology. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 4(1), 57.
49.
McKenna, K. Y. A., & Bargh, J. A. (2006). Coming out in the age of the Internet identity lemarginalizatioif through virtual group participation. Small Groups: Key Readings, 433.
50.
McKenna, K. Y. A., Green, A. S., & Gleason, M. E. J. (2002). Relationship formation on the Internet: What's the big attraction? Journal of Social Issues, 58(1), 9-31.
51.
Meng Ma, Ritu Agarwal (2007) Through a Glass Darkly: Information Technology Design, Identity Verification, and Knowledge Contribution in Online Communities Information Systems Research, 18(1), March 2007, pp. 42–67
52.
Morahan-Martin, J., & Schumacher, P. (2000). Incidence and correlates of pathological Internet use among college students. Computers in Human Behavior, 16(1), 13-29.53.
Ostrom, E. (1991). Governing the commons: The evolution of institutions for collective action Cambridge Univ Pr.
54.
O'Sullivan, B. (2000). Impression management functions of communication channels in relationships. Human Communication Research, 26(3), 403-431.
55.
PA Pavlou, M Fygenson (2006). Understanding and Mitigating Uncertainty In Online Exchange Relationships: a Principal– Agent perspective. MIS Quarterly, Volume 30, Issue 1.
56.
Parks, M. R., & Floyd, K. (1996). Making friends in cyberspace. The Journal of Communication, 46(1), 80-97.
57.
Phillips, L. W. (1981). Assessingmeasurement error in key informant reports: A methodological note on organizational analysis in marketing. Journal of Marketing Research, 395-415.
58.
Phillips, L. W., & Bagozzi, R. P. (1986). On measuring organizational properties of distribution channels: Methodological issues in the use of key informants. Research in Marketing, 8, 313-369.
59.
Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Lee, J. Y., & Podsakoff, N. P. (2003). Common method biases in behavioral research: A critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88(5), 879-903.
60.
Postmes, T., & Spears, R. (1998). Deindividuation and antinormative behavior: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 123, 238-259.
61.
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(1), 104-113.
62.
Prentice-Dunn, S., & Rogers, R. W. (1983). Deindividuation in aggression. Aggression, Theoretical and Empirical Reviews: Theoretical and Empirical Reviews, 155.63.
Prentice-Dunn, S., & Rogers, R. W. (1989). Deindividuation and the self-regulation of behavior. The Psychology of Group Influence, 2, 87-109.
64.
Prentice-Dunn, S., & Spivey, C. B. (1986). Extreme deindividuation in the laboratory: Its magnitude and subjective components. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 12(2), 206.
65.
R. Dyerf, R. Green, M. Pittsf, G. Millward. (1995). What's the Flaming Problem? or Computer Mediated Communication Deindividuating or Disinhibiting?, People and computers X: proceedings of HCI'95, Huddersfield.
66.
Reicher, S., Spears, R., & Postmes, T. (1995). A social identity model of deindividuation phenomena. European Review of Social Psychology, 6(1), 161-198.
67.
Rice, R. E. (1993). Using social presence theory to compare traditional and new organizational media. Human Communication Research, 19(4), 451-484.
68.
Rice, R. E., & Love, G. (1987). Electronic emotion: Socioemotional content in a computer-mediated communication network. Communication Research, 14(1), 85.
69.
Roger, T., Rips Lance, J., & Kenneth, R. The psychology of survey response (2000) cambridge.
70.
Schouten, A. P., Valkenburg, P. M., & Peter, J. (2007). Precursors and underlying processes of adolescents' online self-disclosure: Developing and testing an “Internet-attribute-perception” model. Media Psychology, 10(2), 292-315.
71.
Schrage, M. (1997). The real problem with computers. Harvard Business Review, 75, 178-188.
72.
Seidler, J. (1974). On usinginformants: A technique for collecting quantitative data and controlling measurement error in organization analysis. American Sociological Review, 816-831.
73.
Shea, V. (1994). Netiquette Albion Books San Rafael, CA.
74.
Sheeks, M. S., & Birchmeier, Z. P. (2007). Shyness, sociability, and the use of computer-mediated communication in relationship development. CyberPsychology & Behavior, 10(1), 64-70.
75.
Short, J., Williams, E., & Christie, B. (1976). The social psychology of telecommunications John Wiley & Sons.
76.
Siegel, J., Dubrovsky, V., Kiesler, S., & McGuire, T. W. (1986). Group processes in computer-mediated communication. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 37(2), 157-187.
77.
Singer, J. E., Brush, C. A., & Lublin, S. C. (1965). Some aspects of deindividuation: Identification and conformity. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 1(4), 356-378.
78.
Sivo, S. A., Saunders, C., Chang, Q., & Jiang, J. J. (2006). How low should you go? low response rates and the validity of inference in IS questionnaire research. Journal of the Association for Information Systems, 7(1), 17.
79.
Spears, R., & Lea, M. (1992). Social influence and the influence of the “social” in computer-mediated communication. Contexts of Computer-Mediated Communication, 30-65.
80.
Sproull, L., & Kiesler, S. (1986). Reducing social context cues: Electronic mail in organizational communications. Management Science, 1492-1512.
81.
Sproull, L., & Kiesler, S. (1986). Reducing social context cues: Electronicmail in organizational communications. Management Science, 1492-1512.
82.
Sproull, L., & Kiesler, S. (1991). Connections: New ways of working in the networked organization MIT press.
83.
Stritzke, W. G. K., Nguyen, A., & Durkin, K. (2004). Shyness and computer-mediated communication: A self-presentational theory perspective. Media Psychology, 6(1), 1-22.
84.
Suler, J. (2004). The online disinhibition effect. CyberPsychology and Behavior, 7, 321-326.
85.
Trevino, L. K., Lengel, R. H., Bodensteiner, W., Gerloff, E. A., & Muir, N. K. (1990). The richness imperative and cognitive style: The role of individual differences in media choice behavior. Management Communication Quarterly, 4(2), 176.
86.
Turkle, S. (1984). The second self: Computers and the human spirit.
87.
Turkle, S. (1994). Constructions and reconstructions of self in virtual reality: Playing in the MUDs. Mind, Culture, and Activity, 1(3), 158–167.
88.
Walther, J. B. (1992). Interpersonal effects in computer-mediated interaction: A relational perspective. Communication Research, 19(1), 52.
89.
Walther, J. B. (1995). Relational aspects of computer-mediated communication: Experimental observations over time. Organization Science, 186-203.
90.
Walther, J. B. (1996). Computer-mediated communication: Impersonal, interpersonal, and hyperpersonal interaction. Communication Research, 23(1), 3.
91.
Zimbardo, P. G. (1969). The human choice: Individuation, reason, and order versus deindividuation, impulse, and chaos. Nebraska Symposium on Motivation, 17 237-307.
92.
Zimbardo, P. G. (1990). Shyness: What it is, what to do about it Da Capo Press.
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:校內校外均不公開 not available
開放時間 Available:
校內 Campus:永不公開 not available
校外 Off-campus:永不公開 not available

您的 IP(校外) 位址是 54.196.106.106
論文開放下載的時間是 校外不公開

Your IP address is 54.196.106.106
This thesis will be available to you on Indicate off-campus access is not 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