跳到主要內容

簡易檢索 / 詳目顯示

回結果列表
研究生： 張雅涵
Ya-han Chang
論文名稱： 青少年資訊分享的態度
Attitudes of Adolescents toward Information Sharing
指導教授： 范懿文
Yi-Wen Fan
口試委員:
學位類別： 碩士
Master
系所名稱： 管理學院 - 資訊管理學系
Department of Information Management
畢業學年度： 95
語文別： 英文
論文頁數： 47
中文關鍵詞： 青少年 、資訊文化 、資訊分享態度
外文關鍵詞： Adolescent, Information Culture, Attitude toward Information sharing
相關次數： 點閱：4  下載：0 
分享至:
查詢本校圖書館目錄 查詢臺灣博碩士論文知識加值系統 勘誤回報

    • 近年來，先進的資訊和通訊科技大幅地增加了青少年進行資訊分享的潛力。然而，如果青少年沒有分享的意願，資訊將無法被分享得如我們所預期地那樣廣泛。因此，研究青少年資訊分享的態度是很重要的。本研究的目的在於了解青少年對於資訊分享的態度，並且探究有哪些因素會影響這些態度。
    以資訊分享理論為基礎，本研究提出第一個模型：知覺資訊文化與自我表現將會對青少年對於資訊分享的一般態度造成影響。至於互惠和友誼的影響，本研究提出第二個模型去探究互惠和友誼對青少年資訊分享的直接態度所造成的相互影響。本研究發現，開放的知覺資訊文化和自我表現對青少年資訊分享的一般態度有顯著且正向的影響。另外，互惠和友誼一樣會正向地影響青少年資訊分享
    的直接態度。其中特別的是，相對於先前拒絕幫助青少年的資訊尋求者，青少年較傾向分享資訊給先前曾幫助過他卅她的資訊尋求者。且他們也較樂意分享資訊給他卅她們的好朋友。除此之外，本研究還發現互惠和友誼之間存在交互作用。

    Advanced information and communication technologies vastly increase the potential for adolescents to share information these days. However, if adolescents are
    not willing to share, information may not be shared as widely as we expect. Therefore, it is very important to study adolescents’ attitudes toward information sharing. The purpose of this study is to understand the attitudes of adolescents toward information sharing and to explore what factors would have influences on it.
    Based on theory of information sharing, this study proposes a model in which perceptions of information culture and self-expression will influence general attitudes of adolescents toward information sharing. As to the impact of reciprocity and friendship, this study proposes a second model to study the interactive influence of reciprocity and friendship on direct attitudes of adolescents toward information sharing. This study found that open perceived information culture and self-expression have significantly positive impacts on general attitudes of adolescents toward information sharing, and that reciprocity positively influences direct attitudes of adolescents toward information sharing as well as friendship. Especially, adolescents are more inclined to share with information seeker who previously helped them than with information seeker who previously refused to help them. They are also more willing to share with their close friends. Additionally, interaction effect exists between reciprocity and friendship.

    1. Introduction.............................................1 1.1 Background and Motivations..........................1 1.2 Research Purposes and Questions..... ...............2 1.3 Organization of This Thesis.........................5 2. Literature Review.....................................6 2.1 Information Sharing Theory..........................6 2.2 Information Culture................................10 2.3 Friendships among Adolescents......................12 3. Research Methods.....................................15 3.1 Model 1: General Attitude toward Information Sharing............................................15 3.2 Model 2: Direct Attitude toward Information Sharing............................................17 3.3 Data Collection....................................18 3.3.1 Subjects........................................18 3.3.2 Questionnaire Design............................19 3.4 Construct Measurements.............................20 3.4.1 General Attitude Measurements...................20 3.4.2 Direct Attitude Measurements....................21 3.5 Method of Data Analysis............................22 4. Data Analysis........................................23 4.1 Descriptive Statistics.............................23 4.2 Reliability and Validity...........................25 4.3 Model 1: General Attitude toward Information Sharing............................................29 4.3.1 Hypotheses Testing of General Attitude..........29 4.3.2 Discussion of Findings..........................30 4.4 Model 2: Direct Attitude toward Information Sharing............................................31 4.4.1 Hypotheses Testing of Direct Attitude...........31 4.4.2 Discussion of Findings..........................33 5. Conclusions and Suggestions..........................38 5.1 Conclusions........................................38 5.2 Managerial Implications............................39 5.3 Research Limitations...............................40 5.4 Suggestions for Future Research Directions.........40 References..............................................41 Appendix A: Questionnaire of General Attitude toward Information Sharing.....................................46 Appendix B: Questionnaire of Direct Attitude toward Information Sharing.....................................47

    1. Alavi, M., and Leidner, D. E. “Review: Knowledge Management and Knowledge Management Systems: Conceptual Foundations and Research issues,” MIS Quarterly (25:1), 2001, pp.107-136.
    2. Bagozzi, R.P., and Yi, Y. “On the evaluation of structure equation models,”Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science (16), 1988, pp.74-94.
    3. Bentler, P.M. “Structural Modeling and Psychometrika: on Growth and Achievements,” Psychometrika (51:1), 1986, pp.35-51.
    4. Bock, G. W., and Kim, Y. G. “Breaking the Myths of Rewards: An Exploratory Study of Attitudes about Knowledge Sharing,” Information Resources Management Journal (15:2), 2002, pp.14-21.
    5. Bock, G.W., Zmud, R.W., Kim, Y.G., and Lee, J.N. “Behavioral Intention Formation in Knowledge Sharing Examing the Roles of Extrinsic Motivators, Social-Psychological Forces, and Organizational Climate,” MIS Quarterly (29:1), 2005, pp.87-111.
    6. Browne, M.W., and Cudeck, R. “Alternative Ways of Assessing Model Fit,” in Testing Structural Equation Models, Kenneth B., and Long, J.S. (eds.), Sage
    Publications, Newbury Park, CA, 1993, pp.136-162.
    7. Chin, W.W., and Todd, P.A. “On the Use, Usefulness, and Ease of Use of Structural Equation Modeling in MIS Research：A Note of Caution,” MIS Quarterly (19:2), 1995, pp.237-246.
    8. Chiou, H.J. Principles and Practice of Structural Equation Modeling with LISREL (6 th ed.), YEH YEH BOOK GALLERY, Taiwan, 2006.
    9. Constant, D., Keisler, S., and Sproull, L. “What''s Mine Is Ours, Or Is It? A Study of Attitudes about Information Sharing,” Information Systems Research (5:4),
    1994, pp.400-421.
    10. Davenport, T.H. Information Ecology, Oxford, England, Oxford University Press, 1997.
    11. Donald R.C., and Pamela S.S. Business Research Methods (9th ed.), McGraw-Hill, 2006.
    12. Emerson, R.M. “Rational Choice and Social Exchange: A Critique of Exchange Theory,” The American Journal of Sociology (82:6), 1977, pp.1364-1366
    13. Emerson, R.M. “Social Exchange Theory,” Annual Review of Sociology (2), 1976, pp.335-362
    14. Fornell, C., and Larcker, D.F. “Evaluating Structural Equation Models with Unobservable Variables and Measurement Error,” Journal of Marketing Research (18:1), 1981, pp.39-50.
    15. Hair, J.F., Anderson, R.E., Tatham, R.L., and Black, W.C. Multivariate Data Analysis (5th ed.), Prentice Hall, 1998.
    16. Hall, H. “Social Exchange for Knowledge Exchange,” Managing Knowledge: Conversations and Critiques, University of Leicester Management Centre, 2001, pp.1-23.
    17. Hansen, S., and Avital M. “Share and Share Alike: The Social and Technological Influences on Knowledge Sharing Behavior,” Sprouts (5:1), 2005, pp.1-19.
    18. Holsapple, C.W., and Joshi, K.D. “An Investigation of Factors That Influence the Management of Knowledge in Organizations,” Journal of Strategic Information Systems (9), 2000, pp.235-261.
    19. Ipe, M. “Knowledge Sharing on Organizations: A Conceptual Framework,”Human Resource Development Review (2:4), 2003, pp.337-359.
    20. Jarvenpaa, S.L., and Staples, D.S. “The Use of Collaborative Electronic Media for Information Sharing: An Exploratory Study of Determinants,” Journal of Strategic Information Systems (9:2/3), 2000, pp.129-154.
    21. Joreskog, K.G., and Sorbom, D. LISREL VI: Analysis of linear structural relationships by maximum likelihood, instrumental variables, and least squares
    methods (4th ed.). Mooresville, IN: Scientific Software, 1986.
    22. Kankanhalli, A., Tan, B.C.Y., and Wei, K.K. “Contributing Knowledge to Electronic Knowledge Repositories: An Empirical Investigation,” MIS Quarterly
    (29:1), 2005, pp.113-143.
    23. Kelley, H.H., and Thibaut, J.W. Interpersonal Relations: A Theory of Interdependence, Wiley, New York, 1978.
    24. Kim, S., and Lee, H. “The Impact of Organizational Context and Information Technology on Employee Knowledge-Sharing Capabilities,” Public Administration Review (66:3), 2006, pp.370-285.
    25. King, W.R. “Maybe A “Knowledge Culture” Isn’t Always So Important After All!” Information Systems Management (23:1), 2006, pp.88-89.
    26. Kolekofski, K.E., and Heminger, A.R. “Beliefs and Attitudes Affecting Intentions to Share Information in An Organization Setting,” Information & Management (40), 2003, pp.521-532.
    27. Kwan, M.M., and Cheung, P.K. “The Knowledge Transfer Process: From Field Studies to Technology Development,” Journal of Database Management (17:1), 2006, pp.16-32.
    28. Leidner, D.E., and Jarvenpaa, S.L. “The Use of Information Technology to Enhance Management School Education: A Theoretical View,” MIS Quarterly
    (19:3), 1995, pp.265-291.
    29. Lucas, L.M. “The Impact of Trust and Reputation on The Transfer of Best Practices,” Journal of Knowledge Management (9:4), 2005, pp.87-101
    30. Luo, L. “Why People Are Willing to Share Knowledge: An Open-Source Account,” 2002. Submitted to Queen’s University Knowledge Summit Doctoral Consortium 2002 Research-in-Progress
    31. Maxwell, K.A. “Do Friends Matter? The Role of Peer Influence on Adolescent Risk Behavior,” Electronic Dissertation, University of Pennsylvania, 2000.
    32. Moon, H.K., and Moon, S.P. “Effective Reward Systems for Knowledge Sharing,” Knowledge Management Review (4:6), 2002, pp.22-25
    33. Nonaka I., and Konno, N. “The concept of ‘Ba’: Building a foundation for knowledge creation,” California Management Review (40:3), 1998, pp.40-54.
    34. Nonaka, I., Takeuchi, H. The Knowledge-Creating Company - How Japanese Companies Create the Dynamics of Innovation, Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK, 1995.
    35. Nunnally, J.C. Psychometric Theory (2nd ed.), New York, McGraw-Hill,1978.
    36. Oliver, G. “Investigating Information Culture: A Comparative Case Study Research Design and Methods,” Archival Science (4), 2004, pp.287-314.
    37. Panye, M.A “Adolescent Decision-Making: A Comparison of Adult and Teenage Perspectives in New Zealand,” International Journal of Adolescence and Youth (10:4), 2002, pp.277-295.
    38. Rafaeli, S., and Raban, D.R. “Information Sharing Online: A Research Challenge,” Int, J. Knowledge and Learning (1:1/2), 2005, pp.62-79.
    39. Ruggles, R. “The State of The Notion: Knowledge Management in Practice,”California Management Review (40:3), 1998, pp.80-89.
    40. Schwab, D.P., "Construct Validity in Organizational Behavior," Research in Organizational Behavior (2), B.M. Shaw and L.L. Cummings (eds.), JAI Press, Greenwich, CT, 1980, pp.3-43.
    41. Smith, H., and McKeen, J.D. “Instilling A Knowledge-Sharing Culture,” Queens University School of Business Kingston, Ontario, Canada, pp.1-20.
    42. Wasko, M.M, and Faraj, S. “Why Should I Share? Examining Social Capital and Knowledge Contribution in Electronic Networks of Practice,” MIS Quarterly
    (29:1), 2005, pp.35-57.
    43. Wasko, M.M., and Frarj, S. ““It Is What One Does”: Why People Participate and Help Others in Electronic Communities of Practice,” Journal of Strategic
    Information Systems (9), 2000, pp.155-173.
    44. Wu, S., Lin, C.S., and Lin, T.C. “Exploring Knowledge Sharing in Virtual Teams: A Social Exchange Theory Perspective,” Proceedings of the 39th Hawaii
    International Conference on System Sciences, 2006.
    45. Yang, S.C. “A Study on Tacit Knowledge Acquisition and Sharing among Group Members from a Social Exchange Theory Perspective,” Ph. D. Dissertation,
    Department of Information Management, National Central University, 2006.

    QR CODE
    :::