以往關於填答問卷的自我揭露的研究，大多聚焦在探討問卷的格式設計、題項設計、調查方所提供的誘因等等。從傳統的紙本問卷到電子問卷,大多數都脫離不了這些因素。但隨著社群網站的興起,網路上群眾的力量也越來越大。因此本研究想探討受訪者是否會因為群眾的行為而影響其自我揭露行為。希望可以藉由本研究的成果，更深入瞭解企業對於問卷之回收率不足、或是所收集資訊多為偽造資料的問題。
本研究透過準實驗法來探討群眾壓力對於誘因、隱私顧慮與自我揭露行為之間的關係。研究以社群網站 Facebook 為模擬環境,在模擬環境中發放問卷。透過情境的模擬來執行本研究自變數：誘因跟群眾壓力的操弄,以衡量在不同情境下，受測者的自我揭露行為的影響。
實驗結果發現，隱私顧慮的確對於自我揭露行為有負向關係,而誘因則對自我揭露行為有正向關係，且群眾壓力則對於隱私顧慮與自我揭露行為之間有調節作用。當網路使用者面對有群眾壓力的情況，網路使用者則會比較偏向自我揭露。同時，這項群眾壓力的調節作用在網路使用者有高隱私顧慮的情況之下，影響更明顯。因此，在現實生活中，問卷商可以考慮同時提供誘因與群眾壓力給予受測者，進而提升問卷的回收率與真實性。

Past researches on self-disclosure in answering questionnaires have mostly focused on design of the format, wordings of the items and the incentives provided to complete the survey. This is true for both traditional paper and pencil questionnaires as well as electronic questionnaires. As social networking proliferates, the power of crowds on the Internet surged. This research aims at uncovering the effects of crowd behavior on informants’ self-disclosure. The goals is gain more insights, in order to solve the problems of low response rate and fake answers in conducting surveys.
This research employed a quasi-experiment design, looking into the relationship between crowd pressure, incentive, privacy concern and self–disclosure. The study used Facebook as an experimental setting, and conducted questionnaire survey in the simulated environment, where incentive and crowd pressure were manipulated. Participants’ self-disclosure behaviors under these conditions were measured.
Results of the experiment reveal that privacy concern is negatively associated with self- disclosure, while incentive is positively associated to self-disclosure. Crowd pressure clearly moderate the effect between privacy concern and self-disclosure behavior, when participants are faced with crowd pressure, they tend to closure more information. This moderating effect of crowd pressure is stronger for participants with higher privacy concerns. As a result, organizations conducting questionnaire surveys could consider providing incentive and crowd pressure information to participants to increase response rate, and to reduce fake answers.

1. Ajzen, I. (1985). From intentions to actions: A theory of planned behavior: Springer.
2. Ajzen, I. (1989). Attitude structure and behavior. Attitude Structure and Function, 241-
274.
3. Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human
Decision Processes, 50(2), 179-211.
4. Allen, V. (1965). Situational factors in conformity. Advances in Experimental Social
Psychology, 2, 133-170.
5. Awad, N. F., & Krishnan, M. (2006). The personalization privacy paradox: an empirical
evaluation of information transparency and the willingness to be profiled online for
personalization. MIS Quarterly, 13-28.
6. Bagozzi, R. P., & Yi, Y. (1988). On the evaluation of structural equation models. Journal
of the Academy of Marketing Science, 16(1), 74-94.
7. Baird, I. S., & Thomas, H. (1985). Toward a contingency model of strategic risk taking.
Academy of Management Review, 10(2), 230-243.
8. Banerjee, A. V. (1992). A simple model of herd behavior. The Quarterly Journal of
Economics, 797-817.
9. Bauer, R. A. (1960). Consumer behavior as risk taking. Dynamic marketing for a
Changing World, 389-398.
10. Brayman, A., & Cramer, D. (1997). Quantitative data analysis with SPSS for windows:
Routledge, London & NY.
11. Church, A. H. (1993). Estimating the effect of incentives on mail survey response rates: A
meta-analysis. Public Opinion Quarterly, 57(1), 62-79.
12. Coe, J. B., Weijs, C. A., Muise, A., Christofides, E., & Desmarais, S. (2011). Teaching veterinary professionalism in the Face (book) of change. Journal of Veterinary Medical Education, 38(4), 353-359.
13. Cozby, P. C. (1973). Self-disclosure: a literature review. Psychological Bulletin, 79(2), 73.
14. Crespo, A. H., del Bosque, I. R., & de los Salmones Sanchez, M. G. (2009). The influence of perceived risk on Internet shopping behavior: A multidimensional perspective. Journal
of Risk Research, 12(2), 259-277.
15. David Gefen, C. M. R. (2002). Implementation team responsiveness and user evaluation
of customer relationship management: A quasi-experimental design study of social
exchange theory. Journal of Management Information Systems, 19(1), 47-69.
16. Derlega, V. J., & Grzelak, J. (1979). Appropriateness of self-disclosure. Self-disclosure:
Origins, patterns, and implications of openness in interpersonal relationships, 151-176.
17. Deutsch, M., & Gerard, H. B. (1955). A study of normative and informational social influences upon individual judgment. The Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology,
51(3), 629.
18. Dillman, D. A. (1978). Mail and telephone surveys (Vol. 3): Wiley Interscience.
19. Dinev, T., & Hart, P. (2006). An extended privacy calculus model for e-commerce
transactions. Information Systems Research, 17(1), 61-80.
20. Drennan, J., & Mort, G. (2003). Examination of the influence of personal attributes on
consumer use on m-services. ANZMAC 2003 Conference
21. Fishbein, M., & Ajzen, I. (1975). Belief, attitude, intention and behavior: An introduction
to theory and research. Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA, 1975.
22. Fogel, J., & Nehmad, E. (2009). Internet social network communities: Risk taking, trust,
and privacy concerns. Computers in Human Behavior, 25(1), 153-160.
23. Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981). Evaluating structural equation models with
unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of Marketing Research, 39-50.
24. Goodwin, C. (1991). Privacy: Recognition of a consumer right. Journal of Public Policy & Marketing, 149-166.
25. Hackler, J. C., & Bourgette, P. (1973). Dollars, dissonance, and survey returns. Public Opinion Quarterly, 276-281.
26. Hair, J. F., Anderson, R. E., Tatham, R. L., & William, C. (1998). Black (1998), Multivariate data analysis: Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
27. Joinson, A. N. (2001). Self‐disclosure in computer‐mediated communication: The role of self‐awareness and visual anonymity. European Journal of Social Psychology, 31(2), 177- 192.
28. Jourard, S. M. (1959). Healthy personality and self-disclosure. Mental Hygiene. New York.
29. Kankanhalli, A., Tan, B. C., & Wei, K.-K. (2005). Contributing knowledge to electronic
knowledge repositories: an empirical investigation. MIS Quarterly, 113-143.
30. Kim, D. J., Ferrin, D. L., & Rao, H. R. (2008). A trust-based consumer decision-making model in electronic commerce: The role of trust, perceived risk, and their antecedents.
Decision Support Systems, 44(2), 544-564.
31. 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.
32. Li, H., Sarathy, R., & Xu, H. (2011). The role of affect and cognition on online consumers'
decision to disclose personal information to unfamiliar online vendors. Decision Support
Systems, 51(3), 434-445.
33. Lim, N. (2003). Consumers’ perceived risk: sources versus consequences. Electronic
Commerce Research and Applications, 2(3), 216-228.
34. Lord, K. R., Lee, M.-S., & Choong, P. (2001). Differences in normative and informational
social influence. Advances in Consumer Research, 28, 280-285.
35. Markus, H. R., & Kitayama, S. (1991). Culture and the self: Implications for cognition, emotion, and motivation. Psychological Review, 98(2), 224.
36. McCallister, E., Grance, T., & Scarfone, K. A. (2010). Guide to Protecting the Confidentiality of Personally Identifiable Information (PII). National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), Special Publication 800- 122
37. Metzger, M. J. (2004). Privacy, trust, and disclosure: Exploring barriers to electronic commerce. Journal of Computer‐Mediated Communication, 9(4), 00-00.
38. Murray, K. B., & Schlacter, J. L. (1990). The impact of services versus goods on consumers’ assessment of perceived risk and variability. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 18(1), 51-65.
39. Paxson, M. C. (1995). Increasing survey response rates: Practical instructions from the total-design method. The Cornell Hotel and Restaurant Administration Quarterly, 36(4), 66-73.
40. Ross, L., Bierbrauer, G., & Hoffman, S. (1976). The role of attribution processes in conformity and dissent: Revisiting the Asch situation. American Psychologist, 31(2), 148.
41. 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.
42. Smith, M. A., & Leigh, B. (1997). Virtual subjects: Using the Internet as an alternative
source of subjects and research environment. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, &
Computers, 29(4), 496-505.
43. Stutzman, F. (2006). An evaluation of identity-sharing behavior in social network
communities. International Digital and Media Arts Journal, 3(1), 10-18.
44. Trice, A. D., & Layman, W. H. (1984). Improving guest surveys. The Cornell Hotel and
Restaurant Administration Quarterly, 25(3), 10-13.
45. Wallace, K. A. (1999). Anonymity. Ethics and Information technology, 1(1), 21-31.
46. Warren, S. D., & Brandeis, L. D. (1890). The right to privacy. Harvard Law Review, 193-
220.
47. Wheeless, L. R., & Grotz, J. (1976). Conceptualization and measurement of reported self‐
disclosure. Human Communication Research, 2(4), 338-346.
48. Woodside, A. G. (1968). Group influence and consumer risk taking: an experimental study.
Pennsylvania State University.
49. Yates, J. (1992). Risk-taking behavior: John Wiley & Sons.
50. Zeng, S.-Y., Wu, L.-L., & Chen, H.-G. (2009). Sharing private information online: The
mediator effect of social exchange. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the 11th International Conference on Electronic Commerce.