臺灣博碩士論文加值系統

The internet today is dominated by interpersonal interactions. This has led to electronic word-of-mouth becoming an influential source of information to the modern consumer. This study adds to the knowledge of interpersonal online communication behavior. A research framework consisting of the attribution theory and the dialectical thinking theory was developed. Threads from a popular food forum were then analyzed using netnography. The results show that individuals use positive and negative attributions towards oneself or another to help strengthen statements made online. In addition, dialectical posts elicit more conversation than do non-dialectical posts.

The internet today is dominated by interpersonal interactions. This has led to electronic word-of-mouth becoming an influential source of information to the modern consumer. This study adds to the knowledge of interpersonal online communication behavior. A research framework consisting of the attribution theory and the dialectical thinking theory was developed. Threads from a popular food forum were then analyzed using netnography. The results show that individuals use positive and negative attributions towards oneself or another to help strengthen statements made online. In addition, dialectical posts elicit more conversation than do non-dialectical posts.

Chapter 1 INTRODUCTION 1
1.1 Research Background 1
1.2 Research Motivation 4
1.3 Research Objectives and Questions 6
Chapter 2 LITERATURE REVIEW 7
2.1 Electronic Word-of-Mouth 7
2.2 Attribution Theory 9
2.3 Dialectical Thinking 12
2.4 Personal Influence 14
2.5 Hedonic and Utilitarian Products 17
Chapter 3 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY 19
3.1 Research Framework 20
3.2 Analytical Questions 23
3.3 Netnography 24
3.4 Analytical Methods 29
3.5 Forum Selection Criteria 30
Chapter 4 RESULTS 34
4.1 Comparing Hedonic and Utilitarian Products 35
4.2 Attributions 37
4.3 Research Framework Results 39
4.3.1 Cell 1 – Dialectical Thinkers and Attributions 42
4.3.2 Cell 2 – Non-Dialectical Thinkers and Attributions 45
4.3.3 Cell 3 – Dialectical Thinkers without Attributions 50
4.3.4 Cell 4 – Non-Dialectical Thinkers without Attributions 55
4.4 Overall Findings 61
4.4.1 Coding Differences 61
4.4.2 Comparing Attributions to No Attributions 62
4.4.3 Why use Attributions? 64
4.4.4 Development of Conversations 66
4.5 Discussion 70
Chapter 5 CONCLUSION 71
5.1 General Discussion 71
5.2 Contributions 74
5.3 Managerial Implications 75
5.4 Limitations and Future Research 77
REFERENCES 79

Bachman, J.G., &; O’Malley, P.M. (1984). Yea-saying, nay-saying, and going to extremes: Black-white differences in response styles. Public Opinion Quarterly, 48(2), 491-509.
Brewer, J. D. (2000). Ethnography (Understanding social research). Buckingham: Open University Press.
Brown, J., Broderick, A.J., &; Lee, N. (2007). Word-of-mouth communication within online communities: conceptualizing the online social network. Journal of Interactive Marketing, 21(3), 2-20.
Chatterjee, P. (2001). Online reviews: Do consumers use them? Advances in Consumer Research, 28, 129-133.
Choi, I., &; Choi, Y. (2002). Culture and self-concept flexibility. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 28(11), 1508-1517.
Dellarocas, C. (2003). The digitization of word-of-mouth: promise and challenges of online feedback mechanisms. Management Science, 49(10), 1407-1424.
Deutsch, M., &; Gerard, H.B. (1955). A study of normative and informational influences upon individual judgment. The Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 51(3), 629-636.
Doh, S.J., &; Hwang, J.S. (2009). How consumers evaluate eWOM (Electronic word-of-mouth) messages. CyberPsychology &; Behavior, 12(2), 193-197.
Ennew, C.T., Banerjee, A.K., &; Li, D. (2000). Managing word-of-mouth communication: Empirical evidence from India. International Journal of Bank Marketing, 18(2), 75-83.
Glaser, B. G., &; Strauss, A. M. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory: Strategies for qualitative research. Chicago: Aldine.
Goldsmith, R.E., &; Horowitz, D. (2006). Measuring motivations for online opinion seeking. Journal of Interactive Advertising, 6(2), 3-14.
Hamamura, T., Heine, S.J., &; Paulhus, D.L. (2008). Cultural differences in response styles: The role of dialectical thinking. Personality and Individual Differences, 44(4), 932-942.
Heider, F. (1958). The psychology of interpersonal relations. New York: Wiley.
Hennig-Thurau, T., &; Walsh, G. (2003). Electronic word-of-mouth: Motives for and consequences of reading customer articulations on the internet. International Journal of Electronic Commerce. 8(2), 51-74.
Hennig-Thurau, T., Gwinner, K.P., Walsh, G., &; Gremler, D.D. (2004). Electronic word-of-mouth via consumer opinion platforms: what motivates consumers to articulate themselves on the internet. Journal of Interactive Marketing, 18(1), 38-52.
Hirschman, E.C., &; Holbrook, M.B. (1982). Hedonic consumption: Emerging concepts, methods, and propositions. Journal of Marketing. 46(3), 92-101.
Hui, C.H., &; Triandis, H.C. (1989). Effects of culture and response format on extreme response style. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 20(3), 296-309.
Kelley, H.H. (1967). Attribution theory in social psychology. Nebraska Symposium on Motivation, 15, 192-238.
Kelley, H.H. (1973). Processes of causal attribution. American Psychologist, 28 (2), 107-128.
Kelman, H.C. (1958). Compliance, identification, and internalization: Three processes of attitude change. The Journal of Conflict Resolution. 2(1), 51-60.
Kozinets, R. V. (2002). The field behind the screen: Using netnography for marketing research. Journal of Marketing Research, 39(1), 61-72.
Kozinets, R.V. (2010). Netnography: The marketer’s secret weapon. Netbase. Retrieved from: http://info.netbase.com/rs/netbase/images/Netnography_WP.pdf
Laczniak, R.N., DeCarlo, T.E., &; Ramaswami, S.N. (2001). Consumers’ responses to negative word-of-mouth communication: An attribution theory perspective. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 11(1), 57-73.
Latane, B. (1981). The psychology of social impact. American Psychologist, 36(4), 343-356.
Lee, M., &; Youn, S. (2009). How eWOM platforms influence consumer product judgement. International Journal of Advertising, 28(3), 473-499.
Mayzlin, D. (2006). Promotional chat on the internet. Marketing Science, 25(2), 155-163.
Mead, G.H. (1938). The philosophy of the act. C. W. Morris, (Ed.) Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Mizerski, R.W., &; Green, S. (1978). An investigation into the causal links between attribution schema and decision-making. Advances in Consumer Research, 5, 126-130.
Mudambi, S.M., &; Scuff, D. (2010). What makes a helpful online review? A study of customer reviews on Amazon.com. MIS Quarterly, 34(1), 185-200.
Pandit, N.R. (1996). The creation of theory: A recent application of the grounded theory method. The Qualitative Report, 2(4). Retrieved from:
http://www.nova.edu/ssss/QR/QR2-4/pandit.html
Park, C., &; Lee, T.M. (2009). Information direction, website reputation and eWOM effect: A moderating role of product type. Journal of Business Research, 62, 61-67.
Peng, K., &; Nisbett, R.E. (1999). Culture, dialectics, and reasoning about contradiction. American Psychologist, 54(9), 741-754.
Richins, M.L., &; Root-Shaffer, T. (1988). The role of evolvement and opinion leadership in consumer word-of-mouth: An implicit model made explicit. Advances in Consumer Research, 15, 32-36.
Rotter, J.B. (1954). Social learning and clinical psychology. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice Hall.
Rotter, J.B. (1966). Generalized expectancies for internal versus external control of reinforcement. Psychological Monographs, 80(1), 1-28.
Sen, S., &; Lerman, D. (2007). Why are you telling me this? An examination into negative consumer reviews on the web. Journal of Interactive Marketing, 21(4), 76–94.
Singer, J.L. (1966). Daydreaming: An introduction to the experimental study of inner experience. New York: Random House.
Smith, P.B. (2004). Acquiescent response bias as an aspect of cultural communication style. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 35, 50-61.
Strahilevitz, M., &; Meyers, J.G. (1998). Donations to charity as purchase incentives: How well they work may depend on what you are trying to sell. Journal of Consumer Research, 24(4), 434-446.
Sundaram, D.S., Mitra, K., &; Webster, C. (1998). Word-of-mouth communications: A motivational analysis. Advances in Consumer Research, 25(1), 527-531.
Sweeney, J.C., Soutar, G.N., &; Mazzarol, T. (2008). Factors influencing word of mouth effectiveness: Receiver perspectives. European Journal of Marketing, 42(3/4), 344-364.
Werde, B. (2003). The web diarist as a pitchman. New York Times. Retrieved from: http://www.nytimes.com/2003/03/27/technology/the-web-diarist-as-pitchman.html
Wittgenstein, L. (1968). Philosophical investigations. (G.E.M. Amscombe, Trans.) New York: MacMillan. (Original work published 1953).