臺灣博碩士論文加值系統

近年來，隨著社群媒體不斷地成長，許多賣家開始透過社群媒體作為交易平台，這種類型的活動特別在Facebook上的粉絲專頁最為廣泛。在台灣，有數以千計的粉絲專頁，而每個粉絲專頁都有各自營業的特色。當使用者想要在不同特色的Facebook粉絲專頁上與賣家交易時，信任將會扮演不可或缺的角色。因此，為了要更加了解信任在Facebook粉絲專頁所扮演的角色，此研究分成兩個階段。第一個階段為探索性研究，目的在於確認使用者是否能區別不同程度表現的Facebook粉絲專頁。第二個階段為實證性研究，目的在於證明不同程度表現的粉絲專頁以及消費者購買經驗會對信任形成有不同程度的調節效果。
在第一階段的研究中，目的為透過信任來探索使用者是否可以區分不同程度表現的粉絲專頁。我們將研究中所蒐集的粉絲專頁依據粉絲人數、有無官方網站、貼文性質以及其他資訊分類成高等表現、中等表現以及低等表現。研究中所探索的信任為科技信任信念(technology trust beliefs)及人際信任信念(interpersonal trust beliefs)。此外，我們也同時研究粉絲專頁的知覺可用性(perceived usability)，因為知覺可用性對信任在某些層面上有些許相關。此研究使用問卷調查法蒐集必要的資料，而最後的統計結果指出粉絲專頁的表現的確會造成不同程度的使用者信任以及知覺可用性，尤其高階表現的粉絲專頁與低階表現者的差異最為顯著。
在第二階段的研究中，我們探索買家、賣家與平台因素在不同程度表現的粉絲專頁中對信任信念所產生的影響。其中，買家的因素為信任傾向(Disposition to trust)、賣家的因素為網站提供者特性(Web seal provider attribute)、平台的因素為粉絲專頁上所表現出的聲譽(Reputation)。此外，我們認為賣家的信任信念會對自己的行為意圖(Behavioral intention)有所影響。根據第一階段的研究結果，我們設計高等表現與低等表現的兩個粉絲專頁的情境以作為調節變數，並且也將消費者是否在粉絲專頁上有過購買的經驗作為另一個調節變數。
第二階段共有285位受測者參與此研究。進一步分析之後，研究結果指出粉絲專頁不論是在高等表現或者低等表現的情境中，信任傾向、網站提供者特性對信任信念有顯著且正面的影響。然而，聲譽對信任信念的影響在高等表現及低等表現的情境中皆不顯著。而信任信念對於行為意圖在這兩個情境中亦為顯著。當分析過程中以購買經驗作為調節變數時，研究結果顯示當樣本皆為在粉絲專頁上有購物經驗的時候，信任傾向、網站提供者特性及聲譽對於信任信念的影響皆是顯著且正向，相反地，當樣本為無購買經驗者，除了信任傾向的結果為顯著外，網站提供者特性及聲譽皆為不顯著。除此之外，我們同時操弄情境及經驗兩者為調節變數時，研究結果指出當受測者有購買經驗的時候，在兩者情境中所有的因素關係皆為顯著。然而，當受測者為無購買經驗的時候，除了信任傾向對於信任信念的影響及信任信念對於行為意圖的影響為顯著之外，其餘因素關係皆不顯著。
研究結果發現，賣家對於聲譽及網站提供者特性上會有不同的感知進而影響信任信念。我們認為買家會有這樣的感受差異主要原因是因為不同表現的粉絲專頁上所呈現的不同商品資訊、賣方資訊、貼文資訊、服務品質及與賣家與買家間的互動關係所造成的，這樣的結果進而影響買方的信任信念。

As social media grows rapidly in recent years, many sellers begin to use it as the transaction platform, and it obviously happens on Facebook fans-page. However, there are thousands of Facebook fans-pages in Taiwan and they have different operating performance. If users tend to involve in transacting with sellers on Facebook fans-pages, trust will play an important role among different levels of performance. Therefore, this research can be divided into two stages. Stage 1 was exploratory study, we primarily concerned on whether users can distinguish Facebook fans-page among different levels of performances. Stage 2 was empirical study in order to primarily explore trusting beliefs among different levels performance of Facebook fans-pages.
In the stage 1, we explored whether can distinguish different performance of Facebook fans-page through trust. The levels performance of Facebook fans-pages which we collected can be classified into high performance, medium performance, and low performance level according to their number of fans, official website, postings, and other information. The trust concept in this study includes technology trust beliefs and interpersonal trust beliefs. Technology trust beliefs can be divided into functionality belief and reliability belief. Moreover, this study adds perceived usability in examination in addition to it is somehow related with trust according to prior research. The questionnaire survey was conducted to collect necessary data. The results suggested the participants showed significantly different responses among different Facebook fans-pages with different performance levels. Specifically, high performance Facebook fans-pages resulted in significantly higher trust beliefs and perceived usability than low performance fans-pages. However, the results also showed that users can’t clearly distinguish medium performance fans-page from high performance and low performance one.
In the stage 2, we explored the influence of buyer, seller, and platform factors on trusting beliefs among different levels of Facebook fans-page performance. About factors, the buyer’s factor is disposition to trust, the seller’s factor is Web seal provider attribute, and platform’s factor is reputation which will have influence on the buyer’s formation of trusting beliefs. In addition, we proposed that trusting beliefs will have effect toward behavioral intention which indicated the buyer satisfaction, fans-page quality, and repeat visits, recommendation, and positive comments. According to the results of stage 1, we designed two different levels of high performance and low performance conditions as a moderating effect to explore these factors. Moreover, experience is also a moderating effect, because the subjects who have experience in purchasing on Facebook fans-page will realize and distinguish the process of different performance condition design more than the subject who have no experience.
Among 285 subjects participated in this research to fill out the questionnaire of two different performance conditions. As the moderating effect is performance conditions, the findings showed that disposition to trust and Web seal provider attribute have significantly positive effects on trusting beliefs among high performance and low performance conditions. However, reputation is not significant in high performance condition or low performance condition. Trusting beliefs toward behavioral intention is also significant among two performance conditions. As the moderating effect is experience, the findings showed that disposition to trust, Web seal provider attribute, and reputation all have significantly positive effects on trusting beliefs according to the subjects who have experience in purchasing on Facebook fans-page. In contrast, except disposition to trust is significant, Web seal provider attribute and reputation are not significant. According to examination of performance condition and experience as moderating effects, the findings indicated that all factors are significant among high performance condition or low performance condition as the subject have experience. However, except disposition to trust is significant, the other factors are all not significant.
Our contribution is that buyers may have different perception of reputation and Web seal provider attribute. The explanation is that buyers may perceive diversity of product information, store information, postings, service quality and interaction with sellers among two different performance, and the perceptions will have influence on the buyers’ formation of trusting beliefs.

Chapter 1. Introduction 1
1.1. Research Background 1
1.2. Research Motivation and Purpose 2
1.2.1 Stage 1: The Exploratory Study 2
1.2.2 Stage 2: The Empirical Study 4
Chapter 2. Literature Review 6
2.1 The Exploratory Study 6
2.1.1 Technology Trust Beliefs 7
2.1.2 Interpersonal Trust Beliefs 8
2.1.3. Perceived Usability 8
2.2 The Empirical Study 10
2.2.1 Trust 10
2.2.2 Trusting Beliefs 11
2.2.3 Antecedents of Trust 12
2.2.3.1 Buyer Factor: Disposition to Trust 12
2.2.3.2 Seller Factor: Web Seal Provider Attributes 14
2.2.3.3 Platform Factor: Reputation 15
Chapter 3. Methodology 16
3.1 Stage 1: The Exploratory Study 16
3.1.1 Research Framework 16
3.1.2 Scenario Design 17
3.1.3 Operational Definitions 18
3.1.3.1 Technology Trust Beliefs - Functionality Belief 18
3.1.3.2 Technology Trust Beliefs - Reliability Belief 18
3.1.3.3 Interpersonal Trust Beliefs 19
3.1.3.4 Perceived Usability 19
3.1.4 Data Collection 19
3.1.5 Data Analysis 21
3.1.5.1 Sample Characteristics 21
3.1.5.2 Test of Reliability and Validity 21
3.1.6 Research Results of Stage 1 24
3.2 The Empirical Study 25
3.2.1 The Research Model 25
3.2.2 Instrument Development 26
3.2.3 Manipulation Check of Perceived Usability 27
3.2.4 Experiment Design 27
3.2.5 Moderating Effects 28
3.2.5.1 Performance of Facebook Fans-page 28
3.2.5.2 Experience in Purchasing on Facebook Fans-page 28
3.2.6 Data Collection 29
Chapter 4. Data Analysis 31
4.1 Sample Characteristic 31
4.2 Test of Reliability and Validity 31
4.3 Results of Regression Analysis for Performance Condition 34
4.4 Results of Regression Analysis for Experience 36
4.5 Results of Regression Analysis for Performance Condition and Experience 36
Chapter 5. Conclusion 40
5.1 The Exploratory Study of Stage 1 40
5.2 The Empirical Study of Stage 2 41
5.3 Contribution 42
References 44
Appendix 1. The Questionnaires of the Exploratory Study 48
Appendix 2. The Questionnaire of the Empirical Study 50
Appendix 3. Condition Design and Process 52
3.1 High Performance Condition 52
3.2 Low Performance Condition 60

1.Anderson, E., & Weitz, B. (1989). Determinants of continuity in conventional industrial channel dyads. Marketing science, 8(4), 310-323.
2.Bausch, S., & Han, L. (2006). Podcasting gains an important foothold among us adult online population, according to nielsen/netratings. Retrieved June, 2, 2008.
3.Benbasat, I., & Wang, W. (2005). Trust in and adoption of online recommendation agents. Journal of the Association for Information Systems,6(3), 4.
4.Bhattacherjee, A. (2002). Individual trust in online firms: Scale development and initial test. Journal of management information systems, 19(1), 211-241.
5.Casaló, L., Flavián, C., & Guinalíu, M. (2008). The role of perceived usability, reputation, satisfaction and consumer familiarity on the website loyalty formation process. Computers in Human behavior, 24(2), 325-345.
6.Davis, F. D. (1989). Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS quarterly, 319-340.
7.Doney, P. M., & Cannon, J. P. (1997). An examination of the nature of trust in buyer-seller relationships. The Journal of Marketing, 35-51.
8.Dryer, D. C. (1999). Getting personal with computers: how to design personalities for agents. Applied Artificial Intelligence, 13(3), 273-295.
9.Dwyer, C., Hiltz, S., & Passerini, K. (2007). Trust and privacy concern within social networking sites: A comparison of Facebook and MySpace. AMCIS 2007 Proceedings, 339.
10.Flavián, C., Guinalíu, M., & Gurrea, R. (2006). The role played by perceived usability, satisfaction and consumer trust on website loyalty. Information & Management, 43(1), 1-14.
11.Fogel, J., & Nehmad, E. (2009). Internet social network communities: Risk taking, trust, and privacy concerns. Computers in human behavior, 25(1), 153-160.
12.Friedman, B., & Millett, L. I. (1997). Reasoning about computers as moral agents: A research note (p. 205). Stanford: CSLI Publications.
13.Ganesan, S. (1994). Determinants of long-term orientation in buyer-seller relationships. The Journal of Marketing, 1-19.
14.Gefen, D. (2000). E-commerce: the role of familiarity and trust. Omega, 28(6), 725-737.
15.Gefen, D. (2002). Customer loyalty in e-commerce. Journal of the association for information systems, 3(1), 2.
16.Gefen, D., Karahanna, E., & Straub, D. W. (2003). Trust and TAM in online shopping: an integrated model. MIS quarterly, 27(1), 51-90.
17.Herbig, P., Milewicz, J., & Golden, J. (1994). A model of reputation building and destruction. Journal of Business Research, 31(1), 23-31.
18.Jarvenpaa, S. L., Tractinsky, N., & Saarinen, L. (1999). Consumer trust in an internet store: a cross‐cultural validation. Journal of Computer‐Mediated Communication, 5(2), 0-0.
19.Johnson-George, Cynthia, and Walter C. Swap. "Measurement of specific interpersonal trust: Construction and validation of a scale to assess trust in a specific other." Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 43.6 (1982): 1306.
20.Kaplan, S. E., & Nieschwietz, R. J. (2003). A Web assurance services model of trust for B2C e-commerce. International Journal of Accounting Information Systems, 4(2), 95-114.
21.Kennedy, M., & Sakaguchi, T. (2009). Trust in social networking: Definitions from a global, cultural viewpoint. Social Networking Communities and E-Dating Services: Concepts and Implications, 225-238.
22.Lankton, N. K., & McKnight, D. H. (2011). What does it mean to trust Facebook?: examining technology and interpersonal trust beliefs. ACM SIGMIS Database, 42(2), 32-54.
23.Lippert, S. K. (2001). An exploratory study into the relevance of trust in the context of information systems technology..
24.Muir, B. M., & Moray, N. (1996). Trust in automation. Part II. Experimental studies of trust and human intervention in a process control simulation.Ergonomics, 39(3), 429-460.
25.Mandel, N., & Johnson, E. (1999). Constructing Preferences Online: Can Web Pages Change What You Want?. Unpublished manuscript, University of Pennsylvania.
26.Mayer, R. C., Davis, J. H., & Schoorman, F. D. (1995). An integrative model of organizational trust. Academy of management review, 20(3), 709-734.
27.McKnight, D. H., Cummings, L. L., & Chervany, N. L. (1998). Initial trust formation in new organizational relationships. Academy of Management review, 23(3), 473-490.
28.McKnight, D. H. & Chervany N. L. (2001). What trust means in e-commerce customer relationships: an interdisciplinary conceptual typology. International journal of electronic commerce, 6(2), 35-59.
29.McKnight, D. H., Choudhury, V., & Kacmar, C. (2002). Developing and validating trust measures for e-commerce: An integrative typology. Information systems research, 13(3), 334-359.
30.McKnight, D. H. (2005). Trust in information technology. The Blackwell encyclopedia of management, 7, 329-331.
31.Nielsen, J. Usability 101. <http://www.useit.com/alertbox/20030825.html>.
32.Rousseau, D. M., Sitkin, S. B., Burt, R. S., & Camerer, C. (1998). Not so different after all: A cross-discipline view of trust. Academy of management review, 23(3), 393-404.
33.Shneiderman, B. (2000). Designing trust into online experiences. Communications of the ACM, 43(12), 57-59
34.Wu, C. S., Cheng, F. F., & Yen, D. C. (2014). The Influence of Seller, Auctioneer, and Bidder Factors on Trust in Online Auctions. Journal of Organizational Computing and Electronic Commerce, 24(1), 36-57.
35.Zeithaml, V. A., Berry, L. L., & Parasuraman, A. (1996). The behavioral consequences of service quality. The Journal of Marketing, 31-46.