請用此 Handle URI 來引用此文件：
http://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/jspui/handle/123456789/90622完整後設資料紀錄
| DC 欄位 | 值 | 語言 |
|---|---|---|
| dc.contributor.advisor | 陳品豪 | zh_TW |
| dc.contributor.advisor | Pin-Hao Chen | en |
| dc.contributor.author | 郭姸希 | zh_TW |
| dc.contributor.author | Yen-Si Kuo | en |
| dc.date.accessioned | 2023-10-03T16:54:08Z | - |
| dc.date.available | 2023-11-09 | - |
| dc.date.copyright | 2023-10-03 | - |
| dc.date.issued | 2023 | - |
| dc.date.submitted | 2023-07-26 | - |
| dc.identifier.citation | Allen, V. L. (1965). Situational factors in conformity. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 2, pp. 133–175). Elsevier.
Asch, S. E. (1955). Opinions and Social Pressure. Scientific American, 193(5), 31–35. Baek, E. C., & Parkinson, C. (2022). Shared understanding and social connection: Integrating approaches from social psychology, social network analysis, and neuroscience. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 16(11), e12710. Bar-Tal, D. (2000). Shared beliefs in a society: Social psychological analysis. SAGE Publications. Baumeister, R. F., & Leary, M. R. (1995). The need to belong: Desire for interpersonal attachments as a fundamental human motivation. Psychological Bulletin, 117(3), 497–529. Beran, T., Drefs, M., Kaba, A., Al Baz, N., & Al Harbi, N. (2015). Conformity of responses among graduate students in an online environment. The Internet and Higher Education, 25, 63–69. Betsch, T., Plessner, H., Schwieren, C., & Gütig, R. (2001). I like it but I don’t know why: A value-account approach to implicit attitude formation. Personality & Social Psychology Bulletin, 27(2), 242–253. Bond, C. F., Jr, & Titus, L. J. (1983). Social facilitation: A meta-analysis of 241 studies. Psychological Bulletin, 94(2), 265–292. Bond, R. (2005). Group Size and Conformity. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations: GPIR, 8(4), 331–354. Boothby, E. J., Clark, M. S., & Bargh, J. A. (2014). Shared experiences are amplified. Psychological Science, 25(12), 2209–2216. Bruder, M., Dosmukhambetova, D., Nerb, J., & Manstead, A. S. R. (2012). Emotional signals in nonverbal interaction: dyadic facilitation and convergence in expressions, appraisals, and feelings. Cognition & Emotion, 26(3), 480–502. Buck, R., Losow, J. I., Murphy, M. M., & Costanzo, P. (1992). Social facilitation and inhibition of emotional expression and communication. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 63(6), 962–968. Campbell, J. D., & Fairey, P. J. (1989). Informational and normative routes to conformity: The effect of faction size as a function of norm extremity and attention to the stimulus. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 57(3), 457–468. Charness, N., Yoon, J. S., Souders, D., Stothart, C., & Yehnert, C. (2018). Predictors of attitudes toward autonomous vehicles: The roles of age, gender, prior knowledge, and personality. Frontiers in Psychology, 9, 2589. Cheong, J. H., Molani, Z., Sadhukha, S., & Chang, L. J. (2020). Synchronized affect in shared experiences strengthens social connection.i.org/10.31234/osf.io/bd9wn Cialdini, R. B., & Goldstein, N. J. (2004). Social influence: Compliance and conformity. Annual Review of Psychology, 55, 591–621. Crawford, J. L., & Haaland, G. A. (1972). Predecisional information seeking and subsequent conformity in the social influence process. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 23(1), 112–119. Cunningham, W. A., & Zelazo, P. D. (2007). Attitudes and evaluations: A social cognitive neuroscience perspective. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 11(3), 97–104. Cunningham, W. A., Zelazo, P. D., Packer, D. J., & Van Bavel, J. J. (2007). The iterative reprocessing model: A multilevel framework for attitudes and evaluation. Social Cognition, 25(5), 736–760. Davis, J. L., & Rusbult, C. E. (2001). Attitude alignment in close relationships. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 81(1), 65–84. de Bruin, D., van Baar, J. M., Rodríguez, P. L., & FeldmanHall, O. (2023). Shared neural representations and temporal segmentation of political content predict ideological similarity. Science Advances, 9(5), eabq5920. Echterhoff, G., Higgins, E. T., & Levine, J. M. (2009). Shared reality: Experiencing commonality with others’ inner states about the world. Perspectives on Psychological Science: A Journal of the Association for Psychological Science, 4(5), 496–521. Fazio, R. H., Chen, J.-M., McDonel, E. C., & Sherman, S. J. (1982). Attitude accessibility, attitude-behavior consistency, and the strength of the object-evaluation association. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 18(4), 339–357. Festinger, L. (1950). Informal social communication. Psychological Review, 57(5), 271–282. Fiske, S.T. (2007). Core social motivations, a historical perspective: Views from the couch, consciousness, classroom, computers, and collectives. In W. Gardner & J.Y. Shah (Eds.), Handbook of motivation science (pp. 3–22). New York: Guilford. Fiske, S. T. (2018). Social beings: Core motives in social psychology. John Wiley & Sons. Fiske, S. T., Cuddy, A. J. C., & Glick, P. (2007). Universal dimensions of social cognition: Warmth and competence. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 11(2), 77–83. Flynn, F. J. (2005). Having an open mind: the impact of openness to experience on interracial attitudes and impression formation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 88(5), 816–826. Gabbert, F., Memon, A., & Allan, K. (2003). Memory conformity: Can eyewitnesses influence each other’s memories for an event? Applied Cognitive Psychology, 17(5), 533–543. Gardner, W. L., Pickett, C. L., & Brewer, M. B. (2000). Social exclusion and selective memory: How the need to belong influences memory for social events. Personality & Social Psychology Bulletin, 26(4), 486–496. Garrett, R. K. (2009). Politically motivated reinforcement seeking: Reframing the selective exposure debate. The Journal of Communication, 59(4), 676–699. Garrett, R. K., Carnahan, D., & Lynch, E. K. (2013). A turn toward avoidance? Selective exposure to online political information, 2004–2008. Political Behavior, 35(1), 113–134. Gaumer, C. J., & LaFief, W. C. (2005). Social facilitation. Journal of Food Products Marketing, 11(1), 75–82. Goeree, J. K., & Yariv, L. (2015). Conformity in the lab. Journal of the Economic Science Association, 1(1), 15–28. Hardin, C. D., & Conley, T. D. (2001). A relational approach to cognition: Shared experience and relationship affirmation in social cognition. In G. B. Moskowitz (Ed.), Cognitive social psychology: The Princeton symposium on the legacy and future of social cognition (pp. 3-17). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.[Google Scholar]. Hardin, C. D., & Higgins, E. T. (1996). Shared reality: How social verification makes the subjective objective. In R. M. Sorrentino (Ed.), Handbook of motivation and cognition (Vol. 3, pp. 28–84). The Guilford Press, xxvi. Herman, C. P. (2015). The social facilitation of eating. A review. Appetite, 86, 61–73. Higgins, E. T. (2011). Sharing inner states: A defining feature of human motivation. Grounding Sociality: Neurons, Mind, and Culture, 149–174. Higgins, E. T., & McCann, C. D. (1984). Social encoding and subsequent attitudes, impressions, and memory: “Context-driven” and motivational aspects of processing. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 47(1), 26–39. Houston, D. A., & Fazio, R. H. (1989). Biased processing as a function of attitude accessibility: Making objective judgments subjectively. Social Cognition, 7(1), 51–66. Jarrold, W., Mundy, P., Gwaltney, M., Bailenson, J., Hatt, N., McIntyre, N., Kim, K., Solomon, M., Novotny, S., & Swain, L. (2013). Social attention in a virtual public speaking task in higher functioning children with autism. Autism Research: Official Journal of the International Society for Autism Research, 6(5), 393–410. Jolly, E. (2018). Pymer4: Connecting R and python for linear mixed modeling. Journal of Open Source Software, 3(31), 862. Jolly, E., Tamir, D. I., Burum, B., & Mitchell, J. P. (2019). Wanting without enjoying: The social value of sharing experiences. PloS One, 14(4), e0215318. Jost, J. T., Ledgerwood, A., & Hardin, C. D. (2008). Shared reality, system justification, and the relational basis of ideological beliefs. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 2(1), 171–186. Klucharev, V., Hytönen, K., Rijpkema, M., Smidts, A., & Fernández, G. (2009). Reinforcement learning signal predicts social conformity. Neuron, 61(1), 140–151. Krosnick, J. A. (2002). The challenges of political psychology: Lessons to be learned from research on attitude perception. Thinking about Political Psychology., 354, 115–152. Lee, V., & Wagner, H. (2002). The effect of social presence on the facial and verbal expression of emotion and the interrelationships among emotion components. Journal of Nonverbal Behavior, 26(1), 3–25. Mallinson, D. J., & Hatemi, P. K. (2018). The effects of information and social conformity on opinion change. PloS One, 13(5), e0196600. McGraw, K. M., & Dolan, T. M. (2007). Personifying the state: Consequences for attitude formation. Political Psychology, 28(3), 299–327. McKelvey, W., & Kerr, N. H. (1988). Differences in conformity among friends and strangers. Psychological Reports, 62(3), 759–762. McKelvie. (2007). Measuring attitude toward capital punishment and right-wing authoritarianism: Psychometric properties of two short instruments. New Developments in Psychological Testing. https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Stuart-Mckelvie-2/publication/304998367 Merton, R. K. (1948). The self-fulfilling prophecy. The Antioch Review, 8(2), 193–210. Michaeli, M., & Spiro, D. (2015). Norm conformity across societies. Journal of Public Economics, 132, 51–65. Miller, D. T., & Turnbull, W. (1986). Expectancies and interpersonal processes. Annual Review of Psychology, 37(1), 233–256. Olson, M. A., & Fazio, R. H. (2001). Implicit attitude formation through classical conditioning. Psychological Science, 12(5), 413–417. Peters, U. (2022). What is the function of confirmation bias? Erkenntnis. An International Journal of Analytic Philosophy, 87(3), 1351–1376. Pickett, C. L., Gardner, W. L., & Knowles, M. (2004). Getting a cue: The need to belong and enhanced sensitivity to social cues. Personality & Social Psychology Bulletin, 30(9), 1095–1107. Reid, C. A., Davis, J. L., & Green, J. D. (2019). Whatever it takes: Attitude alignment in close relationships following third-party rejection. The British Journal of Social Psychology / the British Psychological Society, 58(4), 853–868. Riemann, R., Grubich, C., Hempel, S., Mergl, S., & Richter, M. (1993). Personality and attitudes towards current political topics. Personality and Individual Differences, 15(3), 313–321. Rosander, M., & Eriksson, O. (2012). Conformity on the internet–the role of task difficulty and gender differences. Computers in Human Behavior, 28, 1587-1595. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0747563212000891 Rossignac-Milon, M., Bolger, N., Zee, K. S., Boothby, E. J., & Higgins, E. T. (2021). Merged minds: Generalized shared reality in dyadic relationships. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 120(4), 882–911. Rossignac-Milon, M., & Higgins, E. T. (2018). Epistemic companions: Shared reality development in close relationships. Current Opinion in Psychology, 23, 66–71. Sherif, M. (1935). A study of some social factors in perception. Archives of Psychology (Columbia University), 187, 60. Shook, N. J., Fazio, R. H., & Richard Eiser, J. (2007). Attitude generalization: Similarity, valence, and extremity. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 43(4), 641–647. Todorov, A., Said, C. P., Engell, A. D., & Oosterhof, N. N. (2008). Understanding evaluation of faces on social dimensions. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 12(12), 455–460. Toelch, U., & Dolan, R. J. (2015). Informational and normative influences in conformity from a neurocomputational perspective. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 19(10), 579–589. Triplett, N. (1898). The dynamogenic factors in pacemaking and competition. The American Journal of Psychology, 9(4), 507–533. Van Bavel, J. J., Jenny Xiao, Y., & Cunningham, W. A. (2012). Evaluation is a dynamic process: Moving beyond dual system models. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 6(6), 438–454. Wheatley, T., Kang, O., Parkinson, C., & Looser, C. E. (2012). From mind perception to mental connection: Synchrony as a mechanism for social understanding. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 6(8), 589–606. Wijenayake, S., van Berkel, N., Kostakos, V., & Goncalves, J. (2020). Impact of contextual and personal determinants on online social conformity. Computers in Human Behavior, 108, 106302. Wright, D. B., & Villalba, D. K. (2012). Memory conformity affects inaccurate memories more than accurate memories. Memory, 20(3), 254–265. Zajonc, R. B. (1965). Social Facilitation. Science, 149(3681), 269–274. Zillich, A. F., & Guenther, L. (2021). Selective exposure to information on the internet: Measuring cognitive dissonance and selective exposure with eye-tracking. International Journal of Communication Systems, 15(0), 20. | - |
| dc.identifier.uri | http://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/jspui/handle/123456789/90622 | - |
| dc.description.abstract | 人類是社會性的動物，我們的世界觀不僅受到內在態度的影響，也會經由外在社會環境所塑造。本論文旨在探討社會環境與既存態度如何交互影響，共同形塑個體對於世界的認知與詮釋。研究者將社會環境分為互動對象和社會情境兩個因素，並設計一系列實驗來操弄參與者的觀影經驗，隨後評估對於影片角色的主觀感受，並以此來探討個體態度與社會環境立場間的一致性如何影響影片角色的觀感。在研究一中，參與者獨自觀看一部具有特定立場的電影。結果顯示當個體的態度與社會情境一致時，他們對角色的印象會與其他相同態度者更相似，暗示了個體會搜尋情境中符合自我立場的資訊。在研究二中，參與者會跟態度與自我相同或不同的個體一同觀影。結果發現個體態度和互動對象的態度的存在交互作用，顯示互動他人的態度將會影響個體對於影片中角色的主觀感受。研究三中更進一步檢驗個體對於互動對象態度的信念之影響。結果顯示當個體的態度與社會情境一致時，更傾向受到互動對象的被告知的態度影響。反之，當態度與情境不一致時，則更傾向受到互動對象的真實態度影響。這些結果說明，態度與社會情境不一致的個體，更敏於覺察周圍的所傳遞的社會訊號。總上所述，本研究結果突顯了人類的社會性本質，探討了人們如何從社會情境與互動對象中尋求資訊，進一步形塑對其所處世界之認知概念形成與詮釋。此外，本論文提供了對於互動心智中，個體的態度、社會情境、及互動對象之間的複雜動態關係更深入的理解。 | zh_TW |
| dc.description.abstract | Humans are inherently social beings, and our perspectives of the world are shaped not only by our internal attitudes but also by our external social surroundings. This dissertation explored the impact of social context and interactive others on individuals’ impressions of movie characters across three studies. Study 1 examined the influence of social context by having participants watch a movie alone. Our results revealed that individuals’ impressions aligned more closely with others who shared the same attitude when their attitudes closely matched the social context, emphasizing the importance of contextual information. Study 2 examined the combined effects of social context and interactive others by pairing participants with individuals who either shared or differed in their attitudes. The findings revealed an interaction effect between attitude and pairing condition, illustrating the impact of interactive others on their impressions. In Study 3, the influence of interactive others’ actual or informed attitudes was examined, indicating that individuals whose attitudes aligned with the social context were more influenced by their partners’ informed attitudes, while those with differing attitudes were more influenced by their partners’ actual attitudes. This suggests that individuals aware of the attitude-context mismatch are more responsive to social signals. Overall, these findings underscore the social nature of human beings in shaping their worldview based on their social surroundings. Moreover, our findings also provide a deeper understanding of complex dynamics between attitudes, social context, and interactive others. | en |
| dc.description.provenance | Submitted by admin ntu (admin@lib.ntu.edu.tw) on 2023-10-03T16:54:08Z No. of bitstreams: 0 | en |
| dc.description.provenance | Made available in DSpace on 2023-10-03T16:54:08Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 0 | en |
| dc.description.tableofcontents | Chinese Abstract i
English Abstract ii 1. Introduction 1 2. Methods 7 2.1. Participants 7 2.2. Experimental Procedure and Materials 8 2.3. Capturing In-Group Similarity on Character Impressions 12 3. Results 15 3.1. Study 1 15 3.2. Study 2 16 3.3. Study 3 19 4. Discussion 22 5. References 29 | - |
| dc.language.iso | en | - |
| dc.subject | 社會情境 | zh_TW |
| dc.subject | 互動心智 | zh_TW |
| dc.subject | 角色印象 | zh_TW |
| dc.subject | 態度 | zh_TW |
| dc.subject | interacting minds | en |
| dc.subject | attitude | en |
| dc.subject | social context | en |
| dc.subject | character impression | en |
| dc.title | 社會情境在互動心智中如何影響角色印象之個體間相似性 | zh_TW |
| dc.title | Interacting Minds: How Social Surroundings Influence Intersubject Similarity in Character Impression | en |
| dc.type | Thesis | - |
| dc.date.schoolyear | 111-2 | - |
| dc.description.degree | 碩士 | - |
| dc.contributor.oralexamcommittee | 郭郡羽;張仁和 | zh_TW |
| dc.contributor.oralexamcommittee | Chun-Yu Kuo;Jen-Ho Chang | en |
| dc.subject.keyword | 互動心智,社會情境,態度,角色印象, | zh_TW |
| dc.subject.keyword | interacting minds,social context,attitude,character impression, | en |
| dc.relation.page | 36 | - |
| dc.identifier.doi | 10.6342/NTU202302030 | - |
| dc.rights.note | 未授權 | - |
| dc.date.accepted | 2023-07-28 | - |
| dc.contributor.author-college | 理學院 | - |
| dc.contributor.author-dept | 心理學系 | - |
| 顯示於系所單位： | 心理學系 | |
文件中的檔案：
| 檔案 | 大小 | 格式 | |
|---|---|---|---|
| ntu-111-2.pdf 未授權公開取用 | 1.66 MB | Adobe PDF |
系統中的文件，除了特別指名其著作權條款之外，均受到著作權保護，並且保留所有的權利。