Skip navigation

DSpace

機構典藏 DSpace 系統致力於保存各式數位資料(如:文字、圖片、PDF)並使其易於取用。

點此認識 DSpace
DSpace logo
English
中文
  • 瀏覽論文
    • 校院系所
    • 出版年
    • 作者
    • 標題
    • 關鍵字
    • 指導教授
  • 搜尋 TDR
  • 授權 Q&A
    • 我的頁面
    • 接受 E-mail 通知
    • 編輯個人資料
  1. NTU Theses and Dissertations Repository
  2. 管理學院
  3. 資訊管理學系
請用此 Handle URI 來引用此文件: http://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/jspui/handle/123456789/97495
完整後設資料紀錄
DC 欄位值語言
dc.contributor.advisor吳玲玲zh_TW
dc.contributor.advisorLing-Ling Wuen
dc.contributor.author李名涵zh_TW
dc.contributor.authorMing-Han Lien
dc.date.accessioned2025-07-02T16:09:46Z-
dc.date.available2025-07-03-
dc.date.copyright2025-07-02-
dc.date.issued2025-
dc.date.submitted2025-06-18-
dc.identifier.citationAi, J., Gursoy, D., Liu, Y., & Lv, X. (2022). Effects of offering incentives for reviews on trust: Role of review quality and incentive source. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 100, 103101.
Bacharach, M., & Gambetta, D. (2001). Trust in signs. Trust in society, 2, 148-184.
Barreto, A. M. (2014). The word-of-mouth phenomenon in the social media era. International Journal of Market Research, 56(5), 631-654.
Bataineh, A. Q. (2015). The impact of perceived e-WOM on purchase intention: The mediating role of corporate image. International Journal of marketing studies, 7(1), 126.
Brown, J. J., & Reingen, P. H. (1987). Social ties and word-of-mouth referral behavior. Journal of Consumer research, 14(3), 350-362.
Cheung, C. M.-Y., Sia, C.-L., & Kuan, K. K. (2012). Is this review believable? A study of factors affecting the credibility of online consumer reviews from an ELM perspective. Journal of the Association for Information Systems, 13(8), 2.
Cho, S., Huh, J., & Faber, R. J. (2014). The influence of sender trust and advertiser trust on multistage effects of viral advertising. Journal of advertising, 43(1), 100-114.
Clark, M. S., & Mils, J. (1993). The difference between communal and exchange relationships: What it is and is not. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 19(6), 684-691.
Cook, K. S., Cheshire, C., Rice, E. R., & Nakagawa, S. (2013). Social exchange theory. Handbook of social psychology, 61-88.
Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (1987). The support of autonomy and the control of behavior. Journal of personality and social psychology, 53(6), 1024.
Dhanesh, G. S., & Duthler, G. (2019). Relationship management through social media influencers: Effects of followers’ awareness of paid endorsement. Public relations review, 45(3), 101765.
Erkan, I., & Evans, C. (2016). The influence of eWOM in social media on consumers’ purchase intentions: An extended approach to information adoption. Computers in Human Behavior, 61, 47-55.
Facebook People You May Know AI system. (2024). from https://transparency.meta.com/features/explaining-ranking/fb-people-you-may-know/?referrer=1
Folkes, V. S. (1988). Recent attribution research in consumer behavior: A review and new directions. Journal of Consumer research, 14(4), 548-565.
Gaziano, C., & McGrath, K. (1986). Measuring the concept of credibility. Journalism quarterly, 63(3), 451-462.
Godes, D., & Mayzlin, D. (2004). Using online conversations to study word-of-mouth communication. Marketing science, 23(4), 545-560.
Godes, D., Mayzlin, D., Chen, Y., Das, S., Dellarocas, C., Pfeiffer, B., . . . Verlegh, P. (2005). The firm's management of social interactions. Marketing letters, 16, 415-428.
Gvili, Y., & Levy, S. (2018). Consumer engagement with eWOM on social media: The role of social capital. Online information review, 42(4), 482-505.
Gvili, Y., & Levy, S. (2023). I Share, Therefore I Trust: A moderated mediation model of the influence of eWOM engagement on social commerce. Journal of business research, 166, 114131.
Harvey, P., & Martinko, M. J. (2009). Attribution theory and motivation. Organizational behavior, theory and design in health care, 143-158.
Horning, M. A. (2017). Interacting with news: Exploring the effects of modality and perceived responsiveness and control on news source credibility and enjoyment among second screen viewers. Computers in Human Behavior, 73, 273-283.
Hussain, S., Song, X., & Niu, B. (2020). Consumers’ motivational involvement in eWOM for information adoption: The mediating role of organizational motives. Frontiers in psychology, 10, 3055.
Jeong, E., & Jang, S. S. (2011). Restaurant experiences triggering positive electronic word-of-mouth (eWOM) motivations. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 30(2), 356-366.
Jung, J., Bapna, R., Golden, J. M., & Sun, T. (2020). Words matter! Toward a prosocial call-to-action for online referral: Evidence from two field experiments. Information Systems Research, 31(1), 16-36.
Kelley, H. H. (1973). The processes of causal attribution. American psychologist, 28(2), 107.
Kim, H., & Song, J. (2010). The quality of word‐of‐mouth in the online shopping mall. Journal of Research in Interactive Marketing, 4(4), 376-390.
Kim, S. J., Maslowska, E., & Tamaddoni, A. (2019). The paradox of (dis) trust in sponsorship disclosure: The characteristics and effects of sponsored online consumer reviews. Decision support systems, 116, 114-124.
Kleinginna Jr, P. R., & Kleinginna, A. M. (1981). A categorized list of motivation definitions, with a suggestion for a consensual definition. Motivation and emotion, 5(3), 263-291.
Kozinets, R. V., De Valck, K., Wojnicki, A. C., & Wilner, S. J. (2010). Networked narratives: Understanding word-of-mouth marketing in online communities. Journal of marketing, 74(2), 71-89.
Kumar, A., & Gera, N. (2023). Examining Social Media Usage, Brand Image and E-WOM (Quantity, Quality and Credibility) as Determinants of Purchase Intention. Parikalpana KIIT Journal of Management, 19(1), 150-168.
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.
Li, X., & Wu, L. (2018). Herding and social media word-of-mouth: Evidence from Groupon. Forthcoming at MISQ.
Litvin, S. W., Goldsmith, R. E., & Pan, B. (2008). Electronic word-of-mouth in hospitality and tourism management. Tourism management, 29(3), 458-468.
Liu, D., Ainsworth, S. E., & Baumeister, R. F. (2016). A meta-analysis of social networking online and social capital. Review of General Psychology, 20(4), 369-391.
López, M., Sicilia, M., & Verlegh, P. W. (2022). How to motivate opinion leaders to spread e-WoM on social media: monetary vs non-monetary incentives. Journal of Research in Interactive Marketing, 16(1), 154-171.
Lou, C. (2022). Social media influencers and followers: Theorization of a trans-parasocial relation and explication of its implications for influencer advertising. Journal of advertising, 51(1), 4-21.
Martin, W. C. (2014). Independent versus incentivized word-of-mouth: Effects on listeners. Academy of Marketing Studies Journal, 18(1), 261.
Meta. (2024). Facebook People You May Know AI system. from https://transparency.meta.com/features/explaining-ranking/fb-people-you-may-know/?referrer=1
Molm, L. D., Takahashi, N., & Peterson, G. (2000). Risk and trust in social exchange: An experimental test of a classical proposition. American journal of sociology, 105(5), 1396-1427.
Nekmat, E., & Gower, K. K. (2012). Effects of disclosure and message valence in online word-of-mouth (eWOM) communication: implications for integrated marketing communication. International Journal of Integrated Marketing Communications, 4(1), 85-98.
Ohanian, R. (1990). Construction and validation of a scale to measure celebrity endorsers' perceived expertise, trustworthiness, and attractiveness. Journal of advertising, 19(3), 39-52.
Oliver, R. L. (1977). Effect of expectation and disconfirmation on postexposure product evaluations: An alternative interpretation. Journal of applied psychology, 62(4), 480.
Park, C., & Lee, T. M. (2009). Information direction, website reputation and eWOM effect: A moderating role of product type. Journal of business research, 62(1), 61-67.
Reimer, T., & Benkenstein, M. (2016). Altruistic eWOM marketing: More than an alternative to monetary incentives. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 31, 323-333.
Reimer, T., & Benkenstein, M. (2018). Not just for the recommender: How eWOM incentives influence the recommendation audience. Journal of business research, 86, 11-21.
Reingen, P. H., & Kernan, J. B. (1986). Analysis of referral networks in marketing: Methods and illustration. Journal of Marketing Research, 23(4), 370-378.
Reyes-Menendez, A., Saura, J. R., & Martinez-Navalon, J. G. (2019). The impact of e-WOM on hotels management reputation: exploring tripadvisor review credibility with the ELM model. Ieee Access, 7, 68868-68877.
Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000). Intrinsic and extrinsic motivations: Classic definitions and new directions. Contemporary educational psychology, 25(1), 54-67.
Ryu, G., & Feick, L. (2007). A penny for your thoughts: Referral reward programs and referral likelihood. Journal of marketing, 71(1), 84-94.
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.
Snoj, B., Korda, A. P., & Mumel, D. (2004). The relationships among perceived quality, perceived risk and perceived product value. Journal of Product & Brand Management, 13(3), 156-167.
Social Media in Taiwan - 2023 Stats & Platform Trends. (2023). Retrieved May 9, 2023, from https://oosga.com/social-media/twn/
Steffes, E. M., & Burgee, L. E. (2009). Social ties and online word of mouth. Internet research, 19(1), 42-59.
Verma, S., & Yadav, N. (2021). Past, present, and future of electronic word of mouth (EWOM). Journal of Interactive Marketing, 53(1), 111-128.
Wang, Q., Mao, Y., Zhu, J., & Zhang, X. (2018). Receiver responses to referral reward programs in social networks. Electronic Commerce Research, 18, 563-585.
West, M. D. (1994). Validating a scale for the measurement of credibility: A covariance structure modeling approach. Journalism quarterly, 71(1), 159-168.
Wilcox, K., & Stephen, A. T. (2013). Are close friends the enemy? Online social networks, self-esteem, and self-control. Journal of Consumer research, 40(1), 90-103.
Wirtz, J., & Chew, P. (2002). The effects of incentives, deal proneness, satisfaction and tie strength on word‐of‐mouth behaviour. International journal of service industry management, 13(2), 141-162.
Wu, P. C., & Wang, Y. C. (2011). The influences of electronic word‐of‐mouth message appeal and message source credibility on brand attitude. Asia Pacific Journal of Marketing and Logistics, 23(4), 448-472.
Xu, M., Yu, Z., & Tu, Y. (2023). I Will Get a Reward, Too: When Disclosing the Referrer Reward Increases Referring. Journal of Marketing Research, 60(2), 355-370.
Zeithaml, V. A. (1988). Consumer perceptions of price, quality, and value: a means-end model and synthesis of evidence. Journal of marketing, 52(3), 2-22.
Zhang, K. Z., Zhao, S. J., Cheung, C. M., & Lee, M. K. (2014). Examining the influence of online reviews on consumers' decision-making: A heuristic–systematic model. Decision support systems, 67, 78-89.
-
dc.identifier.urihttp://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/jspui/handle/123456789/97495-
dc.description.abstract本研究旨在探討社群媒體上電子口碑(eWOM)分享動機對消費者感知eWOM品質及推薦者可信度的影響。電子口碑分享的動機可分為內在動機(如享受分享的樂趣)和外在動機(如追求金錢回報)。當消費者感知到電子口碑分享動機為內在動機時,其對電子口碑資訊品質與推薦者可信度的評價會高於感知電子口碑分享動機為外在動機的消費者。在本研究中,將此現象稱為動機效應(motivation effect)。
本研究進一步探討社交連結強度(強連結與弱連結)及動機透明度(透明與不透明)如何調節動機效應。我們假設社交強度正向調節動機效應。當消費者與推薦者之間為強連結時,動機效應強於弱連結的情境。此外我們假設動機透明度負向調節動機效應。當動機透明時,動機效應弱於動機不透明的情境。
本研究採用實驗法驗證假設,實驗結果顯著支持動機效應的假設,然而社交連結強度未顯著調節動機效應。實驗結果部分支持動機透明度的調節效應:當依變項為eWOM品質,動機透明度顯著負向調節動機效應;但當依變項為推薦者可信度時,負向調節效應未達顯著水準。綜合研究結果,企業可優先鼓勵具有內在動機的口碑分享;相較於人際關係,eWOM訊息本身的內容價值更為關鍵,此外,若能審慎揭露推薦動機,亦有助於提升eWOM的整體影響力。
zh_TW
dc.description.abstractThis study examines how the motivation behind electronic word-of-mouth (eWOM) on social media influences receivers' perceptions of eWOM quality and the credibility of the recommender. eWOM motivations are categorized into intrinsic (e.g., joy of sharing) and extrinsic (e.g., monetary rewards). When eWOM is perceived as intrinsically motivated, receivers tend to evaluate the message as higher in quality and view the recommender as more credible than when the motivation is perceived as extrinsic. This phenomenon is referred to as the “motivation effect.”
This study further investigates how social tie strength (strong vs. weak) and motivation transparency (transparent vs. non-transparent) moderate the motivation effect. We hypothesize that social tie strength positively moderates the motivation effect, such that the effect is stronger when the receiver and the recommender share a strong tie compared to a weak tie. In addition, we hypothesize that motivation transparency negatively moderates the motivation effect, meaning the effect is weaker when the motivation is disclosed than when it is not.
An experimental design was used to test the hypotheses. Results confirmed the motivation effect: participants rated eWOM quality and recommender credibility higher under intrinsic motivation. However, social tie strength did not significantly moderate this effect, suggesting that the value of the eWOM content itself is more influential than interpersonal closeness. Motivation transparency partially moderated the effect on perceived eWOM quality, weakening the motivation effect when the motivation was disclosed. No significant moderation was found for recommender credibility.
These findings suggest that companies should prioritize encouraging intrinsically motivated eWOM. Compared to social ties, the perceived value of the message plays a more crucial role. Additionally, carefully disclosing motivation can help enhance the overall impact of eWOM.
en
dc.description.provenanceSubmitted by admin ntu (admin@lib.ntu.edu.tw) on 2025-07-02T16:09:46Z
No. of bitstreams: 0
en
dc.description.provenanceMade available in DSpace on 2025-07-02T16:09:46Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 0en
dc.description.tableofcontents中文摘要 i
Abstract ii
Table of Contents iv
List of Figures v
List of Tables vi
Chapter 1 Introduction 1
Chapter 2 Literature Review 4
2.1 Perceived Quality of eWOM and Credibility of Recommender 4
2.2 Perceived Motivation of eWOM 5
2.3 Social tie strength 8
2.4 Motivation transparency 10
Chapter 3 Research Methodology 13
3.1 Test Material 14
3.1.1 Motivation of eWOM 14
3.1.2 Social Tie Strength 15
3.1.3 Motivation Transparency 15
3.1.4 Social media platform and product selection 15
3.2 Dependent Variable 16
3.3 Participants and Procedure 16
Chapter 4 Empirical Results 18
4.1 Reliability of Measurement and Manipulation Check 18
4.2 Hypothesis Testing 19
Chapter 5 Conclusion and Discussion 28
5.1 Conclusion 28
5.2 Limitation and Future Research 30
Reference 33
-
dc.language.isoen-
dc.subject社交連結強度zh_TW
dc.subject動機透明度zh_TW
dc.subject推薦者可信度zh_TW
dc.subject感知電子口碑品質zh_TW
dc.subject電子口碑分享動機zh_TW
dc.subjectmotivation transparencyen
dc.subjectmotivation of eWOMen
dc.subjectperceived quality of eWOMen
dc.subjectcredibility of recommenderen
dc.subjectsocial tie strengthen
dc.title廣告抑或利他?社群媒體口碑分享動機對消費者反應之影響:社交連結強度與動機透明度的調節效果zh_TW
dc.titleAdvertisement or altruism? the effects of perceived motivation of sharing eWOM: Social tie and motivation transparency as the moderatorsen
dc.typeThesis-
dc.date.schoolyear113-2-
dc.description.degree碩士-
dc.contributor.oralexamcommittee翁崇雄;簡怡雯zh_TW
dc.contributor.oralexamcommitteeChorng-Shyong Ong;Yi-Wen Chienen
dc.subject.keyword電子口碑分享動機,感知電子口碑品質,推薦者可信度,社交連結強度,動機透明度,zh_TW
dc.subject.keywordmotivation of eWOM,perceived quality of eWOM,credibility of recommender,social tie strength,motivation transparency,en
dc.relation.page37-
dc.identifier.doi10.6342/NTU202501203-
dc.rights.note同意授權(全球公開)-
dc.date.accepted2025-06-19-
dc.contributor.author-college管理學院-
dc.contributor.author-dept資訊管理學系-
dc.date.embargo-lift2025-07-03-
顯示於系所單位:資訊管理學系

文件中的檔案:
檔案 大小格式 
ntu-113-2.pdf1.16 MBAdobe PDF檢視/開啟
顯示文件簡單紀錄


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。

社群連結
聯絡資訊
10617臺北市大安區羅斯福路四段1號
No.1 Sec.4, Roosevelt Rd., Taipei, Taiwan, R.O.C. 106
Tel: (02)33662353
Email: ntuetds@ntu.edu.tw
意見箱
相關連結
館藏目錄
國內圖書館整合查詢 MetaCat
臺大學術典藏 NTU Scholars
臺大圖書館數位典藏館
本站聲明
© NTU Library All Rights Reserved