政大機構典藏-National Chengchi University Institutional Repository(NCCUR):Item 140.119/131377

政大機構典藏-National Chengchi University Institutional Repository(NCCUR):Item 140.119/131377

English | 正體中文 | 简体中文 | Post-Print筆數 : 27 | Items with full text/Total items : 113311/144292 (79%)
Visitors : 50937542 Online Users : 941

RC Version 6.0 © Powered By DSPACE, MIT. Enhanced by NTU Library IR team.

Scope

please add "double quotation mark" for query phrases to get precise results

please goto advance search for comprehansive author search

Adv. Search

Home ‧ Login ‧ Upload ‧ Help ‧ About ‧ Administer

Goto mobile version

政大典藏 > College of Communication > Master`s Program in Communication > Theses > Item 140.119/131377

Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/131377

Title:	無聲的參與？ Twitch 遊戲實況「潛水者」參與行為之初探 Silent participants? The exploration of lurker’s participation in Twitch.tv
Authors:	謝廷昊 Hsieh, Ting-Hao
Contributors:	劉慧雯 Liu, Hui-Wen 謝廷昊 Hsieh, Ting-Hao
Keywords:	Twitch遊戲實況參與文化洗頻機緣混合研究方法浮潛者潛水者 Twitch video game live streaming Participatory culture Spam Affordances Mixed methods Spammer Lurker
Date:	2020
Issue Date:	2020-08-03 18:47:26 (UTC+8)
Abstract:	閱聽人如何參與媒介活動？過去在閱聽人研究中，觀眾透過主動詮釋、解讀的方式參與媒介內容，而在Jenkins的「參與文化」概念中，個體的展演性被強調，迷成為主要的討論重點，隨後「參與文化」的討論逐漸從「個人表現」（individual expression）轉往「社群參與」（community involvement），在社群的集體參與中，參與者的分工觀點被強調，集體是一個網絡化、組織化的參與結構。本研究以Twitch遊戲實況為研究田野，整理出五種遊戲實況中常見參與類型，其中包含潛水者，以及選擇性參與社群活動的浮潛者（spammer），而為了「看見」潛水者與浮潛者，本研究以「混合研究方法」（mixed methods）作為主要的操作手段，理解遊戲實況中的觀眾參與聊天室的行為模式與動機；文獻上，則以「參與文化」（participatory culture）、「機緣」（affordances）、「洗頻、刷頻」，（spam），以及「潛水者」（lurker）等相關理論或田野現象作為主要概念架構，理解在平台的技術條件中，潛水者的多樣參與行為如何延伸既有關於「潛水者」與「社群參與」的討論。研究結果發現，潛水者除了以不發言作為界定其身分的標準外，本研究認為「於意義中潛水」也是另一種重新指認潛水者的方式，此於「洗頻、刷頻」時浮出水面的參與行為使得個人特殊性逐漸消失，使得浮潛者在個人參與層次呈現出「不參與」的姿態；此外，「搭便車」的觀點在潛水者跨平台的行動中也受到挑戰，並同時也印證了參與文化所強調的跨平台匯流的參與行動。而對於完全不（在平台內、外）發言的潛水者來說，無聲的參與突顯出他們以舊媒介的參與模式做為新媒介的使用方式，也就是將直播、實況當作電視進行收看，此參與行為使實況成為一種電視文類，也使過去對「觀眾」此強調與媒介內容直接接觸的概念轉往「觀」「眾」此強調觀看其他觀眾參與行動的意義轉向。 How does audience engage in media activities? From audience study, we know audience can reform the meaning of the texts through his/her own social experience, and in the concept of “participatory culture” which was proposed by Henry Jenkins, audience participation means not only “individual expression” but “community involvement” which puts more emphasis on collective intelligence or collaborative problem-solving. In this sense, community stands for the organized structure of participation, everyone matters. In line with that, Twitch live streaming platform as participatory culture encounters some individual actions or participations that cannot be integrated into the whole culture. Those participants include “lurker” and “spammer”. The study takes “mixed methods” to find out the reason why they want to engage into the community in this way, and how those participations extend the concept of lurker. The study results find out “lurking in the meaning” can be another way to identify lurkers, and those who choose to join the community during “spam” amplify the collective participation while decreasing their individuality, making their participations barely visible. Furthermore, the concept of “free rider” along with lurkers cannot refer to them anymore when we consider the participation of cross-platform, this also confirm the theory of participatory culture which lights up the importance of platform convergence and audience mobility. As for the one who never leaves any messages neither in nor out of the Twitch.tv, the reason why they keep silent participation is they view live streaming as television. In other words, they use the old way (as viewers not active participants) to consume new media, which recontextualizes video game live streaming as a television genre, and those who participate into video game live streaming community will be part of this genre as well. To sum up, lurkers are not only the viewer of media content, but the viewer of whole participatory culture.
Reference:	中文部分 Twitch（2019）。〈隨選影片〉，《Twitch》。取自https://help.twitch.tv/s/article/videos-on-demand 王宜燕（2012）。〈閱聽人研究實踐轉向理論初探〉，《新聞學研究》，113， 39-75。王道還、程樹德、傅大為、錢永祥（1989）。《科學革命的結構》。台北：遠流。（原書：Kuhn, T. S.(1962). The structure of scientific revolutions. The University. of Chicago Press.）吳姿嫻（2014）。《從中間開始：論日常中的媒介使用》，政治大學新聞研究所博士論文。宋曜廷、潘佩妤（2010）。〈混合研究在教育研究的應用〉，《教育科學研究期刊》，55（4），97-130。巫晉瑋（2019）。《打是情，罵是愛？網路紅人與粉絲負向關係之權力行使研究》，政治大學傳播碩士學位學程碩士學位論文。李明穎（2012）。〈網路潛水者的公民參與實踐之探索：以「野草莓運動」為例〉，《新聞學研究》，112，77-116。林照真、劉昌德（2019年10月23日）。〈林照真Ｘ劉昌德｜假新聞管制與言論自由〉。取自卓越新聞網https://www.feja.org.tw/48601 俞蘋（2015）。〈全臺上網成年人中超過七成曾分享線上影音 / 影片〉，《科技部傳播調查資料庫》。取自 http://www.crctaiwan.nctu.edu.tw/ResultsShow_detail.asp?RS_ID=38 胡幼慧（1996）。《質性研究：理論、方法及本土女性研究實例》。台北：巨流。范麗娟（1994）。〈深度訪談簡介〉，《戶外遊憩研究》，7（2），25-35。夏慧馨（2017）。《媒介／文本／人？以塊莖思維探析彈幕觀影情境》，政治大學傳播碩士學位學程碩士學位論文。翁書婷（2015）。〈[專訪] Twitch來勢洶洶！臺灣流量擠進全球Top 5，直播內容擴及音樂〉，《數位時代》。取自https://www.bnext.com.tw/article/35925/BN-2015-04-10-195645-40 馬傑偉、孟樊（1998）。《電視文化理論》。新北：揚智。區國強（2013）。〈新聞攝影之「見證」技術：從演化之角度探討當代電視新聞影像〉，「2013中華傳播學會」發表之論文，新北市輔仁大學。張玉佩（2009）。〈遊戲、人生：從線上遊戲玩家探討網路世界與日常生活的結合〉，《新聞學研究》，98，1-45。張玉佩（2011）。〈線上遊戲之閱聽人愉悅經驗探索〉，《中華傳播學刊》，19， 61-96。張玉珮（2003）。《當代閱聽人研究之理論重構：試論閱聽人的思辨能力》，政治大學新聞研究所博士論文。張鐵志（2018年12月7日）。〈張鐵志：台式民粹主義的崛起〉。取自蘋果新聞網https://tw.appledaily.com/forum/20181207/3CH3HZ6GD3Z3QLGD6WWI26HSGA/ 張鐵志（2019年4月17日）。〈張鐵志：韓國瑜與柯文哲－台式民粹主義的兩種類型〉。取自上報https://www.upmedia.mg/news_info.php?SerialNo=61397 曹家榮（2009）。〈MSN Messenger的媒介訊息：從符擔性看MSN人際關係展演〉，《資訊社會研究》，14，133-166。陳芸芸、劉慧雯（2011）。《McQuail`s大眾傳播理論》。台北：韋伯文化。（原書：Denis McQuail, (2000). McQuail’s Mass Communication Theory. Sage Publications Inc.). 陳盈帆（2007）。〈反迷的「迷群」？從對抗情緒中產生的反迷閱聽人之探索─以反偶像社群為例〉，「2007中華傳播學會」發表之論文，新北市淡江大學。陳雪雲（2004）。〈媒介與我：閱聽人研究回顧與展望〉，翁秀琪（編），《臺灣傳播學的想像》（上），頁305-345。台北：巨流。陳憶慈、陳斯穎（2015）。〈情殺新聞與第三人效果相關性研究〉，「2015中華傳播學會」發表之論文，高雄市義守大學。凱絡媒體週報（2016）。〈專題報告：電玩實況主，新世代的廣告代言人〉，《凱絡媒體週報》。取自https://www.bnext.com.tw/article/35925/BN-2015-04-10-195645-40 曾靉（2017）。〈1,600萬臺灣人都在看！Twitch營運長Kevin Lin談遊戲直播的下一個未來〉，《數位時代》。取自https://www.bnext.com.tw/article/42943/twitch-focus-on-mobile-app-and-content-in-2017 黃厚銘（2009）。〈邁向速度存有論─即時性電子媒介時代的風險〉。《新聞學研究》，101，139-175。黃勝淋（2017）。《重返集體狂歡的年代？探索Live實況直播的意涵─以遊戲實況為例》，政治大學傳播碩士學位學程碩士學位論文。黃葳威（1999年4月）。〈虛擬閱聽人？從回饋觀點分析臺灣地區收視/聽率調查的現況─以潤利、紅木、尼爾遜公司為例〉。「1999傳播管理理論與實務研討會」發表之論文。廖明中（2017）。《遊戲實況的粉絲經濟及其矛盾》，臺灣大學社會學研究所學位論文。劉倚帆（2011）。〈初探智慧型手機如何改變社會時空經驗〉，「2011中華傳播學會」發表之論文，新竹市交通大學。劉慧雯（2017）。〈建構倫理閱聽人：試論社群媒體使用者的理論意涵〉，《新聞學研究》，131，87-125。蔡佶良（2017）。《遊戲實況的運作機制：閱聽人、社群價值、資本邏輯》，交通大學傳播研究所學位論文。謝志偉、王慧玉（2010）。《混合方法研究導論》。台北：心理。（原書：Creswell, JW, & Plano Clark, VL (2007). Designing and conducting mixed methods research.Sage.）鍾蔚文、陳百齡、陳順孝（2006）。〈數位時代的技藝：提出一個分析架構〉，《中華傳播學刊》，10，233-263。羅世宏（2004）。《文化研究：理論與實踐》。台北：五南。（原書：Barker, C. (2003). Cultural studies: Theory and practice. Sage.）英文部分 Abercrombie, N., & Longhurst, B. J. (1998). Audiences: A sociological theory of performance and imagination. SAGE Publications Ltd. Alasuutari, P. (1999). Introduction: Three phases of reception studies. In Pertti Alasuutari (Ed.), Rethinking the media audience. (pp.1-21). Sage. Alfaro, M. J. M. (1996). Intertextuality: Origins and development of the concept. Atlantis, 18, 268-285. Allen, R. C., & Hill, A. (Eds.). (2004). The television studies reader. Psychology Press. Andrejevic, M. (2009). The twenty-ﬁrst-century telescreen. In Turner, G., & Tay, J. (Eds.), Television studies after TV: Understanding television in the post-broadcast era. (pp. 41-50). Routledge. Ang, I (1985). Watching Dallas: Soap opera and the melodramatic imagination. London,UK: Methuen & Co. Ltd. Brown, M. E. (1987). The politics of soaps: Pleasure and feminine empowerment. Australian Journal of Cultural Studies, 4(2), 1-25. Chemero, A. (2003). An outline of a theory of affordances. Ecological psychology, 15(2), 181-195. Cheung, G., & Huang, J. (2011). Starcraft from the stands: Understanding the game spectator. Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, 763-772. Consalvo, M. (2017). When paratexts become texts: De-centering the game-as-text. Critical Studies in Media Communication, 34(2), 177-183. Coppa, F. (2014). Fuck yeah, fandom is beautiful. The Journal of Fandom Studies, 2(1), 73-82. Davison, W. P. (1983). The third-person effect in communication. Public opinion quarterly, 47(1), 1-15. Deleuze, G., & Guattari, F. (1987). A thousand plateaus: Capitalism and schizophrenia. (B. Massumi. Trans.). Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press. (Original work published 1991). Dorfman, M. H. (1996). Evaluating the interpretive community: Evidence from expert and novice readers. Poetics, 23(6), 453-470. Downs, J., Vetere, F., & Smith, W. (2015). Differentiated participation in social videogaming. Proceedings of the Annual Meeting of the Australian Special Interest Group for Computer Human Interaction, 92-100. Edelmann, N. (2013). Reviewing the definitions of “lurkers” and some implications for online research. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking, 16(9), 645-649. Fish, S. E. (1980). Is there a text in this class?: The authority of interpretive communities. Harvard University Press. Fiske, J. (1987).Television Culture, Methuen, London. Fiske, J. (1989). Understanding Popular Culture. Boston, Unwin Hyman. Fiske, J. (1992). The cultural economy of fandom. In Lewis, L. A. (Eds.), The adoring audience: Fan culture and popular media (pp. 30-49). Routledge. Ford, C., Gardner, D., Horgan, L. E., Liu, C., Tsaasan, A. M., Nardi, B., & Rickman, J. (2017). Chat speed op pogchamp: Practices of coherence in massive twitch chat. Proceedings of the 2017 CHI Conference Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems, 858-871. Gandolfi, E. (2016). To watch or to play, it is in the game: The game culture on Twitch. tv among performers, plays and audiences. Journal of Gaming & Virtual Worlds, 8(1), 63-82. Georgen, C., Duncan, S. C., & Cook, L. (2015). From lurking to participatory spectatorship: Understanding affordances of the Dota 2 noob stream. Proceedings of CSCL 2015, 2, 581-585. Gerbner, G., & Gross, L. (1976). Living with television: The violence profile. Journal of communication, 26(2), 172-199. Gibson, J. J. (1979). The ecological approach to visual perception. Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin Company. Gray, J. (2003). New audiences, new textualities: Anti-fans and non-fans. International journal of cultural studies, 6(1), 64-81. Gray, J., Sandvoss, C., & Harrington, C. L. (Eds.). (2017). Fandom: Identities and communities in a mediated world. NYU Press. Grossberg, L. (1987). The in-difference of television. Screen, 28(2), 28-46. Hall, S. (1973). Encoding/decoding. In S. Hall, D. Hobson, A. Lowe, & P. Willis (Eds.)(2005) Culture, media, language (pp. 117-127). New York, NY: Routledge. Hamilton, W. A., Garretson, O., & Kerne, A. (2014). Streaming on twitch: fostering participatory communities of play within live mixed media. Proceedings of the 32nd annual ACM conference on Human factors in computing systems, 1315-1324. Harrington, C. & Denise D. Bielby (1995). Soap fans: Pursuing pleasure and making meaning in everyday life. Temple University Press. Hills, M. (2002). Fan cultures. Psychology Press. Hoijer, B. (1995) Genreforestiillningar och tolkningar av beriittande i tv [Genre Expectations and Interpretations of Television Narrationl. University of Stockholm, Department of Journalism, Media and Communication, Report No. 1. Höijer, B. (1999). To be an audience. In Pertti Alasuutari (Ed.), Rethinking the media audience. (pp.179-194). Sage. Honeychurch, S., A. Bozkurt, L. Singh, and A. Koutropoulos. (2017). Learners on the Periphery: Lurkers as Invisible Learners. European Journal of Open, Distance and E-Learning (EURODL), 20(1), 191–211. Hutchby, I. (2001). Technologies, texts and affordances. Sociology, 35(2), 441-456. Ivankova, N. V., Creswell, J. W., & Stick, S. L. (2006). Using mixed-methods sequential explanatory design: From theory to practice. Field methods, 18(1), 3-20. Jenkins , H. (1988). Star Trek rerun, reread, rewritten: Fan writing as textual poaching. Critical Studies in Media Communication, 5(2), 85-107. Jenkins, H. (1992). Textual poachers: Television fans and participatory culture. Routledge. Jenkins, H. (2006). Convergence Culture: Where Old and New Media Collide. NYU Press. Jenkins, H. (2009). Confronting the challenges of participatory culture: Media education for the 21st century. Mit Press. Jenkins, H., Ford, S., & Green, J. (2013). Spreadable media: Creating value and meaning in a networked culture. NYU press. Jenkins, H., Ito, M., & Boyd, D. (2015). Participatory Culture in a Networked Era: A Conversation on Youth, Learning, Commerce, and Politics. Polity. Jenson, J. (1992). Fandom as pathology: The consequences of characterization. In Lewis, L. A. (Eds.), The adoring audience: Fan culture and popular media (pp. 9-29). Routledge. Katz, E., & Liebes, T. (1990). Interacting with" Dallas": Cross cultural readings of American TV. Canadian Journal of Communication, 15(1), 45-65. Kristeva, J. (1980). Desire in language: A semiotic approach to literature and art. Columbia University Press. Lee, Y. W., Chen, F. C., & Jiang, H. M. (2006). Lurking as participation: A community perspective on lurkers` identity and negotiability. Proceedings of the 7th international conference on Learning sciences, 404-410. Liao, S., & Chou, E. Y. (2012). Intention to adopt knowledge through virtual communities: posters vs lurkers. Online information review, 36(3), 442-461. Lin, H., & Sun, C. T. (2011). The role of onlookers in arcade gaming: Frame analysis of public behaviors. Convergence, 17(2), 125-137. Livingstone, S. M. (1990). Interpreting a television narrative: How different viewers see a story. Journal of Communication, 40(1), 72-85. Ludvigsen, M., & Veerasawmy, R. (2010). Designing technology for active spectator experiences at sporting events. Proceedings of the 22nd Conference of the Computer-Human Interaction Special Interest Group of Australia on Computer-Human Interaction, 96-103. May, D. B., & Etkina, E. (2002). College physics students’ epistemological self-reflection and its relationship to conceptual learning. American Journal of Physics, 70(12), 1249-1258. McCombs, M. E., & Shaw, D. L. (1972). The agenda-setting function of mass media. Public opinion quarterly, 36(2), 176-187. McCombs, M., & Reynolds, A. (2002). News influence on our pictures of the world. In J. Bryant & D. Zillmann (Eds.), Media effects: Advances in theory and research (p. 1–18). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers. Morley, D. G. (1980). The nationwide audience. London : British Film Institute. Nagy, P., & Neff, G. (2015). Imagined affordance: Reconstructing a keyword for communication theory. Social Media+ Society, 1(2), 1-9. Napoli, P. M., & Kosterich, A. (2017). Measuring fandom: Social TV analytics and the integration of fandom into television audience measurement. In Gray, J., Sandvoss, C., & Harrington, C. L. (Eds.), Fandom: Identities and communities in a mediated world (pp. 402-418). NYU Press. Nielsen, J. (2006). Participation inequality: Encouraging more users to contribute. JakobNielsen’s Alberbox, October 9, 2006. Retrieved from http://www.useit.com/alertbox/participation_inequality.html Noelle-Neumann, E. (1974). The spiral of silence a theory of public opinion. Journal of communication, 24(2), 43-51. Nonnecke, B., & Preece, J. (2003). Silent participants: Getting to know lurkers better. In Lueg, C., & Fisher, D. (Eds.), From Usenet to CoWebs: interacting with social information spaces (pp. 110-132). Springer, London. Phang, C. W., Kankanhalli, A., & Sabherwal, R. (2009). Usability and sociability in online communities: A comparative study of knowledge seeking and contribution. Journal of the association for Information Systems, 10(10), 721-747. Postigo, H. (2016). The socio-technical architecture of digital labor: Converting play into youtube money. New media & society, 18(2), 332-349. Rafaeli, S., Ravid, G., & Soroka, V. (2004). De‐lurking in virtual communities: A social communication network approach to measuring the effects of social and cultural capital. In R.H. Sprague (Chair), Proceedings of the 37th Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS 04), (pp. 10). Los Alamitos, CA: IEEE. Ridings, C., Gefen, D., Arinze B. (2006). Psychological barriers: lurker and poster motivation and behavior in online communities. Communications of the Association for Information Systems, 18, 329-354. Salomon, G. (1979). Interaction of media, cognition, and learning: An exploration of how symbolic forms cultivate mental skills and affect knowledge acquisition. San Francisco, Jossey-Bass Publishers. Sjöblom, M., Törhönen, M., Hamari, J., & Macey, J. (2019). The ingredients of Twitch streaming: Affordances of game streams. Computers in Human Behavior, 92, 20-28. Spigel, L., & Olsson, J. (2004). Television after TV: Essays on a medium in transition. Duke University Press. Spilker, H. S., Ask, K., & Hansen, M. (2018). The new practices and infrastructures of participation: How the popularity of twitch. tv challenges old and new ideas about television viewing. Information, Communication & Society, 23(4), 605-620. Stoffregen, T. A. (2003). Affordances as properties of the animal-environment system. Ecological psychology, 15(2), 115-134. Sun, N., Rau, P. P. L., & Ma, L. (2014). Understanding lurkers in online communities: A literature review. Computers in Human Behavior, 38, 110-117. Tagarelli, A., & Interdonato, R. (2018). Mining lurkers in online social networks: Principles, models, and computational methods. Springer. Takahashi, M., Fujimoto, M., & Yamasaki, N. (2003). The active lurker: Influence of an in-house online community on its outside environment. Proceedings of the 2003 international ACM SIGGROUP conference on Supporting group work, 1-10. Taylor, T. L. (2018). Watch me play: Twitch and the rise of game live streaming. Princeton University Press. Whitworth, B., & Whitworth, E. (2004). Spam and the social-technical gap. Computer, 37(10), 38-45. Williams, R. & Gilbert, A (2018). The State of Fandom Studies 2018: Rebecca Williams and Anne Gilbert (Pt. 1). Confessions of An Aca-Fan, April 3, 2018. Retrieved from http://henryjenkins.org/blog/2018/4/3/the-state-of-fandom-studies-2018-rebecca-williams-and-anne-gilbert-pt-1 Williams, R. (2015) Post-object fandom: Television, identity and self-narrative. London: Bloomsbury. Zhang, W., & Storck, J. (2001). Peripheral members in online communities. Proceedings of AMCIS 2001, 586-593
Description:	碩士國立政治大學傳播學院傳播碩士學位學程 106464037
Source URI:	http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0106464037
Data Type:	thesis
DOI:	10.6814/NCCU202000941
Appears in Collections:	[Master`s Program in Communication] Theses

Files in This Item:

File	Description	Size	Format
403701.pdf		5855Kb	Adobe PDF2	114	View/Open

All items in 政大典藏 are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved.

社群 sharing

著作權政策宣告 Copyright Announcement

1.本網站之數位內容為國立政治大學所收錄之機構典藏，無償提供學術研究與公眾教育等公益性使用，惟仍請適度，合理使用本網站之內容，以尊重著作權人之權益。商業上之利用，則請先取得著作權人之授權。
The digital content of this website is part of National Chengchi University Institutional Repository. It provides free access to academic research and public education for non-commercial use. Please utilize it in a proper and reasonable manner and respect the rights of copyright owners. For commercial use, please obtain authorization from the copyright owner in advance.

2.本網站之製作，已盡力防止侵害著作權人之權益，如仍發現本網站之數位內容有侵害著作權人權益情事者，請權利人通知本網站維護人員(nccur@nccu.edu.tw)，維護人員將立即採取移除該數位著作等補救措施。
NCCU Institutional Repository is made to protect the interests of copyright owners. If you believe that any material on the website infringes copyright, please contact our staff(nccur@nccu.edu.tw). We will remove the work from the repository and investigate your claim.

DSpace Software Copyright © 2002-2004 MIT & Hewlett-Packard / Enhanced by NTU Library IR team Copyright © - Feedback