政大機構典藏-National Chengchi University Institutional Repository(NCCUR):Item 140.119/131495
English  |  正體中文  |  简体中文  |  Post-Print筆數 : 27 |  全文筆數/總筆數 : 113160/144130 (79%)
造訪人次 : 50753961      線上人數 : 721
RC Version 6.0 © Powered By DSPACE, MIT. Enhanced by NTU Library IR team.
搜尋範圍 查詢小技巧：
  • 您可在西文檢索詞彙前後加上"雙引號"，以獲取較精準的檢索結果
  • 若欲以作者姓名搜尋，建議至進階搜尋限定作者欄位，可獲得較完整資料
    •  進階搜尋
    政大機構典藏 > 商學院 > 資訊管理學系 > 學位論文 >  Item 140.119/131495


    請使用永久網址來引用或連結此文件: https://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/131495


    題名: 隱私悖論關聯決策機制之神經科學研究
    Decision Mechanism Associated with Privacy Paradox: A Neuroscience Study
    作者: 張佳賢
    Chang, Chia-Hsien
    貢獻者: 梁定澎
    林怡伶
    Liang, Ting-Peng
    Lin, Yi-Ling
    張佳賢
    Chang, Chia-Hsien
    關鍵詞: 隱私悖論
    隱私矛盾
    認知神經科學
    雙邊系統理論
    Privacy Paradox
    Privacy Concern
    Cognitive Neuroscience
    Dual Process Theory
    Decision Mechanism
    日期: 2020
    上傳時間: 2020-09-02 11:46:35 (UTC+8)
    摘要: 隨著時間推進，資訊科技是日益成熟與發達，人們生活不得不依賴資訊科技，擁有各種行動裝置，而使用行動裝置時，應用程式與之有緊密關係。大部分的行動應用程式要求使用者提供個人隱私資訊，方能繼續下載並使用該應用程式。過去許多研究中發現，人們總是宣稱對於其隱私資訊有所顧慮、不願輕易公開個人敏感資訊，然而在網路世界卻無法將這般說詞落實為真實行為，該隱私顧慮意圖與行為之間不一致之現象就被稱為隱私悖論（Privacy Paradox）。
    人的決策行為須經由大腦神經機制的運作，愈來愈多的行為研究利用神經科學工具來探討大腦在進行特定決策時的運作機制。過去探討隱私悖論之研究大多以問卷為研究方法，僅搜集受測者意圖或態度資料，為了有效提升真實行為之衡量，本研究欲透過過去學者利用功能性磁振造影（functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging, fMRI）研究搜集而來的受測者於App下載情境之意圖與行為實驗腦區資料進行深入分析。探討使用者在發生隱私悖論之下，在問卷調查所表示的隱私保護意圖與下載手機應用程式時的隱私揭露行為間的腦部神經反應機制差異，並且以過去與雙邊系統理論（Dual Process Theory）有關的決策機制實驗結果來解釋這些腦部運作機制。
    As information technology matures, people have become dependent upon various mobile devices. Mobile devices are deeply integrated with applications which request users to provide personal, private information before granting access to its services. Past literature has indicated that there is a general concern among users regarding their private information, and they would not easily disclose personal and sensitive information. They nevertheless reveal their personal information on Internet. Users make such reluctance difficult to transform into actual behavior. This discrepancy between user intention and behavior is described as the Privacy Paradox.
    With the advances of neuroscience tool, a growing amount of research started to investigate how brain makes privacy-sensitive decisions. Literature regarding on the Privacy Paradox tends to use the questionnaire survey as research method while it may barely collect the intention or attitude data of the participants. In order to effectively increase the assessment of real behavior, this research used brain intention and behavior data collected from previous research implementing functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging (fMRI), to highlight differences in the users` decision mechanisms revealed in questionnaire surveys on privacy protection intention on the one hand, and the privacy disclosure behaviors while downloading mobile device applications on the other. In addition, the outcomes of previous decision mechanism experiments using Dual Process Theory were imported to prove the difference between users` privacy protection intention and behavior. The objective of this research is to explore the mechanism of brain in paradoxical dichotomy between intention and behavior based on the Privacy Paradox, and to provide the explanation how such mechanism works using Dual Process Theory.
    參考文獻: 一、 中文部分
    [1] 王紹蓉，梁定澎，賴誼禎（2016）。揭露與隱藏之拉鋸：人氣需求與隱 私顧慮對臉書隱私管理行為之影響。中華民國資訊管理學報，23（4），445-472。
    [2] 侯雅晴（2019）。 隱私悖論的功能性磁振造影研究。 國立政治大學資訊管理學系碩士學位論文，1-127。
    [3] 徐亦礽（2016）。複合與簡單風險決策之神經差異。國立成功大學經濟學系碩士學位論文，1-69。
    [4] 楊亨利，邱顯貴（2003）。 線上購物網站值得消費者信任的因素之研究。 資訊社會研究，（5），139-174。
    [5] 劉家宏（2018）。以社群網路分析探討雙系統大腦決策機制。國立政治大學資訊管理學系碩士學位論文，1-72。
    [6] 賴立芸（2019）。資訊隱私悖論因素探討。國立政治大學資訊管理學系碩士學位論文，1-94。

    二、 英文部分
    [1] Acquisti, A. (2004). Privacy in electronic commerce and the economics of immediate gratification. EC `04: Proceedings of the 5th ACM Conference on Electronic Commerce, USA. 21-29.
    [2] Acquisti, A., Brandimarte, L., & Loewenstein, G. (2015). Privacy and human behavior in the age of information. Science, 347(6221), 509-514.
    [3] Acquisti, A., Cranor, L., Fong, C., & Tsai, J. (2006). What’s it for you? A survey of online privacy concerns and risk. NET Institute Working Paper. 06-29, 1-20.
    [4] Baddeley, A. (2000). The episodic buffer: a new component of working memory? Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 4(11), 417-423.
    [5] Barnes, S. B. (2006). A privacy paradox: Social networking in the United States. First Monday, 11(9).
    [6] Barth, S., & De Jong, M. D. T. (2017). The privacy paradox: Investigating discrepancies between expressed privacy concerns and actual online behavior - A systematic literature review. Telematics and Informatics, 34(7), 1038-1058.
    [7] Bata, H., Chen, Y., Pentina, I., & Zhang, L. (2016). Exploring privacy paradox in information-sensitive mobile app adoption: A cross-cultural comparison. Computers in Human Behavior, 65, 409-419.
    [8] Bian, H., Duan, J., Gao, L., Wei, Q., & Yuan, C. (2013). The Neural Basis of Social Status Recognition and Its Influencing Factors. Advances in Psychology, 3, 262-268.
    [9] Buchanan, T., Joinson, A. N., Reips, U.-D., & Schofield, C. B. P. (2010). Privacy, Trust, and Self-Disclosure Online. Taylor & Francis, 25(1), 1-24.
    [10] Courvoisier, D., Joinson, A. N., & Vasalou, A. (2010). Cultural differences, experience with social networks and the nature of “true commitment” in Facebook. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 68(10), 719-728.
    [11] Code, C., Cowell, S. F., Egan, G. F., Harasty, J., & Watson, J. D. (2000). The functional neuroanatomy of simple calculation and number repetition, a parametric PET activation study. NeuroImage, 12, 565-573.
    [12] Den Ouden, H., Frith, U., Frith, C., & Blakemore S.-J. (2005). Thinking about intentions. Neuroimage, 28, 787-96.
    [13] Dinev, T., & Hart, P. (2006). An Extended Privacy Calculus Model for E-Commerce Transactions. Information Systems Research, 17(1), 61-80.
    [14] Dinev, T., Smith, H. J., & Xu, H. (2011). Information Privacy Research: An Interdisciplinary Review. MIS quarterly, 35(4), 989-1015.
    [15] Evans, J. S. B. T. (2002). Logic and human reasoning: An assessment of the deduction paradigm. Psychological Bulletin, 128(6), 978-996.
    [16] Evans, J. S. B. T. (2003). In two minds: dual-process accounts of reasoning. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 7(10), 454-459.
    [17] Evans, J. S. B. T., Handley, S. J., Over, D. E., & Perham, N. (2002). Background beliefs in Bayesian inference. Memory & Cognition volume, 30, 179-190.
    [18] Fiddick, L., Cosmides, L., & Tooby, J. (2000). No interpretation without representation: the role of domain-specific representations and inferences in the Wason selection task. Cognition, 77(1), 1-79.
    [19] Fodor, J. (1983). The Modularity of Mind. The Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
    [20] Glover, G. H., Menon, V., Reiss, A. L., Rivera, S. M., & White, C. D. (2000). Dissociating prefrontal and parietal cortex activation during arithmetic processing. NeuroImage, 12, 357-365.
    [21] Grafman, J., Levin, H. S., Martinkowski, K., Mirvis, S., Rickard, T., Scheller, J., & Winslow M. (1996). Dyscalculia and Dyslexia after right hemisphere injury in infancy. Archives of Neurology, 53, 88-96.
    [22] Grafman, J., & Rickard, T. (2000). Acalculia. Issues in clinical and cognitive neuropsychology. Patient-based approaches to cognitive neuroscience, 345-351.
    [23] Gu, J., Xu, Y. C., Xu, H., Zhang, C., & Ling, H. (2017). Privacy concerns for mobile app download: An elaboration likelihood model perspective. Decision Support Systems, 94, 19-28.
    [24] Hughes-Roberts, T. (2013). 2013 International Conference on Social Computing. ISBN 978-0-7695-5137-1.
    [25] Kahneman, D. (2003). A perspective on judgment and choice: Mapping bounded rationality. American Psychologist, 58(9), 697-720.
    [26] Kokolakis, S. (2017). Privacy attitudes and privacy behaviour: A review of current research on the privacy paradox phenomenon. Computers & Security, 64, 122-134.
    [27] Lai, C. Y., Liang, T. P., & Hui, K. L. (2018). Information Privacy Paradox: A Neural Science Study. PACIS 2018 Proceedings, 247.
    [28] Lieberman, M. D. (2007). Social Cognitive Neuroscience: A Review of Core Processes. Annual Review of Psychology, 58, 259-289.
    [29] Magedanz, T., & Simoes, J. (2009). What happens when you mix social networks, contexts and mobile advertising in the same glass? International Journal of Mobile Marketing, 4(2), 52-60.
    [30] Mak, A. K. Y., Hu, Z.-G., Zhang, J. X., Xiao, Z.-W., & Lee, T. M. C. (2009). Neural correlates of regulation of positive and negative emotions: An fMRI study. Neuroscience Letters, 457(2), 101-106.
    [31] Martinez-Selva, J. M., Sanchez-Navarro, J.P., Bechara, A., & Roman, F. Brain mechanisms involved in decision making. REVIEW IN NEUROSCIENCE, 42(7), 411.
    [32] McLeod, P., Plunkett, K., & Rolls, E. T. (1998). Introduction to connectionist modelling of cognitive processes. Oxford University Press.
    [33] Metzger, M. J. (2007). Making sense of credibility on the Web: Models for evaluating online information and recommendations for future research. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology.
    [34] Mithen, S. (2002). Human evolution and the cognitive basis of science. The Cognitive Basis of Science. Cambridge University Press, 23-24.
    [35] Oaksford, M., & Chater N. (2001). The probabilistic approach to human reasoning. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 5(8), 349-357.
    [36] Ochsner, K. N., Knierim, K., Ludloow, D. H., Hanelin, J., Ramachandran, T., & Glover, G. (2004). Reflecting upon feelings: an MRI study of neural systems supporting the attribution of emotion to self and other. J Cogn Neurosci, 16, 1746-72.
    [37] Oomen, I., & Leenes, R. (2008). Privacy risk perceptions and privacy protection strategies. Policies and Research in Identity Management, Springer Verlag, Boston, 121-138.
    [38] Potzsch, S. (2008). Privacy Awareness: A Means to Solve the Privacy Paradox? I The Future of Identity in the Information Society, Springer-Verlag, Berlin Heidelberg, 226-236.
    [39] Smith, H. J., Milberg, S. J., & Burke, S. J. (1996). Information privacy: measuring individuals` concerns about organizational practices. MIS quarterly, 20(2), 167-196.
    [40] Stanovich, K. E., & West, R. F. (1998). Individual differences in framing and conjunction effects. Thinking & Reasoning, 4, 289-317.
    [41] Stutzman, F., Capra, R., & Thompson, J. (2011). Factors mediating disclosure in social network sites. Computers in Human Behavior, 27, 590-598.
    [42] Xu, H., Luo, X., Carroll, J. M., & Rosson, M. B. (2011). The personalization privacy paradox: An exploratory study of decision making process for location-aware marketing. Decision Support Systems, 51(1), 42-52.
    [43] Youn, S., & Hall, K. (2008). Gender and online privacy among teens: Risk perception, privacy concerns, and protection behaviors. Cyberpsychology & Behavior, 11(6), 763-765.
    [44] Zhang, S., Wang, G., Liu, Q., & Abawajy, J. H. (2018). A trajectory privacy-preserving scheme based on query exchange in mobile social networks. Soft Computing, 22, 6121-6133.
    [45] Zysset, S., Wendt, C. S., Volz, K. G., Neumann, J., Huber, O., & Von Cramon, D. Y. (2006). The neural implementation of multi-attribute decision making: a parametric fMRI study with human subjects. Neuroimage, 31(3), 1380-1388.
    描述: 碩士
    國立政治大學
    資訊管理學系
    107356020
    資料來源: http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0107356020
    資料類型: thesis
    DOI: 10.6814/NCCU202001628
    顯示於類別:[資訊管理學系] 學位論文

    文件中的檔案:

    檔案 描述 大小格式瀏覽次數
    602001.pdf5112KbAdobe PDF23檢視/開啟


    在政大典藏中所有的資料項目都受到原著作權保護.


    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 ©   - 回饋