政大機構典藏-National Chengchi University Institutional Repository(NCCUR):Item 140.119/140005

政大機構典藏-National Chengchi University Institutional Repository(NCCUR):Item 140.119/140005

English | 正體中文 | 简体中文 | Post-Print筆數 : 27 | 全文筆數/總筆數 : 113318/144297 (79%)
造訪人次 : 51023552 線上人數 : 862

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

主頁 ‧ 登入 ‧ 上傳 ‧ 說明 ‧ 關於政大典藏 ‧ 管理

到手機版

政大機構典藏 > 商學院 > 企業管理研究所（MBA學位學程） > 學位論文 > Item 140.119/140005

請使用永久網址來引用或連結此文件: https://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/140005

題名:	COVID-19對Facebook上影響社群商務意圖之因素的調節作用 Moderating Effect of COVID-19 on the Factors influencing Social Commerce Intention on Facebook
作者:	李峻凱 Lee, Chun-Kai
貢獻者:	洪叔民 Horng, Shwu-Min 李峻凱 Lee, Chun-Kai
關鍵詞:	新冠肺炎臉書電子商務社群網絡社群商務 COVID-19 Facebook E-commerce Social network Social commerce
日期:	2022
上傳時間:	2022-05-02 15:05:40 (UTC+8)
摘要:	在新冠肺炎疫情之下，由於感染力強與死亡率高，且疫情早期尚無研發能根治的藥物與疫苗，因此，大眾地生活習慣大幅改變，會避免與人接觸，從原先的實體互動與交易轉變至線上完成，使得網路購物與社群活動變得更加活絡。此段時間各個電商平台使出各種方式吸引消費者使用，例如：蝦皮主打每月購物節與遊戲互動、Momo主打24小時到貨，而Facebook社群商務的模式與其他電商平台有很大的差異，僅提供交易使用者平台露出與查詢產品，沒有任何金流物流等支援服務，也因為這樣的模式，非常依賴交易雙方的對彼此之信任，但也因為社群使用者的人數為全台第一，故在特定販售主題的直播台與社團群組能聚集更多的消費者。而本研究針對Facebook用戶對於社群商務意圖進行探討，得出社群商務意圖之資訊接收行為的互惠性、結合型社會資本、橋接型社會資本、情感支持、對網站的信任、服務內容品質、新冠肺炎此七項因素，對於接收行為有正向且顯著影響；而社群商務意圖之資訊給予行為的互惠性、結合型社會資本、橋接型社會資本、情感支持、對網站的信任、聲譽、利他主義、享樂主義此八項因素，對於給予行為有正向且顯著影響。然而，本研究也將導入新冠肺炎因素作為干擾變數，得出對於Facebook社群商務意圖接收行為中所有變數皆不具有顯著干擾效果；而對於Facebook社群商務意圖給予行為中的利他主義、對網站的信任與易使用性，此三個變數具有顯著干擾效果。期許本研究可作為臉書甚至各電商營運策略之參考。 Under the epidemic situation of COVID‐19, due to the strong infectious power and high mortality rate, and there are no drugs or vaccines that can cure the disease in the early stage of the epidemic. Thus, the habit of life of the people have changed obviously. In addition to avoid connecting with other people. So, the transition of transactions to online makes online shopping and community activities more active. During the time, various e-commerce platforms used various methods to attract consumers. For example, Shopee focus on monthly shopping festivals and game interaction and Momo focus on 24-hour delivery arriving at customers’ home. But, Facebook’s social commerce business model is very different from other e-commerce platforms. The difference is that only the trading platform is provided to post and search products, and there is no support services such as cash flow and logistics. Also because of this business model, it is very dependent on the trust of both parties in the transaction. Besides, the number of community users is top 1 in Taiwan so live broadcast channels and community groups with specific sales themes can gather more consumers than other e-commence platforms in the same moment. In this study, we explored the social business intentions of Facebook users, and obtained the reciprocity, bonding social capital, bridging social capital, emotional support, trust toward service, service content quality and COVID-19. These seven factors have the positive and significant impact on the receiving behavior; and the reciprocity, bonding social capital, bridging social capital, emotional support, trust toward service, reputation, altruism and hedonic, these eight factors, have the positive and significant impact on the giving behavior. Besides, this study also put the factor of COVID-19 as an interference variable, and concluded that it had no significant interference effect on all variables in receiving behavior of Facebook`s social business intention; while for giving behavior of Facebook`s social business intention, the altruism, trust toward service and ease of use, these three variables, have a significant interference effect. Finally, it is hoped that this research can be used as a reference for Facebook and even various e-commerce business strategies.
參考文獻:	經濟部統計處-零售業統計調查https://www.moea.gov.tw/MNS/dos/home/Home.aspx Digital Report 2020 台灣報告，台灣網路生態大解析！https://www.breaktime.com.tw/archives/6293 IMF, (2020). World Economic Outlook Update-A Crisis Like No Other, An Uncertain Recovery in: IMF.org, Retrieved June 2020 from: https://www.imf.org/en/Publications/WEO/Issues/2020/06/24/WEOUpdateJune2020 WHO Coronavirus (COVID-19) Dashboard in: WHO.int, Retrieved August 2020 from: https://covid19.who.int/ Busalim, A. H. (2016). Understanding social commerce: A systematic literature review and directions for further research. International Journal of Information Management, 36(6), 1075-1088. GSM Association (2019). Social commerce in emerging markets: Understanding the landscape and opportunities for mobile money. Retrieved May 18 2020, from:https://www.gsma.com/mobilefordevelopment/wpcontent/uploads/2019/12/Social-commerce-in-emerging-markets.pdf Liang, T. P., Ho, Y. T., Li, Y. W., & Turban, E. (2011). What drives social commerce: The role of social support and relationship quality. International journal of electronic commerce, 16(2), 69-90. Olenski, S. (2012), Are brands wielding more influence in social media than we thought? Retrieved Dec. 20 2018 from: https://www.forbes.com/sites/marketshare/2012/05/07/are-brands-wielding-more-influence-in-social-media-than-we-thought/#72ac731c71e1 Nahapiet, J., & Ghoshal, S. (1998). Social capital, intellectual capital, and the organizational advantage. Academy of management review, 23(2), 242-266. Hajli, N., Sims, J., Zadeh, A. H., & Richard, M. O. (2017). A social commerce investigation of the role of trust in a social networking site on purchase intentions. Journal of Business Research, 71, 133-141. Xiang, L., Zheng, X., Lee, M. K., & Zhao, D. (2016). Exploring consumers’ impulse buying behavior on social commerce platform: The role of parasocial interaction. International journal of information management, 36(3), 333-347. Wang, X., Lin, X., & Spencer, M. K. (2019). Exploring the effects of extrinsic motivation on consumer behaviors in social commerce: Revealing consumers’ perceptions of social commerce benefits. International Journal of Information Management, 45, 163-175. Fang, Y. H., & Chiu, C. M. (2010). In justice we trust: Exploring knowledge-sharing continuance intentions in virtual communities of practice. Computers in Human Behavior, 26(2), 235-246. Farivar, S., Turel, O., & Yuan, Y. (2018). Skewing users’ rational risk considerations in social commerce: An empirical examination of the role of social identification. Information & Management, 55(8), 1038-1048. Wasko, M.M., and Faraj, S. (2005). Why should i share? Examining social capital and knowledge contribution in electronic networks of practice, MIS Quarterly, 29(1), 35-57. Pelaprat, E., & Brown, B. (2012). Reciprocity: Understanding online social relations. First Monday, 17(10). Tajvidi, M., Wang, Y., Hajli, N., & Love, P. E. (2021). Brand value Co-creation in social commerce: The role of interactivity, social support, and relationship quality. Computers in Human Behavior, 115, 105238. Bandura, A. (1977). Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. Psychological review, 84(2), 191–215. Gittell, R., & Vidal, A. (1998). Community organizing: Building social capital as a development strategy. Sage. Makmor, N., Alam, S. S., & Aziz, N. A. (2018). Social support, trust and purchase intention in social commerce era. Int. J. Supply Chain Manag, 7(5), 572-581. Hajli, N. (2015). Social commerce constructs and consumer`s intention to buy. International Journal of Information Management, 35(2), 183-191. Porter, C.E., and Donthu, N. (2008). Cultivating trust and harvesting value in virtual communities, Management Science, 54(1), 113-128. Kim, D. J., Ferrin, D. L., & Rao, H. R. (2008). A trust-based consumer decision-making model in electronic commerce: The role of trust, perceived risk, and their antecedents. Decision support systems, 44(2), 544-564. Jiang, J. C., Chen, C. A., & Wang, C. C. (2008, August). Knowledge and trust in E-consumers` online shopping behavior. In 2008 International Symposium on Electronic Commerce and Security (pp. 652-656). IEEE. Dai, H., & Salam, A. F. (2014). Does service convenience matter? An empirical assessment of service quality, service convenience and exchange relationship in electronic mediated environment. Electronic Markets, 24(4), 269-284. Rauniar, R., Rawski, G., Yang, J., & Johnson, B. (2014). Technology acceptance model (TAM) and social media usage: an empirical study on Facebook. Journal of Enterprise Information Management. Davis, F. D. (1989). Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS quarterly, 319-340. Ernst, C. P. H., Pfeiffer, J., & Rothlauf, F. (2013). Hedonic and utilitarian motivations of social network site adoption. Johannes Gutenberg University Mainz: Working Papers in Information Systems and Business Administration, 1-14. Wang, H., Chung, J. E., Park, N., McLaughlin, M. L., & Fulk, J. (2012). Understanding online community participation: A technology acceptance perspective. Communication Research, 39(6), 781-801. Osatuyi, B., & Qin, H. (2018). How vital is the role of affect on post-adoption behaviors? An examination of social commerce users. International Journal of Information Management, 40, 175-185. Tepperman, (2020). Virtual Experience News in: windsorstar.com, Retrieved December 2020 from: https://windsorstar.com/news/local-news/in-the-time-of-covid-19-boxing-day-is-all-about-the-virtual-experience Abdul Abiad, Mia Arao, Suzette Dagli, Benno Ferrarini, Ilan Noy,Patrick Osewe, Jesson Pagaduan, Donghyun Park, and Reizle Platitas.(2020). The Economic Impact of the COVID-19 Outbreak on Developing Asia. Laato, S., Islam, A. N., Farooq, A., & Dhir, A. (2020). Unusual purchasing behavior during the early stages of the COVID-19 pandemic: The stimulus-organism-response approach. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 57, 102224. Lipsman and Liu, (2020). US Ecommerce News in: emarketer.com, Retrieved June 2020 from: https://www.emarketer.com/content/us-ecommerce-2020 Sayyida, S., Hartini, S., Gunawan, S., & Husin, S. N. (2021). The Impact of the Covid-19 Pandemic on Retail Consumer Behavior. Aptisi Transactions on Management (ATM), 5(1), 79–88. Blau, P.M. (1964). Exchange and Power in Social Life, New York: Transaction Publishers. Kollock, P. (1999). The economies of online cooperation. Communities in cyberspace, 220-339. Hsu, C.-L., and Lin, J.C.-C. (2008). Acceptance of blog usage: The role of technology acceptance, social influence and knowledge-sharing motivation, Information & Management, 45(1), 65-74. Wang, X., Lin, X., & Spencer, M. K. (2019). Exploring the effects of extrinsic motivation on consumer behaviors in social commerce: Revealing consumers’ perceptions of social commerce benefits. International Journal of Information Management, 45, 163-175. Wang, Y., & Herrando, C. (2019). Does privacy assurance on social commerce sites matter to millennials?. International Journal of Information Management, 44, 164-177. Yahia, I. B., Al-Neama, N., & Kerbache, L. (2018). Investigating the drivers for social commerce in social media platforms: Importance of trust, social support and the platform perceived usage. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 41, 11-19. Curry, O., Roberts, S.G.B. and Dunbar, R.I.M. (2013). Altruism in social networks: evidence for a `Kinship Premium`, British Journal of Psychology, 104(2), 283-295. McConnell, K. E. (1997). Does altruism undermine existence value?. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, 32(1), 22-37. Carlo, G., Eisenberg, N. Troyer, D. Switzer, G. and Speer, A.L. (1991). The altruistic personality: In what contexts is it apparent? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 61(3), 450-458. Mamonov, S., & Benbunan-Fich, R. (2017). Exploring factors affecting social e-commerce service adoption: The case of Facebook gifts. International Journal of Information Management, 37(6), 590-600. Pelaprat, E., & Brown, B. (2012). Reciprocity: Understanding online social relations. First Monday, 17(10). Kankanhalli, A., Tan, B. C., & Wei, K. K. (2005). Contributing knowledge to electronic knowledge repositories: An empirical investigation. MIS quarterly, 113-143. Cheung, M.K., Lee, K.O. and Lee, W.Y. (2013). Understanding the continuance intention of knowledge sharing in online communities of practice through the post-knowledge-sharing evaluation processes, Journal of the American Society for Information Science & Technology, 64(7), 1357-1374. Cho, N., Li, G.Z. and Su, C.-J. (2007). An empirical study on the effect of individual factors on knowledge sharing by knowledge type, Journal of Global Business & Technology, 3(2), 1-15 Molinillo, S., Anaya-Sánchez, R., & Liébana-Cabanillas, F. (2020). Analyzing the effect of social support and community factors on customer engagement and its impact on loyalty behaviors toward social commerce websites. Computers in Human Behavior, 108, 105980. Adler, P. S., & Kwon, S. W. (2002). Social capital: Prospects for a new concept. Academy of Management Review, 27(1), 17-40. Haythornthwaite, C. (2005). Social networks and Internet connectivity effects. Information, Community & Society, 8(2), 125-147. Granovetter, M. S. (1973). The strength of weak ties. American journal of sociology, 78(6), 1360-1380. Zhang, H., Lu, Y., Gupta, S., & Zhao, L. (2014). What motivates customers to participate in social commerce? The impact of technological environments and virtual customer experiences. Information & Management, 51(8), 1017-1030. Chen, J., & Shen, X. L. (2015). Consumers` decisions in social commerce context: An empirical investigation. Decision Support Systems, 79, 55-64. Liu, Y., & Shrum, L. J. (2002). What is interactivity and is it always such a good thing? Implications of definition, person, and situation for the influence of interactivity on advertising effectiveness. Journal of advertising, 31(4), 53-64. Pentina, I., Prybutok, V. R., & Zhang, X. (2008). The role of virtual communities as shopping reference groups. Journal of Electronic Commerce Research, 9(2), 114-136. Chen, H-L, Fan, H-L and Tsai, C-C (2014). The role of community trust and altruism in knowledge sharing: An investigation of a virtual community of teacher professionals, Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 17(3), 168-179. Enders, A., Hungenberg, H., Denker, H. P., & Mauch, S. (2008). The long tail of social networking.: Revenue models of social networking sites. European Management Journal, 26(3), 199-211. Janda, S. (2008). Does gender moderate the effect of online concerns on purchase likelihood? Journal of Internet Commerce, 7(3), 339-358. Wongkitrungrueng, A., & Assarut, N. (2020). The role of live streaming in building consumer trust and engagement with social commerce sellers. Journal of Business Research, 117, 543-556. Mayer, R. C., Davis, J. H., & Schoorman, F. D. (1995). An integrative model of organizational trust. Academy of management review, 20(3), 709-734. McKnight, D.H., Choudhury, V. and Kacmar, C. (2002), Developing and validating trust measures for e-commerce: An integrative typology. Information systems research, 13(3), 334-359. Kim, S., & Park, H. (2013). Effects of various characteristics of social commerce (scommerce) on consumers’ trust and trust performance. International Journal of Information Management, 33(2), 318-332. Choi, S. B., & Kim, J. M. (2018). A comparative analysis of electronic service quality in the online open market and social commerce: the case of Korean young adults. Service Business, 12(2), 403-433. Green, D.T. and Pearson, J.M. (2011). Integrating website usability with the electronic commerce acceptance model, Behavior & Information Technology, 30(2), 181-199. Chong, A. Y. L., Lacka, E., Boying, L., & Chan, H. K. (2018). The role of social media in enhancing guanxi and perceived effectiveness of E-commerce institutional mechanisms in online marketplace. Information & management, 55(5), 621-632. Gibreel, O., AlOtaibi, D. A., & Altmann, J. (2018). Social commerce development in emerging markets. Electronic Commerce Research and Applications, 27, 152-162. Wamba, S. F., Bhattacharya, M., Trinchera, L., & Ngai, E. W. (2017). Role of intrinsic and extrinsic factors in user social media acceptance within workspace: Assessing unobserved heterogeneity. International Journal of Information Management, 37(2), 1-13. Horng, S. M. (2016). A study of active and passive user participation in virtual communities. Journal of Electronic Commerce Research, 17(4), 289-311. Koh, J. and Kim, Y.-G. (2003). Sense of virtual community: A conceptual framework and empirical validation, International Journal of Electronic Commerce, 8(2), 75-93. The Guardian, (2020). Death Toll News in: theguardian.com, Retrieved March 2020 from: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/mar/02/coronavirus-death-toll-passes-3000-worldwide-as-second-person-dies-in-us Abiad, A., Arao, R. M., & Dagli, S. (2020). The economic impact of the COVID-19 outbreak on developing Asia. Fassnacht, M., & Koese, I. (2006). Quality of electronic services: conceptualizing and testing a hierarchical model. Journal of service research, 9(1), 19-37.
描述:	碩士國立政治大學企業管理研究所(MBA學位學程) 108363064
資料來源:	http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0108363064
資料類型:	thesis
DOI:	10.6814/NCCU202200388
顯示於類別:	[企業管理研究所（MBA學位學程）] 學位論文

文件中的檔案:

檔案	描述	大小	格式	瀏覽次數
306401.pdf		1521Kb	Adobe PDF2	103	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