政大機構典藏-National Chengchi University Institutional Repository(NCCUR):Item 140.119/152883

政大機構典藏-National Chengchi University Institutional Repository(NCCUR):Item 140.119/152883

English | 正體中文 | 简体中文 | Post-Print筆數 : 27 | 全文筆數/總筆數 : 113485/144472 (79%)
造訪人次 : 51390348 線上人數 : 795

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 > 傳播學院 > 國際傳播英語碩士學程 > 學位論文 > Item 140.119/152883

請使用永久網址來引用或連結此文件: https://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/152883

題名:	當事實遇上主觀性：探究受眾黨派取向如何影響對事實查核機構的信任 When Facts Meet Subjectivity: Exploring Partisanship-Induced Trust in Fact-checking Organizations
作者:	游承璋 Yu, Cheng-Chang
貢獻者:	施琮仁 Shih, Tsung-Jen 游承璋 Yu, Cheng-Chang
關鍵詞:	事實查核政治政黨捷思黨派取向台灣信任黨派推敲可能性模型台灣事實查核中心 Fact-checking Politics Partisan heuristic Party identification Taiwan Trust Partisanship Elaboration likelihood model Taiwan FactCheck Center
日期:	2024
上傳時間:	2024-08-05 14:36:46 (UTC+8)
摘要:	事實查核經常作為遏制網路上錯誤訊息傳播的對策，然而，其在國際上經常遭受質疑，且常被視為具有政治偏見，表示建立公眾對事實查核機構的信任仍是一項挑戰。為了探討黨派特性與訊息來源之間的關聯性如何影響事實查核的有效性，本研究以推敲可能性模型的雙路徑特徵作為理論基礎，檢視個人在接觸不同事實查核訊息時的意見形成過程。作為綜合性研究，本研究檢視事實查核內容中具有黨派性質的刺激物和個人的黨派取向。本研究在實驗設計上選擇以臺灣政治中藍綠陣營對立為背景的中國國民黨和民主進步黨的黨派捷思作為外圍路徑的激發因素，並以不同等級的論證強度作為中心路徑的激發因素。此外，本研究還探討了個人對事實查核機構的信任多寡以及其後續對事實查核行為的動機強度。根據收集了333位臺灣受訪者的線上問卷數據，在考慮國民黨的黨派取向作為調節變項時，事實查核訊息中的政黨捷思會對於個人對事實查核機構的信任有負面影響；對事實查核機構的信任會對使用相同工具和使用其他工具進行事實查核的意圖有正面影響；而政黨捷思對這兩種事實查核行為的意圖均無顯著影響。不同的是，結果發現論證強度、事實查核行為意圖和個人對事實查核機構的信任之間存在完全中介效應，這與大多數過去相關文獻結果一致。然而，無論以政黨捷思或論證強度作為預測變數，兩黨的黨派取向對於兩個模型中的調節效應均不顯著。總結來說，本研究否定了臺灣的公眾在接收到線上事實查核訊息時，其黨派取向會影響其對事實查核機構信任的可能性。此外，研究結果強調，個人若接收到含有國民黨之政黨捷思的事實查核訊息，無論其黨派取向如何，均傾向於對事實查核機構表現出較低的信任。 Fact-checking, which is frequently suggested as a countermeasure to stop the dissemination of online misinformation, has faced international skepticism and is often viewed as politically biased, showing that building public trust in fact-checking organizations remains a challenge. To explore how the affiliation between partisan elements and informational sources can influence fact-checking effectiveness, the dual route feature of the Elaboration Likelihood Model is utilized as a theoretical basis to examine individuals’ opinion-forming processes when coming across different fact-checking information. This study functions as an integrated study, examining both partisan stimuli embedded within the fact-checking content and individuals' party identifications. The experimental design includes partisan heuristics of the Kuomintang and the Democratic Progressive Party as the motivators on the peripheral route, selected based on the political polarization in Taiwanese politics between pan-blue and pan-green, and different levels of argument strength as the motivators on the central route. Additionally, the study examines individuals' trust in fact-checking organizations and their subsequent behavioral intentions toward fact-checking. The data collected from online questionnaires taken by 333 Taiwanese respondents first suggested that partisan heuristics in fact-checking information negatively influence individuals’ trust in fact-checking organizations when party identification of the KMT was considered the moderator. Trust in fact-checking organizations positively influences intentions to fact-check with the same tool and with other tools, as partisan heuristics have no significance in influencing both behavioral intentions. Conversely, a full mediation effect between argument strength, both fact-checking behaviors, and trust in fact-checking organizations was found, aligning with most previous literature. However, party identifications of both parties showed insignificant moderation effects on both models, either when partisan heuristics or argument strength were predictor variables. Generally, this study rejected that Taiwanese individuals' party identifications influence their trust in fact-checking organizations when they receive online fact-checking information. Furthermore, the findings highlighted that individuals stimulated by KMT heuristics in fact-checking information tend to show lower trust in the fact-checking organization, regardless of their party identifications.
參考文獻:	Achen, C., Bartels, L. (2016). Democracy for Realists: Why Elections Do Not Produce Responsive Government. Princeton University Press Allcott, Hunt, and Matthew Gentzkow. 2017. Social Media and Fake News in the 2016 Election. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 31 (2), 211–35. Alon-Barkat, S. (2019). Can government public communications elicit undue trust? exploring the interaction between symbols and substantive information in Communications. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 30(1), 77–95. https://doi.org/10.1093/jopart/muz013 Amazeen, M. A. (2015). Revisiting the epistemology of fact-checking. Critical Review: A Journal of Politics and Society, 27(1), 1–22. https://doi.org/10.1080/08913811.2014.993890 Amazeen, Michelle A., Emily Thorson, Ashley Muddiman, and Lucas Graves. 2018. Correcting Political and Consumer Misperceptions: The Effectiveness and Effects of Rating Scale versus Contextual Correction Formats. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly 95 (1): 28–48. https://doi.org/10.1177/1077699016678186 ANES. (2016). [Data set] https://electionstudies.org/data-center/ 2016-time-series-study/ ANES. (2019). ANES 2016 time series study full release user guide and codebook. The University of Michigan and Stanford University. https://electionstudies.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/12/anes_timeseries_2016_userguidecodebook.pdf ANES. (2020). [Data set] https://electionstudies.org/data-center/2020-time-series-study/ ANES. (2021). ANES 2020 time series study full release user guide and codebook. The University of Michigan and Stanford University. https://electionstudies.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/07/anes_timeseries_2020_userguidecodebook_20210719.pdf Angst, C., & Agarwal, R. (2009). Adoption of electronic health records in the presence of privacy concerns: The elaboration likelihood model and individual persuasion. MIS Quarterly, 33, 339–370. Appelman, A., & Sundar, S. S. (2016). Measuring message credibility: Construction and validation of an exclusive scale. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 93(1), 59–79. https://doi.org/10.1177/1077699015606057 Arceneaux, K. (2007). Can partisan cues diminish democratic accountability? Political Behavior, 30, 139–160. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11109-007-9044-7 Bailey, J. E., & Pearson, S. W. 1983. Development of a tool for measuring and analyzing computer user satisfaction. Management Science. 29(5), 530–545. Barr, Abigail. 2003. Trust and Expected Trustworthiness: Experimental Evidence from Zimbabwean Villages. The Economic Journal of Nepal 113 (489), 614–30. Batra, R., & Stayman, D. M. (1990). The role of mood in advertising effectiveness. Journal of Consumer Research, 17(2), 203. https://doi.org/10.1086/208550 Batra, R., & Stephens, D. (1994). Attitudinal effects of ad-evoked moods and emotions: The moderating role of motivation. Psychology and Marketing, 11, 199–215. Bauer, P. C. (2019). Conceptualizing trust and trustworthiness (No. 61). Revised version of working paper published in: Political Concepts Working Paper Series. Berger, A. A. (2018). Media and communication research methods: An introduction to qualitative and quantitative approaches. Sage Publications. Bernhard, R., & Freeder, S. (2018). The more you know: Voter heuristics and the information search. Political Behavior, 42(2), 603–623. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11109-018-9512-2 Berinsky, A. J. (2017) Rumors and health care reform: experiments in political misinformation. British Journal of Political Science, 47, 241–262. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0007123415000186 Bhattacherjee, A., & Sanford, C. C. (2006). Influence processes for information technology acceptance. An elaboration likelihood model. MIS Quarterly, 30, 805–825. Bolsen, Toby, James N. Druckman, and Fay Lomax Cook. (2014). The Influence of Partisan Motivated Reasoning on Public Opinion. Political Behavior 36 (2): 235–62. Botterill, L. C., Lake, J., & Walsh, M. J. (2021). Factors affecting public responses to health messages during the COVID-19 pandemic in Australia: partisanship, values, and source credibility. Australian Journal of Political Science, 56(4), 358-375. https://doi.org/10.1080/10361146.2021.1978389 Brodsky, J. E., Brooks, P. J., Scimeca, D., Galati, P., Todorova, R., & Caulfield, M. (2021). Associations between online instruction in lateral reading strategies and fact-checking COVID-19 news among college students. AERA Open, 7, 23328584211038937. Brody, Richard A., and Benjamin I. Page. (1972). “The Assessment of Policy Voting.” American Political Science Review 66(2),450–58. Bromiley, Philip, and Larry L Cummings. (1995). “Transactions Costs in Organizations with Trust.” Research on Negotiation in Organizations 5, 219–50. Bullock, J. G. (2007). Experiments on partisanship and public opinion: Party cues, false beliefs, and Bayesian updating. Stanford University. Bullock, J. G. (2011). Elite influence on public opinion in an informed electorate. American Political Science Review, 105, 496–515. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0003055411000165 Bullock, John G., Alan S. Gerber, Seth J. Hill, and Gregory A. Huber. (2015). “Partisan Bias in Factual Beliefs about Politics.” Quarterly Journal of Political Science 10 (4): 519–78. Burden, B. C., & Klofstad, C. A. (2005). Affect and cognition in party identification. Political Psychology, 26(6), 869–886. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9221.2005.00448.x Campbell, A., Converse, P. E., Miller, W. E., & Stokes, D. E. (1960). The American voter. John Wiley. Campbell, Angus, Phillip E. Converse, Warren E. Miller, and Donald E. Stokes. (1960). The American Voter. Wiley. Carpenter, C. J. (2014). A meta-analysis of the ELM’s argument quality × processing type predictions. Human Communication Research, 41(4), 501–534. https://doi.org/10.1111/hcre.12054 Carson, A., Gibbons, A., Martin, A., & Phillips, J. B. (2022). Does third-party fact-checking increase trust in news stories? an Australian case study using the “Sports Rorts” affair. Digital Journalism, 10(5), 801–822. https://doi.org/10.1080/21670811.2022.2031240 Castle, J. J., & Stepp, K. K. (2021). Partisanship, religion, and issue polarization in the United States: A reassessment. Political Behavior, 43(3), 1311–1335. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11109-020-09668-5 Chang, C. Tao, C. C. (2016). Report of the 2015 Taiwan Communication Survey: Political communication (First Phase, Fourth Wave, MOST 103-2420-H-004-033-SS2). National Chengchi University. https://doi.org/10.6141/TW-SRDA-D00161-1. Chen, Q., Zhang, Y., Evans, R., & Min, C. (2021b). Why do citizens share covid-19 fact-checks posted by Chinese government social media accounts? the elaboration likelihood model. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 18(19), 10058. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph181910058 Chryssochoidis, G., Strada, A., & Krystallis, A. (2009). Public trust in institutions and information sources regarding risk management and communication: Towards integrating extant knowledge. Journal of Risk Research, 12(2), 137–185. https://doi.org/10.1080/13669870802637000 Citrin, J., & Luks, S. (2001). Political trust revisited: Déjà vu all over again?. In J. R. Hibbing & E. Theiss-Morse (Eds.), What is it about government that Americans dislike? Cambridge University Press. Coan, T. G., Merolla, J. L., Stephenson, L. B., & Zechmeister, E. J. (2008). It’s not easy being green: Minor party labels as Heuristic AIDS. Political Psychology, 29(3), 389–405. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9221.2008.00636.x Cohen, G. L. (2003). Party over policy: The dominating impact of group influence on political beliefs. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 85, 808-822. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.85.5.808 Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences. New Jersey: Hillsdale. Cole, J., Sarraf, S., & Wang, X. (2015). Does use of survey incentives degrade data quality? Proceedings of the Association for Institutional Research Annual Forum. Çömlekçi, M. F. (2020). Combating fake news online: Turkish fact-checking services. In K. Dalkir & R. Katz (Eds.), Navigating fake news, alternative facts, and misinformation in a post-truth world (pp. 273-289). IGI Global. Çömlekçi, M. F. (2022). Why Do Fact-Checking Organizations Go Beyond Fact-Checking? A Leap Toward Media and Information Literacy Education. International Journal of Communication, 16 Converse, P. E. (1964). The nature of belief systems in mass publics. In D. E. Apter (Ed.), Ideology and discontent (pp. 206-261). Free Press. Cook, J., & Lewandowsky, S. (2016). Rational irrationality: Modeling climate change belief polarization using Bayesian networks. Topics in cognitive science, 8(1), 160-179. Cyr, D., Head, M., Lim, E., & Stibe, A. (2018). Using the elaboration likelihood model to examine online persuasion through website design. Information & Management, 55(7), 807–821. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.im.2018.03.009 Davis, F. D., Bagozzi, R. P., & Warshaw, P. R. (1989). User acceptance of computer technology: A comparison of two theoretical models. Management Science, 35, 982–1003. Davis, R., & Wong, D. (2007). Conceptualizing and measuring the optimal experience of the eLearning environment. Journal of Innovative Education, 5, 97–126. De Jong, B. A., Dirks, K. T., & Gillespie, N. (2016). Trust and team performance: A meta-analysis of main effects, moderators, and covariates. Journal of Applied Psychology, 101(8), 1134–1150. https://doi.org/10.1037/apl0000110 Deustskens, E., de Ruyter, K., Wetzels, M., & Oosterveld, P. (2004). Response rate and response quality of internet-based surveys: An experimental study. Marketing Letters, 15(1), 21-36. Downs, Anthony. (1957). An Economic Theory of Democracy. New York: Harper & Row. Erikson, Robert S., and Lee Sigelman. 1995. “A Review: Poll-Based Forecasts of Midterm Congressional Election Outcomes: Do the Pollsters Get It Right?” Public Opinion Quarterly 59(4), 589–605. Eagly, A. H., & Chaiken, S. (1993). The psychology of attitudes. Harcourt brace Jovanovich college publishers. Eagly, A. H., Wood, W., & Chaiken, S. (1978). Causal inferences about communicators and their effect on opinion change. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 36(4), 424–435. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.36.4.424 Earle, T.C. (2004). Thinking aloud about trust: A protocol analysis of trust in risk management. Risk Analysis 24(1), 169–83. Easton, D. (1965). A systems analysis of political life. University of Chicago Press. Ecker, U. K., Lewandowsky, S., Fenton, O., & Martin, K. (2014). Do people keep believing because they want to? Preexisting attitudes and the continued influence of misinformation. Memory & Cognition, 42, 292-304. Faul, F., Erdfelder, E., Lang, A.-G., & Buchner, A. (2007). GPower 3: A flexible statistical power analysis program for the social, behavioral, and biomedical sciences. Behavior Research Methods, 39, 175-191. Fehr, E., Fischbacher, U., Rosenbladt, B. V., Schupp, J., & Wagner, G. G. (2002). A nation-wide laboratory. Examining trust and trustworthiness by integrating behavioral experiments into representative surveys. Journal of Contextual Economics–Schmollers Jahrbuch, (4), 519-542. Fiorina, M. P. (1981). Retrospective voting in American national elections. New Haven: Yale University Press. Flynn, D. J., Brendan Nyhan, and Jason Reifler. (2017). “The Nature and Origins of Misperceptions: Understanding False and Unsupported Beliefs about Politics.” Political Psychology 38 (S1), 127–50. Forgas, J. P. (2007). When sad is better than happy: Negative affect can improve the quality and effectiveness of persuasive messages and social influence strategies. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 43, 513–528. Freiling, I., Krause, N. M., Scheufele, D. A., & Brossard, D. (2021). Believing and sharing misinformation, fact-checks, and accurate information on social media: The role of anxiety during COVID-19. New Media & Society, 25(1), 141–162. https://doi.org/10.1177/14614448211011451 Friedrich, J., & Smith, P. (1998). Suppressive influence of weak arguments in mixed-quality messages: An exploration of mechanisms via argument rating, pretesting, and order effects. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 20, 293–304. Fung, R., & Lee, M. (1999). EC-Trust (trust in electronic commerce): Exploring the antecedent factors. In Proceedings of Information Systems Americas Conference, Milwaukee, Wisconsin, USA. Gambetta, D. (1988). Trust: Making or breaking cooperative relations. Blackwell. Giffin, K. (1967). The contribution of studies of source credibility to a theory of interpersonal trust in the communication process. Psychological Bulletin, 68, 104–120. Graves, L., & Amazeen, M. A. (2019). Fact-checking as idea and practice in journalism. Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Communication. https://doi.org/10.1093/acrefore/9780190228613.013.808 Green, D. P., Palmquist, B., & Schickler, E. (2004). Partisan hearts and minds: Political parties and the social identities of voters. Yale University Press. Greenberg, S., Yaari, E., & Bar‐Ilan, J. (2013). Perceived credibility of blogs on the internet – the influence of age on the extent of criticism. Aslib Proceedings, 65(1), 4–18. https://doi.org/10.1108/00012531311297159 Greene, S. (2004). “Social Identity Theory and Party Identification.” Social Science Quarterly 85, 136–53. Hart, P. S., & Nisbet, E. C. (2011). Boomerang effects in science communication. Communication Research, 39(6), 701–723. https://doi.org/10.1177/0093650211416646 Hayes, A. F. (2017). Introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process analysis: A regression-based approach. Guilford publications. Herne, K., Sipinen, J., Kestilä-Kekkonen, E., Mattinen, L., & Söderlund, P. (2022). The force of the argument source: The partiality of the source influences the evaluation of political arguments. Frontiers in Communication, 7. https://doi.org/10.3389/fcomm.2022.778771 Hosmer, Larue T. (1995). “Trust: The Connecting Link Between Organizational Theory and Philosophical Ethics.” Academy of Management Review. Academy of Management 20(2): 379–403. Huddy, L., & Bankert, A. (2017). Political partisanship as a social identity. Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Politics. https://doi.org/10.1093/acrefore/9780190228637.013.250. Hsiao, Y.-C. (2014) Political Polarization in Taiwan: An Analysis on Mass Feeling Thermometer toward Political Parties. Journal of Electoral Studies, 21(2), 1-42 Ito, K. (2002). Additivity of heuristic and systematic processing in persuasion: Effects of source credibility, argument quality, and issue involvement. Japanese Journal of Experimental and Social Psychology, 41, 137–146. Iyengar, S., Sood, G., & Lelkes, Y. (2012). Affect, not ideology: A social identity perspective on polarization. Public Opinion Quarterly, 76, 405–431. https://doi.org/10.1093/poq/nfs038 Jackson, John E. (1975). “Issues, Party Choices, and Presidential Votes.” American Journal of Political Science 19(2),161–85. Jeng, Heng-Yu (2019). Taiwan ye shi chengyuan! Gongkai zijin laiyuan, meiyou dangpai lichang…Jiaru guoji shishi chahe wangluo bi shou wu cheng nuo. The Storm Media. https://www.storm.mg/article/2118310 Jennings, F. J. (2019). An uninformed electorate: Identity-motivated elaboration, partisan cues, and learning. Journal of Applied Communication Research, 47(5), 527–547. https://doi.org/10.1080/00909882.2019.1679385 Jennings, F. J. (2019). An uninformed electorate: Identity-motivated elaboration, partisan cues, and learning. Journal of Applied Communication Research, 47(5), 527–547. https://doi.org/10.1080/00909882.2019.1679385 Jennings, J., & Stroud, N. J. (2021). Asymmetric adjustment: Partisanship and correcting misinformation on Facebook. New Media & Society, 25(7), 1501–1521. https://doi.org/10.1177/14614448211021720 Jin, X.-L., Yin, M., Zhou, Z., & Yu, X. (2021). The differential effects of trusting beliefs on social media users’ willingness to adopt and share health knowledge. Information Processing & Management, 58(1), 102413. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ipm.2020.102413 Johnson, B. T., Maio, G. R., & Smith-McLallen, A. (2005). Communication and attitude change: Causes, processes, and effects. The handbook of attitudes, 617-669. Kao, D. T. (2012). Exploring the effect of regulatory focus on ad attitudes: The moderating roles of message sidedness and argument quality. International Journal of Psychology, 47(2), 142–153. https://doi.org/10.1080/00207594.2011.628672 Kaplan, M. F. (1989). Task, situational, and personal determinants of influence processes in group decision making. Advances in group processes, 6, 87-105. Karens, R., Eshuis, J., Klijn, E.-H., & Voets, J. (2015). The impact of public branding: An experimental study on the effects of Branding Policy on citizen trust. Public Administration Review, 76(3), 486–494. https://doi.org/10.1111/puar.12501 King, D. C. (1997). The polarization of American parties and mistrust of government. In J. S. Nye, Jr., P. D. Zelikow, & D. C. King (Eds.), Why people don’t trust government. Harvard University Press. Kiousis, S. (2001). Public trust or mistrust? Perceptions of media credibility in the information age. Mass Communication & Society, 4, 381-403. Knobloch-Westerwick, Silvia, Cornelia Mothes, Benjamin K. Johnson, Axel Westerwick, and Wolfgang Donsbach. (2015). “Political Online Information Searching in Germany and the United States: Confirmation Bias, Source Credibility, and Attitude Impacts.” Journal of Communication 65(3), 489–511. Kraft, P. W., Lodge, M., & Taber, C. S. (2015). Why people “don’t trust the evidence” motivated reasoning and scientific beliefs. The ANNALS of the American Academy of political and social science, 658(1), 121-133. Krupenkin, M. Does Partisanship Affect Compliance with Government Recommendations? Political Behavior 43, 451–472 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11109-020-09613-6 Kunda, Z. (1990). The case for motivated reasoning. Psychological Bulletin, 108(3), 480–498. Martel, C., Mosleh, M., & Rand, D. G. (2021). You’re definitely wrong, maybe: Correction style has minimal effect on corrections of misinformation online. Media and Communication, 9(1), 120–133. Kuo, C.-Y. (2023). Political Polarization in Taiwan: The Effect of Media Communication on Political Polarization. Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation, National Taiwan University. Kuś, M., & Barczyszyn-Madziarz, P. (2020). Fact-checking initiatives as promoters of media and information literacy: The case of Poland. Central European Journal of Communication, 13(2), 249–265. https://doi.org/10.19195/1899-5101.13.2(26).6 Ladd, J. M. (2010). The role of media distrust in partisan voting. Political Behavior, 32(4), 567–585. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11109-010-9123-z Lau, R. R., & Redlawsk, D. P. (2001). Advantages and disadvantages of cognitive heuristics in political decision making. American Journal of Political Science, 45(4), 951. https://doi.org/10.2307/2669334 Lau, R. R., & Redlawsk, D. P. (2001). Advantages and disadvantages of cognitive heuristics in political decision making. American Journal of Political Science, 45, 951–971. Lee, H.-I. (2021). Negative Partisanship in Taiwan: Analysis of Taiwanese Presidential Election from 2004 to 2020 [Master's thesis, National Taiwan University]. Airiti Library. https://doi.org/10.6342/NTU202100972 Lee, Tien-Tsung. (2010). “Why They Don’t Trust the Media: An Examination of Factors Predicting Trust.” American Behavioral Scientist 54(1), 8–21 Lewandowsky, S., Cook, J., Ecker, U., Albarracin, D., Amazeen, M., Kendou, P., Lombardi, D., Newman, E., Pennycook, G., Porter, E., Rand, D., Rapp, D., Reifler, J., Roozenbeek, J., Schmid, P., Seifert, C., Sinatra, G., Swire-Thompson, B., van der Linden, S., Vraga, E., Wood, T., & Zaragoza, M. (2020). The Debunking Handbook 2020. https://doi.org/10.17910/b7.1182 1 Lewicki, R.J., D.J. McAllister, and R.J. Bies. (1998). Trust and distrust: New relationships and realities. Academy of Management Review 23, no. 3: 438–58. Lewicki, R. J., & Bunker, B. B. (1995). Trust in relationships: A model of development and decline. In B. B. Bunker & J. Z. Rubin (Eds.), Conflict, cooperation, and justice: Essays inspired by the work of Morton Deutsch. Jossey-Bass. Lewis-Beck, M. S., Jacoby, W. G., Norpoth, H., & Weisberg, H. F. (2008). The American voter revisited. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press. Li, C.-Y. (2013). Persuasive messages on information system acceptance: A theoretical extension of elaboration likelihood model and social influence theory. Computers in Human Behavior, 29(1), 264–275. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2012.09.003 Lin, C.S., & Chou, H.Y. (2014). The Political-Communication Effects of Televised Presidential Debates on First-Time Voters: The Example of 2012 Taiwan President Election. Journal of Electoral Studies, 21(1), 47-87. Lippmann, W. 2009 [1922]. Public Opinion. Sioux Falls, SD: NuVision Publications. Liu, F.C.S. (2009). Partisan Orientation and Selective Exposure during Taiwan's 2008 Presidential Election Campaign. Journal of Electoral Studies, 16(2), 51-70. Liu, Qian-Jing (2021). Zhengzhi xuezhe: Zhengdang qingxiang tai qiang, jiao nan jieshou gengzheng xunxi. Taiwan FactCheck Center. https://tfc-taiwan.org.tw/articles/4899 MacCracken, G. (1989). Who is the celebrity endorser? Cultural foundations of the endorsement process. Journal of Consumer Research, 16, 310–321. Markus, Gregory B., and Philip E. Converse. (1979). “A Dynamic Simultaneous Equation Model of Electoral Choice.” American Political Science Review 73(4),1055–70. Martin, B., Lang, B., & Wong, S. (2003). Conclusion explicitness in advertising: The moderating role of need for cognition (NFC) and argument quality (AQ) on persuasion. Journal of Advertising, 32, 57–65. Mason, L. (2014). ‘I disrespectfully agree’: The differential effects of partisan sorting on social and issue polarization. American Journal of Political Science, 59(1), 128–145. https://doi.org/10.1111/ajps.12089 McKnight, D. H., & Chervany, N. L. (1996). The meanings of trust. Carlson School of Management, University of Minnesota. Meirick, P. C. (2016). Motivated reasoning, accuracy, and updating in perceptions of Bush’s legacy. Social Science Quarterly, 97(3), 699–713. https://doi.org/10.1111/ssqu.12301 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, 58(13), 2078–2091. Miller, W. E., & Shanks, J. M. (1996). The new American voter. Cambridge: Harvard University Press. Mishra, A. K. (1996). Organizational responses to crisis: The centrality of trust. In R. M. Kramer & T. R. Tyler (Eds.), Trust in organizations: Frontiers of theory and research (pp. 261–287). Sage Publications. Mondak, Jeffrey J. (1993a). “Public Opinion and Heuristic Processing of Source Cues.” Political Behavior 15(2), 167–92. Mondak, Jeffrey J. (1993b). “Source Cues and Policy Approval: The Cognitive Dynamics of Public Support for the Reagan Agenda.” American Journal of Political Science 37(1), 186–212. Morris, D. S., Morris, J. S., & Francia, P. L. (2020). A fake news inoculation? fact checkers, partisan identification, and the power of misinformation. Politics, Groups, and Identities, 8(5), 986–1005. https://doi.org/10.1080/21565503.2020.1803935 Neyman, J. (1934). On the Two Different Aspects of the Representative Method: The Method of Stratified Sampling and the Method of Purposive Selection. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, 97(4), 558–625. https://doi.org/10.2307/2342192 Nicholson SP (2012) Polarizing Cues. American Journal of Political Science 56(1), 52–66. Nyhan, B., & Reifler, J. (2012). Misinformation and Fact-checking: Research Findings from Social Science. Nyhan, B., & Reifler, J. (2015). The effect of fact-checking on elites: A field experiment on US state legislators. American Journal of Political Science, 59(3), 628–640. https://doi.org/10.1111/ajps.12162 Olson, J. M., & Zanna, M. P. (1993). Attitudes and attitude change. Annual Review of Psychology, 44(1), 117-154. Pal, A., & Loke, C. (2019). Communicating fact to combat fake: Analysis of fact-checking websites. In Proceedings of the 2019 international conference on information technology and computer communications (pp. 66–73). Peck, J., & Wiggins, J. (2006). It just feels good: Customers’ affective response to touch and its influence on persuasion. Journal of Marketing, 70, 56–69. Peng, Y., Lu, Y., & Shen, C. (2023). An agenda for studying credibility perceptions of visual misinformation. Political Communication, 40(2), 225–237. https://doi.org/10.1080/10584609.2023.2175398 Perloff, R. M. (2015). A three-decade retrospective on the hostile-media effect. Mass Communication & Society, 18(6), 701–729. https://doi.org/10.1080/15205436.2015.1051234 Perloff, R. M. (2016). The dynamics of persuasion: Communication and attitudes in the twenty-first century. Routledge. Petty, R. E., & Briñol, P. (2012). The elaboration likelihood model. Handbook of Theories of Social Psychology: Volume 1, 224–245. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781446249215.n12 Petty, R. E., & Cacioppo, J. T. (1981). Attitudes and persuasion. Classic and Contemporary Approaches. Dubuque. Wm. C. Brown. Petty, R. E., & Cacioppo, J. T. (1979). Issue involvement can increase or decrease persuasion by enhancing message-relevant cognitive responses. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 37, 1915- 1926. Petty, R. E., Harkins, S. G., & Williams, K. D. (1980). The effects of group diffusion of cognitive effort on attitudes: An information-processing view. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 38(1), 81–92. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.38.1.81 Petty, R.E., Cacioppo, J.T. (1986). The Elaboration Likelihood Model of Persuasion. In: Communication and Persuasion. Springer Series in Social Psychology. Springer, New York, NY. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4612-4964-1_1 Petty, Richard & Wegener, T. (1999), The Elaboration Likelihood Model: Current status and controversies. In S. Chaiken & Y. Trope (Eds.), Dual-process theories in social psychology (pp. 37–72). The Guilford Press. Petty, R. (1998). Attitude change: Multiple roles for persuasion variables. In D. T. Gilbert, S. T. Fiske, & G. Lindzey (Eds.), Handbook of social psychology (Vol. 1, 4th ed., pp. 323-390). McGraw Hill. Pew Research Center for the People and the Press. (1998). Deconstructing Distrust: How Americans View Government. Washington, DC: Pew Research Center for the People and the Press. Pew Research Center for the People and the Press. (2003). The 2004 Political Landscape: Evenly Divided and Increasingly Polarized. Washington, DC: Pew Research Center for the People and the Press. Pham, M. T., & Avnet, T. (2004). Ideals and thoughts and the reliance on affect versus substance in persuasion. Journal of Consumer Research, 30, 503–518. Popkin, Samuel L. (1991). The Reasoning Voter: Communication and Persuasion in Presidential Campaigns. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Pretus, C., Servin-Barthet, C., Harris, E. A., Brady, W. J., Vilarroya, O., & Van Bavel, J. J. (2023). The role of political devotion in sharing partisan misinformation and resistance to fact-checking. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 152(11), 3116–3134. https://doi.org/10.1037/xge0001436 Prince, V. (2005). Sex vs. gender. International Journal of Transgenderism, 8(4), 29–32. https://doi.org/10.1300/j485v08n04_05 Putnam, R. D. (1993). Making democracy work. Civic traditions in modern Italy. Princeton University Press. Putnam, R. D. (2000). Bowling alone. The collapse and revival of American community. Simon & Schuster. PytlikZillig, L. M., & Kimbrough, C. D. (2016). Consensus on conceptualizations and definitions of trust: Are we there yet? In E. Shockley, T. M. Neal, L. M. PytlikZillig, & B. H. Bornstein (Eds.), Interdisciplinary perspectives on trust: Towards theoretical and methodological integration (pp. 17–47). Springer. Rahn, W. M. (1993). The role of partisan stereotypes in information processing about political candidates. American Journal of Political Science, 472-496. Redlawsk, D. P. (2002). Hot cognition or cool consideration? testing the effects of motivated reasoning on political decision making. The Journal of Politics, 64(4), 1021–1044. https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-2508.00161 Ricco, R. B. (2008). The influence of argument structure on judgements of argument strength, function, and adequacy. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 61(4), 641-664. Rieh, S.Y. (2002). Judgment of information quality and cognitive authority in the web. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 53(2), 145–161. Rosenblum, Nancy L., and Muirhead, Russell. (2020). A Lot of People Are Saying: The New Conspiracism and the Assault on Democracy. Princeton University Press Rosenstone, S. J., & Hansen, J. M. (1993). Mobilization, participation, and democracy in America. Macmillan. Rousseau, Denise M, Sim B Sitkin, Ronald S Burt, and Colin Camerer. (1998). Not so Different After All: A Cross-Discipline View of Trust. Academy of Management Review. Academy of Management 23(3), 393– 404. Rucker, D. D., & Petty, R. E. (2006). Increasing effectiveness of communications to consumers: Recommendations based on the elaboration likelihood and attitude certainty perspectives. Journal of Public Policy and Marketing, 25, 39–52. Schaffner, B. F., & Streb, M. J. (2002). The partisan heuristic in low-information elections. Public Opinion Quarterly, 66(4), 559–581. https://doi.org/10.1086/343755 Schmidt, M., & Hollensen, S. (2010). Product development and target market segmentation. Harlow: Pearson. Selnes, F. (1998). Antecedents and consequences of trust and satisfaction in buyer–seller relationships. European Journal of Marketing, 32(3/4), 305–322. Seppänen, Risto, Kirsimarja Blomqvist, and Sanna Sundqvist. (2007). Measuring Inter-Organizational Trust—a Critical Review of the Empirical Research in 1990–2003. Industrial Marketing Management 36(2), 249–65. Shin, J., & Thorson, K. (2017). Partisan selective sharing: The biased diffusion of fact-checking messages on social media. Journal of Communication, 67(2), 233–255. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcom.12284 Sitkin, Sim B, and Nancy L Roth. (1993). Explaining the Limited Effectiveness of Legalistic ‘Remedies’ for Trust/ Distrust. Organization Science 4(3), 367–92. Sniderman, Paul M., Richard A. Brody, and Philip E. Tetlock. (1991). Reasoning and Choice: Explorations in Political Psychology. Cambridge University Press. Stephenson, M. T., Benoit, W. L., & Tschida, D. A. (2001). Testing the mediating role of cognitive responses in the elaboration likelihood model. Communication Studies, 52, 324–337. Strömbäck, J., Tsfati, Y., Boomgaarden, H., Damstra, A., Lindgren, E., Vliegenthart, R., & Lindholm, T. (2020). News Media Trust and its impact on media use: Toward a framework for future research. Annals of the International Communication Association, 44(2), 139–156. https://doi.org/10.1080/23808985.2020.1755338 Sue, V. M., & Ritter, L. A. (2012). Conducting online surveys. Sage. Sussman, S. W., & Siegel, W. S. (2003). Informational influence in organizations: An integrated approach to knowledge adoption. Information Systems Research, 14(1), 47-65. Taber, C. S., & Lodge, M. (2006). Motivated skepticism in the evaluation of political beliefs. American journal of political science, 50(3), 755-769. Taiwan FactCheck Center. (2020, July 30). Taiwan FactCheck Center Shengming: huiying jinri Kuomintang jizhehui. Taiwan FactCheck Center you Taiwan Media Watch Foundation yu the Association for [Thumbnail Link]. Facebook. https://www.facebook.com/100070286298342/posts/611781026143692/ Tajfel, H. (1978). Social categorization, social identity, and social comparisons. In H. Tajfel (Ed.), Differentiation between social groups (pp. 61-76). Academic Press. Teng, S., Khong, K. W., & Goh, W. W. (2015). Persuasive communication: A study of major attitude-behavior theories in a social media context. Journal of Internet Commerce, 14(1), 42–64. https://doi.org/10.1080/15332861.2015.1006515 Teo, T., & Zhou, M. (2014). Explaining the intention to use technology among university students: A structural equation modeling approach. Journal of Computing in Higher Education, 26(2), 124–142. Ternullo, S. (2022). “I'm Not Sure What to Believe”: Media distrust and opinion formation during the COVID-19 pandemic. American Political Science Review, 116(3), 1096-1109. https://doi.org/10.1017/S000305542200003X Thomas, C. W. (1998). Maintaining and restoring public trust in government agencies and their employees. Administration & Society, 30(2), 166-193. Thorson, E. (2015). Belief echoes: The persistent effects of corrected misinformation. Political Communication, 33(3), 460–480. https://doi.org/10.1080/10584609.2015.1102187 Toulmin, S. (1958). The layout of arguments. The uses of argument, 94-145. Tseng, H.-T. (2023), "Shaping path of trust: the role of information credibility, social support, information sharing and perceived privacy risk in social commerce", Information Technology & People, Vol. 36 No. 2, pp. 683-700. https://doi.org/10.1108/ITP-07-2021-0564 Tsfati, Y. (2003). Does audience skepticism of the media matters in agenda setting? Journal of Broadcasting and Electronic Media, 47, 157-176. Tsfati, Y., & Cappella, J. N. (2003). Do people watch what they do not trust? Exploring the association between news media skepticism and exposure. Communication Research, 30(5), 504–529. https://doi.org/10.1177/ 0093650203253371 Tsfati, Y., & Cappella, J. N. (2005). Why do people watch news they do not trust: Need for cognition as a moderator in the association between news media skepticism and exposure. Media Psychology, 7, 251-272. Tyler, T.R. (2005). Policing in black and white: Ethnic group differences in trust and confidence in the police. Police Quarterly. 8, 322–342. Umbach, P. D. (2004) Web surveys: best practice. New Directions for Institutional Research, 121, 23-38 Uscinski, J. E., & Butler, R. W. (2013). The epistemology of fact-checking. Critical Review, 25(2), 162–180. https://doi.org/10.1080/08913811.2013.843872 Vallone, R. P., Ross, L., & Lepper, M. R. (1985). The hostile media phenomenon: Biased perception and perceptions of media bias in coverage of the Beirut massacre. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 49(3), 577–585. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.49.3.577 Venkatesh, V., & Brown, S. A. (2001). A longitudinal investigation of personal computers in homes: Adoption determinants and emerging challenges. MIS Quarterly, 25, 71–102. Venkatesh, V., & Brown, S. A. (2001). A longitudinal investigation of personal computers in homes: Adoption determinants and emerging challenges. MIS Quarterly, 25, 71–102. Venkatesh, V., & Davis, F. D. (1996). A model of the antecedents of perceived ease of use: Development and test. Decision Science, 27, 451–481. Venkatesh, V., Morris, M. G., Davis, G. B., & Davis, F. D. (2003). User acceptance of information technology: Toward a unified view. MIS Quarterly, 425–478. Wagner, J. K., & Wiezel, A. (2022). Do partisans always like their Inparty and dislike their Outparty? an analysis of partisans across the affective spectrum. American Politics Research, 51(3), 373–380. https://doi.org/10.1177/1532673x221139475 \ Walker, M., & Gottfried, J. (2019, June 27). Republicans far more likely than Democrats to say fact-checkers tend to favor one side. Pew Research Center. https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2019/06/27/republicans-far-more-likely-than-democrats-to-say-fact-checkers-tend-to-favor-one-side/ Walter AS, Redlawsk DP (2019) Voters’ partisan responses to politicians’ immoral behavior. Political Psychology 40(5), 1075–1097. Wang, A. H.-E. (2019). The myth of polarization among Taiwanese voters: The missing middle. Journal of East Asian Studies, 19(3), 275–287. Wang, A. H. E., Yeh, Y. Y., Wu, C. K., & Chen, F. Y. (2022). Media literacy and partisan convergence across social network sites. The Social Science Journal, 1-14. Warren, M. E. (1999). Democratic theory and trust. In M. E. Warren (Ed.), Democracy and trust (pp. 310–345). Cambridge University Press. Weber, L., and A. Carter. (1998). On constructing trust: Temporality, self-disclosure, and perspective-taking. International Journal of Sociology and Social Policy 18(1), 7–26. Weir, K. (2019, November 1). Politics is personal. Monitor on Psychology. https://www.apa.org/monitor/2019/11/cover-politics Winter, S., Metzger, M. J., & Flanagin, A. J. (2016). Selective use of news cues: A multiple-motive perspective on information selection in social media environments. Journal of Communication, 66(4), 669–693. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcom.12241 Xenos, M. A., Moy, P., & Becker, A. B. (2011). Making sense of The Daily Show: Understanding the role of partisan heuristics in political comedy effects. In A. Amarasingam (Ed.), The Stewart/ Colbert effect: Essays on the real impact of fake news (pp. 47–62). McFarland. Xiao, Y.-J. (2014). Political Polarization in Taiwan: An Analysis on Mass Feeling Thermometer toward Political Parties. Journal of Electoral Studies, 21(2), 1-42. https://doi.org/10.6612/tjes.2014.21.02.01-42 Xu, X., & Yao, Z. (2015). Understanding the role of argument quality in the adoption of online reviews. Online Information Review, 39(7), 885–902. https://doi.org/10.1108/oir-05-2015-0149 Yang, Q., Hayat, N., Al Mamun, A., Makhbul, Z. K., & Zainol, N. R. (2022). Sustainable customer retention through social media marketing activities using hybrid sem-neural network approach. PLOS ONE, 17(3). https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0264899 Zaller, John. (1992). The Nature and Origins of Mass Opinion. Cambridge University Press Zanna, M. P., & Rempel, J. K. (1988). Attitudes: A new look at an old concept. In D. Bar-Tal & A. W. Kruglanski (Eds.), The social psychology of knowledge (pp. 315–334). Cambridge University Press. Zha, X., Yang, H., Yan, Y., Liu, K., & Huang, C. (2018). Exploring the effect of social media information quality, source credibility and reputation on informational fit-to-task: Moderating role of Focused Immersion. Computers in Human Behavior, 79, 227–237. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2017.10.038 Zhao, X., Chen, L., Jin, Y., & Zhang, X. (2023). Comparing button-based chatbots with webpages for presenting fact-checking results: A case study of health information. Information Processing & Management, 60(2), 103203. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ipm.2022.103203 Zucker, L. G. (1986). Production of trust: Institutional sources of economic structure, 1840–1920. Research in Organizational Behavior, 8, 53–111.
描述:	碩士國立政治大學國際傳播英語碩士學位學程(IMICS) 110461006
資料來源:	http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0110461006
資料類型:	thesis
顯示於類別:	[國際傳播英語碩士學程] 學位論文

文件中的檔案:

檔案	描述	大小	格式	瀏覽次數
100601.pdf		2410Kb	Adobe PDF	0	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