政大機構典藏-National Chengchi University Institutional Repository(NCCUR):Item 140.119/153432
English  |  正體中文  |  简体中文  |  Post-Print筆數 : 27 |  Items with full text/Total items : 113648/144635 (79%)
Visitors : 51676434      Online Users : 474
RC Version 6.0 © Powered By DSPACE, MIT. Enhanced by NTU Library IR team.
Scope Tips:
  • 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


    Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/153432


    Title: 虛擬社會中的道德法庭：網路公審的產生、運作與影響
    The Moral Court in the Virtual Society: The Emergence, Operation, and Effect of Cyber Public Trials
    Authors: 陳昀楨
    Chen, Yun-Chen
    Contributors: 馬藹萱
    Ma, Ai-Hsuan Sandra
    陳昀楨
    Chen, Yun-Chen
    Keywords: 網路公審
    劇場理論
    虛擬法庭
    道德
    公平正義
    Cyber public trials
    Dramaturgical theory
    Virtual courtroom
    Moral
    Justice
    Date: 2024
    Issue Date: 2024-09-04 15:13:34 (UTC+8)
    Abstract: 現實社會中與公平正義相關的議題經常在虛擬社會中被討論，進而產生網路公審的現象。為此，本研究比較公審在虛擬社會與現實社會間的差異，並探討發起網路公審為何成為現今社會大眾爭取公平正義偏好使用的手段、網路公審的運作、各類角色的行動與互動、與網路公審對現實社會帶來的影響。
    本研究以Facebook、Instagram、Dcard、PTT四大網路社群平台為研究場域，透過深度訪談法、參與觀察法與問卷調查法進行資料蒐集。研究者以網路公審中發起者、參與者、受審者三個角色作為深度訪談的目標群體，透過21位受訪者，瞭解各角色在參與網路公審時的態度以及對於其他角色的看法，並針對四大社群平台之公審貼文及留言進行參與觀察。此外，研究者也在四大社群平台發放網路調查問卷（共計回收77份），以蒐集網路使用者對於網路公審的看法。
    網路使用者對虛擬法庭的運作存在理想型劇本的想像，即是公審會針對事件行為本身進行討論。若參與者皆能遵照這樣的劇本期待，網路公審有機會成為虛擬社會對不同事件、議題進行公共討論的理想空間。但實際上往往會有發起者為了一己之私，導致展演出現「逆風」的插曲。此外，當針對行為進行譴責已無法滿足留言者心中的正義時，會出現「人肉搜索」的情形，以正義為名包裝自身的惡意。儘管虛擬法庭中公審的結果常能滿足現實法庭判決所無法達成的道德正義，但是無法提供受害者實質上的幫助，因此對其並不算真正取得所尋求的公平正義。個人情緒及身分在網際網路的不可辨識性，經常導致網路公審衍生為網路霸凌，甚至影響受審者在現實社會的生活與身心狀態。但網路公審也可引發公眾重新檢視社會規範與價值，進而產生正面的影響。
    本研究應用劇場論、社會心理學理論與傳播學理論，對網路公審的產生、發展過程、各類行動者的行為與互動、與對現實社會的影響提供重要的實證解釋。其研究結果不僅建立相關理論的跨域對話，也具有政策與實務上的參考價值。
    Issues related to fairness and justice in real society are often discussed in virtual communities, leading to the phenomenon of cyber public trials. This study distinguishes the features of cyber public trials from those in real society, examines why initiating public trials have become a preferred method for the public to pursue fairness and justice today, the operation of cyber public trials, the actions of and interactions among participants in various roles, and the impacts of cyber public trials on real society.
    The study employed Facebook, Instagram, Dcard, and PTT as field sites. Data were collected through in-depth interviews, participant observation, and an online survey. The study targeted three roles in cyber public trials for recruiting informants: initiator, participant, and the person on trial, and interviews were conducted with 21 informants. Participant observation of public trials’ posts and comments was performed on the four online social platforms. The study also conducted an online survey on these four platforms (77 valid questionnaires received) to gather the Internet users’ opinions on cyber public trials.
    There is an ideal type of script held by Internet users for how the virtual courtroom should operate, that is the discussion would focus on the incident or behavior in question. If participants in the virtual courtroom follow this script, cyber public trials could potentially become the ideal site for public discussion of various events and issues. However, in practice, the initiator may pursue personal interests, causing a backlash in the performance. Furthermore, when condemning behavior fails to satisfy the commentators’ sense of justice, “doxing” would often take place in the name of justice to disguise personal malice. Although the outcomes of public trials in the virtual courtroom often achieve moral justice that the real courtroom may not grant, cyber public trials do not provide tangible assistance to victims, thus failing to deliver the genuine fairness and justice. The ambiguity in personal emotions and identity on the Internet often foster cyberbullying in cyber public trials, affecting the life as well as the physical and psychological well-being of the person on trial. Cyber public trials may also enable the public to reexamine social norms and values and generate positive impacts.
    By applying dramaturgical theory, social psychological theories, and media theories, this study provides sound empirical explanations of cyber public trials’ emergence and developmental process, the behavior of and interactions among various actors therein, and the impacts of cyber public trials in real society. The results not only establish cross-disciplinary theoretical dialogues but also carry valuable practical and policy implications.
    Reference: 【中文】
    CTWANT，2023，律師娘肉搜小三找錯人 「連女帶爸」公審超慘下場曝光。https://www.ctwant.com/article/275341?utm_source=yahoo&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=275341，取用日期：2024年6月5日。
    ETtoday新聞雲，2024，彫博女死亡案遭公審最終不起訴　她爆瘦10公斤不敢再當保母。https://www.ettoday.net/news/20240313/2699512.htm，取用日期2024年7月2日。
    三立新聞網，2023，李昂博愛座風向逆轉！年輕女「1留言」讓長輩沈默　有力論述萬人讚。https://www.setn.com/News.aspx?NewsID=1357414，取用日期：2023年9月26日。
    中時新聞網，2022，南一中生坐博愛座 阿伯打去學校投訴！網見這幕全挺學生。https://www.chinatimes.com/realtimenews/20220906000990-260405?chdtv，取用日期：2023年10月5日。
    中時新聞網，2022，控被店家當小偷！奧客公審遭打臉「爆米花全丟火鍋」秒刪文。https://www.chinatimes.com/realtimenews/20220803005866-260405?chdtv，取用日期2024年6月30日。
    王力，1994，《現場歷史--文化大革命中紀事》。牛津：牛津大學。
    台 灣 資 訊 社 會 研 究 學 會，2019，《2019年台灣網路報告》。臺北市：財團法人台灣網路資訊中心。
    台 灣 資 訊 社 會 研 究 學 會，2022，《2022年台灣網路報告》。臺北市：財團法人台灣網路資訊中心。
    司法院全球資訊網，2024，司法院簡介。https://www.judicial.gov.tw/tw/cp-209-210-b0504-1.html#，取用日期：2024年8月1日。
    全國法規資料庫，2023，刑法。https://law.moj.gov.tw/LawClass/LawAll.aspx?pcode=C0000001，取用日期：2023年6月19日。
    朱力、盧亞楠，2009，〈現代集體行為中的新結構要素─網絡助燃理論探討〉。《江蘇社會科學》6：84-90。
    李惠婷，2011，《台灣人肉搜索文化之探討》。新竹：國立交通大學理學院科技與數位學習學程研究所碩士論文。
    每日新聞採訪團隊著、張嘉芬譯 ，2022，《失控的匿名正義：抹黑中傷、獵巫肉搜，你敲下的每個字都是傷人的利器》。臺北：寶鼎。（每日新聞採訪團隊，2020，ＳＮＳ暴力―なぜ人は匿名の刃をふるうのか。東京：株式會社每日新聞社。）
    華視新聞網，2021，鳳山集體霸凌案 19歲掌摑男遭私刑「斷手」。 https://news.cts.com.tw/cts/society/202102/202102072030677.html，取用日期：2023年9月26日。
    周佳儀，2008，《網路論壇的沉默螺旋現象—以台大PTT討論版為例》。臺北：世新大學新聞學研究所碩士論文。
    孟飛、呂雙波，2021，《斜槓古人　一些微浮誇、小荒唐的古人日常：古代當官有試用期╳梁朝有個宇宙大將軍╳宋朝人數學很好╳元朝也有洗門風》。臺北：崧燁文化。
    林近，2014，《社群媒體的沉默螺旋現象─以臉書為例》。臺北：國立臺灣大學社會科學院新聞研究所碩士論文。
    林維國，2013，《新媒體與民意：理論與實證》。臺北：五南。
    近藤朋子，2021，〈社群網路霸凌對社會之影響與建議—以日本的「誹謗中傷」為例〉。《涉外執法與政策學報》11：75-91。
    洪世謙，2013，〈「虛擬」的悖論—從解構哲學觀點探討網路空間〉。《人文及社會科學集刊》26(1)：41-61。
    唐士哲，2005，〈在速度的廢墟中挺進：電子媒介新聞的唯物批判觀點〉。《新聞學研究》84：79-118。
    財團法人台灣網路資訊中心，2023，2023年台灣網路報告。https://report.twnic.tw/2023/，取用日期：2024 年 5 月 2 日。
    許涵綺，2014，《媒體公審現象的檢討－以「公平審判」與「媒體近用」概念為中心》。臺北：國立臺灣大學政治學研究所碩士論文。
    彭家發，1992，《新聞論》。三民書局。
    傳播調查資料庫，2022，「哪個媒體是你的心頭好？」－台灣民眾使用各媒體之情形。https://crctaiwan.dcat.nycu.edu.tw/ResultsShow.asp，取用日期：2024年5月2日。
    廖國良、黃正魁、張仁俊、劉籹君，2012，〈臺灣網路霸凌之實證研究〉。《資訊與管理科學》5(1)：31-55。
    榎本博明著、王榆琮譯 ，2016，《暴走社會：鄉民正義、網路霸凌與媒體亂象，我們如何面對反應過度的社會》。臺北：時報。（榎本博明，2015，「過剰反応」社会の悪夢。東京：ＫＡＤＯＫＡＷＡ。）
    榎本博明著、簡捷譯 ，2017，《有人就是要害死你! 人際關係地獄求生指南, 破解酸民、小人、腹黑狂的心理機制, 不再腹背受敵而鮮血淋漓》。臺北：遠流。（榎本博明，2016，他人を引きずりおろすのに必死な人。東京：SBクリエイティブ。）
    劉正杰、董旭英，2018，〈以同儕關係、從眾行為與認知同理心探討網路霸凌旁觀者之行為傾向〉。《中華心理學刊》60(2)：101-124。
    劉宗翰，2018，《網路公審下的沉默螺旋現象－－以作家瓊瑤倡議善終權引發之風波為例》。臺北：輔仁大學大眾傳播學研究所碩士論文。

    【英文】
    Aarts, H., & Dijksterhuis, A. (2003). “The silence of the library: Environment, situational norm, and social behavior.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 84(1): 18-28.
    Allan, G. J. (1997). The forest and the trees: sociology as life, practice, and promise. Temple University Press.
    Barstow, A. L. (1995). Witchcraze: A New History of the European Witch Hunts. HarperOne.
    Batson, C. D., Ahmad, N., & Stocks, E. L. (2011). Four forms of prosocial motivation: Egoism, altruism, collectivism, and principlism. In D. Dunning (Ed.), Social motivation (pp. 103–126). Psychology Press.
    Baym, N. K. (1995). The emergence of community in computer-mediated communication. In S. G. Jones (Ed.), CyberSociety: Computer-mediated communication and community (pp. 138–163). CA: Sage.
    Sanderson, C. A. (2020). Why We Act: Turning Bystanders Into Moral Rebels. Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.
    Clark, R. D., & Word, L. E. (1972). “Why don't bystanders help? Because of ambiguity?” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 24(3): 392-400.
    Darwin, C. (1998). The Expression Of The Emotions In Man And Animals. Oxford University Press.
    Elliot, A., Timothy, D. W., Robin, M. A., & Samuel, R. S. (2020). Social Psychology, Global Edition. Pearson Education Limited.
    Festinger, L., Pepitone, A., & Newcomb, T. (1952). Some consequences of de-individuation in a group. The Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 47(2, Suppl), 382–389.
    Freud, S. (2010). The Ego and the Id. Createspace Independent Publishing Platform
    Fuller, L. L. (1964). The Morality of Law. Yale University Press.
    Galtung, J., & Ruge, M. H. (1965). The structure of foreign news the presentation of the Congo, Cuba and Cyprus crises in four Norwegian newspaper, Journal of Peace Research, 2(1), 64-91.
    Goffman, E. (1959), The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life. Anchor Books.
    Hart, H. L. A. (1961), The Concept of Law. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    Hafer, C. L., & Bègue, L. (2005). “Experimental Research on Just-World Theory: Problems, Developments, and Future Challenges.” Psychological Bulletin 131(1): 128-167.
    James, C. S. (1985). Weapons of the Weak: Everyday Forms of Peasant Resistance. Yale University Press.
    Kiesler, C. A., Nisbett, R. E., & Zanna, M. P. (1969). “On inferring one's beliefs from one's behavior.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 11(4): 321-327.
    Knapp, M. L., Hall, J. A., & Horgan, T. G. (2014). Nonverbal Communication in Human Interaction. Wadsworth.
    Latané, B., & Darley, J. M. (1970). The unresponsive bystander : why doesn’t he help? Appleton-Century Crofts.
    Lea, M., Spears, R., & de Groot, D. (2001). “Knowing me, knowing you: Anonymity effects on social identity processes within groups.” Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 27(5): 526-537.
    Lerner, M. J., & Simmons, C. H. (1966). “Observer's reaction to the "innocent victim": Compassion or rejection?” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 4(2): 203-210.
    Mead, M. (2001). New Lives for Old: Cultural Transformation--Manus, 1928-1953. Harper Perennial.
    Cawthorne, N. (2020). Witches: The History of a Persecution. Arcturus Publishing.
    Olweus, D. (1997). “Bully/victim problems in school: Facts and intervention.” European Journal of Psychology of Education 12(4): 495-510.
    Reicher, S., & Spears, R., & Postmes, Tom. (1995). A Social Identity Model of Deindividuation Phenomena. European Review of Social Psychology 6(1): 161-198.
    Rheingold, H. (1993). The Virtual Community: Homesteading on the Electronic Frontier. Reading. MA: Addison-Wesley.
    Ronson, J. (2015). So You've Been Publicly Shamed. New York: Riverhead Books.
    Solomon, L. Z., Solomon, H., & Stone, R. (1978). “Helping as a function of number of bystanders and ambiguity of emergency.” Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 4(2): 318-321.
    Steven, P. (2012). The Better Angels of Our Nature: Why Violence Has Declined. Penguin Books.
    Tajfel, H., & Turner, J. C. (1979). An integrative theory of intergroup conflict. In W. G. Austin, & S. Worchel (Eds.), The social psychology of intergroup relations (pp. 33-37). Monterey, CA: Brooks/Cole.
    Tallentyre, S.G. (1906). The Friends of Voltaire. London: Smith, Elder & Co.
    Turkle, S. (1997). Life on the Screen: Identity in the Age of the Internet. Simon & Schuster
    Willard, N. E. (2007). Cyberbullying and cyberthreats: Responding to the challenge of online social aggression, threats, and distress. Research Press.
    William, J. (1890). The Principles of Psychology. New York: Henry Holt and Co.
    Description: 碩士
    國立政治大學
    社會學系
    109254007
    Source URI: http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0109254007
    Data Type: thesis
    Appears in Collections:[Department of Sociology] Theses

    Files in This Item:

    File SizeFormat
    400701.pdf3860KbAdobe PDF0View/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