| Reference: | 參考書目
一、中文部分
I書籍
1.吳統雄，電話調查理論與方法(台北:聯經出版公司，民國七十三年)。
2.林清山，心理與教育統計學(台北:東華書局，民國六十九年) 。
3.卓峰志，郵寄問卷回收率之研究(台北:政治大學新聞研究所碩士論文，民國七十四年)。
4.楊國樞等，社會及行為科學研究法上下冊(台北:東華書局，民國六十九年)。
5.樊志育，廣告效果研究(台北:三民書局，民國七十三年)。
6.鄭瑞城，電傳視訊(台北:政治大學新聞研究所，民國七十四年)。
II期刊
1.工商時報，「怎樣把收視率做好?」，民國七十一年五月八日，第十二版。
2.工商時報，「收視率是劊子手嗎?」，民國七十一年四月卅一日，第十二版。
3.民生報，「收視率可靠程度引起爭執」，民國七十一年四月二十九日，第十一版。
4.民生報，「收視率具有多少公信力?」，民國七十四年十二月二日，第十一版。
5.吳心柳，「收視率不是劊子手」，聯合報，民國七十一年五月七日，第八版。
6.林暉，「經濟有效運用電視媒體」，實業世界，民國七十三年十月:頁32-35。
7.徐佳士，「電視的劊子手」，天下雜誌，民國七十年四月一日，頁33。
8.陳世敏，「都是收視率惹的禍?」六篇，民生報，民國七十二年五月三十一日至六月五日。
9.黃奇鏗，「好個電視調查站!」，掃描線雜誌第二期，民國七十一年四月，頁28-33。
10.葉明佳，「廣告媒體計劃的基本概念」，實業世界，民國七十三年十月:頁11-12。
11.鄒光華、何銘驥合譯，「媒體計劃的過程」，實業世界，民國七十三年十月:頁13-21。
12.鄒光華、何銘驥合著，「媒體計算公式」，實業世界，民國七十三年十月:頁23-26。
13.鄭炳耀，「媒體計劃是科學還是藝術?」，實業世界，民國七十三年十月:頁27-31。
14.樊志育，「台灣廣告事業發展的方向」，廣告時代月刊，民國七十三年九月:頁20-23。
15.賴東明，「如何科學化運用媒體?」，實業世界，民國七十三年十月，頁9-10。
二、英文部分
I書籍
1. Babbe, Earl R., Survey Research Methods (California:Wadsworth Publishing Company Inc . , 1973)
2. Blumler, Jay G. & Elihu Katz, The uses of Mass Communications-current perspectives on Gratifications Research (California: Sage publications Inc., 1974)
3. Bogart, Leo, Strategy in Advertising (New York:Harcourt, Brace & World Inc., 1967)
4. David, H.A., Contributions to Survey Sampling and Applied Statistics (New York : Academic press Inc., 1978)
5. Dillman, Don A., Mail and Telephone Surveys (New York: John Wiley & Sons Inc, 1978)
6. Frey, James H., Survey Research by telephone (California: Sage Library of Social Research,1984)
7. Goodhardt, G.J. et. al., The Television Autience (England: Saxon House, Teakfield Itd., 1979)
8. Groves, Robert M. & Robert L. Kahn, Surveys by telephone (New York: Academic press Inc., 1979)
9. Haskins, Jack B., How to Evaluate Mass Communications, Syracuse University, 1968)
10. Jugenheimer, Donald W. & Peter B. Turk , Advertising Media (Ohio: Grid publishing Inc . 1980)
11. Kline F. Gerald & SuSan H. Evans, Prime-time Television (California: Sage Publications Inc., 1980).
12. Lin, Nan, Foundations of Social Research (New York: Mcgraw-Hill Inc., 1976)
13. Meier Normanc and Harond W. Saunders, The polls and public opinion (Iowa City: State University of Iowa, 1949)
14. Pai, Ya-Long, An Examination of Television Autience Measurement Method in the United States and the Republic of China (Thesis of Master degree, University of Texas at Austin)
15. Robinson, John P ., How Americans use time (New York: Praeger Publishers, 1977)
16. Wrightsman, Lawrence S., Stuart W. Cook & Claire Selltiz, Research Methods in Social Relations (New York: Holt, Rinehart and winston Inc., 1976).
II期刊
1. Baker, William F. "Industry needs more reliable measures of TV viewer behavior" (Television/Radio Age, March 4, 1985): 47-52.
2. Beville, Hugh M. "Infighting emerges in meter battle as Nielsen accelerates timeable though hedging on specifics" (Television/ Radio Age, August 23, 1982a): 43-45, 82-86.
3. Beville, Hugh M. "Will Increasing Interest in qualitative ratings lead to more emphasis on Measuring program appeal?" (Television/Radio Age, November 15, 1982b ): 53-92.
4. Beville, Hugh M. "Cable ratings methodology must employ common parameters to those used by broadcast television" (Television/Radio Age, January 17, 1983): 70-73, 112.
5. Boyd, Douglas A. and Joseph D. Straubhaar "Developmental Impact of the home Video Cassette Recorder on third world countries" (Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, Winter 1985):5-17.
6. Galloway, John J. & F. Louise Meek, "Audience uses and gratification: An Expectancy model",Communcation Research, 8 (October 1981): 435-49.
7. Henry, Leslie "Let`s get their measure" (Media, March, 1980): 6-9.
8. Jaffe, Alfred J. "ARB-NSI dispute complicates cable diary issue" (Television/Radio Age, November 24, 1975): 35-36.
9. Jaffe, Alfred J. "Arbitron vs. Nielsen: they`re fighting the local meters wars with different sampling Methods" (Television/Radio Age, July 9, 1984): 34-36, 106-107.
10. Josephson, Sanford "Expected Arbitron-Nielsen race to install meters in local TV market turning into meter-diary battle" (Television/Radio Age, June 6, 1983): 38-39.
11. Linsky, Arnold S. "Stimulating Responses to Mailed Questionnaires: A Review" (POQ, Spring 1975, No.1): 83-101.
12. Macain, Thomas "The invisible influence: European Andience Research" (Intermedia July/Sep. 1985 Volume 13): 74-79.
13. Metzger, Gale "Current andience measurement is doing the Job; meter at local level should be viewed cautiously" (Television/Radio Age, February 20, 1984) : 46-47, 86-87.
14. Rogers, Theresa F. "Interviews by Telephone and in person: Quality of Response and Field performance" (POQ Spring 1976, Vol 40 No 1): 51-65.
15. Rosenthal Edmond M. "System audience measurement takes a measured path" (Cableage, March 18, 1985); 8-12.
16. Sobel Robert "Recent qualitative TV studies get Mixed ratings" (Television/Radio age Vol.xxx , No 22 June 6, 1983): 35-37.
17. Swisshelm George "Need seen for expanded meters, different diaries" (Television/Radio age Volume XXX, No.l7 Mar 28, 1983): 37-39, 122
18. Swisshelm George "Has TV meter expansion really been worth it?" (Television/Radio Age Vol.XXXII No.8 November 12, 1984) : 41-43, 98
19. Swisshelm George "Diary-meter ratings gap: Are agencies adjusting for it?" (Television/Radio age May 13, 1985a) : 43-45 , 152-154.
20. Swisshelm George "Agencies , Clients welcome new TAA qualitative survey" (Television/Radio August 5, 1985): 37-39, 115-118.
21. Steeh, Charlotte G. "Trends in Nonresponse Rates, 1952-1979 (POQ Vol.45 Spring 1981, No.1): 41-57.
22. Tranb, James, "The world according to Nielsen"(Channels January/February 1985) : 26-32.
23. Webster, Janes G. & Jacob J. Wakshlag "A theory of television program choice" (communication Research/October 1983) : 430-447. |
