本研究之主要研究目的在於了解不同的資訊安全訊息呈現方式如何影響資訊安全的服從意圖。此研究整合了保護動機理論(Protection Motivation Theory)、解釋級別理論(Construal Level Theory)和調節焦點理論(Regulatory Focus Theory)來達到上述目的。依據解釋級別理論，本研究將訊息描述區分為抽象與具體，結合保護動機理論，探討不同內容的訊息描述如何影響威脅(Threat)與因應(Coping)的鑑定結果(Appraisal)；最後，依據調節焦點理論之論述，本研究試圖了解不同調節焦點導向的狀況下，(1)威脅以及因應鑑定的重要性是否不同，(2)不同訊息描述內容的效果是否有差異。
研究結果指出具體的威脅敘述短文會導致威脅鑑定(Threat appraisal)，而具體的威脅解決短文會導致因應鑑定(Coping appraisal)。不同的人格特質(Regulatory focus)並不會中介短文與鑑定(Appraisal)之間的關係。
知覺嚴重性 (Perceived severity)、知覺脆弱性(perceived vulnerability)和反應效能(Response efficacy)是主要影響服從意圖的因子。此外，比起促進定向的人(Promotion individual)，預防定向的人(Prevention individual)影響服從意圖的因素更應該要注意威脅鑑定(Threat appraisal)中的知覺脆弱性(Perceived vulnerability)。比起預防定向的人(Prevention individual)，促進定向的人(Promotion individual)影響服從意圖的因素更應該要注意因應鑑定(Coping appraisal)中的自我效能(Self-efficacy)。

The purposes of this study have three. First, we want to discover how different illustration of information security messages affects people attitude toward compliance intention. In addition, we want to know whether the personalities moderate the compliance process or not. Finally, we find out the crucial factor that most affect the process of compliance intention.
We integrate protection motivation theory, construal-level theory, and regulatory focus theory to build a model. The messages we build for this study are about mobile phone authority setting and have two types: threat description and threat respond. To distinguish the difference of the messages, each type of message has low-level construal concrete version and high-level construal abstract version. In addition, we assume that personalities will moderate the process, so we applied the concept of regulatory focus theory to exam it.
In the result, it shows concrete threat description message will lead an individual to threat appraisal and concrete threat response message will lead the individual to coping appraisal. Regulatory focus didn’t moderate the process of the message toward compliance intention. Perceived severity, perceived vulnerability, and Response efficacy are the factors that affect compliance intention. Besides, to enact the advocacy message, for prevention individual can focus on perceived vulnerability which in threat appraisal to enhance compliance intention. For promotion individual can focus on self-efficacy which in coping appraisal to enhance compliance intention.

論文審定書 i
中文摘要 iii
Abstract iv
List of figures vii
List of tables viii
Chapter 1 Introduction 1
1.1 Background 1
1.2 Motivation & Research Question 2
Chapter 2 Literature Review 6
2.1 Protection Motivation Theory 6
2.2 Construal-level Theory 9
2.3 Regulatory Focus Theory 13
Chapter 3 Research Model & Hypotheses 17
3.1 Research Model 17
3.2 Research hypothesis 19
3.2.1 Different construal level of messages toward appraisal 19
3.2.2 Regulator focus moderate appraisal 21
3.2.3 Appraisal to compliance intention 23
3.2.4 Regulator focus moderate compliance intention 24
3.3 Operational Definition 26
Chapter 4 Research Methodology & Data Collection 28
4.1 Experimental Design & Process 28
4.2Manipulation & Measurement 29
4.2.1 Manipulation & manipulation check 29
4.2.2 Measurement 30
4.3 Data Collection 34
Chapter 5 Data Analysis 35
5.1 Manipulation Check 35
5.2 Demographic statistics 36
5.3 Measurement Validation 39
5.3.1 Reliability and Validity 39
5.3.2 Common method variance 42
5.4 Hypotheses testing 44
5.4.1 Relationship between message and appraisal 45
5.4.2 Relationship between appraisal and compliance intention 48
5.4.3 Result 52
5.5 Discussion 53
Chapter 6 Conclusion and Implication 56
6.1 Summary 56
6.2 Contribution 57
6.3 Limitation and Suggestions for Future Study 59
References 60

Anderson, J. M. (2003). Why we need a new definition of information security. Computers & Security, 22(4), 308-313.
Bar-Anan, Y., Liberman, N., & Trope, Y. (2006). The association between psychological distance and construal level: evidence from an implicit association test. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 135(4), 609-622.
Brockner, J., & Higgins, E. T. (2001). Regulatory focus theory: Implications for the study of emotions at work. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 86(1), 35-66.
Bulgurcu, B., Cavusoglu, H., & Benbasat, I. (2010). Information security policy compliance: an empirical study of rationality-based beliefs and information security awareness. MIS Quarterly, 34(3), 523-548.
Cavusoglu, H., Mishra, B., & Raghunathan, S. (2004). The effect of internet security breach announcements on market value: Capital market reactions for breached firms and internet security developers. International journal of electronic commerce, 9(1), 70-104.
Chang, H., Zhang, L., & Xie, G.-X. (2015). Message framing in green advertising: The effect of construal level and consumer environmental concern. International Journal of Advertising, 34(1), 158-176. doi: 10.1080/02650487.2014.994731
Cialdini, R. B., & Richardson, K. D. (1980). Two indirect tactics of image management: Basking and blasting. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 39(3), 406.
Crowe, E., & Higgins, E. T. (1997). Regulatory focus and strategic inclinations: Promotion and prevention in decision-making. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 69(2), 117-132.
Dhar, R. (1997). Consumer preference for a no-choice option. The Journal of consumer research, 24(2), 215-231.
Dhar, R., & Kim, E. Y. (2007). Seeing the forest or the trees: Implications of construal level theory for consumer choice. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 17(2), 96-100.
Enck, W., Ongtang, M., & McDaniel, P. (2009). On Lightweight Mobile Phone Application Certification. Proceedings of the 16th ACM conference on Computer and communications security. ACM.
Förster, J., Liberman, N., & Higgins, E. T. (2005). Accessibility from active and fulfilled goals. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 41(3), 220-239.
Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981). Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of marketing research, 39-50.
Fujita, K., & Han, H., A. (2009). Moving beyond deliberative control of impulses: The effect of construal levels on evaluative associations in self-control conflicts. Psychological Science, 20(7), 799-804.
Höne, K., & Eloff, J. H. P. (2002). What makes an effective information security policy? Network security, 2002 (6), 14-16.
Hansen, J., & Wanke, M. (2010). Truth from language and truth from fit: The impact of linguistic concreteness and level of construal on subjective truth. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 36(11), 1576-1588.
Hanus, B., & Wu, Y. A. (2015). Impact of Users’ Security Awareness on Desktop Security Behavior: A Protection Motivation Theory Perspective. Information Systems Management, 33(1), 2-16.
Henderson, M. D., Trope, Y., & Carnevale, P. J. (2006). Negotiation from a near and distant time perspective. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 91(4), 712.
Herath, T., & Rao, H. R. (2009). Protection motivation and deterrence: a framework for security policy compliance in organisations. European Journal of Information Systems, 18(2), 106-125.
Higgins, E. T. (1998). Promotion and prevention: Regulatory focus as a motivational principle. Advances in experimental social psychology, 30, 1-46.
Ifinedo, P. (2012). Understanding information systems security policy compliance: An integration of the theory of planned behavior and the protection motivation theory. Computers & Security, 31(1), 83-95.
Jain, A. K., & Shanbhag, D. (2012). Addressing security and privacy risks in mobile applications. IT Professional,, 14(5), 28-33.
Jeong, B., & Yoon, T. (2014). The Role of Regulatory Focus and Message Framing on Persuasion of Anti-piracy Educational Campaigns.
Johnson, M. D. (1984). Consumer choice strategies for comparing noncomparable alternatives. Journal of Consumer Research, 11(3), 741-753.
Johnson, M. D. (1988). Comparability and hierarchical processing in multialternative choice. The Journal of consumer research, 15(3), 303-314.
Johnston, A. C., & Warkentin, M. (2010). Fear appeals and information security behaviors: an empirical study. MIS Quarterly, 549-566.
Kao, D. T., Wu, P.-H., & Yu, A. P.-I. (2017). The impact of construal level on brand preferences: Ad metaphors and brand biography as moderators. Asia Pacific Management Review, 22(1), 52-59.
Kim, H., Rao, A. R., & Lee, A. Y. (2009). It's time to vote: The effect of matching message orientation and temporal frame on political persuasion. Journal of Consumer Research, 35(6), 877-889.
Kim, Y.-J. (2006). The role of regulatory focus in message framing in antismoking advertisements for adolescents. Journal of Advertising, 35(1), 143-151.
Lee, A. Y., Keller, P. A., & Sternthal, B. (2010). Value from regulatory construal fit: The persuasive impact of fit between consumer goals and message concreteness. Journal of Consumer Research, 36(5), 735-747.
Liberman, N., Eyal, T., Trope, Y., & Walther, E. (2004). The pros and cons of temporally near and distant action. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 86(6), 781.
Lindell, M. K., & Whitney, D. J. (2001). Accounting for common method variance in cross-sectional research designs. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86(1), 114-121.
Maddux, J. E., & Rogers, R. W. (1983). Protection motivation and self-efficacy: A revised theory of fear appeals and attitude change. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 19(5), 469-479.
Memmert, D., Hüttermann, S., & Orliczek, J. (2013). Decide like Lionel Messi! The impact of regulatory focus on divergent thinking in sports. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 43(10), 2163-2167.
Micu, C. C., & Chowdhury, T. G. (2010). The effect of message's regulatory focus and product type on persuasion. Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice, 18(2), 181-190.
Novak, T. P., & Hoffman, D. L. (2008). The fit of thinking style and situation: New measures of situation-specific experiential and rational cognition. Journal of Consumer Research, 36(1), 56-72

Pechmann, C., Zhao, G., Goldberg, M. E., & Reibling, E. T. (2003 ). What to convey in antismoking advertisements for adolescents: The use of protection motivation theory to identify effective message themes. Journal of Marketing, 67(2), 1-18.
Pham, M. T., & Avnet, T. (2004). Ideals and Oughts and the Reliance on Affect versus Substance in Persuasion. Journal of Consumer Research, 30(4), 503-518.
Pham, M. T., & Avnet, T. (2009). Contingent reliance on the affect heuristic as a function of regulatory focus. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 108(2), 267-278.
Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Lee, J. Y., & Podsakoff, N. P. (2003). Common method biases in behavioral research: a critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88(5), 879-903.
Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., & Podsakoff, N. P. (2012). Sources of method bias in social science research and recommendations on how to control it. Annual review of psychology, 63, 539-569.
Rippetoe, P. A., & Rogers, R. W. (1987). Effects of components of protection-motivation theory on adaptive and maladaptive coping with a health threat. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 52(3), 596.
Rogers, R. W. (1975). A protection motivation theory of fear appeals and attitude change. The Journal of Psychology, 91(1), 93-114.
Roy, R., & Phau, I. (2014). Examining regulatory focus in the information processing of imagery and analytical advertisements. Journal of Advertising, 43(4), 371-381.
Siponen, M., Pahnila, S., & Mahmood, A. (2007). Employees' adherence to information security policies: an empirical study. In IFIP International Information Security Conference (pp. 133-144). Springer, Boston, MA.
Siponena, M., Pahnila, S., & Mahmood, A. (2006). Factors influencing protection motivation and IS security policy compliance. In Innovations in Information Technology, 1-5.
Song, D., & Morton, C. R. (2016). The Influence of Regulatory Focus on the Effect of Product Cues. Psychology & Marketing, 33(11), 917-933.
Trope, Y., & Liberman, N. (2000). Temporal construal and time-dependent changes in preference. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 79(6), 876-889.
Trope, Y., & Liberman, N. (2010). Construal-level theory of psychological distance. Psychological review, 117(2), 440-463.
Ülkümen, G., & Cheema, A. (2011). Framing goals to influence personal savings: The role of specificity and construal level. Journal of marketing research, 48(6), 958-969.
Vance, A., Siponen, M., & Pahnila, S. (2012). Motivating IS security compliance: insights from habit and protection motivation theory. Information & Management, 49(3), 190-198.
Velde, F. W. V. d., & Pligt, J. V. d. (1991). AIDS-related health behavior: Coping, protection motivation, and previous behavior. Journal of Behavioral Medicine, 14(5), 429-451.
Wan, E. W., Hong, J., & Sternthal, B. (2009). The effect of regulatory orientation and decision strategy on brand judgments. Journal of Consumer Research, 35(6), 1026-1038.