博碩士論文 etd-0802111-154208 詳細資訊


[回到前頁查詢結果 | 重新搜尋]

姓名 林宜澄(Yi-cheng Lin) 電子郵件信箱 E-mail 資料不公開
畢業系所 傳播管理研究所(Communications Management)
畢業學位 碩士(Master) 畢業時期 99學年第2學期
論文名稱(中) 置入性新聞的識讀能力與第三人效果
論文名稱(英) Media Literacy and the Third-Person Effect of Product Placement in the Television News
檔案
  • etd-0802111-154208.pdf
  • 本電子全文僅授權使用者為學術研究之目的,進行個人非營利性質之檢索、閱讀、列印。
    請遵守中華民國著作權法之相關規定,切勿任意重製、散佈、改作、轉貼、播送,以免觸法。
    論文使用權限

    電子論文:校內校外完全公開

    論文語文/頁數 中文/151
    統計 本論文已被瀏覽 5565 次,被下載 2017 次
    摘要(中)   本研究旨在探討置入性新聞的第三人效果,試圖釐清置入性新聞的說服效果,對閱聽眾本身及其週遭其他人的影響力,並檢視閱聽眾的媒體識讀能力是否如同過去學者所言,足以協助閱聽眾辨識出媒體內容的勸服意圖,進而傾向評估置入性新聞對自己的說服效果較低,對其他人的影響較大,及閱\聽眾是否會出於保護其他人的心態進而傾向支持政府應限制置入性新聞。
      本研究主要以問卷調查為研究方法,研究對象乃針對高雄市三所國中的學生施測,共回收476份有效問卷。問卷資料經獨立t檢定、成對t檢定、相關分析以及階層迴歸分析後發現,置入性新聞會引起第三人效果:第三人效果認知強度隨著新聞中不同置入程度的訊息而增減,相較於隱含式的置入性新聞,明顯的置入性新聞所引發的第三人效果認知較強,但置入程度的差異對第三人效果認知差距並無顯著的影響,也就是人們在評估置入性新聞對他人具有影響的同時,亦認為訊息對自身具有相近的影響力。
      媒體識讀能力變項的分析結果發現個人對電視新聞的媒體識讀能力可以有效預測第三人效果認知程度,此研究結果如同過去相關研究所論,唯有仰賴個人對媒體的專業素養,才得以辨識廣告的目的,且傾向評估自己不易受到訊息的影響。
      另外,本研究針對第三人效果的行為層面之探討,結果顯示第三人效果認知是支持限制置入性新聞的顯著預測變項,但因第三人效果認知差距無法區分訊息同時對自己與他人影響皆大或小的兩種情況(羅文輝,2000b),故本研究結果在第三人效果認知差距上是無法預測規範行為,而此一研究結果,再次驗證Xu和Gonzenbach(2008)彙整第三人效果行為層面的研究發現所得,第三人效果認知為最顯著的預測變項,因此,建議未來研究可以針對置入性新聞的第三人效果認知的成因作延伸性的探討。
    摘要(英)    This study aimed to examine the third-person effect of product placement in the television news, for clarifying the effect of persuasiveness of news with product placement and comparing the assessment of the impact on others and themselves. The study also concerned about the media literacy if it can help the audience to identify the messages of persuasive intention, to evaluate the impact of product placement in the television news is greater on others than on themselves, and to support the government to prohibit product placement in the television news.
       In this study, the main research method was questionnaire survey, and the research participants were junior high school students from three sections in Kaohsiung. There were 476 valid questionnaires totally. Data were analyzed by methods of independent t-test, paired t-test, correlation and hierarchical regression analysis. The results found that product placement of television news would cause the third-person effect: messages of product placement of different levels would result in different intensities of third-person perception. Compared to implicit-style placements in the television news, obvious ones triggered strong media impact on others, but did not trigger third-person perception differential. It meant people tend to view product placement in the television news had impact on others as well as on themselves.
       Another focus of this study was personal media literacy ability. Analytic results showed that literacy ability was a better predictor of the third-person effect perception. The result of the study was similar to the findings of the past research: media literacy could assist in identifying the purpose of product placement in the television news, and could avoid the perceived effect of media messages on themselves (Cohen, 1982; Rucinski & Salmon, 1990; Wei, Lo & Lu, 2008).
       Most importantly, this study contributed to the growing literature on behavioral component of the third-person effect by demonstrating that the third-person effect perception was a great predictor of support for restriction of product placement in the televiton news than the third-person perception differential. The reason was that the third-person perception differential could not distinguish perceived effects of product placement in the television news on others as well as themselves (Wen-Hui Luo, 2000b). As research result of Xu and Gonzenbach on the behavioral component of the third-person effect, third-person perception differential was the most significant predictor of support for media censorship. Therefore, this study suggests that future research could probe into the mechanisms through which the third-person effect of product placement in the television news occurs.
    關鍵字(中)
  • 媒體識讀
  • 置入性新聞
  • 規範行為
  • 第三人效果認知差距
  • 第三人效果
  • 關鍵字(英)
  • media literacy
  • advertorial
  • product placement in the television news
  • media censorship
  • the third-person perception differential
  • third-person effect
  • 論文目次 目錄
    論文審定書………………………………………………………………i
    誌謝……………………………………………………………………ii
    中文摘要…………………………………………………………………iii
    英文摘要…………………………………………………………………v
    第一章 緒論…………………………………………………………1
    壹、研究動機與目的……………………………………………1
    第二章 文獻探討………………………………………………………7
    壹、置入性行銷的演進…………………………………………7
    一、置入性行銷策略………………………………………7
    二、置入性新聞…………………………………………10
    貳、媒體識讀………………………………………………15
    参、媒體內容與第三人效果…………………………………20
    一、置入性新聞的第三人效果及其干擾變項………… 20
    二、置入程度對第三人效果的影響…………………… 32
    三、媒體識讀、置入性新聞與第三人效果………………37
    四、第三人效果與規範行為…………………………… 38
    第三章 研究方法………………………………………………………42
    壹、樣本選取之前測……………………………………… 42
    貳、正式問卷之研究對象…………………………………… 43
    参、研究架構、研究假設與實驗設計 ………………………44
    肆、實驗流程 ………………………………………………45
    伍、變項 ………………………………………………………47
    陸、問卷內容修訂…………………………………………… 57
    柒、統計分析…………………………………………………66
    第四章 資料分析與討論………………………………………………67
    壹、描述性統計分析………………………………………… 67
    貳、研究假設結果分析………………………………………69
    第五章 結論與建議……………………………………………………80
    壹、研究發現…………………………………………………80
    貳、研究貢獻…………………………………………………89
    参、研究限制與建議………………………………………….92
    參考資料………………………………………………………………97
    附錄一:媒體識讀之前測問卷………………………………………108
    附錄二:媒體識讀之前測結果………………………………………111
    附錄三:前測問卷……………………………………………………112
    問卷3-1:第一則「明顯置入性新聞」之檢測問卷………… 112
    問卷3-2:第一則「無置入性新聞」之檢測問卷…………… 114
    問卷3-3:第一則「隱含式置入性新聞」之檢測問卷………116
    問卷3-4:第二則「隱含式置入性新聞」之檢測問卷 ………118
    問卷3-5:第二則「明顯置入性新聞」之檢測問卷………….120
    問卷3-6:第二則「無置入性新聞」之檢測問卷 ……………122
    問卷3-7:「媒體認知」之檢測問卷 …………………………124
    附錄四:正式問卷………………………………………………………127
    問卷4-1:「明顯置入性新聞」之檢測問卷……………………127
    問卷4-2:「隱含式置入性新聞」之檢測問卷………………129
    問卷4-3:「無置入性新聞」之檢測問卷………………………130
    問卷4-4:「媒體認知」之檢測問卷………………………131
    附錄五:實驗設計之新聞影片說明…………………………………133
    一、前測實驗設計之新聞影片………………………………133
    二、正式問卷實驗設計之新聞影片…………………………137
    參考文獻 中華傳播學會(2010年12月26日)。〈新聞性置入行銷的氾濫,台灣民主的危機〉。上網時間:2011年1月20日,取自http://ccs.nccu.edu.tw/news_content.php?N_ID=520
    王泰俐、蘇蘅(2009)。〈電視新聞商業置入廠商身分揭露、產品類型以及置入策略對新聞可信度的影響〉,《中華傳播學刊》,32: 27-51。
    王毓莉(2005)。〈政府運用「置入性行銷」從事菸害防制工作之初探性研究〉,《中華傳播學刊》,8: 115-159。
    台灣媒體觀察教育基金會(2011年1月10日)。〈「反收買新聞」聯盟成立聲明〉。上網時間:2011年1月27日,取自http://www.mediawatch.org.tw/node/1517
    李欣芳(2011年1月11日)。〈小英會黃哲斌:若執政不恢復置入行銷〉,《自由電子報》。上網時間:2011年1月27日,取自http://www.libertytimes.com.tw/2011/new/jan/11/today-p3.htm
    李美賢(2011年1月11日)。〈新防會2010年12月份新聞觀察報告:反置入立法貴在落實 媒體須自律才是根本〉。上網時間:2011年1月27日,取自http://www.atj.org.tw/newscon1.asp?number=9482
    周慧如(2011年1月5日)。〈政策乎?廣告乎?〉,《中時電子報》。上網日期:2011年1月27日,取自http://news.chinatimes.com/reading/110513/122011010500515.html
    周典芳、陳國明(2008)。《媒介素養概論》。五南,台北。
    林上祚(2011年1月13日)。〈節目廣告化 3頻道罰百萬〉。上網時間:2011年1月27日,取自http://showbiz.chinatimes.com/2009Cti/Channel/Showbiz/showbiz-news-cnt/0,5020,110511+112011011300003,00.html
    林士珍(2007)。《媒體識讀能力與第三人效果之研究—以2006年世新傳播資料庫為例》。世新大學廣播電視電影學系碩士論文。
    林怡萱(2004)。《女性主義教育學與媒體識讀教育:一個行動研究的成果》。中山大學傳播管理研究所碩士論文。
    林照真(2005)。〈「置入性行銷」:新聞與廣告倫理的雙重崩壞〉,《中華傳播學刊》,8: 29。
    林美雅、向倩儀、蔡維鴻(2005)。〈瘦身廣告的第三人效果瘦身廣告的第三人效果〉,《中華傳播學刊》,7: 227-253。
    洪雅慧(2007)。〈網路電子郵件之「第三人效果」與「第一人效果」-以台灣「319槍擊疑雲」電子郵件散播為例〉,《新聞學研究》,90: 1-42。
    胡幼偉(1998)。〈選舉民調第三者效果的因果分析〉,「中華傳播學會第二屆年會論文集」,台北;中華傳播學會。
    胡幼偉(1998),《傳播訊息的第三者效果:理論探源與實證研究》。台北:五南出版。
    徐振興(2005)。《產品置入電視戲劇節目與其行銷溝通效果之研究》。(國科會專題研究計畫成果報告,NSC 93-2412-H-034-002)。台北:中國文化大學廣告學系。
    陳炳宏(2005)。〈探討廣告商介入電視新聞產製之新聞廣告化現象:兼論置入性行銷與新聞專業自主〉,《中華傳播學刊》,8: 209-246。
    陳志賢、陳志萍(2007)。〈電視改革的第三人效果與新社會運動模式:以大高雄地區民眾意見調查為例〉,《新聞學研究》,91: 35-83。
    陳清河、鄭自隆(2004)。〈政令宣導節目置入之表現形式與效果研究〉,鄭自隆(編),《電視置入:型式、效果與倫理》,頁33-71。台北:正中書局。
    張錦華、黃浩榮(2001)。《監督媒體DIY》。台北,法蘭克福。
    張錫量(2006)。《民眾對休閒遊憩區採用電視新聞置入性行銷接受度與遊憩滿度相關之研究》。大葉大學碩士論文。
    教育部(2002年10月24日)。〈媒體素養教育政策白皮書〉。上網時間:2010年4月6日,取自http://mediaportal.moe.gov.tw/front/bin/partprint.phtml?Part=committee02&Category=0&Style=1
    黃哲斌(2010年12月13日)。〈我搭著噴射機,離開中國時報〉。上網日期:2011年1月27日,取自http://puppydad.blogspot.com/2010/12/blog-post_13.html
    馮建三(1992)。《廣告的符碼》。台北,遠流。(原書:Jhally, S. [1987]. The codes of advertising. New York: St. Martin's Press.)
    彭文正(2007)。〈第三人效果的理解與疑惑〉,《中華傳播學刊》,12: 3-52。
    彭賢恩、張郁敏(2008)。〈政治置入性新聞對新聞可信度之影響〉,《新聞學研究》,95: 55-110。
    管中祥(2003)。《全球資本下地方文化的衰退與再生產─以新店地區有線電視地方頻道為例》。世新大學傳播所博士論文。
    廖淑君(2005)。《政府置入性行銷法律議題之研究》。世新大學法學院碩士論文。
    蔡尚琴(2003)。〈公共電視媒體識讀節目「別小看我」作為國小高年級學童教學輔助教材之可行性—以台北區學童觀看第 25 集節目「電視生死符」為例〉,《2003應用媒體暨動畫藝術理論與實務研討會論文集》。台北:國立台灣藝術大學。
    蔡樹培(2005)。〈電視新聞性置入行銷:行銷視野之探討〉,《中華傳播學刊》,8: 3-15。
    鄭自隆(2008)。《電視置入:型式、效果與倫理》。台北:正中書局。
    劉昌德、羅世宏(2005)。〈電視置入性行銷之規範:政治經濟學觀點的初步考察〉,《中華傳播學刊》,8: 41-61。
    劉幼琍(2005)。《數位時代的有線電視經營與管理》。台北:正中書局。
    蕭介雲(2010年12月22日)。〈年代綜合台置入行銷嚴重 NCC今撤照〉,《台灣醒報》。上網日期:2011年1月27日,取自http://anntw.com/awakening/news_center/show.php?itemid=18859
    謝筠(2009)。《台灣民眾生活型態與其媒體識讀能力之研究-以2006、2007世新傳播資料庫為例》。世新大學廣播電視電影學系碩士論文。
    羅文輝譯(1992)。《信差的動機》。台北:遠流。(原書Hulterng, J. L. [1976]. The messenger’s motives: Ethical problem of the news media. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.)
    羅文輝(2000a)。〈性策略理論、性別、第三人效果與支持限制色情媒介〉,《新聞學研究》,63: 201-222。
    羅文輝(2000b)。〈負面內容與社會距離對第三人效果認知的影響〉,《新聞學研究》,65: 95-129。
    羅文輝、牛隆光(2003)。〈自尊、第三人效果與對限制媒介支持度的關聯性研究〉,《新聞學研究》,75: 141-167。
    羅文輝、劉蕙苓(2006)。〈置入性行銷對新聞記者的影響〉,《新聞學研究》,89: 81-125。
    Atwood, L. E. (1994). Illusions of media power: The third-person effect. Journalism Quarterly, 71(2), 269-281.
    Brosius, H-B., & Engel, D. (1996). The causes of third-person effects: Unrealistic optimism, impersonal impact, or generalized negative attitudes towards media influence? International Journal of Public Opinion Research, 8, 142-162.
    Balasubramanian, S. K. (1994). Beyond advertising and publicity: Hybrid messages and public policy issues. Journal of Advertising, 23(4), 29-46.
    Balasubramanian, S. K., Karrh, J. A., & Patwardhan, H. (2006). Audience response to product placements: An integrative framework and future research agenda. Journal of Advertising, 35(3), 115-141.
    Chia, S. C., Lu, K.-H., & McLeod, D. M. (2004). Sex, lies, and video compact disc: A case study on third-person perception and motivations for media censorship. Communication Research, 31, 109-130.
    Cho, H., & Boster, F. J. (2008). First and third person perceptions on anti-drug ads among adolescents. Communication Research, 35(2), 169-189.
    Cohen, J., Mutz, D., Price, V., & Gunther, A. C. (1988). Perceived impact of defamation: An experiment on third-person effects. Public Opinion Quarterly, 52, 161-173.
    Cohen, J., & Davis, R. (1991). Third-person effects and the differential impact in negative political advertising. Journalism Quarterly, 68, 680-686.
    Chapin, J. (2002). Third-person perception and school violence. Communication Research Reports, 19(3), 216-225.
    Davison, W. P. (1983). The third-person effect in communication. Public Opinion Quarterly, 40, 1-15.
    D’Astous, A. & Chartier, F. (2000). A study of factors affecting consumer evaluations and memory of product placement in movies. Journal of Current Issues and Research in Advertising, 22(2), 31-52.
    Day, A. (2008). Out of the living room and into the voting booth: An analysis of corporate public affairs advertising under the third-person effect. American Behavioral Scientist, 52(2), 243-260.
    DeLorme, D. E. & Reid, L. N. (1999). Moviegoers' experiences and interpretations of brands in films revisited. Journal of Advertising, 28(2), 71-95.
    Driscoll, P. D. & Salwen, M. B. (1997). Self-perceived knowledge of the OJ. Simpson trial: third-person perception and perceptions of guilt. Journalism and Mass Communication Quarterly, 74(3), 541-556.
    Duck, J. M., & Mullin, B. A. (1995). The perceived impact of the mass media: Reconsidering the third-person effect. European Journal of Social Psychology, 25(1), 77-95.
    Duck, J. M., Terry, D. J., & Hogg, M. A. (1995). The perceived influence of AIDS advertising: Third-person effects in the context of positive media content. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 17, 305-325.
    Galician, M. L. & Bourdeau, P. G. (2004). The evolution of product placements in Hollywood cinema: Embedding high-involvement “heroic” brand images. In M. Galician (Ed.), Handbook 01 product placement in the mass media: New strategies in marketing theory, practice, trends, and ethics. New York: Haworth Press.
    Glynn, C. & Ostman, R. (1988). Public opinion about public opinion. Journalism Quarterly, 65, 299-306.
    Gould, S. J., Gupta, P. B., & Grabner-Krauter, S. (2000). Product placements in movies: A cross-cultural analysis of Austrian, French and American consumers’ attitudes toward this emerging, international promotional medium. Journal of Advertising, 29(4), 41.
    Gunther, A. C., & Thorson, E. (1992). Perceived persuasive effects of product commercials and public service announcements: Third-person effects in new domains. Communication Research, 19 (5), 574-596.
    Gupta, P. B. & Lord, K. R. (1998). Product placement in movies: The effect of prominence and mode on audience recall. Journal of Current Issues and Research in Advertising, 20(1), 47-59.
    Gunther, A. C. (1991). What we think others think: Cause and consequences in third person effect. Communication Research, 18, 355-372.
    Gunther, A. C., & Mundy, P. (1993). Biased optimism and the third person effects. Journalism Quarterly, 70,57-67.
    Gunther, A. C. (1995). Overrating the X-rating: The third-person perception and support for censorship of pornography. Journal of Communication, 45(1), 27-38.
    Gunther, A. C., & Hwa, A. P. (1996). Public perceptions of television influence and opinions about censorship in Singapore. International Journal of Public Opinion Research, 8(3), 248-265.
    Hoorens, V., & Ruiter, S. (1996). The optimal impact phenomenon : Beyond the third-person effect. European Journal of Social Psychology, 26, 599-610.
    Henriksen, L., & Flora, J. A. (1999). Third-person perception and children : Perceived impact of pro-and anti-smoking ads. Communication Research, 26 (6), 643-665.
    Hoffner, C., Buchanan, M., Anderson, J. D., Hubbs, L. A., Kamigaki, S. K., Kowalczyk, L.,Pastorek, A., Plotkin, R. S., Silberg, K. J.(1999). Support for censorship of television violence: the role of the Third-person effect and news exposure. Communication Research, 26(6), 726-742.
    Hoffner, C., & Buchanan, M. (2002). Parent’s responses to television violence: The third person perception, parental mediation and support for censorship. Media Psychology, 4, 231-252.
    Huh, J., DeLorme, D., & Reid, L. N. (2004). The third-person effect and its influence on behavioral outcomes in a product advertising context: The case of direct-to-consumer prescription drug advertising. Communication Research, 31, 568-599.
    Innes, J. M. & Zeitz, H. (1988). The public’s view of the impact of the mass media: A test of the “third person” effect. European Journal of Social Psychology, 18, 457-463.
    Karrh, J. A. (1998). Brand placement: A review. Journal of Current Issues and Research in Advertising, 20(2), 31-49.
    Lasorsa, D. L. (1989). Real and Perceived effect of ’Amerika.’ Journalism Quarterly, 66 , 373-378.
    Lo, V., & Wei, R. (2002). Third-person effect, gender, pornography on the Internet. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 46(1), 13-33.
    Mason, L. (1995). Newspaper as repeater: An experiment on defamation and third-  person effect. Journalism Quarterly, 72(3), 610-620.
    McQuail, D. (2005). McQuail’s Mass Communication Theory (5th ed.). London: Sage.
    McLeod, D. M., Eveland, W. P., & Nathanson, A. I. (1997). Support for censorship of violent and misogynic rap lyrics: An analysis of the third-person effect. Communication Research, 24(2), 153-174.
    Mutz, D. C. (1989). The influence of perceptions of media influence: Third-person effects and the public expression of opinions. International Journal of Public Opinion Research, 1(1), 3-23.
    Neer, K. (2004). How product placement works. Retrieved November 16, 2010, from http://money.howstuffworks.com/product-placement.htm/printable
    Paul, B., Salwen, M. B., & Dupagne, M. (2000). The third-person effect: a meta-analysis of the perceptual hypothesis. Mass Communication & Society, 3(1), 57-85.
    Perloff, R. M. (1989). Ego-involvement and the third-person effect of televised news coverage. Communication Research, 16, 236-267.
    Perloff, R. M. (1993). Third-person effect research 1983-1992: A review and synthesis. International Journal of Public Opinion Research, 5, 167-184.
    Perloff, R. M. (1999). The third-person effect: A critical review and synthesis. Media Psychology, 1, 353-378.
    Price, V., Huang, L. N., & Tewksbury, D. (1997). Third-person effects on news coverage: Orientations toward media. Journalism and Mass Communication Quarterly, 74(3), 525-540.
    Price, V., Tewksbury, D., & Huang, L. N. (1998). Third-person effects on publication of a Holocaust-denial advertisement. Journal of Communication, 48(2), 3-26.
    Rojas, H., Shah, D. V., & Faber, R. J. (1996). For the good of others: Censorship and the third-person effect. International Journal of Public Opinion Research, 8, 163-186.
    Rucinski, D., & Salmon, C. T. (1990). The “other” as the vulnerable voter: A study of the third-person effect in the 1988 U.S. presidential campaign. International Journal of Public Opinion Research, 2, 345-368.
    Russell, C. A. (1998). Toward A Framework of Product Placement: Theory Propositions . Advances in Consumer Research, 25, 357-362. Provo, UT : Association for Consumer Research. Retrieved November 16, 2010, from http://www.acrwebsite.org/volumes/display.asp?id=8178
    Russell, C. A. (2002). Investigating the effectiveness of product placements in television shows: The role of modality and plot connection congruence on brand memory and attitude. Journal of Consumer Research, 29(3), 306-318.
    Salwen, M. B., & Driscoll, P. D. (1997). Consequences of third-person perception in support of press restrictions in the 0 .1. Simpson trial. Journal of Communication, 47(2), 60-78.
    Salwen, M. B. (1998). Perceptions of media influence and support for censorship: The third-person effect in the 1996 presidential election. Communication Research, 25(3), 259-285.
    Sun, Y., Shen, L., & Pan, Z. (2008). On the behavioral component of the third-person effect. Communication Research, 35(2), 257-278.
    Tal-Or, N. (2007). Age and third-person perception in response to positive product advertisements. Mass Communication & Society, 10(4), 403-422.
    Tiedge, J. T., Silverblatt, A., Havice, M. J., & Rosenfeld, R. (1991). Discrepancy between perceived first-person and perceived third-person mass media effects. Journalism Quarterly, 68: 141-154.
    The BBC has moved to strengthen its journalism and complaints procedures after criticism in the Hutton Report [Electronic version]. (2004, June 23). The BBC’s journalism after Hutton. Retrieved November 19, 2010, from http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/entertainment/3831857.stm
    Wei, R., & Lo, V. H. (2007). The third-person effects of political attack ads in the 2004 U. S. presidential election. Media Psychology, 9(2), 367-388.
    Wei, R., & Lo, V. H. & Lu, H. Y. (2008). Third-Person Effects of Health News. American Behavioral Scientist, 52(2), 261-277.
    White, H. A., & Dillon, J. F. (2000). Knowledge about other’s reaction to a public service announcement: The impact on self persuasion and third-person perception. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 77(4), 788-803.
    Xu, J. & W.J. Gonzenbach (2008). Does a perceptual discrepancy lead to action? A meta-analysis of the behavioral component of the third-person effect. International Journal of Public Opinion Research, 20(3), 375-385.
    Youn, S., Faber, R. J., & Shah, D. V. (2000). Restricting gambling advertising and the third-person effect. Psychology and Marketing, 17(7), 633-649.
    口試委員
  • 曾士杰 - 召集委員
  • 侯政男 - 委員
  • 王慶寧 - 委員
  • 李雅靖 - 指導教授
  • 林素真 - 指導教授
  • 口試日期 2011-07-21 繳交日期 2011-08-02

    [回到前頁查詢結果 | 重新搜尋]


    如有任何問題請與論文審查小組聯繫