1. NCCU Academic Hub
  2. 傳播學院
  3. 傳播學院傳播碩士學位學程
  4. 學位論文
Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://ah.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/125098
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.advisor王淑美zh_TW
dc.contributor.advisorWang, Su-Meien_US
dc.contributor.author江建璁zh_TW
dc.contributor.authorKong, Keng-Chungen_US
dc.creator江建璁zh_TW
dc.creatorKong, Keng-Chungen_US
dc.date2019en_US
dc.date.accessioned2019-08-07T09:18:58Z-
dc.date.available2019-08-07T09:18:58Z-
dc.date.issued2019-08-07T09:18:58Z-
dc.identifierG1054640602en_US
dc.identifier.urihttp://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/125098-
dc.description碩士zh_TW
dc.description國立政治大學zh_TW
dc.description傳播學院傳播碩士學位學程zh_TW
dc.description105464060zh_TW
dc.description.abstract在數位技術社會之中，使用者藉由智慧手錶、智慧手環、手機應用程式與數位感應器等，展開自我追蹤（self-tracking）技術實踐記錄日常行走步數、心跳率、睡眠品質與運動狀況。本研究以數據化（datafication）、物質性（materiality）與拼裝體（assemblage）為理論基礎，藉由台灣跑步社群的自我追蹤經驗，旨在探究以下研究問題：第一、數據化實踐為何，如何建構身體與自我知識的過程；第二、跑者如何與技術物、物質性形塑自我追蹤樣貌；第三、跑者如何透過身體、數據及技術物共構「跑者拼裝體」，並且於人與物之間展現何種關係。\n本研究主張，自我追蹤涉及一系列的使用者、技術物、個人數據、apps與數位技術等異質元素，從中創造一種拴著使用者身體、數據與技術物的拼裝體狀態。經由深度訪談十五名跑者，以及分析自我追蹤數據與apps上的貼文等資料，本文的主要研究發現如下：（一）、跑者使用自我追蹤的動機，主要為檢測運動身體的各種表現、全天候監測心率，與記錄睡眠狀況，進而透過數位平台展演個人數據與跑步身體形象，發展出同儕之間相互比較與競爭各自表現的情形；（二）、研發商或設計方將特定的技術想像銘刻於技術物，透過使用腳本鼓勵、限定、或約束著使用者該如何運用技術物、顯示什麼數據，以及預設著誰是使用者。面對藍牙、app及技術物損壞或阻力等物質性與空間限制，使用者亦可能替換錶帶、修復或改用其他的自我追蹤裝置。（三）、跑者隨時佩戴、組裝、捨棄或卸下技術物，伴隨的是跑步身體、感官與中樞神經系統之延伸，產生數據與身體、使用者與技術物相互依賴、相互依附的關係。本研究要強調的是，自我追蹤實踐之中的「跑者拼裝體」形塑出身體與數據、使用者與技術物持續拼裝，交引纏繞的關係。zh_TW
dc.description.abstractIn the context of digital technology society, digital sensors and self-tracking technology features in smartwatches, smart wristbands and mobile applications enable users to conduct a self-tracking action and obtain data such as their daily steps taken, heart rate, sleeping patterns, sports activities &, etc. This research forms a theoretical framework with the element of datafication, materiality and assemblage, further applied on experiences gathered from the runners’ community in Taiwan, with the aim to study the (1) demonstration on datafication and construction of the body/self-knowledge that emerges from self-tracking practices; (2) form of engagement of the user with the technological artefact and materiality that constitute self-tracking practices; (3) how runner assemblages, bringing together human bodies, data and artefact display the complexity of relations between the human and material.\nThis thesis argues that self-tracking practices are always composed of inter-correlating connections between users and heterogeneous assemblage components such as technological artefacts, digital data, apps and technologies, which the elements are tethered to the human body in certain forms or status. On the basis of the qualitative study, this research investigates how self-tracking is practiced by Taiwan runners in the context of sports activities and everyday routines. By analyzing fundamental data collected from running activities, runners are able to monitor variant aspects of their body such as sports body, heart rate and sleeping pattern. The data generated by these technologies forms a collective data network where runners establish a social connection amongst the community. By showcasing the self-tracking data via apps or digital platforms, runners are able to make comparison of results or compete with peers.\nAt the same time, this thesis too focuses on the materiality of the technological artefact where developers or designers not only configure users but also prescribe technological norms by embedding the technologies into wearable devices and apps, which controls the ways of data display. Therefore, the developers or designers have the ability to differentiate and categorize users based on the personalized data collected. In this thesis, analysis on malfunction, flaws, mistakes, problems or other defects of the self-tracking device will be emphasized too. In short, this dissertation focuses on the concept of runner assemblage, conducting an in-depth study and analysis on the data-body, user-materiality, human-material which it further emerges and entangling as a part of self-tracking practices.en_US
dc.description.tableofcontents摘要 i\nAbstract iii\n圖目錄 ix\n表目錄 xi\n第壹章 緒論 1\n第一節 現象：從「一萬步」的數字談起 1\n第二節 背景：自我追蹤的發展 3\n（一）、自我書寫與自我追蹤之間關聯 3\n（二）、自我追蹤技術發展流變 4\n（三）、量化自我社群與運動 6\n第三節 定位：理論思路與問題意識 9\n第貳章 文獻評述 11\n第一節、自我追蹤實踐與相關理論 11\n（一）、何謂自我追蹤實踐？ 11\n（二）、自我追蹤實踐之相關研究 13\n（三）、數據化實踐的基本概念 16\n1. 數據化與小數據 16\n2.「原始」數據與「煮著」數據 19\n3. 數據主義與數字的信任 20\n（四）、小結 23\n第二節、技術物與物質性 24\n（一）、媒介研究中的物質取徑 24\n（二）、技術物的基本概念 27\n（三）、物質性的理論關懷 29\n（四）、小結 33\n第三節、跑者身體與拼裝體 34\n（一）、身體與自我的理論基礎 34\n（二）、跑者身體的理論基礎 36\n（三）、拼裝體的基本概念 38\n（四）、小結 41\n第四節、概念架構：跑者拼裝體 42\n第叁章　研究方法設計 47\n第一節、深度訪談與蒐集「物」之方法 47\n第二節、研究架構與步驟 49\n（一）、研究程序 49\n（二）、選擇訪談對象 50\n（三）、訪談綱要 54\n第肆章 「數據/身體」實踐 57\n第一節 、個案描述 55\n（一）、監測心率與步數，自我照護的健康主體：心慈 59\n（二）、蒐集跑步數據，培養運動習慣的使用者：芷琪 61\n（三）、以數據調整跑步，鞭策訓練的配速員：芝儀 63\n（四）、各處穿戴技術物，自我追蹤嵌入使用者生活：金龍 65\n第二節 、整體分析 66\n（一）、個人使用動機 66\n1、日記式的記錄，瞭解每次跑步表現 67\n2、全天候監測心率，實現自我照護目的 68\n3、輕便攜帶裝置，配合跑步身體移動 70\n4、跑步社群藉由數位連結，分享個人數據 71\n（二）、數據型態 74\n1、跑步「當下」脈絡 75\n（1）、邊跑邊看手錶，監測心率與配速 75\n（2）、藉由數據設定目標、追蹤體能狀態 77\n（3）、觀察跑步其他數據 80\n2、日常生活的「數據/身體」脈絡 82\n（1）、記錄日常行走的步數 83\n（2）、監測平日的睡眠品質 85\n（三）、同儕監控與社會連結 87\n第三節、本章小結 91\n第伍章 「使用者/技術物」實踐 93\n第一節、銘刻於技術物的「腳本」 93\n（一）、「隱而未顯」的技術物腳本 94\n（二）、腳本預設「誰是使用者」 96\n（三）、數據主義腳本 97\n第二節、自我追蹤的物質性 100\n（一）、外顯的物質性 101\n（二）、內隱的物質性 103\n第三節、物質性的限制與損壞 105\n（一）、藍牙與app限制 105\n（二）、空間限制 106\n（三）、損壞的數據與技術物 108\n第四節、本章小結 110\n第陸章 自我追蹤的拼裝體實踐 113\n第一節、自我追蹤者的身體經驗 113\n（一）、「觀看」跑步數據與身體 113\n（二）、數據化的跑步身體 116\n（三）、脆弱與受傷的身體 115\n第二節、跑者拼裝體 122\n（一）、跑者與物共同形塑的拼裝體 123\n（二）、身體/技術物的延伸 126\n（三）、人與物「交引纏繞」的關係 130\n第三節、本章小結 133\n第柒章 研究結論 135\n第一節 、自我追蹤的數據化、技術物與運動身體 135\n第二節、概念討論及研究貢獻 137\n（一）、自我追蹤作為運動身體的理解方式 137\n（二）、身體感受與數據的交互掙扎 140\n（三）、自我追蹤實踐中的跑步拼裝體 142\n第三節、研究限制與未來建議 144\n參考文獻 147\n\n附錄一 PTT的受訪者徵求文 159\n附錄二 受訪者徵求文 160zh_TW
dc.format.extent3851288 bytes-
dc.format.mimetypeapplication/pdf-
dc.source.urihttp://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G1054640602en_US
dc.subject自我追蹤zh_TW
dc.subject數據化zh_TW
dc.subject物質性zh_TW
dc.subject拼裝體zh_TW
dc.subject智慧手錶zh_TW
dc.subject技術物zh_TW
dc.subject跑步身體zh_TW
dc.subject數據zh_TW
dc.subject交引纏繞zh_TW
dc.subjectSelf trackingen_US
dc.subjectdataficationen_US
dc.subjectmaterialityen_US
dc.subjectassemblageen_US
dc.subjectsmartwatchen_US
dc.subjecttechnological artefacten_US
dc.subjectrunning bodyen_US
dc.subjectdataen_US
dc.subjectentanglementen_US
dc.title人與物交纏：自我追蹤實踐中的跑者拼裝體zh_TW
dc.titleEntanglement of Human and Material: The Runner Assemblage in Self-Tracking Practiceen_US
dc.typethesisen_US
dc.relation.reference參考文獻\n（一）、中文部分\n\n江淑琳（2016）。〈探索數位即時新聞生產之物質性的可能研究取徑. 〉，《傳播文化與政治》，4: 27-5。\n\n傅正思、許績勝、 馬君萍 、王耀聰（2013）。<心跳率在跑步訓練上的應用>，《興大體育學刊》， 12： 153-160。\n\n汪益譯（1999）。《預知傳播紀事：麥克魯漢讀本》。臺北，臺灣：臺灣商務。（原書McLuhan, E., & Zingrone, F. [Eds.]. [1997]. Essential McLuhan. London,UK: Routledge. ）\n\n劉海龍（2018）。<傳播中的身體問題與傳播研究的未來>，《國際新聞界》，2：37-46。\n\n雷祥麟譯 （2004）。<直線進步或交引纏繞? >，吳嘉苓、傅大為、雷祥麟（編），《STS 科技渴望社會》，頁 79-106。台北：群學。（原文Latour, B. [2000]. Progress or Entanglement? Two Models for the Long Term Evolution of Human Civilisations）\n\n陳恒安（2009）。〈沒有丹麥王子的《哈姆雷特》:技術物的歷史〉，《科學發展》，439：83-85。\n\n陳向明（2000）。質的研究方法與社會科學研究。北京：教育科學出版社。\n\n賴嘉玲（2014）。<當流動科技闖進藝術殿堂：從博物館視聽導覽之使用談其對藝文消費之介入>，《新聞學研究》，119：121-159。\n\n賴嘉玲（2013）。<「收拾行囊」通關啟程：談「旅者─ 行李」組裝體之移動政治>，《文化研究》，17：123-158。\n\n劉育成（2018）。〈隱私不再？－以身體與訊息作為隱私概念雙重性的社會實作理論觀點探究〉，《資訊社會研究》，35：87-123。\n\n鄭斐文（2013）。〈社會建構論、批判實在論與行動者網絡理論觀點下的身體與社會：以肥胖議題為例>，《臺灣社會學刊》，53：143-182。\n\n畢恆達（1995）。〈生活經驗研究的反省：詮釋學的觀點〉，《本土心理學研究》，4: 224-259。\n\n鍾蔚文、陳百齡、陳順孝（2006）。〈數位時代的技藝：提出一個分析架構〉，《中華傳播學刊》，10：233-264。\n\n（二）、英文部分\nAjana, B. (2018). Introduction: Metric Culture and the Over-Examined. In Ajana, B (Eds.), Metric Culture: Ontologies of Self-Tracking Practices (pp. 1-10). London, UK: Emerald Publishing.\n\nAjana, B. (2017). Digital health and the biopolitics of the Quantified Self. Digital Health. https://doi.org/10.1177/2055207616689509\n\nAkrich, M. (1992). The De-Scription of Technical Objects. In W. E. Bijker and J. Law (Eds.) Shaping Technology/Building Society: Studies in Sociotechnical Change (pp. 205–224). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.\n\nAkrich, M., & Latour, B. (1992). A Summary of a Convenient Vocabulary for the Semiotics of Human and Nonhuman Assemblies. In W. E. Bijker and J. Law (Eds.) Shaping\nTechnology/Building Society: Studies in Sociotechnical Change (pp. 259–264). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.\n\nAllen Collinson, J. (2008). Running the routes together: Corunning and knowledge in action. Journal of Contemporary Ethnography, 37 (1), 38-61.\n\nAllen-Robertson, J. (2018). Critically assessing digital documents: materiality and the interpretative role of software. Information, Communication & Society, 21(11), 1732-1746.\n\nAllen-Robertson, J. (2017). The materiality of digital media: The hard disk drive, phonograph, magnetic tape and optical media in technical close-up. New Media & Society, 19(3), 455–470. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444815606368\n\nAnderson, C. W., & De Maeyer, J. (2015). Objects of Journalism and the News. Journalism, 16 (1), 3–9.\n\nAustin, M. (2007). Chasing happiness together: Running and Aristotle`s philosophy of friendship. In Austin, M. (ed.), Running and Philosophy: A Marathon for the Mind, 11-20. Oxford, UK: Blackwell.\n\nBalsamo, A. (2012). I Phone, I Learn. In Snickars P. & Vonderau P. (Eds.), Moving Data: The iPhone and the Future of Media (pp. 251-264). New York, NY: Columbia University\nPress.\n\nBarrie, L., Waitt, G., & Brennan-Horley, C. (2019). Cycling Assemblages, Self-Tracking Digital Technologies and Negotiating Gendered Subjectivities of Road Cyclists On-the-Move. Leisure Sciences, 1-19. doi:10.1080/01490400.2018.1539682\n\nBeer, D. (2016). Metric Power. London, UK: Palgrave Macmillan.\n\nBerson, J. (2015). Computable Bodies: Instrumented Life and the Human Somatic Niche. London, UK: Bloomsbury.\n\nBiniok, P., & Hülsmann, I. (2016). 21st Century Men and the Digital Amalgamation of Life.In: Selke S. (eds) Lifelogging: Digital Self-Tracking: Between Disruptive Technology and Cultural Change (pp.81-110). Wiesbaden, Germany: Springer VS\n\nBoczkowski, P. J., & Lievrouw, L.A. (2008). Bridging STS and communication studies: scholarship on media and information technologies. In Amsterdamska, O., Hackett EJ, Lynch, M, and Wajcman, J. (Eds.) The Handbook of Science and Technology Studies (pp.949–977). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.\n\nBorges-Rey, E. (2017). Towards an epistemology of data journalism in the devolved nations of the United Kingdom: Changes and continuities in materiality, performativity and reflexivity. Journalism. doi:10.1177/1464884917693864\n\nBowker, G. (2005). Memory Practices in the Sciences. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.\n\nBowker, G. (2013). Data Flakes: an afterword to raw data is an oxymoron. In: Gitelman, L.(Eds.) ‘Raw Data’ Is an Oxymoron (pp. 167–172). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.\n\nboyd, d., & Crawford, K. (2012). Critical Question for Big Data. Information, Communication & Society, 15(5), 662-679.\n\nBrighenti, A. M. (2018). The Social Life of Measures: Conceptualizing Measure–Value Environments. Theory, Culture & Society, 35(1), 23–44. doi:10.1177/0263276416689028\n\nCarey, J. W. (1989). Communication as Culture: Essays on Media and Society. New York: Routledge.\n\nCamus, A., & Vinck, D. (2019). Unfolding Digital Materiality: How Engineers Struggle to Shape Tangible and Fluid Objects. In Vertesi, J., Ribes, D., DiSalvo, C., Loukissas, Y., Forlano, L., Rosner, (Eds.) digitalSTS: A Field Guide for Science & Technology Studies (pp. 17-41). Oxford, UK: Princeton University Press.\n\nCheney-Lippold, J. (2011). A New Algorithmic Identity: Soft Biopolitics and the Modulation of control. Theory, Culture & Society, 28(6), 164–181. doi:10.1177/0263276411424420\n\nChoe, E. K., Lee, N. B., Lee, B., Pratt, W., & Kientz, J. A. (2014). Understanding quantified-selfers` practices in collecting and exploring personal data. Proceedings of the 32nd annual ACM conference (pp. 1143-1152). New York: ACM.\n\nCook, S., Shaw, J., & Simpson, P. (2016). Jography: Exploring Meanings, Experiences and Spatialities of Recreational Road-running. Mobilities, 11(5), 744-769.\ndoi:10.1080/17450101.2015.1034455\n\nCrawford, K., Lingel, J., & Karppi, T. (2015). Our metrics, ourselves: A hundred years of self-tracking from the weight scale to the wrist wearable device. European Journal of Cultural Studies, 18(4-5), 479-496.doi:10.1177/1367549415584857\n\nDant, T. (2014). The Driver and the Passenger. In P. Adey; D. Bissell; K. Hannam; P. Merriman, M. Sheller (Eds.) Mobilities Handbook. London, UK: Routledge.\n\nDant, T. (2004). The Driver-car. Theory, Culture & Society, 21(4–5), 61–79. https://doi.org/10.1177/0263276404046061\n\nDant, T. (1999). Playing with things: Interacting with a windsurfer. In Material Culture in the Social World. Buckingham, UK: Open University Press.\n\nde Montjoye, Y.-A., Radaelli, L., Singh, V. K., & Pentland, A. S. (2015). Unique in theshopping mall: On the identifiability of credit card metadata. Science, 347(6221), 536-539. doi:10.1126/science.1256297\n\nDeleuze, G., & Guattari, F. (1988), A Thousand plateaus: Capitalism and Schizophrenia (Massumi, B., Trans.). Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.\n\nDeLanda, M. (2006). A new philosophy of society: assemblage theory and social complexity. London, UK: Continuum.\n\nDidžiokaitė, G., Saukko, P., & Greiffenhagen, C. (2018). The mundane experience of everyday calorie trackers: Beyond the metaphor of Quantified Self. New Media & Society, 20(4), 1470-1487. doi:10.1177/1461444817698478\n\nDourish, P. (2016). Rematerializing the platform: Emulation and the digital-material. In: Pink, S., Ardevol, E., Lanzeni, D. (Eds.), Digital Materialities (pp. 29–44.). London, UK: Bloomsbury.\n\nElias, A. S., & Gill, R. (2018). Beauty surveillance: The digital self-monitoring cultures of neoliberalism. European Journal of Cultural Studies, 21(1), 59–77.\ndoi:10.1177/1367549417705604\n\nEtkin, J. (2016). The hidden cost of personal quantification. Journal of Consumer Research, 42(6), 967-984\n\nFotopoulou, A. (2018). From networked to quantified self: Self-tracking and the moral economy of data. In Z. Papacharissi (Eds), A Networked Self: Platforms, Stories,\nConnections (pp.144-159). New York, NY: Routledge.\n\nFotopoulou, A., & O’Riordan, K. (2017). Training to self-care: fitness tracking, biopedagogy and the healthy consumer. Health Sociology Review, 26(1), 54-68.\ndoi:10.1080/14461242.2016.1184582\n\nFox, N.J., & Alldred, P. (2015). New materialist social inquiry: designs, methods and the research-assemblage. International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 8(4), 399–414.\n\nFuentes, C., & Sörum, N. (2019). Agencing ethical consumers: smartphone apps and the socio-material reconfiguration of everyday life. Consumption Markets & Culture, 22(2), 131-156. doi:10.1080/10253866.2018.1456428\n\nGane, N. (2005). Radical Post-humanism: Friedrich Kittler and the Primacy of Technology. Theory, Culture & Society, 22(3), 25–41. https://doi.org/10.1177/0263276405053718\n\nGilmore, J. N. (2016). Everywear: The quantified self and wearable fitness technologies. New Media & Society, 18(11), 2524–2539.doi: 10.1177/1461444815588768\n\nGitelman, L., & Jackson, V. (2013). Introduction. In L. Gitelman (Eds.), “Raw Data” is an Oxymoron (pp. 1-14). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.\n\nGoodyear, V. A., Kerner, C., & Quennerstedt, M. (2019). Young people’s uses of wearable healthy lifestyle technologies; surveillance, self-surveillance and resistance. Sport,Education and Society, 24(3), 212-225. doi:10.1080/13573322.2017.1375907\n\nGreenfield, A. (2006). Everyware: The Dawning Age of Ubiquitous Computing. Berkeley, CA: New Riders.\n\nHaraway, D. (1991). Simians, Cyborgs and Women: The Reinvention of Nature. London, UK: Free Association.\n\nHardey, M. (2019). On the body of the consumer:performance‐seeking with wearables and health and fitness apps. Sociology of Health & Illness. doi:10.1111/1467-9566.12879\n\nHodder, I. (2014). The Entanglements of Humans and Things: A Long-Term View. New Literary History, 45(1), 19–36. doi: 10.1353/nlh.2014.0005.\n\nJones, M.R. (2014). A Matter of Life and Death: Exploring Conceptualizations of Sociomateriality in the Context of Critical Care. MIS Quarterly, 38(3), 895-925.\n\nInnis, H. A. (1972). Empire and communications. Toronto, CA: University of Toronto Press.\n\nKelly, K. (2016). The inevitable: Understanding the 12 technological forces that will shape our future. New York, NY: Viking Press.\n\nKennedy, H., & Hill, R. L. (2018). The Feeling of Numbers: Emotions in Everyday Engagements with Data and Their Visualisation. Sociology, 52(4), 830–848.\ndoi:10.1177/0038038516674675\n\nKitchin, R. (2014). The Data Revolution: Big Data, Open Data, Data Infrastructures & Their Consequences. London, UK: SAGE.\n\nKittler, F.A. (2010). Optical media (A. Enns, Trans.). Cambridge, UK: Polity Press. (Originalwork published 2002).\n\nKittler, F. A. (1999). Gramophone, film, typewriter (G. Winthrop-Young & M. Wutz, Trans.) Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press. (Original work published 1986)\n\nKristensen, D. B., & Ruckenstein, M. (2018). Co-evolving with self-tracking technologies. New Media & Society, 20(10),3624–3640. doi:10.1177/1461444818755650\n\nKroes, P. (2012). Technical artefacts: Creations of mind and matter. Dordrecht: Springer.\n\nKvale, S. (1996). Interviews: An introduction to qualitative research interviewing. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.\n\nLeonardi, P. M. (2012). Materiality, sociomateriality, and socio-technical systems: What do these terms mean? How are they related? Do we need them? In P. M. Leonardi, B. A.\nNardi & J. Kallinikos (Eds.), Materiality and organizing: Social interaction in a technological world (pp. 25-48). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.\n\nLievrouw, L.A. (2014). Materiality and media in communication and technology studies: an unfinished project. In: Gillespie, T, Boczkowski, PJ, Foot, KA (Eds.) Media Technologies: Essays on Communication, Materiality, and Society (pp. 21–52.). Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.\n\nLi, I., Dey, A., & Forlizzi, J. (2010). A stage-based model of personal informatics systems. Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (pp.\n557-566). New York, NY: ACM\n\nLomborg, S., Thylstrup, N. B., & Schwartz, J. (2018). Thetemporal flows of self-tracking: Checking in, moving on, staying hooked. New Media & Society, 20(12), 4590–4607.\ndoi:10.1177/1461444818778542\n\nLomborg, S., & Frandsen, K. (2016). Self-tracking ascommunication. Information, Communication & Society, 19(7), 1015-1027. doi:10.1080/1369118X.2015.1067710\n\nLupton, D., & Maslen, S. (2019). How Women Use Digital Technologies for Health: Qualitative Interview and Focus Group Study. J Med Internet Res, 21(1), e11481.\n\nLupton, D., & Maslen, S. (2018). The more-than-human sensorium: sensory engagements with digital self-tracking technologies. The Senses and Society, 13(2), 190-202.\ndoi:10.1080/17458927.2018.1480177\n\nLupton, D., Pink, S., Heyes LaBond, C., & Sumartojo, S. (2018). Personal Data Contexts, Data Sense and Self-Tracking Cycling. International Journal of Communication,\n12(19), 647-665.\n\nLupton, D., & Smith, G.J.D. (2018). ‘A much better person’: The agential capacities of self-tracking practices. In Ajana, B (Eds.), Metric Culture: Ontologies of Self-Tracking Practices (pp.57-75). London, UK: Emerald Publishing,\n\nLupton, D. (in press). Self-Tracking. In Frederick, S., Kennerly, M., Abel, J. (Eds.), Information: Keywords (preprint). New York: Columbia University Press.\n\nLupton, D. (2019a). The thing-power of the human-app health assemblage: thinking with vital materialism. Social Theory & Health, 17(2), 125–139. doi:10.1057/s41285-019-00096-y\n\nLupton, D. (2019b). The thing-power of the human-app health assemblage: thinking with vital materialism. Social Theory & Health, online first. Doi: 10.1057/s41285-019-00096-y\n\nLupton, D. (2018). “I Just Want It to Be Done, Done, Done!” Food Tracking Apps, Affects,and Agential Capacities. Multimodal Technologies and Interaction, 2(2): 29.\n\nLupton, D. (2017a). Self-tracking, health and medicine, Health Sociology Review, 26:1, 1-5, doi:10.1080/14461242.2016.1228149\n\nLupton, D. (2017b). Feeling your data: Touch and making sense of personal digital data. New Media & Society, 19(10), 1599-1614. doi:10.1177/1461444817717515\n\nLupton, D. (2017c). Digital media and body weight, shape, and size: An introduction and review. Fat Studies, 6(2), 119-134. doi:10.1080/21604851.2017.1243392\n\nLupton, D. (2016a). The quantified self. Cambridge, UK: Polity Press.\n\nLupton, D. (2016b). You are Your data: self-tracking practices and concepts of data. In Selke,Stefan (Eds.), Lifelogging: Digital Self-Tracking: Between Disruptive Technology and Cultural Change (pp.61-79). Wiesbaden, Germany: Springer VS\n\nLupton, D. (2016c). The diverse domains of quantified selves: self-tracking modes and dataveillance. Economy and Society, 45:1, 101-122, doi:10.1080/03085147.2016.1143726\n\nLupton, D. (2015) Donna Haraway: the digital cyborg assemblage and the new digital health technologies. In Collyer, F. (Eds.), The Palgrave Handbook of Social Theory in Health, Illness and Medicine (pp.567-581). Houndmills, UK: Palgrave Macmillan.\n\nLupton, D. (2014). Self-tracking cultures: towards a sociology of personal informatics. Australian Computer-Human Interaction Special Interest Group (OzCHI) 2014\nconference proceedings, ACM Publishers.\n\nLupton, D. (2013a). Quantifying the body: monitoring and measuring health in the age of mHealth technologies. Critical Public Health, 23(4), 393-403\n\nLupton, D. (2013b). The digital cyborg assemblage: Haraway’s cyborg theory and the new digital health technologies. In Collyer, F. (ed), The Handbook of Social Theory for the Sociology of Health and Medicine. Houndmills, UK:Palgrave Macmillan.\n\nLyon, D. (2003). Surveillance as Social Sorting: Computer Codes and Mobile Bodies.In D. Lyon (Eds.) Surveillance as Social Sorting（pp.13-30）. London, UK: Routledge.\n\nLyon, D. (2002). Everyday surveillance: Personal data and social classifications. Information,Communication & Society, 5(2), 242-257.\n\nMau, S. (2019). The metric society: On the quantification of the social. Cambridge, UK: Polity Press.\n\nMayer-Schönberger, V., & Cukier, K. (2013). Big data: A revolution that will transform how we live, work, and think. Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin Harcourt.\n\nMcLuhan, M. (1964/1994). Understanding Media: The Extensions of Man. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press\n\nMeneley, A. (2019). Walk This Way: Fitbit and Other Kinds of Walking in Palestine”. Cultural Anthropology, 34 (1), 130-54. doi:10.14506/ca34.1.11.\n\nMennicken, A., & Espeland, W. N. (2019). What`s New with Numbers? Sociological Approaches to the Study of Quantification. Annual Review of Sociology, 45(1).\ndoi:10.1146/annurev-soc-073117-041343\n\nMitchell, W. J. (2003). Me++: The cyborg self and the networked city. Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press.\n\nMoats, D. (2017). From media technologies to mediated events: a different settlement between media studies and science and technology studies. Information, Communication & Society, 1-16.\n\nNeff, G., & Nafus, D. (2016) Self-Tracking. Massachusetts: MIT Press.\n\nNiva, M. (2017). Online weight-loss services and a calculative practice of slimming. Health, 21(4), 409–424. doi:10.1177/1363459315622042\n\nNicholls, B. (2016). Everyday Modulation: Dataism, Health Apps, and the Production of Self-Knowledge. In H. Randell-Moon & R. Tippet (Eds.), Security, Race, Biopower: Essays\non Technology and Corporeality (pp. 101-120). London, UK: Palgrave Macmillan.\n\nOrlikowski, W. J., & Scott, S. V. (2008). Sociomateriality: Challenging the Separation of Technology, Work and Organization. The Academy of Management Annals, 2(1), 433-\n474. doi:10.1080/19416520802211644\n\nOrlikowski, W. J. (2007). Sociomaterial Practices: Exploring Technology at Work. Organization Studies, 28(9), 1435-1448. doi:10.1177/0170840607081138\n\nOrlikowski, W. J. (1992). The duality of technology: Rethinking the concept of technology in organizations. Organization Science, 3 (3): 398-427.doi:10.1287/orsc.3.3.398\n\nPangrazio, L., & Selwyn, N. (2019). ‘Personal data literacies’: Some critical literacies approach to enhancing understandings of personal digital data. New Media & Society, 21(2), 419–437. doi: 10.1177/1461444818799523\n\nPeters, J. D. (2015). The marvelous clouds: Toward a philosophy of elemental media.Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press.\n\nPinch, T., & Bijker, W. E. (1987). The social construction of facts and artifacts: Or how the sociology of science and the sociology of technology might benefit each other, In W. E. Bijker, T. P. Hughes, and T. Pinch (Eds.), The social construction of technological systems: New directions in the sociology and history of technology (pp.17-50).\nCambridge, MA: MIT Press.\n\nPink, S., Ardevol, E., & Lanzeni, D. (2016). Digital materiality: Configuring a field of anthropology/design? In S. Pink, E. Ardevol, & D. Lanzeni (Eds.), Digital materialities: Anthropology and design. Oxford, UK: Bloomsbury.\n\nPink, S., & Fors, V. (2017a). Self-tracking and mobile media: new digital materialities. Mobile Media & Communication, 5(3), 219–238. doi:0.1177/2050157917695578\n\nPink, S., Ruckenstein, M., Willim, R., & Duque, M. (2018). Broken data: Conceptualising\ndata in an emerging world. Big Data & Society. doi: 10.1177/2053951717753228\n\nPorter, T.M. (1995). Trust in Numbers: The Pursuit of Objectivity in Science and Public Life.\nPrinceton, NJ: PrincetonUniv. Press\n\nRettberg J.W. (2018). Apps as Companions: How Quantified Self Apps Become Our Audience and Our Companions. In: Ajana B. (Eds.) Self-Tracking. London, UK: Palgrave Macmillan.\n\nRettberg, J. W. (2014). Quantified Selves. In J.W. Rettberg (Eds.), Seeing Ourselves through\nTechnology: How We Use Selfies, Blogs and Wearable Devices to see and shape Ourselves (pp.61-78). London, UK: Palgrave Macmillan\n\nRich, E., & Miah, A. (2017). Mobile, wearable and ingestible health technologies: towards a\ncritical research agenda. Health Sociology Review, 26(1), 84-97.doi:10.1080/14461242.2016.1211486\n\nRubin, H. J., & Rubin, I. S. (2005). Qualitative interviewing: The art of hearing data (2nd ed.).\nThousand Oaks, CA: Sage\n\nRuckenstein, M., & Pantzar, M. (2017). Beyond the Quantified Self: Thematic exploration of a dataistic paradigm. New Media & Society, 19(3), 401-418. doi:10.1177/1461444815609081\n\nRuckenstein, M., & Schüll, N. D. (2017). The Datafication of Health. Annual Review of Anthropology, 46(1): 261-278.\n\nSanders, R. (2017). Self-tracking in the Digital Era: Biopower, Patriarchy, and the New Biometric Body Projects. Body & Society, 23(1), 36–63. doi:10.1177/1357034X16660366\n\nSesay, A., Oh, O. & Ramirez, R. (2016). Understanding Sociomateriality through the Lens of Assemblage Theory: Examples from Police Body-Worn Cameras. Proceedings of the Thirty Seventh International Conference on Information Systems, (pp. 1-19). Dublin, Ireland.\n\nSharon, T. (2017). Self-Tracking for Health and the Quantified Self: Re-Articulating Autonomy, Solidarity, and Authenticity in an Age of Personalized Healthcare. Philosophy & Technology, 30(1), 93-121. doi:10.1007/s13347-016-0215-5\n\nShilling, C. (2005). The body in culture, technology and society. London, UK: Sage.\n\nShipway, R., & Holloway, I. (2016). Health and the running body: Notes from an ethnography. International Review for the Sociology of Sport, 51(1), 78–96. ttps://doi.org/10.1177/1012690213509807\n\nShipway, R., & Holloway, I. (2010). Running Free: Embracing a healthy lifestyle through distance running. Perspectives in Public Health, 130 (6), 270-276.\n\nSmith, G. J. D., & Vonthethoff, B. (2017). Health by numbers? Exploring the practice and experience of datafied health. Health Sociology Review, 26(1), 6-21. doi:10.1080/14461242.2016.1196600\n\nSteensen, S. (2018). What is the matter with newsroom culture? A sociomaterial analysis of\nprofessional knowledge creation in the newsroom. Journalism, 19(4), 464–480. doi:10.1177/1464884916657517\n\nThrift, N. (2014). The ‘sentient’ city and what it may portend. Big Data & Society. April–June, 1–21. doi:10.1177/2053951714532241\n\nTiman, T., & Albrechtslund, A. (2015). Surveillance, Self and Smartphones: Tracking Practices in the Nightlife. Science and engineering ethics, 24(3), 853–870. doi:10.1007/s11948-015-9691-8\n\nTurkle, S. (2015). Reclaiming conversation: The power of talk in a digital age. New York, NY: Penguin Press.\n\nTurner, B.S. (2008). The Body and Society (3rd Eds.). London, UK: Sage.\n\nUsher, N. (2018). Re-Thinking Trust in the News. Journalism Studies 19(4), 564-578.\n\nvan dijck, J. (2014). Datafication, dataism and dataveillance: big data between scientific paradigm and ideology. Surveillance & Society 12(2): 197–208.\n\nWajcman, J., & Jones, P. K. (2012). Border communication: media sociology and STS. Media, Culture & Society, 34(6), 673–690.doi: 10.1177/0163443712449496\n\nWeißenfels, S., Ebner, K., Dittes, S., & Smolnik, S. (2016, Jan.). Does the is Artifact Matter in Sociomateriality Research? A Literature Review of Empirical Studies. Paper presented at the 2016 49th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS), Kauai, Hawaii.\n\nWerning, S. (2015). Swipe to Unlock- How the materiality of the Touchscreen Frames Media Use and Corresponding Perceptions of Media Content. Digital Culture & Society,\n1(1), 55-72. doi:10.14361/dcs-2015-0105\n\nWilliams, S. J., Coveney, C., & Meadows, R. (2015), ‘M‐apping’ sleep? Trends and transformations in the digital age. Social Health Illness, 37: 1039-1054. doi:10.1111/1467-9566.12283\n\nWise, J. (2017). Towards a minor assemblage: An introduction to the clickable world. In Hess, A., Davisson, A. (Eds.) Theorizing Digital Rhetoric (pp. 68-82). Taylor and Francis.\n\n網絡部分（中英文）\n王順正 （1999年4月30日）。<運動與心臟跳動>，《運動生理週訊》。取自http://www.epsport.idv.tw/sportscience/scwangshow.asp?repno=4&page=1\n\nDavis, J. (2013). The Qualified Self. Retrieved from Cyborgology. https://thesocietypages.org/cyborgology/2013/03/13/the-qualified-self/ Accessed 22 Apr.2018.\n\nFox S, Duggan M. (2013). Health online. Pew Internet and American Life Project. Retrieved\nfrom https://www.pewinternet.org/2013/01/15/health-online-2013/. Accessed 05 May.\n2019.\n\nKallinikos, J., Aaltonen, A., and Marton, A. (2010). A Theory of Digital Objects. Retrieved\nfrom https://firstmonday.org/ojs/index.php/fm/article/view/3033/2564 Accessed 09 Sept. 2018.\n\nLeonardi, P. M. (2010). Digital materiality? How artifacts without matter, matter. First monday,\n15(6). Retrieved from http://firstmonday.org/article/view/3036/2567 [Accessed\n10.07.2018].\n\nWolf, G. (2009). Know thyself: tracking every facet of life, from sleep to mood to pain.\nRetrieved from Wired: https://www.wired.com/2009/06/lbnp-knowthyself/. Accessed 09 Sept. 2018.\n\nWolf, G. (2010). The data-driven life. Retrieved from The New York Times Magazine.\nRetrieved from https://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/02/magazine/02self-measurement-t.html. Accessed 09 Sept. 2018.zh_TW
dc.identifier.doi10.6814/NCCU201900548en_US
item.grantfulltextopen-
item.openairecristypehttp://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_46ec-
item.openairetypethesis-
item.cerifentitytypePublications-
item.fulltextWith Fulltext-
Appears in Collections:學位論文
Files in This Item:
File SizeFormat
060201.pdf3.76 MBAdobe PDF2View/Open
Show simple item record

Google ScholarTM

Check

Altmetric

Altmetric


Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.