Publications-Theses
Article View/Open
Publication Export
-
題名 隱私悖論的功能性磁振造影研究
An fMRI Study on Information Privacy Paradox作者 侯雅晴
Hou, Ya-Ching貢獻者 梁定澎<br>林怡伶
Liang, Ting-Peng<br>Lin, Yi-Ling
侯雅晴
Hou, Ya-Ching關鍵詞 隱私矛盾
隱私悖論
雙邊系統理論
功能性磁振造影
Privacy Concern
Privacy Paradox
Dual Process Theory
Functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging日期 2019 上傳時間 5-Sep-2019 15:46:08 (UTC+8) 摘要 隨著大數據分析技術的進步，隱私問題越來越受到大家的關注。特別是在 移動應用程式的時代裡，人們雖然注重個人資訊隱私，實際上卻有許多人不經 意地透露自己的隱私資訊，而這種思想與行為不一致的現象則被稱作隱私悖論， 亦稱作隱私矛盾。過往文獻透過隱私相關研究理論，對於隱私顧慮的信念與意 圖實際行為之間的不一致提出了許多解釋，並以問卷與訪談等方式作為研究方 法，讓使用者回溯在特定情境中是否有過隱私揭露行為的經驗。然而，一個人的決策行為並非是絕對理性思維，個人之心理層面因素與情 緒因素皆會影響決策結果。因此，本實驗透過雙邊系統理論(dual process theory)定義個人在做決策時會受到兩個不同的系統的影響，進而推論個人發生 隱私矛盾現象時，比起沒有隱私矛盾現象發生時所採用的決策方式有所不同。 除此之外，最近神經科學的進步讓研究者可以透過觀察腦部影像的變化，了解 實際決策時的腦部反應機制，可以更客觀的了解產生這種現象的神經機制，有 助於更深入的理解造成這種現象的原因。因此，本研究從神經科學的角度驗證 隱私悖論的現象，基於心理學領域的雙邊系統理論(Dual Process Theory)並透 過功能性磁造振影(functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging, fMRI)了解使用者在手 機應用程式下載的情境下，其影響個人隱私顧慮的潛在因素與發生隱私矛盾時 的腦區反應。
With the advancement of big data analytics technology, privacy issues are getting more and more attention. Although people report that they pay attention to personal information privacy, many people inadvertently disclose their privacy information in actual behavior. This phenomenon is called “privacy paradox” which means the inconsistency between the attitude and the actual behavior in the privacy related decision-making.In previous literature, a few theories have been proposed to explain the inconsistency between reported privacy concerns and the actual self-disclosure behavior and been evaluated with questionnaires and interviews. Recent advancement in neuroscience allows researchers to observe brain activations in the decision process to explore the neural mechanisms associated with certain behavior. Therefore, based on the Dual Process Theory, the objective of this study is to apply functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging (fMRI) to explore the neural mechanisms associated with privacy paradox.參考文獻 一、中文部分韓承靜(2004 年)。認知神經科學的形成背景與範圍概述。科學教育月刊蕭文龍，黃莉君，&楊雅雯(2016)。神經資訊系統文獻匯整分析。東吳經濟商學學報，(92)，37-56。梁曉丹，李穎灝，&劉芳(2018)。在線隱私政策對消費者提供個人信息意願的影響機制研究 - 信息敏感度的調節作用。管理評論，30(11)，97-107。管家娃，張玥，朱慶華，&趙宇翔(2016)。國外社交網站隱私悖論問題研 究綜述與國內研究建議。圖書情報工作，60(22)，126-134。陳乃嘉，&任維(2019)。認知神經科學研究的文獻計量分析。Researches of Cognitive Neuroscience Based on Bibliometric Analysis. Advances inPsychology, 9(02), 313.陳韋亭(2014)。大腦決策機制之資料探勘研究。中山大學資訊管理學系研究所學位論文，1-83。徐亦礽. (2016). 複合與簡單風險決策之神經差異. 成功大學經濟學系學位論文,1-69.白麗英，袁博，張蔚，張振，蘭姣，&王益文。 (2014)。人際合作與衝突影響博弈決策的結果評價。心理學報，46(11)，1760-1771。劉燁，付秋芳，&傅小蘭。 (2009 年)。認知與情緒的交互作用。科學通報，54(18)，2783-2796。汪蕾，沉翔宇，&林志萍。 (2010 年)。基於決策神經科學的風險決策與含糊決策研究進展(博士論文)。二、英文部分Acquisti, A., & Grossklags, J. (2005). Privacy and rationality in individual decision making. IEEE security & privacy, 3(1), 26-33.Acquisti, A., Brandimarte, L., & Loewenstein, G. (2015). Privacy and human behavior in the age of information. Science, 347(6221), 509-514.Barnes, S. B. (2006). A privacy paradox: Social networking in the United States. First Monday, 11(9).Barth, S., & De Jong, M. D. (2017). The privacy paradox–Investigating discrepancies between expressed privacy concerns and actual online behavior–A systematic literature review. Telematics and Informatics, 34(7), 1038-1058.Bhattacherjee, A., & Sanford, C. (2006). Influence processes for information technology acceptance: An elaboration likelihood model. MIS quarterly, 805-825. Buck, C., Horbel, C., Germelmann, C. C., &Eymann, T. (2014). The unconscious appconsumer: Discovering and comparing the information-seeking patterns among mobile application consumers.Cai, H., & Liu, C. (2004). Anterior Cingulate Cortex and Executive Function. Advances in Psychological Science, 12(05), 643-650.Camara, E., Rodriguez-Fornells, A., Ye, Z., & Münte, T. F. (2009). Reward networks in the brain as captured by connectivity measures. Frontiers in neuroscience, 3, 34.Choi, H., Park, J., & Jung, Y. (2018). The role of privacy fatigue in online privacy behavior. Computers in Human Behavior, 81, 42-51.Delgado, M. R., Tricomi, E., Vartanian, O., & Mandel, D. (2011). Reward processingand decision making in the human striatum. Neuroscience of decision making, 145-172.Evans, J. S. B. (2003). In two minds: dual-process accounts of reasoning. Trends in cognitive sciences, 7(10), 454-459.Glenn, A. L., Raine, A., & Schug, R. A. (2009). The neural correlates of moral decision-making in psychopathy. Molecular psychiatry, 14(1), 5.Glöckner, A., & Witteman, C. (2010). Beyond dual-process models: A categorisation of processes underlying intuitive judgement and decision making. Thinking & Reasoning, 16(1), 1-25.Glöckner, A., & Witteman, C. (2010). Beyond dual-process models: A categorisation of processes underlying intuitive judgement and decision making. Thinking & Reasoning, 16(1), 1-25.Gu, J., Xu, Y. C., Xu, H., Zhang, C., & Ling, H. (2017). Privacy concerns for mobile app download: An elaboration likelihood model perspective. Decision Support Systems, 94, 19-28.Halchenko, Y. O., Hanson, S. J., & Pearlmutter, B. A. (2005). Multimodal integration: fMRI, mri, EEG, MEG. Advanced image processing in magnetic resonance imaging,223-265.Hargittai, E., & Marwick, A. (2016). “What can I really do?” Explaining the privacy paradox with online apathy. International Journal of Communication, 10, 21.Kokolakis, S. (2017). Privacy attitudes and privacy behaviour: A review of current research on the privacy paradox phenomenon. Computers & security, 64, 122-134.Lai, C. Y., Liang, T. P., & Hui, K. L. (2018). Information Privacy Paradox: A NeuralScience Study. Information Privacy, 6, 26-2018.Lee, J. M., Gebremariam, A., Wu, E. L., LaRose, J., & Gurney, J. G. (2011).Evaluation of nonfasting tests to screen for childhood and adolescentdysglycemia. Diabetes Care, 34(12), 2597-2602.Lieberman, M. D. (2007). Social cognitive neuroscience: a review of core processes. Annu. Rev. Psychol., 58, 259-289.Martinez-Selva, J. M., Sanchez-Navarro, J. P., Bechara, A., & Roman, F. (2006). Brain mechanisms involved in decision-making. Revista de neurologia, 42(7), 411.Mohammed, Z., & Tejay, G. (2015). The role of cognitive disposition indeconstructing the privacy paradox: a neuroscience study.Ortiz, J., Chih, W. H., & Tsai, F. S. (2018). Information privacy, consumer alienation, and lurking behavior in social networking sites. Computers in Human Behavior, 80, 143-157.Petty, R. E., Cacioppo, J. T., & Goldman, R. (1981). Personal involvement as a determinant of argument-based persuasion.Journal of personality and social psychology, 41(5), 847.Sahlin, N. E., Wallin, A., & Persson, J. (2010). Decision science: from Ramsey to dual process theories. Synthese, 172(1), 129-143.Sarraf, S., & Sun, J. (2016). Functional brain imaging: A comprehensive survey. arXiv preprint arXiv:1602.02225.Simon, H. A. (1955). A behavioral model of rational choice. The quarterly journal of economics, 69(1), 99-118.Smith, H. J., Milberg, S. J., & Burke, S. J. (1996). Information privacy: measuringindividuals` concerns about organizational practices. MIS quarterly, 20(2), 167-196.Spiekermann, S., Grossklags, J., & Berendt, B. (2001, October). E-privacy in 2nd generation E-commerce: privacy preferences versus actual behavior. In Proceedings of the 3rd ACM conference on Electronic Commerce (pp. 38-47). ACM.Udo, G. J. (2001). Privacy and security concerns as major barriers for e-commerce: a survey study. Information Management & Computer Security, 9(4), 165-174. 74Van den Broeck, E., Poels, K., & Walrave, M. (2015). Older and wiser? Facebook use, privacy concern, and privacy protection in the life stages of emerging, young, and middle adulthood. Social Media+ Society, 1(2), 2056305115616149.Wang, T., Duong, T. D., & Chen, C. C. (2016). Intention to disclose personal information via mobile applications: A privacy calculus perspective. International Journal of Information Management, 36(4), 531-542.Weinberger, M., Bouhnik, D., & Zhitomirsky-Geffet, M. (2017). Factors Affecting Students’ Privacy Paradox and Privacy Protection Behavior. Open Information Science, 1(1), 3-20.Wijesekera, P., Baokar, A., Hosseini, A., Egelman, S., Wagner, D., &Beznosov, K. (2015). Android permissions remystified: A field study on contextual integrity. In 24th {USENIX} Security Symposium ({USENIX} Security 15) (pp. 499-514).Wirtz, J., Lwin, M. O., & Williams, J. D. (2007). Causes and consequences of consumer online privacy concern. International Journal of Service Industry Management, 18(4), 326-348.Zhang, S., Wang, G., Liu, Q., & Abawajy, J. H. (2018). A trajectory privacy- preserving scheme based on query exchange in mobile social networks. Soft Computing, 22(18), 6121-6133. 描述 碩士
國立政治大學
資訊管理學系
1063560201資料來源 http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G1063560201 資料類型 thesis dc.contributor.advisor 梁定澎<br>林怡伶 zh_TW dc.contributor.advisor Liang, Ting-Peng<br>Lin, Yi-Ling en_US dc.contributor.author (Authors) 侯雅晴 zh_TW dc.contributor.author (Authors) Hou, Ya-Ching en_US dc.creator (作者) 侯雅晴 zh_TW dc.creator (作者) Hou, Ya-Ching en_US dc.date (日期) 2019 en_US dc.date.accessioned 5-Sep-2019 15:46:08 (UTC+8) - dc.date.available 5-Sep-2019 15:46:08 (UTC+8) - dc.date.issued (上傳時間) 5-Sep-2019 15:46:08 (UTC+8) - dc.identifier (Other Identifiers) G1063560201 en_US dc.identifier.uri (URI) http://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/125536 - dc.description (描述) 碩士 zh_TW dc.description (描述) 國立政治大學 zh_TW dc.description (描述) 資訊管理學系 zh_TW dc.description (描述) 1063560201 zh_TW dc.description.abstract (摘要) 隨著大數據分析技術的進步，隱私問題越來越受到大家的關注。特別是在 移動應用程式的時代裡，人們雖然注重個人資訊隱私，實際上卻有許多人不經 意地透露自己的隱私資訊，而這種思想與行為不一致的現象則被稱作隱私悖論， 亦稱作隱私矛盾。過往文獻透過隱私相關研究理論，對於隱私顧慮的信念與意 圖實際行為之間的不一致提出了許多解釋，並以問卷與訪談等方式作為研究方 法，讓使用者回溯在特定情境中是否有過隱私揭露行為的經驗。然而，一個人的決策行為並非是絕對理性思維，個人之心理層面因素與情 緒因素皆會影響決策結果。因此，本實驗透過雙邊系統理論(dual process theory)定義個人在做決策時會受到兩個不同的系統的影響，進而推論個人發生 隱私矛盾現象時，比起沒有隱私矛盾現象發生時所採用的決策方式有所不同。 除此之外，最近神經科學的進步讓研究者可以透過觀察腦部影像的變化，了解 實際決策時的腦部反應機制，可以更客觀的了解產生這種現象的神經機制，有 助於更深入的理解造成這種現象的原因。因此，本研究從神經科學的角度驗證 隱私悖論的現象，基於心理學領域的雙邊系統理論(Dual Process Theory)並透 過功能性磁造振影(functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging, fMRI)了解使用者在手 機應用程式下載的情境下，其影響個人隱私顧慮的潛在因素與發生隱私矛盾時 的腦區反應。 zh_TW dc.description.abstract (摘要) With the advancement of big data analytics technology, privacy issues are getting more and more attention. Although people report that they pay attention to personal information privacy, many people inadvertently disclose their privacy information in actual behavior. This phenomenon is called “privacy paradox” which means the inconsistency between the attitude and the actual behavior in the privacy related decision-making.In previous literature, a few theories have been proposed to explain the inconsistency between reported privacy concerns and the actual self-disclosure behavior and been evaluated with questionnaires and interviews. Recent advancement in neuroscience allows researchers to observe brain activations in the decision process to explore the neural mechanisms associated with certain behavior. Therefore, based on the Dual Process Theory, the objective of this study is to apply functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging (fMRI) to explore the neural mechanisms associated with privacy paradox. en_US dc.description.tableofcontents 目錄4表目錄 6圖目錄 8第一章 緒論 9第一節 研究背景與動機 9第二節 研究目的 11第三節 研究流程 12第二章 文獻探討 13第一節 隱私矛盾 13第二節 雙邊系統理論 15第三節 認知神經科學 18第四節 隱私悖論之認知神經科學 20第五節 雙邊系統理論之認知神經科學 22第三章 研究架構與方法 25一、研究架構 25二、研究假說 25第一節 實驗設計 27一、實驗內容 27二、材料篩選機制 32三、實驗流程與設計 39四、實驗對象與招募管道 42五、實驗儀器與場地 43六、實驗日期 43第二節 資料分析與前測結果 44一、資料分析方法 44二、前測分析與結果 47第四章 研究分析結果 53第一節 敘述性統計 53第二節 fMRI 影像資料分析 55一、資料分析方法與篩選標準 55二、隱私矛盾現象之腦區反應 57三、無隱私矛盾現象之腦區反應 61四、隱私矛盾現象與決策機制之驗證 63五、無隱私矛盾現象與決策機制之驗證 65六、問卷與手機應用程式下載情境之差異 67第五章 結論與建議 70第一節 研究結論 70一、問卷與手機應用程式下載情境之差異 70二、隱私矛盾現象之腦區反應 71二、隱私矛盾現象之決策機制驗證 71第二節 貢獻 72一、學術貢獻 72二、實務貢獻 73第三節 研究限制 73第四節 未來研究方向 73參考文獻 74附錄一 問卷 78附錄二 手機應用程式變數平均值表.95附錄三 IRB 同意書 98附錄四 台灣心智科學腦造影中心實驗同意書 103附錄五 fMRI 實驗示意圖-問卷情境 105附錄六 fMRI 實驗示意圖-手機應用程式下載情境 110附錄七 腦區活化影像 120 zh_TW dc.format.extent 19139289 bytes - dc.format.mimetype application/pdf - dc.source.uri (資料來源) http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G1063560201 en_US dc.subject (關鍵詞) 隱私矛盾 zh_TW dc.subject (關鍵詞) 隱私悖論 zh_TW dc.subject (關鍵詞) 雙邊系統理論 zh_TW dc.subject (關鍵詞) 功能性磁振造影 zh_TW dc.subject (關鍵詞) Privacy Concern en_US dc.subject (關鍵詞) Privacy Paradox en_US dc.subject (關鍵詞) Dual Process Theory en_US dc.subject (關鍵詞) Functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging en_US dc.title (題名) 隱私悖論的功能性磁振造影研究 zh_TW dc.title (題名) An fMRI Study on Information Privacy Paradox en_US dc.type (資料類型) thesis en_US dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 一、中文部分韓承靜(2004 年)。認知神經科學的形成背景與範圍概述。科學教育月刊蕭文龍，黃莉君，&楊雅雯(2016)。神經資訊系統文獻匯整分析。東吳經濟商學學報，(92)，37-56。梁曉丹，李穎灝，&劉芳(2018)。在線隱私政策對消費者提供個人信息意願的影響機制研究 - 信息敏感度的調節作用。管理評論，30(11)，97-107。管家娃，張玥，朱慶華，&趙宇翔(2016)。國外社交網站隱私悖論問題研 究綜述與國內研究建議。圖書情報工作，60(22)，126-134。陳乃嘉，&任維(2019)。認知神經科學研究的文獻計量分析。Researches of Cognitive Neuroscience Based on Bibliometric Analysis. Advances inPsychology, 9(02), 313.陳韋亭(2014)。大腦決策機制之資料探勘研究。中山大學資訊管理學系研究所學位論文，1-83。徐亦礽. (2016). 複合與簡單風險決策之神經差異. 成功大學經濟學系學位論文,1-69.白麗英，袁博，張蔚，張振，蘭姣，&王益文。 (2014)。人際合作與衝突影響博弈決策的結果評價。心理學報，46(11)，1760-1771。劉燁，付秋芳，&傅小蘭。 (2009 年)。認知與情緒的交互作用。科學通報，54(18)，2783-2796。汪蕾，沉翔宇，&林志萍。 (2010 年)。基於決策神經科學的風險決策與含糊決策研究進展(博士論文)。二、英文部分Acquisti, A., & Grossklags, J. (2005). Privacy and rationality in individual decision making. IEEE security & privacy, 3(1), 26-33.Acquisti, A., Brandimarte, L., & Loewenstein, G. (2015). Privacy and human behavior in the age of information. Science, 347(6221), 509-514.Barnes, S. B. (2006). A privacy paradox: Social networking in the United States. First Monday, 11(9).Barth, S., & De Jong, M. D. (2017). The privacy paradox–Investigating discrepancies between expressed privacy concerns and actual online behavior–A systematic literature review. Telematics and Informatics, 34(7), 1038-1058.Bhattacherjee, A., & Sanford, C. (2006). Influence processes for information technology acceptance: An elaboration likelihood model. MIS quarterly, 805-825. Buck, C., Horbel, C., Germelmann, C. C., &Eymann, T. (2014). The unconscious appconsumer: Discovering and comparing the information-seeking patterns among mobile application consumers.Cai, H., & Liu, C. (2004). Anterior Cingulate Cortex and Executive Function. Advances in Psychological Science, 12(05), 643-650.Camara, E., Rodriguez-Fornells, A., Ye, Z., & Münte, T. F. (2009). Reward networks in the brain as captured by connectivity measures. Frontiers in neuroscience, 3, 34.Choi, H., Park, J., & Jung, Y. (2018). The role of privacy fatigue in online privacy behavior. Computers in Human Behavior, 81, 42-51.Delgado, M. R., Tricomi, E., Vartanian, O., & Mandel, D. (2011). Reward processingand decision making in the human striatum. Neuroscience of decision making, 145-172.Evans, J. S. B. (2003). In two minds: dual-process accounts of reasoning. Trends in cognitive sciences, 7(10), 454-459.Glenn, A. L., Raine, A., & Schug, R. A. (2009). The neural correlates of moral decision-making in psychopathy. Molecular psychiatry, 14(1), 5.Glöckner, A., & Witteman, C. (2010). Beyond dual-process models: A categorisation of processes underlying intuitive judgement and decision making. Thinking & Reasoning, 16(1), 1-25.Glöckner, A., & Witteman, C. (2010). Beyond dual-process models: A categorisation of processes underlying intuitive judgement and decision making. Thinking & Reasoning, 16(1), 1-25.Gu, J., Xu, Y. C., Xu, H., Zhang, C., & Ling, H. (2017). Privacy concerns for mobile app download: An elaboration likelihood model perspective. Decision Support Systems, 94, 19-28.Halchenko, Y. O., Hanson, S. J., & Pearlmutter, B. A. (2005). Multimodal integration: fMRI, mri, EEG, MEG. Advanced image processing in magnetic resonance imaging,223-265.Hargittai, E., & Marwick, A. (2016). “What can I really do?” Explaining the privacy paradox with online apathy. International Journal of Communication, 10, 21.Kokolakis, S. (2017). Privacy attitudes and privacy behaviour: A review of current research on the privacy paradox phenomenon. Computers & security, 64, 122-134.Lai, C. Y., Liang, T. P., & Hui, K. L. (2018). Information Privacy Paradox: A NeuralScience Study. Information Privacy, 6, 26-2018.Lee, J. M., Gebremariam, A., Wu, E. L., LaRose, J., & Gurney, J. G. (2011).Evaluation of nonfasting tests to screen for childhood and adolescentdysglycemia. Diabetes Care, 34(12), 2597-2602.Lieberman, M. D. (2007). Social cognitive neuroscience: a review of core processes. Annu. Rev. Psychol., 58, 259-289.Martinez-Selva, J. M., Sanchez-Navarro, J. P., Bechara, A., & Roman, F. (2006). Brain mechanisms involved in decision-making. Revista de neurologia, 42(7), 411.Mohammed, Z., & Tejay, G. (2015). The role of cognitive disposition indeconstructing the privacy paradox: a neuroscience study.Ortiz, J., Chih, W. H., & Tsai, F. S. (2018). Information privacy, consumer alienation, and lurking behavior in social networking sites. Computers in Human Behavior, 80, 143-157.Petty, R. E., Cacioppo, J. T., & Goldman, R. (1981). Personal involvement as a determinant of argument-based persuasion.Journal of personality and social psychology, 41(5), 847.Sahlin, N. E., Wallin, A., & Persson, J. (2010). Decision science: from Ramsey to dual process theories. Synthese, 172(1), 129-143.Sarraf, S., & Sun, J. (2016). Functional brain imaging: A comprehensive survey. arXiv preprint arXiv:1602.02225.Simon, H. A. (1955). A behavioral model of rational choice. The quarterly journal of economics, 69(1), 99-118.Smith, H. J., Milberg, S. J., & Burke, S. J. (1996). Information privacy: measuringindividuals` concerns about organizational practices. MIS quarterly, 20(2), 167-196.Spiekermann, S., Grossklags, J., & Berendt, B. (2001, October). E-privacy in 2nd generation E-commerce: privacy preferences versus actual behavior. In Proceedings of the 3rd ACM conference on Electronic Commerce (pp. 38-47). ACM.Udo, G. J. (2001). Privacy and security concerns as major barriers for e-commerce: a survey study. Information Management & Computer Security, 9(4), 165-174. 74Van den Broeck, E., Poels, K., & Walrave, M. (2015). Older and wiser? Facebook use, privacy concern, and privacy protection in the life stages of emerging, young, and middle adulthood. Social Media+ Society, 1(2), 2056305115616149.Wang, T., Duong, T. D., & Chen, C. C. (2016). Intention to disclose personal information via mobile applications: A privacy calculus perspective. International Journal of Information Management, 36(4), 531-542.Weinberger, M., Bouhnik, D., & Zhitomirsky-Geffet, M. (2017). Factors Affecting Students’ Privacy Paradox and Privacy Protection Behavior. Open Information Science, 1(1), 3-20.Wijesekera, P., Baokar, A., Hosseini, A., Egelman, S., Wagner, D., &Beznosov, K. (2015). Android permissions remystified: A field study on contextual integrity. In 24th {USENIX} Security Symposium ({USENIX} Security 15) (pp. 499-514).Wirtz, J., Lwin, M. O., & Williams, J. D. (2007). Causes and consequences of consumer online privacy concern. International Journal of Service Industry Management, 18(4), 326-348.Zhang, S., Wang, G., Liu, Q., & Abawajy, J. H. (2018). A trajectory privacy- preserving scheme based on query exchange in mobile social networks. Soft Computing, 22(18), 6121-6133. zh_TW dc.identifier.doi (DOI) 10.6814/NCCU201900915 en_US
