Publications-Theses
Article View/Open
Publication Export
-
題名 隱私悖論關聯決策機制之神經科學研究
Decision Mechanism Associated with Privacy Paradox: A Neuroscience Study作者 張佳賢
Chang, Chia-Hsien貢獻者 梁定澎<br>林怡伶
Liang, Ting-Peng<br>Lin, Yi-Ling
張佳賢
Chang, Chia-Hsien關鍵詞 隱私悖論
隱私矛盾
認知神經科學
雙邊系統理論
Privacy Paradox
Privacy Concern
Cognitive Neuroscience
Dual Process Theory
Decision Mechanism日期 2020 上傳時間 2-Sep-2020 11:46:35 (UTC+8) 摘要 隨著時間推進，資訊科技是日益成熟與發達，人們生活不得不依賴資訊科技，擁有各種行動裝置，而使用行動裝置時，應用程式與之有緊密關係。大部分的行動應用程式要求使用者提供個人隱私資訊，方能繼續下載並使用該應用程式。過去許多研究中發現，人們總是宣稱對於其隱私資訊有所顧慮、不願輕易公開個人敏感資訊，然而在網路世界卻無法將這般說詞落實為真實行為，該隱私顧慮意圖與行為之間不一致之現象就被稱為隱私悖論（Privacy Paradox）。人的決策行為須經由大腦神經機制的運作，愈來愈多的行為研究利用神經科學工具來探討大腦在進行特定決策時的運作機制。過去探討隱私悖論之研究大多以問卷為研究方法，僅搜集受測者意圖或態度資料，為了有效提升真實行為之衡量，本研究欲透過過去學者利用功能性磁振造影（functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging, fMRI）研究搜集而來的受測者於App下載情境之意圖與行為實驗腦區資料進行深入分析。探討使用者在發生隱私悖論之下，在問卷調查所表示的隱私保護意圖與下載手機應用程式時的隱私揭露行為間的腦部神經反應機制差異，並且以過去與雙邊系統理論（Dual Process Theory）有關的決策機制實驗結果來解釋這些腦部運作機制。
As information technology matures, people have become dependent upon various mobile devices. Mobile devices are deeply integrated with applications which request users to provide personal, private information before granting access to its services. Past literature has indicated that there is a general concern among users regarding their private information, and they would not easily disclose personal and sensitive information. They nevertheless reveal their personal information on Internet. Users make such reluctance difficult to transform into actual behavior. This discrepancy between user intention and behavior is described as the Privacy Paradox.With the advances of neuroscience tool, a growing amount of research started to investigate how brain makes privacy-sensitive decisions. Literature regarding on the Privacy Paradox tends to use the questionnaire survey as research method while it may barely collect the intention or attitude data of the participants. In order to effectively increase the assessment of real behavior, this research used brain intention and behavior data collected from previous research implementing functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging (fMRI), to highlight differences in the users` decision mechanisms revealed in questionnaire surveys on privacy protection intention on the one hand, and the privacy disclosure behaviors while downloading mobile device applications on the other. In addition, the outcomes of previous decision mechanism experiments using Dual Process Theory were imported to prove the difference between users` privacy protection intention and behavior. The objective of this research is to explore the mechanism of brain in paradoxical dichotomy between intention and behavior based on the Privacy Paradox, and to provide the explanation how such mechanism works using Dual Process Theory.參考文獻 一、 中文部分[1] 王紹蓉，梁定澎，賴誼禎（2016）。揭露與隱藏之拉鋸：人氣需求與隱 私顧慮對臉書隱私管理行為之影響。中華民國資訊管理學報，23（4），445-472。[2] 侯雅晴（2019）。 隱私悖論的功能性磁振造影研究。 國立政治大學資訊管理學系碩士學位論文，1-127。[3] 徐亦礽（2016）。複合與簡單風險決策之神經差異。國立成功大學經濟學系碩士學位論文，1-69。[4] 楊亨利，邱顯貴（2003）。 線上購物網站值得消費者信任的因素之研究。 資訊社會研究，（5），139-174。[5] 劉家宏（2018）。以社群網路分析探討雙系統大腦決策機制。國立政治大學資訊管理學系碩士學位論文，1-72。[6] 賴立芸（2019）。資訊隱私悖論因素探討。國立政治大學資訊管理學系碩士學位論文，1-94。二、 英文部分[1] Acquisti, A. (2004). Privacy in electronic commerce and the economics of immediate gratification. EC `04: Proceedings of the 5th ACM Conference on Electronic Commerce, USA. 21-29.[2] Acquisti, A., Brandimarte, L., & Loewenstein, G. (2015). Privacy and human behavior in the age of information. Science, 347(6221), 509-514.[3] Acquisti, A., Cranor, L., Fong, C., & Tsai, J. (2006). What’s it for you? A survey of online privacy concerns and risk. NET Institute Working Paper. 06-29, 1-20.[4] Baddeley, A. (2000). The episodic buffer: a new component of working memory? Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 4(11), 417-423.[5] Barnes, S. B. (2006). A privacy paradox: Social networking in the United States. First Monday, 11(9).[6] Barth, S., & De Jong, M. D. T. (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.[7] Bata, H., Chen, Y., Pentina, I., & Zhang, L. (2016). Exploring privacy paradox in information-sensitive mobile app adoption: A cross-cultural comparison. Computers in Human Behavior, 65, 409-419.[8] Bian, H., Duan, J., Gao, L., Wei, Q., & Yuan, C. (2013). The Neural Basis of Social Status Recognition and Its Influencing Factors. Advances in Psychology, 3, 262-268.[9] Buchanan, T., Joinson, A. N., Reips, U.-D., & Schofield, C. B. P. (2010). Privacy, Trust, and Self-Disclosure Online. Taylor & Francis, 25(1), 1-24.[10] Courvoisier, D., Joinson, A. N., & Vasalou, A. (2010). Cultural differences, experience with social networks and the nature of “true commitment” in Facebook. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 68(10), 719-728.[11] Code, C., Cowell, S. F., Egan, G. F., Harasty, J., & Watson, J. D. (2000). The functional neuroanatomy of simple calculation and number repetition, a parametric PET activation study. NeuroImage, 12, 565-573.[12] Den Ouden, H., Frith, U., Frith, C., & Blakemore S.-J. (2005). Thinking about intentions. Neuroimage, 28, 787-96.[13] Dinev, T., & Hart, P. (2006). An Extended Privacy Calculus Model for E-Commerce Transactions. Information Systems Research, 17(1), 61-80.[14] Dinev, T., Smith, H. J., & Xu, H. (2011). Information Privacy Research: An Interdisciplinary Review. MIS quarterly, 35(4), 989-1015.[15] Evans, J. S. B. T. (2002). Logic and human reasoning: An assessment of the deduction paradigm. Psychological Bulletin, 128(6), 978-996.[16] Evans, J. S. B. T. (2003). In two minds: dual-process accounts of reasoning. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 7(10), 454-459.[17] Evans, J. S. B. T., Handley, S. J., Over, D. E., & Perham, N. (2002). Background beliefs in Bayesian inference. Memory & Cognition volume, 30, 179-190.[18] Fiddick, L., Cosmides, L., & Tooby, J. (2000). No interpretation without representation: the role of domain-specific representations and inferences in the Wason selection task. Cognition, 77(1), 1-79.[19] Fodor, J. (1983). The Modularity of Mind. The Massachusetts Institute of Technology.[20] Glover, G. H., Menon, V., Reiss, A. L., Rivera, S. M., & White, C. D. (2000). Dissociating prefrontal and parietal cortex activation during arithmetic processing. NeuroImage, 12, 357-365.[21] Grafman, J., Levin, H. S., Martinkowski, K., Mirvis, S., Rickard, T., Scheller, J., & Winslow M. (1996). Dyscalculia and Dyslexia after right hemisphere injury in infancy. Archives of Neurology, 53, 88-96.[22] Grafman, J., & Rickard, T. (2000). Acalculia. Issues in clinical and cognitive neuropsychology. Patient-based approaches to cognitive neuroscience, 345-351.[23] 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.[24] Hughes-Roberts, T. (2013). 2013 International Conference on Social Computing. ISBN 978-0-7695-5137-1.[25] Kahneman, D. (2003). A perspective on judgment and choice: Mapping bounded rationality. American Psychologist, 58(9), 697-720.[26] Kokolakis, S. (2017). Privacy attitudes and privacy behaviour: A review of current research on the privacy paradox phenomenon. Computers & Security, 64, 122-134.[27] Lai, C. Y., Liang, T. P., & Hui, K. L. (2018). Information Privacy Paradox: A Neural Science Study. PACIS 2018 Proceedings, 247.[28] Lieberman, M. D. (2007). Social Cognitive Neuroscience: A Review of Core Processes. Annual Review of Psychology, 58, 259-289.[29] Magedanz, T., & Simoes, J. (2009). What happens when you mix social networks, contexts and mobile advertising in the same glass? International Journal of Mobile Marketing, 4(2), 52-60.[30] Mak, A. K. Y., Hu, Z.-G., Zhang, J. X., Xiao, Z.-W., & Lee, T. M. C. (2009). Neural correlates of regulation of positive and negative emotions: An fMRI study. Neuroscience Letters, 457(2), 101-106.[31] Martinez-Selva, J. M., Sanchez-Navarro, J.P., Bechara, A., & Roman, F. Brain mechanisms involved in decision making. REVIEW IN NEUROSCIENCE, 42(7), 411.[32] McLeod, P., Plunkett, K., & Rolls, E. T. (1998). Introduction to connectionist modelling of cognitive processes. Oxford University Press.[33] Metzger, M. J. (2007). Making sense of credibility on the Web: Models for evaluating online information and recommendations for future research. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology.[34] Mithen, S. (2002). Human evolution and the cognitive basis of science. The Cognitive Basis of Science. Cambridge University Press, 23-24.[35] Oaksford, M., & Chater N. (2001). The probabilistic approach to human reasoning. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 5(8), 349-357.[36] Ochsner, K. N., Knierim, K., Ludloow, D. H., Hanelin, J., Ramachandran, T., & Glover, G. (2004). Reflecting upon feelings: an MRI study of neural systems supporting the attribution of emotion to self and other. J Cogn Neurosci, 16, 1746-72.[37] Oomen, I., & Leenes, R. (2008). Privacy risk perceptions and privacy protection strategies. Policies and Research in Identity Management, Springer Verlag, Boston, 121-138.[38] Potzsch, S. (2008). Privacy Awareness: A Means to Solve the Privacy Paradox? I The Future of Identity in the Information Society, Springer-Verlag, Berlin Heidelberg, 226-236.[39] Smith, H. J., Milberg, S. J., & Burke, S. J. (1996). Information privacy: measuring individuals` concerns about organizational practices. MIS quarterly, 20(2), 167-196.[40] Stanovich, K. E., & West, R. F. (1998). Individual differences in framing and conjunction effects. Thinking & Reasoning, 4, 289-317.[41] Stutzman, F., Capra, R., & Thompson, J. (2011). Factors mediating disclosure in social network sites. Computers in Human Behavior, 27, 590-598.[42] Xu, H., Luo, X., Carroll, J. M., & Rosson, M. B. (2011). The personalization privacy paradox: An exploratory study of decision making process for location-aware marketing. Decision Support Systems, 51(1), 42-52.[43] Youn, S., & Hall, K. (2008). Gender and online privacy among teens: Risk perception, privacy concerns, and protection behaviors. Cyberpsychology & Behavior, 11(6), 763-765.[44] 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, 6121-6133.[45] Zysset, S., Wendt, C. S., Volz, K. G., Neumann, J., Huber, O., & Von Cramon, D. Y. (2006). The neural implementation of multi-attribute decision making: a parametric fMRI study with human subjects. Neuroimage, 31(3), 1380-1388. 描述 碩士
國立政治大學
資訊管理學系
107356020資料來源 http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0107356020 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) 張佳賢 zh_TW dc.contributor.author (Authors) Chang, Chia-Hsien en_US dc.creator (作者) 張佳賢 zh_TW dc.creator (作者) Chang, Chia-Hsien en_US dc.date (日期) 2020 en_US dc.date.accessioned 2-Sep-2020 11:46:35 (UTC+8) - dc.date.available 2-Sep-2020 11:46:35 (UTC+8) - dc.date.issued (上傳時間) 2-Sep-2020 11:46:35 (UTC+8) - dc.identifier (Other Identifiers) G0107356020 en_US dc.identifier.uri (URI) http://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/131495 - 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) 107356020 zh_TW dc.description.abstract (摘要) 隨著時間推進，資訊科技是日益成熟與發達，人們生活不得不依賴資訊科技，擁有各種行動裝置，而使用行動裝置時，應用程式與之有緊密關係。大部分的行動應用程式要求使用者提供個人隱私資訊，方能繼續下載並使用該應用程式。過去許多研究中發現，人們總是宣稱對於其隱私資訊有所顧慮、不願輕易公開個人敏感資訊，然而在網路世界卻無法將這般說詞落實為真實行為，該隱私顧慮意圖與行為之間不一致之現象就被稱為隱私悖論（Privacy Paradox）。人的決策行為須經由大腦神經機制的運作，愈來愈多的行為研究利用神經科學工具來探討大腦在進行特定決策時的運作機制。過去探討隱私悖論之研究大多以問卷為研究方法，僅搜集受測者意圖或態度資料，為了有效提升真實行為之衡量，本研究欲透過過去學者利用功能性磁振造影（functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging, fMRI）研究搜集而來的受測者於App下載情境之意圖與行為實驗腦區資料進行深入分析。探討使用者在發生隱私悖論之下，在問卷調查所表示的隱私保護意圖與下載手機應用程式時的隱私揭露行為間的腦部神經反應機制差異，並且以過去與雙邊系統理論（Dual Process Theory）有關的決策機制實驗結果來解釋這些腦部運作機制。 zh_TW dc.description.abstract (摘要) As information technology matures, people have become dependent upon various mobile devices. Mobile devices are deeply integrated with applications which request users to provide personal, private information before granting access to its services. Past literature has indicated that there is a general concern among users regarding their private information, and they would not easily disclose personal and sensitive information. They nevertheless reveal their personal information on Internet. Users make such reluctance difficult to transform into actual behavior. This discrepancy between user intention and behavior is described as the Privacy Paradox.With the advances of neuroscience tool, a growing amount of research started to investigate how brain makes privacy-sensitive decisions. Literature regarding on the Privacy Paradox tends to use the questionnaire survey as research method while it may barely collect the intention or attitude data of the participants. In order to effectively increase the assessment of real behavior, this research used brain intention and behavior data collected from previous research implementing functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging (fMRI), to highlight differences in the users` decision mechanisms revealed in questionnaire surveys on privacy protection intention on the one hand, and the privacy disclosure behaviors while downloading mobile device applications on the other. In addition, the outcomes of previous decision mechanism experiments using Dual Process Theory were imported to prove the difference between users` privacy protection intention and behavior. The objective of this research is to explore the mechanism of brain in paradoxical dichotomy between intention and behavior based on the Privacy Paradox, and to provide the explanation how such mechanism works using Dual Process Theory. en_US dc.description.tableofcontents 第一章 緒論 1第一節 研究背景與動機 1第二節 研究目的 3第三節 研究流程 4第二章 文獻探討 5第一節 隱私悖論 5第二節 隱私悖論與認知神經科學 8第三節 雙邊系統理論與認知神經科學 11第三章 研究架構與方法 15第一節 研究架構 15第二節 研究假說 16一、 手機應用程式下載情境 16二、 問卷情境 17第三節 實驗資料來源與說明 18一、 fMRI實驗應用程式材料篩選 18二、 fMRI實驗 20第四節 自變數定義 24第五節 資料分析方式 26第四章 研究分析與結果 31第一節 fMRI腦部資料分析 31一、 ANY-QNY-QACtrl之分析結果 33二、 QNY-ANY-QACtrl之分析結果 35第二節 雙邊系統決策機制驗證分析結果 37一、 ANY-QNY-QACtrl之驗證結果 37二、 QNY-ANY-QACtrl之驗證結果 38第五章 結論與建議 40第一節 研究結論 40一、 隱私悖論意圖與行為之差異 40二、 隱私悖論意圖與行為決策路徑之差異 41第二節 研究貢獻 42一、 理論層面貢獻 42二、 實務層面貢獻 43第三節 研究限制 43第四節 未來研究方向 43參考文獻 44一、 中文部分 44二、 英文部分 44附件一：應用程式材料篩選問卷 50附件二：fMRI實驗內容 72一、 問卷情境實驗內容 72二、 手機應用程式下載情境實驗內容 77 zh_TW dc.format.extent 5234789 bytes - dc.format.mimetype application/pdf - dc.source.uri (資料來源) http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0107356020 en_US dc.subject (關鍵詞) 隱私悖論 zh_TW dc.subject (關鍵詞) 隱私矛盾 zh_TW dc.subject (關鍵詞) 認知神經科學 zh_TW dc.subject (關鍵詞) 雙邊系統理論 zh_TW dc.subject (關鍵詞) Privacy Paradox en_US dc.subject (關鍵詞) Privacy Concern en_US dc.subject (關鍵詞) Cognitive Neuroscience en_US dc.subject (關鍵詞) Dual Process Theory en_US dc.subject (關鍵詞) Decision Mechanism en_US dc.title (題名) 隱私悖論關聯決策機制之神經科學研究 zh_TW dc.title (題名) Decision Mechanism Associated with Privacy Paradox: A Neuroscience Study en_US dc.type (資料類型) thesis en_US dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 一、 中文部分[1] 王紹蓉，梁定澎，賴誼禎（2016）。揭露與隱藏之拉鋸：人氣需求與隱 私顧慮對臉書隱私管理行為之影響。中華民國資訊管理學報，23（4），445-472。[2] 侯雅晴（2019）。 隱私悖論的功能性磁振造影研究。 國立政治大學資訊管理學系碩士學位論文，1-127。[3] 徐亦礽（2016）。複合與簡單風險決策之神經差異。國立成功大學經濟學系碩士學位論文，1-69。[4] 楊亨利，邱顯貴（2003）。 線上購物網站值得消費者信任的因素之研究。 資訊社會研究，（5），139-174。[5] 劉家宏（2018）。以社群網路分析探討雙系統大腦決策機制。國立政治大學資訊管理學系碩士學位論文，1-72。[6] 賴立芸（2019）。資訊隱私悖論因素探討。國立政治大學資訊管理學系碩士學位論文，1-94。二、 英文部分[1] Acquisti, A. (2004). Privacy in electronic commerce and the economics of immediate gratification. EC `04: Proceedings of the 5th ACM Conference on Electronic Commerce, USA. 21-29.[2] Acquisti, A., Brandimarte, L., & Loewenstein, G. (2015). Privacy and human behavior in the age of information. Science, 347(6221), 509-514.[3] Acquisti, A., Cranor, L., Fong, C., & Tsai, J. (2006). What’s it for you? A survey of online privacy concerns and risk. NET Institute Working Paper. 06-29, 1-20.[4] Baddeley, A. (2000). The episodic buffer: a new component of working memory? Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 4(11), 417-423.[5] Barnes, S. B. (2006). A privacy paradox: Social networking in the United States. First Monday, 11(9).[6] Barth, S., & De Jong, M. D. T. (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.[7] Bata, H., Chen, Y., Pentina, I., & Zhang, L. (2016). Exploring privacy paradox in information-sensitive mobile app adoption: A cross-cultural comparison. Computers in Human Behavior, 65, 409-419.[8] Bian, H., Duan, J., Gao, L., Wei, Q., & Yuan, C. (2013). The Neural Basis of Social Status Recognition and Its Influencing Factors. Advances in Psychology, 3, 262-268.[9] Buchanan, T., Joinson, A. N., Reips, U.-D., & Schofield, C. B. P. (2010). Privacy, Trust, and Self-Disclosure Online. Taylor & Francis, 25(1), 1-24.[10] Courvoisier, D., Joinson, A. N., & Vasalou, A. (2010). Cultural differences, experience with social networks and the nature of “true commitment” in Facebook. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 68(10), 719-728.[11] Code, C., Cowell, S. F., Egan, G. F., Harasty, J., & Watson, J. D. (2000). The functional neuroanatomy of simple calculation and number repetition, a parametric PET activation study. NeuroImage, 12, 565-573.[12] Den Ouden, H., Frith, U., Frith, C., & Blakemore S.-J. (2005). Thinking about intentions. Neuroimage, 28, 787-96.[13] Dinev, T., & Hart, P. (2006). An Extended Privacy Calculus Model for E-Commerce Transactions. Information Systems Research, 17(1), 61-80.[14] Dinev, T., Smith, H. J., & Xu, H. (2011). Information Privacy Research: An Interdisciplinary Review. MIS quarterly, 35(4), 989-1015.[15] Evans, J. S. B. T. (2002). Logic and human reasoning: An assessment of the deduction paradigm. Psychological Bulletin, 128(6), 978-996.[16] Evans, J. S. B. T. (2003). In two minds: dual-process accounts of reasoning. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 7(10), 454-459.[17] Evans, J. S. B. T., Handley, S. J., Over, D. E., & Perham, N. (2002). Background beliefs in Bayesian inference. Memory & Cognition volume, 30, 179-190.[18] Fiddick, L., Cosmides, L., & Tooby, J. (2000). No interpretation without representation: the role of domain-specific representations and inferences in the Wason selection task. Cognition, 77(1), 1-79.[19] Fodor, J. (1983). The Modularity of Mind. The Massachusetts Institute of Technology.[20] Glover, G. H., Menon, V., Reiss, A. L., Rivera, S. M., & White, C. D. (2000). Dissociating prefrontal and parietal cortex activation during arithmetic processing. NeuroImage, 12, 357-365.[21] Grafman, J., Levin, H. S., Martinkowski, K., Mirvis, S., Rickard, T., Scheller, J., & Winslow M. (1996). Dyscalculia and Dyslexia after right hemisphere injury in infancy. Archives of Neurology, 53, 88-96.[22] Grafman, J., & Rickard, T. (2000). Acalculia. Issues in clinical and cognitive neuropsychology. Patient-based approaches to cognitive neuroscience, 345-351.[23] 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.[24] Hughes-Roberts, T. (2013). 2013 International Conference on Social Computing. ISBN 978-0-7695-5137-1.[25] Kahneman, D. (2003). A perspective on judgment and choice: Mapping bounded rationality. American Psychologist, 58(9), 697-720.[26] Kokolakis, S. (2017). Privacy attitudes and privacy behaviour: A review of current research on the privacy paradox phenomenon. Computers & Security, 64, 122-134.[27] Lai, C. Y., Liang, T. P., & Hui, K. L. (2018). Information Privacy Paradox: A Neural Science Study. PACIS 2018 Proceedings, 247.[28] Lieberman, M. D. (2007). Social Cognitive Neuroscience: A Review of Core Processes. Annual Review of Psychology, 58, 259-289.[29] Magedanz, T., & Simoes, J. (2009). What happens when you mix social networks, contexts and mobile advertising in the same glass? International Journal of Mobile Marketing, 4(2), 52-60.[30] Mak, A. K. Y., Hu, Z.-G., Zhang, J. X., Xiao, Z.-W., & Lee, T. M. C. (2009). Neural correlates of regulation of positive and negative emotions: An fMRI study. Neuroscience Letters, 457(2), 101-106.[31] Martinez-Selva, J. M., Sanchez-Navarro, J.P., Bechara, A., & Roman, F. Brain mechanisms involved in decision making. REVIEW IN NEUROSCIENCE, 42(7), 411.[32] McLeod, P., Plunkett, K., & Rolls, E. T. (1998). Introduction to connectionist modelling of cognitive processes. Oxford University Press.[33] Metzger, M. J. (2007). Making sense of credibility on the Web: Models for evaluating online information and recommendations for future research. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology.[34] Mithen, S. (2002). Human evolution and the cognitive basis of science. The Cognitive Basis of Science. Cambridge University Press, 23-24.[35] Oaksford, M., & Chater N. (2001). The probabilistic approach to human reasoning. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 5(8), 349-357.[36] Ochsner, K. N., Knierim, K., Ludloow, D. H., Hanelin, J., Ramachandran, T., & Glover, G. (2004). Reflecting upon feelings: an MRI study of neural systems supporting the attribution of emotion to self and other. J Cogn Neurosci, 16, 1746-72.[37] Oomen, I., & Leenes, R. (2008). Privacy risk perceptions and privacy protection strategies. Policies and Research in Identity Management, Springer Verlag, Boston, 121-138.[38] Potzsch, S. (2008). Privacy Awareness: A Means to Solve the Privacy Paradox? I The Future of Identity in the Information Society, Springer-Verlag, Berlin Heidelberg, 226-236.[39] Smith, H. J., Milberg, S. J., & Burke, S. J. (1996). Information privacy: measuring individuals` concerns about organizational practices. MIS quarterly, 20(2), 167-196.[40] Stanovich, K. E., & West, R. F. (1998). Individual differences in framing and conjunction effects. Thinking & Reasoning, 4, 289-317.[41] Stutzman, F., Capra, R., & Thompson, J. (2011). Factors mediating disclosure in social network sites. Computers in Human Behavior, 27, 590-598.[42] Xu, H., Luo, X., Carroll, J. M., & Rosson, M. B. (2011). The personalization privacy paradox: An exploratory study of decision making process for location-aware marketing. Decision Support Systems, 51(1), 42-52.[43] Youn, S., & Hall, K. (2008). Gender and online privacy among teens: Risk perception, privacy concerns, and protection behaviors. Cyberpsychology & Behavior, 11(6), 763-765.[44] 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, 6121-6133.[45] Zysset, S., Wendt, C. S., Volz, K. G., Neumann, J., Huber, O., & Von Cramon, D. Y. (2006). The neural implementation of multi-attribute decision making: a parametric fMRI study with human subjects. Neuroimage, 31(3), 1380-1388. zh_TW dc.identifier.doi (DOI) 10.6814/NCCU202001628 en_US
