Avatar 近年來在社群媒體非常盛行，但是 avatar 的設計以及所產生的效果目前仍未被充 分理解，因此本研究的發現，將有助於實務工作者未來在設計 avatar 以及運用 avatar 在電子 商務的行銷時，有具體而可參考的方針。此外，目前個人化的概念已普遍運用在行銷策略中。
隨著資訊科技的進步，個人化技術不斷的推層出新，嘗試著藉由個人化的一對一互動模式，
塑造出類似實體世界的人際互動效果。本研究由認知神經科學的角度具體了解個人化對消費 者的影響，也能作為個人化技術創新的參考方向。
34
參考文獻
1. 李玉雯、梁定澎，「個人化客戶服務的感情因素」，產業與管理論壇，11(3)，2009，38-51 頁。
2. Aston-Jones, G., and Cohen, J. D. “An integrative theory of locus coeruleus-norepinephrine function: Adaptive gain and optimal performance,” Annual Review of Neuroscience, 2005, 28(1), pp. 403-450.
3. Bauer, H.B., and Neumann, M.M. “Investigating The Effects Of Avatars As Virtual Representatives In Electronic Commerce,” University of Mannheim, Germany, 2005.
4. Caglayan, A. and Harrison,C., Agent Sourcebook, New York : John Wiley & Sons, Inc, 1997.
5. Choi, C.S.Y., Yun,H., and Kim, K.K.. “The Impact of Avatar Appearance and Offline Identity Disclosure on Trust in Virtual Worlds,” AMCIS 2009 Proceedings, Paper 270.
6. Dalgleish, T. “The emotional brain,” Nature Reviews: Neuroscience, 2004, 5, pp. 583-589.
7. Dimoka, A. “What Does the Brain Tell Us about Trust and Distrust? Evidence from a Functional Neuroimaging Study,” MIS Quarterly, 2010, 34(2), pp. 373-396.
8. Dimoka, A., Pavlou, Paul A. Davis, and Fred D. “The Potential of Cognitive Neuroscience for Information Systems Research,” Paper presented at Twenty Eighth International Conference on Information Systems, Montreal, 2007.
9. Epstein, S. “Integration of the cognitive and the psychodynamic unconscious,” American Psychologist, 1994, 49(8), pp. 709-724.
10. Epstein, S., and Pacini, R. “Some basic issues regarding dual-process theories from the perspective of cognitive-experiential self-theory,” In S. Chaiken & Y. Trope (Eds.), Dual process theories in social psychology (pp. 462–482). New York: Guilford, 1999.
11. Evans J. S. B. T. “Dual-processing accounts of reasoning judgment and social cognition,
“ Annual Review of Psychology, 2008, 59, pp. 255-278.
12. Galanzhi, H., and Nah, F.F.H. “Deception in cyberspace: A comparison of textonly vs. avatar
supported medium,” In. J. HumanComputer Studies, 2007, 65, pp. 770783.
13. Hemp, P. “AvatarBased Marketing”, Harvard Business Review, June, 2006, pp.4857.
14. Holzwarth, M., Janiszewski, C., and Neumann, M.M. “The Influence of Avatars on Online Consumer Shopping Behavior,” Journal of Marketing, 2006, 70, pp. 1936.
15. Hussain, M., Nakamura, B. and Marino, J. “Avatar Appearance & Information Credibility in Second Life,” iConf, 2011.
16. Jin, S.A.A., “Modality Effects in Second Life: The Mediating Role of Social Presence and the Moderating Role of Product Involvement,” CyberPsychology & Behavior, December 2009, 12(6), pp. 717721.
17. Jin, S.A.A., and Bolebruch, J. “Avatarbased Advertising in second life: The role of presence and attractiveness of virtual spokespersons,” Journal of Interactive Advertising, 10(1), 2009, pp. 5560.
18. Keeling, K., McGoldrick, P., Beatty, S. “Avatars as salespeople: Communication style, trust, and intentions, “Journal of Business Research, 2010, 63, pp. 793800.
35
19. Komiak, S. Y. X., and Benbasat, I. “The Effects of Personalization and Familiarity on Trust and Adoption of Recommendation Agents,” MIS Quarterly, 30(4), 2006, pp. 941-960.
20. Kramer, J., Noronha, S., and J., V. "A User-Centered Design Approach to Personalization,"
Communications of the ACM (43:8) 2000, pp 45-48.
21. Kuo, W., Sjostrom, T., Chen, Y., Wang, Y., and Huang, C. “Intuition and deliberation: Two systems for strategizing in the brain,” Science, 2009, 324(5926), pp. 519.
22. Lee, J.R. and Park, S.G.. “Whose Second Life is This: How AvatarBased Racial Cues Shape EthnoRacial Minorities' Perception of Virtual Worlds,” Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking, 14(11), 2011, pp.637642.
23. Liang, T.-P., Chen, H.-Y., and Turban, E., “Effect of Personalization on the Perceived Usefulness of Online Customer Services: A Dual-Core Theory,” Paper presented at the 11th International Conference of Electric Commerce, Taipei, 2009a, August.
24. Liang, T.-P., Lai, H.-J., and Ku, Y.-C. "Personalized Content Recommendation and User Satisfaction: Theoretical Synthesis and Empirical Findings," Journal of Management Information Systems (23:3) 2006, pp 45-70.
25. Liang, T.-P., Li, Y.-W., and Turban, E. “Personalized Services as Empathic Response: The Role of Intimacy,” Paper presented at Pacific Asia Conference on Information Systems, Hyderabad, India, 2009b, March.
26. Lieberman, M. D. “Reflective and reflexive judgment processes: a social cognitive neuroscience approach,” In: Forgas, J.P., Williams, K.R., Hippel, W.v. (Eds.), Social Judgments:
Explicit and Implicit Processes. Cambridge Univ. Press, New York, 2003, pp. 44– 67.
27. McGloin, R., Nowak, K.L., Stiffano, S.C., and Flynn, G.M. “The effect of Avatar Perception on Attributions of Source and Text Credibility,” Working paper, University of Connecticut.
28. Miller, E. K., and Cohen, J. D. “An integrative theory of prefrontal cortex function,” Annual Review of Neuroscience, 2001, 24(1), pp. 167.
29. Mittal, B., and Lassar, W.M. "The Role of Personalization in Service Encounters," Journal of Retailing (72:1) 1996, pp 95-109.
30. Nassiri, N. “Increasing Trust through the Use of 3D ecommerce Environment,” Department of Business Information Technology, Dubai, UAE, 2008
31. Ochsner, K. N., and Gross, J. J. “The cognitive control of emotion,” Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 2005, 9(5), pp. 242-249.
32. Papadopoulou, P. “Applying virtual reality for trustbuilding ecommerce,” Virtual Reality, 11, 2007, pp.107127.
33. Petty, R.E., and Cacioppo, J.T. Communication and Persuasion: Central and Peripheral Routes to Attitude Change, Springer-Verlag, New York, 1986.
34. Pornpitakpan, C., “The Persuasiveness of Source Credibility: A Critical Review of Five Decades' Evidence”, Journal of Applied Psychology, 34(2), 2004, pp. 223444.
35. Qiu, L. and Benbasat, I. “A study of demographic embodiments of product recommendation agents in electronic commerce,” International Journal of HumanComputer Studies, 2010, 68, pp. 669688.
36
36. Qiu, L. and Benbasat, I., “Evaluating Anthropomorphic Product Recommendation Agents: A Social Relationship Perspective to Designing Information Systems,” Journal of MIS, 25(4), Spring 2009, pp. 145 – 182.
37. Reigelsberger, J., Sasse, M.A., and McCarthy, J.D. “Rich Media, Poor Judgement? A Study of Media Effects on Users’ Trust in Expertise, “ 2006, Presence.
38. Riedl, R., Hubert, M., and Kenning, P. “Are There Neural Gender Differences in Online Trust?
An fMRI Study on the Perceived Trustworthiness of eBay Offers,” MIS Quarterly, 34(2), 2010, pp. 397-428.
39. Riedl, R., Mohr, P.N.C., Kenning, P.H., Davis, F.D., Heekeren, H.R. (2014), “Trusting Humans and Avatars: A Brain Imaging Study Based on Evolution Theory,” Journal of MIS, 30:4, pp.
83-114.
40. Riegelsberger, J., Sasse, M.A., and McCarthy, J.D. “Do People Trust Their Eyes More Than Their Ears? Media Bias While Seeking Expert Advice,” CHI 2005, April 27, 2005.
41. Rubini,D. , “Overcoming the paradox of personalization : building adoption, loyalty, and trust in digital market,” Design Management Journal , Spring, 2001, pp.49-54.
42. Sanfey, A. G., Rilling, J. K., Aronson, J. A., Nystrom, L. E., and Cohen, J. D. “The neural basis of economic decision-making in the Ultimatum Game,” Science, 2003, 300(5626), pp.
1755-1758.
43. Shahabi, C., and Banaei-Kashani, F. “Efficient and Anonymous Web-usage Mining for Web Personalization,” Informs Journal on Computing, 15(2), 2003, pp. 123-147.
44. Sloman, S. A. “The empirical case for two systems of reasoning,” Psychological Bulletin, 1996, 119(1), pp. 3-22.
45. Smith, E. E., and Jonides, J. “Storage and executive processes in the frontal lobes,” Science, 1999, 283(5408), pp. 1657-1661.
46. Smith, E. R., and DeCoster, J. “Dual-process models in social and cognitive psychology:
Conceptual integration and links to,” Personality & Social Psychology Review, 2000, 4(2), pp.
108.
47. Stanovich, K. E. “The robot’s rebellion: Finding meaning in the age of Darwin,” Chicago:
University of Chicago Press, 2004.
48. Stanovich, K. E. “Who is rational? Studies of individual differences in reasoning,” Mahweh, NJ: Erlbaum, 1999.
49. Surprenant, C. F., and M. R. Solomon,“Predictability and Personalization in the Service Encounter,” Journal of Marketing, 51, 1987, pp.86-96.
50. Tam, K. Y., and Ho, S. Y. “Web Personalization as a Persuasion Strategy: An Elaboration Likelihood Model Perspective,” Information Systems Research, 16(3), 2005, pp.271-291.
51. Tam, K.Y., and Ho, S.Y. “Understanding the Impact of Web Personalization on User Information Processing and Decision Outcomes,” MIS Quarterly, 30(4), 2006, pp. 865-890.
52. Vom Brocke, J. and Liang, T.P. (2014), “Guidelines for Neuroscience Studies in Information Systems Research,” Journal of MIS, 30:4, pp. 211-234.
53. Wang, S.S., Moon, S.I., Kwon, K.H., Evans, C.A., Stefanone, M.A. “Face Off: Implications of
37
visual cues on initiating friendship on Facebook,” Computer in Human Behavior, 2010, 26, pp.
226234.
54. Zhang, X., Edwards, J. and Harding, J. “Personalized Online Sales Using Web Usage Data Mining,” Computers in Industry, 58(8-9), 2007, pp. 772-782.
科技部補助計畫衍生研發成果推廣資料表
日期:2014/10/31
科技部補助計畫
計畫名稱: 數位替身在個人化推薦中的效果：神經資訊系統的探索性研究 計畫主持人: 梁定澎
計畫編號: 101-2410-H-004-054-MY2 學門領域: 資訊管理
無研發成果推廣資料
101 年度專題研究計畫研究成果彙整表
計畫主持人：梁定澎 計畫編號：101-2410-H-004-054-MY2 計畫名稱：數位替身在個人化推薦中的效果：神經資訊系統的探索性研究 Guidelines for Neuroscience
Studies in Information
Systems Research, JMIS, 30:4.
博士後研究員 0 0 100%
專任助理 0 0 100%
其他成果
(
無法以量化表達之成 果如辦理學術活動、獲 得獎項、重要國際合 作、研究成果國際影響 力及其他協助產業技 術發展之具體效益事 項等，請以文字敘述填 列。)1. 透過此計畫並在神經經濟學的相關研討會發表，已經建立跟國際上神經資訊 系統領域的密切合作關係，未來應該可以有更好的研究成果發表
2. 編輯 Journal of MIS 的神經資訊系統特刊，已經在 2014 年 4 月號(vol. 30, No.
4)出刊，對資訊管理學界有很大的幫助。
成果項目 量化 名稱或內容性質簡述
測驗工具(含質性與量性) 0
課程/模組 0
電腦及網路系統或工具 0
教材 0
舉辦之活動/競賽 0
研討會/工作坊 0
電子報、網站 0
科 教 處 計 畫 加 填 項
目 計畫成果推廣之參與（閱聽）人數 0