「互動性」在電腦中介環境（CME）中，具有相當重要的系統特徵，本研究嘗試對電腦中介環境的網路溝通使用行為進行探討，主旨在於瞭解互動性對網路使用者在網上溝通工具之即時溝通軟體（IM）、電子佈告欄（BBS）、和部落格（Blog）的使用態度和意圖。為探討資訊科技的使用態度與意圖，本研究引用「科技接受模型」（TAM）；但傳統的科技接受模型較偏重在外部動機而忽略了內在動機，因而採用「沈浸理論」作為反應網路溝通工具使用者內部動機的因素。所以本研究的研究架構考量了系統特性之互動性、外部動機之科技接受模型，以及內部動機之沈浸理論。調查研究使用驗證性因素分析(CFA)和線性結構模式（SEM），分別檢驗測量模型及整體模型當中各個構面間關係的強度。研究結果區分為方法論和理論驗證兩部分。在方法論上，具信度和效度的衡量各研究構面，以了解網路溝通行為。在理論驗證部分，資料分析結果顯示互動性、認知易用性、認知有用性及沈浸經驗皆會影響使用者的使用態度和意圖。

Online interactivity is the key characteristic of the computer mediated environment (CME), this study try to provide a better understanding of the communication behavior in the CME. This research’s objective is to investigate the effects of interactivity level on Web user’s attitude and intention towards the usage of online communication tools, such as Instant Messaging (IM), Bulletin Board Discussions (BBS), and Web log (Blog). As the result, we cite technology acceptance model (TAM) to support this research. However, traditional TAM ignores intrinsic motivation, so we introduce flow experience as the factor that reflects the user’s intrinsic motivation in online communication tool acceptance. Specifically speaking, we test constructs from system characteristic (Interactivity), extrinsic motivation (TAM), and intrinsic motivation (Flow Theory) in an integrated theoretical framework of online communication behavior. We use the confirmatory factor analysis to examine the measurement model, and apply structure equation modeling to access the empirical strength of the relationships in the proposed framework. Overall, the conclusions can be placed into two categories: methodological and theoretical. On the methodological front, we have demonstrated the development of a reliable and valid measure to capture a critical construct to understand online communication behaviors. On the theoretical front, the results reveal that attitude and behavioral intention are directly/indirectly affected by interactivity, perceived ease of use, perceived usefulness and flow experience.

1.Adams, D.A., R.R. Nelson, and P.A. Todd, 1992. ”Perceived Usefulness, Ease of Use, and Usage of Information Technology”, MIS Quarterly, 16(2): 227-247
2.Agarwal, R. and J. Prasad, 1997. “The Role of Innovation Characteristics and Perceived Voluntariness in the Accepted of Information Technologies”, Decision Science, 28(3): 557-582
3.Agarwal, R. and J. Prasad, 1998. “A Conceptual and Operational Definition of Personal Innovativeness in the Domain of Information Technology”, Information Systems Research, 9(2): 204-215
4.Agarwal, R. and J. Prasad, 1999. “Are Individual Difference Germane to the Acceptance of New Information Technology”, Decision Science, 30(2): 361-391
5.AI-Gahtani, S.S. and M. King, 1999. “Attitudes, Satisfaction and Usage: Factors Contributing to Each in the Acceptance of Information Technology”, Behavior and Information Technology, 18(4): 277-297
6.Allen, M.J. and W.M. Yen, 1979. Introduction to Measurement Theory, Brooks-Cole, Monterey, CA.
7.Bagozzi, R.P., Y. Yi, and L.W. Philips, 1988. “On the evaluation of structural equation models”, Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 16: 74-94
8.Bagozzi, R.P., Y. Yi, and L.W. Philips, 1991. “Assessing construct validity in organizational research”, Administrative Science Quarterly, 36: 421-458
9.Bajaj,A. and S.R. Nidumolu, 1998. “A Feedback Model to Understand Information System Usage”, Information & Management, 33: 213-224
10.Bhattacherjee, A., 2001.”An Empirical Analysis of the Antecedents of Electronic Commerce Service Continuance”, Decision Support System, 32(2): 201-214
11.Borges, J.A., I. Morales, and N.J. Rodriguez, 1997. Page design guidelines developed through usability testing. In: Forsythe, C., Groose, E., Ratner, J. (Eds.), Human Factors and Web Development. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc., Hillsdale, New Jersey: 137-152.
12.Bradbury, D., 2001. “Pigeon post for the 21st century”, Computer Weekly, (October 18):1-6
13.Burgoon, J. K., J. A. Bonito, B. Bengtsson, C. Cederberg, M. Lundeberg and L. Allspach, 2000. “Interactivity in Human-Computer Interaction: A Study of Credibility, Understanding, and Influence”, Computers in Human Behavior, 16: 553-574
14.Cambell, D.T. and D.F. Fiske, 1959. “Convergent and discriminant validation by the multitrait-multimethod matrix”, Psychological Bulletin, 56:81-105
15.Cameron, A.F. and J. Webster, 2005. “Unintended consequences of emerging communication technologies: Instant Messaging in the workplace”, Computers in Human Behavior, 21: 85-103
16.Chau, P.Y.K., 1996. “An Empirical Assessment of a Modified Technology Acceptance Model”, Journal of Management Information System, 13(2): 185-204
17.Chau, P.Y.K. and P.J.H. Hu, 2001. “Information Technology Acceptance by Individual Professionals: A Model Comparison Approach”, Decision Science, 32(4): 699-719
18.Chen, C. and R. Rada, 1996. “Interacting with hypertext: a meta-analysis of experimental studies”, Human-Computer Interaction, 11: 125-156
19.Chen, K. and D.C. Yen, 2004. “Improving the Quality of Online Presence through Interactivity”, Information & Management, 42: 217-226
20.Chen, L.D., M.L. Gillenson, and D.L. Sherrell, 2002. “Enticing Online Consumers: An Extended Technology Acceptance Perspective”, Information & Management, 39: 705-719
21.Churchill, G.A., 1979. “A Paradigm for Developing Better Measures of Marketing Constucts”, Journal of Marketing Research, 16: 64-73
22.Coviello, N.E., R.J. Brodie, and H.J.Munro, 1997. “Understanding Contemporary Marketing: Development of a Classification Scheme”, Journal of Marketing Management, 13(6): 501-522
23.Coviello, N., R. Milley and B. Marcolin, 2001. “Understanding IT-Enabled Interactivity in Contemporary Marketing”, Journal of Interactive Marketing, 15 (4): 18-33
24.Cronbach, L.J., 1951. “Coefficient Alpha and the Internal Consistency of Tests”, Psychometrika, 16: 297-334
25.Cronbach, L.J., 1971. “Test Validation”, In: Educational Measurement, 2nd Edition, R.L. Thorndike(ed.), American Council on Education, Washington, D.C.:443-507
26.Cross, R. and J. Smith, 1996. “Consumer-focused strategies and tactics”, In: Forrest, E. and R. Mizerski (Eds.), Interactive Marketing: The Future Present. IL, NTC Business Book: 5-27.
27.Csikszentmihalyi, M., 1975. ”Play and Intrinsic Rewards”, Humanistic Psych, 15: 41-63
28.Csikszentmihalyi, M., 1975. Beyond Boredom and Anxiety, JosseyBass, San Francisco.
29.Csikszentmihalyi, M. and J. LeFevre, 1989. “Optimal experience in work and leisure”, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 56 (5): 815-822.
30.Davis Jr., F.D.,1989. “Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology”, MIS Quarterly, 13 (3): 319-340.
31.Davis, F.D., R.P. Bagozzi, and P.R. Warshaw, 1989. “User Acceptance of Computer Technology: Comparison of Two Theoretical Models”, Management Science, 35(8): 982-1003
32.Davis, F.D., 1993. ”User Acceptance of Information Technology: System Characteristics, User Perceptions and Behavioral Impacts”, International Journal of Man-Machine Students, 38: 475-487
33.Day, G., 1998. “Organizing for Interactivity”, Journal of Interactive Marketing, 12(1): 47-53
34.Deci, E.L. and R.M., Ryan, 1985. “Intrinsic Motivation and Self-Determination in Human Behavior”, Plenum Press, New York.
35.Deighton,J., 1996. “Perspectives－The Future of Interactive Marketing”, Harvard Business Review, (November- December): 151-152
36.Dishaw, M.T. and D.M. Strong, 1999. “Extending the technology acceptance model with task-technology fit constructs”, Information and Management, 36 (1): 9-21.
37.Dysart, J., 1998. “Interactivity: the web’s new standard”, NetWorker: the Craft of Network Computing, 2 (5): 30-37
38.Fishbein, M. and I.A. Belief, 1975. Attitude, Intentions and Behavior: An Introduction to Theory and Research, Addison-Wesley, Boston.
39.Fornell, C.D. and F, Larcker, 1981. “Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement errors”, Journal of Marketing Research, 20: 158-166
40.Fortin, D.R. and R.R. Dholakia, 2005. “Interactivity and Vividness Effects on Social Presence and Involvement with a Web-Based Advertisement”, Journal of Business Research, 58: 387-396
41.Gefen, D. and D.W. Straub, 2003. “Managing User Trust in B2C e-Services”, E-Service Journal, 2(2): 7-24
42.Gefen, D., E. Karahanna, and D.W. Straub, 2003. “Trust and TAM in Online Shopping: An Integrated Model”, MIS Quarterly, 27(1): 51-90
43.Gefen, D., E. Karahanna, and D.W. Straub, 2003. “Inexperience and Experience with Online Stores: The Importance of TAM and Trust”, IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, 50(3): 307-321
44.Gefen, D., 2003. “TAM or Just Plain Habit: A Look at Experienced Online Shopping”, Journal of End User Computing, 15(3): 1-13
45.Ghose, S., and W.Y. Dou, 1998. “Interactive functions and their impacts on the appeal of internet presences sites”, Journal of Advertising Research, 38, 29-43
46.Ha, L. and E.L. James, 1998. “Interactivity reexamined: a baseline analysis of early business web sites”, Journal of Broadcasting and Electronic Media, 42(4): 29-43
47.Haeckel, S.H., 1998. “About the Nature and Future of Interactive Marketing”, Journal of Interactive Marketing, 12 (1): 63-71
48.Hagel, J., 1999. “Net Gain: Expanding Markets through Virtual Communication”, Journal of Interactive Marketing, 13(1): 55-65
49.Hamburger, Y.A., A. Fine, and A. Goldstein, 2004. “The Impact of Internet Interactivity and Need for Closure on Consumer Preference”, Computer in Human Behavior, 20: 103-117
50.Hardgrave, B.C. and R.A. Johnson, 2003. “Toward an Information Systems Development Acceptance Model: The Case of Object-Oriented System Development”, IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, 50(3): 322-336
51.Henry, J.W. and R.W. Stone, 1999. “A Structural Equation Model of End-User Satisfaction with a Computer-Based Medical Information System”, Information Resources Management Journal, 7: 21-33.
52.Hoffman, D.L. and P.N. Thomas, 1996. “Marketing in Hypermedia Computer-Mediated Environments: Conceptual Foundations”, Journal of Marketing, 60(3): 50-68
53.Hong, W., J.Y.L. Thong, W.M. Wong and K.Y. Tam, 2001/2002. “Determinants of User Acceptance of Digital Libraries: An Empirical Examination of Individual Differences and System Characteristics”, Journal of Management Information Systems, 18(3): 97-124
54.Horton, R.P., T. Buck, P.E. Waterson and C.W. Clegg, 2001. “Explaining Intranet Use with the Technology Acceptance Model”, Journal of Information Technology, 16: 237-249
55.Hsu, C.L. and H.P. Lu, 2004. “Why do people play on-line games? An extended TAM with social influences and flow experience”, Information & Management, 41: 853-868
56.Hu, L. and P.M. Bentler, 1999. “Cutoff Criteria for Fit Indexes in Covariance Structure Analysis: Conventional Criteria versus New Alternatives”, Structural Equation Modeling, 6(1): 1-55
57.Iacobucci, D., and J.D. Hibbard, 1999. “Toward an Encompassing Theory of Business Marketing Relationships (BMPRs) and Interpersonal Commercial Relationships (ICRs) : An Empirical Generation”, Journal of Interactive Marketing, 13 (3): 13-33
58.Igabaria, M, T. Guimaraes and G.B. Davis, 1995. “Testing the Determinants of Microcomputer Usage via a Structural Equation Model”, Journal of Management Information System, 11(4): 87-114
59.ISO 9244-11, 1998. Ergonomic requirements for office work with visual display terminals (VDTs) – Part 11: guidance on usability.
60.Jiang, J.J., M.K. Hsu, G. Klein and B. Lin, 2000. “E-commerce User Behavior Model: an Empirical Study”, Human Systems Management, 19(4): 265-276
61.Jonassen, D., M. Davison, M. Collins, J. Campbell and B.B. Haag, 1995. “Constructivism and computer-mediated communication in distance education”, The American Journal of Distance Education, 9(2): 7-26
62.Joreskog, K.G. and D. Sorbom, 1989. LISREL 7: A Guide to the Program and Applications, 2ded. Chicago: SPSS, Inc.
63.Kerlinger, F.N., 1964. Foundations of Behavioral Research, Holt, Rinehart, and Winston, New York, NY.
64.Kling, A., 1994. The economic consequences of WWW. In: Proceedings of the Second International WWW Conference Chicago, IL. Available at http://archive.ncsa.uiuc.edu/SDG/IT94/Proceedings/ComEC/kling/Webeconc.html at 15:33:12 11-Dec-2001 EDT.
65.Koufaris, M., 2002. “Applying Technology Acceptance Model and Flow Theory to Online Consumer Behavior”, Information Systems Research, 13(2): 205-223
66.Kristof, R. and A. Satran, 1995. Interactivity by Design: Creating and Communicating with New Media, Adobe Press, CA.
67.Lang, E. M., 2005. “Would You, Could You, Should You BLOG ? “, Journal of Accountancy, 199 (6): 36.
68.Lederer, A.L., D.J. Maupin, M.P. Sena and Y. Zhuang, 2000. “The Technology Acceptance Model and the World Wide Web”, Decision Support Systems, 29: 269-282
69.Lee, J.S., 2000. “Interactivity: A New Approach,” Association for Education in Journalism at Mass Communication, August 9-12, Phoenix, AZ.
70.Leech, N.L., K.C. Barrett, and G.A. Morgan, 2005. SPSS for intermediate statistics : use and interpretation, Mahwah, N.J. : Lawrence Erlbaum.
71.Light, A. and I. Wakeman, 2001. “Beyond the interface: users’ perceptions of interaction and audience on web sites”, Interaction with Computers, 13: 325-351
72.Lin, J.C.C. and H. Lu, 2000. “Towards an Understanding of the Behavioral Intention to Use a Web Site”, International Journal of Information Management, 20: 197-208
73.Lindenberg, J. and M.A. Neerinex, 1999. “A generic usability test environment for web-based services”, Erognomic in Uitvoering Conference, The Netherlands.
74.Long, J.S., 1983. Confirmatory Factory Analysis, Sage, Beverly Hills, CA.
75.Lu, J., C.S. Yu, C. Liu and J.E. Yao, 2003. “Technology Acceptance Model for Wireless Internet”, Internet Research, 13(3): 206-222
76.Mathieson, K., 1991. “Predicting User Intentions: Comparing the Technology Acceptance Model with the Theory of Planned Behavior”, Information Systems Research, 2(3): 173-191
77.Mathieson, K., E. Peacock and W.W. Chen, 2001. “Extending the Technology Acceptance Model: The Influence of Perceived User Resources”, Database for Advances in Information Systems, 32(3): 86-112
78.McClea, M., D.C. Yen and A. Huang, 2004. “An analytical study towards the development of a standardized IM application”, Computer Standards & Interface, 26: 343-355
79.McMillan, S.J. and J.S. Hwang, 2002. “Measures of Perceived Interactivity: An Exploration of the Role of Direction of Communication, User Control, and Time in Shaping Perceptions of Interactivity”, Journal of Advertising, 31 (3): 29-42
80.Moon, J.W. and Y.G. Kim, 2001. “Extending the TAM for a World-Wide-Web context”, Information and Management, 38: 217-230
81.Nardi, B.A., J.S. Diane, M. Gumbrecht, and L. Swartz, 2004. “Why We BLOG”, Communications of the ACM, 47 (12): 41-46.
82.Novak, T.P, D.L. Hoffman and Y.-F. Yung, 2000. “Measuring the Customer Experience in Online Environments: A Structural Modeling Approach”, Marketing Science, 19 (1): 22-42
83.Nunnally, J.C., 1967. Psychometric Theory, McGrawHill, New York, NY.
84.Orr, B., 2004.” Is There an in your Future”, American Bankers Association, 96 (12): 54 .
85.Pena-Shaff, J.B. and C. Nicholls, 2004. “Analyzing student interactions and meaning construction in computer bulletin board discussions”, Computers & Education, 42: 243-265
86.Rafaeli, S., 1988. “Interactivity: From New Media To Communication”, Advancing Communication Science: Merging Mass and Interpersonal Process, R.P. Hawkins, J.M. Wieman, and S. Pingree, eds. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications, 110-34
87.Reardon, K.K. and E.M. Rogers, 1988, “Interpersonal Versus Mass Communication: A False Dichotomy”, Human Communication Research, 15(2): 284-303
88.Rettie, R., 2001. “An exploration of flow during Internet use”, Internet Research: Electronic Networking Application and Policy, 11 (2): 103-113.
89.Salisbury, W.D., R.A. Pearson, A.W. Pearson and D.W. Miller, 2001. “Perceived Security and World Wide Web Purchase Intention”, Industrial Management & Data Systems, 101(3): 165-176
90.Sandelands, L.E., S.J. Asford and J.E. Dutton, 1983. “Reconceptualizing the overjustification effects: a template-matching approach”, Motivation and Emotion, 7(3): 229-255
91.Schaffer, L.C. and M.J. Hannafin, 1986. “The effects of progressive interactivity on learning from interactive video”, Educational Communication and Technology, 34: 89-96
92.Scott, J., 1994. “The measurement of information systems effectiveness: evaluating a measuring instrument”, in: Proceedings of the Fifteenth International Conference on Information Systems, Vancouver, BC: 111-128
93.Shackel, B., 1991. “Usability-context, framework, design, and evaluation”, In: Shackel, B. and S. Richardson (Eds.), Human Factors for Informatics Usability, Cambridge University Press, UK: 21-38
94.Sims, R., 1997. “Interactivity : A Forgotten Art ?”, Computer in Human Behavior, 13 (2) : 157-180
95.Stewart, D.W. and P.A. Pavlou, 2002. “From Consumer Response to Active Consumer: Measuring the Effectiveness of Interactive Media”, Academy of Marketing Science. Journal, 30 (4): 376-396
96.Straub, D.W., 1989, “Validating Instruments in MIS Research”, MIS Quarterly, 13(2):147-170
97.Szuprowicz, B.O., 1996. Interactive Communications: New Technologies and Future Directions, Computer Technology Research Corp., SC.
98.Tan, M. and T. Teo, 2000. “Factors influencing the adoption of Internet banking“, Journal of the AIS, 1(5), http://www.jais.isworld.org/articles/1-5/
99.Taylor, S. and P.A. Todd, 1995. “Understanding Information technology Usage: A Test of Competing Models”, Information System Research, 6(2): 144-176
100.Taylor, S. and P.A. Todd, 1995. “Assessing IT Usage: The Role of Prior Experience”, MIS Quarterly, 19(4):561-570
101.Teo, H.H., L.B. Oh, C. Liu and K.K. Wei, 2003. “An Empirical Study of the Effects of Interactivity on Web User Attitude”, International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 58: 281-305
102.Venkatesh, V. and F.D. Davis, 1996. “A Model of the Antecedents of Perceived Ease of Use: Development and Test”, Decision Science, 27(3): 451-481
103.Venkatesh, V., 2000. “Determinants of Perceived Ease of Use: Integrating Control, Intrinsic Motivation, and Emotion into the Technology Acceptance Model”, Information Systems Research, 11(4): 342-365
104.Venkatesh, V. and F.D. Davis, 2000. “A Theoretical Extension of the Technology Acceptance of Information Technology a Unified View”, MIS Quarterly, 46(2): 186-204
105.Venkatesh, V., M.G. Morris, G.B. Davis and F.D. Davis, 2003. “User Acceptance of Information Technology: Toward a Unified View”, MIS Quarterly, 27(3):425-478
106.Webster , J., L. Trevino and L. Ryan, 1993. “The dimensionality and correlates of flow in human-computer interactions”, Computers in Human Behavior, 9(4): 411-426.
107.Wu, I.L. and J.L. Chen, 2005. “An extension of Trust and TAM model with TPB in the initial adoption of on-line tax: An empirical study”, Human-Computer Studies, 62: 784-808
108.Yu, J.,I. Ha, M. Choi and J. Rho, 2005, “Extending the TAM for a t-commerce”, Information and Management, 42: 965-976