4 research outputs found

    ๋ถˆํ™•์‹ค์„ฑ์— ๋Œ€ํ•œ ์ธ๋‚ด๋ ฅ ๋ถ€์กฑ๊ณผ ์ด์ƒ์„ญ์‹ํ–‰๋™์˜ ๊ด€๊ณ„

    Get PDF
    ํ•™์œ„๋…ผ๋ฌธ (์„์‚ฌ)-- ์„œ์šธ๋Œ€ํ•™๊ต ๋Œ€ํ•™์› : ์‚ฌํšŒ๊ณผํ•™๋Œ€ํ•™ ์‹ฌ๋ฆฌํ•™๊ณผ, 2018. 2. ๊ถŒ์„๋งŒ.๋ถˆํ™•์‹ค์„ฑ์— ๋Œ€ํ•œ ์ธ๋‚ด๋ ฅ ๋ถ€์กฑ์ด๋ž€ ์–ด๋– ํ•œ ์‚ฌ๊ฑด์˜ ๋ฐœ์ƒ ๊ฐ€๋Šฅ์„ฑ๊ณผ๋Š” ์ƒ๊ด€์—†์ด ๋ฏธ๋ž˜์˜ ๋ถˆํ™•์‹ค์„ฑ ์ž์ฒด๋ฅผ ์ˆ˜์šฉํ•˜์ง€ ๋ชปํ•˜๊ณ , ๋ถ€์ •์ ์ด๊ณ  ์œ„ํ˜‘์ ์œผ๋กœ ํ•ด์„ํ•˜๋Š” ๊ฒฝํ–ฅ์„ฑ(Birrell et al., 2011Freeston et al., 1994)์œผ๋กœ ์ •์˜๋œ๋‹ค. ์ตœ๊ทผ์˜ ์—ฐ๊ตฌ์—์„œ ๋ถˆํ™•์‹ค์„ฑ์— ๋Œ€ํ•œ ์ธ๋‚ด๋ ฅ ๋ถ€์กฑ์€ ๋ฒ”๋ถˆ์•ˆ์žฅ์• ๋ฅผ ํฌํ•จํ•œ ๋‹ค์–‘ํ•œ ์ •์„œ์žฅ์• ์˜ ๋ฒ”์ง„๋‹จ์ ์ธ ์ทจ์•ฝ์„ฑ์œผ๋กœ ์ œ์•ˆ๋˜์—ˆ๋‹ค. ๋ถˆํ™•์‹ค์„ฑ์— ๋Œ€ํ•œ ์ธ๋‚ด๋ ฅ ๋ถ€์กฑ์ด ๋ถˆ์•ˆ๊ณผ ์šฐ์šธ์žฅ์• ์— ์˜ํ–ฅ์„ ๋ฏธ์นœ๋‹ค๋Š” ์ผ๊ด€๋œ ์—ฐ๊ตฌ๊ฒฐ๊ณผ๋“ค์ด ์žˆ์ง€๋งŒ, ๋ถˆํ™•์‹ค์„ฑ์— ๋Œ€ํ•œ ์ธ๋‚ด๋ ฅ ๋ถ€์กฑ๊ณผ ์„ญ์‹์žฅ์• ์˜ ๊ด€๊ณ„๋ฅผ ์‚ดํŽด๋ณธ ์—ฐ๊ตฌ๋Š” ๋“œ๋ฌผ๋‹ค. ์ด์— ๋”ฐ๋ผ ๋ณธ ์—ฐ๊ตฌ์—์„œ๋Š” ๋จผ์ € ๋ถˆํ™•์‹ค์„ฑ์— ๋Œ€ํ•œ ์ธ๋‚ด๋ ฅ ๋ถ€์กฑ์„ ์ธก์ •ํ•  ์ˆ˜ ์žˆ๋Š” ๋„๊ตฌ๋ฅผ ํ•œ๊ตญ์–ด๋กœ ๋ฒˆ์•ˆ ๋ฐ ํƒ€๋‹นํ™”ํ•˜์˜€์œผ๋ฉฐ, ๋ถˆํ™•์‹ค์„ฑ์— ๋Œ€ํ•œ ์ธ๋‚ด๋ ฅ ๋ถ€์กฑ์ด ์ด์ƒ์„ญ์‹ํ–‰๋™์˜ ์œ ํ˜•์ธ ์„ญ์‹์ ˆ์ œ์™€ ํญ์‹ํ–‰๋™์„ ๊ณ ์œ ํ•˜๊ฒŒ ์˜ˆ์ธกํ•˜๋Š” ๋ณ€์ธ์ž„์„ ํ™•์ธํ•˜์˜€๋‹ค. ๋‚˜์•„๊ฐ€ ๋ถˆํ™•์‹ค์„ฑ์— ๋Œ€ํ•œ ์ธ๋‚ด๋ ฅ ๋ถ€์กฑ์ด ์„ญ์‹์ ˆ์ œ์™€ ํญ์‹ํ–‰๋™์— ์˜ํ–ฅ์„ ๋ฏธ์น˜๋Š” ๊ณผ์ •์—์„œ ์ฒดํ˜• ๋ฐ ์ฒด์ค‘์— ๊ทผ๊ฑฐํ•œ ์ž๊ธฐ ํ‰๊ฐ€์™€ ์Œ์‹๊ฐˆ๋ง์˜ ๋งค๊ฐœ์—ญํ• ์„ ํ™•์ธํ•˜๊ณ ์ž ํ•˜์˜€๋‹ค. ์—ฐ๊ตฌ I์—์„œ๋Š” ๋ถˆํ™•์‹ค์„ฑ์— ๋Œ€ํ•œ ์ธ๋‚ด๋ ฅ ๋ถ€์กฑ์„ ์ธก์ •ํ•  ์ˆ˜ ์žˆ๋„๋ก ๊ฐœ๋ฐœ๋œ ๋‹จ์ถ•ํ˜• ๋ถˆํ™•์‹ค์„ฑ์— ๋Œ€ํ•œ ์ธ๋‚ด๋ ฅ ๋ถ€์กฑ ์ฒ™๋„(IUS-12)๋ฅผ ๋ฒˆ์•ˆํ•˜๊ณ  ์‹ ๋ขฐ๋„์™€ ํƒ€๋‹น๋„, ์š”์ธ๊ตฌ์กฐ๋ฅผ ํ™•์ธํ•˜์˜€๋‹ค. ์ผ๋ฐ˜ ๋Œ€ํ•™์ƒ๋“ค(N=201)์„ ๋Œ€์ƒ์œผ๋กœ ์ˆ˜์ง‘ํ•œ ์ž๋ฃŒ๋ฅผ ๋ถ„์„ํ•œ ๊ฒฐ๊ณผ, ์ฒ™๋„์˜ ์‹ ๋ขฐ๋„๋Š” ์šฐ์ˆ˜ํ•œ ์ˆ˜์ค€์œผ๋กœ ๋‚˜ํƒ€๋‚ฌ์œผ๋ฉฐ, ์›์ฒ™๋„์˜ 2์š”์ธ ๊ตฌ์กฐ๋ฅผ ๋”ฐ๋ฅด๋Š” ๊ฒƒ์œผ๋กœ ํ™•์ธ๋˜์—ˆ๋‹ค. ๋‹ค๋งŒ, ๋‘ ๋ฌธํ•ญ(๋ฌธํ•ญ 3๊ณผ ๋ฌธํ•ญ11)์ด ๊ฐ๊ฐ ์›์ฒ™๋„์™€ ๋‹ค๋ฅธ ์š”์ธ์— ๋ถ€ํ•˜๋˜์—ˆ๋‹ค. ๋ถˆํ™•์‹ค์„ฑ์— ๋Œ€ํ•œ ์ธ๋‚ด๋ ฅ ๋ถ€์กฑ๊ณผ ๋ฐ€์ ‘ํ•œ ๊ด€๋ จ์ด ์žˆ๋Š” ๋ถˆ์•ˆ ๋ฐ ์šฐ์šธ ๊ด€๋ จ ์ฒ™๋„๋“ค๊ณผ์˜ ์ƒ๊ด€๊ด€๊ณ„๋ฅผ ๋ถ„์„ํ•œ ๊ฒฐ๊ณผ, ์œ ์˜๋ฏธํ•œ ์ƒ๊ด€์ด ๋‚˜ํƒ€๋‚˜ ์ฒ™๋„์˜ ํƒ€๋‹น๋„๊ฐ€ ์–‘ํ˜ธํ•œ ๊ฒƒ์œผ๋กœ ๋‚˜ํƒ€๋‚ฌ๋‹ค. ์—ฐ๊ตฌ II์—์„œ๋Š” ๋ถˆํ™•์‹ค์„ฑ์— ๋Œ€ํ•œ ์ธ๋‚ด๋ ฅ ๋ถ€์กฑ์ด ์ด์ƒ์„ญ์‹ํ–‰๋™์„ ๊ณ ์œ ํ•˜๊ฒŒ ์˜ˆ์ธกํ•˜๋Š” ๋ณ€์ธ์ž„์„ ํ™•์ธํ•˜์˜€์œผ๋ฉฐ, ๋ถˆํ™•์‹ค์„ฑ์— ๋Œ€ํ•œ ์ธ๋‚ด๋ ฅ ๋ถ€์กฑ์ด ์„ญ์‹์ ˆ์ œ ๋ฐ ํญ์‹์œผ๋กœ ์ด์–ด์ง€๋Š” ๊ณผ์ •์—์„œ ์ฒดํ˜• ๋ฐ ์ฒด์ค‘์— ๋Œ€ํ•œ ๊ณผ๋Œ€ํ‰๊ฐ€์™€ ์Œ์‹๊ฐˆ๋ง์˜ ์—ญํ• ์„ ํƒ์ƒ‰ํ•˜์˜€๋‹ค. ์ด๋ฅผ ์œ„ํ•ด 498๋ช…์˜ ๋Œ€ํ•™์ƒ์„ ๋Œ€์ƒ์œผ๋กœ ์ˆ˜์ง‘ํ•œ ์ž๋ฃŒ๋ฅผ ๋ถ„์„ํ•˜์˜€๋‹ค. ์œ„๊ณ„์  ํšŒ๊ท€๋ถ„์„ ๊ฒฐ๊ณผ, ๋ถˆํ™•์‹ค์„ฑ์— ๋Œ€ํ•œ ์ธ๋‚ด๋ ฅ ๋ถ€์กฑ์€ ์„ฑ๋ณ„๊ณผ ์™„๋ฒฝ์ฃผ์˜๋ฅผ ํ†ต์ œํ•œ ๋’ค์—๋„ ์„ญ์‹์ ˆ์ œ๋ฅผ ์œ ์˜๋ฏธํ•˜๊ฒŒ ์˜ˆ์ธกํ•˜์˜€๊ณ , ์„ฑ๋ณ„๊ณผ ๋ถ€์ •์ •์„œ์กฐ๊ธ‰์„ฑ์„ ํ†ต์ œํ•œ ๋’ค์—๋„ ํญ์‹ํ–‰๋™์„ ์œ ์˜๋ฏธํ•˜๊ฒŒ ์˜ˆ์ธกํ•˜์˜€๋‹ค. ๋˜ํ•œ ๋ถˆํ™•์‹ค์„ฑ์— ๋Œ€ํ•œ ์ธ๋‚ด๋ ฅ ๋ถ€์กฑ์ด ์ฒดํ˜• ๋ฐ ์ฒด์ค‘์— ๋Œ€ํ•œ ๊ณผ๋Œ€ํ‰๊ฐ€๋ฅผ ๋งค๊ฐœ๋กœ ํ•˜์—ฌ ์„ญ์‹์ ˆ์ œ์— ๋ฏธ์น˜๋Š” ๊ฐ„์ ‘ํšจ๊ณผ๊ฐ€ ์œ ์˜๋ฏธํ•˜์˜€๊ณ , ๋ถˆํ™•์‹ค์„ฑ์— ๋Œ€ํ•œ ์ธ๋‚ด๋ ฅ ๋ถ€์กฑ์ด ์Œ์‹๊ฐˆ๋ง์„ ๋งค๊ฐœ๋กœ ํญ์‹ํ–‰๋™์— ๋ฏธ์น˜๋Š” ๊ฐ„์ ‘ํšจ๊ณผ ๋˜ํ•œ ํ†ต๊ณ„์ ์œผ๋กœ ์œ ์˜๋ฏธํ•œ ๊ฒƒ์œผ๋กœ ๋‚˜ํƒ€๋‚ฌ๋‹ค. ๋ณธ ์—ฐ๊ตฌ์—์„œ๋Š” IUS-12๊ฐ€ ๋ถˆํ™•์‹ค์„ฑ์— ๋Œ€ํ•œ ์ธ๋‚ด๋ ฅ ๋ถ€์กฑ์„ ์ธก์ •ํ•˜๋Š” ์‹ ๋ขฐ๋กญ๊ณ  ํƒ€๋‹นํ•œ ๋„๊ตฌ์ž„์„ ํ™•์ธํ•˜์˜€๋‹ค. ๋ณธ ์—ฐ๊ตฌ์˜ ๊ฒฐ๊ณผ๋Š” ๋ถˆํ™•์‹ค์„ฑ์— ๋Œ€ํ•œ ์ธ๋‚ด๋ ฅ์ด ๋ถ€์กฑํ•œ ์‚ฌ๋žŒ๋“ค์ด ํ™•์‹ค์„ฑ๊ณผ ํ†ต์ œ๊ฐ์„ ์ฆ์ง„์‹œํ‚ค๊ธฐ ์œ„ํ•œ ์ˆ˜๋‹จ์œผ๋กœ ์„ญ์‹์ ˆ์ œ๋ฅผ ๋‚˜ํƒ€๋‚ผ ์ˆ˜ ์žˆ์œผ๋ฉฐ, ๋ถˆํ™•์‹ค์„ฑ์— ๋Œ€ํ•œ ์ธ๋‚ด๋ ฅ ๋ถ€์กฑ์œผ๋กœ ์ธํ•œ ๋ถ€์ •์ •์„œ๋ฅผ ์ผ์‹œ์ ์œผ๋กœ ์™„ํ™”์‹œํ‚ค๋ ค๋Š” ์‹œ๋„๋กœ์„œ ํญ์‹ํ–‰๋™์„ ๋‚˜ํƒ€๋‚ผ ์ˆ˜ ์žˆ๋‹ค๋Š” ๊ฒƒ์„ ์‹œ์‚ฌํ•œ๋‹ค. ๋งˆ์ง€๋ง‰์œผ๋กœ ๋ณธ ์—ฐ๊ตฌ๊ฐ€ ์ง€๋‹ˆ๋Š” ์‹œ์‚ฌ์  ๋ฐ ํ•œ๊ณ„์ , ๊ทธ๋ฆฌ๊ณ  ํ›„์† ์—ฐ๊ตฌ๋ฅผ ์œ„ํ•œ ์ œ์–ธ์— ๋Œ€ํ•ด ๋…ผ์˜ํ•˜์˜€๋‹ค. ์ฃผ์š”์–ด : ๋ถˆํ™•์‹ค์„ฑ์— ๋Œ€ํ•œ ์ธ๋‚ด๋ ฅ ๋ถ€์กฑ์ด์ƒ์„ญ์‹ํ–‰๋™์ฒด์ค‘ ๋ฐ ์ฒดํ˜•์— ๋Œ€ํ•œ ๊ณผ๋Œ€ํ‰๊ฐ€์Œ์‹๊ฐˆ๋ง ํ•™ ๋ฒˆ : 2016-20185Abstract Intolerance of uncertainty(IU) is defined as the tendency to perceive and react negatively to uncertain situations regardless of the actual probability of the feared outcomes. IU has been suggested as a transdiagnostic risk factor for emotional disorders. Despite a wealth of evidence for the role of IU in anxiety and depressive disorders, research investigating the association between IU and Eating Disorders(EDs) is limited. Thus, the present study examined the association between IU and problematic eating behaviors among college students. In Study I, a short-version of the Intolerance of Uncertainty Scale(IUS-12) was translated into Korean and the psychometric properties of IUS-12 were evaluated. First, Exploratory Factor Analysis(EFA) was performed using responses from 201 undergraduates students enrolled in an introductory psychology classes at Seoul National University. EFA yielded two factors and each factor was consisted of items that were nearly identical to original IUS-12 except item 3 and 11. Two factors were named 1) Prospective Intolerance of Uncertainty(P-IU) and 2) Inhibitory Intolerance of Uncertainty(I-IU). Confirmatory Factor Analysis(CFA) using independent undergraduates students sample(N=498) supported a two factor structure of K-IUS-12 extracted from EFA. The K-IUS-12 total scale demonstrated excellent internal consistency and construct validity. The aim of Study II was to investigate the unique association of IU with problematic eating behaviors and examine potential mediating role of overvaluation of shape and weight and food craving in the relationship between IU and problematic eating behaviors. The results showed that IU accounted for a significant variance in dietary restraint, after controlling for gender and perfectionism. IU also explained an additional variance in binge eating beyond and above gender and negative urgency. To clarify the psychological process underlying the relationship between IU and disordered eating behaviors, indirect effect of IU on dietary restraint via overvaluation of shape and body and indirect effect of IU on binge eating via food craving were examined separately. Both indirect effects of IU on dietary restraint and binge eating were statistically significant. The present study suggests that the K-IUS-12 is a reliable and valid measure for assessing levels of difficulty tolerating uncertainty in undergraduates sample. The results of the study indicate that individuals who are intolerant of uncertainty may engage in dietary restraint in order to gain certainty and perceived control, while others may engage in binge eating as a maladaptive strategy to manage uncertainty and negative affect. Finally, the implications and limitations of this study, and suggestions for future studies were discussed. Keywords : Intolerance of Uncertainty, Problematic Eating Behaviors, Overvaluation of Shape and Weight, Food Craving Student Number : 2016-20185Introduction 1 The association between Intolerance of Uncertainty(IU) and Eating Disorders(EDs) 4 Exploring the potential mediating mechanisms of a link between IU and EDs 8 IU and other ED-related constructs 10 Overview of the Present Study 12 Study I. Development of the Korean version of a short-form of the Intolerance of Uncertainty Scale(K-IUS-12) 14 Method 16 Results 21 Discussion 30 Study II. The Relationship between Intolerance of Uncertainty and Problematic Eating Behavior: An examination of potential mediating pathways 34 Method 39 Results 43 Discussion 56 General Discussion 58 References 63 Appendix 77 Abstract in Korean 107Maste

    The Effect of Consensus on Delivery Intention in Facebook Context

    No full text
    ํ•™์œ„๋…ผ๋ฌธ (์„์‚ฌ)-- ์„œ์šธ๋Œ€ํ•™๊ต ๋Œ€ํ•™์› : ๊ฒฝ์˜ํ•™๊ณผ, 2013. 8. ์ด์œ ์žฌ.์ตœ๊ทผ ๋ช‡ ๋…„ ์‚ฌ์ด ์†Œ์…œ ๋„คํŠธ์›Œํ‚น ์„œ๋น„์Šค(SNS)๋Š” ์˜จ๋ผ์ธ ๊ตฌ์ „์˜ ์ด์•„๋กœ ๋– ์˜ฌ๋ž๋‹ค. ๊ทธ ์ค‘์—์„œ๋„ ํŽ˜์ด์Šค๋ถ์€ ์›”๊ฐ„ 10์–ต ๋ช…์ด ๋„˜๋Š” ์‹ค์‚ฌ์šฉ์ž๋ฅผ ๊ธฐ๋ฐ˜์œผ๋กœ ์••๋„์ ์ธ ์˜ํ–ฅ๋ ฅ์„ ๋ฐœํœ˜ํ•˜๊ณ  ์žˆ๋‹ค. ํŽ˜์ด์Šค๋ถ ํ™˜๊ฒฝ์—์„œ์˜ ์˜จ๋ผ์ธ ๊ตฌ์ „์€ ์ข‹์•„์š”๋ผ๋Š” ๊ณ ์œ ํ•œ ๊ธฐ๋Šฅ ๋•๋ถ„์— ๋ธ”๋กœ๊ทธ, ์ปค๋ฎค๋‹ˆํ‹ฐ ๋“ฑ์„ ํ†ตํ•œ ๊ธฐ์กด์˜ ์˜จ๋ผ์ธ ๊ตฌ์ „๊ณผ ์ฐจ๋ณ„ํ™”๋œ ํŠน์„ฑ๋“ค์„ ๋‚˜ํƒ€๋‚ธ๋‹ค. ๋งŒ์•ฝ ํŽ˜์ด์Šค๋ถ์˜ ์ด์šฉ์ž๋“ค์ด ๊ฒŒ์‹œ๋ฌผ ํ•˜๋‹จ์˜ ์ข‹์•„์š” ๋ฒ„ํŠผ์„ ๋ˆ„๋ฆ„์œผ๋กœ์จ ๊ทธ ๊ฒŒ์‹œ๋ฌผ์— ๋Œ€ํ•œ ์ž์‹ ๋“ค์˜ ๋™์˜๋‚˜ ํ˜ธ๊ฐ์„ ํ‘œํ˜„ํ•˜๋ฉด, ๋™์‹œ์— ํ•ด๋‹น ๊ฒŒ์‹œ๋ฌผ์€ ๋„คํŠธ์›Œํฌ์ƒ์— ์žˆ๋Š” ์นœ๊ตฌ๋“ค์˜ ํƒ€์ž„๋ผ์ธ์œผ๋กœ ์ „๋‹ฌ๋œ๋‹ค. ๊ณต์‹ํ™”ํ•˜์ž๋ฉด [์ข‹์•„์š”=๋™์˜=๊ตฌ์ „]์ธ ๊ฒƒ์ด๋‹ค. ๋ฟ๋งŒ ์•„๋‹ˆ๋ผ, ํš๋“ํ•œ ์ข‹์•„์š”์˜ ๊ฐœ์ˆ˜๋Š” ๋ˆ„์ ๋˜์–ด ํ‘œ์‹œ๋˜๊ธฐ ๋•Œ๋ฌธ์— ์–ผ๋งˆ๋‚˜ ๋งŽ์€ ์‚ฌ๋žŒ๋“ค์ด ๊ทธ ๊ฒŒ์‹œ๋ฌผ์— ๋™์˜๋ฅผ ํ‘œํ˜„ํ–ˆ๋Š”์ง€ ์‰ฝ๊ฒŒ ๋™์˜์„ฑ ์ˆ˜์ค€์„ ์ธก์ •ํ•  ์ˆ˜ ์žˆ๋‹ค. ๊ทธ๋ ‡๋‹ค๋ฉด ํš๋“ํ•œ ์ข‹์•„์š”์˜ ๊ฐœ์ˆ˜์— ์˜ํ•ด ๋™์˜์„ฑ ์ˆ˜์ค€์ด ๋‚ฎ๊ฑฐ๋‚˜ ๋†’๊ฒŒ ์ธ์ง€๋˜์—ˆ์„ ๋•Œ, ๊ทธ๊ฒƒ์ด ๋‚˜์˜ ๋™์˜, ํ˜น์€ ๋‚ด๊ฐ€ ์ข‹์•„์š”๋ฅผ ๋ˆŒ๋Ÿฌ ์นœ๊ตฌ๋“ค์—๊ฒŒ ๊ตฌ์ „ํ•  ์˜๋„์— ์–ด๋–ค ์˜ํ–ฅ์„ ๋ฏธ์น ๊นŒ. ๋™์˜์„ฑ์ด ๋†’๋‹ค๊ณ  ์ธ์ง€๋œ ์ •๋ณด๋Š” ๋‹ค๋ฅธ ํŽ˜์ด์Šค๋ถ ์ด์šฉ์ž๋“ค์ด ์ข‹์•„์š” ๋ฒ„ํŠผ์„ ๋ˆŒ๋Ÿฌ ๋™์˜ํ•˜๋„๋ก ์œ ๋„ํ•ด ๋” ๋น ๋ฅธ, ํ˜น์€ ๊ด‘๋ฒ”์œ„ํ•œ ๊ตฌ์ „์„ ์œ ๋ฐœํ•˜์ง€ ์•Š์„๊นŒ. ๋ณธ ์—ฐ๊ตฌ์˜ ์•„์ด๋””์–ด๋Š” ์ด๋Ÿฌํ•œ ์˜๋ฌธ์—์„œ ์ถœ๋ฐœํ•ด, ๋จผ์ € ํŽ˜์ด์Šค๋ถ์—์„œ์˜ ๋™์˜์„ฑ(๋…๋ฆฝ๋ณ€์ˆ˜)๊ณผ ๊ตฌ์ „์˜๋„(์ข…์†๋ณ€์ˆ˜) ๋“ฑ ์ฃผ์š” ๊ฐœ๋…์„ ์ •์˜ํ•˜๊ณ , ๋‘ ๋ณ€์ˆ˜์˜ ๊ด€๊ณ„์„ฑ์ด ์–ด๋– ํ•œ์ง€, ๊ฑฐ๊ธฐ์— ์ž‘์šฉํ•˜๋Š” ๋ณ€์ˆ˜(๋งค๊ฐœ๋ณ€์ˆ˜, ์กฐ์ ˆ๋ณ€์ˆ˜)๋“ค์€ ๋ฌด์—‡์ธ์ง€ ๊ฐ€์„ค์„ ์„ธ์›Œ ์ž„์ƒ์ ์œผ๋กœ ๊ฒ€์ฆํ•˜๋Š” ๊ฒƒ์œผ๋กœ ์ด์–ด์กŒ๋‹ค. ๊ทธ ๊ฒฐ๊ณผ, ํŽ˜์ด์Šค๋ถ ํ™˜๊ฒฝ์—์„œ ๋™์˜์„ฑ์€ ๊ตฌ์ „์˜๋„์— ์ •(+)์˜ ์˜ํ–ฅ์„ ๋ฏธ์น˜๋ฉฐ, ์ด๊ฒƒ์€ ๋‚ด์šฉ ์‹ ๋ขฐ์„ฑ์— ์˜ํ•ด ๋งค๊ฐœ๋˜๊ณ , ์‚ฌํšŒ์  ์‹ค์žฌ๊ฐ์˜ ์ฐจ์› ์ค‘ ์นœ๋ฐ€๊ฐ์— ์˜ํ•ด ์กฐ์ ˆ๋˜๋Š” ๊ฒƒ์œผ๋กœ ํ™•์ธ๋๋‹ค. ๋ณธ ์—ฐ๊ตฌ๋Š” ์ข‹์•„์š”๋ฅผ ํ†ตํ•œ ํŽ˜์ด์Šค๋ถ์˜ ๋…ํŠนํ•œ ๊ตฌ์ „ ๋ฉ”์ปค๋‹ˆ์ฆ˜์„ ๊ทœ๋ช…ํ•จ์œผ๋กœ์จ ์•„์ง ์‹œ์ž‘ ๋‹จ๊ณ„์— ์žˆ๋Š” ํŽ˜์ด์Šค๋ถ ๊ตฌ์ „ ์—ฐ๊ตฌ๋ฅผ ์ž๊ทนํ•˜๋Š” ํ•œํŽธ, ํŽ˜์ด์Šค๋ถ์„ ํ™œ์šฉํ•ด ๋งˆ์ผ€ํŒ… ์ „๋žต์„ ์‹œํ–‰ํ•˜๋ ค๋Š” ์‹ค๋ฌด์ž๋“ค์—๊ฒŒ ํ•ต์‹ฌ ๊ฐœ๋…์— ๋Œ€ํ•œ ์ดํ•ด๋ฅผ ์ œ๊ณตํ•œ๋‹ค๋Š” ์ ์—์„œ ์˜์˜๋ฅผ ์ง€๋‹Œ๋‹ค.In recent years, the social networking service (SNS) has emerged as a major position in the electronic word of mouth(eWOM) domain. In particular, Fa-cebook has an overwhelming influence on eWOM based on the number of monthly active users, which is more than one billion. By virtue of the unique function of like(a button below each post on a users own, or other users post, shared graphic or comment to express ones approval), eWOM in Facebook context shows differentiated characteristics compared to those of previous versions of eWOM such as through blogs or online communities. If a Facebook user expresses his or her consent or favorable impression on a posting by pressing the like button located at the bottom of the posting, the posting will be transferred simultaneously to the timeline of the users friends(mutually agreed relationship of sharing each others information on Facebook network). If this is put into a formula, [like = consent = deliv-ery] is established. In addition, since the accumulated number of the same like button pressed by Facebook members is displayed publicly, you can easily measure the consensus level representing the number of members that have expressed their consent on the posting. This leads to a question of whether the consensus level, measured by the number of members pressing the like button, will directly affect a par-ticular Facebook users intention of consent and delivery. Stronger consent from others with thousands of likes could possibly induce a Facebook us-er to press like button more likely than otherwise, so that such posting could spread more quickly or widely. The idea of this research begins with this question. In this research, the concept of consensus in Facebook is defined before the hypotheses on the relations between consensus and delivery intention, and the variables con-tributing to them are built. Finally, the hypotheses are demonstrated statisti-cally. As a result, it is found that the consensus(Independent Variable) does positively affect on delivery intention(Dependent Variable). Also, the ef-fect between I.V. and D.V. is mediated by content credibility and is moder-ated by intimacy among the dimensions of social presence. The significance of this study is that the unique eWOM mechanism with like button on Facebook context is demonstrated empirically. This form of experiment and its result is expected to stimulate further studies on the Facebook eWOM which are still on the beginning stage. Moreover, it can provide the key concepts on the Facebook eWOM for practitioners who utilize Facebook as an eWOM tool.๋ชฉ ์ฐจ ์ œ1์žฅ ์„œ๋ก  ์ œ1์ ˆ ์—ฐ๊ตฌ์˜ ๋ฐฐ๊ฒฝ ์ œ2์ ˆ ์—ฐ๊ตฌ์˜ ๋ชฉ์  ์ œ2์žฅ ์ด๋ก ์  ๋ฐฐ๊ฒฝ ๋ฐ ์—ฐ๊ตฌ ๊ฐ€์„ค ์ œ1์ ˆ ์ด๋ก ์  ๋ฐฐ๊ฒฝ 1) WOM์™€ eWOM 2) eWOM์—์„œ์˜ ๋™์˜์„ฑ๊ณผ ์‹ ๋ขฐ์„ฑ 3) ์†Œ์…œ๋„คํŠธ์›Œํ‚น์„œ๋น„์Šค : ํŽ˜์ด์Šค๋ถ 4) ํŽ˜์ด์Šค๋ถ ํ™˜๊ฒฝ์—์„œ์˜ eWOM 5) ์‚ฌํšŒ์  ์‹ค์žฌ๊ฐ ์ œ2์ ˆ ์—ฐ๊ตฌ ๊ฐ€์„ค ๋ฐ ์—ฐ๊ตฌ ๋ชจํ˜• 1) ๋™์˜์„ฑ์ด ๊ตฌ์ „์˜๋„์— ๋ฏธ์น˜๋Š” ์ฃผํšจ๊ณผ 2) ๋‚ด์šฉ ์‹ ๋ขฐ์„ฑ์— ์˜ํ•œ ๋งค๊ฐœํšจ๊ณผ 3) ์‚ฌํšŒ์  ์‹ค์žฌ๊ฐ์— ์˜ํ•œ ์กฐ์ ˆํšจ๊ณผ ์ œ3์žฅ ์—ฐ๊ตฌ ๋ฐฉ๋ฒ• ์ œ1์ ˆ ์‚ฌ์ „ ์กฐ์‚ฌ ์ œ2์ ˆ ๋ณธ ์กฐ์‚ฌ 1) ๋ณ€์ˆ˜์˜ ์กฐ์ž‘์  ์ •์˜ 2) ์‹คํ—˜ ์„ค๊ณ„ ๋ฐ ํ‘œ๋ณธ ๊ตฌ์„ฑ 3) ์ธก์ • ๋„๊ตฌ ๋ฐ ์‹คํ—˜ ์ ˆ์ฐจ 4) ์ž๊ทน๋ฌผ ๊ตฌ์„ฑ 5) ์™ธ์ƒ๋ณ€์ˆ˜ ํ†ต์ œ ์ œ4์žฅ ์—ฐ๊ตฌ ๊ฒฐ๊ณผ ์ œ1์ ˆ ์ธ๊ตฌํ†ต๊ณ„ํ•™์  ๋ถ„์„ ์ œ2์ ˆ ์กฐ์ž‘ ์ ๊ฒ€ ์ œ3์ ˆ ํƒ€๋‹น์„ฑ ๋ถ„์„ ์ œ4์ ˆ ์‹ ๋ขฐ์„ฑ ๋ถ„์„ ์ œ5์ ˆ ์—ฐ๊ตฌ ๊ฐ€์„ค ๊ฒ€์ฆ 1) ์ฃผํšจ๊ณผ์— ๊ด€ํ•œ ๊ฐ€์„ค ๊ฒ€์ฆ 2) ๋งค๊ฐœํšจ๊ณผ์— ๊ด€ํ•œ ๊ฐ€์„ค ๊ฒ€์ฆ 3) ์กฐ์ ˆํšจ๊ณผ์— ๊ด€ํ•œ ๊ฐ€์„ค ๊ฒ€์ฆ ์ œ5์žฅ ๊ฒฐ๋ก  ๋ฐ ๋…ผ์˜ ์ œ1์ ˆ ์—ฐ๊ตฌ ๊ฒฐ๊ณผ์˜ ์š”์•ฝ ๋ฐ ์‹œ์‚ฌ์  ์ œ2์ ˆ ์—ฐ๊ตฌ์˜ ํ•œ๊ณ„์  ๋ฐ ํ›„์† ์—ฐ๊ตฌ ๊ณผ์ œ ์ฐธ๊ณ ๋ฌธํ—Œ AbstractMaste
    corecore