http://www.icas.nctu.edu.tw/Course/互动与新媒体（陶振超老师）.doc 开课单位 传播研究所 授课教师 陶振超 授课学期 九十五学年度第一学期 课程名称 互动与新媒体 人数上限 英文名称 Interactivity & New Media 学 分 数 3 上课时数 3 先修课程 选修 课程目标：The purpose of this seminar is to introduce the research of interactivity from both theoretical and applied perspectives. This seminar begins with various approaches to capturing the emergence of interactive media. Next, the central question, where interactivity resides - in media technology, message exchanges, or user perceptions - is discussed. Finally, two possible integrated models of interactivity are reviewed, which advance interactivity by introducing the concept of third variables and a theoretical framework to combine different variables. The seminar is intended to provide students with a theoretical and practical understanding of interactivity in the context of new media. Specific goals include: § To analyze and compare different approaches to interactivity found in the research literature and to investigate critically our own theoretical stances; § To examine how communication theories are employed in interactivity research and explore their future development § To apply conceptual understandings of interactivity to communication processes across a variety of settings. 课程纲要： Part 1: Dawn of interactivity Week 1 Introduction: Inter + Activity = Interactivity? Week 2 The rise of interactive media Week 3 Does interactivity just mimic the face-to-face model or social interaction? Week 4 Merging mass and interpersonal processes? Week 5 Interactive space Week 6 Explicating interactivity, to be continued (or endless?) Part 2: Where does interactivity reside Week 7 Message-centered approaches Week 8 Application of message-center approaches Week 9 Research paper proposal presentations Week 10 Functional approaches: N-dimensional models Week 11 Functional approaches: Media effects Week 12 Perceptual approaches arising from parasocial interaction Week 13 Perceptual approaches and media effects Week 14 Panel: How do online media view and use "interactivity?" Three guest speakers will be invited to present their experiences. Part 3: Theoretical foundation in media effects research Week 15 Basic elements in communication research Week 16 Empirical studies related to third variables Week 17 An integrated model of interactivity and its effects Week 18 Paper presentations: Proliferation or explication? 参考书目： Bolter, J. D., & Grusin, R. (1999). Remediation: Understanding new media. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Rogers, E. M. (1986). Communication technology: The new media in society. New York: The Free Press. Duncan, S. (1989). Interaction, face-to-face. In E. Barnouw (Ed.), International encyclopedia of communications (pp. 325-328). New York, NY: Oxford University PRess. Carey, J. (1989). Interactive media. In E. Barnouw (Ed.), International encyclopedia of communications (pp. 328-330). New York, NY: Oxford University PRess. Holmqvist, B. (1993). Face to interface. In P. B. Andersen, B. Holmqvist & J. F. Jensen (Eds.), The computer as medium (pp. 222-235). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press. McMillan, S. J. (2001). Interactivity. In S. Jones (Ed.), Encyclopedia of new media. New York, NY: Moschovitis Group. Schudson, M. (1978). The idea of conversation in the study of mass media. Communication Research, 5(3), 320-329. Hanssen, L., Jankowski, N. W., & Etienne, R. (1996). Interactivity from the perspective of communication studies. In N. W. Jankowski & L. Hanssen (Eds.), The contours of multimedia: Recent technological theoretical and empirical developments (pp. 61-73).Luton, UK: University of Luton Press. Beniger, J. R. (1987). Personalization of mass media and the growth of pseudo-community. Communication Research, 14(3), 352-371. Bucy, E. P., & Newhagen, J. E. (1999). The micro- and macrodrama of politics on television: Effects of media format on candidate evaluations. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 43(2), 193-210. Heller, R. S., & McKeeby, J. (1993). Computing access in public spaces: A case study. Interactive learning environments, 3(1), 77-89. Laurel, B. (2000). Musings on amusements in America, or what I did on my summer vacation. In P. Lunenfeld (Ed.), The digital dialectic: New essays on new media (pp. 214-235). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Screven, C. G. (1999). Information design in informal settings: Museums and other public spaces. In R. Jacobson (Ed.), Information design (pp. 131-192). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Jensen, J. F. (1998). Interactivity: Tracking a new concept in media and communication studies. Nordicom Review(1), 185-204. Kiousis, S. (2002). Interactivity: A concept explication. New Media & Society, 4(3), 355-383.Liu, Y., & Shrum, L. J. (2002). What is interactivity and is it always such a good thing? Implications of definition, person, and situation for the influence of interactivity on advertising effectiveness. Journal of Advertising, 31(4), 53-64. McMillan, S. J. (2002). Exploring models of interactivity from multiple research traditions: Users, documents, and systems. In L. Lievrouw & S. Livingston (Eds.), Handbook of new media (pp. 163-182). London: Sage. Rafaeli, S. (1988). Interactivity: From new media to communication. In R. P. Hawkins, J. Wiemann & S. Pingree (Eds.), Advancing communication science: Merging mass and interpersonal process (pp. 110-134). Newbury Park, CA: Sage. Rafaeli, S., & Sudweeks, F. (1997). Networked interactivity. Journal of Computer Mediated Communication, 2(4). Retrieved March 30, 2004 from http://www.ascusc.org/jcmc/vol2/issue4/rafaeli.sudweeks.html. Newhagen, J. E. (2004). Interactivity, dynamic symbol processing, and the emergence of content in human communication. The Information Society, 20(5), 397-402. Tremayne, M., & Dunwoody, S. (2001). Interactivity, information processing, and learning on the World Wide Web. Science Communication, 23(2), 111-134. Cassell, M., Jackson, C., & Cheuvront, B. (1998). Health communication on the Internet: An effective channel for health behavior change? Journal of Health Communication, 3(1), 71-79. Schultz, T. (2000). Mass media and the concept of interactivity: an exploratory study of online forums and reader email. Media, Culture & Society, 22(2), 205-221. Heeter, C. (1989). Implications of new interactive technologies for conceptualizing communication. In J. Salvaggio & J. Bryant (Eds.), Media in the information age: Emerging patterns of adoption and consumer use (pp. 217-235). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Ha, L., & James, E. L. (1998). Interactivity reexamined: A baseline analysis of early business web sites. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 42(4), 457-474. McMillan, S. J. (1999). Health communication and the Internet: Relations between interactive characteristics of the medium and site creators, content, and purpose. Health Communication, 11(4), 375-390. Paul, M. J. (2001). Interactive disaster communication on the Internet: A content analysis of sixty-four disaster relief home pages. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 78(4), 739-753. Bucy, E. P. (2004). The interactivity paradox: Closer to the news but confused. In E. P. Bucy & J. E. Newhagen (Eds.), Media access: Social and psychological dimensions of new technology use (pp. 47-72). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Sundar, S. S., Narayan, S., Obregon, R., & Uppal, C. (1998). Does web advertising work? Memory for print vs. online media. Journalism and Mass Communication Quarterly, 75(4), 822-835. Sundar, S. S., Kalyanaraman, S., & Brown, J. (2003). Explicating web site interactivity: Impression formation effects in political campaign sites. Communication Research, 30(1), 30-59. Sundar, S. S. (2004). Theorizing interactivity's effects. The Information Society, 20(5), 387-391.Horton, D., & Wohl, R. R. (1956). Mass communication and parasocial interaction: Observations on intimacy at a distance. Psychiatry, 19(3), 215-229. Lee, J.-S. (2000). Interactivity: A new approach. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Association for Education in Journalism and Mass Communication, Phoenix, AZ. Newhagen, J. E., Cordes, J. W., & Levy, M. R. (1995). [email protected]: Audience scope and the perception of interactivity in viewer mail on the internet. Journal of Communication, 45(3), 164-175. Wu, G. (1999). Perceived interactivity and attitude toward website. Paper presented at the 1999 Annual Conference of American Academy of Advertising, Albuquerque, New Mexico. Bucy, E. P. (2004). Interactivity in society: Locating an elusive concept. The Information Society, 20(5), 375-385. Chung, H., & Zhao, X. (2004). Effects of perceived interactivity on Web site preference and memory: Role of personal motivation. Journal of Computer Mediated Communication, 10(1). Retrieved December 28, 2005 from http://jcmc.indiana.edu/vol10/issue1/chung.html. McMillan, S. J., & Hwang, J.-S. (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. McMillan, S. J., Hwang, J.-S., & Lee, G. (2003). Effects of structural and perceptual factors on attitudes toward the website. Journal of Advertising Research, 43(4), 400-409. McLeod, D. M., Kosicki, G. M., & McLeod, J. M. (2002). Resurveying the boundaries of political communication effects. In J. Bryant & D. Zillmann (Eds.), Media effects: Advances in theory and research. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. McLeod, J. M., & Reeves, B. (1980). On the nature or mass media effects. In S. B. Withey & R. P. Abeles (Eds.), Television and Social Behavior: Violence and Children (pp. 17-54). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. O'Keefe, D. J. (2003). Message properties, mediating states, and manipulation checks: Claims, evidence, and data analysis in experimental persuasive message effects research. Communication Theory, 13(3), 251-274. Eveland, W. P., Jr., Marton, K., & Seo, M. (2004). Moving beyond "just the facts": The influence of online news on the content and structure of public affairs knowledge. Communication Research, 31(1), 82-108. Tao, C.-C., & Bucy, E. P. (2006, June). Conceptualizing media stimuli in experimental research: Psychological versus attribute-based definitions. Paper presented at the 56th Annual Conference of the International Communication Association, Dresden, Germany. Tao, C.-C., & Bucy, E. P. (2006, June). Search Google News: Interactivity, emotion, and the moderating role of Internet self-efficacy. Paper presented at the 56th Annual Conference of the International Communication Association, Dresden, Germany. Wu, G. (2005). The mediating role of perceived interactivity in the effect of actual interactivity on attitude toward the website. Journal of Interactive Advertising, 5(2). Retrieved December 28, 2005 from http://jiad.org/vol5/no2/wu/index.htm. Tao, C.-C., & Bucy, E. P. (2005, November). The mediated moderation model of interactivity. Paper presented at the 91st Annual Conference of the National Communication Association, Boston, MA.Tremayne, M. (2005). Lessons learned from experiments with interactivity on the Web. Journal of Interactive Advertising, 5(2). Retrieved December 28, 2005 from http://jiad.org/vol5/no2/tremayne/index.html. 课程进行方式、课程要求及评分标准： Grading/Evaluation Assignment, Percent of grade, & Due date Weekly reflections (critiques): 30% ( 9 am on the day of the class) Field assignment:15% (Week 6) Discussion leader: 10% (Week 1-8, 10-13, 15-17) Research paper Paper proposal:5% (Week 9) Paper draft:10% (Week 14) Peer review:10% (Week 15) Paper presentation:5% (Week18) Final paper:15% (Week 18) Overview of assignments Weekly reflections (critiques) require students to read assigned readings every week and write a reflection. This reflection should consist of at least three parts: (1) identify the research question; (2) identify new concepts and definitions of interest to you; (3) either criticize these authors' theoretical stances or apply these authors' arguments to different situations, or both. Ask for clarification if there is something you do not understand. Remember that a reflection is not just a summary. In the reflection, the summary should be no more than five lines. Post your reflections on the assigned group weblog by 9 am on the day the readings is due. A field assignment requires students to write a thoughtful 5-6 page paper based on a trip to an interactive environment, whether a theme park, museum, virtual reality game, or even laser tag. Each student will be responsible for leading the discussion once. When you are the discussion leader, you need to prepare a two-page handout, read classmates' weblogs, and synthesize critical questions. Presentations should be about 25 minutes in length, and should be followed by 25 minutes of discussion. Research paper should review some area of concepts and theoretical frameworks of interactivity and apply that area to some aspect of communication processes. The research paper will be written in stages, beginning with a paper proposal and draft, followed by peer reviews, and the final paper submission. For the final paper, students should revise or extend their draft based on peer reviews and instructor comments. During the last week of class, each student will be required to present their paper in a panel format. --

※ 发信站: 批踢踢实业坊(ptt.cc) ◆ From: 59.113.73.19