近幾年來，隨著網際網路的興起帶動了社群網站的普及，而網路上也出現了許多不同類型的社群網站，像是：Twitter、LinkedIn、Instagram等等，但其中，又以Facebook為最受歡迎以及使用者人數最多的社群網站，並且使用者能夠利用Facebook來分享各種資訊、維護現有關係及拓展新的人際關係，藉由大量的呈現自我資訊來經營個人身份及建立社會資本。一位使用者的Facebook上，會同時出現許多來自不同領域的好友，像是過去大學同學、同事、親戚家人及老闆，因此，Facebook出現了一個獨有的現象，稱為「群體共存」。本研究提出一理論模型，探討在群體共存下，使用者在進行資料處理的過程中，可能會因為擁有不同的個人特質而採取不一樣的管理應對策略，進而再驗證採取應對策略後是否會影響對於Facebook的參與程度。

本研究藉由網路問卷調查，取得523份有效樣本。研究結果顯示，公眾自我意識程度較高的使用者，傾向於採取預防型應對策略；而私人自我意識程度較高的使用者則採取矯正型應對策略。參與度影響方面，研究發現採取預防型應對策略者會提升對Facebook的參與程度，而矯正型應對策略者對Facebook的參與程度並沒有影響。最後，採取矯正型應對策略者會促使正向提升採取預防型應對策略，並於最後提出管理上的意涵以及未來研究方向。

The development of Internet, leading to the popularity of social network sites in recent years, different types of social network sites have been arising, like Twitter, LinkedIn, Instagram and so on. Especially, Facebook has become the most popular and having the largest number of users. Facebook users can share variety of information, maintain the relationship and expand the interpersonal relationship on Facebook, manage personal identity and establish social capital through personal information presentation. On Facebook, there are many friends from different spheres simultaneously, such as college classmates, colleagues, relatives and boss; therefore, there is a unique phenomenon on Facebook, called group co-presence. In this study, we propose a model to explain this phenomenon. In the process of data processing, Facebook users may adopt different kinds of strategies according to their personal characteristics under the group co-presence; further, we want to test whether adopting different strategies will affect Facebook engagement or not.

In this study, the data were collected by network questionnaire. A total of 523 valid questionnaires are obtained. The results suggest, people who have more public self-consciousness, tend to adopt preventive strategies, on the other hand, people who have more private self- consciousness, tend to adopt corrective strategies. And Facebook engagement, the results suggest that Facebook engagement can be positively influenced by adopting preventive strategies, and adopting corrective strategies doesn’t influence on Facebook engagement. Finally, adopting corrective strategies will positively influence on adopting preventive strategies. Implications for managers and future research directions are discussed.

參考文獻
[1]MIC AISP產業情報顧問服務網站(2014)。品牌運用社群發展現況與應用。台北：財團法人資訊工業策進會產業情報研究所(MIC)。
[2]張海龍，(2014)，自我意識探析，中國市場，(21)：174-176。
[3]郭明煌、廖鴻圖、蕭麗齡與王亭雅，(2014)，資訊隱私顧慮對社群網站使用者使用意圖影響之研究－以Facebook為例，資訊管理學報，21卷4期：341-363。
[4]劉靜怡，(2012)，社群網路時代的隱私困境: 以Facebook為討論對象，臺大法學論叢，41卷1期：1-70。
[5]Ajzen, I., & Fishbein, M. (1980). Understanding attitudes and predicting social behaviour. (Vol.278): Prentice-Hall Englewood Cliffs, NJ.
[6]Bargh, J. A., McKenna, K. Y. A., & Fitzsimons, G. M. (2002). Can You See the Real Me? Activation and Expression of the “True Self” on the Internet. Journal of Social Issues, 58(1): 33-48.
[7]Binder, J., Howes, A., & Sutcliffe, A. (2009). The problem of conflicting social spheres: effects of network structure on experienced tension in social network sites. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (pp. 965-974). ACM.
[8]Boyd, D. (2002). Faceted id/entity: Managing representation in a digital world.(Master of Science in Media Atrs and Sciences), Massachusetts Institute ofTechnology.
[9]Bruch, M. A., Hamer, R. J., & Heimberg, R. G. (1995). Shyness and Public Self‐Consciousness: Additive or Interactive Relation with Social Interaction?. Journal of Personality, 63(1):47-63.
[10]Calder, B. J., Malthouse, E. C., & Schaedel, U. (2009). An experimental study of the relationship between online engagement and advertising effectiveness. Journal of Interactive Marketing, 23(4): 321-331.
[11]Carver, C. S., & Scheier, M. F. (1981). Attention and self-regulation: A control theory approach to human behavior. New York: Springer-Verlag.
[12]Carver, C. S., & Scheier, M. F. (1985). Aspects of self, and the control of behavior. The self and social life, 146-174.
[13]Clarke, R. (1999). Internet privacy concerns confirm the case for intervention. Communications of the ACM, 42(2):60-67.
[14]Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
[15]Christofides, E., Muise, A., & Desmarais, S. (2012). Risky Disclosures on Facebook The Effect of Having a Bad Experience on Online Behavior. Journal of Adolescent Research, 27(6): 714-731.
[16]DeAndrea, David C., & Walther, Joseph B. (2011). Attributions for Inconsistencies Between Online and Offline Self-Presentations. Communication Research. 38(6): 805-825.
[17]DiMicco, J. M., & Millen, D. R. (2007, November). Identity management: multiple presentations of self in facebook. In Proceedings of the 2007 international ACM conference on Supporting group work (pp. 383-386). ACM.
[18]Doherty, K., & Schlenker, B. R. (1991). Self‐consciousness and strategic self‐presentation. Journal of Personality, 59(1):1-18.
[19]Donath, J., & Boyd, D. (2004). Public displays of connection. bt technology Journal, 22(4): 71-82.
[20]Dunn E, Biesanz J, Human L, et al.(2007). Misunderstanding the affective consequences of everyday social interactions: The hidden benefits of putting one’s best face forward. Journal of Personality & Social Psychology, 92:990–1005.
[21]eBizMBA. (2015). Top 15 Most Popular Social Networking Sites.
http://www.ebizmba.com/articles/social-networking-websites
[22]Ellison, N. B., Steinfield, C., & Lampe, C. (2007). The benefits of Facebook “friends:” Social capital and college students’ use of online social network sites. Journal of Computer‐Mediated Communication, 12(4): 1143-1168.
[23]Facebook Developers: https://developers.facebook.com/.
[24]Facebook Newsroom : http://newsroom.fb.com/company-info/.
[25]Fenigstein, A., Scheier, M. F., & Buss, A. H. (1975). Public and private self-consciousness: Assessment and theory. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 43(4):522.
[26]Fenigstein, A. (1979). Self-consciousness, self-attention, and social interaction. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 37(1):75.
[27]Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981). Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of marketing research, 39-50.
[28]Frank, F. D., Finnegan, R. P., & Taylor, C. R. (2004). The race for talent: retaining and engaging workers in the 21st century. In Human Resource Planning.
[29]Franzoi, S. L. (1983). Self-concept differences as a function of private self-consciousness and social anxiety. Journal of Research in Personality, 17(3):275-287.
[30]Henseler, J., & Sarstedt, M. (2013). Goodness-of-fit indices for partial least squares path modeling. Computational Statistics, 28(2): 565-580.
[31]Hove, E. V. (1996). The legislation on privacy protection and social research. Computers in Human Services, 12(1-2):53-67.
[32]Kim, J., & Lee, J. E. R. (2011). The Facebook paths to happiness: Effects of the number of Facebook friends and self-presentation on subjective well-being. CyberPsychology, behavior, and social networking, 14(6): 359-364.
[33]Lampinen, A., Tamminen, S., & Oulasvirta, A. (2009, May). All my people right here, right now: management of group co-presence on a social networking site. In Proceedings of the ACM 2009 international conference on Supporting group work (pp. 281-290). ACM.
[34]Lampinen, A., Lehtinen, V., Lehmuskallio, A., & Tamminen, S. (2011, May). We're in it together: interpersonal management of disclosure in social network services. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on human factors in computing systems (pp. 3217-3226). ACM.
[35]Leary, M. R., & Kowalski, R. M. (1997). Social anxiety. Guilford Press.
[36]Lee, J. E. R., Moore, D. C., Park, E. A., & Park, S. G. (2012). Who wants to be “friend-rich”? Social compensatory friending on Facebook and the moderating role of public self-consciousness. Computers in Human Behavior, 28(3):1036-1043.
[37]Lee-Won, R. J., Shim, M., Joo, Y. K., & Park, S. G. (2014). Who puts the best “face” forward on Facebook?: Positive self-presentation in online social networking and the role of self-consciousness, actual-to-total Friends ratio, and culture. Computers in Human Behavior, 39:413-423.
[38]Liu, Y., Gummadi, K. P., Krishnamurthy, B., & Mislove, A. (2011, November). Analyzing facebook privacy settings: user expectations vs. reality. In Proceedings of the 2011 ACM SIGCOMM conference on Internet measurement conference (pp. 61-70). ACM.
[39]Luthans, F., & Peterson, S. J. (2002). Employee engagement and manager self-efficacy. Journal of Management Development, 21(5): 376-387.
[40]Madden, M. & Smith, A. (2010). Reputation Management and Social Media. Washington, DC: Pew Internet & American Life Project.
[41]Marder, B., Joinson, A., & Shankar, A. (2012, January). Every post you make, every pic you take, I'll be watching you: Behind social spheres on Facebook. In System Science (HICSS), 2012 45th Hawaii International Conference on (pp. 859-868). IEEE.
[42]Marwick, A. E. and D. Boyd (2011). "I tweet honestly, I tweet passionately: Twitter users,context collapse, and the imagined audience." New media & society 13(1): 114.
[43]Pesce, J. P., Casas, D. L., Rauber, G., & Almeida, V. (2012, April). Privacy attacks in social media using photo tagging networks: a case study with Facebook. In Proceedings of the 1st Workshop on Privacy and Security in Online Social Media (p. 4). ACM.
[44]Pew Research Center. 2015. Demographics of Key Social Networking Platforms.
[45]Reich, S., & Vorderer, P. (2012). Individual differences in need to belong in users of social networking sites. In annual meeting of the international communication association.
[46]Resnick, E. (2001). Defining engagement. Journal of International Affairs-Columbia University, 54(2):551-568.
[47]Ridings, C. M., Gefen, D., & Arinze, B. (2002). Some antecedents and effects of trust in virtual communities. The Journal of Strategic Information Systems, 11(3):271-295.
[48]Scheier, M. F., Buss, A. H., & Buss, D. M. (1978). Self-consciousness, self-report of aggressiveness, and aggression. Journal of Research in Personality, 12(2):133-140.
[49]Scheier, M. F. (1980). Effects of public and private self-consciousness on the public expression of personal beliefs. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 39(3):514.
[50]Schlenker, B. R., & Leary, M. R. (1982). Social anxiety and self-presentation: A conceptualization model. Psychological Bulletin, 92(3):641.
[51]Singh, K. P., & Gill, M. S. (2015). Role and users’ approach to social networking sites (SNSs): A study of universities of North India. The Electronic Library, 33(1).
[52]Smith, H. J., Milberg, S. J., & Burke, S. J. (1996). Information privacy: measuring individuals' concerns about organizational practices. MIS Quarterly, 167-196.
[53]Strano, M. M., & Queen, J. W. (2015). Covering Your Face on Facebook. Journal of Media Psychology.
[54]Strater, K., & Lipford, H. R. (2008, September). Strategies and struggles with privacy in an online social networking community. In Proceedings of the 22nd British HCI Group Annual Conference on People and Computers: Culture, Creativity, Interaction-Volume 1 (pp. 111-119). British Computer Society.
[55]Tenenhaus, M., Vinzi, V. E., Chatelin, Y. M., & Lauro, C. (2005). PLS path modeling. Computational statistics & data analysis, 48(1): 159-205.
[56]Wetzels, M., Odekerken-Schroder, G., & Oppen, C. (2009). Using PLS path modeling for assessing hierarchical construct models: Guidelines and empirical illustration. MIS Quarterly. 33(1): 177-195.
[57]Young, A. L., & Quan-Haase, A. (2009, June). Information revelation and internet privacy concerns on social network sites: a case study of facebook. In Proceedings of the fourth international conference on Communities and technologies (pp. 265-274). ACM.