在新冠疫情隔離下，人們的活動範圍與公共場所紛紛受到限制，社交活動也轉往社群媒體上，Getty Museum Challenge這場活動帶起了全球性的線上參與，邀請來自各方的創作者，選取家中的三個日常物件為道具，模仿一件藝術作品並拍攝上傳至社群平台。
在短時間內擴散於各大社群媒體，更是反映出數位影像透過社群標籤，與媒體匯流下強勢的病毒傳播力，使影像如網路迷因般，產生病毒式的流通，而人們在隔離期間的人際孤立，也因爲社群媒體而得以維繫。不僅反映了人與人對人際關係連結的渴求，也顯現了即使透過社群媒體的傳播助力，影像創作的文本互涉的創意性與創造力。
研究將以Gillian Rose的批判性視覺方法論開展，針對這場疫情下的線上參與活動，可以從三個層次觀察標註＃Getty Museum Challenge影像，特別是透過影像流通的：構成模式、技術模式，以及社會模式，本研究著眼於個案的影像流通過程，以及標籤所牽動的社群創造力與療癒效果，藉助網路迷因的視覺文化研究觀點加以思索，從而釐清挑戰活動的影像，流通於美術館、數位媒介及網路群眾背後縱錯複雜的社會關係，反身思考數位時代裡媒介匯流下的文化情境。

In response to the COVID-19 pandemic, museums announced lockdown measures to keep physical distancing. Online services became a significant place for people to interact and spread information, while struggle in isolate anxiety. In the meantime, The J. Paul Getty Museum got people to engage a challenge, by recreating their favorite artworks with 3 things lying around their home. Soon after, the response has been massive and successfully sparked a viral trend of recreating.
Through the social tagging, digital images are able to diffuse rapidly to a large, widespread internet users, which is close to the concept of internet meme. In the isolation scenario, Getty museum challenge rebuilt the social interactions in addition to inspire creative powers and intertextualization.
This thesis began from the site of circulation of #Gettymuseumchallenge, approached the intersection of sites and modalities, through the Critical Visual Methodology, written by Gillian Rose. Elaborate on the internet memes and social tagging, particularly towards its technological, compositional, and social modalities. Furthermore, to extract the dynamic power of social tagging by the visual culture aspects of internet meme. Thinking reflexivity in relation to social connections, between museum, digital media, and internet user, in media-convergence culture.

中文文獻
王惟芬、麥金泰（2019）後真相。時報文化。
呂思慧（2008）。布希亞的文化消費理論：以宗教迎神活動為例（碩士）。淡江大學。
西野嘉章（2016）。行動博物館: 文化經濟的視野（黃姍姍、張依文、陳艾文，譯）。藝術家。（原著出版於2012年）
施登騰（2019，11月）。數位轉譯系列：與非專業者的距離～談分眾分類法（folksonomy）的協作應用。Medium。https://medium.com/artech-interpreter/%E6%95%B8%E4%BD%8D%E8%BD%89%E8%AD%AF%E7%B3%BB%E5%88%97%E8%88%87%E9%9D%9E%E5%B0%88%E6%A5%AD%E8%80%85%E7%9A%84%E8%B7%9D%E9%9B%A2-%E8%AB%87%E5%88%86%E7%9C%BE%E5%88%86%E9%A1%9E%E6%B3%95-folksonomy-%E7%9A%84%E5%8D%94%E4%BD%9C%E6%87%89%E7%94%A8-482fdd69d0fa
高千惠（2017）。詮釋之外：藝評社會與近當代前衛運動。典藏藝術家庭。
黃瑞祺（2000） 現代與後現代。巨流出版。
張淇龍、卜小蝶（2006)。淺談Web 2.0與通俗分類於圖書資訊服務之應用。圖書與資訊學刊，57，74–93。
曾靖越（2019）。從線上到線下：一個虛實整合的觀展想像。現代美術學報，（37），6-44。
戴海波、孫禕妮（2016）。論媒介與媒介化的互動機制。中華傳播協會，臺北市，臺灣。
Alvesson, M. & Skoldberg, K. （2011）。反身性方法論：質性研究的新視野（施盈廷、劉忠博、張時健，譯）。韋伯文化國際。（原著出版於2000年）
Bauman, Z.（2018）。液態現代性（陳雅馨，譯）。商周出版。（原著出版於2000年）
Dawkins, R. (2014)。自私的基因（趙淑妙，譯）。天下遠見出版。（原著出版於2006年）
Delanty, G.（2009）。現代性與後現代性（駱盈伶，譯）。韋伯文化國際出版。（原著出版於2000年）
Ishida, M., & Miyazaki, S.（2017）演算法圖鑑：26種演算法 + 7種資料結構，人工智慧、數據分析、邏輯思考的原理和應用（陳彩華，譯）。臉譜出版社。（原著出版於2017）
Jameson, F. （2001）。後現代主義與文化理論（唐小兵，譯）。合志文化。（原著出版於1989年）
Lash, S.（2007）。資訊的批判（許夢雲，譯）。韋伯文化國際出版。（原著出版於2001年）
Lee, N (2019). 《演算法圖鑑》第二章：排序。Medium。https://medium.com/change-or-die/%E6%BC%94%E7%AE%97%E6%B3%95%E5%9C%96%E9%91%91%E7%AC%AC%E4%BA%8C%E7%AB%A0%E6%8E%92%E5%BA%8F-3f6f537adc6c
Sturken, M., & Cartwright, L. （2013）。觀看的實踐（陳品秀、吳莉君，譯）。臉譜出版。（原著出版於2009年）
Urry, J., & Lash, S.（2010）。符號與空間的經濟分析（趙偉妏譯）。韋伯。（原著出版於1994）

英文文獻
Allam, H., Bliemel, M., Al Amir, O., Toze, S., Shah, K., & Shoib, E. (2020, November). Collaborative Ontologies in Social Tagging Tools: A Literature Review of Natural Folksonomy. Seventh International Conference on Information Technology Trends (ITT) Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates
Allen, G. (2000). Intertextuality. The New Critical Idiom.
Arias-Maldonado, M. (2020). A Genealogy for Post-Truth Democracies: Philosophy, Affects, Technology. Communication & Society, 33(2), 65-78.
Barthes, R. (1968). Element of semiology. （Lavers., A. & Smith, S., Trans） (Original work published 1964).
Brown, K., & Mairesse, F. (2018). The definition of the museum through its social role. Curator, 61(4), 525–539.
Burgess, J. (2008). All Your Chocolate Rain Are Belong to Us? Viral Video, YouTube, and the Dynamics of Participatory Culture. In Lovink, G., & Niederer, S. (EDS.), In Video Vortex Reader: Responses To Youtube. Amsterdam. Institute of Network Cultures.
Castells, M. (2004). Annenberg Research Network on International Communication. In Castells, M., Fernandez-Ardevol, M., Linchuan Qiu, J., &; Sey, A. (EDS.), The Mobile Communication Society. A Cross-cultural Analysis of Available Evidence on the Social Uses of Wireless Communication Technology. University of Southern California.
Distin, K. (2004). The selfish meme: A critical reassessment. Cambridge University Press.
Featherstone, M.(1995). Undoing culture: globalization, postmoderism, and identity. Sage Publications.
Galison, P. (1997). Material Culture, Theoretical Culture, and Delocalization: In Science in the Twentieth Century. Amsterdam: Harwood.
Goffman, E. (1959). The presentation of self in everyday life. Garden City.
Heath, C., Bell, C., & Sternberg, E. (2001). Emotional selection in memes: The case of urban legends. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 81(6), 1028–1041.
Hemsley, J. &. Mason, R. M. (2013). The Nature of Knowledge in the Social Media Age: Implications for Knowledge Management Models. Journal of Organizational Computing and Electronic Commerce 23, no. 1–2, 138–176.
Huntington, H. E. (2017). Pepper spray cop and the American dream: Using synecdoche and metaphor to unlock internet memes’ visual political rhetoric. Communication Studies, 67(1), 77–93.
ICOM (2020, 11) Follow-up report: Museums, Museum professionals and COVID-19. ICOM. https://icom.museum/en/news/follow-up-report-museums-covid-19/
Jenkins, H. (2006). Convergence Culture. New York University Press.
Lash, S. (1990). Sociology of postmodernism. Routledge.
Lenhardt, C. (2016). Free Peltier now!: The use of internet memes in American. American Indian Culture and Research Journal, 40(3), 67–84.
Lyotard, J. F. (1984). Postmodern Condition The Postmodern Condition: A Report on Knowledge. Bennington (G, Bennington., & Massumi, B., Trans). University Of Minnesota Press. (original work published 1979)
Mcclain, C., Vogels, A., Perrin, A., Sechopoulos, S., & Lee, R (2021, 12). The Internet and the Pandemic. Pew Research Center. https://www.pewresearch.org/internet/2021/09/01/the-internet-and-the-pandemic/
Meinhof, U. H., & Smith, J. (2000). Intertextuality and the media : From genre to everyday life. Manchester University Press.
Mitchell, W. J. T. (2015). Image Science: Iconology, Visual Culture, And Media Aesthetics. The University Of Chicago.
Milner, R. (2012). The world made meme: Discourse and identity in participatory media. University of Kansas.
Mican, D., & Tomai, N. (2013). Extracting Usage Patterns and the Analysis of Tag Connection Dynamics within Collaborative Tagging Systems. Informatică Economică, 17(1), 99–112.
Mirzoeff, N. (1999). An Introduction to Visual Culture. London. Routledge.
Rose, G. (2016). Visual Methodologies: An Introduction to Researching with Visual Materials. SAGE Publications.
Shearer, E. & Mitchell, M. (2021, 01) News Use Across Social Media Platforms in 2020. Pew Research Center. https://www.pewresearch.org/journalism/2021/01/12/news-use-across-social-media-platforms-in-2020/
Shifman, L. (2014). Memes in Digital Culture. The MIT Press.
Wiggins, B, E. (2019) The discursive power of memes in digital culture: ideology, semiotics, and intertextuality. Routledge
Shorty Awards (2021). From the 13th annual shorty awards #gettymuseumchallenge: Finalist in hashtag. Shorty Awards https://shortyawards.com/13th/gettymuseumchallenge