本研究旨在探討我國臉書使用者個人的隱私意識程度、隱私設定的瞭解程度及採取的隱私保護策略。首先，本研究以使用者特質與行為變項探討其對臉書的信任度、網路自我效能、基本電腦技術防護的影響，之後再更進一步瞭解其隱私意識、隱私設定及隱私保護策略。在研究方法上，主要以問卷調查法為主，文獻檢閱法為輔。在問卷調查法中，利用mySurvey線上問卷調查網站設計出本研究之電子問卷，並發佈至臉書網站上，供臉書的使用者填寫，共回收580份有效問卷，調查所得資料以IBM SPSS Statistics 19統計軟體進行量化分析。 本研究之結論歸納如下：一、大多數的使用者雖具有隱私意識，卻不瞭解如何運用隱私設定來保護自己的隱私。二、使用者最常使用的隱私保護策略為「發布私人訊息給朋友，而不是公開發布消息」，而最不會使的為「提供虛假或不準確的訊息」。三、教育程度越高、使用臉書的經驗越久，以及有加入社團的使用者，對臉書的滿意度低。四、臉書追蹤使用者的瀏覽紀錄與行為，明顯與個人資料保護法所有牴觸。五、法律應設法發展一套適合數位時代的隱私觀念，例如：承認公開場合中的一些隱私。This research aims to explore privacy on Facebook in terms of the awareness level, the knowledge, the configuration settings and the strategy of the protective actions in Taiwan. First, the users’ characteristics and behaviors are deployed as the factors to investigate their trust in the Facebook, internet self-efficacy, and the impact on the basic computer protection strategy. After that, the users’ privacy consciousness, privacy configuration settings and the privacy protection strategies are further analyzed.This research adopts the questionnaire survey as the primary tool and literature analytic method as the auxiliary. In the questionnaire survey, the “mySurvey” online tool is used to design the questionnaires posted on the Facebook for gathering the responses. A total of 580 valid responses were obtained and analyzed by the IBM SPSS Statistics 19.The following conclusions can be drawn from the present study:A.Most users are privacy aware. However, they do not know how to do with the privacy configuration settings to protect their privacy.B.The most frequently used privacy policy is "publish private message to a friend, rather than publicly announced" and the least frequently used policy is "providing false or inaccurate messages." C.The more users are highly educated or frequently get involved in Facebook , the less they are satisfied with the Facebook. D.Facebook tracks users’ browsing history and behaviors. This violates obviously the Personal Information Protection Act. E.The law should keep pace with the digital revolution. The dichotomy of public/private should be relativized to accommodate the need of privacy protection even in the digital public space.
