隨著網際網路的發展，越來越多使用者在網路上尋求知識，然而這些知識不會憑空出現，換言之，必定需要願意分享這些知識的人，但為什麼這些人願意在網路上分享呢?在臺灣，最受歡迎的問答網站為，雅虎奇摩知識家；另一方面，世界最大的搜尋引擎，Google也曾在2002年創建Google Answers以供知識尋求者在上面進行問答。Google Answers在2006年結束，但雅虎知識家至今仍蓬勃發展。是甚麼樣的原因造成他們產生如此不同的結局呢?
由於Google Answers已結束，因此本研究將針對知識家進行探討，在建構模型前，本研究先進行了三個月對時為知識長的觀察，接著針對其中三位知識長進行訪談。由於探討的主題為為何知識提供者願意在網路上分享知識，因此我們僅針對高度分享者進行分享，並採用理性行為模型，
觀察後發現Google Answers與知識家有兩個顯著差異，在獎勵系統面，知識家採用的是虛擬回饋，知識提供者並不會得到金錢；而在Google Answers上的知識提供者，分享可以獲得金錢獎勵。在專家認定方面，Google Answers需要先經過Google的認證以擁有回答權利；在雅虎知識家上，每個人都擁有自由問答的權利，不受限制。針對這些差異性，我們將「獎勵」以及「自我認知有用」加入構念，另一方面，分不分享也許會受到個人特質的影響，因此「利他主義」加入構念中。另外由於知識家擁有虛擬社群的特性，也將「虛擬社群意識」構念。
本研究一共回收了167份問卷，並針對不同等級進行分析，結果顯示，分享程度越高者越不受獎勵所影響，較受到情感方面的影響，而對低度分享者而言，實質獎勵更具激勵。在專家認證方面，分享程度越高者，越不受到他人影響，而是認為自己有能力分享便會進行分享，不喜歡受到他人的控制。而對這些高度分
享者而言，利他主義都是影響是否分享的因素。

Through the developing of Internet, more and more users are used to seek knowledge on it. The knowledge need people to share them on the internet. Therefore, why the “people” do like to share, become a very interesting issue. In Taiwan, the most famous Q&A website is Yahoo! Kimo Knowledge+ (thereafter, denoted as Knowledge+.) Google launched a Q&A website called Google Answers on 2002, and it was closed on 2006. What reason to make this result (One survive and one decay)?
In this study, we focus on Knowledge+. At the beginning, we spent three months to observe on 10 users who reached the highest rank of Knowledge+, and we then interviewed with three of them. In this research, we focus on the higher level sharing people. We adapted Theory of Reasoned Action.
In the reward way, Knowledge+ uses virtual reward whereas Google Answers used monetary awards. In expert identification, everyone can share on Knowledge+ whereas Google will identify the expert before they have the right to share. From the different, we add “Reward” and “Self-efficacy” as our constructs. On the other hand, we also think about the personality and the virtual community feature of Knowledge+ and add “Altruism” and “the Sense of virtual Community.”
We received 167 available responses, and also analysis them by different ranks. According to the result, we conclude that for higher level sharer, they need emotional attachment rather than physical reward whereas the lower level sharer will motivate by physical reward. Secondly, the higher sharers do not like to feel control; they share because they are willing to rather than other reasons or motivates. For all these sharers, altruism is a factor that influence share or not.

1. Ajzen, I., & Fishbein, M. (1980). Understanding attitudes and predicting social behavior. Englewood Cliffs: NJ: Prentice-Hall.
2. Balasubramanian, S., & Mahajan, V. (2001). The Economic leverage of the virtual community. International Journal of Electronic Commerce , 5 (3), pp. 103 - 138.
3. Bandura, A. (1982). Self-efficacy mechanism in human agency. American Psychologist , 37 (2), pp. 122-147.
4. Blanchard, A. L., & Markus, M. L. (2002). Sense of virtual community –maintaining the experience of belonging. In: 35th Hawaii International Conference on System Science, (pp. 3566–3575). 7–10 January,Hawaii.
5. Bock, G.-W., Zmud, R. W., & Kim, Y.-G. (2005). Behavioral in tention formation in knowledge sharing: examining the roles of extrinsic motivators, social-psychological forces, and orgnizational climate. MIS Quarterly , 29 (1), pp. 87-111.
6. Bowles, S. (2006). Group competition, reproductive leveling, and the evolution of human altruism. Science Magazine , 314 (5805), 1569 - 1572.
7. Burroughs, S. M., & Eby, L. T. (1998). Psychological sense of community at work: A measurement system and explanatory framework. Journal of Community Psychology , 26, pp. 509-532.
8. Chang, M. (1998). Predicting unethical behavior: a comparison of the theory of reasoned action and the theory. Journal of Business Ethics , 17 (6), pp. 1825–1834.
9. Chiu, C.-M., Hsu, M.-H., & Wang, E. T. (2006). Understanding knowledge sharing in virtual communities: an integration of social capital and social cognitive theories. Decision Support Systems , 42 (3), pp. 1872-1888.
10. Chu, K.-M. (2009). A study of members' helping behaviors in online community. Internet Research , 19 ( 3), pp. 279-292.
11. Chu, L.-C., Huang, K.-M., & Tsai, K.-c. (2004). The research on motivation system of internet virtual community. Journal of Publishing and Management , 1 (1), pp. 61-78.
12. Compeau, D. R., & Higgins, C. A. (1995). Computer self-efficacy： Development of a measure and initial test. MIS Quarterly , 19 (2), pp. 189-211.
13. Compeau, D. R., Higgins, C. A., & Huff, S. (1999). Social cognitive theory and individual reactions to computing technology: a Longitudinal study. MIS Quarterly , 23 (2), pp. 145-158.
14. Constant, D., & Sproull, L. (1996). The kindness of strangers:the usefulness of electronic weak ties for technical advice. Organixation Science , 7 (2), pp. 119-135.
15. Deci, E. L., Koestner, R., & Ryan, R. M. (1999). A meta-analytic review of experiments examining the effects of extrinsic rewards on intrinsic motivation. Psychological Bulletin , 125 (6), pp. 627-668.
16. Eisenberger, R., & Cameron, J. (1996). “Detrimental Effects of Reward: Reality or Myth?”. American Psychologist , 51 (11), pp. 1153-1166.
17. Eisenberger, R., & Cameron, J. (1996). Detrimental effects of reward: reality or myth? American Psychologist , 53 (11), pp. 1156-1166.
18. Fernback, J., & Thompson, B. (1995). Virtual communities: abort,retry, failure? Originally presented as Computer mediated communication and the American collectivity: The dimensions of a community within cyberspace. at the annual meeting of the International Communication Association,Albuquerque, New Mexico.
19. Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981). Structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error: algebra and statistics. Journal of Marketing Research , 18 (3), pp. 382-388.
20. Gagne, M. (2009). A model of knowledge-sharing model. Human Resourse Managemant , 48 (4), pp. 571-589.
21. Gusfield, J. R. (1975). Community: A Critical Response. New York: Harper & Row.
22. Hagerty, B. L.-S. (1996). Sense of belonging and indicators of social and psychological functioning. Archives of Psychiatric Nursing , 10 (4), pp. 235-244.
23. Hair., J. F., Anderson, R. E., Tatham, R. L., & Black, W. C. (1992). Multivariate Data Analysis. New York: Macmillan .
24. Hall, H. a. (2004). Creation and recreation: motivating collaboration to generate knowledge capital in online communities. International Journal of Information Management , 24 (4), pp. 235-246.
25. Heller, K. (1989). The return to community. American Journal of Community Psychology , 17 (1), pp. 1-15.
26. Howellsi, K., Tonkin, M., Milburn, C., Lewis, J., Draycot, S., Cordwell, J., et al. (2009). The EssenCES measure of social climate: A preliminary validation and normative data in UK high secure hospital settings. Criminal Behaviour and Mental Health , 19, pp. 308–320.
27. Hsu, C.-L., & Lin, J. C.-C. (2008). Acceptance of blog usage: the roles of technology acceptance, social influence and knowledge sharing motivation. Information & Management , 45, pp. 65–74.
28. Hsu, M.-H., & Chiu, C.-M. (2004). Internet self-efficacy and electronic service acceptance. Decision Support Systems , 38 (3), pp. 369-381.
29. Hsu, M.-H., Ju, T. L., Yen, C.-H., & Chang, C.-M. (2007). Knowledge sharing, behavior in virtual communities: the relationship between trust, self-efficacy, and outcome expectations. Journal of Information Science , pp. 153-169.
30. Icek Ajzen, M. F. (1980). Understanding Attitudes and Predicting Social Behavior. NJ: Prentice Hall.
31. Jones, Q. (1997). Virtual-communities, virtual settlements & cyber-archaeology:a theoretical outline. Journal of Computer Mediated Communication , 3 (3), p. 35.
32. Kaiser, H. F. (1974). An index of factorial simplsity. Psychometrika , 39, pp. 31-36.
33. Kankanhalli, A., Tan, B. C., & Wei, K.-K. (2005). Contributing knowledge to electronic knowledge repositories an empirical investigation. MiS Quarterly , 29 (1), pp. 113-143.
34. Kollock., P. The Economies of Online Cooperation: Gifts, and Public Goods in Cyberspace. NewYork: in Communities in Cyberspace.
35. Krebs, D. L. (1975). Empathy and Altruism. Joumal of Personality and Social Psychology , 32 (6), pp. 1132-1146.
36. Lee, C. (1990). Modifying an American Consumer Behavior Model for Consumers in Confucian Culture: The Case of the Fishbein BehavioralIntention Model. Journal of International Consumer Marketing , 3 (1), pp. 27-50.
37. Lin, H.-F. (2007). Effects of extrinsic and intrinsic motivation on employee knowledge sharing intentions. Journal of Information Science , pp. 1–15.
38. Lin, H.-F. (2007). The role of online and offline features in sustaining virtual communities: an empirical study. Internet Research , 17 (2), pp. 119-138.
39. Lin, M.-J. J., Hung, S.-W., & Che, C.-J. (2009). Fostering the determinants of knowledge sharing in professional. Computers in Human Behavior , 25, pp. 929-939.
40. Lu, H., & Lin, C.-C. J. (2003). Predicting customer behavior in the market-space: a study of Rayport and Sviokla’s framework. Information & Management , 40, pp. 1-10.
41. Ma, M., & Agarwal, R. (2007). Through a glass darkly: information technology design, identity verification, and knowledge contribution in online communities. Information Systems Research , 18 (1), pp. 42–67.
42. McDermott, R., & O’Dell, C. (2001). Overcoming culture barriers to sharing knowledge. Journal of Knowledge Management , 5 (1), pp. 76–85.
43. Njite, D., & Parsa, H. (2005). Structural equation modeling of factors that influence consumer Internet purchase. Journal of Services Research , 5 (1), pp. 43–60.
44. O'DellCarla, & GraysonC.Jackson. (1998). If only we knew what we know: Identification and transfer of internal best practices. California Management Review, 40 (3).
45. Perry, A. C. (1908). The Management of A City School. New York: Macmillan.
46. Rjwilmsi. (2009, Sepetmber 24). Google Answers. Retrieved 12 17, 2009, from Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Google_Answers
47. Roberts, T. (1998). Are newsgroups virtual communities. Proceedings of CHI 98 Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (pp. 360-367). New York: ACM Press/Addison-Wesley Publishing Co.
48. Ryan, M. R., Valerie, M., & Richard, K. (1983). Relation of reward contingency and interpersonal context to intrinsic motivation: a review and test using cognitive evaluation theory. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology , 45 (4), pp. 736-750.
49. Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000). Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being. American Psychologist , 45 (4), pp. 736-750.
50. Slocombe, T. (1999). Applying the theory of reasoned action to the analysis of an individual’s polychronicity. Journal of Managerial Psychology , 14 (3), pp. 313–322.
51. Smith, D. H. (1981). Altruism, volunteers, and volunteerism. Journal of Voluntary Action Research , 10 (1), pp. 21-36.
52. Taylor, S., & Todd, P. A. (2001). Understand information technoledg usage:a test of competing models. Information System Research , 6 (2), pp. 144-176.
53. Toro, A. P., Julian, R., & Edward, S. (1987). Social Climate Comparison of Mutual Help and Psychotherapy Groups. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology , 55 (3), pp. 430-431.
54. Venkatesh, M., Morris, G., Davis, B., & Davis, F. (2003). User acceptance of information technology: toward a unified view. MIS Quarterly , 27 (3), pp. 425-478.
55. Wasko, M. M., & Faraj, S. (2005). Why should I share?examining social capital and knowledge contribution in electronic networks of practice. MIS Quarterly , 29 (1), pp. 35-57.
56. Wellman, B., & Gulia, M. (1999). Virtual communities as communities. In M. A. Smith, & P. Kollock, Communities in cyberspace (pp. 167-194). New York: Routledge.
57. Xu, B., Donald, R. J., & Shao, B. (2009). Volunteers’ involvement in online community based software development. Information & Management , 46, pp. 151–158.
58. Yu, C.-P., & Chu, T.-H. (2007). Exploring knowledge contribution from an OCB perspective. Information & Management (44), pp. 321–331.