電子化民主強調公民參與的重要性，政府亦積極投入推動的工作，值得我們注意的是，就政府所設置的電子化民主機制而言，民眾在使用上的觀感和意願可能是重要的，本研究想要了解對於已使用過的民眾而言，哪些因素會影響他們持續使用該機制的意願？本研究以計畫行為理論為研究架構之基礎，並依據文獻整合假設自覺風險性對態度、持續使用意願有顯著影響。

本研究主要的目的有二：一是透過文獻探討以了解電子化民主起源與實行目標，並藉此了解電子化民主對民眾而言，扮演何種角色與提供哪些功能和效益。二是透過實證研究來對計畫行為理論進行模式檢測，檢視該理論是否適用於解釋持續使用意願的影響因素，並藉此了解影響民眾持續使用意願的因素。

實證研究的結果顯示影響民眾持續使用網路公共論壇意願的因素為態度和認知行為控制，僅主觀規範較無顯著影響。由此可知，計畫行為理論並不能完全解釋「持續使用意願」的影響因素，但仍有部分論點可以適用於解釋「持續使用意願」的影響因素。再者，對民眾持續使用網路公共論壇之意願的影響力最大為民眾對使用論壇的態度。此外，本研究發現在網路公共論壇使用上，由於個人資料外洩或侵犯隱私的機率低，故對已使用過的民眾而言，風險問題可能並無影響，故自覺風險性對「網路公共論壇持續使用意願」的影響並不顯著。

Issues concerning e-Democracy emphasize the importance of citizen participation. Governments in the worldwide invest much in pushing e-Democracy. Specifically, citizens’ attitude and intention are crucial for e-Democracy institutions of Governments. The central theme in this research is: which factors will affect their continuance usage intention for citizens who have been using online public forums? The research model based on Theory of Planned Behavior supposes that attitude and continuance usage intention will be affect by perceived risk.

There are two purposes in this research. Firstly, it attempts to realize the origin and the goal of e-Democracy according to some related literatures. Secondly, it also conducts a model-testing to examine the applicability of the theory through the investigation.

Results of the investigation indicated that citizens’ continuing usage intention of online public forums is affected by the attitude and perceived behavior control. Further, subjective norm didn’t have any obvious influence. These largely show that Theory of Planned Behavior based model is partly suitable to explain the factors of the citizens’usage intention. Overall, the most crucial factor affecting citizens’usage intention is their attitude toward using online public forums. In addition, perceived risk had no obvious influence on the usage intention as expected. This may be due to lower probabilities that individual data or privacy being damaged in online public forums.

一、 中文部分

尤婷靜，2003。〈影響網路報稅接受意向之關鍵因素：三種理論模式之比較〉，中正大學資訊管理學系碩士論文。
行政院研究發展考核委員會，2005。《九十四年數位落差調查報告初稿》。
李敏正，2003。〈延伸計劃行為理論以預測WWW持續使用之研究〉，高雄第一科技大學資訊管理學系碩士論文。
李政忠，2004。〈網路調查所面臨的問題與解決建議〉，《資訊社會研究》，第6期，頁1-24。
周文賢，2002。《多變量統計分析》，台北：智勝。
邱皓政，2005。《結構方程模式—LISREL的理論、技術與應用》，台北：雙葉書廊。
徐千偉，2000。〈網際網路與公民參與：台北市政府網路個案分析〉，政治大學公共行政學系碩士論文。
張明貴 譯，1993。《自由民主的經驗與時代》，C.B. Macpherson 原著，台北：桂冠。
項 靖，1997。〈線上政府：初探全球資訊網與台灣地區地方政府行政〉，收錄於行政發展與地方政府競爭力之提昇研討會論文集。
項 靖，1999。〈地方政府網路公共論壇與民主行政之實踐〉，《東海社會科學學報》，第18期，頁149-178。
項靖、翁芳怡，2000。〈我國政府網路民意論壇版面使用者滿意度之實證研究〉，《公共行政學報》，第4期，頁259-285。
黃東益、黃佳珊，2003。〈地方政府『數位民主』機制—以台灣省二十一縣市政府網站為例〉，《法政學報》，第16期，頁179-202。
葉俊榮，2004。〈電子化民主對民主政治發展之意涵〉，《研考雙月刊》，第28卷第4期，頁12-24。
蕭乃沂、黃建國，2005。〈電子民主的行政可行性：公務人員的行為觀點〉，發表於第五屆「政治與資訊科技」研討會，佛光人文社會學院主辦（4/15），台北。
羅晉，2004。〈網際審議式民主之實現與現實：以我國地方政府網際公共論壇為例〉，《行政暨政策學報》，第39期，頁105-142。
溫素真，2004。〈消費者使用簡訊折價券之行為意圖〉，高雄第一科技大學行銷與流通管理研究所碩士論文。
鄭仁富，2004。〈未來公民投票可考慮開放電子連署〉，
（http://www.find.org.tw/0105/news/0105_news_disp.asp?news_id=3062）visited 2005/7/10。
鄭傑升，2001。〈從民眾使用的觀點建構電子化政府推動成效評估量表〉，元智大學工業工程研究所碩士論文。
劉宗熹，2005。〈E化民主〉，
（http://www.taskco.com.tw/kt/k12.htm）visited 2005/7/11。
蕃薯藤，2004。〈台灣網路使用調查〉，
（http://survey.yam.com/survey2004/chart/index.php）
visited 2005/9/07。

二、 英文部分
Ajzen, I. (1985). “From intentions to actions: A theory of planned behavior,” in Kuhl, J. & J. Beckman (eds.), Action-control: From cognition to behavior , pp.11-39. Heidelberg: Springer.
Ajzen, I. (1989). “Attitude Structure and Behavior,” in Pratkans, A. R., S. J. Breckler & A. G. Greenwald(eds.), Attitude Stucture and Function Hillsdale, pp.252. N.J: Erlbaumand Associates.
Ajzen, I. (1991). “The Theory of Planned Behavior,” Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Process, 50: 179-211.
Ajzen, I. (2005). “Laws of human behavior: Symmetry, compatibility, and attitude-behavior correspondence,” in Beauducel, A., B. Biehl, M. Bosniak, W. Conrad, G. Sch□nberger & D. Wagener (eds.), Multivariate research strategies, pp. 3-19. Aachen, Germany: Shaker Verlag.
Ajzen, I. & M. Fishbein (1980). Understanding attitudes and predicting social behavior. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Bandura, A. (1977). “Self-efficacy: Toward a Unifying Theory of Behavioral Change,” Psychological Review, 84(2): 191-215.
Barnes, S. J. & R. Vidgen (2004). “Interactive E-Government: Evaluating the Web Site of the UK Inland Revenue,” Journal of Electronic Commerce in Organizations, 2(1): 42-63.
（www.webqual.co.uk/papers/inlandrevenue.pdf）visited 2005/6/02.
Bhattancherjee, A. (2000). “Acceptance of E-Commerce Services: The Case of Electronic Brokerages,” IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics- Part A: Systems and Humans, 30(4): 411-420.
Bhattancherjee, A. (2001). “Understanding Information Systems Continuance: An Expectation-Confirmation Model,” MIS Quaterly, 25(3): 351-370.
Brants, K., M. Huizenga & R. van Meerten (1996). “ The New Canals of Amsterdam: An Exercise in Local Electronic Democracy,” Media, Culture & Society, 18: 233-247.
Casaregola, V. & R. A. Cropf (1998). “Virtual Town Halls: Using Computer Networks to Improve Public Discourse and Facilitate Service Delivery,”
（http://www.iog.ca/policity/CP/Public%20Library/library_reference_virtual_town_halls.html）visited 2005/5/20.
Baum, C. & A. D. Maio (2000). “Gartner's Four Phases of E-Government Model,”
（http://aln.hha.dk/IFI/Hdi/2001/ITstrat/Download/Gartner_eGovernment.pdf）visited 2005/7/6.
Conhaim, W. W. (2000). “E-democracy gains ground,” Link – up, 17: 5-8.
Couper, M. P. (2000). “A Riew of Issues and Approaches,” Public Opinion
Quarterly, 64(4): 464-494.
Davis, F.D. (1989). “Perceived Usefulness, Perceived Ease of Use, and User
Acceptance of Information Technology,” MIS Quarterly, 13(3): 319-340.
Davis, F.D., R.P. Bagozzi & P. R. Warshaw (1989). “User acceptance of
computer technology: a comparison of two theoretical models,”
Management Science, 35(8): 982-1003.
Docter, S. & W. H. Dutton (1998). “The first amendment online: Santa
Monica's public electronic network,” in Tsgarousianou, R., D. Tambini
and C. Bryan (eds.), Cyberdemocracy: Technology , cities and civic networks, pp.125-151. London: Routledge.
Fishbein, M. & I. Ajzen (1975). Belief, attitude, intention, and behavior: An introduction to theory and research. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
Fisher, B., M. Margolis and D. Resnick (1994). “A New Way of Talking Politics: Democracy on the Internet,”
（http://www.eff.org/pub/Activism/E-voting/net_civics.survey）
visited 2005/5/20.
Friis, C. S. (1997). “A Critical Evaluation of the Danish National ICT-Strategy,” （http://www.dcu.ie/communications/iegis/Friis.htm）visited 2005/5/20.
Gr□nlund, □ke (2002). “E-democracy and e-government－state of the art,”
（http://www.ifla.org/IV/ifla68/papers/062-090e.pdf）visited 2005/5/18.
Gr□nlund, □ke (2003). “e-Democracy: in Search of Tools and Methods for Effective Participation,” Journal of Multicriteria Decision Analysis, 12: 93-100.
Hacker, K. L. (1996). “Missing Links in the Evolution of Electronic Democratization,” Media, Culture & Society, 18(2): 213-232.
Hair, J. F., R. E. Anderson, R. L. Tatham & W. C. Black (1998) Multivariate Data Analysis, Prentice Hall.
Hunt, H. K. (1977). “CS/D －Overview and Future Research Direction,” in Conceptualization and Measurement of Consumer Satisfaction and Dissatisfaction,H. Keith Hunt, ed. Cambridge, MA: Marketing Science Institute.
Igbaria, M., T. Guimaraes & G. B. Davis (1995). “Testing the determinants of Microcomputer usage via a structural equation model,” Journal of Management Information Systems, 11(4): 87-114.
Johnson, S. M. (1998). “The Internet Changes Everything: Revolutionizing Public Participation and Access to Government Information Through the Internet,” Administrative Law Review, 50(2): 277-337.
Jordan, B. J. (1998). “Collective Learning Online: A Report on the Information Society and Governance Project,”
（http://www.snafu.de/~mjm/brooks4.html）visited 2005/5/20.
Kersten, G. E. (2003). “e-Democracy and Participatory Decision Processes: Lessons from e-Nagotiation Experiments,” Journal of Multicriteria Decision Analysis, 12: 127-143.
Latour, S. A.＆Peat, N. C. (1979). “Conceptual and Methodological Issues in Consumer Satisfaction Research,” in Advances in Consumer Research, 6 ed.William L. Wikie. Ann Arbor MI: Association for Consumer Research, pp.431-437.
OECD (2001). Citizens as partners: Information, Consultation and Public Participation in Policy-making.
（www1.oecd.org/publications/e-book/4201141E.PDF）
visited 2005/5/22.
OECD (2003a). The E-government Imperative: Main Findings. Paris.
（http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/60/60/2502539.pdf）
visited 2005/7/6.
OECD (2003b). Promise and Problem of E-Democracy: Challenges of Online Citizen Engagement.
（www1.oecd.org/publications/e-book/4204011E.PDF）
visited 2005/5/22.
Oliver, R. L. (1980). “A Cognitive Model for the Antecedents and Consequences of Satisfaction,” Journal of Marketing Research, 17: 460-469.
Phang, C. W., J. Sutanto, Y. Li, A. Kankanhalli (2005). “Senior Citizens’ Adoption of E-Government: In Quest of the Antecedents of Perceived Usefulness,”
（http://csdl2.computer.org/comp/proceedings/hicss/2005/2268/05/22680130a.pdf）visited 2005/5/20.
Planmo, M. (2005). “From Patron-Client to Client-Server: E-democracy in Tanzania?”
（www.cdt.org/egov/handbook/tanzania.pdf）visited 2005/4/20.
Rose, G., M. Warkentin, D. Gefen & P. Pavlou (1999). “The Role and System Characteristics of Internet-Voting in the Republic of South Africa: Looking Inside a Multi-cultural, Nascent Democracy,”（www.uic.edu/~evaristo/p3.pdf）visited 2005/5/12.
Ruge, M. (2005). “IT and E-Democracy,”
（www.bbc.qld.edu.au/resource/files/ITN330Report.pdf）
visited 2005/5/12.
Schwartz, E. I. (1993). “Direct Democracy: Are You Ready for the Democracy Channel?”
（http://www.eff.org/pub/Activism/E-voting/democracy_online.article）visited 2005/5/19.
Spreng, R. A., B. M. Scott & R. W. Olshavsky (1996). “A reexamination of the Determinants of Consumer Satisfaction,” Journal of Marketing, 60: 15-32.
Szajna, B. (1996). “Empirical evaluation of the revised technology acceptance model,” Management Science, 42(1): 85-92.
Taylor, S. & P.A. Todd (1995a). “Understanding Information Technology Usage: A Test of Competing Models,” Information Systems Research, 6(2): 144-176.
Taylor, S. & P.A. Todd (1995b). “Assesing IT Usage:The Role of Prior Experience,” MIS Quaterly, 19(4):561-571.
Torres, L., V. Pina & B. Acerete (2005). “E-Governance Developments in EU Cities. Reshaping Government Relation to Citizen,”
（http://www.uc3m.es/uc3m/dpto/EMP/seminar/torres.pdf）
visited 2005/7/5.
Venkatesh, V. & Davis F. D. (1996). “A model of the antecedents of perceived ease of use: Development and Test,” Decision Sciences, 27(3): 451-481.
Watson R. T. & B. Mundy (1999). “A strategic perspective of electronic democracy,” Association for Computing Machinery. Communications of the ACM, 44(1): 27-30.
Weare, C., J. A. Musso and M. L. Hale (1999). “Electronic Democracy and the Diffusion of Municipal Web Pages in California,” Administration & Society, 31(1): 3-27.
White, C. S. (1997). “Citizen Participation and the Internet: Prospects for Civic Deliberation in the Information Age,” Social Studies, 88(1): 23-28.
Zurita, Laura (2005).“Who is out there? Experiences from a mixed mode participatory experience,”
（http://www.trafikdage.dk/writeable/ddnpaper/Paper30.doc）
visited 2005/4/21.
Zuurmond, A. (1994). “From Bureaucracy to Infocracy: A Tale of Two Cities,” Informatization and the Public Sector, 3(3): 189-204.