進階搜尋


下載電子全文  
系統識別號 U0026-0406201817433900
論文名稱(中文) 深度體驗的因素與類型
論文名稱(英文) Intensity Factors and Categories of Experiences
校院名稱 成功大學
系所名稱(中) 工業設計學系
系所名稱(英) Department of Industrial Design
學年度 106
學期 2
出版年 107
研究生(中文) 謝辰甫
研究生(英文) Eric Chen-F Hsieh
學號 P36031155
學位類別 碩士
語文別 英文
論文頁數 124頁
口試委員 指導教授-馬敏元
口試委員-何俊亨
口試委員-陳璽任
口試委員-鄧怡莘
中文關鍵字 體驗營造  深度經驗  經驗類型  感性工學 
英文關鍵字 Experience  Intensity Factors  Deep Interactive Experience  Categories of Interactive Experience  Kansei Engineering 
學科別分類
中文摘要 隨著科技進步與大量新媒體的出現,相應的載具也因應系統間複雜的交流而呈現豐富、多樣的面貌;在跳脫實體載具的限制之下,人與物之間的關係也隨之出現新的互動模式,間接影響了人與人之間的生活,創造豐富多彩的互動體驗。體驗無所不在,而優異的「互動性」不僅在資訊工程、人機互動的領域扮演重要的角色,在感性體驗的營造上更屬重要的一環。在探討互動性與相應體驗的營造上並無明確定義可供參考,深度體驗的剖析也尚須操作型指標參與,因此本研究分為兩階段探討互動體驗的「深度因子」與「類型」:第一階段以質性編碼的概念,針對在焦點團體內探討深淺互動經驗的謄錄文本進行概念化編碼分析;第二階段藉由影響經驗深度的因子對樣本進行二次編碼,以集群分析搭配數量化三類找出深度經驗的脈絡,藉由經驗的探索回推體驗的營造該如何施力。研究結果可以歸納為兩部分:第一部分為以「類別(Categories)-屬性(Properties)-面向(Dimensions)」所彙整的深度體驗因子列表;第二部分為深、淺互動的六大脈絡。第二部分將深度經驗彙整成三條主脈絡,分別為「無力往返(Powerless)」、「善意回應(Empathy-altruism)」以及「怦然心動(Sudden Upbeat)」等三類;淺層經驗則分為「清淡隨緣(Let Go)」、「突然皺眉(Sudden Frown)」及「瑣碎日常(Trivial Matters)」等三型。藉由比較深度與淺層的特徵,歸結出三種可能產生深層互動的脈絡,分別為:(1) 認真投入卻得不到正向情緒的激發;(2)在乎卻不能再現的經歷;以及(3)出乎意料地引發正向情緒的經歷,以上三條主要脈絡都符合情報理論的觀點,即發生期望越低的事件,所帶來的互動深度較高。本研究將對未來互動展覽以及感性體驗的使用提供參考。
英文摘要 The notion of interaction between systems has been more and more complicated with the progress of technology and the emergence of new media. Human society and between-human interaction had been subtly modified by the diverse objects, no matter entity or the virtual one. Interaction is omnipresent and wide-reached. ‘Interactivity’ play a vital part in Human-computer Interaction and Emotional Experience, but to date, there’re still no clear definitions and operational indicators for referencing.
This research explores intensity factors and patterns of interactions by Grounded Theory. The findings can be separated into two sections, including the intensity factors and patterns of interaction. The first section presents all the factors that affect the level of intensity in interactive experiences which followed the structure of ‘Category-Concept-Properties-Dimension’. The second section defines 6 distinct patterns of interactive experiences based on the analysis of cluster analysis and qualification method type Ⅲ. The result takes in three patterns of deep-interactive experience, including ‘Powerless’, ‘Empathy-altruism’ and ‘Sudden Upbeat’, and the other three patterns of shallow-interactive experience, ‘Let Go’, ‘Sudden Frown’ and ‘Trivial Matters’ were included. Moreover, three ways of building deep-interactive experiences had been generated from six patterns shown above, including (1) Negative emotion provoked by high investment, (2) Un-reproduced experiences, (3) Unexpected experiences lead to positive emotions.
On the basis of Information theory, ‘the lower frequency of an event (interaction), the deeper interaction it generates’. This study will provide a reference for future interactive exhibitions and guideline for creating emotional experiences.
論文目次 摘要 i
SUMMARY ii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS iii
TABLE OF CONTENTS iv
LIST OF TABLES vii
LIST OF FIGURES viii
CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION 1
1.1 General Background and Motivation 1
1.2 Research Objective 2
1.3 Research Scope and Limitation 2
CHAPTER 2 LITERATURE REVIEW 4
2.1 Experience 4
2.1.1 Individual Experience 4
2.1.2 Experience 6
2.1.3 Preliminary Summary 7
2.2 Activity 8
2.2.1 Activity Theory 8
2.2.2 Preliminary Summary 10
2.3 Statistics and Analysis Methods 11
2.3.1 Coding 11
2.3.2 Focus Group 13
2.3.3 Card Sorting 14
2.3.4 KJ Method 15
2.3.5 Quantification Method Type Ⅲ 16
2.3.6 Preliminary Summary 17
2.4 Commentary 17
CHAPTER 3 EXPERIMENTAL METHODS AND PROCEDURE 20
3.1 Experimental Design and Structure 20
3.2 Data Collection Procedure 21
3.2.1 Focus Group Interview 21
3.2.2 Experience Sharing 24
3.2.3 Card Sorting 25
3.3 Data Analysis 26
3.3.1 Coding 26
3.3.2 Code Team 26
3.3.3 Coding Procedure 27
3.3.4 Type Analysis 28
CHAPTER 4 RESEARCH FINDINGS 29
4.1 Capturing Intensity Factors within Card Sorting 29
4.2 Multi-Dimension Aspect of Intensity Factors of Experience 32
4.2.1 Activity Aspect 32
4.2.2 Change Aspect 34
4.3 Influences of Interpretation and Evaluation 35
4.3.1 Interpretation 35
4.3.2 Evaluation 37
4.3.3 Preliminary Summary 38
4.4 Features and Patterns of Interaction 38
4.4.1 Selection of Intensity Factors 39
4.4.2 Four types of Interaction 39
4.4.3 Deep Interactive Experience 43
4.4.4 Shallow Interactive Experiences 45
CHAPTER 5 CONCLUSION AND IMPLICATION 48
5.1 Research Result 48
5.2 Research Review and Future Prospects 51
5.2.1 Participants Selection 51
5.2.2 Adoption of Samples 52
5.2.3 Card Sorting Task 52
BIBLIOGRAPHIES 53
中文文獻 53
外文文獻 54
APPENDIX A 中文精簡版本 56
APPENDIX B Interview Notes and Open Coding Data 96
APPENDIX C List of Codes 110
APPENDIX D Axial Coding Result 120
APPENDIX E Score of Each Factors 123
參考文獻 Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1998). 質性研究入門: 紮根理論研究方法 (吳芝儀, 廖梅花譯). 嘉義市: 濤石文化: 原著出版於.
Bella Martin, Bruce Hanington著;趙慧芬,吳莉君,林潔盈譯 (2012). 設計的方法: 臺北市: 原點出版: 大雁文化發行, 2012初版.
Tompkins, G. E., & McGee, L. M. (1993). Teaching reading with literature: Case studies to action plans: Prentice Hall.
王韋堯, 黃詩珮, & 劉怡寧. (2012). 消費品廣告設計之情緒效價與喚起分析. 設計學報 (Journal of Design), 17(3).
周雅容. (1997). 焦點團體法在調查研究上的應用. 調查研究-方法與應用,(3), 51-73.
林金定, 嚴嘉楓, & 陳美花. (2005). 質性研究方法: 訪談模式與實施步驟分析. 身心障礙研究季刊, 3(2), 122-136. ﹝Lin, J. D., Yen, C. F., & Chen, M. H. (2005). Qualitative Research Method: Models and Steps of Interviewing. Journal of Disability Research, 3 (2), 122-136.﹞
徐佳穗. (2016). 虛擬擁有物的情感連結: 人與其虛擬擁有物之間的情感關係.
耿慶瑞. (2000). WWW 互動廣告的互動層次. 廣告學研究(15), 161-181.
張文智, & 江潤華. (2009). 設計溝通模式與團隊創造力關係之探討. 設計學報, 14(2), 1-18.
陳伯璋. (1998). 教育研究方法的新取向: 質的研究方法: 南宏圖書.
陳昺麟. (2001). 社會科學質化研究之紮根理論實施程序及實例之介紹. 勤益學報, No. 19, 327-342.
陳盈純. (2002). 互依性和社會支持對研發團隊績效的影響—以溝通為干擾變項. 國立中央大學圖書館.
陳斐卿, 林盈秀, & 蕭述三. (2013). 教師合作設計課程的困難—活動理論觀點. Journal of Educational Practice and Research, 26(1), 63-94.
游章雄, 黃培華, & 陳彥如. (2009). 使用者導向之互動設計研究. 工業設計(121), 189-194.
黃建達, & 梁容輝. (2009). 促進社會儀式之互動設計. Paper presented at the 本校師生於 14th CID Annual Design Conference, 中華民國設計學會第 14 屆設計學術研究成果研討會. Taichung, May 16-17, 2009. 發表.
黃政傑. (1996). 質的教育研究: 方法與實例. 台北: 漢文.
Ariel, Y., & Avidar, R. (2015). Information, interactivity, and social media. Atlantic Journal of Communication, 23(1), 19-30.
Barnard, C. I. (1968). The functions of the executive (Vol. 11): Harvard university press.
Brewer, W. F., & Treyens, J. C. (1981). Role of schemata in memory for places. Cognitive psychology, 13(2), 207-230.
Brown, A. (1987). Metacognition, executive control, self-regulation, and other more mysterious mechanisms. Metacognition, motivation, and understanding, 65-116.
Daft, R. L., & Lengel, R. H. (1986). Organizational information requirements, media richness and structural design. Management science, 32(5), 554-571.
Flavell, J. H. (1979). Metacognition and cognitive monitoring: A new area of cognitive–developmental inquiry. American psychologist, 34(10), 906.
Grbich, C. (1998). Qualitative research in health: an introduction: Sage.
Gross, J. J. (1998a). Antecedent-and response-focused emotion regulation: divergent consequences for experience, expression, and physiology. Journal of personality and social psychology, 74(1), 224.
Gross, J. J. (1998b). The emerging field of emotion regulation: An integrative review. Review of general psychology, 2(3), 271.
Gross, J. J., & Thompson, R. A. (2007). Emotion regulation: Conceptual foundations.
Hasan, H., & Kazlauskas, A. (2014). Activity theory: Who is doing what, why and how.
Heeter, C. (1989). Implications of interactivity for communication research. Media use in the information age: Emerging patterns of adoption and consumer use. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum, 217-235.
Hollnagel, E., & Woods, D. D. (2005). Joint cognitive systems: Foundations of cognitive systems engineering: CRC Press.
Hume, D. (2012). Emotions and moods. Organizational behavior, 258-297.
Hussain, D. (2015). Meta-Cognition in Mindfulness: A Conceptual Analysis. Psychological Thought, 8(2), 132-141. doi:10.5964/psyct.v8i2.139
Lombard, M., & Ditton, T. (1997). At the heart of it all: The concept of presence. Journal of Computer‐Mediated Communication, 3(2), 0-0.
Pandit, N. R. (1996). The creation of theory: A recent application of the grounded theory method. The qualitative report, 2(4), 1-15.
Parsons, P., & Sedig, K. (2014). Adjustable properties of visual representations: Improving the quality of human‐information interaction. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 65(3), 455-482.
Rafaeli, S., & Ariel, Y. (2007). Assessing interactivity in computer-mediated. Oxford handbook of Internet psychology, 71-88.
Reich, J. W., Zautra, A. J., & Potter, P. T. (2001). Cognitive structure and the independence of positive and negative affect. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 20(1), 99-115.
Rondeau, A., Gibson, J. L., Ivancevich, J. M., & Donnelly, J. H. (1992). Organizations: Behavior, Structure, Processes: JSTOR.
Rumelhart, D. (1980). Schemata: The building blocks of cognition. In. R. Spiro, B. Bruce and W. Brewer (eds.) Theoretical issues in reading comprehension: Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Russell, J. A., & Pratt, G. (1980). A description of the affective quality attributed to environments. Journal of personality and social psychology, 38(2), 311.
Sedig, K., Parsons, P., & Babanski, A. (2012). Towards a characterization of interactivity in visual analytics. JMPT, 3(1), 12-28.
Shannon, C. E., & Weaver, W. (1949). The mathematical theory of information.
Shedroff, N. (1999). Information interaction design: A unified field theory of design. Information design, 267-292.
Smith, T. (2017). Schema Theory (pp. 1-5): Great Neck Publishing.
Stewart, D. W., & Shamdasani, P. N. (2014). Focus groups: Theory and practice (Vol. 20): Sage publications.
論文全文使用權限
  • 同意授權校內瀏覽/列印電子全文服務,於2020-06-15起公開。
  • 同意授權校外瀏覽/列印電子全文服務,於2020-06-15起公開。


  • 如您有疑問,請聯絡圖書館
    聯絡電話:(06)2757575#65773
    聯絡E-mail:etds@email.ncku.edu.tw