進階搜尋


下載電子全文  
系統識別號 U0026-2308201616591500
論文名稱(中文) 地震高風險地區住宅耐震補強行為意圖之個人決策探討-以臺南市永康區為例
論文名稱(英文) Behavioral Intention of Personal Decision Making toward Residential Seismic Strengthening in High-Risk Seismic Zones: a Case Study in Yongkang District of Tainan
校院名稱 成功大學
系所名稱(中) 都市計劃學系
系所名稱(英) Department of Urban Planning
學年度 104
學期 2
出版年 105
研究生(中文) 鄭皓騰
研究生(英文) Hao-Teng Cheng
學號 P28981029
學位類別 博士
語文別 中文
論文頁數 104頁
口試委員 口試委員-陳亮全
口試委員-邊泰明
口試委員-孔憲法
口試委員-洪鴻智
口試委員-詹士樑
指導教授-鄒克萬
中文關鍵字 住宅耐震補強  地震減災  行為意圖  雙系統理論  結構方程式  多群組分析 
英文關鍵字 Residential seismic strengthening  Seismic risk mitigation  Dual processing theory  Behavioral intention  Structural Equation Modeling  Multiple group analysis 
學科別分類
中文摘要 近年來全球嚴重大規模地震災害發生頻傳下,住宅耐震補強被政府為一種以鼓勵居民自行從事減災行為的有效政策,而公共政策的順利推行乃奠基於民眾支持,也因此解析民眾的決策行為逐漸成為各領域學者的重要研究議題。過去研究常使用質化方法做為探討對地震減災行為決策架構的研究工具,然而問卷代表性的問題使得研究成果解釋上有所侷限,而以量化方法的研究上則僅限探討影響變數與行為本身的單一關係。本研究之目的,在於發展以結構方程式為操作基礎的住宅耐震補強行為意圖模型,以雙系統理論為基礎,選擇情緒、災害知覺、信任、責任為模式變數,藉由分析行為意圖與影響變數之結構性關係下探討其決策過程,同時多群組分析解釋不同社經族群決策過程的差異,並以具地震高風險地區的臺南永康區做為實證地區進行研究操作。根據研究結果,情緒為影響各變數的重要因素,同時對於行為意圖有直接與間接的影響,而信任與責任兩變數對行為意圖的影響,則藉由對性別與教育程度族群的多族群分析下而得以證實。藉由本研究的成果,可作為未來政府執行減災政策中與居民進行政令宣導的溝通策略參考。
英文摘要 Residential Seismic Strengthening has been regard as an efficient policy by governments for encouraging household adopting seismic risk mitigation behaviors. To enhance the acceptance of seismic risk mitigation, the issue of decision-making has been concerned by researchers. In the past literature, qualitative measures, employed to reveal the process of seismic risk mitigation behavioral intentions, cause the restricted outcomes due to the problem of sample representativeness and the quantitative measures are restricted to analyse the simple linear relationship. The aim of this thesis is to construct a behavioral intention model of residential seismic strengthening based on a quantitative method of Structural Equation Modeling (SEM) for analysing the structural relationship between affecting factors and behavioral intention. In this model, the framework is based on dual processing theory and included the four variables, such as emotion, risk perception, trust and responsibility. The multiple group analysis of SEM is applied to discuss the different decision-making processes of each socio-economic group. A high seismic-risk zone of Yongkang District in Tainan has been conducted as the case study area in this study. According to the results, the emotion variable is the most affective factors to influence each variable and behavioral intention. The effects of trust and responsibility are shown the statistical significance in the gender and education group. The results could provide the suggestions in the communication risk strategy for the future works.
論文目次 第一章 緒論……………………………………………………………1
第一節 研究動機與目的………………………………………………1
第二節 研究範疇………………………………………………………4
第三節 名詞定義與解釋………………………………………………6
第四節 研究流程、方法與內容………………………………………7
第二章 文獻回顧與評析………………………………………………10
第一節 決策理論發展…………………………………………………10
第二節 個人決策模型…………………………………………………15
第三節 地震預防行為相關研究………………………………………19
第四節 地震預防行為探討之研究方法………………………………31
第五節 小結……………………………………………………………37
第三章 研究設計………………………………………………………38
第一節 研究內容與方法………………………………………………38
第二節 模型架構假說…………………………………………………40
第三節 結構方程式之建立……………………………………………47
第四節 問卷調查計畫…………………………………………………52
第四章 實證分析………………………………………………………57
第一節 預試與正式問卷分析…………………………………………57
第二節 住宅耐震補強行為意圖模型之評估…………………………63
第三節 多群組分析……………………………………………………69
第四節 研究假設驗證…………………………………………………74
第五節 風險溝通策略擬定……………………………………………77
第五章 結論與建議……………………………………………………81
參考文獻 ………………………………………………………………84
附錄一 調查問卷………………………………………………………95
附錄二 問卷調查分析…………………………………………………98
參考文獻 壹、英文文獻
1.Ainuddin, S., Mukhtar, U., Ainuddin, S. (2014). Public perception about enforcement of building codes as risk reduction strategy for seismic safety in Quetta, Baluchistan. International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction, 9, 99-106.
2.Ainuddin, S., Routray, J. K., & Ainuddin, S. (2014). People's risk perception in earthquake prone Quetta city of Baluchistan. International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction, 7, 165-175.
3.Ajzen, I. (1985). From intentions to actions: A theory of planned behavior: Springer.
4.Alhakami, A. S., & Slovic, P. (1994). A psychological study of the inverse relationship between perceived risk and perceived benefit. Risk analysis, 14(6), 1085-1096.
5.Anscombe, F. J., & Aumann, R. J. (1963). A definition of subjective probability. Annals of mathematical statistics, 199-205.
6.Arlikatti, S., Lindell, M. K., & Prater, C. S. (2007). Perceived stakeholder role relationships and adoption of seismic hazard adjustments. International Journal of Mass Emergencies and Disasters, 25(3), 218.
7.Armaş, I. (2008). Social vulnerability and seismic risk perception. Case study: the historic center of the Bucharest Municipality/Romania. Natural Hazards, 47(3), 397-410.
8.Armaş, I., & Avram, E. (2008). Patterns and trends in the perception of seismic risk. Case study: Bucharest Municipality/Romania. Natural Hazards, 44(1), 147-161.
9.Asgary, A., & Willis, K. G. (1997). Household behaviour in response to earthquake risk: An assessment of alternative theories. Disasters, 21(4), 354-365.
10.Asgary, A., Levy, J. K., & Mehregan, N. (2007). Estimating willingness to pay for a hypothetical earthquake early warning systems. Environmental Hazards, 7(4), 312-320.
11.Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action. Englewood Cliffs, NJ, 1986.
12.Baron, J. (1994). Thinking and deciding. Cambridge University Press.
13.Basolo, V., Steinberg, L. J., Burby, R. J., Levine, J., Cruz, A. M., & Huang, C. (2008). The effects of confidence in government and information on perceived and actual preparedness for disasters. Environment and Behavior.
14.Becker, J. S., Paton, D., Johnston, D. M., & Ronan, K. R. (2012). A model of household preparedness for earthquakes: how individuals make meaning of earthquake information and how this influences preparedness. Natural hazards, 64(1), 107-137.
15.Bell, D. E. (1982). Regret in decision making under uncertainty. Operations research, 30(5), 961-981.
16.Bell, D. E. (1985). Disappointment in decision making under uncertainty. Operations research, 33(1), 1-27.
17.Bentler, P. M., & Chou, C. P. (1987). Practical issues in structural modeling. Sociological Methods & Research, 16(1), 78-117.
18.Bollen, K. A. (1989). A new incremental fit index for general structural equation models. Sociological Methods & Research, 17(3), 303-316.
19.Botzen, W., & van den Bergh, J. C. (2012). Risk attitudes to low-probability climate change risks: WTP for flood insurance. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 82(1), 151-166.
20.Botzen, W., Aerts, J., & van den Bergh, J. C. (2009). Willingness of homeowners to mitigate climate risk through insurance. Ecological Economics, 68(8), 2265-2277.
21.Bradford, R., O'Sullivan, J., Van der Craats, I., Krywkow, J., Rotko, P., Aaltonen, J., et al. (2012). Risk perception–issues for flood management in Europe. Natural Hazards and Earth System Science, 12(7), 2299-2309.
22.Butler Jr, John K., and R. Stephen Cantrell. (1984). A behavioral decision theory approach to modeling dyadic trust in superiors and subordinates. Psychological reports, 55(1), 19-28.
23.Camerer, C., & Weber, M. (1992). Recent developments in modeling preferences: Uncertainty and ambiguity. Journal of risk and uncertainty, 5(4), 325-370.
24.Chaiken, S., & Eagly, A. H. (1989). Heuristic and systematic information processing within and. Unintended thought, 212, 212-252.
25.Clore, G. L., Schwarz, N., & Conway, M. (1994). Affective causes and consequences of social information processing. Handbook of social cognition, 1, 323-417.
26.Collins, A. E. (2013). Applications of the disaster risk reduction approach to migration influenced by environmental change. Environmental Science & Policy, 27, S112-S125.
27.Comerio, M. C. (2004). Public policy for reducing earthquake risks: a US perspective. Building Research & Information, 32(5), 403-413
28.Damasio, A. R., & Sutherland, S. (1994). Descartes' Error: Emotion, Reason and the Human Brain. Nature, 372(6503), 287-287..
29.Davis, F. D. (1989). Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS quarterly, 319-340.
30.DeSteno, D., Bartlett, M. Y., Braverman, J., & Salovey, P. (2002). Sex differences in jealousy: Evolutionary mechanism or artifact of measurement?. Journal of personality and social psychology, 83(5), 1103.
31.Dooley, D., Catalano, R., Mishra, S., & Serxner, S. (1992). Earthquake preparedness: predictors in a community survey1. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 22(6), 451-470.
32.Dunn, J. R., & Schweitzer, M. E. (2005). Feeling and believing: the influence of emotion on trust. Journal of personality and social psychology, 88(5), 736.
33.Duval, S., Mulilis, J., & Lalwani, N. (1998). Predictors of earthquake preparedness. In The International Emergency Management Society Conference (pp. 225-235).
34.Duval, T. S., & Mulilis, J. P. (1999). A Person‐Relative‐to‐Event (PrE) Approach to Negative Threat Appeals and Earthquake Preparedness: A Field Study1. Journal of applied social psychology, 29(3), 495-516.
35.Egbelakin, T., Wilkinson, S., Potangaroa, R., & Ingham, J. (2011). Enhancing seismic risk mitigation decisions: a motivational approach. Construction Management and Economics, 29(10), 1003-1016.
36.Evans, J. S. B. (2003). In two minds: dual-process accounts of reasoning. Trends in cognitive sciences, 7(10), 454-459.
37.Evans, J. S. B. (2008). Dual-processing accounts of reasoning, judgment, and social cognition. Annu. Rev. Psychol., 59, 255-278.
38.Farley, J. E., Barlow, H. D., Finkelstein, M. S., & Riley, L. (1993). Earthquake hysteria, before and after: A survey and follow-up on public response to the Browning forecast. International Journal of Mass Emergencies and Disasters, 11(3), 271-277.
39.Fischer, A., Peters, V., Neebe, M., Vávra, J., Kriel, A., Lapka, M., et al. (2012). Climate change? No, wise resource use is the issue: social representations of energy, climate change and the future. Environmental Policy and Governance, 22(3), 161-176.
40.Fischhoff, B., Slovic, P., Lichtenstein, S., Read, S., & Combs, B. (1978). How safe is safe enough? A psychometric study of attitudes towards technological risks and benefits. Policy sciences, 9(2), 127-152.
41.Fishbein, M., & Ajzen, I. (1975). Belief, attitude, intention and behavior: An introduction to theory and research.
42.Flynn, J., Slovic, P., Mertz, C. K., & Carlisle, C. (1999). Public support for earthquake risk mitigation in Portland, Oregon. Risk Analysis, 19(2), 205-216.
43.Forgas, J. P. (1995). Mood and judgment: the affect infusion model (AIM). Psychological bulletin, 117(1), 39.
44.Garcia, E. M. (1989). Earthquake preparedness in California: a survey of Irvine residents. National Emergency Training Center.
45.Gilbert, D. T., Pinel, E. C., Wilson, T. D., Blumberg, S. J., & Wheatley, T. P. (1998). Immune neglect: a source of durability bias in affective forecasting. Journal of personality and social psychology, 75(3), 617.
46.Gorsuch, R. L. (1990). Common factor analysis versus component analysis: Some well and little known facts. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 25(1), 33-39.
47.Halamish, V., Liberman, N., Higgins, E. T., & Idson, L. C. (2008). Regulatory focus effects on discounting over uncertainty for losses vs. gains. Journal of Economic Psychology, 29(5), 654-666.
48.Heller, K., Alexander, D. B., Gatz, M., Knight, B. G., & Rose, T. (2005). Social and personal factors as predictors of earthquake preparation: the role of support provision, network discussion, negative affect, age, and education1. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 35(2), 399-422.
49.Herbert, T. T. (1981). Dimensions of organizational behavior: Macmillan College.
50.Hertwig, R., Barron, G., Weber, E. U., & Erev, I. (2004). Decisions from experience and the effect of rare events in risky choice. Psychological Science, 15(8), 534-539.
51.Ho, M. C., Shaw, D., Lin, S., & Chiu, Y. C. (2008). How do disaster characteristics influence risk perception?. Risk Analysis, 28(3), 635-643.
52.Hochbaum, G. M. (1958). Public participation in medical screening programs: A socio-psychological study. US Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, Public Health Service, Bureau of State Services, Division of Special Health Services, Tuberculosis Program.
53.Jackson, E. L. (1981). Response to earthquake hazard The west coast of north America. Environment and Behavior, 13(4), 387-416.
54.James, G. (2000). Empowering bureaucrats. MC Technology Marketing Intelligence, 20(12), 62-68.
55.Joffe, H. (2003). Risk: From perception to social representation. British journal of social psychology, 42(1), 55-73.
56.Joffe, H., & O’Connor, C. (2013). Risk society and representations of risks: Earthquakes and beyond. In Cities at Risk (pp. 9-23). Springer Netherlands.
57.Joffe, H., Rossetto, T., Solberg, C., & O'Connor, C. (2013). Social representations of earthquakes: a study of people living in three highly seismic areas. Earthquake Spectra, 29(2), 367-397.
58.Johnson, E. J., and Tversky, A. (1983). Affect, generalization, and the perception of risk. Journal of personality and social psychology, 45(1), 20.
59.Jöreskog, K. G., & Sörbom, D. (1986). LISREL VI: Analysis of linear structural relationships by maximum likelihood, instrumental variables, and least squares methods. Scientific Software.
60.Kahneman, D., & Tversky, A. (1979). Prospect theory: An analysis of decision under risk. Econometrica: Journal of the Econometric Society, 263-291.
61.Kahneman, D., Slovic, P., & Tversky, A. (1982). Judgement under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases: Cambridge, UK, Cambridge University Press.
62.Keller, C., Siegrist, M., & Gutscher, H. (2006). The role of the affect and availability heuristics in risk communication. Risk Analysis, 26(3), 631-639.
63.Le Dang, H., Li, E., Nuberg, I., & Bruwer, J. (2014). Understanding farmers’ adaptation intention to climate change: A structural equation modelling study in the Mekong Delta, Vietnam. Environmental Science & Policy, 41, 11-22.
64.Leiserowitz, A. (2006). Climate change risk perception and policy preferences: The role of affect, imagery, and values. Climatic change, 77(1-2), 45-72.
65.Lerner, J. S., & Keltner, D. (2000). Beyond valence: Toward a model of emotion-specific influences on judgement and choice. Cognition & Emotion, 14(4), 473-493.
66.Lerner, J. S., & Keltner, D. (2001). Fear, anger, and risk. Journal of personality and social psychology, 81(1), 146.
67.Lindell, M. K., & Hwang, S. N. (2008). Households' perceived personal risk and responses in a multihazard environment. Risk Analysis, 28(2), 539-556.
68.Lindell, M. K., & Perry, R. W. (2000). Household adjustment to earthquake hazard a review of research. Environment and behavior, 32(4), 461-501.
69.Lindell, M. K., & Perry, R. W. (2003). Communicating environmental risk in multiethnic communities (Vol. 7). Sage Publications.
70.Lindell, M. K., & Perry, R. W. (2012). The protective action decision model: theoretical modifications and additional evidence. Risk Analysis, 32(4), 616-632.
71.Lindell, M. K., & Prater, C. S. (2000). Household adoption of seismic hazard adjustments: A comparison of residents in two states. International Journal of Mass Emergencies and Disasters, 18(2), 317-338.
72.Lindell, M. K., & Prater, C. S. (2002). Risk Area Residents’ Perceptions and Adoption of Seismic Hazard Adjustments1. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 32(11), 2377-2392.
73.Lindell, M. K., & Whitney, D. J. (2000). Correlates of household seismic hazard adjustment adoption. Risk Analysis, 20(1), 13-26.
74.Lindell, M. K., Arlikatti, S., & Prater, C. S. (2009). Why people do what they do to protect against earthquake risk: Perceptions of hazard adjustment attributes. Risk Analysis, 29(8), 1072-1088.
75.Lindell, M. K., Tierney, K. J., & Perry, R. W. (2001). Facing the Unexpected: Disaster Preparedness and Response in the United States. Joseph Henry Press.
76.Lo, A. Y. (2013). The role of social norms in climate adaptation: Mediating risk perception and flood insurance purchase. Global Environmental Change, 23(5), 1249-1257.
77.Loehlin, J. C. (1992). Genes and environment in personality development. Sage Publications, Inc.
78.Loewenstein, G. F., Weber, E. U., Hsee, C. K., & Welch, N. (2001). Risk as feelings. Psychological bulletin, 127(2), 267.
79.Loewenstein, G., & Lerner, J. S. (2003). The role of affect in decision making. Handbook of affective science, 619(642), 3.
80.Loomes, G., & Sugden, R. (1982). Regret theory: An alternative theory of rational choice under uncertainty. The economic journal, 92(368), 805-824.
81.Loomes, G., & Sugden, R. (1986). Disappointment and dynamic consistency in choice under uncertainty. The Review of Economic Studies, 53(2), 271-282.
82.Loomes, G., Starmer, C., & Sugden, R. (1992). Are preferences monotonic? Testing some predictions of regret theory. Economica, 17-33.
83.López-Mosquera, N., García, T., & Barrena, R. (2014). An extension of the Theory of Planned Behavior to predict willingness to pay for the conservation of an urban park. Journal of environmental management, 135, 91-99.
84.Lutz, A. R., Simpson-Housley, P., & Deman, A. F. (1999). Wilderness rural and urban attitudes and perceptions. Environment and Behavior, 31(2), 259-266.
85.Mayer, J. D., Gaschke, Y. N., Braverman, D. L., & Evans, T. W. (1992). Mood-congruent judgment is a general effect. Journal of personality and social psychology, 63(1), 119.
86.McClure, J., Walkey, F., & Allen, M. (1999). When earthquake damage is seen as preventable: Attributions, locus of control and attitudes to risk. Applied Psychology, 48(2), 239-256.
87.McKnight, D. H., Cummings, L. L., & Chervany, N. L. (1998). Initial trust formation in new organizational relationships. Academy of management review, 23(3), 473-490.
88.Mileti, D. S., & Darlington, J. D. (1997). The role of searching in shaping reactions to earthquake risk information. Social Problems, 44(1), 89-103.
89.Mulilis, J. P. (1999). Gender and Earthquake Preparedness: A Research Study of Gender Issues in Disaster Management: Differences in Earthquake Preparedness Due to Traditional Stereotyping or Cognitive Appraisal of Threat?. Australian Journal of Emergency Management, 14(1), 41.
90.Mulilis, J. P., & Duval, T. S. (1995). Negative Threat Appeals and Earthquake Preparedness: A Person‐Relative‐to‐Event (PrE) Model of Coping With Threat1. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 25(15), 1319-1339.
91.Mulilis, J. P., & Lippa, R. (1990). Behavioral change in earthquake preparedness due to negative threat appeals: A test of protection motivation theory. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 20(8), 619-638.
92.Neumayer, E., Plümper, T., & Barthel, F. (2014). The political economy of natural disaster damage. Global Environmental Change, 24, 8-19.
93.Nguyen, L. H., Shen, H., Ershoff, D., Afifi, A. A., & Bourque, L. B. (2006). Exploring the causal relationship between exposure to the 1994 Northridge earthquake and pre-and post-earthquake preparedness activities. Earthquake spectra, 22(3), 569-587.
94.Palm, R., & Carroll, J. (1998). Illusions of safety: Culture and earthquake hazard response in California and Japan. Westview Press.
95.Pan, A. (2012). A study on residents’ risk perception in abrupt geological hazard. Journal of Risk Analysis and Crisis Response, 2(1), 44-55.
96.Paradise, T. R. (2006). Perception of seismic risk in a Muslim city. The Journal of North African Studies, 11(3), 243-262.
97.Paradise, T. R. (2006). Perception of seismic risk in a Muslim city. The Journal of North African Studies, 11(3), 243-262.
98.Paradox, P. (1997). The Art of Political Decision Making. The (Stone), 93.
99.Paton, D. (2008). Risk communication and natural hazard mitigation: how trust influences its effectiveness. International Journal of Global Environmental Issues, 8(1-2), 2-16.
100.Paton, D., Bajek, R., Okada, N., & McIvor, D. (2010). Predicting community earthquake preparedness: a cross-cultural comparison of Japan and New Zealand. Natural Hazards, 54(3), 765-781.
101.Paul, B. K., & Bhuiyan, R. H. (2010). Urban earthquake hazard: perceived seismic risk and preparedness in Dhaka City, Bangladesh. Disasters, 34(2), 337-359.
102.Pellizzoni, L. (2005). TRUST, RESPONSIBILITY AND ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY. European Societies, 7(4), 567-594.
103.Perry, R. W., & Lindell, M. K. (2008). Volcanic risk perception and adjustment in a multi-hazard environment. Journal of Volcanology and Geothermal Research, 172(3), 170-178.
104.Rashed, T., & Weeks, J. (2003). Assessing vulnerability to earthquake hazards through spatial multicriteria analysis of urban areas. International Journal of Geographical, 17, 547-576.
105.Ravenswaay, E. v. (1995). Public perceptions of agrichemicals. Task force report/Council for Agricultural Science and Technology (ISSN 0194-4088(123).
106.Rogers, E. (1983). M.(1983). Diffusion of innovations. New York.Z
107.Rogers, R. W. (1975). A protection motivation theory of fear appeals and attitude change1. The journal of psychology, 91(1), 93-114.
108.Rogers, R. W., Cacioppo, J. T., & Petty, R. (1983). Cognitive and physiological processes in fear appeals and attitude change: A revised theory of protection motivation Social psychophysiology: A sourcebook (pp. 153-177).
109.Rousseau, D. M., Sitkin, S. B., Burt, R. S., & Camerer, C. (1998). Not so different after all: A cross-discipline view of trust. Academy of management review, 23(3), 393-404.
110.Rundmo, T. (2002). Associations between affect and risk perception. Journal of Risk Research, 5(2), 119-135.
111.Russell, L. A., Goltz, J. D., & Bourque, L. B. (1995). Preparedness and hazard mitigation actions before and after two earthquakes. Environment and Behavior, 27(6), 744-770.
112.Rüstemli, A., & Karanci, A. N. (1999). Correlates of earthquake cognitions and preparedness behavior in a victimized population. The Journal of Social Psychology, 139(1), 91-101.
113.Saunders, W. S. A., & Becker, J. S. (2015). A discussion of resilience and sustainability: Land use planning recovery from the Canterbury earthquake sequence, New Zealand. International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction, 14, 73-81.
114.Savage, L. J. (1954). The foundations of statistics. New York,: Wiley.
115.Schneider, A., & Ingram, H. (1990). Behavioral assumptions of policy tools. The Journal of Politics, 52(02), 510-529.
116.Schniederjans, D. G., & Starkey, C. M. (2014). Intention and willingness to pay for green freight transportation: an empirical examination. Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment, 31, 116-125.
117.Schwarz, N. (2011). Feelings-as-information theory. Handbook of theories of social psychology, 1, 289-308.
118.Schwarz, N., & Clore, G. L. (1983). Mood, misattribution, and judgments of well-being: Informative and directive functions of affective states. Journal of personality and social psychology, 45(3), 513.
119.Slovic, P. (1987). Perception of risk. science, 236(4799), 280-285.
120.Slovic, P. (1993). Perceived risk, trust, and democracy. Risk analysis, 13(6), 675-682.
121.Slovic, P. (1999). Trust, emotion, sex, politics, and science: Surveying the risk‐assessment battlefield. Risk analysis, 19(4), 689-701.
122.Slovic, P., Finucane, M. L., Peters, E., & MacGregor, D. G. (2004). Risk as analysis and risk as feelings: Some thoughts about affect, reason, risk, and rationality. Risk analysis, 24(2), 311-322.
123.Slovic, P., Finucane, M. L., Peters, E., & MacGregor, D. G. (2007). The affect heuristic. European journal of operational research, 177(3), 1333-1352.
124.Sobkow, A., Traczyk, J., & Zaleskiewicz, T. (2016). The affective bases of risk perception: Negative feelings and stress mediate the relationship between mental imagery and risk perception. Frontiers in Psychology, 7, 932.
125.Solberg, C., Rossetto, T., & Joffe, H. (2010). The social psychology of seismic hazard adjustment: re-evaluating the international literature. Natural Hazards and Earth System Sciences, 10(8), 1663-1677.
126.Spittal, M. J., McClure, J., Siegert, R. J., & Walkey, F. H. (2008). Predictors of two types of earthquake preparation: survival activities and mitigation activities. Environment and Behavior, 40(6), 798-817.
127.Stewart, J. (1993). Rational choice theory, public policy and the liberal state. Policy Sciences, 26(4), 317-330.
128.Stryker, S. (1980). Symbolic interactionism: A social structural version. Benjamin-Cummings Publishing Company.
129.Taylan, A. (2015). Factors influencing homeowners' seismic risk mitigation behavior: A case study in Zeytinburnu district of Istanbul. International journal of disaster risk reduction, 13, 414-426.
130.Terpstra, T. (2011). Emotions, trust, and perceived risk: Affective and cognitive routes to flood preparedness behavior. Risk Analysis, 31(10), 1658-1675.
131.Thompson, R. L., Higgins, C. A., & Howell, J. M. (1994). Influence of experience on personal computer utilization: testing a conceptual model. Journal of management information systems, 11(1), 167-187.
132.Triandis, H. C. (1977). Interpersonal behavior. Brooks/Cole Pub. Co..
133.Triandis, H. C. (1977). Interpersonal behavior: Brooks/Cole Publishing Company Monterey, CA.
134.Trumbo, C. W., & McComas, K. A. (2003). The function of credibility in information processing for risk perception. Risk Analysis, 23(2), 343-353.
135.Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1975). Judgment under uncertainty: Heuristics and biases. In Utility, probability, and human decision making (pp. 141-162). Springer Netherlands.
136.Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1992). Advances in prospect theory: Cumulative representation of uncertainty. Journal of Risk and uncertainty, 5(4), 297-323.
137.Uitto, J. I. (1998). The geography of disaster vulnerability in megacities: a theoretical framework. Applied geography, 18(1), 7-16.
138.UNISDR. (2005). Hyogo framework for action 2005-2015: building the resilience of nations and communities to disasters. Paper presented at the Extract from the final report of the World Conference on Disaster Reduction (A/CONF. 206/6).
139.Vandenberg, R. J., & Lance, C. E. (2000). A review and synthesis of the measurement invariance literature: Suggestions, practices, and recommendations for organizational research. Organizational research methods, 3(1), 4-70.
140.Venkatesh, V., Morris, M. G., Davis, G. B., & Davis, F. D. (2003). User acceptance of information technology: Toward a unified view. MIS quarterly, 425-478.
141.Visschers, V. H., Meertens, R. M., Passchier, W. F., & DeVries, N. K. (2007). How does the general public evaluate risk information? The impact of associations with other risks. Risk Analysis, 27(3), 715-727.
142.Wallquist, L., Visschers, V. H., & Siegrist, M. (2010). Impact of knowledge and misconceptions on benefit and risk perception of CCS. Environmental science & technology, 44(17), 6557-6562.
143.Wang, J., & Wang, X. (2012). Structural equation modeling: Applications using Mplus. John Wiley & Sons.
144.White, P., Pelling, M., Sen, K., Seddon, D., Russell, S., & Few, R. (2005). Disaster risk reduction: a development concern. London: DfID.
145.Whitney, D. J., Lindell, M. K., & Nguyen, H. H. D. (2004). Earthquake beliefs and adoption of seismic hazard adjustments. Risk Analysis, 24(1), 87-102.
146.Wilson, T. D., Lindsey, S., & Schooler, T. Y. (2000). A model of dual attitudes. Psychological review, 107(1), 101.
147.Zhu, D., Xie, X., & Gan, Y. (2011). Information source and valence: How information credibility influences earthquake risk perception. Journal of environmental psychology, 31(2), 129-136.
貳、中文文獻
1.丁學勤(2008),零售商承諾量表的發展與驗證。管理學報,25(2):195-220。
2.王今朝(2006),决策行为的经济学理论辨析及其逻辑演进。科技进步与对策,23(6):138-140。
3.任維廉、呂堂榮、劉柏廷(2009),科技接受行為模式之整合分析-三個主要模式之比較。資管評論,15(1):101-13。
4.吳中勤(2014),成就目標理論模式再概念化及其目標組型之探析。教育研究學報,48(2):27-47。
5.吳明隆、涂金堂(2009),SPSS與統計應用分析(修訂版)。臺北市:五南。
6.李欣輯、廖楷民、楊惠萱、郭彥廉(2009),恆春地震對居民心理、社會、經濟之影響與災害減輕政策。科技發展政策報導,2,41-56。
7.李梓楠(2011),人如何思考?雙系統理論的介紹與推理上的應用。海巡,52: 58-64。
8.周士雄、施鴻志(2000),環境風險管理決策中之公眾認知探討-以地震災害減緩措施為例。都市與計劃,27(3):363-380。
9.邱皓政(2011),結構方程式模式LISREL的理論、技術與應用(第二版)。臺北:雙葉書廊有限公司。
10.洪鴻智、陳一杰,、簡長毅(2008),土地使用變遷之地震風險分析-以新竹市為例. 都市與計劃,35(4),361-380。
11.財團法人成大研究發展基金會(2014),臺南市102年度防災型都市更新先期規劃案第一期期中報告書。臺南:臺南市政府。
12.張偉豪(2011),SEM論文寫作不求人。臺北:鼎茂圖書出版股份有限公司。
13.曹建宇、張長義(2008),地震災害經驗與調適行為之比較研究-以台南縣白河,台中縣東勢居民為例。華岡地理學報,21:52-75。
14.梁世武、李均揚(2014),從鄰避效應與認知失調解析臺灣居民的核電風險認知與態度。臺灣公共衛生雜誌,33(4):428-444。
15.郭彥廉、林彥伶、蕭代基(2015),運用家戶震災預防行為與意願模型擬定風險溝通策略,中華防災學刊,7(1):73-80。
16.陳亮全、洪鴻智、詹士樑、簡長毅(2003),地震災害風險-效益分析於土地使用規劃之應用:應用HAZ-Taiwan系統,都市與計劃,30(4),281-299。
17.陳威榮、黃健柏(2012),台灣住宅地震保險制度研究,保險經營與制度,11(1):43-70。
18.陳順宇(2009),結構方程式模式AMOS操作。臺北:心理出版社。
19.廖楷民(2009),從風險認知角度分析民眾備災心理-以地震災害為例,科技發展政策報導,(2):76-82。
20.劉世南(2012),不確定下的判斷與決策行為: 認知心理學與幸福經濟學的取向。臺北:麗文文化。
21.劉坤松、蔡義本(2014),台南地區地震危害潛勢微分區,建築學報,89, 153-176。
22.邊泰明、黃泳涵(2013),信任與都市更新參與意願之研究,都市與計劃, 40(1):1-29。
參、網路資源
1.建築物實施耐震能力評估及補強資訊管理系統,http://cpabm.cpami.gov.tw/k-inx/,2015年12月10日。
2.臺南市政府永康區戶政事務所網站,http://www.yungkang-house.gov.tw/index.php,2014年10月1日。
3.臺灣地質知識服務網,http://twgeoref.moeacgs.gov.tw/GipOpenWeb/wSite/mp,2015年9月12日。
4.臺灣抗震網,http://www.comedrill.com.tw/site/page/view/insurance,2015年12月10日。
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2018-09-01起公開。
  • 同意授權校外瀏覽/列印電子全文服務,於2019-09-01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