Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://hdl.handle.net/11455/28534
標題: 以支應性理論探討環境屬性與使用者行為關係之研究
Exploring the Relationship Between Environmental Attributes and Users' Behavior Based on Affordance Concept
作者: 鄭佳美
Cheng, Chia-Mei
關鍵字: Affordance
支應性
Physical Attributes of Environment
Users' Behavior
Open Space
Design
Post-Occupancy Evaluation
環境物理特性
使用者行為
開放空間
設計
使用後評估
出版社: 園藝學系所
引用: 一、中文部份: 圖書 ■ 王錦堂譯,(1987),環境心理學,台隆書局。 ■ 何友鋒,(1992),用後評估研究的發展及課題,研討會論文集,p.60。 ■ 李素馨譯,(1995),行為觀察與公園設計,Rutledge, A.J.原著(1985),田園城市,台北。 ■ 徐純譯,(2001),藍圖之前的規劃—科學中心的建築群像,Peter Anderson & Boak Alexander原著,海生館,屏東。 ■ 黃榮耀,(1989),從環境行為模式談都市景觀美學-論建築色彩的特質與應用,建築師,中華民國建築師公會。 ■ 陳格理,(1992),建築用後評估在美國發展歷程之探討,建築理論與應用研討會論文集。 ■ 張春興,(1991),現代心理學,東華書局,台北。 ■ 漢寶德,(2000),博物館管理,田園城市文化,台北。 ■ 關華山譯,(1987),研究與設計-環境行為的研究,漢威出版社。 期刊論文 ■ 何健銘,(2002),都市廣場開放空間使用後評估之研究—以台北市信義計畫區為例,碩士論文,台北科技大學建築與都市設計研究所。 ■ 李幸峰,(1991),省立美術館前廣場使用特性之研究,碩士論文,逢甲大學都市計畫研究所。 ■ 李琬琬譯,(1983),建築物用後評估簡介,Craig M. Zimring & Janet E. Reizenstein 合著,建築師雜誌,第9卷第11期,pp.32-38。 ■ 宋品彤,(2004),民眾使用國立自然科學博物館戶外開放空間之現況調查分析,碩士論文,台南藝術學院博物館學研究所。 ■ 林俊男、游蕙瑜、陳俊嘉、江建明、蘇志豪、陳淑芬、楊朝順、朱信泰,(2001),從生物、心理符號角度解讀Affordance理論意義,專題研討,雲林科技大學工業設計研究所。 ■ 洪玎螢,(2003),都市中行人徒步區設置使用與環境品質關係之研究-以台中市繼光街與電子街行人徒步區為例,碩士論文,逢甲大學土地管理學研究所。 ■ 倪淑真,2003,校園休憩設施中座椅的配置與使用行為之研究,碩士論文,逢甲大學建築及都市計畫研究所。 ■ 陳力豪,(2003),物件物理特質所提供之Affordance差異研究,碩士論文,雲林科技大學工業設計研究所。 ■ 陳弘哲,(1999),以環境行為觀點探討都市開放空間之使用—以彰化文化中心開放空間為例,碩士論文,東海大學建築研究所。 ■ 陳柏壽,(1990),商業設施周邊開放空間使用者行為之研究—以台北太平洋崇光與頂好為例,碩士論文,中原大學建築工程研究所。 ■ 陳宏銘,(2003),一種另類運動的文化地景-以都市滑板族的運動空間為例,碩士論文,台灣大學園藝學研究所。 ■ 陳格理,(1992),現階段建築環境用後評估研究工作的檢討,空間雜誌,第31 期,p.52-56。 ■ 郭依蒨,(2005),由歷史建築再利用之使用後評估檢視委外經營機制,碩士論文,中原大學建築學研究所。 ■ 彭繼賢,(1997),以環境行為觀點探討都市開放空間之研究—以高雄市公園為例,碩士論文,成功大學建築研究所。 ■ 張華憫,(2001),使用者於功能空間認知之探討,碩士論文,成功大學工業設計研究所。 ■ 蔡淑瑩,(1982),都市廣場之研討-以台北市為例,碩士論文,成功大學建築研究所。 ■ 鄭文瑞,(1991),從本土發展現況探討公共開放空間事物之推動-以台灣台北市為例,碩士論文,淡江大學建築研究所。 ■ 賴慧儀,(2000),都市原住民社區類型與環境品質滿意度之研究,逢甲大學土地管理研究所碩士論文。 ■ 謝孟宏,(2002),在行人徒步公園中支應性的設計,碩士論文,淡江大學建築研究所。 ■ 謝伯昌,(1995),都市開放性空間模式研究,碩士論文,成功大學建築研究所。 ■ 魏志昌,(1994),都市高層建築開放空間留設問題之研究,碩士論文,成大建築研究所。 網路資料 ■ 內政部營建署,建築技術規則之建築設計施工篇 第十五章實施都市計畫地區建築基地綜合設計。http://www.cpami.gov.tw/law/law/lawe-2/b-rule.htm 二、英文部分: 圖書 ■ Bonnes, M., & Secchiaroli, G. (1995). Environmental psychology: A psycho-social introduction. London: Sage. ■ Gibson, J.J. ( 1986). The ecological approach to visual perception. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Original work published in 1979. ■ Gaver, W.W. ( 1991). Technology affordances. Conference Proceedings CHI’91. ACM. New York. 79-84. ■ Heimstra, N.W. & McFarling, L.H. (1978). Environmental psychology. Cole Pub.Co.(Monterey, Calif.) ■ Jordan, T., Raubal, M., Gartrell, B.,& Egenhofer, M.J. (1998). Eighth International Symposium on Spatial Data Handling. Vancouver. 98-109. ■ Kleiber, D.A., Wade M.G., & Atkinson A.L. (2005). Constraints to Leisure. Jackson, E.L.(Eds.). Venture Publishing, Inc. p.234-243 ■ Kyttä, M. (1995). The affordances of urban, small town, and rural environments for children. Paper presented in “Building Identities” conference in Amsterdam. ■ Lynch, K. (1972). The Openness of Open Space. in Gyorgy Kepes, ed. Art of Environment. New York: Braziller. 108-124. (First published 1964) ■ McGrenere, J.,& Ho, W. (2000). Affordances: Clarifying and Evolving a Concept. Proceedings of Graphics Interface 2000. Montreal. May 2000. ■ Norman, D.A. (1988). The Psychology of Everyday Things. NY: Basic Books. ■ Norman, D.A. (1988). The design of Everyday Things. NY: Basic Books. ■ Norman, D.A. (1992). Turn Signals are the Facial Expression of Automobiles. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley. ■ Norman, D.A. (1998). The Invisible Computer. Cambridge: MA, MITPress. ■ Preiser, W. et al. ( 1988). Post-Occupancy Evaluation, VAR, New York: Van Nostrand Peinhold. ■ Reed, E.S. (1993). The intention to use a specific affordance: a conceptual framework for psychology. In Wozniak, R.H.,& Fischer, K.W. (Eds). Development in Context. Acting and Thinking in Specific Environments. Hillsdale. NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. ■ Reed, E.S. (1996). Encountering the world: Toward an ecologi¬cal psychology. New York: Oxford University Press. ■ Rabinowitz, H. (1975). Building in the study. University of Wisconsin. ■ Shaw, R.E., Flascher, O.M.,& Kader, E.E. (1995). Dimensionless invariants for intentional systems: Measuring the fit of vehicular activities to environmental layout. In Flach, J., Hancock, P., Caird, J., Vincente, K.(Eds.). Global perspectives on the ecology of human -machine systems. vol. 1. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, pp. 293-357. ■ Snyder. (1979). Architectural Research. VNR. N. Y. ■ Trancik, R. (1986). Finding lost space: Theories of urban design. Van Nostrand Reinhold. New York. ■ Zimring, C.M. (1987). Evaluation of designed environment. In. R. B. Bechtel, R.W. Marans, & W. Michelson (Eds), Methods in environmental and behavioral research, New York, Van Nostrand Reinhold Company Inc. 期刊論文 ■ Anii, A. (1997). The Relationship between the Affordance Perception for "Clearable" Height of Crossbar in High Jump and Properties of the Body. Japanese Society of Sport Psychology. 24(1). ■ Averill, F.,& Bernad, D.M. (2003). Review of Perceiving the Affordances - A Portrait of Two Psychologists E.J. Gibson; Erlbaum, 2002. Cognitive Systems Research. 4(4): 385-389. ■ Andel, V.J. (1984/1985). Effects on children’s outdoor behavior of physical changes in a Leiden neighborhood. Children’s Environments Quarterly. 1(4): 46-54. ■ Clark, C.,&Uzzell, D.L. ( 2002). The affordance of the home, neighbourhood, school and town centre for adolescent. Journal of Environmental Psychology. 22: 95-108. ■ Cesari, P.,& Newell, K.M. ( 1999). The scaling of human grip configuration. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance. 25: 927-935. ■ Choi, H.J.,& Mark, L.S. (2004). Scaling affordances for human reach actions. Human Movement Science. 23 (6): 785-806. ■ Carello, C., Grosofsky, A., Reichel, F.D., Solomon, H.Y.,& Turvey, M.T. (1989). Visually perceiving what is reachable. Ecological Psychology. 1: 27-54. ■ Greeno, J.G., (1994). Gibson’s Affordances. Psychological Review. 101: 336-342. ■ Greeno, J.G.. (1994). Gibson’s Affordances. Psychological Review. 101(2): 336-342. ■ Gardner, D.L., Mark, L.S., Ward, J. A.,& Edkins, H. ( 2001). How do task characteristics affect the transitions between seated and standing reaches?. Ecological Psychology. 13: 245-274. ■ Heft, H. (1988). Affordances of children’s environments: A functional approach to environmental description. Children’s Environments Quarterly. 5(3): 29-37. ■ Hirose, N. (2002). An ecological approach to embodiment and cognition. Cognitive Systems Research. 3 (3): 289-299 ■ Hirose, N., & Nishio, A. (2001). The process of adaptation to perceiving new action capabilities. Ecological Psychology. 13: 49-69. ■ Jiang, Y.,& Mark, L.S. (1994). The effect of gap depth on the perception of whether a gap is crossable. Perception & Psy¬chophysics, 56, 691-700. ■ Klevberg, G..L.,& Anderson, D.I. (2002). Visual and haptic perception of postural affordances in children and adults. Human Movement Science. 21: 169-186. ■ Kyttä, M. (2002). Affordances of children’s environment in the context of citys, small towns, suburbs and rural villages in Finland and Belarus. Journal of Environmental Psychology. 22(2002): 109-123. ■ Kyttä, M. (2004). An internet-based design game as a mediator of children’s environmental visions. Journal of Environment and Behavior. 36(1): 127-151. ■ Llobera, M. (2001). Building Past Landscape Perception With GIS: Understanding Topographic Prominence. Journal of Archaeological Science. 28: 1005-1014. ■ Mark, L.S.,& Vogele, D. (1987). A biodynamic basis for perceived categories of action: A study of sitting and stair climbing. Journal of Motor Behavior. 19: 367-384. ■ Mark, L. S. (1987). Eyeheight-scaled information about afford¬ances: A study of sitting and stair climbing. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Perform¬ance, 13, 361-370. ■ Mark, L.S., Nemeth, K., Gardner, D., Dainoff, M.J., Duffy, M.,& Grandt, K. (1997). Postural dynamics and the preferred critical boundary for visually-guided reaching. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance. 23: 1-15. ■ Norman, D.A. (1999). Affordance, Conventions and Design. Journal of interaction. 6(3): 38-43 ■ Peck, A.J., Jeffers, R.G., Carello, C.,& Turvey, M.T. (1996). Haptically perceiving the length of one rod by means of another. Ecological Psychology. 8: 237-258. ■ Scarantino, A. (2003). Affordances Explained. Philosophy of Science. 70(5): 949-961. ■ Woolley, H.,& Johns, J.R. (2001). Skateboarding: The city as playground. Journal of Urban Design. 6: 211-230. ■ Warren,W.H. (1984). Perceiving affordances: Visual guidance of stair climbing. Journal of Experimental Psychology : Human Perception and Performance. 10: 683-703. ■ Warren, W.H.,& Whang, S. (1987). Visual guidance of walking through apertures: Body-scaled information for affordances. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance. 13: 371-384. ■ Webster, D.S. (1999). The concept of affordance and GIS a note on Llobera (1996). Antiquity, 73: 915-917. 網路資料 ■ Norman, D.A., Affordances and Design. Don Norman''s jnd website: http://www.jnd.org/dn.mss/affordances_and_desi.html ■ Zhang, J. (2001). Categorization of Affordances. Dept. of Health Informatics, Univ. of Texas at Houston.http://acad88.sahs.uth.tmc.edu/courses/hi6301/affordance.html.
摘要: 本研究旨在以Gibson(1979)所提出的「支應性」理論,探討於開放空間中「環境物理特性」、「使用者屬性」與「活動支應性」三者之間的對應關係。研究以「台灣美術館前開放空間」作為調查樣區,對此開放空間中的使用者進行問卷調查,研究結果發現,個體的身體與心理屬性,皆為影響其對環境中各種活動支應性感知的要素,且透過對個體屬性所對應之活動支應性的調查,能夠鑑別出不同族群在感知活動上的差異性與類型。本研究之主要結論如下: 1. 「性別」不同對於「總體支應性感知」未出現顯著差異; 但對「各項活動支應性感知」出現顯著差異。 2. 「年齡」不同對於「總體支應性感知」出現顯著差異; 且對「各項活動支應性感知」亦出現顯著差異。 3. 「行動能力」不同之受測者對「總體支應性感知」未出現顯著差異; 但對「各項活動支應性感知」出現顯著差異。 4. 「活動偏好程度」不同對「總體支應性感知」出現顯著差異; 且是否偏好某項活動對「各項活動支應性感知」亦出現顯著差異。 5. 「目的」不同對「總體支應性感知」出現顯著差異; 且對「各項活動支應性感知」亦出現顯著差異。 6. 「熟悉程度」不同對「總體支應性感知」呈現出顯著的差異性; 「最常使用區域」對「單區支應性感知」亦出現顯著差異。
The major purpose of this study was to explore the relationships among variables of environmental attributes, users' characteristics, and activity affordance. Open spaces of Taiwan Art Museum served as a study area. Questionnaire survey method was adopted to generate the required data. The results showed that users' physical and psychological attributes had significant influences on the perceived activity affordance in an environment. Through the survey of individual attributes corresponding to activity affordance, the study identified differences and types of perceived activity between different user's groups. The study concluded that gender, age, action ability had significant influences on every perceived activity affordance, but not for the overall perceived affordance. However, the degree of activity preferred, activity purpose, and the degree of familiarity had significant influences on both overall perceived affordance and every perceived activity affordance.
URI: http://hdl.handle.net/11455/28534
其他識別: U0005-0308200615254700
文章連結: http://www.airitilibrary.com/Publication/alDetailedMesh1?DocID=U0005-0308200620143200
Appears in Collections:園藝學系

文件中的檔案:

取得全文請前往華藝線上圖書館



Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.