Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://hdl.handle.net/11455/28962
標題: 台灣鄉村景觀類型與意象之研究
Landscape Types and Images of Rural Areas in Taiwan
作者: 蔡淑美
Tsai, Su-Mei
關鍵字: generalization
歸納法
Q sorting
typology
prototype
rural landscape classification
Q分類
類型學
原型
鄉村景觀分類
出版社: 園藝學系所
引用: 1. 王志弘譯,(1995),人文地理學辭典,Oxford原出版,台北。 2. 米建國,(2008),知識論(書評),東吳哲學學報,17(2008): 107-116。 3. 吳文雄、楊燦堯、劉聰桂,(2005),台灣的岩石,遠足文化事業股份有限公司,台北。 4. 吳煥加,(1998),二十世紀西方建築,p201-205,田園城市文化事業有限公司,台北。 5. 吳進喜,(2004),台灣的地理,玉山社,台北。 6. 吳康、丁傳林、趙善華譯,(1999),心理類型上下,原作者榮格 C. G. Jung,桂冠圖書股份有限公司,台北。 7. 李彥希,(2006),台灣地區景觀美感因素結構之研究—以台灣國家公園為例,博士論文,中興大學園藝學系,台中。 8. 李瓊玉,(1994),遊客農村景觀意象之研究,碩士論文,東海大學景觀學系,台中。 9. 宋伯欽譯,(1977),都市意象,Kevin Lynch 原著,台隆書店,台北。 10. 林幸怡,(1995),農村景觀資源評估模式之研究,碩士論文,中興大學園藝學系,台中。 11. 林世超,(1997),傳統聚落分析—以澎湖許家村為例,西瀛風物,1:1-14。 12. 侯錦雄,(1995),鄉村景觀變遷之研究—錦水村山地聚落景觀評估,東海學報,36:1-18。 13. 侯錦雄,(1998),景觀生態美學:城鄉風貌塑造的規劃與設計理念,均衡發展學術研討會論文集,p7,1-13。 14. 郭思禹,(2005),政治行政關係之研究—以Q方法論對台北市府會聯絡人的應用,世新大學行政管理學系碩士論文,台北。 15. 施植明譯,(1992),城市建築,Aldo Rossi原著,田園城市,台北。 16. 施植明譯,(1986),場所精神—邁向建築現象學,Norberg-Schulz原著,尚林出版社,台北 17. 楊明青,(2005),鄉村觀光與大自然體驗生存價值之初探,2005鄉村建康產業研討會論文集,台中。 18. 楊建夫,(2002),台灣的山脈,遠足文化事業股份有限公司,台北。 19. 陳伯沖,(1997),建築形式學—邁向圖像思維,田園城市,台北。 20. 陳尊賢、許正一,(2002),台灣的土壤,遠足文化事業股份有限公司,台北。 21. 莊輝煌,(1981),理論與實例探討都市景觀之調查評估與發展,成功大學建築研究所碩士論文。 22. 曹正,(2007),視覺景觀理論,太倉規劃顧問公司,台北。 23. 黃世孟,(1995),景觀調查基地規劃導論,P.2251-271,中華民國建築學會,台北。 24. 黃希庭,(2005),簡明心理學辭典,國家出版社,台北。 25. 歐聖榮,(1994),鄉村景觀評估系統之研究,兩岸農村發展規劃學術研討會論文集,中國農村發展規劃學會,p102-122。 26. 歐聖榮,(2004),鄉村遊憩環境之塑造,2004鄉村風貌研習會,國立虎尾科技大學,。 27. 夏鑄九,(1987),對一個城市形式與城市設計理論之認識論上的批判: 開文林區及其知識上之同道,台大建築與城鄉研究學報,3(1): 119-131。 28. 蔡郁芬,(2005),城市觀光意象對旅遊選擇意願影響之研究-以四大都會區為例,南華大學旅遊事業管理研究所碩士論文 29. 蔡龍銘,(1999),農村景觀資源規劃,地景出版社。 30. 戴君玲,(2003),「鄉村」與「發展」概念迷思之討論,農業推廣文彙。 31. 劉桂標,(1994),意義即用法?──論後期維根斯坦為"意義"所下的定義,香港人文哲學會, 1994 年 3-4 月 第 3-4 期 。 32. 謝宏昌,(2003),全球化涵構中的鄉村性,九十二年年會暨全球衝擊與鄉村調適研討會。 33. Arriaza, M., Canas-Ortega,. J. F., Canas-Madueño, J. A., Ruiz-Aviles, P. (2004). Assessing the visual quality of rural landscapes. Landscape and Urban Planning, 69: 115-125 34. Angileri, V., Toccolini, A. (1993). The assessment of visual quality as a tool for the conservation of rural landscape diversity. Landscape and Urban Planning, 24: 105-112. 35. Antrop, M. (1997). The concept of traditional landscapes as a base for landscape evaluation and planning. The example of Flanders Region. Landscape and Urban Planning, 38: 105-117. 36. Antrop, M. (2000). Background concepts for integrated landscape analysis. Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment, 77:17-28. 37. Antrop, M. (2005). Why landscape of past are important for the future. Landscape and Urban Planning, 70: 21-34. 38. Antrop, M., Eetvelde, V. V. (2000). Holistic aspects of suburban landscape: visual image interpretation and landscape metrics. Landscape and Urban Planning, 50: 43-58. 39. Appleyard, D. (1976). Planning a pluralist city: conflicting realties in Ciudad Guayana. Cambridge, The M.I.T. Press. 40. Bagozzi, R. P., and Burnkrant, R. E. (1985). Attitude organization and the attitude-behavior relation: a replay to Dillon and Kumar, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 49:47-57. 41. Barham, C. & Begum, N. (2006). The new urban/ rural indicator in the labour force survey. Office for National Statistics, Labour Market Trends, December(2006): 409-417. 42. Bartel. A. (2000). Analysis of landscape pattern: towards a ‘top down’ indicator for evaluation of landuse. Ecological Modelling, 130: 87-94. 43. Baloglu, S., and Brinberg, D., (1997). Affective images of tourism destinations, Journal of Travel Research, 35:11-15. 44. Baloglu, S. (1999). Image variations of Turkey by familiarity index informational and experience dimensions. Tourism Management, 20: 361-365. 45. Baloglu, S., and McCleary, K. W. (1999). A model of destination image formation. Annals of Tourism Research, 26 : 868—897. 46. Baloglu, S., and Mangaloglu, M. (2001). Tourism destination images of Turkey, Egypt, Greece, and Italy as perceived by US-based tour operators and travel agents. Tourism Management, 22: 1-9. 47. Baloglu, S., and Love, C. (2005). Association meeting planners’ perceptions and intentions for five major US convention cities: the structured and unstructured images. Tourism Management, 26: 743-752. 48. Beerli, A., and Martı´n, J. D. (2004). Factors influencing destination image. Annals of Tourism Research, 31(3): 657–681. 49. Beilin, R.(2005). Photo-elicitation and the agricultural landscape: ‘seeing’ and ‘telling’ about farming, community and place. Visual Studies, 20(1): 56-68. 50. Benfield, F., Raimi, M. D., & Chen, D (1999) Once there were greenfields: sprawl is undermining America’s environment, economy and social fabric. Natural Resources Defense Council, New York. 51. Bigne, J. E., Sanchez, M. I., and Sanchez, J. (2001). Tourism image, evaluation variables and after purchase behaviour: inter-relationship. Tourism Management, 22: 607–616. 52. Brooke, D. (1994). A countryside character Programme. Landscape Research, 19(3): 128-132. 53. Brush, R. & Chenoweth, R. E. & Barman, T (2000) Group differences in the enjoy ability of driving through rural landscapes. Landscape and Urban Planning, 4: 39-45. 54. Buhyoj G. J. & Wellman, J. D. (1980). The speciation of a nonlinear psychophysical function for visual landscape dimensions. Journal of Leisure Research, 12: 257-272. 55. Brown D. F. (2007) The spatial and temporal dimensions of a rural landscape: the Yucatec Maya k’ax., The Canadien Geographer, 1(2007): 91-108. 56. Canter, D. (1977). The Psychology of Place. London: Architectural Press. 57. Cai, L. A. (2002). Cooperative branding for rural destinations. Annals of Tourism Research, 29(3): 720–742. 58. Chaudhary, M. (2000). India’s image as a tourist destination—a perspective of foreign tourists .Tourism Management, 21: 293-297. 59. Chen, P. J., and Kerstetter, D. L. (1999) International students’ image of rural Pennsylvania as a travel destination. Journal of Travel Research, 37(3): 256-266. 60. Chen, J. S. (2001). A case study of Korean outbound travelers’ destination images by using correspondence analysis. Tourism Management, 22: 345-350. 61. Child, D. (1970). The essentials of factor analysis. New York: Holt. 62. Choi, W.M., Chan, A., and Wu, J. (1999) .A qualitative and quantitative assessment of Hong Kong’s image as a tourist destination. Tourism Management, 20: 361–365. 63. Clare, T. (2000). An assessment of the potential of the TWINSPAN program of multi-variate analysis to contribute to the classification and management of village landscapes, with reference to historical features. Landscape Research, 25(1): 117-139. 64. Cortina, J. M. (1993). What is coefficient alpha? An examination of theory and applications. Journal of Applied Psychology, 78(1): 98-104. 65. Council of Europe, 2000. The European Landscape Convention. Strasbourg. 66. Countryside Commission. (1991). Assessment and conservation of landscape character. The Warwickshire Landscapes Project approach. Countryside Commission Publications. 67. Crompton, J. L. (1979). An assessment of the image of Mexico as a vacation destination and influence of geographical location upon that image. Journal of Travel research, 17: 18-23. 68. Daugstad, K., Ronningen, K. & Skar, B. (2006). Agriculture as an upholder of cultural heritage? Conceptualizations and value judgements—A Norwegian perspective in international context., Journal of Rural Studies, 22(2006): 67-81. 69. Daniel, T. C. & Vining, J. (1983). Methodological issues in the assessment of landscape quality. Human Behaviour and Environment, Vol. 6: Behaviour and the Natural Environment. New York: Plenum Press, pp. 39-84. 70 Daniel, T. C. & Boster, R. S. (1976). Measuring Landscape Aesthetics: The Scenic Beauty Method (USDA Forest Service Research Paper RM-167), Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station, Fort Collins, CO. 71. Daniel, T. C. (2001). Whither scenic beauty? Visual landscape quality assessment in the 21st century. Landscape and Urban Planning, 54: 267-281. 73 Dee, C. (2004). The imaginary texture of the real critical visual studies in landscape architecture: context, foundations and approaches. Landscape Research, 29(1), 13-30. 74. Dobni, D. and Zinkhan, G. M. (1990). In search of brand image: a foundation analysis. Advances in Consumer Research, 17(1): 10-19. 75 Echtner, C.M., and Ritchie, J. R. B. (1993). The measurement of destination image: an empirical assessment, Journal of Travel Research, spring: 3-13. 76. Espelt, N.G., and Benito, J.A.D. (2005). The social constructions of the image of Girona: a methodological approach. Tourism Management, 26: 777-785. 77. European Commission, Expert Group on the Urban Environment, and Nuclear Safety Directorate-General for Environment and Civil Protection. 1996. 78. Gallarza, M. G., Saura, I. G.,and Garci´a, H. C. (2000). Destination image towards a conceptual framework. Annals of Tourism Research, 29(1): 56-78. 79. Groot, W. T., & Born, R. J. G.. Visions of nature and landscape type preferences: an exploration in The Netherlands. Landscape and Urban Planning, 63 (2003) 127–138. 80. Hagerhall, C. M. (2001). Consensus in landscape preference judgements. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 21: 83-92. 81. Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., Anderson, R. E., & Tatham, R. L. (2006). Multivariate data analysis. NJ: Pearson Education. 82. Harvey,T. & Works, M. A. (2002). Urban sprawl and rural landscapes: perceptions of landscape as amenity in Portland. Oregon Local Environment,7(4): 381-396. 83. Holbrook, M. B. (1978). Beyond attitude structure: Toward the informational determinants of attitude. Journal of Marketing Research, 15(November): 545-56. 84. Hsu, C. H. C., Wolfe, K., and Kang, S. K. (2004). Image assessment for a destination with limited comparative advantages, Tourism Management, 25: 121–126. 85. Hull, R. B. & Buhyo¡, G. J. (1983). Distance and scenic beauty. A nonmonotonic relationship. Environment and Behavior, 15: 77-81. 86. James, F. S. (1997). Stability of landscape perceptions in the face of landscape change. Landscape and Urban Planning, 37: 109-113. 87. Jones, O. (1995). Lay Discourses of the Rural: developments and implications for rural studies. Journal of Rural Studies, 11(1): 35- 49. 88. Jong, U. M. (2002). Blairgowrie: the meaning of place. Urban policy and research, 20(1): 73-86. 89. Jung, Carl G. (1935b [1954]). Archetypes of the collective unconscious. Coll. Works (Vol. IX, Part I). London: Rout-ledge & Kegan Paul. 90. Kaiser, H. F. (1974). An index of factorial simplicity. Psychometrika, 39, 31-36. 91. Kaplan, S. (1983). A model of person-environment compatibility. Environment and Behavior, 15: 311-332. 92. Kaplan, S. (1987). Aesthetics, a¡ect and cognition. Environmental preference from an evolutionary perspective. Environment and Behavior, 19: 3-32. 93. Kaplan, A, & Taskin, T. & Onenc, A. (2006) . Assessing the visual quality of rural and urban-fringed landscapes surrounding livestock farms. Biosystems Engineering, 5(3) : 437-448. 94. Kinnear, P. R., & Gray, C. D. (2005). SPSS 12 made simple. New York: Psychology Press. 95. Krause, C. L. (2001). Our visual landscape managing the landscape under special consideration of visual aspects. Landscape and Urban Planning, 54: 239-254. 96. Klijn, I.., & Vos, W. (2000). A new identity for landscape ecology in Europe: a research strategy for next decade. Landscape Ecology to Landscape Science. Kluwer Academic Publishers, WLO, Wageningen, pp. 149—161. 97. Lee, J. (2007). Experiencing landscape: Orkney hill land and farming. Journal of Rural Studies, 23: 88-100. 98. Linton, R. B. Jr. (1968). The Assessment of scenery as a national resources. Scottish Geographical Magazine, 84: 219-238. 99. Litton, R. B. Jr. (1968). Recognition of the scenic resources. Forest Landscape Description and Inventories: A Basis for Land Planning and Design. USDA, Forest Service. 100. Lowenthal, (1997). European landscape transformations: the rural residue. Understanding Ordinary Landscapes. Yale University Press, New Haven, CT, pp. 180—188. 101. Lynch, K. (1960). The image of the city. The M.I.T. Press.Cambridge, M.A. 102. MacKay, K. J., and Fesenmaier, D. R. (1997). Pictorial element of destination in image formation. Annals of Tourism Research, 24 : 537—565. 103. Mackenzie, A. F. D. (2004). Re-imagining the land, North Sutherland, Scotland. Journal of Rural Studies, 20: 273-287. 104. Madsen, L. M.& Adriansen, H.K. (2004). Understanding the use of rural space: the need for multi-method, Journal of Rural Studies, 20(2004): 485-497. 105. Marsh, W. L. (1964). Landscape Vocabulary. Miramar Publishing. 106. McCarthy, J. (2006). Regeneration of cultural Quarters: public art for place image or place identity. Journal of Urban Design, 11(2): 242-262. 107. Meinig, O. W., (1979). The beholding eye. Ten versions of the same sense Interpretation of Ordinary Landscapes: Geographical Essays. Oxford University Press, Oxford. 108. Mehrabian, A. & Russell, J. A. (1974). An Approach to Environmental Psychology. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. 109. Menghi, M., Intile, C. (1992). Landscape variability using two methodological procedures. Landscape Research, 17(21): 80-89. 110. Meunier, J. (1971). Existence, space, and architectures. RIBA. 111. Milman, A. & Pizam, A. (1995). The role of awareness and familiarity with a destination: The central Florida case. Journal of Travel Research, 33(3), 21-27. 112. Musacchio, L., Crewe, K., Steiner, F., and Schmidt, J. (2003). The future of agricultural landscape preservation in the Phoenix Metropolitan Region. Landscape Journal, 22: 1-03. 113. Mutersbaugh, T., Klooster, D., Renard, M. C., and Taylor, P. (2005). Certifying rural spaces: quality-certified products and rural governance. Journal of Rural Studies, 21: 381-388. 114. Nie, N., Hull, C., Jenkins, J., Steinbrenner, K., & Bent, D. (1975). SPSS: Statistical package for the social sciences. New York: McGraw-Hill. 115. Noberg-Schulz, C. (1963). Intentions in architecture. 116. Oliver, P. (2003). Dwellings the vernacular house world wide. Phaidon. 117. Oppermann, M. (1991). Rural tourism in southern Germany. Annals of Tourism Research, 23(1): 86-102. 118. Petek, F. (2005). Typology of Slovenia’s Alpine region with emphasis on land use and changes in land use. Acta geographica Slovenica, 45(1):33-52. 119. Phillips, M., Fish, R., and Agg, J. (2001). Putting together ruralities: towards a symbolic analysis of rurality in the British mass media. Journal of Rural Studies, 17: 1-27. 120. Pike, S., (2002) Destination image analysis a review of 142 papers from 1973 to 2000. Tourism Management, 23: 541–549. 121. Piko, B.F.,Bak, J. and Gibbons, F. X. (2007). Prototype perception and smoking: Are negative or positive social images more important in adolescence? Addictive Behaviors , 32(8): 1728-1732. 122. Pitt, D. G. & Zube, E. H. (1987). Management of natural environments. Handbook of Environmental Psychology. New York: Wiley, pp. 1009-1051. 123. Pocock, D. & Hudson, R. (1978). Images of the urban environment. Columbia University press, New York. 124. Prentice, R. (2004). Tourist familiarity and imagery. Annals of Tourism Research, 31(4): 923-945). 125. Primsahl, J. (1990). Heterogeneity in agriculture and landscape : form segregation to integration. Landscape and Urban Planning, 18: 221-228 126. Qvistrom, M. and Saltzman, K. (2006). Exploring landscape dynamics at the edge of the city: spatial plans and everyday places at the inner urban fringe of Malmo, Sweden. Landscape research, 31(1): 21-41. 127. Real, E., Arce, C. and Sabucedo, J. M. (2000). Classification of landscapes using Quantitative and Categorical data, and prediction of their scenic beauty in north-western Spain. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 20: 355-373 128. Relph, E. (1986). Place and placelessness. London: Pion Limited. 129. Robert, L. and Hall, D. (2001). Rural Tourism and Recreation Principles and Practice. U.K: CABI. 130. Russel, J. A. and Pratt, G. (1980). A description of affective quality attributed to environment, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 38(2):311-322. 131 Ryan, C., and Cave, J. (2005). Structuring destination image: a qualitative approach. Journal of Travel Research, 44: 143-150. 132. Sanoff, H. (1911). Visual notation visual research methods in design, New york. 133. Schauman, S. (1988). Scenic value of countryside landscapes to local residents: A Whatcom County, Washington Case Study. Landscape Journal, 7: 40-46. 134. Schauman, S. (1988). Countryside scenic assessment: Tools and application. Landscape Journal, 15: 227-239. 135. Scott, M. J., Canter, D. V. (1997). Picture or place? A multiple sorting study of landscape. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 17: 263-281. 136. Shafer, E. L., Hamilton, S. F. & Schmidt, E. A. (1969). Natural landscape preferences: a predictive model. Journal of Leisure Research, 1: 1-19. 137. Smith, T., Nelischer, M., Perkins, N. (1997). Quality of an urban community: a framework for understanding the relationship between quality and physical form. Landscape and Urban Planning, 39: 229-241. 138. Soliva, R. (2007). Landscape stories: using ideal type narratives as a heuristic device in rural studies. Journal of Rural Studies, 23: 62-74. 139. Stilgoe, J. R. (2005). Landscape and Image. University of Virginia Press, Journal of Cultural Geography, book review. 140. Terkenhi, T. S. (2001). Towards a theory of the landscape: the Aegean landscape as a cultural image. Landscape and Urban Planning, 57: 197-208. 141. Terkenhi, T. S. (2005). New landscape spatialities: the changing scales of function and symbolism. Landscape and Urban Planning, 70: 165-176. 142. Thwaites, K. (2001). Experiential landscape place: an exploration of space and experience in neighbourhood landscape architecture. Landscape Research, 26(3): 245-255. 143. Tonnelliera, F., & Curtisb, S. (2005). Medicine, landscapes, symbols: “The country Doctor” by Honoré de Balzac. Health and Place, 11: 313-321. 144. Trauer,B., & Ryan, C. (2005). Destination image, romance and place experience—an application of intimacy theory in tourism. Tourism Management, 26: 481–491. 145. Tuan. Y. F. (1990). Topophilia: A Study of Environmental Perception, Attitudes, and Values. Columbia University Press, Columbia. 146. Ulrich, R. S. (1983). Aesthetic and ajective response to the natural environment. Human Behavior and Environment, 6: 85-125. 147. Vailaya, A., Jain, A., and Zhang, H. J. (1998). On image classification: city images vs. landscapes. Pattern Recognition, 31(12): 1921-1935. 148. Verteuil, R., D. (1966). The scapegoat archetype. Journal of Religion and Health, 31(12): 209-225. 149. Vos, W., & Klijn, I. (2000). Trends in European landscape development: prospects for a sustainable future. Kluwer Academic Publishers, WLO, Wageningen, pp. 13—30. 150. Walmsley, D. J. and Young, M. (1998). Evaluative images and tourism: the use of personal constructs to describe the structure of destination images. Journal of Travel Research, 36(3): 65-69. 139 151 Wherrett, J. R. (2000) Creating landscape preference models using internet survey techniques. Landscape Research, 25(1): 79-96. 152. Wohlwill, J. F. (1976). Environmental aesthetics: the environment as a source of aject. Human Behavior and the Environment, 1: 37-86. 153. Young, B. (1994). Landscape mapping in England using an Airphoto based land systems mapping approach. Landscape Research, 19(3): 144-148. 154. Zube, E. H., Pitt, D. G. & Anderson, T.W. (1975). Perception and prediction of scenic resource values of the Northeast. Hutchinson and Ross, 151-167. 網路資源 http://www.answers.com/topic/archetype http://www.oup.co.uk/ Britannica Concise Encyclopedia http://www.britannica.com/ Psychoanalysis http://www.psychoanalysis.org.uk/frontpage.htm Science Dictionary http://www.answers.com/topic/archetype wikipedia http://www.wikipedia.org/ Jungian archetypes http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Archetypes
摘要: 台灣鄉村的環境特色富饒豐盈變化多端,近年來有許多想法如民宿、創意咖啡店、社區營造、千里步道等都在鄉村地區開展,因此,本研究想了解台灣鄉村的景觀特色究竟是什麼,故而如此吸引人;從類型學的角度,可以透過景觀分類的操作得到不同的鄉村景觀風貌與特色,再進一步了解人們對這些不同景觀類型有什麼感受,最後彙整總體鄉村景觀特色。 本研究分三個階段進行,第一階段為台灣鄉村景觀類型調查歸納分析,擇取台灣北、中、南、東共44處鄉村樣本點拍攝1940張照片,先以歸納分析法,初步得到八個鄉村景觀類型;第二階段是以Q 分類法進行分類,運用和第一階段相同的照片,先將照片縮減後,以88張照片對138位受測者進行照片分類與特色描述,再以二階段階層分析法,得到9個照片群組,這個結果和第一階段進行比較,最後得到8類鄉村景觀,依受測者對類型的描述辭語交集收斂之命名為高台旱作景觀、縱谷農作景觀、溪谷雜作景觀、近山林野景觀、梯田茶園景觀、濱海水鄉景觀與海岸田園景觀。 第三階段為鄉村景觀類型與意象之探討,從第一階段每類型選取4張共32張照片,302位受測者觀看照片並進行問卷填寫。意象部份問卷經因素分析之最大變異法(varimax)將因素轉軸後結果認知意象獲得三個因素:明亮清新的、開闊協調的與自然疏離的,而情感意象為閒適靜樸與便利有人情味,景觀組成份為農作田園、濱海漁塭、生態山景與富饒梯田四個構面。單因子變異數分析受測者對8類鄉村景觀其意象感受與景觀意義都是有差異的;多元迴歸結果顯示在景觀重要性上認知意象之明亮清新的、開闊協調的與自然疏離的影響大,景觀重要性與熟悉度上明亮清新的、開闊協調的影響大,在情感意象上閒適靜樸對重要性影響非常大,而閒適靜樸與便利有人情味在熟悉度與喜愛度上都有影響;經典型相關分析後,景觀的組成因子越趨於生態山景的實質因素,認知意象因子會產生明亮清新的想法,組成因子越趨於農作田園的,認知意象因子會產生自然疏離的想法越低,而生態山景對鄉村景觀的情感意象因子會具有閒適靜樸的感受,農作田園則對鄉村景觀的情感意象因子越具有便利有人情味的感受。
In virture to the various and abundant environment characteristics, there are many ideas proceeding in Taiwan rural areas recently, such as the B&B travel、the individual cafe, the local community transforming and the footpath systems and so on. Hence, this research tried to understand what is the critical landscape characteristic in Taiwan rural area? With the typology viewpoint, using the landscape classification method to obtain the different rural landscape types and the attracted characteristics, further realized the images of these different landscape types finally represented the overall rural landscape characteristics. This research was carried out by three stages, the first stage was to investigate and generalize the Taiwan rural landscape types, from 44 sample sites distributing in the North、the Middle、the South and the Eeast Area of Taiwan to get 1940 photographs , using the generalize analysis method to obtains eight rural landscape types initially; The second stage was carried on the photos classification by the Q sorting task , with the same photos as the first stage, to reducing the photos number, than a sample of 138 subjects were used for 88 photos sorting task and characteristic description, the photos matrix was put into the twostep cluter analysis to get 9 photo groups, this result was compared with the result of first stage, finally, 8 kind of rural landscape types were obtain, according to description refined by the subjects to give the name of the rural landscape types: the up-flat drought fields, the plain fields, the longitudinal valley, the valley crops field, the mountain cultivated, the terraced tea farm, the seashore cultivated and the coastal slender field landscape . The third stage was focus on the image of the rural landscape types, 4 photos select from each landscape type altogether 32 photos were chosen, 302 subjects were carry out the questionnaire investigation by onlooking photos. By performing factor analysis using varimax rotation, the study extracted three cognition image factors named as bright and fresh, wide and harmonize, nature and isolated, the affective image factors were named peaceful and quiet, touch of humanity conveniently. After one way analysis of variance, the results showed that there were significant differences in the landscape image, landscape familiarity, landscape preference and importance between in the 8 landscape types. The multiple regression result showed that in the cognition image, the landscape importance effect factors were bright and fresh, wide and harmonize nature and isolated, the landscape familiarity effect factors were bright and fresh, wide and harmonize, the landscape preference effect factors were bright and fresh, wide and harmonizes. In the affective image, the important effect factors was peaceful and quiet, but peaceful and quiet, touch of humanity conveniently effect the landscape familiarity and preference. After canonical correlation analysis, the landscape composition factor more tends the ecology mountain scenery physical causes, the cognition image factor was bright and fresh, the composition factor more tends the farm crops countryside, the cognition image factor was nature and isolated to be lower, the ecology mountain scenery can have the peaceful and quie feeling to the landscape''s affective image factor, the farm crops landscape gived the touch of humanity conveniently feeling.
URI: http://hdl.handle.net/11455/28962
其他識別: U0005-1501200917195900
文章連結: http://www.airitilibrary.com/Publication/alDetailedMesh1?DocID=U0005-1512200815373400
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.