臺灣博碩士論文加值系統

一般人在日常活動中的空間裡，藉由上肢完成許多動作任務。人體動作的產生過程是感覺器官接收訊息後，經由腦部整合並轉換成動作模式再傳導至肢體運動器官而產生運動。上肢動作的過程需要整合感官、知覺、認知、動作控制等環節 (Bailey, 1989)，這些能力關係著許多關節肢段、肌肉協調及動作反應時間 (Hogan, 1989)。過程中若有任何一個環節出現問題就會影響到動作的執行。進而造成上肢動作障礙者在社會與環境上無法獨立自主，影響其生活的品質。治療師為了解問題就會對個案作上肢功能的評估，目前操作這些評估量表都需要經過專業的訓練。為此，本研究研發給治療師使用的上肢動作簡易評估平台，此平台係以觸控螢幕搭配 Flash 軟體設計而成。利用軟體在螢幕上不同位置建立尺寸可變的目標物，讓個案點選目標物後即可取得使用者的操作能力特性，由此可以很容易的了解個案的上肢動作能力。本研究對為平台進行可行性實驗，實驗對象有一般男、女生各11位及滿6足歲慣用右手學童之智能障礙者3位。結果顯示系統有鑑別上肢動作障礙的能力，可獲得個案在操作目標物的操作評估結果。因此本平台發展成上肢動作障礙的評估工具應具有可行性。

Human being use upper extremity to finish action assignment in daily life. The process of the action is that the sense organ receives the message, integrate by brain and transmit to movement mode, then conduct extremity organ to get action. The process of operating objects needs to combine with sense, aesthesia, cognition, action controlling…etc., (Bailey, 1989) these abilities concern many joints、muscle coordinate and reaction time (Hogan, 1989). It will cause operating perplexity when one of these links gets problems. And then cause upper extremity function limitation can not be autonomous in the environment to affect the life quality. Physician will estimate case’s upper extremity function for knowing the problems, at least it needs professional training to operate these evaluation tool. So the study develops evaluation tool which can objectively quantify input interface. The platform is designed with touch screen and Flash software. The software builds variables size target in different place on screen, and after cases choice the target and we will easy to get their movement characteristic ability. The experiment takes from common male and female schoolchildren each 11 and more 3 intelligent barrier schoolchildren who are 6 years old the right hand users. The result display system has diacritic ability of the action, and also can get the estimation of case’s operating. The platform is the feasible evaluation tool.

中文摘要 Ⅲ
英文摘要 Ⅳ
目錄 Ⅵ
表目錄 Ⅷ
圖目錄 Ⅸ
1. 緒論 10
2. 文獻回顧 12
2.1. 輸入介面與上肢動作障礙者的關係 13
2.1.1. 智能障礙 13
2.1.2. 介面的特性 14

2.1.3. 動作協調能力的評估工具 15
2.2. 上肢動作障礙者 17
2.2.1. 動作控制的產生 17
2.2.2. 視覺感官的功能 19
2.2.3. 認知的運作 20
2.2.4. 動作控制的反應時間 21
2.3. 輸入介面設置與反應時間的關係 22
2.3.1. 動作控制的範圍 23
2.3.2. 刺激與反應的時間關係 23
2.4. 評估工具 26
2.4.1. 軟體 26
2.4.2. 觸控螢幕 28
3. 研究方法 30
3.1. 實驗假設 30
3.1.1. 實驗目的 30
3.1.2. 實驗設備 31
3.2. 研發評估工具 32
3.2.1. 空間的配置 32
3.2.2. 評估系統設計 34
3.2.3. 評估結果分析 40
3.3. 實驗對象 41
3.3.1. 實驗對象資料 41
3.4. 實驗設計 42
3.4.1. 實驗一 42
3.4.2. 實驗二 42

4. 實驗結果 44
4.1. 一般學童的實驗結果 44
4.1.1. 目標尺寸反應時間 44
4.1.2. 單一目標尺寸與反應時間 45
4.2. 智能障礙學童的實驗結果 44
4.2.1. 個案一 46
4.2.1.1. 個案一目標尺寸反應時間 46
4.2.2. 個案二 47
4.2.1.2. 個案二目標尺寸反應時間 47
4.2.3. 個案三 48
4.2.1.3. 個案三目標尺寸反應時間 48
5. 討論 49
5.1. 一般學童的動作效率 49
5.2. 特殊學童的動作效率 49
5.3. 評估工具 49
6. 結論與建議 51
6.1. 結論 51
6.2. 研究限制 51
6.3. 未來研究建議 52
6.3.1. 擴大受試族群 52
6.3.2. 起始點的設置 52
中文參考文獻 53
英文參考文獻 54

中文參考文獻
1.李芝慧，李開偉，電腦軟體操作介面之設計探討–以EMG 軟體為例，中華民國人因工程學會研討會論文集，276-279, 2000。
2.胡名霞, 動作控制與動作學習, 第二版, 2006。
3.張靜文、祁業榮，學齡前兒童手眼協調能力之調查研究，大專體育學刊，3（2），11-21, 1991。

英文參考文獻
1.A NEUROPHYSIOLOGICAL BASIS FOR THE TREATMENT OF CEREBRAL PALSY (K. BOBATH 1980).
2.Albert M.Cook and Susan M. Hussey, Assistive Technologies, 2nd Edition - Principles and Practice, 2007.
3.American Association on Mental Retardation, Mental Retardation: Definition, Classification, and Systems of Supports 10th Edition, 2007.
4.Bailey RW: Human performance engineering, ed 2, Englewood Cliffs, NJ, 1989, Prentice Hall.
5.Beaton, R. J. and Weiman, N. (1984). Effects of touch key size and separation on menu-selection accuracy (Tech. Report HFL-500-01).
6.Beaverton, OR: Tektronix Laboratory, Human Factors Research Department.
7.Brooks VB: The neural basis of motor control, New York, 1986, Oxford University Press.
8.Burgess MK: Motor control and the role of occupational therapy: past,present and future, Am J Occup Ther 43:345-348,1989.
9.Bickford, J. Albert. 1982. "Initial and non-initial indirect objects in Spanish."‭ Work Papers of the Summer Institute of Linguistics, University of North Dakota 26: 118-57.
10.E. Grandjean, Fitting the Task to the Man, Chapter 17, pp.240-243,Taylor & Francis, London, U.K.,1979.
11.Fitts, P. M. (1947). Psychological research on equipment design(Research Report 19). Washington, DC: U.S. Army Air Forces Aviation Psychology Program.
12.Fitts PM: The information capacity of the human motor system in controlling the amplitude of movement, J Exp Psychol 47:381-391, 1954.
13.Jock Mackinlay; Stuart K. Card; George G. Robertson, A Semantic Analysis of the Design Space of Input Devices. Human-Computer Interaction, Volume 5, Issue 2 ＆ 3 June 1990 , pages 145 – 190.
14.MIL-STD-1472D, HUMAN ENGINEERING DESIGN CRITERIA FOR MILITARY SYSTEMS, EQUIPMENT AND FACILITIES, 1989.
15.Posner, M. I., Inhoff, A. W., Friedrich, F. J. & Cohen, A. Isolating attentional systems: a cognitive-anatomical analysis. Psychobiology, 15, 107-121. , 1987a.
16.P. M. Fitts and C. M. Seeger, S-R Compatibility: Spatial characteristics of stimulus and response codes, J. Exp. Psychology, 46, pp.199-210, 1953.
17.Posner, M.I. & Klein, R. (1973). On the functions of consciousness. In S Korkblum (ed.), Attention and Performance IV, New York: Academic Press.
18.R. E. Morin and D. A. Grant, Learning and performance on a keyce, J. Exp. Psychology, 49, pp.39-47, 1955.
19.SE Henderson, DA Sugden - The Psychological Corporation, London, UK, 1992.
20.S. Pheasant, Body Space, Anthropometry, Ergonomics, and Design, Chapter2, Taylor and Francis, London, U.K.,1986.
21.Sandra G. Brauer, Marjorie Woollacott and Anne Shumway-Cook, The Interacting Effects of Cognitive Demand and Recovery of Postural Stability in Balance-Impaired Elderly Persons. The Journals of Gerontology Series A: Biological Sciences and Medical Sciences 56:M489-M496, 2001.
22.Schultz, D. P. & Schultz, S. E., 1998. Psychology & Work Today, Upper Saddle River, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, Inc.
23.Schmidt, R., Hunter, J., Mackenzie, & Muldrow, T. (1979). Impact of valid selection procedures on workforce productivity. Journal of Applied Psychology, 64, 609-26.
24.Shea, D. L., Lubinski, D., & Benbow, C. P. (2001). Importance of assessing spatial ability in intellectual talented young adolescents: A 20-years longitudinal study. Journal of Educational Psychology, 93, 604-614.
25.W. H. Teichner and J. M. Krebs, Law of visual choice reaction time, Psychological Rev., 81, pp.75-98, 1974.