臺灣博碩士論文加值系統

本研究主要目的為探討認知需求高、低與一致性、非一致性語言數學文字題對解題表現的影響，一致性、非一致性語言之差異主要是由於題目陳述方式的不同而造成解讀上的錯誤，高、低認知需求者則由於對資訊處理的態度與方式不同而造成解題上的差異，因此兩者皆會對解題表現造成影響。

本研究使用比較類型數學文字題為實驗刺激物，並透過重複量數統計方法做檢驗，觀察兩個自變數的主效果是否確實影響解題表現，研究發現一致性、非一致性語言數學文字題對解題時間、解題錯誤、反轉錯誤皆有達到顯著影響，顯示在解非一致性語言數學文字題時較容易犯此三種錯誤，而認知需求高、低僅對解題錯誤上有達到顯著影響，顯示為低認知需求者之解題錯誤較高。

最後，依據分析結果，本研究建議可以透過教學的方式提升解題者對數學文字題類型的正確識別，並藉由練習的方式提升整合題目資訊與推導關係運算式的熟練度。

The difference between consistent and inconsistent language came from interpretative error for stating the problem in different ways, while the difference between high and low need for cognition was resulted from taking different attitude and approach on dealing with information. Hence, both elements influence solving-problem capability.
The stimuli of this research were arithmetic word problems with comparative types, and the verification was also made through repetitive quantitative statistical approach. It discovered that arithmetic word problems with consistent and inconsistent language significantly influenced time for solving, arithmetic error and reversal error, which were easily occurred in solving problems with inconsistent language. As for the cognition language, it only shows significant effects on arithmetic error.
At last, this research recommended that taking instructions as a mean to elevate correctness in identification on arithmetic word problem was helpful for people solving arithmetic problems, and also the familiarity in integrating information in the problems or deriving the relational equations should be enhanced through practice.

目錄 iii
圖目錄 v
表目錄 vi
第一章 緒論 1
第一節 研究背景與動機 1
第二節 研究流程 3
第二章 文獻探討與研究假說 4
第一節 比較類型數學文字題 4
第二節 認知需求 10
第三章 研究設計 13
第一節 實驗刺激物 13
第二節 研究變數之操作型定義 15
第三節 實驗設計 15
第四節 實驗程序 17
第四章 資料分析 19
第一節 樣本敘述 19
第二節 樣本分類 19
第三節 認知需求與數學文字題類型在解題表現上的影響 20
第五章 結論與建議 24
第一節 研究結論 24
第二節 研究貢獻 27
第三節 管理實務上意涵 27
第四節 研究限制與未來建議 28
參考文獻 29
附錄 31

中文文獻
高泉豐（1994）。認知需求的概念與測量。中華心理學刊，36（1），1-20。

英文文獻
Ahlering, R. F. (1987). Need for Cognition, Attitudes, and the 1984 Presidential Election. Journal of Research in Personality, 21(1), 100-102.
Cacioppo, J. T., & Petty, R. E. (1982). The Need for Cognition. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 42(1), 116-131.
Cacioppo, J. T., Petty, R. E., & Kao, C. F. (1984). The Efficient Assessment of Need for Cognition. Journal of Personality Assessment, 48(3), 306-307.
Cacioppo, J. T., Petty, R. E., Kao, C. F., & Rodriguez, R. (1986). Central and Peripheral Routes to Persuasion: An Individual Difference Perspective. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51(5), 1032-1043.
Cohen, A. R., Stotland, E., & Wolfe, D. M. (1955). An Experimental Investigation of Need for Cognition. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 51, 291-294.
Haugtvedt, C. P., Petty, R. E., & Cacioppo, J. T. (1992). Need for Cognition and Advertising: Understanding the Role of Personality Variables in Consumer Behavior. Journal of Consumer Psychology 1(3), 239-260.
Hegarty, M., Mayer, R. E., & Green, C. E. (1992). Comprehension of Arithmetic Word Problems: Evidence From Students' Eye Fixations. Journal of Educational Psychology, 84(1), 76-84.
Leone, C., & Dalton, C. H. (1988). Some Effects of the Need for Cognition on Course Grades. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 67(1), 175-178. .
Lewis, A. B., & E.Mayer, R. (1987). Students' Miscomprehensin of Relational Statements in Arithmetic Word Problems. Educational Psychology, 79, 363-371.
Pajares, F. (1996). Self-Efficacy Beliefs and Mathematical Problem-Solving of Gifted Students. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 21(4), 325-344
Pajares, F., & Kranzler, J. (1995). Self-Efficacy Beliefs and General Mental Ability in Mathematical Problem-Solving. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 20(4), 426-443.
Smith, S. M., & Petty, R. E. (1996). Message Framing and Persuasion: A Message Processing Analysis. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 22(3), 257-268
Stayman, D. M., & Kardes, F. R. (1992). Spontaneous Inference Processes in Advertising: Effects of Need for Cognition and Self-Monitoring on Inference Generation and Utilization Journal of Consumer Psychology, 1(2), 125-142.
Verschaffel, L., Corte, E. D., & Pauwels, A. (1992). Solving Compare Problems: An Eye Movement Test of Lewisn and Mayer's Consistency Hypothesis. Educational Psychology, 84, 85-94.