臺灣博碩士論文加值系統

閱讀是目前極受關注的議題之一。近來已有許多關於影像顯示終端機中字型、
字型大小與閱讀速度的研究，卻少見紙本印刷字型大小和閱讀間關係的研究。本研
究藉由三種不同大小中文字型（標楷體8、10、12 點字型）評估字型大小對閱讀成
效的影響，並進而探討字型大小、測驗題型與理解層次之關係。本研究包含兩個實
驗，實驗一為完全參與者內設計，以24 名中國醫藥大學修習概念圖課程的學生為實
驗對象。參與者在閱讀三篇不同字型大小、不同文本的文章，以單選題測驗及繪製
概念圖進行評量，以了解字型大小與閱讀速度、正確率及閱讀理解之關係。實驗一
結果發現10 點字型的閱讀速度最快，雖字型大小不影響單選題得分，卻影響概念圖
得分。實驗一不一致的結果可能來自不同難度的閱讀理解測驗，因此實驗二探討字
型大小與閱讀速度、不同難度閱讀理解測驗之關係。採用51 名亞洲大學學生為實驗
參與者，參與者閱讀三篇不同題材不同字型大小的文章，並同時接受三種不同難度
的閱讀理解測驗。實驗二結果發現：十點字型時同樣有最快的閱讀速度，字型大小
不影響三種題型的得分，但在不同理解層次及題型中，參與者的理解測驗得分顯著
不同。綜合以上結果，字型大小會影響閱讀速度，中文標楷體以10 點字型閱讀速度
最快；字型大小是否會影響閱讀理解，受到閱讀理解測驗難度的調控，但仍不能排
除有其他因素(例如動機)的影響。

Reading is one of the most regarded issue presently. Recently, there have been many
studies to discuss the relationship between the font size and reading speed on video
display terminals. However, there is little study to discuss the relationship between the
font size and reading speed in printed Chinese. This study was aimed to evaluate the
effects of printed Chinese in three font size (8pt, 10pt, 12pt) on reading performance and
to understand the relationship among font size, types of reading comprehension test and
comprehension levels. Two experiments were included in this study. In experiment 1, the
complete within-participant design was used and twenty-four participants who were
learning Mind Mapping in China Medical University were recruited. Participants were
asked to read three articles in different font size and content. The reading speed was
measured by the time needed to finish reading. The reading accuracy and comprehension
were determined by multiple choices and drawing a concept map. Results showed that
reading speed was the highest in 10pt font size, but a significant difference was found in
concept mapping test, but no in multiple choice test. The difficulty of reading
comprehension test was suggested to be the modulator of font size effect. Therefore, three
reading comprehension tests (multiple-choice, matching, and concept mapping) with
different difficulty levels were used in experiment 2. Fifty-one Participants from Asia
University were asked to read three texts in different font size and different content,
followed by the comprehension tests. Results also showed that reading speed was the
highest in 10pt. Although reading comprehension scores was significant different from
each other, font size had no effect on them. Taken together, the results clearly showed that
IV
font size affect reading speed. These results also suggested that the effect of font size on
reading comprehension was modulated by the difficulty level of reading comprehension
test, but other variables, such as motivation, were not excluded.

中文摘要 --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- II
英文摘要 --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- III
目錄 --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- V
表目次 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ VII
圖目次 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ IX
第一章 緒論 --------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1
第一節 研究動機 --------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1
第二節 研究目的---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 4
第三節 研究問題 --------------------------------------------------------------------------- 5
第二章 文獻探討 --------------------------------------------------------------------------- 7
第一節 閱讀的力量 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ 7
第二節 影響閱讀成績的因素 ------------------------------------------------------------ 9
第三節 字型大小與閱讀成績的關係 --------------------------------------------------- 14
第四節 閱讀理解的歷程------------------------------------------------------------------- 16
第五節 閱讀理解的評量型式------------------------------------------------------------ 23
第三章 研究方法與結果 ------------------------------------------------------------------ 27
第一節 實驗一 字型大小對閱讀之影響測試---------------------------------------- 27
第二節 實驗二 不同理解層次與理解測驗題型------------------------------------- 43
第四章 研究結果分析與討論 ------------------------------------------------------------ 61
第五章 結論與建議------------------------------------------------------------------------ 67
參考文獻 --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 69
附錄 --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 75

加尼、葉寇魏奇（1998）。教學心理學 學習的認知基礎（岳修平譯）。臺北市：遠流。
安德沃、肖內西（1997）。心理學實驗研究法（洪蘭、曾志朗譯）。臺北市：遠流。
吳明烈（2004）。歐盟終身學習的發展與實踐策略。比較教育，56，137-170。
岡田明（1973）。最近讀書之心理學：日本文化科學社。
林玟慧（1995）。閱讀理解策略教學對國中閱讀障礙學生閱讀效果之研究。特殊教育研究學刊，12，109。
林建平（1997）。學習輔導 理論與實務。台北市：五南。
林寶貴、錡寶香（1999）。中文閱讀理解測驗。台北：教育部特殊教育工作小組。
柏恩茲（2004）。心智.大腦與學習 認識心理及教育相關之神經科學研究（游婷雅譯）。台北市：洪葉文化。
柯華葳（1999）。閱讀理解困難篩選測驗。台北: 行政院國家科學委員會。
柯華葳、詹益綾、張建妤、游婷雅（2008）。台灣四年級學生閱讀素養（PIRLS 2006報告）。中壢市：國立中央大學學習與教學研究所。
張春興（2007）。教育心理學（第二版）。台北市：東華。
莊仲仁（1982）。字距與行距對中文閱讀的影響。中華心理學刊，24（2），121-126。
彭聃齡、張必隱（2000）。認知心理學。台北：東華。
黃瓊儀（1996）。相互教學法對國小高年級學童閱讀理解能力、後設認知能力與閱讀態度之影響。國立嘉義師範學院國民教育研究所碩士論文，未出版。
劉玲吟（1994）。後設認知閱讀策略的教學對國中低閱讀能力學生閱讀效果之研究。國立彰化師範大學特殊教育研究所碩士論文，未出版。
蔡銘津（1995）。文章結構分析策略教學對增進學童閱讀理解與寫作成效之研究。國立高雄師範大學教育學系碩士論文，未出版。
簡佑宏、陳建雄（2005）。動態中文文字呈現方式於小螢幕閱讀之研究。設計學報，10（3），123-138。
魏靜雯（2004）。心智繪圖與摘要教學對國小五年級學生閱讀理解與摘要能力之影響。國立臺灣師範大學教育心理與輔導研究所碩士論文，未出版。
蘇宜芬（2004）。閱讀理解的影響因素及其在教學上的意義。教師天地，129，21-28。
蘇宜芬、林清山（1992）。後設認知訓練課程對國小低閱讀能力學生的閱讀理解能力與後設認知能力之影響。教育心理學報，25，245~267。
Alotaibi, A. Z. (2007). The effect of font size and type on reading performance with Arabic words in normally sighted and simulated cataract subjects. Clinical and Experimental Optometry, 90(3), 203-206. doi: 10.1111/j.1444-0938.2007.00123.x
Belmore, S. M. (1985). Reading computer-presented text. Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society, 23(1), 12-14.
Bergqvist, U., Wolgast, E., Nilsson, B., & Voss, M. (1995). The influence of VDT work on musculoskeletal disorders. Ergonomics, 38(4), 754-762. doi: 10.1080/00140139508925147
Beymer, D., Russell, D., & Orton, P. (2008). An eye tracking study of how font size and type influence online reading.
Dillon, A. (1992). Reading from paper versus screens: a critical review of the empirical literature. Ergonomics, 35(10), 1297 - 1326. doi: 10.1080/00140139208967394
Feely, M., Rubin, G. S., Ekstrom, K., & Perera, S. (2005). Investigation into font characteristics for optimum reading fluency in readers with sight problems. International Congress Series, 1282, 530-533. doi: 10.1016/j.ics.2005.05.121
Garner, R. (1982). Efficient text summarization: Costs and benefits. The Journal of Educational Research, 75(5), 275-279.
Goodman, K. (1976). Reading: A psycholinguistic guessing game. In H. Singer & R. Ruddell (Eds.), Theoretical models and processes of reading (2 ed., pp. 497-508). Newark, Delaware: International Reading Association.
Goodman, K. S. (1967). Reading: A psycholinguistic guessing game. Journal of the Reading Specialist, 6(4), 126 - 135. doi: 10.1080/19388076709556976
Gough, P. B. (2004). One second of reading: Postscript. In R. B. Ruddell & N. J. Unrau (Eds.), Theoretical models and processes of reading (5 ed.). Newark, DE: International Reading Association.
Heppner, F. H., Anderson, J. G. T., Farstrup, A. E., & Weiderman, N. H. (1985). Reading performance on a standardized test is better from print than from computer display. Journal of Reading, 28(4), 321-325.
Just, M. A., & Carpenter, P. A. (1980). A theory of reading: From eye fixations to comprehension. Psychological review, 87(4), 329-354. doi: 10.1037/0033-295X.87.4.329
Kintsch, W. (2005). An Overview of Top-Down and Bottom-Up Effects in Comprehension: The CI Perspective. Discourse Processes, 39(2), 125 - 128. doi: 10.1207/s15326950dp3902&3_2
Kintsch, W., & Keenan, J. (1973). Reading rate and retention as a function of the number of propositions in the base structure of sentences. Cognitive psychology, 5(3), 257-274. doi: 10.1016/0010-0285(73)90036-4
Krischer, C. C., & Meissen, R. (1983). Reading Speed under Real and Simulated Visual Impairment. Journal of Visual Impairment and Blindness, 77(8), 386-388.
Lee, D.-S., Shieh, K.-K., Jeng, S.-C., & Shen, I. H. (2008). Effect of character size and lighting on legibility of electronic papers. Displays, 29(1), 10-17.
Mandler, J. M. (1983). Representation. In J. H. Flavell & E. M. Markman (Eds.), Handbook of child psychology (Vol. 3, pp. 420-494). New York: Wiley.
Mansfield, J. S., Legge, G. E., & Bane, M. C. (1996). Psychophysics of reading. XV: Font effects in normal and low vision. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci, 37(8), 1492-1501.
Matthíasdóttir, Á., & Halldórsdóttir, ó. (2007). Books vs e-material What is the deal? retrieved from http://ecet.ecs.ru.acad.bg/cst07/Docs/cp/sIV/IV.9.pdf
Muter, P., & Maurutto, P. (1991). Reading and skimming from computer screens and books: the paperless office revisited? Behaviour & Information Technology, 10(4), 257-266.
Noyes, J. M., Garland, K.J., & Robbins, L. (2004). Paper-based versus computer-based assessment: is workload another test mode effect? British Journal of Educational Technology, 35(1), 111-113. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-8535.2004.00373.x
Noyes, J. M., & Garland, K. J. (2003). VDT versus paper-based text: reply to Mayes, Sims and Koonce. International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics, 31(6), 411-423. doi: 10.1016/S0169-8141(03)00027-1
Noyes, J. M., & Garland, K. J. (2008). Computer- vs. paper-based tasks: Are they equivalent? [Article]. Ergonomics, 51(9), 1352-1375. doi: 10.1080/00140130802170387
Palinscar, A. S., & Brown, A. L. (1984). Reciprocal Teaching of Comprehension-Fostering and Comprehension-Monitoring Activities. Cognition and instruction, 1(2), 117 - 175. doi: 10.1207/s1532690xci0102_1
Pearson, P., & Johnson, D. (1978). Teaching reading comprehension: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, New York.
Piolat, A., Roussey, J., Thunin, O., PIOLAT, A., ROUSSEY, J.-Y., & THUNIN, O. (1997). Effects of screen presentation on text reading and revising. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 47(4), 565-589.
Resnick, L. B., & Resnick, D. P. (1992). Assessing the thinking curriculum: New tools for educational reform. In B.R. Gifford & M. C. O'Connor (Eds.), Changing assessments: Alternative views of aptitude, achievement, and instruction (pp. 37-75). Boston: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Rumelhart, D. E. (1985). Toward an interactive model of reading. In H. Singer & R. Ruddell (Eds.), Theoretical models and processes of reading (3rd ed.). Newark, Delaware: International Reading Association.
Schmar-Dobler, E. (2003). Reading on the Internet: The Link between Literacy and Technology. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 47(1), 80-86.
Stein, N. L., & Trabasso, T. (1982). What's in a story: An approach to comprehension and instruction. In R. GLASER (Ed.), Advances in instructional psychology (Vol. 2, pp. 271-282). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Sternberg, R. J., & Mio, J. (2008). Cognitive psychology (5th ed.). Belmont, CA Wadsworth Publishing.
Wastlund, E., Reinikka, H., Norlander, T., & Archer, T. (2005). Effects of VDT and paper presentation on consumption and production of information: Psychological and physiological factors. Computers in Human Behavior, 21(2), 377-394. doi: 10.1016/j.chb.2004.02.007
Ziefle, M. (1998). Effects of display resolution on visual performance. Human Factors, 40(4), 554-568.