臺灣博碩士論文加值系統

隨著電子科技的進步以及軟體系統的越趨複雜，越來越多的作業必須透過人與電腦之間的互動來完成，其中發展迅速且應用廣泛，並以顧客的需求為導向的複雜功能消費性電子產品更是與人類息息相關。故本篇論文選擇行動電話此一產品當作研究的重心。面對這樣一個複雜功能產品，一般使用者(casual users)在尚未充分瞭解產品功能前，往往無法充分利用其內所包含的強大功能。
為了克服使用者與複雜功能消費性產品之間的障礙，本研究從使用者介面設計著手進行使用度的評估標準，使其能夠在設計階段即能針對使用度加以考量而減少變更的次數。實驗結果顯示對一初學者而言，在使用行動電話時，螢幕搜尋輔助提供選單結構性資訊，可以降低學習時間，幫助初學者建立適當的心智模式，若能使用符合相容性之按鍵配置，不但可降低心智負荷，更可增加搜尋選單的效率。此外，對一熟練使用者而言，利用NGOMSL分析因功能選單架構上的差異造成執行時間、心智負荷的不同，進而決定合適的選單架構。
從理論的角度來看，本研究說明了文字或符號標示所隱含之概念相容性及空間相容性之差異。若按鍵在符號標示上有一定規律的方向性，也就是十字配置中之對稱性或平行配置中之封閉性，則使用者可將整組按鍵以一個串集(chunk)加以記憶，因此，降低分辨按鍵空間方向上所帶來的心智負荷。

As microprocessor-based technology becomes more popular and cheaper, electronic consumer products now generally integrate various and complex functions. For this type of products, however, usability has long been a notorious problem.
This study investigated the usability issues based on cell phones, focusing on menu navigation aids, menu structures, and function keys arrangements design. Research results show that for casual-users, menu navigation aids increase learning efficiency and ease the process of building mental models. Operating efficiency and mental workload for experienced users, on the other hand, are affected by different menu structures and can be predicted using NGOMSL models. In terms of function keys arrangements, using layout (parallel and cross) and coding (symbol and text) as two orthogonal dimensions, thirty-two treatments were examined and best combinations were suggested and discussed based on compatibility theories.
Form theoretical perspective, the results show the performance differences between textual and symbolic labeling involve concept and spatial compatibility for function keys arrangements design. When closure or symmetric patterns shown in a set of function keys, the patterns may be memorized as a whole, or, a chunk, thus the mental workload associated with recognizing the keys can be reduced.

中文摘要 II
英文摘要 III
目錄 IV
圖目錄 VIII
表目錄 X
第一章 緒論 1
第二章 研究背景及架構 3
2.1 產品功能密度分析 5
2.2 產品需求分析 7
2.2.1 品質機能展開 8
2.2.2 行動電話之需求分析 10
2.3 研究範疇 13
2.4 研究架構 13
2.5 研究重要性 15
第三章 行動電話功能鍵配置設計 17
3.1 文獻回顧與基本原理 17
3.1.1 相容性的探討 18
3.1.1.1 群體定型反應 18
3.1.2 相容性的類型 19
3.1.2.1 移動相容性 19
3.1.2.2 空間相容性 21
3.1.2.3 概念相容性 21
3.1.2.4 感覺型式相容性 22
3.1.3 行動電話功能鍵配置中之相容性 23
3.2 研究方法 25
3.2.1 介面設計與控制 25
3.2.2 研究範疇 28
3.2.3 假設建立 29
3.2.4 實驗一：無任何標示說明 31
3.2.4.1 獨立變數與相依變數 31
3.2.4.2 實驗配置 32
3.2.4.3 受測者 33
3.2.4.4 實驗設備 33
3.2.4.5 實驗程序與資料蒐集 33
3.2.5 實驗二：按鍵上為文字說明標示 34
3.2.5.1 獨立變數與相依變數 34
3.2.5.2 實驗配置 35
3.2.5.3 受測者 35
3.2.5.4 實驗設備 36
3.2.5.5 實驗程序 36
3.2.5.6 資料蒐集與問卷 36
3.2.6 實驗三：按鍵上為符號說明標示 36
3.2.6.1 獨立變數與相依變數 37
3.3 實驗結果與分析 37
3.3.1 實驗一：ANOVA分析 37
3.3.2 實驗一：對比分析 43
3.3.3 實驗二：ANOVA分析 44
3.3.4 實驗二：對比分析 46
3.3.5 實驗三：ANOVA分析 48
3.3.6 實驗三：對比分析 51
3.3.7 綜合分析 52
第四章 行動電話顯示螢幕輔助設計 55
4.1 文獻回顧與基本原理 56
4.1.1 心智模式 56
4.1.1.1 心智模式對介面設計的影響 57
4.1.2 視覺動量在螢幕輔助之應用 58
4.2 研究方法 60
4.2.1 視窗輔助介面設計 60
4.2.1.1 清單結構輔助 61
4.2.1.2 樹狀結構輔助 62
4.2.1.3 數字輔助 62
4.2.2 假設建立 63
4.2.3 實驗設計 64
4.2.3.1 獨立變數與相依變數 64
4.2.3.2 實驗配置 65
4.2.3.3 受測者與實驗設備 66
4.2.3.4 實驗程序 66
4.2.3.5 資料蒐集 66
4.3 實驗結果與分析 66
4.3.1.1 實驗按鍵次數之分析 67
4.4 綜合分析與檢討 75
第五章 行動電話選單結構比較 77
5.1 文獻回顧與基本原理 77
5.1.1 作業分析 78
5.1.2 GOMS與NGOMSL 79
5.1.3 GOMS與NGOMSL之優缺點和限制 86
5.2 NGOMSL分析軟體 87
5.2.1.1 介面設計與操作系統的方式 87
5.3 研究方法 91
5.3.1 假設建立 91
5.3.2 實驗設計 91
5.3.2.1 獨立變數與相依變數： 92
5.3.2.2 實驗配置 93
5.3.2.3 受測者與實驗設備 93
5.3.2.4 實驗程序 94
5.3.2.5 資料蒐集 94
5.4 實驗結果與分析 94
5.5 NGOMSL 驗證 97
第六章 結果與討論 103
6.1 研究結果論述 103
6.2 研究限制 104
6.3 未來研究方向 106
參考文獻 108
附錄 A 行動電話意見調查問卷及頻率分析結果 116
附錄 B 行動電話功能鍵配置設計實驗後問卷 123
附錄 C 行動電話螢幕輔助實驗題組 124
附錄 D 行動電話功能鍵配置設計實驗分析資料 125
附錄 E 行動電話顯示螢幕輔助實驗分析資料 131
附錄 F 行動電話選單結構設計實驗分析資料 134
附錄 G NGOMSL分析 136

Annet J., Duncan K. D., Stammers R., & Gery M. J. (1971). Task analysis. Department of Employment Training, information paper 6. London: HMSO.
Barnard, P., Hammond, N., Hinton, G., MacLean, A., Long, J., & Whitefield, A. (1981). Evaluating the interface of a document processor: a comparison of expert judgement and user observation. In Human-Computer Interaction - Interact ''84, Proceedings of the IFIP Conference. (pp. 725-729). New York: Human-Computer Interaction:
Bayuer, m. I. & John, B. E. (1995). Modeling time-constrained learning in a highly interactive task. In Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI) - Conference Proceedings Proceedings of the Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. Part 1 (of 2) May 7-11 1995 v1 1995 Denver,(pp. 19-26). New York : ACM.
Bradley, J. V. (1954). Desirable control-display relationships for moving-scale instrument (Tech. Rept. 54-423).. Dayton, OH: U. S. Air Force, Wright Air Development Center.
Brebner, J., & Sandow, B. (1976). The effect of scale side on population stereotype. Ergonomics, 19, 571-580.
Buurman, R. D. (1997). User-centered design of smart product. Ergonomics, 40, 1159-1169.
Card, S. K., Moran T. P., & Newell, A. (1983). The psychology of human-computer interaction. Hillsdale NJ: Erlbaum.
Carswell, C. M., & Wickens, C. D. (1988). Comparative graphics: History and applications of perceptual integrality theory and the proximity compatibility hypothesis. University of Illinois Technical Report (ARL-88-2-2/AHEL-88-1; AHEL Technical Memorandum 8-88). Savory, IL: Aviation Research Laboratory.
Cellier, J. -M., Eyrolle, H. & Marine, C. (1997). Expertise in dynamic environments. Ergonomics, 40(1), 28-50.
Chapanis, A., & Linderbaum, L. E. (1959). A reaction time study of four control-display linkages. Human Factors, 1(4), 1-7.
Chapnis, A., & Kinkade R. G. (1972). Design of control. In H. P. Van Cott and R. G. Kinkade (Eds.), Human engineering guide to equipment design. Washington, DC: Government Printing Office.
Chi, C. F., & Chung, K. L. (1996). Task analysis for computer-aided design (CAD) at a keystroke level. Applied Ergonomics, 27, 255-265.
Cohen, L. (1995). Quality Function Development: How to Make QFD Work for You. New York: Addison-wesley.
De Vet, J. H. M. (1993). User-interface specification guidelines for consumer products. In IPO Annual Process Report vol 28. (pp. 151-159). Institute for Perception Research: Eindhoven, The Netherlands.
Deweaulf, L. G., Lewis, C. M., Debon, A., Stein, K. L., & Dewoif A. M. (1990). An integrative display for patient monitoring. In Proceeding of Human Factors Society 34th Annual Meeting (pp. 514-517). Santa Monica, CA: Human Factors Society.
Eastman, M. S., Wood, D. D., & Elm, W. C. (1986). Specifying and communicating data structure in computer-based graphic displays. In Proceedings of Human Factors Society 30th Annual Meeting (pp. 514-517). Santa Monica, CA: Human Factors Society.
Elkerton, J., & Palmiter, S. L. (1991). Designing help using a GOMS model: An information retrieval evaluation. Human Factors, 33, 185-204.
Ells, J. G., & Dewar, R. E. (1979). Rapid comprehension of verbal and symbolic traffic sign messages. Human Factors, 21, 161-168.
Esterby, R. S. (1970). The perception of symbols for machine displays. Ergonomics, 13, 149-158.
Fitts, P. M. and Seeger, C. M. (1953). S-R compatibility: Spatial characteristics of stimulus and response codes. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 46 199-210.
Gentner, D. & Stevens, A. (1983). Mental Models. NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Gould, J. H., & Lewis, C. (1985). Designing for usability: key principle and what designers think. Communications of the ACM, 28, 300-311.
Grandjean, E. (1988). Fitting the task to the man. London: Taylor & Francis.
Hayes, J. R. (1978). Cognitive psychology. Homewood, IL: Dorsey.
Hochberg, J., & Brooks, V. (1978). Film cutting and visual momentum. In J. W. Senders, D. F.(Eds.), Eye movements and the higher psychological functions. Erlbaum: Hillsdale, NJ.
Holding, D. H. (1957). Direction of motion relationships between controls and displays in different planes. Journal of Applied Psychology, 41, 93-97.
ISO (1995), ISO DIS 9241-11 Ergonomic requirements for office work with visual display terminals (VDT)s － Part 11. Guidance on usability (Draft International Standard) (ISO, Geneva).
John, B. E., & Newell, A. (1990). Toward an engineering model of stimulus-response compatibility. In R. W. Proctor and T. G. Keeve (Eds.), Stimuli-Response compatibility: An Integrated perspective (pp. 427-279). Amsterdam, Netherlands: North-Holland.
John, H., & Clausing, D. (1988). The House of quality. Harvard business Review, 66, 63-73.
Johnson, G. I., & Vianen, E. P. G. (1992). Comparative evaluation of basic car radio controls. In E. Lovesey (Ed.), Contemporary Ergonomics (pp. 456-462). London: Taylor and Francis.
Johnson, G. I., & Westwater, M. G. (1996). Usability and self-service information technology: cognitive engineering in product design and evaluation. AT&T Technical Journal, 75(1), 64-73.
Johnson, P. (1992). Human-computer interaction: Psychology, task analysis and software engineering. Maidenhead: McGraw-Hill.
Jordan, P. W., Thomas, B., Weerdmeester, B. A., & McClelland I. L. (1996). Usability Evaluation in Industry. London: Taylor and Francis.
Kieras, D. E. (1988). Towards a practical GOMS model methodology for user interface design. In Handbook of Human-Computer Interaction (pp. 67-85). Amsterdam: Elsevier.
Kieras, D. E., & Polson, P. (1985). An approach to the formal analysis of user complexity. International Journal of Man-Machine Studies, 22, 365-394.
Koubek, R. J. and Salvendy, G. (1991). Cognitive performance of super-expert on computer program modification tasks. Ergonomics, 34, 1095-1112.
Kuuluvainen, I., Koivisto, K., Kaunisto, R., Black, A., & Bayley, O. (1995). Putting usability into television. In Digest of Technical Papers - IEEE International Conference on Consumer Electronics Proceedings of the 1995 IEEE International Conference on Consumer Electronics (pp. 318-319). Rosemont, IL: IEEE.
Landauer, T. (1995). The Trouble with Computers. MIT Press, MA.
Lewis, J. (1986). Power switches: some user expectations and preferences. In Proceedings of the Human Factors Society 30th Annual Meeting (pp. 859-899). Santa Monica, CA: Human Factors Society.
Marinissen, A. H. (1993). Information on product use in the design process. In ergonomics in a Changing World, proceedings of 29th annual Conference of the Ergonomics Society of Australia Perth, Australia 1-3 December (pp. 78-85). Canberra: Ergonomics Society of Australia.
Meyer, B., & Catrambone R. (1996). Application of cognitive measures and models in predicting point-of-sale terminal performance. In Proceedings of the Human factors and Ergonomics Society 40th annual Meeting (pp. 1041-1045). USA: Human factors and Ergonomics Society.
Miller, G. A (1956). The magical number seven plus or minus two: some limits on our capacity for processing information . Psychological Review, 63, 81-97.
Mitta, D. A., Delk, C. M., & Lively, M. W. (1995). Selecting system functionality for interface evaluation. Human Factor, 37, 817-843.
Moran, T. P. (1981). The command language grammar: a representation for the user interface of interactive computer systems. International Journal of man-Machine Studies, 15, 3-50.
Morin, R. E., & Grant, D. A. (1955). Learning and performance on a key-pressing task as a function of the degree of spatial-response correspondence. Journal of Experimental psychology, 49, 29-47.
Navon, D., and Gopher, D. (1979). On the economy of the human processing system. Psychological Review, 86, 214-253.
Norman, D. A. (1992). Turn Signals are the Facial Expressions of Automobiles. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley
Norman, D. A. (1993). Things That Make Us Smart. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley
Payne, S. J., & Green, T. R. G. (1986). Task-action grammars: a model of the mental representation of task language. Human-Computer Interaction, 2, 93-133.
Peece, J., Rogers, Y., Sharp, H., Benyon, D., Holland, S. & Carey, T. (1994). Human-Computer Interaction.New York: Addison-Wesley
Petropoulos, H., & Brebner, J. (1981). Stereotypes for direction-of-movement of rotary controls associated with linear displays: The effect of scale presence and position, of pointer direction. Ergonomics, 24, 143-151.
Pressman, R.S. (1992). Software Engineering: A Practitioner''s Approach. McGraw-Hill, New York.
Proctor, R. W., & Zandt, A. V. (1994). Human Factors in Simple and complex system. chapter13. Boston. USA: Allyn and Bacon.
Ray, R. D., & Ray, W. D. (1979). An analysis of domestic cooker control design. Ergonomics, 22, 1243-1248.
Roozenburg, N. F. M., & Eekels, J. (1995). Product Design: Fundamentals and methods. Chichester: Wiley.
Sakata, M., Kondo, K., Sakai, S., Kimura, S., Tatsumi, Y., & Fujie, K. (1995). An approach from cognitive science and semiotics for evaluating and designing user interface of audio-visual products. In Digest of Technical Papers - IEEE International Conference on Consumer Electronics Proceedings of the 1995 IEEE International Conference on Consumer Electronics (pp. 316-317). Rosemont, IL: IEEE.
Sanders, E. B. N. (1993). Product development for 1990s. In Proceedings of the Human factors and Ergonomics Society 37th annual Meeting (pp. 422-426). Santa Monica: Human factors and Ergonomics Society.
Sanders, M. S., & McCormick, E. J. (1993). Human Factors in Engineer and Design. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Shinar, D., & Acton, M. B. (1978). Control-display relationships on the four-burner range: Population stereotype versus standards. Human Factors, 20(1), 13-17.
Spragg S. D. S., Finck A., & Smith S. (1959). Performance on a two-dimensional following tracking task with miniature stick control, as a function of control-display movement relationship. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 48, 247-254.
Stammers, R. B. & Shepherd, A. (1995). Task Analysis. In J. Wilson and N. Corlett (Eds). Evaluation of Human Work, (pp. 144-168). London: taylor and Francis.
Standish, Group (1995). Reported in Forbes
Stanton, N., & Young, M. (1998). Is utility in the mind of the beholder? A study of ergonomics methods. Applied Ergonomics, 29, 41-54.
Sun, Microsystems (1999). http://www.sun.com/usability/
Tang, K.-H., Koubek, R. J., Lightner, N. J., & Salvendy, G. (1999). Development and validation of a theoretical model for cognitive skills acquisition. International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics, 24,25-38.
Treu, S. (1994). User Interface Design: A Structured Approach. New York: Plenum Press.
Vicente, K. J., & Williges, R. C. (1987). Accommodating and isolating individual difference in searching a hierarchical file system. Human Factors, 29, 349-359.
Vorst, L. M. T., Kanis, H., & Marinissen A. H. (1992). User involved design of a remote control. In H. Bouma and J. A. M. Graafmans (Eds.) Gerontechnology (pp. 343-348). Amsterdam: ISO Press.
Warrick, M. J. (1947). Direction of movement in the use of control knobs to position visual indicators. In P. M. Fitts (Ed), Psychological research on equipment design (Research Rept. 19) Columbus, OH: Army Air Force, Aviation Psychology Program.
Wickens, C. D. (1984). Processing resources in attention. In R. Parasurman and D. R. Davies(Eds.), Varieties of Attention, 63-102, Orlando, FL: Academic.
Wickens, C. D. (1992). Engineering Psychology and Human Performance, 2nd ed. New York, NY: Harper Collins.
Wiklund, M. E. (1994). Usability in Practice: How Companies Develop User-Friendly Products. Cambridge, MA: Academic Press.
Winner, R. I.. Pennell, J. P., Bertrand, H. E. & Slusarczuk, M. M. G. (1988). The role of concurrent engineering in weapons system acquisition. Virginia, Alexandria: IDA Report R-338, Institute for Defense
Wood, D. D., Roth, E. M., & Stubler, E. F. (1990). Navigating through large display networks in dynamic control applications. In Proceedings of the 34th Annual Meeting of the Human Factors society (pp. 396-399). Santa Monica: Human Factors society.
Worringham, C., & Beringer, D. (1989). Operator orientation and compatibility in visual-motor task performance. Ergonomics, 32, 387-400.
Wright, P., & Lickorish, A. (1994). Menus and memory load: navigation strategies in interactive search task. Internal Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 40, 965-1008.