臺灣博碩士論文加值系統

文本(text)之編排方式，會由於人員閱讀時視覺辨識、生理反應及理解認知特性，而產生不同的績效。本研究從人因工程之角度，對於文本之可讀性(readability)增進做一研究，包括文章段落（paragraph）幾種不同行長及以內容之語意架構為考量之段落呈現方式，對視覺搜尋及一般性閱讀績效之影響做探討。以期在實務上，供文章段落版面設計之參考，能同時適用於視覺搜尋及一般閱讀工作。
從實驗一得知:不同字數行長對於視覺搜尋正確率無顯著差異。而就視覺搜尋速率而言，以32字最佳，22字其次，14字績效最差。所以初步推論：人員均就版面編排是否易於搜尋而調整其搜尋速率，以將搜尋正確率維持於一定水準。另外視覺搜尋適用行長長於一般閱讀情況。在段落呈現方式方面，發現小段落之編排方式相較於大段落，對搜尋績效之影響無顯著差別。所以初步推論：由於視覺搜尋沒有或極少涉及文章內容理解層面，所以反應語意架構為考量之段落呈現方式對搜尋工作而言，較不具有意義。
從實驗二得知:不同字數行長對於閱讀測驗答對率無顯著差異。而就閱讀速率而言，以22字最佳，32字其次，14字績效最差。所以初步推論：人員均就版面編排是否易於閱讀而調整其閱讀速率，以將閱讀理解程度維持於一定水準。在段落呈現方式方面，發現小段落相較於大段落，對閱讀績效之影響無顯著差別。所以初步推論：此種段落呈現方式相較於他種語意分割的版面編排方式而言，對於明顯涉及文章內容理解工作的閱讀而言助益很小，所以對一般性閱讀無明顯作用。

The text layout will result in different performance because of the visual perception, physiological reaction and cognition of human beings while reading. From the ergonomics standpoint, the readability improvement of the paragraph layout, such as effects of the line length and the semantic segmentation arrangement, were investigated in this study. We intend that it will be recommended as guidelines of the paragraph layout design in order to facilitate visual search as well as reading.
The result of experiment one revealed that:(1)No significant differences were found in visual search accuracy when different line lengths were used. We conclude that searching accuracy of the passage does not vary as a function of the layout, indicating that people maintain a constant level of searching accuracy by varying their searching rate. (2)A significant difference was found in searching rate between the use of the line length of 32 characters and 14 characters. We conclude that the optimum line length for visual search is longer than for general reading. (3)Compared with the general section display, one single sentence displayed as a section itself was found no significant differences in visual search performance. No or little comprehension demands during visual search can account for this result.
The result of experiment two indicated that:(1)No significant differences were found in general reading comprehension when different line lengths were used. We conclude that reading comprehension of the passage does not vary as a function of the layout, indicating that people maintain a constant level of reading comprehension by varying their reading rate. (2)A significant difference was found in general reading rate between the use of the line length of 22 characters and 14 characters. (3)Compared with the general section display, one single sentence displayed as a section itself was found no significant differences in general reading performance. Much comprehension demands during general reading can account for this result because of little help of the layout.

中文摘要 I
英文摘要 II
誌謝 IV
目錄 V
表目錄 VIII
圖目錄 IX
第一章 緒論 1
1.1研究背景與動機 1
1.2研究目的 5
1.3研究步驟 7
1.4研究範圍與限制 9
1.4.1研究範圍 9
1.4.2研究限制 9
第二章 文獻探討 10
2.1可讀性 10
2.2視覺作業歷程 11
2.2.1字彙辨識 11
2.2.2閱讀 13
2.2.3視覺搜尋及其與閱讀之比較 17
2.3影響版面呈現之變項 20
2.3.1空間運用 21
2.3.2行長 23
2.3.3語意分割 27
2.4小結 31
第三章 研究實驗 35
3.1實驗一：文章段落之目標搜尋績效測試35
3.1.1實驗目的 35
3.1.2實驗材料 35
3.1.3受試者 36
3.1.4實驗控制變項 36
3.1.5實驗因變項 37
3.1.6實驗自變項 37
3.1.7實驗設計 38
3.1.8實驗程序 39
3.1.9分析方法 40
3.2實驗二:文章段落之閱讀績效測試 41
3.2.1實驗目的 41
3.2.2實驗材料 41
3.2.3受試者 44
3.2.4實驗因變項 44
3.2.5實驗自變項 45
3.2.6實驗設計 45
3.2.7實驗程序 46
3.2.8分析方法 47
第四章 實驗結果與討論 49
4.1實驗一：文章段落之目標搜尋績效測試結果49
4.1.1行長對視覺搜尋績效之影響 49
4.1.2段落大小對視覺搜尋績效之影響 52
4.1.3行長與段落大小之交互作用 54
4.2實驗二：文章段落之閱讀績效測試結果55
4.2.1行長對閱讀績效之影響 57
4.2.2段落大小對一般性閱讀績效之影響 59
4.2.3行長與段落大小之交互作用 60
第五章 結論與建議 62
5.1結論 62
5.2建議事項 63
參考文獻 66
附錄一 版面（一） 74
附錄二 版面（二） 75
附錄三 版面（三） 76
附錄四 版面（四） 77
附錄五 版面（五） 78
附錄六 版面（六） 79
附錄七 不同行長相對應搜尋速率之Tukey事後比較80
附錄八 不同行長相對應閱讀速率之Tukey事後比較81

1.王明嘉(1997)，「字的解析」，設計，74，p34-58。
2.李杉峰(1989)，傳達企業情報的圖文構成，台北，藝風堂，p162。
3.林川(1993)，漢字的書寫--閱讀排列方式分析，陝西印刷研究所，p1-20。
4.林清山(1981)，教育心理學--認知取向，台北，遠流，p290-300。
5.柳閩生（1986），「讀你千遍也不厭倦：版面設計與閱讀意願探討」，世新學報,2,p207-215
6.柳閩生（1987），版面設計，台北，幼獅文化事業，p56-58。
7.徐佳士(1973)，「中文報紙版面改革之研究」，新聞學研究，12，p17-66。
8.宮崎紀郎、玉垣庸一、伊藤成男(1992)，新聞本文用字對閱讀之影響，日本視覺傳達設計學會研究，65，p21-28。
9.陳俊宏、黃雅卿(1995)，「中文明體字寬高比及編排方式之易讀性和意象研究」，Journal of Science and Technology, 6(4), p379-395.
10.莊仲仁(1982)， 中國語文的心理學研究， p219-226， 台北，文鶴。
11.許勝雄(1995)，影響文字理解度的語意變項探討，國科會專題研究計畫成果報告，台北，台灣。
12.許勝雄(1996)，以詞代字為中文文章呈現單位（一）：閱讀效率測試，國科會專題研究計畫成果報告，p17-18。
13.曾志朗、洪蘭（1978），「閱讀中文字：一些基本的實驗研究」，中華心理學刊，20，p45-49。
14.劉英茂、葉重新、王聯慧、張迎桂(1974)，「詞單位對閱讀效率的影響」，中華心理學刊，16，p25-32。
15.魏朝宏(1990)，文字造型，台北，眾文，p1。
16.Arnold, E.C.(1969),Modern newspaper design, New York: Harper & Row.
17.Balota, D.A. & J.I. Chumbley(1985),"The locus of word-frequency effects in the pronunciation task: Lexical access and/or production? ",Journal of Memory and Language, 24, p89-106.
18.Baron, J.(1978),The word-superiority effect:Perceptual leraning from reading. In W.K.Estes(Ed.),Handbook of learning and cognitive process, 6, Hillsdale,N.J.,Hawrence Erlbaum Associates.
19.Bever, T.G., S. Jandrean, R. Burwell, R. Kaplan & A. Zaenen (1990),"Spacing Printed Text to Isolate Major Phrases Improves Readability",Visible Language,25(1),p74-87.
20.Bourne, C. P.(1962),"The world''s technical journal literature: an estimate of volume,origin,language,field, indexing and abstracting", American Documentation, 13, p159-168.
21.Boyton, R.M.(1960),"In Visual search techniques", Washington, D.C.: National Academy of Science-NCR Publication,712,p231-239.
22.Burnhill P.(1970),"Typographic education: headings in text",Journal of Typographic Research, 4,p353-365.
23.Buswell, G.T.(1992), Fundamental reading habits: A study of their development, Chicago, Chicago University press.
24.Chapanis, A.(1965),"Words,Words,Words", Human Factors, 7,p1-17.
25.Duchnicky, R.L. & P.A. Kolers(1983),"Readability of text scrolled on visual display terminals as a function of window size.", Human Factors, 25(6), p683-692.
26.Fisher, D.F.(1975),"Reading and Visual Search",Memory & Cognition, 3, p197-209
27.Fisher, D.F.(1976),Spatial factors in reading and research: the case for space in: R.A. Monty & J.W. Sanders (Eds.), Eye-movements and Psychological Process, Hillsdale, N.J., Hawrence Erlbaum Associates.
28.Foster, J.J.(1970),"A study of the legibility of one and two-column layouts for BPS publication",Bulletin of the British Psychological Society, 23,p113-114.
29.Frase, L.T. & B.J. Schwartz(1979),"Typographical Cues That Facilitate Comprehension",Journal of Educational Psychology,71(2),p197-206.
30.Goodman, K.S.(1970), Reading: A psycholinguistics guessing game, in H. Singer & R.B. Ruddell, R.B.(eds.), Theoretical models and processes of reading, Newark, DE: International Reading Association.
31.Haber, R.(1978),"Visual perception",Annual Review of Psychology, 29, p31-59.
32.Haber, R.N. & L.R. Haber(1981),"Visual components of the reading process",Visible Language, xv2,p147-182.
33.Hartley, J.(1978),Design Instructional Text ,London:Kogan Page New York:Nichols Publishing Co.
34.Hartley, J. & P. Burnhill(1971),"Experiments with unjustified text", Visible Language,5(3),p265-278.
35.Hochberg J. & Brooks V.(1970), Reading as an international behavior, In Singer H. & R. Ruddell(Eds.), Newark: International Reading Association, p304-314.
36.Huey, E.B.(1908),The psychology and pedagogy of reading, New York: Macmillan, Republished: Cambridge, MA,MIT Press.
37.Johnston, J.C.(1981),Understanding word perception: Clues from studying the word-superiority effect, In Tzeng O.J.L. & H. Singer (Eds.), Perception of print: Reading research in experimental psychology,p65-84.
38.Klare, G.R.(1963), The measurement of readability, Iowa State University Press, p65.
39.McNamara, W.G., D.G. Patterson & M.A. Tinker (1953),"The influence of size of type on speed of reading in the elementary grades",The Sight Saver Review, 23,p28-33.
40.Monsell, S.,M.C. Doyle & P.N. Haggard (1989),"Effects of frequency on visual word recognition tasks: Where are they? ",Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 118,p43-71.
41.Morton J. & S. Sasanuma (1984), Lexical access in Japanese, In L. Henderson (Eds.), Orthographies and reading, London: Erlbaum.
42.Paterson, D.G. & M.A. Tinker(1940),How to make type readable, New York: Harper.
43.Poulton, E.C.(1959),"Effect of printing types and formats on the comprehension of scientific journals",Cambridge: MRC Applied Psychology Research Unit Report ,36,p21-30.
44.Rayner, K. & A. Pollatsek (1989),The Psychology of Reading, ch5,Prentice Hall.
45.Rogers & D. Fisk(1995),"Contextual Effects on General Learning 、Feature Learning and Attention Strengthening in Visual Search", Human Factor, 37(1),p158-172.
46.Saarinen , J.（1997）,"The speed of visual search in the absence of sensory effects",Perception,26,p85-91.
47.Sanders, M.S. & E.J. McCormick(1992),Human Factors in Engineering and Design, McGraw-Hill,p102.
48.Schindler, R. M. (1978),"The effect of prose context on visual search for letters",Memory &Cognition,6(2),p124-130.
49.Senders, J.W.(1963),"Information storage requirements for the contents of the world''s libraries.", Science, 141,p1067-1068.
50.Shiffrin, R.M. & M.P. Czerwinski (1988),"A model of automatic attention attraction When mapping is partially consistent",Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning Memory and Cognition,14,p562-569.
51.Spragins, A., C. Lefton & D.F. Fisher(1976),"Eye movement while reading and searching spatially transformed text",A development examination, 4(1),p36-42.
52.Taylor, S.E.(1965),"Eye movements while reading: facts and fallacies", American Educational Research Journal,2,p187-202.
53.Tinker, M.A.(1955),"Perceptual and oculomotor efficiency in reading material in vertical and horizontal arrangements",American Journal of Psychology,68,p444-449.
54.Tinker, M.A.(1963),Legibility of Print,Iowa State University Press.
55.Verghese, P. & K. Nakayama(1994),"Stimulus discriminability in visual search",Vision Research,34,p2453-2467.
56.West, S.(1987),Design for Desktop Publishing, In the Waite Group (J.Stockford, Eds.), Desktop Publishing Bible,Indianapolis, IN: Howard W. Sams.