跳到主要內容

臺灣博碩士論文加值系統

(44.200.77.92) 您好!臺灣時間:2024/02/24 13:57
字體大小: 字級放大   字級縮小   預設字形  
回查詢結果 :::

詳目顯示

: 
twitterline
研究生:曹文力
研究生(外文):Wen-Li Tsao
論文名稱:在遊戲情境中以沉浸經驗探討玩興對創造力的影響
論文名稱(外文):A Theoretical Model Based on the Flow Experience to Explore the Influence of Playfulness on Creativity in Playing Situation
指導教授:孫春在孫春在引用關係
指導教授(外文):Chuen-Tsai Sun
學位類別:碩士
校院名稱:國立交通大學
系所名稱:理學院碩士在職專班網路學習學程
學門:電算機學門
學類:網路學類
論文種類:學術論文
畢業學年度:94
語文別:中文
論文頁數:154
中文關鍵詞:創造力遊戲情境玩興沉浸經驗
外文關鍵詞:CreativityPlaying SituationPlayfulnessFlow experience
相關次數:
  • 被引用被引用:90
  • 點閱點閱:2833
  • 評分評分:
  • 下載下載:533
  • 收藏至我的研究室書目清單書目收藏:22
創造力的表現是受個體因素及其環境交互作用之影響,當不同的個體處在相同環境中會有不同的創造力表現。也因此過去多數有關人機互動的研究,都以個體差異來探討不同的個體在經歷遊戲情境後產生創造力的差異。然而在人機互動(遊戲)當中,個體會產生不同程度的沉浸經驗,本研究欲進一步探討個體的玩興是否透過在經歷遊戲情境後所引發的沉浸而影響到其創造力的表現,本研究認為沉浸度越高,對個體在創造力的表現越有正面的影響。

本研究是以沉浸經驗去探討從個體角度切入的創造力研究,將個體玩興視為內在動機的特質,遊戲情境視為外在動機的條件,去探討在人機互動中不同玩興特徵的個體經歷遊戲的沉浸經驗差異,以及在經歷遊戲後透過沉浸經驗對其創造力表現的影響。因此,推測個體有創意的表現,其共同點為受個體玩興所引發的沉浸經驗所影響。沉浸經驗(以中介變項操弄)是否就是連接玩興(以自變項操弄)與創造力(以依變項操弄)兩變項之間的關鍵因子呢?這是本研究想要探討的目的。

本研究採實驗相關研究法,研究樣本為四年級學童 (N=330),以問題解決的單機電腦遊戲∼「機械反斗城」為情境。所有學童都經歷包含6個關卡的問題解決遊戲情境,以了解不同玩興的學童,在經歷6個不同挑戰度的問題解決遊戲情境時其沉浸過程(沉浸路徑),以及經歷遊戲情境後的沉浸狀態,並進而瞭解學童創造力表現的程度,也就是本研究欲探討不同玩興的學童,透過在經歷遊戲情境之後產生的沉浸經驗,其創造力的表現差異。

在經歷遊戲前,以「玩興感受量表」來定義學童的玩興特徵。在經歷遊戲中,施以「活動期間的挑戰-技能探測」,以測量出學童經歷遊戲的沉浸過程(沉浸路徑)。在經歷遊戲後,先施以「活動之後的沉浸經驗調查」,以測量出學童經歷遊戲後的沉浸狀態;接著再以「問題情境科技創造力測驗」做為學童經歷遊戲情境歷程(發現問題、解決問題歷程及結果)之後的創造力評量。

根據實驗結果分析發現:
一、個體的玩興對於在遊戲情境中所產生之沉浸狀態有正向的影響。
二、個體在遊戲情境中所產生的沉浸狀態對於創造力有正向的影響。
三、個體玩興對對創造力表現的影響中,沉浸狀態是扮演「中介變項」的關鍵因子。
四、玩興構面對於個體的沉浸狀態有不同的顯著差異,亦即玩興構面對沉浸狀態有不同的影響力「動機與自主(β = .224**) > 幽默與歡樂(β = .043) > 冒險與熱情(β = .000)」。
五、沉浸狀態構面對個體的創造力有不同的顯著差異,亦即沉浸狀態構面對創造力有不同的影響力「專注(β = .272***) > 樂趣(β = -.073) > 控制(β = .017)」。
六、個體具有不同的沉浸路徑會有不同的創造力表現,亦即創造力的表現會受到沉浸過程的影響(沉浸型 > 無聊型 > 憂慮型)。
七、沉浸過程對沉浸狀態有正向的影響。
八、個體的玩興、沉浸狀態能有效預測其創造力,亦即創造力是受到玩興透過沉浸狀態的影響。
The behavior of creativity is affected by the interaction of individual factor and its environment. Different creativity behaviors are generated when different individuals are in the same environment. However, most of the researches also focus on the individual difference to probe into the differences on creativity generated by individuals after experiencing play situation. The effect of playfulness on creativity is further discussed in this research. We want to understand if the individual flow experience generated in Human-Computer Interaction (HCI) can give rise to further positive effect.

This creativity research focuses on flow experience and discusses it through individual point of view. We take individual playfulness as the characteristic of internal motive and play situation as condition of external motive to probe the differences of flow experience that individuals with different playfulness characteristics experience from play situation. We also discuss the effect of creativity behavior from flow experience after individual experiencing play situation. Therefore, we presume individuals do have creativity behavior. But is the common point affected by the flow experience generated by individual playfulness? Is flow experience (manipulated as intervening variable) the key factor connecting the two variables of playfulness (manipulated as independent variable) and creativity (manipulated as dependent variable)? These are the purposes this research tries to study.

An experimental and correlational research method is used in this research. The research sample are fourth students (N=330). A play named “Machine-Rus” is used as situation. All the students have experienced problem solving play situations including six levels. This helps us to understand the flow process (flow path) for students with different playfulness in experiencing six different levels of problem solving play situations and the flow state after experiencing the play situations to further understand the degree of students’ creativity behaviors. Namely, this research tries to understand the differences of creativity behaviors from students with different playfulness through the flow experience generated after experiencing play situations.

Before experiencing the play situation, “Perception playfulness scale” is used to define the playfulness characteristics of students. To measure the flow process (flow path) students experienced during play situation, “challenge – skill probing” is applied in activity duration. After experiencing the play situation, “flow experience investigation after activity” is applied first to measure the students’ flow state after experiencing the play situation. Then, “question situation technology creativity test” is used to evaluate students’ creativity after the process of experiencing play situation (the process and result of discovering and solving question).

We discover the followings according to experiment result analyses:
1. The individual playfulness creates positive effect to the flow state generated in play situation.
2. The flow state generated by individual in play situation creates positive effect to creativity.
3. Flow state plays the key factor of “intervening variable” in the effect of individual playfulness to creativity behavior.
4. Playfulness facet can generate distinct notable differences to individual flow state (Adventure and Enthusiasm > Humor and Joyous > Motive and Autonomy).
5. Flow state facet can generate distinct notable differences to individual creativity (Attention > Enjoyment > Control).
6. Different creativity behaviors indicate different flow paths. In other words, the creativity behaviors are affected by flow processes (Flow type > Boredom type > Anxiety type).
7. Flow process creates positive effect to flow state.
8. Individual playfulness and flow state can effectively predict one’s creativity. That is to say, creativity behavior is affected by playfulness through flow state.
中文摘要-----------------------------------------------I
誌謝---------------------------------------------------V
目錄--------------------------------------------------VI
表目錄----------------------------------------------VIII
圖目錄------------------------------------------------XI
第一章 緒論-------------------------------------------1
1.1 研究動機------------------------------------------1
1.2 研究目的------------------------------------------3
1.3 研究假說------------------------------------------4
1.4 重要名詞定義--------------------------------------4
1.5 研究範圍與限制------------------------------------5
第二章 文獻探討---------------------------------------6
2.1 創造力---------------------------------------------6
2.2 遊戲情境------------------------------------------15
2.3 玩興----------------------------------------------22
2.4 沉浸經驗------------------------------------------32
2.5 連接玩興與創造力兩變項之間的關鍵-沉浸經驗--------39
2.6 本研究之定位--------------------------------------40
第三章 研究方法--------------------------------------41
3.1 研究模型------------------------------------------41
3.2 衡量構面與變項操作型定義--------------------------42
3.3 研究對象------------------------------------------50
3.4 研究工具------------------------------------------51
3.5 實驗流程------------------------------------------58
3.6 問卷設計與實施方式--------------------------------60
第四章 資料分析--------------------------------------61
4.1 因素分析及信度分析--------------------------------61
4.2 基本資料分析--------------------------------------69
4.3 玩興、沉浸狀態與創造力間之關----------------------95
4.4 研究假說驗證--------------------------------------99
第五章 結論與建議-----------------------------------115
5.1 結論---------------------------------------------115
5.2 建議---------------------------------------------117
參考文獻---------------------------------------------120
中文部份---------------------------------------------120
英文部份---------------------------------------------121
附錄-------------------------------------------------129
附錄A 研究中使用的量表工具--------------------------129
附錄B 創造力的測驗分類編碼及計分標準----------------146
附錄C 量表使用同意書--------------------------------153

表目錄
表1 三個匯合取向之創造力理論以4P的觀點來分類----------10
表2 以4P的觀點來分類創造力的評量----------------------13
表3 個體動機之文獻整理--------------------------------18
表4 遊戲誘因之文獻整理--------------------------------19
表5 玩興的定義之文獻彙整------------------------------23
表6 玩興視為內在動機之文獻彙整------------------------24
表7 玩興的型態之文獻彙整------------------------------25
表8 玩興的測量之文獻彙整------------------------------27
表9 玩興與創造力之文獻彙整----------------------------29
表10 沉浸的三階段及相關因素之文獻彙整-----------------34
表11 不同任務類型之沉浸的測量彙整---------------------37
表12 沉浸測量的方法及構面之彙整-----------------------38
表13 沉浸空間上的25個沉浸點---------------------------46
表14 將沉浸過程換算(量化方式)成沉浸狀態---------------48
表15 編碼說明-----------------------------------------50
表16 計分方式-----------------------------------------50
表17 分類編碼及計分標準-------------------------------53
表18 「機械反斗城」遊戲情境中6個關卡之問題解決策略----54
表19 沉浸過程問卷1------------------------------------60
表20 玩興感受量表因素分析初步結果---------------------62
表21 玩興感受量表第二次因素分析結果-------------------63
表22 玩興感受量表第三次因素分析結果-------------------64
表23 玩興感受量表的信度分析結果-----------------------64
表24 玩興感受量表因素和總量表間的相關分析結果---------65
表25 玩興感受量表的因素命名結果-----------------------66
表26 沉浸狀態量表因素分析結果-------------------------67
表27 沉浸狀態量表的信度分析結果-----------------------68
表28 沉浸狀態量表因素和總量表間的相關分析結果---------68
表29 沉浸狀態量表的因素命名結果-----------------------69
表30 學童的玩興感受-----------------------------------70
表31 學童性別在玩興感受上的差異-----------------------71
表32 沉浸空間上的25個沉浸點---------------------------72
表33 關卡1遊戲情境的沉浸點分佈------------------------72
表34 「機械反斗城」遊戲情境中關卡1之問題解決結果------73
表35 學童經歷遊戲情境中關卡1之沉浸過程----------------73
表36 關卡2遊戲情境的沉浸點分佈------------------------74
表37 「機械反斗城」遊戲情境中關卡2之問題解決結果------75
表38 學童經歷遊戲情境中關卡2之沉浸過程----------------75
表39 關卡3遊戲情境的沉浸點分佈------------------------76
表40 「機械反斗城」遊戲情境中關卡3之問題解決結果------76
表41 學童經歷遊戲情境中關卡3之沉浸過程----------------77
表42 關卡4遊戲情境的沉浸點分佈------------------------77
表43 「機械反斗城」遊戲情境中關卡4之問題解決結果------78
表44 學童經歷遊戲情境中關卡4之沉浸過程----------------78
表45 關卡5遊戲情境的沉浸點分佈------------------------79
表46 「機械反斗城」遊戲情境中關卡5之問題解決結果------80
表47 學童經歷遊戲情境中關卡5之沉浸過程----------------80
表48 關卡6遊戲情境的沉浸點分佈------------------------81
表49 「機械反斗城」遊戲情境中6之問題解決結果----------81
表50 學童經歷遊戲情境中關卡6之沉浸過程----------------82
表51 整個遊戲情境的沉浸點分佈-------------------------82
表52 「機械反斗城」遊戲情境中6個關卡之問題解決結果----83
表53 學童經歷整個遊戲情境(包含6個關卡)之沉浸過程------84
表54 憂慮型:個別學童的玩興、沉浸狀態以及創造力指標---87
表55 沉浸型:個別學童的玩興、沉浸狀態以及創造力指標---88
表56 無聊型:個別學童的玩興、沉浸狀態以及創造力指標---89
表57 低創造力表現的群組(N=50)學童之玩興、沉浸狀態
以及創造力平均指標-------------------------------90
表58 高創造力表現的群組(N=50)學童之玩興、沉浸狀態
以及創造力平均指標-------------------------------91
表59 中創造力表現的群組(N=50)學童之玩興、沉浸狀態
以及創造力平均指標-------------------------------92
表60 學童經歷遊戲情境的沉浸狀態-----------------------93
表61 學童性別在沉浸狀態上的差異-----------------------94
表62 學童性別在創造力表現上的差異---------------------95
表63 不同沉浸狀態的學童在創造力表現上的差異-----------96
表64 不同玩興的學童在創造力表現上的差異---------------97
表65 不同玩興的學童在創造力表現上的差異---------------98
表66 預測的因果關係-----------------------------------99
表67 研究假說所採用的迴歸分析-------------------------99
表68 玩興與沉浸狀態相關分析摘要表--------------------100
表69 以玩興預測沉浸狀態之簡單迴歸分析摘要表----------100
表70 沉浸狀態與創造力相關分析摘要表------------------101
表71 以沉浸狀態預測創造力之簡單迴歸分析摘要表--------102
表72 玩興構面與沉浸狀態多元迴歸分析------------------103
表73 玩興各構面與沉浸狀態相關分析摘要表--------------103
表74 以玩興預測沉浸狀態之多元迴歸分析摘要表----------104
表75 沉浸狀態構面與創造力多元迴歸分析----------------105
表76 沉浸狀態各構面與創造力相關分析摘要表------------106
表77 以沉浸狀態變項預測創造力之多元迴歸分析摘要表----106
表78 將沉浸過程換算成沉浸狀態(量化)------------------108
表79 沉浸過程與沉浸狀態相關分析摘要表----------------108
表80 以沉浸過程預測沉浸狀態之多元迴歸分析摘要表------109
表81 「機械反斗城」遊戲情境中6個關卡之問題解決結果---112
表82 階層迴歸分析------------------------------------113
表83 玩興、沉浸狀態與創造力相關分析摘要表------------113
表84 創造力階層多元迴歸分析摘要表--------------------114

圖目錄
圖1 研究動機圖-----------------------------------------3
圖2 文獻探討架構圖-------------------------------------6
圖3 CSIKSZENTMIHALYI的系統理論圖-----------------------8
圖4 AMABILE的創造力成份理論圖--------------------------9
圖5 創造力的4P----------------------------------------12
圖6 可玩性模式----------------------------------------21
圖7 玩興與沉浸經驗的關係------------------------------31
圖8 三個頻道的沉浸模型--------------------------------35
圖9 四個頻道的沉浸模型--------------------------------36
圖10 研究模型-----------------------------------------42
圖11 三個頻道的沉浸模型-------------------------------44
圖12 三個頻道的沉浸空間-------------------------------44
圖13 沉浸路徑-----------------------------------------45
圖14 與沉浸差距---------------------------------------47
圖15 各沉浸點的與沉浸差距-----------------------------48
圖16 「機械反斗城」遊戲畫面分區說明-------------------56
圖17 「機械反斗城」遊戲工具說明圖---------------------56
圖18 「機械反斗城」遊戲解題說明-----------------------57
圖19 「機械反斗城」遊戲解題說明-----------------------58
圖20 學童觀察遊戲畫面---------------------------------59
圖21 闖關順序-----------------------------------------59
圖22 三個頻道的沉浸空間-------------------------------71
圖23 關卡1遊戲情境之沉浸過程的狀態分佈----------------73
圖24 關卡2遊戲情境之沉浸過程的狀態分佈----------------74
圖25 關卡3遊戲情境之沉浸過程的狀態分佈----------------76
圖26 關卡4遊戲情境之沉浸過程的狀態分佈----------------78
圖27 關卡5遊戲情境之沉浸過程的狀態分佈----------------79
圖28 關卡6遊戲情境之沉浸過程的狀態分佈----------------81
圖29 整個遊戲情境(包含6個關卡)之沉浸過程的狀態分佈----83
圖30 高低玩興學童在整個遊戲情境之沉浸過程的狀態分佈---85
圖31 高玩興男女學童在整個遊戲情境之沉浸過程的狀態分佈-85
圖32 低玩興男女學童在整個遊戲情境之沉浸過程的狀態分佈-86
圖33 憂慮型:個別學童的沉浸路徑-----------------------87
圖34 沉浸型:個別學童的沉浸路徑-----------------------88
圖35 無聊型:個別學童的沉浸路徑-----------------------89
圖36 低創造力表現的群組(N=50)學童的沉浸路徑-----------90
圖37 高創造力表現的群組(N=50)學童的沉浸路徑-----------91
圖38 中創造力表現的群組(N=50)學童的沉浸路徑-----------92
圖39 玩興、沉浸狀態與創造力的因果模式路徑圖----------102
圖40 玩興構面與沉浸狀態之路徑圖----------------------105
圖41 沉浸狀態構面與創造力之路徑圖--------------------107
圖42 沉浸過程與沉浸狀態之路徑圖----------------------110
圖43 所有受測學童沉浸過程與沉浸狀態的相關性----------111
圖44 所有受測學童沉浸過程與沉浸狀態的迴歸性----------111
中文部份:
江麗莉等(譯)(1997)。Joe L. Frost著。兒童遊戲與遊戲環境(Play and Playscapes)。台北:五南。
余嬪、吳靜吉(2003)。業精於勤、荒於嬉?談成人的玩興與組織玩興氣氛。創造力實踐歷程研討會。
余嬪、吳靜吉、楊潔欣、程蕙瑤、蔡淑敏(2004)。玩興與創造力、工作表現之關係。第二屆「創新與創造力」研討會。
林珊如、林建妤(2004)。創意自我效能與預期評量對內在動機、創造力之影響的實驗研究。國立交通大學教育研究所碩士論文。
吳靜吉、陳嘉成、林偉文(1988)。創造力量表簡介。「技術創造力」研討活動(二):研究方法探討。高雄:國立中山大學。
吳靜吉、陳甫彥、郭俊賢、林偉文、劉士豪、陳玉樺(1998)。新編創造思考測驗研究。台北:教育部。
吳靜吉(2002)。創造力的研究取向之回顧與展望。中央大學:創造思考教學策略與實務研討會。
洪蘭(譯)(1999)。Robert J. Sternberg & Todd I. Lubart著。不同凡想(Defying the Crowd)。臺北市:遠流。
姜文閔(譯)(1992)。John Dewey著。我們如何思維(How we think)。臺北市:五南。
徐子超(譯)(2003)。Michael Schrage著。認真玩創新:進入創新與新經濟的美麗新世界(Serious play: how the world’s best companies simulate to innovate)。台北:五南。
徐鋒志(譯)(2002)。Robert I. Sutton著。11又1/2逆向管理-看起來怪,但非常管用(Weird Ideas that Work)。臺北市:大塊文化。
吳靜吉、曾敬梅(2002)。研究生玩興、幽默、創意態度、所知覺系所創造氛圍與創造力之關係。國立政治大學教育研究所碩士論文。
吳靜吉、曾敬梅(2003)。玩興、幽默、創意態度、對研究所創造氛圍知覺與創新行為的關係。創造力實踐歷程研討會。
黃瓊慧(2000)。從沉浸(flow)理論探討台灣大專學生網路使用之行為。國立交通大學傳播研究所碩士論文。
張定綺(譯)(1996)。Csikszentmihalyi著。快樂,從心開始(Flow-the psychology of optimal experience)。台北:天下文化出版社發行。
張春興(1996)。教育心理學- 三化取向的理論與實踐。台北:東華。
葉玉珠、鄭芳怡(2004)。國小學童解釋形態、領域知識、創意生活經驗與科技創造力之關係。國立中山大學碩士論文。
楊斐羽、梁朝雲(2004)。將傳統遊戲的玩性因素導入電子遊戲之設計:一個遊戲心理學的基礎研究。教學科技與媒體,69,20-38。
劉秀娟(1994)。幼兒玩性與社會性遊戲之研究。文化大學兒童福利學系碩士論文。

英文部份:
Amabile, T. M., (1983). The Social Psychology of Creativity. Springer, New York.
Aguilar, T. E. (1985). Social and environmental barriers to playfulness. In J. L. Frost, & S. Sunderlin,(Eds.), When Children Play. Weaton, MD: Association for Childhoon Education International. pp. 73-76.
Alessi, S. M., & Trollip, S. R. (1985). Computer-based instruction: Methods and development. New Jersey: Prentice-Hall.
Amabile, T. M. (1995). KEYS: Assessing the climate for creativity. Instrument published by the Center for Creative Leadership, Greensboro, NC.
Amabile, T. M. (1996). Creativity in the context. New York: Springer-Verlag.
Amabile, T. M. (1997), "Motivating Creativity in Organizations: On Doing What You Love and Loving What You Do", California Management Review, 40 (Fall): 39-58.
Atkinson, M., & Kydd, C. (1997). Individual characteristics associated with World Wide Web use: An empirical study of playfulness and motivation. The DATA BASE for Advances in Information Systems, 28(2), 53-62.
Adams, E. (1998). A Symmetry Lesson. Retrieved August 8, 2003, from http://www.gamasutra.com/features/game_design/19981016/symmetry.htm
Aarseth, E. (2003). Playing Research: Methodological approaches to game analysis. Proceedings of Melbourne DAC 2003.
Bruner, J., Jolly, A. & Sylva, K (1976). Play - Its Role in Development and Evolution. New York: Basic Books, Inc.
Barnett, L. A., & Kleiber, D. (1982). Concomitants of playfulness in early childhood: Cognitive abilities and gender. The Journal of Genetic Psychology, 141, 115-127.
Barnett, L. A. (1990). Playfulness: Definition, Design, and Measurement. Play and Culture, Vol. 3, pp. 319-336.
Barnett, L. A. (1991). The Playful Child: Measurement of a Disposition to Play. Play and Culture, Vol. 4, pp. 51-74.
Bundy, A. (1997). Play and playfulness: what to look for. In L Parham, L Fazio (eds.) Play in occupational therapy for children. St. Louis: Baltimore, 52-66.
Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1975). Beyond Boredom and Anxiety. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers.
Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1985). Emergent Motivation and the Evolution of the Self. In D. A. Kleiber & M. Maehr (Eds.), Advances in Motivation and Achievement (Vol. 4, pp. 93-119). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1988). Society, culture, and person: A system view of creativity. The Nature of Creativity.
Csikszentmihalyi, M., & Csikszentmihalyi, I. S. (1988). Optimal experience: psychological studies of flow in consciousness. Cambridge; New York: Cambridge University Press.
Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1988). Society, culture, and person: a systems view of creativity. In Sternberg, R. J. (ed.), The Nature of Creativity: Contemporary Psychological Perspectives (pp. 325-339), Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1990). Flow: The psychology of optimal experience. New York: Harper & Row.
Crawford, C. (1990). Lessons from Computer Game Design. In B. Laurel (Ed.), The Art of Human-Computer Interface Design, (pp. 103-11). Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley Publishing Company, Inc.
Clarke, S.G., Haworth, J.T. (1994). Flow experience in daily lives of sixth-form college students. British Journal of Psychology, 85, 511–523.
Clarke, S. G., & Haworth, J. T. (1994). Flow Experience in the Daily Lives of 6th-Form College-Students. British Journal of Psychology, 85, 511-523.
Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1996). The creative personality. Psychology Today, 29(4): 36.
Crawford, C. (1997). The Art of Computer Game Design. Washington State University Vancouver. Retrieved November 16, 2003, from http://www.mindsim.com/MindSim/Corporate/artCGD.pdf
Chen, H., Wigand, R., Nilan, M. S. (1999). Optimal experience of web activities. Computers in Human Behavior, 15 (5), 585–608.
Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1999). Implications of a systems perspective for the study of creativity. In R. J. Sternberg (Ed.), Handbook of creativity (pp. 313–328). Cambridge, England: Cambridge Univ. Press.
Chen, H. (2000). Exploring web users’ on-line optimal flow experiences. Dissertation, Syracuse University, Syracuse, NY, Unpublished.
Csikszentmihalyi, M., & Wolfe, R. (2000). New conceptions and research approaches to creativity: Implications of a systems perspective for creativity in education. In K.A. Heller (Ed.), International handbook of giftedness and talent (pp. 81-93). Oxford, UK: Elsevier Science.
Costikyan, G. (2002). I Have No Words & I Must Design. In Mäyrä, F. Conference Proceedings of Computer Games and Digital Cultures, pp. 9-33, Tampere University Press.
Csikszentmihalyi, M. (2002). Flow: The Classic Work on how to Achieve Happiness. London: Rider.
Casas, A. K. & Rogers, C. S. (2003). Childhood Playfulness as a Predictor of Adult Playfulness and Creativity: A Longitudinal Study. Paper presented at the Association for the Study of Play, Atlanta, GA.
Dewey, J. (1946). John Dewey Society, New York : Harper.
Deci, E. L. (1975). Intrinsic motivation. New York: Plenum Press.
Dempsey, J. V., Rasmussen, K., & Lucassen, B. (1994). Instructional gaming: Implications for instructional technology. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of Association for Educational Communications and Technology, Nashville. Paper presented at the Association for the Study of Play, Baltimore, MD.
Duvall, H. (2001). It’s all in your mind: Visual psychology and perception in game design. Gamasutra. Retrieved August 22, 2002, from http://www.gamasutra.com/features/20010309/duvall_pfv.htm.
Ellis, M. J. (1973). Why People Play. Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey.
Ellington, H., Adinall, E., & Percival, F. (1982). A Handbook of Game Design. London, UK: Kogan.
Ellis, G. D., Voelkl, J. E., & Morris, C. (1994). Measurement and analysis issues with explanation of variance in daily experiences using the flow model. Journal of Leisure Research, 26 (4), 337–356.
Ermi, L. & Mäyrä, F. (2005). Fundamental Components of the Gameplay Experience: Analysing Immersion. Presented at the International DiGRA Conference, June 16th - 20th, 2005, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada (http://www.gamesconference.org/digra2005/overview.php)
Frasca, Gonzalo (2000). Ludology Meets Narratology: Similitude and differences between (video) games and narrative. Retrieved JAN 18, 2003, from http://www.jacaranda.org/frasca/ludology.htm.
Finneran, C. M., & Zhang, P. (2003). A Person-Artifact-Task (PAT) Model of Flow Antecedents in Computer-Mediated Environments. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, Special Issue on HCI and MIS, 59(4), 397-402.
Guilford, J. P. (1950). Creativity. American Psychologist, 5: 444–454.
Gagne, E. D. (1985). The Cognitive Psychology of School Learning. Little Brown and Company. Boston, MA.
Graham, B. C. (1987). The effects of teachers’ playfulness and creativity on teacher-child interactions. Masters thesis, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University.
Glynn, M. A., & Webster, J. (1992). The adult playfulness scale: an initial assessment. Psychological Reports, 71, 83-103.
Glynn, M. A., & Webster, J. (1993). Refining the nomological net of the adult playfulness scale: Personality, motivational and attitudinal correlates for highly intelligent adults. Psychological Reports, 72, 1023-1026.
Ghani, J. A., & Deshpande, S. P. (1994). Task characteristics and the experience of optimal flow in human-computer interaction. The Journal of Psychology, 128(4), 381.
Ghani, J. A. (1995). Flow in Human-Computer Interactions: Test of a model. In J. M. Carey (Ed.), Human Factors in Information Systems: Emerging Theoretical Bases (pp. 291-311). Norwood, New Jersey: Ablex Publishing Corporation.
Garris, R., Ahlers, R. & Driskell, J. E. (2002). Games, Motivation, and Learning: A Research and Practice Model. Simulation & Gaming. 33, 441-467.
Hoffman, D. L., & Novak, T. P. (1996). Marketing in hypermedia computer-mediated environments: conceptual foundations. Journal of Marketing, 60, 50-68.
Hopson, J. (2002). The Psychology of Choice. Retrieved June 21, 2003 from http://www.gamasutra.com/features/20020204/hopson_pfv.htm
Huang, M. H. (2003). Designing Website Attributes To Induce Experiential Encounters. Computers in Human Behavior, (19)4, pp 425-442.
Jones, M.G. (1998). Creating engagement in computer-based learning environments. Instructional Technology Forum: ITForum Listserv. Retrieved Dec 7, 1998, from the http://itech1.coe.uga.edu/itforum/paper30/paper30.html
Järvinen, Aki. (2002). Gran Stylissimo: The Audiovisual Elements and Styles in Computer and Video Games. In: Mäyrä, Frans (Ed.). Computer Games and Digital Cultures. Tampere, 6 – 8 June, Tampere University Press.
John, Y. & Ding, Y. (2002). HCI and Game Design: From a Practitioner’s Point of View. Retrieved Aug. 17, 2005, from http://www.ye-brothers.com/documents/HCIGAMEDESIGN.pdf
Kogan, N. (1983). Stylistic variation in childhood and adolescence: Creativity, metaphor, and cognitive styles. In J. H. Flavell & E. M. Markman (Ed.), P. H. Mussen (Series Ed.), Handbook of Child Psychology: Vol. 3, Cognitive Development (pp. 630-706). New York: Wiley.
Keller, S. (1992). Children and the Nintendo. Technical Report.
Karat, J., Karat C. and Ukelson, J. (2000). Affordances, Motivation, and the Design of User Interfaces. Communications of the ACM, 43(8), 49–51.
Lieberman, J. N. (1975). Playfulness, cognitive style, and leisure or? Do we need to educate for leisure? Society and Leisure, 3: 83-87.
Lieberman, J. N. (1977). Playfulness: Its Relationship to Imagination and Creativity. Academic Press, New York, NY.
Levy, J. (1983). Play Behavior, Robert E. Krieger. Malabar, FL.
Lepper, M. R., & Hodell, M. (1989). Intrinsic motivation in the classroom. In C. Ames & R. Ames (Eds.), Research on motivation in education (Vol. 3, PP 73-105). San Diego: Academic Press.
Lombard, M., Reich, R., Grabe, M. E., Bracken, C. and Ditton, T. (2000). Presence and television: The role of screen size. Human Communication Research, 26(1), 75-98.
Lazzaro, N. (2004). Why we play games: four keys to more emotion in player experiences. Game Developers Conference 2004. Retrieved Nov 9, 2004, from http://xeodesign.com/xeodesign_whyweplaygames.pdf.
Lindley C. A. (2005). Story and Narrative Structures in Computer Games. In: Developing Interactive Narrative Content: sagas/sagasnet reader. Bushoff, B. ed. Munich: High Text.
MacKinnon, D. (1970). Creativity: A multi-faceted phenomenon. In J. D. Roslansky (Ed.), Creativity: A discussion at the Nobel conference (pp. 17–32). Amsterdam: North-Holland.
Moore, A. (1985). Childrearing practices associated with playfulness and type a behavior in children. Doctoral dissertation, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University.
Malone, T. W., & Lepper, M. R. (1987). Making learning fun: A taxonomy of intrinsic motivations for learning. In Snow, R. E. & Farr, M. J. (Eds.), Aptitude, learning, and instruction (Vol. 3). Cognitive and affective process analyses. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Massimini, F., & Carli, M. (1988). The systematic assessment of flow in daily experience. In M. Csikszentmihalyi & I. S. Csikszentmihalyi (Eds.), Optimal experience: psychological studies of flow in consciousness (pp. 266-287). Cambridge; New York: Cambridge University Press.
Martocchio, J. J., & Webster, J. (1992). Effects of feedback and cognitive playfulness on performance in microcomputer software training. Personnel Psychology, 45, 553-578.
Merrill, Paul, F., Hammons, K., Vincent, B. R., Reynolds, P. L., Christensen, L., & Tolman, M.N. (1996). Computers in education, 3rd ed (pp. 65-86). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
Moneta, G. B., & Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1996). The effect of perceived challenges and skills on the quality of subjective experience. Journal of Personality, 64 (2), 275-310.
Mumford, M. D., Baughman, W. A., Threlfall, K. V., Supinski, E. P., & Costanza, D. P. (1996). Process based measures of creative problem solving skills: I. Problem construction. Creativity Research Journal, 9, 62–76.
Murray J. H. (1997). Hamlet on the Holodeck: The Future of Narrative in Cyberspace. Baltimore & London: MIT Press.
Moon, J., & Kim, Y. (2001). Extending the TAM for a World-Wide-Web context. Information and Management, 38 (4), 217–230.
Nunnally, J. C. (1978). Psychometric Theory, (2nd edn) McGraw Hill: New York.
Nicolopoulou, A. (1993). Play, cognitive development, and the social world: Piaget, Vygotsky, and beyond. Human Development, 36, 1-23.
Novak, T. P., & Hoffman, D. L. (1997). Measuring the Flow Experience Among Web Users. Paper presented at the Interval Research Corporation.
Novak, T. P., Hoffman, D. L., & Yung, Y. F. (1998), Modeling the Structure of the Flow Experience. INFORMS Marketing Science and the Internet Mini-Conference, MIT.
Novak, T. P., Hoffman, D. L., & Yung, Y. F. (2000). Measuring the Customer Experience in Online Environments: A Structural Modeling Approach. Marketing Science, 19(1), 22-42.
Piaget, J. (1950). The psychology of intelligence. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.
Piaget, J. (1962). Play, Dreams and Imitation in Childhood. New York: Norton, 1962.
Pepler, D. J. and Ross, H. S. (1981) The effects of play on convergent and divergent problem-solving, Child Development, 52, 1202–1210.
Privette, G. & Bundrick, C. M. (1987). Measurement of Experience: Construct and Content Validity of the Experience Questionnaire. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 65, 315-332.
Privette, Gayle & Charles M. Bundrick (1987), Measurement of Experience: Construct and Content Validity of the Experience Questionnaire. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 65, 315-332.
Provost, J. A. (1990). Work, play and type: Achieving balance in your life. Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologist Press.
Pellegrini, A. D. (Ed.). (1995). The future of play theory: A multidisciplinary inquiry into the contributions of Brian Sutton-Smith. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.
Parker-Rees, R. (1997). Learning from play: design and technology, imagination and playful thinking. IDATER 97 Loughborough University.
Pearce, J. M., Ainley, M., & Howard, S. (2005). The Ebb and Flow of Online Learning. Computers in Human Behavior, 21(5), 745-771.
Rubin, K. (1977). Play behaviors of young children. Young Children, 3, 16-24.
Rubin, K. H., Fein, G. G., & Vandenberg, B. (1983). Play. In E. M. Hetherington (Ed.), Handbook of Child Psychology: Vol. 4, Socialization, personality, and social development (pp. 693-774). New York: Wiley.
Rubin, K. (1989). The play observation scale. University of Waterloo.
Rogers, C. S., Impara, J., Frary, R., Harris, T., Meeks, A., Semanic-Lauth, & Reynolds, M. (1991). Measuring playfulness: Development of the child behaviors inventory of playfulness. Play & Culture Studies, 1, 121-135.
Runco, M. A., Chand, I. (1995). Cognition and creativity. Educational Psychology Review, 7, 243–267.
Rieber, L. P. (1996). Seriously considering play: Designing interactive learning environments based on the blending of microworlds, simulations, and games. Educational Technology Research & Development, 44(2), 43-58.
Runco, M. A. (1999). Misjudgment. In M. A. Runco, & S. R. Pritzker (Eds.), Encyclopedia of Creativity (Vol. 2, pp. 235-240). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
Rogers, C. S., & Sluss, D. J. (1999). Play and inventiveness: Revisiting Erikson’s views on Einstein’s playfulness. Play and Culture Studies, 2, 3-24.
Rogers, C. S., Fox, G. E., Harrison, P. K., & Ross, J. D. (2000). Playfulness and temperament among older adolescents and young adults. Paper presented at the Association for the Study of Play, Baltimore, MD.
Rollings, A. & Morris, D. (2000). Game Architecture and design. The Coriolis Group.
Rouse, R. (2001). Game Design: Theory and Practice. Wordware Publishing Inc, Texas, US.
Riddoch, A. (2003). Interactive Entertainment Systems - Psychology and Game Design. Retrieved June 21, 2003, from the Electronics and Computer Science(ECS): http://www.ecs.soton.ac.uk/~ajr/cm402/lecture2.html
Russ, S. W. (2003). Play and Creativity: developmental issues. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 47, 3, 291–303.
Sutton-Smith, B. (1967). The role of play in cognitive development. Young Children. 22, 361-370.
Singer, J. L., Singer, D. G. & Sherrod, L. R. (1980). A factor analytic study of preschooler’s play behavior. American Psychology Bulletin, 2, 143–156.
Sandelands, L. E., Buckner, G. C. (1989). Of art and work: Aesthetics experience and the psychology of work feeling. Research in Organizational Behavior, 11, 105-131.
Starbuck, W. H., and Webster, J. (1991). When is Play Productive? Accounting, Management, and Information Technology, Vol. 1, No. 1, pp.71-90.
Sternberg, R. J., Lubart, T. I., (1991). An investment theory of creativity and its development. Human Development, 34, 1–32.
Stipek, D. (1993). Motivation to learn: From theory to practice (2nd ed.). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
Schaefer, C., & Greenberg, R. (1997). Measurement of playfulness: A neglected therapist variable. International Journal of Play Therapy, 6 (2), 21-31.
Sternberg R. J. & Lubart, T. I. (1999). The Concept of Creativity: Prospects and Paradigms. Handbook of Creativity.
Skadberg, Y.X. & J.R. Kimmel (2004) Visitors' Flow Experience while Browsing a Web Site: Its Measurement, Contributing Factors and Consequences. Computers in Human Behavior (20), pp 403-422.
Torrance, E. P. (1962). Guiding creative talent. Englewood Cliffs, N.J: Prentice-Hal.
Taylor, S. I. (1992). The relationship between playfulness and creativity of Japanese preschool children. Doctoral dissertation, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University.
Trevino, L.K., Webster, J. (1992). Flow in computer-mediated communication. Communication Research, 19(5), 539–573.
Taylor, S. I., & Rogers, C. S. (2001). The relationship between playfulness and creativity of Japanese preschool children. International Journal of Early Childhood, 33 (1), 43-49.
Trevlas, E., Matsouka O., Zachopoulou, E. (2003). Relationship between playfulness and motor creativity in preschool children. Early Child Development and Care, 173(5), 535 – 543.
Trevlas E., Grammatikopoulos V., Tsigilis N. & Zachopoulou E. (2003). Evaluating Playfulness: Construct Validity of the Children's Playfulness Scale. Early Childhood Education Journal, 31(1), 33 - 39.
Vygotsky, L. (1967). Play and its role in the mental development of the child. Soviet Psychology, 5, 6-18.
Vygotsky, L.S. (1979). Consciousness as a problem in the psychology of behavior. Soviet Psychology, 27(4).
Webster, J. (1989). Playfulness and Computers at Work. New York University, New York.
Webster, J., & Martocchio, J. J. (1992). Microcomputer playfulness: Development of a measure with workplace implications. MIS Quart. 16(2) 201–226.
Webster, J., Trevino, L. K., & Ryan, L. (1993). The Dimensionality and Correlates of Flow in Human-Computer Interactions. Computers in Human Behavior, 9(4), 411-426.
Woszczynski, A. B, Roth, P. L., & Segars, A. H. (2002). Exploring the theoretical foundations of microcomputer playfulness. Computers in Human Behavior, 18 (4), 369–388.
Yager, S., Kappelman, L., Maples, G., & Prubutok, V. (1997). Microcomputer playfulness: Stable or dynamic trait? Database for Advances in Information Systems, 28(2), 43-52.
Yee, N. (2002). Facets: 5 Motivation Factors for Why People Play MMORPG's. Available at http://www.nickyee.com/facets/home.htm.
QRCODE
 
 
 
 
 
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               
第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁 top