臺灣博碩士論文加值系統

　　遊憩干擾在戶外遊憩活動當中經常發生，遊客在面對其他遊客的干擾時會產生什麼調適行為，以及使用者的經驗層次不同對於調適又有何影響。本研究針對三個變項，探討遊憩干擾、使用經驗與調適行為三者之關係。
　　本研究以陽明山二子坪步道健行者為對象，問卷發放413份，有效回收401份，受訪者當中近80%表示至少受到一項干擾。本研究使用單因子變異數分析來驗證研究架構之關係，研究結果顯示整體模式中，遊憩干擾類別對於調適行為當中的暫時替代與資源替代有顯著差異，其他則無，因此遊客感受到不同的遊憩干擾類別，對於調適行為部分有顯著差異。而在使用經驗當中，不同的使用經驗類別對於調適行為並無顯著差異，因此使用經驗不同的類別對於調適行為並沒有差別。
　　本研究驗證戶外遊憩干擾與調適行為之架構模式，探討遊憩區使用者行為之管理意涵，以期提供管理單位有效之遊客管理建議。

　　　Recreation hassles happen very often in outdoor recreation. The literature suggests that visitors will have coping when hassles occur. In addition, the literature indicates that experienced visitors are more likely to engage in more problem-focused coping strategies. The study attempted to explore the relationships of recreation hassles, ex-perience use history (EUH) and coping .
The survey was conducted on Erzhiping trail from March to May 2006. A total of 413 questionnaires were completed, of which 401 were valid. The results show that nearly 80 percents of respondents indicated some kinds of recreation hassles, and ‘noise from other people’ was indicated most important factor interfering with hiking experi-ence. Regarding the relationship between recreation hassles and coping, it is found that there were significant differences between the types of hassles and coping. In addition, the analysis indicated that there were no significant differences between EUH and cop-ing.
The study tested the framework between recreation hassles and coping, and dis-cussed the management implication of recreational users. To provide management more effective suggestions.

中文摘要　．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．． i
英文摘要　．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．． ii
誌謝辭　　．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．． iii
內容目錄　．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．． iv
表目錄　　．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．． vi
圖目錄　　．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．． vii
第一章　　緒論．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．． 1
　　第一節　　研究背景．．．．．．．．．．．．．．． 1
　　第二節　　研究問題與目的．．．．．．．．．．．． 3
第三節　　研究範圍與對象．．．．．．．．．．．． 7
第四節　　研究內容與流程．．．．．．．．．．．． 7
第二章　　文獻回顧．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．． 10
　　第一節　　遊憩干擾．．．．．．．．．．．．．．． 10
　　第二節　　使用經驗．．．．．．．．．．．．．．． 12
　　第三節　　調適行為．．．．．．．．．．．．．．． 14
第三章 研究設計．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．． 21
第一節　　研究架構．．．．．．．．．．．．．．． 21
第二節　　操作性定義．．．．．．．．．．．．．． 22
第三節　　研究假設．．．．．．．．．．．．．．． 23
　　第四節　　問卷設計．．．．．．．．．．．．．．． 24
　　第五節　　抽樣方法．．．．．．．．．．．．．．． 29
　　第六節　　分析方法．．．．．．．．．．．．．．． 30
　　第七節　　預試．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．． 31


第四章　　研究結果與分析．．．．．．．．．．．．．． 34
　　第一節　　樣本分析．．．．．．．．．．．．．．． 34
　　第二節　　遊憩干擾．．．．．．．．．．．．．．． 36
　　第三節　　調適行為．．．．．．．．．．．．．．． 41
　　第四節　　遊憩干擾、使用經驗與調適行為之關係．． 48
第五章　　結論與建議．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．． 55
　　第一節　　結論．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．． 55
　　第二節　　研究限制．．．．．．．．．．．．．．． 57
　　第三節　　建議．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．． 58
參考文獻　．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．． 60
附錄A　　預試問卷．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．． 68
附錄B　　正式問卷．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．． 72
附錄C　　遊憩干擾原始問卷．．．．．．．．．．．．． 75
附錄D　　調適行為原始問卷．．．．．．．．．．．．． 76

一、中文部分

內政部營建署(2004)，93年陽明山國家公園各遊憩區遊客人次統計[線上資料]，來源：http://w3.cpami.gov.tw/statisty/93/93_pdf [2005, December 7]。

王小文(1998)，遊客對遊憩衝突知覺之研究－以大屯自然公園為例，國立台灣大學園藝研究所未出版之碩士論文。

交通部觀光局(2005)，94年台閩地區主要觀光遊憩區遊客人數月別統計[線上資料]，來源：http://admin.taiwan.net.tw/indexc. asp [2006, March 21]。

吳明隆(2002)，SPSS統計應用實務，台北：松崗電腦圖書資料股份有限公司。

李朝盛，叢培芝(1996)，陽明山國家公園遊客行為及遊憩型態發展之研究，內政部營建署陽明山國家公園管理處委託報告。

張嘉宇(2003)，遊客面對遊憩區擁擠所採行調適機制之探討-以劍湖山主題遊樂園遊客為例，南華大學旅遊事業管理學研究所未出版之碩士論文。

曹勝雄，林若慧，林裕強，邱新雅，陳姿君(2001)，陽明山國家公園遊客滿意度調查分析之研究：第二版，內政部營建署陽明山國家公園管理處委託報告。

陳水源(1988)，擁擠與戶外遊憩體驗關係之研究-社會心理層面探討，國立台灣大學森林研究所未出版之博士論文。

曾慧青(2004)，生態觀光之遊憩衝突研究，私立銘傳大學觀光研究所未出版之碩士論文。

楊宏志(1995)，何去何從：森林遊樂區遊憩容納量，戶外遊憩研究，8(4)，75-93。

歐陽台生，陳嘉峰，李宜儒，李文霖，衡寶龍(1996)，台北市近郊鄰近陽明山國家公園之步道調查工作，內政部營建署陽明山國家公園管理處委託報告。

鍾文玲(1993)，遊客對遊憩衝突認知之研究-以北勢溪黃櫸皮寮之釣魚者為例，國立台灣大學園藝研究所未出版之碩士論文。

二、英文部分

Adelman, B. J. E., Heberlein, T. A., & Bonnicksen, T. M. (1982). Social psychological explanations for persistence of a conflict between paddling canoeist and motorcraft users in boundary waters canoe area. Leisure Science, 5(1), 45-61.
Anderson, D. H., & Brown, P. J. (1984). The displacement Process in recreation. Journal of Leisure Research, 16(1), 61-73.

Bury, R. L., Holland, S. M., & McEwen, D. N. (1983). Analyzing recreational conflict-Understanding why conflict occurs is req-uisite to managing that conflict. Journal of Soil and Water Conservation, 37, 401-403.

Decker, P. J., & Borgen, F. H. (1993). Dimensions of work appraisal: Stress, strain, coping, job satisfaction, and negative affectivity. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 40(4), 470-478.

Folkman, S., & Lazarus, R. S. (1980). An analysis of Coping in a middle-aged community sample. Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 21, 219-239.

Graefe, A. R., Vaske, J. J., & Kuss, F. R. (1984). Social carrying ca-pacity: An integration and synthesis of twenty years of re-search. Leisure Sciences, 6(4), 395-431.

Hammitt, W. E., & McDonald, C. (1983). Past on-site experience and its relationship to managing river recreation resources. Forest Science, 29, 262-266.

Hammitt, W. E., & Patterson, M. E. (1991). Coping behavior to avoid visitor encounters: Its relationship to wildland privacy. Journal of Leisure Research, 23(3), 225-237.

Hammitt, W. E., Backlund, E. A., & Bixler, R. D. (2004). Experience use history, place bonding and resource substitution of trout anglers during recreation engagements. Journal of Leisure Re-search, 36(3), 356-378.

Heberlein, T. A., & Shelby, B. (1977). Carrying capacity, values, and the satisfaction model: A reply to Greist. Journal of Leisure Research, 9(2), 142-148.

Heer, C., Rusterholz, H., & Baur, B. (2003). Forest perception and knowledge of hikers and mountain bikers in two different areas in northwestern Switzerland. Environment Management, 31(6), 709-723.

Ivy, M. I., Stewart, W. P., & Lue, C. C. (1992). Exploring the role of tolerance in recreational conflict. Journal of Leisure Research, 24(4), 348-360.

Jackson, E. L., & Wong, R. A. G. (1982). Perceives conflict between urban cross-country skiers and snowmobilers in Alberta. Journal of Leisure Research, 14(1), 47-62.

Jacob, G. R., & Schreyer, R. (1980). Conflict in outdoor recreation: A theoretical perspective. Journal of Leisure Research, 12(4), 368-380.

Johnson, A. K., & Dawson, C. P. (2004). An exploratory study of the complexities of behavior in Adirondack wilderness. Leisure Sciences, 26, 281-293.

Kanner, A. D., Coyne, J. C., Schaefer, C., & Lazarus, R. S. (1981). Comparison of two models of stress measurement: Daily has-sles and uplifts versus major events. Journal of Behavioral Medicine, 4(1), 1-39.

Kuentzel, W. F., & Heberlein, T. A. (1992). Coping and behavioral adaptations to perceived crowding: A panel study of coping and displacement. Journal of Leisure Research, 24(4), 377-393.

Lynch, T. P., Wilkerson, E., Melling, L., Hamilton, R., Macready, A., & Feary, S. (2004). Conflict and impacts of divers and anglers in a marine park. Environment Management, 33(2), 196-211.

Manning, R. E., & Ciali, C. P. (1980). Recreation density and user satisfaction: A further exploration of the satisfaction model. Journal of Leisure Research, 12(4), 329-345.

Manning, R. E., & Valliere, W. A. (2001). Coping in outdoor recrea-tion: Causes and consequences of crowding among community residents. Journal of Leisure Research, 33(4), 410-426.

Miller, L. R., Dickerson, J. E., & Pearlman-Houghie, D. J. (2001). Quiet enjoyment in the national parks of England and Wales: Public understanding of the term and its influence on attitudes towards recreational activities. Leisure Sciences, 20, 19-40.

Miller, T. A., & McCool, S. F. (2003). Coping with stress in outdoor recreational settings: An application of transactional stress theory. Leisure Sciences, 25, 257-275.

Needham, M. D., & Rollins, R. B. (2005). Interest group standards for recreation and tourism impacts at ski areas in the summer. Tourism Management, 26, 1-13.

Schneider, I. E., & Budruk, M. (1999). Displacement as a response to the federal recreation fee program. Journal of Park and Rec-reation Administration, 17(3), 76-84.

Schneider, I. E., & Hammitt, W. E. (1995a). Visitor response to out-door recreation conflict: A conceptual approach. Leisure sci-ences, 17, 223-234.

Schneider, I. E., & Hammitt, W. E. (1995b). Visitor responses to on-site recreation conflict. Journal of Applied Research, 20(4), 249-268.

Schreyer, R., & Lime, D. W. (1984). A novice isn’t necessarily a novice－The influence of experience use history on subjective perceptions of recreation participation. Leisure Sciences, 6(2), 131-149.

Schreyer, R., Lime, D. W., & Williams, D. R. (1984). Characterizing the influence of past experience on recreation behavior. Jour-nal of Leisure Research, 16(1), 34-50.

Schuster, R. M., Hammitt, W. E., & Moore, D. (2003). A theoretical model to measure the appraisal and coping response to hassles in outdoor recreation settings. Leisure Sciences, 25, 277-299.

Schuster, R. M., Hammitt, W. E., & Moore, D. (2006). Stress ap-praisal and coping response to hassles experienced in outdoor recreation settings. Leisure Sciences, 28, 97-113.

Shafer, C. S.,& Hammitt, W. E. (1995). Congruency among experi-ence dimensions, condition indicators, and coping behaviors in wilderness. Leisure Sciences, 17, 263-279.

Shelby, B., Bregenzer, N. S., & Johnson, R. (1988). Displacement and product shift: empirical evidence from Oregon rivers. Journal of Leisure Research, 20(4), 274-288.

Taylor, S. E., & Schneider, S. (1989). Coping and the simulation of events. Social Cognition, 7(2), 174-194.

Vitterso, J., Chipeniuk, R., Skar, M., &Vistad, O. (2004). Recrea-tional conflict is affective: The case of cross-country skiers and snowmobiles. Leisure Sciences, 26, 227-243.

Watson, D., & Clark, L. A. (1988). Development and validation of brief measures of positive and negative affect: The PANAS scales. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54(6), 1063-1070.

Williams, D. R., Schreyer, R., & Knopf, R. C. (1990). The effect of the experience use history on the multidimensional structure of motivations to participate in leisure activities. Journal of Lei-sure Research, 22(1), 36-54.