(3.235.191.87) 您好!臺灣時間:2021/05/13 04:44
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:::

我願授權國圖
: 
twitterline
研究生:郭柏雅
研究生(外文):Bo-YaKuo
論文名稱:心智模式於介面設計的文化認知差異性
論文名稱(外文):A Cultural Study of User's Cognitive Model in UI Designs
指導教授:何俊亨何俊亨引用關係
指導教授(外文):Chun-Heng Ho
學位類別:碩士
校院名稱:國立成功大學
系所名稱:工業設計學系碩博士班
學門:設計學門
學類:產品設計學類
論文種類:學術論文
論文出版年:2013
畢業學年度:101
語文別:中文
論文頁數:88
中文關鍵詞:文化構面網路搜尋行為認知行為
外文關鍵詞:Cultural dimensiononline searchingcognitive behavior
相關次數:
  • 被引用被引用:0
  • 點閱點閱:334
  • 評分評分:系統版面圖檔系統版面圖檔系統版面圖檔系統版面圖檔系統版面圖檔
  • 下載下載:0
  • 收藏至我的研究室書目清單書目收藏:1
此研究期許透過使用者的認知模式,來探討不同文化背景對於介面使用所產生的認知差異。本實驗參考Hofstede 所提出的文化構面作為文化差異標準,並透過使用者操作網路介面的使用行為轉化為認知模式架構來作對應比較。代表東、西方文化背景的受試者共十二位參與本實驗。

實驗結果顯示,"長期導向-短期導向"、"獨立主義-群體主義"以及"男性行為-女性行為"這三種面向之指數對於認知模式具有較小的影響。"高度權力距離-低度權力距離"以及"高度避免不確定性-低度避免不確定性"面向較能反應出受試者在網路介面上的使用差異。
This article examines the impact of cultural context on user interface designs in a cognitive viewpoint. The study attempts to testify online searching behavior is culturally biased. The study adopts the theory of Hofstede’s cultural dimensions for cultural criteria. Experiments in this study transit the process of online surfing into mental models further comparison. Twelve participants were selected respectively to represent different cultural backgrounds for cultural comparison and qualitative study.

The results showed that long term orientation scores, high individualism scores andmasculinity scores show small relevance in such behavioral systems. However, power distance scores and uncertainty avoidance scores are highly related to participant’s cognitive behavior on the Internet.
摘要 I
English Abstract II
Acknowledgements III
Table of Contents IV
Table and Figures VII
Chapter 1 Introduction 1
1-1 Background Research 1
1-1-1 The role of cognitive science in product design 1
1-1-2 Cultural impact on human cognition 1
1-1-3 The cognitive impact of cultural variances on product design 3
1-1-4 Mental models in user interface designs 6
1-2 Research purpose 7
1-3 Structure of research proposal 7
Chapter 2 Literature review 9
2-1 A cognitive approach to cultural dimensions 9
2-1-1 Cultural cognition 9
2-1-2 Research Works on cultural comparison 10
2-2 Cultural cognition variances on product design 13
2-2-1 Frame shifting 13
2-2-2 Mental models and cultural cultivation 14
Chapter 3 Method 15
3-1 Hypothesis 15
3-2 Participants 15
3-2-1 Participant cleaning 15
3-2-2 Final participants 16
3-3 Material 16
3-3-1 Questionnaires of computer usage, online search habits and
demographics 16
3-3-2 Search tasks and thinking aloud protocols 17
3-3-3 VSM (Value survey module) questionnaire 20
3-3-4 Translation 20
3-4 Apparatus 21
3-5 Procedure 21
3-5-1 Piloting experiment procedure 21
3-5-2 Final experiment procedure 22
3-6 Analysis 22
3-6-1 Transcription of thinking aloud protocols 22
3-6-2 Coding schemes for transcriptions 23
Chapter 4 Results and discussion 26
4-1 Computer use, online search habits and demographics data 26
4-2 VSM questionnaire data 27
4-3 Cultural dimension in search behavior 28
4-3-1 Cultural impact on search behavior 28
4-3-2 Cultural impact on power distance 29
4-3-3 Cultural impact on individualism and collectivism 30
4-3-4 Cultural impact on uncertainty avoidance 31
4-3-5 Cultural impact on masculinity and femininity 32
4-3-6 Cultural impact on long-term and short-term orientation 33
4-3-7 Cultural comparison of factors 33
Chapter 5 Conclusion 38
5-1 Comparing VSM results and cultural dimensions in search behavior
38
5-1-1 Comparing power distance index 38
5-1-2 Comparing uncertainty avoidance index 39
5-1-3 Comparing individualism index 40
5-1-4 Comparing masculinity index 40
5-1-5 Comparing long-term orientation index 41
5-2 Other online search diversities 41
5-2-1 Phenomenon one: comparative culture online 41
5-2-2 Phenomenon two: decision making in opposite order 42
5-2-3 Phenomenon three: time saving for different reasons 42
5-2-4 Phenomenon four: attitude towards the search task 42
5-3 Future work 43
References 44
Appendix 48
Appendix A: Questionnaire and search tasks of pretest 1. 48
Appendix B: Research authorization of pretest 2. 52
Appendix C: Questionnaire and search tasks of pretest 2. 53
Appendix D: Research authorization (Mandarin). 59
Appendix E: Questionnaire 1 (Mandarin). 60
Appendix F: Experiment process (Mandarin). 62
Appendix G: Think aloud instructions (Mandarin).63
Appendix H: Practice task (Mandarin). 64
Appendix I: Search tasks (Mandarin). 65
Appendix J: Answer sheets (Mandarin). 66
Appendix K: Questionnaire 2 (Mandarin). 67
Appendix L: Questionnaire 3- VSM (Mandarin). 70
Appendix M: Research invitation (English). 73
Appendix N: Research authorization (English). 74
Appendix O: Questionnaire 1 (English). 75
Appendix P: Experiment process (English). 77
Appendix Q: Think aloud instructions (English). 78
Appendix R: Practice task (English). 79
Appendix S: Search tasks (English). 80
Appendix T: Answer sheets (English). 82
Appendix U: Questionnaire 2 (English). 83
Appendix V: Questionnaire 3- VSM (English). 86
Akkerman, S., Bossche, P. V., Admiraal, W., Gijselaers, W., Segers, M., Simons,R. J., & Kirschner, P. (2007). Reconsidering group cognition: From conceptual
confusion to a boundary area between cognitive and socio-cultural perspectives? Educational Research Review, 2: 39–63.
Boland, J. E., Chua, H. F., & Nisbett, R. E. (2005). Cultural variation in eye movements during scene perception. The National Academy of Sciences, 102(35) 12629 -12633.
Baron, J. (1998, Dec). Teaching on-line across cultures. In A. Gooley, C. Pearson,& S. Towers (Eds.), Proceedings of the 3rd international conference on open learning, Brisbane, 67−72.
Barrett, H.C., Laurence, S., Margolis, E. (2008). Artifacts and Original Intent: A Cross-Cultural Perspective on the Design Stance. Journal of Cognition and Culture, 8, 1–22.
Brown, D. E. (1991). Human Universals. New York, McGraw-Hill.
Coulson, S. (2006). Semantic leaps: Frame shifting and conceptual blending in meaning construction. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Centra, J. A., & Gaubatz, N. B. (2005. Jul). STUDENT PERCEPTIONS OF LEARNING AND INSTRUCTIONAL EFFECTIVENESS IN COLLEGE COURSES. A VALIDITY STUDY OF SIR II, ETS.
Clemmensen, T., Hertzum, M., Hornbæk, K., Shi, Q., & Yammiyavar, P. (2009). Cultural Cognition in Usability Evaluation. Interacting with Computers, 21(3),212-220.
Carley, & Kathleen. (1988). Formalizing the Social Expert's Knowledge. Sociological Methods and Research, (17), 165 -232.
Chavan, A. L., Gorney, D., Prabhu, B., & Arora, S. (2009). The Washing Machine That Ate My Sari—Mistakes in Cross-Cultural Design. Interactions, (1-2).
Carley, K., & Palmquist, M. (1992). Extracting,Representing, and Analyzing Mental Models. Social Forces, University of North Carolina Press, Vol. 70, (3), 601-636.
Everett, D. L. (2005). Cultural Constraints on Grammar and Cognition in Piraha˜-Another Look at the Design Features of Human Language. Current Anthropology, 46(4), 8-10.
Friedman, T. (2005). The world is flat. US: Farrar, Straus and Giroux.
Fillmore, C. (1975). An alternative to checklist theories of meaning. Berkeley: 45 Berkeley Linguistics Society. 123-131.
Gardner, K. M., Rush, A.R., Crist, M., Konitzer, R., & Teegarden, B. (1998). Cognitive Patterns : Problem-Solving Frameworks for Object Technology: Advances in Object Technology (SIGS: Managing Object Technology), Cambridge University Press.
Giroux, H. A., & Myrsiades, K. (2001). Culture and pedagogy in the new millennium, : Rowman and Littlefield.
Gifford, A., (2008). Cultural, cognition and human action. The Journal of Socio-Economics, 12.
Hekkert, P., & Leder, H. (2008). Product aesthetics. San Diego: Elsevier.
Holzinger, A. (2005, Jan). USABILITY ENGINEERING METHODS FOR
SOFTWARE DEVELOPERS. COMMUNICATIONS OF THE ACM, 48(1), 71-74.
Hofstede, G. (2001). Culture's Consequences, Comparing Values, Behaviors, Institutions, and Organizations across Nations. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Janß, A., Lauer, W., & Radermacher, K. (2008, Sep). Using Cognitive Task Analysis for UI Design in Surgical Work Systems. ECCE'08, 16-19, Madeira, Portugal.
Lidwell, Holden, & Butler. (2003). Universal principles of design. Taipei: Uni –books.
Li, H., Sun, X., & Zhang, K. (2007). Culture-Centered Design: Cultural Factors in Interface Usability and Usability Tests. Eighth ACIS International Conference
on Software Engineering, Artificial Intelligence, Networking, and Parallel/Distributed Computing.
Minsky, M. (1975). A framework for representing knowledge. The psychology of computer vision. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Markussen, T., & Krogh, P. G. (2008) Mapping Cultural Frame Shifting in Interaction Design with Blending Theory. International Journal of Design, 2(2).
Marcus, A. (2001, Aug). Cross-Cultural User-Interface Design. Paper presented at the meeting of Human-Computer Interface Internat. (HCII), New Orleans, LA.
Marcus, A., & Gould, E. W. (2000). CROSSCURRENTS, Cultural Dimensions and Global Web User-Interface Design. Interactions, (7 -8).
Masuda, T., Gonzalez, R., Kwan, L., & Nisbett, R. E. (2008). Culture and Aesthetic Preference: Comparing the Attention to Context of East Asians and Americans. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin. 34(9), 1260-1275.
Nielsen, J. (n. d.). Ten Usability Heuristics. Retrieved on Nov. 1, 1994 from http://www.useit.com/papers/heuristic/heuristic_list.html
Nisbett, R. E. (2003). The Geography of Thought: How Asians and Westerners Think Differently and - Why. Brealey, London.
Nielsen, J. (1996). Top ten mistakes in Web design. Jakob Nielsen’s Alertbox.Retrieved July 20, 2003, from http://www.useit.com/alertbox/9605.html.
Nielson, J. (1994, Apr). Usability Inspection Methods. Conference companion, CHI’940, Boston, Massachusetts.
Nielsen, J. (1999). Top ten new mistakes of Web design. Jakob Nielsen’s Alertbox. Retrieved July 20, 2003, from
http://www.useit.com/alertbox/990530.html.
Norman, D. (1986). User Centered System Design: New Perspectives on Human-Computer Interaction. CRC Press.
Nisbett, R. E., Peng, K. P., Choi, I., & Norenzayan, A. (2005). Culture and systems of thought: Holistic versus analytic cognition. Psychological Review, 108(2), 291-310.
Norman. (1988). The psychology of everyday things. Taipei: Yuan –Liou Publishing Co., Ltd.
Petiot, J. F., Salvo, C., Hossoy, I., & Papalambros, P.Y., Gonzalez, R. (2009). A cross-cultural study of users’ craftsmanship perceptions in vehicle interior design. Int. J. Product Development, Vol. 7, Nos. 1/2.
Pinker, S. (2006). The blank slate. The General Psychologist, (41:1), 1-8.
Smith, P. J., & Smith, S. N. (1999). Differences between Chinese and Australian students: Some implications for distance educators. Distance Education, 20 (1), 64−80.
Sunley, P., Pinch, S., Reimer, S., & Macmillen, J. (2008). Innovation in a creative production system: the case of design. Journal of Economic Geography, 8, 675–698.
Tomasello, M., Carpenter, M., Call, J., Behne, T., & Moll, H. (2005). Understanding and sharing intentions: The origins of cultural cognition. BEHAVIORAL AND BRAIN SCIENCES, 28, 000–000.
Tomasello, M., Kruger, A. & Ratner, H. (1993). Cultural learning. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 16, 495–552.
Watkins, D., & Biggs, J. (2001). Teaching the Chinese Learners: Psychological and Pedagogical Perspectives. Melbourne/Hong Kong: Australian Council for Educational Research/Comparative Education Research Center.
Yamada, Y., Ishihara, K., & Yamaoka, T. (2011). A Study on an Usability Measurement Based on the Mental Model. Universal Access in HCI, Part I, HCII, LNCS 6765, 168–173.
Zhu, C., Valcke, M., Schellens, T. (2008). A cross-cultural study of Chinese and Flemish university students: Do they differ in learning conceptions and approaches to learning? Learning and Individual Differences, 18, 120 -127.
Adel, R. (2009). http://reyadel.wordpress.com/2009/10/22/learning-from-hofstede-asean5-east-asia/.
Boland, J. E., Chua, H. F., & Nisbett, R. E. How we see it: Culturally different eye movement patterns over visual scenes. http://www-personal.umich.edu/~jeboland/pdfs/ChinaConferenceChapter_colorpic.pdf.
Donald Norman website. (2002). http://www.interaction-design.org/references/authors/donald_a__norman.html
Hofstede, G. (2003). http://www.geert-hofstede.com/hofstede_taiwan.shtml.
International organization of standardization (ISO). (2011).
http://www.iso.org/iso/home.html.
連結至畢業學校之論文網頁點我開啟連結
註: 此連結為研究生畢業學校所提供,不一定有電子全文可供下載,若連結有誤,請點選上方之〝勘誤回報〞功能,我們會盡快修正,謝謝!
QRCODE
 
 
 
 
 
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               
第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁 top
系統版面圖檔 系統版面圖檔