臺灣博碩士論文加值系統

連環漫畫自二十世紀開始於全世界蓬勃發展，在台灣也成為青少年重要的休閒讀物，讀者們喜愛「有趣」、「有創意」的作品，無論是在學術層面或者實務層面這一點都是無庸置疑的，然而在評價一部作品的創意時如何才能客觀，而什麼樣的變因會影響創意評價的分數，值得研究探討。本研究主要討論人格特質與漫畫創意評價之間的關係，實驗分為兩個階段：問卷調查與鍊結表記Linkography圖實驗，以Ashton &; Lee所提出的HEXACO-PI-R人格特質量表為檢測基礎，第一階段的問卷挑選兩篇獲獎漫畫作為刺激物，在網路社群上發放問卷，共回收391份樣本。第二階段依第一階段的分析結果，自有達到相關上顯著水準的三個特質（情緒性、外向性、經驗開放性）中，自高分群與低分群分別挑選兩位受測者，共12位進行第二階段的Linkography圖實驗，以兩篇出版漫畫作為刺激物，驗證第一階段之成果。經由統計分析比較後得出以下三大結論：1. 情緒性高分者評價分數顯著大於情緒性低分者，且情緒性與漫畫創意評價呈現低度正相關。2. 外向性及經驗開放性與漫畫創意評價有低度相關性，但不適用於所有的漫畫作品。3. 誠實性、親和性以及盡責性與漫畫創意評價之間沒有相關性。

Comic strips have been continually flourishing over the world since 20th century. It also became an important entertainment for adolescence in Taiwan. There’s no doubt that readers prefer to the “interesting” and “creative” comics. But there are several questions that how can we judge a comic strip objectively. In addition, what makes the rating scores for creativity different? It’s worth the hassle. The study focuses on the relationship between personality and creativity evaluation of comic strips. Two experiments were performed to test the approach: questionnaire and Linkography test. The study used “HEXACO-PI-R” which was developed by Ashton and Lee to classify personality. Two awarded comic works was chosen as the stimulus in first study. The questionnaire was distributed on social networking sites. 391 samples were collected and the effective response rate was 100%. According to the analysis of questionnaire in first study, the researcher chose 12 subjects who have high scores/ low scores on Emotionality, Extraversion and Openness to experience. The Linkography test was in order to validate the facts from the first test. After the statistical analysis and comparing between the two experiments, there are three major discoveries as following: 1. The high scorers of Emotionality rate the creativity of comic strips higher than the low scorers. There are low positive correlation between Emotionality and creativity evaluation of comic strips. 2. Extraversion and Openness to experience have low correlation to creativity evaluation of comic strips, but not among every comic strip. 3. Honesty-Humility, Agreeableness and Conscientiousness are not correlated with creativity evaluation of comic strips.

第一章 緒論 1
第一節 研究背景與動機 1
第二節 研究目的 2
第三節 研究方法與流程 3
第二章 文獻探討 7
第一節 漫畫 7
第二節 人格特質 13
第三節 創造力與創意之評估 19
第三章 研究方法 33
第一節 第一階段 ─ 問卷調查 33
第二節 第二階段 ─ Linkography圖實驗 39
第三節 研究變項與研究假設 42
第四章 研究資料分析 44
第一節 第一階段─問卷調查資料分析 44
第二節 第二階段─Linkography圖的資料分析 58
第三節 研究假設驗證與討論 62
第五章 結論與建議 69
第一節 結論 69
第二節 研究侷限與建議 72
參考文獻 74
附件一　人格特質及漫畫創意評量標準相關性問卷 84
附件二　第二階段Linkogrophy圖 89

英文文獻
Allport, G.W. (1937). Personality - A psychological interpretation. New York: Henry Holt and Company.
Amabile, T.M. (1983). The social psychology of creativity. New York: Springer-Verlag.
Amabile, T.M. (1996). Creativity in context: Update to the social psychology of creativity. Oxford: Westview Press.
Amabile, T.M. (1997). Motivating creativity in organizations. California Management Review, Fall, p.43.
Amabile, T.M. (1998). A model of creativity and innovation in organizations. In B. M. Staw &; L. L. Cummings (Eds.), Research in Organizational Behavior, 10, 123-167. Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
Amabile, T.M. (1998). How to Kill Creativity. Harvard Business Review, September-October, 77-87.
Batey, M. &; Furnham, A. (2006). Creativity, intelligence and personality: A critical review of the scattered literature. Genetic, Social and General Psychology Monographs, 123(4), 355-429.
Batey, M., Rawles, R. &; Furnham, A. (2009). Divergent thinking and interview ratings. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 27(1), 57-67.
Bater, M., Furnham, A. &; Safiullina, X. (2010). Intelligence, general knowledge and personality as predictors of creativity. Learning and individual differences. Journal of Psychology and Education, 20, 532-535.
Buchanan, L.B. (1998). The impact of big five personality characteristics on group cohesion and creative task performance. Unpublished PhD. Dissertation, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University.
Byrd, R.E. (1986). Creativity and Risk-taking. Pfeiffer International Publishers, San Diego, CA.
Cattell, R. B. (1956). Personality and motivation theory based on structural measurement. In J. L.
Chou, S.B., Chou, H.W., I, B. (2012). Evaluating the creativity of comic strips: a Linkography data clustering approach. unpublished test, National Taiwan Normal University.
Chou, S.B., Chou, H.W., Chen, Y.L. (2013). Entropy of Linkography: Evaluating the creativity of short animation. Creativity Research Journal, 25, Issue1, 33-37.
Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1996). Creativity : Flow and the Psychology of Discovery and Invention. New York: Harper Perennial.
Feist, G. J. (1998). A meta-analysis of personality in scientific and artistic creativity. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 2(4), 290−309.
Furnham, A. &; Bachtiar, V. (2008). Personality and intelligence as predictors of creativity. Personality and Individual Differences, 45(7), 613−617.
Gaughan, E.T., Miller, J.D., Lynam, D.R. (2012). Examining the utility of general models of personality in the study of psychopathy: A comparison of the HEXACO-PI-R and NEO PI-R. Journal of Personality Disorders, 26, 513-523.
Gardner, H. (1993). Frames of Mind: The Theory of Multiple Intelligences. New York: Basic Books.
George, J.M., and Zhou, J. (2001). When Openness to Experience and Conscientiousness Are Related to Creative Behavior: An Interactional Approach.Journal of Applied Psychology, 86, 513-524.
Geher,G., Miller, G.(2007). Mating Intelligence: Sex, Relationships, and the Mind's Reproductive System. New York: Lawrence erlbaum associates.
Getzels, J.W. (1975). Problem-finding and the inventiveness of solutions. Journal of Creative Behavior, 12-18.
Getzels, J.W. &; Jackson, P. J. (1962). Creativity and Intelligence: Explorations with Gifted Students. New York: John Wiley and Sons, Inc.
Guilford, J.P. (1959). Personality. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Guilford, J.P. (1965). Fundamental statistics in psychology and education. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Guilford, J.P. (1967). The Nature of Human Intelligence.
Gough, H. G. (1979). A creative personality scale for the Adjective Check List. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 37(8), 1398-1405.
Goldberg, L. R. (1981) Language and individual differences: The search for universals in personality lexicons. Review of Personality and Social Psychology, 2. In L. Wheeler (Ed.)
Goldberg, L. R. (1992). The development of markers for the Big-five factor structure. Psychological Assessment, 4 (1), 26–42.
Goldschmidt, G. (1990). Linkography: assessing design productivity, Cyberbetics and System'90, R. Trappl. World Scientific, Singapore: 291-298.
Goldschmidt, G. (1995). The designer as a team of one. Design Studies, 16(2), 189-210.
Grigorenko, E. L., &; Sternberg, R. J. (1993). Thinking styles questionnaires for teachers and students. , unpublished test, Yale University.
Grigorenko, E.L., &; Sternberg, R.J. (1995). Thinking styles. In D. H. Saklofske &; M. Zeidner (Eds.) International handbook of personality and intelligence, 205-229.New York: Plenum Press.
Costa, P. T., &; McCrae, R.R. (1992). Neo PI-R professional manual. Odessa, FL: Psychological.
Hair, J. F., Anderson, R. E., Tatham, R. L., and Black, W. C. (1998). Multivariance data analysis (5th Ed.).Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Hilgard, E. R., &; Atkinson, R. C. (1969). Introduction to psychology. New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.
Hu, W., &; Adey, P. (2002). A Scientific Creativity Test for Secondary School Students. International Journal of Science Education, 24(4), 389-404.
Kan, J.W., &; Gero, J.S. (2005). Entropy measurement of linkography in protocol studies of designing. In J.S. Gero &; N. Bonnardel, (Eds.), Studying Designers’, 5, 229-245. Australia: 2005 Key Center of Design Computing and Cognition, University of Sydney.
Kan, J.W., Bilda, Z. &; Gero, J.S. (2007). Comparing entropy measures of idea links in design protocols: Linkography entropy measurement and analysis of differently conditioned design sessions, AIEDAM 21, 4, 367-377.
King, L.A., Walker, L.M., Broyles, S.J. (1996). Creativity and the five-factor model. Journal of Research in Personality , 30, 189-203.
Kaufman, J.C., Gentile, C.A. &; Baer, J. (2005). Do gifted student writers and creative writing experts rate creativity the same way? Gifted Child Quarterly, 49, 260-265.
Kaufman, J.C., Baer, J., Cole, J.C. &; Sexton, J.D. (2008). A comparison of expert and nonexpert raters using the Consensual Assessment Technique. Creativity Research Journal, 20, 171-178.
Lee, K. &; Ashton, M.C. (2004). Psychometric properties of the HEXACO personality inventory. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 39, 329-358.
Lee, K., &; Ashton, M. C. (2008). The HEXACO personality factors in the indigenous personality lexicons of English and 11 other languages. Journal of Personality, 76, 1001-1053.
Lee, K., &; Ashton, M. C. (2009). The HEXACO-60: A short measure of the major dimensions of personality. Journal of Personality Assessment, 91, 340-345.
Lynch, B. (1926). A history of Caricature. London: Faber &; Gwyer.
McCrae, R. R., &; Costa, P. T., Jr. (1989). Reinterpreting the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator from the perspective of the five-factor model of personality. Journal of Personality, 57, 17-40.
Mellou, E. (1996). The two conditions view of creativity. Journal of Creative Behavior, 30(2), 126-149.
Mooney, R.L. (1963). A conceptual model for integrating four approaches to the identification of creative talent. In C. W. Taylor &; F. Barron (Eds.), Scientific creativity: Its recognition and development, 331-340, New Yor: Wiley.
Norman, W. T. (1963). Toward an adequate taxonomy of personality attributes: Replicated factor structure in peer nomination personality ratings. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 66 (6), 574–583.
Osborn, A.F. (1957). Applied Imagination: Principles and procedures of creative thinking. (Revised edition). New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons.
Rodes, M. (1961). An analysis of creativity. Phi Delta Kappa, 42, 305-310.
Saucier, G. (1994). Mini-markers: A brief version of Goldberg’s unipolar Big-Five markers. Journal of Personality Assessment, 63, 506–516.
Silvia, P.J., Kaufman, J.C., Reiter-Palmon, R. &; Wigert, B. (2011). Cantankerous creativity: Honesty–Humility, Agreeableness, and the HEXACO structure of creative achievement. Personality and Individual Differences, 10(5), 687-689.
Sternberg, R. (1988). The triarchic mind: A new theory of human intelligence. New York: Viking.
Sternberg, R. J. &; Lubart, T. I. (1996). Investing in creativity. American Psychologist, 51(7), 77-688.
Tokar, D.M., Fischer, A.R., Snell, A.F., &; Harik-Williams, N. (1999). Efficient assessment of the five-factor model of personality: Structural validity analyses of the NEO Five-Factor Inventory (Form S). Measurement and Evaluation in Counseling and Development, 32, 14-30.
Torrance, E.P. (1966). The Torrance Tests of Creative Thinking – Norms-Technical Manual Research Edition – Verbal Tests, Forms A and B – Figural Tests, Forms A and B. Princeton NJ: Personnel Press.
Torrance, E.P. (1981). Predicting the creativity of elementary school children (1958-80) - and the teacher who "made a difference." Gifted Child Quarterly, 25, 55-62.
van der Lugt, R. &; van der Graaf, A. (2002). Context Indicators for Determining Links Between Design Ideas. Design research and technology, 261-266.
Watson, D. (1989). Strangers' ratings of the five robust personality factors: Evidence of a surprising convergence with self-report. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 57, 120-128.
Wallas, G. (1926). The art of thought. New York: Harcourt Brace.
Wallach, M., &; Kogan, N. (1965). Modes of thinking in young children. New York, NY: Holt, Rinehart &; Winston.
Ward, A.W. (1875). A history of English dramatic literature to the death of Queen Anne. London: Macmillan.
Woodman, R., Sawyer, J. &; Griffin, R. (1993). Toward a theory of organizational creativity. Academy of management Review, 18, 293-321.
Wolfradt, U. &; Pretz, J.E. (2001). Individual differences in creativity: Personality, story writing, and hobbies. European Journal of Personality, 15(4), 297-310