臺灣博碩士論文加值系統

本研究旨在探討機車駕駛使用行車影像記錄器對危險駕駛行為的影響。臺灣具有廣大的機車駕駛族群，且相較於汽車，機車族群若有意外將付出更多的代價。近年來，行車影像記錄器對肇事責任與車禍重建有不少功勞，然而卻鮮少研究針對機車族群進行討論。過去的研究說明，環境因素與駕駛的個人因素是產生危險駕駛的主要原因；而行車影像記錄器的使用與否，亦與個人對監視安全、隱私風險的態度有關。研究以自我控制能力與上述兩種態度作為個人因素，操弄使用行車影像記錄器作為環境因素，來探討危險駕駛──風險駕駛及侵略型駕駛──是否有所不同。

研究對象針對網路之機車駕駛，蒐集199位使用者與180位未使用者，共379個樣本進行分析。研究結果發現：(一)機車駕駛的監視安全與隱私風險態度影響使用行車影像記錄器與否；(二)使用行車影像記錄器的駕駛，在使用過後，降低自身的危險駕駛行為；(三)使用行車影像記錄器並無調節自我控制對危險駕駛的影響力；(四)監視安全與隱私風險之個人因素對危險駕駛行為並無影響。

根據結果，本研究認為使用行車影像記錄器可提醒機車駕駛人注意自己的駕駛方式，而有助於減少危險駕駛行為。本研究之貢獻在於針對新興環境因子初步探索，並作為往後交通管理之研究基礎。

The purpose of this study was to investigate the effect of risky driving behavior on motorcyclists equipped with the video event data recorder (car recorder). Comparing to the car drivers, motorcyclists are usually more serious injured from road traffic accidents. In recent years, car recorders got great amounts of credit for reconstructing traffic accidents and clarifying the responsibility.

However, only few studies discussed the effects of the car recorder on motorcyclists' riding behaviors. Previous studies indicated that environmental and personal factors could interact together to influence risky driving behaviors. In this study, low self-control, attitudes toward surveillance and risk of privacy were treated as the personal factors; equipping with the car recorder or not was treated as the environmental factor to investigate their motorcyclists' aggressive driving and risky driving behaviors.

Online survey were used to collected 199 motorcyclists equipped car recorder and 180 regular motorcyclists' responses.

The result indicated that (1) both attitudes toward surveillance and risk of privacy affected the usage of car recorder. (2) The risky driving behaviors were decreased after the motorcyclists equipped car recorders. (3) Car recorders could not moderate the effects of self-control on risky driving behaviors. (4) The attitudes security surveillance and risk of privacy were not related to risky driving. According to the results, this study suggested that car recorders could remind the motorcyclists to be careful while riding motorcycle, and decrease the risky driving behaviors. This study provided the insights into preliminary exploration under new environmental factors, and the results could be the foundation of traffic management in the future.

目錄 V
表目錄 VI
圖目錄 VII
第一章 緒論 1
第一節 研究背景與動機 1
第二節 名詞解釋 4
第三節 研究目的 5
第二章 文獻探討 6
第一節 監視安全、隱私風險與行車影像記錄器 6
第二節 危險駕駛研究發展與促發因素 11
第三節 自我控制與侵略型駕駛行為 18
第四節 自我控制、行車記錄器與駕駛行為 22
第五節 小結 22
第三章 研究方法 23
第一節 研究架構與假設 23
第二節 研究抽樣與施測 26
第三節 研究工具與統計方法 28
第四章 研究結果 32
第一節 焦點團體訪談 32
第二節 問卷量表之信、效度分析 33
第三節 描述性統計分析 39
第四節 主要研究發現 43
第五節 小結 47
第五章 結論與建議 48
第一節 研究摘要 48
第二節 研究結果與討論 50
第三節 研究可能之貢獻 53
第四節 研究限制與未來研究建議 54
參考書目 55
附錄一 焦點團體訪談內容節錄 61
附錄二 網路問卷 63

Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behavior. Organizational behavior and human decision processes, 50(2), 179-211.
Anderson, C. A., & Bushman, B. J. (2002). Human aggression. Psychology, 53(1), 27.
Argyle, M. (1983). The psychology of interpersonal behaviour: Penguin.
Ariel, B., Farrar, W. A., & Sutherland, A. (2015). The effect of police body-worn cameras on use of force and citizens’ complaints against the police: a randomized controlled trial. Journal of Quantitative Criminology, 31(3), 509-535.
Arnett, J. J., Offer, D., & Fine, M. A. (1997). Reckless driving in adolescence:‘State’and ‘trait’factors. Accident Analysis & Prevention, 29(1), 57-63.
Baron, R. M., & Kenny, D. A. (1986). The moderator–mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51(6), 1173.
Barratt, E. S. (1970). Anxiety and impulsiveness: Toward a neuropsychological model. Retrieved from
Bateson, M., Nettle, D., & Roberts, G. (2006). Cues of being watched enhance cooperation in a real-world setting. Biology letters, 2(3), 412-414.
Beck, L. C., Trombetta, W., & Share, S. (1986). Using focus group sessions before decisions are made. North Carolina Medical Journal, 47(2), 73-74.
Bogard, W. (1996). The simulation of surveillance: Hypercontrol in telematic societies: Cambridge University Press.
Boyce, T. E., & Geller, E. S. (2002). An instrumented vehicle assessment of problem behavior and driving style:: Do younger males really take more risks? Accident Analysis & Prevention, 34(1), 51-64.
Brin, D. (1999). The transparent society: Will technology force us to choose between privacy and freedom? : Basic Books.
Chase, L. J., & Mills, N. H. (1973). Status of frustrator as a facilitator of aggression: A brief note. The Journal of psychology, 84(2), 225-226.
Clarke, R. V. (1980). " situational" Crime Prevention: Theory and Practice. The British Journal of Criminology, 20(2), 136-147.
Corbett, R., & Marx, G. T. (1991). Critique: No soul in the new machine: Technofallacies in the electronic monitoring movement. Justice Quarterly, 8(3), 399-414.
Deffenbacher, J. L., Huff, M. E., Lynch, R. S., Oetting, E. R., & Salvatore, N. F. (2000). Characteristics and treatment of high-anger drivers. Journal of counseling psychology, 47(1), 5.
Deffenbacher, J. L., White, G. S., & Lynch, R. S. (2004). Evaluation of two new scales assessing driving anger: The Driving Anger Expression Inventory and the Driver's Angry Thoughts Questionnaire. Journal of Psychopathology and Behavioral Assessment, 26(2), 87-99.
Doob, A. N., & Gross, A. E. (1968). Status of frustrator as an inhibitor of horn-honking responses. The Journal of Social Psychology, 76(2), 213-218.
Dula, C. S., & Geller, E. S. (2003). Risky, aggressive, or emotional driving: Addressing the need for consistent communication in research. Journal of safety research, 34(5), 559-566.
Elliott, B. (1999). Road rage: Media hype or serious road safety issue?
Ellison‐Potter, P., Bell, P., & Deffenbacher, J. (2001). The effects of trait driving anger, anonymity, and aggressive stimuli on aggressive driving behavior. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 31(2), 431-443.
Ellison, P. A., Govern, J. M., Petri, H. L., & Figler, M. H. (1995). Anonymity and aggressive driving behavior: A field study. Journal of Social Behavior & Personality.
Foucault, M. (1977). Discipline and punish: The birth of the prison: Vintage.
Grasmick, H. G., Tittle, C. R., Bursik, R. J., & Arneklev, B. J. (1993). Testing the core empirical implications of Gottfredson and Hirschi's general theory of crime. Journal of research in crime and delinquency, 30(1), 5-29.
Grey, M., Triggs, T., & Haworth, N. (1989). Driver Aggression: The role of personality, social characteristics, risk and motivation. STAYSAFE 58, 9.
Hauber, A. R. (1980). The social psychology of driving behaviour and the traffic environment: Research on aggressive behaviour in traffic. Applied Psychology, 29(4), 461-474.
Hennessy, D. A., & Wiesenthal, D. L. (1999). Traffic congestion, driver stress, and driver aggression. Aggressive behavior(25), 409-423.
Hennessy, D. A., & Wiesenthal, D. L. (2001). Gender, driver aggression, and driver violence: An applied evaluation. Sex Roles, 44(11-12), 661-676.
Jennings, W. G., Fridell, L. A., & Lynch, M. D. (2014). Cops and cameras: Officer perceptions of the use of body-worn cameras in law enforcement. Journal of Criminal Justice, 42(6), 549-556.
Jessor, R. (1987). Risky driving and adolescent problem behavior: An extension of problem-behavior theory. Alcohol, Drugs, and Driving, 3(3-4), 1-11.
Joireman, J., Anderson, J., & Strathman, A. (2003). The aggression paradox: understanding links among aggression, sensation seeking, and the consideration of future consequences. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 84(6), 1287.
Jonah, B. A. (1997). Sensation seeking and risky driving: a review and synthesis of the literature. Accident Analysis & Prevention, 29(5), 651-665.
Krueger, R. A., & Casey, M. A. (2014). Focus Groups: A Practical Guide for Applied Research: SAGE Publications.
Lajunen, T., Parker, D., & Summala, H. (1999). Does traffic congestion increase driver aggression? Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, 2(4), 225-236.
Lin, Y. (2013). Aggressive Driving: Insights Derived from Psychology's General Aggression Model: LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC.
Loeber, R., Stouthamer-Loeber, M., Van Kammen, W. B., & Farrington, D. P. (1989). Development of a new measure of self-reported antisocial behavior for young children: Prevalence and reliability Cross-national research in self-reported crime and delinquency (pp. 203-225): Springer.
Lyon, D. (1994). The electronic eye: The rise of surveillance society: U of Minnesota Press.
McCarney, R., Warner, J., Iliffe, S., Van Haselen, R., Griffin, M., & Fisher, P. (2007). The Hawthorne Effect: a randomised, controlled trial. BMC medical research methodology. Retrieved from https://bmcmedresmethodol.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/1471-2288-7-30
McGarva, A. R., Ramsey, M., & Shear, S. A. (2006). Effects of driver cell-phone use on driver aggression. The Journal of Social Psychology, 146(2), 133-146.
Miller, D. T., & Ross, M. (1975). Self-serving biases in the attribution of causality: Fact or fiction? Psychological bulletin, 82(2), 213.
Mizell, L., Joint, M., & Connell, D. (1997). Aggressive driving: Three studies: AAA Foundation for Traffic Safety.
Mooney, G., Pile, S., & Brook, C. (1999). Unruly Cities?: Order/disorder: Psychology Press.
Moore, M., & Dahlen, E. R. (2008). Forgiveness and consideration of future consequences in aggressive driving. Accident Analysis & Prevention. Retrieved from http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2574511/
Parry, M. H. (1968). Aggression on the road: Tavistock Publications, London, England.
Poster, M. (1990). The mode of information: Poststructuralism and social context: University of Chicago Press.
Robins, L. N., & Wish, E. (1977). Childhood deviance as a developmental process: A study of 223 urban black men from birth to 18. Social Forces, 56(2), 448-473.
Shinar, D. (1998). Aggressive driving: the contribution of the drivers and the situation. Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, 1(2), 137-160.
Strathman, A., Gleicher, F., Boninger, D. S., & Edwards, C. S. (1994). The consideration of future consequences: Weighing immediate and distant outcomes of behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 66(4), 742.
Svenson, O. (1981). Are we all less risky and more skillful than our fellow drivers? Acta psychologica, 47(2), 143-148.
Taddicken, M. (2014). The ‘Privacy Paradox’in the Social Web: The Impact of Privacy Concerns, Individual Characteristics, and the Perceived Social Relevance on Different Forms of Self‐Disclosure. Journal of Computer‐Mediated Communication, 19(2), 248-273.
Tasca, L. (2000). A review of the literature on aggressive driving research: Ontario Advisory Group on Safe Driving Secretariat, Road User Safety Branch, Ontario Ministry of Transportation.
Wedekind, C., & Braithwaite, V. A. (2002). The long-term benefits of human generosity in indirect reciprocity. Current Biology. Retrieved from http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0960982202008904
Yagil, D. (1998). Gender and age-related differences in attitudes toward traffic laws and traffic violations. Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, 1(2), 123-135.
Young, J. (2014). Implementation of a randomized controlled trial in Ventura, California: A body-worn video camera experiment. Unpublished master’s thesis, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, England.
Zuckerman, M. (1994). Behavioral Expressions and Biosocial Bases of Sensation Seeking: Cambridge University Press.
何正光（2009）從防衛空間探討錄影監視系統設置管理之研究─以臺北市為例。國立臺北大學犯罪學研究所碩士論文。
吳坤旭 （2011）。監視錄影系統之犯罪預防實證研究-以桃園縣為例。國立臺北大學犯罪學研究所碩士論文
吳曉綺（2012）。警察機關建置CCTV對竊盜犯罪預防之效用。國立臺北大學犯罪學研究所碩士論文
李萬益（2006）。閉路監視系統運用於犯罪偵查之研究。國立臺北大學犯罪學研究所碩士論文。
周文生、宋宗哲（2013）。行車影像紀錄器於交通執法應用之探討。執法新知論衡第九卷第二期，頁 1-28，民國 102 年 12 月。
周愫嫻、曹立群（2014）。犯罪學理論及其實證 臺北市：五南圖書出版股份有限公司。
孟維德（2009）。從美國堪薩斯市預防巡邏實驗評析見警率與巡邏的效能。刊於《警學叢刊》，第三十九卷第四期，頁1-22。
林曉芳（2013）。全球行車影像記錄器市場暨台灣產業發展動向剖析。證券櫃檯，12，49-52。
林聲（2013）。危「機」四伏的公共空間：以照相手機作為一種影像監視。國立台灣藝術大學廣播電視學系研究所碩士論文。
許春金（2010）。犯罪學(修訂第六版)。臺北市：三民書局
許春金、陳玉書（2013）。犯罪預防與犯罪分析。臺北市：三民。
黃健庭（2010）。警察運用監視錄影系統偵辦刑案現況與問題之研究─以嘉義市為例。國立中正大學犯罪防治研究所碩士論文。
楊雅玲（2005）。美麗新視界？－臺灣都市公共空間中錄影監視系統之興起，臺灣大學建築與城鄉研究所博士論文。
鄒維剛（2014）。臺灣網民對行車記錄器的看法。國立暨南大學公共行政與政策學系學位論文，P1 - 116