本研究之目的乃在試圖整合學習者個人特質以了解造成學習成效差異的原因。研究的變數包括以MBTI分類的人格特質、社會學習理論的自我效能、過去相關學習成就以及「科技接受模式（Technology Acceptance Model; TAM）」中之認知上的有用性及易用性等，且以中央大學一年級學生為研究樣本，利用問卷調查法收集各項資料並進行分析。
研究結果發現：
1.人格特質、認知上的有用性、電腦自我效能以及過去相關學習成就確實對學習者的電腦學習成效有影響。
2.學習者的高中電腦及聯考數學成績對於認知上的有用性與易用性有顯著的影響。而人格特質的不同截面對此二因素也有不同程度的影響。
3.人格特質及過去相關學習成就會顯著影響學習者的電腦自我效能。
4.不同性別在電腦學習成效、認知上的有用性與易用性、電腦自我效能以及過去相關學習成就等變數上有顯著差異。
5.不同學院的學習者，在電腦學習成效、電腦自我效能、認知上的有用性及易用性等變數上會有顯著差異。

中文部分：
1.王克先 (民86)，「學習心理學」，桂冠圖書公司。
2.王甫昌 (民73)，「知人又知心」，哈佛企業管理顧問公司出版部。
3.王宗斌 (民88)，「訓練方式、電腦自我效能及學習型態對學習績效的影響－網頁設計實地實驗」，國立中央大學資訊管理研究所碩士論文。
4.李德高 (民83)，「教育心理學」，五南圖書出版公司。
5.林欽榮 (民72)，「管理心理學」，五南圖書出版公司。
6.周曉虹 (民84)，「社會學習理論」，桂冠圖書公司。
7.洪光遠與鄭慧玲 (民84)，「人格心理學」，桂冠圖書公司。
8.張春興 (民80)，「心理學」，東華書局。
9.張春興與楊國樞 (民72)，「心理學」，三民書局。
10.陳淑琦 (民87)，「大學理工科系學生生涯自我效能、結果預期、職業興趣與職業選擇之相關研究」，國立高雄師範大學輔導研究所碩士論文。
11.賈馥茗編著(民80)，「教育心理學」，國立空中大學。
12.楊乾中 (民86)，「企業資訊教育訓練」，技術及職業教育，第38期，59-61頁。
13.劉信雄 (民80)，「國小學生認知風格、學習策略、自我效能、與學業成就關係之研究」，國立政治大學教育研究所博士論文。
14.鄭英耀 (民80)，「國小教師創造思考、批判思考及其相關因素之研究」，國立政治大學教育研究所博士論文。
15.鄭毅萍 (民74)，「電腦資訊系統中，設計者與使用者的認知型態--實證研究」，國立交通大學管理科學研究所碩士論文。
16.蔡淑娥 (民73)，「高中生的電腦態度、電腦成就及其相關因素之研究」，國立政治大學教育研究所碩士論文。
英文部分：
1.Allinson, C.W. and J. Hayes (1996). “The cognitive styles index: A measure of intuition-analysis for organisational research,” Journal of Management Studies, 33, pp.119-135.
2.Bandura, A. (1977). “Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change,” Psychological Review, 84(2), pp.191-215.
3.Bandura, A. (1982). “Self-efficacy mechanism in human agency,” American Psychologist, 37(2), pp.122-147.
4.Bandura, A. (1984). “Recycling misconceptions of perceived self-efficacy,” Cognitive Therapy and Research, 8(3), pp.231-255.
5.Bandura, A. (1991). “Social cognitive theory of self-regulation,” Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Process, 50, pp.248-287.
6.Benbasat, I. and A.S. Dexter (1986). “An investigation of the effectiveness of color and graphical presentation under varying time constraints,” MIS Quarterly, 10(1), pp.59-84.
6.Benbasat, I. and A.S. Dexter (1986). “An investigation of the effectiveness of color and graphical presentation under varying time constraints,” MIS Quarterly, 10(1), pp.59-84.
8.Borg, M.O. and S.L. Shapiro (1996). “Personality type and student performance in principles of economics,” Journal of Economics Education, 27(1), pp.3-25.
8.Borg, M.O. and S.L. Shapiro (1996). “Personality type and student performance in principles of economics,” Journal of Economics Education, 27(1), pp.3-25.
10.Brown, J.S. and S.E. Newman (1985). “Issues in cognitive and social ergonomics: From our house to Bauhaus,” Human-Computer Interaction, 1, pp.359-391.
11.Butcher, D.F. and W.A. Muth (1985). “Predicting performance in an introductory computer science course,” Communications of The ACM, 28(3). pp.263-268.
12.Cheney, P.H., R.I. Mann., and D.L. Amoroso (1986). “Organizational factors affecting the success of end-user computing,” Journal of MIS, 3, pp.65-80.
13.Coe, C.K. (1992). “The MBTI: Potential uses and misuses in personnel administration,” Public Personnel Management, 21(4), pp.511-522.
14.Coffin, R.J. and P.D. MacIntyre (1999). “Motivational influences on computer-related affect states,” Computers in Human Behavior, 15, pp.549-569.
15.Compeau, D.R. and C.A. Higgins (1995). “Computer self-efficacy: Development of a measure and initial test,” MIS Quarterly, June, pp.189-211.
16.Compeau, D., C.A. Higgins, and S. Huff (1999). “Social cognitive theory and individual reactions to computing technology: A longitudinal study,” MIS Quarterly, 23(2), pp.145-158.
17.Cooper, S.E. and J.A. Miller (1991). “MBTI learning style-teaching style discongruencies,” Educational and Psychological Measurement, 51(3), pp.699-706.
18.Davis, F.D. (1989a). “Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology,” MIS Quarterly, 13(3), pp.319-340.
19.Davis, F.D., R.P. Bagozzi, and P.R. Warshaw (1989b). “User acceptance of computer technology: A comparison of two theoretical models,” Management Science, 35(8), pp.982-1003.
19.Davis, F.D., R.P. Bagozzi, and P.R. Warshaw (1989b). “User acceptance of computer technology: A comparison of two theoretical models,” Management Science, 35(8), pp.982-1003.
19.Davis, F.D., R.P. Bagozzi, and P.R. Warshaw (1989b). “User acceptance of computer technology: A comparison of two theoretical models,” Management Science, 35(8), pp.982-1003.
22.Gal-Ezer, J. and D. Harel (1998). “What (else) should CS educators knows?,” Communications of The ACM, 11(9), pp.77-84.
23.Goodwin, L. and J.M. Wilkes (1986). “The psychological and background characteristics influencing students’ success in computer programming,” AEDS Journal, 19(1), pp.1-9.
24.Harrison, A.W. and R.K. Rainer Jr. (1992). “The influence of individual differences on skill in end-user computing,” Journal of Management Information Systems, 9(1), pp.93-111.
24.Harrison, A.W. and R.K. Rainer Jr. (1992). “The influence of individual differences on skill in end-user computing,” Journal of Management Information Systems, 9(1), pp.93-111.
26.Igbaria, M. and J. Iivari (1995a). “The effects of self-efficacy on computer usage,” Omega, 23(6), pp.587-605.
27.Igbaria, M., J. Iivari, and H. Maragahh (1995b). “Why do individuals use computer technology? A Finnish case study,” Information and Management, 29, pp.227-238.
27.Igbaria, M., J. Iivari, and H. Maragahh (1995b). “Why do individuals use computer technology? A Finnish case study,” Information and Management, 29, pp.227-238.
29.Kagan, D.M. (1998). “Learning how to program or use computers: a review of six applied suties,” Educational Technology, 28(3), pp.49-51.
29.Kagan, D.M. (1998). “Learning how to program or use computers: a review of six applied suties,” Educational Technology, 28(3), pp.49-51.
31.Knuth, D.E. (1974). “Computer science and its relation to mathematics,” American Mathematical Monthly, 81, pp.323-343.
32.Mager, R.F. (1992). “No self-efficacy, no performance,” Training, April, pp.32-36.
33.Martocchio, J.J. (1994). “Effects of conceptions of ability on anxiety, self-efficacy, and learning in training,” Journal of Applied Psychology, 79(6), pp.819-825.
34.McCaulley, M.H. (1990). “The Myers-Briggs Type Indicator: A measure for individuals and group,” Measurement & Evaluation in Counseling & Development, 22(4), pp.181-195.
35.Messick, S. (1984). “The nature of cognitive styles: Problems and promises in educational practice,” Educational Psychologist, 19, pp.59-74.
36.Murphy, C.A., D. Coover, and S.V. Owen (1989). “Development and validation of the computer self-efficacy scale,” Educational and Psychological Measurement, 49, pp.893-899.
37.Myers, I.B. and M.H. McCaulley (1985). Manual: A guide to the development and use of the Myers-Briggs type indicator, Palo Alto: Consulting Psychologists Press.
38.Oman, P.W. (1986). “Identifying student characteristics influencing success in introductory computer science courses,” AEDS Journal, 19(2-3), pp.226-233.
39.Rainer, R.K. and A.W. Harrison (1993). “Toward development of the end user computing construct in a university setting,” Decision Sciences, 24, pp.1187-1202.
40.Riding, R.J. (1997). “On the nature of cognitive style,” Educational Psychology, 17, pp.29-50.
41.Rockart, J.F. and L.S. Flannery (1983). “The management of end user computing,” Communications of The ACM, 26, pp.776-784.
42.Szajna, B. (1996). “Empirical evaluation of the revised Technology Acceptance Model,” Management Science, 42(1), pp.85-92.
42.Szajna, B. (1996). “Empirical evaluation of the revised Technology Acceptance Model,” Management Science, 42(1), pp.85-92.
44.Venkatesh, V. and F.D. Davis (1996). “A model of the antecedents of perceived ease of use: development and test,” Decision Sciences, 27(3), pp.451-481.
45.Warshaw, P.R. (1980). “A new model for predicting behavioral intentions: An alternative to Fishbein,” Journal of Marketing Research, 17(2), pp.153-172.
46.Winter, S.J., K.M. Chudoba, and B.A. Gutek (1998). “Attitudes toward computers: when do they predict computer use?,” Information and Management, 34(5), pp.275-284.
46.Winter, S.J., K.M. Chudoba, and B.A. Gutek (1998). “Attitudes toward computers: when do they predict computer use?,” Information and Management, 34(5), pp.275-284.
48.Zmud, R.W. (1979). “Individual differences and MIS Success: A review of the empirical literature,” Management Science, 25(10), pp.966-979.