過去溝通理論提出二種互動，分別是人際互動（Interaction）與外在互動(Outeraction)，這二種互動已經受到很多學者廣泛的注意與討論。本研究主要提出一個新的互動概念『內在互動』（Intra-action），『內在互動』的定義是『發自內心的東西或事物，藉由工具或活動，呈現個人內心的心智、思考或想法，並且可以與自我內在進行互動，幫助發覺自我，瞭解自我，表達自我，而不需要與他人互動或討論』。『內在互動』的例子相當多，例如：註記、日記，Web Log、心得筆記或自我效能測驗等，我們將深入探討『內在互動』的特性與重要性，並且與人際互動與外在互動進行比較，研究探討這三種互動之間的差異與相關性。
從這三個互動的觀點，我們開發對應的互動工具『註記工具』、『討論區』與『即時通』，應用在課程上並且進行實驗，探討這三個互動的相關性與對學習成效的影響，結果顯示『內在互動』對於學習有非常顯著的影響，並且比其他二種互動更為重要。除此之外，我們也進行問卷和訪談，了解學生對三種互動工具的滿意度，並深入研究學生對這三種互動影響學習的看法，作為後續研究的改進參考。

In the last few years, a number of researches have been devoted to the study of “Interaction” and “Outeraction”. The purpose of this study extends our further understanding about a novel construct: intra-action. The term “Intra-action” can be defined as “A kind of communication to interact with oneself through some tools or activities, which can help people to represent one’s mind or thought and to further understand themselves without communicating with others.” Through these kinds of communications, someone can discover and express oneself. Examples of “Intra-action” are annotation, diary, Blog, notes, and test of self- efficiency. In this paper , we not only discussed deeply the characteristic and importance of ” Intra-action”, but also compare it with “Outeraction”and “Interaction” to show the difference and relation among three kinds of communication.
We design communication tools Vpen, discuss board and Jmsn Messenger for “Intra-action”, “Interaction”, “Outeraction” respectively and apply them in the class. Then we study the relation of three kinds of communication and affection of learning achievements. The result shows “Intra-action” affect learning achievements more significantly and important than “Interaction” and “Outeraction”. Besides, to realize the satisfaction of system and the meaning of three kinds of communications in learning, we give questionnaire and Interview with the students.

中文部分：
翁淑緣(民89)。影響國中學生電腦學習意願之個人特性探討。教育與心理研究，23，147-172。
陳美靜(民87)。國中教師電腦基本能力之研究。國立台灣師範大學資訊教育研究所碩士論文。
陳麗鈴(民87)。高職學生電腦焦慮之相關因素研究。大葉大學資訊管理研究所碩士論文。
英文部分：
Baker, L.＆ Brown, A.L.(1984). Metacognitive skills in reading. In D. Person（ed.）, Handbook of reading research (pp.353-394). New York: Longman
Berg, G.A.(2002). Why Distance Learning?: Higher Education Administrative Practices: Oryx Press.
Bransford, J. D., Brown, A., & Cocking, R. (2000). How people learn: mind, brain, experience and school, expanded edition. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
Brown, A. L. & Smiley, S. S. (1978). The development of strategies for studying texts. Child Development, 19, 1076-1088.
Cameron, A.F., & Webster, J (2005).Unintended consequences of emerging communication technologies: Instant Messaging in the workplace. Computers in Human Behavior 21, 85–103
Damon, W. (1984). Peer interaction: The untapped potential. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 5, 331-343.
Dewey, J. (1916). Democracy and education. New York: Macmillan. Retrieved April 26, 2004, from the Institute for Learning Technologies.
Gardner, H. (1999) Multiple intelligence reframed. New York, USA: Basic Book.
Hwang W.Y. & Wang C.Y. (2005). A Study of Multimedia Annotation of Web-Based Materials. accepted for publication on Computers and Education.
Holmberg, B. (1989). Theory and practice of distance education. London: Routledge.
Howe, M. J. A. (1977). Learning and the acquisition of knowledge by students: some experimental investigations. In M. J. A. Howe(ed.), Adult Learning: psychological research and applications (pp.1-16). London: Wiley.
Katz, L., & Rezaei, A. (1999). The potential of modern telelearning tools for collaborative learning. Canadian Journal of Communication, 24, 427–448.
Laurillard, D. (1997). Rethinking university teaching: A framework for the effective use of educational technology. London: Routledge.
Lipman, M. (1991). Thinking in education. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Marshall, C. C. (1997). Annotation: from paper books to the digital library. In Proceedings of the second ACM international conference on Digital libraries (pp. 131-140). New York: ACM Press.
Nardi, B. A., Whittaker, S. and Bradner, E. (2000). Interaction and outeraction : Instant messaging in action. In S. Whittaker and W. A. Kellog(eds.), CSCW2000: ACM 2000 Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work(pp.79-88). New York, USA: ACM press.
Parker, A. (1999). Interaction in distance education: The critical conversation. Educational Technology Review, 12,13-17.
Scott Frees, G. Drew Kessler.(2004). Developing Collaborative Tools to Promote Communication and Active Learning in Academia. 34th ASEE/IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference.
Scardamalia, M. & B., C. (1993). Technologies for knowledge-building discourse. Communications of the ACM, 36(5), 37-41.
Scott Nicholson, (2002). Socialization in the ‘‘virtual hallway’’: Instant messaging in the asynchronous Web-based distance education classroom, Internet and Higher Education, 5,363–372.
Sims, R. (1999). Interactivity on stage: Strategies for learner-designer communication. Australian Journal of Educational Technology, 15(3), 257-272.
Slavin, R. (1995). Cooperative learning theory, research, and practice. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
Vygotsky, L.S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.( Original work published 1932)
Wagner, E. D. (1994). In support of a functional definition of interaction. The American Journal of Distance Education, 8(2), 6-26
Wenger, E., McDermott, R., & Snyder, W. (2002). Cultivating communities of practice: A guide to managing knowledge. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Business School Press.
William J. Doll; Gholamreza Torkzadeh (1998). The measurement of End-User Computering Satisfaction. MIS Quarterly,12, (2), 259-274.
Wortzel , R. (1979). New Life Style Determinants of Womens’s food Shopping Behavior ,Journal of Markrting , 43, 28-29 .
Jonassen, D. H. (1991). Evaluating constructivistic learning. In: T. M. Duffy & D. H. Jonassen (eds.), Constuctivism and the technology of instruction: A conversation (pp.129-135). New York, USA: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates