| 研究生: |
洪崇議 Chung-I Hung |
|---|---|
| 論文名稱: |
探討行動網頁介面設計以及人格特質對使用者經驗之影響研究 A Study on the effects of Mobile Web Interface Design and Personality Traits on User Experience |
| 指導教授: |
范錚強
C.K. Farn 范懿文 I.W. Fan |
| 口試委員: | |
| 學位類別: |
碩士 Master |
| 系所名稱: |
管理學院 - 資訊管理學系 Department of Information Management |
| 論文出版年: | 2017 |
| 畢業學年度: | 105 |
| 語文別: | 中文 |
| 論文頁數: | 62 |
| 中文關鍵詞: | 使用者介面 、使用者經驗 、MBTI 人格特質 、行動網頁設計 、感知複雜度 |
| 外文關鍵詞: | User Interface, User Experience, MBTI Personality Trait, Mobile Website Design, Perceived Complexity |
| 相關次數: | 點閱:24 下載:0 |
| 分享至: |
| 查詢本校圖書館目錄 查詢臺灣博碩士論文知識加值系統 勘誤回報 |
現今行動裝置的使用率逐年上升,網頁開發的進入門檻逐漸降低,各家企業紛紛開 始專注於開發出一個最佳的使用者經驗網頁,因此行動網頁元素的設計顯得更加重要。 本研究希望探討網頁元素在什麼樣的設計下,能在行動網頁上有最好的呈現方式,此外, 本研究加入人格特質調節變數,來分析人格是否會影響使用者對元素設計的感受,再進 一步探討整體行動網頁的使用者經驗。
本研究以「實驗室研究法」,探討行動網頁介面常使用的兩個元素:「導覽選單」與 「網格版面」,本實驗透過這兩項元素的複雜度設計,並利用任務情境,讓使用者實際 的瀏覽與操作介面。實驗結束後,以問卷量測的分析方式,探討使用者的人格特質以及 對介面的感知複雜度,並分析出最佳的使用者經驗設計模式。
本研究的受測人數共 149 人,使用 SPSS, AMOS 與 SmartPLS 3.0 進行資料分析與 模型推論。研究結果發現:(1) 網格版面這項元素對感知複雜度的影響,會受到導覽選 單的調節。(2) 本研究也發現人格特質、導覽選單、網格版面三者的交互作用會與感知 複雜度有顯著的影響。(3) 使用者對介面的感知複雜度越高,其對於網頁介面的使用者 經驗,會有負向的影響。
Nowadays people are spending more and more time on mobile devices for web browsing. Therefore, the issue of user experience of websites becomes important to attract sticky users. This study attempts to explore the conditions for mobile website interface design, to achieve good user experience. In addition, the moderating effects of personality traits on the effects of these design elements on user experience are also explored.
A laboratory experiment was carried out in this study. Two of the design complexity elements, namely, “Navigation levels” and “Grid Layout” were chosen as manipulated independent variables. The experiment assigned each informant with a task requiring him/her to operate a mobile web page with different interfaces. User experience, perceived complexities and user’s personally traits were measured with questionnaires after usage.
A total of 149 informants were recruited, and their responses were collected and analyzed. Analysis tools, including SPSS, AMOS and SmartPLS 3.0 were used for data analysis and inferences. Results show that: (1) navigation levels and grid layout interacts to affect perceived complexity, (2) the above effect is moderated by personality traits, and (3) perceived complexity have a negative influence on user experiences.
英文文獻
1. Attneave, F. (1957). Physical determinants of the judged complexity of shapes. Journal of experimental Psychology, 53(4), 221.
2. Benyon, D., Turner, P. & Turner, S. (2005). Designing Interactive Systems – People, Activities, Contexts, Technologies. Addison Wesley.
3. Berlyne, D. E. (1963). Complexity and incongruity variables as determinants of exploratory choice and evaluative ratings. Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology, 17, 274.
4. Berlyne, D. E. (1971). Information, uncertainty, redundancy, aesthetics and psychobiology. New York: Meredith Corporation.
5. Chipman, S. F. (1977). Complexity and structure in visual patterns. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 106(3), 269.
6. ComScore. (2015). ComScore Reports June 2015 U.S. Smartphone Subscriber Mar ket Share. From https://www.comscore.com/Insights/Rankings/comScore-Reports-June -2015-US-Smartphone-Subscriber-Market-Share, accessed on March 2017.
7. Garrett, J.J. (2002). The Elements of User Experience. From http://www.jjg.net/elements/pdf/elements_ch02.pdf, accessed on March 2017.
8. Google. (2015). Finding more mobile-friendly search results. From https://webmasters.googleblog.com/2015/02/finding-more-mobile-friendly-search.htm, accessed on March 2017.
9. Google. (2016). Responsive Web Design. From https://developers.google.com/webm asters/mobile-sites/mobile-seo/responsive-design, accessed on March 2017.
10. Heckhausen, H. (1964). Complexity in perception: Phenomenal criteria and information theoretic calculus—A note on D. Berlynes “Complexity Effects.”
11. Hinderks, A. (2015). UEQ. From http://www.ueq-online.org/, accessed on March 2017.
12. Huizingh, E. K. (2000). The content and design of web sites: an empirical study.
Information & Management, 37(3), 123-134. 42
13. ISO-9241-210. (2010). Ergonomics of human system interaction-Part 210: Human-centred design for interactive systems. International Standardization Organization (ISO). Switzerland.
14. Laugwitz, B., Held, T., & Schrepp, M. (2008). Construction and evaluation of a user experience questionnaire. In Symposium of the Austrian HCI and Usability Engineering Group (pp. 63-76). Springer Berlin Heidelberg.
15. Ling, C., Lopez, M., & Xing, J. (2007). Validating information complexity questionnaires using travel web sites. International Conference on Human-Computer Interaction (pp. 901-910). Springer Berlin Heidelberg.
16. Marcotte, E. (2010). Responsive Web Design. From https://alistapart.com/article/responsive-web-design, accessed on March 2017.
17. Marcus, A. (2001). Babyface Design for Mobile Devices and the Web. In Smith, Michael J., and Salvendy, Gavriel, (Eds.), Conference Proceedings, Human-Computer Interface Internet. (HCII), Vol. 2, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, New Orleans, LA, pp. 514-518.
18. Miller, G. A. (1956). The magical number seven, plus or minus two: some limits on our capacity for processing information. Psychological review, 63(2), 81.
19. Nielsen, J. (2009). Short-Term Memory and Web Usability. From https://www.nngroup.com/articles/short-term-memory-and-web-usability/, accessed on March 2017.
20. Shneiderman, B. (2010). Designing the user interface: strategies for effective human-computer interaction. Pearson Education India.
21. StatCounter. (2016). Mobile and tablet internet usage exceeds desktop for first time worldwide. From
http://gs.statcounter.com/press/mobile-and-tablet-internet-usage-exceeds-desktop-for-firs t-time-worldwide, accessed on March 2017.
22. Strother, L., & Kubovy, M. (2003). Perceived complexity and the grouping effect in band patterns. Acta psychologica, 114(3), 229-244.
23. Tan, F. B., Tung, L. L., & Xu, Y. (2009). A Study Of Web-designers'criteria For Effective
Business-to-consumer (b2c) Websites Using The Repertory Grid Technique. Journal of
Electronic Commerce Research, 10(3), 155. 43
24. Väänänen-Vainio-Mattila, K., & Wäljas, M. (2011). How do users find out what's new: a study of change indicators in mobile services. In Proceedings of the 15th International Academic MindTrek Conference: Envisioning Future Media Environments (pp. 201-204). ACM.
25. Vouchercloud. (2014). eCommerce Psychology – Making the Product Look Good. From https://www.vouchercloud.com/blog/consumer-psychology-the-e-commerce-checkout/, accessed on March 2017.
26. Zeldman, J. (2011). Responsive Design. I don’t think that word means what you think it means. From http://www.zeldman.com/2011/07/06/responsive-design-i-dont- think-that-word-means-what-you-think-it-means/, accessed on March 2017.
中文文獻
1. 王任輝 (2015)。電子商務網站 RWD介面設計法則之使用者經驗及眼動行為研究。
中山大學資訊管理學系研究所學位論文,1-67。
2. 林秀瑋 (2010)。國小特殊教育教師人格特質與工作滿意度之研究。臺灣師範大學特
殊教育學系學位論文,1-120。
3. 林惠芬 (1999)。啟智教育教師人格特質之研究。特殊教育與復健學報,第7期,頁
281-296。
4. 財團法人台灣網路資訊中心 (2016)。「臺灣已有八成上網民眾採智慧手機進行連網」,
2016 年 3 月 19 日取自 http://www.twnic.net.tw/download/200307/20170109e.pdf
5. 馬于雯、鐘國應 (2008)。心理功能傾向量表與軍校生學習經驗量表之編製及其在軍
校生學校適應之運用。應用心理學,第37期,頁95-123。
6. 張仕錩 (2013)。使用者之場域傾向與介面互動模式對主觀複雜度之影響。實踐大學
工業產品設計學系碩士班碩士論文。
7. 黃堅厚 (2004)。人格心理學。臺北市:心理。
8. 楊淑晴 (1999)。麥布二氏心理類型量表 (MBTI) 之總覽。教育研究資訊,7(2), 100-110。
9. 資策會創新應用中心(2016)。「2016年台灣無線網路使用調查」,2016年4月19 日取自 https://www.twnic.net.tw/download/200307/20170109e.pdf