服務設計包含多渠道、多角色、多場景的特性，與過往的設計領域截然不同，導致其許多方法與工具沿用自其他領域，因此目前主要的研究方向為設計工具與設計流程，而測試階段仍未有充足的研究與瞭解，雖然有學者針對服務設計測試提出不同服務原型測試方法，但過往的研究較針對單一服務原型方法進行個案研究，至今尚未有充足的研究討論其方法之間的差異性，以致於在服務測試階段時，無法針對不同類型之服務選擇適當的測試方法。因此本研究透過實際執行服務設計測試，藉由口語分析與量化分析探討服務原型與使用者回饋之間的影響，比較故事版、桌上演練、角色扮演之間的差異性。本研究發現，相同服務在利用不同服務原型進行測試時，會帶給受試者不同服務體驗與感受，以及產生不同程度的回饋，透過研究發現，最終提出故事版、桌上演練、角色扮演的使用時機和操作建議，並針對服務原型研究提出建議。

Service design includes the characteristics of multi-channel, multi-role, and multi-scenario, which is very different from the past design field. It leads to many methods and tools in service design are used in other fields. Therefore, the main research direction is design tools and design processes, while it is insufficient research and understanding in the test stage. Although some scholars have proposed different service prototyping for service design testing, there have not been sufficient studies to discuss the differences between service prototyping. So that during the service testing, it is not possible to choose an appropriate service prototyping for different types of services. Therefore, this study explores the impact of service prototyping and user feedback through protocol analysis and quantitative analysis, and explores the differences between storyboard, desktop walkthrough, and service roly-play. This study found that the same service is tested with different testing methods, it will bring different service experiences and feelings to the subjects, and generate different levels of feedback. Through research and discovery, the use of timing and operation suggestions for storyboard, desktop walkthrough, and service roly-play will eventually be proposed. And make recommendations for service prototype research.

英文文獻
1. Anderson, E. W., & Sullivan, M. W. (1993). The antecedents and consequences of customer satisfaction for firms. Marketing science, 12(2), 125-143.
2. Bansal, H. S., Irving, P. G., & Taylor, S. F. (2004). A three-component model of customer to service providers. Journal of the Academy of marketing Science, 32(3), 234-250.
3. Blomkvist, J., Åberg, J., & Holmlid, S. (2013, October). Service walkthroughs to support service development. In ServDes. 2012 Conference Proceedings Co-Creating Services; The 3rd Service Design and Service Innovation Conference; 8-10 February; Espoo; Finland (No. 067, pp. 43-52). Linköping University Electronic Press.
4. Blomkvist, J., & Holmlid, S. (2010). Service prototyping according to service design practitioners. In Conference Proceedings, ServDes. 2010, Exchanging Knowledge, Linköping, Sweden, 1-3 December 2010 (Vol. 2, pp. 1-11). Linköping university electronic press.
5. Blomkvist, J., & Segelström, F. (2014). Benefits of external representations in service design: A distributed cognition perspective. The Design Journal, 17(3), 331-346.
6. Blomkvist, J., & Wahlman, F. (2018, July). Facilitating in service design using desktop walkthroughs. In ServDes2018. Service Design Proof of Concept, Proceedings of the ServDes. 2018 Conference, 18-20 June, Milano, Italy (No. 150, pp. 812-821). Linköping University Electronic Press.
7. Council, D. (2011). Eleven Lessons: Managing design in eleven global brands. The design process.
8. Dorst, K. (1995). Analysing design activity: new directions in protocol analysis. Design Studies, 2(16), 139-142.
9. Eckersley, M. (1988). The form of design processes: a protocol analysis study. Design studies, 9(2), 86-94.
10. Ericsson, K. A., & Simon, H. A. (1984). Protocol analysis: Verbal reports as data. the MIT Press.
11. Grace, D., & O'Cass, A. (2004). Examining service experiences and post-consumption evaluations. Journal of Services Marketing, 18(6), 450-461.
12. Holmlid, S., & Evenson, S. (2007, June). Prototyping and enacting services: Lessons learned from human-centered methods. In Proceedings from the 10th Quality in Services conference, QUIS (Vol. 10).
13. Jones, M., & Samalionis, F. (2008). From small ideas to radical service innovation. Design Management Review, 19(1), 20-26.
14. Lovelock, C., & Gummesson, E. (2004). Whither services marketing? In search of a new paradigm and fresh perspectives. Journal of service research, 7(1), 20-41.
15. Mager, B., & Sung, T. J. D. (2011). Special issue editorial: Designing for services. International Journal of Design, 5(2).
16. Moritz, S. (2009). Service design: Practical access to an evolving field. Lulu. com.
17. Parasuraman, A., Zeithaml, V. A., & Berry, L. L. (1988). Servqual: A multiple-item scale for measuring consumer perc. Journal of retailing, 64(1), 12.
18. Parasuraman, A., Zeithaml, V. A., & Malhotra, A. (2005). ES-QUAL: a multiple-item scale for assessing electronic service quality. Journal of service research, 7(3), 213-233.
19. Rae, J. (2007). Seek the magic with service prototypes. Retrieved, 5(25), 2010.
20. Reichheld, F. F. (2003). The one number you need to grow. Harvard business review, 81(12), 46-55.
21. Stickdorn, M., Schneider, J., Andrews, K., & Lawrence, A. (2011). This is service design thinking: Basics, tools, cases (Vol. 1). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.
22. Voss, C. A. (1992). Measurement of INNOVATION and DesignPerformance IN SERVICES. Design Management Journal (Former Series), 3(1), 40-46.
23. Wieland, H., Polese, F., Vargo, S. L., & Lusch, R. F. (2012). Toward a service (eco) systems perspective on value creation. International Journal of Service Science, Management, Engineering, and Technology (IJSSMET), 3(3), 12-25.
24. Zeithaml, V. A. (1988). Consumer perceptions of price, quality, and value: a means-end model and synthesis of evidence. Journal of marketing, 52(3), 2-22.

中文文獻
1. 李儀家.(2014). 跨管道服務設計對服務體驗品質和顧客滿意度的影響研究-以速食點餐為例. 臺灣科技大學.
2. 宋同正. (2014). 序–服務設計的本質內涵和流程工具. 設計學報 (Journal of Design), 19(2).
3. 洪仕閔, 陳沁蔚, 游硯雅, 蔡炘志, & 唐玄輝. (2019). 動物之家創新領養流程改善. 工業設計, (139), 7-12.
4. 唐玄輝, & 劉育東. (1996). 設計思考中口語整合編碼系統初探—以工業設計活動為編碼案例 (Doctoral dissertation).
5. 蕭淑玲、盧臆嫣、李昱辰、張呈瑋、鄭兆策、陳以玲(2012). 服務設計，跟著做-從洞察顧客到設計服務體驗. 台北:財團法人資訊工業策進會.
6. 康正男, 胡林煥, & 周宇輝. (2009). 顧客知覺服務品質, 滿意度與忠誠度: 臺灣大學運動休閒館之研究. 臺灣體育運動管理學報, (9), 101-116.
7. 遠藤直紀 (2016)，「7大步驟打造企業關鍵留客力：從滿足需求到超越期待！」，王美娟譯，臺北市：台灣東販出版社。