隨著以手持行動裝置作為社交平台逐漸普及化，因此本研究目的在探討即時通訊程式APP介面設計之使用情況。本研究前測以Apple store三款下載率最高、最為台灣大眾廣泛使用的即時通訊程式程式APP做為前測試樣本，研究方法為先讓受測者操作測試任務之後填寫問卷，再將實驗所得之相關數據進行分析。此次研究採用雙因子變異數分析，並以SPSS加以探討操作績效與互動滿意度，同時考量使用者體驗(多數使用者操作習慣、選單功能辨識度、按鍵大小及文字閱讀之需求)，以為提供即時通訊程式程式APP介面設計提供更為完善的設計方向。
後續依據前導性實驗的結果，採用2(使用者經驗高低)x 3(頁面導覽模式)雙因子組間實驗設計，進行版面設計模擬實驗與驗證，在實驗中需要操作時間績效、主觀感受評量(USE)以及系統使用性評量(SUS)，將實驗結果做個別與整體分析探討，並提出設計建議。
從研究資料可以歸納出下列成果：(1)「大圖示導覽模式」適合被設計於功能較多且功能與功能之間需要頻繁切換的應用，透過良好的空間導覽版面，使用者只需以感官記憶便能直覺性地操作，對於使用者的記憶負擔最低。(2) 應用程式(APP)能夠給予清楚而立即的回饋(feedback)，有助於使用者使用時更自在也更有信心。(3) 個人化設定的多寡會影響使用者滿意度。讓重度使用者適時的加入自製的個人化選項，以及針對不同族群做出個人化的設定，皆更能增人們的使用意願。

With the popularization of using portable mobile device as a social platform, the purpose of the study is to explore user experience on the layout design of mobile instant message application (App) and provide a way of improvement for layout design. "Line", "WhatsApp” and "WeChat" which are three of the most famous used Apps among users in Taiwan are selected as samples in the pre-test stage. The research method is to analyze the data generated from questionnaires that filled out by the participants after they completed the experiment. The study adopts two-way analysis of variance (two-way ANOVA) design. In addition to users’ task performance, their satisfaction of interaction was also analyzed via SPSS. Meanwhile, the study also explores user experience including interaction habit of the mobile device, distinctiveness of the function menu, size of button, and word reading requirements.
According to the result generated from the pre-test, the study adopts experimental design with two independent variables, i.e., 2 (user experience) by 3 (page navigation mode) between subject design, to simulate the experiment regarding layout design and conduct the usability testing. Participants' task performance, USE and SUS questionnaires were also filled for further analysis to help provide design suggestions.
Finally, the research results can be concluded as follows: (1) "Large menu" is suitable for the application with multifunction and frequent switch between functions. With a good spatial navigation layout design, users can just operate the application with intuition based on their sensory memory, and it can also minimize the user's burden of memory. (2) The clear and immediate feedback of application would help user feel more comfortable as well as confident when using the mobile service. (3) The scope of personal setting will influence user satisfaction. Users will increase their willingness to use due to the design of more personal settings they can choose. For example, heavy users can add customized items in their own interface, or various personal settings for different user groups.

參考文獻
1.勵忠發，(1996)，記號、藝術、情報，台北，正中書局。
2.田中正名，(1999)，視覺傳達設計，台北，六合。
3.許勝雄、彭游、吳水丕，(1999)，人因工程，蒼海書局。
4.黃室苗(1993)，產品語意學及其在設計上之應用，工業設計，第二十二卷，第三期，pp 170-174。
5.韓叢耀，(2005)，圖像傳播學，臺北，威仕曼文化。
6.張宏睿、曾誰我 (1997)，3D繪圖軟體介面圖像設計整探討，2007年明志科技大學 技術與教學研討會論文集，第6-13頁。
7.Donald A. Norman著，翁鵲嵐、鄭玉屏、張志傑譯，(2005)，情感設計，臺北，田園城市。
8.陳烜之，(2007)，認知心理學，台北，五南圖書。
9.林榮泰，(1993)，評估圖像方法的研究，明志工專學報，第二十五期，pp239~256
10.任宗浩，(2001)，心智模式動態變化之研究－物理現象的觀察與詮釋。科學教育學刊，9(2)，pp 147-168。
11.何明泉、李如菁，(1993)，電腦人機介面上圖像語意之研究，成功大學工業設計研究所。
12.余能榜，(2005)，智慧型車內資訊系統介面使用性評估，工業工程與管理研究所碩士論文。
13.楊雅淳，(2001)，從使用者中心探討影視娛樂網頁介面設計原則-以電影公司網頁介面為例，銘傳大學，設計管理研究所碩士論文。
14.Norman, D. A. (2007)，卓耀宗譯，設計&日常生活:如何選擇安全好用的日常生活用品，遠流出版社。

英文部分.
1.Cairney, P.T. & Siess, D. (1982)."Communication Effectiveness of Symbolic Safety Signs with Difference User Groups," Applied Ergonomics, 13(2), pp.91-97
2.Clark, E. V. (1973). What’s in a word: On the child’s acquisition of semantics in his first language. In T. E. Moore (Ed.), Cognitive development and the acquisition of language. New York: Academic Press.
3.Collins, B.L. & Lerner, N.D. (1983). An Evaluation of Exit Symbol Visibility
(NBSIR82-2675), Washington: National Bureau of Standards.
4.Horton, William (1994)，The Icon Book，USA, John Wiley & Sons Inc。
5.Hegarty, M., & Just, M. A. (1993). Constructing mental models of machines from text and diagrams. Journal of Memory and Language, 32, 717-742.
6.Snyder, H. L. (1988), "Image quality". In M. Helander (Ed.), Handbook of Human-Computer Interaction.Amsterdam: Elsevier, 437-474.
7.Larkin, J. H., & Simon, H. A. (1987). Whya diagram is (sometimes) worth ten
thousand words. Cognitive Science, 11, 65-99.
8.Markman, E. M. (1989). Categorization and naming children: Problems of induction. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
9.Nelson, K. (1973). Structure and strategy in learning to talk. Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development, 38 (Whole NO. 149)
10.Rogers, Y. (1989). Icons at the interface: their usefulness.Interacting with Computers Interacting with Computers, 1(1) 105-117.
11.Paivio, A. (1998). Mental reoresentations:adual coding approach Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.
12.Proctor, R. W. & Zandt, T. V. (1994).Human Factors in Sample and Complex System. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
13.Peirce, C. S. (1965). The collected papers of Charles Sanders Peirce. In M.Gottdiener (Eds ), Semiotics. (pp.105-135. vol 1.), London: Sage
14.Preece, J. (1998).A Guide to Usability Human Factors in Computing, New York: Wiley Computer Publishing
15.Wickens, C. (1992).Engineering Psychology and Human Performance, 2nd edition, Harper Collins Publishers.
16.Shannon, C. E. (1948).A mathermatical Theory of Communication, The Bell System Technical Joumal.Vol 27, PP.379-423 (Part I)
17.Siebert L., & Ballard, L. (1992). Making A Good Layout, Cincinnati, OH: North Light Books.