Widget應用程式為Web2.0趨勢發展下的新式網路服務，隨著科技環境允許與使用者生活習慣改變下，網站不僅是提供資訊的窗口，更是使用者資訊交流、分享、表現自我的平台。Widget應用程式可供自己製作和自由下載，亦能在電腦桌面上單獨執行。但現有Widget之功能與介面設計是否符合使用者之使用情境與需求?是否能有效協助使用者於電腦桌面作業的效率?以及是否能立即呈現資訊並給予回饋?皆是值得深入探討之議題。本研究目的分別為(1) 由文獻探討分析、Widget功能與介面使用現況分析、Widget服務網站、以及進一步從Widget客製化觀點探討使用者需求與感受；(2) 依據上述結果設計較現有樣本更符合使用者心智模式且具較良好愉悅度、使用性之Widget應用程式介面原型以利測試；(3) 提出Widget應用程式之介面原型測試評估與研究結果。
本研究以使用者需求觀點，第一階段進行Widget相關文獻分析，同時以問卷調查Widget使用現況、喜好與需求，並根據文獻分析結果針對目前三大代表性Widget服務網站Yahoo Widget工具、Google 桌面小工具、Windows Life Gallery，以宏觀角度了解整體Widget服務架構，與使用者實際操作感受。第二階段以問卷與訪談形式針對電腦桌面Widget之使用經驗調查。第三階段根據文獻探討、現況分析與使用者需求與經驗調查結果，進行Widget介面之設計，共設計出兩組不同Widget介面與三組側欄介面原型，分別為: (1)參考典型Widget介面設計之控制組；(2)動態呈現與擬物化風格之高互動性介面組；(3)彈性收納與展示之高實用性介面組，進行2(高低Widget依賴程度)X3(三組Widget側欄呈現方式)雙因子混合設計實驗，研究結果如下：

(1)單一與多功能Widget於愉悅性量表項目中，在「安全」、「興奮」、「滿意」、「娛樂」皆有顯著差異存在，由此可知在功能多寡上，多功能之Widget能顯著提升使用者操作Widget介面時的愉悅性，得到符合操作期望之結果。

(2)單一與多功能Widget於使用者行為模式項目中，在「即刻喜悅」、「足夠滿意」、「預期記憶」項目有顯著差異存在，顯示多功能之Widget更能符合使用者行為模式，不僅給予使用者立即的結果與回饋，其功能齊全明瞭更讓使用者容易理解與認同，不需重新學習即可很快上手。

(3)三款Widget側欄介面於愉悅性量表項目中，在「安全」、「滿意」、「娛樂」、「自由」有顯著差異存在，高互動性Widget側欄在娛樂項目之愉悅性最高，顯示使用者樂於接受擬物化風格之Widget介面設計與互動模式帶來的新鮮體驗，但長時間使用後使用者仍會考慮其於桌面使用時是否影響正常工作。

(4) 三款Widget側欄介面於符合使用者行為模式程度項目中，於「安全探索」、「慣用習性」、「空間記憶」、「流暢重複」項目有顯著差異存在，且皆為高實用性側欄之分數最高，顯示高實用性Widget側欄介面最能符合使用者行為模式。在「Widget依賴程度」部分，於「即刻喜悅」項目有顯著差異存在，高Widget依賴程度受測者較低Widget依賴程度受測者更能掌握到立即性的資訊與回饋。

(5) 三款Widget側欄介面於QUIS使用者互動滿意度項目中，於介面整體感受、畫面呈現、介面遣詞與資訊、學習性、軟體性能五大面向皆有顯著差異存在，且高實用性側欄介面分數皆為最高，顯示使用者對高實用性Widget側欄介面整體滿意度最高。

Widget application is the latest online service under the Web2.0 developing trend. Along with the technological environment and the changes of users’ living habits, the Website is not only an access to information, but also a platform for users exchanging information, sharing resources, and presenting themselves. Widget application provides various functions, including entertainment, working, and learning, which can be created by the users, downloaded freely, and also can be solely executed on the desktop. But whether or not the existing functions and the interface design of Widget fit into users’ situations and demands while using; whether they could effectively assist users when interacting with the computer desktop; and whether they could immediately present information and provide feedback; those are the issues worthwhile to be discussed in-depth. The purposes of this study are: (1) through analyzing the relevant literature, the function of Widget, the current use of the interface of Widget; and the Website service of Widget, the author investigated users’ demands and feelings from the perspective of user customization. (2) According to the above-mentioned results, a new Widget user interface design, compared to its testing sample, was proposed to be more suitable for users’ mental models. Besides, the interface prototype of Widget application which has better pleasurability and usability facilitated during its testing. (3) Proposing an evaluation of the interface prototype and research results of Widget application.

This study, from a point of view of users’ demands, first focused on analyzing literature which is related to Widget, simultaneously by using questionnaires to survey users’ current situations, preferences, and demands when using Widget; and then according to the literature review and in connection with those three representative Widget service Websites, i.e., Yahoo Widget Tool, Google Desktop Gadget, and Windows Life Gallery, the author could better understand the overall Widget service from a wider perspective, and also users’ feelings when interacting with the Widget. After that, the author investigated the experience of using Widget on a computer desktop by means of questionnaires and interviews. Finally, according to the literature review, analysis of current situation, demands of users, and the results of survey on users’ experience, the author designed two kinds of Widget user interfaces, and three prototypes of sidebar interface: (1) control group: referring to a typical Widget interface design; (2) group with a high interactive interface: dynamic presentation and materialized style; (3) group with a interface of high practicability: flexible for storage and display. The author had experimented 2 (the degree of the dependence on Widget) x 3 (the way how the three groups of Widget sidebar present) mixed factorial design. The research results are as followings:

(1) From the questionnaire on users’ pleasurability, there were significant differences between single and multi-functional Widget on ‘security’, ‘excitement’, ‘satisfaction’, and ‘entertainment’. The author could see that multi-functional Widget obviously stimulated users’ pleasure while they interacting with the Widget interface; thus, the result fits with the author’s expectation.

(2) Single and multi-functional Widget on the item - ‘the degree of fitting with the behavioral model of users’, there were significant differences on ’instant joy’, ‘sufficient satisfaction’, and ‘expected memory’; which shows that multi-functional Widget fits more with users’ behavioral models. It not only provided users instant results and feedbacks, but its functions were also complete and easy for users to understand without learning it in advance.

(3) There were significant differences on ‘security’, ‘satisfaction’, and ‘entertainment’, and ‘freedom’ toward the three types of Widget sidebar interfaces on the questionnaire regarding users’ pleasurability. The score of the high interactive Widget sidebar was the highest, which showed that users were willing to accept the materialized Widget interface and the new experiences of interactive model. However, after having used for a long time, users considered whether Widget would affect normal operation when using desktop.

(4) On the item - ‘the degree of fitting with the behavioral model of users’, there were significant differences among the three types of Widget sidebar interfaces: ‘secure exploration’, ‘conventionality’, ‘spacial memory’, ‘smooth repetition’. The score of the highly practical sidebar was the highest, which showed that high practicability of the Widget sidebar interface fits most with users’ behavioral models. On the part of ‘the degree of the dependence on Widget’, there was a significant difference on ‘instant joy’. The participants who were highly dependent on Widget were more able to grasp instant information and feedback than those who were lowly dependent.

(5) Three types of Widget sidebar interfaces on the items of the QUIS users’ satisfaction toward interaction, there were significant differences on the following five dimensions: overall feelings to the interface; the screen; wordings used and the information on the interface; and capacities for learning, and for software. The score of the highly practical sidebar was the highest, which showedthat the overall satisfaction of users toward the highly practical Widget interface was the highest.

1.Beier, B., & Vaughan, M. W. (2003, 4). Web usability: The bull's-eye: a framework for Web application user interface design guidelines. CHI’03, Ft. Lauderdale. Florida, USA. 5(1), 489-496.
2.Colin G., Harrison & Caglayan, K. (1997). Agent sourcebook. Manhattan, New York: John Wiley & Sons.
3.Craik, K. J. W. (1943). The Nature of Explanation. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.
4.Dean, R. (1998). Personalizing your Web site, available at http://www.builder.com/business/personal.
5.Gould, J. D. & Lewis, C. H. (1985). Designing for usability: Key principles and what designers think. Communications of the ACM, 28(3), 300-311.
6.Jokela, T. (2001). Assessment of user-centred design processes as a basis for improvement action, An Experimental Study in Industrial Settings (Acta Universitatis Ouluensis ed.). Oulu: Oulu University Press.
7.Jarrett, C. (2001). Usability Ms user-centred design. Paper presented at the the 48th Annual Conference of the Society for Technical Communication, Chicago, USA.
8.Jordan, P. W. (2000). Designing pleasurable products. London, UK: Taylor & Francis.
9.Jordan, P. W. (1996). Human factors for pleasure in product use. Applied Ergonomics, 29, 25-33.
10.Kristof, R., & Satran, A. (1995). Interactivity by design. Mountain View, CA: Adobe Press.
11.Mao, J.-Y., Vredenburg, K., Smith, P. W., & Carey, T. (2005). The state of user-centered design practice. Communications of the ACM, 48(3), 105-109.
12.Norman, D. A. (1983). Some Observations on Mental Models. In Gentner, D. and A. L. Stevens (eds.), Mental Models, HillSDale, NJ: Erlbuam, 7-9.
13.Norman, D. A. (1988). The Design of Everyday Things. New York: Basic Books.
14.Ochs, N. V. (1999). Personalization and customization: where are they now? available at http://mSDn.microsoft.com/workshop/
15.O’Reilly, T. (2005, 9). What Is Web 2.0 -Design Patterns and Business Models for the Next Generation of Software? From http://www.oreillynet.com/pub/a/oreilly/tim/news/2005/09/30/what-is-Web-20.html
16.Pearrow, M. (2000). Web Site Usability Handbook. Rochkand, MA: Charles River Media Inc.
17.Preece, J. (1998). A guide to Usability – Human Factors in Computing: New York: Wiley Computer Publishing.
18.Rubin, J. (1994). Handbook of Usability Testing: How to plan, Design, and Conduct Effective Tests. Manhattan, New York: John Wiley & Sons.

19.Rich, C. (1999). Creating Online Media: A Guide to Research, Writing and Design on the Internet, Quebecor Printing Book Group.
20.Rasmussen, K. L. & Davidson-Shivers, G. V. (1998). Hypermedia and learning styles: Can performance be influenced? Journal of Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia, 7(4), 291-308.
21.Shneiderman, B. and Catherine, P., (2005). Design the user interface fourth edition strategies for effective human-computer interaction, 4th Ed. Addison-Wesley, English.
22.Tiger, L. (1992). The pursuit of pleasure. Boston: Little Brown.
23.Vredenburg, K., Isensee, S., & Righi, C. (2002). User-centered Design: An Integrated Approach. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall PTR.
24.Vredenburg, K., Mao, J., Smith P. W. & Carey, T. (2002). A survey of user-centered design practice. CHI 2002, April 20-25, 2002, Minneapolis, Minnesota, USA.
25.Tidwell, J. (2005). Designing Interface. Sebastopol, CA: O’reilly Media, Inc.
26.方裕民，(2003)，人與物的對話─互動介面設計理論與實務，台北：田園城市。
27.李仁芳，(2006)，Web 2.0，網路上有錢，創意在裡面，台北：資策會出版；經濟部技術處發行，2-3。
28.虞孝成，(2006)，Web 2.0，網路上有錢，創意在裡面，台北：資策會出版；經濟部技術處發行，3-4。
29.李青蓉等編著，(1998)，人機介面設計，台北：空大。
30.Web 2.0，網路上有錢，創意在裡面，(2006)，台北：資策會出版；經濟部技術處發行。
31.Jenifer Tidwell，(2005)，操作介面設計模式(蔡學鏞譯)，台北：美商歐萊禮。
32.Jennifer Preece, Yvonne Rogers, Helen Sharp，(2003)，互動設計─跨越人-電腦互動(陳建雄譯)，台北：全華科技。
33.Norman, D. A. ，(2005)，情感設計 (翁鵲嵐、鄭玉屏、張志傑譯)，台北：田園城市。
34.游曉貞，(1999)，資訊設計於視覺傳達設計之發展，跨世紀視覺設計研討會論文集，崑山技術學院。
35.唐國豪，(2003)，人機互動，科學發展，368期，18-23
36.周碩彥，(2006)，從大量生產到大量客製，科學發展，2006年3月，399期，20-25
37.季欣麟，(2000)，量身定作的網路時代，遠見雜誌，134-140。
38.葉政鑫、張悟非，(2002)，對應原則在人機互動設計之運用研究，2002 中華民國設計學會學術研究成果研討會，155-160。
39.徐瑜卿，(2006)，行動多媒體通訊產品使用者介面設計之研究，國立台灣科技大學設計研究所，11~12。
40.楊智元，(2005)，符合使用者個人喜好需求的入口網站介面之研究，大葉大學資訊管理所碩士論文，7~10。
41.陳品岑，(2006)，知名品牌之產品愉悅性研究─以手機為例，銘傳大學設計管理研究所，31~32。
42.林怡君，(2007)，Weblog使用者介面之個人化設計探討，國立台灣科技大學設計研究所，27。
43.張吉元，(1996)，多媒體商品展示系統介面文字語音及顯示特效的搭配對消費者影響之研究，大葉大學資訊管理研究所。
44.陳建宏，(2005)，電子地圖在導覽系統上的使用差異性研究，國立台灣科技大學設計研究所，7。
45.張建清（2000），網際網路個人化代理服務－從My Yahoo!、Tom.com 及Openfind PIE2000 談起。網際先鋒四月號。
46.林嫊貞，(2004)，智慧型個人化網頁推薦機制之設計，【摘要】，大同大學資訊工程系碩士論文，2007/11/13，取自「全國博碩士論文資訊網」：http://etds.ncl.edu.tw/theabs/site/sh/detail_result.jsp (編號: 092TTU01392011)
47.鄭光成，(2000)，虛擬實境中依使用者需求之預取架構，【摘要】，大葉大學資訊管理所碩士論文，2007/11/13，取自「全國博碩士論文資訊網」：https://etds.ncl.edu.tw/theabs/service/detail_result.jsp (編號: 088DYU00396017)
48.柯建志，(2005)，情境設計與使用者中心設計於發展互動系統之比較性研究，【摘要】，國立交通大學傳播所碩士論文，2007/11/13，取自「全國博碩士論文資訊網」：https://etds.ncl.edu.tw/theabs/service/detail_result.jsp (編號: 093NCTU5376008)
49.郭如萍，(2006)，使用者中心設計取向之網站使用性實踐初探：意義、方法與台灣網路產業現況，P14，國立交通大學傳播所碩士論文，未出版，2007/11/13，取自「全國博碩士論文資訊網」：https://etds.ncl.edu.tw/theabs/service/detail_result.jsp (編號: 094NCTU5376016)
50.李元嫄，(2004)，心智模式對於產品操作認知的影響-以數位相機為例，【摘要】，國立交通大學應用藝術所碩士論文，2007/11/13，取自「全國博碩士論文資訊網」：https://etds.ncl.edu.tw/theabs/service/detail_result.jsp (編號: 092NCTU5509009)
51.邱柏清，(2004)，網頁介面愉悅性之研究，【摘要】，國立台灣科技大學設計研究所碩士論文，2007/11/13，取自「全國博碩士論文資訊網」：https://etds.ncl.edu.tw/theabs/service/detail_result.jsp (編號: 092NTUST619006)
52.蔡佳穎，(2004)，使用者介面愉悅性之研究 ─ 以兒童藝術類學習網站為例，國立台灣科技大學設計研究所碩士論文，2007/11/13，取自「全國博碩士論文資訊網」：https://etds.ncl.edu.tw/theabs/service/detail_result.jsp(編號: 092NTUST619022)
53.蔡宜佳，(2006)，互動設計之參與者愉悅經驗研究，【摘要】，國立台中技術學院多媒體設計研究所碩士論文，2007/11/13，取自「全國博碩士論文資訊網」：https://etds.ncl.edu.tw/theabs/service/detail_result.jsp(編號: 094NTTI0641008)
54.余少卿，(2004)，個人化行動數位導覽之互動設計探討－以故宮博物院「乾隆皇帝的文化大業」特展為例，元智大學資訊傳播學系，2007/11/13，取自「全國博碩士論文資訊網」：http://etds.ncl.edu.tw/theabs/site/sh/search_result.jsp (編號: 091YZU00676021)
55.周祖慶，(2003) 客製化概念行銷與體驗行銷之互動性理論分析-以遊戲產業為例【摘要】，國立中央大學企業管理研究所，2007/11/13，取自「全國博碩士論文資訊網」：http://etds.ncl.edu.tw/theabs/site/sh/detail_result.jsp (編號: 092NCU05121045 )

56.蔡燿駿(2006)，Web2.0時代，更個人化網路內容登場http://ad.cw.com.tw/cw/Web2/intro.htm
57.林裕洋，(2007)，Web2.0時代網站邁向整合性服務，企業應以專業服務、獨家特質吸引網友，http://app.digitimes.com.tw/ShowNews.aspx?zCatId=868&zNoteSDocId=0000072057_B8H1581JUH47UN589WY37
58.歐立偉，(2000)，什麼是UX使用者經驗（User Experience）? http://www.ou-online.com/internet/internet_001122.asp
59.工商時報，2007.9.7，Web2.0 搭起企業與顧客的心橋，經營知識D3版。
60.QUIS (2006). http://lap.umd.edu/quis/
61.Widgipedia http://www.widgipedia.com/
62.Taiwan.CNET.com http://taiwan.cnet.com/news/software/0,2000064574,20105851,00.htm
63.Enorth.com.cn，(2007)，諾基亞力推，Widget手機軟體用戶自己做，http://it.big5.enorth.com.cn/system/2007/08/28/001842578.shtml