隨著物聯網技術發展成熟，物件逐漸被賦予複雜的運算功能，有別以往將其視作為使用的工具，物件開始展現出能動性，甚至擁有了主體性。過往，在人機互動領域中，設計師在設計物件能動性時，習慣透過擬人的隱喻方法，賦予物件相對應的個性，但這與使用者實際所感受到的能動性是否相同呢?為了探索設計師如何設計物件能動性以及使用者如何感受物件所展現的能動性，同時比較兩者間的差異，本研究透過開展知覺交錯模型得到16種互動模式，並對這16種互動模式加以分析，從中發現6種主要的表現形態，為了對這6種表現形態有更深入的研究，透過設計作研究的方法，我們設計了一個研究原型:互動面紙盒，它擁有自主供給面紙與旋轉的功能，隨後在實驗中，我們比較了5種由上階段得到的表現形態所組成的互動模式，並從中獲得體驗中的實徵資料， 透過此實驗，本研究對物件能動性的特性有了更加深刻的理解，並展示了不同互動模式應用於互動面紙盒上的差異。

With the growing maturity of technology within Internet of Things (IoT), objects are gradually given complex processing features. Different from the past that objects were regarded as tools, they begin to show more agency and even have their subjectivity. Previous works within HCI, designers are used to designing object agency by applying anthropomorphic metaphor that enables objects to have corresponding personality. However, is object agency designed by designers the same as perceived by users? This thesis explores how designers design object agency and how people perceive object agency in practice, and meanwhile, compares the difference between the two. In this research, we got sixteen types of interaction models by expanding the perceptual crossing model. After analyzing these interaction models, we found six main performative types. To further investigate these performative types, we designed the Tissue Box: a research prototype that feeds tissue paper and rotates autonomously. In this experiment, we compared five interaction models composed of six performative types found at the previous stage and gain the empirical data. The experiment gave insights into the characteristic of object agency and showed how difference the interaction models are applied to the Tissue Box.

外文文獻
1.Philip van Allen, Joshua McVeigh-Schultz, Brooklyn Brown, Hye Mi Kim, and Daniel Lara. 2013. AniThings: animism and heterogeneous multiplicity. In CHI ’13 Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI EA ’13). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 2247–2256. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1145/2468356.2468746
2.Siti Aisyah binti Anas, Shi Qiu, Matthias Rauterberg, and Jun Hu. 2016. Exploring Social Interaction with Everyday Object based on Perceptual Crossing. In Proceedings of the Fourth International Conference on Human Agent Interaction (HAI ’16). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 11–18. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1145/2974804.2974810
3.Nazli Cila, Iskander Smit, Elisa Giaccardi, and Ben Kröse. 2017. Products as Agents: Metaphors for Designing the Products of the IoT Age. In Proceedings of the 2017 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI ’17). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 448–459. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1145/3025453.3025797
4.Eva Deckers, Stephan Wensveen, Rene Ahn, and Kees Overbeeke. 2011. Designing for perceptual crossing to improve user involvement. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI ’11). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 1929–1938. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1145/1978942.1979222
5.Eva Deckers, Stephan Wensveen, Pierre Levy, and Rene Ahn. 2013. Designing for perceptual crossing: designing and comparing three behaviors. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI ’13). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 1901–1910. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1145/2470654.2466251
6.Christopher Frauenberger. 2019. Entanglement HCI The Next Wave? ACM Trans. Comput.-Hum. Interact. 27, 1, Article 2 (January 2020), 27 pages. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1145/3364998
7.William W. Gaver, John Bowers, Kirsten Boehner, Andy Boucher, David W.T. Cameron, Mark Hauenstein, Nadine Jarvis, and Sarah Pennington. 2013. Indoor weather stations: investigating a ludic approach to environmental HCI through batch prototyping. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI ’13). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 3451–3460. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1145/2470654.2466474
8.Lars Hallna¨s & Johan Redstro¨m. 2001. Slow technology–designing for reflection.Personal and ubiquitous computing, 5(3), 201-212.
9.Graham Harman. 2009. Prince of Networks: Bruno Latour and Metaphysics. re.press.
10.Yuan-Yao Hsu, Wenn-Chieh Tsai, Wan-Chen Lee, and Rung-Huei Liang. 2018. Botanical Printer: An Exploration on Interaction Design with Plantness. In Proceedings of the 2018 Designing Interactive Systems Conference (DIS ’18). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 1055–1068. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1145/3196709.3196809
11.Haiyan Jia, Mu Wu, Eunhwa Jung, Alice Shapiro, and S. Shyam Sundar. 2012. Balancing human agency and object agency: an end-user interview study of the internet of things. In Proceedings of the 2012 ACM Conference on Ubiquitous Computing (UbiComp ’12). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 1185–1188. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1145/2370216.2370470
12.Ilpo Koskinen, John Zimmerman, Thomas Binder, Johan Redström, and Stephan Wensveen. 2012. Design Research Through Practice From the Lab, Field, and Showroom.
13.Bruno Latour. 2011. Network Theory| Networks, Societies, Spheres: Reflections of an Actor-network Theorist. International Journal Of Communication, 5, 15. Retrieved from
14.Maurice Merleau-Ponty. 1958 .Phenomenology of perception (C. Smith, Trans).London, UK: Routledge, & Kegan Paul. (Original work published 1945).
15.James Pierce. 2009. Material awareness: promoting reflection on everyday materiality. In CHI ’09 Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI EA ’09). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 4459–4464. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1145/1520340.1520683
16.Leila Takayama. 2009. Making sense of agentic objects and teleoperation: in-the-moment and reflective perspectives. In Proceedings of the 4th ACM/IEEE international conference on Human robot interaction (HRI ’09). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 239–240. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1145/1514095.1514155
17.Ron Wakkary, Doenja Oogjes, Sabrina Hauser, Henry Lin, Cheng Cao, Leo Ma, and Tijs Duel. 2017. Morse Things: A Design Inquiry into the Gap Between Things and Us. In Proceedings of the 2017 Conference on Designing Interactive Systems (DIS ’17). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 503–514. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1145/3064663.3064734
18.Ron Wakkary, Doenja Oogjes, Henry W. J. Lin, and Sabrina Hauser. 2018. Philosophers Living with the Tilting Bowl. In Proceedings of the 2018 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI ’18). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, Paper 94, 1–12. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1145/3173574.3173668
19.Mark Weiser. 1991 .The computer for the 21st century. Scientific American,265(3), 94-104.
20.John Zimmerman, Jodi Forlizzi, and Shelley Evenson. 2007. Research through design as a method for interaction design research in HCI. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI ’07). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 493–502. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1145/1240624.1240704

中文文獻
1.陳伯璋(2000)。質性研究方法的理論基礎。載於中正大學教育研究所(主編),質性的研究方法,25-49。高雄:麗文文化。
2.張書翔、梁容輝(2018)。物件人誌學於居家空間的初探。2018明志科技大學技術與教學國際研討會「未來。設計力」。