在虛實混合實境科技(Mixed Reality)日漸盛行的趨勢下，人與資訊互動的方式從傳統的2D介面轉換到3D的環境空間中，同樣地，設計團隊概念發想與溝通的模式也隨之改變，由於混合實境本質帶有虛擬與現實混合的特性，其操作互動的模式與真實環境連結性極高，若單純以腦力想像多層次的空間互動操作，容易產生想像困難與討論斷點的問題。
本研究發現體現激盪法（Embodied storming method）與混合實境皆強調人與空間環境的互動關係，因而假設此發想法能對於以混合實境為題的設計發想有所幫助，並加以討論與腦力激盪法在思考內容上的差異為何，此為本研究之主要問題。因此本研究目的為：在混合實境的概念設計過程中探討體現激盪法對於團隊的思考過程有哪些層面的影響，透過實驗設定展現「體現激盪法」與「混合實境設計概念思考過程」兩者之間的關聯性，著重分析此法對「活動情境」與「互動細節」的影響為何，採用實驗對照法讓兩組設計團隊在一定時間內發想同一題目：體現組使用透明片原型道具執行體現激盪法；腦力組使用便利貼進行腦力激盪，並影音記錄兩組討論的過程，實驗結果經口語分析編碼發現：(1)體現激盪法組可由肢體操作透明片道具，演繹虛擬資訊呈現位置與互動操作後，引發聯想產生概念應用情境，思考內容階層轉變屬於由下到上的順序。；(2)兩組口語資料中，體現激盪組之「互動命名」次數顯著比另一組多，因而更有機會思考出更特殊的混合實境互動層面構想，且讓功能情境再次更加展開。；(3)從實驗分析與質性訪談中得知，以體現激盪法討論互動細節，較能幫助成員之間理解與傳達，而使用腦力激盪法之組別證實很難單純用想像的方式去討論多層級的操作與互動，因此產出的概念多停留在視覺形式的呈現，討論對談中較缺少特殊的空間互動描述。
綜合以上實驗結果本研究結論：體現激盪法對於混合實境概念團隊發想的思考過程具有顯著的影響力，並與採用腦力激盪法之組別在思考內容上有明顯的差異。本研究建議體現法與腦力激盪法可並用交錯執行，進而得到更多潛在的虛實空間中的互動形式細節，是一能活絡設計團隊進行混合實境概念的發想方法。

The Mixed Reality technology trend has undergone recently, the way human interacting with information is transferring 2D interface into 3D environment. Likewise, the method that the design team members generate the concept has to be changed as well. Because of the user input and other operation of Mixed Reality have a significant correlation with the physical environment, using current method like brainstorming, the design team may hardly envisage the multilevel interactive operation details in the physical environment. This study shows that both the embodied storming and Mixed Reality emphasize the interaction between the user and physical environment. Therefore, we proposed a core hypothesis that the embodied storming method can effects on team concept generation in the Mixed Reality design process. Our major research question is to find the differences in the design activity between embodied storming and brainstorming. The aim of our study is to discuss how the embodied storming method effects on team concept generation in the Mixed Reality design process. Through the setting of experimentation to show the correlations between the embodied storming method and the Mixed Reality concept design process, and focused on the analysis of what does this method impact on the scenario and the interaction details of concept. We conducted two design teams by the control experiment method, which develop the same design subject within the time and recorded the discussion in the process on video. The experiment is divided into two teams, which is named as team E and team B. As for the team E, conducting the embodied storming method with transparent sheet-prototyping. In team B, using the brainstorming as well as scenario design approach with sticky note. With protocol analysis, results showed first, the thinking logic of embodied storming is commenced from the layout of virtual information performed by body language, associated with interaction and operation, subsequently to develop the concept of scenario; second, we compare the descriptions of discussing with two teams, the quantity of narrative included physical and digital interactions indicated that team E is larger than team B; and third, according to the analysis and interview results, the embodied storming method can help communicate and understand the idea between each other. On the one hand, the experiment confirmed that the team B hardly envisage the multilevel interactive operation details. The concept generated from team B merely presented with the visual form, with rarely the narrative of physical and digital interactions. To conclude, the embodied storming showed that this method can have a great effect on Mixed Reality concept design process. Additionally, the design activity had obvious difference between team E and team B. Furthermore, we suggest that the design team can use embodied storming method and brainstorming method by turns to come up with more potential forms of interaction in detail. This effective method can make the design team more vivid in the Mixed Reality concept generation process.

英文文獻
1.Council, D. (2007). A study of the design process. UK Des. Counc, 44, 1-144.
2.Gruenfeld, D. H., Mannix, E. A., Williams, K. Y., & Neale, M. A. (1996). Group composition and decision making: How member familiarity and information distribution affect process and performance. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 67(1), 1-15.
3.Johnson, M. (2008). The meaning of the body: Aesthetics of human understanding. University of Chicago Press.
4.Milgram, P., Takemura, H., Utsumi, A., & Kishino, F. (1994), Augmented Reality: A class of displays on the reality-virtuality continuum, SPIE Vol. 2351, Telemanipulator and Telepresence Technologies (1994), p282-292.
5.Osborn, A. F. (1953). Applied imagination : principles and procedures of creative problem-solving. New York: Scribner.
6.Schleicher, D., Jones, P., & Kachur, O. (2010). Bodystorming as embodied designing. Interactions, 17(6), 47-51.
7.Schön, D. A., & Wiggins, G. (1992). Kinds of seeing and their functions in designing. Design Studies, 13(2), 135-156.
8.Simon, H. A. (1978). Information-processing theory of human problem solving. Handbook of learning and cognitive processes, 5, 271-295.
9.Suwa, M., & Tversky, B. (1997). What do architects and students perceive in their design sketches? A protocol analysis. Design Studies, 18(4), 385-403.
10.Valkenburg, R., & Dorst, K. (1998). The reflective practice of design teams. Design Studies, 19(3), 249-271.
中文文獻
1.大西淳、鄉健太郎（2002）。《要求工学》。共立出版。
2.山崎和彦、上田義弘、高橋克実、早川 誠二、郷健太郎、柳田宏治（2018）。 結構化劇本。《使用者體驗願景設計：從0到1的產品、服務、商業模式創新手法》（頁74-84）。
網路文獻
1. 8ninths (2015). Design Patterns Mixed Reality. Retrieved May 25, 2018, from http://8ninths.com/hololens-design-patterns/
2.Bray, B. (2018, March 21). What is mixed reality? Retrieved April 21, 2018, from https://docs.microsoft.com/zh-tw/windows/mixed-reality/mixed-reality#the_mixed_reality_spectrum