研究生: |
王啟翰 Chi-Han Wang |
---|---|
論文名稱: |
數位家庭多媒體中心互動介面選單結構與使用者之認知風格探討 An Investigation on the Cognitive Style and Menu Structure for the User Interface of Home Media Center |
指導教授: |
陳建雄
Chien-Hsiung Chen |
口試委員: |
柯志祥
Chih-Hsiang Ko 陳立杰 Li-Chiech Chen |
學位類別: |
碩士 Master |
系所名稱: |
設計學院 - 設計系 Department of Design |
論文出版年: | 2007 |
畢業學年度: | 95 |
語文別: | 中文 |
論文頁數: | 106 |
中文關鍵詞: | 數位家庭多媒體中心 、場地獨立 、場地依賴 、資訊呈現 、介面使用性 |
外文關鍵詞: | Digital home media center, Field independent, Field dependent, Information visualization, Interface usability |
相關次數: | 點閱:422 下載:44 |
分享至: |
查詢本校圖書館目錄 查詢臺灣博碩士論文知識加值系統 勘誤回報 |
近年來由於影音多媒體的快速發展,各類數位媒體大舉進入人們的生活中,數位家庭多媒體中心之概念隨之產生,數位家庭多媒體中心多以播放影音多媒體為其主要功能,消費者必須在短時間內,了解使用者介面所呈現之資訊,並學習如何操作。本研究透過第一階段現有介面之調查與實驗,找出現有介面之優缺點,進而進行第二階段介面測試原型之設計改良,以期望本研究之成果,能改善現有數位家庭多媒體使用者介面之問題,並帶給使用者更好之介面操作使用性。
本研究之進行採2(場地獨立與場地依賴2種受測者風格)x3(階層式、棋盤式、及環形式3種介面測試原型)受測者間實驗設計方式,每位受測者只執行一組介面測試,測試中包含五項使用者對於影音播放設備常用之任務操作,測試後亦請受測者填寫一份系統使用性尺度SUS主觀感受量表與量測工作負荷指標NASA-TLX量表,研究結果如下:
(1)本研究中場地獨立與場地依賴兩種受測者,在操作不同風格之使用者介面時,其操作行為與績效有明顯之差異性存在,其中場地獨立的受測者以自我為參照的依據來處理資訊,有清晰且分化的察覺功能,在操作三套介面時,較能在複雜的介面中,找出所需的操作功能並執行任務。而場地依賴型之受測者通常是以外在線索的依據來處理資訊,其察覺功能較為籠統且不分化,易受無關線索與背景環境的影響,故造成其整體任務操作績效明顯偏低。
(2)三套介面測試原型經五項任務測試後發現,階層式介面測試原型五項任務平均操作時間為480.43秒,環形式介面測試原型平均操作時間為374.20秒,棋盤式介面測試原型平均操作時間為221.85,經SPSS軟體進行雙因子變異數分析後發現,受測者之操作績效以棋盤式介面測試原型最佳,其次為環形式介面,最後則為階層式介面。
(3)有關系統使用性尺度(SUS)之主觀感受量表結果,經統計分析後,場地獨立與場地依賴兩類型之受測者間無顯著性差異存在,但三套介面之使用性皆有顯著性差異存在,其平均分數分別為階層式介面測試原型48.25分、環形式介面測試原型62.63分、與棋盤式介面測試原型為74.75分,當比對整體操作時間後發現,棋盤式介面的整體執行時間最短,且棋盤式介面測試原型使用性評比最高,由此可推論受測者認為此介面具有良好的使用性,且滿意度最高。
(4) 由NASA-TLX量表量測工作負荷指標發現,受測者與棋盤式介面測試原型互動時,其心智負荷、時間負荷、精力耗費、及挫折程度,皆低於其他兩組介面並有顯著差異存在,整體績效表現評比亦最高。
As the rapid development of multimedia technology, various types of digital media have come to our daily life. The concept of digital home media center (DHMC) was formed by following the trend. Because the primary functions of the DHMC is to present audio and video information to its users, it is important for the users to understand the displayed information and learn to operate the user interface within a very short time. The first stage of this study is to investigate the pros and cons of the current user interface design of DHMC. The results were adopted to help create interface prototypes in the second stage of the study. It is hoped that the research results can be good references to help design future user interface of the DHMC.
A 2 (field-independent and field-dependent user styles) x 3 (hierarchical, chessboard, and circular display types) factorial between-subjects design was conducted in the experiment. That is, each participant was required to interact with only one interface prototype. A total of five interaction tasks regarding audio and video playing were planned in the experiment. After that, the participant was required to answer both system usability scale (SUS) and NASA-TLX questionnaires. The results generated from this study revealed that:
(1)There existed significant differences in the task performance between field-independent and field-dependent user styles. The field-independent participant tended to process information based on his/her personal problem-solving skill and possess situational awareness. S/he is able to find the required functions in the complex user interface and completed the tasks in a short time. On the other hand, the field-dependent participant tended to rely on unrelated external information and could easily be affected by the environment, which resulted in poor task performance.
(2)After conducting five interaction tasks, the participants’ average task performances among three display types from the best to the worst after the two-way ANOVA were chessboard (221.85), circular (374.20 sec), and hierarchical (480.43 sec) types of prototypes.
(3)There existed no significant difference between field-independent and field dependent user styles in terms of system usability scale (SUS) questionnaire. Nonetheless, there existed significant difference among three display types. The average scores listed from the highest to the lowest were chessboard (74.75), circular (62.63), and hierarchical (48.25). Therefore, participants thought that the chessboard type of display had the best interface usability as well as the highest satisfaction.
(4)The results generated form the NASA-TLX questionnaire showed that the chessboard type of interface prototype was significantly lower than the other two prototypes in mental demand, temporal demand, effort, and frustration. The overall performance was also higher.
中文文獻
1.山岡俊樹(1998)。螢幕畫面介面設計,中日設計教育研討會論文集,雲林科技大學,p.74-75。
2.方裕民(1999)。GUI界面設計理論與實務-以家庭娛樂系統設計案為例,中日設計教育研討會論文集,雲林科技大學,p.47-60。
3.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。
4.吳知賢(1989)。國小高年級兒童之人格特質、媒體偏好、科目興趣與其認知型態的關係。台南師院學報,22,29-54。
5.吳裕益(1987)。認知能力與認知型態個別差異現象之探討。教育學刊,7,51-98
6.李約德、楊裕富(2004/8/6)。取自http://www.yuntech.edu.tw/~yangyf/topre/201ulee2.html使用者經驗與心理層面的互動性與親和性之設計,產品設計與空間設計領域中。
7.莊良寶(2000)。知識圖學習活動設計對網路化學習的影響。國立臺灣師範大學資訊教育研究所碩士論文。
8.許鳳火(1998)。使用者對不同相機產品的操作介面比較研究,中日設計教育研討會論文集,雲林科技大學,p.91-100。
9.張貞瑩(2005)。設計資訊網頁的連結架構與使用者認知風格類型對瀏覽行為之影響,大同大學工業設計研究所碩士論文。
10.楊健則(2005)。微軟Media Center 入侵客廳,PC Office數位工作者雜誌。
11.鄭有訓(2002)。互動介面模式之效益研究-以網路電視為例,成工大學工業設計所碩士論文。
12.Norman, D.A. (2000). 卓耀宗譯,設計心理學,台北:遠流。
13.Bailey, R. W. (1995). 林修如譯,Human Performance Engineering (應用人因工程學),台北:桂冠。
英文文獻
1.Burke, D. M. (1998).The relationship of multiple intelligences profiles to success in computer-based concept mapping, Doctoral dissertation, University Of Massachusetts Lowell, Dissertation Abstracts International, 59-03, p.790.
2.Byrne, M. D. (1993). Using Icons to Find Documents: Simplicity is Critical, INTERCHI 93, Amsterdam, April, p.24-29.
3.Chapanis, P. (1965). Man-Machine Engineering. Monterey, CA: Brooks/Cole.
4.Chuang, Y.-R (1999). Teaching in a multimedia computer environment: A study of effects-of learning style, gender, and math achievement. Retrieved Nov. 25, 2003. From http://imej.wfu.edu/articles/l999/1/10/.
5.Davis, J. K. & Frauk, B. M. (1979). Learning and memory of field Independent -dependent Individuals. Journal of Research in Personality, 13, p.469-479.
6.Fowler, S. L. & Stanwick, V. R. (1995). The GUI Style Guide, Cambridge, MA: Academic Press.
7.Kessler, R. (1995). Cognitive styles and concept mapping dimensions of hypermedia computer users, Doctoral dissertation, Florida Atlantic University, Dissertation Abstracts International. 56-04A, 1324.
8.Newman, W. M. & Lamming, M. G. (1995). Interactive system design, UK: Addison-Wesley, p.300-301.
9.Norman, D. A. (1993). Things that make us smart, Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley, p.78-79.
10.Redmond, J. & Parkinson A. (2002). Do cognitive styles affect learning performance in different computer media? Proceedings of the 7th Annual Conference on Innovation and Technology in Computer Science Education, Aarhus, Denmark.
11.Repman, J., Weller, H. G., & Lan, W. (1993). The impact of social context on learning in hypermedia-based instruction. Journal of Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia, 2(3), p.283-298.
12.Väänänen-Vainio-Mattila, K. & Ruuska, S. (2000). Designing mobile phones and communicators for consumers’ needs at Nokia. In E. Bergman (ed.). Information appliances and beyond. Sanfrancisco, CA: Morgan Kaufmann, p.169-204.