3D列印近幾年來蓬勃發展，募資平台上可以看到越來越多人性化的3D列印機出現，價格也有越來越低的趨向。在硬體裝置低價化的發展下，背後崛起的是軟體的多樣化及相關網路服務的發展，而隨著智慧型裝置越來越普及，讓3D列印相關軟體有更多的發展空間。本研究目的為探討平板3D建模軟體之三維介面設計，透過實驗分析結果進一步進行介面的改善與設計，了解不同視角控制方式與表單類型對介面的影響，以達到更好的操作績效與互動體驗。
本研究分為兩個階段，第一階段為前導性實驗，透過雙因子組間實驗進行三款現有平板3D建模軟體的任務操作，了解其介面的操作與物件編輯功能的必要性與介面設計重點。第二階段根據前導性實驗結果進行介面設計，並以平板3D建模軟體的視角控制與表單類型為自變項進行分析，採用雙因子組間實驗設計，以3(視角控制) X 2(表單類型)作六款樣本的使用性探討，研究結果發現：(1) 單軸視角控制因為設計時加入限制，可以減少操作步驟與錯誤發生機會，達到更快速完成任務的結果。(2) 移動表單的彈性高，符合初次使用者的期待，在建模過程中，直覺的控制可以輔助並避免干擾的狀況。(3)建模軟體需符合不同經驗的使用者期待，而使用者依經驗高低與接受度可分為固定型、活用型、嘗試型、學習型。在設計上可以以不同模式的切換來符合不同需求。(4)建模軟體之整體畫面以明亮、功能簡易的介面呈現為佳，而簡易的介面設計可以減少使用者的心理壓力。(5)功能圖示的隱喻性與尺寸需要列入考量，避免認知錯誤及誤觸的發生。

As the 3D printing technology becomes cheaper, more common, and more well-developed in recent years, many easier-to-use 3D printers can be found in many fund-raising platforms. The low-price fabricating technology spreaded with mobile devices has boosted diverse and related web services. This study focused on the 3D modeling APP design on a tablet PC, and attempted to optimize the user experiences through a series of experiments by investigating the effects between different viewing angle control and menu style of the user interface.
This study is composed of two stages. The first stage was a pretest which tested three existed 3D modeling APP interfaces and further analyzed the data by a 2-way repeated measures ANOVA. Based on the results of the first phase, the second stage was planned to be a verification experiment, i.e., a redesign of the user interface. There are two independent variables in this stage of experiment, including “Viewing angle control” and “Menu style”. A 3 (viewing angle control) X 2 (menu style) two-way repeated measures ANOVA was conducted. The generated results revealed that: (1) With limited viewing angle control may result in lesser steps of setup and lower error, which further brings faster completion time. (2) Flexible menu style meets the users’ expectation, which leads to more natural control and prevents them from unnecessary interferences. (3) The 3D modeling APP interfaces should be adjustable according to different user experiences, and the experiences of the users can be categorized into four different types. (4) The interface of the modeling APP should be bright and clear to use. The simple interface design can also minimize the stress of the users. Finally, (5) While designing the icons in the function bar, the metaphor and size of the icons should take careful considerations to prevent users from misunderstanding of functions or triggering unwanted icons.

英文文獻
1. Baudel, T., Fitzmaurice, G.W., Kurtenbach, G., & Owen, R. N. (1999). The Hotbox: efficient access to a large number of menu-items. Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, pp. 231-237.
2. Boven, L.V. & Gilovich, T.D. (2003). Journal of Personality and Social Psychology [Special section]. To do or to have? That is the question. 85, 1193-1202.
3. Catanese, P. (2001). Director’s third dimension: Fundamentals of 3D programming in Director 8.5. Indiana, IN: Que.
4. Cockburn, A., & Quinn, P. (2008). The effects of menu parallelism on visual search and selection. Proceedings of the ninth conference on Australasian user interface, 76, pp. 79-84.
5. Cohé, A., Dècle, F., & Hachet, M. (2011). tBox: A 3D Transformation Widget designed for Touch-screens. Proceedings of the ACM CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, pp. 3005-3008.
6. Davis, F. D. (1985). A technology acceptance model for empirically testing new end-user information systems: Theory and results. Doctoral dissertation, Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
7. Ekstrom, R. B., French, J. W., Harman, H. H., & Dermen, D. (1976). Manual for Kit of Factor-Referenced Cognitive Tests. New Jersey, NJ: Princeton.
8. French, J. W. (1951). The description of aptitude and achievement tests in terms of rotated factors. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
9. Garrett, J. J. (2004). The Elements of User Experience: User-centered Design for the Web. New York, NY: New Riders.
10. Gorgorio, N. (1998). Exploring the functionality of visual and non-visual strategies in solving rotation problems. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 35, 207-231.
11. Hachet, M., Bossavit, B., Cohé, A., & de la Rivière, J. B. (2011). Toucheo: multitouch and stereo combined in a seamless workspace. Proceedings of the ACM Symposium on User Interface Software and Technology, pp. 587-592.
12. Marc, H., & Noam, T. (2006). Behaviour & information technology, 25(2), 91-97. London, England: Taylor& Francis.
13. Martens, B. & Peter, H. ( 2004). Archi CAD: Best practice-the virtual building revealed, New York, NY: Springer Wien.
14. McGee, M. G. (1979). Human spatial abilities: psychometric studies and environmental, genetic, hormonal, and neurological influences. Psychological Bulletin, 86(5), 889-918.
15. Michael, W. B., Guilford, J. P., Fruchter, B., & Zimmerman, W. S. (1957). The description of sptatial-visualization abilities. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 17(2), 185-199.
16. Nielsen, J. (1993). Usability Engineering. Boston, MA: Academic Press.
17. Norman, D.A. (1988). Design of everyday things. New York, NY: Currency Doubleday.
18. Picard, R. & Klein, J. (2002). Computers that recognize and respond to user emotion: theoretical and practical implications [Special section]. Interacting with Computers, 14, 141-169.
19. Preece, J., Rogers, Y., Benyon, D., & Davies, G. (1992). A Guide to Usability: Human Factors in Computing. Scotland: Open University Press.
20. Saffer, D. (2009). Designing gestural interfaces. Sebastopol, CA: O’Reilly Media.
21. Sanders, M. S. & McCormick, E. J. (1992). Human factors in engineering and design. Ohio, OH: McGraw-Hill.
22. Shneiderman, B. (1991). Touch screens now offer compelling uses. IEEE Software, pp.93-94.
23. Solso, R. L. (1994). Cognition and the visual arts. Boston, MA: MIT Press.
24. Waller, D. (2000). Individual differences in spatial learning from computer-simulated environments. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 8, 307-321.

 
中文文獻
1. 王啟翰(2006)。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(未出版之碩士論文)。國立台灣科技大學，臺北市。
2. 江秉潤、陳飛亨(2015)。 3D設計for 3D列印超入門Blender快速建模全書。臺北：碁峯。
3. 呂玠樺(2013)。3D使用者介面的可用性評估(未出版之碩士論文)。國立雲林科技大學，斗六市。
4. 李琛玫(1996)。國中一般能力資優生、美術資優生與普通生之視覺空間認知能力研究(未出版之碩士論文)。彰化師範大學，彰化市。
5. 林浚傑(2007)。國小學童之平面視覺空間能力研究。(未出版之碩士論文)。國立新竹教育大學，新竹市。
6. 林鼎勝(2014)。3D列印的發展現況。科技發展月刊。503，32-37。
7. 邱美虹(2016)。科學模型與建模：科學模型、科學建模與建模能力。化學教育期刊，11，1-3。
8. 洪蘭(譯)(2000)。腦內乾坤：男女有別，其來有自(原作者:Anne Moir & David Jessel)，臺北：遠流。(原著出版年：1991)
9. 張春興、林清山(1973)。教育心理學。臺北：文景。
10. 張睿麟(2014)。3D列印與自造者時代的商業模式(未出版之碩士論文)。東海大學，臺中市。
11. 陳正偉(2008)。觸控介面操作使用經驗之研究與設計－以電子睡眠日誌為例(未出版之碩士論文)。國立台灣科技大學，臺北市。
12. 陳建雄(譯)(2006)。互動設計跨越人─電腦互動(原作者：Preece, J., Rogers, Y., & Sharp, H.)。臺北：全華。(原著出版年：2002)
13. 陸谷孫、黃勇民(譯)(1997)。透視(原作者：Angrill, M. C., & Parramon, J. M.)。臺北：三民。
14. 黃萬見、蔡朝旭、黃國忠、鄭嘉隆(2002)。3D顯示器市場與技術研究。經濟部技術處產業報告(編號：ITRIEK-0453-S163)。臺北市：工研院。
15. 廖翎吟(2003)。國小兒童靜態 3D 電腦圖像空間深度判斷研究(未出版之碩士論文)。國立新竹師範學院，新竹市。
16. 劉麗惠(2013)。3D列印讓你我都是創新實踐者。貿易雜誌，270，36-39。
17. 潘玉華(2003)。電子遊戲專家與生手之表現差異研究(未出版之碩士論文)。國立交通大學，新竹市。
18. 戴文雄、賴良助、林茂宏(2003)。國中學生空間能力內涵之建構。工業教育學刊，27，55-64.
19. 櫻井正二郎(1999)。雙眼立體視覺：是獨立的歷程嗎？載於李江山等著，視覺與認知：視覺知覺與視覺運動系統。臺北：遠流。
20. 顧兆仁(2013)。大型多點觸控螢幕上之3D 虛擬物件旋轉操作的手勢掌控性分析(未出版之博士論文) 。大同大學，臺北市。

網路文獻
1. Gartner(2015). Gartner Says Worldwide Shipments of 3D Printers to Reach More Than 490,000 in 2016. Retrieved from http://www.gartner.com/newsroom/id/3139118
2. Watt, A,(2000). 3D Computer Graphics,(3th ed.). [DS Reader version]. Retrieved from http://www.amazon.com/Computer-Graphics-3rd-Alan-Watt/dp/0201398559
3. 吳顯東(2013, 5)。3D列印技術與應用發展趨勢分析。財團法人資訊工業策進會產業情報研究所(MIC)。取自http://mic.iii.org.tw/aisp/reports/reportdetail_register.asp?docid=3028&rtype=freereport
4. 從全球智慧型行動終端市場趨勢看我國產業發展(2011, 11)。網路通訊國際標準分析及參與制定計畫網。取自http://std-share.itri.org.tw/IndustryPaper/More?ClassID=1&id=7
5. 經濟學人封面故事：第三次工業革命來了，製造業的社群化(2012, 4)。科技報橘。取自http://techorange.com/2012/04/25/economist-the-third-manufacturing-revolution/
6. 維基百科全書：平板電腦(2016)。取自https://zh.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E5%B9%B3%E6%9D%BF%E9%9B%BB%E8%85%A6
7. 維基百科全書：開源軟體(2016)。取自https://zh.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E5%BC%80%E6%BA%90%E8%BD%AF%E4%BB%B6