臺灣人文及社會科學引文索引資料庫系統

:::

詳目顯示

回上一頁
第 1 筆 / 總合 1 筆   第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁
/1頁
題名：基於資訊線索之大學圖書館網站標籤建構研究
作者：呂智惠
作者(外文)：Lu, Chih-Hwei
校院名稱：國立臺灣師範大學
系所名稱：圖書資訊學研究所
指導教授：謝建成
學位類別：博士
出版日期：2016
主題關鍵詞：資訊架構；網站標籤；底層標籤；階層標籤；資訊線索；卡片分類；層面分類；索引典；尋獲度；information architecture；website labels；leaf label；node label；information scent；card sorting；faceted classification；thesaurus；findability
原始連結：連回原系統網址new window
相關次數：
  • 被引用次數被引用次數:期刊(0) 博士論文(0) 專書(0) 專書論文(0)
  • 排除自我引用排除自我引用:0
  • 共同引用共同引用:0
  • 點閱點閱:1
網站標籤提供視覺與認知的導引，被視為網站內容與使用者間溝通的重要橋樑，直接影響使用者是否能有效且精準地獲取資訊；同時網站標籤更是一種文字型的資訊線索能協助使用者找到所需的資訊或達成目標任務。本研究探討大學圖書館網站標籤之建構，因網站標籤內容關係到所傳達資訊的完整性與確實性，要如何縮減使用者對於網站標籤產生認知差異，讓網站標籤具備其重要導引或暗示性之資訊線索功能，是本論文研究主要探討之議題。
資訊架構學為本研究的理論基礎，由資訊架構三元素(內容、使用者、情境)組成的網站資訊生態到資訊架構的四個組成系統(組織、標籤、導覽、搜尋)，都與本研究的核心議題網站標籤建構息息相關，在資訊架構學中特別強調瞭解使用者需求與使用者行為，因此網站的尋獲度即為重要的評估方法；資訊組織為本研究的方法論基礎，主要從組織分類的概念探討適合網站大量資訊資源組織分類的方法，根據相關研究的分析最後本研究採用卡片分類、層面分類與索引典概念作為網站標籤組織分類建構的方法；資訊線索則為本論文導入網站標籤建構之核心議題，資訊線索為資訊覓食理論的一個重要概念，資訊覓食理論是源自於動物覓食行為的研究，除了重點探討資訊線索之內涵與相關理論研究，為完整建構資訊覓食的理論內容，仍由最原始的動物覓食行為談起，其次說明資訊覓食理論，最後則聚焦探討資訊線索的理論基礎與實證研究。
本論文基於研究目的提出六個研究問題，分別為：
1. 現行全國大學圖書館網站底層標籤內容與標籤命名為何？
2. 不同身分者(專業使用者、圖書館員、一般使用者)對大學圖書館網站底層標籤認知是否有落差？其對底層標籤命名建議為何？
3. 不同身分者(專業使用者、圖書館員、一般使用者)對大學圖書館網站階層標籤建構之內容與方式為何？
4. 不同身分者(專業使用者、圖書館員、一般使用者)所建構之網站底層標籤，以及將上述三種身分綜合認知建構之底層標籤資訊線索對其內部尋獲度是否有差異?
5. 不同身分者(專業使用者、圖書館員、一般使用者)所建構之網站階層標籤，以及將上述三種身分綜合認知建構之階層標籤資訊線索對其內部尋獲度是否有差異？
6. 以不同資訊組織方法所建構之網站標籤，歸類內容與方式為何？其網站標籤建構對內部尋獲度是否有差異？
本論文分三部分進行：研究的第一部分是蒐集整理全國112所大學圖書館網站之底層標籤，歸納分析各校圖書館網站標籤名稱異同與組織方式，接著從專業使用者、圖書館員、一般使用者以及綜合認知資訊線索的角度，蒐集分析對底層標籤的認知異同與命名建議，藉以發掘不同身分者建構底層標籤內容之差異；接下來透過卡片分類法分別產生由專業使用者、圖書館員、一般使用者、及資訊線索四組樹狀架構，探討網站底層標籤與資訊線索對內部尋獲度之效益；研究的第二部分是由專業使用者、圖書館員、一般使用者、以及綜合認知資訊線索的角度進行樹狀架構階層標籤之建構，蒐集不同身分者對階層標籤的認知差異與命名建議；最後透過尋獲度測試、使用者認知標籤合適度評分探討網站階層標籤與資訊線索對內部尋獲度之效益；研究的第三部分是透過層面分類與索引典的資訊組織概念建構大學圖書館網站標籤，最後比較原圖書館網站標籤、使用者新替換之網站標籤、以及層面分類索引典概念建構之網站標籤三組標籤之內部尋獲度效益。
本研究從資訊架構、資訊組織、資訊覓食三方面探討大學圖書館網站標籤之意涵與其建構方法及內容，應用資訊覓食理論中重要的資訊線索概念探討網站標籤之建構。根據研究結果發現，網站標籤作為資訊線索會受使用者認知、網站架構、建構者身分等因素影響其內部尋獲度；同時發現大學圖書館網站標籤建構透過本研究設計之方法包括底層標籤認知調查與建構、階層標籤建構、以及任務導向尋獲度測試與標籤合適度評分等過程，可建構一具備資訊線索高、尋獲度佳之圖書館網站標籤。
針對本論文研究所探討的研究問題與研究目的，提出以下研究結論：
一、112所大學圖書館網站底層標籤命名現況與網站架構深廣度差異大，80%以上之大學圖書館所建置之網站架構是屬尋獲度較佳者。
二、專業使用者、圖書館員、一般使用者對底層標籤認知與建構內容不盡相同，三種身分者所提出底層標籤內容完全不相符者達61.4%；而專業使用者與一般使用者對於底層標籤認知較為相近。
三、專業使用者、圖書館員、一般使用者建構網站階層標籤方式與名稱皆有差異，專業使用者會兼顧圖書資訊專業並從一般使用者角度出發，選用淺顯易懂之用語；圖書館員常以工作經驗中所使用的網頁名稱為命名依據；一般使用者會考量其所熟知的詞彙，較為精簡通俗，亦會擷取原有網站底層標籤名稱中之關鍵字作為命名的依據。
四、綜合認知資訊線索與專業使用者建構之底層標籤對使用者理解網站內容有實質幫助，對內部尋獲度具有點擊網頁過程的輔助作用。
五、綜合認知資訊線索之階層標籤於尋獲度測試結果相較於專業使用者、圖書館員、及一般使用者而言具有顯著差異，其使用者執行任務所花費時間與路徑步數最短少、標籤合適度評分最高分，可有效提升網站內部尋獲度。
六、結合層面分類與索引典概念所建構附註詞彙關聯對照之網站標籤確可提升網站內部尋獲度。
Website labels provide visual and cognitive cues, facilitate the communication of website content to users, and directly influence whether users can efficiently and accurately obtain information. In addition, website labels are text-based information scents that assist users in obtaining required information and achieving their goals. This dissertation explored the adequate construction of university library website labels. Because the content of website labels is related to the completeness and accuracy of information transmission, the methods of reducing the cognitive differences of users regarding website labels and providing suggestive information scents through website labels are crucial research topics.
Information architecture is the theoretical basis of the dissertation. The three elements of information architecture (content, user, and context), which form a website information ecology, and the four components of information architecture (organization, label, navigation, and search) are closely related to the construction of website labels. Information architecture emphasizes the importance of understanding user requirements and behavior; thus, the findability of a website is extremely crucial. Information organization is the methodological basis of the dissertation to be employed to explore the concepts of organization and classification of website information. In accordance with related studies, the researcher applied the concepts of card sorting, faceted classification, and thesaurus to organize and classify website labels. Information scent is a crucial consideration for the construction of website labels and an essential concept in information foraging theory, which originated from a study on animal foraging behavior. In this dissertation, the researcher explored the connotation of information scent and related theories and discussed animal foraging behavior to construct a complete information foraging theory. Subsequently, the researcher explained information foraging theory and reviewed information scent and related empirical studies.
In this dissertation, the researcher proposed six research questions as follows:
1. What are the content and names of leaf labels for current university library websites in Taiwan?
2. Do professional users, librarians, and general users have different understandings of leaf labels for university library websites? What are the suggestions of professional users, librarians, and general users about the names of leaf labels?
3. How do professional users, librarians, and general users construct node labels for university library website and what is the content of the node labels?
4. Do professional users, librarians, and general users construct website leaf labels differently? Do the information scent of leaf labels constructed by professional users, librarians, or general users influence internal findability differently?
5. Do professional users, librarians, and general users construct website node labels differently? Do the information scent of node labels constructed by professional users, librarians, or general users influence internal findability differently?
6. How are website labels that were constructed through different information organization methods classified? Do website labels constructed according to various methods influence internal findability differently?
This dissertation had three parts. In the first part, the researcher collected and organized leaf labels from 112 university library websites and analyzed the names of various university library website labels and the methods for organizing the website labels. Subsequently, from the perspectives of professional users, librarians, general users, and comprehensive cognitive information scent, the researcher analyzed cognitive differences of leaf labels between professional users, librarians, and general users and collected their suggestions about label names to understand how these three types of users construct the content of leaf labels. Next, a card sorting method was applied to produce four tree structures (i.e., professional users, librarians, general users, and information scent) and to explore the influences of website leaf labels and information scent on internal findability. In the second part, from the perspectives of professional users, librarians, general users, and comprehensive cognitive information scent, we constructed tree-structured node labels, investigated the cognitive differences of node labels between professional users, librarians, and general users, and collected their suggestions about label names. Finally, the researcher tested findability, assessed the suitability of users’ cognitive labels, and explored the influences of website node labels and information scent on internal findability. In the third part, the concepts of faceted classification and a thesaurus were adopted to construct university library website labels and compared the internal findability of three sets of labels (i.e., original library website labels, users’ alternative website labels, and website labels constructed using the concepts of faceted classification and thesaurus).
This dissertation explored the connotation of university library website labels and the methods for constructing the website labels from three aspects (i.e., information architecture, information organization, and information foraging). The concept of information scent, which is a crucial concept in information foraging theory, was applied to determine the ideal method of constructing website labels. According to the results, the internal findability of website labels that provide information scent was influenced by user cognition, website architecture, and user identities. In this dissertation, the construction of university library website labels involved the following processes: investigating users’ understanding of leaf labels, constructing leaf labels, constructing node labels, testing task-oriented findability, and assessing label suitability. Through the use of these processes, library website labels with rich information scent and excellent findability were constructed.
The conclusions of this dissertation are as follows:
1. Substantial differences in leaf label names and website architecture existed among the 112 university library websites; more than 80% of the studied university libraries had website architecture with excellent findability.
2. Professional users, librarians, and general users understood the leaf labels and constructed the content of the leaf labels differently. Professional users, librarians, and general users had differing opinions about 61.4% of the constructed content of the leaf labels; however, professional and general users had similar understandings of the leaf labels.
3. Professional users, librarians, and general users constructed and named website node labels differently. Professional users used their expertise in library information to construct and name website node labels and often chose terms that were easy to understand from the perspective of general users. Librarians often named website node labels according to their own working experience. General users used terms familiar to them, which were typically simple and common, or used the keywords of the names of the original website leaf labels to construct and name website node labels.
4. Comprehensive cognitive information scent and leaf labels constructed by professional users helped users understand the content of websites, thereby enhancing the internal findability.
5. Compared with the node labels from professional users, librarians, and general users, significant differences in the findability of node labels existed for comprehensive cognitive information scent. The information scent enhanced the internal findability of website when the amount of search time spent by users was the shortest, the number of path steps performed by users was the smallest, and the score for the suitability of labels was the highest.
6. Website labels that contained related words and were constructed according to the concepts of faceted classification and thesaurus effectively enhanced the internal findability of websites.
一、英文文獻
Adkisson, H.P.(2005). Use of faceted classification. Retrieved from http://www.webdesignpractices.com/navigation/facets.html
Ahlstrom, V., & Allendoerfer, K. (2004). Information organization for a portal using a card-sorting technique. Retrieved from
http://hf.tc.faa.gov/technotes/dot-faa-ct-tn04-31.pdf
Aitchison, J. & Clarke, S.D.(2004).The thesaurus: A historical viewpoint, with a look to the future. Cataloging & Classification Quarterly 37(3/4) , 5-21.
Akerelrea, C., & Zimmerman, D. (2002). A group card sorting methodology for developing informational web sites. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the 2002 IEEE Professional Communications Conference.
Augustine, S., & Greene, C. (2002). Discovering how students search a library web site: A usability case study. College & research libraries, 63(4), 354-365.
Bernard, M. L. (2002). Examining the effects of hypertext shape on user performance. Usability New, 4(2).
Brinck, T., Gergle, D., & Wood, S. D. (2002). Usability for the web: Designing web sites that work. San Francisco, CA: Morgan Kaufmann Publishers.
Broughton, V. (2001). Faceted classification as a basis for knowledge organization in a digital environment; the bliss bibliographic classification as a model for vocabulary management and the creating of multidimensional knowledge structures. The New Review of Hypermedia and Multimedia, 7(1), 67-102.
Campbell, N. (2001). Usability assessment of library-related web sites: Methods and case studies, Chicago: LITA.
Casey, M.E. & Savastinuk, L.C.(2007). Library 2.0: A Guide to Participatory Library Service. Retrieved from https://ejournals.library.ualberta.ca/index.php/jchla/article/viewFile/22841/17024
Chi, E. H., Pirolli, P., Chen, K., & Pitkow, J. (2001). Using information scent to model user information needs and actions and the Web. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on Human factors in computing systems.
Church, J., Brown, J., & VanderPol, D. (2001). Walking the web: Usability testing of navigational pathways at the University of Nevada, Las Vegas Libraries. Usability assessment of library-related Web sites: Methods and case studies, 109-117.
Courage, C., & Baxter, K. (2004). Understanding your users: A practical guide to user requirements methods, tools, and techniques. San Francisco, CA: Morgan Kaufmann.
Crowley, G.H., Leffel, R., Ramirez, D., Hart, J.L., & Armstrong, T.S. (2002).User perceptions of the library’s web pages: A focus group study atTexas A&M University. The Journal of Academic Librarianship, 28(4),205-210.
Deaton, M. (2002). Sorting techniques for user-centered information design. Retrieved March, 30, 2005.
Denton, W. (2003). How to make a faceted classification and put it on the web? Retrieved from http://www.miskatonic.org/library/facet-web-howto.html
Dickstein, R., & Mills, V. (2000). Usability testing at the university of arizona library: How to let users in on the design. Information technology and libraries, 19(3), 144-150.
Ellis, D. & Vasconcelos, A. (1999). Ranganathan and the net: Using facet analysis to search and organize the World Wide Web. Aslib Proceedings, 51(1), 3-10.
Faiks, A., & Hyland, N. (2000). Gaining user insight: a case study illustrating the card sort technique. College and Search Libraries, 61(4), 349-357.
Farris, J.S., Jones, K.S., & Elgin, P.D. (2002). Users’ schemata of hypermedia: what is so spatial about a website. Interacting with Computers, 14, 487-502.
Fincher, S., & Tenenberg, J. (2005). Making sense of card sorting data. Expert Systems, 22(3), 89-93.
Fuccella, J. (1997). Using user centered design methods to create and design usable web sites. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the 15th international conference on computer documentation.
Game, M.A.(2004). Mapping an informatio architecture’s scent: evaluating the effects of task and context on judgments of relevance(Unpublished master’s thesis). Carleton University, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada.
Hahsler, M., & Simon, B. (2001). User-centered navigation re-design for web-based information systems. Retrieved from
http://www.wu-wien.ac.at/usr/wi/bsimon/publikationen/navigation_re-design_amcis.pdf
Hawley, M. (2008). Extending card-sorting techniques to inform the design of web site hierarchies. Retrieved from http://www.uxmatters.com/MT/archives/000332.php
Horowitz, E., Sahni, S., & Mehta, D.(2006). Fundamentals of Data Structures in C++ (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Silicon Press.
Institute, The Information Architecture. (2013). WHAT IS INFORMATION ARCHITECTURE? Retrieved from http://www.iainstitute.org/documents/learn/What_is_IA.pdf
Jacob, E. K., & Loehrlein, A. (2009). Information architecture. Annual review of information science and technology, 43(1), 1-64.
Jeng, J. (2005). What is usability in the context of the digital library and how can it be measured? Information Technology and Libraries, 24(2) , 47-56.
Kalbach, J. (2007). Designing Web Navigation. Sebastopol, CA: O'Reilly
Kaufman, J. (2006). Card sorting: An inexpensive and practical usability technique. Retrieved from http://unraveled.com/publications/assets/card_sorting/Card_Sorting-Kaufman.pdf
Krug, S. (2006). Don’t make me think: A common sense approach to web usability (2nd ed.).Berkeley, CA: New Riders.
Loehrlein, E. K. J. a. A. (2009). Information Architecture. Annual review of information science and technology, 43(no.1), 44-50.
Loumakis, F., Stumpf, S., & Grayson, D. (2011). This image smells good: effects of image information scent in search engine results pages. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the 20th ACM international conference on Information and knowledge management.
Maurer, D., & Warfel, T. (2004). Card sorting: a definitive guide. Retrieved from http://cuttingedgecourse.com/CIS360/CardSortingGuide.pdf
McGillis, L., & Toms, E. G. (2001). Usability of the academic library web site: implications for design. College & research libraries, 62(4), 355-367.
Morville, P. (2005). Ambient findability: libraries at the crossroads of ubiquitous computing and the internet. Online, 29(6), 16-21.
Morville, P., & Rosenfeld, L. (2006). Information architecture for the World Wide Web: Designing large-scale web sites: O'Reilly Media, Inc
Nielsen, J. & Norman, D. A. (2000). Web-Site Usability:Usability On The Web Isn't A Luxury, InformationWeek Online, January 14. Retrieved from http://www.cems.uwe.ac.uk/~fjmaddix/bcn/usability/Usability%20On%20The%20Web%20Isn't%20A%20Luxury.htm
Nielsen, J. (2009). Card Sorting: Pushing Users Beyond Terminology Matches. Retrieved from http://www.useit.com/alertbox/word-matching.html
Palmer, J.(1988). The design and evaluation of online help for Unix EMACS: capturing the user in menu design. Professional Communication, IEEE Transactions on,31(1), 44-51. Retrieved from http://www.useit.com/alertbox/word-matching.html
Paul, C. L. (2008). Investigation of Applying the Delphi Method to a New Card Sorting Technique. Retrieved from http://www.iainstitute.org/news/documents/research/results/applying_delphi_method_to_card_sort.pdf
Pirolli, P. (2007). Information foraging theory: Adaptive interaction with information: Oxford University Press.
Robertson, J. (2001). Information design using card sorting. Retrieved from http://www.steptwo.com.au/papers/cardsorting/index.html
Rugg, G. & McGeorge, P.(2005). The sorting techniques: a tutorial paper on card sorts, picture sorts and item sorts. Expert Systems, 22(3), 94-107.
Sauro, J.(2013, June 25). Measuring User Confidence In Usability Tests [Web blog]. Retrieved from http://www.measuringu.com/blog/measuring-confidence.php
Shearer, J.R.(2004). A Practical Exercise in Building a Thesaurus. Cataloging & Classification Quarterly, 37(3), 35-56.
Soergel, D.(1974). Indexing Language & Thesaurus: Construction & Maintenance. Los Angeles: Melville Pub. Co.
Spencer, D., & Garrett, J. J. (2009). Card sorting: Designing usable categories. Brooklyn, NY: Rosenfeld Media.
Spivey, M.A.(2000). The vocabulary of library home pages: An influence on diverse and remote end-users. Information Technology and Libraries,19(3), 151-156.
Stephens, D.W., Brown, J.S. & Ydenberg, R.C.(2007). Foraging : behavior and ecology. Chicago : University of Chicago Press.
Toub, S. (2000). Evaluating information architecture : a practical guide to assessing web site organization. Retrieved from http://argus-acia.com/white_papers/evaluating_ia.pdf
Tullis, T., & Wood, L. (2004). How many users are enough for a card-sorting study? . Retrieved from http://home.comcast.net/~tomtullis/publications/UPA2004CardSorting.pdf
Upchurch, L., Rugg, G., & Kitchenham, B. (2001). Using card sorts to elicit web page quality attributes. Ieee software(4), 84-89.
Vigo, M., Leporini, B. & Paterno, F.(2009). Enriching Web Information Scent for Blind Users. Proceedings of the 11th International ACM SIGCCESS Conference on Computers and Accessibility, 123-130.
Wang, P., Hawk, W. B., & Tenopir, C. (2000). Users’ interaction with World Wide Web resources: An exploratory study using a holistic approach. Information processing & management, 36(2), 229-251.
Wurman, R. S. (1996). Information Architects. New York: Graphis Inc.
Yee, K.P., Swearingen, K., Li, K. & Hearst, M. (2003). Searching and organizing: Faceted metadata for image search and browsing. Paper presented at the Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems: Proceedings of the Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems in New York 5-10 April 2003, New York.
Zimmermann, T. (2005). Information Architecture. Retrieved from http://www14.in.tum.de/konferenzen/Jass05/courses/6/Papers/03.pdf
二、中文文獻
6Mde貓（2013）。Users are the Hunters—信息覓食理論探究。用戶研究，2013年12月13日，檢自http://6mdecatdesign.lofter.com/post/28e14e_b95085
呂智惠、謝建成、黃琬姿、黃毓絜（2016）。網站資訊架構之使用者經驗研究：以臺師大科普閱讀網站建置與使用性測試為例。大學圖書館，20（1），63-87。
呂智惠、謝建成、楊康苓（2014）。階層標籤建構者對大學圖書館網站尋獲度影響之研究。圖書資訊學研究， 9（1），131-170。
呂智惠、謝建成、蕭潔（2014）。基於層面分類概念建構大學圖書館網站標籤之研究。圖書資訊學研究， 8（2），197-237。
呂豔麗（2006）。圖書館Web站點信息構建的設計與實踐。當代圖書館， 85（1），26-27。
杜佳、朱慶華（2004）。信息建構在網站評價中的應用:以南京大學網站為例。情報資料工作，141，13-16。
尚玉昌（2003）。行為生態學。台北市：五南。
林雯瑤（2006，6月）。層面分類的概念與應用。教育資料與圖書館學，44（2），153-171。
美國資訊科學學會臺北分會、農業科學資料服務中心、國立中央圖書館（1993）。索引典理論與實務。台北市：中國圖書館學會。
馬費成、姜婷婷（2013）。信息構建對當代情報學發展的影響。圖書館論壇，6，20-25，檢自http://www.lwlm.com/tushuqingbao/200411/5008.htm
張秀（2008）。國內信息構建(IA)研究述評。圖書館學刊，2，18-21。
張雨青（2006）。標示系統之功能與設計原則。生活科技教育月刊，39（2），77-88。
張楠楠（2013）。基於信息線索的用戶行為研究之研究（碩士論文）。取自CNKI中國知識資源總庫
張慧銖（2011）。圖書館電子資源組織─從書架到網路。新北市：Ａiriti Press。
教育部（2015）。103學年度全國大學校院名錄。檢自http://ulist.moe.gov.tw/Download/FileDownload
許文馨、吳頡琳、陳俊宇、吳怡臻（2015）。國立臺灣大學圖書館網站之好用性評估：以圖書資訊學系學生觀點為例。大學圖書館， 19（1），115-139。
陳向明（2002）。社會科學質的研究。台北市：五南。
陳淑君（2012）。索引典的中英詞彙語義對應之研究：以中國藝術領域為例（未出版之博士論文）。國立臺灣大學圖書資訊學研究所，臺北市。
黃明居（2012）。資訊架構。在圖書館學與資訊科學大辭典，檢自http://terms.naer.edu.tw/detail/1678990/?index=2
楊陽、張新民（2009）。信息覓食理論的研究進展。現代圖書情報技術，174，73-79。
劉素清、廖三三（2013）。用戶視角下的電子資源利用障礙及對策。圖書情報工作， 51（21），頁 48-51。
劉強、曾民族（2003）。 信息構築體系及其對推動信息服務業進步的影響。情報理論與實踐， 26（1），1-7。
蔡維君（2006）。大學圖書館好用性評估: 以臺灣大學圖書館網站為例。（未出版之碩士論文）。國立臺灣大學圖書資訊學研究所，臺北市。
謝建成（2011）。圖書館網站架構之研究。台北市：文華圖書館管理。
謝建成、丁依玲、陳慧倫 （2011）。 大學圖書館網站資訊尋獲度之研究。資訊管理學報 ， 47（3），頁 25-49。
謝建成、吳怡青（2010）。改進修正型德菲式卡片分類法探討大學圖書館網站尋獲度之研究。教育資料與圖書館學，47（3），245-281。
謝建成、林黃瑋（2012）。基於網站廣度與深度之網站尋獲度研究。教育資料與圖書館學， 50（2），頁 255-288。
謝建成、楊慧婷（2012）。以知識結構表徵工具建構大學圖書館網站。圖書資訊學研究，7（1），39-83。
謝建成、劉至逢（2012）。大學圖書館網站使用性評估之探討。教育資料與圖書館學， 47（2），頁 163-198。
謝寶煖、周秉貞（2003）。以顧客導向觀點評估政府網站之資訊架構。圖書與資訊學刊，46，175-198
瞿海源、畢恆達、劉長萱、楊國樞主編（2012）。社會及行為科學研究法(一)：總論與量化研究法。台北市：臺灣東華。
藍素華（2001）。大學圖書館網站資訊架構使用性之研究。中國圖書館學會會報， 67，139-154。
藝立協編著（2003）。Blog：部落格線上出版、網路日誌實作。台北市：上奇科技。

 
 
 
 
第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁 top
QR Code
QRCODE

臺灣人文及社會科學引文索引資料庫

目前上線人數：1101（臺灣：1083，外國：18） ／ 本年度總使用人次：2071125 ／ 訪客人次（自102年09月）：67882673
國家圖書館著作權聲明 Copyright © 2013 All rights reserved.
本館地址: 100201臺北市中山南路20號． 本館地圖及交通資訊．
總機：(02)23619132．最佳瀏覽解析度為1024x768以上