本研究目的針對行政院體育委員會消息來源和體育記者間的互動進行探討，了解體育記者如何選擇與接近消息來源、記者與體委會消息來源之互動現況，同時探討體育記者的專業意理對於選擇和接近體委會消息來源的影響。本研究針對44位體育記者和20位體委會消息來源進行問卷調查，其研究結果發現，體育記者最常引用主委、副主委作為新聞消息來源；有22位(50%)受訪者認為體育記者應扮演監督角色，必要時應和體委會採較對立的立場；有28位(63.6%)體育記者選擇體委會消息來源是根據消息來源的可信度高低；有25位(56.8%)體育記者與體委會消息來源互動之場合是在體委會舉行例行記者會時的公開採訪。本研究歸納出的體育記者四種專業意理取向分別為「監督政策取向」、「社會責任取向」、「資訊傳佈取向」及「調查解釋取向」；傾向引用主委、副主委消息來源的體育記者在「資訊傳佈取向」上的得分顯著高於引用其他三類消息來源；傾向與體委會採取較對立立場的體育記者在「監督政策取向」上的得分顯著高於其他互動關係類型；傾向選擇消息來源可信度高低類型的記者在「資訊傳佈取向」上的得分顯著高於選擇其他消息來源類型；此外，傾向選擇以過去採訪經驗判斷類型的記者在「調查解釋取向」上的得分顯著高於選擇其他消息來源類型；每個月互動一次的記者在「資訊傳佈取向」上的得分顯著高於其他互動頻率類型。在體委會消息來源方面，有9位(45%)受訪者表示應和體育記者發展互信互賴的關係；有六成體委會消息來源會依據過去與體育記者的接觸情形是否良好來決定是否接受記者採訪；有七成受訪者表示未曾私下與記者進行聯誼互動。

The present study was aimed to investigate interaction of sports journalists and news sources of Sports Affairs Council (SAC). The main goal of this study was to explore how sports journalists choose and access sports information, how journalists interact with news sources from SAC, and the differences in their expertise capabilities. Forty four sports journalists and 20 staff from SAC were participated in this study. Results revealed that director/deputy director was the main source of the information. Half of the journalists think that they should play a supervisory role and take confrontational perspective if necessary. Most journalists chose information based on the credibility, and about 60% of journalists interacted with SAC staff during press conference held by SAC. Besides, four factors were extracted from expertise capabilities items, including, "policy supervision," "social responsibilities," "information dissemination," and "investigation and explanation." Journalists, who tend to use director/deputy director as their main source of information scored significantly higher than others in terms of information dissemination. Journalists, who tend to take confrontational perspective scored significantly higher than others in terms of policy supervision. Moreover, journalists, who tend to choose information based on its credibility scored significantly higher than others in terms of information dissemination. Journalists, who tend to choose information based on their past experience scored significantly higher than others in terms of investigation and explanation. And also journalists, who interact with SAC staff once a month scored significantly higher than others in terms of information dissemination. As for SAC staff, 45% of staff think that a positive mutual relationship should be developed; 60% of staff decided to be interviewed depending on how they interacted before; 70% of staff have no experience interacting with journalists privately.