社區鄰里環境是兒童成長相當重要之場域，因此要了解兒童在鄰里內各項活動之移動自由與影響因素，為十分重要之課題；但過去研究探討鄰里環境對兒童在鄰里活動之影響，缺乏對於社區中不同鄰里特徵環境下之兒童，在鄰里內之各項活動行為是否具有差異進行驗證；故本研究以新北市泰山區為例，探討居住於衛星市鎮不同鄰里環境特徵下之兒童，在鄰里中之移動自由 (freedom of movement)是否有差異，並探討不同鄰里環境特徵影響兒童移動自由之因素。 本研究以泰山、義學國小為實證社區學校，進行問卷抽樣調查，並對其學區進行土地使用調查，共計回收 522份問卷；研究者並以「型態法」為疊圖法，將現調範圍依鄰里特徵進行分區劃分；疊圖結果共劃分七個區域；其後，依據各分區之鄰里環境特徵，將位於市鎮中心住商混合使用之D,E區歸類為「中心區」；位於中心區外圍，舊建物與新建物並存之 B, F區歸類為「外圍發展區」，並進行不同分區兒童在移動自由上之差異性分析，結果驗證分區兒童雖在移動自由上無明顯差異，但中心區 (D, E 區)兒童「完全通學獨立移動」者較其他分區多，通學旅程完全由成人接送者亦較其他分區少，但差異程度未達統計上之顯著水準。 此外，中心區家長感受「區內步行系統不安全程度」會負向影響兒童通學獨立移動程度；「家庭年收入為36萬元以下」之家庭，其兒童通學獨立移動程度亦較高；對外圍發展區而言，「通學經過交叉路口數」、「家長居住年期較低」(3-5年)，均會負向影響其兒童之通學獨立移動程度。 中心區兒童之年級對其通學與玩耍的獨立移動具正向影響，但對其他分區而言，兒童年級之影響則不明顯；無論中心區或外圍發展區，家長「對鄰里環境之親近認同感」與「對兒童獨立移動認同感」，亦會分別正向影響分區兒童之通學獨立移動程度；由此顯示，家長對鄰里環境與對兒童教養之態度，比鄰里環境因素更顯著地正向影響兒童通學獨立移動之程度。

The neighborhood environment plays a crucial role in children’s personal development. therefore, it is very important to understand the degrees of freedom of movement and other influential factors on children’s various activities in the neighborhood. Previous studies of the influence of the neighborhood environment on children’s activities have failed to determine whether there were any behavioral differences between the children resulting from their respective environmental characteristics. Therefore, this study investigated these causal relationships in terms of the children’s relative degrees of mobility. A questionnaire sample survey was conducted in Taishan Elementary School and Yi Shiue Elementary School, along with a land use survey from the school district. A total of 522 questionnaires were collected. This study used morphological analysis as the mapping technique to divide the district into different zones, according to their neighborhood characteristics. The mapping result showed seven zones. The downtown area of mixed residential and commercial use (Zones D and E) was characterized as the “central area.” The area of old and new buildings co-existing on the outskirts (Zones B and F) of the central area were characterized as the “peripheral development area.” A difference analysis on the freedom of movement of children living in different zones was then performed. The results confirmed that even though there was no significant difference in the freedom of movement of children living in different zones, the children living in the “central area” had a higher level of independent mobility from home to school, and fewer children were escorted by adults, compared to those living in other zones. However, these differences did not reach a statistically significant level. Furthermore, a sense of “the unsafe level of the pedestrian system within the district” that a parent had in the central area did not negatively influence the level of children’s independent mobility from home to school. Children from “families with an annual income below 360,000” had a higher level of independent mobility from home to school. For the peripheral development area, “the number of crossroads from home to school” and a “shorter period of parents living in the neighborhood” (3 to 5 years) negatively influenced the level of children’s independent mobility from home to school. The grade level (seniority) of children in the central area positively influenced their independent mobility from home to school and play in neighborhood, but had no significant influence in either other districts. Parents’ “sense of closeness and identification to the neighborhood” and “sense of identification to children’s independent mobility” positively influenced the level of independent mobility from school to home of children in different areas. The findings show that parents’ attitudes towards the neighborhood environment and parenting had a more significant positive influence on the level of children’s independent mobility from home to school than neighborhood environment factors.