歷年優秀論文獎助 > 2017優秀學位論文得獎名單 >張伊岑
| 研究生 | 張伊岑 |
| 研究生(外文) | Yi-Tsen Chang |
| 論文名稱 | 視障電子圖書館網站設計準則之研究 |
| 論文名稱(外文) | Design Principles of Digital Library for the Visually Impaired |
| 指導教授 | 林維真 |
| 指導教授(外文) | Wei-Jane Lin |
| 口試委員 | |
| 口試日期 | 2017-06-27 |
| 學位類別 | 碩士 |
| 校院名稱 | 國立臺灣大學 |
| 系所名稱 | 圖書資訊學研究所 |
| 論文出版年 | 2017 |
| 畢業學年度 | 105 |
| 語文別 | 中文 |
| 論文頁數 | 112 |
| 中文關鍵詞 | 視障電子圖書館、可及性、好用性、層級分析法 |
| 外文關鍵詞 | Digital library for visually impaired、Accessibility、Usability、Analytic Hierarchy Process(AHP) |
| 中文摘要 | 本研究以視障電子圖書館的可及性與好用性為研究重點，首先，從無障礙網頁規範中的四大原則推導出視障電子圖書館的可及性構面與要項，而後從使用者的網頁評估法、視覺障礙的網頁評估研究及電子圖書館好用性相關研究中綜整出視障電子圖書館的好用性構面，並參考國內外視障電子圖書館相關實證研究，從中找出視障電子圖書館的圖書館服務功能構面，將三個構面融合為視障電子圖書館評估時的基礎架構。為了解三大構面及其下各評估準則在整體架構中的相對重要性，以便後續作為評估視障圖書館時更有力的參考依據，招募學者專家3人、實務專家7人及具有視障電子圖書館使用經驗的視障者7人，分別從視障圖書資訊服務的設計者、提供者及實際使用者等三種角度切入進行層級分析法問卷的填答，其中針對視障者另進行問卷後的訪談。 研究結果顯示，在視障電子圖書館可及性與好用性要素的目標構面中，學者專家及實務專家認皆為權重最高的目標構面為「可及性」(學者專家W=0.476；實務專家W=0.391)，其次為「好用性」(學者專家W=0.262；實務專家W=0.355)，最後為「圖書館服務功能」(學者專家W=0.0.262；實務專家W=0.254)。但視障者對目標構面的排序卻與他們相反，認為最重要的構面為「圖書館服務功能」(W=0.391)，排序第二為「好用性」(W=0.338)，最後才為「可及性」(W=0.272)。而在3個目標構面下的11個評估準則中，學者專家認為「可及性」構面下的「可感知」(G=0.194)為最重要的評估準則，實務專家則將「好用性」構面下的「效能」(G=0.134)列為優先次序第一，視障者則認為「圖書館服務功能」構面下的「館藏借閱」(G=0.143)評估準則最為重要。 最後合併三種類專家的調查結果，得到整體專家對所有目標構面及評估準則的相對重要性排序，整體專家認為最重要的構面為「可及性」(W=0.354)，後面依序是「好用性」(W=0.335)與「圖書館服務功能」(W=0.31)，但三者的權重分數相差不大，表示具有相近的重要性。評估準則的部分則以「可及性」構面下的「可操作」(G=0.129)分數最高，後面依序為「圖書館服務功能」構面下的「館藏發展」(G=0.12)以及「好用性」構面下的「效能」(G=0.112)。 |
| 外文摘要 | This study focused on accessibility and usability of digital library for visually impaired, the aim of the study was to explore the evaluation elements and structures of accessibility and usability of digital library for visually impaired. The processes of the study could be separated into 2 stages. The first stage was to use literature review to find the accessibility and usability criteria of digital library for visually impaired. The main criteria of accessibility were derived from four principles of Web Content Accessibility Guidelines 2.0(WCAG2.0), and according to results of literature review of usability testing and digital library researches it came to criteria of usability and features of digital library for visually impaired. The second step was to use analytic hierarchy process (AHP) to sort all criteria of accessibility, usability and features. The study recruited 3 scholars, 7 librarians and 7 visually impaired users of digital libraries as analyzed experts. Visually impaired users were interviewed after doing AHP queustionnaires to understand their opinions about digital library for visually impaired. Findings of this study were about the accessibility and usability criteria in digital library for visually impaired, the most important criterion in both scholar and librarian’s groups was accessibility (scholar’s W=0.476；librarian’s W=0.391), the second was usability (scholar’s W=0.262；librarian’s W=0.355), and the last factor was feature (scholar’s W=0.262；librarian’s W=0.254). However, visually impaired user had inverse order of priority toward criteria. In their opinion, the most important criterion was feature (W=0.391), the next was usability (W=0.338), and the accessibility (W=0.272) was the last factor that the visually impaired users considered. Among the 11 guidelines under 3 constructs, the most important factor in the scholar’s group was perceivable (G=0.194) which of the construct of accessibility, in the librarian’s group was effectiveness (G=0.134) which under the contruct of usability, and in the visually impaired user’s group was borrow and use (G=0.143) which of the construct of feature. At last, combining three groups of experts obtained priority orders of whole contructs and criteria of all experts. In all experts’ point of view, accessibility (W=0.354) was the most important contruct, the second was usability (W=0.335), and the last contruct was feature (W=0.31). The weight scores of these three contructs were quitely close, it meant that the importances of these conctructs were similar. Among the 11 guidelines, the most important top three factors were operable (G=0.129), collection (G=0.12), and effectiveness (G=0.112). |
| 連結 | 臺灣博碩士論文知識加值系統 |