透過您的圖書館登入
IP:18.191.88.249
  • 學位論文

遊憩場所活動與地方情感之關係探討

Exploring the Relationship between Activities and Affective Bonding in Recreational Sites

指導教授 : 鄭佳昆

摘要


地方情感是人和特定地點經由長時間互動下產生的情感連結。人透過地方提供的活動能增進人地互動,與地方形成緊密的情感關係,促使活動在地方情感的建立上扮演一個關鍵的角色。地方情感的理論發展目前處於一個緩慢進步的階段,有學者認為這是受到測量量表過於多樣化造成。本研究檢視眾多文獻的地方情感量表,發現他們測量活動的方式各有不同,這種情況可能源自於活動和地方情感的關係不明確所導致。然而,過去已有許多學者投入活動和地方情感的研究,這些文獻大多來自於活動涉入、活動專門化與地方情感之間的關係探討,侷限於單一特定活動的討論;卻很少有研究探討各種活動和地方情感的關係。因此本研究回顧過去與活動相關的文獻,釐清各種活動和地方情感之間可能存在的關係。本研究將地方尺度侷限於遊憩場所,探討人在遊憩場所進行的活動與地方情感的關聯。 研究分為三個部分討論,第一部分先釐清地方情感量表中不同類型的活動問項於量測上的差異,根據過去數十餘篇中外相關文獻使用的量表,將活動問項歸納為三種版本:特定活動、非特定活動與綜合類型。由於使用者在地方通常不只從事一種活動,不同版本(特定/非特定)問項測量出的地方情感可能有所差異。因此調查台北市青年公園進行特定活動 (打籃球、打羽毛球、跳舞) 之使用者;讓同一受測者針對不同版本的活動問項進行填答。第二部分則探討使用者從事活動種類、活動數量和地方情感的關係,已有超過三十篇的研究顯示出活動涉入和地方情感具有正向關係,然而這些研究多關注於單一特定活動。過去研究發現當人們對特定活動的技巧或涉入到達一定程度時,他們不再依賴特定地點。除非人們在此地點上可從事其他種活動,不然難以與地方發展出強烈的情感連結。此外,受到地點提供使用者參與活動數量的差異,活動空間可分為一般活動空間與特定活動空間進行探討。因此於台北市十一處公園與象山親山步道兩種類型空間進行現地調查,了解其中活動種類、活動數量和地方情感的關係。第三部分則探討特定活動空間中活動依附對地方情感的影響模型:當使用者對於活動情感越高時,透過不同的體驗偏好滿足他們的需求,能建立出與地方的情感連結。並且透過了解不同導向的人活動依附對地方情感的影響模型之差異,區分出人的活動情感和地方情感的不同。本部分研究於象山親山步道進行現地問卷調查檢驗活動依附和地方情感的關係模型。 第一部分研究結果顯示使用非特定活動類型的問項涵蓋的情感層面較廣,似乎較能反應出對於地點的不同情感反應。第二部分研究結果則指出在遊憩場所參與不同種類活動的人,其影響地方情感的效果不同;分為正向、負向和無影響關係。使用者從事的活動數量確實因活動空間類型的不同,有不同的地方情感。一般活動空間中,地方情感和使用者從事活動數量正向相關;地方情感越高的人,參與越多活動。特定活動空間的地方情感則可能主要受到特定活動的影響,和使用者從事活動的數量無關。第三部分研究則顯示在特定活動空間中,主要受到使用者對於該特定活動的依附情感決定地方情感,並且會透過體驗偏好中介影響地方情感;活動依附影響地方情感的模型成立。此外,由於活動導向的人和其他導向的人在活動依附對地方情感的影響上有所不同,藉此區分出人對於活動情感和地方情感的差別。 在地方情感理論發展上,未來使用地方情感測量工具時,不同的活動版本測得之地方情感可能不同,需要更小心的處理與解釋。本研究也證實在地方建立情感時,必須去考量多種活動以及活動特性,對於了解地方情感是如何形成有相當的幫助。在景觀規劃與管理上,可於不同遊憩場所中加入多種適當的活動,能增進人與地方的情感,穩定人與地方之間的關係,地方較不易被替代。

並列摘要


Many researchers believed that the affective bond is developed gradually through the long-term interaction with place. The formation of bonding comes from activities that people do in place. Activity is helpful for enhancing people-place interactions; therefore, people develop emotional bonding with place. It supports that activity plays an important role in measuring place bonding. However, in recent years,many researchers measure the people-place emotional bonding using different types of activities. Besides, more than 30 studies have shown that the levels of activity involvement are positively correlated with place bonding. Most of those studies focused on only one specific activity. However, we can engage in many activities in place. Therefore, it is important to consider the relationship between a variety of activities and affective bonding in recreational sites. The relationship between activity and affective bonding in recreational sites was investigated in three studies. The first study focused on comparing the difference between specific activity and non-specific activities in place bonding scales. The second study examined that the effect of different types of activities on affective bonding. In addition, quantity of activities might correlate with people-place affective bonding. It should also consider types of activity settings because the quantity of activities afforded in settings are not the same. In the third study, activity attachment, experience preference and people-place affective bonding were investigated to find out how emotional bonding in place can be formed through single specific activity. An on‐site survey was conducted for all three experiments. The first results showed that measuring place bonding in different activity types was different. Items with non-Specific activity seem to be more sensitive to measure the affective bonding. The second study showed that different type of activities had positive/non/negative relationships with affective bonding in recreational sites.Respondents’ place attachment was positively correlated with the number of activities that people engaged in general-activities settings; however, such correlation was not observed in the specific-activity settings. The third results revealed that the model of activity attachment influencing place attachment was established. The current study suggests that it is important to pay more attention on designing and handling place bonding scales in the future. The current study also indicated the necessity to consider multiple activities for developing bonding with a place, which will contribute to our understanding of how place bonding was developed. The result would also help landscape designer to manage better landscape planning and design in the future.

參考文獻


2. Alexander, C. (2002). The nature of order. An essay on the art of building and the
3. Alexandris, K., Funk, D. C., & Pritchard, M. (2011). The impact of constraints on motivation, activity attachment, and skier intentions to continue. Journal of leisure research, 43(1), 56-79.
4. Anderson, D. H., & Fulton, D. C. (2008). Experience preferences as mediators of the wildlife related recreation participation: Place attachment relationship. Human Dimensions of Wildlife, 13(2), 73-88.
6. Bricker, K. S., & Kerstetter, D. L. (2000). Level of specialization and place attachment: An exploratory study of whitewater recreationists. Leisure Sciences, 22(4), 233-257.
7. Brook, I. (2003). Making here like there: place attachment, displacement and the urge to garden. Ethics, Place and Environment, 6(3), 227-234.

延伸閱讀