博碩士論文 104554005 詳細資訊




以作者查詢圖書館館藏 以作者查詢臺灣博碩士 以作者查詢全國書目 勘誤回報 、線上人數:17 、訪客IP:44.200.169.3
姓名 張凱婷(Kai-Ting Chang)  查詢紙本館藏   畢業系所 網路學習科技研究所
論文名稱 探討個別差異與回饋形式在數位遊戲式學習系統中對學習動機、學習成效與遊戲表現之影響:以九年級國文學習為例
(Effects of Individual Differences and Feedback Types of a Digital Game-Based Learning System on Learning Motivation, Learning Performance and Gaming Performance: A Case Study on Ninth Graders’ Chinese Learning)
相關論文
★ Using Digital Board Game to Enhance Student Engagementin Learning★ 從人因與互動行為模式的觀點探討數位遊戲式學習輔助能源知識
★ 探討認知風格於數位遊戲式英語學習環境對遊戲行為與學習成效之影響★ 由空間能力探討遊戲式英語學習如何影響學習者之遊戲行為和遊戲表現
★ 探討先備知識及學習風格在角色扮演遊戲中對英語字彙習得成效與行為模式之影響★ 從全面性的角度探討先備知識對同儕互評中受評與 評分之影響
★ 從認知風格的角度探討同儕互評分組對遊戲製作與評量之影響★ 探討創作媒介、個別差異、範例式教學及創作模式對九年級學生音樂創作的學習動機及成效之影響
★ 探討趨向表現目標與逃避表現目標對於 學習成效與表現目標採取之影響 -以數位遊戲式英語字彙為例★ 探討英語焦慮與先備知識對英語發音學習成效、獎章成效、遊戲成效、學習動機及遊戲心流之影響──以大型多人線上角色扮演遊戲為例
★ 探討認知風格及遊戲心流對英語字彙學習成效、遊戲成效與自我效能之影響—以多人線上角色扮演遊戲為例★ 從認知風格的角度探討同儕互評對遊戲式學習系統製作與評量之影響
★ 電腦輔助教師回饋於外語寫作情境之研究:成果與觀感★ 探討英語閱讀遊戲對印尼高中英語學習者的影響
★ 製作者與評量者之認知風格匹配與不匹配對遊戲人機介面與教學影片製作與評量的影響★ 探討趨向表現目標與逃避表現目標對於學習成效與表現目標採取之影響-以數位遊戲式翻譯技巧為例
檔案 [Endnote RIS 格式]    [Bibtex 格式]    [相關文章]   [文章引用]   [完整記錄]   [館藏目錄]   至系統瀏覽論文 ( 永不開放)
摘要(中) 近幾年來,許多研究指出性別、認知風格與自我效能在學習者的學習成效、學習動機和遊戲表現扮演著關鍵的要素,然而,缺乏研究上述性別、認知風格、自我效能、先備知識、學習成效、學習動機和遊戲表現的綜合探討。
本研究對象為國中58位九年級學習者,年齡介於14至15歲之間,實驗依據個別差異分組,可分為:性別、認知風格、自我效能、先備知識與回饋形式。本實驗為期八天,第一天實施認知風格量表,以及國文學習成效卷、學習動機量表、自我效能量表等前測,第二到七天為操作數位遊戲式學習系統,第八天則實施學習成效卷、學習動機量表、自我效能量表後測。
本研究主要的結果如下:在性別方面(1)女性學習者在學習動機測量的整體學習動機、內在目標導向、外在目標導向、工作價值、自我效能、期望成功向度顯著高於男性學習者,但是情緒化向度男性學習者顯著高於女性學習者,即男性學習者比女性較會將失敗歸因於負向的情緒;(2)整體學習成效前測、學習成效(中)的前測與學習成效(難)後測,女性學習者的表現較男性學習者高,唯男性學習者在學習成效(中)的提升幅度較女性學習者大,即學習成效(中)男性學習者有顯著進步。在自我效能方面(1)低自我效能者在學習動機中外在目標導向與期望成功向度的分數較高自我效能者高,即透過明確的任務設定,能幫助低自我效能者建立目標。在認知格方面(1)場獨立學習者在整體學習動機改變與控制信念向度表現較場依賴學習者高;(2)場獨立學習者在遊戲程度(難)的表現正確率以及整體遊戲的答對率較場依賴學習者佳。在回饋形式方面(1)回饋形式詳答組在學習成效(中)後測的表現較簡答組高,即詳答能有效提升學習者在對於學習成效(中)的遊戲表現;(2)回饋形式詳答組在遊戲表現(中)的正確率以及遊戲表現(難)的答對率較簡答組佳。表示詳答能提供完整的訊息資訊,因此對學習者的遊戲表現有所幫助。此外,性別*回饋形式交互作用在學習成效未達顯著水準,表示學習者性別與回饋形式兩因子未同時對學習成效產生顯著影響。在相關的結果方面,發現整體學習動機與自我效能、整體學習成效三者之間為顯著正相關,整體學習成效與整體遊戲表現為顯著正向關,此外,遊戲表現的各向度間亦為顯著正相關。
摘要(英) However, there is a lack of research on comprehensive investigation of gender, cognitive styles, self-efficacy, prior knowledge, learning performance, learning motivation, and game performance.
The participancs of this study were 58 nineth grade high school learners, aged between 14 and 15. The experiment was divided into different groups according to learners′ individual differences, including gender, cognitive styles, self-efficacy, prior knowledge and feedback types. The experiment lasted for eight days. On the first day, the cognitive styles scale was implemented, as well as the pre-test of the Mandarin language learning performance test, the learning motivation scale, and the self-efficacy scale. The second to seventh days were the operation of the digital game-based learning system. On the eighth day, the post-test of Mandarin language learning performance test, the learning motivation scale, and the self-efficacy scale were implemented.
The main results of this study are as follows: in terms of gender (1) female learners′ overall learning motivation and aspects of internal goal orientation, external goal orientation, work value, self-efficacy, and expected success were significantly higher than male learners. However, the aspect of emotional orientation of male learners was significantly higher than that of female learners. In other words, male learners attributed failure more to negative emotions than female learners; (2) In terms of pre-test of learning performance and pre-test of learning performance (middle) and post-test (difficult) post-test, female learners performed better than male learners, but male learners improved their learning performance (middle) more compared to female learners. In other words, learning performance (middle) of male learners had significant progress. In terms of self-efficacy, (1) learners with low self-efficacy, in the learning motivation, had higher scores in the external goal-oriented and expected success than those with high self-efficacy. In other words, through clear task setting, it helped learners with low self-efficiency establish goals. In terms of cognitive styles, (1) field-independent learners performed better in the change of overall learning motivation and locus of control than field-dependent learners; (2) field-independent learners’ accuracy of performance of the game level (difficult) and the overall game correction rate were better than those of field-dependent learners. In terms of feedback type, (1) the detailed feedback type group was better than the simple feedback type group in the post-test of learning performance (middle). In other words, the detailed feedback type could effectively improve the game performance in the learning performance (middle); (2) In the feedback type, the accuracy of the game performance (middle) and the correction rate of the game performance (difficult) were better than the simple feedback type group. In other words, the detailed feedback type could provide complete information, so it helped the learner′s game performance. In addition, the interactions of gender and feedback types had not reached a significant level of learning performance, indicating that the two factors of learners′ gender and feedback type had not reached a significant impact on learning performance at the same time. In the results of correlation, we found that overall learning motivation, self-efficacy and overall learning performance were significantly positively-correlated to each other. The overall learning performance was significantly positively-correlated with overall game performance. In addition, there were significant positive correlations between the various aspects of game performance.
關鍵字(中) ★ 數位遊戲式學習
★ 個別差異
★ 回饋形式
★ 學習動機
★ 學習成效
★ 遊戲表現
關鍵字(英) ★ digital game-based learning
★ individual differences
★ feedback type
★ learning motivation
★ learning performance
★ gaming performance
論文目次 摘 要 i
Abstract iii
致 謝 vi
目 錄 vii
圖 目 錄 ix
表 目 錄 x
第一章 緒論 1
1.1研究背景與動機 1
1.2研究目的 4
1.3研究問題 4
1.4名詞解釋 5
1.5研究範圍與限制 6
第二章 文獻探討 7
2.1數位遊戲式學習 7
2.2學習動機 11
2.3認知風格 15
2.4自我效能 20
第三章 研究方法 24
3.1研究設計 24
3.2研究對象 25
3.3教學內容與活動 25
3.4研究工具 26
3.5實驗流程 46
3.6資料處理與分析 47
第四章 結果與討論 49
4.1使用數位遊戲式學習系統學習國文,不同先備知識學習者對遊戲表現之影響 49
4.2使用數位遊戲式學習系統學習國文,不同性別學習者對學習動機、學習成效與遊戲表現之影響 51
4.3使用數位遊戲式學習系統學習國文,不同自我效能學習者對學習動機、學習成效及遊戲表現之影響 59
4.4使用數位遊戲式學習系統學習國文,不同認知風格學習者對學習動機、學習成效及遊戲表現之影響 65
4.5使用數位遊戲式學習系統學習國文,不同回饋形式對學習者學習動機、學習成效及遊戲表現之影響 71
4.6使用數位遊戲式學習系統學習國文,學習者性別與不同回饋形式在學習成效上交互作用之影響 77
4.7使用數位遊戲式學習系統學習國文,不同性別、自我效能、認知風格、回饋形式組別在學習者的學習動機、自我效能、學習成效和遊戲表現之間的相關 78
第五章 結論 88
5.1研究成果與結論 88
5.2研究貢獻 95
參考文獻 98
附錄一:學習動機量表 111
附錄二:一般性自我效能量表 113
附錄三:國文學習成效卷(90題) 114
參考文獻 方品淳(2017)。古文學習之數位遊戲系統設計:以《老殘遊記-遊大明湖》為例。國立清華大學學習科學研究所碩士論文。
范含芸、吳佳娣、黃思華、楊忠曉(2016)。導入認知風格之遊戲式學習輔助系統對學習成效影響之探究。教育科技與學習,4(1),59-86。
王俊傑(2011)。台灣國中生英語自我效能、英語閱讀策略及英語閱讀成就之相關研究。銘傳大學應用英語學系碩士在職專班碩士論文。
王慧婕(2000)。國中學生數學自我效能、目標導向及課室環境知覺與學業尋助之相關研究。國立彰化師範大學,輔導與諮商學系碩士論文。
田秀蘭(1996)。自我效能與女性之生涯發展。諮商與輔導:123,32-33。
朱敬先(2000)。教育心理學。臺北市五南圖書有限股份公司。
何麗君(2005)。國中學生自我效能、集體效能與學業成就之相關研究。國立彰化師範大學教育研究所碩士論文。
何雅惠(2011)。融入問題解決之數位遊戲教學對不同自我效能及性別的學童問題解決能力之影響。國立臺北教育大學自然科學教育學系碩士班論文。
余怡佳(2013)。國中生英語學習動機、自我效能、英語溝通意願及英語學習成就之研究。國立彰化師範大學兒童英語研究所。
吳志祥(201)。網路合作問題解決活動與學習歷程分析平台之建立與應用。國立臺南大學數位學習科技學系博士班。
吳侑邦(2012)。數位遊戲式古典詩詞欣賞學習系統發展研究。臺北市立教育大學,數學資訊教育教學碩士學位班。
吳恬妮(1999)。探討國中生生物科自我效能與學術地位之關係。國立臺灣師範大學科學教育研究所。
吳裕益(1987)。認知能力與認知型態個別差異現象之探討。教育學刊:7,51-98。
吳靜吉、程炳林(1992)。激勵的學習策略量表之修訂。測驗年刋:39,59-78。
宋裕(2008),從基測命題趨勢談閱讀教學方向,翰林國中國文電子報創刊號。
巫博瀚、陸偉明、賴英娟(2011)。性別、自我效能及所知覺的學習環境對學習情緒之影響:線性混合模式在叢集資料之應用。教育與心理研究:34(1),29-54。
李宜玲(2004)。南部地區製造業員工參與教育訓練動機與自我效能之關係研究。國立高雄師範大學成人教育研究所碩士論文。
李淑雅(2003)。探討國小學童自然科學習自我效能及其對小組教學中同儕互動的影響。台南師院自然碩士學位班。
李毓潔、王貞淑(2010)。電玩遊戲內置入 Bloom 知識與認知歷程重現概念模型。電子商務研究:8(4),473-498。
汪仲彬(2002)。多媒體在國中國文教學運用之研究。靜宜大學中國文學系碩士在職專班碩士論文。
沈奕成(2007)。國中導師領導風格、學生學習動機與班級氣氛知覺之研究。國立嘉義大學國民教育研究所。
周建智、李明俊、李政吉、林益偉(2009)。在多媒體輔助教學之情境學童體育課學習動機與班級氣氛。北體學報:18,46-59。
周啟葶(2007)。高中生英語自我效能、英語學習焦慮、英語學習策略與英語學習成就關係之研究。臺灣師範大學教育學系學位博士班。
林生傳(1984)。高中生「形地辨析型」與「形地混同型」之認知式態及其與教育、職業興趣成就的關係。教育學刊:5,81-112。
林紀慧(2001)。知識學習信念與不同電腦繪圖型態的國小電腦數學學習成效研究。新竹師院學報:14,69-85。
林軍治(1987)。教學法、場地獨立/依賴、性別及社經地位與兒童數學認知層次關係之研究。花蓮師範學院學報:1,253-308。
林慧玉(2005)。國小高年級學童物慾觀、學習態度、成就動機與學業成就之相關研究。國立嘉義大學國民教育研究所碩士論文。
林燕伶(2006)。國中生的家庭環境、人格特質與自然科學習動機關係之研究。國立彰化師範大學生物學系研究所。
林瓊瑤(2002)。英語科學習動機調整訓練團體對高中生自我效能、學習動機及課業成就之影響。國立彰化師範大學輔導與諮商所。
侯雪香(2007)。國中資優生學業自我效能、解釋型態與學業成就之相關研究。國立北教育大學特殊教育學系碩士班。
施良方(1996)。學習理論。高雄市麗文文化事業有限公司。
施淑慎、曾瓊慧、蔡雅如(2007)。國小學童之成就目標、動機與情感中介歷程以及學業成就間路徑模式之檢驗。測驗學刊:54,31-57。
洪紹瑞(2017)。數位視覺設計融匯虛擬化身與學習夥伴之應用對中學生悅趣式古文學習感知之探討。國立清華大學資訊系統與應用研究所碩士論文。
洪婷瑋(2015)。數位遊戲式學習應用於論語教學之學習成效分析。國立臺灣科技大學,數位學習與教育研究所碩士論文。
洪麗珍(2003)。資訊融入教學對國文科學習成效之研究。國立高雄師範大學教育研究所碩士論文。
胡金枝(1994)。國小資優生的學習動機、批判思考與其國語科學業成就之關係。國立台中師範學院初等教育研究所碩士論文。
唐璽惠(1988)。高中英語學習滿意度態度、師生互動、親子關係與英語科成就之相關研究。高雄師院教育研究所碩士論文。
孫凱鈺(2015)。數位遊戲融入課後照顧班對國語科學習之影響個案研究。國立屏東大學資訊科學系碩士碩士論文。
孫劍秋、林孟君(2003),從臺灣中學生PISA閱讀素養的表現談精進學生閱讀素養的教學策略。中等教育:64 (3),35-51。
徐玉婷(2004)。國中生英語焦慮、英語學習動機與英語學習策略之相關研究。國立成功大學教育研究所碩士論文。
徐新逸、黃麗鈴(1999)。高中生學業成就自我效能與學業成就表現之探討:影響自我效能因素與成就表現相關研究。教育與心理研究:22 (下),267-294。
翁敏婷(1999)。國中生理化學習環境知覺及其與學術地位、自我效能關係之探討。國立台灣師範大學科學教育研究所。
馬季鈿(2002)。多元智慧教學對國小學生自然科學習動機與學習成就之影響。國立台北師範學院數理教育研究所碩士論文。
張文隆(1996)。台中縣國小高年級學生學習行為與學業成就關係之研究。台中師範學院國民教育研究所碩士論文。
張月娟(2015)。探討數位學習對國文科學習動機與興趣之影響。大葉大學資訊管理學系碩士論文。
張芝萱(1995)。國民小學資優生學習動機、學習認知、學習方式偏好與學校生活素質感之相關研究。國立新竹師範學院國民教育研究所碩士論文。
張春興(1994)。現代心理學。臺北市臺灣東華書局股份有限公司。
張春興(2000)。教育心理學:三化取向的理論與實踐。臺北市臺灣東華書局股份有限公司。
張淑筵(2003)。應予學習策略教學對國中生的學習表現與自我效能之影響。慈濟大學教育研究所碩士論文。
張景媛(1991)。大學生認知風格、動機與自我調整因素、後設認知與學業成績關係之研究。教育心理學報:24,145-161。
張景琪(2001)。國小學童數學科學習信念、目標取向、學習策略與數學學業成就之相關研究。國立花蓮師範學院國民教育研究所碩士論文。
張韶瑩(2003)。高雄地區國二學生數學認知型態與數學學習成就相關研究。國立高雄師範大學數學研究所碩士論文。
張錦鶴(2003)。彰化縣國小高年級學生學習行為與學業成就關係之研究。國立臺中師範學院國民教育研究所碩士論文。
教育部(2005)。國民中小學語文教學參考手冊。頁5。
曹博盛(2005)。TIMSS 2003臺灣國中二年級學生的數學成就及其相關因素之探討。載於張秋男(主編),國際數學與科學教育成就趨勢調查2003(頁55-94)。臺北市:國立臺灣師範大學科學教育中心。
許玉芳(2008)。國小學童的教師期望、父母期望與自我效能、學業成就之相關研究。國立屏東教育大學心理輔導教育研究所碩士論文。
許繼德(2002)。網路輔助教學對不同認知風格的國小學童在英語學習動機與成就之影響。國立屏東師範學院教育科技研究所碩士論文。
連秀玉(1995)。場地獨立型與場地相依型的國中學生對化學計量解題行為之研究。國立彰化師範大學科學教育研究所碩士論文。
郭本禹、姜飛月(2008)。自我效能理論及其應用。上海市上海教育出版社。
Alavi, M., Wheeler, B. C., & Valacich, J. S. (1995). Using IT to Reengineer Business Education: An Exploratory Investigation of Collaborative Tele-learning. MIS Quarterly, 19(3), 293-313.
Allport, G. W. (1937). Personality: A psychological interpretation. Oxford, England: Holt.
Bandura, A. (1977). Self-efficacy: toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. Psychological Review, 84(2), 191-215.
Barsch, J. (1991). Barsch Learning Style Inventory. Novato, CA: Academic Therapy.
Billington, J., Baron-Cohen, S., & Wheelwright, S. (2007). Cognitive style predicts entry into physical sciences and humanities: Questionnaire and performance tests of empathy and systemizing. Learning and Individual Differences, 17(3), 260-268.
Bjorklund, D. F. (1989). Children’s thinking—Developmental function and individual differences. Pacific Grove, CA: Brooks/Cole Publishing.
Burguillo, J. C. (2010). Using game theory and competition-based learning to stimulate student motivation and performance. Computers & Education, 55(2), 566–575.
Chang, H. Y., Yang, S., Lee, J., Tao, L., Hwang, W. S., Jena, D., & Akinwande, D. (2013). High-performance, highly bendable MoS2 transistors with high-k dielectrics for flexible low-power systems. ACS nano, 7(6), 5446-5452.
Chen, H. R., Hwang, J. P., Wu, T. T., Huang, Y. M., & Hsueh, H. T. (2011). Assessment of implementing a Digital Game-based Learning system over Facebook. In Advanced Learning Technologies (ICALT), 11th IEEE International Conference on.
Chen, S. Y., & Macredie, R. D. (2004). Cognitive modelling of student learning in web-based instructional programmes. International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction, 17(3), 375-402.
Chen, S. Y., & Paul, R. J. (2003). Editorial: Individual differences in web-based instruction—An overview. British Journal of Educational Technology, 34(4), 385-392.
Chen, S. Y., Magoulas, G. D., & Dimakopoulos, D. (2005). A flexible interface design for web directories to accommodate different cognitive styles. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 56(1), 70-83.
Chiu, Y. –H., Kao, C. -W., & Reynolds, B. L. (2012). The relative effectiveness of digital game-based learning types in English as a foreign language setting: A meta-analysis. British Journal of Educational Technology, 43(4), 104-107.
Chuang, T. Y., & Chen, W. F. (2009). Effect of Computer-Based Video Games on Children: An Experimental Study. Educational Technology & Society, 12(2), 1–10.
Clariana, R. B., Wagner, D., & Roher Murphy, L. C. (2000). Applying a connectionist description of feedback timing. Educational Technology Research and Development, 48(3), 5-21.
Cohen, A. D., & Weaver, S. J. (2006). Styles and strategies based instruction: A teachers’ guide. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota.
Cojocariu, V. M., & Boghian, I. (2014). Teaching the Relevance of Game-based Learning to Preschool and Primary Teachers. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 142, 640-646.
DeTure, M. (2004). Cognitive style and self-efficacy: Predicting student success in online distance education. The American Journal of Distance Education, 18(1), 21-38.
Dickey, M. D. (2011). Murder on Grimm Isle: the impact of game narrative design in an educational game-based learning environment. British Journal of Educational Technology, 42(3), 456–469.
Dunn, R., & Dunn, K. (1984). Learning style: state of the scene. Theory into Practice, 23, 20-25.
Ebner, M., & Holzinger, A. (2007). Successful implementation of user-centered game based learning in higher education: an example from civil engineering. Computers & Education, 49(3), 873–890.
Erhel, S., & Jamet, E. (2013). Digital game-based learning: Impact of instructions and feedback on motivation and learning effectiveness. Computers & Education, 67, 156–167.
Felder, R. M. (2000). Index of learning styles (ILS). from http://www2.ncsu.edu/unity/lockers/users/f/felder/public/ILSpage.html
Felder, R. M., & Soloman, B. A. (1997). Index of learning styles questionnaire. from http://www.engr.ncsu.edu/learningstyles/ilsweb.html.
Fengfeng, K. (2008). Alternative goal structures for computer game-based learning. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 3, 429–445.
Fleming, N. D. (2000). The Active Learning. from: http://www.active-learning-site.com/vark.htm
Garcia, T., Matula, J. S., Harris, C. L., Dowdy, K. E., Lissi, M. R., Davila, C., & Powdrill,L. (1996). Predictors of self-handicapping: An examination of personal and contextual factors. ERIC Document Reproduction Service (No. ED 397115)
Garger, S., & Guild, P. (1984). Learning Styles: The crucial differences. Curriculum Review, 23(1), 9-12.
Garris, R., Ahlers, R., & Driskell, J. E. (2002). Games, motivation, and learning: A research and practice model. Simulation & Gaming, 33(4), 441-467.
Garsrud, R. S. (1988). Self-handicapping behavior: A critical review of empirical research.Doctoral dissertations, Biola University. ERIC Document Reproduction Service (No.ED 299521)
Gee, J. P. (2005). Why video games are good for your soul: Pleasure and learning. Melbourne, Australia: Common Ground.
Gregorc, A. F. (1982). Gregorc Style Delineator. Columbia, CO: Gregorc Associates, Inc.
Hamari, J., Shernoff, D. J., Rowe, E., Coller, B., Asbell-Clarke, J., & Edwards, T. (2016). Challenging games help students learn: An empirical study on engagement, flow and immersion in game-based learning. Computers in human behavior, 54, 170-179.
Hampton, N. Z., & Mason, E. (2003). Learning disabilities, gender, sources of efficacy, self-efficacy beliefs, and academic achievement in high school’s students. Journal of School Psychology, 41, 101-112.
Hitosugi, C. I., Schmidt, M., & Hayashi, K. (2014). Digital game–based learning (DGBL) in the L2 classroom: The impact of the UN’s off-the-shelf videogame, Food Force, on learner affect and vocabulary retention. CALICO Journal, 31(1), 19-39.
Hlodan, O. (2008). Digital games: learning through play. Bioscience, 58(9), 791–805.
Honey, P., & Mumford, A. (1989). Learning style questionnaire-trainer guide. Philadelphia, PA: Organization Design and Development, Inc.
Hong, J. C., Hwang, M. Y., Tam, K. P., Lai, Y. H., & Liu, L. C. (2012). Effects of cognitive style on digital jigsaw puzzle performance: a GridWare analysis. Computers in Human Behavior, 28(3), 920-928.
Huang, W.-H., Huang, W.-Y., & Tschopp, J. (2010). Sustaining iterative game playing processes in DGBL: The relationship between motivational processing and outcome processing. Computers & Education, 55(2), 789–797.
Hung, H. T., Yang, J. C., Hwang, G. J., Chu, H. C., & Wang, C. C. (2018). A scoping review of research on digital game-based language learning. Computers & Education, 126, 89-104.
Hwang, G. J., & Wu, P. H. (2011). Advancements and trends in digital game-based learning research: a review of publications in selected journals from 2001 to 2010. British Journal of Educational Technology, 43(1), 6-10.
Inal, Y., & Cagiltay, K. (2007). Flow experiences of children in an interactive social game environment, 38(3) , 455-464.
Jacobson, R. R., & Harris, S. M. (2008). Does the type of campus influence self-regulated learning as measured by the motivated strategies for learning questionnaire (MSLQ). American Journal of Education, 128(3), 412-431
Jonassen, D. H., & Grabowski, B. L. (1993). Handbook of individual differences, learning, and instruction. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Joo, Y. J., Bong, M., & Choi, H. J. (2000). Self-efficacy for self-regulated learning,academic self-efficacy, and internet self-efficacy in web-based instruction. Educational Technology Research and Development, 48(2), 5-17.
Kickmeier-Rust, M. D., & Albert, D. (2010). Micro –adaptivity: protecting immersion in didactically adaptive digital educational games. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 26(2), 95-105.
Kimble, C. E., & Kimble, E. A., & Croy, N. A. (1998). Development of self-handicapping tendencies. Journal of Social Psychology, 138(4), 524-534.
Kinzie, M. & Joseph, D. (2008). Gender differences in game activity preferences of middle school children: implications for educational game design. Education Technology Research & Development, 56(5), 643-663.
Kleinfeld, J. (1998). The myth that schools shortchange girlsl:Social science in the service of deception. Washington, DC:Women’s Freedom Network.
Kolb, D. A. (1984). Learning style inventory. Boston, MA: McBer.
Kozhevnikov, M. (2007). Cognitive styles in the context of modern psychology: Toward an integrated framework of cognitive style. Psychological Bulletin, 133(3), 464-481.
Kuhn, J. T., & Holling, H. (2009). Gender, reasoning ability, and scholastic achievement: Amultilevel mediation analysis. Learning and Individual Differences, 19(2), 229-233.
Layton, P. L. (1984). Self-efficacy, locus of control, career salience, and women′s careerchoice. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Minnesota.
Lee, C. H. M., Cheng, Y. W., Rai, S., & Depickere, A. (2005). What affect student cognitive style in the development of hypermedia learning system? Computers & Education, 45(1), 1-19.
Lent, R. W., Brown, S. D., & Larkin, K. C. (1984). Relation of self-efficacy expectation to academic achievement and persistence. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 31(3), 356-362.
Lent, R. W., Brown, S. D., Brenner, B., Chopra, S. B., Davis, T., Talleyrand, R., & Suthakaran, V. (2001). The role of contextual supports and barriers in the choice ofmath/science educational options: A test of social cognitive hypotheses. Journal of Counseling Psycholog, 48(4), 474-483.
Liu, T. Y., & Chu, Y. L. (2010). Using ubiquitous games in an English listening and speaking course: Impact on learning outcomes and motivation. Computers & Education, 55(2), 630-643.
Locke, E. A., & Latham, G. P. (1984). Goal setting: A motivational technique that works. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Locke, E. A., & Latham, G. P. (1990). Work motivation and satisfaction: Light at the end of the tunnel. American Psychological Society, I(4), 240-246.
Lumsden, L. S. (1994). Student Motivation To Learn. ERIC Digest, ERIC Document Reproduction Service, 92.
Maccoby, E. E., & Jacklin, C. N. (1974). The psychology of sex differences. Stanford, CA: Stanford University.
Maehr, M. L., & Meyer, H. A. (1997). Understanding motivation and schooling:Where we’ve been,where we are, and where we need to go. Education Psychology Review, 9, 71-409.
Mampadi, F., Chen, S. Y., Ghinea, G., & Chen, M. P. (2011). Design of adaptive hypermedia learning systems: A cognitive style approach. Computers & Education, 56(4), 1003-1011.
Marki, R. H., Maki, W. S., Patterson, M., & Whittaker, P. D. (2000). Evaluation of a Web-based Introductory Psychology Course: I. Learning and Satisfaction in On-line Versus Lecture Courses. Behavior Research Methods. Instruments and Computers, 32(2), 230-239.
Marzano, R. J., Pickering, D. J., & Pollock, J. E. (2001). Classroom Strategies that Work: Researched-Based Strategies for Increasing Student Achievement. Alexandria, VA: ASCD.
Maslow, A. H. (1943). Conflict, frustration, and the theory of threat. The Journal of bnormal and Social Psychology, 38(1), 81-86.
Mayer, R. E. (2009). Multimedia Learning. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
McCown, R., Driscoll, M., & Roop, P. G. (1996). Educational Psychology: A learning-centered approach to classroom practice (2nd ed.). Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
McDaniel, R., & Kenny, R. (2013). Evaluating the relationship between cognitive style and pre-service teachers’ preconceived notions about adopting console video games for use in future classrooms. International Journal of Game-Based Learning (IJGBL), 3(2), 55-76.
Meng, K., & Patty, D. (1991). Field Dependence and Contextual Organizers. The Journal of Educational Research, 84(3), 183-189.
Messick, S. (1976). Personality consistencies in cognition and creativity. In S. Messick (Ed.), Individuality in Learning (pp. 4-23). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Meimaris, M. (2008). Computer games-based learning: research and initiatives. DIMEA ′08: Proceedings of the 3rd international conference on Digital Interactive Media in Entertainment and Arts, xviii-xviii.
Midgley, C., & Urdan, T. (1995). Predictors of middle school students′ use of self-handicapping strategies. Journal of Early Adolescence, 15(4), 389-411.
Morgan, H. (1997). Cognitive styles and classroom learning. Westport, CT: Praeger.
Newstead, S. E., & Hoskins, S. (2003). Encouraging student motivation. In H. Fry, S. Ketteridge, & S. Marshall (Eds), A handbook for teaching & Learning in higher education (2nd ed.) (pp. 62-74). London: RoutledgeFalmer.
Orwant, J. (2000). EGGG: the extensible graphical game generator. Unpublished PhD thesis, MIT, Cambridge.
Oxford, R. (1993). Styles analysis survey (SAS): Assessing your own learning and working styles. In J. R. Reid, (Ed.), Learning Styles in the ESL/EFL Classroom(pp.208-217). Boston, MA: Heinle & Heinle.
Pajares, F., & Miller, M. D. (1994). Role of self-efficacy and self-concept beliefs in mathematical problem solving: A path analysis. Journal of Educational Psychology, 86(2), 193-203.
Papastergiou, M. (2009). Digital game-based learning in high school computer science education: Impact on educational effectiveness and student motivation. Computers & Education, 52(1), 1-12.
Pask, G. (1976). Styles and Strategies of Learning, British Journal of Educational Psychology, 46, 128-148.
Pavlas, D. (2010). A model of flow and play in game-based learning: The impact of game characteristics, player traits, and player states (Doctoral dissertation, University of Central Florida Orlando, Florida).
Pintrich, P. R. (1989). The dynamic interplay of student motivation and cognition in the college classroom. In C. Ames & M. L. Maehr (Eds.), Advances in motivation and achievement: Motivation enhancing environments (Vol. 6, pp.117-160). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
Pintrich, P. R. (1991). A manual for the use of the motivated strategies for learning questionnaire (MSLQ). Ann Arbor, Mich.; [Washington, DC]: University of Michigan; U.S. Dept. of Education, Office of Educational Research and Improvement, Educational Resources Information Center.
Pintrich, P. R. (2003). Motivation and classroom learning. In W. M. Reynolds & G. E. Miller (Eds.), Handbook of psychology: Educational psychology (Vol. 7, pp.103-122). Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons.
Pintrich, P. R., & de Groot, E. V. (1990). Motivational and self-regulated learning components of classroom academic performance. Journal of Educational Psychology, 82(1), 33-40.
Pintrich, P., Roeser, R., & de Groot, E. (1994). Classroom and Individual Differences in Early Adolescents′ Motivation and Self-Regulated Learning. The Journal of Early Adolescence, 14(2), 139-161.
Pivec, M. & Dziabenko, O. (2004). Game-based learning framework for collaborative learning and stdent e-teamwork. from www.e-mentor.edu.pl/_xml/wydania/4/42.pdf
Pivec, M., & Dziabenko, O. (2004). Game-Based Learning in Universities and Lifelong Learning: UniGame:Social Skills and Knowledge Training Game Concept. Journal of Universal Computer Science, 10(1), 4-16.
Prensky, M. (2001). Digital game-based learning. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
Radosevich, D. J., Vaidyanathan, V. T., Yeo, S., & Radosevich, D. M. (2004). Relating goal orientation to self-regulatory processes: A longitudinal field test. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 29, 207-229.
Raffini, J. P. (1996). 150 ways to increase intrinsic motivation in the classroom. Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
Ramdass, D., & Zimmerman, B. J. (2011). Developing self-regulation skills: The important role of homework. Journal of Advanced Academics, 22(2), 194-218.
Raptis, G. E., Fidas, C., & Avouris, N. M. (2016). A qualitative analysis of the effect of wholistic-analytic cognitive style dimension on the cultural heritage game playing. Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on Information, Intelligence, Systems & Applications.
Razak, A. A., Connolly, T., & Hainey, T. (2012). Teachers’ views on the approach of digital games-based learning within the curriculum for excellence. International Journal of Game-Based Learning (IJGBL), 2(1), 33-51.
Riding, R. J. & Cheema, I. (1991). Cognitive Styles-An Overview and Integration. Educational Psychology, 4(11), 193-215.
Riding, R. J., & Cheema, I. (1991). Cognitive styles—An overview and integration. Educational Psychology, 11(3-4), 193-215.
Riding, R. J., & Watts, M. (1997). The effect of cognitive style on the preferred format of instructional materia1. Educational Psychology, 17(1-2), 179-183.
Saracho, O. N., & Spoclek, B. (1984). Cognitive style and children’s learning:Individual variation in cognitive processes. Washington, DC: National Instution of Education.
Saracho, O. N., & Spodek, B. (1981). Teachers’ cognitive style and their education impliciations. Educational Forum, 45(2), 153-159.
Schunk, D. H., & Pajares, F. (2011). Self-efficacy theory. In K. R. Wentzel & A. Wigfield (Eds.), Handbook of motivation at school (pp. 35-53). New York, NY: Routledge.
Schunk, D. H., & Zimmerman, B. J. (Eds.). (2008). Motivation and self-regulated learning: Theory, research, and applications. New York, NY: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Schutte, J. G. (1997). Virtual Teaching in Higher Education: The New Intellectual Superhighway or Just Another Traffic Jam. from www.csun.edu/sociology/virexp.htm .
Sherer, M., & Maddox, J. E. (1982). The Self-Efficacy Scale: contruction and validation, Psychological Reports, 51, 663-671.
Simoes, J., Redondo, R. D., & Vilas, A. F. (2013). A Social Gamification Framework fora K-6 Learning Platform. Computers in Human Behavior, 29, 345-353.
Small, R. V. (2005). About motivation. In S. L. Tice, N. Jackson, L. M. Lambert, & P. Englot (Eds), University teaching: A reference guide for graduate students and faculty (2nd ed.) (pp. 30-45). New York, NY: Syracuse University Press.
Smith, L., & Mann, S. (2002). Playing the game: A model for gameness in interactive game based learning. Proceedings of the 15th Annual NACCQ.
Song, S. H., & Keller, J. M. (1999). The ARCS model for developing motivationallyadaptive computer-assisted instruction. Paper presented at the Association for Educational Communications and Technology, Houston, TX.
Spires, H. A., Rowe, J. P., Mott, B. W., & Lester, J. C. (2011). Problem solving and game-based learning: Effects of middle grade students′ hypothesis testing strategies on learning outcomes. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 44(4), 453-472.
Squire, K. (2003). Video games in education. In¬ternational Journal of Intelligent Simulations and Gaming, 2(1).
Stipek, D. (1995). Effects of different instructional approaches on young children’s achievement and motivation. Child Developmet, 66(1), 209-223.
Stoeger, H., & Ziegler, A. (2008). Evaluation of a classroom based training to improve selfregulation in time management tasks during homework activities with fourth graders. Metacognition and Learning, 3, 207-230.
Suh, S., Kim, S. W., & Kim, N. J. (2010). Effectiveness of MMORPG-based instruction in elementary English education in Korea. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 26(5), 370-378.
Sullivan, A. (2009). Academic self-concept, gender and single-sex schooling. British Educational Research Journal, 35(2), 259-288.
Sweller, J. (2004). Instructional design consequences of an analogy between evolution by natural selection and human cognitive architecture. Instructional Science, 32(1-2), 9-31.
Sweller, J. (2010). Element interactivity and intrinsic, extraneous, and germane cognitive load. Educational Psychology Review, 22(2), 123-138.
Tao, S. Y., Huang, Y. H., & Tsai, M. J. (2016). Applying the Flipped Classroom with Game-Based Learning in Elementary School Students′ English Learning. In Educational Innovation through Technology (EITT), 2016 International Conference on (59-63). IEEE.
Theodoropoulos, A., Antoniou, A., & Lepouras, G. (2016). How Do Different Cognitive Styles Affect Learning Programming? Insights from a Game-Based Approach in Greek Schools. ACM Transactions on Computing Education, 17(1), 1-25.
Thorndike, E. L. (1927). The law of effect. The American Journal of Psychology, 39(1/4), 212-222.
Urdan, T., Midgley, C., & Anderman, E. M. (1998). The role of classroom goal structure in students′ use self-handicapping strategies. American Educational Research Journal, 35(1), 101-122.
Wang, T. H. (2007). What strategies are effective for formative assessment in an e-learning environment? Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 23(3), 171-186.
Wigfield, A., & Eccles, J. S. (2000). Expectancy-value theory of achievement motivation. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 25, 68-81.
Witkin, H. A., Moore, C. A., Goodenough, D. R., & Cox, P. W. (1977). Field dependent and field-independent cognitive styles and their educational implications. Review of ducational Research, 47, 1-64.
Witkin, H. A., Oltman, P. K., Raskin, E., & Karp, S. A. (1971). A manual for the embedded figure tests. Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologist Press.
Witkin, H., Dyk, R., Faterson, H., Goodenough, D., & Karp, S. A. (1962). Psychological differertiation. New York, NY: Wiley.
Wood, T. A., Griffiths, D., Chappell, D., & Davies, N. O. (2004). The structural characteristics of video games: a psycho-structural analysis. Cyberpsychology and Behavior, 7(1), 1-10.
Wu, P.-H., Luh, W.-M., & Lai, Y.-C. (2011). The effects of sex, self-efficacy and perceived learning environment on the achievement emotions: Analyzing clustered data by using linear mixed models. Journal of Education & Psychology, 34(1), 29-54.
Yee, N. (2006). Motivations for play in on-line game. CyberPsychology and Behavior, 9(6), 772-775.
Zimmerman, B. J. (2000). Self-Efficacy: An Essential Motive to Learn. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 25, 82-91.
Zimmerman, B. J., & Martinez-Pons, M. (1990). Students differences in self-regulated learning: relating grade, sex, and giftedness to self-efficacy and strategy use. Journal of Education Psychology, 82, 51-59.
指導教授 楊接期 審核日期 2019-6-21
推文 facebook   plurk   twitter   funp   google   live   udn   HD   myshare   reddit   netvibes   friend   youpush   delicious   baidu   
網路書籤 Google bookmarks   del.icio.us   hemidemi   myshare   

若有論文相關問題,請聯絡國立中央大學圖書館推廣服務組 TEL:(03)422-7151轉57407,或E-mail聯絡  - 隱私權政策聲明