博碩士論文 107524010 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:71 、訪客IP:3.133.112.223
姓名 王楠鈞(Nan-Chun Wang)  查詢紙本館藏   畢業系所 網路學習科技研究所
論文名稱 注意力指引工具於合作電腦模擬問題解決之影響
(The Effect of Attention Guiding Tool on Problem Solving of Collaborative Computer Simulations)
相關論文
★ 以視覺為主的遊戲空間輔助全身性學習★ 以數位教室環境增進同步遠距教學之臨場感
★ 以行動載具支援並分析合作式的探索活動★ 以混合實境支援工作臺協同探究學習
★ 使用資料探勘輔助學習者探索大型資料庫—學習者經驗之研究★ 以貢獻與聯結為基礎之社會知識創造模型—一個資源與概念合作聯結工具
★ 互動式計算桌面環境對於合作學習的優缺點★ 以共享螢幕及群組軟體支援一對一環境下面對面的合作網路探索
★ 合作學習使用網際網路: 學習腳本在面對面網路合作探索的影響★ 兒童使用超媒體的Web2.0創作故事平台之探究--衍生與重組
★ 以創用為基礎之合作說故事平台 - 衍生、重組、擁有感★ 透過網路實施模擬實務社群並利用即興創作激發創意
★ 使用群組軟體與共同螢幕進行一對一合作網路探索活動★ 以Cyber-Physical環境支援程式設計學習之探究
★ 跨領域合作設計活動之互動分析:群組軟體的支援與設計★ 不同成就學生於模擬遊戲環境中程式學習效果之探究
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]   [檢視]  [下載]
  1. 本電子論文使用權限為同意立即開放。
  2. 已達開放權限電子全文僅授權使用者為學術研究之目的,進行個人非營利性質之檢索、閱讀、列印。
  3. 請遵守中華民國著作權法之相關規定,切勿任意重製、散佈、改作、轉貼、播送,以免觸法。

摘要(中) 線上非面對面的合作過程中,學生往往難以確切感知組員提供之信息,知道組員關注資訊之處,導致合作缺乏組織與協調,也常存在搭便車的現象,難有高質量的對話。因此本研究蒐集 128 名18至25歲受試者兩兩一組,以2*2雙因子變異數分析,瞭解學生在同步與分工模式下有無注意力指引工具是如何透過電腦模擬合作問題解決科學問題,研究者以眼動追蹤分析學生活動過程中的軌跡,瞭解其注意力分佈與學習歷程,以對話分析瞭解學生間的互動程度,並以合作品質問卷瞭解學生的合作感知。後欲瞭解小組合作對個人的影響,以階層線性模型分析小組層次與個人層次變數關聯,以皮爾森積差相關分析清楚小組層次變數之關聯,探討提供注意力指引工具於不同合作模式下,小組合作如何影響學生個人的學習及感知。結果發現兩種合作模式裡,學生的凝視時間及次數、合作時的協調感受與互動對話的程度有著不同的影響,而提供注意力指引工具後也會影響學生的注意力凝視,但在學習表現與互動對話卻有不一樣的影響,我們也發現互動對話與個人注意力凝視及合作感知息息相關,提供注意力指引工具學生越是頻繁交換資訊,揭露彼此的注意力,及方便學生澄清現象,然而在同步與分工模式裡提供卻有不同影響,在同步模式卻容易忽略某些重要資訊,而在分工模式卻能改善複雜的合作模式,幫助學生發現重要資訊,結果顯示注意力指引工具應用於不同合作模式的過程需審慎使用。
摘要(英) During non-face-to-face online collaboration, it’s hard to be conscious of the information shared within students. They don’t know where their partners are looking at. Thus, free-riding often occurs, and that leads to the deficiency of organization, coordination and high-quality conversation. Therefore, we collected 128 participants between 18 to 25 in groups of two in this study. We used two-way ANOVA with sychronnous control mode (SC) and distributed control mode (DC) data, whether provided attention guiding tool (AGT) or not, to understand how students collaborative deal with the scientific problem by computer simulation. We used eye-tracking to analyze the student’s eye movement to understand their attention distribution and learning behavior. Also, we quantified the discourse to find out their engagement and used questionnaire to collect their feelings. Furthermore, we revealed the relationship between group and student by Hierarchical Linear Modeling to realize how collaboration affects students. In addition, we used Pearson Correlation Coefficient to understand the relationship between group variables. The results show that students′ gaze duration, gaze frequency, feelings and discourse have different effects. Otherwise, providing AGT will also affect the students′ gaze fixation. However, there are different effects in their performance and discourse when AGT is providing. We find that discourse is closely related to personal gaze fixation and feelings. Students exchange information more frequently, expose each other’s attention and clarify the phenomenon easier during activity after we provide AGT. Nevertheless, providing AGT in SC mode and DC mode has different effects. It’s easy to neglect some important information in the SM, while it can ameliorate the complicated collaboration to help students find important information in DM. To sum up, AGT needs to be used with caution.
關鍵字(中) ★ 電腦模擬
★ 合作問題解決
★ 眼動分析
★ 注意力指引
★ 群體感知
關鍵字(英) ★ computer simulation
★ collaborative problem solving
★ eye-tracking
★ attention guiding
★ group awareness
論文目次 摘要 I
Abstract II
致謝 III
目錄 V
圖目錄 VIII
表目錄 X
第一章 緒論 1
1.1 研究背景與動機 1
1.2 研究目的與問題 3
1.3 名詞解釋 4
1.3.1 眼動追蹤(Eye-tracking) 4
1.3.2 興趣區域(Area of Interest;AOI) 4
1.3.3 凝視(Fixation) 4
1.3.4 電腦模擬(Computer Simulation) 4
1.3.5 群體感知(Group Awareness) 4
1.3.6 注意力指引工具(Attention Guiding Tool;AGT) 5
1.4 研究範圍與限制 5
1.5 論文架構 5
第二章 文獻探討 6
2.1 電腦模擬 6
2.2 眼動追蹤 7
2.3 注意力指引工具 8
第三章 系統介紹 9
3.1 系統架構與設計理念 9
3.2 系統設計 11
3.2.1 模擬說明 11
3.2.2 科學學習活動系統說明 12
3.2.3 系統注意力指引工具說明 18
3.3 合作模式與注意力指引機制 19
第四章 研究方法 22
4.1 研究流程 22
4.2 實驗設計 24
4.2.1 實驗說明 24
4.2.2 填寫實驗同意書 25
4.2.3 前測試題測驗 25
4.2.4 實驗指導語 25
4.2.5 觀看系統教學影片 25
4.2.6 詳述教學影片重點 25
4.2.7 進行眼動校正 25
4.2.8 科學學習活動 26
4.2.9 後測試題測驗 26
4.2.10 合作品質問卷 26
4.2.11 訪談 26
4.2.12 填寫受試者資料 26
4.2.13 給予受試者費用 26
4.3 研究對象 27
4.4 研究工具 28
4.4.1 CoSci平台 28
4.4.2 前後測紙筆測驗 28
4.4.3 系統操作Log檔 28
4.4.4 眼動追蹤儀 29
4.4.5 眼動蒐集軟體 31
4.4.6 MATLAB 35
4.4.7 合作品質問卷 38
4.5 資料蒐集與分析 39
4.5.1 個人眼動資料 40
4.5.2 合作感知 41
4.5.3 學習成效 41
4.5.4 ICAP互動對話分析 42
4.5.5共同注意力指標 44
第五章 研究結果與討論 45
5.1 個人層次資料分析結果 45
5.1.1 個人眼動 45
5.1.2 合作感知 49
5.1.3 學習成效 50
5.2 小組層次資料分析結果 57
5.2.1 ICAP互動對話分析結果 57
5.2.2共同注意力指標 62
5.3 階層線性模型小組層次與個人層次之關聯 67
5.3.1 ICAP互動對話與個人眼動指標之關聯 67
5.2.3 ICAP互動對話與合作感知之關聯 76
5.3.3 ICAP互動對話與進步分數之關聯 82
5.3.4 共同注意力指標與合作感知之關聯 83
5.3.5 共同注意力指標與進步分數之關聯 85
5.4 小組層次共同注意力指標與ICAP互動對話之關聯 87
第六章 結論與建議 92
6.1 結論 92
6.2 未來發展與建議 99
參考文獻 100
附錄A 科學學習活動教材 107
附錄B 受試者實驗參與同意書 108
附錄C 合作品質問卷 109
附錄D 學習成效前後測測驗卷 110
附錄E 學生互動對話類型範例 111
附錄F 階層線性模型無顯著之變數摘要表 114
F-1 ICAP互動對話與個人眼動指標之關聯 114
同步模式 114
分工模式 123
F-2 ICAP互動對話與進步分數之關聯 132
同步模式 132
分工模式 134
F-3 ICAP互動對話與合作感知之關聯 137
同步模式 137
分工模式 147
F-4 共同注意力指標與合作感知之關聯 156
同步模式 156
分工模式 165
F-5 共同注意力指標與進步分數之關聯 176
同步模式 176
分工模式 178
參考文獻 邱秉誠(2016)。個人電腦模擬及合作電腦模擬對於合作科學問題解決之影響。國立中央大學網路學習科技研究所碩士論文,桃園市。
林尊韋(2020)。不同電腦模擬模式對於合作問題解決過程之影響 : 非同步、同步和分工模式。國立中央大學網路學習科技研究所碩士論文,桃園市。
教育部(2016)。2016-2020 資訊教育總藍圖。臺北市:作者。
黃福坤(2006)。透過物理模擬動畫進行物理教學與學習-介紹簡易模擬動畫設計環境Easy Java Simulation。物理雙月刊,28,3,536-543。
彭郁翔(2018)。不同電腦模擬模式對於合作科學問題解決之影響:以眼動進行分析。國立中央大學網路學習科技研究所碩士論文,桃園市。
謝翌甄(2019)。合作式電腦模擬於科學問題解決之影響:以眼動進行分析(未出版之碩士論文)。國立中央大學網路學習科技研究所碩士論文,桃園市。
Adams, W. K., & Wieman, C. E. (2011). Development and validation of instruments to measure learning of expert‐like thinking. International Journal of Science Education, 33(9), 1289-1312.
Bodemer, D. (2011). Tacit guidance for collaborative multimedia learning. Computers in Human Behavior, 27(3), 1079-1086.
Bodemer, D., & Dehler, J. (2011). Group awareness in CSCL environments. Computers in Human Behavior,27(3), 1043-1045.
Boucheix, J. M., & Lowe, R. K. (2010). An eye tracking comparison of external pointing cues and internal continuous cues in learning with complex animations. Learning and Instruction, 20(2), 123-135.
Buder, J. (2011). Group awareness tools for learning: Current and future directions. Computers in Human Behavior, 27(3), 1114-1117.
Buder, J., & Bodemer, D. (2008). Supporting controversial CSCL discussions with augmented group awareness tools. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 3(2), 123-139.
Chang, C. J., Chang, M. H., Chiu, B. C., Liu, C. C., Chiang, S. H. F., Wen, C. T., ... & Wu, S. W. (2017). An analysis of student collaborative problem solving activities mediated by collaborative simulations. Computers & Education, 114, 222-235.
Chang, C. J., Liu, C. C., Wu, Y. T., Chang, M. H., Chiang, S. F., Chiu, B. C., ... & Wu, S. W. (2016, January). Students′ perceptions on problem solving with collaborative computer simulation. In 24th International Conference on Computers in Education, ICCE 2016 (pp. 166-168). Asia-Pacific Society for Computers in Education.
Chi, M. T., & Wylie, R. (2014). The ICAP framework: Linking cognitive engagement to active learning outcomes. Educational psychologist, 49(4), 219-243.
Dede, C. (2009). Immersive Interfaces for Engagement and Learning. Science, 323(5910), 66–69.
De Koning, B. B., Tabbers, H. K., Rikers, R. M., & Paas, F. (2010). Attention guidance in learning from a complex animation: Seeing is understanding?. Learning and instruction, 20(2), 111-122.
Deslauriers, L., Schelew, E., & Wieman, C. (2011). Improved Learning in a Large-Enrollment Physics Class. Science, 332(6031), 862–864.
Dourish, P., & Bellotti, V. (1992, December). Awareness and coordination in shared workspaces. In Proceedings of the 1992 ACM conference on Computer-supported cooperative work (pp. 107-114).
Endsley, M. R. (1995). Toward a theory of situation awareness in dynamic systems. Human factors, 37(1), 32-64.
Engelmann, T., Dehler, J., Bodemer, D., & Buder, J. (2009). Knowledge awareness in CSCL: A psychological perspective. Computers in Human Behavior, 25(4), 949-960.
Esquembre, F. (2004). Easy Java Simulations: A software tool to create scientific simulations in Java. Computer physics communications, 156(2), 199-204.
Gredler, M. E. (1996). Educational games and simulations: A technology in search of a (research) paradigm. In D. H. Jonassen (Ed.), Handbook of research on educational communications and technology(pp. 521-540). New York: Macmillan.
Griffin, P., McGaw, B., & Care, E. (2012). Assessment and teaching of 21st century skills: Methods and Approach. New York, NY: Springer.
Gross, T., Stary, C., & Totter, A. (2005). User-centered awareness in computer-supported cooperative work-systems: Structured embedding of findings from social sciences. International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction, 18(3), 323-360.
Gutwin, C., & Greenberg, S. (2002). A descriptive framework of workspace awareness for real-time groupware. Computer Supported Cooperative Work, 11(3-4), 411-446.
Gutwin, C., & Greenberg, S. (2004). The importance of awareness for team cognition in distributed collaboration. In E. Salas & S. M. Fiore (Eds.), Team cognition: Understanding the factors that drive process and performance (p. 177–201). American Psychological Association.
Hao, J., Liu, L., von Davier, A., Kyllonen, P., & Kitchen, C. (2016). Collaborative Problem Solving Skills versus Collaboration Outcomes: Findings from Statistical Analysis and Data Mining. In EDM (pp. 382-387).
Hessels, R. S., Kemner, C., van den Boomen, C., & Hooge, I. T. (2016). The area-of-interest problem in eyetracking research: A noise-robust solution for face and sparse stimuli. Behavior research methods, 48(4), 1694-1712.
Hoegl, M., & Gemuenden, H. G. (2001). Teamwork quality and the success of innovative projects: A theoretical concept and empirical evidence. Organization science, 12(4), 435-449.
Holmqvist, K., Nyström, M., Andersson, R., Dewhurst, R., Halszka, J., & van de Weijer, J. (2011). Eye Tracking : A Comprehensive Guide to Methods and Measures. Oxford University Press.
Hovardas, T., Pedaste, M., Zacharia, Z., & de Jong, T. (2018). Model-Based Inquiry in Computer-Supported Learning Environments: The Case of Go-Lab. Cyber-Physical Laboratories in Engineering and Science Education, 241–268.
Hsu, C. Y., Chiou, G. L., & Tsai, M. J. (2016, August). A pilot study on developing and validating a fixation-based scaffolding learning system. Poster presented at 2016 International Conference of East-Asian Association for Science Education. Tokyo, Japan.
Infante, C., Hidalgo, P., Nussbaum, M., Alarcón, R., & Gottlieb, A. (2009). Multiple Mice based collaborative one-to-one learning. Computers & Education,53(2), 393-401.
Janssen, J., & Bodemer, D. (2013). Coordinated computer-supported collaborative learning: Awareness and awareness tools. Educational psychologist, 48(1), 40-55.
Janssen, J., Erkens, G., Kanselaar, G., & Jaspers, J. (2007). Visualization of participation: Does it contribute to successful computer-supported collaborative learning?. Computers & Education, 49(4), 1037-1065.
Järvelä, S., Kirschner, P. A., Panadero, E., Malmberg, J., Phielix, C., Jaspers, J., & Järvenoja, H. (2014). Enhancing socially shared regulation in collaborative learning groups: designing for CSCL regulation tools. Educational Technology Research and Development, 63(1), 125–142.
Just, M. A., & Carpenter, P. A. (1976). Eye fixations and cognitive processes. Cognitive psychology, 8(4), 441-480.
Just, M. A., & Carpenter, P. A. (1980). A theory of reading: From eye fixations to comprehension. Psychological Review, 87, 329-354.
Justice, L. M., Skibbe, L., Canning, A., & Lankford, C. (2005). Pre‐schoolers, print and storybooks: An observational study using eye movement analysis. Journal of Research in Reading, 28(3), 229-243.
Kahveci, M., & Orgill, M. (Eds.). (2015). Affective dimensions in chemistry education. Springer Berlin Heidelberg.
Ke, F., & Carafano, P. (2016). Collaborative science learning in an immersive flight simulation. Computers & Education, 103, 114-123.
Knoblich, G., Ohlsson, S., & Raney, G. E. (2001). An eye movement study of insight problem solving. Memory and Cognition, 29(7), 1000-1009.
Laurillard, D. (2013). Teaching as a design science: Building pedagogical patterns for learning and technology. Routledge.
Lindgren, R., Tscholl, M., Wang, S., & Johnson, E. (2016). Enhancing learning and engagement through embodied interaction within a mixed reality simulation. Computers & Education, 95, 174-187.
Liu, C. Y., Wu, C. J., Wong, W. K., Lien, Y. W., & Chao, T. K. (2017). Scientific modeling with mobile devices in high school physics labs. Computers & Education, 105, 44-56.
Mayer, R. E., & Moreno, R. (2003). Nine ways to reduce cognitive load in multimedia learning. Educational psychologist, 38(1), 43-52.
Marwan, N., & Kurths, J. (2002). Nonlinear analysis of bivariate data with cross recurrence plots. Physics Letters A, 302(5-6), 299-307.
Marwan, N., Romano, M. C., Thiel, M., & Kurths, J. (2007). Recurrence plots for the analysis of complex systems. Physics reports, 438(5-6), 237-329.
Munneke, L., Andriessen, J., Kanselaar, G., & Kirschner, P. (2007). Supporting Interactive Argumentation: Influence of Representational Tools on Discussing a Wicked Problem. Computers in Human Behavior, 23(3): 1072-1088
National Research Council (2011). Assessing 21st century skills. Washington, DC: National
Academies Press.
National Research Council. (2011). Learning science through computer games and simulations. National Academies Press.
Olsen, J. K., & Finkelstein, S. (2017). Through the (thin-slice) looking glass: An initial look at rapport and co-construction within peer collaboration. Philadelphia, PA: International Society of the Learning Sciences.
Otterbring, T., Wästlund, E., Gustafsson, A., & Shams, P. (2014). Vision (im)possible? The effects of in-store signage on customers’ visual attention. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 21(5), 676–684.
Pereira, M. L. F., Marina von Zuben, A. C., Aprahamian, I., & Forlenza, O. V. (2014). Eye movement analysis and cognitive processing: detecting indicators of conversion to Alzheimer’s disease. Neuropsychiatric disease and treatment, 10, 1273.
Pifarré, M., Cobos, R., & Argelagós, E. (2014). Incidence of group awareness information on students′ collaborative learning processes. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 30(4), 300-317.
Poole, A., & Ball, L. J. (2006). Eye tracking in HCI and usability research. In Encyclopedia of human computer interaction (pp. 211-219). IGI Global.
Price, A. M., Perkins, K. K., Holmes, N. G., & Wieman, C. E. (2018). How and why do high school teachers use PhET interactive simulations?. Learning, 33, 37-7.
Rayner, K. (1978). Eye movements in reading and information processing. Psychological Bulletin, 85(3), 618–660.
Rayner, K. (1998). Eye movements in reading and information processing: 20 years of research. Psychological bulletin, 124(3), 372.
Rayner, K. (2009). Eye movements and attention in reading, scene perception, and visual search. The quarterly journal of experimental psychology, 62(8), 1457-1506.
Richardson, D. C., & Dale, R. (2005). Looking to understand: The coupling between speakers′ and listeners′ eye movements and its relationship to discourse comprehension. Cognitive science, 29(6), 1045-1060.
Rutten, N., van Joolingen, W. R., & van der Veen, J. T. (2012). The learning effects of computer simulations in science education. Computers & Education, 58(1), 136–153.
Stahl, G., Koschmann, T., & Suthers, D. D. (2006). Computer-supported collaborative learning. In R. K. Sawyer (Ed.), Cambridge handbook of: The learning sciences (pp. 409–425). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press
Sanders, M. S., & McCormick, E. J. (1987). Human factors in engineering and design. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Schneider, B., Abu-El-Haija, S., Reesman, J., & Pea, R. (2013, April). Toward collaboration sensing: applying network analysis techniques to collaborative eye-tracking data. In Proceedings of the Third International Conference on Learning Analytics and Knowledge (pp. 107-111).
Schneider, B., & Pea, R. (2013). Real-time mutual gaze perception enhances collaborative learning and collaboration quality. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning,8(4), 375-397.
Sharma, K., Leftheriotis, I., & Giannakos, M. (2020). Utilizing Interactive Surfaces to Enhance Learning, Collaboration and Engagement: Insights from Learners’ Gaze and Speech. Sensors, 20(7), 1964.
Slykhuis, D. A., Wiebe, E. N., & Annetta, L. A. (2005). Eye-tracking students′ attention to PowerPoint photographs in a science education setting. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 14(5-6), 509-520.
Smith, S. G., & Sherwood, B. A. (1976). Educational uses of the PLATO computer system. Science, 192(4237), 344-352.
Songer, N. B., & Linn, M. C. (1991). How do students′ views of science influence knowledge integration?. Journal of research in science teaching, 28(9), 761-784.
Susac, A. N., Bubic, A., Kaponja, J., Planinic, M., & Palmovic, M. (2014). Eye movements reveal students′ strategies in simple equation solving. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 12(3), 555-577.
Thomas, M. (Ed.). (2013). Pedagogical considerations and opportunities for teaching and learning on the web. IGI Global.
Trilling, B., & Fadel, C. (2009). 21st century skills: Learning for life in our times. John Wiley & Sons.
Tsai, M. J., Hou, H. T., Lai, M. L., Liu, W. Y., & Yang, F. Y. (2012). Visual attention for solving multiple-choice science problem: An eye-tracking analysis. Computers & Education, 58(1), 375-385.
Van Gog, T., Jarodzka, H., Scheiter, K., Gerjets, P., & Paas, F. (2009). Attention guidance during example study via the model’s eye movements. Computers in Human Behavior, 25(3), 785-791.
Van Gog, T., Paas, F., Van Merriënboer, J. J., & Witte, P. (2005). Uncovering the problem-solving process: Cued retrospective reporting versus concurrent and retrospective reporting. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 11(4), 237.
Villamor, M., & Rodrigo, M. M. (2017). Impact of Both Prior Knowledge and Acquaintanceship on Collaboration and Performance: A Pair Program Tracing and Debugging Eye-Tracking Experiment. In Proceedings of the 25th International Conference in Computers in Education (pp. 182-187).
Villamor, M., & Rodrigo, M. M. (2018, July). Predicting successful collaboration in a pair programming eye tracking experiment. In Adjunct Publication of the 26th Conference on User Modeling, Adaptation and Personalization (pp. 263-268).
Wang, C. Y., Tsai, M. J., & Tsai, C. C. (2016). Multimedia recipe reading: Predicting learning outcomes and diagnosing cooking interest using eye-tracking measures. Computers in Human Behavior, 62, 9-18.
Wen, C. T., Chang, C. J., Huang, S. C., Chang, M. H., Chiang, S. H. F., Liu, C. C., ... & Yang, C. W. (2019, September). An Analysis of Student Inquiry Performances in Computer Supported Light-Weighted Collaborative Experiment. In International Cognitive Cities Conference (pp. 316-322). Springer, Singapore.
Winsberg, E. (2013). Computer simulations in science. Retrieved from https://stanford.library.sydney.edu.au/entries/simulations-science/
Yarbus, A. L. (2013). Eye movements and vision. Springer.
Zhang, Y., Pfeuffer, K., Chong, M. K., Alexander, J., Bulling, A., & Gellersen, H. (2016). Look together: Using gaze for assisting co-located collaborative search. Personal and Ubiquitous Computing, 21(1), 173-186.
Zoethout, H., Wesselink, R., Runhaar, P., & Mulder, M. (2017). Using Transactivity to Understand Emergence of Team Learning. Small Group Research,48(2), 190-214.
指導教授 劉晨鐘(Chen-Chung Liu) 審核日期 2020-7-30
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