大航海高峰會遊戲中的玩家衝突策略與人 格分析

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：60

、訪客IP：18.225.195.163

姓名

傅彩如(Tsai-Ju Fu) 查詢紙本館藏

畢業系所

網路學習科技研究所

論文名稱

大航海高峰會遊戲中的玩家衝突策略與人格分析
(Analyzing Conflict Resolution Strategies and Personality Traits of Players in the Great Voyage Summit Game)

相關論文

★ 遊戲式學習增進印尼國小兒童運算思維之成效研究	★ 科技輔助版圖遊戲增進印尼兒童英語詞彙學習之成效研究
★ 運用均一教育平台於國中資源班學生數學學習之研究	★ <亞米大陷阱>數位學習營養教育遊戲對臺灣飲食營養價值學習成效之探討
★ 台灣地形遊戲教育中的沙盒擴增實境系統設計與評估	★ 線上議題探究系統之探究能力分析
★ 線上議題遊戲系統之遊戲行為與互動歷程探討	★ 複合式領地桌遊之學習者人格特質與歷史思維分析
★ 探討成人玩家於議題式遊戲之行為與人格特質的關係	★ 探討成人玩家於大航海高峰會遊戲中情緒與人格的關係
★ 線上社群溝通課程對學員互動關係與團隊發展歷程研究	★ 機械戰馬：連桿仿生機器人之開發及教學設計與運算思維表現評估
★ 情境議題式策略遊戲平台的開發與評估	★ 科技融入幼兒生命教育繪本之學習、興趣、歷程與成效
★ 線上歷史探究系統對中學生歷史思維與探究學習成效分析	★ 文化美感教育桌遊＜金色絲路＞對小學生美感鑑賞素養與文化認知之學習分析影響

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 (2026-6-30以後開放)

摘要(中)

現今許多研究均指出遊戲可以作為教育與心理分析的工具，但針對玩家在遊戲中的行為與其人格特質間的關聯研究仍相對有限。因此，本研究希望透過議題式遊戲的設計，使玩家能夠自覺其衝突解決傾向與思考方式，進而培養良好的衝突解決能力，並為遊戲教學設計提供實證建議。
本研究採質性分析，並通過〈大航海高峰會〉這款議題式遊戲，讓玩家在遊戲中擔任不同的國家以及角色，以收集 15 名成年玩家的遊戲衝突策略，並藉由TKI 測驗及研究者自編的衝突策略問卷及衝突策略觀察量表，來探究玩家於遊玩遊戲前、中、後的對於遊戲議題的衝突策略差異，以及與人格之關聯性為何。
研究結果顯示，僅 27%的玩家在遊玩遊戲前的衝突策略與人格有顯著相關，而有 13%的玩家在遊戲中的衝突策略受到人格影響。在遊戲前後，則有 47%的玩家改變了其衝突策略選擇，這些改變主要受到自我認同、國家經歷、角色任務需求及遊戲難易度的影響。從研究中發現，角色任務及遊戲事件的設計對玩家衝突策略的影響大於人格因素的影響，因此遊戲機制中的角色任務和事件設計對玩家行為有顯著影響。未來的在遊戲設計應重視情境背景和角色設計的細節，以提升玩家的遊戲體驗，和提供不同視角以玩家的培養衝突解決能力。

摘要(英)

Many current studies indicate that games can be used as tools for education and psychological analysis, but research on the relationship between player behavior in
games and their personality traits remains relatively limited. Therefore, this study aims to design an issue-based game that allows players to become aware of their conflict resolution tendencies and thinking styles, thereby cultivating good conflict resolution skills and providing empirical recommendations for game-based teaching design.
This study adopts qualitative analysis and uses the issue-based game "The Age of Sail Summit." In this game, players assume different national and role identities to collect the conflict strategies of 15 adult players. The study employs the TKI test and researcher-developed questionnaires and conflict strategy observation scales to explore the differences in players′ conflict strategies before, during, and after gameplay and their relationship to personality.
The results show that only 27% of players had a significant correlation between their pre-game conflict strategies and personality traits, while 13% of players′ conflict strategies during the game were influenced by their personality. Additionally, 47% of players changed their conflict strategy choices before and after the game. These changes were primarily influenced by self-identity, national experience, role task requirements, and game difficulty. The study found that role tasks and game events had a greater impact on players′ conflict strategies than personality factors. Thus, the design of role tasks and game events significantly affects player behavior. Future game design should emphasize the details of contextual background and role design to enhance players′ gaming experience and provide various perspectives to cultivate their conflict resolution skills.

關鍵字(中)

★ 議題式遊戲
★ 遊戲的衝突策略
★ 人格特質

關鍵字(英)

★ Issue-based games
★ Conflict strategies in games
★ Personality traits

論文目次

中文摘要.........................................................................................................................i
Abstract..........................................................................................................................ii
誌謝.............................................................................................................................. iii
目次...............................................................................................................................iv
圖次..............................................................................................................................vii
表次................................................................................................................................x
一、緒論........................................................................................................................1
1-1 研究背景與動機.................................................................................................1
1-2 研究目的.............................................................................................................3
1-3 研究問題.............................................................................................................4
二、文獻探討................................................................................................................5
2-1 議題式遊戲.........................................................................................................5
2-2 衝突解決的策略.................................................................................................7
2-3 人格特質...........................................................................................................11
三、遊戲流程..............................................................................................................15
3-1 遊戲介紹...........................................................................................................15
3-2 遊戲事件...........................................................................................................16
3-3 遊戲機制...........................................................................................................18
3-4 科技輔助...........................................................................................................22
四、研究方法..............................................................................................................25
4-1 研究對象...........................................................................................................25
4-2 研究架構...........................................................................................................25
4-3 研究工具...........................................................................................................28
4-3-1 TKI 測驗 .................................................................................................28
4-3-2 衝突策略問卷...........................................................................................28
4-3-3 衝突策略觀察量表...................................................................................30
4-4 資料處理...........................................................................................................31
五、研究結果..............................................................................................................39
5-1 數據說明...........................................................................................................39
5-1-1 玩家之 TKI 測驗結果 ..............................................................................39
5-1-2 玩家遊戲前的衝突策略選擇結果...........................................................40
5-1-3 玩家遊戲中的衝突策略結果...................................................................41
5-1-4 玩家遊戲後的衝突策略選擇結果...........................................................42
5-2 面對議題選擇的衝突策略與人格的關係分析...............................................44
5-2-1 外交官.......................................................................................................45
5-2-2 船長...........................................................................................................50
5-2-3 指揮官.......................................................................................................56
5-3 遊戲中的衝突策略與人格關係分析...............................................................61
5-3-1 英國...........................................................................................................62
5-3-2 法國...........................................................................................................68
5-3-3 荷蘭...........................................................................................................73
5-3-4 西班牙.......................................................................................................78
5-3-5 葡萄牙.......................................................................................................83
5-4 玩家於事件前後的衝突策略關係分析...........................................................88
5-4-1 個人因素影響分析...................................................................................88
5-4-2 國家因素影響分析...................................................................................91
5-4-3 角色因素影響分析...................................................................................96
5-4-4 歸納原因...................................................................................................98
六、結論....................................................................................................................100
參考文獻....................................................................................................................103
中文部分................................................................................................................103
英文部分................................................................................................................104
附件一知情同意書..................................................................................................110
附件二 TKI 測驗......................................................................................................112
附件三衝突策略問卷..............................................................................................117
附件四衝突策略問卷選項對照..............................................................................137

參考文獻

教育部 (2014 年 11 月 ) 。核心素養的三面九項。 108 課綱資訊網。https://shs.k12ea.gov.tw/site/12basic/category?root=40&cid=47&oid=318
李仁豪、陳怡君(2016)。IPIP 大五人格量表簡版的發展及其跨年齡層的測量不變性檢定。教育研究與發展期刊， 12(4) ， 91-93 。https://doi.org/10.3966/181665042016121204004
林長信(2018)。複合式桌遊之設計與開發及人格特質於遊戲歷程之分析與探討［未出版之博士論文］。國立臺南大學數位學習科技學系。
吳承翰(2011)。桌上遊戲參與型態對人際溝通改善之研究－以臺北地區桌上遊戲專賣店顧客為例［未出版之碩士論文］。國立臺灣師範大學運動與休閒管理研究所。
玩轉學校 (2015) 。 ESG 議題式遊戲設計。玩轉學校 Play School 。https://pleyschool.org/esg_csr/ibg/
張健峰(2012)。以 TKI 衝突處理模式分析政府資訊委外個案［未出版之碩士論文］。國立中興大學高階經理人班。
陳君儀(2021)。發展桌遊作為性別平等倡導工具的歷程-以女鬼故事桌遊創作為例［未出版之碩士論文］。實踐大學社會工作學系。
陳霈瑜(2020)。情境式議題遊戲之學習互動與策略探討以香料航海爭霸戰為例。［未出版之碩士論文］國立臺南大學數位學習科技學系碩士論文。
鄧凱銘(2013)。遊戲式學習對心流經驗相關變項影響之研究［未出版之碩士論文］。國立東華大學資訊工程學系。
Adha, D. W., Wahyudi, E., Kasmira, J., & Saragih, G. M.(2023). Strategi Penyelesaian Konflik Lahan antara Perusahaan dengan Masyarakat melalui Pendekatan Sosiologi Hukum. Journal on Education, 5(4), 11039-11045. https://doi.org/10.31004/joe.v5i4.2028
Andrukaniec, E., Franken, C., Kirchhof, D., Kraus, T., Schöndorff, F., & Geiger, C. (2013). OUTLIVE–An Augmented Reality Multi-user Board Game Played with a Mobile Device. In Reidsma, D., Katayose, H., Nijholt, A. (Eds.), Advances in Computer Entertainment. 10th International Conference, ACE 2013, Boekelo, The Netherlands, November 12-15, 2013. Proceedings (pp. 501-504). Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-03161-3_38
Antonioni, D. (1998). Relationship between the Big Five personality factors and conflict management styles. International Journal of Conflict Management, 9(4), 336-355. https://doi.org/10.1108/eb022814
Amanuel, B. (2017). The big five personality traits. International Journal in Management & Social Science, 5(3), 99-105.
Biçer, R. (2011). Kişilik ve Bir Kur’an Terimi Olarak Şakile. Gazi Üniversitesi Gazi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 31(2), 399-418.
Brown, J. G. (2012). Empowering students to create and claim value through the Thomas–Kilmann conflict mode instrument. Negotiation Journal, 28(1), 79-91. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1571-9979.2011.00327.x
Caprara, G. V. (1999). The notion of personality: Historical and recent perspectives. European Review, 7(1), 127-137. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1062798700003793
Cerkez, N., Vrdoljak, B., & Skansi, S. (2021). A method for MBTI classification based on impact of class components. IEEE Access, 9, 146550-146567. https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2021.3121137
Cheng, P. H., Yeh, T. K., Chao, Y. K., Lin, J., & Chang, C. Y. (2020). Design ideas for an issue-situation-based board game involving multirole scenarios. Sustainability, 12(5), 2139. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12052139
Daeng M., M. Y., Adha, D., Wahyudi, E., Kasmira, J., & Saragih, G. (2023). Strategi Penyelesaian Konflik Lahan antara Perusahaan dengan Masyarakat melalui Pendekatan Sosiologi Hukum. Journal on Education, 5(4), 11039-11045. https://doi.org/10.31004/joe.v5i4.2028
Deutsch, M. (1973). The resolution of conflict: Constructive and destructive processes. American Behavioral Scientist, 17(2), 248-248. https://doi.org/10.1177/000276427301700206
Ferry, D. L. (1986). Review of Dynamic Administration; The Collected Works of Mary Parker Follett, by M. P. Follett, H. C. Metcalf, & L. Urwick. The Academy of Management Review, 11(2), 451–454. https://doi.org/10.2307/258474
Gustavsson, J. P., Jönsson, E. G., Linder, J., & Weinryb, R. M. (2003). The HP5 inventory: definition and assessment of five health-relevant personality traits from a five-factor model perspective. Personality and Individual Differences, 35(1), 69-89. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0191-8869(02)00142-3
Han, J., Kim, K., Jung, K., & Lee, K. O. (2010). RFID-based digital board game platforms. Computing and Informatics, 29(6+), 1141-1158. https://www.cai.sk/ojs/index.php/cai/article/view/136
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. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2015.07.045
Islam, N., & Rimi, N. S. (2017). Conflict management technique in private commercial banks of Bangladesh: an application of Thomas-Kilmann conflict handling model. European Journal of Business and Management, 9(29), 91-99.
Kilmann, R. H., & Thomas, K. W. (1977). Developing a forced-choice measure of conflict-handling behavior: The" MODE" instrument. Educational and psychological measurement, 37(2), 309-325. https://doi.org/10.1177/001316447703700204
Konovsky, M. A., Frank, J., McDonald, M. A. (1989). Using Parametric Statistics to Explore the Construct Validity of the Thomas-Kilmann Conflict Mode Survey. Management Communication Quarterly, 3(2):268-290. https://doi.org/10.1177/0893318989003002007
Lewin, K. (1947). Frontiers in group dynamics: Concept, method and reality in social science; social equilibria and social change. Human relations, 1(1), 5-41. https://doi.org/10.1177/001872674700100103
Mount, M. K., Barrick, M. R., Scullen, S. M., & Rounds, J. (2005). Higher‐order dimensions of the big five personality traits and the big six vocational interest types. Personnel psychology, 58(2), 447-478. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-6570.2005.00468.x
Neelam, P., Agarwal, N. (2016). A Study of personality traits of B.Ed students. Learning Community-An International Journal of Educational and Social Development, 7(2), 127-131.
Nischal, S. (2014). Application of Thomas Kilmann conflict resolution mechanism for conflict management in HR of manufacturing sector. The IIS University-Journal of Commerce and Management, 3(1), 62-70.
Novikova, I. A. (2013). Big Five (the five-factor model and the five-factor theory). In K.D. Keith (Ed.), The encyclopedia of cross-cultural psychology. John Wiley & Sons, Inc. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/9781118339893.wbeccp054
Parlett, D.(1999). The Oxford history of board games. Oxford University Press.
Pellas, N., & Mystakidis, S. (2020). A systematic review of research about game-based learning in virtual worlds. Journal of Universal Computer Science, 26(8), 1017-1042. http://dx.doi.org/10.3897/jucs.2020.054
Pittenger, D. (1993). Measuring the MBTI… and coming up short. Journal of Career Planning and Employment, 54(1), 48-52.
P. M. Suresh Kumar. (2023). Conflicts in Modern Society. RESEARCH REVIEW International Journal of Multidisciplinary, 8(7), 21-25. https://doi.org/10.31305/rrijm.2023.v08.n07.004
Polatov, A. N., & Pavlovets, I. V. (2022). Theoretical Analysis of Conflict Management in the Perspective of Urban Society. International Journal Papier Public Review, 3(1), 1-6. https://doi.org/10.47667/ijppr.v3i1.135
Rahim, M. A. (2002). Toward a theory of managing organizational conflict. International journal of conflict management, 13(3), 206-235. https://doi.org/10.1108/eb022874
Rahim, M. A. (2023). Managing conflict in organizations. Routledge.
Ribeiro, L. H. F., Germano, V. E., Bruno, L. P., Freire, M. L., Nascimento, E. G. C., & Medeiros Fernandes, T. A. A. (2022). Game-based learning como estratégia de ensino e aprendizagem no ensino médico. Research, Society and Development, 11(12), e02111232183-e02111232183. https://www.doi.org/10.33448/rsd-v11i12.32183
Runde, C., & Armon, B. K. (2016). Conflict competence in a multicultural world. In In J. L. Wildman, R. L. Griffith, & B. K. Armon (Eds.), Critical Issues in Cross Cultural Management (pp. 61–72). Springer International Publishing/Springer Nature. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-42166-7_5
Shih, J. L., Huang, S. H., Lin, C. H., & Tseng, C. C. (2017). STEAMing the Ships for the Great Voyage: Design and Evaluation of a Technology integrated Maker Game. IxD&A, (34), 61-87. http://dx.doi.org/10.55612/s-5002-034-004
Slabbert, A. D. (2002). Managerial modes of conflict resolution in the banking industry. South African Journal of Economic and Management Sciences, 5(1), 258-270. http://dx.doi.org/10.4102/sajems.v5i1.2674
Sung, H. Y., & Hwang, G. J. (2013). A collaborative game-based learning approach to improving students′ learning performance in science courses. Computers & education, 63, 43-51. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2012.11.019
Tekinbas, K. S., & Zimmerman, E. (2003). Rules of play: Game design fundamentals. The MIT Press.
Thomas, K. W., & Kilmann, R. H. (1974). Thomas-Kilmann Conflict Mode Instrument (TKI) [Database record]. APA PsycTests. https://doi.org/10.1037/t02326-000
Thomas, K. W, Kilmann, R.H. (2008). Thomas-kilmann conflict mode. TKI Profile and Interpretive Report, 1(11), 2-11.
Pratchett, T., Young, G., Brooks, C., Jeskins, L., & Monagle, H. (2016). Practical Tips for Developing Your Staff, Facet.
Videnovik, M., Vold, T., Kiønig, L., Madevska Bogdanova, A., & Trajkovik, V. (2023). Game-based learning in computer science education: a scoping literature review. International Journal of STEM Education, 10(1), 54. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-023-00447-2
Wallace, J. R., Pape, J., Chang, Y. L. B., McClelland, P. J., Graham, T. N., Scott, S. D., & Hancock, M. (2012, February 11-15). Exploring automation in digital tabletop board game [Conference presentation]. CSCW ′12: Computer Supported Cooperative Work, Seattle, WA, United States. http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/2141512.2141585
Wang, Z., Sapienza, A., Culotta, A., & Ferrara, E. (2019, August 20-23). Personality and behavior in role-based online games [Conference presentation]. 2019 IEEE Conference on Games (CoG), London, UK. https://doi.org/10.1109/CIG.2019.8848027
Wilson, R. S., Barnes, L. L., Aggarwal, N. T., Boyle, P. A., Hebert, L. E., Mendes de Leon, C. F., & Evans, D. A. (2010). Cognitive activity and the cognitive morbidity of Alzheimer disease. Neurology, 75(11), 990-996. https://doi.org/10.1212%2FWNL.0b013e3181f25b5e
Wohn, D. Y., & Wash, R. (2013). A virtual “Room” with a cue: Detecting personality through spatial customization in a city simulation game. Computers in Human Behavior, 29(1), 155-159. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2012.07.029
Womack, D. F. (1988). Assessing the Thomas-Kilmann conflict mode survey. Management Communication Quarterly, 1(3), 321-349. https://doi.org/10.1177/089331898800100300

指導教授

施如齡(Ju-Ling Shin)

審核日期

2024-6-19

推文