TAM理論架構增加“知覺娛樂性”的效用－以大學生參與網球運動驗證

The Effectiveness of How TAM Theories Enhanced the "Perceived Playfulness"-A Case Study of University Students' Participation of Tennis Activities for Verification

10.29423/JSRR.200806_2(4).0009

賴永僚(Yeong-Laio Lay)

知覺娛樂性 ； 知覺易用性 ； 知覺有用性 ； 行爲態度 ； 行爲意圖 ； Perceived Playfulness ； Perceived Ease of Use ； Perceived Usefulness ； Behavioral Attitude ； Behavioral Intention

運動與遊憩研究

2卷4期（2008 / 06 / 01）

122 - 137

繁體中文

本研究旨在TAM理論（科技接受模型）架構增加「知覺娛樂性」驗證大學生參與網球運動的行爲表現，以瞭解大學生個人運動行爲改變的機制。本研究採立意抽樣方式，選取臺灣中部五所大專院校之學生爲研究對象，問卷調查分析後，有效問卷爲476份。經LISREL8.52線性分析檢定，結果發現：知覺娛樂性對行爲態度具有負向影響，而對行爲意圖具有正向影響，然而透過行爲態度則是間接負向影響行爲意圖。知覺有用性對行爲態度具有正向影響，而對行爲意圖則是具有負向影響。知覺易用性對行爲態度具有正向影響。行爲態度能正向影響行爲意圖。知覺易用性與知覺有用性透過行爲態度則是間接影響行爲意圖。最後根據本研究結果進行討論，並提出學理及應用的意義，以及對體育教學單位與未來研究方向提出建議。

This research was purposed to explore the behavioral expression for university students' participation of tennis sports by using the ”Perceived Playfulness” added by the framework of TAM Theory (Technology Acceptance Model;). The mechanism to change students' individual sports behaviors should be understood. In this research, the purposive sampling was implemented and respondent subjects were selected among the students from 5 mid-Taiwan universities. After questionnaire analysis was completed, the researcher had collected 476 valid replies. The LISREL 8.52 Linear Analysis was applied to process the analysis. The final results showed that perceived playfulness caused negative influence on behavioral attitude, but showed positive influence on behavioral intention. However, through behavioral attitude, it caused indirect negative influence on behavioral intention. Perceived usefulness caused positive influence on behavioral attitude but showed negative influence on behavioral intention. Perceived ease of use caused positive influence on behavioral attitude. Behavioral attitude positively affected behavioral intention. Perceived use of ease and perceived usefulness caused indirect influence on behavioral intention through behavioral attitude. Finally, the discussion was made in accordance with the research results. The theories and applicable meanings, together with the suggestions to physical education units and upcoming researches, were also proposed.

1. 張志銘(2007)。以科技接受模型驗證桌球運動參與行爲之意向。管理實務與理論研究，1(2)，76-88。
   連結：
2. Abbott, C. L.,Weinmann, C. A.,Bailey, C. I.(1999).The relationship between sport salience and choice behaviour in division I collegiate baseball players.Sport Psychological,30,369-380.
3. Ajzen, I.,J. Kuhi (Eds.),J. Beckmann (Eds.)(1985).Action control: from cognition to behavior.Heidelberg:Springer.
4. Cronbach, L. J.(1951).Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of tests.Psychometrika,16,297-334.
5. Csikszentmihalyi, M.(1975).Beyond Boredom and Anxiety.San Francisco:Jossey-Bass.
6. Davis, F. D.(1989).Perceived Usefulness, Perceived Ease of Use, and User Acceptance of Information Technology.MIS Quarterly,13,319-340.
7. Dzewaltowski, D. A.,Noble, J. M.,Shaw, J. M.(1990).Physical activity participation: Social cognitive theory versus the theories of reasoned action planned behavior.Journal of Sport & Exercise Psychology,12(4),338-405.
8. Fishbein, M.,Ajzen, I.(1975).Belief, Attitude, Intention, and behavior: An Introduction to theory and research.Reading, MA:Addison-Wesley.
9. Gatch, C. L.,Kendzierski, D.(1990).Predicting Exercise Intention: The theory of planned behavior.Research Quarterly For Exercise and Sport,61(1),100-102.
10. Godin, G.(1994).Theories of reasoned action and planned behavior: usefulness for exercise promotion.Medicine and Science in Sports and exercise,26(11),1391-1394.
11. Hair, J. F.,Anderson, R, F.,Tatham, R. L.,Black, W. C.(1988).Multivariate data analysis.Englewood Cliffs. NJ:Prentice-Hall.
12. Kimiecik, J. C.(1992).Predicting vigorous physical activity of corporate employees: Comparing the theories of reasoned action and planned behavior.Journal of Sport & Exercise Psychology,14(2),192-206.
13. Moon. J. W.,Kim. Y. G.(2001).Extending the TAM for a World-Wide-Web context.Information & Management,38,217-230.
14. Wankel, L. M.,Mummery, W. K.,Stephens, T.,Craig, C. L.(1994).Prediction of physical activity intention from social psychological variables: Results from the campbell's survey of well-being.Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology,16(1),56-69.
15. Yordy, G. A.,Lent, R.W.(1993).Predicting aerobic exercise participation: Social cognitive, reasoned action, and planned behavior models.Journal of Sport & Exercise Psychology,15(4),363-374.
16. 尤婷靜(2003)。嘉義，國立中正大學資訊管理學系。
17. 吳明隆(2006)。統計應用學習實務問卷分析與應用統計。臺北:知城。
18. 吳明隆、涂金堂(2005)。SPSS與統計應用分析。臺北:五南。
19. 吳采芳(2001)。臺北，國防管理學院資源管理研究所。
20. 洪蘭譯、曾志朗譯(1997)。心理學實驗研究法。臺北:遠流。
21. 曾佳珍(1999)。臺北，國立臺彎大學護理學研究所。
22. 黃芳銘(2002)。結構方程模式理論與應用。臺北:五南。
23. 溫素真(2004)。高雄，國立高雄第一科技大學行銷與流通管理所。

1. 陳南琦、張志銘、林忠政(2012)。結合科技接受模式與計畫行為理論探討參與 Wii 運動型遊戲之行為意圖。運動與遊憩研究，7(1)，53-67。
2. 許家謙、凌家如、林清同(2016)。高齡者參與槌球運動行為模式之探討：計畫行為理論之應用。戶外遊憩研究，29(1)，79-111。
3. 柯伶玫、江昱仁、方崇任(2014)。使用平板電腦觀賞運動競賽意願之研究。運動與遊憩研究，9(1)，118-136。
4. 賴永僚、楊世達、張志銘、翁旭昇(2009)。參與羽球不同運動階段學生的知覺有用性、知覺易用性、行爲態度與行爲意圖差異驗證。運動與遊憩研究，4(2)，34-45。
5. 賴永僚、楊世達、張志銘、翁旭昇(2010)。參與羽球不同運動階段學生的知覺有用性、知覺易用性、行為態度與行為意圖差異驗證。島嶼觀光研究，2(4)，66-79。