草悟道景觀改善之使用者景觀偏好與注意力恢復效益評估

Improvement Benefit Assessment of Landscape Preference and Attention Restoration by Calligraphy Greenway Landscape Engineering

吳振發(Chen-Fa Wu)；謝燕芬(Yen-Fen Hsieh)；黃宣瑄(Hsuan-Hsuan Huang)

草悟道 ； 景觀偏好 ； 注意力恢復 ； Calligraphy Greenway ； Landscape Preference ； Attention Restoration

造園景觀學報

22卷3期（2018 / 09 / 01）

33 - 53

繁體中文

綠地提供市民休憩，具注意力恢復效用，綠地更是都市中不可或缺的場域。都市綠地景觀於建設後數十年，多會進行改善工程，然而新的風貌是否能夠增加民眾的景觀偏好，提高注意力恢復效果，是值得深入討論的議題。本研究目的在於驗證綠地景觀改善是否能夠增加使用者的景觀偏好及注意力恢復效益。研究方法首先回顧景觀偏好及注意力恢復力相關理論，並以臺中草悟道為研究範圍，採用景觀改善前後照片及問卷調查使用者感受，將調查結果進行多變量分析。研究結果顯示，景觀改善後，使用者對於臺中草悟道的景觀偏好、注意力恢復幾乎都高於景觀改善前，顯示此景觀工程深獲民眾喜愛，且認為有助於其注意力之恢復。本研究為景觀工程效益評估之先驅研究，研究方法具有方便操作之可行性，未來將可提供公部門作為景觀工程建造效益評估之參考。

Green landscapes provide people with outdoor relaxation. And they have attention restoration effect. Urban green landscapes are indispensable field. After the construction of urban green space landscape for decades, it will carry out improvements; however, whether the new style can increase people's preferences, and improve attention restoration is worth discussing. Therefore, the purpose of this study is to examine green landscape improvements can increase the user's landscape preference and attention restorations or not. This research area is Calligraphy Greenway. First, this study reviews the theory of landscape preference and attention restoration. Then, this study uses photos of before improvement and after improvement and conduct questionnaires survey, and multivariate analysis to investigate the feelings of users. The result shows that after landscape improvement, the user's feelings of overall landscape, landscape preferences, and attention restoration of Calligraphy Greenway are higher than the landscapes, which are before improvement. This study is a pioneer in the study of landscape projects benefit assessment, and the study method is feasibility and easy. It will be able to provide the public sector as a reference to benefit assessment of construction projects in future.

1. Hartig, T.,Böök, A.,Garvill, J.,Olsson, T.,Gärling, T.(1996).Environmental influences on psychological restoration.Scandinavian Journal of psychology,37(4),378-393.
2. Hartig, T.,Evans, G. W.(1993).Psychological foundations of nature xperience.Advances in psychology,96,427-457.
3. Hartig, T.,Kaiser, F. G.,Bowler, P. A.(1997).Institute of Housing Research, Working paperInstitute of Housing Research, Working paper,未出版
4. Hartig, T.,Mang, M.,Evans, G. W.(1991).Restorative effects of natural environment experiences.Environment and behavior,23(1),3-26.
5. Herzog, T. R.,Black, A. M.,Fountaine, K. A.,Knotts, D. J.(1997).Reflection and attentional recovery as distinctive benefits of restorative environments.Journal of environmental psychology,17(2),165-170.
6. Kaplan, R.,Kaplan, S.(1989).The experience of nature: A psychological perspective.CUP Archive.
7. Kaplan, S.(1987).Aesthetics, affect, and cognition environmental preference from an evolutionary perspective.Environment and behavior,19(1),3-32.
8. Kaplan, S.(1995).The restorative benefits of nature: Toward an integrative framework.Journal of environmental psychology,15(3),169-182.
9. Kaplan, S.,Bardwell, L. V.,Slakter, D. B.(1993).The museum as a restorative environment.Environment and Behavior,25(6),725-742.
10. Kirshbaum, M. N.,Donbavand, J.(2014).Making the most out of life: Exploring the contribution of attention restorative theory in developing a non-pharmacological intervention for fatigue.Palliative and Supportive Care,12,473-480.
11. Kroh, D. P.,Gimblett, R. H.(1992).Comparing live experience with pictures in articulating landscape preference.Landscape Research,17(2),58-69.
12. Laumann, K.,Gärling, T.,Stormark, K. M.(2001).Rating scale measures of restorative components of environments.Journal of Environmental Psychology,21(1),31-44.
13. Lückmann, K.,Lagemann, V.,Menzel, S.(2013).Landscape Assessment and Evaluation of Young People: Comparing Nature- Orientated Habitat and Engineered Habitat Preferences.Environment and Behavior,45(1),86-112.
14. Petros, A. K.,Georgi, J. N.(2011).Landscape Preference Evaluation for Hospital Environmental Design.Journal of Environmental Protection,2,639-647.
15. Rapoport, A.(1977).Human Aspect of Urban Form.N.Y:Pergmo.
16. Ulrich, R. S.(1983).Aesthetic and affective response to natural environment.Behavior and the natural environment
17. Weng, P. Y.,Chiang, Y. C.(2014).Psychological Restoration through Indoor and Outdoor Leisure Activities.Journal of Leisure Research,46(2),203-217.
18. 李素馨(2000)。中山高公路土地使用景觀偏好探討。造園學報，6(1/2)，19-34。
19. 李素馨,何英齊(2000)。應用瞳位追蹤方法建立景觀偏好模式之研究。造園學報，6(1/2)，71-89。
20. 李素馨,張淑貞(2006)。都市街道特性與被搶恐懼感之研究。造園學報，12(1)，41-58。
21. 李麗雪(1998)。臺北市，國立臺灣大學園藝學系研究所。
22. 周先捷(2005)。臺中市，靜宜大學觀光事業學系暨研究所。
23. 邵郊(1993).生理心理學.臺北:五南.
24. 邱皓政(2006).量化研究與統計分析.臺北:五南.
25. 張習賓(2006)。臺中市，逢甲大學都市計劃研究所。
26. 黃富瑜,林晏州(1999)。淡水捷運線使用者對沿線景觀知覺與偏好之探討。臺灣園藝，45(1)，101-116。
27. 黃韻璇(2009)。臺中市，國立中興大學農村規劃研究所。
28. 詹智勝(2007)。臺中市，逢甲大學景觀與遊憩研究所。
29. 羅淼文(2012)。臺中市，逢甲大學景觀與遊憩研究所。

1. 蔡純玉,廖碧勤,陳思宏,吳振發(2019)。參與可食地景使用者行為之變化及類型。戶外遊憩研究，32(3)，101-131。
2. 凃宏明,李靖童(2020)。景觀工程的社會爭議與衝擊。造園景觀學報，24(1)，23-40。