以腦波量測探討文理組學生於不同量表之認知差異

The Use of EEG to Explore College Students’ Cognitive Differences between Likert Scales and Semantic Differential Scales

10.6846/TKU.2017.00856

彭善怡

李克特量表 ； 語意差異量表 ； 腦電圖 ； 事件相關電位 ； P300 ； Likert Scale ； Semantic Differential Scale ； EEG ； ERPs ； P300

淡江大學資訊管理學系碩士班學位論文

2017年

碩士

吳錦波

繁體中文

近年來，隨著資訊科技的發展，腦神經科學研究工具也逐漸進步，在認知神經科學領域的相關研究也藉由先進的腦波儀器進行實驗，以更精確地瞭解人們在認知、決策等大腦的心智運作狀態變化。在資訊系統(IS)領域中，有許多比較李克特量表和語意差異量表的研究，但其中鮮少有以認知神經科學的觀點進行量表差異之相關研究，因此本研究將以認知神經科學為出發點，探討不同學科背景（文、理）的大學生，於填答李克特量表和語意差異量表時的認知歷程，以了解受測者受到量表刺激時腦波有何差異。 　　本研究使用實驗法，受測者為四十名大學生(文組20人、理組20人)，並使用腦波儀蒐集受測者填答量表時的腦波訊號，再藉由腦電圖(EEG)進行事件相關電位分析，以腦波成份P300來說明其認知差異。本研究結果發現：一、受測者於填答兩種量表時的腦波確實存在顯著的差異，且李克特量表之P300振幅均大於語意差異量表；二、當文、理組受測者於填答李克特量表時，腦部受到的反應及刺激較不易看出其有所差異；三、文、理組受測者於填答語意差異量表時的腦波確實存在差異，且文組受測者腦部所受到的刺激及反應較理組受測者大。本研究結果，可做為日後量表及腦波相關研究之參考。

With the advance of science and technology, the tools for research in cognitive neuroscience has made a great progress recently. The field of cognitive neuroscience has been utilizing advanced brainwave devices to better understand the changes in the mental functioning of the brain in cognition, emotion, and decision-making, etc. In the field of information systems, there are studies comparing the Likert scale with the Semantic Differential Scale, but few studies explore them from the perspective of cognitive neuroscience by using physiological measurement tools. Thus, the purpose of this study is to explore the cognitive differences in filling in the Likert scale and semantic differential scale by college students. 　　This study is based on an experimental method involving forty college students, 20 students in engineering and 20 students in liberal art. An electroencephalograph is used for brainwave signal collection when the subjects are filling the scale. Then the event-related potential component, P300 is used for statistical analysis. The results of this study show that students’ brain waves are different when they fill in the two scales, and the P300 for Likert scale is higher than that of semantic differential scale. The results also reveal that there are no significant differences between the two groups of subjects in filling in the Likert scale. However, both groups in filling in the semantic differential scale show significant differences, and the liberal art students exhibit higher P300 than those of engineering students, which may indicate that higher cognitive efforts needed in the interpretation of words. The results of this study can be used as a reference for future scale and brain wave related research.

1. 4. 蕭文龍、黃莉君、楊雅雯，2016，神經資訊系統文獻彙整分析，東吳經濟商學學報，第九十二期：37~56頁。
   連結：
2. 5. 蕭夙婷、張瓊云，2009，從神經生理觀點探討幼兒注意力之表現，幼兒保育論壇，第四期：8~26頁。
   連結：
3. 1.Begleiter, H., Porjesz, B., Chou, C. L., & Aunon, J. I., 1983, “P3 and stimulus incentive value. Psychophysiology,” Vol. 20, No.1, pp. 95-101.
   連結：
4. 4.Chin, W. W., Johnson, N., & Schwarz, A., 2008, “A fast form approach to measuring technology acceptance and other constructs,” MIS Quarterly, pp.687-703.
   連結：
5. 5.Courchesne, E., Hillyard, S. A., & Galambos, R., 1975, “Stimulus novelty, task relevance and the visual evoked potential in man”.
   連結：
6. 6.Davis, F. D., 1989, “Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology,” MIS quarterly, pp.319-340.
   連結：
7. 7.Davis, F. D., Bagozzi, R. P., & Warshaw, P. R., 1989, “User acceptance of computer technology: a comparison of two theoretical models,” Management science, Vol.35, No.8, pp.982-1003.
   連結：
8. 8.Eimer, M., 1998, “Methodological issues in event-related brain potential research. Behavior Research Methods,” Instruments & Computers, Vol.30, No.1, pp.3-7.
   連結：
9. 9.Ford, J. M., Roth, W. T., & Kopell, B. S., 1976, “Auditory evoked potentials to unpredictable shifts in pitch,” Psychophysiology, Vol.13, No.1, pp.32-39.
   連結：
10. 10.Fishbein, M., & Ajzen, I., 1977, Belief, attitude, intention, and behavior: An introduction to theory and research, MA: Addison-Wesley.
    連結：
11. 11.Fitzgerald, P. G., & Picton, T. W., 1983, “Event-related potentials recorded during the discrimination of improbable stimuli,” Biological Psychology, Vol.17, No.4, pp. 241-276.
    連結：
12. 14.Kutas, M., McCarthy, G., & Donchin, E., 1977, “Augmenting mental chronometry: the P300 as a measure of stimulus evaluation time,” Science, Vol.197, No.4305, pp. 792-795.
    連結：
13. 15.Luck, S. J., Woodman, G. F., and Vogel E. K., 2000, “Event-related potential studies of attention,” Trends in Cognitive Sciences, Vol.4, No.11, pp.432–440.
    連結：
14. 16.McCarthy, G., & Donchin, E., 1981, “A metric for thought: a comparison of P300 latency and reaction time,” Science, Vol.211, No.4477, pp.77-80.
    連結：
15. 17.Onton, J., Delorme, A., and Makeig, S., 2005, “Frontal midline EEG dynamics during working memory,” NeuroImage, Vol.27, pp. 341-356.
    連結：
16. 18.Pfurtscheller, G., and Klimesch, W., 1992, “Functional topography during a visuoverbal judgment task studied with event-related desynchronization mapping,” Journal of Clinical Neurophysiology, Vol.9, No.1, pp.120-131.
    連結：
17. 19.Preston, C. C., & Colman, A. M., 2000, “Optimal number of response categories in rating scales: reliability, validity, discriminating power, and respondent preferences,” Acta psychologica, Vol.104, No.1, pp.1-15.
    連結：
18. 20.Sauseng, P., Hoppe, J., Klimesch, W., Gerloff, C., and Hummel, F., 2007, “Dissociation of sustained attention from central executive functions: Local activity and interregional connectivity in the theta range,” European Journal of Neuroscience, Vol.25, pp.587-593.
    連結：
19. 21.Snyder, E., & Hillyard, S. A., 1976, “Long-latency evoked potentials to irrelevant,” deviant stimuli. Behavioral Biology, Vol.16, No.3, pp.319-331.
    連結：
20. 22.Squires, N. K., Squires, K. C., & Hillyard, S. A., 1975, “Two varieties of long-latency positive waves evoked by unpredictable auditory stimuli in man,” Electroencephalography and clinical neurophysiology, Vol.38, No.4, pp.387-401.
    連結：
21. 23.Sutton, S., Braren, M., Zubin, J., & John, E. R., 1965. “Evoked-potential correlates of stimulus uncertainty,” Science, Vol.150, No.3700, pp.1187-1188.
    連結：
22. 24.Verhagen, T., van Den Hooff, B., & Meents, S., 2015, “Toward a Better Use of the Semantic Differential in IS Research: An Integrative Framework of Suggested Action,” Journal of the Association for Information Systems, Vol.16, No.2, pp.108.
    連結：
23. 參考文獻
24. 一、中文部分
25. 1. 余伍洋、楊寬弘、陳明招，1994，聽覺誘發波在精神生理學之臨床意義。
26. 2. 洪蘭，大腦的秘密檔案，2006，台北市：台灣東華。
27. 3. 高木繁治，大腦構造地圖，2011，台北市：三悅出版。
28. 6. 魏景漢 ，1995，事件相關電位（ ERP）研究發展，復旦神經生物學講座，第六期：127~134頁。
29. 二、英文部分
30. 2.Celesia, G. G., & Brigell, M., 1992, “Event-related potentials,” Current Opinion in Neurology, Vol.5, No.5, pp.733-739.
31. 3.Chen, J., Hung, T., Lin, J., Lo, L., Kao, J., Hung, C., Chen, Y., and Lai, Z., , 2005, “Effects of anxiety on EEG coherence during dart throw,” The 2005 World Congress of the International Society for Sport Psychology.
32. 12.Gazzaniga, M. S., Ivry, R. B. & Mangun, G. R., 2002, “Cognitive Neuroscience: The biology of the mind (2nd ed.),” New York: W.W.Norton.
33. 13.Himmelfarb, S., 1993, “The measurement of attitudes,” The psychology of attitudes, pp.23-87.