論文:東北角海岸攀岩冒險遊憩活動之研究

[chao]

http://192.192.58.195/cgi-bin/theabs...098&t=136&o=v1



第 筆
第 1 筆
國家圖書館索書號: 系統編號: 91CYUT5675026
　　　　　出版年: 民2003/08/18
　　　　　研究生: 朱笠瑄 Li-Hsien Chu
(以研究生姓名查詢國家圖書館索書號 ，未查獲者表國圖尚未典藏)
(以研究生姓名查詢國科會科資中心微片資料庫)
(連結至全國圖書聯合目錄)　 (連結至政大圖書館館藏目錄)
　　　　電子全文: 電子全文下載
　　　　論文名稱: 東北角海岸攀岩冒險遊憩活動之研究
　　　　論文名稱: The Research of the Adventure Recreation on Rock Climbing
at the Northeastern Coast
　　　　指導教授: 王正平 Cheng-Ping Wang
　　　　學位類別: 碩士
　　　　校院名稱: 朝陽科技大學
　　　　系所名稱: 休閒事業管理系碩士班
　　　　　學年度: 91
　　　　　語文別: 中文
　　　　論文頁數: 84
　　　　　關鍵字: 冒險遊憩活動 rock climbing
攀岩活動 enduring involvement
持久涉入 adventure recreation
[摘要]


　本研究引用Ewert & Hollenhorst（1989）之冒險模型和Schuett（1991）與McIntyre（
1992）所提及持久涉入程度，以攀岩活動為例驗證冒險模型。研究目的為探討冒險遊憩參
與者之涉入程度，以驗證冒險模型的適用性，並探討攀岩者持久涉入程度分別與個人屬性
及活動/環境屬性的關係。
　本研究調查方法採直接訪談法進行問卷調查，並定義母體為所有至龍洞岩場從事攀岩者
，共計回收269份有效問卷。調查問卷包括基本資料、技術/經驗層次、參與頻率、攀岩動
機、共同前往攀岩的對象、活動的持久涉入程度、環境偏好、風險認知與控制定位等項目
。
　本研究分析結果顯示，隨著攀岩者對攀岩活動的涉入程度增加，參與頻率增加、經驗/技
術層次提高、控制定位由外控轉換成內控；攀岩動機方面，涉入程度深之攀岩者相較於涉
入程度淺者，在挑戰、冒險等內在動機相對較強，在運動健身、欣賞風景等外在動機相對
較弱；風險認知方面，涉入程度深者，在肢體風險與設備風險認知增高，在財務風險、滿
意度風險、心理風險與時間風險等認知降低，涉入程度淺者，在肢體風險與設備風險認知
降低，在財務風險、滿意度風險、心理風險與時間風險等認知增高；社會特性方面，涉入
程度深之攀岩者相較於涉入程度淺者，經常與同好前往攀岩的頻率相對較高，與教練或攀
岩課程同學前往攀岩的頻率相對較低；環境偏好方面，涉入程度深之攀岩者相較於涉入程
度淺者，對於自然且具挑戰性的岩場偏好程度相對較高，對於有方便人工設施的岩場偏好
程度相對較低。在了解不同攀岩者心理行為後，提供管理單位有效的經營管理策略與行銷
策略，讓參與者獲得有品質的遊憩體驗。


[摘要]


　In this study, level of the enduring involvement (Schuett, 1991；McIntyre,
1992) of rock climbing participants was used to test the Adventure Model (
Ewert and Hollenhorst, 1989). The purpose of this study to explore (1) the
underlying factors personal rock climbing involvement and (2) the relationship
among rock climbing involvement and the individual attribute, the activity/
setting attribute.
　The method used to conduct this study was by the mean of using questionnaires
submitted by the rock-climbing participants that visited the Lone Dome, a
total of 269 questionnaires were collected. The questionnaire is included
sociodemographic, skill level, experience, frequency of participation, the
motivations for rock climbing, social orientation, level of the enduring
involvement of the participant in rock climbing, perception of risk,
environmental preference, and louse of control.
　The finding of this study showed that as enduring involvement increased,
skill level/experience/frequency of participation increased, the louse of
control shifted from external to internal, physical/functional risk increased,
financial/satisfaction/psychological/time risk decreased, go rock climbing
with teacher/mentor/people in classes less frequency than with peers of
similar interest, the challenge/take a risk (intrinsic motivations) more
strongly than the physical setting (external motivations), prefers more
natural and challenge environment than human development environment. These
characteristics and behaviors are then matched with certain recreation setting
attributes that managers can manipulate in order to create high quality
opportunities for the users.


[論文目次]


　目　 錄
　第一章緒論
　第一節研究背景與動機……………………………………………1
　第二節研究目的……………………………………………………5
　第二章文獻回顧
　第一節冒險遊憩之定義……………………………………………6
　第二節冒險模型……………………………………………………7
　第三節持久涉入的定義……………………………………………11
　第四節影響冒險遊憩持久涉入之個人屬性………………………15
　第五節影響冒險遊憩持久涉入之活動/環境屬性………………20
　第三章研究方法
　第一節研究架構與研究假設………………………………………25
　第二節研究範圍……………………………………………………28
　第三節研究變數與問卷設計………………………………………32
　第四節資料分析方法………………………………………………38
　第四章研究結果與討論
　第一節攀岩者社經背景分析………………………………………39
　第二節攀岩者遊憩特性分析………………………………………42
　第三節攀岩者之持久涉入程度分析………………………………52
　第四節個人屬性與持久涉入相關性分析…………………………55
　第五節活動/環境屬性與持久涉入相關性分析……………………61
　第五章結論與分析
　第一節研究結論……………………………………………………68
　第二節研究建議……………………………………………………73
　參考文獻…………………………………………………………………77
　附錄一……………………………………………………………………83


　圖　 目　 錄
　圖2-2-1　概念性冒險模型………………………………………………9
　圖2-3-1　持久涉入描述性模型…………………………………………12
　圖2-3-2　激流泛舟之冒險模型…………………………………………14
　圖3-1-1　研究架構圖……………………………………………………26
　圖3-2-1　研究基地位置圖………………………………………………29
　圖3-2-2　龍洞岩場區域圖………………………………………………30
　圖3-2-3　龍洞岩場現況圖………………………………………………31


　表　 目　 錄
　表1-1-1　冒險旅遊體系表………………………………………………3
　表2-4-1　攀岩等級說明表………………………………………………16
　表2-4-2　動機構面相關研究表…………………………………………19
　表2-5-1　各種類型之風險說明表………………………………………22
　表4-1-1　受訪者基本資料次數分配表………………..………………41
　表4-2-1　受訪者過去一年參與戶外攀岩活動次數分配表……………43
　表4-2-2　受訪者參與攀岩活動年數分配表……………………………44
　表4-2-3　受訪者的攀岩技術等級分析表………………………………45
　表4-2-4　受訪者的攀岩動機重視度分析表……………………………47
　表4-2-5　受訪者之控制定位分析表……………………………………48
　表4-2-6　社會特性同意程度分析表……………………………………49
　表4-2-7　環境偏好同意程度分析表……………………………………50
　表4-2-8　風險認知同意程度分析表……………………………………51
　表4-3-1　受訪者對攀岩活動之持久涉入程度分析表…………………53
　表4-3-2　不同持久涉入程度分組表……………………………………54
　表4-4-1　持久涉入構面與個人屬性相關分析表………………………56
　表4-4-2　持久涉入構面與攀岩動機相關分析表………………………57
　表4-4-3　受訪者攀岩動機因素結構表…………………………………59
　表4-4-4　不同持久涉入程度之動機問項排序表………………………60
　表4-5-1　持久涉入構面與風險認知構面相關分析表…………………62
　表4-5-2　持久涉入構面與社會特性構面相關分析表…………………63
　表4-5-3　不同持久涉入程度之社會特性問項排序表…………………64
　表4-5-4　持久涉入構面與環境偏好構面相關分析表…………………65
　表4-5-5　不同持久涉入程度之環境偏好問項排序表…………………66
　表5-1-1　各冒險遊憩活動研究之實證結果差異表……………………72


[參考文獻]


　一、中文部分
　1.方怡堯（2002），「遊憩涉入與遊憩體驗關係之研究－以溫泉遊客為例」，第四屆休
閒遊憩觀光學術研討會—觀光發展與觀光衝擊篇，台北，第105-116頁。
　2.交通部觀光局（1997），「台灣潛在生態觀光及冒險旅遊產品研究與調查」，中華民
國戶外遊憩學會，台北，第169-174頁。
　3.朴來慶、呂金霙（1998），前往龍洞岩場，鍾郡出版社，台北。
　4.李素馨（1994），「典型相關分析—專業程度、遊憩動機和基地屬性認知關係之探討
」，戶外遊憩研究，第七卷，第三期，第39-62頁。
　5.李玉麟（1998），「攀岩技術報告書」，碩士論文，國立體育學院教練研究所。
　6.李克凡（2002），「人工岩場參與者安全規範之研究」，碩士論文，國立體育學院體
育管理學系。
　7.李美樺、歐聖榮（2002），「飛行傘參與者之特質與環境屬性偏好之探討」，第四屆
休閒遊憩觀光學術研討會—休閒理論與遊憩行為篇，台北，第263-270頁。
　8.林晏州、劉毓妮（1993），「遊客對激流泛舟環境屬性之偏好」，戶外遊憩研究，第
六卷，第三期，第53-75頁。
　9.東北角海岸國家風景區管理處http://www.necoast-nsa.gov.tw
　10.陳明川、歐聖榮（2002），「風浪板活動參與者之體驗與環境屬性偏好之研究」，第
四屆休閒遊憩觀光學術研討會—休閒理論與遊憩行為篇，台北，第271-279頁。
　11.陳玠穎、歐聖榮（2002），「攀岩者之遊憩動機與環境屬性偏好關係之研究」，第四
屆休閒遊憩觀光學術研討會—觀光發展與觀光衝擊篇，台北，第159-171頁。
　二、英文部分
　1.Barnard, J. (1968 ), The Eduaemonists. In S.Z. Klausner (Ed.) why man takes
chances: Studies in stree-seeking. Garden City: Doubleday Anchor.
　2.Bryan, H. (1977), “Leisure value system and recreational specialization:
the case of trout fishermen,” Journal of Leisure Research, Vol. 9, pp. 174-
187.
　3.Bryan, H. (1979), “Conflict in the great outdoors,” Bureau of Public
Administration, Sociological Studies, No. 4, University of Alabama, Birmingham.
　4.Bloch, P., & Bruce, G. (1984), “The leisure experience and consumer
products: An investigation of under ying satisfactions,” Journal of Leisure
Research, Vol. 16, pp. 74-88.
　5.Cheron, E., & Ritchie, J. (1982), “The organization of leisure in human
society,” Journal of Leisure Research, Vol. 14, No.1, pp. 139-154.
　6.Ewert, A. (1985), “Why people climb: The relationship of participant
motives and experience level to mountaineering,” Journal of Leisure Research,
Vol. 17, No. 3, pp. 241-250.
　7.Ewert, A., & Boon, T. (1987), “Risk management: Defusing the dragon,”
Journal of Experiential Education, Vol. 10, No. 3, pp. 28-36.
　8.Ewert, A. (1987), “Risk recreation poses a new management problems,”
Park Science, Vol. 8, No. 1, pp. 7-8.
　9.Ewert, A. (1988 ), “Reduction of trait anxiety through participation in
Outward Bound,” Leisure Sciences, Vol. 10, No. 2, pp. 107-117.
　10.Ewert, A. & Hollenhorst, S. (1989), “Testing the adventure model:
empirical support for a model of risk recreation participation,” Journal of
Leisure Research, Vol. 21, No. 2, pp. 124-139.
　11.Ewert, A. (1990), “On the edge: the role of risk recreation in our
society,” Paper presented at the Outdoor Recreation Trends Symposium Ⅲ,
Indianapolis, IN.
　12.Ewert, A. (1994), “Playing the edge: Motivational and risk-taking in a
high altitude wilderness-like environment,” Environment and Behavior. Vol.
26, No. 1, pp. 3-24.
　13.Ewert, A., & Hollenhorst, S. (1994), “Individual and setting attributes
of the adventure recreation experience,” Leisure Sciences, Vol. 16, pp. 17 7-
191.
　14.Ewert, A., & Galloway, S. (2001), “Adventure recreation: what’s new for
resource managers, public policy analysis, and recreation providers,” Parks &
Recreation, Vol. 36, No. 2, pp. 26-34.
　15.Elsrud, T. (2001), “Risk creation in traveling,” Annals of Tourism
Research, Vol. 28, No. 3, pp. 597-617.
　16.Feher, P., Meyers, M.C. & Skelly, W. A. (1998 ), “Psychological profile
of climbers: state and trait attributes,” Journal of Sport Behavior, Vol. 21,
No. 2, pp. 167-180.
　17.Huper, N., & Gardner, D. (1971), “Differential involvement with product
and issues: An exploratory study,” Proceedings, 2nd. Annual Conference of the
Association of Consumer Research, pp. 262-269.
　18.Hollenhost, S. (1987), “The relationship between recreation
specialization and characteristics, behaviors, and preferences of selected
rockclimbing,” Dissertation Abstracts International, Vol. 49.
　19.Havitz, M., & Dimanche, F. (1990), “Propositions of testing the
involvement construct in recreational and tourism contexts,” Leisure
Sciences, Vol. 12, pp. 179-195.
　20.Knopp, T., Ballman, G., & Merriarn, L. (1979), “Toward a more direct
measure of river user preferences,” Journal of Leisure Research, Vol. 14, No.
1, pp.317-326.
　21.Kapferer, J., & Laurent, G. (1985), “Consumers\' involvement profile: New
empirical results,” Advances in Consumer Research, Vol. 12, pp. 290-295.
　22.Levitt, E. (1980), “The psychology of anxiety,” Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence
Erlbaum.
　23.Lefcourt, H. M. (1982), “Locus of control: current trends in theory and
research (2nd ed.),” Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
　24.Manfredo, M., Driver, B., & Brown, P. (1983), “A test of concepts
inherent in experience based setting management for outdoor recreation areas,
” Journal of Leisure Research, Vol. 15, No. 3, pp. 263-283.
　25.Mitchell, G.M. (1983), Mountain experience: The psychology and sociology
of adventure. Chicago University of Chicago Press.
　26.McIntyre. N. (1989), “The personal meaning of participation: Enduring
involvement,” Journal of Leisure Research, Vol. 21, No. 2, pp. 167-179.
　27.Moser, S. (1991), “A tenuous hold,” Outside Business, pp. 26-29.
　28.McIntyre, N. (1992), “Involvement in risk recreation: A comparison of
objective and subjective measures of engagement,” Journal of Leisure
Research, Vol. 24, No. 1, pp. 64-71.
　29.McIntyre, N. and Pigram, J. (1992), “Recreation specialization
reexamined: The case of vehicle-based campers,” Leisure Sciences, Vol. 14,
pp. 3-15.
　30.Priest, S., & Baillie, R. (1987), “Justifying the risk to others: The
real razor’s edge,” Journal of Experiential Education, Vol. 10, No. 1, pp.
16-22.
　31.Priest, S. (1992), “Factor exploration and confirmation for the
dimensions of an adventure experience,” Journal of Leisure Research, Vol. 24,
No. 2, pp. 127-139.
　32.Rotter, J. B. (1966), “Generalized expectancies for internal versus
external control of reinforcement,” Psychological Monographs, Vol. 80, No. 1,
pp. 1-28.
　33.Robinson, D. (1992), “A descriptive model of enduring risk recreation
involvement,” Journal of Leisure Research, Vol. 24, No. 1, pp. 52-63.
　34.Schreyer, R., & Lime, D. (1984), “A novice isn’t necessarily a novice-
The influence of experience use history on subjective perceptions of
recreation participation,” Leisure Sciences, Vol. 6, No.2, pp. 131-149.
　35.Schreyer R., Lime, D., & Williams, D. (1984), “Characterizing the
influence of past experiences on recreation behavior,” Journal of Leisure
Research, Vol. 16, No. 1, pp. 34-55.
　36.Schuett, M. (1991), “Testing the adventure model for outdoor adventure
recreation participation,” Ph. D. Dissertation, University of Illinois at
Urbana- Champaign.
　37.Schuett, M. (1993), “Refining measure of adventure recreation involvement
,” Leisure Sciences, Vol. 15, pp. 205-216.
　38.Schuster, R., Thompson, J., & Hammitt, W. (2001), “Rock climbers’
attitudes toward management of climbing and the use of bolts,” Environmental
Management, Vol. 28, pp. 403-412.
　39.Tyebjee, T. (1979), “ Respones time, conflict, and involvement in brand
choice,” Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 6, pp. 295-304.
　40.Virden, R. (1986), “The effects of recreation specialization and
motivations on the environmental setting preferences of backcountry hikers,”
Dissertation Abstracts International, Vol. 47.
　41.Wellman, J., Roggenbuck, J., & Smith, A. (1982), “Recreation
specialization and norms of depreciative behavior among canoeists,” Journal
of\' Leisure Research, Vol. 14, pp. 323-340.
　42.Williams, D., Schreyer, R. & Knopf, R. (1990), “The effect of the
experience use history on the multidimensional structure of motivation to
participate in leisure activities,” Journal of Leisure Research, Vol. 22, No.
1, pp.36-54.
　43.Walle, A.H. (1997), “Pursuing risk or insight: marketing adventures,”
Annals of Tourism Research, Vol. 24, No. 2, pp.265-282.
　44.Weber, K. (2001), “Outdoor adventure tourism: A review of research
approaches,” Annals of Tourism Research, Vol. 28, No. 2, pp. 360-377.
　45.Zaichkowsky, J. L. (1985), “Measureing the involvement construct,”
Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 12, pp. 341-352.
[機讀格式] 輸出 ISO2709 機讀編目格式


預覽及儲存檢索結果

標 示 欄 位
本頁 1 筆
記錄 1 至 10
部份選擇 書目
全部欄位
部份欄位

e-mail 地址 :
標題 :






------------
您是本系統自1997年09月01日以來之第位貴賓
國家圖書館著作權聲明 Copyright@1997-2003 National Central Library
如果您有任何問題或意見歡迎與我們連絡：datas@ncl.edu.tw
指導單位：教育部高等教育司
系統規劃：國家圖書館 系統製作：飛資得資訊


-------

When I have a little time, I climb;
and if any is left, I eat and sleep.

「攀岩星球」上只住著兩種人，一種是在攀岩的人；
另一種是爬累了正在休息的人。


[ 這篇文章修改由: chao 在 2003-12-08 20:57 ]

[penguin66]

填過她的問卷..很希望下次能有個更瞭解攀岩活動的人來進行這樣的研究 [img]images/forum/smilies/[/img]

[dolphin]

子凱，謝謝! [img]images/forum/smilies/icon_smile.gif[/img]