第五章 結論與建議
5.2 建議
本研究試圖利用個體內心潛在變量之連結，瞭解小客車使用者面對油價最終的行為 反應如何受其影響，其中利用Rasch Model有效量測潛在變量，最終卻未能有效解釋相 互間的關係以實證之，因此，提出以下建議，供後續研究者參考。
1. 本研究礙於時間、人力與成本等限制，持續長達兩個月的調查，僅能回收315份問 卷，經篩選後有效問卷為286份，於實證分析上稍嫌過少；又因問卷回收緩慢，擠 壓研究分析之時間限制，使分析結果未臻完善。因此建議後續相關研究可提早進行 調查，提供誘因增加填達率與有效問卷數，以提高研究之代表性。
2. 問卷依研究架構需要設計，其中除調查內容過多，造成受測者填答時間太過冗長而 意願偏低以外，因應油價之運輸行為改變傾向試題，以單向度原則設計，僅能提供 整體傾向之資訊，不易深入瞭解各種替代運具之個別量化傾向程度。因此建議後續 研究能就替代運具設計多向度問卷，俾利分析能夠更為詳盡。
3. 調查內心潛在特質之問項應經過更多次的測試與修正，以確認整份問卷之量測精準 度與穩定性，本研究之問卷雖前後經過數次試訪與修正，仍有部份試題使受訪者誤 解或效度偏低。因此，建議相關研究引用或設計類似問卷應不斷地經過試測與修 正，盡所能將偏誤減至最低。
4. 探究油價影響運輸行為的相關研究，在具備充足的研究時間與資源前提下，進行長 期追蹤調查個體之實際運輸行為改變情形，應為此種實證性研究之最佳調查方法。
5. 本研究嘗試提出以汽車依賴度解釋因應油價之運輸行為改變傾向，惟是否仍有其他 潛在變量更能夠加強解釋運輸行為改變傾向，值得相關後續研究考慮如環保意識等 相關變量的探討，以期能更有效地解釋模型。
55
參考文獻
1. United States Government Accountability Office, Uncertainty about Future Oil Supply Makes It Important to Develop a Strategy for Addressing a Peak and Decline in Oil Production
http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d07283.pdf
2. 彼得．特札基安(Peter Tertzakian)，每秒千桶：看準下一波能源大勢與世紀商機，美 商麥格羅‧希爾，台北市，2006。
3. 2006 臺灣能源統計手冊EnergyStatisticalDataBook
http://www.moeaec.gov.tw/opengovinfo/Plan/all/files/EnergyStatisticalDataBook.pdf 4. 陳亭羽，「運具選擇之能力集合分析及其在大眾捷運之應用」，國立交通大學，碩士
論文，民國八十二年。
5. 蕭傑諭，「以習慣觀點探討旅運者運具選擇行為之研究」，國立交通大學，碩士論文，
民國八十五年。
6. 鄭永祥，「機車使用者轉乘大眾捷運系統個體選擇行為之研究」，國立交通大學，碩 士論文，民國八十三年。
7. 張則斌，「台鐵實施車種簡化後之旅客轉乘行為研究」，國立交通大學，碩士論文，
民國九十年。
8. Oxford Advanced Learner’s Dictionary
http://www.oup.com/elt/catalogue/teachersites/oald7/?cc=global
9. Koppelman, F.S., “Non-linear Utility Functions in Models of Travel Choice Behavior”, Transportation, Volume 10, Issue 2, pp.127-146, 1981.
10. Gray, D., et al., “Car Dependence in Rural Scotland: Transport Policy, Evolution and the Impact of the Fuel Duty Escalator”, Journal of Rural Studies, Volume 17, pp.113-125, 2001.
11. Abe, M.A., Sinha, K.C., “Pricing in mass transportation”, Transportation Engineering Journal, Volume 99, Issue 1, pp.83–91, 1973.
12. Fujii, S., Garling, T., “Application of Attitude Theory for Improved Predictive Accuracy of Stated Preference Methods in Travel Demand Analysis”, Transportation Research Part
A: Policy and Practice, Volume 37, Issue 4, pp.389-402, May 2003.
13. Johansson, M.V., et al., “The Effects of Attitudes and Personality Traits on Mode Choice”, Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Volume 40, Issue 6, pp.507-525, July 2006.
14. Bamberg, S., et al., “Does Habitual Car Use Not Lead to More Resistance to Change of Travel Mode?”, Transportation, Volume 30, Issue 1, pp.97-108, 2003.
15. Thogersen, J., “Understanding Repetitive Travel Mode Choices in a Stable Context: A Panel Study approach” Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Volume 40, Issue 8, pp.621-638, October 2006.
16. Betsch, T., et al., “Behavioral Routines in Decision Making: the Effects of Novelty in Task Presentation and Time Pressure on Routine Maintenance and Deviation”, European Journal of Social Psychology, Volume 28, Issue 6, pp.861-878, 1998.
17. Chen, C., et al., “Activity Rescheduling: Reasoned or Habitual?”, Transportation Research Part F, Volume 7, Issue 6, pp.351-371, 2004.
18. Wu, S.C., “Measuring the Latent Traits of Travelers: Exploring the Vehicle Dependence and Evaluating the Perceived Physical Abilities of the Elderly Bus Passengers’’, National Chiao Tung University, Unpublished doctoral dissertation, January 2008.
19. Dupuy, G.., “From the ‘magic circle’ to ‘automobile dependence’: measurements and political implications”, Transport Policy, Volume 6, Issue 1, pp.1–17, 1999.
20. Goodwin, P., “Car dependence”, Transport Policy, Volume 99, pp.151–152, 1995.
21. Kitamura, R., “An evaluation of activity-based travel analysis”, Transportation, Volume 15, Issue 1-2, pp.9–34, 1988.
22. Pas, E.I., “Recent advances in activity-based travel demand modeling”, Proceedings of Activity-Based Travel Forecasting Conference, USDOT, 1996.
23. Chang, H.L., Wu, S.C., “Exploring the vehicle dependence behind mode choice:
Evidence of motorcycle dependence in Taipei”, Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Volume 42, Issue 2, pp.307–320, February 2008.
24. Neo-Traditional Neighborhood Design
http://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/ped_bike/univcourse/swless06.htm
25. Asad, J.K., Daniel, R., “Travel behavior in neo-traditional neighborhood developments:
A case study in USA”, Transportation Research Part A, Volume 39, pp.481–500, 2005.
26. Handy, S., el at., “Correlation or causality between the built environment and travel
57
behavior? Evidence from Northern California”, Transportation Research Part D, Volume 10, Issue 6, pp.427–444, November 2005.
27. Gärling, T., Schuitema, G., “Travel Demand Management Targeting Reduced Private Car Use: Effectiveness, Public Acceptability and Political Feasibility”, Journal of Social Issues, Volume 63, Issue 1, pp. 139–153, 2007.
28. Geoff, R., Heidi, M., “Travel behaviour change impacts of a major ride to work day event”, Transportation Research Part A, Volume 41, pp.351–364, 2007.
29. Anable, J., “‘Complacent Car Addicts’ or ‘Aspiring Environmentalists’? Identifying travel behaviour segments using attitude theory”, Transport Policy, Volume 12, Issue 1, pp.65-78, January 2005.
30. Hagman, O., “Mobilizing meanings of mobility: car users’ constructions of the goods and bads of car use” Transportation Research Part D, Volume 8, Issue 1, pp.1–9, 2003.
31. Jensen, M., “Passion and heart in transport—a sociological analysis on transport behaviour”, Transport Policy, Volume 6, Issue1, pp.19–33. 1999.
32. Gabriela, B., J, A.S.C., “Understanding attitudes towards public transport and private car:
A qualitative study”, Transport Policy , Volume 14, pp.478–489, 2007.
33. Maria, N., Rikard, K., “Travel behaviour and environmental concern”, Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment, Volume 5, Issue 3, pp.11–234, May 2000.
34. Steg, L., “Car use: lust and must. Instrumental, symbolic and affective motives for car use”, Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Volume 39, Issue 2–3, pp.147–162, 2005.
35. Lord, F.M., “The relation of test score to the trait underlying the test”, Educational and Psychological Measurement, Volume 13, pp.517-548, 1953.
36. Birnbaum, A., “Efficient design and use of tests of a mental ability for various decision-making problems” (Series Report 58-16, No. 71-55-23). USAF School of Aviation Medicine. Randolph Air Force Base, Texas.
37. Load, F.M., Application of item response theory to practical testing problems, Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
38. Hambleton, R.K., Swaminathan, H., Item response theory: Principles and applications, Boston, MA: Kluwer-Nijhoff, 1985.
39. Hambleton, R.K., et al., Fundamentals of item response theory, Newburry Park, CA:
SAGE, 1991.
40. Rasch, G., Probabilistic Models for Some Intelligence and Attainment Tests, Copenhagen, Danish Institute for Educational Research, 1960.
41. Linacre, J.M., “Investigating rating scale category utility”, Journal of Outcome Measurement, Volume 3, pp.103–122, 1999.
42. Andrich, D., “A Rating Formulation for Ordered Response Categories”, Psychometrika, Volume 43, Issue 4, pp.561–573, 1978.
43. Hulin, C.L., el at., Item response theory: Application to psychological measurement, Homewood, IL: Dow Jones-Irwin, 1983.
44. Lumsden, J., “The construction of unidimensional tests”, Psychological Bulletin, Volume 58, pp.122–131, 1961.
45. Reckase, M.D., “Unifactor latent trait models applied to multifactor tests: Results and implications”, Journal of Educational Statistics, Volume 4, pp.207–230, 1979.
46. Smith, R.M., Miao, C.Y., “Assessing Unidimensionality for Rasch Measurement”, Object Measurement Theory into Practice, Chapter18, Greenwood Publishing Group.
47. Hattie, J., “Methodology review: Assessing unidimensionality of tests and items”, Applied Psychological Measurement, Volume 9, pp.139–164, 1985.
48. 許擇基，劉長萱，試題作答理論，台北，中國行為科學社，民國八十一年。
49. Wright, B.D., Master, G.N., Rating Scale Analysis, Chicago: MESA Press, 1982.
50. Wright, B.D., “Solving measurement problems with the Rasch Model”, Journal of Educational Measurement, Volume 14, pp.97–116, 1977.
51. 王文中，「測驗的建構：因素分析還是Rasch分析？」，調查研究，第 3 期，129–166 頁，民國八十六年。
52. Lunz, M.E., et al., “Interjudge Reliability and Decision Reproducibility”, Educational and Psychological Measurement, Volume 54, Issue 4, pp.913–925, 1994.
53. Wright, B. D., “Comparing Rasch measurement and factor analysis”, Structural Equation Modeling, Volume 3, pp.3–24, 1996.
54. Smith, R. M., et al., “Using item mean squares to evaluate fit to the Rasch model”, Journal of Outcome Measurement, Volume 2, pp.66–78, 1998.
55. 王濟川、郭志剛，Logisyic 迴歸模型-方法及應用，台北市，五南，民國九十三年。
56. Feinberg, S., The analysis of cross-classified categorical data(2nd ed.), Cambridge, MA:
MIT Press, 1985.
57. DeMaris, A. Logit Modeling: Practical Applications. Newbury Park, CA: Sage
59
Publications, 1992.
58. Liao, T. F., Interpreting probability models logit, probit, and other generalized linear models, Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, 1994.
59. Jelinek, F., Probabilistic Information Theory, McGraw-Hill, New York, 1968.GAO, 2007 60. Sharples JM and Fletcher JP., Pedestrian Perceptions of Road Crossing Facilities,
Transport Research Laboratory , Scottish Executive, 2001.
61. Räsänen, M., et al., “Pedestrian self-reports of factors influencing the use of pedestrian bridges”, Accident Analysis and Prevention, Volume 39, Issue 5, pp. 969-973, September 2007.
62. Verplanken B., Orbell S., “Reflections on Past Behavior: A Self-Report Index of Habit Strength”, Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 33, 6, pp.1313-1330(18), 1 June 2003.
63. Ajzen, I., “Residual effects of past on later behaviour: Habituation and reasoned action perspectives”, Personality and Social Psychology Review, 6(2), 107–122, 2002.
64. Ronis, D.L., et al., “Attitudes, decisions, and habits as determinants of repeated behaviour”, In A. R. Pratkanis, S. J. Breckler, A.G. Greenwald (Eds.), Attitude structure and function (pp. 213–239), Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum, 1989.
65. Peter, T., A Thousand Barrels a Second: The Coming Oil Break Point and the Challenges Facing an Energy Dependent World, McGraw-Hill, NEW YORK, 2007.
66. Beira˜ o, G., Cabral, J.A.S., “Understanding attitudes towards public transport and private car: A qualitative study”, Transport Policy, 14, pp. 478–489, June 2007.
67. Steg, L., “Car use: lust and must. Instrumental, symbolic and affective motives for car use”, Transportation Research Part A, 39, pp. 147–162, 2005.
68. Steg, L., et al., ”Instrumental-reasoned and symbolic-affective motives for using a motor car”, Transportation Research Part F, Volume 4, Issue 3, pp.151-169, September 2001.
69. Choocharukul, K., et al., ” Psychological Determinants of Moral Obligation of Car Use Reduction and Acceptance of Car Use Restriction in Japan and Thailand”, IATSS RESEARCH, Vol.30 No.2, pp.70–76, 2006.
70. Choocharukul, K., et al., “Psychological effects of travel behavior on preference of residential location choice”, Transportation Research Part A, Volume 42, Issue 1, pp.116-124, January 2008.
71. Fujii, S., “Communication with non-drivers for promoting long-term pro-environmental travel behaviour”, Transportation Research Part D, Volume 12, Issue 2, pp.99-102,
March 2007.
72. Albert, G.., Mahalel, D., “Congestion tolls and parking fees: A comparison of the potential effect on travel behavior”, Transport Policy, Volume 13, Issue 6, pp.496-502, November 2006.
73. Fujii, S., Taniguchi, A., “Determinants of the effectiveness of travel feedback programs—a review of communicative mobility management measures for changing travel behaviour in Japan”, Transport Policy, Volume 13, Issue 5, pp.339-348, September 2006.
74. Mokhtarian, P.L., Cao, X., ”Examining the impacts of residential self-selection on travel behavior: A focus on methodologies”, Transportation Research Part B, Available online 17 September 2007.
75. Scheiner, J., “Housing mobility and travel behaviour: A process-oriented approach to spatial mobility: Evidence from a new research field in Germany”, Journal of Transport Geography, Volume 14, Issue 4, pp.287-298, July 2006.
76. Donegan, K.S., et al., “Indexing the contribution of household travel behaviour to sustainability”, Journal of Transport Geography, Volume 15, Issue 4, pp.245-261, July 2007.
77. Kwan, M.P., et al., “The interaction between ICT and human activity-travel behavior”, Transportation Research Part A, Volume 41, Issue 2, pp.121-124, February 2007.
78. Khattak, A.J., Rodriguez, D. “Travel behavior in neo-traditional neighborhood developments: A case study in USA”, Transportation Research Part A, Volume 39, Issue 6, pp.481-500, July 2005.
79. Srinivasan, S., Rogers, P., “Travel behavior of low-income residents: studying two contrasting locations in the city of Chennai, India”, Journal of Transport Geography, Volume 13, Issue 3, pp. 265-274, September 2005.
80. Nilsson, M., Küller, R., “Travel behaviour and environmental concern”, Transportation Research Part D, Volume 5, Issue 3, pp. 211-234, May 2000.
81. Rose, G., Marfurt, H., “Travel behaviour change impacts of a major ride to work day event”, Transportation Research Part A, Volume 41, Issue 4, pp.351-364, May 2007.
82. Axhausen, K.W., Bhat, C. “Travel behaviour research and connection choice”, Transportation Research Part A, Volume 39, Issue 4, pp.277-278, May 2005.
83. Taylor, M.A.P., Ampt, R.S., “Travelling smarter down under: policies for voluntary travel
61
behaviour change in Australia”, Transport Policy, Volume 10, Issue 3, pp.165-177, July 2003.
84. Rastogi, R., Rao, K.V.K., “Defining transit accessibility with environmental inputs”, Transportation Research Part D, Volume 8, Issue 5, pp.383-396, September 2003.
85. Ma kiewicz, A., Ratajczak, W., ”Towards a new definition of topological accessibility”, Transportation Research Part B, Volume 30, Issue 1, pp.47-79, February 1996.
附錄一、研究問卷
第二部份：以下運具之選擇方案，請依您的個人狀況與感受回答。 非常
第四部份：這一年來汽油價格上漲，是否已經造成您的運輸行為改變，請依您的情形回
簡 歷
姓 名：陳政瑋 籍 貫：台中縣
出生日期：民國72 年 10 月 01 日
聯絡地址：台中縣大雅鄉學府路250 巷 44 號 聯絡電話：（04）25667378
E – mail ：nctu2.9532526@nctu.edu.tw 學 歷：
民國97 年 06 月 國立交通大學運輸科技與管理學系碩士班畢業 民國95 年 06 月 國立高雄大學應用經濟學系畢業
民國91 年 06 月 國立文華高級中學畢業 民國88 年 06 月 台中市立居仁國民中學畢業 民國85 年 06 月 台中縣立大雅國民小學畢業