第六章 結論與建議
6.4 後續研究建議
國
立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
另一方面，將無障礙設計納入教育課程，培養更多具無障礙網站建置能力 的人才，以降低建置成本，帶動私部門網站無障礙化的效果與意願。透過學習 瞭解網站無障礙化的用意和精神，他們不僅具備無障礙設計能力，更可能成為 無障礙精神深化的重要推手。無障礙網路空間的落實，需要政府、企業和民間 社團跨部門整合，政府必須扮演驅動者和協調者的角色，倡導企業和民間社團 共同參與，讓身心障礙者獲得完整的電子化服務。
重視身心障礙者權益，深化無障礙精神，打造完善的無障礙生活環境，讓 身心障礙者公平正義地參與社會活動，不僅是社會全民之福，亦表示我國對身 心障礙者的照護，達到已開發國家水準之列。
6.4 後續研究建議
本研究最終目的為探究電子治理長期影響的重要變項，據以提出無障礙網 路空間計畫後續發展建議。在研究中，建立以使用者觀點為出發的評估模型，
並於無障礙網路空間計畫上獲得驗證，針對實際驗證結論提出以下建議，以供 後續研究者參考。
一、因果模型保留「資訊品質」與「行銷推廣」構面
雖然許多政府機構網站都有提供無障礙網路空間服務，但是私部門網站的 無障礙化，以及障礙者的使用行為仍未普及化，這個現象會間接反應在各種品 質構面。資訊系統成功模型中，品質構面會受到使用行為的影響，因為使用者 會依據使用經驗對品質評分，例如「您所使用的政府網站所提供的資料內容是 否詳細？」等問題，若沒有相關使用經驗，無法得知想找尋什麼資料，便不易 判斷相關品質的優劣。本研究中的政府網站使用經驗群組差異結果即為例證，
有政府網站使用經驗的使用者，明顯較無經驗的使用者，更重視資訊品質構面 對滿意度構面的關係。因此，雖然本研究的系統品質與資訊品質構面在因果模 型中，部分相關假設未獲得驗證，建議仍保留該衡量構面，未來在無障礙網路
‧ 國
立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
空間計畫使用普及化之際，相信對整體評估系統會有貢獻。
相對來說，使用不普及的現象同時間接反應在「行銷推廣」構面，僅有不 到一成的受訪者對政府「宣傳推廣」持正向意見，大部分的受訪者期望政府能 有更多宣導且瞭解需求面的問題，促成普及化的教育與使用。例如無政府網站 使用經驗的使用者，其滿意度更為依賴行銷推廣的影響，凸顯行銷推廣的重要 性。此衡量構面不僅可以直接表達宣傳的不足與否，亦可間接透露普及化的程 度（若確實達到使用普及化，推測該構面便不再與滿意度、效益和影響等反映 性構面具顯著相關）。
二、問卷設計列入「問題回饋」及「使用經驗」
為了對無障礙網路空間計畫提出具體改善建議，且能在不同的發展時期，
滿足不同類型的身心障礙使用者，其網站使用問題必定是複雜且可能彼此衝突，
如視障者必須靠輔助軟體才能閱讀網頁，聽障者在資訊理解上需要更多時間消 化，網站無障礙設計必須針對其問題有不同的反映，以提升使用者的效益。本 研究中，有超過八成的受訪者認為，政府應多瞭解身心障礙者的真正需求。因 此，建議在問卷中進行實際使用問題反映的測量，以確實得到需求面的意見反 饋，例如藉由先行訪談或發展初期的相關文獻歸納問題，將選項列入問卷中以 確實得到需求面的問題回饋意見，提升資料的實用性。
根據黃東益等（2009）提出的電子治理影響評估架構中，使用行為是評估 構面的一環，而實際操作上，參酌 Seddon (1997)對資訊系統成功模型修正建議，
認為使用行為不適合放在因果模型中，本研究中並無考慮此衡量變項。然而，
本研究與李洛維（2010）的看法類似，使用行為雖不包涵於因果模型中，仍可 做為重要的區隔變數，例如本研究中，近四成的受訪者完全沒有政府網站的使 用經驗，間接影響品質構面的評分，且政府網站使用經驗的群組分析，其模型 因果關係存在顯著差異。因此，建議問卷設計中，除了考量使用經驗，應列入 使用次數相關的衡量題項，以便針對經驗不同的使用者進行群組分析。在
‧ 國
立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
Sabherwal et al. (2006)的資訊系統成功模型中，使用者經驗即為重要構面之一。
三、擴大研究對象範圍，考量障礙類別特殊性
建立無障礙網路空間計畫成效評估因果模型是本研究的主要目的之一，檢 討計畫內容與目標是否滿足使用者的需求與期待。然而，由於無障礙網路空間 計畫的目標對象為身心障礙者，在特定感官有別於一般人的特異性，必須謹慎 考量調整模型的構面及設計相關的測量題目，例如在設計問卷之際，先對部分 使用者進行訪談，以便完成能取得有用資訊的測量題項。再者，無障礙網路空 間計畫的目標對象不限於視覺障礙者，針對不同障礙族群的使用者，問卷內容 亦需修改，以符合特定的身心障礙使用者族群，進而滿足資料之可用性。此外，
在模型的基本架構上，應針對不同障礙類別之特殊性進行調整，例如進行主成 分分析，將相關性差異大的測量題目分開至不同的衡量構面，或建立新的構面，
使單一構面的指標在信效度上具有一致性。
‧ 國
立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
‧
http://sowf.moi.gov.tw/stat/year/list.htm
行政院研究發展考核委員會（2003）。92 年度無障礙網路空間推動報告。台北
‧
‧
‧
黃東益、朱斌妤、蕭乃沂（2009）。電子治理成效指標與評估：G2C 與 G2B。
行政院研究發展考核委員會委託研究報告（編號：0972461343）。台北市，
行政院研究發展考核委員會。
‧
蕭乃沂、朱斌妤、黃東益（2010）。電子治理成效指標與評估：G2A 與 G2D。
行政院研究發展考核委員會委託研究報告（編號：0992460052）。台北市，
行政院研究發展考核委員會。
蕭乃沂、羅晉（2010）。電子化政府的價值鏈評估觀點：以數位台灣 e 化政府 計畫為例。公共行政學報，36，1-37。
Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and
Human Decision Processes, 50, 179-211.
American Customer Satisfaction Index. (2006). ACSI government model. Ann Arbor:
American Customer Satisfaction Index. Retrieved from:
http://www.theacsi.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=30&Ite mid=150
Australian Government Information Management Office. (2009). Australians' Use
of and Satisfaction with e-Government Services. Parkes: Australian
Government Information Management Office. Retrieved from:http://www.finance.gov.au/publications/use-of-e-government-services-2005/
Australian Human Rights Commission. (2010). World Wide Web access: Disability
Discrimination Act advisory notes. Sydney: Australian Human Rights
Commission. Retrived from:http://www.hreoc.gov.au/disability_rights/standards/www_3/www_3.html
Barnes, S. J., & Vidgen, R. (2000a). WebQual: An exploration of web-site quality.
Paper presented at the meeting of the Eighth European Conference on Information Systems, Vienna.
Barnes, S. J., & Vidgen, R. (2000b). Information and interaction quality: Evaluating
Internet bookshop web sites with WebQual. Paper presented at the meeting of
the Thirteenth Bled Electronic Commerce Conference, Slovenia.Barnes, S. J., & Vidgen, R. (2001a). Assessing the quality of auction web sites. Paper presented at the meeting of the Hawaii International Conference on Systems Sciences, Hawaii.
Barnes, S. J., & Vidgen, R. (2001b). Evaluating WAP news sites: the WebQual/M
approach. Paper presented at the meeting of the Ninth European Conference on
Information Systems, Slovenia.‧
e-commerce quality. Journal of Electronic Commerce Research, 3(3), 114-127.Barnes, S. J., & Vidgen, R. (2003a). Measuring web site quality improvements: A case study of the forum on strategic management knowledge exchange.
Industrial Management and Data Systems, 103(5), 297-309.
Barnes, S. J., & Vidgen, R. (2003b). Interactive e-government: Evaluating the web site of the UK inland revenue. Journal of Electronic Commerce in
Organizations, 2(1), 42-63.
Barnes, S. J., & Vidgen, R. (2005). Data triangulation in action: Using comment
analysis to refine web quality metrics. Paper presented at the meeting of the 13
th European Conference on Information Systems, Germany.Bauer, H. H., Falk, T., & Hammerschmidt, M. (2006). eTransQual: A transaction process-based approach for capturing service quality in online shopping.
Journal of Business Research, 59(7), 866-875.
Boyer, K. K., Hallowell, R., & Roth, A. V. (2002). E-services: Operating strategy - a case study and a method for analyzing operational benefits. Journal of
Operations Management, 20(2), 175-188.
Chin, W. (2004). Multi-group analysis with PLS. Retrived from:
http://disc-nt.cba.uh.edu/chin/plsfaq/multigroup.htm
Collier, J. E., & Bienstock, C. C. (2006). Measuring Service Quality in E-Retailing.
Journal of Service Research, 8(3), 260-275.
Cristobal, E., Flavián, C., & Guinalíu, M. (2007). Perceived e-service quality (PeSQ): Measurement validation and effects on consumer satisfaction and web site loyalty. Managing Service Quality, 17(3), 317-340.
Curran, K., Walters, N., & Robinson, D. (2007). Investigating the problems faced by older adults and people with disabilities in online environments. Behaviour &
Information Technology, 26(6), 447-453.
D’ Ambra, J. & Rice, R. E. (2001). Emerging factors in user evaluation of the World Wide Web. Information & Management, 38(6), 373-384.
DeLone, W. H., & Mclean, E. R. (1992). Information system success: The quest for the dependent variable. Information Systems Research, 3(1), 60-95.
‧
information system success: A ten-year update. Journal of ManagementInformation Systems Research, 19(4), 9-30.
Disabled People's Association. (2010). Annual Report 2010-2011. Singapore:
Disabled People's Association. Retrived from:
http://www.dpa.org.sg/PDF/Annual%20report%20for%20year%20ended%203 1%20Mar%202011.pdf
European Commission. (2000). eEurope 2002: action plan. Brussels: European Commission. Retrived from:
http://ec.europa.eu/information_society/eeurope/2002/action_plan/pdf/actionpla n_en.pdf
European Commission. (2007a). European i2010 initiative on e-Inclusion: To be
part of the information society. Brussels: European Commission. Retrived from:
http://ec.europa.eu/information_society/activities/einclusion/policy/i2010_initia tive/index_en.htm
European Commission. (2007b). Assessment of the Status of eAccessibility in
Europe. Brussels: European Commission. Retrived from:
http://ec.europa.eu/information_society/activities/einclusion/docs/meac_study/
meac_report_exec_sum_05_11.pdf
European Commission. (2008a). Towards an accessible information society.
Brussels: European Commission. Retrived from:
http://ec.europa.eu/information_society/activities/einclusion/policy/accessibilit y/com_2008/index_en.htm
European Commission. (2008b). Study on the measurement of eGoverment user
satisfaction and impact. Brussels: European Commission. Retrived from:
http://ec.europa.eu/information_society/activities/egovernment/studies/docs/use r_satisfaction_final_report.pdf
Fornell, C. & Larcker, F. D. (1981). Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement errors. Journal of Marketing
Research, 18(2), 39-50.
Heeks, R. (2006). Benchmarking e-government: Improving the national and international measurement, evaluation and comparison of e-government. IDPM
i-Government Working Papers, 18, 1-33.
‧
Hsu, F. M., Chen, T. Y., & Wang, S. (2009). Efficiency and satisfaction of electronic records management systems in e-government in Taiwan. The Electronic
Library, 27(3), 461-473.
Indian Institute of Management. (2007). Impact assessment study of e-government
projects in India. Ahmedabad: Indian Institute of Management. Retrieved from:
http://www.iimahd.ernet.in/egov/documents/impact-assessment-study-dit.pdf
Infocomm Development Authority. (2006). Singapore iN2015 Masterplan Offers a
Digital Future for Everyone. Singapore: Infocomm Development Authority.
Retrived from:
http://www.ida.gov.sg/News%20and%20Events/20050703161451.aspx?getPag etype=20
IT Strategic Headquarters. (2000). Basic law on the formation of an advanced
information and telecommunications network society. Tokyo: IT Strategic
Headquarters. Retrieved from:http://www.kantei.go.jp/foreign/it/it_basiclaw/it_basiclaw.html
IT Strategic Headquarters. (2001). e-Japan priority policy program. Tokyo: IT Strategic Headquarters. Retrieved from:
http://www.kantei.go.jp/foreign/it/network/priority-all/index.html
IT Strategic Headquarters. (2006). New IT reform strategy: Realizing ubiquitous and
universal network society where everyone can enjoy the benefits of IT. Tokyo:
IT Strategic Headquarters. Retrieved from:
http://www.kantei.go.jp/foreign/policy/it/ITstrategy2006.pdf
Jaeger, P., & Matteson, M. (2009). e-Government and technology acceptance: The case of the implementation of Section 508 guidelines for websites. Electronic
Journal of e-Government, 7(1), 87-98.
Jaeger, P. T. (2004). The social impact of an accessible e-democracy: The importance of disability rights laws in the development of the federal e-government. Journal of Disability Policy Studies, 15(1), 19-26.
Jaeger, P. T. (2006). Assessing Section 508 compliance on federal e-government Web sites: A multi-method, user-centered evaluation of accessibility for persons with disabilities. Government Information Quarterly, 23(2), 169-190.
Jaeger, P. T. (2008). User-centered policy evaluations of Section 508 of the Rehabilitation Act: Evaluating e-government web sites for accessibility for persons with disabilities. Journal of Disability Policy Studies, 19(1), 24-33.
‧
Jansen, A., & Ølnes, S. (2004). Quality assessment and benchmarking of Norwegian
public web sites. Paper presented at the meeting of the 4th European
Conference on E-Government, Dublin.Janssen, D., Rotthier, S., & Snijkers, K. (2004). If you measure it they will score: An assessment of international eGovernment benchmarking. Information Polity,
9(3-4), 121-130.
Japanese Industrial Standards Committee. (2010). Guidelines for older persons and
persons with disabilities-Information and communications equipment, software and services-Part 3: Web content. Tokyo: Japanese Industrial Standards
Committee. Retrived from:http://www.jisc.go.jp/app/pager?id=74800
Jarvis, C. B., Mackenzie, S. B., & Podsakoff, P. M. (2003). A critical review of construct indicators and measurement model misspecification in marketing and consumer research. Journal of Consumer Research, 30(2), 199-218.
Kelly, B., Sloan, D., Brown, S., Seale, J., Lauke, P., Ball, S., & Smith, S. (2009).
Accessibility 2.0: Next steps for web accessibility. Journal of Access Services,
6(1-2 ), 265-294.
Kim J., Lee J., Han K., & Lee M. (2002). Business as buildings: Metrics for the architectural quality of internet businesses. Information Systems Research,
13(3), 239-254.
Kim, T. H., Im, K. H., & Park, S. C. (2005). Intelligent measuring and improving model for customer satisfaction level in e-government. EGOV 2005, LNCS
3591, 38-48.
Kotler, P., & Lee, N. (2007). Marketing in the Public Sector: A roadmap for
improved performance. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education.
Kunstelj, M., & Vintar, M. (2004). Evaluating the progress of e-government development: A critical analysis. Information Polity, 9(3-4), 131-148.
Ladhari, R. (2010). Developing e-service quality scales: A literature review. Journal
of Retailing and Consumer Services, 17(66), 464-477.
Loiacono, E. T., Watson, R. T., & Goodhue, D. L. (2000). WebQual: A web site
quality instrument. Paper presented at the meeting of the WPI Computer
Science Colloquium, Worcester, Massachusetts.‧
Loiacono, E. T., Watson, R. T., & Goodhue, D. L. (2002). WebQual: A measure of
web site quality. Paper presented at the meeting of the 2002 Marketing
educators' conference: Marketing theory and applications, Chicago, American.Loiacono, E. T., Watson, R. T., & Goodhue, D. L. (2007). WebQual: An instrument for consumer evaluation of web sites. International Journal of Electronic
Commerce, 11(3), 51-87.
Ministry of Internal Affairs and Communications. (2006). u-Japan policy. Tokyo:
Ministry of Internal Affairs and Communications. Retrived from:
http://www.soumu.go.jp/menu_seisaku/ict/u-japan_en/index.html
National Telecommunications and Information Administration. (1995). Falling
Through the Net: A Survey of the "Have Nots" in Rural and Urban America.
Washington DC: National Telecommunications and Information Administration.
Retrived from: http://www.ntia.doc.gov/ntiahome/fallingthru.html
OECD (2001). Understanding the Digital Divide 2000. Paris: Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. Retrived from:
http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/38/57/1888451.pdf
Office of the e-Envoy. (2003). Guidelines for UK government websites: Illustrated
handbook for web management teams. London: Office of the e-Envoy. Retrived
from:http://www.eppingforestdc.gov.uk/Library/files/Supporting_People/WebsiteGui delines.pdf
Palmer, J. (2002). Web site usability, design and performance metrics. Information
Systems Research, 13(1), 151-167.
Parasuraman, A., Zeithaml, V. A., & Berry, L. L. (1985). A conceptual model of service quality and its implications for future research. Journal of Marketing,
49, 41-50.
Parasuraman, A., Zeithaml, V. A., & Berry, L. L. (1988). SERVQUAL: A multiple-item scale for measuring consumer perceptions of service quality.
Journal of Retailing, 64(1), 12-37.
Parasuraman, A., Zeithaml, V. A., & Malhotra, A. (2005). E-S-QUAL: A multiple-item scale for assessing electronic service quality. Journal of Service
Research, 7(3), 213-233.
‧
success: models, dimensions, measures, and interrelationships. EuropeanJournal of Information Systems Research, 17(3), 236-263.
Public Sector Commission. (2010). Website standards, guidelines and checklists.
Perth: Public Sector Commission. Retrived from:
http://www.publicsector.wa.gov.au/AgencyResponsibilities/WebStandards/Page s/WGFStandardsAndGuidelines.aspx
Rossiter, J. R. (2002). The C-OAR-SE procedure for scale development in marketing. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 19, 305-335.
Rowley, J. (2006). An analysis of the e-service literature: towards a research.
Internet Research, 16(3), 339-359.
Rubaii-Barrett, N., & Wise, L. R. (2008). Disability access and e-government: An empirical analysis of state practices. Journal of Disability Policy Studies, 19(1), 52-64.
Sabherwal, R., Jeyaraj, A., & Chowa, C. (2006). Information system success:
Individual and organizational determinants. Management Science, 52(12), 1849-1864.
Santos, J. (2003). E-service quality: a model of virtual service quality dimensions.
Managing Service Quality, 13(3), 233-246.
Schellong, A. R. M. (2010). Benchmarking EU e-government at the crossroads: A framework for e-government benchmark design and improvement.
Transforming Government: People, Process and Policy, 4(4), 365-385.
Seddon, P. B. (1997). A respecification and extension of the DeLone and McLean model of IS success. Information Systems Research, 8(3), 240-253.
Servon, L. J. (2002). Bridging the digital divide: Technology, community, and
public policy. Malden, Massachusetts: Blackwell Pub.
Shih, H. P. (2004). Extended technology acceptance model of internet utilization behavior. Information & Management, 41(6), 719-729.
Stowers, G. N. L. (2002). The state of federal websites: The pursuit of excellence.
Arlington, Virginia: PricewaterhouseCoopers Endowment for the Business of Government.
‧
Tung, L. L., & Rieck, O. (2005). Adoption of electronic government services among business organizations in Singapore. Journal of Strategic Information Systems,
14.
United Nations. (2006a). Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities.
New York: United Nations. Retrieved from:
http://www.un.org/disabilities/default.asp?id=150
United Nations. (2006b). International day of disabled persons 2006. New York:
United Nations. Retrieved from:
http://www.un.org/esa/socdev/enable/iddp2006.htm
Wang, Y. S., & Liao, Y. W. (2008). Assessing eGovernment systems success: A validation of the DeLone and McLean model of information systems success.
Government Information Quarterly, 25(4), 717-733.
Waseda University Institutte of e-Government. (2011). The 2011 Waseda University world e-government ranking. Journal of E-Governance, 34(2), 56-63.
Web Accessibility Initiative. (2005). Essential components of web accessibility.
Massachusetts: Web Accessibility Initiative. Retrieved from:
http://www.w3.org/WAI/intro/components.php
West, D. M. (2001). WMRC global e-government survey, October, 2001.
Providence, Rhode Island: Brown University.
West, D. M. (2002). State and federal e-government in the United States, 2002.
West, D. M. (2002). State and federal e-government in the United States, 2002.