本研究之目的是評估運用模式語言來輔助設計師的初步構想發展，模式語言是由建築設計理論家亞歷山大所提出，主要概念是幫助初學者透過經過歸納、有系統之方法來學習設計。研究內容將探討運用模式語言在產品設計領域時，對於設計初學者的草圖構想展開階段是否具有實質的效益。
實驗主要有兩大部分，第一部分實驗主要是探討如何歸納模式語言之方法。邀請具有相關設計經驗者來進行研討會。藉由討論共同的方式編輯出一套有系統的模式語言，定立模式語言之撰寫方式，主要包括1.命名 2.圖片 3.問題 4.解決方法與建議四項要素，並且以圖卡的方式來便利於運用。第二部分實驗在驗證模式語言對於初學者在學習設計過程中是否能有效增進其圖像構想展開能力。分成實驗組與對照組兩組進行比較和分析；實驗組運用模式語言來刺激初學者進行構想發展；對照組則是選擇目錄法，即是以觀看大量圖片的方式來進行構想發展。實驗過程採用數位錄影機來紀錄，在藉由觀看所紀錄的影片來將受測者的動作資訊轉化分類成不同種類的草圖認知行為，探討兩組在草圖認知行為上的差異，並且邀請專家來評估兩組的初學者的造型構想展開技巧。
研究結果發現，大致來說實驗組與對照組的受測者所產生的各種草圖認知行為在個數與比例差異不大，推測可能兩組的受測者皆是設計之初學者的原因，但是兩組的受測者在草圖認知行為所組成的思考模式卻有很大的差異，透過運用模式語言的初學者較能有連續性且系統性的思考模式；單純只參考大量圖片的方式的思考較短暫且不連續，比較不具有效率。並且根據專家的評估所得的分數，運用模式語言的初學者在造型構想展開技巧上優於運用目錄法的初學者。

The theme of this thesis is to evaluate the possibility of utilizing pattern language to assist designer's preliminary idea. According to Alexander’s proposition, the concept of pattern language is to help novice architects to study design through the systematic process. This study is to investigate whether novices would have a great improvement in idea sketching toward a pattern language.
The experiment in this study includes two principal parts. The first part is to find a systematizing method to generalize pattern language by inviting experts to join a design workshop to edit a series of systematic pattern language through the discussion. The pattern language is made by the picture card, containing four key elements: 1 Name, 2.Picture 3.Question.4.Solution, it make novice easier to learn by it. The second part is to prove pattern language could promote its picture idea and develop novices’ ability through the process of studying. By dividing into the experiment group and the contrast group, the experiment group sketch toward pattern language; and the contrast group chooses the catalog method by watching a large number of pictures. We would compare and analyze the difference between these two methods through the information what video camera recorded.
The result of this investigation finds that the cognitive actions in both groups are similar; it may be because the both groups are all novices. However, there is a huge diversity of the cognitive thinking way organized by the cognitive action in both groups. The novices utilizing pattern language have the continuous and systematic cognitive thinking that consisted of the cognitive action .The thinking of the other novices on catalog method is discontinuous and inefficient. According to the evaluation of the experts’ assessment, the novices utilizing pattern language is more efficient than the novice designers on catalog method.

參考文獻
(1)中文部分
1. Christopher Alexander 著，淡江大學建築學會合譯，”模式語彙之再現 A PATTERN LANGUAGE “，尚林出版社，1992
2. Christopher Alexander 著，趙冰譯，”建築的永恆之道 The Timeless way of Building”，六合出版社，1994
3. Christopher Alexander 著，蔣振文譯，”奧立岡實驗 THE OREGON EXPERIMENT ”，境與象出版社，1978
4. Edward T. White著，林敏哲、林明毅譯，”建築語彙”，六合出版社，1995
5. 夏鑄九著，” 理論建築 ”，台灣社會研究，1995。
6. 楊礫、徐立著，”人類理性與設計科學”，復漢出版社，1996。
7. 蕭銘芚著，” 造形發想法之理論與實務”，五南出版社，2000。
8. 林崇宏著，”設計原理 ”，全華科技圖書股份有限公司，1998。
9. 林品章著，”基礎設計教育-造形教育的理論與實踐 ”，藝術家出版社，1990。
10.鄭昭明著，” 認知心理學 “ ，桂冠圖書股粉有限公司，1993。
11.星野 匡著，楊淑芬譯，”創意思考的方法 ”，建宏出版社，1993。
12.王受之著，”世界現代設計 ”，藝術家出版社，1997。
13.陳依君，”產品愉悅感的模式語言 ”，國立台北科技大學創新設計研究所碩士論文，2003
14.劉懿元，”立姿康復輔行具之系統規劃模式研究 ”，國立成功大學工業設計研究所碩士論文，1995。
15.陳宇軒，論產品意象在媒體的轉譯過程 ，實踐大學工業產品設計研究所碩士論文，2000。

(2) 西文部分
1. Tracy Lewis,“A community learns design: towards a pattern language for novice visual programmers”. Proceedings of the IEEE 2002 Symposia on Human Centric Computing Languages and Environments (HCC’02). 2002
2. J. Tidwell. , “Common Ground: A Pattern Language for Human-Computer Interaction Interface Design”, 1999 http://www.mit.edu/~jtidwell/ui_patterns_essay.html.
3. L. Pemberton., “The Promise of Pattern Languages for Interaction Design”, Loughborough University, UK. , 2000
4. Manolya Kavakli,” Structure in idea sketching behavior ”,Design Studies 19 485-517 , 1998
5. Manolya Kavakli,” Sketching as mental imagery processing”, Design Studies 22 347–364 , 2001
6. Finke, R A, “levels of equivalence in imagery and perception“ , Psychological Review 87 113–132, 1980
7. Suwa, M, Gero, J S and Purcell, T,”Macroscopic analysis of design processes based on a scheme for coding designers’ cognitive actions” Design Studies 19(4) 455–483, 1998
8. Suwa, M and Tversky, B,”What do architects and students perceive in their design sketches? A protocol analysis ”,Design Studies 18(4) 385–403, 1997
9. Gero, J S and McNeill, T,"An approach to the analysis of design protocols”, Design Studies 19(1) 21–61, 1998
10.Dorst, K and Dijkhuis, J,”Comparing paradigms for describing design activity” Design Studies 16(2) , 1995
11. Suwa, M and Tversky, B,” What architects see in their design sketches: implications for design tools” in Human Factors in Computing Systems: CHI’96, ACM, New York pp191–192, 1996
12. Suwa, M and Tversky, B,” What architects and students perceive in their design sketches? A protocol analysis ”,Design Studies 18 385–403, 1997
13. Manolya Kavakli,” The structure of concurrent cognitive actions: a case study on novice and expert designers”, Design Studies 23 25–40, 2002
14. Remko van der Lugt,” How sketching can affect the idea generation process in design group meetings” , Design Studies 26 101–122, 2005
15. Fish, J and Scrivener, S,” Amplifying the mind’s eye: sketching and visual cognition” ,Leonardo Vol 23 No 1 pp 117-126, 1990
16. Goldschmidt, G, “The dialectics of sketching Creativity Research” ,Journal Vol 4 No 2 pp 123-143, 1991
17. Van der Lugt, R,”Developing a graphic tool for creative problem solving in design groups “Design Studies Vol 21 No 5 pp 505-522, 2000
18. Van der Lugt, R,” Sketching in design idea generation meetings Doctoral dissertation”, Delft University of Technology, 2001
19. Van der Lugt, R.”Brainsketching and how it differs from brainstorming“, Creativity and Innovation Management Vol 11 No 1 pp 43-54, 2002
20. Yukari Nagai,” How Designers Transform Keywords into Visual Images”,ACM 1-58113-465, 2002
21. M. Tovey and S. Porter,” Sketching, concept development and automotive design”, Design Studies 24 135–153, 2003
22. Anne Bruseberg and Deana Mcdonagh-Philp,” New product development by eliciting user experience and aspirations”, Int. J. Human-Computer Studies55, 435–452, 2001
23. Kees Dorst and Nigel Cross,”Creativity in the design process:
co-evolution of problem–solution”, Design Studies 22 425–437, 2001
24. Morgan, D. L.,” Focus groups as qualitative research” Beverly Hills, CA: Sage,1988