本研究目的為制定一個可用來評估產品創意的表單，研究中以產品設計的四個階段 「概念發想」、「產品功能」、「模型製作」與「後續評估」為基礎來彙整創意相關文獻並統整能夠評估創意的元素，其後與五位具設計相關背景的業師進行訪談以立意抽樣的方法來分析檢核創意的元素並製成表格。最後，本研究將工業設計產品的創意評估分為四個階段：第一階段是「原創性」，包含「產品欲解決的問題點題材新穎」、「解決問題的手法獨特」與「產品造型創新」三個項目；第二階段是「產品功能」包含「改善原有功能」、「產生新功能」、「賦予象徵意義」、「趣味（幽默感）」、「創造需求」五個項目；第三階段是「模型構成」包含「由簡單的元素構成複雜的機構」、「低成本材料」、「製作過程簡單」、「容易量產」與「使用特殊的材料」五個項目；第四階段為「產品造成的影響能使某項數據顯著變化」，其中包含「使用頻率」、「製造成本」、「身體負荷」、「時間」、「能源」、「人力資源」、「購買意願」七個項目。
本研究並以學生的作品、實體作品設計競賽獲獎作品與概念設計競賽獲獎作品三種類別的作品作為樣本，進行產品創意評估表的應用與討論。應用結果發現每件產品符合的創意元素數量與產品的類別並無明顯的關聯，但三種類別的作品中，有最多產品符合的元素皆為產品功能階段中的「改善原有功能」，分別有58.3%、79.2%與79.4%的產品符合，故筆者建議後續研究可將此元素再進行細分。

The purpose of this study is to develop a form that can be used to evaluate product creativity. The author collects elements that can be used to evaluate ideas through literature and product collection, and analyzes the elements and forms them through expert interviews. Finally, this study divides the product's creative assessment into four stages. The first stage is “originality”, which includes “the novelty of the problem”, “the uniqueness of the problem-solving method” and “the innovation of product modeling”. The second stage is the "product function", which includes "improvement of original functions", "generation of new functions", "empowerment of symbolic significance", "fun (humor sense)" and "creation of demand". The third stage is “model composition" including “consist of simple elements forming complex institutions”, “low-cost materials”, “simple production processes”, “easy production”, and “the use of special materials”. The final stage is "the effect of the product can cause a significant change in a particular data” including "use frequency," "manufacturing cost," "body load," "time," "energy," "human resources," and "willingness to buy".
This study also uses the students' works, design competition winning works and the conceptual design competition winning works as a sample to carry out the application of the creativeness assessment form. The results show that the number of creative elements that each product meets is not significantly related to the product category. However, among the three categories of works, the most suitable elements are the "improvement of original functions" in the product function stage. 58.3%, 79.2% and 79.4% of the products respectively are in conformity, so we suggest that the subsequent research can subdivide this element.

Bruce, H. & Bella, M.（2012）。設計的方法：100個分析難題，跟成功商品取經，讓設計更棒、更好的有效方法。（譯者：趙慧芬、林潔盈、吳莉君）。台北：原點出版。
方菁容、鄧成連、衛萬里（2016）。建構數位廣告設計創意評價之構面與準則。設計學報，21（1），1-18。
呂紹川（2015）。國中生科技創意歷程與產品創意之關係研究。科技與工程教育學刊，48（1），69-109。
吳明清（1992）。教育研究基本觀念與方法之分析‧台北：五南書局。
吳靜吉 (2003，8月) 。創造力的評量─4P觀點‧論文發表於創意教師行動研究成長營‧澎湖市：國立澎湖技術學院。
林思彤（2008）。創造力的匯合觀點與影響因素。T&D飛訊，70期，1-19頁。
陳明鴻、陳一平（2014）。產品設計領域中創造力組成成分之多元迴歸分析．設計研究學報，7，64-80。
陳玫伶（2007）。知識於創意設計中的角色（碩士論文）。國立台北科技大學創新設計研究所。
陳偉昌（2001）。職業學校機械科學生技術能力與創造力之相關研究（碩士論文）。台北：國立臺灣師範大學工業教育研究所。
熊興福、曲敏、張峰（2005）。產品設計中的形態創意。包裝工程，26（6），171-173。
潘裕豐（2006）。為何及如何進行創造思考教學。生活科技教育月刊，39（2），38-55。
簡嘉誠（2001）。領導風格型態、創造力人格特質搭配對組織承諾與創新績效影響關係之研究（碩士論文）。桃園：國立中央大學企業管理學系研究所。
Amabile, T. M. (1982). Social psychology of creativity: A consensual assessment technique. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 43, 997-1013.
Amabile, T. M. (1983). The social psychology of creativity. New York: Springer-Verlag.
Amabile, T. M. (1996). Creativity in context. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.
Amabile. T. M. (1988). A model of creativity and innovation in organizations. In B. M. Staw & L. L. Cummings (Eds.). Research in organizational behavior, 10, 123-167. Greenwich. CT: JAI Press.
Atkinson, E. S. (1999). Key factors influencing pupil motivation in design and technology. Retrieved from https://scholar.lib.vt.edu/ejournals/JTE/v10n2/atkinson.html
Besemer, S. P. & O’Quinn, K. (1986). Analyzing creative products: Refinement and test of a judging instrument. Journal of Creative Behavior, 20, 115-126.
Besemer, S. P. & O’Quinn, K. (1999). Confirming the three-factor creative product analysis matrix model in an American sample. Creativity Research Journal, 12(4), 287-296.
Besemer, S. P. & Treffinger, D. J. (1981). Analysis of creative products: review and synthesis. Journal of Creative Behavior, 15, 158-178.
Chang, J. H., Chen, H. C., Hsu, C. C., Chan, Y. C., & Chang, Y. L. (2015). Flexible humor styles and the creative mind: Using a typological approach to investigate the relationship between humor styles and creativity. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 9(3), 306-312.
Dacey, J. S. & Lennon, K. H. (1998). Understanding creativity: The interplay of biological, psychological, and social factors. CA: Jopssey-Bass Inc.
Darren W. Dahl & Page Moreau (2002). The Influence and Value of Analogical Thinking During New Product Ideation. Journal of Marketing Research, 39(1), 47-60.
Davis, G. A. (1973). Psychology of problem solving. New York: Basic Books.
D. Horn, and G. Salvendy (2006). Product creativity: conceptual model, measurement and characteristics, Theoretical Issues in Ergonomics Science, 7(4), 395-412.
Dorst, K. (2007). Understanding design. Hamburg: Gingko Press.
Edward F. Fern. (1982), The use of focus groups for idea generation: the effects of group size, acquaintanceship, and moderator on response quantity and quality. Journal of Marketing Research, 19(1), 1-13
Everett, D. & Lippert, J. (1994). The new work: How to thrive in the changing economy. New York: The Detroit Free Press.
Ford, C. (1996). A theory of individual creative action in multiple social domains. Academy of Management Review, 21, 1112-1142.
Hennessey, B. A. & Amabile, T. (1988). The conditions of creativity. In R. J. Sternberg (Ed.). The nature of creativity, 11-38. Cambridge: Cambridge Press.
K.Z. Zhou & F. Wu (2010). Technological capability, strategic flexibility, and product innovation. Strategic Management Journal, 31(5), 547-561.
Mahle, U. (2007). The path to invention：some companies have found a way to reach an elusive goal. Mechanical Engineering, 129(9), 37.
Mark W. Stuhlfaut & Chan Yun Yoo (2011). A tool for evaluating advertising concepts: Desirable characteristics as viewed by creative practitioners, Journal of Marketing Communications, 19(2), 81-97. DOI: 10.1080/13527266.2010.550009
Mayer, R. B., 1999, Fifty years of creativity research, In R. J. Sternberg (Ed.), Handbook of Creativity (pp. 449-459). Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, UK.
Mishra, P., & Koehler, M.J. (2008, March). Introducing technological pedagogical content knowledge. Paper presented the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New York.
Morgan, D. L. (1996). Focus groups. Annual review of sociology, 129-152.
M. Y. N. Fasiha, Y. Sakayama, E. Yamamoto, T. Taura and Y. Nagai (2010). Understanding the Nature of Deep Impressions by analyzing the Structure of Virtual Impression Networks. Proceedings of International Design Conference - DESIGN 2010. Dubrovnik, Croatia.
Nagai Y., Taura T. (2011). Discussion on Direction of Design Creativity Research (Part 2) - Research Issues and Methodologies: From the Viewpoint of Deep Feelings and Desirable Figure. In: Taura T., Nagai Y. (eds) Design Creativity 2010. London: Springer. DOI: 10.1007/978-0-85729-224-7_2
Ogilvy, R. (1983). Ogilvy on advertising. London: Pan Books Ltd. and Orbis Publishing Ltd.
Reddot (2017). Red Dot Award: Product Design. Retrieved from http://www.red-dot.sg/dconcept/#
Renzulli, J. S. & Reis, S. M. (1981). Student product assessment form. in J. S. Renzulli, S. M. Reis, & L. H. Smith, revolving door identification model. Mansfield Center, CT: Creative Learning Press.
Runco, M. A., Plucker, J. A. & Lim, W. (2000, 2001). Development and psychometric integrity of a measure of identional behavior. Creativity Research Journal, 13, 393-400.
Sternberg, R. J. & Lubart, T. I. (1995). Defying the crowd: Cultivating creativity in a culture of conformity. New York: Free press.
Stuhlfaut, M. W., & Yoo, C. Y. (2013). A tool for evaluating advertising concepts: Desirable characteristics as viewed by creative practitioners. Journal of Marketing Communications, 19(2), 81-97.
Subin Im, Suodh Bhat, & Yikuan Lee(2015). Consumer perceptions of product creativity, coolness, value and attitude. Journal of Business Research, 68(1), 166-172.
Tierney, P. & Farmer, S. M. (2002). Creative self-efficacy: its potential antecedents and relationship to creative performance. Academy of Management Journal, 45(6), 1137-1148.
Torrance, E. P. (1987). Using the Torrance test of creative thinking to guide the teaching of creative behavior. Bensenville, IL: Scholastic Testing Service.
Wallas, G. (1976). Stage in the creative process. In A. Rothenberg and C. R.Hansman (Eds.). The creativity question, 69-73. Duke University Press.