搜尋網站為現今找尋資料的重要工具之一，提供使用者一個新的平台及一種非線性且有互動的搜尋方式，可以幫助大眾免去奔波之苦，也擴大了搜尋的範圍。但是現有搜尋引擎比對功能尚未完善，需要人工閱讀及篩選資料，介面設計的改善可以降低視覺搜尋的難度，亦可補足搜尋網站目前的缺失，但鮮少有相關的研究探討。

　　本研究實驗之初，廣泛的蒐集台灣繁體中文搜尋網站並整理以找出介面要素，再參考網頁介面呈現相關文獻，決定首頁頁面實驗變項為資訊呈現多寡；結果頁面實驗變項為標題內文字體大小、間隔色塊的有無、關鍵字的顏色、每行字數、有無分頁、內容位置七項，實驗後分析各項結果頁面要素對搜尋效率的影響程度。除此之外，也探討不同認知模式合搜尋經驗的受測者之搜尋情形，以找出不同認知模式使用者是否對於介面有不同的偏好。本研究利用實驗來探討影響線上搜尋的頁面要素及其影響程度，期能將其概念化以作為搜尋網站介面的設計準則，以增進搜尋網站的人機溝通。並嘗試以設計角度出發，結合資訊科學對搜尋網站本身的功能研究與人類學對搜尋行為的探討，發展出新的研究方法。

　　最後，本研究整理出最適合搜尋行為的介面編排並將其影響性整理成表，以供搜尋網站介面設計人員根據不同的需求作頁面設計。

　Search engines are the most used web services. They gather Web pages, present the contents of the pages, and allow searchers to issue queries.
Although computer technology advanced and search engines have been improved, users are still forced to sift through the long ordered list of document returned by the engines. Good interface design can facilitate visual search and improve the search efficiency.

　This study investigates how the search web interface influence users’ search efficiency. We conducted a computer-based experiment to compare the search efficiency of different interface design. The interfaces in the experiment are with different properties such as text size, the color of keyword and so on. Besides, the cognitive style and the searching experience are taken into consideration. Relevant studies indicate that the two factors influence search behaviors, and we want to know if it is influential in interface as well.

　Finally, this study proposed guidelines for improving search web interfaces for designers.

參考文獻
【中文部分】
1.林敬欣，網頁介面中動態型態對圖像意義傳達影響之研究，國立成功大學工業管理研究所
碩士論文，2001
2.林錦全，視覺設計要素在洗衣機操作介面上之運用研究，銘傳大學設計管理研究所碩士論
文，2004
3.郁芳，中文常用印刷字體之易讀性及其意象研究，國立雲林科技大學視覺傳達設計學研究
所碩士論文，1997
4.胡龍騰、黃瑋瑩、潘中道合譯，Ranjit Kumar著，研究方法，學富文化，台北，2000
5.莊錦昌，網頁介面使用性之探討與意象之研究，國立成功大學工業設計研究所碩士論文，
2001
6.陳李綢，認知發展與輔導。台北：心理出版社，1999
7.陳君儒， 2002 ， 不同族群對於PDA功能需求與選單系統操作績效之研究，大同大學工業
設計研究所碩士論文
8.陳書瑩，高中生活科技教科書版面編排設計之研究，國立臺灣師範大學工業教育研究所碩
士論文，1999
9.曾元琦，認知風格對使用者介面設計的影響－以掃瞄器為例，國立成功大學工業管理研究
所碩士論文，1999
10.顏龍源等，「搜尋引擎大搜尋」，資訊與教育雜誌 特刊（民90 年12 月）
11.黃任鴻，文章段落版面編排之視覺搜尋及閱讀效應，國立台灣科技大學管理研究所工業管
理學程碩士論文，1998
12.黃健治，高齡者使用VDT之字體大小和字型的研究，國立成功大學工業管理研究所碩士論文，2000
13.謝毓琛，產品介面配置相對方位之刻板印象研究－以幻燈機為例，國立成功大學工業管理研究所碩士論文，1999

【英文部分】
1.Baecker, R.M.,Buxton, (1987) W.A.S. Reading in Human-Computer Interaction: A Multi-disciplinary Approach. Los Altos, CA: Morgan Kaufmann.
2.Bates,M. J. (1989).The design of browsing and berrypicking techniques for the on-line search interface. Online Review, 13(5), 407-431.
3.Drabenstott, K. M. (1984), Subject Searching in library catalogs: Before and after the introduction of online catalogs. Dublin, OH: online Computer Library Center.
4.Fenichel, C.H., (1981). Online searching measures that discriminate
among users with different types of experience. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 32,23-32.
5.Frokjaer, E., Hornback, K, (2000). Measuring usability: Are
effectiveness, efficiency and satisfaction really correlated? In: Proceedings of ACM Conference Human Factors in Computing(CHI’00).ACM Press, New York, pp.344-352. .
6.Goldberg J. H., Kotval X. P. (1998) Computer interface evaluation using eye movements: methods and constructs. International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics 24, p.631-645.
7.Hearst, M. A. (1999), User interfaces and visualization. In R. Baeza-Yates,＆B. Ribeiro-Neto (Eds.), Modern information retrieval. New York: Anderson Wesley Longman.
8.Heines, J. (1984), Screen design strategies for computer-assisted instruction. Bedford, MA: digital Press.
9.Hock-Hai Teo, Lih-Bin Oh , Chunhui Liu , Kwok-Kee Wei. (2002) An empirical study of the effects of interactivity on web user attitude. Department of Information Systems, School of Computing, National Unervisity of Singapore.
10.Hsieh-Yee, I.,. Effects of search experience and subject knowledge on the search tactics of novice and experienced searchers. Journal of the American Society for Information Science,44,161-174. (1993)
11.Humphreys, G. W., Bruce, V., (1989). Visual Cognition: Computational, Experimental, and Neuropsychological Perspectives, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Hillsdale, NJ.
12.Ingrid Hsieh-Yee, (1992) “Research on Web Search Behavior” Library and Information Science Research 23(2001): 168-169
13.Ingwersen, P. Information retrieval interaction. London, UK: Taylor Graham.
14.Kingery, David; Furuta, Richard . (1997) Skimming electronic newspaper headlines: a study of typeface, point size, screen resolution, and monitor size. Information Processing & Management Volume: 33, Issue: 5, September, 1997, pp. 684-696
15.Kim, Kyung-Sun. (2001) Information-seeking on the Web: Effects of user and task variables. Library and Information Science Research Volume: 23, Issue: 3, Autumn, 2001, pp. 233-255.
16.Klein, R. (1980)Does Oculomotor Readiness Mediate Cognitive Control of Visual Attention in Attention and Performance, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Hillsdale, NJ, In: R.S. Nickerson (Eds.) .
17.Komlodi A. ( 2004) Task management support in information seeking: a case for search histories. Information Systems Department, College of Engineering and Technology.
18.Korthauer, R. D.,＆ Koubek, R. J.(1994). An empirical evaluation of knowledge, cognitive style, and structure upon the performance of hypertext task. International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction,6,373-390.
19.Kowalski, G., (1997) Information Retrieval Systems: Theory and Implementation, Kluwer Academic Publishers, MA.
20.Locerof A.,and Paterno, F,. (1998). Automatic support for usability evaluation. IEEE Transactions on Software engineering 24, 863-888.
21.Loftus, G. R., Mackworth, N. H.,(1978). Cognitive determinants of fixation location during picture viewing. Journal og Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance 4(4).
22.Marchionini, G., (1989). Information seeking strategies of novices using a full-text electronic encyclopedia. Journal of the American Society for Information Science.,40,53-66.
23.Marchionini G., Lin X., ＆Dwiggins, S., (1990). Effects of search and subject expertise on information seeking in a hypertext environment. In D Henderson (Ed.), Information in the year 2000, from research to applications: Proceeding of the 53rd annual meeting of the American Society for Information Science, November 3-8 (pp. 129-142).Meford, NJ:Learned Information, Inc.
24.Marchionini, G., (1995). Information seeking in electronic environments. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
25.Marchionini, G., Mu X., (2002). User studies informing E-table interfaces. Interaction Design Laboratory, School of Information and Library Science, University of North Carolina.
26.Matthews, J. R., Lawrence, G. S., ＆Ferguson, D. K., (1983). Using online catalogs: A nationwide survey. New York: Neal-Schuman.
27.Michael Gordon , Praveen Pathak.(1998) Finding information on the World Wide Web:the retrieval effectiveness of search engines. Computer and Information Systems, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI48109-1234, USA.
28.Miller, G. A. (1956). The magical number seven plus or minus two: some limits in our capacity for processing information. Psychological Review, 63, 81-92.
29.Murch, G., In: R.M. Baecker, et al. (Eds.), (1995). Color Graphics: Blessing and Ballyhoo in Reading in Human-Computer Interaction: Toward the Year 2000, 2nd edn., Morgan Kaufmann Publishers, San Francisco, CA.
30.Nielsen, J., Designing Web Usability.(2000). New Riders, Indianapolis.
31.Park, S (2000). Usability, user preferences, effectiveness, and user behaviors when searching individual and integrated full-text databases, implications for digital libraries. Journal of American Society for Information science, 51(5), 456-468.
32.Patria A. Chalmers(2003).The role of cognitive theory in human-computer interface. Crew System Interface Division, US Air Force
33.Paul Jen-Hwa Hu , Pai-Chun Ma , Patrick Y.K. Chau.(1999).Evaluation of user interface designs for information retrieval systems: a computer-based experiment.
34.Preece, J.,Rogers Y., Sharp H., Benyon, D., Holland, S., Carey, T., (1994).Human computer Interaction. Addison-Wesley, Workingham, UK.
35.Qiu, L., (1993). Analytical searching vs. browsing in hypertext information retrieval systems. Canadian Journal of Information and Library Science, 19,1-13.
36.Robins, D., (1997). Shifts of focus in information retrieval interactionl. Paper presented at the American Society for Information Science Annual Meeting.
37.Shackel, B., (1991) Usability-context, framework, design and
evaluation. In: Shackel, B.Richardson, S. (Eds.),Human Factors for
Informatics.
38.Sheppard, S.,＆ Rouff, C. In J. John Marciniak(Ed), (1994). Encyclopedia of software engineering. (Vol. 2).New York, NY: John Wiley＆sons.
39.Shneiderman, B. (1998)Designing the user interface. Reading. MA: Addison. Wesley and Longman.
40.Soergel, D., (1985). Organizing information: principles of data base and retrieval systems. San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
41.Sweller, J.,＆Chandler, P. (1993).Why some material is difficult to learn. Cognition and Instruction, 12, 184-233.
42.Szabo, M.,＆ Kanuka, H. (1998). Effects of violating screen design principles of balance, unity and focus on recall, learning, study time and completion rates. Journal of Multimedia and Hypermedia,8,23-42.
43.Tennant,M. (1988). Psychology and Adult Learning. London: Routledge.
46. Tennyson, R. D. (1996). Concept learning. InT. Plomp,＆D.P.Ely(Eds),International encyclopedia of educational technology(2nd ed.).Cambridge, UK：Cambridge University Press.
44.Wilson Lee, Izak Benbasat.(2003). Designing an electronic interface: attention and product memory as elicited by web design. Division of Management Information Systems, Sauder School of Business, University of British Columbia, Vancouver,BC.V6T 1Z2,Canada
45.Witkin, H. A., Moore, C. A.,Goodenough, D.R.,＆Cox, P. W.(1977).Field dependent and field independent cognitive styles and their educational implications. Review of Educational Research,47,1-64.
46.Yee, M.M. (1991). System design and cataloging meet the users: user interface design to online public access catalog., Journal of American Society for Information Science 42 (2),78-98.
47.Yeung, A. S. (1999) Cognitive load and learner expertise: spilt attention and redundancy effects in reading comprehension task with vocabulary definitions. Journal of Experienceal Education, 67(3), 197-221.