本研究主要是探討使用者認知差異與使用需求對新產品開發之影響，並以塑膠摺疊椅的開發為例作為驗證。在認知差異的研究中，藉由摺疊椅的舒適性探討視覺與觸覺認知之差異，整體研究規劃為兩部份；第一部份為視覺照片觀測實驗，第二部份為觸覺實物試坐實驗。消費者分別針對八張椅子採取李克特量表進行舒適度評分，透過其主觀意識來判斷摺疊椅在視覺與觸覺上的舒適性，最後運用數量化一類作統計分析。研究結果顯示消費者在判斷一張摺疊椅的舒適度比重時，不管是以電腦銀幕上之照片觀測或實物試坐，座墊與靠背的舒適度比重差異不大。受測者從電腦銀幕觀看照片時，由於照片不大，他們會較為注意到椅子尺寸較大的部位，如椅寬及座深等尺寸，對座墊前弧及靠背弧度等尺寸較為忽略，特別對座墊前弧是極難從照片中判斷的項目。而消費者在試坐摺疊椅後，對舒適度重要性之排序為座墊前弧 > 座墊與靠背夾角 > 靠背弧度 > 座深 > 背板長 >座寬。在實物試坐的實驗研究中，本研究定出摺疊椅較為舒適的理想尺寸範圍，作為具體化設計階段中，2D組立圖繪製時的參考尺寸。在視覺銀幕圖片觀測的實驗中所得的各項影響座椅舒適性的偏相關係數，則可作為3D視圖評選階段的權重參考數據。
在使用者需求研究方面，主要是透過結合評價構造法(EGM)與品質機能展開法(QFD)，縮短產品設計開發的企劃步驟。本研究首先透過評價構造法對專家進行深度訪談，萃取出「塑膠摺疊椅」(中位)原始評價項目（即顧客需求），(下位)之具體條件（即品質要素）及 (上位)之抽象理由。在完成深度訪談後，再把品質要素轉化成使用者需求項目重要性調查問卷，並透過對消費者問卷調查分析消費者需求項目之權重，同時使用AHP法進行重要性權重值計算。再把EGM所得的(中位) 原始評價項目作為品質屋左側的使用者需求項目、(下位)具體條件作為品質屋的上方品質要素及（上位）抽象理由作為使用者需求項目及品質要素的構面，經轉換後列出需求品質-品質要素矩陣展開表，進而建立摺疊椅的使用者需求。
最終在產品完成後，本研究透過使用者滿意度測試，得知使用者對此產品的整體滿意度約達99.3%。從以上可證明，透過評價構造法(EGM)與品質機能展開法(QFD)的結合，能縮短整體操作步驟，提昇開發效率；並能快速獲得使用者需求，進而充分將使用者的需求轉換成產品開發時的設計參數，降低在需求品質-品質要素轉換時可能產生遺漏的缺失。透過視覺實驗的研究，能準確獲得較為舒適的理想尺寸提供設計摺疊椅時的參考尺寸，而透過觸覺實驗的研究能獲得構想評選時權重值的參考依據，評選出較受一般大眾所接受的構想，使整體開發過程更能迅速準確。簡言之，本研究結果可作為日後相關研究的基礎，同時也可協助企業與設計師，進行摺疊椅概念設計時之具體參考。

This study explored the impact on the new product development caused by cognitive differences and user needs by taking plastic folding chairs as example and validation. In the study of cognitive differences, the comfort of folding chairs perceived by watching and touching were compared. The experiment was divided into two stages: the first part used photos while the second part employing real chairs. The levels of comfort of eight chairs were evaluated subjectively using Likert scale in both stages. Finally Quantification Theory Type 1 was used for the statistical analysis. The results revealed that the weights of the comfort provided by seat cushions and back cushions of folding chairs were not different significantly while the former being slightly higher no matter by photo observation on computer screen or by trying real chair. When viewed photos on computer screen, subjects tended to neglect small dimensions such as the front curve of seat cushion and the curve of back cushion. After trying real chairs, the ranking of the importance to comfort was: front curve of seat cushion > seat-to-back angle > curve of back cushion > seat depth > back height > seat width. Ideal ranges of dimensions of more comfortable folding chairs decided during the real chairs experiments could serve as the reference dimensions for 2D assembly drawings in the stage of detailed design while the partial correlation coefficients obtained during the photo observation experiments, can serve as weights reference in the stage of appraisal on 3D renderings.
In the study of user needs, Evaluation Grid Method (EGM) and Quality Function Deployment (QFD) were integrated to shorten the planning procedures of product design and development. The original evaluation items of plastic folding chairs, i.e., customer demands (middle level), the concrete criteria, i.e., quality elements (lower level) and the abstract reasons (upper level) were first extracted during the in-depth-interview with experts. After the interviews, quality elements were then transformed into questionnaire for the investigation of the importance of user needs items, and used AHP to calculate the weight value of the importance. The original evaluation items obtained by EGM further served as the user needs items on the left-hand side of the house of quality, while the concrete criteria as the quality elements on the top, and the abstract reasons as the construction elements of user needs items and quality elements. After the transformation, an expanded matrix of required quality-quality elements could be obtained, and then the user needs for folding chairs can then be established.
A satisfaction test was conducted for the final design in this study to reveal that the overall user satisfaction reached 99.3%. It showed that, by combining EGM and QFD, the overall design and development procedure could be shortened and the efficiency could be increased. And, user needs could be acquired more rapidly and fully transformed into design parameters without missing quality elements during the transformation. The ideal and more comfortable dimensions were obtained during the visual experiments to serve as the reference dimensions when designing folding chairs. Reference weights for idea appraisal were obtained during the tactile experiments to serve as reference for choosing ideas that will be accepted by most of the average people to make the overall development process even more rapid and precise. In short, while the results of this study can serve as the foundation of related research in the future, they can also assist the enterprises and designers in conducting the conceptual design of folding chairs and serve as a consolidated reference during the design stage.

參考文獻
外文部份
Age C. Mandel, (1976). Work-Chair with Tilting Seat, Ergonomics, Vol. 19, Issue 2, pp. 157-164.
Alvin R. Tilley, (1998). The Measure of Man and Woman,Human Factors in Design Henery Dreyfuss Associates,New York.
Atanu Chaudhuri and Malay Bhattacharyya.(2009). A combined QFD and integer programming framework to determine attribute levels for conjoint study, International Journal of Production ResearchVolume 47, Issue 23, pp. 6633-6649.
Baxter, M., (1995). Product Design Practical Methods for the Systematic Development of New Products, Cgapman & Hall, London.
Benner M., Linnemann A. R, Jongen W.M.F.& Folstar P., (2002). Quality Function (QFD)-can it be used to develop food products？Food Quality and Preference, Vol. 14, pp. 327-339.
B. Shackel , K. D. Chidsey and Pat Shipley, (1969). The Assessment of Chair Comfort, Ergonomics, Vol. 12, Issue 2, pp. 269-306.
Case-Smith,J. ( 2010). Occupational therapy in children. Elsevier Mosby: St. Louis.
Chih-Hsien Chen, (2011). Improvement of QFD-based total quality for local cultural industries: procedural and empirical investigation, Journal of the Chinese Institute of Industrial Engineers,28, 124-133.
Chen C. C. , & Su W. C. ,(2012). Applying Kano Model into the Innovative Product Design Using the Material Rush Grass, Journal of Cultural and Creative Industries Research, Vol. 2, No. 4, pp. 383-402.
D. M. Barkla, (1964). Chair angels, duration of sitting, and comfort ratings, Ergonmics, Vol. 7, Issue 3,pp. 297-304.
Fariborz, P., (2006). An Analytic Model for Locating Facilities Strategically. Omega, 34, pp.41-55.
Elif Kılıç Delice and Zülal Güngör,(2011). A mixed integer goal programming model for discrete values of design requirements in QFD, International Journal of Production ResearchVolume 49, Issue 10, pp 2941-2957.
E. F. Le Chartentier, (1969). Easy Chair Diminsions for Comfort-tive Approach, Egonomics, Vol. 12,Issue 2, PP. 328-337.
Fukuji I. and Shuntaro K. , (2009). Using Evaluation Grid Methods and Think Aloud Methods to Identify Undergraduate Students’ Image of a Desirable Bookstore, Asia-Pacific Conference on Library & Information Education & Practice, pp. 1-34.
Hanumaiah,N., Ravi, B., &Mukherjee, N. P., (2006). Rapid Hard Tooling Process Selection Using QFD-Ahp Methodogy. Journal of Manufacturing Technology Management, 17(3),332-350.
Havser,J.R., & Clausing D., (1988). The House of quality. Harvard Business Review, pp. 1-11.
Junichiro Sanui, (1996), Visualization of users' requirements: Introduction of the Evaluation Grid Method. Proceedings of the 3rd Design &Decision Support Systems in Architecture &Urban Planning Conference, Vol.1, pp. 365-374.
Kelly, G.A., (1955), The psychology of personal constructs. 2 volumes, New York: Norton.
Likert, Rensis, (1932), A Technique for the Measurement of Attitudes, Archives of Psychology, pp. 1~55.
Lueder. R. K., (1995). Seat Comfort: a review of the contract in the office envirement
Human Factors 25, pp.701~711.
Miho Suzuki, (2008). Visual and tactile cross-modal mere exposure effects, Cognition & Emotion,vol.22, pp.2007-2029.
Marks, L. E., （1978）. Multimodal Perception"，Handbook of Perception，pp321-339。
Martin G. Helander, (1995). Ergonomics of ergonomic chairs-a study of adjustability features, Ergonomics , vol. 38, no.10, pp.147-154.
Martin G Helander, (2003). Forget about ergonomics in chair design ? Focus on aesthetics and comfort! , Ergnomics, Vol. 46, Issue 13-14, pp. 1306-1319.
Maskell , P. and Malmberg, A. (1999). Localised learning and industrial competiveness, Cambridge Journal of Economics,23,167-185.
Motoyuki Akamatsu ,( 2007). A comparision of tactile, auditory, and visual feedback in a pointing taskusing a mouse-tape device, Ergonomics , vol.38, no4, pp.816-827.
Ronald, Mascitelli, (2000). From Experience: Harnessing tacit knowledge to achieve breakthrough innovation. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 17,179-193.
Prytherch, David and McLundie, Mairghread, (2002).So what is haptics anymay？Research issues in art design and media.ISSN 1474-2365. Issue No.2, Spring.
Pullman, M. E., Moore, W.L., &Wardell, D . G., (2002). Acomparison of quality
funcation deployment and conjoint analysis in new product design, Vol. 19, pp.354-364.
P. Radhakrishnan, Dr. V. M. Prasad and Dr. M. R. Gopalan, (2009). Extensive Analysis and Prediction of Optimal Inventory levels in supply chain management based on Particle Swarm Optimization Algorithm, Journal of Convergence Information Technology, 4, 25-33.
Rungtai Lin , ( 2012). Ergonomic Design for High Shool Desk and Chair in Taiwan”,
Journal of the Chinese Institute of Industrial Engineers, vol.17, no.3, pp.291-299.
Sanui, J., (1996). Visualization of usera’ requirements: Introduction of the Evaluation Grid Method. Proceedings of the 3rd Design & Decision Support Systems in Architecture & Urban Planning Conference, Vol.1, pp.365-374.
Shackel, B., Chidsev. K. D, . and Shipley. P., (2009). The assessment of chair comfort .” In Grandjean , (E .) . Proceedings of the symposium on Sitting Posyure , pp.155~192
S. Vinodh and J. Srikrishna. (2012). Application of fuzzy logic-based Eco-QFD for a disconnecting switch , International Journal of Sustainable Engineering Vol. 5, Issue 2, pp109-119.
Tafeuchi, H.and I. Nonaka (1986),The Product Development Game,Harvard Business Review,Vol.64,No.1, pp.137-146.
Ujigawa M. , Maruyama G. and Sanui J. ,(1999). Development of evaluation grid method using electronic-mail. A study on users' preference for gas stations, Journal of Architecture, Planning and Environmental Engineering, VOL. 518; pp.75-80

中文部份
馬敏元 (2010)，淺談日本新產品開發之感「心」技術，工業材料雜誌，台彎，工業技術研究院，160-172。
鄧振源、曾國雄 (1989)，層級分析法（AHP）的內涵特性與應用（下），中國統計學報，第27卷，第7期，p.1-20。