同樣的幽默圖像，為何有人覺得好笑，有人卻甚感無聊？是部份讀者沒有注意到圖像的細節，還是觀看相同的位置但卻沒有激發幽默反應？如果以引導參與者之注意力後，會不會使其更好笑？
實驗一以準實驗方式研究高低幽默理解、高低幽默欣賞組別於觀看幽默圖像時眼動軌跡之差異，並以眼動技術探討影響幽默理解與幽默欣賞的成因。首先進行紙本預試（N = 24）方式挑選出最高理解高有趣和最低理解低有趣的圖片作正式實驗用。正式實驗則用獨立樣本t檢定進行單純效果分析（N = 42）。結果發現參與者高理解、有趣組別之凝視熱區圖（Fixation Map）略有不同，詳細分析瞳孔熱區圖（Pupil Heat Map）後發現高理解、高有趣組瞳孔均激發在圖片重點位置中；低理解、低有趣組瞳孔激發分散，於無非重要資訊的位置被激發。
實驗二以實驗操弄閃爍方式引導參與者注意圖片中之關鍵區域（N = 20），關鍵區域為實驗一中高理解、高有趣參與者之凝視位置，實驗結果與實驗一之參與者作比較理解程度與有趣程度之比較。結果發現閃爍關鍵區域有效提升圖片之理解程度，而對於低理解、低有趣程度的圖片時能提升有趣程度。
本研究兩項實驗中，研究結果最後支持高低理解程度差異在於注意力，高低有趣組別差異是個體幽默感不同所造成。

Why the same humoral picture does receive different evaluation? Is it because people watched different location? Or people watch the same places but process distinct way? We could not know why until using Eye Tracker technique. Experiment 1 comparing high- and low-group of humor when viewing pictures, to investigate the causes of humor appreciation and humor comprehension. 45 Participants are required to evaluate understanding and funniness after viewing 2 humor pictures. The results confirmed that high- and low-group of humor with no differences in eye movement, such as fixation map, average saccade count, average fixation duration and average fixation count. But pupil heat map showed that the higher group feel more excited than the lower group at the “key point”. In experiment 2 show the effect of using attention guide (Blinking the key point of humor picture) when viewing pictures. Compare to experiment 1, attention guide helped to improve humor comprehension, not funniness. This study support funniness caused by senses of humor, and humor comprehension caused by humor attention.

中文部份
伊彬、林演慶（2008）。視覺影像處理之眼球運動相關研究探討。設計學報，11（4），59-80。
林耀南、曹毓珊、林怡君（2011）。幽默廣告類型與訊息正反性對廣告喜好度之影響-以恐懼訴求爲干擾變項。輔仁管理評論，18（3），19-47。
許峻豪、鄭谷苑（2005）。圖像幽默理解歷程與雙路徑幽默理解模式。應用心理研究，26，117-142。
陳淑蓉、陳學志（2005）。幽默感的定義與測量：多向度幽默感量表之編製。應用心理研究，26，167-187。
陳學志（1991）。幽默理解的認知歷程。國立台灣大學心理學系博士論文。
陳學志、郭姵含、詹雨臻、蘇雅靜（2011年10月）。文字與圖像訊息對幽默欣賞及幽默理解的影響─眼動軌跡分析研究。「第50屆台灣心理學會」發表論文。台中市亞洲大學。
陳學志、彭淑玲、曾千芝、邱皓政（2008）。藉由眼動追蹤儀器探討平均掃視幅度大小與創造力之關係。教育心理學報，39，127-149。
陳學志、賴惠德、邱發忠（2010）。眼球追蹤技術在學習與教育上的應用。教育科學研究期刊，55（4），39 -68 。
陳學志、蘇嘉鈴、葉季蓉（2011）。幽默對創造力認知與特質成分之預測效果研究。創造學刊，2（1），53-78.
曾千芝（2009）。頓悟性問題解題歷程之眼動分析。國立臺灣師範大學教育心理與輔導學系碩士論文。
鄧育仁、孫式文（2000）。廣告裡的圖象隱喻：從多空間模式分析。新聞學研究第，62，35-71。
鄭昭明、陳學志、詹雨臻、梁庚辰（2010年6月）。中文笑話的理解、好笑及厭惡評定之常模建立。陳學志（主持人），中文笑話。第22屆國際幽默研討會，香港城市大學。
鄭昭明、陳學志、詹雨臻、蘇雅靜、曾千芝（2013）。台灣地區華人情緒與相關心理生理資料庫─中文笑話評定常模。中華心理學刊，55（4），555-569.
簡郁芩、吳昭容（2012）。以眼動型態和閱讀測驗表現探討箭頭在科學圖文閱讀中的圖示效果。中華心理學刊，54（3），385-402。
聶其陽、羅勁（2012）。“啊哈！” 和“哈哈！”：頓悟與幽默的腦認知成分比較。心理科學進展，20（002），219-227。
蘇雅靜（2010）。基模優勢性與推論難度對幽默故事理解之影響：以眼動資料為證據。國立台灣師範大學教育心理與輔導學系碩士論文。
蘇雅靜、鄭昭明、陳學志（2014）。笑話的逆溯推論歷程：以眼動資料為證。中華心理學刊，56（1），83-95。

外文部份
Apter, M. (1997). Reversal theory: What is it? Journal-Article, 10, 217-220.
Blair, M., Watson, M., & Meier, K. (2009). Errors, efficiency, and the interplay between attention and category learning. Cognition, 112(2), 330-336.
Chan, Y. C. (2014). Emotional structure of jokes: A corpus-based investigation. Bio-medical materials and engineering, 24(6), 3083-3090.
Chen, M., & Ko, H. (2010). Exploring the eye movement patterns as Chinese children read texts: A developmental perspective. Journal of Research in Reading, 3(1), 1-15.
De Luca, M., Di Pace, E., Judica, A., Spinelli, D., & Zoccolotti, P. (1999). Eye movement patterns in linguistic and non-linguistic tasks in developmental surface dyslexia. Neuropsychologia, 37(12), 1407-1420.
Duncker, K. (1945). On problem solving. Psychological Monographs, 58, 1-110.
Grant, E. R., & Spivey, M. J. (2003). Eye movements and problem solving guiding attention guides thought. Psychological Science, 14(5), 462-466.
Harms, E. (1943). The development of humor. The Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 38(3), 351.
Klin, A., Jones, W., Schultz, R., & Volkmar, F. (2003). The enactive mind, or from actions to cognition: lessons from autism. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences, 358(1430), 345-360.
Knoblich, G., Ohlsson, S., & Raney, G. E. (2001). An eye movement study of insight problem solving. Memory & Cognition, 29(7), 1000-1009.
Loftus, G. R. (1981). Tachistoscopic simulations of eye fixations on pictures. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Learning and Memory, 7(5), 369.
Martin, R. A. (2010). The psychology of humor: An integrative approach. Academic Press.
Nerhardt, G. (1970). Humor and inclination to laugh: emotional reactions to stimuli of different divergence from a range of expectancy. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology, 11, 185-195. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9450.1970.tb00734.
Nerhardt, G. (1976). Incongruity and funniness: Towards a new descriptive model. In A. J. Chapman & H. C. Foot (Eds.), Humour and laughter: Theory, research and applications (pp. 55-91). London: Wiley.
Nodine, C. F., Locher, p. J., & Krupinski, E. A. (1993). The role of formal art training on perception and aesthetic judgment of art compositions. Leonardo, 26(3), 219-227.
Norman, D. A., & Bobrow, D. G. (1975). On data-limited and resource-limited processes. Cognitive psychology, 7(1), 44-64.
Olson, R. K., Kliegl, R., & Davidson, B. J. (1983). Dyslexic and normal readers' eye movements. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 9(5), 816.
Phillips, B. J. (2000). The impact of verbal anchoring on consumer response to image ads. Journal of Advertising, 15-24.
Ruch, W. (1983). Humor-Test 3 WD ( Form A , B and K ).Unpublished manuscript. University of Düsseldorf, Department of Psychology, Düsseldorf, Germany.
Ruch, W. (1992). Assessment of appreciation of humor: Studies with the 3 WD Humor Test. In C. D. Spielberger & J. N. Butcher (Eds.), Advances in personality assessment (Vol. 9) (pp. 27-75). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Smith, M. (2001). Writing a successful paper. The Trey Research Monthly, 53, 149-150.
Speck, P. S. (1987). On humor and humor in advertising (Doctoral dissertation, Texas Tech University).
Strick, M., Holland, R. W., Van Baaren, R., & Van Knippenberg, A. (2009). Humor in the eye tracker: Attention capture and distraction from context cues. The Journal of General Psychology: Experimental, Psychological, and Comparative Psychology, 137(1), 37-48.
Suls, J. M. (1972). A two-stage model for the appreciation of jokes and cartoons: An information processing analysis. In J. H. Goldstein & p. E. McGhee (Eds.), The psychology of humor: Theoretical perspectives and empirical issues (pp. 81-100). New York: Academic Press.
Taylor, S. E. (1965). Eye movements in reading: Facts and fallacies. American Educational Research Journal, 2(4), 187-202.
Tseng, C. C., Chen, C. H., Chen, H. C., Sung, Y. T., & Chang, K. E. (2014). Verification of Dual Factors theory with eye movements during a matchstick arithmetic insight problem. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 13, 129-140.
Wyer, R. S., & Collins, J. E. (1992). A theory of humor elicitation. Psychological review, 99(4), 663.