在數位環境下，數位科技改變人們日常生活與資訊取得方式，本研究的目的期望探討不同世代在資訊行為上的特徵與差異，換言之，希望了解數位原生與數位移民不同世代的資訊行為與互動的情形，特別是數位原生與數位移民在工作/課業情境與日常生活情境下的資訊行為，包括在資訊尋求的歷程中產生哪些資訊需求？使用哪些資訊尋求管道？面對大量的資訊時是如何篩選合適的資訊？滿足資訊需求之後是否還會再進行資訊分享，延續資訊的價值？除了探討不同世代的資訊行為之外，還會進一步探討代間在資訊與情感交流上有何特質。
本研究採用質性取向的半結構訪談法，以滾雪球取樣方式訪談10位數位原生與10位數位移民，並輔以White等人提出的V&R地圖來描述受訪者的資訊資源使用狀況。本研究以紮根理論為依據，將收集的訪談資料加以編碼。研究結果發現（一）數位原生與數位移民在工作/學業中的資訊行為方面：（1）資訊需求與職業有關、（2）數位移民主要資訊尋求管道為尋引擎與人脈，數位原生會使用搜尋引擎、書籍與其他線上資源、（3）數位原生與數位移民皆會依據資訊權威、判斷資訊內容與詢問相關人員做為資訊評估之參考，數位原生還會觀察資訊的重複性與參考網友評論、（4）資訊的分享與資訊使用目的有關；（二）數位原生與數位移民在日常生活中的資訊行為方面：（1）數位移民與數位原生的資訊需求有知識性與消費性，數位原生還有休閒性的需求、（2）數位移民與數位原生皆會使用搜尋引擎、手機應用程式與社群網站進行資訊搜尋，數位原生還會參考網友經驗分享、人脈與書籍、（3）數位原生與數位移民在搜尋引擎檢索到的資訊會根據資訊權威、判斷資訊內容與親自查證來做評估，而社群網站則視社團人數、按讚數與內容來判斷，而數位原生還會參考網友評論、（4）數位原生與數位移民皆會使用社群網站進行大眾分享，經由貼文與轉分享傳播資訊，小眾分享方面數位移民多透過單一通訊軟體進行分享，而數位原生則會使用數個通訊工具進行分享；（三）數位原生與數位移民互動現象方面：（1）代間互動經驗上，數位原生主會教導數位移民如何使用科技工具與提供資訊，數位移民則會透過即時通訊來分享資訊與關心子女、（2）代間互動後的影響，包括：數位移民學習使用科技增加溝通管道，並且取得親友的即時動態，代間在教學上有良好的交流，不過也導致親子面對面互動減少，並且數位移民慣於尋求數位原生之協助，數位移民和數位原生相較，不易直觀使用科技產品，以及會因為資訊解讀的不同而產生衝突等。

In the digital environment, digital technology changes people's daily lives and information acquisition methods. The purpose of this study is to explore the characteristics and differences of information behavior in different generations. In other words, I would like to know the information behavior and interaction of several native and digital immigrants in different generations, especially the information behavior of several native and digital immigrants in the work/course situation and daily life situation. Do research questions include what information needs are generated in the journey of information seeking? What methods are used to seek information? How to choose the right information? Will you share the information further? In addition to exploring the information behavior of different generations, it also explores the characteristics of intergenerational communication in information and emotions.
In this study, qualitative semi-structured interviews were used to interview 10-digit native and 10-digit immigrants by snowball sampling, and the V&R map proposed by White et al. was used to describe the information resources of respondents. Based on grounded theory, this study encodes the collected interview data. The results of the study found that (1) the information behavior of several native and digital immigrants in work/study: (A) information needs are related to occupations, and (B) digital immigrants mainly seek channels to find engines and contacts. Digital natives will also use search engines, books, and other online resources, and (C) several digital natives and digital immigrants will judge the basis based on the information authority, content and relevant personnel. Digital natives will also observe the repetitiveness of information and online reviews, and (D) Information sharing is related to the purpose of information use. (2) Information behaviors of several digital natives and digital immigrants in daily lives: (A) digital immigrants and digital native information needs are knowledgeable and purchasing-oriented. Digital natives also have casual information needs, (B) digital immigrants and digital natives will use search engines, mobile applications and social networking sites for information search. Digital natives will also refer to online experience sharing, connections and books, and (C) several natives and digital immigrants will evaluated on the search engine based on information authority, content and secondary verification. They also judge the social networking site according to the number of people in the community, by the number of praises and content. Digital natives will also refer to online reviews, (D) several digital natives and digital immigrants will use the social networking site for public sharing and disseminate information through postings and sharing. For sharing in the small groups, several digital immigrants share through a single communication software, but several digital natives use several communication tools to share. (3) The interaction between several native and digital immigrants: (A) in the experience of intergenerational interaction, the digital natives will teach digital immigrants to use handheld devices and provide information. Digital immigrants will share information and care for their children through instant messaging, and (B) the impact of intergenerational interactions, including digital immigrants, learn to use handheld gadgets to increase communication channels and get instant updates of relatives and friends. There are good exchanges in teaching between generations, but it also leads to a reduction in a face-to-face interaction between parents and children. Several digital immigrants are accustomed to seeking assistance from several digital natives. Compared with digital natives, digital immigrants are not easy to use handheld electronics intuitively. Moreover, intergenerational conflicts arise due to differences in information interpretation.

一、中文部分
台灣網路資源中心網路使用調查（2016）。TWNIC 2016年6月「寬頻網路使用調查 」報告。檢自：http://www.twnic.net.tw/download/200307/200307index.shtml
古必鵬（2008）。網路社群資訊分享行為之探討：以GOGOBOX網路社群平臺為例。社教雙月刊，93，22–25。
李青芬與唐先梅 (2008)。民眾對代間學習之初探研究。載於中華民國家庭教育學會(主編)：人口結構改變與家庭教育(頁213-233)。台北：師大書苑。
林珊如（2001）。圖書資訊學概論。台北:國立空中大學
林珊如（2002）。網路使用者特性與資訊行為研究趨勢之探討。圖書資訊學刊，17，35-47。
林珊如（2006）。資訊行為研究的理論性考察。行政院國家科學委員會專題研究計畫成果報告（編號： NSC 94-2413-H-002-008-），未出版。
林宜穎（2005）。美國代間學習之研究（博士論文）。取自臺灣博碩士論文系統。
林麗惠（2011）。代間學習方案對世代互動影響之研究。教育學刊，37，119-150。
李郁雅（2000）。博士論文硏究歷程中情境與資訊行為之探索: 以植物分類學為例（未出版之碩士論文）。國立台灣大學圖書資訊學研究所，台北市。
李青松、林歐貴英、陳若琳與潘榮吉（2010）。老人與家庭。臺北市：國立空中大學。
徐新逸與彭康鈞（2013）。大學生與大學教師在資訊行為考量因素之比較研究。 教育資料與圖書館學，50（3），393-423。
陳向明（2002）。社會科學質的硏究。台北，五南圖書。
陳毓璟（2014）。代間學習策略融入社會老年學之學習歷程與成效研究。教育科學研究期刊，59（3），1-28。
黃慕萱（1994）。情境模式在解釋資訊尋求行為之適用性探討。圖書館學刊，9，49-70。
黃慕萱（2001）。成人讀者之資訊尋求行為。臺北市立圖書館館訊，19（2），8-23。
黃富順（2004）。高齡學習。台北：五南出版社。
黃國城（2007）。代間學習及其對高齡教育之啟示。社區發展季刊，118，265-278。
黃迺毓、周麗端、林如萍、鄭淑子、陳若琳與唐先梅 (2004)。家庭生活教育導論。台北縣：國立空中大學。
蔡至欣、賴玲玲（2011）。虛擬社群的資訊分享行為。圖書資訊學刊，9（1），161-196。
國家發展委員會（2016）。105年臺灣世代數位機會發展現況。國家發展委員會，未出版。
葉乃靜（2005）。多元文化下的資訊行為研究。臺北市:文華。
葉乃靜（2011）。日常生活中的資訊人。臺北市: 文華。
劉玉玲（2014）。數位原生與數位移民的網路科技運用。臺灣教育評論月刊，3（7），4-8。

二、英文部分
Aday, R. H., McDuffie, W., & Sims, C. R. (1993). Impact of an intergenerational program on black adolescents’ attitudes toward the elderly. Educational Gerontology, 19, 663-673.
Allen, T. J. (1969). Information needs and uses. Annual Review of Information Science And Technology, 4, 3-29.
American Library Association (1989) American Library Association Presidential Committee on Information Literacy. Final Report. Chicago: ALA.
Ansari, M. N. (2008).Information seeking behavior models：a review. Pakistan Library & Information Science Journal, 39 (4), 3-16.
Bar-Ilan, J. and Belous, Y. (2007).Children as architects of web directories.Journal of The American Society for Information Science and Technology, 58 (6), 895-907.
Bao, X., & Bouthillier, F. (2013, October). Information sharing: As a type of information behavior. In Proceedings of the Annual Conference of CAIS/Actes du congrès annuel de l'ACSI.
Belkin, N.J. (1980). Anomalous state of knowledge as a basis for information retrieval. Canadian Journal of Information Science, 5, 133-143.
Bennett, S., Maton, K., & Kervin, L. (2008). The ‘digital natives’ debate: A critical review of the evidence. British Journal of Educational Technology, 39(5), 775-786. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8535.2007.00793.
Berenbaum, R. L., & Zweibach, D. F. (1996). Young adults and down syndrome as caregivers for the elderly with dementia: An intergenerational project. Journal of Gerontological Social Work, 26(3), 159-169.
Bostrum,A. K., Hatton-Yeo, A., Ohsaka,T. and Sawano,Y. (2000). A general assessment of IP initiatives in the countries involved. Retrived from http:// www.unesco.org/
education/uie/pdf/intergen.pdf.
Chen, C. C., & Hernon, P. (1982). Information seeking: assessing and anticipating user needs. NY: Neal-Schuman .
Clough, B.S.(1992).Broadening perspectives on learning activities in later life. Educational Gerontology, 18, 447-459.
Connaway, L. S., Radford, M. L., Dickey, T. J., De Angelis Williams, J., & Confer, P. (2008).Sense-making and synchronicity: Information-seeking behaviors of Millennials and Baby Boomers. Libri, 58(2), 123-135.
Connaway, L. S., Lanclos, D. M., & Hood, E. M. (2015). “I always stick with the first thing that comes up on Google...” Where People Go for Information, What They Use, and Why. The Library in the Life of the User, 173.
Crook, C. (2008). Web 2.0 technologies for learning: The current landscape–opportunities, challenges and tensions.
Dede, C. (2005). Planning for neomillennial learning styles. Educause Quarterly 28(1). Retrieved from http://www.educause.edu
Dervin, B. (1992). From the mind’s eye of the user: The sense-making qualitative-quantitative methodology. Qualitative Research in Information Management, 9, 61-84.
Erdelez, S. (1997). Information encountering: A conceptual framework for accidental information discovery. Information Seeking in Context.Proceedings of the International Conference on Research in Information Needs, Seeking and use in Different Contexts. Retrieved from https://search.proquest.com/docview/
57419338?accountid=14228
Erdelez, S., & Rioux, K. (2000). Sharing information encountered for others on the web. New Review of Information Behaviour Research, 1, 219-233. Retrieved from https://search.proquest.com/docview/57570242?accountid=14228
Flanagan, J. C. (1954). The Critical Incident Technique. Psychological Bulletin, 51, 327-58.
Gaston, J. (2006). Reaching and teaching the digital natives. Library Hi Tech News, (23)3, 12-13.
Granville, G. (2002). A review of intergenerational practice in the UK. Beth Johnson Foundation.Retrieved from ttp://scottishmentoringnetwork.co.uk/assets/
downloads/resources/intergenerational.pdf
Hassan, L. (2013). Assessing the information needs of historians working with digitised primary sources in the UK: A sequential mixed methods study(doctoral dissertation, University of Huddersfield ). Retrieved from http://eprints.hud.ac.uk/19321/1/
Havenstein, H. (2016, September 17). Generation Y in the workplace; Digital natives’ tech need are changing companies forever. Retrieved from http://www.cio.com/article/2433628/staff-management/generation-y-in-the-workplace--digital-natives--tech-needs-are-changing-companies-f.html
Heathfield, S. M. (2011). Managing millennials: Eleven tips for managing millennials. Retrieved from:http://humanresources.about.com/od/managementtips/a/ millen
ials.htm?p=1
Herrmann, D. S., Sipsas-Herrmann, A., Stafford, M. & Herrmann, N.C. (2005). Benefits and risks of intergenerational program participation by senior citizens. Educational Gerontology, 31, 123-138.
Ito, M., Horst, H., Bittanti, M., Boyd, D., Herr-Stephenson, R., Lange, P., Pascoe, C. and Robinson,L.(2008).Living and Learning with New Media.Chicago, MacArthur Foundation .
Jukes, I., & Dosaj, A. (2006). Understanding digital children (DKs): Teaching & learning in the new digital landscape. Retrieved from https://pdfs.semanticscholar.
org/c320/ab40afe340839998c34c866372a5b4706fc5.pdf
Krikelas, J. (1983). Information-Seeking Behavior: Patterns and Concepts. Drexel Library Quarterly, 19(2), 5-20.
Kuhlthau, C. (1988). Developing a model of the information search process of users in libraries. Library and Information Science Research, 10(3), 257-304.
Kuhlthau, C. C., Heinstrom, J., & Todd, R. J. (2008).The 'Information Search Process' Revisited： Is the Model Still Useful? .Information Research, 13(4).
Kumar, G. (1990).Defining the concept of information needs. Binwal, J. C.et al (eds.) In social science information: problems and prospects(p.p295). New Delhi :Vikas.
Kurt, A. A., Günüç, S., & Ersoy, M. (2013). The current state of digitalization: Digital native, digital immigrant and digital settler. Egitim Bilimleri Fakultesi Dergisi, 46(1), 1-22.
Kvavik, R. B., Caruso, J. B. & Morgan, G. (2004). ECAR study of students and information technology2004: convenience, connection, and control. Boulder, CO: EDUCAUSE Center for Applied Research.Retrieved from http://www.educause.
edu/ir/library/pdf/ers0405/rs/ers0405w.pdf
Lei, J. (2009). Digital natives as preservice teachers: What technology preparation is needed? . Journal of Computing in Teacher Education, 25(3), 87-97.
Lankshear, C. and Knoebel, M. (2004).From flogging to blogging via wifi. paper presented at the American Educational Research Association Annual Meeting.San Diego, CA.
Livingstone, S. (2009). Children and the Internet. Cambridge.Boston ,Polity Press.
Ljoså, E. (1998). The role of university teachers in a digital era. European Journal of Open, Distance and E-Learning, 1(2).
Lohman, H., Griffiths, Y., Coppard, B. M., & Cota, L. (2003) The power of book discussion groups in intergenerational learning, Educational Gerontology, 29　,103-115.
Manheimer, R.J., Snodgrass,D.D. & McKenzie, D.M. (1995).Older adult education：A guide to research,program and policies. Westport, Conn.Greenwood Press.
Marchionini G. (1995). Information seeking. In Electronic Environments. Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge University Press.
Marshall, C., & Rossman, G. B. (2010). Designing qualitative research. NY：Sage.
McNeely, B. (2005). Using technology as a learning tool, not just the cool new thing. Educating the net generation, 4-1.
Meshel, D.S. (2004). Intergenerational contact,attitudes,and stereotypes of adolescents and older people. Education Gerontology, 30(6), 457-479.
Moody, H. R. (2002). Aging: Concept and controversies(4th Ed). Thousand Oaks,Calif.: Pine Forge Press.
Newman, S.＆ Smith, T.B. (1997). Developmental theories as the basis for intergene rational programs. Washington, DC: Taylor & Francis.
Oblinger, D., & Oblinger, J. (2005). Is it age or IT: First steps toward understanding the net generation. Educating the net generation, 2(1-2), 20.
Oblinger, D. G., van’t Hooft, M., Greenfield, A., de Freitas, S., Tonkin, E., & Haller, M. (2008).Emerging technologies for learning. Coventry: British Educational Communicationsand Technology Agency. Retrieved from http://dera.ioe.ac.uk/1503/
Ohsako, T. (2002). The role of intergenerational program in promoting lifelong learning for all ages. Retrieved December 23, 2004 from http:// www. unesco. org/education/uie/pdf/uiestud36.pdf
O'Reilly, T. (2005). What is web 2.0. Retrieved from http://www.oreilly.com/pub/a
/web2/archive/what-is-web-20.html
Palfrey, J. G., & Gasser, U. (2013). Born digital: Understanding the first generation of digital natives. Basic Books.
Pettigrew, K. E., Fidel, R. & Bruce, H.(2001). Conceptual frameworks in information behavior. Annual Review of Information Science and Technology (ARIST),35,43-78.
Pew Research Center (2007) .A Portrait of ‘Generation Next’- How Young People View Their Lives, Futures and Politics. Retrieved from http://www.people-press.org
/2007/01/09/a-portrait-of-generation-next/
Prensky, M. (2001). Digital natives, digital immigrants . On the Horizon, 9(5), 1-6.
Rainie(2006).New Workers, New Workplaces: Digital ‘Natives’ Invade the Workplace.Pew Internet & American Life Project.Retreved from http://www.
pewinternet.org/2006/09/28/new-workers-new-workplaces-digital-natives-invade-the-workplace/
Ransdell, S., Kent, B., Gaillard‐Kenney, S., & Long, J. (2011). Digital immigrants fare better than digital natives due to social reliance. British Journal of Educational Technology, 42(6), 931-938.
Rioux, K. (2005). Rioux’s information acquiring-and-sharing framework. In K. E. Fisher, S. Erdelez, & L. McKechnie (Eds.), Theories of information behavior (pp. 169-173). Medford, N.J.: Published for the American Society for Information Science and Technology by Information Today.
Rosenblum, B. (2008).Developing new skills and expertise to support digital scholarship and scholarly communication. paper presented at World Library and Information Congress:74th IFLA General Conference and Council, Québec, Canada. Abstract retrieved fromhttps://kuscholarworks.ku.edu/handle/1808/4098
Salajan, F. D., Schönwetter, D. J., & Cleghorn, B. M. (2010). Student and faculty inter-generational digital divide: Fact or fiction?. Computers & Education, 55(3), 1393-1403.
Savolainen, R. (1995). Everyday life information seeking: Approaching information seeking in the context of “way of life”. Library & information science research, 17(3), 259-294.
Savolainen, R. (2008). Everyday information practices: a social phenomenological perspective. Maryland:Scarecrow Press.
Selwyn, N. (2009). The digital native: Myth and reality. Aslib Proceedings: New Information Perspectives, 61(4), 364-379.
Smith, E. E. (2012). The digital native debate in higher education: A comparative analysis of recent literature. Canadian Journal of Learning and Technology, 38(3). Retrieved from http://www.cjlt.ca/index.php/cjlt
Smith, E. (2013). Are Adult Educators and Learners ‘Digital Immigrants’? Examining the Evidence and Impacts for Continuing Education. Canadian Journal of University Continuing Education, 39(1).
Strom, R.D., & Strom, S.(1996) Developing curricula for grandparents in Japan. Educational Gerontology, 22(8), 781-794.
Talja, S. (2002). Information sharing in academic communities: Types and levels of collaboration in information seeking and use. New Review of Information Behavior Research, 3(1), 143-159.
Taylor, R. S. (1968). Question-negotiation and information seeking in libraries. College & Research Libraries, 29(3), 178-194.
Tapscott, D. (2008). Grown up digital: How the net generation is changing your world . NY: McGraw-Hill.
Tapscott, D. and Williams, A. (2008).Wikinomics: How Mass Collaboration Changes Everything, Atlantic. New York: Penguin.
Todd, R. J. (1999). Back to our beginnings: Information utilization, Bertram Brookes and the fundamental equation of information science. Information Processing & Management, 35(6), 851-870.
Todd, R. J. (2006). From Information to Knowledge: Charting and Measuring Changes in Students' Knowledge of a Curriculum Topic. Information Research: An International Electronic Journal, 11(4), n4.
UNESCO (2000). Adult learning and ageing populations. Adult learning and groups with special needs. Aseries of 29 booklets. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 435 015).
Wallis, C. (2006).The multitasking generation.Time, 167 (13), 48-55.
Warschauer, M. (2003). Technology and social inclusion: Rethinking the digital　divide.Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Weller, A. (2005). Information seeking behaviour in generation Y students: Motivation, critical thinking and learning theory. Journal of Academic Librarianship, 31(1), 46-63.
White, D. S., & Le Cornu, A. (2011). Visitors and Residents: A new typology for online engagement. First Monday, 16(9).
White, D., Connaway, L. S., Lanclos, D., Le Cornu, A. & Hood, E. (2012). Digital visitors and residents (Progress Report). Retrieved from. https://www.webarchive.org.uk/wayback/archive/20140615023148/http://www.jisc.ac.uk/media/documents/projects/visitorsandresidentsinterim%20report.pdf
White, D., & M Lanclos, D. (2015). Visitors and Residents mapping workshop. Retrieved from. http://daveowhite.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/02/VandRWork
shopformat240215.pdf
Widén, G., Heinström, J., Österbacka, E., Ahmad, F., & Huvila, I. (2016). The Interplay Between Generations and Individual Differences in Information Sharing at the Workplace. Journal of Library and Information Science, 42(1), 79-82.
Williamson, K. (1998).Discovered by chance: The role incidental information acquisition in an ecological model of information use. Library & Information Science Research, 20(1), 23-40.
Wilson, T. D. (1997).Information behaviour: an interdisciplinary perspective. Information processing & management, 33(4), 551-572.
Wilson, T. D. (1981). On user studies and information needs. Journal of documentation, 37(1), 3-15.
Wilson, T. D. (1994). Information needs and uses: fifty years of progress. Fifty years of information progress: a Journal of Documentation review, 15-51.
Wilson, T.D. (1999). Model in information behavior research. Journal of Documentation, 55(3), 249-257.
Wilson, T. D. (2000). Human information behavior. Informing science, 3(2), 49-56.
Vakkari, P., Savolainen, R., & Dervin, B. (1997). Information seeking in context. London: Taylor Graham.
Zhao, Y. C., Xu, X., Sun, X., & Zhu, Q. (2014). An integrated framework of online generative capability: Interview from digital immigrants. Aslib Journal of Information Management, 66(2), 219-239.