隨著數位閱讀的興起，近年來用於輔助數位閱讀的合作式閱讀標註系統已成為研究的焦點。但是過去的研究指出，學習者在進行數位閱讀時，時常難以掌握閱讀數位文本的文章結構。此外，在利用合作式閱讀標註系統進行線上閱讀學習時，由閱讀者進行合作閱讀標註產生之複雜且分散的閱讀標註，會讓閱讀數位文本上的閱讀資訊變得更為複雜，也更難以掌握。因此，本研究針對輔助數位閱讀的合作式閱讀標註系統設計閱讀導覽地圖，以幫助學習者掌握閱讀數位文本的文章結構及各類別標註在文章中各章節的分布位置與數量，以提升學習者的文章結構理解成效，幫助學習者掌握整篇文章閱讀標註的狀況，進而希望提升學習者的閱讀理解成效與降低認知負荷。本研究以桃園縣石門國小五年級三個班級合計73名學生為研究對象，將其以班級為單位隨機分派為實驗組一、實驗組二與控制組，實驗組一採用具閱讀導覽地圖功能之合作式閱讀標註系統，搭配全階段合作閱讀標註輔以學習者進行線上閱讀學習；實驗組二採用具閱讀導覽地圖功能之合作式閱讀標註系統，搭配二階段個人閱讀及合作閱讀標註輔以學習者進行線上閱讀學習；控制組採用不具閱讀導覽地圖功能之合作式閱讀標註系統，搭配全階段合作閱讀標註輔以學習者進行線上閱讀學習。結果顯示採用具閱讀導覽地圖功能之合作式閱讀標註系統，搭配全階段合作閱讀標註輔以學習者進行線上閱讀學習，可以有效降低男性學習者的認知負荷。而採用具閱讀導覽地圖功能之合作式閱讀標註系統，搭配二階段個人閱讀及合作閱讀輔以學習者進行線上閱讀學習，可有效提升學習者的文章結構理解，特別是對於提升女性學習者的文章結構理解成效，顯著優於男性學習者；而對於提升場地相依學習者的文章結構理解成效，則顯著優於場地獨立學習者。

As digital reading is becoming more and more important in the digital age, many studies pay attention on developing collaborative reading annotation systems to assist digital reading for promoting reading comprehension performance. However, learners easily, generate cognitive load when they navigate a large amount of generated annotations and frequently suffer difficulties in understanding the text structure while reading digital texts with the support of the collaborative reading annotation system. To promote the text structure comprehension and reduce cognitive load while performing digital reading activity with the support of the collaborative reading annotation system, this study develops a reading navigation map on a collaborative reading annotation system for helping learners to understand text structure easily and knowing the positions and the amount of different types of annotations. Seventy-three Grade 5 students were recruited from three classes of an elementary school in Taoyuan County, Taiwan to participate in the instruction experiment and three classes were randomly assigned to experimental group 1, experimental group 2, and control group. The experimental group 1 and experimental group 2 used the collaborative reading annotation system with reading navigation map and the control group used the collaborative reading annotation system without the reading navigation map. During the instruction experiment, the learners of experimental group 1 and control group could fully access their own private annotations and peers’ annotations, while the experimental group 2 performed a two-stage reading activity that could only access their own private annotations in the first stage and could fully access their own private annotations and peers’ annotations in the second stage. Analytical results show that, the use of reading navigation map with fully access of collaborative reading function could reduce the cognitive load of male learners. And the use of reading navigation map with two steps of reading activity could enhance text structure comprehension, especially for the female learners and the field dependent learners.

中文部分
吳裕益。(1987)。認知能力與認知型態個別差異現象之探討。
林怡君、張麗麗、陸怡琮。(2013)。Rasch 模式建置國小高年級閱讀理解測驗。
教育心理學報， 45(1)。
周暐達。(2008) 。数位閱讀及其版權管理之探討。研考雙月刊，32(3)，44-52。
柯華葳、陳冠銘。(2004) 。文章結構標示與閱讀理解-以低年級學生為例。教育
心理學報，36(2)，185-200。
柯華葳、詹益綾、張建妤、游婷雅。（2008）。PIRLS2006報告：臺灣四年級學生閱讀素養。行政院國家科學委員專題研究成果報告(編號NSC96-MOE-S-008-002)。桃園：國立中央大學學習與教學研究所。
陳勇汀。(2011)。合作式閱讀標註之知識萃取機制研究。未出版之碩士論文，國
立政治大學圖書資訊與檔案學研究所，台北市。
陳麗華。（1988）。基模理論與教科書內容的設計。現代教育，4(10)，128-139。

英文部分
Abanomey, A. A. (2013). Do EFL Saudi learners perform differently with online
reading? An exploratory study. Journal of King Saud University-Languages and
Translation, 25(1), 1-11.
Amadieu, F., Tricot, A., & Mariné, C. (2009). Prior knowledge in learning from a
non-linear electronic document: Disorientation and coherence of the reading
sequences. Computers in Human Behavior, 25(2), 381-388.
Chen, C. M., & Chen, F. Y. (2014). Enhancing digital reading performance with a
collaborative reading annotation system. Computers & Education, 77, 67-81.
Chen, N. S., Teng, D. C. E., & Lee, C. H. (2011). Augmenting paper-based reading
activity with direct access to digital materials and scaffolded questioning. Computers & Education, 57(2), 1705-1715.
Chen, Y. C., Hwang, R. H., & Wang, C. Y. (2012). Development and evaluation of a
Web 2.0 annotation system as a learning tool in an e-learning environment.
Computers & Education, 58(4), 1094-1105.
Coiro, J., & Dobler, E. (2007). Exploring the online reading comprehension strategies
used by sixth‐grade skilled readers to search for and locate information on the
Internet. Reading research quarterly, 42(2), 214-257.
Conklin, J. (1987). Hypertext: An introduction and survey. IEEE computers, 20(9),17–
41.
Conole, G., & Alevizou, P. (2010). A literature review of the use of Web 2.0 tools in
Higher Education. A report commissioned by the Higher Education Academy.
Cook, L. K., & Mayer, R. E. (1988). Teaching readers about the structure of scientific
text. Journal of Educational Psychology, 80(4), 448.
Dwyer, C. A. (1973). Sex differences in reading: An evaluation and a critique of
current theories. Review of Educational Research, 455-467.
Davis, J., & Huttenlocher, D. (1995). Shared annotation for cooperative learning
proceedings of CSCL95: First international conference on computer support for
collaborative learning (pp. 84–88). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Davis, J. K., & Frank, B. M. (1979). Learning and memory of field
independent-dependent individuals. Journal of Research in Personality, 13(4),
469-479.
DeStefano, D., & LeFevre, J. A. (2007). Cognitive load in hypertext reading: A review. Computers in Human Behavior, 23(3), 1616-1641.
Felder, R. M., & Silverman, L. K. (1988). Learning and teaching Styles in engineering education. Journal of 1.Engineering Education, 78(7), 674-681.
Finn, J. D. (1980). Sex differences in educational outcomes: A cross-national study.
Sex Roles, 6(1), 9-26.
Ford, N., & Chen, S. Y. (2000). Individual differences, hypermedia navigation, and
learning: an empirical study. Journal of educational multimedia and hypermedia,
9(4), 281-311.
Ford, N., & Miller, D. (1996). Gender differences in Internet perceptions and use. In
Aslib Proceedings (Vol. 48, No. 7-8, pp. 183-192). Aslib.
Gao, F. (2013). A case study of using a social annotation tool to support collaboratively
learning. The Internet and Higher Education, 17, 76-83.
Geiger, J. F., & Millis, K. K. (2004). Assessing the impact of reading goals and text
structures on comprehension. Reading Psychology, 25(2), 93-110.
Glover, I., Xu, Z., & Hardaker, G. (2007). Online annotation–Research and practices.
Computers & Education, 49(4), 1308-1320.
Goodenough, D. R. (1976). The role of individual differences in field dependence as a
factor in learning and memory. Psychological Bulletin, 83(4), 675.
Hwang, W. Y., Wang, C. Y., & Sharples, M. (2007). A study of multimedia annotation
of Web-based materials. Computers & Education, 48(4), 680-699.
Huang, Y. -M., Huang, T. -C., & Hsieh, M. -Y. (2008). Using annotation services in a
ubiquitous Jigsaw cooperative learning environment. Educational Technology &
Society, 11(2), 3–15.
Hyönä, J., & Lorch, R. F. (2004). Effects of topic headings on text processing:
Evidence from adult readers’ eye fixation patterns. Learning and instruction,
14(2), 131-152.
Ignacio Madrid, R., Van Oostendorp, H., & Puerta Melguizo, M. C. (2009). The effects
of the number of links and navigation support on cognitive load and learning with
hypertext: The mediating role of reading order. Computers in Human
Behavior, 25(1), 66-75.
Jin, S. H. (2013). Visual design guidelines for improving learning from dynamic and
interactive digital text. Computers & Education, 63, 248-258.
Kawase, R., Herder, E., & Nejdl, W. (2009). A comparison of paper-based and online
annotations in the workplace. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the 4th
European Conference on Technology Enhanced Learning: Learning in the
Synergy of Multiple Disciplines, Nice, France.
Kirschner, P. A. (2002). Cognitive load theory: Implications of cognitive load theory
on the design of learning. Learning and instruction, 12(1), 1-10.
Kolb, D. A. (1981). Learning styles and disciplinary differences. The modern
American college, 232-255.
Kools, M., Ruiter, R. A., Van De Wiel, M. W., & Kok, G. (2008). The effects of
headings in information mapping on search speed and evaluation of a brief health
education text. Journal of Information Science.
Large, A., Beheshti, J., & Rahman, T. (2002). Gender differences in collaborative web
searching behavior: an elementary school study. Information Processing &
Management, 38(3), 427-443.
Liew, C. L., Foo, S., & Chennupati, K. R. (2000). A study of graduate student
end-users’ use and perception of electronic journals. Online Information
Review, 24(4), 302-315.
Liu, W. (2003). Field dependence-independence and sports with a preponderance of
closed or open skill. Journal of Sport Behaviour, 26(3), 285-297.
Liu, Z. (2005). Reading behavior in the digital environment: Changes in reading
behavior over the past ten years. Journal of documentation, 61(6), 700-712.
Liu, Z. (2012). Digital reading: An overview. Chinese Journal of Library and
Information Science Vol, 5(1).
Liu, Z., & Huang, X. (2008). Gender differences in the online reading environment.
Journal of Documentation, 64(4), 616-626.
Lemarié, J., Lorch, J. R. F., & Péry-Woodley, M. P. (2012). Understanding how
headings influence text processing. Discours. Revue de linguistique,
psycholinguistique et informatique, (10).
Lorch Jr, R. F. (1989). Text-signaling devices and their effects on reading and memory
processes. Educational psychology review, 1(3), 209-234.
Lorch Jr, R. F., & Lorch, E. P. (1995). Effects of organizational signals on
text-processing strategies. Journal of educational psychology, 87(4), 537.
Lorch Jr, R. F., & Lorch, E. P. (1996). Effects of headings on text recall and
summarization. Contemporary educational psychology, 21(3), 261-278.
Marcus, N., Cooper, M., & Sweller, J. (1996). Understanding instructions. Journal of
educational psychology, 88(1), 49.
Marshall, C. C. (1997, July). Annotation: from paper books to the digital library.
In Proceedings of the second ACM international conference on Digital
libraries (pp. 131-140). ACM.
Marshall, C. C. (1998, May). Toward an ecology of hypertext annotation. In
Proceedings of the ninth ACM conference on Hypertext and hypermedia: links,
objects, time and space---structure in hypermedia systems: links, objects, time and
space---structure in hypermedia systems (pp. 40-49). ACM.
Mayer, R. E. (1984). Aids to text comprehension. Educational Psychologist, 19(1),
30-42.
Mayer, R. E., & Moreno, R. (2003). Nine ways to reduce cognitive load in multimedia
learning. Educational psychologist, 38(1), 43-52.
McKenna, F. P. (1990). Learning implications of field dependence‐independence:
Cognitive style versus cognitive ability. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 4(6),
425-437.
Mercieca, P. (2004, February). E-book acceptance: What will make users read on
screen. In VALA 12th Biennial Conference and Exhibition (pp. 3-5).
Messick, S. (1984). The nature of cognitive styles: Problems and promise in
educational practice. Educational psychologist, 19(2), 59-74.
Nielsen, J. (2002, April 14). Kid’s corner: Website usability for children. Jakob
Nielsen’s Alertbox. Retrieved March 10, 2005, from http://www.useit.com/ alertbox/20020414.html
Nokelainen, P., Miettinen, M., Kurhila, J., Floréen, P., & Tirri, H. (2005). A shared
document‐based annotation tool to support learner‐centred collaborative learning.
British Journal of Educational Technology, 36(5), 757-770.
Novak, E., Razzouk, R., & Johnson, T. E. (2012). The educational use of social
annotation tools in higher education: A literature review. The Internet and Higher
Education, 15(1), 39-49.
Oh, E., & Lim, D. (2005). Cross relationships between cognitive styles and learner
variables in online learning environment. Journal of Interactive Online
Learning, 4(1), 53-66.
Owings, R. A., Petersen, G. A., Bransford, J. D., Morris, C. D., & Stein, B. S. (1980).
Spontaneous monitoring and regulation of learning: A comparison of successful
and less successful fifth graders. Journal of Educational Psychology, 72(2), 250.
Paas, F., Renkl, A., & Sweller, J. (2003). Cognitive load theory and instructional
design: Recent developments. Educational psychologist, 38(1), 1-4.
Paas, F., Tuovinen, J. E., Tabbers, H., & Van Gerven, P. W. (2003). Cognitive load
measurement as a means to advance cognitive load theory. Educational
psychologist, 38(1), 63-71.
Paas, F. G., & Van Merriënboer, J. J. (1994). Instructional control of cognitive load in
the training of complex cognitive tasks. Educational Psychology Review, 6(4),
351-371.
Qayyum, M. A. (2008). Capturing the online academic reading process. Information
Processing & Management, 44(2), 581-595.
Rau, P. L. P., Chen, S. H., & Chin, Y. T. (2004). Developing web annotation tools for
learners and instructors. Interacting with Computers, 16(2), 163-181.
Riding, R. J., & Sadler‐Smith, E. (1997). Cognitive style and learning strategies: Some
implications for training design. International Journal of Training and
Development, 1(3), 199-208.
Ritchey, K., Schuster, J., & Allen, J. (2008). How the relationship between text and headings influences readers’ memory. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 33(4), 859-874.
Robinson, D. H. (1993). The effects of multiple graphic organizers on students' comprehension of a chapter-length text.
Shuell, T. J.（1981）. Dimensions of individual differences, Berkeley, CA：McCutchan.
Todd, R. J., & Kuhlthau, C. C. (2004). Student learning through Ohio school
libraries: Background, methodology and report of findings. Retrieved Apr. 8,
2007, from http://www.oelma.org/StudentLearning/documents/OELMAReportof Findings
Slotte, V., & Lonka, K. (1999). Review and process effects of spontaneous note-taking
on text comprehension. Contemporary Educational Psychology,24(1), 1-20.
Sung, E., & Mayer, R. E. (2012). When graphics improve liking but not learning from
online lessons. Computers in Human Behavior, 28(5), 1618-1625.
Sweller, J., Van Merrienboer, J. J., & Paas, F. G. (1998). Cognitive architecture and
instructional design. Educational psychology review, 10(3), 251-296.
Taylor, B. M., & Beach, R. W. (1984). The effects of text structure instruction on
middle-grade students' comprehension and production of expository text. Reading
Research Quarterly, 134-146.
Witkin,H.A.& Goodenough,D.R.(1977).Field -dependence andinterpersonal behavior. Psychological Bulletin ,84,661-689
Wolfe, J. L. (2000, June). Effects of annotations on student readers and writers.
In Proceedings of the fifth ACM conference on Digital libraries (pp. 19-26).
ACM.
Wright, P. (1991). Cognitive overheads and prostheses: Some issues in evaluating
hypertexts. In Paper presented at the Proceedings of the third ACM conference on
hypertext. USA: San Antonio.
Yang, X., Yu, S., & Sun, Z. (2013). The effect of collaborative annotation on Chinese
reading level in primary schools in China. British Journal of Educational
Technology, 44(1), 95-111.