隨著網際網路的興盛與新型冠狀疫情的爆發，線上同步學習（Synchronous Online Learning）已然成為當今教育中不可或缺的學習模式。然而，互動性不足為當今線上同步學習中所面臨的重要課題。許多研究證實藉由虛擬學習情境中產生之擬社會人際互動對參與者之學習結果具有積極影響，然而，多數研究僅針對離線遊戲式教材進行探討，鮮少有研究探討將虛擬情境運用於線上同步學習中。是以，本研究於線上同步學習中，在參與者熟悉的傳統遠距學習平台內建置虛擬情境，探討參與者在學習過程中產生之擬社會人際互動對於學習結果影響。本研究採準實驗法進行實驗設計，以30名新北市某私立大學大三、大四學生為研究對象，實驗組採虛擬情境化線上同步學習，對照組採傳統遠距線上同步學習。學習過程中以問題導向學習模式（Problem-Based Learning）進行學習流程，並以「擬社會人際互動量表」、「線上學習情境之學習動機量表」及「淡古文化學習成效測驗量表」作為研究工具。研究結果發現:一、虛擬情境化線上同步學習對參與者之擬社會人際互動具有顯著影響。二、線上同步學習中，參與者之擬社會人際互動對學習動機具有顯著影響。三、線上同步學習中，參與者之擬社會人際互動對學習成效並無顯著影響。本研究結果提供後續線上同步課程設計建議，應增加課堂互動性以提升參與者之學習動機，並審慎評估學習內容與流程以改善學習成效。

With the universal of Internet and the impact of the Covid-19, “synchronous online learning” has become a trend of learning method in current education system. However, the lack of interaction is an important issue in synchronous online learning nowadays. Many studies have confirmed that the para-social interaction produced in virtual learning environment can improve learning outcomes, but most studies only focused on digital offline game learning materials, few studies have applied the virtual environment to online synchronous learning. Therefore, in this study, a virtual environment is built in the traditional distance learning platform familiar to the participants, investigating the influence of learners' para-social interaction on learning outcomes. This study used quasi-experiment design method and 30 college students were chosen as the study samples. The experimental group used virtual environment for online synchronous learning. The control group used traditional distance learning platform for online synchronous learning. The problem-based learning model was used to design the online learning process in the experiment, and the "Audience–Persona Interaction Scale", "Learning Motivation Scale for Online Learning Scale" and "Tamsui ancient culture learning outcomes scale" were used as a research tool. The research results found that: 1. virtualizing an online Synchronized Instruction has a significant impact on participants' para-social interaction. 2. In online synchronous learning, participants' para-social interaction has a significant impact on learning motivation. 3. In online synchronous learning, participants' para-social interaction has no significant impact on learning outcomes. The results of this study provide suggestions for the design of online synchronous courses. Interaction should be increased to enhance participants' learning motivation, and learning content and processes should be carefully evaluated to improve learning outcomes.

王淳瑩 & 洪承宇（2022）。遠距教學與遠距中輟: 臺灣國高中英語實體課程轉線上教學挑戰與因應策略。中等教育， 73（1），11-28。
王紹蓉（2022）。探索行動直播平臺的社會支持因素: 擬社會互動與遠距臨場感觀點。新聞學研究，（150），45-95。
阮紹薇（2000）。電腦網路中 [虛擬社群] 現象與經營策略之探討。大學圖書館， 4，60-80。
林含諭. (2017). 提升學生學習動機的關鍵因素與策略探討. 臺灣教育評論月刊, 6(3), 187-190.
陳璽芳（2019）。PBL 問題導向學習教學法應用於國中歷史科校外教學之活動設計。臺灣教育評論月刊，8（1）， 249-256。
教育部（2019）。專科以上學校遠距教學實施辦法。教育部主管法規查詢系統。https://edu.law.moe.gov.tw/LawContent.aspx?id=FL040400
Anderson, T. D., & Garrison, D. R. (1995). Transactional issues in distance education: The impact of design in audioteleconferencing. American Journal of Distance Education, 9(2), 27-45.
Anderson, T. D. (1996). The virtual conference: Extending professional education in cyberspace. International Journal of Educational Telecommunications, 2(2), 121-135.
Auter, P. J., & Palmgreen, P. (2000). Development and validation of a parasocial interaction measure: The audience‐persona interaction scale. Communication Research Reports, 17(1), 79-89.
Ali, S. S. (2019). Problem based learning: A student-centered approach. English language teaching, 12(5), 73-78.
Adams, B., & Wilson, N. S. (2020). Building community in asynchronous online higher education courses through collaborative annotation. Journal of educational technology systems, 49(2), 250-261.
Adedoyin, O. B., & Soykan, E. (2020). Covid-19 pandemic and online learning: the challenges and opportunities. Interactive learning environments, 1-13.
Adnan, M., & Anwar, K. (2020). Online Learning amid the COVID-19 Pandemic: Students' Perspectives. Online Submission, 2(1), 45-51.
Aw, E. C.-X., & Labrecque, L. I. (2020). Celebrity endorsement in social media contexts: understanding the role of parasocial interactions and the need to belong. Journal of Consumer Marketing.
Al-Areibi, I., Dickson, B. A., & Kotsopoulos, D. (2022). An analysis of synchronous and asynchronous online undergraduate motivation during the covid pandemic. International Journal of E-Learning & Distance Education, 37(1), 1-37.
Barrows, H. S., & Tamblyn, R. M. (1980). Problem-based learning: An approach to medical education (Vol. 1). Springer Publishing Company.
Becker, B., & Mark, G. (2002). Social conventions in computermediated communication: A comparison of three online shared virtual environments. In The social life of avatars, 19-39.
Bélisle, J. F., & Bodur, H. O. (2010). Avatars as information: Perception of consumers based on their avatars in virtual worlds. Psychology & Marketing, 27(8), 741-765.
Bolliger, D. U., Supanakorn, S., & Boggs, C. (2010). Impact of podcasting on student motivation in the online learning environment. Computers & Education, 55(2), 714-722.
Bombari, D., Schmid Mast, M., Canadas, E., & Bachmann, M. (2015). Studying social interactions through immersive virtual environment technology: virtues, pitfalls, and future challenges. Frontiers in psychology, 6, 869.
Bower, M., Dalgarno, B., Kennedy, G. E., Lee, M. J., & Kenney, J. (2015). Design and implementation factors in blended synchronous learning environments: Outcomes from a cross-case analysis. Computers & Education, 86, 1-17.
Bian, Y., Yang, C., Zhou, C., Liu, J., Gai, W., Meng, X., Tian, F., & Shen, C. (2018). Exploring the weak association between flow experience and performance in virtual environments. Proceedings of the 2018 CHI conference on human factors in computing systems.
Baber, H. (2020). Determinants of students’ perceived learning outcome and satisfaction in online learning during the pandemic of COVID-19. Journal of Education and e-learning Research, 7(3), 285-292.
Besser, A., Flett, G. L., & Zeigler-Hill, V. (2022). Adaptability to a sudden transition to online learning during the COVID-19 pandemic: Understanding the challenges for students. Scholarship of Teaching and Learning in Psychology, 8(2), 85.
Chang, D., & Lin, M.-C. (2016). A study of effects and limitations of the application of problem-based learning on a student teaching curriculum. Journal of teacher education and professional development, 9(2), 1-26.
Clark, R. C., & Mayer, R. E. (2016). E-learning and the science of instruction: Proven guidelines for consumers and designers of multimedia learning. john Wiley & sons.
Dhawan, S. (2020). Online learning: A panacea in the time of COVID-19 crisis. Journal of educational technology systems, 49(1), 5-22.
Dung, D. T. H. (2020). The advantages and disadvantages of virtual learning. IOSR Journal of Research & Method in Education, 10(3), 45-48.
Ellis, S. R. (1994). What are virtual environments? IEEE Computer Graphics and Applications, 14(1), 17-22.
Esra, M., & Sevilen, Ç. (2021). Factors influencing EFL students’ motivation in online learning: A qualitative case study. Journal of Educational Technology and Online Learning, 4(1), 11-22.
Feilitzen, C., & Linné, O. (1975). Identifying with television characters. Journal of communication.
Frederick, E., Hamrick, M. E., & Clavio, G. (2014). Bypass and broadcast: Utilizing parasocial interaction to examine@ nhl communication on Twitter during the 2012–2013 lockout. Journal of Sports Media, 9(2), 25-44.
Fong, K., & Mar, R. A. (2015). What does my avatar say about me? Inferring personality from avatars. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 41(2), 237-249.
Giles, D. C. (2002). Parasocial interaction: A review of the literature and a model for future research. Media psychology, 4(3), 279-305.
Horton, D., & Richard Wohl, R. (1956). Mass communication and para-social interaction: Observations on intimacy at a distance. Psychiatry, 19(3), 215-229.
Hrastinski, S. (2008). Asynchronous and synchronous e-learning. Educause quarterly, 31(4), 51-55.
Hartmann, T., & Goldhoorn, C. (2011). Horton and Wohl revisited: Exploring viewers' experience of parasocial interaction. Journal of communication, 61(6), 1104-1121.
Hung, P. H., Hwang, G. J., Wu, T. H., Lin, I. H., Lee, Y. H., & Chang, W. Y. (2012, March). The differences of collaborative learning and scientific inquiry competencies between experienced and novice learners in ubiquitous problem-based learning. In 2012 IEEE Seventh International Conference on Wireless, Mobile and Ubiquitous Technology in Education, 277-281.
Henriksen, D., Creely, E., & Henderson, M. (2020). Folk pedagogies for teacher transitions: Approaches to synchronous online learning in the wake of COVID-19. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 28(2), 201-209.
Hussein, A. A., & Al-Chalabi, H. K. M. (2020). Pedagogical agents in an adaptive E-learning system. SAR J. Sci. Res, 3, 24-30.
Hsu, C.-L. (2020). How vloggers embrace their viewers: Focusing on the roles of para-social interactions and flow experience. Telematics and Informatics, 49, 101364.
Jin, S.-A. A. (2010). Parasocial interaction with an avatar in second life: A typology of the self and an empirical test of the mediating role of social presence. Presence, 19(4), 331-340.
Jin, S.-A. A. (2011). Leveraging avatars in 3D virtual environments (Second Life) for interactive learning: The moderating role of the behavioral activation system vs. behavioral inhibition system and the mediating role of enjoyment. Interactive learning environments, 19(5), 467-486.
Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. T. (2018). Cooperative learning: The foundation for active learning. Active learning—Beyond the future.
Jarzyna, C. L. (2021). Parasocial interaction, the COVID-19 quarantine, and digital age media. Human Arenas, 4(3), 413-429.
Konijn, E. A., Utz, S., Tanis, M., & Barnes, S. B. (2008). Parasocial interactions and paracommunication with new media characters. In Mediated interpersonal communication, 191-213.
Krämer, N. C., & Bente, G. (2010). Personalizing e-learning. The social effects of pedagogical agents. Educational Psychology Review, 22(1), 71-87.
Kavli, K. (2012). The player's parasocial interaction with digital entities. In Proceeding of the 16th international academic mindtrek conference, 83-89.
Kara, M., Erdogdu, F., Kokoç, M., & Cagiltay, K. (2019). Challenges faced by adult learners in online distance education: A literature review. Open Praxis, 11(1), 5-22.
Kopp, M., Gröblinger, O., & Adams, S. (2019). Five common assumptions that prevent digital transformation at higher education institutions. INTED2019 Proceedings, 1, 1448-1457.
Kardong-Edgren, S. S., Farra, S. L., Alinier, G., & Young, H. M. (2019). A call to unify definitions of virtual reality. Clinical Simulation in Nursing, 31, 28-34.
Liebers, N., & Schramm, H. (2019). Parasocial interactions and relationships with media characters–an inventory of 60 years of research. Communication Research Trends, 38(2), 4-31.
Keaton, W., & Gilbert, A. (2020). Successful online learning: What does learner interaction with peers, instructors and parents look like? Journal of Online Learning Research, 6(2), 129-154.
Kang, H. J., Shin, J.-h., & Ponto, K. (2020). How 3D virtual reality stores can shape consumer purchase decisions: The roles of informativeness and playfulness. Journal of Interactive Marketing, 49(1), 70-85.
Kowert, R., & Daniel Jr, E. (2021). The one-and-a-half sided parasocial relationship: The curious case of live streaming. Computers in Human Behavior Reports, 4, 100150.
Lin, S.-F., & McDonald, D. G. (2011). Assessing Dimensionality of the Parasocial Interaction Scale. 資訊傳播研究, 1(2), 1-28.
Lin, L.-C., Hung, I.-C., & Chen, N.-S. (2019). The impact of student engagement on learning outcomes in a cyber-flipped course. Educational Technology Research and Development, 67, 1573-1591.
Li, Y., Ma, T., & Ch'Ng, E. (2019). Enhancing VR experiential learning through the design of embodied interaction in a shared virtual environment.
Moore, M. G. (1989). Three types of interaction.
Moreno, R., & Flowerday, T. (2006). Students’ choice of animated pedagogical agents in science learning: A test of the similarity-attraction hypothesis on gender and ethnicity. Contemporary educational psychology, 31(2), 186-207.
McBrien, J. L., Cheng, R., & Jones, P. (2009). Virtual spaces: Employing a synchronous online classroom to facilitate student engagement in online learning. International review of research in open and distributed learning, 10(3).
Martin, F., & Parker, M. A. (2014). Use of synchronous virtual classrooms: Why, who, and how. MERLOT Journal of Online Learning and Teaching, 10(2), 192-210.
Malmia, W., Makatita, S. H., Lisaholit, S., Azwan, A., Magfirah, I., Tinggapi, H., & Umanailo, M. C. B. (2019). Problem-based learning as an effort to improve student learning outcomes. Int. J. Sci. Technol. Res, 8(9), 1140-1143.
Martha, A. S. D., & Santoso, H. B. (2019). The design and impact of the pedagogical agent: A systematic literature review. Journal of Educators Online, 16(1), n1.
Nah, F. F.-H., Eschenbrenner, B., & DeWester, D. (2011). Enhancing brand equity through flow and telepresence: A comparison of 2D and 3D virtual worlds. MIs Quarterly, 731-747.
Orhan, G., & Beyhan, Ö. (2020). Teachers’ perceptions and teaching experiences on distance education through synchronous video conferencing during Covid-19 pandemic. Social Sciences and Education Research Review, 7(1), 8-44.
Papa, M. J., Singhal, A., Law, S., Pant, S., Sood, S., Rogers, E. M., & Shefner‐Rogers, C. L. (2000). Entertainment‐education and social change: an analysis of parasocial interaction, social learning, collective efficacy, and paradoxical communication. Journal of communication, 50(4), 31-55.
Park, Y. J., & Bonk, C. J. (2007). Is online life a breeze? A case study for promoting synchronous learning in a blended graduate course. MERLOT Journal of Online Learning and Teaching, 3(3), 307-323.
Parker, M. A., & Martin, F. (2010, July). Synchronous virtual classrooms: Student perceptions from an online and blended education course. In 2010 International Conference on Technology for Education, 93-100.
Pérez-Marín, D. (2021). A Review of the Practical Applications of Pedagogic Conversational Agents to Be Used in School and University Classrooms. Digital, 1(1), 18-33.
Putra, R. W. P. (2021). Improving the students’ motivation in learning English through Google Meet during the online learning. English Learning Innovation (englie), 2(1), 35-42.
Pavel, I. A., Bogdanici, C. M., Donica, V. C., Anton, N., Savu, B., Chiriac, C. P., ... & Salavastru, S. C. (2023). Computer Vision Syndrome: An Ophthalmic Pathology of the Modern Era. Medicina, 59(2), 412.
Rubin, A. M., Perse, E. M., & Powell, R. A. (1985). Loneliness, parasocial interaction, and local television news viewing. Human communication research, 12(2), 155-180.
Rubin, A. M., & Perse, E. M. (1987). Audience activity and soap opera involvement a uses and effects investigation. Human communication research, 14(2), 246-268.
Rogoff, B. (1990). Apprenticeship in thinking: Cognitive development in social context. Oxford university press.
Resnick, L. B., Levine, J. M., & Behrend, S. (1991). Socially shared cognition. Washington: American Psychological Association.
Rasmussen, L. (2018). Parasocial interaction in the digital age: An examination of relationship building and the effectiveness of YouTube celebrities. The Journal of Social Media in Society, 7(1), 280-294.
Schroeder, R. (2002). Social interaction in virtual environments: Key issues, common themes, and a framework for research. In The social life of avatars, 1-18.
Schrader, C., & Bastiaens, T. J. (2012). The influence of virtual presence: Effects on experienced cognitive load and learning outcomes in educational computer games. Computers in Human Behavior, 28(2), 648-658.
Schroeder, N. L., Adesope, O. O., & Gilbert, R. B. (2013). How effective are pedagogical agents for learning? A meta-analytic review. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 49(1), 1-39.
Solimini, A. G. (2013). Are there side effects to watching 3D movies? A prospective crossover observational study on visually induced motion sickness. PloS one, 8(2), e56160.
Stein, J.-P., Linda Breves, P., & Anders, N. (2022). Parasocial interactions with real and virtual influencers: The role of perceived similarity and human-likeness. New Media & Society, 14614448221102900.
Shrestha, S., Haque, S., Dawadi, S., & Giri, R. A. (2022). Preparations for and practices of online education during the Covid-19 pandemic: A study of Bangladesh and Nepal. Education and information technologies, 1-23.
Taylor, T. L. (2002). Living digitally: Embodiment in virtual worlds. In The social life of avatars, 40-62.
Tao, Y., Zhang, G., Zhang, D., Wang, F., Zhou, Y., & Xu, T. (2022). Exploring Persona Characteristics in Learning: A Review Study of Pedagogical Agents. Procedia Computer Science, 201, 87-94.
Turner, A. B. (2022). Streaming as a Virtual Being: The Complex Relationship Between VTubers and Identity.
Van Der Land, S., Schouten, A. P., Feldberg, F., van Den Hooff, B., & Huysman, M. (2013). Lost in space? Cognitive fit and cognitive load in 3D virtual environments. Computers in Human Behavior, 29(3), 1054-1064.
Wood, D. F. (2003). Problem based learning. Bmj, 326(7384), 328-330.
Watts, L. (2016). Synchronous and asynchronous communication in distance learning: A review of the literature. Quarterly Review of Distance Education, 17(1), 23.
Weber, W., & Ahn, J. (2021). COVID-19 conferences: resident perceptions of online synchronous learning environments. Western Journal of Emergency Medicine, 22(1), 115.
Yang, Y. O. (2022). Instructional Strategies for Applying Community of Inquiry Model in Virtual Community. Journal of Education Research, (335), 39-53.
Zhou, X. (2020). Virtual YouTuber Kizuna AI. ies, L u n d U, 205.
Zeng, X., & Wang, T. (2021). College Student Satisfaction with Online Learning during COVID-19: A review and implications. International Journal of Multidisciplinary Perspectives in Higher Education, 6(1), 182-195.
Zhang, Y. (2022, January). A Study on the Para-social Interaction Between Idols and Fans in Virtual Applications. In 2021 International Conference on Social Development and Media Communication, 1118-1124.