隨著網際網路的普及，國小學童因課業需求，上網查找資料已相當普遍，如何有效判斷網路資訊更形重要。本研究藉處於抽象思考轉變期之國小高年級學童為研究對象，採用實驗法、問卷調查法與訪談法，嘗試瞭解國小高年級學童對於網路資訊的相關判斷行為特性，並進一步探討個人背景對相關判斷之影響。
本研究以便利抽樣方式，選擇一所台北市立國民小學31位六年級學童為對象，進行網路資訊相關判斷實驗。實驗內容依據國小學童課業需求特性所設計之檢索任務，並針對每項檢索結果進行相關判斷及填寫問卷。本研究同時篩選6位學童進行訪談。研究結果顯示，檢索任務平均完成時間為1101秒（約18分鐘），每筆檢索結果平均須花費25.6秒的判斷時間，同時每筆檢索結果的平均點閱次數與平均瀏覽網頁數皆不高，顯示受試者的相關判斷頗為迅速，唯判斷品質仍有改善空間。就相關判斷準則之重要性排序，內容主題性、摘要主題性及語言/可理解性為前三項受試者重視之相關判斷準則。綜合實驗及訪談結果，受訪者對於相關判斷準則的運用，具有「豐富多元不重複，質精易懂有深度，解釋有據附詳圖」等特性。就個人背景對相關判斷之影響，主要結果包括：1.自評個人具有主題知識者，對於相關準則的重要性認知程度較高；2.自評個人具有主題興趣者，平均花費在每筆檢索結果的判斷時間較多。綜合上述，國小高年級學童傾向獨立解決問題，具體與抽象思考並行，且積極善用所學，以上網經驗強化判斷能力，唯常將查找課業資訊視為負擔，只求儘速完成，較少樂在其中。
根據上述，本研究建議未來在落實網路資訊素養課程上，除了教導網路資源類型與檢索技巧外，傳授網路資訊相關判斷之重要原則與使用技巧也相當重要。若能提供經驗教育，並就學童程度，適時、適度提升其相關判斷能力，將有助學童建立正確且完整的網路資訊認知。

Through the widespread of internet, in order to handle the requirements of school work, it is very common for elementary school students to surf the websites for information. Therefore, how to effectively determine the information on the websites is more important than ever. The research objects are the sixth grade students who are at the stage of abstract thinking transformation, adopts experimental, questionnaire survey and interview methods, attempts to identify the relevance judgment of sixth grade students to the web information, and further examine the influence of personal backgrounds to the relevance judgment.
This study selects the research objects of 31 sixth grade students in a municipal elementary school in Taipei city through the convenience sampling method and processes the experiment of web information relevance judgment. The subject of the experiment is designed based on the search tasks according to the feature of school work requirements of elementary students and proceeded the relevance judgment and questionnaire on each search result. This study selects out 6 students as interviewees at the same time. The result shows that the average complete time of search tasks is 1101 sec. (approximately 18 mins.) and 25.6 sec. to make the judgment of the search result. In addition, the average clicks and website surfing of each search result are low, which indicates that the relevance judgments of the examinees are fast, however the quality of judgments sill required to be improved. As for the ranking of importance, topicality of contents, abstract topicality, and language/understandability of relevance criteria are the top 3 criterion that the examinees emphasize. The general experiments and results of interviews show that the application of relevance criteria of the interviewees possesses the features of diversities, quality, depth, well explained, and detailed pictures. As for the influences of personal backgrounds to the relevance judgments, the major results include: 1. those who self-evaluate themselves as obtaining knowledge of topics have higher level of recognition of the importance of relevance criteria; 2. those who self-evaluate themselves as interested in the topics spend longer time to make judgments on each search result averagely. To sum up, sixth grade students tend to solve problems independently, combine concrete and abstract thinking and actively apply what they previously learned. Enforce their ability of judgment with websites surfing experiences. However, they often view the search for school work as burdens, try to accomplish as soon as possible and feel hard to find the pleasure in it.
According to what mentioned above, this study suggests that in the future, the cultivation of web information course, should not only instructs the network resource and search skills, but also the important principles and skills of relevance judgment of web information. If it is possible to provide experienced education, and improve students’ abilities of relevance judgment according to their level timely and moderately, then it will assist students to establish integrated and complete recognition on the web information.

一、 中文部份
交通部統計處（2007）。台灣地區民眾使用網際網路狀況調查報告。台北市：交通部。
行政院研考會（2007）。數位落差調查報告。台北市：行政院。
行政院研考會（2006）。國中小學生數位能力與數位學習機會調查報告。台北市：行政院。
林清山（1992）。心理與教育統計學。台北市：台灣東華。
林傑斌、林川雄、劉明德（2004）。SPSS統計建模與應用實務。台北縣：博碩文化。
陳嘉儀（2001）。國小高年級學生資訊需求之研究－以國語實小與北新國小為例。國立台灣大學圖書資訊學研究所碩士論文，未出版，台北市。
陳慧珍（2006）。網路圖像使用者相關判斷之研究。國立臺灣師範大學圖書資訊學研究所碩士論文，未出版，台北市。
曾淑賢（2001）。兒童資訊需求、資訊素養及資訊尋求行為。台北市：文華圖書館管理。
程良雄主持（1999）。公共圖書館讀者資訊需求與資訊尋求行為之研究。南投縣：台灣省政府文化處。
黃慕萱（1996）。資訊檢索中「相關」概念之研究。台北市：學生書局。
黃慕萱（2002）。國小學生的資訊需求研究。中國圖書館學會會報，69，1-11。
黃瀅芳（2006）。大學教師與學生網路學術性資訊品質判斷硏究。國立臺灣師範
大學圖書資訊學研究所碩士論文，未出版，台北市。

二、 西文部份
Armbruster, B. B., & Armstrong, J. O.（1993）. Locating information in text: A focus on children in the elementary grades. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 18, 139-161.
Barry, C. L. & Schamber, L.（1998）. User's criteria for relevance evaluation: a cross-situational comparison. Information Processing & Management, 34（2/3）, 219-236.
Barry, C.L.（1994）. User-defined relevance criteria: an exploratory study. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 45（3）, 149-159.
Bateman, J.（1998）. Changes in relevance criteria: a longitudinal study. In: Preston, C., ed. Proceedings of the 61st American Society for Information Science Annual Meeting. Medford, NJ: Information Today, 23-32.
Bilal, D.（2000）. Children’s use of the Yahooligans! Web search engine:Ⅰ. Cognitive, physical, and affective behaviors on fact-based search tasks. Journal of the American Society for Information Scienece, 51（7）, 646-665.
Bilal, D.（2001）. Children’s use of the Yahooligans! Web search engine: Ⅱ. Cognitive, physical, and affective behaviors on fact-based search tasks. Journal of the American Society for Information Scienece and Technology, 52（2）, 118-136.
Bilal, D.（2002a）. Children’s use of the Yahooligans! Web search engine: Ⅲ. Cognitive, physical, and affective behaviors on fact-based search tasks. Journal of the American Society for Information Scienece and Technology, 53（13）, 1170-1183.
Bilal, D.（2002b）. Perspectives on children’s navigation of the World Wide Web: Does the type of search task make a difference? Online Information Review, 26（2）, 108-117.
Borgman, C. et al.（1995）. Children’s search behavior on browsing and keyword online catalogs: The Science Library Catalog project. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 46, 663-684.
Borlund, P.（2003）. The concept of relevance in IR. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 54（10）, 913–925.
Bowler, L., Large, A., & Rejskind, G.（2001）. Primary school students, information literacy and the Web. Education for Information, 19（3）, 201-223.
Bruce, H.W.（1994）. A cognitive view of the situational dynamism of user-centered relevance estimation. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 45, 142-148.
CACL Committee on Reference Materials for Children （1984）. Children's Reference Services Survey. Canadian Library Journal, 41 （February 1984）, 16-18.
Children and their use of online public access catalog. Retrieved Jun. 1, 2008, from: http://httpsrv.ocs.drexel.edu/grad/mec24/rol.html
Choi, Y. and Rasmussen, E.M.（2002）. User’s relevance criteria in image retrieval in American history. Information Processing and Management, 38（5）, 695-726.
Cooper, L. Z.（2002）. A case study of information-seeking behavior in 7-year-old children in a semistructured situation. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 53（11）, 904-942.
Cosijn, E. & Ingwersen, P.（2000）. Dimensions of relevance. Information Processing and Management, 36, 533-550.
Edmonds, L., Moore, P., & Balcom, K. M.（1990）. The effectiveness of an online catalog. Schoolo Library Journal, 36（10）, 28-32.
Enochsson, A. B.（2001）. Children choosing Web pages. The New Review of Information Behaviour Research, 2, 151-165.
Fitzgerald, M. A., & Galloway, C.（2001）. Relevance judging, evaluation, and decision making in virtual library: A descriptive study. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 52（12）, 989-1010.
Fitzgibbons, S. A.（1983）. Reference and information services for children and young adults: Definitions, services and issues. Reference Librarian 7/8, 1-30.
Herman, G. B.（1983）. What time is it in Antarctica?: Meeting the information needs of children. Reference Librarian, 7/8, 75-82.
Hirsh, S. G.（1997）. How do children find information on different types of tasks? Children’s use of the Science Library Catalog. Library Trends, 45（4）, 725-745.
Hirsh, S. G.（1999）. Children’s relevance criteria and information seeking on electronic resources. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 50, 1265-1283.
Hooten, P. A.（1994）. Children, technology, and instruction: A case study of elementary school children using an online public access catalog （OPAC）. School Library Media Quarterly, 23（1）, 43-51.
Hornung, E.（2000）. Children's evaluation criteria of search engines. E-Prints in Library and Information Science. Retrieved Jun. 1, 2008, from: http://eprints.rclis.org/archive/00002164/01/text2.htm
Hung, T.Y., Zoeller, C., &Lyon, S.（2005）. Relevance judgments for image retrieval in the field of journalism: A pilot study. ICADL 2005, Bangkok, Thailand.
Kafai, Y., & Bates, M.（1997）. Internet web-searching instruction in the elementary classroom: Building a foundation for information literacy. School Library Media Quarterly, 25（2）, 103-111.
Kuhlthau, C. C.（1988）. Meeting the information needs of children and young adults: Basing library media programs on developmental states. Journal of Youth Services in Libraries, 2（1）, 511-557.
Külper, U., Schulz, U., & Will, G.（1997）. Bucherschatz—a prototype of a children's OPAC. Information Services and Use, 17, 201-214
Large, A.（2005）. Children, teenagers, and the Web. Annual Review of Information Science and Technology, 39（1）, 347-392.
Large, A., & Beheshti, J.（2000）. The web as a classroom resource: Reactions from the users. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 51（12）, 1069-1080.
Large, A., Beheshti, J., & Breuleux, A.（1998）. Information seeking in a multimedia environment by primary school students. Library and Information Science Research, 20, 343-376.
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.
Lewis, R. W.（1989）. Elementary school children express their needs for catalog information. Journal of Youth Services in Libraries, 2（2）, 151-156.
Lu, I-Chung（1994）. Children’s searching for information in a textbook: grade differences in metacognition and performance. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University Iowa, IA.
Luckin, R., Rimmer, J., and Lloyd, A.（2001）. What is the Internet and how can it help us learn? Exploring children's conceptions of what the Internet is and does. ICCE2001: International Conference on Computers in Education, Seoul, Korea, November 2001. Retrieve Jun. 1, 2008, from: http://www.icce2001.org/cd/pdf/p13/UK008.pdf
Maglaughlin, K. L., & Sonnewald, H.（2002）. User perspective on relevance criteria: A comparison among relevance, partially relevance, and not-relevance. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 53（5）, 327-342.
Marchionini, G.（1989a）. Making the transition from print to electronic encyclopedias: Adaption of mental models. International Journal of Man-Machine Studies, 30, 591-618.
Marchionini, G.（1989b）. Information-seeking strategies of novices using a fulltext electronic encyclopedia. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 40（1）, 54-66.
Marchionini, G., Dwiggins, S., Katz, A., & Lin, X.（1993）. Information seeking in full-text end-user-oriented search systems: The roles of domain and search expertise. Library and Information Science Research, 15（1）, 35-69.
Moore, P. A., & St. George, A.（1991）. Children as information seekers: The cognitive demands of books and library systems. School Library Media Quarterly, 19（3）, 161-168.
Oliver, R., & Oliver, H.（1996）. Information access and retrieval with hypermedia information systems. British Journal of Educational Technology, 27, 33-44.
Oliver, R., & Perzylo, L.（1994）. Children's information skills: Making effective use of multimedia sources. Educational and Technology Training International, 31（3）, 219-230.
Park, H.（1997）. Relevance of science information: Origins and dimensions of relevance and their implications to information retrieval. Information Processing and Management, 33（3）, 339-352.
Park, T. K.（1992）. The nature of relevance in information retrieval: An empirical study. Ph. D. diss., Indiana University, Bloomington.
Park, T. K.（1993）. The nature of relevance in information retrieval: An empirical study. Library Quarterly, 63（3）, 318-351.
Rees, A.M., & Schultz, D.G.（1967）. A field experimental approach to the study of relevance assessments in relation to document searching: I. Final report （NSF Contract No. C-423）. Cleveland, OH: Case Western Reserve University.
Rieh, S.Y.（2002）. Judgement of information quality and cognitive authority in the web. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 53（2）, 145-161.
Saracevic, T.（1975）. Relevance: A review of and a framework for the thinking on the notion in information science. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 26, 321–343.
Saracevic, T.（1996）. Relevance reconsidered. Information science: Integration in perspectives.Proceedings of the Second Conference on Conceptions of Library and Information Science.Copenhagen （Denmark）, 201-218.
Savolainen, R. & Kari, J.（2006）. User-defined relevance criteria in web searching. Journal of Documentation, 62（6）, 685-707.
Schacter, J., Chung, G., & Dorr, A.（1998）. Children’s Internet searching on complex problems: Performance and process analysis. Journal of the American Society for Information Scinece, 49（9）, 840-849.
Schamber, L.（1991）. Users' criteria for evaluation in a multimedia environment. Proceedings of the American Society for Information Science, Washington, DC, 126–133. Medford, NJ: Learned Information, Inc.
Schamber, L.（1994）. Relevance and information behavior. Annual Review of Information Scienec and Technology, 29, 3-48.
Schamber, L., & Bateman, J.（1996）. User criteria in relevance evaluation: Toward development of a measurement scale. Proceedings of the American Society for Information Science, Baltimore, MD, 218–225 .Medford, NJ: Learned Information, Inc.. http://asis.org/annual-96/ElectronicProceedings/schamber.html
Schamber, L., Eisenberg, M.B., & Nilan, M.S.（1990）. A re-examination of relevance: Toward a dynamic, situational definition. Information Processing & Management, 26, 755–775.
Shenton, A. K., & Dixon, P.（2003）. A comparison of youngsters’ use of CD-ROM and the internet as information resources. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 54（11）, 1029-1049.
Shenton, A.K., & Dixon, P.（2003）. Youngsters’ use of other people as an information-seeking method. Journal of Librarianship and Information Science, 35（4）, 219-233.
Shenton, A.K., & Dixon, P.（2004）. Issues arising from youngsters' information-seeking behavior. Library & Information Science Research, 26（2）, 177-200.
Solomon, P.（1993）. Children's information retrieval behavior: a case analysis of an OPAC. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 44（5）, 245-264.
Spink, A., Greisdorf, H., & Bateman, J.（1998）. From highly relevant to not relevant: Examining different regions of relevance. Information Processing and Management, 34（5）, 599-621.
Tang, R. S., & Solomon, P.（2001）. Use of relevance criteria across stages of document evaluation: On the complementarity of experimental and naturalistic studies. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 52（8）, 676-685.
Tang, R., and Solomon, P.（1998）. Toward an understanding of the dynamics of relevance judgments: An analysis of one person’s search behavior. Information Processing and Management, 34, 237-256.
Taylor, A. R., Cool, C., & Belkin, N. J.（2007）. Relationships between categories of relevance criteria and stage in task completion. Information Processing and Management, 43, 1071-1084.
Vakkari, P., & Hakala, N.（2000）. Changes in relevance criteria and problem stages in task performance. Journal of Documentation, 56（5）, 540-562.
Wallace, R. M., Kupperman, J., & Krajcik, J.（2000）. Science on the web: Students online in a sixth-grade classroom. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 9（1）, 75-104.
Wang, P., & Soergel, D.（1998）. A cognitive model of document use during a research project. Study I. Document selection. Journal of the American Society of Information Science and Technology, 49（2）, 115-133.
Wang, P., & White, M. D.（1999）. A cognitive model of document use during a research project. Study II: Decisions at the reading and writing stages. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 50（2）, 98-114.
Wilson, P.（1973）. Situational relevance. Information Storage and Retrieval, 9（8）, 457–471.
Wilson, T., D.（1997）. Information behaviour: an inter-diciplinary persepective. Information Processing and Management, 33（4）, 551-572.
Xu, Y., & Chen, Z.（2006）. Relevance judgment: What do information consumers consider beyond topicality? Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 57（7）, 961-973.
Yang, M. and Marchionini, G.（2004）. Exploring users’ video relevance criteria – a pilot study. In Schamber, L. and Barry, C.L.（Eds）, ASIST 2004, Proceedings of the 67th ASIST Annual Meeting, Information Today, Medford, NJ, 229-238.