本研究主要探討知識網絡表徵分析應用於大學圖書館網站，並以國立臺灣師範大學圖書館作為研究個案，藉此驗證本研究所提出之分析資料方法與過去分析資料方法的差異性。以知識結構評量的方法為研究基礎，在蒐集資料的部份採用卡片分類法、相似性評法進行第一階段實驗，所得之結果進行簡易網站架構，輔以過去資訊架構研究之使用性任務導向之使用性測試、系統使用性量表問卷來評斷第一階段各分析之網站成效。試圖瞭解利用不同的蒐集資料及分析方式所架構的網站之差異及成效，並了解目前現有臺師大圖書館網站在使用上相對成效為何。最後將此評估過程建立一網站架構評估參考模式，提供有意針對大學圖書館網站資訊架構進行研究者作為參考。
研究結果顯示學生網站徑路搜尋分析一般性資訊問題部分在使用性評估結果較佳，其次是學生網站因素分析結果一般性資訊問題，此外，在每一個網站中表現皆以一般性資訊問題比個人化資訊問題表現皆來的較佳，在網站滿意度表現各網站之間皆無顯著性差異之情形。在知識網絡表徵結果顯示學生知識架構與館員知識架構有所差異，學生知識網絡表徵產生一個中心概念，並由此中心概念向外延生；館員知識網絡表徵產生三個中心概念，並在概念之間產生概念橋之情形。在本研究分析資料過程中發現，不同分析軟體及計算方式所產生之網站及項目皆有所不同。
最後根據研究結果對現有之臺師大圖書館網站提出四點建議：一、多元採用各種蒐集資料及分析資料方式來設計圖書館網站；二、建立網站標籤一致性；三、加強圖書館推廣服務；四、建立網站使用性評估機制。

This study is discuss apply usability knowledge structure network representations analyze University Library Website Architecture,and use National Taiwan Normal University library website for case study.Proposed in this study to validate analytical methods differences with the past .The basis of knowledge structure assessment study, using card sorting and similarity ratings method to collect data, for the first phase of experiments.The results obtained easy web site architecture.Supplemented by the usability testing and system usability scale of information architecture research to judge the first phase of the analysis of the effectiveness of the website.Trying to understand the use of different methods to collect and analyze data result of the the website structure and usability effectiveness and understand the Taiwan Normal University library website currently.Finally this framework for the process to establish a web site assessment reference model, provided university library website information structure of the researchers as a reference.
The results showed that students with general information web site pathfinder analysis part of the problem better in the use of assessment results, followed by factor analysis of the students web site with general information questions.In addition, the performance of each site begin with general information questions than it is showing all personal information to a better.Satisfaction with the performance of the site for each site were no significant differences between the cases.Knowledge network representations results showed that the knowledge structure of students differ from librarians.Students create a knowledge network representation by a central concept, and thus the central concept outward expansion of other concepts.Librarians create knowledge networks representation by three central concepts and conceptual bridge between the concept of case.In this study, the process of analysis found in different analysis software and methods of calculating produce different the website structure and items.
Four suggestions were proposed: First, multiple use multiple methods to collect and analyze data to design the library web site; Second, set up the labeling system of consistency; Third, the Library Extension Service should be strengthened ; Fourth, the establishment of site usability evaluation mechanisms.

Koubek, R. J., & Mountjoy, D. N. (1991). Toward a model of knowledge structure and a comparative analysis of knowledge structure measurement techniques. Dayton, OH: Department of Biomedical and Human Factors Engineering, Wright State University. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED339-719.)
Goldsmith, T. E., Johnson, P. J., & Acton, W. H. (1991). Assessing structural knowledge. Journal of Educational Psychology, 83, 88-96.
onassen, D. H., Beissner, K., & Yacci, M. (1993). Structural knowledge: Techniques for representing, conveying, and acquiring structural knowledge. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Miller, G. A. (1969). A psychological method to investigate verbal concepts. Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 6, 169-191.
Stein, M. K., Baxter, J. A., & Leinhardt, G. (1990). Subject matter knowledge and elementary instruction: A case from functions and graphing. American Educational Research Journal, 27, 639-663.
White, R. T. (1985). Interview protocols and dimensions of cognitive structure. In L. H. T. West & A. L. Pines (Eds.), Cognitive structure and conceptual change. Orlando, FL: Academic Press.
Deaton, M(2002). Sorting techniques for user-centweed information design.
Upchurch, L., Rugg, G., & Kitchenham, B.(2001).Using card sorts to elicit web pages quality attributes. IEEE Software, 18(4), 84-89
Palmer, J.(1988). The Design and evaluation of online help for Unix EMACS: capturing the user in menu design. IEEE Transactions on professional communication, 31(1), 44-51
Hudson, W.(2005).Playing your cards right: getting the most from card sorting fot navigation design. Interactions, 12, 56-58.
Maurer, D., & Warfel, T. (2004). Card sorting: a definitive guide. Retrieved on November 10, 2006, form http://www.boxesandarrows.com/view/card_sorting_a_definitive_guide
Fuccella, J. (1997). Using user centered design methods to create and design usable web sites. In Proceedings of the 15th international conference on computer documentation (pp. 69-77). New York: ACM Press.
Akerelrea, C., & Zimmerman, D. (2002). A group card sorting methodology for developing informational web sites. Retrieved December 12, 2006, form http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/iel5/8118/22469/01049127.pdf
Fincher, S., & Tenenberg, J. (2005). Making sense of card sorting data. Expert Systems, 22(3), 89-93.
Fincher, S., & Tenenberg, J. (2005). Making sense of card sorting data. Expert Systems, 22(3), 89-93, as cited in McKeithen, K., Reitman, J. S., Reuter, H. H., & Hirtle, S. C. (1981). Knowledge organization and skill differences in computer programmers. Cognitive Psychology, 13, 307-325.
Faiks, A., & Hyland, N. (2000). Gaining user insight: a case study illustrating the card sort technique. College and Search Libraries, 61(4), 349-357.
Ahlstrom, V., & Allendoerfer, K. (2004). Information organization for a portal using a card-sorting technique (DOT/FAA/CT-TN04/31). Atlantic City International Airport, NJ: Federal Aviation Administration William J. Hughes Technical Center. Retrieved November 20, 2006 from http://hf.tc.faa.gov/technotes/dot-faa-ct-tn04-31.pdf
Nielsen, J., & Sano, D. (1994).Design of Sun Web: Sun Microsystems Intranet. Retrieved on November 4, 2006, form http://www.useit.com/papers/sunweb/
Capra, M. G. (2005). Factor analysis of card sort data: an alternative to hierarchical cluster analysis. In Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society 49th Annual Meeting, 651-655.
Schvaneveldt (Ed.), Pathfinder associative networks: Studies in knowledge organization (pp. 255-266). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
Dearhotlt & Schvaneveldt (1990), Properties of pathfinder networks. In R. W. Schvaneveldt (Ed.), Pathfinder associative networks: Studies in knowledge organization (pp. 1-30). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
丁依玲 (民96)。以卡片分類法分析大學圖書館網站架構— 以國立臺灣師範大學圖書館網站為例。未出版之碩士論文，國立臺灣師範大學圖書資訊學研究所，臺北市。
蔡維君 (民95)。大學圖書館使用性評估：以臺灣大學圖書館網站為例。未出版之碩士論文，國立臺灣大學圖書資訊學研究所，臺北市。
謝建成、劉至逢(民97)。大學圖書館使用性評估之探討。第十九屆國際資訊管理學術研討會，國立暨南國際大學，南投縣。
藍素華 (民90)。大學圖書館網站資訊架構可用性之研究：以國立臺灣大學圖書館網站為例。未出版之碩士論文，國立臺灣大學圖書資訊學研究所，臺北市。
宋德忠、林世華、陳淑芬、張國恩(民87)。知識結構的測量：徑路搜尋法與概念構圖法的比較。教育心理學報，30卷(2期)，123-142 頁。
余民寧(民92)。線上認知診斷評量模式之研究：以國小數學科低成就學生為對象。行政院國家科學委員會專題研究計畫成果報告。計畫主持人:余民寧。
黃湃翔、江新合、洪振方(2006)。知識結構網路表徵分析之研究─高一基礎力學為例。
宋德忠、林世華、陳淑芬、張國恩(民87)。知識結構的測量：徑路搜尋法與概念構圖法的比較。教育心理學報，30卷(2期)，123-142 頁。
林邦傑(民70)。群集分析及其應用。教育與心理研究，4期，31-57頁。
江淑卿(民86)。知識結構的重要特性之分析暨促進知識結構教學策略之實驗研究。國立台灣師範大學教育與輔導研究所博士論文。
張新民、胡紅亮、王豔、梁戰平、張傳本、鄭力(民93，3月)。網站信息架構的評估。現代圖書情報技術，2004(3)，51-55。