本研究旨在探討設計思考訓練課程中，洞察觀點（point of view, POV）階段的「提示」，對於學生「POV提案品質」及創造力的影響。
研究共分為兩階段：研究一為前導研究，採取不等組後測實驗設計，研究參與者為69名大學生（男生21人，佔30.43%），研究者於創造心理學課程招募自願之大學生參與者，隨機分配至「逐步多想」、「逐步」、「無提示」三種操弄情境，讓受試者撰寫關於設計對象問題的POV語句，接著以專家共識評量評定POV的語句獨創性。研究結果顯示：逐步、多想的操弄對大學生POV產出數、需求獨創性及洞見獨創性均未有顯著影響。
研究二為正式研究，乃是準實驗研究，採取不等組前後測設計，研究參與者均為國中七、八年級學生（M = 12.95, SD = 0.12）共計48名（男30人，62.5%）。研究參與者依報名時間分配至「POV階段提示逐步多想」之實驗組（N = 18）及「POV階段無提示」之控制組（N = 30），均進行3小時的設計思考快速體驗課程，其中實驗組在POV發想階段，教師予以逐步區分思考步驟並提示盡可能多想點子。研究工具以「新編創造思考測驗」、「威廉斯創造傾向測驗」對參與者進行前後測，並以專家共識評量評定參與者於課程中產出的POV想法及設計作品創新性。
研究結果發現，實驗組於POV發想時逐步提示多想策略，能提升參與者POV點子的「需求獨創性」、「洞見獨創性」。兩組學生創造思考、創造傾向沒有顯著差異，惟兩組學生均於課程之後提升創造思考、創造傾向。實驗組的設計作品驚奇性優於對照組，作品價值性、有用性則沒有差異。研究者依據上述結果提出研究結論，並針對未來研究與教學實務提出建議。

The purpose of this study was to investigate the effect of Point of View (POV) prompts on students' POV proposal quality and creativity in a design thinking training program.
The study was divided into two phases: Study I was a pilot study with an unequal group post-test experimental design. 69 university students (21 males, 30.43%) were recruited to participate in a creative psychological course and randomly assigned to three manipulation situations: "progressive thinking," "progressive" and "no prompting." Then, the originality of the POV sentences was assessed by an expert consensus rating. The results of the study showed that the stepwise and multi-thought manipulation did not have a significant effect on the number of POVs produced, demand originality, nor insight originality of the university students.
Study II was a formal study, a quasi-experimental study with a pre-posttest design with unequal groups. 48 participants (30 males, 62.5%) were enrolled in 7th and 8th grade in junior high school (M = 12.95, SD = 0.12). Participants were assigned to the experimental group (N = 18) and the control group (N = 30) according to their enrollment time, and were given a three-hour Design Thinking Quick Experience session. The participants were pre-tested and post-tested with the New Creativity Test and the Williams Propensity to Create Test, and their POV ideas and design innovations were assessed by an expert consensus.
The results of the study revealed that the experimental group was able to enhance the "demand originality" and "insight originality" of the participants' POV ideas by gradually prompting multiple thinking strategies during POV development. There was no significant difference in the creative thinking and creative tendency between the two groups, but both groups improved their creative thinking and creative tendency after the course. The experimental group's design works were more surprising than the control group, but there was no difference in the value and usefulness of the works. Based on these results, the researcher draws conclusions and makes suggestions for future research and teaching practice.

王木榮、林幸台（1986）：威廉斯創造力測驗修訂研究。特殊教育研究學刊，2，231–250。
王佳琪、宋世祥（2019）：設計思考融入職前師資培育課程之實施與成效：以適性教學為例。教育科學研究期刊，64（4），145–173。 http://doi.org/10.6209/JORIES.201912_64(4).0006
王保堤、游光昭、王鼎銘（2006）：設計導向課程對學生科技創造力影響之研究。新竹教育大學學報，22，77–103。https://doi.org/10.7044/NHCUE.200606.0077
何姿儀、余庭宇、吳婉君、陳怡潔、陳筑君、陳靖雯、莊皓鈞（2017年12月27日）：銀浪新趨勢—創造我的 X 人生：專題研究。明志科技大學經營管理系。https://bm.mcut.edu.tw/var/file/46/1046/img/1583/520090832.pdf
吳靜吉（1998）：新編創造思考測驗研究第二年期末報告。教育部輔導工作六年計劃研究報告。教育部訓育委員會。http://depart.moe.edu.tw/ED2800/News_Content.aspx?n=98D52D5BD48ACC6D&sms=4E4FC20742593EE0&s=7581E217941ADC10
林幸台、王木榮（1994）：威廉斯創造力測驗指導手冊。心理。
林重新（2001）：心理與教育統計。揚智文化。
林偉文（2011）：創意教學與創造力的培育─以「設計思考」為例。教育資料與研究雙月刊，100，53–74。
林緯倫、連韻文、任純慧（2005）：想得多是想得好的前提嗎?探討發散性思考能力在創意問題解決的角色。中華心理學刊，47（3），211–227。http://doi.org/10.6129/CJP.2005.4703.02
侯世強（2019）：威廉斯創造力測驗修訂版信效度之研究（未發表）。國立臺灣師範大學特殊教育學系碩士論文。
國家教育研究院（2016年3月20日）：國民中小學暨普通型高級中等學校-藝術領域課程綱要草案。http://www.naer.edu.tw/files/16-1000-10466.php?Lang=zh-tw
國家教育研究院（2019年3月27日）：十二年國民基本教育課程綱要綜合型高級中等學校─科技領域。https://www.naer.edu.tw/files/15-1000-14113,c1594-1.php
張厚粲、徐建平（2007）：現代心理與教育統計學。心理。
郭家宏（2019年11月8日）：翻轉產品優先的思維慣性，用這 3 個工具精準抓到消費者需求。科技報橘。 https://buzzorange.com/techorange/2019/11/08/3-tools-to-portraituser/?fbclid=IwAR0dWO7kSbFWrMGqlVY1V5NQT8r91zBOLr7mYUrczcjKxbQoZNbIOPqiyWA
陳育祥（2016）：透過設計思維的藝術教育─以科技部高瞻計畫課程為例。教育脈動，6，100–112。
陳家富、劉育東（1997）：發現問題在建築設計創造力中的角色（未發表）。國立交通大學應用藝術研究所碩士論文。
湯偉君、邱美虹（1999）：創造性問題解決（CPS）模式的沿革與應用。科學教育月刊，223，2–20。
黃博聖、陳學志、劉政宏（2012）：「中文詞彙遠距聯想測驗」之編製及其信、效度報告。測驗學刊，59（4），581–607。http://doi.org/10.7108/PT.201212.0581
黃麗鳳、陳雅鈴、Hartmut Wedekind（2020）：運用設計思考提升職前幼教師科學遊戲設計能力之個案研究。科學教育學刊，28（2），99–118。 http://dx.doi.org/10.6173/CJSE.202006_28(2).0001
楊朝陽、康仕仲、 陳彥甫、林喬茵、王嫊凌、林怡萱（2018）：以「設計導向學習」模式初探智齡設計課程。科學教育學刊，26（S），399–418。http://doi.org/10.6173/CJSE.201812/SP_26.0002
葉韋伶、陳麗華 、彭增龍（2017）：社會設計做為公民教育的實踐模式：一所國小的案例分析。課程與教學，20（3），59–84。http://doi.org/10.6384/CIQ.201707_20(3).0003
劉弘煌（2015）：社會統計學：理論與應用（三版）。雙葉書廊。
蕭浥真（2020）：運用設計思考及專案導向學習提升國小三年級學童創新應變素養之行動研究. 國立臺北教育大學教育學系學位論文（未發表）。國立臺北教育大學教育學系教育創新與評鑑碩士班在職專班碩士論文。
謝佩芯（2012）：設計思考力與團隊創造力之關係。設計與環境學報，13，29–45。
謝依珊、張世慧（2016）：創造性問題解決融入科學玩具製作教學對國小資優生創造力及科學創造性問題解決之研究。特教論壇，20，20–35。http://doi.org/10.6502/SEF.2016.20.20-35
Albert, R. S., & Runco, M. A. (1999). A history of research on creativity. In R. J. Sternberg (Ed), Handbook of creativity (pp. 16–31). University Press.
Alpha Team 台大創新設計學院學術小組（2017年2月13日）：Facebook content [Rookie's Guide 設計思考新手手冊]。Facebook。https://www.facebook.com/ntudalpha/posts/1838432553077826/
Alpha Team台大創新設計學院學術小組（2018年6月25日）：設計思考教練手冊Coach's Guide。http://www.alphateam.tw/coachsguide/
Amabile, T. M. (1996). Creativity and innovation in organizations. Harvard Business School.
Anderson, T., Garrison, D. R., Archer, W., & Rourke, L. (2000). Methodological issues in the content analysis of computer conference transcripts. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, 12, 8–22.
Archer, L. B. (1979). Whatever became of design methodology? Design Studies, 1(1), 17–20.
Barron, F. (1955). The disposition towards originality. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 51, 478–485. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0048073
Beaty, R. E., & Silvia, P. J. (2012). Why do ideas get more creative across time? An executive interpretation of the serial order effect in divergent thinking tasks. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 6(4), 309–319. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0029171
Beaty, R. E., Nusbaum, E. C., & Silvia, P. J. (2014). Does insight problem solving predict real-world creativity? Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 8(3), 287–292. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0035727
Besemer, S. P. & Treffinger, D. J. (1981). Analysis of creative products: review and synthesis. Journal of Creative Behavior, 15(3), 158–178. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2162-6057.1981.tb00287.x
Bourgeois-Bougrine, S., Latorre, S., & Mourey, F. (2018). Promoting creative imagination of non-expressed needs: Exploring a combined approach to enhance design thinking. Creativity Studies, 11(2), 377–394. https://doi.org/10.3846/cs.2018.7184
Brown, T. (2008). Design thinking. Harvard Business Review, 86(6), 84.
Brown, T. (2009). Change by design: how design thinking transforms organizations and inspires innovation. HarperCollins.
Brown, T., & Wyatt, J. (2010). Design thinking for social innovation. Development Outreach, 12(1), 29–43. https://doi.org/10.1596/1020-797X_12_1_29
Buchanan, R. (1992). Wicked problems in design thinking. Design Issues, 8, 5–21. https://doi.org/10.2307/1511637
Buerkli, D. (2013). Why the d. school has its limits. The Stanford Daily. https://www.stanforddaily.com/2013/03/07/why-the-d-school-has-its-limits/
Carlgren, L., Elmquist, M., & Rauth, I. (2016). The challenges of using design thinking in industry experiences from five large firms. Creativity and Innovation Management, 25(3), 344–362. https://doi.org/10.1111/caim.12176
Carroll, M., Goldman, S., Britos, L., Koh, J., Royalty, A., & Hornstein, M. (2010). Destination, imagination and the fires within: design thinking in a middle school classroom. International Journal of Art & Design Education, 29(1), 37–53. https://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1476-8070.2010.01632.x
Chiang, C.-J.（2021年1月26日）：OA的”OPEN”-開放授權（Open Content Licensing）。國立臺灣大學圖書館參考服務部落格。http://tul.blog.ntu.edu.tw/archives/27019
De Vries, M. J. (1997). Science, technology and society: a methodological perspective. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 7, 21–32. https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-94-011-5598-4_3
De Wever, B., Schellens, T., Valcke, M., & Van Keer, H. (2006). Content analysis schemes to analyze transcripts of online asynchronous discussion groups: a review. Computers & education, 46(1), 6–28. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2005.04.005
Design Council. (2007, January 20). 11 lessons: a study of the design process. https://www.designcouncil.org.uk/sites/default/files/asset/document/ElevenLessons_Design_Council%20%282%29.pdf
Diefenthaler, A., Moorhead, L., Speicher, S., Bear, C., & Cerminaro, D. (2017). Thinking and Acting Like a Designer: How design thinking supports innovation in K-12 education. Wise Ideo.
Doppelt, Y., Mehalik, M. M., Schunn, C. D., Silk, E., & Krysinski, D. (2008). Engagement and achievements: a case study of design-based learning in a science context. Journal of Technology Education, 19(2), 22–39.
Dyer, R. R., Reed, A. P., & Berry, Q. R. (2006). Investigating the relationship between high school technology education and test scores for algebra 1 and geometry. Journal of Technology Education, 17(2), 8–18. https://dx.doi.org/10.21061/jte.v17i2.a.1
Edwin, C. S., Emily, J. S., & John, C. H. (2005). The Creative Personality. Gifted.
Eysenck, H. J. (1995). Genius: The natural history of creativity (Vol. 12). Cambridge University Press.
Finke, R. A., Ward, T. B., & Smith, S. M. (1992). Creative cognition: Theory, research, and applications. MIT Press.
Guilford, J. P. (1950). Creativity. American Psychologist, 5, 444–454.
Guilford, J. P. (1956). The structure of intellect. Psychological Bulletin, 53, 267–293.
Guilford, J. P. (1988). Some changes in the structure-of-intellect model. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 48(1), 1–4. https://dx.doi.org/10.1177/001316448804800102
Hasso Plattner Institute of Design at Stanford. (2007). Design thinking process. Stanford University.
Hennessey, B. A., Amabile, T. M., & Mueller, J. S. (2011). Consensual assessment. Encyclopedia of Creativity, 2011, 253–260. https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-375038-9.00046-7
Henriksen, D., Richardson, C., & Mehta, R. (2017). Design thinking: a creative approach to educational problems of practice. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 26, 140–153. https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2017.10.001
IDEO (2012). Design thinking toolkit for educators (2nd ed.). https://designthinkingforeducators.com/
Isaksen, S. G. (1989). Creative problem solving: A process for creativity [Unpublished training manual]. The Creative Problem Solving Group-Buffalo.
Isaksen, S. G. (1995). On The Conceptual Foundations of Creative Problem Solving: A Response to Magyari‐Beck. Creativity and Innovation Management, 4(1), 52–63. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8691.1995.tb00202.x
Isaksen, S. G., & Treffinger, D. J. (1985). Creative problem solving: The basic course. Bearly,.
Isaksen, S. G., Dorval, K. B., & Treffinger, D. J. (2000). Creative approaches to problem solving: A framework for change. Kendall Hunt Publishing Company.
Iskander, N. (2018). Design thinking is fundamentally conservative and preserves the Status Quo. Harvard Business Review. https://hbr.org/2018/09/design-thinking-is-fundamentally-conservative-and-preserves-the-status-quo
Jauk, E., Benedek, M., & Neubauer, A. C. (2014). The road to creative achievement: A latent variable model of ability and personality predictors. European Journal of Personality, 28(1), 95–105. https://doi.org/10.1002/per.1941
Johansson‐Sköldberg, U., Woodilla, J., & Çetinkaya, M. (2013). Design thinking: past, present and possible futures. Creativity and Innovation Management, 22(2), 121–146. https://doi.org/10.1111/caim.12023
Kim, K. H. (2005). Can only intelligent people be creative? Journal of Secondary Gifted Education, 16, 57–66. https://doi.org/10.4219/jsge-2005-473
Köhler, W. (1925). The mentality of apes (E. Winter, Trans.). Vintage Books.
Krippendorff, K. (2006). The semantic turn: a new foundation for design. Taylor and Francis, Boca Raton, FL.
Kuhn, J. T., & Holling, H. (2009). Gender, reasoning ability, and scholastic achievement: A multilevel mediation analysis. Learning and Individual Differences, 19(2), 229–233. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2008.11.007
Lewrick, M., Link, P., & Leifer, L. (2018). The design thinking playbook: Mindful digital transformation of teams, products, services, businesses and ecosystems. John Wiley & Sons.
Luguri, J. B., Napier, J. L., & Dovidio, J. F. (2012). Reconstruing intolerance: Abstract thinking reduces conservatives' prejudice against nonnormative groups. Psychological Science, 23, 756–763. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797611433877
Martin, R. L., & Christensen, K. (2013). Rotman on design: The best on design thinking from Rotman Magazine. University of Toronto Press.
Matud, M. P., Rodríguez, C., & Grande, J. (2007). Gender differences in creative thinking. Personality and individual differences, 43(5), 1137–1147. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2007.03.006
Mayer, R.E. (1999). Fifty years of creativity research. In R. J. Sternberg (Ed), Handbook of creativity (pp. 449–460). Cambridge University Press.
Medeiros, K. E., Partlow, P. J., & Mumford, M. D. (2014). Not too much, not too little: The influence of constraints on creative problem solving. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 8(2), 198–210. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0036210
Mehalik, M. M., & Schunn, C. (2006). What constitutes good design? A review of empirical studies of design processes. International Journal of Engineering Education, 22(3), 519–532. https://doi.org/0949-149X/91
Metcalfe, J. & Wiebe, D. (1987). Intuition in insight and non-insight problem solving. Memory & Cognition 15, 238–246. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03197722
Mumford, M. D., & Whetzel, D. L. (1996). Insight, creativity, and cognition: On Sternberg and Davidson's the nature of insight. Creativity Research Journal, 9(1), 103–107. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15326934crj0901_10
Mumford, M. D., Todd, E. M., Higgs, C., & McIntosh, T. (2017). Cognitive skills and leadership performance: The nine critical skills. The Leadership Quarterly, 28(1), 24–39. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2016.10.012
Neuendorf, K. A. (2002). The content analysis guidebook Sage Publications. Thousand Oaks.
Nickerson, R. S., Perkins, D. N., & Smith, E. E. (1985). The Teaching of Thinking. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Incorporated.
Nohria, N., & Gulati, R. (1996). Is slack good or bad for innovation? Academy of management Journal, 39(5), 1245–1264. https://doi.org/10.2307/256998
Norman, D. (2013). The design of everyday things. Basic Books.
Norman, D. A., & Verganti, R. (2012). Incremental and radical innovation: design research versus technology and meaning change. Design Issues, 30(1), 78–96. https://doi.org/10.1162/DESI_a_00250
Nusbaum, E. C., & Silvia, P. J. (2011). Are intelligence and creativity really so different? Fluid intelligence, executive processes, and strategy use in divergent thinking. Intelligence, 39, 36–45. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intell.2010.11.002
Oldham, G. R., & Cummings, A. (1996). Employee creativity: Personal and contextual factors at work. Academy of Management Journal, 39(3), 607–634. https://doi.org/10.2307/256657
Osborn, A. F. (1953). Applied imagination. Oxford, England: Scribner'S.
Patnaik, D., & Mortensen, P. (2009). Wired to care: how companies prosper when they create widespread empathy. Jump Associates.
Plucker, J. A., Qian, M., & Schmalensee, S. L. (2014). Is What You See What You Really Get? Comparison of Scoring Techniques in the Assessment of Real-World Divergent Thinking. Creativity Research Journal, 26(2), 135–143. https://doi.org/10.1080/10400419.2014.901023
Reitman, W. R. (1965). Cognition and thought: An information processing approach. Wiley.
Rietzschel, E. F., Nijstad, B. A., & Stroebe, W. (2010). The selection of creative ideas after individual idea generation: Choosing between creativity and impact. British Journal of Psychology, 101(1), 47–68. https://doi.org/10.1348/000712609X414204
Rittel, H. W. J., & Webber, M. M. (1973). Dilemmas in a general theory of planning. Policy Sciences, 4(2), 155–169.
Rivet, E. A. & Krajcik, S. J. (2004). Achieving standards in urban systematic reform: An example of a sixth grade project-based science curriculum. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 41(7), 669–692. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20021
Runco, M. A. (2008). Commentary: Divergent thinking is not synonymous with creativity. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 2(2), 93–96. https://doi.org/10.1037/1931-3896.2.2.93
Runco, M. A., & Jaeger, G. J. (2012). The standard definition of creativity. Creativity Research Journal, 24(1), 92–96. https://doi.org/10.1080/10400419.2012.650092
Sannomiya, M., & Yamaguchi, Y. (2016). Creativity training in causal inference using the idea post-exposure paradigm: Effects on idea generation in junior high school students. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 22, 152–158. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2016.09.006
Schooler, J. W., Fallshore, M., & Fiore, S. M. (1995). Epilogue: Putting insight into perspective. In J. E. Davidson (Ed.), The nature of insight (pp. 559–587). MIT Press.
Shen, W., Yuan, Y., Liu, C., & Luo, J. (2016). In search of the ‘Aha!’experience: Elucidating the emotionality of insight problem‐solving. British Journal of Psychology, 107(2), 281–298. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjop.12142
Silvia, P. J., Nusbaum, E. C., & Beaty, R. E. (2017). Old or new? Evaluating the old/new scoring method for divergent thinking tasks. The Journal of Creative Behavior, 51(3), 216–224. https://doi.org/10.1002/jocb.101
Silvia, P. J., Nusbaum, E. C., Berg, C., Martin, C., & O’Connor, A. (2009). Openness to experience, plasticity, and creativity: Exploring lower-order, high-order, and interactive effects. Journal of Research in Personality, 43(6), 1087–1090. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrp.2009.04.015
Silvia, P. J., Winterstein, B. P., Willse, J. T., Barona, C. M., Cram, J. T., Hess, K. I., Martinez, J. L., & Richard, C. A. (2008). Assessing creativity with divergent thinking tasks: Exploring the reliability and validity of new subjective scoring methods. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 2(2), 68–85. https://doi.org/10.1037/1931-3896.2.2.68
Simon, H. A. (1969). The sciences of the artificial. MIT Press.
Stein, M. I. (1953). Creativity and culture. Journal of Psychology, 36, 31–322.
Sternberg, R. J. (Ed.). (1999). Handbook of creativity. Cambridge University Press.
Stokes, D. (2007). Incubated cognition and creativity. Journal of Consciousness Studies,14(3), 83–100. https://philpapers.org/archive/STOICA
Tarbutton, T. (2018). Leveraging 21st Century learning & technology to create caring diverse classroom cultures. Multicultural Education, 25(2), 4–6.
Thoring, K., & Müller, R. M. (2011). Understanding the creative mechanisms of design thinking: An evolutionary approach. In Proceedings of the DESIRE’11 Conference Creativity and Innovation in Design (pp. 137–144). ACM.
Treffinger, D. J., Selby, E. C., & Isaksen, S. G. (2008). Understanding individual problem-solving style: A key to learning and applying creative problem solving. Learning and individual Differences, 18(4), 390–401. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2007.11.007
Tschimmel, K. (2012). Design Thinking as an effective toolkit for innovation. In ISPIM Conference Proceedings. The International Society for Professional Innovation Management (ISPIM).
Weisberg, R. W. (1995). Prolegomena to theories of insight problem solving: A taxonomy of problems. In R. J. Sternberg & J. E. Davidson (Eds.), The nature of insight (Paperback ed., pp. 157–196). MIT Press.
Weisberg, R. W. (2011). Frank lloyd wright’s fallingwater: A case studyof inside-the-box creativity. Creativity Research Journal, 23, 296–312. https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10400419.2011.621814
Williams, F. E. (1969). Models for encouraging creativity in the classroom by integrating cognitive-affective behaviors. Educational Technology, 9(12), 7–13.
Williams, F. E. (1980). The creativity assessment packet. Psychologists and Educators Inc.
Williams, F. E. (1993). The creativity assessment packet. Psychologists and Educators Inc.
Williams, P. J. (2000). Design: The only methodology of technology? Journal of Technology Education, 11(2), 48–60.
Yang, Ch. M. (2018). Applying design thinking as a method for teaching packaging design. Journal of Education and Learning, 7(5), 52–61. https://doi.org/10.5539/jel.v7n5p52