本研究旨在探討跑酷玩家觀察空間的方式，如何從練習的現場傳遞到日常生活中。藉由此研究可進一步討論空間反抗的行動，如何在結束以後仍能夠保存與運作，以及其形式為何。本研究以參與觀察以及深度訪談進行資料收集，對象為台北、高雄兩地之跑酷玩家與團體。以資料描繪跑酷的練習方式、內容，以及跑酷玩家的論述與社群文化。研究發現，玩家在跑酷中學到身體與環境、情緒與環境的知識，並能以這種知識去判斷、了解空間。這些知識以默會的形式在玩家的日常生活中發生作用。跑酷在日常生活的空間中進行，因此玩家能夠在日常生活中以跑酷學習到的默會知識感受移動的可能性，並將這種觀感以及跑酷的論述作為他們生活風格。本研究認為在日常生活中運作的跑酷空間觀，是一種空間反抗展演後的延續。本研究同時發現，跑酷社群尋求體制認可的同時，亦改變了接觸跑酷的方式。從不同的路徑接觸跑酷可能養成與過去不同的跑酷空間觀，因此具空間反抗特性的空間觀，需特定的接觸路徑使能達成。

This study was to investigate how parkour practitioner observes spaces, and to investigate how this way of observation spread from practicing to practitioner’s everyday life. This study also discussed how a spatial resistant activity preserved after the activity ends. Research methods were field work and interview. Subjects were parkour practitioners and groups at Kaohsiung and Taipei. The knowledge generated in practice and the subculture of parkour was demonstrated in this article. This study discovered that practitioners learned two kinds of knowledge, physical and emotional. Practitioner could use this knowledge to confirm physical and emotional condition of them self and environment. The knowledge performed in practitioner’s everyday life was preserve as tacit knowledge. Practitioners practice parkour in their daily life spaces, which enable them to perceive their daily life space with the knowledge of pakrour. Practitioners transformed this perception of space and subculture of parkour to a kind of attitude, and take this attitude as their lifestyle. The study suggests that the space awareness of parkour was an extension of spatial resistant activity. The study also discovered that the institutionalization of parkour could provide different way for people to practice parkour, which may not provide the same space awareness to practitioner.

[第一章、導論+1]
[一、跑酷源起+2]
[二、跑酷在台灣+3]
[三、文獻回顧+4]
[四、研究目的+6]
[五、研究方法+6]
[六、章節架構+7]
[第二章、描繪跑酷+9]
[一、跑酷的練習+9]
[二、從練習中凝聚的知識與態度+13]
[三、跑酷玩家的論述與態度+17]
[四、小結+20]
[第三章、跑酷與實作+22]
[一、作為實作的跑酷+22]
[二、跑酷與默會知識+25]
[三、Parkour vision+29]
[四、小結+30]
[第四章、跑酷到底是什麼？+32]
[一、內行看什麼門道？+32]
[二、不只是運動的運動+37]
[三、小結+40]
[第五章、從另類走向主流+42]
[一、運動的發展，運動化與組織+42]
[二、被體制看見的需求+44]
[三、滿足制度的需求+47]
[四、小結+50]
[第六章、結論+53]
[一、研究發現+53]
[二、研究限制+54]
[三、從身體到日常+55]
[參考文獻+56]

王润斌、徐波，2010，〈论跑酷运动及其文化性格〉。体育学刊 17(2)：38-41。
何永彬、邱旺璋，2001，〈足球運動制度化過程初探〉。大專體育(52)：149-153。
呂芳陽、陳麒文，2000，〈羽球運動的制度化過程〉。大專體育(51)：135-139。
李祥瑞，2003，〈不玩板的板弟-滑板文化在台灣〉。世新大學碩士傳播研究所論文。
林伯勳，2001，〈街舞、街頭舞者與中正紀念堂－人、活動、次文化與公共空間之關係〉，國立政治大學地政研究所碩士論文。
柯彥惠、陳志成、林昌國，2004，〈排球運動體制化的過程〉。淡江體育(7)：57-61。
段義孚著、潘桂成譯，1998，《經驗透視中的空間和地方》。台北：國立編譯館。
畢恒達，2001，《空間就是權力》。台北：心靈工坊
許明霖，2001，〈方言的發散: 街頭, 展覽, 消費場域的臺灣塗鴉次文化〉。中央大學藝術學研究所論文。
陳仲栩，2009，〈滑板族身體空間知覺與認同〉。臺灣師範大學運動與休閒管理研究所學位論文。
Adey, Peter, 2009, Mobility. London: Routledge.
Adey, Peter著、徐苔玲、王志弘譯，2013，《移動》。台北：群學。
Ameel, Lieven and Sirpa Tani, 2012, “Parkour: Creating loose spaces?”Geografiska Annaler: Series B, Human Geography 94(1): 17-30.
Atkinson, Michael, 2009, “Parkour, anarcho-environmentalism, and poiesis” Journal of Sport & Social Issues 33(2): 169-194.
Atkinson, Michael and Kevin Young, 2008, Deviance and social control in sport. Leeds: Human Kinetics.
Bavinton, Nathaniel, 2007, “From Obstacle to Opportunity: Parkour, leisure, and the reinterpretation of constraints” Annals of Leisure Research 10(3-4): 391-412.
Bonnewitz , Partice著、孫智綺譯，2002，《布赫迪厄社會學的第一課》。台北：麥田。
Borden , Iain, 2001, Skateboarding, space and the city: Architecture and the body. New York: Bloomsbury Academic.
Bridge, Gary與Watson, Sophie著、唐伟譯，2003，〈城市公众空间综览〉。收錄於汪民安、陈永国、马海良著，《城市文化读本》。北京大學出版社。
Brown, Neill, 2009, ”The Art of Displacement: Parkour as a challenge to social perceptions of body and space”. ParkourGenerations. com
Castells, Manuel著、陳志梧譯，1993，〈一個跨文化的都市社會變遷理論〉。收錄於王志弘、夏鑄九著，《空間的文化形式與社會理論讀本》。台北：明文出版。
Certeau, Michel de著、方琳琳、黃春柳譯，2009，《日常生活的實踐：1. 實踐的藝術》。南京大學出版社。
Daskalaki, Maria, Alexandra Stara and Miguel Imas , 2008, “The‘Parkour organisation’: inhabitation of corporate spaces” Culture and organization 14(1): 49-64.
Freitas, Elizabeth de, 2011, “Parkour and the Built Environment: Spatial Practices and the Plasticity of School Buildings” Journal of Curriculum Theorizing 27(3):209-220.
Gehl , Jan著、陳秋伶譯，1996，《戶外空間的場所行為—公共空間使用之研究》。台北：田園城市。
Gilchrist , Paul and Belinda Wheaton , 2011, “Lifestyle sport, public policy and youth engagement: Examining the emergence of parkour” International journal of sport policy and politics 3(1): 109-131.
Higgins, Jeanmarie, 2009, “The Revitalization of Space: Freestyle Parkour and Its Audiences” Theatre Symposium(17): 113-123.
Ingham, Alan G, 2004, “The sportification process: A biographical analysis framed by the work of Marx, Weber, Durkheim and Freud” Sport and modern social theorists(2004): 11-32.
Kidder, Jeffrey L, 2012, ”Parkour, the affective appropriation of urban space, and the real/virtual dialectic” City & Community 11(3): 229-253.
Lamb, Matthew D, 2010, “Negating the negation: The practice of parkour in spectacular city” Kaleidoscope: A Graduate Journal of Qualitative Communication Research 9(1): 91-105.
Morrow, Don, 1992, “The institutionalization of sport: a case study of Canadian Lacrosse, 1844–1914” The International Journal of the History of Sport 9(2): 236-251.
Mould, Oli, 2009, “Parkour, the city, the event” Environment and planning. D, Society and space 27(4): 738-750.
Pearson, Kent, 1979, “The institutionalization of sport forms” International Review for the Sociology of Sport 14(1): 51-60.
Polanyi, Michael, 1967, The tacit dimension. Gloucester: Peter Smith.
Polanyi, Michael著、彭锋譯，2006，《社会, 经济和哲学：波兰尼文选》。北京：商务印书馆
Saville, Stephen John, 2008, “Playing with fear: parkour and the mobility of emotion” Social & Cultural Geography 9(8): 891-914.
Scheer, Monique, 2012, “Are emotions a kind of practice (and is that what makes them have a history)? A Bourdieuian approach to understanding emotion” History and theory 51(2): 193-220.
Shove, Elizabeth, Mika Pantzar and Matt Watson, 2012, The dynamics of social practice: everyday life and how it changes. London: Sage
Wheaton, Belinda 2004, Introduction: Mapping the lifestyle sport-scape. London: Routledge.