一般探討旅運者運具選擇行為時，多半以個體選擇模式，如羅吉特模式、普羅比模式，運用顯示性或敘述性偏好資料來分析旅運者決策行為。由於旅運者的心理決策歷程變數通常不可直接量測，具有潛在變數性質。是故，亦有研究採用線型結構方程或模糊理論來探討旅運者在運具選擇時的心理決策過程。本研究結合行為科學中的計畫行為理論、消費者行為領域中的EMB模式和涉入理論，以探討相關心理變數與實際運具選擇行為存在何種關連性和其影響程度高低。
考量在城際交通運輸的活動需求比例上，通勤比例佔有很大部分，是以研究對象鎖定在通勤上班上課的旅運者，並以台北地區為實證研究範圍。以問卷調查來收集旅運者對捷運的偏好資料，並使用統計軟體SPSS10.0來作卡方分析、迴歸分析及多變量分析。針對不同運具的通勤旅運者，從態度、涉入程度、群體影響力和行為意向來分析其運具選擇的心理決策過程。
研究發現：私人運具使用者對捷運的涉入程度遠較大眾運具使用者來的低。就全體通勤旅運者的人口統計變項觀察，又以年齡、職業、運具持有及通勤地距離捷運站距離跟捷運涉入程度有顯著相關性。在使用捷運態度方面，不論私人運具和大眾運具使用者，一致持高度正面的看法。在所有自變數對行為意向的影響程度比較下，群體影響力是最不顯著，而涉入和使用態度對通勤旅運者使用捷運的行為意向有顯著影響。從實際運具選擇和使用捷運行為意向差異來看，大眾運具使用者是高於私人運具使用者。由上可知，交通主管機關或相關業者要提高捷運使用率，應強化捷運服務水準和轉乘其他運具的便利性，藉以吸引使用私人運具的通勤旅運者改搭捷運。

In the analysis of travelers’ decision-making behavior, Discrete Choice model in Revealed Preference data or Stated Preference data, such as logit model and probit model, is generally used in the exploration of travelers’ mode choice behavior. Some former research adapted Structural Equation Model (SEM) or Fuzzy Theory in exploring the variables of travelers’ psychological decision process, because the variables which were not easily measured directly and tend to be latent variables.This study combines Theory of Planned Behavior (TPB) and EMB Model in consumer behavior science, to investigate the relationship and degree of interaction between psychological variables and actual mode choice behavior.

The comuter represent high percentage of inter-city transportation, therefore, this empirical study has focused on the commuters in Taipei metropolitan area. Commuter’s feedback on MRT preference was collected through the face-to-face interview. The collected data was analyzed by using SPSS10.0 for chi-square test, the regression analysis and multi-variables analysis. Through the study of their attitude, the degree of involvement, group affection and intention towards various modes, the psychological decision process for commuter was analyzed and concluded.

The results of the research concluded that: private transportation users have higher degree of involvement to MRT than the public ones. It is observed that the variables of age, occupation, possession of veheche, the distance from commutes' place to MRT station, among all variables, have significant reciprocity with the degree of involvement for MRT.In the aspects the commuters' attitude of using the MRT’s, both private and public transportation users showed positive opinions. Among all variables, the group influence had the least significance to the action intention, while the involvement and attitude showed high significance to the MRT’s action intention.The public transportation users show higher difference between actual mode use behavior and intention, as compared to the private one. Therefore, the traffic authorities and businessman need to increase the quality of the service of MRT and convience of transfer between transportation modes, if they want to raise the percentage of commuters to using MRT.

第一章 緒論 1

第一節 研究背景與動機 1
第二節 研究目的 2
第三節 研究範圍和對象 2
第四節 研究流程和內容 3

第二章 文獻回顧 6

第一節 運具選擇行為 6
第二節 消費者行為理論 9
第三節 涉入理論 15
第四節 計畫行為理論 26
第五節 小結 33

第三章 研究方法暨調查規劃 34

第一節 研究架構 34
第二節 研究假設與變數 35
第三節 問卷設計流程 38
第四節 調查規劃 42
第五節 正式樣本概述 45

第四章 實證分析 49

第一節 信效度分析 49
第二節 涉入分組 54
第三節 因素分析及路徑分析 75
第四節 研究理…………………………………………………...…83

第五章 結論與建議 86

第一節 研究結論 86
第二節 後續研究建議 88

參考文獻 ………...……………………………………………………………90
附錄一：正式問卷 97

中文部分
1. 宇留野著，孫景韓譯，『交通心理學』，徐氏基金會，民國六十八年。
2. 賴文彬，『消費行為的情境與涉入效應之研究』，中山管理學術研究中心叢書，民國七十九年。
3. 黃俊英，『行銷研究—管理與技術』，第四版，華泰書局，民國八十五年。
4. W. Lawrence Neuman原著，朱柔若譯，『社會研究方法—質化與量化取向』，第三版，揚智文化，民國八十九年。
5. 林惠玲、陳正倉，『統計學—方法與應用』，第二版，雙葉書廊，民國八十九年。
6. Philip Kotler、Swee Hoon Ang、Siew Meng Leong、Chin Tiong Tan原著，謝文雀譯，『行銷管理—亞洲實例』，第二版，華泰文化，民國八十九年。
7. 林建煌，『消費者行為』，第一版，智勝文化事業股份有限公司，民國九十一年。
8. 王慶瑞，『運輸系統規劃』，增訂版，正揚出版社，民國九十一年。
9. 邱皓政，『量化研究與統計分析—SPSS中文視窗版資料分析範例』，第二版，五南書局，民國九十一年。
10. 吳明隆，『SPSS統計應用學習實務－問卷設計與應用統計』，第一版，知城數位文化，民國九十二年。
11. 陳景堂，『統計分析SPSS for Windows入門與應用』，第五版，儒林圖書，民國九十三年。
12. 吳正桓，『情感與認知一致性及預期討論對態度結構的影響』，中華心理學刊，第三十四卷，頁二十九至頁四十，民國八十一年。
13. 吳統雄，『態度與行為之研究的信度與效度：理論、應用、反省』，民意學術專刊，頁二十九至五十三，民國八十四年。
14. 蔡明達、耿慶瑞，『服務涉入的衡量』，文大商管學報，第五卷第一期，頁十九至頁四十二，民國八十九年。
15. 賴香菊、林東清、孫培真、許孟祥，『影響Web使用者網路購物意願之因素探討—一個結合EKB和TPB為基礎的理論模式建構』，國際資訊管理研究暨實務研討會論文集，民國九十一年。
16. 董啟崇、趙祖佑，『利用模糊近似推論方式建構通勤者決策行為模式』，運輸計劃季刊，第三十一卷第四期，頁六百七十九至頁七百零七，民國九十一年。
17. 孫蒨如、李易儒，『訊息型態及思考目的對稀釋效果的影響』，中華心理學刊，第四十六卷第一期，頁五十七至頁七十四，民國九十三年。
18. 鄭燕翔，『旅行者運具選擇決策規則模式之研究』，國立成功大學交通管理科學研究所未出版碩士論文，民國八十三年。
19. 賴文泰，『家戶通勤行為、小客車持有與使用混合需求模型之研究』，國立成功大學交通管理科學研究所未出版博士論文，民國八十八年。
20. 吳昭賢，『信念對態度的影響之研究』，私立淡江大學國際貿易研究所未出版碩士論文，民國八十七年。
21. 林裕舜，『消費者涉入模糊測度』，私立義守大學管理研究所未出版碩士論文，民國八十八年。
22. 梁志隆，『台北大眾捷運系統服務品質與顧客滿意度之研究』，國立中山大學公共事務管理研究所未出版碩士論文，民國八十九年。
23. 曾鵬庭，『以旅運者行為探討中長程國道客運市場之行銷契機』，國立交通大學交通運輸管理研究所未出版碩士論文，民國九十年。
24. 楊文壽，『行動電話手機消費者之涉入程度與購買決策相關因素之關聯性研究』，國立交通大學經營管理研究未出版碩士論文，民國九十年。
25. 陳裕宏，『運輸業經營策略規劃之研究－以台灣高鐵為例』，國立海洋大學河海工程研究所未出版碩士論文，民國九十一年。
26. 周佳儀，『高雄都會區女性住宅消費意向研究之研究』，國立中山大學公共事務管理研究所未出版碩士論文，民國九十二年。
27. 蔡青姿，『醫學美容雷射消費意向模式建構之研究—結構方程式的應用』，國立中正大學企業管理研究所未出版碩士論文，民國九十二年。
28. 陳育棠，『網站環境之認知、情感對消費者態度及行為意圖之影響－以農產品網站為例。』，國立中興大學行銷管理研究所未出版碩士論文，民國九十二年。
29. 楊家銘，『機車使用者涉入程度與運具選擇過程影響之關聯性研究—以台北市為例』，國立交通大學交通運輸科技和管理研究所未出版碩士論文，民國九十二年。
30. 陳俊名，『行前交通資訊對城際旅行者運具選擇行為影響之研究』，私立淡江大學，運輸管理研究所未出版碩士論文，民國九十二年。
31. 邱靜淑，『都市通勤者運具選擇行為研究』，國立暨南大學土木工程研究所未出版碩士論文，民國九十三年。
32. 陳蓉蓉，『應用模糊系統於汽車產品涉入之研究』，私立長庚大學資訊管理研究所未出版碩士論文，民國九十三年。
33. 台北市政府主計處網站 http://www.dbas.taipei.gov.tw/
34. 台北縣政府主計室網站 http://www.juji.tpc.gov.tw/

英文部分
1. Ajzen,I, (1985),“From Intentions to Actions:A theory of PlannedBehavior”,in.KuhlandJ.Bechmann(Eds),Action-Control:From Congition to Behavior,Springer,Heidelbrg, ,pp.11-39.
2. Ajzen,I, and Fishbein, M.(1980)“Understanding Attitudes and Predicting Social Behavior”,Prentice-Hall,Englewood Cliffs,NJ.
3. Ajzen,I, (1989) “Attitude Structure and behavior” in A.R.Pratkanis,S.J.Breckler,and A.G.Greenwald(Eds)
4. Abernethy A. M., & Franke, G. R.(1996),“The Information Content of Adverting:A Meta-Analysis”, Journal of Adverting, 2, pp.1-17.
5. Blackwell,R.D.,Engel,J.F.,&Miniard,P.W.(2000), ‘Consumer Behavior ’The Drained Press, 7th Ed
6. Bamberg, S., S.M. Kuhnel, & P. Schmidt. (1999)“The Impact of General Attitudes on Decisions.”Rationality and Society, Vol. 11, No. 1, pp. 5-25.
7. Ben-Akiva, M., Walker J., Bernardino A. T., Gopinath D. A., Morikawa T.,and Polydoropoulou A. (1997)” Integration of Choice and Latent Variable Models,” The Eighth Meeting of the International Association of Travel Behavior Research, September
8. Bloch, Peter H.(1981), “An exploration into the Scaling of
Consumers’ involvement With a Product Class,” in Advances in Consumer Research, Vol.6, Kent R. Monroe, ed., Ann Arbor, MI:Association for Consumer Researc h, pp.61-65.
9. Batra, Rajeev and Michael L. Ray(1986), “Operationalizing
Involvement as Depth and Quality of Cognitive response,” in Advances in Consumer Resarch, Vol.10, Richard P. bagozzi and Alice M. Tybout, eds.,Ann Arbor, MI:Association for Consumer Research, pp.309-313.
10. Bloch, P. H., & Richins M. L. (1983), “A Theoretical Model for the Study of Product Importance Perceptions, ”Journal of Marketing, 47, 69-81.
11. Celuch, K. G. and Slama, M. (1993), “Program Content and Advertising Effectiveness: A Test of the Congruity Hypothesis for Cognitive and Affective Sources of Involvement,” Psychology and Marketing, 10(4), pp. 285-299.
12. Davis, F. D., (1986), “A Technology Acceptance Model of Empirically Testing New End-User Information Systems: Theory and Results,” Doctoral Dissertation, Sloan School of Management, Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
13. Davis, F.D., R.P. Bagozzi and P.R. Warshaw,(1989), “User Acceptance of ComputerTechnology：A Comparison of Two Theoretical Models,” Management Science, Vol.35,pp.982-1003.
14. Edward B. R. (1991), “Entrepreneurs In High Technology, ” Oxford University Press.
15. Greenwald,A,G and C.Leavitt(1984)“Audience Involvement in Advertising:Four Levels.”Journal of consumer research,Vol.16,pp.384-408.
16. Golob, T.F.,(2001)“Joint models of attitudes and behavior in the Evaluation of the San Diego I-15 congestion pricing project.” Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Vol. 35, pp. 495-514.
17. Kakkar, P. & R. J. Lutz (1975) “The Psychological Situation as a Determinant of Consumer Behavior ”, in Advance in Consumer Research.
18. Kassarjian, Harold. H.,(1981) “Low Involvement: A Second Lock” Advances in Consumer Research, Vol.8, Kent B. Monroe, ed., 31-34.
19. Kroes .P.E and Sheldon.J.R (1988): “Stated Preference Methods: An Introduction.”Journal of Transport Economics and Policy, vol.22, pp.11-25.
20. Krugman,H.E., 〝The Impact of Television Advertising Learning Without Involvement 〞, Public Opinion Quarterly vol.29, pp,349-356,1965.
21. Laurent,G and J.N.Kapferer(1986), “Computer Invovlement Profiles”Journal of Adversising Research, Vol22,pp48-56.
22. Lien-yee Li,(1997), “Effect of Orientation and Ecological Attitude on Actual Enviormenttal Committent:The Moderating Role of Consumer Affairs,”
23. Lastovicka, John L. and David M. Gardner(1979), “components of
involvement.” In attitude Research Plays for High Stakes, John C.Maloney and Bernard Silverman, eds., Chicago, IL:American Marketing Associtaion, pp.53-73.
24. Houston, Michael J. and Michael L. Rothschild(1978), “Conceptual andMethodological Perspectives in Involvement,” in Research Frontiers in Marketing: Dialogues and Direction, S. Jain ed., Chicago: American Marketing Association, pp.184-187.
25. Hartwick, J. and H. Barki, (1994), “Explaining the Role of User Participation in Information System Use.” Management Science (40:4), pp.440-465.
26. Howard, J. A., & Sheth, J. N. (1969). The theory of buyer behavior. New York: Wiley.
27. Howard, J. A. (1989). “Consumer behavior in marketing strategy”. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
28. Millar, Murray G. and Abraham Tesser, “The Effects of Affective-Cognitive Consistency and Thought on the Attitude-Behavior Relation,” Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 25, 189-202 (1989).
29. Murray, K.B. and Schlacter, J.L.(1990), “The Impact of Services versus Goods on Consumer Assessment of Perceived Risk and Variability,” Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 18(1), 51-65.
30. Nicosia, F. M.(1966). Consumer Decision Process: Marketing and Advertising Implications, Englewood Cliffs, N.J:Prentice-Hall., pp.13-28.
31. Parkany, Emily, Phillip Viveiros, and Ryan Gallagher. “Are Attitudes Important in Travel Choices? ” Presented at the Transportation Research Board Annual Meeting in January 2004 and to be published in Transportation Research Record, 2004.
32. Palma, A. and Rochat, D. (2000).” Mode Choice for Trips to Work in Geneva: an EmpiricalAnalysis”, Journal of Transport Geography, Vol. 8, pp. 43-51.
33. Parasuraman, A., Zeithaml, V. A. and Berry, L. L, “The BehavioralConsequences of Service Quality,” Journal of Marketing, Vol.60, pp.31-46,1996.
34. Park, C. W. and Young, S. M. (1986), “Consumer Response to Television Commercials: The Impact of Involvement and Background Music on Brand Attitude Formation,” Journal of Marketing Research, 23(1), pp. 11-24.
35. Petty, RE, and Cacioppo, JT (1984), “The Elaboration Likelihood Model of Persuasion,” Advances in Consumer Research, 11, pp. 673-675. 87
36. Rempel, J.K., Holmes, J.G. & Zanna, M.P. (1985), “Trust in Close Relationships,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 49, pp.94-112.
37. Robertson, T. S.,Zielinski, J. and Scott, W.(1985). Consumer Behavior Illinois:Scott,Foresman and Company.
38. Schiffman, Leon G. & Leslie Lazar Kanuk(2000),”Consumer Behavior,” Prentice Hall.
39. S R.M. Kuppam & unkanapalli, S., R.M. Pendyala.(2000) “Dynamic analysis of traveler attitudes and perceptions using panel data”. Transportaton Research Record, Vol. 1718, pp. 52-60
40. Tardiff, T.J.(1977), “ Causal inferences involving transportation attitudes and behavior.”Transportation Research, Vol. 11, pp. 397-404.
41. Taylor,M.B. (1981)“Product Involvement Concept:An Advertising Planning Point of view ” Attitude Research Vol.67,Iss,pp84-98
42. Slama, Mark E. and Armen Tashchian (1985). “Selected Socioeconomic and Demographic Characteristics Associated with Purchasing Involvement”, Journal of Marketing, 49(Winter), p77-82.
43. Spangenberg,Eric R.,Voss, Kevin E&Crowly, Ayn E,(1997). “Measureing the Hedonic and Utilitarian Dimensions of Attitude:A Generally Applicable Scale”Advances in Consumer Research,Vol.24(Mar),pp.434-447.
44. Warrington, P. & Shim, S.(2000) .“An empirical investigation of the relationship between product involvement and brand commitment”.Psychology and Marketing, 17(9), 761-782
45. Wright, Peter,(1973).“The Cognitive Processes Mediating Acceptance of Advertising,” Journal of Marking Research, Vol.10(February),pp.53-62.
46. Yavas, U. & E. Babakus (1995), “Purchasing Involvement in Saudi Arabia: Measure Development and Validation, ” Journal of International Consumer Marketing, 8,23-41.
47. Zaichkowsky, J.L,(1985).“Measuring the Involvement Construct”,Journal of Consumer Research, Vol.12,pp341-352.
48. Zaichkowsky, J.L(1986), “Conceptualizing Involvement”, Journal ofAdvertising ,Vol.15,pp.4-14.
49. Zaichkowsky, J.L,(1995). “The Personal Involvement Inventory:Reduction,Revision,and Application to Advertising ”Advertising ,Journal of Advertising,Vol 23:4,pp59-70.
50. Zaltman, G. and M. Wallendrof, “ Consumer Behavior Basic Findings and Management Implications, New York, John-Wiley & Sons, 1983,p622-624.