Publication:
國小學童手寫表現與捏力控制

Simple item page
dc.contributor.advisor陳重佑
dc.contributor.advisorChen, Chung-Yu
dc.creator陳玉如
dc.creatorChen, Yu-Ju
dc.date2005
dc.date.accessioned2017-02-22T15:01:28Z
dc.date.accessioned2025-07-30T15:17:47Z
dc.date.available2017-02-22T15:01:28Z
dc.date.issued2017-02-22T15:01:28Z
dc.description學位類別：碩士
dc.description校院名稱：國立臺灣體育學院
dc.description系所名稱：體育研究所
dc.description畢業學年度：93年
dc.description論文頁數：80頁
dc.description.abstract　　本研究主要探討不同書寫表現之國小學童，其手部精細動作在不同用力程度下，捏力控制的準確性與穩定性相對於不同年級層的比較。實驗分別以國小二、四、六年級各20、20、19名學童為實驗參加者，實驗前由專家教師評定，分為字跡美觀整齊與字跡潦草難認等兩組，實驗要求實驗參加者試做最大捏力之15%、25%以及38%等捏力控制之測試。捏力表現係通過Biometrics E-LINK上肢肌力檢測與分析系統進行資料的收集，並計算絕對誤差（AE）、恆常誤差（CE）、整體變異（TV）、絕對恆常誤差（ACE）、變異誤差（VE）、變異誤差係數（VE-CV）等，相對於不同力量大小的控制進行誤差測量。統計方法採用2（書寫表現）×3（年級）獨立樣本二因子變異數分析，統計的顯著水準訂為α = .05。研究結果顯示，三種力量控制的所有誤差變項在書寫表現與年級二因子的交互作用均無顯著差異（p > .05），年級因子在小、中力量表現也無顯著差異；書寫因子在15%力量的測試中各組力量均超過目標力量，且字跡美觀整齊組的力量控制恆常誤差（0.36 ± 0.37kgw）顯著低於字跡潦草難認組（0.70 ± 0.73kgw）達到顯著差異（F(1,53) = 4.60，p < .05，η2 = .08，power = .56）。在15%、25%捏力控制的書寫表現，VE和VE-CV未達顯著；而38%工作要求下，VE分數與TV分數都是字跡美觀整齊組顯著低於字跡潦草難認組。顯示較小力量控制的準確性與較大力量控制的穩定性對寫字表現仍有影響。
dc.description.abstract　　This study focuses on the performance of handwriting to compare the grade difference and the control of pinch force for schoolchildren. Fifty-nine health volunteer schoolchildren without learning retardation for each grade group (grade 2, grade 4, and grade 6) served as participants in this study. Participants were selected from two groups, students with good handwriting that could possibly reflect the art of calligraphy and students with poor handwriting that reflects cacography, by experienced elementary school teachers. Every participant was asked to perform relative pinch force in the 15%, 25%, and 38% peak pinch force. The Biometrics E-Link system with pinchmeter was used to record and assess the pinch force between the tip of the thumb and the knuckle of the index finger. The absolute error (AE), constant error (CE), variable error (VE), coefficient of relative variable error (VE-CV), total variability (TV), and absolute constant error (ACE) were used to evaluate the inconsistency and the accuracy of the fine control of pinch force. 2 (the performances of handwritten) ´ 3 (grades) independent two way ANOVA was adopted to analyze the statistical difference with an alpha level of .05. The results showed that all components of force control error were no any statistics interaction between the factors of handwritten performances and grades (p > .05). There were no any grade differences under the small and median control of pinch force. The handwritten factor under 15% peak pinch force showed both groups performed excess of pinch force to achieve the target force, and the constant error for the student with good handwriting (0.36 ± 0.37kgw) was lower than the student with poor handwriting (0.70 ± 0.73kgw; F(1, 53) = 4.60, p < .05, h2 = .08, power = .56). The VE score and the VE-CE score had no any difference between two groups of handwritten under 15% and 25% peak pinch force, but the VE score and the VE-CE score in 38% peak pinch force were showed the student with good handwriting was lower than the student with poor handwriting. It indicated that the accuracy of control in small pinch force and the stability of control in large pinch force affected the handwritten performance.
dc.description.tableofcontents目　次 第壹章　緒論…………………………………………………1 　第一節、問題背景…………………………………………1 　第二節、研究目的與假設…………………………………5 　第三節、名詞解釋與操作性定義…………………………5 　第四節、研究範圍與限制…………………………………7 　第五節、研究的重要性……………………………………8 第貳章、文獻探討……………………………………………9 　第一節、動作程式是否存在………………………………9 　第二節、寫字控制的影響因素……………………………13 　第三節、精細動作控制相關的問題………………………18 　第四節、書寫能力對學業表現的相關研究………………19 　第五節、本章總結…………………………………………20 第參章、研究方法與步驟……………………………………22 　第一節、實驗參加者………………………………………22 　第二節、實驗時間與地點…………………………………23 　第三節、實驗儀器設備與場地佈置………………………23 　第四節、實驗步驟…………………………………………25 　第五節、資料的收集與統計處理…………………………27 第肆章、結果與討論…………………………………………31 　第一節、書寫表現與最大捏力的測驗……………………31 　第二節、捏力控制準確性的差異…………………………36 　第三節、捏力控制穩定性的差異…………………………48 　第四節、綜合討論…………………………………………59 第伍章、結論與建議…………………………………………66 　第一節、結論………………………………………………66 　第二節、建議………………………………………………67 引用文獻………………………………………………………69 　一、中文部分………………………………………………69 　二、英文部分………………………………………………70
dc.format.extent3862922 bytes
dc.format.mimetypeapplication/pdf
dc.identifier.urihttps://ir.ntus.edu.tw/handle/987654321/70442
dc.languagezh-TW
dc.publisher體育研究所
dc.relation.isbasedon中文部分 Ashcraft, M. H.（2004）。認知心理學（陳學志、邱發忠、劉政宏、林宜利譯）。臺北市：學富。(原出版2002年) Bompa, T. O.（2001）。運動訓練法（林正常、蔡崇濱、劉立宇、林政東、吳忠芳編譯）。臺北市：藝軒。(原出版1999年) Gleitman, H. （1997）。心理學（洪蘭譯）。臺北市：遠流。(原出版1997年) Shaffer, D. R. （2003）。發展心裡學（蘇建文、王雪貞、林翠湄、連廷嘉、黃俊豪譯）。臺北市：學富文化。（原出版1999年） 成戎珠（1994）。動作發展新理論-動力系統理論之介紹。中華物療誌，19（1），88-97。 吳子宏（2002）。「健康與體育領域」多元智慧教學策略。載於李勝雄（主編），健康與體育教學策略（pp. 187-225）。臺北市：五南。 林清山（1992）。心理與教育統計學。東華書局：臺北市。 胡名霞（2003）。動作控制與動作學習。臺北縣：金名。 高麗芷（2001）。感覺統合上篇。臺北市：上誼文化。 教育部（2003）。國民中小學九年一貫課程綱要語文學習領域。臺北市：作者。 陳重佑、陳帝佑（2002）。動態系統理論在動作行為學之應用。彰化師大體育學報，4，53-65。 外文部分 Adams, J. A. (1971). A closed-loop theory of motor learning. Journal of Motor Behavior, 3(2), 111-149. Atkeson, C. G. (1989). Learning arm kinematics and dynamics. Annual Review of Neuroscience, 12, 157-183. Benbow, M. (1995). Principles and practices of teaching handwriting. In A. Henderson & C. Pehoski (Eds.), Hand function in the child: Foundations for remediation. St. Louis, MO: Mosby. Behrman, A. L., & Harkema, S. J. (2000). Locomotor training after human spinal cord injury: A series of case studies. American Physical Therapy Association, 80(7), 688-700. Braswell, G. S., & Rosengren, K. S. (2002). The role of handedness in graphic production: Interactions between biomechanical and cognitive factors in drawing development. British Journal of Developmental Psychology, 20, 581-599. Cunningham Amundson, S. (1992). Handwriting: Evaluation and intervention in school settings. In J. Case-Smith & C. Pehoski (Eds.), Developmental of hand skills in the child. Rockville, MD: American Occupational Therapy Association. Christensen, C. A. (2004). Relationship between orthographic -motor integration and computer use for the production of creative and well-structured written text. The British Journal of Educational Psychology, 74(Pt. 4), 551-564. Cornhill, V. H., & Smith, J. C. (1996). Factors that relate to good and poor handwriting. The American Journal of Occupational Therapy, 50(9), 732-739. Deborah, M., Windsor, M. M., & Sharon, C. (2001). Handwriting readiness: Locatives and visuomotor skills in the kindergarten year. Early Childhood Research & Practice , 3, 1. Retrieved December 7, 2004, Retrieved November 12, 2004, from http://ecrp.uiuc.edu/v3n1/marr.html Fitts, P. M. (1954). The information capacity of the human motor system in controlling the amplitude of movement. Journal of Experimental Psycology, 47, 381-391. Gallahue, D. L. (1996). Developmental physical education for today’s children (3rd ed.). Dubuque, IA: Brown & Benchmark. Gallahue, D. L., & Ozmun, J. C. (2002). Understanding motor development: Infants, children, adolescents, adults (5th ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill. Garvey, M. A., Ziemann, U., Bartko, J. J., Denckla, M. B., Barker, C. A., & Wassermann, E. M. (2003). Cortical correlates of neuromotor development in healthy children. Clinical Neurophysiology, 114(9), 1662-1670. Gardner, H. (1999). Intelligence Reframed. Multiple intelligences for the 21st century, New York: Basic Books. Graham, S., & Weintraub, N. (1996). A review of handwriting research: Progress and prospects from 1980 to 1994. Educational Psychology Review, 8(1), 7-87. Grillner, S., & Zangger, P. (1985). On the central generation of locomotion in the low spinal cat. Experimental Brain Research, 34(2), 241-61. Grillner, S. (1985). Neurobiological bases of rhythmic motor acts in vertebrates. Science, 228, 143-149. Henry, F. M., & Rogers, D. E. (1960). Increased response latency for complicated movements and a memory drum theory of neuromotor reaction. Research Quarterly, 31, 448-458. Karlsdottir, R., & Stefansson, T. (2002). Problems in developing functional handwriting. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 94(2), 623-662. Kirk, R. E. (1995). Experimental design: Procedures for the behavioral sciences (3rd ed.). New York: Brook/ Cole. Konczak, J., Jansen, O. P., & Kalveram, K. T. (2003). Development of force adaptation during childhood. Journal of Motor Behavior, 35(1), 41-52. Levine, M. D., Oberklaid, F., & Meltzer, L. (1981). Developmental output failure: A study of low productivity in school-aged children. Pediatrics, 67(1), 18-25. Magill, R. A. (2004). Motor learning and control: Concept and applications (7th ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill. McGraw, M. B. (1935). Growth: A study of Johnny and Jimmy. New York: Appleton-Century. McHale, K., & Cermak, S. A. (1992). Fine motor activities in elementary school: Preliminary findings and provisional implications for children with fine motor problems. The American Journal of Occupational Therapy, 46(10), 898-903. Pehoski, C., Henderson, A., & Tickle, D. L. (1997). In-hand manipulation in young children: Translation movements. The American Journal of Occupational Therapy, 51(9), 719-728. Rosenblum, S., Parush, S., & Weiss, P. L. (2003). The in air phenomenon: Temporal and spatial correlates of the handwriting process. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 96(3, Pt. 1), 933-954. Schmidt, R. A. (1975). A schema theory of discrete motor skill learning theory. Psychological Review, 82, 225-260. Schmidt, R. A., & Lee, T. D. (2005). Motor control and learning: A behavioral emphasis (4th ed.). Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics. Schneiberg, S., Sveistrup, H., McFadyen, B., McKinley, P., & Levin, M. F. (2002). The development of coordination for reach-to-grasp movements in children. Experimental Brain Research, 146(2), 142-154. Shadmehr, R., & Mussa-Ivaldi F. A. (1994). Adaptive representation of dynamics during learning of a motor task. The Journal of Neuroscience, 14(5), 3208-3224. Stelmach, G. E., & Teulings, H. L. (1987). Temporal and spatial characteristics in repetitive movement. International Journal of Neuroscience, 35(1-2), 51-58. Teulings, H. L., & Schomaker, L. R. (1993). Invariant properties between stroke features in handwriting. Acta Psychologica, 82(1-3), 69-88. Thelen, E. (1995). Motor development: A new synthesis. The American Psychologist, 50(2), 79-95. Thelen, E., Corbetta, D., Kamm, K., Spencer, J. P., Schneider, K., & Zernicke, R. F. (1993). The transition to reaching: Mapping intention and intrinsic dynamics. Child Development, 64(4), 1058-1098. Tseng, M. H., & Cermak, S. A. (1993). The influence of ergonomic factors and perceptual-motor abilities on handwriting performance. The American Journal of Occupational Therapy, 47(10), 919-926. Tseng, M. H. (1993). Factorial validity of the Tseng handwriting problem checklist. The American Journal of Occupational Therapy, 11, 13-27. Tseng, M. H., & Hsueh, I. P. (1997). Performance of school-aged children on a Chinese handwriting. Occupational Therapy International, 4(4), 294-303. Wann, J., & Nimmo-Smith, I. (1991). The control of pen pressure in handwriting: A subtle point. Human Movement Science, 10, 223-246.
dc.subject手寫;捏力;誤差測量;動作控制
dc.subjecthandwritten;pinch force;measures of error;motor control
dc.title國小學童手寫表現與捏力控制
dc.titleThe Control of Pinch Force and Handwritten Performancein Schoolchildren
dc.typethesis
dspace.entity.typePublication

Files

Original bundle
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Loading...
Thumbnail Image
Name:
4105-23253301.pdf
Size:
3.68 MB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format
Download

Collections

學位論文(103學年度之前)