學術產出-學位論文
文章檢視/開啟
書目匯出
-
題名 使用者導向之我國無障礙網路空間服務成效評估
A user-oriented measure for performance of web accessibility in Taiwan作者 黃甯婉
Huang, Ning Wan貢獻者 朱斌妤
Chu, Pin Yu
黃甯婉
Huang, Ning Wan關鍵詞 電子化政府
G2D
無障礙網路空間
身心障礙者
成效評估
eGovernment
G2D
web accessibility
disabilities
performance evaluation日期 2011 上傳時間 24-十月-2012 16:15:00 (UTC+8) 摘要 隨著身心障礙者資訊素養的提升，「網頁可及性」成為各國發展電子化政府服務必須關注的議題，政府對身心障礙者(Government to the Disabled, G2D)的服務在近年逐漸受到重視。由於不同類型身心障礙者的電子治理需求和網路使用方式互異，行政院研究發展考核委員會參考WCAG 1.0，並參照各國在制訂無障礙網頁相關政策和推廣策略，以及國內近年來在身心障礙者保護政策等相關措施，於2002年6月訂定「無障礙網頁開發規範」，建立具體的無障礙網路推廣目標與策略，並自2003年6月展開「無障礙網路空間服務推廣」。本研究欲瞭解無障礙網路空間計畫對身心障礙者的使用影響，經由電子化政府評估和網站服務品質評估等文獻檢閱，結合Heeks (2006)電子化政府價值鏈模型與DeLone & McLean (2003)資訊系統成功模型，建構以使用者為中心的無障礙網路空間計畫成效評估因果模型，以行政院研考會2010年委託研究案「電子治理成效指標與評估：G2A與G2D」為次級資料，驗證模型各構面間的因果關係暨群組分析。研究結果證實本研究之無障礙網路空間計畫成效評估因果模型具相當程度的解釋力，同時根據研究結果提出無障礙網路空間計畫未來發展暨後續研究之建議。整體而言，政府現階段應加強計畫行銷推廣，全面優化網站品質，以提升使用效益與滿意度，循序漸進地引導無障礙網路空間計畫長期影響的正向發展。
In the development of e-government system, Government to the Disabled (G2D) e-service and the issue of web accessibility have becoming gained much attention in many countries all over the world in recent years. Based on the international Web Content Accessibility Guidelines 1.0 (WCAG 1.0), Research, Development and Evaluation Commission (RDEC) has launched a Web Accessibility Initiative Program to improve the web accessibility for disabled users in Taiwan since 2003. In the study, we propose a demand-side causal model consisting of web quality, program quality, and project impacts based on the e-government value chain model (Heeks, 2006) and the information system success model (DeLone and McLean, 2003). The data analysis is obtained from questionnaire collected in the program “Constructing and Evaluating an Assessment Framework for E-Governance Impacts on Association and Disabled”. Many causal assumptions in the model we propose are verified and some suggestions for the development of Web Accessibility Initiative Program and future research are made. To promote benefit and satisfaction and further enhance public trust as a long term objective, the government should emphasize more on marketing strategy and overall optimization of web quality at this stage.參考文獻 全國法規資料庫（2011）。身心障礙者權益保障法。台北市，行政院法務部。取自：http://law.moj.gov.tw/LawClass/LawAll.aspx?PCode=D0050046行政院內政部（2010）。內政部統計年報─身心障礙者人數按年齡與障礙等級分。台北市，行政院內政部。取自：http://sowf.moi.gov.tw/stat/year/list.htm 行政院研究發展考核委員會（2003）。92年度無障礙網路空間推動報告。台北市，行政院研究發展考核委員會。取自：http://www.webguide.nat.gov.tw/wSite/ct?xItem=36287&ctNode=14438&mp=1行政院研究發展考核委員會（2005a）。九十四年身心障礙民眾數位落差調查報告。台北市，行政院研究發展考核委員會。取自：http://www.rdec.gov.tw/ct.asp?xItem=4024389&ctNode=12062&mp=100行政院研究發展考核委員會（2005b）。政府網站無障礙化作業規定。台北市，行政院研究發展考核委員會。取自：http://www.webguide.nat.gov.tw/wSite/public/Attachment/f1243499897045.pdf行政院研究發展考核委員會（2005c）。94年度無障礙網路空間推動報告。台北市，行政院研究發展考核委員會。取自：http://www.webguide.nat.gov.tw/wSite/ct?xItem=36287&ctNode=14438&mp=1行政院研究發展考核委員會（2006）。95年度無障礙網路空間推動報告。台北市，行政院研究發展考核委員會。取自：http://www.webguide.nat.gov.tw/wSite/ct?xItem=36287&ctNode=14438&mp=1行政院研究發展考核委員會（2007a）。九十六年數位落差調查報告。台北市，行政院研究發展考核委員會。取自：http://www.rdec.gov.tw/ct.asp?xItem=4024389&ctNode=12062&mp=100行政院研究發展考核委員會（2007b）。96年度無障礙網路空間推動報告。台北市，行政院研究發展考核委員會。取自：http://www.webguide.nat.gov.tw/wSite/ct?xItem=36287&ctNode=14438&mp=1行政院研究發展考核委員會（2008a）。97年度無障礙網路空間推動報告。台北市，行政院研究發展考核委員會。取自：http://www.webguide.nat.gov.tw/wSite/ct?xItem=36287&ctNode=14438&mp=1行政院研究發展考核委員會（2008b）。97 年身心障礙者數位落差與數位生活需求調查報告。台北市，行政院研究發展考核委員會。取自：http://www.rdec.gov.tw/ct.asp?xItem=4024389&ctNode=12062&mp=100行政院研究發展考核委員會（2008c）。性別數位落差研究報告。台北市，行政院研究發展考核委員會。取自：http://www.rdec.gov.tw/ct.asp?xItem=4024389&ctNode=12062&mp=100行政院研究發展考核委員會（2010a）。第四階段電子化政府計畫接續規劃事宜。 台北市，行政院研究發展考核委員會。取自：http://blog.www.gov.tw/blog/554a1bef-f9cd-4a76-b500-827d48785f83/post.aspx?id=74ff3ef0-c7c2-4f03-823e-5e0339f8d591行政院研究發展考核委員會（2010b）。歷年數位落差調查報告。台北市，行政院研究發展考核委員會。取自：http://www.rdec.gov.tw/ct.asp?xItem=4024389&ctNode=12062&mp=100行政院研究發展考核委員會（2011a）。101-105第四階段電子化政府計畫-核定本。台北市，行政院研究發展考核委員會。取自：http://www.rdec.gov.tw/public/Data/162118244471.pdf行政院研究發展考核委員會（2011b）。100 年無障礙網站補助計畫。台北市，行政院研究發展考核委員會。取自：http://www.npo.nat.gov.tw/project/index.php吳博翰（2008）。我國各大學特殊教育中心無障礙網頁設置現況調查研究。國立屏東教育大學特殊教育學系碩士論文，未出版，屏東縣。李欣怡（2004）。大學圖書館網站無障礙網頁設計之研究。國立中興大學圖書資訊學研究所碩士論文，未出版，台中市。李洛維（2010）電子採購影響評估因果模型之建構與驗證。國立政治大學公共行政學系碩士論文，未出版，台北市。杜順榮（2006）。資訊無障礙推動策略研究報告。取自：http://mail3.batol.net/~bill/love2.txt林信宏（2006）。臺灣中央及地方政府網站無障礙空間之評估。南華大學公共行政與政策研究所碩士論文，未出版，新北市。林家如（2004）。政府網站的無障礙空間-行政院部會網站視覺障礙評估。世新大學行政管理學研究所碩士論文，未出版，台北市。林純伶（2010）。以WCAG2.0探討國內無障礙網頁之差異分析。大同大學資訊經營學系碩士論文，未出版，台北市。邱皓政（2011）。當PLS遇上SEM：議題與對話。αβγ量化研究學刊，3(1)，20-53。侯曉君（2010）。台灣地區圖書館網頁無障礙設計之研究。國立台灣大學圖書資訊學研究所碩士論文，未出版，台北市。政府網站營運交流平台（2008a）。14條規範。台北市，行政院研究發展考核委員會。取自：http://www.webguide.nat.gov.tw/wSite/ct?xItem=36230&ctNode=14410&mp=1政府網站營運交流平台（2008b）。優先等級。台北市，行政院研究發展考核委員會。取自：http://www.webguide.nat.gov.tw/wSite/ct?xItem=36233&ctNode=14413&mp=1政府網站營運交流平台（2008c）。網站設計規範。台北市，行政院研究發展考核委員會。取自：http://www.webguide.nat.gov.tw/wSite/np?ctNode=14419&mp=1&idPath=14382_14419政府網站營運交流平台（2009）。標章申請步驟。台北市，行政院研究發展考核委員會。取自：http://www.webguide.nat.gov.tw/wSite/ct?xItem=36227&ctNode=14417&mp=1施能傑（2010）。電子化政府計畫的績效評估架構：平衡計分卡觀點。《服務科學與政府公共服務績效》國際學術研討會，台北市。紀成達（2009）。無障礙網頁選單之研究。國立臺灣藝術大學多媒體動畫藝術學系碩士論文，未出版，新北市。張凱勛（2008）。無障礙網頁開發之研究。國立臺灣藝術大學多媒體動畫藝術學系碩士論文，未出版，新北市。張瑞哲（2007）。從網頁設計者的觀點探討無障礙網頁設計。國立交通大學應用藝術研究所碩士論文，未出版，新竹縣。陳家錡（2011）。無障礙網頁之互動文字研究。國立臺灣藝術大學多媒體動畫藝術學系碩士論文，未出版，新北市。陳詠暄（2008）。我國大專院校校園無障礙網站之可及性評估。義守大學資訊管理學系碩士論文，未出版，高雄市。陳嬿伃（2005）。無障礙網站推動成效及其發展相關因素探討。世新大學資訊管理學研究所碩士論文，未出版，台北市。曾淑芬、吳齊殷（2002）。台灣地區數位落差問題之研究。行政院研究發展考核委員會委託研究報告（編號：RDEC-RES-090-006）。台北市，行政院研究發展考核委員會。項靖（2009）。透明化電子治理：以網站落實政府資訊公開。行政院研究發展考核委員會委託研究報告（編號：0972461343）。台北市，行政院研究發展考核委員會。黃元鶴（2007）。圖書資訊領域期刊引用影響之結構方程模式分析。教育資料與圖書館學，44(3)，259-273。黃東益（2009）。電子化政府的影響評估：內部顧客的觀點。文官制度季刊，1(3)，25-53。黃東益、朱斌妤、蕭乃沂（2009）。電子治理成效指標與評估：G2C與G2B。行政院研究發展考核委員會委託研究報告（編號：0972461343）。台北市，行政院研究發展考核委員會。黃朝盟（2004）。二○○三台灣地區網路無障礙空間評估。研考雙月刊，28(1)，69-80。黃朝盟、朱斌妤、黃東益（2008）。電子治理成效調查評估與分析報告。行政院研究發展考核委員會委託研究報告（編號：09640D002503）。台北市，行政院研究發展考核委員會。黃朝盟、吳濟安（2007）。電子化政府影響評估。研考雙月刊，257，76-85。葉耀明（2006）。國立台灣師範大學無障礙網路實驗室：各國推動策略。取自：http://o2utown.org/yym001/modules/tinyd1/index.php?id=6葉耀明（2010）。無障礙網頁議題簡介。網頁內容可及性指引WCAG 2.0推動策略說明會，台北市。劉竹昀（2008）。台灣地區政府網頁之使用性與內容可及性探討。. 碩士, 亞洲大學資訊與設計學系碩士論文，未出版，台中市。潘瑛如、方崇雄（2010）。部分最小平方路徑分析法在教育研究上的應用。研習資訊，27(5)，95-107。蕭乃沂、朱斌妤、黃東益（2010）。電子治理成效指標與評估：G2A與G2D。行政院研究發展考核委員會委託研究報告（編號：0992460052）。台北市，行政院研究發展考核委員會。蕭乃沂、羅晉（2010）。電子化政府的價值鏈評估觀點：以數位台灣e 化政府計畫為例。公共行政學報，36，1-37。Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 50, 179-211.American Customer Satisfaction Index. (2006). ACSI government model. Ann Arbor: American Customer Satisfaction Index. Retrieved from:http://www.theacsi.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=30&Itemid=150Australian Government Information Management Office. (2009). Australians` Use of and Satisfaction with e-Government Services. Parkes: Australian Government Information Management Office. Retrieved from:http://www.finance.gov.au/publications/use-of-e-government-services-2005/Australian Human Rights Commission. (2010). World Wide Web access: Disability Discrimination Act advisory notes. Sydney: Australian Human Rights Commission. Retrived from:http://www.hreoc.gov.au/disability_rights/standards/www_3/www_3.htmlBarnes, S. J., & Vidgen, R. (2000a). WebQual: An exploration of web-site quality. Paper presented at the meeting of the Eighth European Conference on Information Systems, Vienna.Barnes, S. J., & Vidgen, R. (2000b). Information and interaction quality: Evaluating Internet bookshop web sites with WebQual. Paper presented at the meeting of the Thirteenth Bled Electronic Commerce Conference, Slovenia.Barnes, S. J., & Vidgen, R. (2001a). Assessing the quality of auction web sites. Paper presented at the meeting of the Hawaii International Conference on Systems Sciences, Hawaii.Barnes, S. J., & Vidgen, R. (2001b). Evaluating WAP news sites: the WebQual/M approach. Paper presented at the meeting of the Ninth European Conference on Information Systems, Slovenia.Barnes, S. J., & Vidgen, R. (2002). An integrative approach to the assessment of e-commerce quality. Journal of Electronic Commerce Research, 3(3), 114-127.Barnes, S. J., & Vidgen, R. (2003a). Measuring web site quality improvements: A case study of the forum on strategic management knowledge exchange. Industrial Management and Data Systems, 103(5), 297-309.Barnes, S. J., & Vidgen, R. (2003b). Interactive e-government: Evaluating the web site of the UK inland revenue. Journal of Electronic Commerce in Organizations, 2(1), 42-63.Barnes, S. J., & Vidgen, R. (2005). Data triangulation in action: Using comment analysis to refine web quality metrics. Paper presented at the meeting of the 13 th European Conference on Information Systems, Germany.Bauer, H. H., Falk, T., & Hammerschmidt, M. (2006). eTransQual: A transaction process-based approach for capturing service quality in online shopping. Journal of Business Research, 59(7), 866-875.Boyer, K. K., Hallowell, R., & Roth, A. V. (2002). E-services: Operating strategy - a case study and a method for analyzing operational benefits. Journal of Operations Management, 20(2), 175-188.Chin, W. (2004). Multi-group analysis with PLS. Retrived from:http://disc-nt.cba.uh.edu/chin/plsfaq/multigroup.htm Collier, J. E., & Bienstock, C. C. (2006). Measuring Service Quality in E-Retailing. Journal of Service Research, 8(3), 260-275.Cristobal, E., Flavián, C., & Guinalíu, M. (2007). Perceived e-service quality (PeSQ): Measurement validation and effects on consumer satisfaction and web site loyalty. Managing Service Quality, 17(3), 317-340.Curran, K., Walters, N., & Robinson, D. (2007). Investigating the problems faced by older adults and people with disabilities in online environments. Behaviour & Information Technology, 26(6), 447-453.D’ Ambra, J. & Rice, R. E. (2001). Emerging factors in user evaluation of the World Wide Web. Information & Management, 38(6), 373-384.DeLone, W. H., & Mclean, E. R. (1992). Information system success: The quest for the dependent variable. Information Systems Research, 3(1), 60-95.DeLone, W. H., & McLean, E. R. (2003). The DeLone and McLean model of information system success: A ten-year update. Journal of Management Information Systems Research, 19(4), 9-30.Disabled People`s Association. (2010). Annual Report 2010-2011. Singapore: Disabled People`s Association. Retrived from:http://www.dpa.org.sg/PDF/Annual%20report%20for%20year%20ended%2031%20Mar%202011.pdfEuropean Commission. (2000). eEurope 2002: action plan. Brussels: European Commission. Retrived from:http://ec.europa.eu/information_society/eeurope/2002/action_plan/pdf/actionplan_en.pdfEuropean Commission. (2007a). European i2010 initiative on e-Inclusion: To be part of the information society. Brussels: European Commission. Retrived from:http://ec.europa.eu/information_society/activities/einclusion/policy/i2010_initiative/index_en.htmEuropean Commission. (2007b). Assessment of the Status of eAccessibility in Europe. Brussels: European Commission. Retrived from:http://ec.europa.eu/information_society/activities/einclusion/docs/meac_study/meac_report_exec_sum_05_11.pdfEuropean Commission. (2008a). Towards an accessible information society. Brussels: European Commission. Retrived from:http://ec.europa.eu/information_society/activities/einclusion/policy/accessibility/com_2008/index_en.htmEuropean Commission. (2008b). Study on the measurement of eGoverment user satisfaction and impact. Brussels: European Commission. Retrived from:http://ec.europa.eu/information_society/activities/egovernment/studies/docs/user_satisfaction_final_report.pdfFornell, C. & Larcker, F. D. (1981). Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement errors. Journal of Marketing Research, 18(2), 39-50.Heeks, R. (2006). Benchmarking e-government: Improving the national and international measurement, evaluation and comparison of e-government. IDPM i-Government Working Papers, 18, 1-33.Hsu, F. M., Chen, T. Y., & Wang, S. (2009). Efficiency and satisfaction of electronic records management systems in e-government in Taiwan. The Electronic Library, 27(3), 461-473.Indian Institute of Management. (2007). Impact assessment study of e-government projects in India. Ahmedabad: Indian Institute of Management. Retrieved from:http://www.iimahd.ernet.in/egov/documents/impact-assessment-study-dit.pdfInfocomm Development Authority. (2006). Singapore iN2015 Masterplan Offers a Digital Future for Everyone. Singapore: Infocomm Development Authority. Retrived from:http://www.ida.gov.sg/News%20and%20Events/20050703161451.aspx?getPagetype=20IT Strategic Headquarters. (2000). Basic law on the formation of an advanced information and telecommunications network society. Tokyo: IT Strategic Headquarters. Retrieved from:http://www.kantei.go.jp/foreign/it/it_basiclaw/it_basiclaw.htmlIT Strategic Headquarters. (2001). e-Japan priority policy program. Tokyo: IT Strategic Headquarters. Retrieved from:http://www.kantei.go.jp/foreign/it/network/priority-all/index.htmlIT Strategic Headquarters. (2006). New IT reform strategy: Realizing ubiquitous and universal network society where everyone can enjoy the benefits of IT. Tokyo: IT Strategic Headquarters. Retrieved from:http://www.kantei.go.jp/foreign/policy/it/ITstrategy2006.pdfJaeger, P., & Matteson, M. (2009). e-Government and technology acceptance: The case of the implementation of Section 508 guidelines for websites. Electronic Journal of e-Government, 7(1), 87-98.Jaeger, P. T. (2004). The social impact of an accessible e-democracy: The importance of disability rights laws in the development of the federal e-government. Journal of Disability Policy Studies, 15(1), 19-26.Jaeger, P. T. (2006). Assessing Section 508 compliance on federal e-government Web sites: A multi-method, user-centered evaluation of accessibility for persons with disabilities. Government Information Quarterly, 23(2), 169-190.Jaeger, P. T. (2008). User-centered policy evaluations of Section 508 of the Rehabilitation Act: Evaluating e-government web sites for accessibility for persons with disabilities. Journal of Disability Policy Studies, 19(1), 24-33.Jansen, A., & Ølnes, S. (2004). Quality assessment and benchmarking of Norwegian public web sites. Paper presented at the meeting of the 4th European Conference on E-Government, Dublin.Janssen, D., Rotthier, S., & Snijkers, K. (2004). If you measure it they will score: An assessment of international eGovernment benchmarking. Information Polity, 9(3-4), 121-130.Japanese Industrial Standards Committee. (2010). Guidelines for older persons and persons with disabilities-Information and communications equipment, software and services-Part 3: Web content. Tokyo: Japanese Industrial Standards Committee. Retrived from:http://www.jisc.go.jp/app/pager?id=74800Jarvis, C. B., Mackenzie, S. B., & Podsakoff, P. M. (2003). A critical review of construct indicators and measurement model misspecification in marketing and consumer research. Journal of Consumer Research, 30(2), 199-218.Kelly, B., Sloan, D., Brown, S., Seale, J., Lauke, P., Ball, S., & Smith, S. (2009). Accessibility 2.0: Next steps for web accessibility. Journal of Access Services, 6(1-2 ), 265-294.Kim J., Lee J., Han K., & Lee M. (2002). Business as buildings: Metrics for the architectural quality of internet businesses. Information Systems Research, 13(3), 239-254.Kim, T. H., Im, K. H., & Park, S. C. (2005). Intelligent measuring and improving model for customer satisfaction level in e-government. EGOV 2005, LNCS 3591, 38-48.Kotler, P., & Lee, N. (2007). Marketing in the Public Sector: A roadmap for improved performance. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education.Kunstelj, M., & Vintar, M. (2004). Evaluating the progress of e-government development: A critical analysis. Information Polity, 9(3-4), 131-148.Ladhari, R. (2010). Developing e-service quality scales: A literature review. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 17(66), 464-477.Loiacono, E. T., Watson, R. T., & Goodhue, D. L. (2000). WebQual: A web site quality instrument. Paper presented at the meeting of the WPI Computer Science Colloquium, Worcester, Massachusetts.Loiacono, E. T., Watson, R. T., & Goodhue, D. L. (2002). WebQual: A measure of web site quality. Paper presented at the meeting of the 2002 Marketing educators` conference: Marketing theory and applications, Chicago, American.Loiacono, E. T., Watson, R. T., & Goodhue, D. L. (2007). WebQual: An instrument for consumer evaluation of web sites. International Journal of Electronic Commerce, 11(3), 51-87.Ministry of Internal Affairs and Communications. (2006). u-Japan policy. Tokyo: Ministry of Internal Affairs and Communications. Retrived from:http://www.soumu.go.jp/menu_seisaku/ict/u-japan_en/index.htmlNational Telecommunications and Information Administration. (1995). Falling Through the Net: A Survey of the "Have Nots" in Rural and Urban America. Washington DC: National Telecommunications and Information Administration. Retrived from: http://www.ntia.doc.gov/ntiahome/fallingthru.htmlOECD (2001). Understanding the Digital Divide 2000. Paris: Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. Retrived from:http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/38/57/1888451.pdfOffice of the e-Envoy. (2003). Guidelines for UK government websites: Illustrated handbook for web management teams. London: Office of the e-Envoy. Retrived from:http://www.eppingforestdc.gov.uk/Library/files/Supporting_People/WebsiteGuidelines.pdfPalmer, J. (2002). Web site usability, design and performance metrics. Information Systems Research, 13(1), 151-167.Parasuraman, A., Zeithaml, V. A., & Berry, L. L. (1985). A conceptual model of service quality and its implications for future research. Journal of Marketing, 49, 41-50.Parasuraman, A., Zeithaml, V. A., & Berry, L. L. (1988). SERVQUAL: A multiple-item scale for measuring consumer perceptions of service quality. Journal of Retailing, 64(1), 12-37. Parasuraman, A., Zeithaml, V. A., & Malhotra, A. (2005). E-S-QUAL: A multiple-item scale for assessing electronic service quality. Journal of Service Research, 7(3), 213-233.Petter, S., DeLone, W., & Mclean, E. (2008). Measuring information systems success: models, dimensions, measures, and interrelationships. European Journal of Information Systems Research, 17(3), 236-263.Public Sector Commission. (2010). Website standards, guidelines and checklists. Perth: Public Sector Commission. Retrived from:http://www.publicsector.wa.gov.au/AgencyResponsibilities/WebStandards/Pages/WGFStandardsAndGuidelines.aspxRossiter, J. R. (2002). The C-OAR-SE procedure for scale development in marketing. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 19, 305-335.Rowley, J. (2006). An analysis of the e-service literature: towards a research. Internet Research, 16(3), 339-359.Rubaii-Barrett, N., & Wise, L. R. (2008). Disability access and e-government: An empirical analysis of state practices. Journal of Disability Policy Studies, 19(1), 52-64.Sabherwal, R., Jeyaraj, A., & Chowa, C. (2006). Information system success: Individual and organizational determinants. Management Science, 52(12), 1849-1864.Santos, J. (2003). E-service quality: a model of virtual service quality dimensions. Managing Service Quality, 13(3), 233-246. Schellong, A. R. M. (2010). Benchmarking EU e-government at the crossroads: A framework for e-government benchmark design and improvement. Transforming Government: People, Process and Policy, 4(4), 365-385.Seddon, P. B. (1997). A respecification and extension of the DeLone and McLean model of IS success. Information Systems Research, 8(3), 240-253.Servon, L. J. (2002). Bridging the digital divide: Technology, community, and public policy. Malden, Massachusetts: Blackwell Pub.Shih, H. P. (2004). Extended technology acceptance model of internet utilization behavior. Information & Management, 41(6), 719-729.Stowers, G. N. L. (2002). The state of federal websites: The pursuit of excellence. Arlington, Virginia: PricewaterhouseCoopers Endowment for the Business of Government.Tung, L. L., & Rieck, O. (2005). Adoption of electronic government services among business organizations in Singapore. Journal of Strategic Information Systems, 14.United Nations. (2006a). Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. New York: United Nations. Retrieved from:http://www.un.org/disabilities/default.asp?id=150United Nations. (2006b). International day of disabled persons 2006. New York: United Nations. Retrieved from:http://www.un.org/esa/socdev/enable/iddp2006.htmWang, Y. S., & Liao, Y. W. (2008). Assessing eGovernment systems success: A validation of the DeLone and McLean model of information systems success. Government Information Quarterly, 25(4), 717-733.Waseda University Institutte of e-Government. (2011). The 2011 Waseda University world e-government ranking. Journal of E-Governance, 34(2), 56-63.Web Accessibility Initiative. (2005). Essential components of web accessibility. Massachusetts: Web Accessibility Initiative. Retrieved from:http://www.w3.org/WAI/intro/components.phpWest, D. M. (2001). WMRC global e-government survey, October, 2001. Providence, Rhode Island: Brown University.West, D. M. (2002). State and federal e-government in the United States, 2002. Providence, Rhode Island: Brown University.West, D. M. (2005). Equity and accessibility in e-government. Journal of E-Government, 1(2), 31-43.Wolfinbarger, M., & Gilly, M. C. (2003). eTailQ: Dimensionalizing, measuring and predicting etail quality. Journal of Retailing, 79(3), 183-198.World Wide Web Consortium. (2008). Web content accessibility guidelines (WCAG) 2.0. Retrived from:http://www.w3.org/TR/2008/REC-WCAG20-20081211/Yoo, B., & Donthu, N. (2001). Developing a scale to measure perceived quality of an internet shopping site (SITEQUAL). Quarterly Journal of Electronic Commerce, 2(1), 31-47.Zeithaml, V. A., Parasuraman, A., & Malhotra, A. (2002). Service quality delivery through web sites: A critical review of extant knowledge. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 30(4), 362-375.Zhu, K., & Kraemer, K. L. (2005). Post-adoption variations in usage and value of e-business by organizations: Cross-country evidence from the retail industry. Information Systems Research, 16(1), 61-84. 描述 碩士
國立政治大學
公共行政研究所
96256011
100資料來源 http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0096256011 資料類型 thesis dc.contributor.advisor 朱斌妤 zh_TW dc.contributor.advisor Chu, Pin Yu en_US dc.contributor.author (作者) 黃甯婉 zh_TW dc.contributor.author (作者) Huang, Ning Wan en_US dc.creator (作者) 黃甯婉 zh_TW dc.creator (作者) Huang, Ning Wan en_US dc.date (日期) 2011 en_US dc.date.accessioned 24-十月-2012 16:15:00 (UTC+8) - dc.date.available 24-十月-2012 16:15:00 (UTC+8) - dc.date.issued (上傳時間) 24-十月-2012 16:15:00 (UTC+8) - dc.identifier (其他 識別碼) G0096256011 en_US dc.identifier.uri (URI) http://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/54079 - dc.description (描述) 碩士 zh_TW dc.description (描述) 國立政治大學 zh_TW dc.description (描述) 公共行政研究所 zh_TW dc.description (描述) 96256011 zh_TW dc.description (描述) 100 zh_TW dc.description.abstract (摘要) 隨著身心障礙者資訊素養的提升，「網頁可及性」成為各國發展電子化政府服務必須關注的議題，政府對身心障礙者(Government to the Disabled, G2D)的服務在近年逐漸受到重視。由於不同類型身心障礙者的電子治理需求和網路使用方式互異，行政院研究發展考核委員會參考WCAG 1.0，並參照各國在制訂無障礙網頁相關政策和推廣策略，以及國內近年來在身心障礙者保護政策等相關措施，於2002年6月訂定「無障礙網頁開發規範」，建立具體的無障礙網路推廣目標與策略，並自2003年6月展開「無障礙網路空間服務推廣」。本研究欲瞭解無障礙網路空間計畫對身心障礙者的使用影響，經由電子化政府評估和網站服務品質評估等文獻檢閱，結合Heeks (2006)電子化政府價值鏈模型與DeLone & McLean (2003)資訊系統成功模型，建構以使用者為中心的無障礙網路空間計畫成效評估因果模型，以行政院研考會2010年委託研究案「電子治理成效指標與評估：G2A與G2D」為次級資料，驗證模型各構面間的因果關係暨群組分析。研究結果證實本研究之無障礙網路空間計畫成效評估因果模型具相當程度的解釋力，同時根據研究結果提出無障礙網路空間計畫未來發展暨後續研究之建議。整體而言，政府現階段應加強計畫行銷推廣，全面優化網站品質，以提升使用效益與滿意度，循序漸進地引導無障礙網路空間計畫長期影響的正向發展。 zh_TW dc.description.abstract (摘要) In the development of e-government system, Government to the Disabled (G2D) e-service and the issue of web accessibility have becoming gained much attention in many countries all over the world in recent years. Based on the international Web Content Accessibility Guidelines 1.0 (WCAG 1.0), Research, Development and Evaluation Commission (RDEC) has launched a Web Accessibility Initiative Program to improve the web accessibility for disabled users in Taiwan since 2003. In the study, we propose a demand-side causal model consisting of web quality, program quality, and project impacts based on the e-government value chain model (Heeks, 2006) and the information system success model (DeLone and McLean, 2003). The data analysis is obtained from questionnaire collected in the program “Constructing and Evaluating an Assessment Framework for E-Governance Impacts on Association and Disabled”. Many causal assumptions in the model we propose are verified and some suggestions for the development of Web Accessibility Initiative Program and future research are made. To promote benefit and satisfaction and further enhance public trust as a long term objective, the government should emphasize more on marketing strategy and overall optimization of web quality at this stage. en_US dc.description.tableofcontents 目次 I表次 V圖次 VII第一章 緒論 11.1 電子化政府的發展 11.2 數位落差與無障礙網路空間 31.3 無障礙網路空間計畫成效評估的重要 61.4 研究目的 8第二章 無障礙網路空間的發展 92.1 網頁可及性的重視 92.2 國外無障礙網路空間發展 122.3 我國無障礙網路空間發展 19第三章 文獻檢閱 293.1 電子化政府評估 293.2 網站服務品質評估 433.3 無障礙網路空間的研究 563.4 小結 58第四章 研究設計 614.1 無障礙網路空間計畫次級資料介紹 614.2 無障礙網路空間計畫成效評估模型 654.3 資料分析方式 77第五章 研究結果 815.1 基本資料分析 815.2 敘述統計分析 815.3 網站特性交叉分析 835.4 研究模型分析 84第六章 結論與建議 1016.1 敘述統計暨交叉分析結論 1016.2 假設驗證結論 1026.3 政策建議 1046.4 後續研究建議 107參考文獻 111附錄 125附錄一 九十條檢測碼 125附錄二 無障礙網站使用者意見調查 129 zh_TW dc.language.iso en_US - dc.source.uri (資料來源) http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0096256011 en_US dc.subject (關鍵詞) 電子化政府 zh_TW dc.subject (關鍵詞) G2D zh_TW dc.subject (關鍵詞) 無障礙網路空間 zh_TW dc.subject (關鍵詞) 身心障礙者 zh_TW dc.subject (關鍵詞) 成效評估 zh_TW dc.subject (關鍵詞) eGovernment en_US dc.subject (關鍵詞) G2D en_US dc.subject (關鍵詞) web accessibility en_US dc.subject (關鍵詞) disabilities en_US dc.subject (關鍵詞) performance evaluation en_US dc.title (題名) 使用者導向之我國無障礙網路空間服務成效評估 zh_TW dc.title (題名) A user-oriented measure for performance of web accessibility in Taiwan en_US dc.type (資料類型) thesis en dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 全國法規資料庫（2011）。身心障礙者權益保障法。台北市，行政院法務部。取自：http://law.moj.gov.tw/LawClass/LawAll.aspx?PCode=D0050046行政院內政部（2010）。內政部統計年報─身心障礙者人數按年齡與障礙等級分。台北市，行政院內政部。取自：http://sowf.moi.gov.tw/stat/year/list.htm 行政院研究發展考核委員會（2003）。92年度無障礙網路空間推動報告。台北市，行政院研究發展考核委員會。取自：http://www.webguide.nat.gov.tw/wSite/ct?xItem=36287&ctNode=14438&mp=1行政院研究發展考核委員會（2005a）。九十四年身心障礙民眾數位落差調查報告。台北市，行政院研究發展考核委員會。取自：http://www.rdec.gov.tw/ct.asp?xItem=4024389&ctNode=12062&mp=100行政院研究發展考核委員會（2005b）。政府網站無障礙化作業規定。台北市，行政院研究發展考核委員會。取自：http://www.webguide.nat.gov.tw/wSite/public/Attachment/f1243499897045.pdf行政院研究發展考核委員會（2005c）。94年度無障礙網路空間推動報告。台北市，行政院研究發展考核委員會。取自：http://www.webguide.nat.gov.tw/wSite/ct?xItem=36287&ctNode=14438&mp=1行政院研究發展考核委員會（2006）。95年度無障礙網路空間推動報告。台北市，行政院研究發展考核委員會。取自：http://www.webguide.nat.gov.tw/wSite/ct?xItem=36287&ctNode=14438&mp=1行政院研究發展考核委員會（2007a）。九十六年數位落差調查報告。台北市，行政院研究發展考核委員會。取自：http://www.rdec.gov.tw/ct.asp?xItem=4024389&ctNode=12062&mp=100行政院研究發展考核委員會（2007b）。96年度無障礙網路空間推動報告。台北市，行政院研究發展考核委員會。取自：http://www.webguide.nat.gov.tw/wSite/ct?xItem=36287&ctNode=14438&mp=1行政院研究發展考核委員會（2008a）。97年度無障礙網路空間推動報告。台北市，行政院研究發展考核委員會。取自：http://www.webguide.nat.gov.tw/wSite/ct?xItem=36287&ctNode=14438&mp=1行政院研究發展考核委員會（2008b）。97 年身心障礙者數位落差與數位生活需求調查報告。台北市，行政院研究發展考核委員會。取自：http://www.rdec.gov.tw/ct.asp?xItem=4024389&ctNode=12062&mp=100行政院研究發展考核委員會（2008c）。性別數位落差研究報告。台北市，行政院研究發展考核委員會。取自：http://www.rdec.gov.tw/ct.asp?xItem=4024389&ctNode=12062&mp=100行政院研究發展考核委員會（2010a）。第四階段電子化政府計畫接續規劃事宜。 台北市，行政院研究發展考核委員會。取自：http://blog.www.gov.tw/blog/554a1bef-f9cd-4a76-b500-827d48785f83/post.aspx?id=74ff3ef0-c7c2-4f03-823e-5e0339f8d591行政院研究發展考核委員會（2010b）。歷年數位落差調查報告。台北市，行政院研究發展考核委員會。取自：http://www.rdec.gov.tw/ct.asp?xItem=4024389&ctNode=12062&mp=100行政院研究發展考核委員會（2011a）。101-105第四階段電子化政府計畫-核定本。台北市，行政院研究發展考核委員會。取自：http://www.rdec.gov.tw/public/Data/162118244471.pdf行政院研究發展考核委員會（2011b）。100 年無障礙網站補助計畫。台北市，行政院研究發展考核委員會。取自：http://www.npo.nat.gov.tw/project/index.php吳博翰（2008）。我國各大學特殊教育中心無障礙網頁設置現況調查研究。國立屏東教育大學特殊教育學系碩士論文，未出版，屏東縣。李欣怡（2004）。大學圖書館網站無障礙網頁設計之研究。國立中興大學圖書資訊學研究所碩士論文，未出版，台中市。李洛維（2010）電子採購影響評估因果模型之建構與驗證。國立政治大學公共行政學系碩士論文，未出版，台北市。杜順榮（2006）。資訊無障礙推動策略研究報告。取自：http://mail3.batol.net/~bill/love2.txt林信宏（2006）。臺灣中央及地方政府網站無障礙空間之評估。南華大學公共行政與政策研究所碩士論文，未出版，新北市。林家如（2004）。政府網站的無障礙空間-行政院部會網站視覺障礙評估。世新大學行政管理學研究所碩士論文，未出版，台北市。林純伶（2010）。以WCAG2.0探討國內無障礙網頁之差異分析。大同大學資訊經營學系碩士論文，未出版，台北市。邱皓政（2011）。當PLS遇上SEM：議題與對話。αβγ量化研究學刊，3(1)，20-53。侯曉君（2010）。台灣地區圖書館網頁無障礙設計之研究。國立台灣大學圖書資訊學研究所碩士論文，未出版，台北市。政府網站營運交流平台（2008a）。14條規範。台北市，行政院研究發展考核委員會。取自：http://www.webguide.nat.gov.tw/wSite/ct?xItem=36230&ctNode=14410&mp=1政府網站營運交流平台（2008b）。優先等級。台北市，行政院研究發展考核委員會。取自：http://www.webguide.nat.gov.tw/wSite/ct?xItem=36233&ctNode=14413&mp=1政府網站營運交流平台（2008c）。網站設計規範。台北市，行政院研究發展考核委員會。取自：http://www.webguide.nat.gov.tw/wSite/np?ctNode=14419&mp=1&idPath=14382_14419政府網站營運交流平台（2009）。標章申請步驟。台北市，行政院研究發展考核委員會。取自：http://www.webguide.nat.gov.tw/wSite/ct?xItem=36227&ctNode=14417&mp=1施能傑（2010）。電子化政府計畫的績效評估架構：平衡計分卡觀點。《服務科學與政府公共服務績效》國際學術研討會，台北市。紀成達（2009）。無障礙網頁選單之研究。國立臺灣藝術大學多媒體動畫藝術學系碩士論文，未出版，新北市。張凱勛（2008）。無障礙網頁開發之研究。國立臺灣藝術大學多媒體動畫藝術學系碩士論文，未出版，新北市。張瑞哲（2007）。從網頁設計者的觀點探討無障礙網頁設計。國立交通大學應用藝術研究所碩士論文，未出版，新竹縣。陳家錡（2011）。無障礙網頁之互動文字研究。國立臺灣藝術大學多媒體動畫藝術學系碩士論文，未出版，新北市。陳詠暄（2008）。我國大專院校校園無障礙網站之可及性評估。義守大學資訊管理學系碩士論文，未出版，高雄市。陳嬿伃（2005）。無障礙網站推動成效及其發展相關因素探討。世新大學資訊管理學研究所碩士論文，未出版，台北市。曾淑芬、吳齊殷（2002）。台灣地區數位落差問題之研究。行政院研究發展考核委員會委託研究報告（編號：RDEC-RES-090-006）。台北市，行政院研究發展考核委員會。項靖（2009）。透明化電子治理：以網站落實政府資訊公開。行政院研究發展考核委員會委託研究報告（編號：0972461343）。台北市，行政院研究發展考核委員會。黃元鶴（2007）。圖書資訊領域期刊引用影響之結構方程模式分析。教育資料與圖書館學，44(3)，259-273。黃東益（2009）。電子化政府的影響評估：內部顧客的觀點。文官制度季刊，1(3)，25-53。黃東益、朱斌妤、蕭乃沂（2009）。電子治理成效指標與評估：G2C與G2B。行政院研究發展考核委員會委託研究報告（編號：0972461343）。台北市，行政院研究發展考核委員會。黃朝盟（2004）。二○○三台灣地區網路無障礙空間評估。研考雙月刊，28(1)，69-80。黃朝盟、朱斌妤、黃東益（2008）。電子治理成效調查評估與分析報告。行政院研究發展考核委員會委託研究報告（編號：09640D002503）。台北市，行政院研究發展考核委員會。黃朝盟、吳濟安（2007）。電子化政府影響評估。研考雙月刊，257，76-85。葉耀明（2006）。國立台灣師範大學無障礙網路實驗室：各國推動策略。取自：http://o2utown.org/yym001/modules/tinyd1/index.php?id=6葉耀明（2010）。無障礙網頁議題簡介。網頁內容可及性指引WCAG 2.0推動策略說明會，台北市。劉竹昀（2008）。台灣地區政府網頁之使用性與內容可及性探討。. 碩士, 亞洲大學資訊與設計學系碩士論文，未出版，台中市。潘瑛如、方崇雄（2010）。部分最小平方路徑分析法在教育研究上的應用。研習資訊，27(5)，95-107。蕭乃沂、朱斌妤、黃東益（2010）。電子治理成效指標與評估：G2A與G2D。行政院研究發展考核委員會委託研究報告（編號：0992460052）。台北市，行政院研究發展考核委員會。蕭乃沂、羅晉（2010）。電子化政府的價值鏈評估觀點：以數位台灣e 化政府計畫為例。公共行政學報，36，1-37。Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 50, 179-211.American Customer Satisfaction Index. (2006). ACSI government model. Ann Arbor: American Customer Satisfaction Index. Retrieved from:http://www.theacsi.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=30&Itemid=150Australian Government Information Management Office. (2009). Australians` Use of and Satisfaction with e-Government Services. Parkes: Australian Government Information Management Office. Retrieved from:http://www.finance.gov.au/publications/use-of-e-government-services-2005/Australian Human Rights Commission. (2010). World Wide Web access: Disability Discrimination Act advisory notes. Sydney: Australian Human Rights Commission. Retrived from:http://www.hreoc.gov.au/disability_rights/standards/www_3/www_3.htmlBarnes, S. J., & Vidgen, R. (2000a). WebQual: An exploration of web-site quality. Paper presented at the meeting of the Eighth European Conference on Information Systems, Vienna.Barnes, S. J., & Vidgen, R. (2000b). Information and interaction quality: Evaluating Internet bookshop web sites with WebQual. Paper presented at the meeting of the Thirteenth Bled Electronic Commerce Conference, Slovenia.Barnes, S. J., & Vidgen, R. (2001a). Assessing the quality of auction web sites. Paper presented at the meeting of the Hawaii International Conference on Systems Sciences, Hawaii.Barnes, S. J., & Vidgen, R. (2001b). Evaluating WAP news sites: the WebQual/M approach. Paper presented at the meeting of the Ninth European Conference on Information Systems, Slovenia.Barnes, S. J., & Vidgen, R. (2002). An integrative approach to the assessment of e-commerce quality. Journal of Electronic Commerce Research, 3(3), 114-127.Barnes, S. J., & Vidgen, R. (2003a). Measuring web site quality improvements: A case study of the forum on strategic management knowledge exchange. Industrial Management and Data Systems, 103(5), 297-309.Barnes, S. J., & Vidgen, R. (2003b). Interactive e-government: Evaluating the web site of the UK inland revenue. Journal of Electronic Commerce in Organizations, 2(1), 42-63.Barnes, S. J., & Vidgen, R. (2005). Data triangulation in action: Using comment analysis to refine web quality metrics. Paper presented at the meeting of the 13 th European Conference on Information Systems, Germany.Bauer, H. H., Falk, T., & Hammerschmidt, M. (2006). eTransQual: A transaction process-based approach for capturing service quality in online shopping. Journal of Business Research, 59(7), 866-875.Boyer, K. K., Hallowell, R., & Roth, A. V. (2002). E-services: Operating strategy - a case study and a method for analyzing operational benefits. Journal of Operations Management, 20(2), 175-188.Chin, W. (2004). Multi-group analysis with PLS. Retrived from:http://disc-nt.cba.uh.edu/chin/plsfaq/multigroup.htm Collier, J. E., & Bienstock, C. C. (2006). Measuring Service Quality in E-Retailing. Journal of Service Research, 8(3), 260-275.Cristobal, E., Flavián, C., & Guinalíu, M. (2007). Perceived e-service quality (PeSQ): Measurement validation and effects on consumer satisfaction and web site loyalty. Managing Service Quality, 17(3), 317-340.Curran, K., Walters, N., & Robinson, D. (2007). Investigating the problems faced by older adults and people with disabilities in online environments. Behaviour & Information Technology, 26(6), 447-453.D’ Ambra, J. & Rice, R. E. (2001). Emerging factors in user evaluation of the World Wide Web. Information & Management, 38(6), 373-384.DeLone, W. H., & Mclean, E. R. (1992). Information system success: The quest for the dependent variable. Information Systems Research, 3(1), 60-95.DeLone, W. H., & McLean, E. R. (2003). The DeLone and McLean model of information system success: A ten-year update. Journal of Management Information Systems Research, 19(4), 9-30.Disabled People`s Association. (2010). Annual Report 2010-2011. Singapore: Disabled People`s Association. Retrived from:http://www.dpa.org.sg/PDF/Annual%20report%20for%20year%20ended%2031%20Mar%202011.pdfEuropean Commission. (2000). eEurope 2002: action plan. Brussels: European Commission. Retrived from:http://ec.europa.eu/information_society/eeurope/2002/action_plan/pdf/actionplan_en.pdfEuropean Commission. (2007a). European i2010 initiative on e-Inclusion: To be part of the information society. Brussels: European Commission. Retrived from:http://ec.europa.eu/information_society/activities/einclusion/policy/i2010_initiative/index_en.htmEuropean Commission. (2007b). Assessment of the Status of eAccessibility in Europe. Brussels: European Commission. Retrived from:http://ec.europa.eu/information_society/activities/einclusion/docs/meac_study/meac_report_exec_sum_05_11.pdfEuropean Commission. (2008a). Towards an accessible information society. Brussels: European Commission. Retrived from:http://ec.europa.eu/information_society/activities/einclusion/policy/accessibility/com_2008/index_en.htmEuropean Commission. (2008b). Study on the measurement of eGoverment user satisfaction and impact. Brussels: European Commission. Retrived from:http://ec.europa.eu/information_society/activities/egovernment/studies/docs/user_satisfaction_final_report.pdfFornell, C. & Larcker, F. D. (1981). Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement errors. Journal of Marketing Research, 18(2), 39-50.Heeks, R. (2006). Benchmarking e-government: Improving the national and international measurement, evaluation and comparison of e-government. IDPM i-Government Working Papers, 18, 1-33.Hsu, F. M., Chen, T. Y., & Wang, S. (2009). Efficiency and satisfaction of electronic records management systems in e-government in Taiwan. The Electronic Library, 27(3), 461-473.Indian Institute of Management. (2007). Impact assessment study of e-government projects in India. Ahmedabad: Indian Institute of Management. Retrieved from:http://www.iimahd.ernet.in/egov/documents/impact-assessment-study-dit.pdfInfocomm Development Authority. (2006). Singapore iN2015 Masterplan Offers a Digital Future for Everyone. Singapore: Infocomm Development Authority. Retrived from:http://www.ida.gov.sg/News%20and%20Events/20050703161451.aspx?getPagetype=20IT Strategic Headquarters. (2000). Basic law on the formation of an advanced information and telecommunications network society. Tokyo: IT Strategic Headquarters. Retrieved from:http://www.kantei.go.jp/foreign/it/it_basiclaw/it_basiclaw.htmlIT Strategic Headquarters. (2001). e-Japan priority policy program. Tokyo: IT Strategic Headquarters. Retrieved from:http://www.kantei.go.jp/foreign/it/network/priority-all/index.htmlIT Strategic Headquarters. (2006). New IT reform strategy: Realizing ubiquitous and universal network society where everyone can enjoy the benefits of IT. Tokyo: IT Strategic Headquarters. Retrieved from:http://www.kantei.go.jp/foreign/policy/it/ITstrategy2006.pdfJaeger, P., & Matteson, M. (2009). e-Government and technology acceptance: The case of the implementation of Section 508 guidelines for websites. Electronic Journal of e-Government, 7(1), 87-98.Jaeger, P. T. (2004). The social impact of an accessible e-democracy: The importance of disability rights laws in the development of the federal e-government. Journal of Disability Policy Studies, 15(1), 19-26.Jaeger, P. T. (2006). Assessing Section 508 compliance on federal e-government Web sites: A multi-method, user-centered evaluation of accessibility for persons with disabilities. Government Information Quarterly, 23(2), 169-190.Jaeger, P. T. (2008). User-centered policy evaluations of Section 508 of the Rehabilitation Act: Evaluating e-government web sites for accessibility for persons with disabilities. Journal of Disability Policy Studies, 19(1), 24-33.Jansen, A., & Ølnes, S. (2004). Quality assessment and benchmarking of Norwegian public web sites. Paper presented at the meeting of the 4th European Conference on E-Government, Dublin.Janssen, D., Rotthier, S., & Snijkers, K. (2004). If you measure it they will score: An assessment of international eGovernment benchmarking. Information Polity, 9(3-4), 121-130.Japanese Industrial Standards Committee. (2010). Guidelines for older persons and persons with disabilities-Information and communications equipment, software and services-Part 3: Web content. Tokyo: Japanese Industrial Standards Committee. Retrived from:http://www.jisc.go.jp/app/pager?id=74800Jarvis, C. B., Mackenzie, S. B., & Podsakoff, P. M. (2003). A critical review of construct indicators and measurement model misspecification in marketing and consumer research. Journal of Consumer Research, 30(2), 199-218.Kelly, B., Sloan, D., Brown, S., Seale, J., Lauke, P., Ball, S., & Smith, S. (2009). Accessibility 2.0: Next steps for web accessibility. Journal of Access Services, 6(1-2 ), 265-294.Kim J., Lee J., Han K., & Lee M. (2002). Business as buildings: Metrics for the architectural quality of internet businesses. Information Systems Research, 13(3), 239-254.Kim, T. H., Im, K. H., & Park, S. C. (2005). Intelligent measuring and improving model for customer satisfaction level in e-government. EGOV 2005, LNCS 3591, 38-48.Kotler, P., & Lee, N. (2007). Marketing in the Public Sector: A roadmap for improved performance. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education.Kunstelj, M., & Vintar, M. (2004). Evaluating the progress of e-government development: A critical analysis. Information Polity, 9(3-4), 131-148.Ladhari, R. (2010). Developing e-service quality scales: A literature review. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 17(66), 464-477.Loiacono, E. T., Watson, R. T., & Goodhue, D. L. (2000). WebQual: A web site quality instrument. Paper presented at the meeting of the WPI Computer Science Colloquium, Worcester, Massachusetts.Loiacono, E. T., Watson, R. T., & Goodhue, D. L. (2002). WebQual: A measure of web site quality. Paper presented at the meeting of the 2002 Marketing educators` conference: Marketing theory and applications, Chicago, American.Loiacono, E. T., Watson, R. T., & Goodhue, D. L. (2007). WebQual: An instrument for consumer evaluation of web sites. International Journal of Electronic Commerce, 11(3), 51-87.Ministry of Internal Affairs and Communications. (2006). u-Japan policy. Tokyo: Ministry of Internal Affairs and Communications. Retrived from:http://www.soumu.go.jp/menu_seisaku/ict/u-japan_en/index.htmlNational Telecommunications and Information Administration. (1995). Falling Through the Net: A Survey of the "Have Nots" in Rural and Urban America. Washington DC: National Telecommunications and Information Administration. Retrived from: http://www.ntia.doc.gov/ntiahome/fallingthru.htmlOECD (2001). Understanding the Digital Divide 2000. Paris: Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. Retrived from:http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/38/57/1888451.pdfOffice of the e-Envoy. (2003). Guidelines for UK government websites: Illustrated handbook for web management teams. London: Office of the e-Envoy. Retrived from:http://www.eppingforestdc.gov.uk/Library/files/Supporting_People/WebsiteGuidelines.pdfPalmer, J. (2002). Web site usability, design and performance metrics. Information Systems Research, 13(1), 151-167.Parasuraman, A., Zeithaml, V. A., & Berry, L. L. (1985). A conceptual model of service quality and its implications for future research. Journal of Marketing, 49, 41-50.Parasuraman, A., Zeithaml, V. A., & Berry, L. L. (1988). SERVQUAL: A multiple-item scale for measuring consumer perceptions of service quality. Journal of Retailing, 64(1), 12-37. Parasuraman, A., Zeithaml, V. A., & Malhotra, A. (2005). E-S-QUAL: A multiple-item scale for assessing electronic service quality. Journal of Service Research, 7(3), 213-233.Petter, S., DeLone, W., & Mclean, E. (2008). Measuring information systems success: models, dimensions, measures, and interrelationships. European Journal of Information Systems Research, 17(3), 236-263.Public Sector Commission. (2010). Website standards, guidelines and checklists. Perth: Public Sector Commission. Retrived from:http://www.publicsector.wa.gov.au/AgencyResponsibilities/WebStandards/Pages/WGFStandardsAndGuidelines.aspxRossiter, J. R. (2002). The C-OAR-SE procedure for scale development in marketing. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 19, 305-335.Rowley, J. (2006). An analysis of the e-service literature: towards a research. Internet Research, 16(3), 339-359.Rubaii-Barrett, N., & Wise, L. R. (2008). Disability access and e-government: An empirical analysis of state practices. Journal of Disability Policy Studies, 19(1), 52-64.Sabherwal, R., Jeyaraj, A., & Chowa, C. (2006). Information system success: Individual and organizational determinants. Management Science, 52(12), 1849-1864.Santos, J. (2003). E-service quality: a model of virtual service quality dimensions. Managing Service Quality, 13(3), 233-246. Schellong, A. R. M. (2010). Benchmarking EU e-government at the crossroads: A framework for e-government benchmark design and improvement. Transforming Government: People, Process and Policy, 4(4), 365-385.Seddon, P. B. (1997). A respecification and extension of the DeLone and McLean model of IS success. Information Systems Research, 8(3), 240-253.Servon, L. J. (2002). Bridging the digital divide: Technology, community, and public policy. Malden, Massachusetts: Blackwell Pub.Shih, H. P. (2004). Extended technology acceptance model of internet utilization behavior. Information & Management, 41(6), 719-729.Stowers, G. N. L. (2002). The state of federal websites: The pursuit of excellence. Arlington, Virginia: PricewaterhouseCoopers Endowment for the Business of Government.Tung, L. L., & Rieck, O. (2005). Adoption of electronic government services among business organizations in Singapore. Journal of Strategic Information Systems, 14.United Nations. (2006a). Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. New York: United Nations. Retrieved from:http://www.un.org/disabilities/default.asp?id=150United Nations. (2006b). International day of disabled persons 2006. New York: United Nations. Retrieved from:http://www.un.org/esa/socdev/enable/iddp2006.htmWang, Y. S., & Liao, Y. W. (2008). Assessing eGovernment systems success: A validation of the DeLone and McLean model of information systems success. Government Information Quarterly, 25(4), 717-733.Waseda University Institutte of e-Government. (2011). The 2011 Waseda University world e-government ranking. Journal of E-Governance, 34(2), 56-63.Web Accessibility Initiative. (2005). Essential components of web accessibility. Massachusetts: Web Accessibility Initiative. Retrieved from:http://www.w3.org/WAI/intro/components.phpWest, D. M. (2001). WMRC global e-government survey, October, 2001. Providence, Rhode Island: Brown University.West, D. M. (2002). State and federal e-government in the United States, 2002. Providence, Rhode Island: Brown University.West, D. M. (2005). Equity and accessibility in e-government. Journal of E-Government, 1(2), 31-43.Wolfinbarger, M., & Gilly, M. C. (2003). eTailQ: Dimensionalizing, measuring and predicting etail quality. Journal of Retailing, 79(3), 183-198.World Wide Web Consortium. (2008). Web content accessibility guidelines (WCAG) 2.0. Retrived from:http://www.w3.org/TR/2008/REC-WCAG20-20081211/Yoo, B., & Donthu, N. (2001). Developing a scale to measure perceived quality of an internet shopping site (SITEQUAL). Quarterly Journal of Electronic Commerce, 2(1), 31-47.Zeithaml, V. A., Parasuraman, A., & Malhotra, A. (2002). Service quality delivery through web sites: A critical review of extant knowledge. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 30(4), 362-375.Zhu, K., & Kraemer, K. L. (2005). Post-adoption variations in usage and value of e-business by organizations: Cross-country evidence from the retail industry. Information Systems Research, 16(1), 61-84. zh_TW
