聲音對於人類而言，仍然有很大的探索空間，本篇研究探討警示音在何種頻率及音量範圍內，可以提升人的記憶正確性及降低反應時間，以達人員快速反應及辨識的警示效果。本研究取樣一組常用的警示複合音，改變其音量及頻率(八度音階為一單位)，分別對人員進行聲音辨識之研究分析。本研究採用3 × 3的實驗設計方法，受測者共有33位，實驗自變數包含三個等差值的頻率及三種響度音量設定。其中頻率部分共區分成二組，一組設定其頻率之等差範圍為四單位，另一組則設定等差範圍為八單位，分別為：正常音(0八度音)、-4八度音及+4八度音及正常音(0八度音)、-8八度音及+8八度音二組；而三種音量的設定值為55、65及75分貝。應變數則為正確率及反應時間。實驗結果顯示，當音頻差距範圍較小時(第一組:0度音、-4度音及+4度音)，人員聲音辨識的正確率顯著地受到影響，其頻率(p-value=0.027)及音量(P-value=0.004)都有顯著的反應，但對於反應時間部分，則並不顯著。而音頻差距範圍較大時(第二組:0度音、-8度音及+8度音)，頻率對於正確率(p-value=0.004)及反應時間(p-value=0.02)，都有顯著地反應，但音量之於後二者則無顯著效應。本研究結果將可初步提供監控室設計人員於警示音設計及選擇，以利整體績效及辨識之提昇。

There was still much unknown in regard to human hearing. This study explored to the extent of alert tone which could enhance people’s memory accuracy and decrease the reaction time. The goal was to achieve rapid response and identification of the warning sounds. The experiment adopted a compound warning sound that varied in volume and frequencies (one octave as a unit) to investigate human auditory vigilance. In this study, a 3×3 experimental design was used. A total of 33 subjects participated in this experiment. The independent variables were frequency with three levels and loudness with three levels. The frequency factor was divided into two groups: a group of 4 unit octave (0, -4, +4 octave), another group of 8 unit octave (0, -8, +8 octave). The three volume settings were 55, 65, 75 dB. The dependent variables were accuracy and reaction time. The results showed that the correct recognition rate was significantly affected by 4 unit octave difference (p-value=0.27) and loudness (p-value=0.004). But the results were significantly affected by the reaction time. Another results showed that the correct recognition rate was significantly affected by 8 unit octave difference (p-value=0.004). The results also had significant effects on reaction time (p-value=0.02). But the results were significantly affected by the loudness. The results of this study may provide control room designer for select the alert tone of frequency and loudness for different warning signals to find out the best solution for users to facilitate identification for human vigilance hearing performance.

1. 張春興，1995，現代心理學，初版，台灣東華書局，台北。

2. 行政院勞工委員會勞工安全衛生研究所，1998，防護具選用技術手冊　
－防音防護具，正中書局，台北。

3. 張一岑，1998，人因工程學，揚智文化，台北。

4. 許勝雄，吳水丕，彭游，1998，人因工程，工程與設計之人性因素
（上冊），滄海書局，台中。

5. 李開偉，2001，人因工程，基礎與應用，全華科技圖書（股）公司，臺北，頁9-1 至9-42。

6. 李開偉，2003，實用人因工程學，全華科技圖書（股）公司，臺北，頁11-1 至11-23。
　
7. 李再長，黃雪玲，李永輝，王明揚，2005，人因工程，華泰文化事業股份有限公司，台北市。

8. 楊昌裔，2006，工業安全與衛生，全華科技圖書股份有限公司，台北市，頁17-1至17-35。

9. 鄭昭明，2006，認知心理學：理論與實踐(三版)，桂冠圖書股份有限公司，台北市，頁95至頁97。

10. 姜定宇，留佳莉，危芷芬，余振民，2009，心理學導論，五南圖書出版股份有限公司，台北市，頁77至頁78。

11. 游恆山，2010，心理學（五版），台灣培生教育出版股份有限公司，台北市，頁171至頁172。

12. 趙金榮，林久翔，馮文陽，姚怡然，曾楓億，2011，人因工程，高立圖書有限公司，新北市。

13. 碩士論文：陳文英，2002，整合式防危警示系統之介面的評估與改善，國立清華大學。

14. 碩士論文：江孟芬，2003，晶圓廠緊急防危監控系統視、聽覺顯示對系統績效之影響，國立清華大學。

15. 科林聽力保健中心耳朵小百科: 　　http://www.ear.com.tw/Hearing/Hearing1.htm, 2011/04/06

16. 勞工安全衛生研究所: http://www.iosh.gov.tw/, 2011/04/06
　　
17. American National Standards Institute(ANSI),1966, “Standard specification for octave Half-octave, and third-octave band filter sets(ANSI S1.11-1966)”, New York.

18. Cheng,B., Masahiro H., Takamasa S., 2002, “Analysis of driver response to collision warning during car following”, Society of Automotive Engineers of Japan, 23, p.p.231~237.

19. Marshall,D.C., Lee,J,D. and Austria,P.A,2007, “ Alerts for In-Vehicle Information Systems: Annoyance, Urgency, and Appropriateness”, Human Factors, Vol. 49, p.p.145-157.

20. Deatherage, B. H. 1972, “ Auditory and other sensory forms of information presentation”, In H. P. Van Cott and R. G. Kinkade(eds.), Human engineering guide to equipment design. Washington, DC: Government Printing Office,p.p.123-160

21. Stefanics, G., Stavrinou, M., Sestieri, C., Ciancetta, L., Belardinelli, P., Cianflone, F., Bemath, L., Hernadi, I., Pizzella, V. and Romani, G. L.,2004,“Cross-modal visual–auditory–somatosensory integration in a multimodal object recognition task in humans”, International Congress Series, p.p. 163-166.

22. Casail ,J. G., Robinson, G. S., Dabney, E. C. and Gauger, D.,2004, “Effect of Electronic ANR and onventional Hearing Protectors on Vehicle Backup Alarm Detection in Noise”, Human Factors, Vol. 46, p.p. 1-10.

23. Stephan, K. L., Smith, S. E., Martin, R. L., Parker, S.P.A. and McAnally, K. I., 2006, “ Learning and Retention of ssociations Between Auditory Icons and Denotative Referents: Implications for the Design of Auditory Warnings “,Human Factors, Vol. 48, p.p. 288-299.

24. Miller, M.E. and Beaton R.J.,1994, “ The Alarming Sounds of Silence” , Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, issue 1,p.p. 21-23.

25. Patterson, R.D.,1982, “Guidelines for auditory warning systems on civil aircraft(CAA Paper 82017),London: Civil Aviation Authority.

26. Bolia, R.S., Angelo, W.R.D’, Mishler, P.J. and Morris L.J. ,2001,“Effects of Hearing Protectors on Auditory Localization in Azimuth and Elevation” Human Factors, Vol. 43, p.p. 122-128.

27. Sanders, M. S.,& McCormick, E. J., 1987, Human factors in engineering and design, New York: McGraw-Hill.

28. Schweinberger, S.R., 2001,“Human brain potential correlates of voice priming and voice recognition,” Neuropsychologia, Vol. 39, p.p.921-936.