由於近年來電腦的迅速發展，使得越來越多的使用者無法有效地利用既有的知識經驗來操作軟體系統上所有功能；因此許多學者提出可將隱喻運用至電腦系統的介面設計之上，幫助學習者可以快速地將過去的知識經驗，轉換映對至新的知識領域當中。然而每個人，包括使用者與設計者，在生活與學習上經驗的不同，所可利用的隱喻來源也就不盡相同，為了能有效地減少設計者與使用者之間認知的差異，Wang & Hwang（2000）提出基層隱喻（Basic Metaphor）的概念及探索程序，企圖能藉由大部分人中所共有的知識經驗，來找出能被一般使用者所接受的電腦基層隱喻。
本論文藉由黃育信（1998）提出之基層隱喻探索方式，透過找尋青少年間共有的知識經驗，來獲得大部分人所能接受認同的電腦介面基層隱喻；研究的過程共進行三次問卷施測，在第一次問卷結果中共找出13項大部分青少年接受之電腦隱喻；而第二次問卷則是藉由這13個隱喻加上從文獻中找到的5個隱喻設計而成，結果發現共有8個電腦隱喻為大部分青少年所能接受，這也就是使用效果最好之隱喻。最後一次施測主要是評估一般成年人對這些找出的電腦隱喻之接受程度，結果在8個隱喻中只有一個是不被大部人所同意的。
本研究初步驗證若能去除因時空造成之差異，便可直接從青少年的經驗當中找尋適合一般大眾的電腦基層隱喻，並將結果得到的電腦介面隱喻基層隱喻加以分層，其中第一層所代表的即為最接受人數最多、隱喻效果最佳之隱喻來源。未來若有設計師想要設計一新系統或軟體時，便應該要先瞭解青少年對此軟體系統的概念想法，再依據本研究結果從中找出適當隱喻，最後配合至成年人的經驗當中加以修正，如此一來將可以成功地滿足大部分使用者的需求，並發揮最大成效。

In recent years, with rapid development of personal computer, more and more users find that it is becoming difficult to use some of the functions in software with theis experience and previous knowledge. Therefore, scholars proposed that metaphor-based interfaces may help users using new software easily by taking it up with pervious experiences and existing concepts. However individual background and experience of the users and designers diversify. In order to decrease the cognitive differences of the same metaphor between designers and users, Wang and Hwang (2000) proposed the concept of using basic metaphors for development of a computer system. They suggested a process for designing basic metaphors. The process, including common knowledge/experiences existing is aiming at identifying basic computer metaphors that can be recognized by ordinary users.
Based on the basic metaphor identifying method introduced by Hwang (1998), this study focused on finding out teenagers’ commom knowledge/experiences that may represent the basic metaphors for computers. Thirteen computer metaphors identified in the pre-test by the teenages plus five metaphors identified from literatures were used as the input for a quertionnaires survey followed. The result indicates the eight metaphors which most subjects recognized easily can be considered most effective basic metaphors. It was verified in a following survey with adult subjects that among the eight most effective metaphors identified by the teenagers, only one of them was disagreed.
If a designer could use an effective basic metaphor from teenagers’ experience for representing a computer system, most users would learn and use it easily. As time and location may change, the effectiveness of those basic metaphors may also change. Thus, a designer must use basic metaphors in designing if the goal is to make the system easy to understand and to use.

方裕民，GUI界面設計理論與實務，中日設計教育研討會論文集，民88。

李賢輝，多媒體藝術導論，
http://ceiba.cc.ntu.edu.tw/th6_500/th6_500g1.htm，民92。

陳坤淼，電腦多媒體之使用者介面設計探討，高速計算世界，民89。

陳雍正，互動多媒體之使用者介面設計初探，雲林科技大學工業設計所專題研討，
民92

許有真 人機介面隱喻之探討，教學科技與媒體，58，頁26-33，民90。

唐國豪，人與機器的對話，科學發展，368，頁18-23，民92

黃育信，人與電腦互動中的基層隱喻研究，清華大學工業工程所碩士論文，
民87.6。

孫名之，心理學導論，台北：曉園出版社，頁99 – 107，民83。

小松原明哲，對話型認知人間工學設計（日文），東京：技報堂出版社，頁89-105，
民81。

Alty, J. L., Kontt, R. P., Andersin, B., Smyth, M. (2000). A framework for engineering metaphor at the user interface. Interacting with Computers, 13(2), 301-322.

Anderson, J. R. (1983). The architecture of cognition. Cambridge, MA:Harvard University Press.

Anderson, B., Smyth, M.G., Knott, R.P., Bergan, M., Bergan, J., Alty, J.L., (1994). Minimizing conceptual baggage: making choices about metaphor. In People and Computers IX, Proceedings of HCI'94 (pp. 179-194), 28-30 August, 1994, Glasgow, UK.

Bielenberg, D. (1993). Interactive design and the mythical intuitive user interfaces. Journal of Interactive Instruction Development. 6(2), 14-19.
Bruner, J. S. (1960). The process of education. London, Oxford University Press.
Carroll, J. M., Mack, R. L. (1985). Metaphor, computing systems, and active learning. International Journal of Man-Machine Studies, 22(1), 39-57.

Busch, T. (1995). Gender differences in self-efficacy and attitudes toward computers. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 12(2), 147-158.

Bush, V. (1945). As we may think. The Atlantic Monthly, 176(1), 101-108.

Carroll, J. M., Mack, R. L., ＆Kellogg, W. A. (1988). Interface metaphors and user interface design. In Handbook of Human-Computer Interface (M. Helander, Ed), 67-85, North-Holland, Amsterdam.

Carroll, J. M., Neal, D. C. (1997). The Role of Metaphors in User Interface Design. In Handbook of Human-Computer Interaction (M. Helander, Ed), 441-457.

Carroll, J. M., Thomas, J. C. (1982). Metaphor and the cognitive representation of computing systems. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics, SMC, 12(2), 107-116.

Cates, W. M. (1994). Designing hypermedia is hell: Metaphor’s role in instructional design. Proceedings of Selected Research and Development Presentations at the 1994 Annual Convention of the Association for Educational Communications and Technology, Nashville, TN, 95-108.

Chi, M. T. H., Feltovich, P. J. & Glaser, R. (1981). Categorization and representation of physics problems by experts and novices. Cognitive Science, 5, 121-152.

Colley A. (2003). Gender differences in adolescents’ perceptions of the best and worst aspects of computing at school. Computers in Human Behavior, 19(6), 673-682.

Comber, C., Colley, A., Hargreaves, D., & Dorn, L. ( 1997). The effects of age, gender and computer experience upon computer attitudes. Educational Research, 39, 123-133.

Gailey, C. (1993). Mediated messages: gender, class and cosmos in home video games. Journal of Popular Culture, 27, 81-97.

Geissler, J. E. & Horridge, P. H. (1993). University student’s computer knowledge and commitment to learning. Journal of Research on Computing in Education, 25(3), 347-365.

Gentner, D. R. (1977). Children’s performance on a spatial analogies task. Child Development, 48, 1034-1039.

Gentner, D. R. (1988). Metaphors as structure mapping: The relational shift. Child Development, 59, 47-59.

Gillan D. J., Fogas B. S., & Suzanne Aberasturi & Shannon Richards (1995). Cognitive ability and computing experience influence interpretation of computer metaphor. In Proceedings of the hum an factors and ergonomics society 39th annual meeting-1995. 243-247, Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, Santa Monica, CA.

Hammond, N., Allinson, L., (1987). The travel metaphor as design principle and training aid for navigating around complex systems. In People and Computers III ( Diaper, D., & Winder, R.,Eds), 75-90.

Heckel, P. (1991). Conceptual models and metaphor in software design. In 36th IEEE Computer Society International Conference – COMPCON, 498-499, Piscataway, NJ: IEEE Service Center.

Hsu Y. C. (2000). The effects of varying levels of interface cues derived from metaphors on the computer user’ information search performance. Doctoral dissertation, Indiana University, USA.

Hutchins, E. (1989). Metaphors for interface design. In The structure of multimodal dialogue (M. M. Taylor, F. Neel, and D. G. Bouwhuis, Eds), 11-28. Elsevier, Amsterdam.

Lakoff, G., Johnson, M. (1980). Metaphors We Live By. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.

Laurel, B. (1993). Computers as Theatre. Reading, MA:Addison-Wesley.

Lin, L. Y. (1989). Learning to use hypertext systems with metaphors: An interface design perspective. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.
MacCormac, E.R., (1985). A Cognitive Theory of Metaphor. Cambridge, MA/London: MIT Press.

Madsen, K. H. (1994). A guide to metaphorical design. Communications of the ACM, 37(12), 57-62.

Madsen K. H. (2000). Magic by Metaphors, In Proceedings of DARE 2000 on design augmented reality environments.
Mandel, T. (1997). The Elements of User Interface Design. John Wiley & Sons, New York.

Marcus, A (1994). Managing metaphors for advanced user interface. In Proceedings of the Workshop on Advanced Visual Interfaces: AVI’94, 12-18, New York: Association of Computing Machinery.

Mayhew, D. J. (1992). Principles and Guidelines in Software User Interface Design. PrenticeHall, Englewood Cliffs (New Jersey).

Norman, K. L., and Chin, J. P. (1989). The menu metaphor: food for thought. Behavior and Information Technology, 8(2), 125-134.

Preece, J., Roger, Y., Benyon, D., Davies, G., and Keller, L. (1993). A Guide to Usability-Human Factors in computing. Addison-Wesley, New York.
Preece, J., Roger, Y., Sharp, D., Holland, S., and Carey, T. (1994). Human-Computer Interaction. Addison-Wesley, New York.

Rogers, Y., Leiser, R., Carr, D., (1988). Evaluating Metaphors for use at the User-System Interface, In Eurinfo'88, Proceedings of the First European Conference on Information Technology for Organizational Systems, ( Bullinger, H-J.,
Protonotarios, E.N., Bouwhuis, D., Reim, F., Eds.) Athens, Greece, 16-20. Elsevier, Amsterdam.

Rummerlhart, D. E., & Norman, D. A. (1981). Analogical processes in learning. In Cognitive Skills and Their Acquisition ( J. R. Anderson, Ed), 335-361.
Siltanen, S. A. (1986). Butterflies are rainbows? : A developmental investigation of metaphor comprehension. Communication Education, 35, 1-12.

Smyth, M. and Kontt R. (1993). The Role of Metaphors at the Human Computer Interface. Proceedings of VAMMS’93.

Smyth, M., Anderson, B & Alty, J. L. (1995). Metaphor Reflections and a Tool for Thought. In People and Computers X, Proceedings of HCI’95 ( M. A. R. Kirby, A. J. Dix and J. E. Finlay,. Eds.), 137-150, Haddonfield, UK: Cambridge University Press.

Väänänen, K., and Schmidt, J. (1994). User interfaces for hypermedia: How to find good metaphor. In CHI’87 Short Papers, Conference on Human Factors in Computing System, 263. New York: Association for Computing Machinery.

Wang, E. & Hwang, A. (2001). A Study on Basic Metaphors in Human-Computer Interaction. In Proceedings of the 14th Congress of the International Ergonomics Association, 140-143, Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, Santa Monica, CA.

Winner, E., Rosentiel, A & Gardner, H. (1976). The development of metaphoric understanding. Developmental Psychology, 12, 289-297.