本研究在以分析層級程序法(Analytic Network Process; ANP)觀點，探究專家與消費者對於綠色產品的關鍵因素，並以發光二極體(LED)燈泡為對象。透過整合性科技接受模式(UTAUT)的構面與因素定義，建構具備利益及成本考量之分析網路程序法 (BC-ANP)的架構與其因素，包括四個有關產品的構面以及其十四項因素。經過專家討論及內容效度分析刪除不合適之因素，再透過專家深度訪談決定構面間與因素間的相依及回饋關係。接著發放專家成對比較問卷以及分析網路程序法的運算，以獲得各因素與方案的優先順序。並對模型進行敏感度分析，以確保分析的穩健。
研究結論顯示，績效期望及效能期望影響結果較大，而社會影響與促進因素的外在影響層面相較之下略小。(i)人們對於產品能給予的益處或增加績效程度的特性感到最為重要，其次則為是否提供良好的效能；(ii)專家認為LED所帶來的主要利益為低耗能特質，而消費者則為LED在低污染方面的特性；(iii)專家及消費者均有強烈購買意願。另以「節省電費」準則對購買意願進行敏感度分析，結果顯示其的變動範圍穩定而不敏感。

This study tries to Investigate the critical factors in the adoption of LED (Light Emitting Diode) Illumination Lights based on Technology Acceptance Model from the aspect of BC-ANP. First we clarify influential factors through Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology (UTAUT), and then fit them to the structure a BC-ANP analytical framework,  including four product-related dimensions and 14 factors. Second, we adopt experts’ opinions and content validity ratio to delete inappropriate factors, and determine the interdependent and feedback relationships for the dimensions and their factors. After that, we calculate the priorities of factors including alternatives according to the results derived from pair-comparisons, and execute sensitive analysis to ensure the stability of the proposed model.
We observed that values of performance expectation and efficiency expectation are higher than the values of social influence and promoting factor. The major results are: (i) Consumers think that given benefits or performances  of products are the most important, and the next is the produce efficiency; (ii) Experts view the main advantage of LED lights is its low energy-consumption, and consumers consider the low pollution of LED lights; and (iii) Experts and consumers have high intention of purchasing LED lights. Besides, the results of the sensitivity analysis on the factors of "electric bill" are rather stable.

目錄

目錄	I
表目錄	IV
圖目錄	VI
第一章	緒論	1
1.1 研究背景與動機	1
1.2 研究目的	2
1.3研究架構	3
第二章 文獻回顧	5
2.1能源使用現況	5
2.2 綠色產品	7
2.2.1 燈泡屬性	8
2.2.2 省電燈泡	8
2.2.3 LED	9
2.2.4 綜合照明產品分析	9
2.3科技接受	11
2.3.1科技接受模式	11
2.3.2整合性科技接受模式	12
2.3.3 科技接受模式三	15
2.4分析網路程序法	17
2.4.1分析網路程序法源起介紹	17
2.4.2 BOCR與分析網路程序法的結合	19
2.5 本章小結	21
第三章 模型建構	22
3.1 網路模型建構	22
3.1.1 內容效度問卷	22
3.1.2 確認相依及回饋關係	25
3.2 ANP專家問卷	26
3.2.1尺度涵義及問卷設計	26
3.2.2 成對比較矩陣與特徵值與特徵向量	27
3.2.3 一致性檢定並整合專家意見	28
3.2.4 建立超級矩陣	29
3.2.5成本效益構面綜合	31
3.3 本章小結	31
第四章 研究結果	32
4.1 ANP專家問卷之資料蒐集對象	32
4.2 整合專家問卷與分析	32
4.2.1 整合專家問卷	33
4.2.2 建立超級矩陣	33
4.2.3 分析各構面與因素的權重	46
4.2.4 多項分析各構面與因素	49
4.2.5 利益與成本之分析	51
4.3 敏感度分析	52
4.4 本章小結	54
第五章 結論與建議	55
5.1 結論	55
5.2 管理意涵	56
5.3 未來研究建議	58
參考文獻	59
1.中文文獻	59
2.英文文獻	60
附錄1 第一階段問卷	64
附錄2 第二階段問卷	68

 
表目錄
表2.1發電容量裝置表(按公司別)	6
表2.2電力消費表	7
表2.3燈泡屬性比較	10
表2.4 科技接受模式應用	12
表2.5 整合型科技接受模式構面整理表	14
表2.6 知覺有用性之決定因素表	16
表2.7 知覺易用性的決定因素	16
表2.8 BOCR-ANP相關文獻	20
表3.1 第一階段問卷發放對象	24
表3.2 第一階段各構面準則	25
表3.3 問卷尺度說明	27
表3.4  R.I. 值	29
表4.1發放對象背景一覽表	32
表4.2 專家填寫利益下之未加權矩陣	34
表4.3 專家填寫利益下之加權矩陣	35
表4.4 專家填寫利益下之極限矩陣	36
表4.5 消費者利益未加權矩陣	37
表4.6 消費者利益加權矩陣	38
表4.7 消費者利益極限矩陣	39
表4.8 專家成本未加權矩陣	40
表4.9 專家成本加權矩陣	41
表4.10 專家成本極限矩陣	42
表4.11 消費者成本未加權矩陣	43
表4.12 消費者成本加權矩陣	44
表4.13 消費者成本極限矩陣	45
表4.14 各構面及因素之權重	48
表4.15 刪減後構面與因素權重	50
表4.16 使用行為的結果排序	52
 
圖目錄
圖1.1 研究流程圖	4
圖2.1 平均每人能源消耗圖	5
圖2.2 科技接受模式(TAM)	11
圖2.3 整合性科技接受模式	13
圖2.4 科技接受模式三	15
圖2.5 ANP網路圖	18
圖3.1 建構BC-ANP模型流程	23
圖3.2 BC-ANP架構圖	26
圖4.1 刪減過後之網路圖	49
圖4.2 調整電費節省之敏感度分析	52
圖4.3 調整替換壽命之敏感度分析	53
圖4.4 調整外部電價之敏感度分析	53

參考文獻
1.中文文獻
Otali官方網站 (2012)，實際案例，取自: http：//www.otali.com.tw/Cases.aspx。
Philips官方網站 (2012)，取自: http：//www.lighting.philips.com.tw。
經濟部能源局 (2012)，永續能源綱領，取自:http://web3.moeaboe.gov.tw。
李芙蓉 (2008)，消費者選購綠色產品之偏好結構與願付價格研究-以燈泡產品為例，台南，成功大學資源工程學系，碩士論文。 
吳佩青 (2011)，臺灣電子業綠色策略績效評估之研究：應用成本與利益控制準則下之分析網路程序法，新北，淡江大學管理科學學系，碩士論文。
宋曉玫 (2012)，以科技接受模式探討中高齡者使用網路即時通訊軟體之意圖與行為，台北，台灣師範大學社會教育學系，碩士論文。
林怡君 (2012)，含綠色準則之台灣電子業供應商評選-運用分析網路程序法，新北，淡江大學管理科學學系，碩士論文。
郭威德 (2009)，以 [整合型科技接受模式] 探討消費者使用便利商店多媒體複合機之意願，新北，淡江大學企業管理學系，碩士論文。
劉柏廷 (2006)，科技接受模式, 結合計劃行為理論與科技接受模式, 科技接受與使用統一理論之實證分析與比較： 以台北市停車收費採用 PDA 為例，新竹，交通大學運輸科技與管理學系，碩士論文。
劉卓英 (2012)，綠色消費行為影響因素之研究—以LED照明產品為例，新北，淡江大學國際商學學系，碩士論文。
經濟部能源局 (2012)，2012年能源產業技術白皮書，台北，經濟部能源局。
經濟部能源局 (2012)，中華民國100年能源統計手冊，台北，經濟部能源局。
 
2.英文文獻
Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behavior, Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes (50:2), 179-211.
Compeau, D. R., and Higgins, C. A. (1995b). Computer Self-Efficacy: Development of a Measure and Initial Test, MIS Quarterly (19:2), 189-211.
Compeau, D. R., Higgins, C. A., and Huff, S. (1999). Social Cognitive Theory and Individual Reactions to Computing Technology: A Longitudinal Study, MIS Quarterly (23:2), 145- 158.
Davis, F. D. (1989). Perceived Usefulness, Perceived Ease of Use, and User Acceptance of Information Technology, MIS Quarterly (13:3), 319-339.
Davis, F. D., Bagozzi, R. P., and Warshaw, P. R. (1989). User acceptance of computer technology: A comparison of two theoretical models, Management Science (35:8), 982-1002.
Davis, F. D., Bagozzi, R. P., and Warshaw, P. R. (1992). Extrinsic and Intrinsic Motivation to Use Computers in the Workplace , Journal of Applied Social Psychology (22:14), 1111- 1132.
D'Souza, C., Taghian, M., Lamb, P., and Peretiatkos, R. (2006). Green products and corporate strategy: An empirical investigation, Society and Business Review, (1:2), 144-157. 
Erdoğmuş, Ş., Kapanoglu, M., and Koc, E. (2005). Evaluating high-tech alternatives by using analytic network process with BOCR and multi actors, Evaluation and Program Planning, (28:4), 391-399. 
Erdoğmuş, Ş., Aras, H., and Koc, E. (2006). Evaluation of alternative fuels for residential heating in turkey using analytic network process (ANP) with group decision-making. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, (10:3), 269-279. 
Fishbein, M., and Ajzen, I. (1975). Belief, Attitude, Intention and Behavior: An Introduction to Theory and Research, Transportation Research Board. Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA.
Hu, P. J., Chau, P.Y. K, Sheng, O. R. L. and Tam, K. Y. (1999). Examining the technology acceptance model using physician acceptance of telemedicine technology, Journal of Management Information Systems (16:2), 91-112.
Lawshe, C. H. (1975). A quantitative approach to content validity, Personnel Psychology, (28:4), 563-575. 
Mathieson, K. (1991). Predicting user Intentions: comparing the technology acceptance model with the theory of planned behavior, Information Systems Research (2:3), 173-191.
Moore, G. C., and Benbasat, I. (1991). Development of an instrument to measure the perceptions of adopting an information technology innovation, Information Systems Research (2:3), 192-222.
Nimse, P., Vijayan, A., Kumar, A., and Varadarajan, C. (2007). A review of green product databases, Environmental Progress, (26:2), 131-137. 
Peattie, K., and Charter, M. (1994). The Marketing Book, London: Butterworth. 	
Saaty, R. W. and Adams, W. J.,(2003). Decision Making in Complex Environment: Super Decisions Software for Decision Making with Dependence and Feedback, Creative Decisions Foundation.
Saaty, T. L. (1980). The Analytic Hierarchy Process: Planning, Priority Setting, Resources Allocation, New York, McGraw-Hill.
Saaty, T. L. (1996). Decision Making with Dependence and Feedback: The Analytic Network Process, Pittsburgh, RWS Publications. 
Saaty, T. L. (2001). The Analytic Network Process: Decision Making with Dependence and Feedback, Pittsburgh, RWS Publications.
Saaty, T. L. (2005). Theory and Applications of the Analytic Network Process: Decision Making with Benefits, Opportunities, Costs, and Risks, Pittsburgh ,RWS Publications.
Saaty, T. L., and Takizawa, M. (1986). Dependence and independence: From linear hierarchies to nonlinear networks. European Journal of Operational Research, (26:2), 229-237. 
Saaty, T. L. and Alexander, J. M. (1989). Conflict Resolution: The Analytic Hierarchy Approach, New York, Praeger.
Saaty, T. L., and Vargas, L. G. (1994). Decision Making in economic, Political, Social, and Technological Environments with the Analytic Hierarchy Process, Pittsburgh, RWS publications. 
Saaty, T. L., and Ozdemir, M. (2003). Negative priorities in the analytic hierarchy process. Mathematical and Computer Modelling, (37:9), 1063-1075. 
Subramanian, G. H. (1994). A replication of perceived usefulness and perceived ease of use measurement, Decision Sciences, (25:5), 863-874. 
Taylor, S., and Todd, P. A. (1995a). Assessing iT usage: The tole of prior experience , MIS Quarterly (19:2), 561-570.
Taylor, S., and Todd, P. A. (1995b). Understanding information technology usage: A test of competing models, Information Systems Research (6:4), 144-176
Thompson, R. L., Higgins, C. A., and Howell, J. M. (1991). Personal computing: Toward a conceptual model of utilization, MIS Quarterly (15:1), 124-143.
Venkatesh, V. (2000). Determinants of perceived ease of use: Integrating perceived behavioral control, computer anxiety and enjoyment into the technology acceptance model, Information Systems Research, 11, 342-365.
Venkatesh, V., and Davis, F. D. (2000). A theoretical extension of the technology acceptance model: Four longitudinal field studies, Management Science, 46, 186-204.
Venkatesh, V., Morris, M. G., Davis, G. B., and Davis, F. D. (2003). User acceptance of information technology: Toward a unified view, MIS Quarterly , 425-478. 
Venkatesh, V.; Bala, H. (2008). Technology acceptance model 3 and a research agenda on interventions, Decision Sciences, (39:2), 273-315
Waltz, C., Strickland, O. L., & Lenz, E. (2010). Measurement in Nursing and Health Research, New York, Springer Publishing Company. 
Webster, J., and Martocchio, J. J. (1992). Microcomputer playfulness: Development of a measure with workplace implications, MIS Quarterly, 16, 201-226.
Wijnmalen, D. J. (2007). Analysis of benefits, opportunities, costs, and risks (BOCR) with the AHP–ANP: A critical validation, Mathematical and Computer Modelling, (46:7), 892-905.