傳播文字工作者的想像力指標、根源與培養

Abstract

想像力是一種經驗、建構與造作心理圖像的心智能力，而且被視為是辨認未來潛在創造新穎想法，以提供人類面對不確定性的基礎。 然而，當代關注於想像力的研究卻非常零散。本研究的目的即是以傳播產業中的專業文字工作者為研究對象，去探索其想像力的指標、根源與培育方法。研究者找尋十八位台灣的聲譽卓著的專業寫作者 （即六位科技作家、六位新聞記者，與六位行銷文案者），進行質性研究的深度訪談。植基於社會建構論，本研究透過半結構深度訪談法，開啟了專業文字工作者想像力的質性探索。此外，在十八個深度訪談完畢之後，研究者更執行了三場焦點座談，分別蒐集來自大學的教育專家，以及來自傳播產業的資深經理人的回饋，以便檢視與確認深度訪談之結果。更有甚者，來自產業組織的專家更能提供新資料，以豐富本研究的意涵。 藉由質性研究的主題分析法，本研究結果辨認出專業文字工作者的十個想像力指標。隨後，研究者揭露了總共十個想像力的根源，並將之分為兩大類：其一為內在根源（個性特質、同理心，與興趣）；其二為外在根源（新聞感、專業背景、非工作經驗、工作經驗、專業規範、壓力，與社會責任感）。 此外，研究者亦確認出十四個專業文字工作者想像力的培育方法，即：閱讀學習、觀察傾聽、涵養廣泛興趣、獲取藝術經驗、紀錄想法、搜尋網路新知、諮詢專家、運用視覺思考、自我省思、發展市場洞見、監控過程、評估結果、標竿比較，與創造有利環境。這些結果均指出，專業文字工作者的想像，可經由一組想像力指標而被評估出來，且事實上亦顯示了三類專業文字工作者擁有其在各指標上發揮而出的獨特想像力（亦即：獨創性、多樣性、沈浸性、情感性、即刻聯想性、目標達成性、合理論辯性、好奇探索性、具體性，以及事物之間的相互類比性），因而可被進一步追溯其根源與培育方法。 進一步而言，本研究從專家的焦點座談中確認出六個主題（亦即：提供學生基礎性課程；鼓勵學生參與多樣活動；提供學生高等暨整合性課程；指導員工深思熟慮地練習新點子；鼓勵員工批判性閱讀學習以跟上趨勢；促使員工熟悉新媒體以理解新點子），代表了在高等教育與工作環境中培育個體想像力的策略。 然而，不管個體是否能夠在這六種組織培育想像力的策略之下，被教育或指導成為一個有想像力的人，他們都能夠練習他們自己發展出來的培育方法，不斷地進行自律參與、啟發與內化，終其一生努力地精進他們原本擁有的想像力。 在結論中，本論文試圖綜整上述所有研究結果，發展出想像力發展之「綠肺模式」，描繪本論文對想像力研究的複雜性意涵，亦即，當文字工作者更運用了其獨特的培養方法時，由各式各樣根源所賦予的專業想像力，將能夠發展其多樣性的面貌。本研究更期望「綠肺模式」對於目前的傳播理論意涵有所貢獻；並且，對於高等教育與傳播產業中，專業文字工作者的想像力培育有所影響或啟發。 最後，本論文提出了研究中不可避免的限制，與據此做出的未來研究建議。

Imagination is the mental capacity for experiencing, constructing, or manipulating mental imagery, and can be considered the basis for recognizing upcoming ideas that could potentially produce innovative thoughts to confront uncertainty. However, extent researches that focus on the assessment of imaginative capacity are sparse. The purpose of this research was to explore the indicators, roots, and cultivation of the imaginative capacities of professional writers in the communication industry. For this purpose, the researcher studied 18 renowned professional writers (i.e., 6 technology writers, 6 journalists, and 6 copywriters) in Taiwan by conducting in-depth interviews. Followed the methodology of social constructionism, the research was designed to incept a detailed exploration of the imagination of professional writers through semistructured in-depth interviews. After 18 semistructured in-depth interviews, the researcher utilized 3 rounds of focus groups interviews to collect feedback from volunteer educational experts and senior managers to examine and confirm the research results from these semistructured in-depth interviews. New data has been obtained to enrich the implication of this research. By conducting the thematic analysis, the results identified 10 indicators of imaginative capacity in the professional writers. After that, the researcher revealed totally 10 roots of imaginative capacity in professional writers. These roots can be divided into both internal roots (i.e., personality traits, empathy, and interests) and external roots (i.e., news sense, academic background, nonwork experiences, work experiences, professional conduct, stress, and social responsibility). In addition, 14 cultivation methods for imaginative capacity of professional writers were also identified (i.e., reading and learning, observing and listening, nurturing broad interests, acquiring aesthetic experiences, recording thoughts, searching online, consulting experts, applying visual thinking, self-reflection, developing market insights, monitoring process, evaluating outcomes, comparing and benchmarking, and creating a welcoming environment). These results indicated that the professional writer imagination could be assessed by the set of indicators, and they also revealed that these three different types of professional writers actually possessed their own distinct imaginative capacity (i.e., uniqueness, diversity, immersion, emotion, immediate association, goal attainment, rational debate, probe of curiosity, concreteness, and analogy between things), those roots of which can also be derived and cultivated. Furthermore, the results from focus groups interviews identified six themes (i.e., provide students with fundamental curriculum; encourage students to participate in diverse activities; supply students with advanced and integrated curriculum; encourage subordinates to practice new ideas deliberately; encourage subordinates to keep pace with trends by reading and learning critically; and urge subordinates to familiarize with new media and grasp new ideas) from two types of organizational professionals, namely educational experts and senior managers. These themes indicate that each cultivation strategy should be executed deliberately within higher education or the workplace. However, regardless of whether professionals possessing a certain imaginative capacity are educated or mentored according to such organizational cultivation strategies, they still practice their own methods for self-disciplined engagement, inspiration, and internalization, and still exert personal effort throughout their life to further refine their existing capacities. In conclusion, all of the results have been synthesized to yield the “Green Lungs Model” for the development of imaginative capacities, depicting insights into the complexities that various roots endowed upon diverse imaginative capacities when distinct cultivation methods were used by professional writers. Accordingly, several implications for theory and practice were presented, which will hopefully exert their anticipated impact on communication studies as well as professional writing in higher education and in the communication industry. Finally, the researcher described the limitations of this research, and make recommendations for future studies.