請用此 Handle URI 來引用此文件:
http://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/jspui/handle/123456789/69783
完整後設資料紀錄
DC 欄位 | 值 | 語言 |
---|---|---|
dc.contributor.advisor | 鄭佳昆(Chia-Kuen Cheng) | |
dc.contributor.author | Yen-Tung Liu | en |
dc.contributor.author | 劉彥彤 | zh_TW |
dc.date.accessioned | 2021-06-17T03:27:45Z | - |
dc.date.available | 2022-08-20 | |
dc.date.copyright | 2020-08-24 | |
dc.date.issued | 2020 | |
dc.date.submitted | 2020-08-20 | |
dc.identifier.citation | 1. 文芸、傅朝卿,(2011),重思文化遺產的道地性概念-從過去到現在的理解。建築學報,76_S,23-46。 2. 王貞懿,(2014),老街道地性認知與景觀偏好之研究。碩士論文,國立台北教育大學社會與區域發展學系,台北。 3. 王婷萱,(2016),地方依附對環境衝擊之影響探討-以北投纜車為例。戶外遊憩研究,29(2),1-26。 4. 邱如美譯,Gilmore, J. H., Pine, B. J. 著,(2008),體驗真實:滿足顧客的真正渴望,台北:天下雜誌股份有限公司。 5. 陳玉箴,(2016),「道地」的建構:「台灣料理」在東京的生產、再現與變遷。台灣人類學刊,14(1),7-54。 6. 陳瀅君,(2009),英國廢墟保存之美學意識源流研究。碩士論文,國立臺北藝術大學建築與古蹟保存研究所,台北。 7. 劉育成、曹家榮,(2013),從「道地」到「對道地的想像」:媒介社會中一種社會自我觀察的可能起點。政治與社會哲學評論,46,37-79。 8. 劉芊瑋,(2016),地方依附與使用經驗關係之探討。碩士論文,國立臺灣大學園藝暨景觀學系,台北。 9. 戴有德、李安娜、呂文博、陳冠仰、楊純瑋,(2014),襲產觀光遊客環境負責任行為前置變數之研究:以道地性、懷舊情感與場所依戀觀點探討之。戶外遊憩研究,27(4),59-91。 10. 戴有德、林濰榕、陳冠仰,(2010),襲產觀光中的懷舊情感是否需要道地性?兼論解說之調節角色。戶外遊憩研究,23(3),61-86。 11. 龔彥君,(2014),探討觀光地區影響遊客道地性評估之因子。碩士論文,國立台北教育大學社會與區域發展學系,台北。 12. Andriotis, K. (2011). Genres of heritage authenticity: Denotations from a pilgrimage landscape. Annals of Tourism Research, 38(4), 1613-1633. 13. Appelbaum, B. (2012). Conservation treatment methodology: Routledge. 14. Baron, R. M., Kenny, D. A. (1986). The moderator–mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal of personality and social psychology, 51(6), 1173. 15. Bartier, A.-L. (2011). Things were better before”: What is the power of nostalgia toward the brand. Louvain School of Management Working Paper Series, 11. 16. Budruk, M., White, D. D., Wodrich, J. A., Van Riper, C. J. (2008). Connecting visitors to people and place: Visitors’ perceptions of authenticity at canyon de chelly national monument, arizona. Journal of heritage tourism, 3(3), 185-202. 17. Castéran, H., Roederer, C. (2013). Does authenticity really affect behavior? The case of the strasbourg christmas market. Tourism Management, 36, 153-163. 18. Castellano, S., Ivanova, O., Adnane, M., Safraou, I., Schiavone, F. (2013). Back to the future: Adoption and diffusion of innovation in retro-industries. European Journal of Innovation Management, 16(4), 385-404. 19. Chang, J., Wall, G., Chang, C.-L. (2008). Perception of the authenticity of atayal woven handicrafts in wulai, taiwan. Journal of Hospitality Leisure Marketing, 16(4), 385-409. 20. Chhabra, D. (2005). Defining authenticity and its determinants: Toward an authenticity flow model. Journal of Travel Research, 44(1), 64-73. 21. Chhabra, D., Healy, R., Sills, E. (2003). Staged authenticity and heritage tourism. Annals of tourism research, 30(3), 702-719. 22. Coeterier, J. (2002). Lay people’s evaluation of historic sites. Landscape and urban planning, 59(2), 111-123. 23. Cohen, E. (1988). Authenticity and commoditization in tourism. Annals of tourism research, 15(3), 371-386. 24. Colwill, S. (2017). Time, patination and decay: The agents of landscape transformation. Paper presented at the ECLAS 2017 Creation/Reaction, University of Greenwich Department of Architecture. 25. Daniel, T. C. (1976). Measuring landscape esthetics: The scenic beauty estimation method (Vol. 167): Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Forest and Range …. 26. Dekkers, M., Marx-Macdonald, S. (2000). The way of all flesh: The romance of ruins. 27. Donald, H., Joseph, C., Don, C., David, G., Steven, S. (1973). Prototype abstraction and classification of new instances as a function of number of instances defining the prototype. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 101(1), 116. 28. Douglas-Jones, R., Hughes, J. J., Jones, S., Yarrow, T. (2016). Science, value and material decay in the conservation of historic environments. Journal of Cultural Heritage, 21, 823-833. 29. Frewald, D. B. (1991). Preferences for older buildings: A psychological approach to architectural design. 30. Gilmore, J. H., Pine, B. J. (2007). Authenticity: What consumers really want: Harvard Business Press. 31. Goulding, C. (2000). The commodification of the past, postmodern pastiche, and the search for authentic experiences at contemporary heritage attractions. European Journal of Marketing. 32. Goulding, C. (2001). Romancing the past: Heritage visiting and the nostalgic consumer. Psychology Marketing, 18(6), 565-592. 33. Grayson, K., Martinec, R. (2004). Consumer perceptions of iconicity and indexicality and their influence on assessments of authentic market offerings. Journal of consumer research, 31(2), 296-312. 34. Hagerhall, C. (2001). Consensus in landscape preference judgements. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 21(1), 83-92. 35. Hammitt, W. E., Backlund, E. A., Bixler, R. D. (2004). Experience use history, place bonding and resource substitution of trout anglers during recreation engagements. Journal of Leisure Research, 36(3), 356-378. 36. Hammitt, W. E., Backlund, E. A., Bixler, R. D. (2006). Place bonding for recreation places: Conceptual and empirical development. Leisure studies, 25(1), 17-41. 37. Hammitt, W. E., Kyle, G. T., Oh, C.-O. (2009). Comparison of place bonding models in recreation resource management. Journal of Leisure Research, 41(1), 57-72. 38. Hammitt, W. E., Cole, D. N., Monz, C. A. (2015). Wildland recreation: Ecology and management: John Wiley Sons. 39. Hede, A.-M., Thyne, M. (2010). A journey to the authentic: Museum visitors and their negotiation of the inauthentic. Journal of Marketing Management, 26(7-8), 686-705. 40. Hekkert, P. P. M. (1995). Artful judgements: A psychological inquiry into aesthetic preference for visual patterns. 41. Herbert, D. T. (1995). Heritage places, leisure and tourism. Heritage, tourism and society, 1, 2²18. 42. Herzog, T. R. (1992). A cognitive analysis of preference for urban spaces. Journal of environmental psychology, 12(3), 237-248. 43. Herzog, T. R., Gale, T. A. (1996). Preference for urban buildings as a function of age and nature context. Environment and Behavior, 28(1), 44-72. 44. Herzog, T. R., Kaplan, S., Kaplan, R. (1976). The prediction of preference for familiar urban places. Environment and Behavior, 8(4), 627-645. 45. Herzog, T. R., Kaplan, S., Kaplan, R. (1982). The prediction of preference for unfamiliar urban places. Population and Environment, 5(1), 43-59. 46. Herzog, T. R., Stark, J. L. (2004). Typicality and preference for positively and negatively valued environmental settings. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 24(1), 85-92. 47. Herzog;, T. R., Shier, R. L. (2000). Complexity, age, and building preference. Environment and Behavior, 32(4), 557-575. 48. Holbrook, M. B. (1993). Nostalgia and consumption preferences: Some emerging patterns of consumer tastes. Journal of Consumer research, 20(2), 245-256. 49. Hughes, H. L. (1996). Redefining cultural tourism. Annals of Tourism Research, 3(23), 707-709. 50. Kerstetter, D. L., Confer, J. J., Graefe, A. R. (2001). An exploration of the specialization concept within the context of heritage tourism. Journal of Travel Research, 39(3), 267-274. 51. Kolar, T., Zabkar, V. (2010). A consumer-based model of authenticity: An oxymoron or the foundation of cultural heritage marketing? Tourism management, 31(5), 652-664. 52. Levene, M., Hu, D. Z., Friedman, O. (2019). The glow of grime: Why cleaning an old object can wash away its value. Judgment Decision Making, 14(5). 53. Levi, D. J. (2005). Does history matter? Perceptions and attitudes toward fake historic architecture and historic preservation. Journal of Architectural and Planning Research, 148-159. 54. Lewicka, M. (2011). Place attachment: How far have we come in the last 40 years? Journal of environmental psychology, 31(3), 207-230. 55. Lilley, D., Bridgens, B., Davies, A., Holstov, A. (2019). Ageing (dis) gracefully: Enabling designers to understand material change. Journal of cleaner production, 220, 417-430. 56. Littrell, M. A., Anderson, L. F., Brown, P. J. (1993). What makes a craft souvenir authentic? Annals of Tourism Research, 20(1), 197-215. 57. Lowenthal, D. (1975). Past time, present place: Landscape and memory. Geographical review, 1-36. 58. Lu, L., Chi, C. G., Liu, Y. (2015). Authenticity, involvement, and image: Evaluating tourist experiences at historic districts. Tourism management, 50, 85-96. 59. Maccannell, D. (1973). Staged authenticity: Arrangements of social space in tourist settings. American journal of Sociology, 79(3), 589-603. 60. Medin, D. L., Schaffer, M. M. (1978). Context theory of classification learning. Psychological review, 85(3), 207. 61. Mencarelli, R., Chaney, D., Pulh, M. (2020). Consumers’ brand heritage experience: Between acceptance and resistance. Journal of Marketing Management, 36(1-2), 30-50. 62. Neumann, P. G. (1974). An attribute frequency model for the abstraction of prototypes. Memory Cognition, 2(2), 241-248. 63. Neumann, P. G. (1977). Visual prototype formation with discontinuous representation of dimensions of variability. Memory Cognition, 5(2), 187-197. 64. Nuryanti, W. (1996). Heritage and postmodern tourism. Annals of tourism research, 23(2), 249-260. 65. özdemir, B., Seyitoğlu, F. (2017). A conceptual study of gastronomical quests of tourists: Authenticity or safety and comfort? Tourism Management Perspectives, 23, 1-7. 66. Park, E., Choi, B.-K., Lee, T. J. (2019). The role and dimensions of authenticity in heritage tourism. Tourism Management, 74, 99-109. 67. Peirce, Charles Sanders (1998), Collected Papers of Charles Sanders Peirce, ed. Charles Hartshorne, Paul Weiss, and Arthur Blank, 8 vols., Bristol: Thoemmes. 68. Poria, Y., Butler, R., Airey, D. (2001). Clarifying heritage tourism. Pergamon-Elsevier Science Ltd. 69. Poria, Y., Reichel, A., Biran, A. (2006). Heritage site perceptions and motivations to visit. Journal of Travel Research, 44(3), 318-326. 70. Posner, M. I. (1969). Abstraction and the process of recognition. The psychology of learning and motivation, 3, 43-100. 71. Proshansky, H. M. (1978). The city and self-identity. Environment and behavior, 10(2), 147-169. 72. Purcell, A. T., Nasar, J. L. (1992). Experiencing other people's houses: A model of similarities and differences in environmental experience. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 12(3), 199-211. 73. Ram, Y., Björk, P., Weidenfeld, A. (2016). Authenticity and place attachment of major visitor attractions. Tourism Management, 52, 110-122. 74. Revilla, G., Dodd, T. H. (2003). Authenticity perceptions of talavera pottery. Journal of Travel Research, 42(1), 94-99. 75. Riegl, A. (1996). The modern cult of monuments: Its essence and its development. Historical and philosophical issues in the conservation of cultural heritage, 69, 83. 76. Rips, L. J. (1989). Similarity, typicality, and categorization. Similarity and analogical reasoning, 2159. 77. Rizzi, G. (2007). Preface. In Ashurst, J. (Ed.), Conservation of Ruins (pp.xviii). Oxford: Butterworth-Heinemann. 78. Rosenbaum, M. S., Cheng, M., Wong, I. A. (2016). Retail knockoffs: Consumer acceptance and rejection of inauthentic retailers. Journal of Business Research, 69(7), 2448-2455. 79. Shannon, S. (2014). A survey of the public: Preference for old and new buildings, attitudes about historic preservation, and preservation-related engagement: University of Southern California. 80. Smaldone, D. (2007). The role of time in place attachment. Paper presented at the In: Burns, R.; Robinson, K., comps. Proceedings of the 2006 Northeastern Recreation Research Symposium; 2006 April 9-11; Bolton Landing, NY. Gen. Tech. Rep. NRS-P-14. Newtown Square, PA: US Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Northern Research Station: 47-56. 81. Smith, E. E., Medin, D. L. (1981). Categories and concepts (Vol. 9): Harvard University Press Cambridge, MA. 82. Solso, R. L., Mccarthy, J. E. (1981). Prototype formation: Central tendency model vs. Attribute-frequency model. Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society, 17(1), 10-11. 83. Waitt, G. (2000). Consuming heritage: Perceived historical authenticity. Annals of tourism research, 27(4), 835-862. 84. Wang, N. (1999). Rethinking authenticity in tourism experience. Annals of tourism research, 26(2), 349-370. 85. Wells, J. C. (2017). How are old places different from new places? A psychological investigation of the correlation between patina, spontaneous fantasies, and place attachment. International Journal of Heritage Studies, 23(5), 445-469. 86. Wells, J. C., Baldwin, E. D. (2012). Historic preservation, significance, and age value: A comparative phenomenology of historic charleston and the nearby new-urbanist community of i'on. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 32(4), 384-400. 87. Williams, D. R., Patterson, M. E., Roggenbuck, J. W., Watson, A. E. (1992). Beyond the commodity metaphor: Examining emotional and symbolic attachment to place. Leisure sciences, 14(1), 29-46. 88. Williams, D. R., Roggenbuck, J. W. (1989). Measuring place attachment: Some preliminary results. Paper presented at the Abstracts: 1989 leisure research symposium. 89. Yi, X., Fu, X., Yu, L., Jiang, L. (2018). Authenticity and loyalty at heritage sites: The moderation effect of postmodern authenticity. Tourism Management, 67, 411-424. 90. Yi, X., Lin, V. S., Jin, W., Luo, Q. (2017). The authenticity of heritage sites, tourists’ quest for existential authenticity, and destination loyalty. Journal of Travel Research, 56(8), 1032-1048. 91. Yuksel, A., Yuksel, F., Bilim, Y. (2010). Destination attachment: Effects on customer satisfaction and cognitive, affective and conative loyalty. Tourism management, 31(2), 274-284. 92. Zancheti, S. M., De Figueirôa Silva, A., Braga, A. C., Gameiro, F. G., Lira, F. B., Costa, L. S. (2006). The patina of the city. City Time, 2(2), 11-22. 93. Zhou, Q. B., Zhang, J., Zhang, H., Li, X. R. (2018). Is all authenticity accepted by tourists and residents? The concept, dimensions and formation mechanism of negative authenticity. Tourism Management, 67, 59-70. | |
dc.identifier.uri | http://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/jspui/handle/123456789/69783 | - |
dc.description.abstract | 歷史場所經常面臨存留與更新的議題,如何留下具有價值的老舊痕跡,遂成為現代發展下的重要課題。過去相關研究在探討老舊痕跡與偏好評價時產生了分歧的結果,位於不同類別之物體上的老舊痕跡會引發正負向評價,在不同背景下的人們對於老舊痕跡的看法也會不同。因此本次研究從影響老舊痕跡與偏好評價的情感因素和認知因素來探討老舊痕跡與視覺偏好的關係。 研究一探討地方依附與老舊感知的關係,當人們對於地點有較高的地方情感依附時,對環境中的老化是否會有較高的評價。研究採用現地問卷調查輔以半結構式訪談進行,問卷內容包含整體老舊感知評價、地方依附、實驗照片和個人基本資料等,結果顯示地方依附與老舊感知評價呈正向關係,並且地方依附構面中的地方認同會完全中介地方依賴對老舊感知評價的影響。 研究二從認知方面來探討歷史建築老舊程度、典型性與視覺偏好的關係。採用問卷調查法,內容包含視覺偏好、典型性、老舊程度和建築功能認知,結果顯示老舊程度與視覺偏好呈現非線性相關,視覺偏好最大值出現約在中低度等級的老舊程度狀況;典型性會中介老舊程度與偏好的關係,並且正向影響偏好。在老舊程度較高的情況,傾向於認定為歷史建築者會有最高的偏好,傾向於認定為建築遺址遺跡者的偏好最低。 研究三以典型性觀點來解釋建築環境老舊程度、道地性與視覺偏好的關係,並加入懷舊傾向的心理特徵來預測個人追求過去事物的程度,在不同古鎮標誌及索引的地點檢測這些關係。結果顯示外觀上的標誌道地性受到老舊程度和地點影響,老舊程度會促進古鎮標誌道地性,減損渡假村標誌道地性,並且在具有古鎮元素的地點時,地點對古鎮標誌道地性的影響會受到懷舊傾向強化。進一步選擇古鎮和渡假村兩地點進行分析,部分驗證了標誌道地性透過索引道地性影響的關係,亦驗證老舊程度透過標誌道地性影響視覺偏好的關係,且此關係會因地點特性與道地的類別而有方向性的改變。整體研究結果有助於了解人們如何評價環境中具有老舊程度的建築,並證實基於不同對象類別評價會有所歧異,在老舊程度促進的道地類別與地點特性相符時才能最大化視覺景觀偏好。 | zh_TW |
dc.description.abstract | Historical places often face the issue of preservation and renewal. How to leave valuable old traces has become an important issue under modern development. Relevant research in the past has produced divergent results when discussing old traces and preference evaluation. Old traces located on different types of objects, and the same objects viewed from different types will produce positive or negative evaluation. Therefore, this study explored the relationship between old traces and visual preferences from the emotional and cognitive factors that affect the evaluation of old traces and preferences. Study 1 explored the relationship between place attachment and old perception. When people have a high place emotional attachment to a place, will they have a higher evaluation of aging in the environment? The study was conducted using an on-site questionnaire survey supplemented by semi-structured interviews. The questionnaire contained the overall old perception evaluation, local attachment, experimental photos and personal information. The results showed that place attachment is positively related to the old perception evaluation, and place identity fully mediated the influence of place dependence on the evaluation of old perception. Study 2 explored the relationship between oldness, typicality and visual preference of historic buildings from a cognitive perspective. The study was conducted using an Internet questionnaire survey with items about visual preference, typicality, oldness and building function recognition. The results showed that oldness is nonlinearly related to the visual preference, and the maximum value of visual preference appeared at the middle-low level of oldness. Typicality mediates the relationship between oldness and preference, and positively affects preference. In the case of a high degree of oldness. Those who tended to regard stimuli as historical architectures had the highest preference, while those who tend to regard stimuli as architectural ruins had the lowest preference. Study 3 explored the relationship between the oldness, authenticity and visual preference of the built environment from typicality theory. Nostalgic proneness was included as a psychological characteristic to predict the tendency of the individual's pursuit of past things, and examined these relationships at different locations of ancient town icons and indexes. The results showed that the iconic authenticity was affected by the aging degree and location. The aging degree will promote the iconic authenticity of the ancient town and reduce the iconic authenticity of the resort. The influence of site on iconic authenticity of ancient town was positively moderated by nostalgic proneness. Further analysis with two locations, which were ancient towns and resorts, partly verified that iconic authenticity affected visual preference through index authenticity. Also, and the relationship between the oldness and the visual preference through iconic authenticity was verified, and the directional changes of the relationship varied with site and authentic categories. Overall, the research results was conductive to understand how people evaluate buildings with old traces in the environment, confirming that the evaluation based on different object categories will be different, and visual landscape preference would be maximized only if the authenticity category promoted by the degree of oldness matched the characteristics of sites. | en |
dc.description.provenance | Made available in DSpace on 2021-06-17T03:27:45Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 U0001-1808202002061300.pdf: 15104769 bytes, checksum: a620db586b94eb1a1f8d710d9e051af2 (MD5) Previous issue date: 2020 | en |
dc.description.tableofcontents | 摘要 I Abstract III 第一章 緒論 1 第一節 研究緣起 1 第二節 研究目的 2 第三節 研究流程 3 第二章 文獻回顧 4 第一節 老舊痕跡與景觀偏好 4 一、 定義 4 二、 影響老舊痕跡評價之因素 5 三、 相關環境研究 8 第二節 典型性 9 一、 定義 9 二、 相關研究 11 第三節 道地性 11 一、 定義與構面 11 二、 道地性的追求與對象的真假 13 三、 道地性判斷與個人標準 14 四、 道地性的測量方式 15 第四節 小結 18 第三章 老舊感知及地方依附之關係探討 21 第一節 研究背景 21 一、 研究問題 22 二、 研究架構 22 三、 名詞定義 22 第二節 研究方法 23 一、 研究對象與地點 23 二、 研究工具 24 三、 調查流程 26 第三節 研究結果 27 一、 受測者組成 27 二、 敘述性統計與量表信度分析 27 三、 地方依附對老舊痕跡評價之影響 29 四、 照片結果與訪談整理 30 第四節 小結 32 第四章 建築老舊程度、典型性與視覺偏好關係之探討 34 第一節 研究背景 34 一、 研究目的 34 二、 研究假設 36 三、 名詞定義 36 第二節 研究方法 37 一、 實驗設計 37 二、 研究工具 37 三、 調查流程 40 四、 資料處理與分析方法 40 第三節 研究結果 41 一、 受測者組成 41 二、 敘述性統計分析 41 三、 研究結果與建築型式之關係 42 四、 老舊感知與偏好關係 43 五、 老舊感知透過典型性對偏好之影響 45 六、 老舊感知與建築功能及典型性認知之關係 47 第四節 小結 48 第五章 以典型性觀點探討老舊程度、道地性與偏好之關係 50 第一節 研究背景 50 一、 研究問題 52 二、 研究架構及假設 52 三、 名詞定義 56 第二節 研究方法 57 一、 實驗設計 57 二、 研究工具 57 三、 研究流程 62 四、 資料處理與分析方法 62 第三節 研究結果 62 一、 受測者組成 63 二、 敘述性統計分析 63 三、 建築環境老舊程度、地點及懷舊傾向對道地性的影響 66 四、 標誌道地性與索引道地性對視覺景觀偏好的影響 72 五、 老舊程度、標誌道地性與視覺景觀偏好的關係。 77 第四節 小結 81 第六章 結論與建議 88 第一節 結論與討論 88 第二節 未來研究建議與應用 95 一、 研究限制與未來研究建議 95 二、 研究應用 97 參考文獻 99 附錄一:研究一問卷 108 附錄二:研究一之實驗照片評值 111 附錄三:研究二問卷 112 附錄四:研究二之實驗照片評值 114 附錄五:研究三問卷 117 附錄六:研究三之實驗照片評值 120 | |
dc.language.iso | zh-TW | |
dc.title | 建築老舊程度與視覺偏好關係之探討 | zh_TW |
dc.title | Examining the Relationships between Buildings’ Oldness and Visual Preference. | en |
dc.type | Thesis | |
dc.date.schoolyear | 108-2 | |
dc.description.degree | 碩士 | |
dc.contributor.advisor-orcid | 鄭佳昆(0000-0001-7081-7188) | |
dc.contributor.oralexamcommittee | 王正平(Cheng-Ping Wang),林晏州(Yann-jou Lin),張俊彥(Chun-Yen Chang),歐聖榮(Sheng-Jung Ou) | |
dc.subject.keyword | 視覺景觀偏好,道地性,典型性,老舊痕跡,古色, | zh_TW |
dc.subject.keyword | preference,authenticity,typicality,old traces,patina, | en |
dc.relation.page | 121 | |
dc.identifier.doi | 10.6342/NTU202003903 | |
dc.rights.note | 有償授權 | |
dc.date.accepted | 2020-08-20 | |
dc.contributor.author-college | 生物資源暨農學院 | zh_TW |
dc.contributor.author-dept | 園藝暨景觀學系 | zh_TW |
顯示於系所單位: | 園藝暨景觀學系 |
文件中的檔案:
檔案 | 大小 | 格式 | |
---|---|---|---|
U0001-1808202002061300.pdf 目前未授權公開取用 | 14.75 MB | Adobe PDF |
系統中的文件,除了特別指名其著作權條款之外,均受到著作權保護,並且保留所有的權利。