請用此 Handle URI 來引用此文件：
http://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/jspui/handle/123456789/98184完整後設資料紀錄
| DC 欄位 | 值 | 語言 |
|---|---|---|
| dc.contributor.advisor | 劉奇璋 | zh_TW |
| dc.contributor.advisor | Chi-Chang Liu | en |
| dc.contributor.author | 施廷融 | zh_TW |
| dc.contributor.author | Ting-Rong Shih | en |
| dc.date.accessioned | 2025-07-30T16:14:59Z | - |
| dc.date.available | 2025-07-31 | - |
| dc.date.copyright | 2025-07-30 | - |
| dc.date.issued | 2025 | - |
| dc.date.submitted | 2025-07-22 | - |
| dc.identifier.citation | 中央研究院生物多樣性研究中心（2025年7月22日）。臺灣物種名錄（TaiCOL）。https://taicol.tw/zh-hant/
行政院農業部（2025年7月22日）。動物保護法。全國法規資料庫。https://law.moj.gov.tw/LawClass/LawAll.aspx?PCode=M0060027 教育部（2025年7月22日）。鑑別度。教育百科。https://pedia.cloud.edu.tw/Entry/WikiContent?title=%E9%91%91%E5%88%A5%E5%BA%A6&search=%E9%91%91%E5%88%A5%E5%BA%A6 蕭文龍（2020）。統計分析入門與應用：SPSS中文版+SmartPLS 3(PLS-SEM)(第三版)。碁峰資訊。 Ajzen, I. (1989) Attitude Structure and Behavior. In Breckler, S.J. and Greenwald, A.G., Eds., Attitude Structure and Function, Lawrence Erlbaum, Hillsdale, 241-274. Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 50(2), 179–211. https://doi.org/10.1016/0749-5978(91)90020-T Andersen, M. C., Martin, B. J., & Roemer, G. W. (2004). Use of matrix population models to estimate the efficacy of euthanasia versus trap-neuter-return for management of free-roaming cats. Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association, 225(12), 1871–1876. https://doi.org/10.2460/javma.2004.225.1871 Ardoin, N. M., Bowers, A. W., & Gaillard, E. (2020). Environmental education outcomes for conservation: A systematic review. Biological Conservation, 241, 108224. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2019.108224 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), 1173–1182. https://doi.org/10.1037//0022-3514.51.6.1173 Belsare, A., & Vanak, A. T. (2020). Modelling the challenges of managing free-ranging dog populations. Scientific Reports, 10(1), Article 1. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-020-75828-6 Bertossi, A., & Marangon, F. (2021). A literature review on the strategies implemented by higher education institutions from 2010 to 2020 to foster pro-environmental behavior of students. International Journal of Sustainability in Higher Education, 23(3), 522–547. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJSHE-11-2020-0459 Borroto-Páez, R. (2009). Invasive mammals in Cuba: An overview. Biological Invasions, 11(10), 2279–2290. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10530-008-9414-z Buckley, K. A., Smith, L. D. G., Crook, D. A., Pillans, R. D., & Kyne, P. M. (2020). Conservation impact scores identify shortfalls in demonstrating the benefits of threatened wildlife displays in zoos and aquaria. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 28(7), 978–1002. https://doi.org/10.1080/09669582.2020.1715992 Carleton-Hug, A., & Hug, J. W. (2010). Challenges and opportunities for evaluating environmental education programs. Evaluation and Program Planning, 33(2), 159–164. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2009.07.005 Chen, C.-C., Chang, A.-M., Wada, T., Chen, M.-T., & Tu, Y.-S. (2019). Distribution of Carnivore protoparvovirus 1 in free-living leopard cats (Prionailurus bengalensis chinensis) and its association with domestic carnivores in Taiwan. PLOS ONE, 14(9), e0221990. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0221990 Coe, S. T., Elmore, J. A., Elizondo, E. C., & Loss, S. R. (2021). Free-ranging domestic cat abundance and sterilization percentage following five years of a trap–neuter–return program. Wildlife Biology, 2021(1), wlb.00799. https://doi.org/10.2981/wlb.00799 Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed). L. Erlbaum Associates. Corfmat, J., Gibson, A. D., Mellanby, R. J., Watson, W., Appupillai, M., Yale, G., Gamble, L., & Mazeri, S. (2023). Community attitudes and perceptions towards free-roaming dogs in Goa, India. Journal of Applied Animal Welfare Science: JAAWS, 26(4), 565–581. https://doi.org/10.1080/10888705.2021.2014839 Costanzi, L., Brambilla, A., Di Blasio, A., Dondo, A., Goria, M., Masoero, L., Gennero, M. S., & Bassano, B. (2021). Beware of dogs! Domestic animals as a threat for wildlife conservation in Alpine protected areas. European Journal of Wildlife Research, 67(4), 70. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10344-021-01510-5 Covitt, B. A., Gomez-Schmidt, C., & Zint, M. T. (2005). An Evaluation of the Risk Education Module. The Journal of Environmental Education, 36(2), 3–13. https://doi.org/10.3200/JOEE.36.2.3-13 Crawford, H. M., Calver, M. C., & Fleming, P. A. (2019). A Case of Letting the Cat out of The Bag-Why Trap-Neuter-Return Is Not an Ethical Solution for Stray Cat (Felis catus) Management. Animals: An Open Access Journal from MDPI, 9(4), 171. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani9040171 Crowley, S. L., Cecchetti, M., & McDonald, R. A. (2020). Diverse perspectives of cat owners indicate barriers to and opportunities for managing cat predation of wildlife. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment, 18(10), 544–549. https://doi.org/10.1002/fee.2254 de Almeida Curi, N. H., Araújo, A. S., Campos, F. S., Lobato, Z. I. P., Gennari, S. M., Marvulo, M. F. V., Silva, J. C. R., & Talamoni, S. A. (2010). Wild canids, domestic dogs and their pathogens in Southeast Brazil: Disease threats for canid conservation. Biodiversity and Conservation, 19(12), 3513–3524. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10531-010-9911-0 Dickinson, J. L., Shirk, J., Bonter, D., Bonney, R., Crain, R. L., Martin, J., Phillips, T., & Purcell, K. (2012). The current state of citizen science as a tool for ecological research and public engagement. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment, 10(6), 291–297. https://doi.org/10.1890/110236 Doherty, T. S., Dickman, C. R., Johnson, C. N., Legge, S. M., Ritchie, E. G., & Woinarski, J. C. Z. (2017a). Impacts and management of feral cats Felis catus in Australia. Mammal Review, 47(2), 83–97. https://doi.org/10.1111/mam.12080 Doherty, T. S., Dickman, C. R., Newsome, T. M., Nimmo, D. G., Ritchie, E. G., Vanak, A. T., Wirsing, A. J., & Glen, A. S. (2017b). The global impacts of domestic dogs on threatened vertebrates. Biological Conservation, 210, 56–59. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2017.04.007 Downes, M. J., Devitt, C., Downes, M. T., & More, S. J. (2015). Neutering of cats and dogs in Ireland; pet owner self-reported perceptions of enabling and disabling factors in the decision to neuter. PeerJ, 3, e1196. https://doi.org/10.7717/peerj.1196 Elliott A, Howell TJ, McLeod EM, Bennett PC. (2019). Perceptions of Responsible Cat Ownership Behaviors among a Convenience Sample of Australians. Animals : An Open Access Journal from MDPI, 9(9). https://doi.org/10.3390/ani9090703 Engels, C. A., & Jacobson, S. K. (2007). Evaluating Long-Term Effects of the Golden Lion Tamarin Environmental Education Program in Brazil. The Journal of Environmental Education, 38(3), 3–14. https://doi.org/10.3200/JOEE.38.3.3-14 Erhabor, N. I., & Don, J. U. (2016). Impact of Environmental Education on the Knowledge and Attitude of Students towards the Environment. International Journal of Environmental and Science Education, 11(12), 5367–5375. Estévez, R. A., Anderson, C. B., Pizarro, J. C., & Burgman, M. A. (2015). Clarifying values, risk perceptions, and attitudes to resolve or avoid social conflicts in invasive species management. Conservation Biology, 29(1), 19–30. https://doi.org/10.1111/cobi.12359 Farris, Z. J., Gerber, B. D., Karpanty, S., Murphy, A., Wampole, E., Ratelolahy, F., & Kelly, M. J. (2020). Exploring and interpreting spatiotemporal interactions between native and invasive carnivores across a gradient of rainforest degradation. Biological Invasions, 22(6), 2033–2047. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10530-020-02237-1 Fielding, W. J., & Mather, J. (2001). Dog Ownership in the West Indies: A Case Study From the Bahamas. Anthrozoös, 14(2), 72–80. https://doi.org/10.2752/089279301786999562 Fournier, A. K., & Geller, E. S. (2004). Behavior Analysis of Companion-Animal Overpopulation: A Conceptualization of the Problem and Suggestions for Intervention. Behavior and Social Issues, 13(1), 51–69. https://doi.org/10.5210/bsi.v13i1.35 Gates, M. C., Walker, J., Zito, S., & Dale, A. (2019). A survey of opinions towards dog and cat management policy issues in New Zealand. New Zealand Veterinary Journal, 67(6), 315–322. https://doi.org/10.1080/00480169.2019.1645627 Glen, A. S., Pennay, M., Dickman, C. R., Wintle, B. A., & Firestone, K. B. (2011). Diets of sympatric native and introduced carnivores in the Barrington Tops, eastern Australia. Austral Ecology, 36(3), 290–296. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1442-9993.2010.02149.x Global Invasive Species Database. (2013). 100 of the world’s worst invasive alien species. Invasive Species Specialist Group, IUCN. https://www.iucngisd.org/gisd/100_worst.php Gompper, Matthew E. (ed.). (2013). Free-Ranging Dogs and Wildlife Conservation. Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:osobl/9780199663217.001.0001 Gratiela, B., & Saracli, S. (2019). Environmental Education and Student’s Perception, for Sustainability. Sustainability, 11, 1553. https://doi.org/10.3390/su11061553 Gunther, I., Finkler, H., & Terkel, J. (2011). Demographic differences between urban feeding groups of neutered and sexually intact free-roaming cats following a trap-neuter-return procedure. Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association, 238(9), 1134–1140. https://doi.org/10.2460/javma.238.9.1134 Gunther, I., Hawlena, H., Azriel, L., Gibor, D., Berke, O., & Klement, E. (2022). Reduction of free-roaming cat population requires high-intensity neutering in spatial contiguity to mitigate compensatory effects. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 119(15), e2119000119. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2119000119 Gunther, I., Raz, T., Berke, O., & Klement, E. (2015). Nuisances and welfare of free-roaming cats in urban settings and their association with cat reproduction. Preventive Veterinary Medicine, 119(3–4), 203–210. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prevetmed.2015.02.012 Herrera, D. J., Cove, M. V., McShea, W. J., Flockhart, D. T., Decker, S., Moore, S. M., & Gallo, T. (2022). Prey selection and predation behavior of free-roaming domestic cats (Felis catus) in an urban ecosystem: Implications for urban cat management. Biological Conservation, 268, 109503. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2022.109503 Ho, H.-C., Ding, T.-S., Yuan, H.-W., Tsai, J.-S., Weng, G.-J., Lin, Y.-H., Chen, H. L., Huang, Y.-B., & Yen, S.-C. (2025). Impacts of free-roaming dogs on spatiotemporal niches of native carnivores in Taiwan. Global Ecology and Conservation, 57, e03411. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gecco.2025.e03411 Hughes, J., MacDonald, D., & Boitani, L. (2016). Roaming free in the rural idyll: Dogs and their connections with wildlife. In The Domestic Dog: Its Evolution, Behavior and Interactions with People: Second Edition (pp. 369–384). https://doi.org/10.1017/9781139161800.018 Hughes, J., & Macdonald, D. W. (2013). A review of the interactions between free-roaming domestic dogs and wildlife. Biological Conservation, 157, 341–351. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2012.07.005 Hungerford, H., Peyton, R. B., & Wilke, R. J. (1980). Goals for Curriculum Development in Environmental Education. The Journal of Environmental Education, 11(3), 42–47. https://doi.org/10.1080/00958964.1980.9941381 International Companion Animal Management Coalition. (2019). Humane dog population management guidance. https://www.icam-coalition.org/download/humane-dog-population-management-guidance/ Islam, A., & Towell, T. (2013). Cat and Dog Companionship and Well-being: A Systematic Review. International Journal of Applied Psychology. Jerger, A. D., Acker, M., Gibson, S., & Young, A. M. (2022). Impact of animal programming on children’s attitudes toward local wildlife. Zoo Biology, 41(5), 469–478. https://doi.org/10.1002/zoo.21702 Kabboush, H., Fodor ,István, Ózsvári ,László, & and Vetter, S. (2024). A Cross-Cultural Study of Veterinarians’ Attitudes to the Euthanasia of Companion Animals. Anthrozoös, 37(1), 89–105. https://doi.org/10.1080/08927936.2023.2266925 Khan, G. F., Sarstedt, M., Shiau, W.-L., Hair, J. F., Ringle, C. M., & Fritze, M. P. (2019). Methodological research on partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM): An analysis based on social network approaches. Internet Research, 29(3), 407–429. https://doi.org/10.1108/IntR-12-2017-0509 Kruuk, H. (1972). Surplus killing by carnivores. Journal of Zoology, 166(2), 233–244. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-7998.1972.tb04087.x Kruuk, H., & Snell, H. (1981). Prey Selection by Feral Dogs from a Population of Marine Iguanas (Amblyrhynchus Cristatus). Journal of Applied Ecology, 18(1), 197–204. https://doi.org/10.2307/2402489 Levy, J. K., Gale, D. W., & Gale, L. A. (2003a). Evaluation of the effect of a long-term trap-neuter-return and adoption program on a free-roaming cat population. Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association, 222(1), 42–46. https://doi.org/10.2460/javma.2003.222.42 Levy, J. K., Woods, J. E., Turick, S. L., & Etheridge, D. L. (2003b). Number of unowned free-roaming cats in a college community in the southern United States and characteristics of community residents who feed them. Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association, 223(2), 202–205. https://doi.org/10.2460/javma.2003.223.202 Loss, S. R., Boughton, B., Cady, S. M., Londe, D. W., McKinney, C., O’Connell, T. J., Riggs, G. J., & Robertson, E. P. (2022). Review and synthesis of the global literature on domestic cat impacts on wildlife. Journal of Animal Ecology, 91(7), 1361–1372. https://doi.org/10.1111/1365-2656.13745 Loss, S. R., Will, T., & Marra, P. P. (2013). The impact of free-ranging domestic cats on wildlife of the United States. Nature Communications, 4(1), 1396. https://doi.org/10.1038/ncomms2380 Loyd, K. A. T., Hernandez, S. M., Carroll, J. P., Abernathy, K. J., & Marshall, G. J. (2013). Quantifying free-roaming domestic cat predation using animal-borne video cameras. Biological Conservation, 160, 183–189. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2013.01.008 Maeda, T., Nakashita, R., Shionosaki, K., Yamada, F., & Watari, Y. (2019). Predation on endangered species by human-subsidized domestic cats on Tokunoshima Island. Scientific Reports, 9(1), 16200. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-019-52472-3 Marchini, S., & Macdonald, D. W. (2020). Can school children influence adults’ behavior toward jaguars? Evidence of intergenerational learning in education for conservation. Ambio, 49(4), 912–925. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13280-019-01230-w Maurer, M., & Bogner, F. X. (2020). Modelling environmental literacy with environmental knowledge, values and (reported) behaviour. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 65, 100863. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.stueduc.2020.100863 Mech, L. D., Goyal, S. M., Bota, C. N., & Seal, U. S. (1986). Canine parvovirus infection in wolves (Canis lupus) from Minnesota. Journal of Wildlife Diseases, 22(1), 104–106. https://doi.org/10.7589/0090-3558-22.1.104 Milfont, T. L., & Sibley, C. G. (2016). Empathic and social dominance orientations help explain gender differences in environmentalism: A one-year Bayesian mediation analysis. Personality and Individual Differences, 90, 85–88. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2015.10.044 Mitchell, B. D., & Banks, P. B. (2005). Do wild dogs exclude foxes? Evidence for competition from dietary and spatial overlaps. Austral Ecology, 30(5), 581–591. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1442-9993.2005.01473.x Morters, M. K., Bharadwaj, S., Whay, H. R., Cleaveland, S., Damriyasa, I. M., & Wood, J. L. N. (2014). Participatory methods for the assessment of the ownership status of free-roaming dogs in Bali, Indonesia, for disease control and animal welfare. Preventive Veterinary Medicine, 116(1–2), 203–208. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prevetmed.2014.04.012 Munir, S. M. I., Mokhtar, M. I., & Arham, A. F. (2023). Public perspectives on strays and companion animal management in Malaysia. BMC Public Health, 23(1), 1428. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-023-16276-5 Patrick, P. G., & Caplow, S. (2018). Identifying the foci of mission statements of the zoo and aquarium community. Museum Management and Curatorship, 33, 120–135. Powers, A. L. (2004). An Evaluation of Four Place-Based Education Programs. The Journal of Environmental Education, 35(4), 17–32. https://doi.org/10.3200/JOEE.35.4.17-32 Rand, J., Fisher, G., Lamb, K., & Hayward, A. (2019). Public Opinions on Strategies for Managing Stray Cats and Predictors of Opposition to Trap-Neuter and Return in Brisbane, Australia. Frontiers in Veterinary Science, 5, 290. https://doi.org/10.3389/fvets.2018.00290 Randler, C., Ilg, A., & Kern, J. (2005). Cognitive and Emotional Evaluation of an Amphibian Conservation Program for Elementary School Students. The Journal of Environmental Education, 37(1), 43–52. https://doi.org/10.3200/JOEE.37.1.43-52 Rickinson, M. (2001). Learners and learning in environmental education: A critical review of the evidence. Environmental Education Research, 7(3), 207–320. https://doi.org/10.1080/13504620120065230 Ringle, C. M., Sarstedt, M., & Straub, D. W. (2012). Editor’s Comments: A Critical Look at the Use of PLS-SEM in “MIS Quarterly.” MIS Quarterly, 36(1), iii–xiv. https://doi.org/10.2307/41410402 Ritchie, E., Dickman, C., Letnic, M., & Vanak, A. (2013). Dogs as predators and trophic regulators. In Free-ranging Dogs and Wildlife Conservation (pp. 55–68). https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:osobl/9780199663217.003.0002 Roediger, H. L., & Karpicke, J. D. (2006). Test-Enhanced Learning: Taking Memory Tests Improves Long-Term Retention. Psychological Science, 17(3), 249–255. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9280.2006.01693.x Russell, J. C., & Blackburn, T. M. (2017). The Rise of Invasive Species Denialism. Trends in Ecology & Evolution, 32(1), 3–6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tree.2016.10.012 Salazar, G., Satheesh, N., Ramakrishna, I., Monroe, M. C., Mills, M., & Karanth, K. K. (2024). Using environmental education to nurture positive human–wildlife interactions in India. Conservation Science and Practice, 6(3), e13096. https://doi.org/10.1111/csp2.13096 Sandøe, P., Nørspang, A. P., Kondrup, S. V., Bjørnvad, C. R., Forkman, B., & Lund, T. B. (2018). Roaming Companion Cats as Potential Causes of Conflict and Controversy: A Representative Questionnaire Study of the Danish Public. Anthrozoös, 31(4), 459–473. https://doi.org/10.1080/08927936.2018.1483870 Sattler, S., & Bogner, F. X. (2017). Short- and long-term outreach at the zoo: Cognitive learning about marine ecological and conservational issues. Environmental Education Research, 23(2), 252–268. https://doi.org/10.1080/13504622.2016.1144173 Sensharma, R., Reinhard, C. L., Powell, L., & Watson, B. (2024). Public perceptions of free-roaming dogs and cats in India and the United States. Journal of Applied Animal Welfare Science: JAAWS, 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1080/10888705.2024.2374078 Short, J., Kinnear, J. E., & Robley, A. (2002). Surplus killing by introduced predators in Australia—Evidence for ineffective anti-predator adaptations in native prey species? Biological Conservation, 103(3), 283–301. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0006-3207(01)00139-2 Slater, M. R. (2001). The role of veterinary epidemiology in the study of free-roaming dogs and cats. Preventive Veterinary Medicine, 48(4), 273–286. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0167-5877(00)00201-4 Slater, M. R., Di Nardo, A., Pediconi, O., Villa, P. D., Candeloro, L., Alessandrini, B., & Del Papa, S. (2008). Free-roaming dogs and cats in central Italy: Public perceptions of the problem. Preventive Veterinary Medicine, 84(1), 27–47. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prevetmed.2007.10.002 Smith, K. F., Acevedo-Whitehouse, K., & Pedersen, A. B. (2009). The role of infectious diseases in biological conservation. Animal Conservation, 12(1), 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-1795.2008.00228.x Smith, K. F., Sax, D. F., & Lafferty, K. D. (2006). Evidence for the role of infectious disease in species extinction and endangerment. Conservation Biology: The Journal of the Society for Conservation Biology, 20(5), 1349–1357. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1523-1739.2006.00524.x Smith, L. M., Quinnell, R. J., Goold, C., Munteanu, A. M., Hartmann, S., & Collins, L. M. (2022a). Assessing the impact of free-roaming dog population management through systems modelling. Scientific Reports, 12(1), Article 1. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-022-15049-1 Smith L. M., Quinnell R., Munteanu A., Hartmann S., Villa P. D., & Collins L. (2022b). Attitudes towards free-roaming dogs and dog ownership practices in Bulgaria, Italy, and Ukraine. PLOS ONE, 17(3), e0252368. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0252368 Somaweera, R., Webb, J. K., & Shine, R. (2011). It’s a dog-eat-croc world: Dingo predation on the nests of freshwater crocodiles in tropical Australia. Ecological Research, 26(5), 957–967. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11284-011-0853-0 Steg, L., & Vlek, C. (2009). Encouraging pro-environmental behaviour: An integrative review and research agenda. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 29(3), 309–317. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2008.10.004 Stern, P. C. (2000). New Environmental Theories: Toward a Coherent Theory of Environmentally Significant Behavior. Journal of Social Issues, 56(3), 407–424. https://doi.org/10.1111/0022-4537.00175 Stern, Powell ,Robert B., & and Ardoin, N. M. (2008). What Difference Does It Make? Assessing Outcomes From Participation in a Residential Environmental Education Program. The Journal of Environmental Education, 39(4), 31–43. https://doi.org/10.3200/JOEE.39.4.31-43 Tavakol, M., & Dennick, R. (2011). Making sense of Cronbach’s alpha. International Journal of Medical Education, 2, 53–55. https://doi.org/10.5116/ijme.4dfb.8dfd Urbach, N., & Ahlemann, F. (2010). Structural equation modeling in information systems research using Partial Least Squares. Journal of Information Technology Theory and Application, 11. Vanak, A., Dickman, C., Silva-Rodriguez, E., Butler, J., & Ritchie, E. (2013). Top-dogs and under-dogs: Competition between dogs and sympatric carnivores. In Free-Ranging Dogs and Wildlife Conservation (pp. 69–93). https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:osobl/9780199663217.003.0003 Vanak, A. T., & Gompper, M. E. (2010). Interference competition at the landscape level: The effect of free-ranging dogs on a native mesocarnivore. Journal of Applied Ecology, 47(6), 1225–1232. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2664.2010.01870.x Vasileva, I., & McCulloch, S. P. (2024). Attitudes and Behaviours Towards Cats and Barriers to Stray Cat Management in Bulgaria. Journal of Applied Animal Welfare Science: JAAWS, 27(4), 746–760. https://doi.org/10.1080/10888705.2023.2186787 Villatoro, F. J., Naughton-Treves, L., Sepúlveda, M. A., Stowhas, P., Mardones, F. O., & Silva-Rodríguez, E. A. (2019). When free-ranging dogs threaten wildlife: Public attitudes toward management strategies in southern Chile. Journal of Environmental Management, 229, 67–75. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2018.06.035 Weese, J. S. (2007). Infectious Diseases of the Dog and Cat, 3rd ed. The Canadian Veterinary Journal, 48(1), 75. Wierzbowska, I. A., Hędrzak, M., Popczyk, B., Okarma, H., & Crooks, K. R. (2016). Predation of wildlife by free-ranging domestic dogs in Polish hunting grounds and potential competition with the grey wolf. Biological Conservation, 201, 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2016.06.016 Woinarski, J. C. Z., Murphy, B. P., Legge, S. M., Garnett, S. T., Lawes, M. J., Comer, S., Dickman, C. R., Doherty, T. S., Edwards, G., Nankivell, A., Paton, D., Palmer, R., & Woolley, L. A. (2017). How many birds are killed by cats in Australia? Biological Conservation, 214, 76–87. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2017.08.006 World Organisation for Animal Health. (2025). Rabies. https://www.woah.org/en/disease/rabies/ Yen, S.-C., Ju, Y.-T., Shaner, P.-J. L., & Chen, H. L. (2019). Spatial and temporal relationship between native mammals and free-roaming dogs in a protected area surrounded by a metropolis. Scientific Reports, 9(1), Article 1. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-019-44474-y Young, J. K., Olson, K. A., Reading, R. P., Amgalanbaatar, S., & Berger, J. (2011). Is Wildlife Going to the Dogs? Impacts of Feral and Free-roaming Dogs on Wildlife Populations. BioScience, 61(2), 125–132. https://doi.org/10.1525/bio.2011.61.2.7 Zamora-Nasca, L. B., & Lambertucci, S. A. (2022). Domestic dog-wildlife interactions and support for pet regulations in protected areas. Biological Conservation, 273, 109705. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2022.109705 Zamora-Nasca, L. B., & Lambertucci, S. A. (2023). Lack of accessibility and clarity in regulations concerning dog access to protected areas lowers public awareness. Scientific Reports, 13(1), Article 1. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-023-33904-7 Zorondo-Rodríguez F., Moreira-Arce D., & Boutin S. (2020). Underlying social attitudes towards conservation of threatened carnivores in human-dominated landscapes. Oryx, 54(3), 351–358. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0030605318000832 | - |
| dc.identifier.uri | http://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/jspui/handle/123456789/98184 | - |
| dc.description.abstract | 遊蕩犬貓對野生動物造成許多影響和衝擊，但目前我國法規沒有適當的配套措施，許多民眾也尚未意識到遊蕩犬貓造成的干擾。本研究採用問卷調查的方式，探討民眾對此議題的知識、態度與支持的管理手段，並透過實施環境教育，研究受眾環境素養的改變。利用SPSS、R、SmartPLS等軟體分析能改變受眾支持的管理手段的因素。結果顯示，受眾對議題的知識題答對率普遍不高。對於支持安樂死與否，民眾的同意度有條件性，同意攻擊人類的遊蕩犬貓應該被安樂死的比例較攻擊野生動物有顯著差異。同時本研究發現，受眾的相關知識越高以及相關態度越正面，他們對於管理手段的支持度也會越高。PLS-SEM模型亦推論出，越關心自然生態環境、喜歡野生動物，對遊蕩犬貓攻擊各物種的關注度會越高，同時更支持減少數量以解決帶來的問題；也會因為關注自然環境，越不會有餵食的傾向。若越擔心遊蕩犬貓對自家安全造成威脅，就越關心其攻擊行為，同時更支持加強飼主責任。
利用推論出的模型設計進班教學的教案，透過成對樣本t檢定分析，結果顯示教學介入前後高中生的環境教育五大面向皆有顯著差異。受眾接受環境教育後，對此議題的認知有所提升，能意識到野生動物的重要性、理解不同立場的人們的想法，並提高對管理手段的支持度。於課程實施五個月後進行延宕測，知識、覺知、行動技能、行動經驗等層面與前測相比，都有顯著差異，顯示部分學習成效得以維持。但與後測相比，多數向度仍有下降趨勢，反映環境教育長期影響仍需透過持續介入加以鞏固。未來若能加強社會大眾對野生動物的喜愛、關注和對環境的敏感度，則能使其支持並配合相關法規的執行和推動。 | zh_TW |
| dc.description.abstract | Free-roaming dogs and cats have significant impacts on wildlife. However, current domestic legislation lacks appropriate supporting measures, and many people remain unaware of the impacts caused by these animals. This study employed a questionnaire-based survey to investigate the public’s knowledge and attitudes regarding this issue, as well as their support for various management measures. In addition, an environmental education program was implemented to examine changes in participants’ environmental literacy. Software tools such as SPSS, R, and SmartPLS were used to analyze the factors influencing participants’ support for management measures. The results showed that respondents’ accuracy rate on knowledge-based questions was generally low. Public support for euthanasia as a population control measure was conditional. Significantly more respondents supported euthanizing free-roaming dogs and cats that attack humans than supported doing so for those attacking wildlife. The study also found that participants with higher levels of knowledge and more positive attitudes toward the issue were more likely to support management measures. PLS-SEM analysis further suggested that individuals with stronger concern for the natural environment and a stronger appreciation for wildlife expressed greater concern about free-roaming dogs and cats attacking various species. They were also more supportive of reducing the population of these animals to resolve the problems caused. Additionally, these individuals were less inclined to feed free-roaming dogs and cats. Furthermore, those who were more worried about threats to their household safety from free-roaming dogs and cats were more concerned about the animals’ aggressive behavior and more supportive of strengthening pet owner responsibility.
Drawing on these findings, an environmental education program was designed and implemented. Paired sample t tests revealed significant differences across all five major aspects of environmental literacy between the pre-test and post-test. After the educational intervention, participants’ understanding of the issue improved; they became more aware of the importance of wildlife, better understood the perspectives of people with differing viewpoints, and increased their support for management measures. Five months after the course, a delayed posttest showed that participants’ levels of knowledge, awareness, skills, and participation remained significantly higher than at the pre-test, indicating that some learning outcomes were retained. However, compared to the immediate post-test, most dimensions showed a downward trend, suggesting that the long-term effects of environmental education require continued reinforcement. In the future, strengthening the public’s appreciation for wildlife, concern for the environment, and environmental sensitivity could encourage greater support for and cooperation with the implementation of relevant regulations. | en |
| dc.description.provenance | Submitted by admin ntu (admin@lib.ntu.edu.tw) on 2025-07-30T16:14:59Z No. of bitstreams: 0 | en |
| dc.description.provenance | Made available in DSpace on 2025-07-30T16:14:59Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 0 | en |
| dc.description.tableofcontents | 謝辭 i
摘要 ii Abstract iii 目次 vi 圖次 viii 表次 ix 第壹章 前言 1 第一節 研究背景與動機 1 第二節 研究目的與研究問題 2 第貳章 文獻回顧 5 第一節 遊蕩犬貓 5 第二節 民眾支持手段相關模型 12 第三節 環境教育 15 第參章 研究方法 17 第一節 研究設計 17 第二節 研究對象與場域 19 第三節 研究工具 21 第四節 資料處理與統計分析 32 第肆章 研究結果 37 第一節 民眾認知調查 37 第二節 環境教育 52 第三節 長時間後學習成效 57 第伍章 研究討論 61 第一節 研究限制 61 第二節 民眾認知調查 61 第三節 環境教育學習成效 65 第四節 長時間後學習成效 66 第陸章 結論與建議 69 參考文獻 73 附錄一 民眾認知調查預試問卷 85 附錄二 專家學者修正之問卷內容 89 附錄三 民眾認知調查正式問卷 93 附錄四 環境教育教案 97 附錄五 環境教育教案回饋表 101 附錄六 環境教育前測問卷 103 附錄七 環境教育後測問卷 107 附錄八 環境教育延宕測問卷 111 | - |
| dc.language.iso | zh_TW | - |
| dc.subject | 野生動物 | zh_TW |
| dc.subject | 遊蕩犬貓 | zh_TW |
| dc.subject | 學習成效 | zh_TW |
| dc.subject | 環境教育 | zh_TW |
| dc.subject | PLS-SEM | zh_TW |
| dc.subject | PLS-SEM | en |
| dc.subject | environmental education | en |
| dc.subject | learning outcomes | en |
| dc.subject | wildlife | en |
| dc.subject | free roaming dogs and cats | en |
| dc.title | 探討民眾對野生動物與遊蕩犬貓間的認知及環境教育成效 | zh_TW |
| dc.title | Exploring Public Perceptions of the Relationship Between Wildlife and Free-Roaming Dogs and Cats, and the Effectiveness of Environmental Education | en |
| dc.type | Thesis | - |
| dc.date.schoolyear | 113-2 | - |
| dc.description.degree | 碩士 | - |
| dc.contributor.oralexamcommittee | 陳建志;曾惠芸 | zh_TW |
| dc.contributor.oralexamcommittee | Chien-Chih Chen;Hui-Yun Tseng | en |
| dc.subject.keyword | 遊蕩犬貓,野生動物,PLS-SEM,環境教育,學習成效, | zh_TW |
| dc.subject.keyword | free roaming dogs and cats,wildlife,PLS-SEM,environmental education,learning outcomes, | en |
| dc.relation.page | 113 | - |
| dc.identifier.doi | 10.6342/NTU202502189 | - |
| dc.rights.note | 同意授權(全球公開) | - |
| dc.date.accepted | 2025-07-23 | - |
| dc.contributor.author-college | 生物資源暨農學院 | - |
| dc.contributor.author-dept | 森林環境暨資源學系 | - |
| dc.date.embargo-lift | 2025-07-31 | - |
| 顯示於系所單位： | 森林環境暨資源學系 | |
文件中的檔案：
| 檔案 | 大小 | 格式 | |
|---|---|---|---|
| ntu-113-2.pdf | 2.15 MB | Adobe PDF | 檢視/開啟 |
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。