本研究旨在建立一個改良等值交換方法的決策系統，以探討該系統是否能夠幫助決策者做出更有信心和資料導向的決策，當人們遇到較為複雜的決策時，等值交換可以協助人們解決更為複雜的決策，但同時也可能會面臨兩個問題，第一個問題是在執行等值交換時並不是目標條件之間的價值差異都很容易衡量(如交通時間與餐點服務)，所以我們提出了一個金錢的概念，將等值交換時所需改動的條件以金錢的方式來衡量 (如交通時間與補償金)，使用這種金錢補償的概念可以使決策者更容易衡量目標之間的價值差異，而這種補償金的概念在本研究中又稱之為犧牲價值，而第二個問題是傳統等值交換使用表格的方式不容易比較，所以本系統提供了視覺化圖表的呈現方式以改善以往使用表格不容易比較的缺點，因此為了改善所先前所提及的兩個問題，我們改良了等值交換並提出犧牲價值概念結合雷達圖互動的方式實踐一個改良等值交換方法的決策系統，並希望決策者使用之後可以輔助決策過程，進而做出理想的決策。

The purpose of this study is to establish an improved even swap method decision system and explore whether this system can assist decision-makers in making more confident and data-driven decisions. When faced with complex decisions, even swap can help resolve more intricate dilemmas. However, it may encounter two challenges. The first issue lies in the difficulty of quantifying the value differences between target conditions during the execution of even swap (e.g., comparing traffic time with meal service). To address this, we introduce the concept of money, measuring the modifications required for even swap in monetary terms (e.g., comparing traffic time with compensation funds). This monetary compensation concept facilitates decision-makers in assessing the value disparities between objectives more easily. In this study, we refer to this compensation as "sacrifice value."

The second challenge with traditional even swap lies in the difficulty of comparison using tabular formats. To improve upon this limitation, our system offers a presentation through visualized charts, mitigating the shortcomings of tabular comparison. Therefore, to address the two aforementioned challenges, we have enhanced the even swap method and introduced the concept of "sacrifice value," combining it with an interactive radar chart presentation. This improved even swap method decision system aims to assist decision-makers in the decision-making process, enabling them to make more optimal choices.

論文審定書 i
誌謝 ii
中文摘要 iii
英文摘要 iv
第一章 緒論 1
第一節 研究背景與動機 1
第二節 研究問題 3
第三節 研究流程 4
第二章 文獻探討 5
第一節 多準則決策制定 5
第二節 等值交換應用之相關案例 7
第三節 等值交換系統 9
第四節 視覺化圖表與多準則決策制定相關文獻探討 11
第五節 總結 13
第三章 系統設計與方法 14
第一節 設計科學研究方法 14
第二節 使用者需求 15
第三節 犧牲價值 15
第四節 系統設計 18
第五節 使用情境 33
第六節 系統開發環境 45
第四章 系統評估與方法 46
第一節 使用者研究 46
第二節 任務設計 47
第三節 評估指標 49
第四節 研究結果 50
第五章 結論與建議 64
第一節 結論 64
第二節 研究限制 65
第三節 未來展望 66
參考文獻 67
附錄一 前測問卷 69
附錄二 決策任務問卷 70
附錄三 訪談題目 74
附錄四 訓練教材 75
附錄五 決策任務測驗內容 77

Błaszczyk, T., & Wachowicz, T. (2008, September 17-19). Application of Even-swap Method in Analyzing New Energy Development Project. Paper presented at the 26th International Conference Mathematical Methods in Economics, Liberec, Czech Republic.
Borkin, M. A., Vo, A. A., Bylinskii, Z., Isola, P., Sunkavalli, S., Oliva, A., & Pfister, H. (2013). What makes a visualization memorable? IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics, 19(12), 2306-2315. https://doi.org/10.1109/TVCG.2013.234
Brooke, J. (1996). SUS-A quick and dirty usability scale. In P. W. Jordan, B. Thomas, B. A. Weerdmeester, & I. L. McClelland (Eds.), Usability evaluation in industry (pp. 189-194). London: Taylor and Francis.
Dereli, T., & Altun, K. (2012). Modified Even-Swaps: A novel, clear, rational and an easy-to-use mechanism for multi-issue negotiation. Computers and Industrial Engineering, 63(4), 1013–1029. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cie.2012.06.013
Dimara, E., Bezerianos, A., & Dragicevic, P. (2018). Conceptual and Methodological Issues in Evaluating Multidimensional Visualizations for Decision Support. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics, 24(1), 749–759. https://doi.org/10.1109/TVCG.2017.2745138
Draper, G. M., Livnat, Y., & Riesenfeld, R. F. (2009). A survey of radial methods for information visualization. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics, 15(5), 759–776. https://doi.org/10.1109/TVCG.2009.23
Hammond, J. S., Keeney, R. L., & Raiffa, H. (1998). Even swaps: a rational method for making trade-offs. Harvard Business Review, 76(2), 137–150.
Lahtinen, T. J., & Hämäläinen, R. P. (2016). Path dependence and biases in the even swaps decision analysis method. European Journal of Operational Research, 249(3), 890–898. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejor.2015.09.056
Luo, C. M., & Cheng, B. W. (2006). Applying even-swap method to structurally enhance the process of intuition decision-making. Systemic Practice and Action Research, 19(1), 45–59. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11213-005-9003-3
Mustajoki, J., & Hämäläinen, R. P. (2007). Smart-Swaps - A decision support system for multicriteria decision analysis with the even swaps method. Decision Support Systems, 44(1), 313–325. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dss.2007.04.004

Peffers, K., Tuunanen, T., Rothenberger, M. A., & Chatterjee, S. (2007). A design science research methodology for information systems research. Journal of Management Information Systems, 24(3), 45–77. https://doi.org/10.2753/MIS0742-1222240302
Taherdoost, H., & Madanchian, M. (2023). Multi-Criteria Decision Making (MCDM) Methods and Concepts. Encyclopedia, 3(1), 77–87. https://doi.org/10.3390/encyclopedia3010006
Few, S. (2012). Show Me the Numbers: Designing Tables and Graphs to Enlighten. Analytics Press.
Li, H. L., & Ma, L. C. (2008). Visualizing Decision Process on Spheres Based on the Even Swap Concept. Decision Support Systems, 45(2), 354–367. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dss.2008.01.004.
Hill, P. (1999). Tangibles, Intangibles and Services: A New Taxonomy for the Classification of Output. The Canadian Journal of Economics / Revue Canadienne d’Economique, 32(2), 426–446. https://doi.org/10.2307/136430
Miettinen, K. (2014). Survey of methods to visualize alternatives in multiple criteria decision making problems. OR Spectrum, 36(1), 3–37. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00291-012-0297-0