本研究主要探討「旅遊目的地意象」、「口碑」與「滿意度」之關係。 「旅遊目的地意象」主要分為3種狀況：期待之旅遊目的地意象（體驗前之旅遊目的地意象）、實際體驗後之旅遊目的地意象，以及旅遊目的地意象之落差。 本研究也探討旅客對旅遊目的地之資訊收集方式及其可靠度，與體驗前之旅遊目的地意象、旅遊目的地意象之落差，和旅遊滿度的相關性。旅客資訊收集的方式，共分為：（1）傳統口碑傳播、（2）傳統媒體傳播、（3）電子口碑傳播、（4）電子媒體傳播四種。 旅遊目的地意象量表的內容由兩大部份組成，第一部份借用Florida(2012) 所提出的創意城市4T條件，發展出創意城市量表，本研究不在討論創意城市，而是借用4T的條件來衡量旅客對目的地的意象。第二部份則根據Pine II & Gilmore(1998) 體驗經濟的4大領域，作為另一個測量旅客對旅遊目的地意象的體驗知覺量表。分別跑出創意城市意象和體驗知覺意象兩個因素，前者的Cronbach’ s α值為.658，後者的Cronbach’ s α值為.881。 旅遊滿意度量表，包括整體滿意度、重遊意願、推薦意願和移居意願的內容，共7個題目，得出一個因素，Cronbach’ s α值為.790。 所有量表評分之方式皆採用 Likert 5點量表，從「非常不同意」、「不同意」「普通」、「同意」到「非常同意」，分別給予1至5分。 本研究的對象為宜蘭的旅客，於2013年6月2日，及6月9日，下午5時至晚上11時，在宜蘭縣羅東鎮之火車站及客運站發放問卷。總共收集208個有效樣本，25歲以下占74%；學生占73.6%；台北人占55%、宜蘭人占11％、台北及宜蘭以外地區占34%。 在旅客旅遊現況方面： 旅遊資訊收集方式之採用狀況（複選題），「電子媒體傳播」（96.2%）為最多，「傳統口碑傳播」（90.4%）第2多， 「傳統媒體傳播」（88.5%）為第三， 「電子口碑傳播」（81.7%）人數最少。採用百分比均超過81.7％，表示大部份旅客會同時採用多種旅遊資訊收集方式。 旅遊資訊收集方式之可靠程度，由高至低之排序為「傳統口碑傳播」（4.02）、 「電子口碑傳播」（3.35）「電子媒體傳播」（3.41）、「傳統媒體傳播」（3.18）。 實際體驗前，旅客期待之旅遊目的地意象，創意城市意象為3.426，旅客體驗意象為3.7139。 實際體驗後之旅遊目的地意象，創意城市整體印象為3.4875，旅客整體體驗為3.90064。 旅遊目的地意象之落差雖然很小（旅遊目的地意象之落差 = 體驗後之旅遊目的地意象－期待之旅遊目的地意象），但各項數值基本都有所提升，創意城市整體印象之落差為0.0615，旅客整體體驗之落差為0.1867，可見旅客實際體驗後之旅遊目的地意象皆比期待稍為好。 旅遊滿意度由7個題目構成整個量表，分數為3.8482，接近同意。細部分為三個構面來看，平衡分數依序為：(1)包括重遊意願的整體滿意度(4.1995)，(2)推薦意願(平均分為3.881)，(3)移居意願(3.0144)。從各構面的狀況，可見旅客對宜蘭的整體滿意度及重遊意願很高，也願意透過各種資料收集方式推薦宜蘭，但是移居宜蘭的意願只有普通。 在假設驗證方面： 1. 旅客對各類已收集之旅遊資訊的信任度與期待之旅遊目的地意象具有顯著的正相關，大部份假設成立。 2. 旅客期待之旅遊目的地意象與實際體驗後之旅遊目的地意象具有顯著的正相關，假設皆成立。 3. 旅客實際體驗後之旅遊目的地意象與旅遊滿意度具有顯著正相關，假設皆成立。 4. 旅客期待之旅遊目的地意象與旅遊滿意度具有顯著的正相關，假設皆成立。 5. 旅客對各類已收集之旅遊資訊的信任度與目的地意象之落差具有顯著的負相關，只有旅客對以電子媒體傳播方式收集之旅遊資訊信任度與目的地意象之落差(以旅客體驗角度) 具有顯著的負相關，假設成立。 6. 目的地意象之落差與旅遊滿意度具有顯著的相關，假設皆不成立。 7. 旅客對各類已收集之旅遊資訊的信任度與旅遊滿意度具有顯著的正相關，結果大部份假設成立。 / The major purpose of this research was to explore the relationship among Destination Image, Word-of-Mouth, and Satisfaction. Destination Image includes 3 situations: Expected Destination Image (期待之旅遊目的地意象), Destination Image After Visiting (實際之旅遊目的地意象), and Gap between Expected and Actual Destination Image (旅遊目的地意象之落差). This research also explored how travelers collect tourist information, including: (1) traditional word-of-mouth dissemination (傳統口碑傳播), (2) traditional advertising dissemination (傳統媒體傳播), (3) electronic word-of-mouth dissemination (電子口碑傳播), and (4) electronic advertising dissemination (電子媒體傳播). The Destination Image Scale is composed of two parts, which include the Traveler Experience Scale from Pine II & Gilmore (1998), and the concepts of Creative City Scale from Florida (2012). The reliability of the scales are .658 and .881. The Satisfaction Scale includes three parts: Total Satisfaction (including willingness to revisit) (整體滿意度和重遊意願), Willingness to Recommend (推薦意願) and Willingness to Migrate (移居意願). The reliability of the scales is .790. All measurement used a 5-point Likert-scale, from 5 (strongly agree) to 1 (strongly disagree). The subjects of this research were travelers to Yilan on June 2 and June 9, 2013, from 5pm to 11pm. 208 questionnaires were collected at bus stations and the train station in Luodong Township of Yilan County. 74% of respondents were under 25 years old; 73.6% were students; 55% were from Taipei, 11% from Yilan, and 34% from other cities. The current traveler information gathering situation: Regarding travelers collecting tourist information, most travelers use electronic advertising dissemination (96.2%), followed by traditional word-of-mouth dissemination (90.4%), traditional advertising dissemination, and finally electronic word-of-mouth dissemination (81.7%). With all four information collection rates above 80%, it is clear that travelers use more than one way to the gather tourist information. The degree of dependence for the methods of collecting information (旅遊資訊收集方式之可靠程度) from high to low is traditional word-of-mouth dissemination, (4.02), electronic word-of-mouth dissemination (3.35), electronic advertising dissemination (3.41), and finally traditional advertising dissemination (3.18). Before visiting the destination (Expected Destination Image) the overall image of a creative city (創意城市整體印象) was 3.426, and overall traveler experience (旅客整體體驗) was 3.7139. Regarding Destination Image After Visiting, the overall creative city image was 3.4875, and overall traveler experience was 3.90064. The Gap between Expected and Actual Destination Image (旅遊目的地意象之落差) was very low, but all evaluations showed an increase from pre- to post-visit. The same method of comparison showed that the gap between the overall image of creative city was 0.0615, and the gap between overall traveler experience is 0.1867. From this, we can see that for the se travelers, the reality was better than the expectation. The Satisfaction Scale included 3 items, from high to low, and Total Satisfaction included willingness to revisit (4.1995), willingness to recommend (3.881), and willingness to migrate (3.0144). Hypothesis testing: 1. Most correlations between the trustworthiness of collected information (旅客對各類已收集之旅遊資訊的信任度) and Expected Destination Image (期待之旅遊目的地意象) were significant and positive. 2. All correlations between Expected Destination Image (期待之旅遊目的地意象) and Destination Image After Visiting (實際之旅遊目的地意象) were significant and positive. 3. All correlations between Destination Image After Visiting (實際之旅遊目的地意象) and Satisfaction (旅遊滿意度) were significant and positive. 4. All correlations between Expected Destination Image (期待之旅遊目的地意象) and Satisfaction (旅遊滿意度) were significant and positive. 5. Only one hypothesis had a significant negative correlation between the trustworthiness of collected information (旅客對各類已收集之旅遊資訊的信任度) and Gap between Expected and Actual Destination Image (旅遊目的地意象之落差). 6. There was no significant correlation between Gap between Expected and Actual Destination Image (旅遊目的地意象之落差) and Satisfaction (旅遊滿意度). 7. Most correlations between the trustworthiness of collected information (旅客對各類已收集之旅遊資訊的信任度) and Satisfaction (旅遊滿意度) were significant and positive.