透過西方統合分析文獻探討臺灣文獻之趨勢：戶外學習與幸福感的系統性文獻回顧

Exploring Taiwanese literature trends in light of Western meta-evidence: A systematic review of outdoor learning and well-being

本文遵循PRISMA指引，透過系統性回顧了戶外活動與人體健康在多個幸福感面向的關聯性。本研究旨在透過西方綜合分析文獻研究之脈絡，檢視台灣在這些主題上的研究進展。經由檢索全球發表論文及臺灣本土資料庫，採用明確納入與排除標準後，共篩選出34篇論文。分析聚焦於過去20年間以每5年為單位之文獻中的參與者類型、介入措施，對照組設計及研究結果進行整理與探討。發現雖有少數研究採用對照組的研究設計，但此類做法並不普遍，多數研究缺乏對照組或控制組。以幸福感研究趨勢而言，臺灣研究與全球幸福感研究趨勢相似，臺灣研究結果顯示其探討面向呈現明顯的增長：初期僅聚焦身心層面，近期逐步納入社交、智力、生態、感知、適應及文化等幸福感維度。研究者發現，文化與感知/靈性相關之幸福感研究與西方的綜合分析文獻存在差異。此外，研究者指出了臺灣戶外領域之相關政策並提出當研究與政策方向一致時，可透過研究成果推動該專業領域的發展，且自戶外政策實行以來，臺灣戶外相關研究能量於2020至2025年間快速攀升。文末提出更詳盡之未來研究方向之建議。

Following PRISMA guidelines, this article systematically reviewed the Taiwanese-related literature concerning outdoor activities and human health across several dimensions of well-being. The purpose was to examine Taiwan’s research progress on these topics within the context of previously conducted Western meta-analytic research. From searching publications worldwide and in Taiwan’s own databases, thirty-four studies were identified using clear inclusion and exclusion criteria. The resulting analysis focused on identifying the wide variety of participants, interventions, comparisons, and outcomes in five-year increments over the past two decades of publications. This demonstrated nearly a two-fold growth for every 5-year increment in the number of publications. In addition, a few studies employed sound research designs with a comparison group; however, this was not a common practice, as many studies lacked comparisons or controls. In conclusion, similar to the trends in well-being studies conducted worldwide, these Taiwanese results demonstrated a notable evolution in the investigation of various dimensions of well-being. These began solely with general physical and mental dimensions, but later examined specific social, intellectual, ecological, perceptual, adaptational, and cultural dimensions. The reviewers found that the cultural and spiritual well-being dimensions showed a slightly different pattern compared with Western meta-evidence. To explain the trends in Taiwan, the reviewers discussed the possibilities of the differences between the Taiwan and Western perspectives. Additionally, the reviewers presented important Taiwanese policies and noted how research had advanced the profession by selecting policy-aligned participants and programs, while measuring various outcomes. Since the year policies were implemented, research activity surged from 2020 to 2025. Recommendations for future research and best practices were offered.