緒論：運動管理為一個正在發展茁壯的研究領域，為聯合亞洲區運動管理的研究， 學者們成立了亞洲運動管理學會 (AASM)，以推廣運動管理研究及促進實務結合為宗 旨，目的在了解亞洲區運動管理的演變。本文旨在分析臺灣與韓國兩國之運動管理研究 領域代表之主要期刊，自創刊至現今的運動管理研究構念發展及趨勢異同。方法：以臺 灣運動管理學報自2002 年創刊至2017 年，及韓國運動管理期刊自1996 年創刊至2017 年為研究範圍，並應用文字資料探勘軟體Leximancer 進行各篇研究英文摘要的整合分 析。結果：兩本運動管理期刊之共同構念為「運動」及「滿意度」；然而臺灣運動管理研 究偏重在「休閒」及「教育」兩大領域，韓國研究則集中關注於「職業運動」領域。臺 灣的相關研究趨勢從最初的體育轉移至休閒活動參與、運動賽會及運動策略的研究脈 絡；另一方面，韓國研究早期關注於運動產業發展及推廣全民運動策略上，近期研究則 偏重於以滿意度、服務品質、價值、品牌形象、態度和行為來探討運動參與者與觀眾行 為等實證研究為發展趨勢。結論：本研究首次將臺灣、韓國此兩個亞洲國家的運動管理 研究，以文字資料採礦方式進行比較及文本分析，以了解兩國研究不同的構念發展及脈 絡，研究成果可提供未來運動管理學門之研究酌參。

Introduction: Sport management is a relatively young and fast-growing academic discipline. Through the dedication of scholars, the field has matured into a distinctive discipline in recent years. Meanwhile, many Asian scholars collaborated to organize the Asian Association for Sport management (AASM), an association created with the purpose of bringing together academics in the field of sport management to not only promote but also carry out practical research. In order to gain a better understanding of the evolution of sport management research in Asia, the purpose of this study was to map out the sport management research landscape in Taiwan and Korea. Methods: Leximancer (a text-mining tool for visualizing the structure of concepts and themes in the text) was used by analyzing data from articles published in the Journal of Taiwan Society for Sport Management (from 2002 to 2017) and the Korean Journal of Sport Management (from 1996 to 2017). These two journals were selected due to their relatively long histories of publication and their large volumes of articles, which allow for more thorough and accurate analyses of trends and themes in these two nations. Results: Between the two journals, the themes “Sport” and “Satisfaction” were shared. However, Taiwanese studies in sport management placed more emphasis on the themes “Leisure” and “Education,” while studies in Korea concentrated on “Professional” subjects. Taiwan studies also moved from a physical education focus toward participant experience in leisure activities, sporting events, and sports strategies over time. On the other hand, earlier studies in Korea focused more on the development of the sports industry and strategies to promote public sports, while recent articles emphasize sport participants’ and spectators’ behavior by empirically examining the relationship between variables such as satisfaction, service quality, value, brand image, attitude, and behavior. Conclusion: This study firstly examined and compared the sport management literature between Asian countries. The findings provide a better understanding of different patterns and trends of sport management research in Taiwan and Korea.