請用此 Handle URI 來引用此文件：
http://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/jspui/handle/123456789/31684完整後設資料紀錄
| DC 欄位 | 值 | 語言 |
|---|---|---|
| dc.contributor.advisor | 石之瑜 | |
| dc.contributor.author | " Shang-Chih,Tsai" | en |
| dc.contributor.author | 蔡尚志 | zh_TW |
| dc.date.accessioned | 2021-06-13T03:17:30Z | - |
| dc.date.available | 2006-07-31 | |
| dc.date.copyright | 2006-07-31 | |
| dc.date.issued | 2006 | |
| dc.date.submitted | 2006-07-28 | |
| dc.identifier.citation | 參考文獻
一、 中文文獻 石之瑜 (1999)：《政治心理學》。台北：五南。 石之瑜 (2000)：〈現實主義國際政治學的知識脈絡〉。《問題與研究》39卷，7期，37-53。 石之瑜 (2001)：〈政治學中理性概念之探究〉。見《政治學的知識脈絡》。台北市：五南。 朱雲漢 (2002)：〈政治學本土化研究的必要性〉。見朱雲漢、王紹光、趙全勝編著。《華人社會政治學本土化研究的理論與實踐》。台北市：桂冠。 朱瑞玲 (1993)：〈台灣心理學研究之本土化回顧與展望〉。《本土心理學研究》，1期，89-119。 俞寬賜 (2002)：《國際法新論》。台北縣：啟英文化。 倪世雄 (2003)：《當代國際關係理論》。台北：五南。 黃旻華 (2000)：〈評「論國際關係理論中的建構主義」〉。《問題與研究》，39卷，11期，71-91。 莫大華 (2003)：《建構主義國際關係理論與安全研究》。台北：時英。 秦亞青 (2001)：〈國際政治的社會建構-溫特及其建構主義國際政治理論〉。《美歐季刊》，15卷，2期，231-264。 楊國樞 (1993)：〈我們為什麼要建立中國人的本土心理學〉。 《本土心理學研究》，1期，6-88。 鄭端耀 (2001)：〈國際關係『社會建構主義理論』評析〉。《美歐季刊》，15卷，2期，199-229。 霍德明、熊秉元、胡春田、巫和懋 (2003)：《經濟學2000：跨世紀新趨勢》。台北市：雙葉。 Said E.W. (2001)：《文化與帝國主義》。蔡源林譯。台北縣：立緒。 二、 英文文獻 Bandura, A. (1999). Social Cognitive Theory of Personality. In L. A. Pervin, & O. P. John (Eds.), Handbook of Personality:Theory and Research. (pp. 154-196)New York, London: The Guilford Press. Baumeister R.F. (1987).How the self became a problem: A psychological review of historical research. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 52, 163-176 Bosma, H. & Gerlsma, C. (2003).From early Attachment Relations to the Adolescent and Adult Organization of Self. In S.Valsiner, & K. J. Connolly (Eds.), Handbook of Developmental Psychology, （pp. 450-488）. London, Thousand Oaks and New Delhi: SAGE Publications. Caprara, G. V. & Cervone, D. (2000).Personality: Determinants Dynamics, and Potentials. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Cooley, C. H.(1902). Human Nature and The Social Order. New York: Scribner 轉引自Triandis (1989) Cross, S. E. Markus, H. R. (1999). The Cultural Constitution of Personality. In L. A. Pervin, and O. P. John (Eds.), Handbook of Personality：Theory and Research (pp. 378-396). New York, London: The Guilford Press. Cross, S. E. & Gore, J. S. (2003) .Cultural Models of the Self. In M. R. Leary, & J. P. Tangney, (Eds.), Handbook of Self and Identity (pp. 536-564).New York: Guilford Press. Devetak, R. (1996). Critical Theory. In S. Burchill, A. Linklater, R. Devetak, M. Paterson, & J. True, Theories of International Relations. (pp.145-178).New York : St. Martin’s Press. Devetak, R. (1996). Postmodernism. In S. Burchill, A. Linklater, R. Devetak, M. Paterson, & J. True, Theories of International Relations.(pp. 179-209).New York : St. Martin’s Press. Dorothy, H. (1997).Selves as cultured: As told by an anthropologist who lacks a soul. In R. D. Ashmore & L. Jussim, (Eds.), Self and Identity: Fundamental Issues. (pp. 160-190). Oxford: Oxford University Press. Doty, R. L. (2000). Desire all the way down. Review of international studies, 26, 137-139. Elliott, A. (2001) .Concept of Self. Malden: Polity Press. Festinger, L. (1957). A Theory of Cognitive Dissonance. Stanford, CA : Standford University Press.轉引自Snibbe, A. C. & Markus, H. R. (2005).You Can’t Always Get What You Want: Educational Attainment, Agency, and Choice. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 88, 703-720 Friedman, G. & Starr, H. (1997). Agency, Structure, and International Politics: From Ontology to Empirical Inquiry. London and New York : Routledge. Fryberg, S. A. & Markus, H. R. (2003).On Being American Indian : Current and Possible Selves. Self and Identity, 2 ,325-344 Guzzini, S. & Leander, A. (2001).A Social Theory for International Relations: An Appraisal of Alexander Wendt’s Theoretical and Disciplinary Synthesis. In Journal of International Relations and Development, 4(4), 316-338. Hogg, M. A. & Cooper, J. (2003). (Eds.), The SAGE Handbook of Social Psychology. London, Thousand Oaks and New Delhi: SAGE Publications. Hoshino-Browne, E., Zanna, A. S., Spencer, S. J., Zanna, M. P., Kitayama, S.,& Lackenbauer, S.,(2005). On the Cultural Guises of Cognitive Dissonance: The Case of Easterners and Westerners. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 89, 294-310 Iyengar, S.S.&LepperM. R.(1999). Rethinking the Value of Choice: A Cultural Perspective on Intrinsic Motivation. Journal of Personality & Social Psychology, 76, 349-366. James, W. (1890). The Principles of Psychology請參 http://psychclassics.yorku.ca/James/Principles/prin10.htm Jonson, C. (1997). Preconception vs. Observation: On the Contribution of Rational Choice Theory and Area Studies to Contemporary Political Science. PS:Political Science & Politics,30 ( 2), 170-174 Kitayama, S. (2002). Culture and Basic Psychological Processes-Toward a System View of Culture: Comment on Oyserman et al.(2002), Psychological Bulletin, 128, 89-96 Kitayama, S., Duffy, S., Kawamura, T., & Larsen, J. T., (2003). Perceiving an Object and Its Context in Different Cultures: A Cultural Look at New Look. Psychological Science, 14 (3), 201-206 Kitayama, S., Snibbe, A. C., Markus, H. R. & Suzuki, T., (2004). Is There Any “Free” Choice? : Self and Dissonance in Two Cultures. Psychological Science, 15(8), 527-533 Kitayama, S. & Uchida, Y.(2005).Interdependent Agency : An Alternatives System for Action. In R. M. Sorrentino, D. Cohen, J. M. Olson, & M.P. Zanna (Eds.),Cultural and Social Behavior : The Ontario Symposium Volume 10. (pp. 137-164)New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Kubalkova , V. (2001)(Eds.),Foreign Policy in a Constructed World .USA Leary, M. R. & Tangney, J. P. (2003). The Self as an Organizing Construct in the Behavioral and Social Sciences. In M. R. Leary, & J. P. Tangney, (Eds.), Handbook of Self and Identity .New York, London: Guilford Press. Lerner,M. R., Easterbrooks, M. A., & Mistry, J. (2003) (Eds.),Handbook of Psychology, Vol. 6 Developmental Psychology. Hoboken, New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons, Inc. Markus, H. R. & Kitayama S.(1991).Culture and the Self: Implications for Cognition, Emotion, and Motivation. Psychological Review, 98, 224-253 Markus, H. R. & Kitayama, S. (2003). Models of agency: Sociocultural diversity in the construction of action. In G. Berman & J. Berman (Eds.), Cross-cultural differences in perspectives on self .Vol. 49 of the Nebraska Symposium on Motivation. (pp. 1-57). Lincoln, NE: University of Nebraska Press. Markus, R. H., & Kitayama, S. (2003). Culture, Self and the Reality of the Social. Psychological Inquiry, 14, 277-283. Markus, R. H. (2004). Culture and Personality : Brief for an Arranged Marriage. Journal of Research in Personality, 38, 75-83. Markus, R. H. Uchida, Y., Omoregie, H., & Kitayama S.(2006).Going for the Gold : Models of Agency in Japanese and American Contexts. Psychological Science, 17(2), 103-112 Mistry, H. & Saraswathi, T. S. (2003).The Cultural Context of Child Development. In R. M. Lerner, M. A. Easterbrooks, & J. Mistry (Eds.) ,Handbook of Psychology, Vol. 6 Developmental Psychology. (pp. 276-279) Pervin, L. A. & John, O. P. (1997)(Eds.),Handbook of Personality: Theory and Research. New York, London: The Guilford Press. Plaut, V. C., Markus, R. H. & Lachman, M. E. (2002). Place Matters: Consensual Features and Regional Variation in American Well- Being and Self. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 83, 160-184 Reber, S. & Reber, E. S.(2001).The penguin dictionary of psychology. Third edition. Robins, R. W., Norem, J. K., & Cheek, J. M. (1999).Naturalizing the self. In L. A. Pervin & O. P. John (Eds.), Handbook of Personality：Theory and Research. New York, London: The Guilford Press. Sear, D. O., Huddy, L., & Jervis, R., (2003)(Eds.),Oxford Handbook of Political Psychology. Oxford and New York：Oxford University Press. Sedikides, C. & Gregg, A. P. (2003). Portaits of the self. In M. A. Hogg & J. Cooper (Eds.), The SAGE Handbook of Social Psychology.(pp.110-138).London, Thousand Oaks and New Delhi: SAGE Publications. Shweder, R. A. (1990) .Cultural Psychology-What Is It? In J. Stinger, W. R. A. Shweder & G. Herdt, (Eds.), Cultural Psychology: Essays on Comparative Human Development .New York :Cambridge University Press. Shweder, R. A., Goodnow, J. Hatano, G., LeVine, R. A., Markus, H.,& Miller, P., (1998). The Cultural Psychology of Development: One Mind, Many Mentalities. In Lerner, Richard M. (Eds.), Handbook of Child Psychology. fifth edition New York：John Wiley & Sons, inc Shweder, R. A. (2003). Why Do Men Barbecue? Recipes for Cultural Psychology. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Smith, S. (2000). Wendt’s world. Review of international studies , 26,151-163. Snibbe, A. C. & Markus H. R.( 2002).The Psychology of Religion and the Religion of Psychology. Psychological Inquiry, 13, 229-234. Snibbe, A. C. & Markus, H. R. (2005).You Can’t Always Get What You Want: Educational Attainment, Agency, and Choice. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 88, 703-720 Stets, J. E. & Burke, P. J. (2003). A Sociological Approach to Self and Identity. In M. R. Leary, & J. P. Tangney, (Eds.), Handbook of Self and Identity (pp.28-152) .New York, London: Guilford Press. Triandis, H. C.(1989). The Self and Social Behavior in Differing Cultural Contexts. Psychological Review, 96,506-520 Triandis, H. C. (1995).Individualism and Collectivism. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.轉引自S. E. Cross, H. R. Markus,(1999).The Cultural Constitution of Personality. True, J. (1996). Feminism. In S. Burchill, A. Linklater,. ,R. Devetak, M. Paterson, & J. True, Theories of International Relations . (pp. 209-251). New York：St. Martin’s Press Uchida,Y., Norasakkunkit, V., & Kitayama, S.(2004). Cultural Constructions of Happiness: Theory and Empirical Evidence .Journal of Happiness Studies, 5: 223-239 Unemori, P., Omoregie, H.& Markus, H. R. (2004). Self-Portraits : Possible Selves in European-American, Chilean, Japanese and Japanese-American Cultural Contexts. Self and Identity , 3, 321-338 Valsiner, S. & Connolly,K.J.(2003) (Eds.),Handbook of Developmental Psychology. London, Thousand Oaks and New Delhi: SAGE Publications. Winter, D. G. (2003).Personality and Political Behavior. In D. O. Sear, L. Huddy, & R. Jervis (Eds.), Oxford Handbook of Political Psychology (pp. 110-145).Oxford and New York : Oxford University Press. Wendt, A. (1999)Social Theory of International Politics. Cambridge :Cambridge University Press. Wendt, A. (2000).On the via media: a response to the critics. Review of international studies , 26,165-180 . Wendt, A. (2003) .Why a World State is Inevitable. European Journal of International Relations, 9 ( 4),491-542 | |
| dc.identifier.uri | http://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/jspui/handle/123456789/31684 | - |
| dc.description.abstract | 本文的貢獻在於透過一種學科的他者（心理學），揭露Wendt與Waltz國際關係理論研究中能動者隱含的特定文化預設。人們對於所處的環境當中的許多文化預設是視而不見的，同樣的學科文化內的研究者不容易發現內部的文化預設。透過與Markus和Kitayama的能動性模型參照，發現Waltz結構現實主義與Wendt國際關係建構理論雖然有許多差異，但兩者的國家能動者想像卻都承載了特定的文化預設（一種屬於中產階級受過大學教育以上的歐裔美國人價值與生活實踐。）。這種的預設藉由在國際關係理論研究的雙重身份（對外在客觀的描述與一種外交行為教戰手則），不斷的被推廣、實踐與再造。因此有必要進一步省思這種被隱含的特定單調文化脈絡預設下對於國際關係理論研究發展的影響，以及檢視文化與知識脈絡的關係。透過與他者的參照重新認識自我，幫助國際關係理論研究進一步開展。 | zh_TW |
| dc.description.provenance | Made available in DSpace on 2021-06-13T03:17:30Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 ntu-95-R89322020-1.pdf: 961459 bytes, checksum: bd32dbf987e75d1aeff68ce8002fd0d0 (MD5) Previous issue date: 2006 | en |
| dc.description.tableofcontents | 目次：
1. 研究動機與架構 1-16 1-1問題動機說明 2 1-2研究的方法和目標 11 1-3關於學科間的差異可能造成的限制 13 2. Wendt的能動者想像 17-36 2-1 Wendt的國際關係建構理論簡介 17 2-1.1國家能動者 18 2-1.2國際結構 22 2-1.3國際結構系統的進程 24 2-2 Wendt的理論建構脈絡 26 2-3 Wendt的其他相關著作 29 2-4與Waltz的理論對照 30 3. Markus與Kitayama的能動性模型 37-67 3-1選擇對話者 37 3-1.1對話的策略 37 3-1.2對應認同 39 3-1.3對應相互建構 40 3-1.4跨文化心理學（cross-cultural psychology） 41 3-1.5文化心理學（cultural psychology） 42 3-1.6本土心理學（indigenous psychology） 43 3-1.7理想的對話對象 45 3-2能動性模型簡介 47 3-2.1分離式能動性模型（disjoint agency model） 48 3-2.2聯合式能動性模型（conjoint agency model） 50 3-3相關的實驗研究介紹 52 3-4模型背後的文化脈絡 61 3-5小結 63 4. 跨領域對話的嘗試、知識脈絡的省思與檢討 68-90 4-1跨領域對話的嘗試 69 4-1.1 Waltz的能動者想像 69 4-1.2 Wendt的能動者想像 70 4-1.3 Waltz 和Wendt 的差 71 4-1.4一種單調的能動者想像 75 4-2知識脈絡的省思 78 4-3對話的可能 83 4-3.1對話需求不對稱 84 4-3.2對話層次的設定 84 4-3.3持續擴大對話的需要 86 4-4小結與貢獻 87 | |
| dc.language.iso | zh-TW | |
| dc.subject | 能動者 | zh_TW |
| dc.subject | 文化心理學 | zh_TW |
| dc.subject | 國際關係建構理論 | zh_TW |
| dc.subject | 能動性模型 | zh_TW |
| dc.subject | 分離式能動性模型 | zh_TW |
| dc.subject | 自我 | zh_TW |
| dc.subject | 聯合式能動性模型 | zh_TW |
| dc.subject | Wendt | en |
| dc.subject | cojoint model | en |
| dc.subject | disjoint model | en |
| dc.subject | self | en |
| dc.subject | Kitayama | en |
| dc.subject | Markus | en |
| dc.subject | models of agency | en |
| dc.subject | agent | en |
| dc.title | 從Markus與Kitayama的能動性模型檢視Wendt的能動者論述 | zh_TW |
| dc.title | Inspecting Wendt's agent discourses by Markus & Kitayama's Models of Agency | en |
| dc.type | Thesis | |
| dc.date.schoolyear | 94-2 | |
| dc.description.degree | 碩士 | |
| dc.contributor.oralexamcommittee | 朱瑞玲,高朗 | |
| dc.subject.keyword | 自我,能動者,能動性模型,國際關係建構理論,文化心理學,分離式能動性模型,聯合式能動性模型, | zh_TW |
| dc.subject.keyword | Wendt,agent,models of agency,Markus,Kitayama,self,disjoint model,cojoint model, | en |
| dc.relation.page | 98 | |
| dc.rights.note | 有償授權 | |
| dc.date.accepted | 2006-07-30 | |
| dc.contributor.author-college | 社會科學院 | zh_TW |
| dc.contributor.author-dept | 政治學研究所 | zh_TW |
| 顯示於系所單位： | 政治學系 | |
文件中的檔案：
| 檔案 | 大小 | 格式 | |
|---|---|---|---|
| ntu-95-1.pdf 未授權公開取用 | 938.92 kB | Adobe PDF |
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。