請用此 Handle URI 來引用此文件：
http://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/jspui/handle/123456789/85531完整後設資料紀錄
| DC 欄位 | 值 | 語言 |
|---|---|---|
| dc.contributor.advisor | 張佑宗(Yu-Tzung Chang) | |
| dc.contributor.author | Yi-Ping Lin | en |
| dc.contributor.author | 林懿平 | zh_TW |
| dc.date.accessioned | 2023-03-19T23:18:04Z | - |
| dc.date.copyright | 2022-07-19 | |
| dc.date.issued | 2022 | |
| dc.date.submitted | 2022-07-08 | |
| dc.identifier.citation | BBC，〈臺灣選舉2018：公投熱點 —— 同性婚姻和同性教育〉，https://www.bbc.com/zhongwen/trad/chinese-news-46315326，2018/11/24。 BBC，〈觀察：臺灣太陽花--未盡的學運，崩壞的民主？〉，https://www.bbc.com/zhongwen/trad/indepth2014/04/140415_ana_taiwan_student_sunflower，2014/04/15。 Ettoday，〈快訊／韓國瑜5點聲明！ 「我沒有辦法參加現行制度初選」〉，https://www.ettoday.net/news/20190423/1427547.htm， 2019/04/23。 中時新聞網，〈韓國瑜頻喊莫忘世上苦人多 他籲別小看這句話！〉，https://www.chinatimes.com/realtimenews/20190610000846-260407?chdtv，2019/06/10。 反黑箱服貿民主陣線，2014 ，「捍衛民主120小時」行動聲明，https://www.peoplemedia.tw/news/1364d3ef-cd58-4644-8ee5-e3cc76047731，2014/03/17。 天下雜誌，〈全球民粹主義崛起，為什麼來到臺灣就失靈了？〉，https://www.cw.com.tw/article/article.action?id=5098666，2020/03/14。 王振寰、錢永祥，1995，〈邁向新國家？民粹威權主義的形成與民主問題〉，《臺灣社會研究季刊》，20: 17-55。 何振盛，2013，〈臺灣政黨變遷與憲政發展對其民主鞏固之影響〉，《發展與前瞻學報》，1: 65-112。 吳介民，2009，〈中國因素與臺灣民主〉，《思想》，11: 141-157。 吳介民、廖美，2015，〈從統獨到中國因素——政治認同變動對投票行為的影響〉，《臺灣社會學》，(29): 89-132。 吳叡人、林秀幸主編，2016，《照破：太陽花運動的震幅、縱深與視域》，臺灣：左岸文化。 吳親恩、林奕孜，2012，〈經濟投票與總統選舉效度與內生問題的分析〉，《 臺灣政治學刊》，(16)2: 175-232。 李丁讚、林文源，2000，〈社會力的文化根源：論環境權感受在臺灣的歷史形成 1970-86〉，《臺灣社會研究季刊》，38: 133-206。 林文正、林宗弘，2020，〈韓流與柯粉:臺灣民粹政治的社會起源〉，《香港與臺灣的社會政治新動向》，頁91-140。 林淑芬，2005，〈“人民” 做主? 民粹主義，民主與人民〉，《政治與社會哲學評論》，12: 141-182。 胡正光、江素慧，2020，〈民粹主義在臺灣─ 韓國瑜及其支持者〉，《臺灣國際研究季刊》，16(3): 155-183。 張佑宗，2009a，〈搜尋臺灣民粹式民主的群眾基礎 〉，《臺灣社會研究季刊》，75: 85-113 張佑宗，2009b，〈選舉輸家與民主鞏固: 臺灣 2004 年總統選舉落選陣營對民主的態度〉，《臺灣民主季刊》，6(1): 41-72。 張佑宗，2011，〈選舉結果，政治學習與民主支持-兩次政黨輪替後臺灣公民在民主態度與價值的變遷〉，《臺灣民主季刊》，8(2): 99-137。 郭正亮，1998，《民進黨轉型之痛》，臺北：商周。 陳家洋，2020，《物質主義的反撲: 臺灣社會民粹主義的群眾基礎》台北：臺灣大學政治學研究所學位論文。 陳陸輝，2000，〈臺灣選民政黨認同的持續與變遷〉，《選舉研究》，7(2): 109-141。 陶儀芬，2008，〈全球化、民粹主義與公共知識社群〉，《思想》，9: 223-231。 華視，〈韓國瑜再度開砲！稱民進黨「愛錢愛權愛自己」〉，https://news.cts.com.tw/cts/politics/201910/201910281979316.html，2019/10/18。 黃光國，2003，《民粹亡臺論》，台北：商周出版。 黃信豪，2011，〈民主態度的類型：臺灣民眾二次政黨輪替後的分析〉，《 選舉研究》，18(1): 1-34。 黃昱珽、蔡瑞明，2015，〈晚近臺灣民粹主義的發展：「人民」與「他者」想像的形成〉，《思與言: 人文與社會科學期刊》，53(3): 127-163。 黑色島國青年陣線，2014 ，〈反對黑箱服貿行動宣言〉，https://www.coolloud.org.tw/node/77868，2014/03/23。 廖崇翰、陳陸輝，2021，〈人格、興趣、黨性：解析臺灣大學生參與太陽花示威運動的因素〉，《臺灣政治學刊》，25(2): 69-113。 劉世鼎、史維，2012，〈去政治化的臺灣政治〉，《思想20：儒家與現代政治》，(20): 79-108。 蔡佳泓、陳陸輝，2015，〈「中國因素」或是 「公民不服從」？從定群追蹤樣本探討太陽花學運之民意？〉，《人文及社會科學集刊》，(27)4: 573-603。 蕭怡靖，2009，〈臺灣選舉與民主化調查之政黨認同測量的探討〉，《選舉研究》，16(1): 67-93。 蕭怡靖、黃紀，2011，〈施政表現在不同層級地方選舉中的影響: 2009 年雲林縣縣長及鄉鎮市長選舉之分析〉，《選舉研究》，18(2): 59-86。 Akkerman, A., Mudde, C., and Zaslove, A. 2014. How populist are the people? Measuring populist attitudes in voters. Comparative political studies 47(9): 1324-1353. Anderson, C. J., Blais, A., Bowler, S., Donovan, T., and Listhaug, O. (Eds.). 2005. Losers' consent: Elections and democratic legitimacy. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Antal, A. 2019. The rise of Hungarian populism: State autocracy and the Orbán regime. Bingley: Emerald Group Publishing. Bansak, K., Hainmueller, J., and Hangartner, D. 2016. How economic, humanitarian, and. religious concerns shape European attitudes toward asylum seekers. Science 354(6309): 217-222. Bernstein, M. 2005. Identity Politics. Annual Review of Sociology 31(1): 47-74. Berman, S. 2019. Populism is a symptom rather than a cause: democratic disconnect, the decline of the center-left, and the rise of populism in western europe. Polity 51(4): 654-667. Becker, S. O., Fetzer, T., and Novy, D. 2017. “Who voted for Brexit? A comprehensive. district-level analysis.” Economic Policy 32(92): 601-650. Bollen, K., and Lennox, R. 1991. Conventional wisdom on measurement: A structural. equation perspective. Psychological bulletin, 110(2): 305-314. Bornschier, S. 2010. Cleavage politics and the populist right: The new cultural conflict. in Western Europe. Philadelphia: Temple University Press. 11-41. Canovan, M. 1981. Populism. New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich. De la Torre, C. 2010. Populist Seduction in Latin America. Ohio: Ohio University. Press. Dirlik A. 2012. “The idea of a ‘Chinese model’: A critical discussion.” China. Information 26(3):277-302. Dippel, Christian, Robert Gold, Stephan Heblich, and Rodrigo Pinto. 2017. Instrumental Variables and Causal Mechanisms: Unpacking the Effect of Trade on Workers and Voters. National Bureau of Economic Research. Dixon, J. K. 1979. Pattern recognition with partly missing data. IEEE Transactions on. Systems, Man, and Cybernetics 9(10): 617-621. Colantone, Italo, and Piero Stanig. ———.2018a. “Global Competition and Brexit.”American political science review 112(2): 201–218. ———. 2018b. “The Economic Determinants of the’Cultural Backlash’: Globalization and Attitudes in Western Europe.”BAFFI CAREFIN Centre Research Paper. 2018–2091. ———. 2018c. “The Trade Origins of Economic Nationalism: Import Competition and Voting Behavior in Western Europe.”American Journal of Political Science 62(4): 936–953. Elchardus, M., & Spruyt, B. 2016. Populism, persistent republicanism and declinism: An empirical analysis of populism as a thin ideology. Government and Opposition 51(1):111-133. Erikson, Erik H. 1994. Identity: Youth and Crisis. New York: WW Norton & Company. Finch, W. H., and Finch, M. E. H. 2016. Regularization methods for fitting linear. models with small sample sizes: Fitting the Lasso estimator using R. Practical Assessment, Research, and Evaluation 21(1): article 7. Fukuyama, F. 2006. The end of history and the last man. New York: Simon and. Schuster. Geva, D. 2020. Daughter, mother, captain: Marine Le Pen, gender, and populism in the. French National Front. Social Politics: International Studies in Gender, State & Society 27(1): 1-26. Golder, M. 2016. Far right parties in Europe. Annual Review of Political Science 19:477-497. Goodwyn, L. 1978. The populist moment: A short history of the agrarian revolt in. America. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Guiso, L., Herrera, H., Morelli, M., & Sonno, T. 2017. Demand and supply of populism. London, UK: Centre for Economic Policy Research. Halikiopoulou, D. 2019. Right-wing populism as a nationalist vision of legitimating. collective choice: A supply-side perspective. The International Spectator 54(2): 35-49. Hawkins. K. A, Kaltwasser. C. R. and Andreadis, I. 2020. “The Activation of Populist. Attitudes.” Government and Opposition 55(2): 283–307. Huang, C. 2018. Testing Partisan Effects on Economic Perceptions: A Panel Design. Approach. 選舉研究 25(2): 89-115. Inglehart, R., and Norris, P. 2019. Cultural Backlash and the Rise of Populism: Trump, Brexit, and Authoritarian Populism. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Ionescu, G., and Gellner, E. 1969. Populism: Its Meaning and National Characteristics. New York: Macmillan. James G, Witten D, Hastie T, Tibshirani R. 2017. An Introduction to Statistical. Learning: With Applications in R. 1st ed. 2013, Corr. 7th printing 2017 edition. Berlin: Springer. Johnston R, Jones K, Manley D. 2018. Confounding and collinearity in regression. analysis: a cautionary tale and an alternative procedure, illustrated by studies of British voting behaviour. Qual Quant 52(4):1957-1976. Kaltwasser, C. R. 2012. The ambivalence of populism: threat and corrective for. democracy. Democratization 19(2): 184-208. Kaltwasser, C. R. 2021. Bringing political psychology into the study of. populism. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B 376(1822). King, G. 1986. How not to lie with statistics: Avoiding common mistakes in quantitative political science. American Journal of Political Science, 30(3): 666-687. Laclau, E. 1977. “Towards a theory of populism.” Politics and ideology in Marxist. theory, 143-200. Levi, Eugenio, and Fabrizio Patriarca. 2020. “An Exploratory Study of Populism: The. Municipality-Level Predictors of Electoral Outcomes in Italy.” Economia Politica 37(3): 833–75. Margalit, Y. 2012. Lost in globalization: International economic integration and the. sources of popular discontent. International Studies Quarterly 56(3): 484-500. Margalit, Y. 2019. “Economic insecurity and the causes of populism, reconsidered.” Journal of Economic Perspectives 33(4): 152-70. Marchlewska, M., Cichocka, A., Panayiotou, O., Castellanos, K., and Batayneh, J. 2018. Populism as identity politics: Perceived in-group disadvantage, collective narcissism, and support for populism. Social Psychological and Personality Science 9(2): 151-162. Matsumoto, Mitsutoyo. 2009. Populism and Nationalism in Taiwan: the Rise and. Decline of Chen Shui-bian. In Kosuke Mizuno & Pasuk Phongpa- ichit (Ed.), Populism in Asia. Kyoto: Kyoto University Press. 181-201. Meléndez, C., and Kaltwasser, C. R. 2019. Political identities: The missing link in the. study of populism. Party Politics 25(4): 520-533. Mols, F., and Jetten, J. 2020. Understanding support for populist radical right parties: toward a model that captures both demand-and supply-side factors. Frontiers in Communication 5: 557-561. Mohrenberg, S., Huber, R. A., and Freyburg, T. 2021. Love at first sight? Populist. attitudes and support for direct democracy. Party Politics 27(3): 528-539. Moran, M., & Littler, J. 2020. Cultural populism in new populist times. European. Journal of Cultural Studies 23(6): 857-873. Mudde, C. 2018. How populism became the concept that defines our age. The. Guardian 22(11). Mudde. C, and Kaltwasser. C. R. 2018. “Studying Populism in Comparative. Perspective: Reflections on the Contemporary and Future Research Agenda.”Comparative Political Studies 51(13): 1667–1693. Noury, A., and Roland, G. 2020. Identity politics and populism in Europe. Annual. Review of Political Science 23: 421-439. Roberts, K. M. 1995. Neoliberalism and the transformation of populism in Latin. America: The Peruvian case. World politics 48(1): 82-116. Rooduijn, M. 2013. A Populist Zeitgeist?: The Impact of Populism on Parties, Media. and the Public in Western Europe. Amsterdam: Universiteit van Amsterdam. Rooduijn, M. 2019. “State of the field: How to study populism and adjacent topics? A. plea for both more and less focus.” European Journal of Political Research 58(1): 362-372. Rodrik, Dani. 2018. “Populism and the Economics of Globalization.”Journal of. international business policy 1(1): 12–33. Seligson, M. A. 2007. The democracy barometers (part I): The rise of populism and the. left in Latin America. journal of Democracy 18(3): 81-95. Schulz, A., Müller, P., Schemer, C., Wirz, D. S., Wettstein, M., and Wirth, W. 2018. Measuring populist attitudes on three dimensions. International Journal of Public Opinion Research 30(2): 316-326. Shyu, H. 2008. Populism in Taiwan: the rise of a populist-democratic culture in a. democratising society. Asian Journal of Political Science 16(2): 130-150. Stanley, B., and Cześnik, M. 2019. “Populism in Poland.” In Populism around the. world ,eds. Stockemer, D. Springer. New York: Springer, Cham, 67-87 Stavrakakis, Y., Andreadis, I., & Katsambekis, G. 2017. A new populism index at work: identifying populist candidates and parties in the contemporary Greek context. European Politics and Society 18(4): 446-464. USA Today. 2021. “President Trump supporters violently storm Capitol Hill: Here's everything we know.” https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2021/01/06/capitol-hill-riot-heres-everything-we-know/6573033002/ Last updated 6January 2021. Urbinati, N. 2019. Political theory of populism. Annual Review of Political Science 22: 111-127. Walker, C. 2018. What Is' Sharp Power'?. Journal of Democracy 29(3): 9-23. Van der Brug, W., Popa, S., Hobolt, S. B., & Schmitt, H. 2021. Democratic Support, Populism, and the Incumbency Effect. Journal of Democracy 32(4): 131-145. Vittinghoff E, Glidden DV, Shiboski SC, McCulloch CE. 2011. Regression Methods in. Biostatistics: Linear, Logistic, Survival, and Repeated Measures Models. 2nd ed. 2012 edition. Berlin: Springer. Walters, S. D. 2018. In defense of identity politics. Signs: Journal of women in culture. and society 43(2): 473-488. White, J. K. 2016. Donald Trump and the scourge of populism. The Forum 14(3): 265-279. Wright, M., Levy, M., and Citrin, J. 2016. Public attitudes toward immigration policy. across the legal/illegal divide: The role of categorical and attribute-based decision-making. Political Behavior 38(1): 229-253. Wuttke, A., Schimpf, C., and Schoen, H. 2020. When the whole is greater than the sum. of its parts: On the conceptualization and measurement of populist attitudes and other multidimensional constructs. American Political Science Review 114(2): 356-374. Wu, C., and Chu, Y. 2020. “Chapter 2 Populism in Taiwan: A Bottom-Up Model.” In Populism in Asian Democracies. Leiden: Brill. Weyland, K. 2001. “Clarifying a contested concept: Populism in the study of Latin. American politics.” Comparative politics 34(1): 1-22. Yen, W. T.2021. Labor Market, Economic Insecurity, and Populism in Taiwan. Taiwan. Journal of Democracy 17(1): 161-189. Zou H., and Hastie T. 2005. “Regularization and variable selection via the elastic. net.” Journal of the royal statistical society: series B (statistical methodology) 67(2): 301-320. | |
| dc.identifier.uri | http://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/jspui/handle/123456789/85531 | - |
| dc.description.abstract | 在政治學界大量轉向關於COVID-19政經後果的研究之前，在歐洲興起的極右派民粹主義(Populism)風潮曾經被視為近年最大的「自由民主危機」。這股潮流不僅從舊世界吹向新世界，使川普(Donald Trump)爆冷當選美國總統，更在亞洲延燒：印度莫迪(Narendra Modi)領導的BJP 擊敗甘地家族、菲律賓出現政治「局外人」杜特蒂(Rodrigo R. Duterte)出任總統，臺灣也在2017年吹起「韓流」。 從川普到韓國瑜，民粹主義的特性一直是製造出「非典型」的選舉結果， 這自然激起了政治學界的研究興趣。選民為何會出現民粹主義態度、悖離既有政治分歧(Political Cleavage)並轉而支持這些非典型候選人，自是此研究旨趣中最重要的研究問題之一。 本研究以臺灣民主鞏固以來兩波最大的民粹主義現象為研究對象，結合當代比較民粹主義研究之理論及方法，依據民粹主義「供需理論」的架構，分析「亞洲民主動態調查」(Asian Barometer Survey, ABS)的第四波與第五波臺灣調查資料，並透過以機器學習為基礎的變數篩選方法，來進行各種民粹主義態度解釋顯著性的比較，進而達成理論辯證的結果。 本文發現，身為上一次總統大選中的選舉輸家，更能夠預測臺灣選民的民粹主義態度生成。相較於經濟衰退、文化變遷造成的焦慮或對中國因素的態度，政治制度安排所造成的「贏家全拿」效果或許才是臺灣民粹主義的真正根源。這個發現意味著，民粹主義在臺灣並非是特定政黨、族群或階級獨有的政治態度，也不會因為特定政黨落敗就消聲匿跡。 | zh_TW |
| dc.description.abstract | Before academia focused on the economic and political consequences of COVID-19, the rising far-right populism in Western Europe was considered the worst crisis of the modern liberal democratic order. In terms of scale, populism also spread across contexts, including the 'Han Kuo-Yu phenomenon' in Taiwan. From Trump to Han Kuo-Yu, populism has shown its defining trait of creating atypical electoral results. Electorates affected by populism abandon their political cleavage in support of populist candidates. This puzzling phenomenon begs the question of why electorates support populism. In other words, why and how did populist attitudes occur among the electorates. Combining existing theories and contemporary research methodology on populism, this research takes on two cases of the populist movement in post-democratic Taiwan. To find out why Taiwanese electorates developed a populist attitude, a machine-learning variable selection process is performed on the Asian Barometer Survey (ABS) database. This research finds out that, contrary to commonly recognized reasons for populist support, being electoral losers in the last presidential election is the best predictor of populist attitude among the Taiwanese voters. This result indicates dissatisfaction with the electoral system could be the primary stimuli for populist attitudes. It also means populism in Taiwan is not bound to particular demographic features or partisanship. This discovery is innovative not only in the Taiwanese context, for it creates a new theoretical possibility for future comparative research. | en |
| dc.description.provenance | Made available in DSpace on 2023-03-19T23:18:04Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 U0001-0607202220270100.pdf: 2446673 bytes, checksum: b8453a485697146a912eddf335c0f5c2 (MD5) Previous issue date: 2022 | en |
| dc.description.tableofcontents | 口試委員審定書 I 謝辭 II 中文摘要 III 英文摘要 V 第一章 緒論 1 第一節 研究動機 1 第二節 研究問題 2 第三節 章節安排 3 第二章 文獻回顧 5 第一節 民粹主義及其解釋 5 第二節 民粹主義在臺灣 11 第三章 理論與研究設計 23 第一節 理論建構 23 第二節 研究設計 25 第四章 敘述統計與交叉分析 35 第一節 敘述統計 35 第二節 交叉分析 39 第五章 正規化迴歸分析與研究結果 43 第一節 理論競逐 43 第二節 模型建構與共線性檢測 46 第六章 結論與討論 51 第一節 輸家的民主 51 第二節 研究限制與未來發展方向 53 參考文獻 55 附錄一 65 附錄二 67 附錄三 69 | |
| dc.language.iso | zh-TW | |
| dc.subject | 變數篩選 | zh_TW |
| dc.subject | 機器學習 | zh_TW |
| dc.subject | 民粹主義 | zh_TW |
| dc.subject | 民粹主義態度 | zh_TW |
| dc.subject | 選舉輸家 | zh_TW |
| dc.subject | Machine Learning | en |
| dc.subject | Populism | en |
| dc.subject | Populist Attitude | en |
| dc.subject | Electoral Loser | en |
| dc.subject | Variable Selection | en |
| dc.title | 臺灣民粹主義態度探源：選舉輸家的解釋 | zh_TW |
| dc.title | Loser's Populism: the Origin of Taiwanese Populist Attitude | en |
| dc.type | Thesis | |
| dc.date.schoolyear | 110-2 | |
| dc.description.degree | 碩士 | |
| dc.contributor.oralexamcommittee | 陳陸輝(Lu-huei Chen),劉嘉薇(Jia-wei Liu) | |
| dc.subject.keyword | 民粹主義,民粹主義態度,選舉輸家,變數篩選,機器學習, | zh_TW |
| dc.subject.keyword | Populism,Populist Attitude,Electoral Loser,Variable Selection,Machine Learning, | en |
| dc.relation.page | 69 | |
| dc.identifier.doi | 10.6342/NTU202201312 | |
| dc.rights.note | 同意授權(全球公開) | |
| dc.date.accepted | 2022-07-08 | |
| dc.contributor.author-college | 社會科學院 | zh_TW |
| dc.contributor.author-dept | 政治學研究所 | zh_TW |
| dc.date.embargo-lift | 2022-07-19 | - |
| 顯示於系所單位： | 政治學系 | |
文件中的檔案：
| 檔案 | 大小 | 格式 | |
|---|---|---|---|
| U0001-0607202220270100.pdf | 2.39 MB | Adobe PDF | 檢視/開啟 |
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。