請用此 Handle URI 來引用此文件：
http://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/jspui/handle/123456789/94377完整後設資料紀錄
| DC 欄位 | 值 | 語言 |
|---|---|---|
| dc.contributor.advisor | 李鳳玉 | zh_TW |
| dc.contributor.advisor | Feng-Yu Lee | en |
| dc.contributor.author | 黃宜婷 | zh_TW |
| dc.contributor.author | Yi-Ting Huang | en |
| dc.date.accessioned | 2024-08-15T17:09:34Z | - |
| dc.date.available | 2024-08-16 | - |
| dc.date.copyright | 2024-08-15 | - |
| dc.date.issued | 2024 | - |
| dc.date.submitted | 2024-08-05 | - |
| dc.identifier.citation | 壹、中文文獻
李鳳玉，2018，〈政黨實力、政治制度以及半總統制下政黨投入總統大選的決定〉，《政治學報》，65: 81-107。 蘇子喬、劉嘉薇，2022，〈國會選制與憲政體制對國會選舉投票率的影響－內閣制與總統制民主國家的跨國分析〉，《台灣民主季刊》，19(1): 1-39。 蕭怡靖，2014，〈從政黨情感溫度計解析台灣民眾的政治極化〉，《選舉研究》，21(2): 1-42。 貳、英文文獻 Abramowitz, A. I. & J. McCoy. 2019. ‘‘United States: Racial Resentment, Negative Partisanship, and Polarization in Trump’s America.’’ The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science 681(1): 137–156. Abramowitz, A. I. & K. L. Saunders. 2008. ‘‘Is Polarization a Myth?’’ The Journal of Politics 70(2): 542–555. Abramowitz, A. I. & S. W. Webster. 2016. ‘‘The Rise of Negative Partisanship and The Nationalization of U.S. Elections in the 21st Century.’’ Electoral Studies 41(1): 12–22. Abramowitz, A. I. & S. W. Webster. 2018. ‘‘Negative Partisanship: Why Americans Dislike Parties but Behave like Rabid Partisans.’’ Political Psychology 39: 119–135. Alesina, A., A. Devleeschauwer, W. Easterly, S. Kurlat & R. Wacziarg. 2003. ‘‘Fractionalization.’’ Journal of Economic Growth 8(2): 155–194. Bassan-Nygate, L. & C. M. Weiss. 2022. “Party Competition and Cooperation Shape Affective Polarization: Evidence from Natural and Survey Experiments in Israel.” Comparative Political Studies 55(2): 287-318. Bernaerts, K., B. Blanckaert. & D. Caluwaerts. 2022. “Institutional design and Polarization. Do Consensus Democracies Fare Better in Fighting Polarization than Majoritarian Democracies?” Democratization 30(2): 153-172. Billig, M. & H. Tajfel. 1973. ‘‘Social Categorization and Similarity in Intergroup.’’ European Journal of Social Psychology 3(1): 27-52. Bormann, N., & M. Golder. 2022. “Democratic Electoral Systems around the World, 1946–2020.” Electoral Studies 78: Article 102487. Cheibub, J. 2002. “Minority Governments, Deadlock Situations, and the Survival of Presidential Democracies.” Comparative Political Studies 35(3): 284-312. Cheibub, J. 2007. Presidentialism, Parliamentarism and Democracy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Cruz, Cesi, Philip Keefer and Carlos Scartascini. 2021. Database of Political Institutions 2020. Washington, DC: Inter-American Development Bank Research Department. Curini, L. & A. Hino. 2012. ‘‘Missing Links in Party-System Polarization: How Institutions and Voters Matter.’’ The Journal of Politics 74(2): 460-473. Dalton, R. J. 2008. ‘‘The Quantity and The Quality of Party Systems: Party System Polarization, Its Measurement, and Its Consequences.’’ Comparative Political Studies 41(7): 899-920. Dow, J. K. 2011. ‘‘Party-System Extremism in Majoritarian and Proportional Electoral Systems.’’ British Journal of Political Science 41(2): 341-361. Doyle, D. & R. Elgie. 2014. ‘‘Maximizing the Reliability of Cross-National Measures of Presidential Power.’’ British Journal of Political Science 46: 731-741. Druckman, J. N. & M. S. Levendusky. 2019. ‘‘What Do We Measure When We Measure Affective Polarization?’’ Public Opinion Quarterly 83(1): 114-122. Druckman, J. N., M. S. Levendusky. & A. McLain. 2018. ‘‘No Need to Watch: How the Effects of Partisan Media Can Spread via Interpersonal Discussions.’’ American Journal of Political Science 62(1): 99-112. Elgie, R. 2012. ‘‘The President of Ireland in Comparative Perspective.’’ Irish Political Studies 27(4): 502-521. Elgie, R., C. Bucur., B. Dolez. & A. Laurent. 2014. ‘‘Proximity, Candidates, and Presidential Power: How Directly Elected Presidents Shape The Legislative Party System.’’ Political Research Quarterly 67(3): 467-477. Esteban, J., & D. Ray. 2008. ‘‘Polarization, Fractionalization and Conflict.’’ Journal of Peace Research 45(2): 163-182. Ezrow, L. 2008. ‘‘Parties’ Policy Programmes and The Dog That Didn’T Bark: No Evidence that Proportional Systems Promote Extreme Party Positioning.’’ British Journal of Political Science 38(3): 479-497. Fearon, J. D. 2003. ‘‘Ethnic and Cultural Diversity by Country.’’ Journal of Economic Growth 8(2): 195-222. Fiorina, M. P., S. J. Abrams. & J. C. Pope. 2006. Culture War? The Myth of a Polarized America. New York: Pearson Longman. Gallagher. 2021. “Election indices” in https://www.tcd.ie/Political_Science/about/people/michael_gallagher/ElSystems/index.php. Latest update 2 February 2024. Gidron, N., J. Adams. & W. Horne. 2018. ‘‘How Ideology, Economics and Institutions Shape Affective Polarization in Democratic Polities.’’ Paper presented at the Annual Conference of the American Political Science Association, August 30- September 2, Boston. Golder, M. 2006. ‘‘Presidential Coattails and Legislative Fragmentation.’’ American Journal of Political Science 50(1): 34-48. Harteveld, E. 2021. ‘‘Fragmented foes: Affective polarization in the Multiparty Context of the Netherlands.’’ Electoral Studies 71: Article 102332. Hetherington, M. &, J. Weiler. 2018. Prius or pickup?: How the Answers to Four Simple Questions Explain America's Great Divide. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Harcourt. Hicken, A. & H. Stoll. 2008. ‘‘Electoral Rules and the Size of the Prize: How Political Institutions Shape Presidential Party Systems.’’ The Journal of Politics 70(4): 1109-1127. Hogg, M. A. 2016. “Social Identity Theory.” In Understanding peace and Conflict through Social Identity Theory: Contemporary Global Perspectives, ed. Shelley McKeown, Reeshma Haji and Neil Ferguson. Switzerland: Springer, 3-17. Horne, W., J. Adams. & N. Gidron. 2023. ‘‘The Way We Were: How Histories of Co-Governance Alleviate Partisan Hostility.’’ Comparative Political Studies 56(3): 299-325. Iyengar, S., G. Sood. & Y. Lelkes. 2012. ‘‘Affect, Not Ideology: A Social Identity Perspective on Polarization.’’ Public Opinion Quarterly 76(3): 405–31. Iyengar, S., Y. Lelkes., M. Levendusky., N. Malhotra. & S. J. Westwood. 2019. “The Origins and Consequences of Affective Polarization in the United States.” Annual Review of Political Science 22: 129-146. Laakso, M. & R. Taagepera. 1979. ‘‘Effective Number of Parties: A Measure with Application to West Europe.’’ Comparative Political Studies 12(1): 3-27. Lee, F. & T. Lin. 2021. ‘‘Institutions, Contexts, and Ethnic Violence in Comparative Perspective.’’ International Political Science Review 42(3): 400–415. Lee, F. 2007. Political institutions, contexts, and ethnic conflict in comparative perspectives. Doctoral dissertation, Department of Government, University of Texas at Austin. Lijphart, A. 1999. Patterns of Democracy: Government Forms and Performance in Thirty-Six Countries. New Haven: Yale University Press. Lijphart, A. 2002. “The Wave of Power-Sharing Democracy.” In The Architecture of Democracy: Constitutional Design, Conflict Management, and Democracy, ed. Andrew Reynolds. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 37–54. Lijphart, A. 2004. ‘‘Constitutional Design for Divided Societies.’’ Journal of Democracy 15(2): 96–109. Lijphart, A. 2012. Patterns of Democracy: Government Forms and Performance in Thirty-Six Countries. New Haven: Yale University Press. Linz, J. J. 1994. “Presidential or Parliamentary Democracy: Does it make a difference?” In The Failure of Presidential Democracy: Comparative Perspectives, ed. Juan J. Linz and Arturo Valenzuela. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press, 3–87. Mainwaring, S. & M. S. Shugart, 1997. ‘‘Juan Linz, Presidentialism, and Democracy: A Critical Appraisal.’’ Comparative Politics 29(4): 449–471. Mainwaring, S. 1993. ‘‘Presidentialism, Multipartism, and Democracy: The Difficult Combination.’’ Comparative Political Studies, 26(6): 198–228. Martin, G. J. & A. Yurukoglu. 2017. ‘‘Bias in Cable News: Persuasion and Polarization.’’ American Economic Review 107(9): 2565-99. Mason, L. & J. Wronski. 2018. ‘‘One Tribe to Bind Them All: How Our Social Group Attachments Strengthen Partisanship.’’ Political Psychology 39(Issue S1): 257-277. Mason, L. 2016. ‘‘A Cross-Cutting Calm: How Social Sorting Drives Affective Polarization.’’ Public Opinion Quarterly 80(Issue S1): 351-377. McCarty, N. M., K. T. Poole. & H. Rosenthal. 2006. Polarized America: The Dance of Ideology and Unequal Riches. MA: MIT Press. McCoy, J. & M. Somer. 2019. ‘‘Toward a Theory of Pernicious Polarization and How It Harms Democracies: Comparative Evidence and Possible Remedies.’’ The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science 681(1): 234-271. Neto, O. A. & G. W. Cox. 1997. ‘‘Electoral Institutions: Cleavage Structures, and the Number of Parties.’’ American Journal of Political Science 41(1):149-174. Reiljan, A. 2020. ‘‘Fear and Loathing across Party Lines’(Also) in Europe: Affective Polarisation in European Party Systems.’’ European Journal of Political Research 59(2): 376-396. Reiljan, A., D. Garzia, F. F. Da Silva. & A. H. Trechsel. 2024. ‘‘Patterns of Affective Polarization Toward Parties and Leaders across the Democratic World.’’ American Political Science Review 118(2): 654-670. Rogowski, J. C. & J. L. Sutherland. 2016. ‘‘How Ideology Fuels Affective Polarization.’’ Political Behavior 38(2): 485-508. Saideman, S. M., D. J. Lanoue, M. Campenni. & S. Stanton. 2002. ‘‘Democratization, Political Institutions, and Ethnic Conflict: A Pooled Times-Series Analysis, 1985–1998.’’ Comparative Political Studies 35(1):103-129. Siaroff, A. 2003. ‘‘Comparative Presidencies: The Inadequacy of the Presidential, Semi-Presidential and Parliamentary Distinction.’’ European Journal of Political Research 42:287-312. Tajfel, H. 1972. ‘‘Social Categorization. English Manuscript of “La catégorisation sociale.’’ In Introduction a la Psychologie Sociale Vol. 1, ed. Moscovici, S., Paris: Larousse, 272-302. Wagner, M. 2021. ‘‘Affective Polarization in Multiparty Systems.’’ Electoral Studies 69: Article 102199. | - |
| dc.identifier.uri | http://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/jspui/handle/123456789/94377 | - |
| dc.description.abstract | 本文欲討論政治制度如何影響選民對政黨的情感極化（affective polarization），將探討以下問題：在低中度社會分歧，即社會零碎化程度（social fragmentation）較低的社會結構中，何種政治制度組合最有利於緩解情感極化？本文使用Comparative Study of Electoral Systems（CSES）第一波至第五波的調查資料，並以民主國家作為量化分析的對象。同時，本文也以Reiljan等人（2024）的指標計算出各國國會選舉年的情感極化程度。經過資料分析，本文發現：在低中度社會分歧的結構條件下，「政府體制為總統制與國會選制為比例性選制」的制度組合，相較其他制度組合，最能緩解國家的情感極化。本文後續將國會選制替換成有效政黨數與政府類型，也極大程度上，證實前述結果。最後，在總統制與半總統制國家，本文也發現在同樣的社會條件下，「總統權力大與有效政黨數高」的制度組合，對比其他制度組合，最能緩解國家的情感極化。 | zh_TW |
| dc.description.abstract | This study aims to explore how political institutions influence affective polarization. Therefore, it poses the following question: Which combinations of political institutions are most effective in reducing affective polarization in societies with low to moderate social fragmentation? This study utilizes data from the Comparative Study of Electoral Systems (CSES) Modules 1 to 5, focusing exclusively on democratic countries. Simultaneously, it adopts the formula developed by Reiljan et al. (2024) to calculate affective polarization for each election year.
The study reveals three key findings: First, compared to other institutional combinations, the combination of a presidential system and proportional representation is the most effective in mitigating affective polarization under conditions of low to moderate social fragmentation. Second, replacing the electoral system with the effective number of parties and government types substantially supports the aforementioned result. Finally, under similar levels of social fragmentation, the combination of high presidential power and a high number of effective political parties proves most effective in reducing affective polarization compared to other combinations. | en |
| dc.description.provenance | Submitted by admin ntu (admin@lib.ntu.edu.tw) on 2024-08-15T17:09:34Z No. of bitstreams: 0 | en |
| dc.description.provenance | Made available in DSpace on 2024-08-15T17:09:34Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 0 | en |
| dc.description.tableofcontents | 目次
謝辭………..……………………………...…..……………………......….. i 摘要………..………………………………..……………………........….. ii Abstract………………………………………………......…………….… iii 第一章 緒論……………..……………………….……...……..……..….. 1 第一節 研究問題…………………………………………………….. 1 第二節 章節安排…………………………………………………...... 4 第二章 文獻安排…………………….……...……..……..……………… 7 第一節 情感極化的定義與起源…………………………………….. 9 第二節 共識型民主理論的問題…………………………..……...... 13 第三節 政治制度對情感極化的影響…………………………........ 17 第三章 理論與假設………………….……...……..……..……..……… 22 第一節 族群安全困境與權力分享的效果……………..………….. 22 第二節 假設推導…………………………………………..……...... 24 第四章 研究設計…………………….……...……..……..……..……… 31 第一節 研究範圍與資料來源……………..……………………….. 31 第二節 相關變數說明……………………………………..……...... 34 第三節 模型設計…………………………………………..……...... 42 第五章 資料分析…………………….……...……..……..……..……… 44 第一節 本文的迴歸模型與事後檢定…………..………………….. 44 第二節 穩健性測試………………………………………..……...... 60 第六章 結論………………………….……...……..……..……..……… 67 第一節 研究發現與貢獻………………………..………………….. 67 第二節 研究限制與未來的研究方向……………………..……...... 70 參考文獻………………………………………………………...………. 72 附錄1：本文資料的摘要性統計………………………………...…….. 78 附錄2：本文的核心自變數與納入的國會選舉年……...…........…….. 80 | - |
| dc.language.iso | zh_TW | - |
| dc.subject | 情感極化 | zh_TW |
| dc.subject | 政府體制 | zh_TW |
| dc.subject | 國會選制 | zh_TW |
| dc.subject | 政黨體系 | zh_TW |
| dc.subject | 聯合政府 | zh_TW |
| dc.subject | 總統權力 | zh_TW |
| dc.subject | 權力分享 | zh_TW |
| dc.subject | Government Structure | en |
| dc.subject | Power Sharing | en |
| dc.subject | Presidential Power | en |
| dc.subject | Coalition Government | en |
| dc.subject | Party System | en |
| dc.subject | Electoral System | en |
| dc.subject | Affective Polarization | en |
| dc.title | 政治制度對情感極化的影響：以制度組合為解釋途徑 | zh_TW |
| dc.title | The Influence of Political Institutions on Affective Polarization: Institutional Combinations as an Explanatory Approach | en |
| dc.type | Thesis | - |
| dc.date.schoolyear | 112-2 | - |
| dc.description.degree | 碩士 | - |
| dc.contributor.oralexamcommittee | 蕭怡靖;蘇彥斌 | zh_TW |
| dc.contributor.oralexamcommittee | Yi-ching Hsiao;Yen-Pin Su | en |
| dc.subject.keyword | 情感極化,政府體制,國會選制,政黨體系,聯合政府,總統權力,權力分享, | zh_TW |
| dc.subject.keyword | Affective Polarization,Government Structure,Electoral System,Party System,Coalition Government,Presidential Power,Power Sharing, | en |
| dc.relation.page | 88 | - |
| dc.identifier.doi | 10.6342/NTU202402882 | - |
| dc.rights.note | 同意授權(全球公開) | - |
| dc.date.accepted | 2024-08-08 | - |
| dc.contributor.author-college | 社會科學院 | - |
| dc.contributor.author-dept | 政治學系 | - |
| 顯示於系所單位： | 政治學系 | |
文件中的檔案：
| 檔案 | 大小 | 格式 | |
|---|---|---|---|
| ntu-112-2.pdf | 1.41 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。