本文以1945-2000年間，41種臺灣地區曾經刊行或2001年以後仍繼續刊行的歷史學期刊論文，以及歷史研究所博碩士論文為母體，分析臺灣地區世界史研究的動向，本文採取分期線性分析、世界斷代史研究、專史分類與洲別比較，探討世界史研究在5個分期的比例升降現象，以及斷代、專史的畸輕畸重。
就本文的5個分期而言，博碩士論文除第1期因未有世界史論文外，在其後的2-5期，均高於期刊論文，而就總比例而言，博碩士論文的世界史占11.1%，較期刊論文的4.6%高約6.5%，造成此種現象的可能因素有二：一、部分世界史博碩士論文的作者未繼續從事相關研究；二、世界史研究學者的知識產能較低，而知識產能較低的原因，或許與語文的困難度和資料不足有關。
臺灣的世界史研究，基本上以歐洲史、美洲史、亞洲史為主體，但相對而言，歐洲史仍為世界史研究的重心。因臺灣的世界史研究，長期以來主要即為西洋史，而所謂西洋史又以歐洲中心論為主體。而且歐洲國家和美國的世界史，亦均以歐洲中心論為依皈。
無論期刊論文或博碩士論文，世界斷代史的重心均為近古以後，期刊論文占71.8%，博碩士論文更高達96.4%，略可說明語文可能是研究世界史的重大障礙，因研究世界近古以前的歷史，須學習中古英文、拉丁文、希臘文、埃及文，顯然難度較高。世界史的專史分類頗為集中，期刊論文排名前5名的專史：思想文化史、史學論題、政治軍事史、社會史合占76.2%；博碩士論文排名前4名的專史：思想文化史、政治軍事史、國際關系史、史學論題、宗教史合占82.5%；說明專史的冷熱門之間有若雲壤。

To understand research trends of world history in Taiwan, this article explores papers published in forty-one historical research journals and M.A. theses and doctoral dissertations written between 1945-2000. Four aspects-linear analysis, periodic divisions, special history, and comparisons amongst continents-are emphasized in the papers.
Among the five periods, none of M.A. theses and doctoral dissertations in world history was accomplished in the first period. However, in the rest of periods, they outnumber the research papers. In terms of percentage, M.A. theses and doctoral dissertations in world history add up to 11.1%, 6.5% higher than research papers. Two factors might explain such difference. First, part of the authors did not continue in this field later on. Second, both language training of scholars and source materials required are inadequate.
Basically, the study of world history has long focused on European, American, and Asian history. However, European history has still attracted most attention. What leads to such phenomenon is that study of world history in Taiwan has long been focused on Western history and study of Western history has usually put its emphasis on Europe. Furthermore, world history in both European countries and the United States are all Eurocentric.
In the studies of world history in periodical divisions, research papers, M.A. theses and doctoral dissertations all focus on early modern period and after. Research papers take 71.8%, and M.A. theses and doctoral dissertations 96.4%. This reveals that language is an enormous barrier, since doing research onpre-modern history requires languages such as Old English, Latin, Greek, and Egyptian, obviously more difficult for researchers. As for topical history, research papers focus on intellectual-cultural history, important historical issues, political-military history, and social history, taking 76.2%. M.A. theses and doctoral dissertations concentrated on intellectual-cultural history, political-military history, international relations, important historical issues, and the history of religion, adding up to 82.5%. It reveals the huge disparity among fields.