:::

詳目顯示

回上一頁
題名:選民分立政府心理認知與投票行為:以2002年北高市長暨議員選舉為例
書刊名:政治科學論叢
作者:吳重禮 引用關係徐英豪李世宏 引用關係
作者(外文):Wu, Chung-liHsu, Ying-haoLee, Shih-hug
出版日期:2004
卷期:21
頁次:頁75-115
主題關鍵詞:分立政府分裂投票政治態度投票行為Divided governmentSplit-ticket votingPolitical attitudeVoting behavior
原始連結:連回原系統網址new window
相關次數:
  • 被引用次數被引用次數:期刊(19) 博士論文(4) 專書(2) 專書論文(3)
  • 排除自我引用排除自我引用:16
  • 共同引用共同引用:522
  • 點閱點閱:76
     近年來,府會分立的態勢逐漸成為我國各級政府普遍存在的現象。在此發展趨勢之下,「分立政府」(divided government)議題逐漸受到學界的關注與重視。本研究旨在探討分立政府體制的成因。詳言之,我國選民是否蓄意投票支持不同政黨的行政首長與民意代表,企圖使得行政部門與立法部門分別由不同政黨掌握而相互制衡,或者其投票行為是受到其他因素的影響,但卻無意間形成分立政府?為檢驗此核心命題,本研究以「2002年至2004年『選舉與民主化調查』三年期研究規劃(Ⅰ):民國九十一年北高兩市選舉大型面訪案」資料,分析二○○二年臺北與高雄市選民分權制衡心理認知與投票行為的關係。實證資料顯示,儘管分立政府心理認知對於分裂投票並無顯著影響,但是在考量分立政府心理認知與政黨認同的交互影響下,抱持「制衡觀」立場的選民傾向於分裂投票,而排斥「制衡觀」的民眾則較易採取一致投票的行為;其中,以泛綠陣營認同者的差異最為顯著。在結論中,本文摘述研究要點,並提出未來的研究方向與建議。
     The phenomenon of divided government seemingly has become the institutional norm at the various levels of governments in Taiwan. On this trend, scholars pay much attention to the issues of divided government gradually. This work aims at examining the causes of divided government. To put it in detail, we examine the contending perspectives: the voters prefer the system of checks and balances by divided partisan control of the executive and legislative branches, and intentionally votes for mayoral and city councilor candidates of different political parties; or, the electoral choice may have little to do with public preferences for divided or unified government but is heavily influenced by other determinants. In this study, we take advantage of the Taiwan's Election and Democratization Study, 2002 (TEDS 2002) survey data of the general preference for divided government and examine if vote choice is on the basis of strategic considerations in the Taipei and Kaohsiung mayoral and city councilor elections of 2002. The empirical results indicate that though the general preference for divided government has not effect upon on the split-ticket voting, considering the interactive variable of the general preference for divided government and party identification, we find that the voters who prefer the divided government tend to split-ticket voting. On the contrary, the voters who prefer the unified government tend to straight-ticket voting. In particular, there is notable difference between the voters who identify with "pan-green" alliance. In the conclusion, we review the major findings and limitations of this study.
期刊論文
1.Brady, David W.(1993)。The Causes and Consequences of Divided Government: Toward a New Theory of American Politics?。American Political Science Review,87(1),189-194。  new window
2.Sigelman, Lee、Wahlbeck, Paul J.、Buell, Emmett H. Jr.(1997)。Vote Choice and the Preference for Divided Government: Lessons of 1992。American Journal of Political Science,41(3),879-894。  new window
3.Burden, B.、Kimball, D. C.(1998)。A New Approach to the Study of Ticket-Splitting。American Political Science Review,92(3),533-544。  new window
4.陳陸輝、游清鑫(20010900)。民眾眼中的分立政府--政黨的府會互動與首長施政滿意度。理論與政策,15(3)=59,61-78。new window  延伸查詢new window
5.Born, Richard(1994)。Split-ticket Voters, Divided Government, and Fiorina's Policy-balancing Model。Legislative Studies Quarterly,19(1),95-115。  new window
6.Garand, James C.、Lichtl, Marci Glascock(2000)。Explaining Divided Government in the United States: Testing an Intentional Model of Split-Ticket Voting。British Journal of Political Science,30(1),173-191。  new window
7.Ingberman, Daniel、Villani, John(1993)。An Institutional Theory of Divided Government and Party Polarization。American Journal of Political Science,37(2),429-471。  new window
8.Jacobson, G. C.(1991)。Explaining Divided Government: Why Can't the Republicans Win the House?。PS: Political Science and Politics,24(4),640-643。  new window
9.Lewis-Beck, Michael S.、Nadeau, Richard(2000)。French Electoral Institutions and the Economic Vote。Electoral Studies,19(2/3),171-182。  new window
10.Pattie, Charles、Johnston, Ron(1998)。Voter Turnout at the British General Election of 1992: Rational Choice, Social Standing or Political Efficacy?。European Journal of Political Research,33(2),263-283。  new window
11.Thurber, James A.(1991)。Representation, Accountability, and Efficiency in Divided Party Control of Government。PS: Political Science and Politics,24(4),653-657。  new window
12.Rabinowitz, G.、MacDonald, S. E.(198903)。A Directional Theory of Issue Voting。American Political Science Review,83(1),93-121。  new window
13.吳重禮、李世宏(20030400)。總統施政表現對於國會選舉影響之初探:以2001年立法委員選舉為例。理論與政策,17(1)=65,27-52。new window  延伸查詢new window
14.Beck, Paul A.、Baum, Lawrence、Clausen, Aage R.、Smith, C. E.(1992)。Patterns and Sources of Ticket Slitting in Subpresidential Voting。American Political Science Review,86(4),916-928。  new window
15.許勝懋(20010500)。臺北市選民的分裂投票行為--一九九八年市長選舉分析。選舉研究,8(1),117-158。new window  延伸查詢new window
16.何思因(19940500)。臺灣地區選民政黨偏好的變遷:1989-1992。選舉研究,1(1),39-52。new window  延伸查詢new window
17.Balch, George I.(1974)。Multiple Indicators in Survey Research: The Concept "Sense of Political Efficacy"。Political Methodology,1(2),1-43。  new window
18.Craig, Stephen C.(1979)。Efficacy, Trust, and Political Behavior: An Attempt to Resolve a Lingering Conceptual Dilemma。American Politics Research,7(2),225-239。  new window
19.黃紀(20011200)。一致與分裂投票:方法論之探討。人文及社會科學集刊,13(5),541-574。new window  延伸查詢new window
20.湯京平、吳重禮、蘇孔志(20021200)。分立政府與地方民主行政:從臺中縣「地方基層建設經費」論地方派系與肉桶政治。中國行政評論,12(1),37-76。new window  延伸查詢new window
21.劉從葦(20031200)。中央與地方分立政府的形成:一個空間理論的觀點。臺灣政治學刊,7(2),107-147。new window  延伸查詢new window
22.Chen, Don-yun、Huang, Tong-yi(19990100)。Divided Government: A New Approach to Taiwan's Local Politics。Issues & Studies,35(1),1-35。  new window
23.吳重禮、林長志(20020300)。我國2000年總統選舉前後中央府會關係的政治影響--核四議題與府會互動的評析。理論與政策,16(1)=61,73-98。new window  延伸查詢new window
24.Sundquist, James L.(1988)。Needed: A Political Theory for the New Era of Coalition Government in the United States。Political Science Quarterly,103(4),613-635。  new window
25.Cutler, Lloyd N.(1988)。Some Reflections about Divided Government。Presidential Studies Quarterly,18(3),485-492。  new window
26.Cutler, Lloyd N.(1980)。To Form a Government: On the Defects of Separation of Powers。Foreign Affairs,59(1),126-143。  new window
27.吳重禮、楊樹源(20010900)。臺灣地區縣市層級「分立政府」與「一致政府」之比較:以新竹縣市與嘉義縣市為例。人文及社會科學集刊,13(3),251-304。new window  延伸查詢new window
28.吳重禮、黃紀、張壹智(20030300)。臺灣地區「分立政府」與「一致政府」之研究:以1986年至2001年地方府會關係為例。人文及社會科學集刊,15(1),145-184。new window  延伸查詢new window
29.Lewis-Beck, Michael S.、Nadeau, Richard(2001)。National Economic Voting in U.S. Presidential Elections。Journal of Politics,63(1),159-181。  new window
30.吳乃德(19990700)。家庭社會化和意識型態:臺灣選民政黨認同的世代差異。臺灣社會學研究,3,53-85。new window  延伸查詢new window
31.許增如(19990300)。一九九六年美國大選中的分裂投票行為:兩個議題模式的探討。歐美研究,29(1),83-126。new window  延伸查詢new window
32.李世宏、吳重禮(20030600)。總統施政表現評價影響因素之分析與比較:以整體施政、經濟發展與兩岸關係為例。公共行政學報,8,35-71。new window  延伸查詢new window
33.黃德福(19911200)。臺灣地區七十八年底選舉分裂投票之初探研究--以臺北縣、雲林縣與高雄縣為個案。政治學報,19,55-80。new window  延伸查詢new window
34.吳重禮、王宏忠(20030500)。我國選民「分立政府」心理認知與投票穩定度:以2000年總統選舉與2001年立法委員選舉為例。選舉研究,10(1),81-114。new window  延伸查詢new window
35.盛杏湲(20031200)。立法機關與行政機關在立法過程中的影響力:一致政府與分立政府的比較。臺灣政治學刊,7(2),51-105。new window  延伸查詢new window
36.黃紀、吳重禮(20001200)。臺灣地區縣市層級「分立政府」影響之初探。臺灣政治學刊,4,105-147。new window  延伸查詢new window
37.吳重禮、譚寅寅、李世宏(20030600)。賦權理論與選民投票行為:以2001年縣市長與第五屆立法委員選舉為例。臺灣政治學刊,7(1),91-156。new window  延伸查詢new window
38.楊婉瑩(20030300)。一致性到分立性政府的政黨合作與衝突--以第四屆立法院為例。東吳政治學報,16,47-93。new window  延伸查詢new window
39.吳重禮、許文賓(20030600)。誰是政黨認同者與獨立選民?--以二〇〇一年臺灣地區選民政黨認同的決定因素為例。政治科學論叢,18,101-140。new window  延伸查詢new window
40.黃秀端(20031200)。少數政府在國會的困境。臺灣政治學刊,7(2),3-49。new window  延伸查詢new window
41.吳重禮(20000300)。美國「分立性政府」研究文獻之評析:兼論臺灣地區的政治發展。問題與研究,39(3),75-101。new window  延伸查詢new window
42.吳重禮(19980600)。美國「分立性政府」與「一致性政府」體制運作之比較與評析。政治科學論叢,9,61-89。new window  延伸查詢new window
43.吳重禮(20010900)。分立政府--肇因、影響、改革。中國行政評論,10(4),1-22。new window  延伸查詢new window
44.吳重禮(20020600)。美國「分立政府」運作的爭議:以公共行政與政策為例。歐美研究,32(2),271-316。new window  延伸查詢new window
45.吳重禮、湯京平、黃紀(19991100)。我國「政治功效意識」測量之初探。選舉研究,6(2),23-44。new window  延伸查詢new window
46.徐火炎(19981100)。李登輝情結的政治心理與選民的投票行為。選舉研究,5(2),35-71。new window  延伸查詢new window
47.吳重禮、李世宏(20050500)。政治賦權、族群團體與政治參與:2001年縣市長選舉客家族群的政治信任與投票參與。選舉研究,12(1),69-115。new window  延伸查詢new window
48.王甫昌(19980700)。族群意識、民族主義與政黨支持:一九九○年代臺灣的族群政治。臺灣社會學研究,2,1-45。new window  延伸查詢new window
49.Alvarez, R. M.、Schousen, M. M.(1993)。Policy Moderation or Conflicting Expectations-Testing the International Models of Split-Ticket Voting。American Politics Quarterly,21(4),410-438。  new window
50.Soss, J.、Canon, D. T.(1995)。Partisan Divisions and Voting Decisions: U. S. Senators, Governors, and the Rise of a Divided Federal Government。Political Research Quarterly,48(2),253-274。  new window
會議論文
1.陳玫君、陳文俊(2003)。高雄市選民的一致與分裂投票行為之研究--2002年高雄市長與市議員選舉個案。「2002年臺灣選舉與民主化調查研究」國際學術研討會,「臺灣選舉與民主化調查」規劃與推動委員會與國立政治大學選舉研究中心主辦 (會議日期: 11月2日)。  延伸查詢new window
2.許勝懋(2003)。臺北市民具有制衡觀嗎?1998與2002市長選舉之比較研究。2002年台灣選舉與民主化調查研究」國際學術研討會,「台灣選舉與民主化調查」規劃與推動委員會與國立政治大學選舉研究中心 (主辦) 。臺北:國立政治大學綜合院館五樓國際會議廳。new window  延伸查詢new window
學位論文
1.吳怡銘(2000)。台北市選民分裂投票之研究--民國八十七年市長與市議員選舉之分析(碩士論文)。國立中正大學。  延伸查詢new window
2.施奕任(2000)。1998 年高雄市市長與市議員選舉中選民『分裂投票』行為(碩士論文)。國立中正大學。  延伸查詢new window
圖書
1.Fiorina, Morris(1996)。Divided Government。New York:Macmillan。  new window
2.Niemi, Richard G.、Weisberg, Herbert E.(1993)。Classics in Voting Behavior。Washington, DC:Congressional Quarterly Press。  new window
3.Wattenberg, Martin P.(1990)。The Decline of American Political Parties。Cambridge, MA:Harvard University Press。  new window
4.Wattenberg, Martin P.(1991)。The Rise of Candidate Centered Politics: Presidential Elections of the 1980s。Cambridge, MA:Harvard University Press。  new window
5.Conway, Margaret M.(1991)。Political Participation in the United States。Washington, DC:Congressional Quarterly。  new window
6.Alesina, Alberto、Rosenthal, Howard(1995)。Partisan Politics, Divided Government, and the Economy。New York:Cambridge University Press。  new window
7.胡佛(1998)。政治學的科學研究(三):政治參與與選舉行為。臺北市:三民書局。  延伸查詢new window
8.Abramson, Paul R.(1983)。Political Attitudes in America: Formation and Change。San Francisco, CA:W. H. Freeman and Company Press。  new window
9.Keith, Bruce E.、Magleby, David B.、Nelson, Candice J.、Orr, Elizabeth A.、Westlye, Mark C.、Wolfinger, Raymond E.(1992)。The Myth of the Independent Voter。Berkeley, CA:University of California Press。  new window
10.陳義彥、黃麗秋(1992)。選舉行為與政治發展。臺北市:黎明文化事業股份有限公司。  延伸查詢new window
11.Milbrath, Lester W.、Goel, Madan L.(1977)。Political participation: How and why people get involved in politics?。Chicago:Rand McNally College Pub. Co.。  new window
12.Rosenstone, Steven J.、Hansen, John Mark(1993)。Mobilization, Participation, and Democracy in America。Longman。  new window
13.Fiorina, Morris P.(1981)。Retrospective Voting in American National Elections。Yale University Press。  new window
14.Tufte, Edward R.(1978)。Political Control of the Economy。Princeton, N. J.:Princeton University Press。  new window
15.Jacobson, Gary C.(1990)。The Electoral Origins of Divided Government: Competition in U. S. House Elections, 1946-1988。Boulder, Colo.:Westview Press。  new window
16.Enelow, James M.、Hinich, Melvin J.(1984)。The Spatial Theory of Voting: An Introduction。Cambridge University Press。  new window
17.Lipset, Seymour Martin(1981)。Political Man--The Social Bases of Politics。Baltimore, Maryland:The Johns Hopkins University Press。  new window
18.Downs, Anthony J.(1957)。An Economic Theory of Democracy。New York:Harper and Row。  new window
19.Thurber, James A.(1991)。Divided Democracy: Cooperation and Conflict Between the President and Congress。Congressional Quarterly Press。  new window
20.Campbell, Angus、Converse, Philip E.、Miller, Warren E.、Stokes, Donald E.(1960)。The American Voter。The University of Chicago Press。  new window
21.Campbell, Angus、Gurin, Gerald、Miller, Warren E.(1954)。The Voter Decides。Westport, Connecticut:Evanston, IL:Greenwood Press:Row, Peterson & Company。  new window
22.王國璋(1993)。當代美國政治論壇。當代美國政治論壇。臺北。  延伸查詢new window
圖書論文
1.Linz, Juan J.(1994)。Democracy, Presidential or Parliamentary: Does It Make a Difference?。The Failure of Presidential Democracy。Baltimore, MD:Johns Hopkins University Press。  new window
2.Cox, Gary W.、Kernell, Samuel(1991)。Introduction: Governing a Divided Era。The Politics of Divided Government。Boulder, CO:Westview Press。  new window
3.Converse, Philip E.(1964)。The Nature of Belief Systems in Mass Publics。Ideology and Discontent。Free Press。  new window
4.Converse, Philip E.(1970)。Attitudes and Non-attitudes: Continuation of a Dialogue。The Quantitative Analysis of Social Problems。Reading, MA:Addison-Wesley。  new window
 
 
 
 
第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁 top
:::
無相關著作
 
QR Code
QRCODE