:::

詳目顯示

回上一頁
題名:態度量表的心理計量學分析:2003年TEDS統獨態度量表的研究
書刊名:選舉研究
作者:黃旻華 引用關係
作者(外文):Huang, Min-hua
出版日期:2006
卷期:13:1
頁次:頁43-85
主題關鍵詞:政治學方法論測量理論心理計量學統獨態度Political methodologyMeasurement theoryPsychometricsUnification and independence
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(4) 博士論文(0) 專書(0) 專書論文(0)
  • 排除自我引用排除自我引用:4
  • 共同引用共同引用:282
  • 點閱點閱:25
政治學者在進行實證分析時,一般都過度輕忽理解測量理論的重要性,導致在測量上有許多問題發生而不自覺,這些問題不見得每一次都會有嚴重的影響,可是一旦發生將從根本上威脅到研究的可信度,使得一篇可能是很好的實證研究失去它原有的價值。本文透過對測量理論原理和核心議題的探討,來強調具備測量理論基礎知識的重要性,並針對五項基本假設,來對於十六種不同統獨量表進行心理計量學的分析。研究發現,任何一項假設都可能左右迴歸分析的結果,甚至在相關係數高達0.995的情況下也是如此,這顯示政治學者在進行測量工作時,應慎重面對測量問題可能對研究成果在科學價值上的減損。
Political scientists usually pay little attention to the understanding of measurement theories when they conduct a quantitative empirical analysis. This engenders many problems beyond their knowledge. While not every problem has a substantial impact on the research, it may fundamentally threaten the credibility and nullify the achievement once it happens. This article tries to argue the importance of proper understanding on some basic knowledge of measurement theories through a discussion of the principles and nuclear issues. Furthermore, a psychometric analysis of sixteenth different scales, based on five psychometric assumptions, is carried out for the unification-independence attitude. The result indicates each of the five assumptions is possibly influential to the regression analysis, even if the simple correlation of the two scales is as high as 0.995. This finding leads to an important conclusion: political scientists should have a serious discussion about the assumptions of their measurement and evaluate the possible impact which may discredit the scientific value of their research.
期刊論文
1.盛治仁(20000700)。統獨不再對決--從2000年總統選舉看臺灣新社會分歧的興起及影響。理論與政策,14(2)=54,119-139。new window  延伸查詢new window
2.Clason, D. L.、Dormody, T. J.(1994)。Analyzing data measured by individual Likert-type items。Journal of Agricultural Education,35(4),31-35。  new window
3.Filsinger, E. E.、Faulkner, J. E.、Warland, R. H.(1979)。Empirical Taxonomy and Religious Individuals: An Investigation Among College Students。Sociological Analysis,40(2),136-146。  new window
4.Knol, D. L.、Berger, M. P.(1991)。Empirical Comparison between Factor Analysis and Multidimensional Item Response Model。Multivariate Behavior Research,26(3),457-477。  new window
5.Mayer, L. S.(1970)。Comment on The Assignment of Numbers to Rank Order Categories。American Sociological Review,35(5),916-917。  new window
6.徐永明、陳明通(19981200)。搜尋臺灣民眾統獨態度的動力:一個個體動態模型的建立。臺灣政治學刊,3,65-114。new window  延伸查詢new window
7.劉勝驥(19980300)。臺灣民眾統獨態度之變化。中國大陸研究,41(3),7-30+93。new window  延伸查詢new window
8.盛杏湲(20020500)。統獨議題與臺灣選民的投票行為:一九九〇年代的分析。選舉研究,9(1),41-75。new window  延伸查詢new window
9.吳乃德(19960700)。自由主義和族群認同:搜尋臺灣民族主義的意識形態基礎。臺灣政治學刊,1,5-39。new window  延伸查詢new window
10.張茂桂、吳忻怡(19971200)。教育對於統獨傾向的作用。臺灣政治學刊,2,107-189。new window  延伸查詢new window
11.游盈隆(19960700)。臺灣族群認同的政治心理分析。臺灣政治學刊,1,41-84。new window  延伸查詢new window
12.陳義彥、陳陸輝(20030900)。模稜兩可的態度還是不確定的未來:臺灣民眾統獨觀的解析。中國大陸研究,46(5),1-20。new window  延伸查詢new window
13.徐火炎(19960700)。臺灣選民的國家認同與黨派投票行為:一九九一至一九九三年間的實證研究結果。臺灣政治學刊,1,85-127。new window  延伸查詢new window
14.Bock, R. D.、Gibbons, R.、Muraki, E.(1988)。Full-information Item Factor Analysis。Applied Psychological Measurement,12(3),261-280。  new window
15.Mayer, L. S.(1971)。A Note on Treating Ordinal Data as Interval Data。American Sociological Review,36(3),519-520。  new window
16.Greer, T.、Dunlap, W. P.、Beatty, G. O.(2003)。A Monte Carlo Evaluation of the Tetrachoric Correlation Coefficient。Educational and Psychological Measurement,63(6),931-950。  new window
17.Kim, Jae-On(1975)。Multivariate Analysis of Ordinal Variables。American Journal of Sociology,81(2),261-298。  new window
18.Kubinger, K. D.(2003)。On Artificial Results Due to Using factor Analysis for Dichotomous Variables。Psychology Science,45(1),106-110。  new window
19.Labovitz, S.(1967)。Some Observations on Measurement and Statistics。Social Forces,46(2),151-160。  new window
20.Labovitz, S.(1970)。The Assignment of Numbers to Rank Order Categories。American Sociological Review,35(3),515-524。  new window
21.Labovitz, S.(1971)。In Defense of Assigning Number to Ranks。American Sociological Review,36(3),521-522。  new window
22.Lee, S. Y.、Leung, K. M.(1992)。Estimation of Multivariate Polychoric and Polyserial Correlation with Missing Observation。British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology,45(2),225-238。  new window
23.Schweitzer, S.、Schweitzer, Donald G.(1971)。Comment on the Pearson R in Random Number and Precise Function Scale Transformations。American Sociological Review,36(3),518-519。  new window
24.Sisson, D. A.、Stocker, H. R.(1989)。Analyzing and Interpreting Likert-type Survey Data。The Delta Pi Epsilon Journal,31(2),81-85。  new window
25.Townsend, J. T.(1990)。Truth and Consequences of Ordinal Differences in Statistical Distributions: Toward a Theory of Hierarchical Inference。Psychological Bulletin,108(3),551-569。  new window
26.Townsend, J. T.、Ashby, F. G.(1984)。Measurement Scales and Statistics: The Misconception Misconceived。Psychological Bulletin,96(2),394-401。  new window
27.Vargo, Louis G.(1971)。Comment on the Assignment of Numbers to Rank Order Categories。American Sociological Review,36(3),517-518。  new window
會議論文
1.潘啓生、廖俊松(2004)。民進黨台灣前途主張變貌的探討。2004年「中國政治學會年會」,(會議日期: 2004/09/18-09/19)。台南:國立成功大學。  延伸查詢new window
2.劉義周(1996)。世代、統獨立場與投票抉擇。「選舉制度、選舉行為與台灣地區政治民主化」學術研討會,(會議日期: 1996/11/30-12/01)。台北:政治大學公企中心。  延伸查詢new window
3.劉義周(1998)。從概念到問卷設計:以統獨態度的測量為例。第二屆「調查研究方法與應用」學術研討會,(會議日期: 1998/03)。台北:中央研究院調查工作研究室。  延伸查詢new window
4.Harvey, R. J.(2003)。Applicability of Binary IRT Models to Job Analysis Data。The Annual Conference of the Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology,(會議日期: 2003/04)。Orlando。  new window
5.石之瑜(2004)。消失的中間選民:二〇〇四年總統大選對空間理論的檢討。「兩岸三地華人公民社會與態度的轉變」國際學術研討會,(會議日期: 2004/01/19-01/20)。台北:中央研究院政治學研究所。  延伸查詢new window
圖書
1.Hair, Joseph F.、Tatham, Ronald L.、Anderson, Rolph E.、Black, William C.(1999)。Multivariate Data Analysis。Upper Saddle River, NJ:Prentice Hall。  new window
2.Jolliffe, I. T.(1986)。Principal Component Analysis。New York, NY:Springer-Verlag。  new window
3.Kim, Jae-On、Mueller, Charles W.(1978)。Factor Analysis: Statistical Methods and Practical Issues。Sage Publications。  new window
4.林清山(1988)。多變量分析統計法。台北:東華書局。  延伸查詢new window
5.Jaccard, J.、Wan, C. K.(1996)。LISREL Approaches to Interaction Effects in Multiple Regression。Thousand Oaks, CA:Sage Publications。  new window
6.王寶墉(1995)。現代測驗理論。台北市:心理出版社。  延伸查詢new window
7.Kim, J. O.、Mueller, C. W.(1978)。Introduction to factor analysis: What it is and how to do it。Sage。  new window
8.陳順宇(2000)。多變量分析。臺北:華泰書局。  延伸查詢new window
9.Embretson, Susan E.、Reise, Steven P.(2000)。Item Response Theory for Psychologists。Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.。  new window
10.Gorsuch, Richard L.(1983)。Factor Analysis。Lawrence Erlbaum Associates。  new window
11.郭生玉(1985)。心理與教育訓練。台北:精華書局。  延伸查詢new window
12.Goldstein, G.、Hersen, M.(1984)。Handbook of Psychological Assessment。New York:Pergamon Press。  new window
其他
1.何榮幸(20030524)。明年總統大選擬同步公投。  延伸查詢new window
2.林晨柏,陳嘉宏(20030813)。扁:一邊一國、公投就是黨魂。  延伸查詢new window
3.林晨柏,陳嘉宏,蕭旭岑,黎珍珍(20030929)。陳水扁:2006催生台灣新憲法。  延伸查詢new window
4.陳嘉宏,林晨柏,邱順斌(20030623)。立委轉述陳總統:包道格未提反對台灣公投。  延伸查詢new window
5.陳嘉宏,蔡慧真,吳典容(20031113)。不妥協 府要公投法務必過。  延伸查詢new window
 
 
 
 
第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁 top
:::
無相關著作
 
QR Code
QRCODE