網路普及的環境中，一些看似「很多」「很大」的網路聲音，常影響到公共政策的走向。但從現有調查資料來看，多數民眾在網路上只是靜靜地當個「潛水客」，不會在網路上參與公共議題的討論、不願將自己的政治偏好顯露在網路平台上（有可能是怕被肉搜、怕被文字圍剿、或是其他原因），若依照哲學家Harbermas的觀點來看，現階段的網路世界還不是一個理想的公共議題言談空間。如何改造網路世界成為民眾願意敞開心胸發言的環境，找到影響民眾網路公共參與的因素，是理論與實務上的重要議題。過去相關研究，大多僅從科技面角度解釋民眾網路公民參與行為，本文則應用二手調查資料，結合政治學公民參與文獻建立模型，在社會結構途徑下因素（例如個人能力資源特徵）之外，聚焦於社會心理途徑下之「信任」的影響效果。資料分析結果發現，傳統社會結構因素所強調的個人特徵（如年齡、性別、與教育程度），對網路公民參與的解釋力並不如預期高，為網路民主的樂觀論點提供了希望。而公民參與理論所強調的「信任」，確實扮演了重要角色，不論是文化、制度、微觀、還是宏觀途徑所產生的信任，對於提升網路公民參與都有正向影響，其中宏觀面的制度成效認知，可以提升網民轉發公共議題資訊的意願，但若要讓網民願意投入公共議題的討論行列，必須讓其認同網路公民參與是一種社會規範責任、信任網路上的網友、信任網路上的隱私安全性與資訊正確性，更必須從未在網路上「被肉搜」或未曾有發言後「被噓」的被霸凌經驗，整合上述，必須非常「信任」網路社會。本文最後依照上述結果提出一些提升網路環境信任度的政策建議。

The Internet has become an integral part of people's daily lives; therefore, governments are using it to collect public opinion to meet people's needs. However, the latest statistics demonstrate that online political participants are not representative of the general population, with only a small proportion of netizens engaging in public issues. Under this circumstance, increasing the willingness of e-participation is urgent for e-democracy. Most e-participation research has focused only on technology-related variables, ignoring the significance of trust-related cultural and psychological factors in e-participation models. Therefore, in this study, secondary survey data with 734 samples were analyzed to answer the following questions: Does micro-level, macro-level, institutional, or cultural ＂trust＂ affect netizens' online political participation? Which trust has the strongest effect? The current findings demonstrate that the four trust sources are all significant factors affecting e-participation, particularly the institutional, micro-level trust that arises from self-experience of being bullied or harassed online. Demographic factors (gender and education level) have only a slight impact on e-participation. This paper makes three contributions: First, we link interdisciplinary literature-from political science and technology science-to facilitate theoretical development and to reveal research and knowledge gaps. Second, we provide further understanding of how ＂trust＂ affects e-participation. Finally, we provide some practical recommendations for improving the quality and possibility of e-democracy.