跳到主要內容

臺灣博碩士論文加值系統

(44.220.62.183) 您好!臺灣時間:2024/03/01 19:28
字體大小: 字級放大   字級縮小   預設字形  
回查詢結果 :::

詳目顯示

: 
twitterline
研究生:郭銘峰
研究生(外文):Ming-Feng Kuo
論文名稱:日本自民黨在眾議院選舉的選票動態轉移:一個縱貫時序的定群追蹤分析
論文名稱(外文):The Dynamics of Electoral Stability and Change of LDP in the Japanese House Elections in 1990’s: A Panel Data Exploration
指導教授:王鼎銘王鼎銘引用關係
指導教授(外文):Ding-Ming Wang
學位類別:碩士
校院名稱:國立成功大學
系所名稱:政治經濟學研究所
學門:社會及行為科學學門
學類:經濟學類
論文種類:學術論文
論文出版年:2004
畢業學年度:92
語文別:中文
論文頁數:90
中文關鍵詞:投票穩定與變遷定群追蹤資料黑白模型馬可夫鍊模型巢狀勝算對數模型不相關選項獨立性
外文關鍵詞:Markov chain ModelsBlack and White ModelIndependence of Irrelevant AlternativesNested Logit Modelelectoral stability and changepanel data
相關次數:
  • 被引用被引用:0
  • 點閱點閱:351
  • 評分評分:
  • 下載下載:73
  • 收藏至我的研究室書目清單書目收藏:1
  戰後日本政黨政治的發展,最為人所熟知的莫過於自民黨獨大達38年之久的「五五體制」(1955~1993年)。然而由自民黨長期執政的情況,卻在1993年的眾院大選後產生相當大的變化,不僅自民黨在是年眾院大選首度失去執政地位,日本更也開始邁入到成熟民主的多黨競爭時期,因此對自民黨勢力的存續來說是遭逢到相當嚴峻的挑戰。值得注意的是,自民黨旋即在短暫的三年內,再度贏得國會最多席次、主導聯合政府成立,並於2000年的眾院選舉後繼續保持執政。本文的研究重點,便是以「日本選舉研究」(Japanese Election Study, JES)所蒐集之縱貫九零年代期間的定群追蹤調查資料,探討日本在「五五體制」後面臨多黨競爭環境下,選民在1993、1996、2000年的三屆眾院選舉中,是否支持自民黨的動態投票演變過程。
  本文研究結果顯示,雖然自民黨在1993年時遭逢到派系嚴重分裂與票源流失的考驗,但自民黨在1996、2000年的眾議員選舉中,仍然擁有相當穩固的票源支持。此外,從定群樣本在第40、41屆眾院選舉的投票因素來分析,更顯示出選民的居住地區、年齡、政黨認同等因素對自民黨選票穩定變遷的影響均十分顯著,並與過去文獻中的發現一致。更仔細來說,都市的選民比較傾向支持非自民黨的候選人,鄉下農村的選民則是比較傾向支持自民黨;另外,選民的年齡越高,則有越高的機率會投給自民黨;最後,選民心理層面的政黨認同意識,對選民投票的決策過程影響相當顯著。若選民具有自民黨的心理政黨認同,在跨年度的選舉中均有非常大的機率會投票支持自民黨。
  此外更重要的是,經馬可夫鍊統計模型(Markov Chain models)的運算後,本文更發現到Converse所提出的黑白模型(black-and-white model),最適宜用來描述定群樣本在1993至2000年的三屆眾議員選舉中,對自民黨投票支持的動態變移軌跡。更具體來說,這些定群樣本中,將可區隔為異質具不同投票移轉特性的兩群人:首先,屬於「堅定不移群」中的受訪者,在不同時間點投票決定的特性,是自始至終堅定不移,這群人佔有約全體的48.28%;次之,屬於「隨機變動群」中的受訪者,在不同時間點投票決定的特性,則是沒有既定政黨偏好、隨機變動,支持或不支持自民黨的機率各均為0.5,這群人則是佔有約全體選民的51.72%。
  The post-war party politics in Japan, called “1955 System”, has been dominated by the Liberal Democratic Party (LDP) since 1955. This system is not changed until 1993 when the LDP lost its majority in the House election and the multi-party competitions became to challenge its domination. But only three years later, the LDP staged a comeback and played the major role in forming a new coalition government, and again, it managed to maintain this control in the 2000 House of Representatives election. The purpose of this study, based on the panel data collected by the Japanese Election Study (JES) in 1990’s, is to analyze the dynamics of electoral stability and change of the LDP supporters during the 1993, 1996, and 2000 House elections.
  Given LDP had confronted the crisis of votes outflow, the data shows that a substantial proportion of LDP supporters remains loyalty during these period. Besides, more elaborate panel data analyses of Nested Logit Model indicates that, the constituent’s residences, ages, and party identification have a significant influence on their stability and change of supporting LDP, which is consistent with the previous studies in this discipline. Specifically, this thesis finds Japanese voters in the urban are more likely to support non-LDP candidates, while the voters from the rural areas prefer the LDP candidates. In addition, comparing to the younger generation, the older Japanese voters are more likely to support LDP. Of those reasons influencing the electoral stability and change, voter’s party identification without doubt plays a very important role. Given the fact that Japanese party system has become a multi-party competition in 1990’s, voter’s strong LDP identification keeps them support LDP candidates consistently and solidly.
  Most importantly, by exploring several Markov chain models, this study finds the “Black and White Model”, proposed by Converse (1964, 1970), is the most appropriate one to explain the dynamics of electoral stability and change in Japan during 1993, 1996, and 2000 House elections. By splitting the population into two latent subgroups with maximum intragroup homogeneity and intergroup heterogeneity, Black and White Model estimates each group’s transition probability. The results show the first subgroup “stayers”, always maintaining their LDP or non-LDP preference without any change, consists of about 48.28% of the panel samples. While another subgroup of “random movers”, who change their support randomly, consists of about 51.72%.
章節目錄
第一章 緒論……………………………………………………………1
第一節 研究動機與問題界定……………………………………1
第二節 研究目的與重要性………………………………………3
第三節 章節安排…………………………………………………6
第二章 日本政黨政治演變與相關文獻回顧…………………………7
第一節 日本政黨政治的演變……………………………………7
第二節 相關文獻回顧 …………………………………………14
一、日本選民投票行為的研究………………………………15
二、穩定與變遷投票的研究…………………………………18
第三章 研究設計 ……………………………………………………25
第一節 研究方法 ………………………………………………26
一、個體層次的定群追蹤研究………………………………26
二、分析方法…………………………………………………29
第二節 資料來源 ……………………………………37
第四章 自民黨票源穩定度的估計:1993、1996年眾院選舉之定群追蹤分析 ……40
第一節 自民黨選票穩定度的初探分析………………………40
第二節 選民投票轉移因素之巢狀勝算對數分析 …42
第五章 選民投票轉移特性的估計:1993、1996、2000眾院選舉之定群追蹤分析 …48
第一節 自民黨選票穩定度的初探分析 ………………………48
第二節 選民動態投票轉移特性之馬可夫鍊分析 ……………52
第六章 結論 ……………………………………………………………………………62
第一節 研究發現 ………………………………………………62
第二節 理論意涵………………………………………………64
第三節 研究限制與建議 ………………………………………65
參考文獻…………………………………………………………………68
附錄………………………………………………………………………83
附錄一 日本政黨政治發展大事紀一覽 ………………………83
附錄二 戰後日本政黨歷史起源脈絡及演進圖 ………………87
附錄三 選民穩定變遷投票之多項勝算對數模型分析 ………88
附錄四 不相關選項獨立性檢定 ………………………………89
附錄五 JESⅡ全部樣本與七波、八波定群樣本基本特徵的比對………………90
參考文獻
一、中文部分
(一)專書
胡佛:《政治參與與投票行為》,(台北:三民書局,初版,1998年)。
曹瑞泰譯,沖野安春著:《現代日本政治》,(台北:國立編譯館,初版,2000年)。
陳義彥、黃麗秋:《選舉行為與政治發展》,(台北:黎明文化事業公司,1992年)。
蔣立峰、高洪著,李炳南主編:《日本政府與政治》,(台北:揚智文化,初版,2002年)。
(二)期刊論文
王鼎銘:〈政策認同下的投票效用與選擇:空間投票理論在不同選舉制度間的比較〉,《選舉研究》,10卷1期(2003年),頁131-166。
王鼎銘、蘇俊斌、黃紀、郭銘峰:〈日本自民黨之選票穩定度研究:1993、1996及2000年眾議院選舉之定群追蹤分析〉,《選舉研究》,11卷2期(2004年),付梓中。
吳明上:〈日本眾議院議員選舉制度改革之探討:小選區比例代表並立制〉,《問題與研究》,42卷2期(2003年),頁79-94。
吳重禮、王宏忠:〈我國選民「分立政府」心理認知與穩定度:以2000年總統選舉與2001年立法委員選舉為例〉,《選舉研究》,10卷1期(2003年),頁81-114。
吳重禮:〈美國「分立性政府」與「一致政府」體制運作之比較與評析〉,《政治科學論叢》,9期(1998年),頁61-90。
林繼文:〈制度選擇如何可能:論日本之選舉制度改革〉,《台灣政治學刊》,2期(1997年12月),頁63-106。
胡澎:〈近代日本妇女的政治参与分析〉,《日本学刊》,3期(2003年),頁63-75。
徐方胜:〈利益诱导与自民党政权-以自民党农林族议员为视角〉,《日本学刊》,3期(2002年),頁41-53。
郑东丽、王庆西:〈日本选举制度改革前后派阀功能比较〉,《日本学刊》,2期(2002年),頁16-27。
曹瑞泰:〈冷戰後日本政黨政治的發展〉,《問題與研究》,36卷10期(1997年10月),頁27-50。
陳儔美:〈從第四十一屆眾議院選舉看日本的新選舉制度〉,《問題與研究》,36卷4期(1997年),頁63-75。
陳鵬仁:〈日本的政黨與國會議員選舉〉,《理論與政策》,10卷2期(1996年3月),頁96-108。
陳陸輝:〈「固定樣本連續訪談法」(panel studies)樣本流失問題的探討〉,《選舉研究》,6卷1期(1999年),頁175-206。
張世賢:〈日本眾議院議員選舉區制改革之研究〉,《中國行政評論》,4卷3期(1995年6月),頁1-42。
張世賢、黃澤銘、黃積聖:〈1996年日本眾議院議員選舉之研究〉,《中國行政評論》,6卷1期(1996年12月),頁93-156。
許介鱗:〈日本新選舉制度對民主政治的影響〉,《研考雙月刊》,21卷1期(1997年),頁42-48。
游盈隆:〈投票行為的緣起與發展〉,《東吳政治社會學報》,8期(1984年),頁195-223。
黃紀:〈實用方法論芻議〉,收錄於何思因、吳玉山(編),《邁入廿一世紀的政治學》,(台北:中國政治學會,《政治學報》特輯,31卷,2000年),頁107-139。
黃紀:〈一致與分裂投票:方法論之探討〉,《人文與社會科學集刊》,13卷5期(2001年12月),頁541-574。
黃紀:〈投票穩定與變遷之分析方法:定群類別資料之馬可夫鍊模型〉,《選舉研究》,付梓中。
黃紀、吳重禮:〈政治分析與研究方法:論2002年立法院行使考試院正副院長同意權之投票模式〉,《問題與研究》,42卷1期(2003年),頁1-17。
黃德福:〈台灣地區七十八年底選舉分裂投票之初探研究:以台北縣、雲林縣與高雄縣為個案〉,《政治學報》,19卷(1991年),頁55-80。
楊鈞池:〈後冷戰時期日本聯合政府與政治改革〉,《政治科學論叢》,16期(2002年6月),頁63-88。
蔡學儀:〈國會改造之選舉制度方案比較〉,《選舉研究》,9卷2期(2002年),頁117-150。
蔡增家:〈九0年代日本派閥政治之分析〉,《問題與研究》,41卷2期(2002年3、4月),頁61-81。
(三)研討會論文
黃紀:〈論「投票穩定與變遷」之估計方法〉,台灣政治學會暨「政黨輪替後之台灣政治」學術研討會論文,政治大學政治系舉辦,2001年12月15日。
蔡增家:〈日本自民黨再執政的政治經濟基礎〉,台灣政治學會「全球化與台灣政治」學術研討會,中正大學政治學系暨研究所舉辦,2002年12月15日。
蔡增家、楊鈞池:〈比較台灣和日本在90年之後的政經體制的轉變〉,台灣與日本評比國際研討會,成功大學社科院與工學院舉辦,2003年1月17-18日。
(四)學位論文
張益超:《選民投票穩定程度之研究---嘉義市第四屆與第五屆市長選舉之分析》,中正大學政治學研究所碩士論文,1999年。
陳若蘭:《台北市選民投票變遷之研究---民國八十三年與八十七年台北市長選舉之分析》,中正大學政治學研究所碩士論文,2001年。
楊鈞池:《後冷戰時期日本聯合政府之研究》,台灣大學政治學研究所博士論文,2001年。
二、英文部分
(一)專書
Abramson, Paul R., Political Attitudes in America: Formation and Change (San Francisco: W.H. Freeman, 1983).
Abramson, Paul R., John H. Aldrich, and David W. Rohde, Change and Continuity in the 1996 Elections (Washington D.C.: CQ Press, 1998).
Achen, Christopher H., and W. Philips Shively, Cross-Level Inference (Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1995).
Akuto, Hiroshi, “Political Process and Public Opinion: Voting Behavior and Mass Communication,” In Hirosuki Eguchi and H. Ichinohe, eds., International Studies of Broadcasting (Tokyo: NHK Radio and Television Culture Research Institute, 1971).
Almond, G.A., and S. Verba, The Civic Culture: Political Attitudes and Democracy in Five Nations (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1963).
Anderson, T.W., “Probability Models for Analyzing Time Change in Attitudes,” In P.F. Lazarsfeld, ed., Mathematical Thinking in the Social Sciences (New York: Macmillian, 1954).
Baltagi, Badi H., Econometric Analysis of Panel Data (New York: John Wiley and Sons, 1995).
Blumen, L., M. Kogan, and P.J. McCarthy, The Industrial Mobility of Labor as a Probability Process (Ithaca, N.Y.: Cornell University Press, 1955).
Burnham, Walter Dean, Critical Elections and the Mainsprings of American Politics (New York: W.W. Norton, 1970).
Butler, D., and D. Stokes, Political Change in Britain (New York: St. Martin’s Press, 1969).
Campbell, Angus, Philip E. Converse, Warren E. Miller, and Donald Stokes, The American Voter (New York: John Wiley and Sons, 1960).
Coleman, J.S., Models of Change and Response Uncertainty (Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall, 1964).
Converse, Philip E., “The Nature of Belief Systems in Mass Publics,” In David E. Apter, ed., Ideology and Discontent (New York: Free Press, 1964) .
Converse, Philip E., “Attitudes and Non-Attitudes: Continuation of a Dialogue,” In E.R. Tufte, ed., The Quantitative Analysis of Social Problems (Reading, M.A.: Addison-Wesley, 1970).
Converse and Dupeux, “Politicization of the Electorate in France and the United States,” In A. Campbell et al., eds., Elections and the Political Order (New York: John Wiley, 1966) .
Cox, G.W., Making Votes Count: Strategic Coordination in the World’s Electoral Systems (Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge University Press, 1997).
Curtis, G.L., Electioneering Japanese Style (New York: Columbia University Press, 1971).
Diggle, Peter J., Patrick Heagerty, Kung-Yee Liang, and Scott L. Zeger, Analysis of Longitudinal Data (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2nd edition, 2002).
Duverger, Maurice, Political Parties: Their Orgnization and Activity in the Modern State (London: Methuen, 1954).
Eldersveld, Samuel J., Political Parties: A Behavioral Analysis (Chicago: Rand McNally, 1964).
Flanagan, S.C., and B.M. Richardson, Japanese Electoral Behavior: Social Cleavages, Social Networks and Partisanship. Sage Contemporary Political Sociology Series, No. 06- 024 (London: Sage, 1977).
Flanagan, S.C., S. Kohei, I. Miyake, B. Richardson, and J. Watanuki, The Japanese Voter (New Haven and London: Yale University Press, 1991).
Fukui, H., “Japan: Factionalism in a Dominant-Party System,” In F.P. Belloni and D.C. Beller, eds., Faction Politics: Political Parties and Factionalism in Comparative Perspective (Santa Barbara: ABC-Clio, 1978).
Green, Donald, Bradley Palmquist, and Eric Schickler, “Partisan Stability: Evidence from Aggregate Data,” In Richard G. Neimi and Hebert F. Weisberg, eds., Controversies in voting Behavior (Washington, D.C.: CQ Press, 2001).
Green, William H., Econometrics Analysis (Upper Saddle River, N.J.: Prentice Hall, 4th Edition, 2000).
Grofman, Bernard, and Arend Lijphart, eds., Electoral Laws and Political Consequence (New York: Agathon Press, 1986).
Hagenaars, Jacques A., Categorical Longitudinal Data: Log-Linear Panel, Trend, and Cohort Analysis (London: Sage, 1990).
Heisse, David, “Casual Inference from Panel data,” In Edgar F. Borgatta, ed., Sociological Methodology (San Francisco: Jossey- Bass, 1970).
Hrebnar, R.J., and A. Nakamura, “The Liberal Democratic Party,” In R.J. Hrebnar, ed., The Japanese Party System: From One-Party Rule to Coalition Government (Boulder, C.O.: Westview, 2000), pp. 85-147.
Jennings, M. Kent, and Richard G. Niemi, Generations and Politics: A Panel Study of Young Adults and their Parents (Priceton, N.J.: Priceton University Press, 1981).
Kemeny, J.G., L. Snell, and G.L. Thompson, Finite Mathematics (Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall, 1966).
King, Gary, A Solution to the Ecological Inference Problem: Reconstructing Individual Behavior from Aggregate Data (Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press, 1997).
King, Gary, Robert O. Keohane, and Sidney Verba, Design Social Inquiry (Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press, 1994).
Kohei, Shinsaku, Political Behavior of the Japanese People (Mimeo: NHK Public Opinion Research Institute, 1972).
Langeheine, Rolf, and Frank van de Pol, “Discrete-Time Mixed Markov Latent Class Models,” In Angela Dale and Richard B. Davies, eds., Analyzing Social and Political Change: A Casebook of Methods (London: Sage Publications, 1994).
Langeheine, Rolf, and Frank van de Pol, “Latent Markov Chains,” In Jacques A. Hagenaars and Allan L. McCutcheon, eds., Applied Latent Class Analysis (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2002).
Lazarsfeld, Paul F., “The Use of Panel in Social Research,” In Patricia L. Kendall, ed., The Varied Sociology of Paul F. Lazarsfeld (New York: Columbia University Press, 1982) .
Lipset, Seymour M., and Stein Rokkan, eds., Party System and Voter Alignments (New York: The Free Press, 1967).
Markus, Gregory B., Analyzing Panel Data (Beverly Hills: Sage, 1979).
McFadden, Daniel, “Econometric Models for Probabilistic Choice,” In C.F. Manski and Daniel McFadden, eds., Structural Analysis of Discrete Data with Econometric Applications (Cambridge, M.A.: MIT Press, 1981).
McFadden, Daniel, “Econometric Analysis of Qualitative Response Models.” In Z. Griliches and Michael D. Intriligator, eds., Handbook of Econometrics 2 (Amsterdam: North Holland, 1984), pp.1394-1461.
Menard, Scott, Longitudinal Research. Sage University Paper Series on Quantitative Applications in the Social Sciences, No. 07- 076 (Newbury Park, C.A.: Sage, 1991).
Milbrath, Lester W., Political Participation (Chicago: Rand McNally, 1965).
Milbrath, Lester W., and M.L. Goal., Political Participation (Chicago: Rand McNally College Publishing Company, 2nd Edition, 1977).
Nei, Normman H., Sidney Verba and John R. Petrocik., The Changing American Voter (Cambridge, Mass: Harvard University Press, 1976).
Plewis, Ian, Analyzing Change: Measurement and Explanation Using Logitudinal Data (New York: John Wiley and Sons, 1985).
Richardson, Bradley M., Japanese Democracy: Power Coordination and Performance (New Haven, C.T.: Yale University Press, 1997).
Rochon, T.R., “Electoral Systems and the Basis for the Vote: the Case of Japan,” In J.C. Campbell, ed., Parties, Candidates and Voters in Japan: Six Quantitative Studies. Michigan Papers in Japanese Studies, No. 2 (Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Center for Japanese Study, 1981), pp. 1-28.
Rokkan, Stein, Citizens, Elections, Parties (Oslo: Universitest-forlaget, 1970).
Taagepera, Rein and Matthew S. Shugart, Seats and Votes: The Effects and Determinants of Electoral Systems (New Haven, Conn.: Yale University Press, 1989).
Thayer, N., How the Conservatives Rule Japan (Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press, 1969).
Van Deth, Jan W., “Interest in Politics,” In M. Kent Jennings and Jan W. van Deth, eds., Continuities in Political Action: A Longitudinal Study of Political Orientations in Three Western Democracies (New York: Water de Gruyter, 1990).
Vermunt, Jeroen K., “LEM: A General Program for the Analysis of Categorical Data,” (Netherlands: Tilburg University, 1997).
Watanuki, Joji, “Patterns of Politics in Present-Day Japan.” In Seymour Martin Lipset and Stein Rokkan, eds., Party Systems and Voter Alignments (New York: Free Press, 1967), pp. 447-466.
Wiggins, L.M., Panel Analysis (San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1973).

(二)期刊論文
Achen, Christopher H., “Mass Political Attitudes and the Survey Response,” American Political Science Review, Vol. 69 (1975), pp. 1218-1231.
Achen, Christopher H., “Social Psychology, Demographic Variables, and Linear Regression: Breaking the Iron Triangle in Voting Research,” Political Behavior, Vol. 14, No. 3 (1992), pp. 195-211.
Alvarez, R. Michael, and Jonathan Nagler, “When Politics and Models Collide: Estimating Models of Multiparty Elections,” American Journal of Political Science, Vol. 42 (1998), pp. 55-96.
Alvarez, R. Michael, and Jonathan Nagler, and Shaun Bowler, “Issues, Economics, and Dynamics of Multiparty Elections: The British 1987 General Election,” American Political Science Review, Vol. 94 (2000), pp. 131-150.
Beck, Paul A., “Models for Analyzing Panel Data: A Comparative Review,” Political Methodology, Vol. 2 (1975), pp. 357-380.
Beck, P.A., R.J. Dalton, S. Greene, and R. Huckfeldt, “The Social Calculus of Voting: Interpersonal, Media, and Organizational Influences on Presidential Choices,” American Political Science Review, Vol. 96, No. 1 (2002), pp. 57-73.
Blundell, R., “Consumer Behavior: Theory and Empirical Evidence — A Survey,” The Economic Journal, No. 98 (1988), pp. 16-65.
Braungart, Richard G.., and Margaret M. Braungart, “The Life Course Development of Left and Right Wing Youth Activist Leader from the 1960s,” Political Psychology, Vol. 11, No. 2 (1990), pp. 243-282.
Butler, David, and Stephen D. Van Beek, “Why Not Swing? Measuring Electoral Change,” Political Science and Politics, Vol. 23, No. 2 (1990), pp. 178-184.
Christensen, Raymond V., and Paul E. Johnson, “Toward a Context-Rich Analysis of Electoral Systems: The Japanese Example,” American Journal of Political Science, Vol. 39, No. 3 (1995), pp. 575-598.
Converse, Philip E., “Of Time and Partisan Stability, ” Comparative Political Studies, Vol. 2, No. 2 (1969), pp. 139-171.
Converse, Philip E., and Gregory B. Markus, “‘Plus a Change…’The New CPS Election Study Panel,” American Political Science Review, Vol. 73 (1979), pp. 2-49.
Cox, G.W., “A comment on Browne and Patterson’s ‘an Empirical Theory of Rational Nominating Behavior Applied to Japanese District Elections’,” British Journal of Political Science, Vol. 29 (1999), pp. 565-569.
Cox, G.W., and E. Niou, “Seat Bonuses Under the Single Nontransferable Vote System: Evidence from Japan and Taiwan,” Comparative Politics, Vol. 26 (1994), pp. 221-236.
Cox, G.W., and F. Rosenbluth, “Factional Competition for the Party Endorsement,”
British Journal of Political Science, Vol. 26 (1996), pp. 259-269.
D’Alimonte, Roberto, and Stefano Bartolini, “‘Electoral Transition’ and Party System Change in Italy,” West European Politics, Vol. 20, No. 1 (1997), pp. 110-134.
Dore, Ronald P., “Japanese Election Candidates in 1955,” Pacific Affairs Vol. 40 (1955), pp. 443-467.
Dorling, D.F.L., C.J. Pattie and R.J. Johnson, “Measuring Electoral Change in Three-Party Systems: An Alternative to Swing,” PS: Political Science and Politics, Vol. 26, No. 4 (1993), pp. 737-741.
Flanagan, S.C., “Voting Behavior in Japan: the Persistence of Traditional Patterns,”
Comparative Political Studies, Vol. 1 (1968), pp. 391-412.
Flanagan, S.C., and M.D. McDonald, “Party Identification as a Cross-National Concept: a Comparison of American and Japanese Identifiers,” Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Political Science Association, Washington, 1979.
Goodman, Leo A., “Statistical Methods for Analyzing Process of Change,” American Journal of Sociology, Vol. 68 (1962), pp. 57-78.
Green, Donald Philip, and Bradley Palmquist, “Of Artifacts and Partisan Instability,”
American Political Science Review, Vol. 34 (1990), pp. 872-901.
Green, Donald, Bradley Palmquist, and Eric Schickler, “Macropartisanship: A Replication and Critique,” American Political Science Review, Vol. 92, No. 4 (1998), pp. 883-899
Inoguchi, Takashi, “A Step Toward One-Party Predominance: The Japan’s General Election of 20 October 1996,” Government and Opposition, Vol. 32, No. 1 (1997), pp. 48-64.
Inoguchi, Takashi, “The Japan’s General Election of 25 June 2000,” Government and Opposition, Vol. 35, No. 4 (2000), pp. 484-498.
Jennings, M. Kent, and Gregory B. Markus, “Partisan Orientations over the Long Hall: Results from the Three-wave Political Socialization Panel Study,” American Political Science Review, Vol. 78 (1984), pp. 1000-1018.
Key, V.O., “Theory of Critical Election,” Journal of Politics, Vol. 17, No. 2 (1955), pp. 3-18.
Key, V.O., “Secular Realignment and the Party System,” Journal of Politics, Vol. 21, No. 1 (1959), pp. 198-210.
Klevmarken, N.A., “Panel Studies: What can We Learn from them?” European Economic Review, Vol. 33 (1989), pp. 375-377.
Kohno, Masaru, “Voter Turnout and Strategic Ticket-Splitting Under Japan''s New Electoral Rules,” Asian survey, Vol. 37, No. 5 (1997), pp. 429-440.
Langeheine, Rolf, and Frank van de Pol, “A Unifying Framework for Markov Modeling in Discrete Space and Discrete Time,” Sociological Methods and Research, Vol. 18 (1990), pp. 416-441.
Leithner, Christain, “Of Time and Partisan Stability Revisisted: Australia and New Zealand 1905-90,” American Journal of Political Science, Vol. 41, No. 4 (1997), pp. 1104-1127.
MacKuen, Michael B., R.S. Erikson, and J.A. Stimson, “Macropartisanship,” American Political Science Review, Vol. 83, No. 4 (1989), pp.1125-1142.
MacKuen, Michael B., R.S. Erikson, and J.A. Stimson, “Question Wording And Macropartisanship,” American Political Science Review, Vol. 86, No. 2 (1992), pp. 475-486.
Markus, Gregory B., “Political Attitudes During an Election Year: A Report on the 1980 NES Panel Study,” American Political Science Review, Vol. 76 (1982), pp. 538-560.
McNemar, Quinn, “Note on the Sampling Error of the Difference between Correlated Proportions or Percentages,” Psychometrika, Vol. 12, No. 2 (1947), pp.153-157.
Nardulli, Peter F., “The Concept of a Critical Realignment, Electoral Behavior, and Political Change,” American Political Science Review, Vol. 89, No. 1 (1995), pp. 10-22.
Plutzer, Eric, “Becoming a Habitual Voter: Inertia, Resources, and Growth in Young Adulthood,” American Political Science Review, Vol. 96 (2002), pp. 41-56.
Pomper, Gerald M., “Classification of Presidential Elections,” Journal of Politics, Vol. 29 (1967), pp. 535-566.
Reed, Steven R., “Strategic Voting in the 1996 Japanese General Election,” Comparative Political Studies, Vol. 32, No. 2 (1999), pp. 257-270.
Richardson, Bradley M., “Party Loyalties and Party Saliency in Japan,” Comparative Political Studies, Vol. 8 (1975), pp. 32-57.
Richardson, Bradley M., “ Stability and Change in Japanese Voting Behavior, 1958-1972,” Journal of Asian Studies, Vol. 36 (1977), pp. 675-693.
Richardson, Bradley M., “Japan’s Habitual Voters: Partisanship on the Emotional Periphery,” Comparative Political Science Studies, Vol. 19 (1986), pp. 356-384.
Richardson, Bradley M., “Constituency Candidates Versus Parties in Japanese Voting Behavior,” American Political Science Review, Vol. 82 (1988), pp. 695-718.
Robinson, W.S., “Ecological Correlations and the Behavior of Individuals,” American Sociological Review, No. 15 (1950), pp. 351-357.
Schwarz, Gideon, “Estimating the Dimension of a Model,” The Annals of Statistics, Vol. 6, No. 2 (1978), pp. 461-464.
Shively, W. Phillips, “Ecological Inference: The Use of Aggregate Data To Study Individuals,” American Political Science Review, Vol. 63, No. 4 (1969), pp. 1183-1196.
Shively, W. Phillips, “The Electoral Impact of Party Loyalist and the Floating Vote: A New Measure and A New Perspective,” Journal of Politics, Vol. 44, No. 3 (1982), pp. 679-691.
Small, K.A., and C. Hsiao, “Multinomial Logit Specification Tests,” International Economic Review, Vol. 26, No. 3 (1985), pp. 619-627.
Taylor, Marylee C., “The Black-and-White Model of Attitude Stability: A Latent Class Examination of Opinion and Nonopinion in the American Public,” American Journal of Sociology, Vol. 89, No. 2 (1983), pp. 373-401.
Van de Pol, Frank, and Rolf Langeheine, “Mixed Markov Latent Class Models,” Sociological Methodology, Vol. 20 (1990), pp. 213-247.
Wellhofer, E. Spencer, “Party Realignment and Voter Transition in Italy, 1987-1996,”
Comparative Political Studies, Vol. 34, No. 2 (2001), pp. 156-186.
Wright, Gerald C., “Level-of-Analysis Effects on Explanations of Voting: The Case of the 1982 US Senate Elections,” British Journal of Political Science, Vol. 19 (1989), pp. 381-398.
三、日文部分
(一)專書
三宅一郎、木下富雄、間場壽一:《異なゐしべの選挙におけゐ投票行動の研究》,(東京:創文社,1967年)。
三宅一郎:《政黨支持の分析》,(東京:創文社,1985年)。
三宅一郎:《日本の政治と選挙》,(東京:東京大學出版會,1995年)。
三宅一郎:《選挙制度變革と投票行動》,(東京:木鐸社,2001年)。
久禮義一:《現代選挙論:投票行動と問題点》,(奈良市:萌書房,初版,2001年)。
內田滿:《政黨政治の論理》,(東京:三嶺書房株式會社,1983年)。
田中直毅:《市場‧政府》,(東京:東洋經濟新報社,2000年)。
升味準之輔:《戰後政治:一九四五-五五年(上)(下)》,(東京:東京大學,1983年)。
山口二郎:《日本政治の課題》,(東京:岩波書店,1997年)。
中野實:《現代日本の政治過程》,(東京:東京大學出版會,1998年)。
北岡伸一:《自民黨:政權黨の38年》,(東京:讀賣新聞出版社,1995年)。
村松岐夫、伊藤光厲、辻中豐:《日本の政治》,(東京:有斐閣,2001年)。
宮田豐:《憲法講義》,(京都:嵯峨野書院,1993年)。
高瀨淳一、近裕一夫:《最新データ-比較政治ハンドブツク》,(實務教育出版,2002年)。
堀江湛、岡澤憲芙:《現代政治學》,(東京:法學書院,1997年)。
福岡政行:《日本の選挙》,(東京:早稻田大學出版部,2001年)。
蒲島郁夫、綿貫讓治、三宅一郎、小林良彰、池田謙一:《JES II コードブツク--變動する日本人の選挙行動》,(東京:木鐸社,1998年)。
蒲島郁夫ゼミ編:《有權者の肖像--55年體制崩壞後の投票行動》,(東京:木鐸社,2001年)。
QRCODE
 
 
 
 
 
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               
第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁 top
1. 王鼎銘、蘇俊斌、黃紀、郭銘峰:〈日本自民黨之選票穩定度研究:1993、1996及2000年眾議院選舉之定群追蹤分析〉,《選舉研究》,11卷2期(2004年),付梓中。
2. 王鼎銘:〈政策認同下的投票效用與選擇:空間投票理論在不同選舉制度間的比較〉,《選舉研究》,10卷1期(2003年),頁131-166。
3. 鄭燦山,〈《河上公注》成書時代及其思想史、道教史之意義〉,《漢學研究》,第十八卷第二期,2000年12月
4. 陳麗桂,〈《老子河上公章句》所顯現的黃老養生之理〉,《中國學術年刊》,第二十一期,2000年3月
5. 張運華,〈身國並重的道家養生論─論《老子河上公章句》〉,《宗教哲學》,第二卷第一期,1996年1月
6. 杜保瑞,〈《河上公注老》的哲學體系之方法論問題檢討(上)、(下)〉,《哲學與文化》,二十九卷第五期、第六期,2002年5月、6月
7. 52. 漢寶德,城市文化的產業化,國家政策論壇,2002。
8. 1. 方世榮,「關係價值、關係品質與忠誠度之探討-零售銀行業的實證研究」,管理學報,第十九卷,第六期,2002。
9. 嚴靈峰,〈日本康應二年老子河上公章句鈔本斠證〉,《大陸雜誌》,第七十卷第六期
10. 鄭燦山,〈老子河上公注長生思想析論〉,《孔孟學報》,第七十七期,1999年9月
11. 吳明上:〈日本眾議院議員選舉制度改革之探討:小選區比例代表並立制〉,《問題與研究》,42卷2期(2003年),頁79-94。
12. 吳重禮、王宏忠:〈我國選民「分立政府」心理認知與穩定度:以2000年總統選舉與2001年立法委員選舉為例〉,《選舉研究》,10卷1期(2003年),頁81-114。
13. 吳重禮:〈美國「分立性政府」與「一致政府」體制運作之比較與評析〉,《政治科學論叢》,9期(1998年),頁61-90。
14. 曹瑞泰:〈冷戰後日本政黨政治的發展〉,《問題與研究》,36卷10期(1997年10月),頁27-50。
15. 陳儔美:〈從第四十一屆眾議院選舉看日本的新選舉制度〉,《問題與研究》,36卷4期(1997年),頁63-75。