政大機構典藏-National Chengchi University Institutional Repository(NCCUR):Item 140.119/143855
English  |  正體中文  |  简体中文  |  Post-Print筆數 : 27 |  Items with full text/Total items : 113318/144297 (79%)
Visitors : 51107218      Online Users : 934
RC Version 6.0 © Powered By DSPACE, MIT. Enhanced by NTU Library IR team.
Scope Tips:
  • please add "double quotation mark" for query phrases to get precise results
  • please goto advance search for comprehansive author search
    •  Adv. Search
    Home ‧ Login ‧ Upload ‧ Help ‧ About ‧ Administer Goto mobile version


    Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/143855


    Title: 負擔或是資產？母職與政治參與之關聯
    A Burden or an Asset ? The Relationship between Motherhood and Political Participation
    Authors: 葉如緣
    Yeh, Ju-Yuan
    Contributors: 楊婉瑩
    Yang, Wan-Ying
    葉如緣
    Yeh, Ju-Yuan
    Keywords: 母職
    政治參與
    交叉壓力
    女性主義
    Motherhood
    Political Participation
    Cross-pressure
    Feminism
    Date: 2022
    Issue Date: 2023-03-09 18:41:46 (UTC+8)
    Abstract: 女性主義詩人Rich (1976) 在其《女人所生》一書中對母職概念提出兩種意義，就社會層面而言，母職體制作為外力，以各種制度或政策形成強制性規範女性；就個人層面而言，母職經驗作為個人經驗，則可以激發出母親們新的個人特質與能力並且充權（empower）女性。換言之，作為母親對女性而言並非僅只於負面的影響，同時也會帶來正面的啟發，而這一種潛藏於母職之中的矛盾性，則同時為我帶來了研究的誘因與動機，想進一步探詢在政治參與之中母職及其特殊性所帶來的影響。
    因此本研究將以量化分析，台灣女性政治參與之中母職身分之差異現象、成因以及影響。描繪出母職女性的政治參與輪廓，並從中建構出母職女性政治參與之類型，以歸納出女性於母職交織性之下政治參與之模式與行為。
    透過兩個「線性迴歸模型」 (linear regression model)，本文分析2019年間之629名女性，觀察母職身份會對其政治參與所造成之影響。研究發現，母職經驗確實會對政治參與產生影響，女性並非一「均質」群體，因身份因素，母職女性更傾向參與具有個人性與地區性的隱性政治參與，而身份因素，亦增強了母職女性於政治參與上的能動性。此外，社會體制議會對政治參與造成影響，傳統規範所產生的交叉壓力，使得在必須揭露自身立場的顯性政治參與上，產生了必須察言觀色的「不敢」；而隱性政治參與的特性，則降低了傳統倫理規範對女性的影響。而當母職經驗與母職體制同時對政治參與作用時，為了維繫母職與主體性的平衡，母職女性於政治參與上不再屈就「政治不活動」，取而代之採取「活動不政治」策略，將隱性政治參與作為替代性選擇。
    母職對女性的作用，是為政治參與的資產亦或為負擔？一如 Rich (1976)所言，事實上母職體制對於女性的政治參與而言確實會帶來負債一般的作用，使女性受制於家庭；反之，母職經驗對於女性政治參與而言卻宛如資產一般，促使女性走出家庭。換言之，母職既為資產，亦為負擔。只要政治參與的場域正確，看似負擔的母職，也能成為女性不可多得的資產。
    Rich(1976), as a feminist poet, had brought up two meanings of motherhood in his book” Of Woman Born”. From social perspectives, institution of motherhood as an external force, stipulates women by systems or policies; from personal perspectives, experience of mothering as a personal experience, can rather inspire mothers to gain new characteristics and capability. Also, personal experience empowers women.
    In other words, women, as being mothers, obtain not only negative impact but also positive inspiration. The ambivalent characteristics of motherhood have become my study incentives and motivation, which urge me to inquire deeply into the special impact of motherhood in the field of political participation.
    Using quantitative analysis, this study observes the difference between women being mothers or women who are not in female political participation in Taiwan. The study also depicts the contour of the political participation of mothers, and further constructs and classifies the types of the political participation of mothers. Even more, it concludes the mode and behavior of the political participation of mothers under intersectionality.
    By using two linear regression models, this study analyzes 629 women in 2019. It observes how motherhood as an identity would cause impacts on female political participation. The study reveals that experience of mothering has an effect on female political participation. Women are not a homogenous population. Based on the difference in identity, women with motherhood prefer “recessive” political participation, which is more personal, or regional. Besides, motherhood as an identity consolidates the motivation in female political participation. On the other hand, the social system has an effect on political participation. Traditional social norms which generate cross-pressure forces women to be afraid of revealing themselves in “dominant” political participation. At the same time, the characteristics of recessive political participation lower the restriction of traditional social norms of women.
    As experience of mothering and institution of motherhood concurrently play roles on political participation, mothers would not compromise themselves to be “inactive in politics”, but to be “active in non-politics”. Besides, they prefer recessive political participation as an alternative choice.
    Motherhood an asset or a burden to female political participation? As Rich(1976) has mentioned, institution of motherhood would certainly be a debt to drag women’s feet in the family. But, on the contrary, experience of mothering would be an asset in female political participation, which prompts women to walk out of the family. Namely, motherhood is a burden and also an asset to female political participation. As long as the field of political participation is appropriate, the seemingly burdensome motherhood can become an exceptional asset to women.
    Reference: 一、 中文部分
    方世榮、張文賢，2014，《統計學導論》，臺北：華泰。
    王瑞香，2000，〈基進女性主義〉，載於《女性主義理論與流派》，顧燕翎主編，臺北：女書文化。
    伊慶春、高淑貴，1988，《已婚職業婦女子女照顧問題之硏究》，臺北：行政院硏究發展考核委員會。
    行政院性別平等會，2021，〈2021性別圖像〉，行政院平等會網站：https://gec.ey.gov.tw/Page/ 8996A23EDB9871BE，檢索日期：2021年6月14日。
    吳俊瑤，2003，《國民小學教師政治態度之研究》，國立屏東師範學院國民教育研究所碩士學位論文。
    吳麗明，2003，〈女研究生就學就業與母職實踐之對話〉，國立高雄師範大學性別教育研究所在職進修專班碩士學位論文。
    呂筱渝，2017，〈母職的煉金術—汪曉青攝影作品析論〉，法國巴黎第八大學婦女與性別研究博士學位論文。
    李令儀譯，Betty Friedan原著，2000，《覺醒與挑戰：女性迷思》，臺北：幸福綠光。
    李宜芳，2011，〈全職媽媽母職意義觀點之轉化學習研究〉，國立臺灣師範大學社會教育學系博士學位論文。
    李冠成，2014，〈兩岸經濟整合與簽署ECFA對台灣民眾統獨立場的影響：2008至2012定群追蹤樣本的實證分析〉，國立政治大學政治學系博士學位論文。
    杜素豪，2008，〈世界價值觀調查資料庫簡介〉，《人文與社會科學簡訊》，10(2): 107-121。
    周碧娥，1987，〈臺灣地區婦女政治參與的變遷〉，《社區發展季刊》，37: 13-25。
    林子雯，1996，〈成人學生多重角色與幸福感之相關研究〉，國立高雄師範大學成人教育研究所碩士學位論文。
    林可文，1998，〈職業婦女的育兒問題〉，《親子教育雜誌》，80: 8-9。
    林芳玫，2000，〈自由主義女性主義〉，載於《女性主義理論與流派》，顧燕翎主編，臺北：女書文化。
    林珮婷，2014，〈男女有別？社會資本使用於政治場域的類型初探〉，《選舉研究》，21(2):81-112。
    邱文仁，2003，〈全球女性大調查〉，《ELLE雜誌》，145: 202-208。
    邱欣怡，2013，〈現代中產階級母親的母職實踐與能動性—以育兒部落客作家為例〉，世新大學性別研究所碩士學位論文。
    邱皓政，2019，《量化研究與統計分析（六版）：SPSS與R資料分析範例解析》，臺北：五南。
    俞彥娟，2003，〈美國婦女史研究中的「母親角色」〉，《近代中國婦女史研究》，11:189-214。
    姜貞吟，2019，〈必須「賢淑」：五種父權家庭拒斥的女性〉，《這是愛女，也是厭女》，臺北：大家出版。
    洪惠芬，2010，〈「現代母職」作為一種兒童照顧安排：母親作為照顧者的勞動處境〉，風險社會下台灣福利社會的未來國際學術研討會，嘉義：國立中正大學。
    胡幼慧，1995，《三代同堂：迷思與陷阱》，臺北：巨流圖書。
    胡佛、陳德禹、朱志宏，1978，〈權力的價值取向：概念架構的建構與評估〉，《社會科學論叢》，27: 3-40。
    唐文慧，2011，〈為何職業婦女決定離職？結構限制下的母職認同與實踐〉，《臺灣社會研究》，85: 201-265。
    徐宗國，1995，《工作內涵與性別角色》，臺北：稻鄉。
    婦女新知編譯組，Alice Schwarzer原著，2001，《拒絕做第二性的女人－西蒙．波娃訪問錄》，臺北：女書文化。
    康雅雯，2016，〈母職經驗中的女性自我：一位全職媽媽的敘說探究〉，國立暨南國際大學諮商心理與人力資源發展學系輔導與諮商研究所碩士學位論文。
    張華蓀，2005，〈蝸行20年：女性主義地理學在臺灣的發展〉，《地理學報》，(42): 25-46。
    梁莉芳，2014，〈為母則強：母職作為改變社會的場域〉，巷仔口社會學：https://twstreetcorner.org/2014/05/11/lianglifang-2/，檢索日期：2021年6月14日。
    梁雙蓮，1987，〈臺灣婦女的政治參與現況與發展〉，《中國論壇》，(23): 79-84
    盛杏湲，2004，〈政治參與〉，載於《政治學》，陳義彥主編，臺北：五南圖書。
    郭秋永，1993，〈政治參與的意義：方法論上的分析〉，《人文及社會學集刊》5(1): 173-211。
    陳孝庭，2004，《社會資本與公民參與關係之研究－以臺北市為例》，國立臺北大學公共行政暨政策學系碩士學位論文。
    陳怡樺，2017〈母職與環境運動的關係〉，國立中山大學社會學系碩士學位論文。
    陳姿穎，2020，〈女性政治參與與母職時間的交會〉，國立臺灣師範大學公民教育與活動領導學系碩士學位論文。
    陳素秋，2010，〈以女性主義反思公民參與〉，「現代公民素養教育」研討會，臺中縣：國家教育研究院籌備處。
    陳義彥，1977，《臺灣地區大學生政治社會化之研究》，國立政治大學政治研究所博士學位論文。
    黃怡瑾，2001，〈「私」領域中的女性困境：生育、教養與照顧工作之分工〉，《臺南師院學報》，34: 341-365。
    黃紀、王德育，2012，《質變數與受限依變數的迴歸分析》。臺北：五南。
    楊美惠譯，Simone de Beauvoir原著，1992，《第二性，第二卷：處境》，臺北：志文。
    楊婉瑩，2007，〈政治參與的性別差異〉，《選舉研究》，14(2): 53-94。
    楊婉瑩、林珮婷，2011，〈當「男女有別」變成「男女不平等」-性別角色認知與政治效能感〉，《女學學誌》，29: 121-172。
    劉秀娟，1998，《兩性關係與教育》，臺北：揚智文化。
    潘淑滿，2005，〈臺灣母職圖像〉，《女學學誌：婦女與性別研究》，20: 41-91。
    鄭忍嬌、周麗端，2013，〈一個勞動階級都市原住民女性的母職生活經驗─妊命、認命、訒命與韌命的歷程〉，《人類發展與家庭學報》，15:83-105。
    蕭淑仁，2003，〈青年女性的生活經驗－以高學歷的職業婦女為例〉，國立中正大學心理學研究所碩士學位論文。
    賴佳杏，2005，〈已婚職業婦女進修研究所時懷孕的生活經驗〉，國立嘉義大學家庭教育研究所碩士學位論文。
    謝美娥，2009，〈就業母親之母職經驗與就業策略初探〉，《中華心理衛生學刊》，22(3): 299-334。
    羅國英，2009，《青少年家庭中的親職壓力與親子衝突》，計畫編號：10.6141/TW-SRDA-E88046-1，臺北：中央研究院人文社會科學研究中心調查研究專題中心學術調查研究資料庫。
    蘇芊玲，1998，〈家庭與社會也需要落實兩性平等教育〉，《兩性平等教育季刊》，1: 36-39。
    ———，1998，《我的母職實踐》，臺北：女書文化。
     
    二、英文部分
    Alpert, Jane. 1973. “Mother Right: A New Feminist Theory.” Off Our Backs 3 (9): 29–31.
    Apple, Rima D., and Janet Lynne Golden, eds. 1997. Mothers & Motherhood: Readings in American History. Women and Health. Columbus: Ohio State University Press.
    Arnup, Katherine, Andrée Lévesque, and Ruth Roach Pierson, eds. 1990. Delivering Motherhood: Maternal Ideologies and Practices in the 19th and 20th Centuries. London ; New York: Routledge.
    Barnes, Samuel H., and Max Kaase. 1979. Political Action: Mass Participation in Five Western Democracies. Beverly Hills, Calif: Sage Publications.
    Beauvoir, Simone de. 1949. The Second Sex. London: Vintage.
    Blondel, Jean. 1970. Voters, Parties and Leaders: The Social Fabric of British Politics. Pelican Books. London: Penguin.
    Bourque, Susan C., and Jean Grossholtz. 1974. “Politics an Unnatural Practice: Political Science Looks at Female Participation.” Politics & Society 4 (2): 225–66. https://doi.org/10.1177/003232927400400205.
    Brady, Henry E., Sidney Verba, and Kay Lehman Schlozman. 1995. “Beyond SES: A Resource Model of Political Participation.” American Political Science Review 89 (2): 271–94. https://doi.org/10.2307/2082425.
    Brambor, Thomas, William Roberts Clark, and Matt Golder. 2006. “Understanding Interaction Models: Improving Empirical Analyses.” Political Analysis 14 (1): 63–82. https://doi.org/10.1093/pan/mpi014.
    Burns, Nancy, Kay Lehman Schlozman, and Sidney Verba. 1997. “The Public Consequences of Private Inequality: Family Life and Citizen Participation.” American Political Science Review 91 (2): 373–89. https://doi.org/10.2307/
    2952362.
    Campbell, Angus, Philip E. Converse, Warren E. Miller, and Donald E. Stokes. 1960. The American Voter. England: John Wiley.
    Campbell, Rosie. 2004. “Gender, Ideology and Issue Preference: Is There Such a Thing as a Political Women’s Interest in Britain?” The British Journal of Politics and International Relations 6 (1): 20–44. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-856X.2004.
    00125.x.
    Carroll, Susan J., and Linda M. G. Zerilli. 1988. “Women’s Autonomy and the Gender Gap: 1980-1982.” In The Politics of the Gender Gap: The Social Political Influence, edited by Carol McClurg Mueller. Beverly Hills: Sage Publications.
    Chodorow, Nancy. 1999. The Reproduction of Mothering: Psychoanalysis and the Sociology of Gender: With a New Preface. Berkeley: University of California Press.
    Clandinin, D. Jean, and F. Michael Connelly. 2000. Narrative Inquiry: Experience and Story in Qualitative Research. 1. ed., 1. PB print. The Jossey-Bass Education Series. San Francisco, Calif: Jossey-Bass.
    Conroy, Meredith, Jessica T. Feezell, and Mario Guerrero. 2012. “Facebook and Political Engagement: A Study of Online Political Group Membership and Offline Political Engagement.” Computers in Human Behavior 28 (5): 1535–46. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2012.03.012.
    Conway, M. Margaret. 1991. Political Participation in the United States. 2nd ed. Washington, D.C: CQ Press.
    Coulthard, Melissa, Alison Walker, and Antony Morgan. 2002. People’s Perceptions of Their Neighbourhood and Community Involvement: Results from the Social Capital Module of the General Household Survey 2000. A National Statistics Publication. London: The Stationery Office.
    Dalton, Russell J. 1996. Citizen Politics in Western Democracies: Public Opinion and Political Parties in the United States, Great Britain, West Germany, and France. Chatham, N.J: Chatham House Publishers.
    ———. 2009. The Good Citizen: How a Younger Generation Is Reshaping American Politics. Rev. ed. Washington, D.C: CQ Press.
    Deth, Jan W. van. 2009. “Norms of Citizenship.” In The Oxford Handbook of Political Behavior, edited by Russell J. Dalton and Hans‐Dieter Klingemann, 1st ed., 402–17. Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199270125.
    003.0021.
    Downs, Anthony. 1957. An Economic Theory of Democracy. New York: Harper.
    Eisenstein, Hester. 1984. Contemporary Feminist Thought. London: Unwin Paperbacks.
    Firestone, Shulamith. 1970. The Dialectic of Sex: The Case for Feminist Revolution. New York, NY: William Morrow and Company.
    Foucault, Michel. 1982. “The Subject and Power.” Critical Inquiry 8 (4): 777–95.
    Franzese, Robert, and Cindy Kam. 2007. Modeling and Interpreting Interactive Hypotheses in Regression Analysis. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press. https://doi.org/10.3998/mpub.206871.
    Glenn, Evelyn Nakano, Grace Chang, and Linda Rennie Forcey, eds. 1994. Mothering: Ideology, Experience, and Agency. New York: Routledge.
    Guerrina, Roberta. 2001. “Equality, Difference and Motherhood: The Case for a Feminist Analysis of Equal Rights and Maternity Legislation.” Journal of Gender Studies 10 (1): 33–42.
    Harding, Sandra G. 1987. Feminism and Methodology: Social Science Issues. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.
    Harell, Allison, and Jillisn Evans. 2005. “Gendered Social Capital and Its Political Implications: The Canadian Case in Comparative Perspective.” In Canadian Political Science Association Annual Meeting. Ontario.
    Hays, Sharon. 1996. The Cultural Contradictions of Motherhood. New Haven, Conn.: Yale Univ. Press.
    Hechter, Michael, and Karl-Dieter Opp. 2001. “Introduction.” In Social Norms, edited by Michael Hechter and Karl-Dieter Opp. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.
    Hodgkin, Suzanne. 2009. “INNER WHEEL OR INNER SANCTUM: Gender and the Social Capital Debate.” Australian Feminist Studies 24 (62): 439–52. https://doi.org/10.1080/08164640903289310.
    Höffe, Otfried. 2007. Political Justice: Foundations for a Critical Philosophy of Law and the State. Cambridge: Polity Press.
    Horne, C. 2003. “The Internal Enforcement of Norms.” European Sociological Review 19 (4): 335–43. https://doi.org/10.1093/esr/19.4.335.
    Howe, Paul. 2006. “Political Knowledge and Electoral Participation in the Netherlands: Comparisons with the Canadian Case.” International Political Science Review 27 (2): 137–66. https://doi.org/10.1177/0192512106061424.
    Inglehart, Ronald, and Pippa Norris. 2003. Rising Tide: Gender Equality and Cultural Change around the World. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    Iversen, Torben, and Frances McCall Rosenbluth. 2010. Women, Work, and Politics: The Political Economy of Gender Inequality. New Haven: Yale University Press.
    Jaggar, Alison M. 1983. Feminist Politics and Human Nature. Philosophy and Society. Totowa, N.J: Rowman & Allanheld.
    Jaquette, Jane. 1974. “Introduction.” In Women in Politics, edited by Jane S. Jaquette. New York: Wiley.
    Jennings, M. Kent. 1979. “Another Look at the Life Cycle and Political Participation.” American Journal of Political Science 23 (4): 755–71. https://doi.org/10.2307/
    2110805.
    Jennings, M. Kent, and Richard G. Niemi. 1981. Generations and Politics: A Panel Study of Young Adults and Their Parents. New Jersey: Princeton University Press.
    Kerber, Linda K. 1988. “Separate Spheres, Female Worlds, Woman’s Place: The Rhetoric of Women’s History.” The Journal of American History 75 (1): 9. https://doi.org/10.2307/1889653.
    Klesner, Joseph L. 2009. “Who Participates? Determinants of Political Action in Mexico.” Latin American Politics and Society 51 (2): 59–90.
    Liefbroer, Aart C., and Francesco C. Billari. 2010. “Bringing Norms Back in: A Theoretical and Empirical Discussion of Their Importance for Understanding Demographic Behaviour: Bringing Norms Back In.” Population, Space and Place 16 (4): 287–305. https://doi.org/10.1002/psp.552.
    Lister, Ruth. 1997. Citizenship: Feminist Perspectives. New York: New York University Press. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-349-26209-0.
    Manne, Kate. 2017. Down Girl: The Logic of Misogyny. New York: Oxford University Press.
    McBride-Stetson, Dorothy. 2004. Women’s Rights in the USA: Policy Debates and Gender Roles. London: Routledge.
    Meyers, Diana Tietjens. 2001. “The Rush to Motherhood: Pronatalist Discourse and Women’s Autonomy.” Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society 26 (3): 735–73. https://doi.org/10.1086/495627.
    Milbrath, Lester W., and Madan Lal Goel. 1977. Political Participation: How and Why Do People Get Involved in Politics? 2d ed. Chicago: Rand McNally College Pub. Co.
    Miller, Arthur H. 1974. “Political Issues and Trust in Government: 1964–1970.” American Political Science Review 68 (3): 951–72. https://doi.org/10.2307/
    1959140.
    Miller, Jean Baker. 1986. Toward a New Psychology of Women. 2nd ed. Boston: Beacon Press.
    Miller, Warren E., and Santa Traugott. 1989. American National Election Studies Data Sourcebook, 1952-1986. Cambridge, Mass: Harvard University Press.
    Muller, Edward N., and Thomas O. Jukam. 1983. “Discontent and Aggressive Political Participation.” British Journal of Political Science 13 (2): 159–79. https://doi.org/
    10.1017/S0007123400003203.
    Mutz, Diana C. 2002. “Cross-Cutting Social Networks: Testing Democratic Theory in Practice.” American Political Science Review 96 (1): 111–26. https://doi.org/
    10.1017/S0003055402004264.
    Norris, Pippa. 1991. “Gender Differences in Political Participation in Britain: Traditional, Radical and Revisionist Models.” Government and Opposition 26 (1): 56–74. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1477-7053.1991.tb01124.x.
    Oakley, Ann. 1974. The Sociology of Housework. London: Robertson.
    Okin, Susan Moller. 1998. “Gender, the Public, and the Private.” In Feminism and Politics, edited by Anne Phillips. Oxford Readings in Feminism. Oxford ; New York: Oxford University Press.
    Pateman, Carole. 2005. “Equality, Difference, Subordination: The Politics of Motherhood and Women’s Citizenship.” In Beyond Equality and Difference: Citizenship, Feminist Politics and Female Subjectivity, edited by Gisela Bock and Susan James. London: Routledge.
    Pattie, Charles, and Ron Johnston. 2003. “Civic Literacy and Falling Electoral Turnout: The United Kingdom 1992-1997.” Canadian Journal of Political Science 36 (3): 579–99. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0008423903778779.
    Pomper, Gerald M. 1975. Voters’ Choice: Varieties of American Electoral Behavior. New York: Dodd, Mead.
    Randall, Vicky. 1987. Women and Politics: An International Perspective. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
    Raney, Tracey, and Loleen Berdahl. 2009. “Birds of a Feather? Citizenship Norms, Group Identity, and Political Participation in Western Canada.” Canadian Journal of Political Science 42 (1): 187–209. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0008423909090076.
    Reinharz, Shulamit, and Lynn Davidman. 1992. Feminist Methods in Social Research. New York: Oxford University Press.
    Rich, Adrienne. 1976. Of Woman Born: Motherhood as Experience and Institution. Norton paperbook edition. New York, NY: W. W. Norton & Company.
    Rinehart, Sue Tolleson. 1992. Gender, Consciousness, and Politics. New York: Routledge.
    Robinson, John P., and Mark R. Levy. 1986. The Main Source: Learning from Television News. New York: Sage Publications.
    Rokkan, Stein. 1970. Citizens, Elections, Parties: Approaches to the Comparative Study of the Processes of Development. Oslo: Universitetforlaget.
    Rosenstone, Steven J., John Mark Hansen, and Keith Reeves. 2003. Mobilization, Participation, and Democracy in America. New York: Longman.
    Rothman, Barbara Katz. 1990. “Recreating Motherhood.” In Beyond Baby M, edited by Dianne M. Bartels, Reinhard Priester, Dorothy E. Vawter, and Arthur L. Caplan, 9–27. Totowa, NJ: Humana Press. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4612-4510-0_2.
    Ruddick, Sara. 1980. “Maternal Thinking.” Feminist Studies 6 (2): 342. https://doi.org/
    10.2307/3177749.
    Sapiro, Virginia. 1983. The Political Integration of Women: Roles, Socialisation, and Politics. Illini Books ed. An Illini Book. Urbana: University of Illinois Press.
    Scaff, Lawrence A. 1975. “Two Concepts of Political Participation.” Western Political Quarterly 28 (3): 447–62. https://doi.org/10.1177/106591297502800303.
    Scheufele, Dietram A., and Matthew C. Nisbet. 2002. “Being a Citizen Online: New Opportunities and Dead Ends.” Harvard International Journal of Press/Politics 7 (3): 55–75. https://doi.org/10.1177/1081180X0200700304.
    Schwartz, Shalom H., and Anat Bardi. 1997. “Influences of Adaptation to Communist Rule on Value Priorities in Eastern Europe.” Political Psychology 18 (2): 385–410. https://doi.org/10.1111/0162-895X.00062.
    Skard, Torild, and Elina Haavio-Mannila. 1984. “Equality between the Sexes: Myth or Reality in Norden?” Daedalus 113 (1): 141–67.
    Stanley, Harold W., Richard G. Niemi, and Harold Watkins Stanley. 1988. Vital Statistics on American Politics. Washington, D.C.: CQ Press.
    Stokes-Brown, Atiya Kai, and Melissa Olivia Neal. 2008. “Give ‘Em Something to Talk about: The Influence of Female Candidates’ Campaign Issues on Political Proselytizing: Female Candidates and Political Proselytizing.” Politics & Policy 36 (1): 32–59. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1747-1346.2008.00093.x.
    Ulbig, Stacy G., and Carolyn L. Funk. 1999. “Conflict Avoidance and Political Participation.” Political Behavior 21 (3): 265–82. https://doi.org/10.1023/
    A:1022087617514.
    Valenzuela, Sebastián, Namsu Park, and Kerk F. Kee. 2009. “Is There Social Capital in a Social Network Site?: Facebook Use and College Students’ Life Satisfaction, Trust, and Participation.” Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication 14 (4): 875–901. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1083-6101.2009.01474.x.
    Verba, Sidney, and Norman H. Nie. 1972. Participation in America: Political Democracy and Social Equality. New York: Harper & Row.
    Verba, Sidney, Norman H. Nie, and Jae-on Kim. 1971. The Modes of Democratic Participation: A Cross-National Comparison. Beverly Hills, Calif: Sage Publications.
    ———. 1987. Participation and Political Equality: A Seven-Nation Comparison. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
    Verba, Sidney, Kay Lehman Schlozman, and Henry E. Brady. 1995. Voice and Equality: Civic Voluntarism in American Politics. Cambridge, Mass: Harvard University Press.
    Walker, Iain, Ngai Kin Wong, and Kerry Kretzschmar. 2002. “Relative Deprivation and Attribution: From Grievance to Action.” In Relative Deprivation, edited by Iain Walker and Heather J. Smith, 288–312. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511527753.013.
    Weiner, Myron. 1971. “Political Participation: Crisis of the Political Process.” In Crises and Sequences in Political Development, edited by Leonard Binder, Joseph La Palombara, Leonard Binder, James S. Coleman, Lucian W. Pye, Sidney Verba, and Myron Weiner, 159–204. Princeton University Press.
    Williams, Raymond. 1961. The Long Revolution. Canada: Broad view Press Inc.
    Wu, Chung-li, and Tzu-Ping Liu. 2017. “Political Participation in Taiwan.” In The Taiwan Voter, edited by Christopher H. Achen and T. Y. Wang, 252–72. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
    Yang, Chia-Ling. 2017. “The Political Is the Personal: Women’s Participation in Taiwan’s Sunflower Movement.” Social Movement Studies 16 (6): 660–71. https://doi.org/10.1080/14742837.2017.1344542.
    Yang, Hongwei, and Jean L. DeHart. 2016. “Social Media Use and Online Political Participation Among College Students During the US Election 2012.” Social Media + Society 2 (1): 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1177/2056305115623802.
    Description: 碩士
    國立政治大學
    政治學系
    107252015
    Source URI: http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0107252015
    Data Type: thesis
    Appears in Collections:[Department of Political Science] Theses

    Files in This Item:

    File Description SizeFormat
    201501.pdf1978KbAdobe PDF2168View/Open


    All items in 政大典藏 are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved.


    社群 sharing

    著作權政策宣告 Copyright Announcement
    1.本網站之數位內容為國立政治大學所收錄之機構典藏，無償提供學術研究與公眾教育等公益性使用，惟仍請適度，合理使用本網站之內容，以尊重著作權人之權益。商業上之利用，則請先取得著作權人之授權。
    The digital content of this website is part of National Chengchi University Institutional Repository. It provides free access to academic research and public education for non-commercial use. Please utilize it in a proper and reasonable manner and respect the rights of copyright owners. For commercial use, please obtain authorization from the copyright owner in advance.

    2.本網站之製作，已盡力防止侵害著作權人之權益，如仍發現本網站之數位內容有侵害著作權人權益情事者，請權利人通知本網站維護人員(nccur@nccu.edu.tw)，維護人員將立即採取移除該數位著作等補救措施。
    NCCU Institutional Repository is made to protect the interests of copyright owners. If you believe that any material on the website infringes copyright, please contact our staff(nccur@nccu.edu.tw). We will remove the work from the repository and investigate your claim.
    DSpace Software Copyright © 2002-2004  MIT &  Hewlett-Packard  /   Enhanced by   NTU Library IR team Copyright ©   - Feedback