政大機構典藏-National Chengchi University Institutional Repository(NCCUR):Item 140.119/148526

政大機構典藏-National Chengchi University Institutional Repository(NCCUR):Item 140.119/148526

English | 正體中文 | 简体中文 | Post-Print筆數 : 27 | 全文筆數/總筆數 : 113648/144635 (79%)
造訪人次 : 51616620 線上人數 : 754

RC Version 6.0 © Powered By DSPACE, MIT. Enhanced by NTU Library IR team.

搜尋範圍

查詢小技巧：

您可在西文檢索詞彙前後加上"雙引號"，以獲取較精準的檢索結果

若欲以作者姓名搜尋，建議至進階搜尋限定作者欄位，可獲得較完整資料

進階搜尋

主頁 ‧ 登入 ‧ 上傳 ‧ 說明 ‧ 關於政大典藏 ‧ 管理

到手機版

政大機構典藏 > 社會科學學院 > 國家發展研究所 > 學位論文 > Item 140.119/148526

請使用永久網址來引用或連結此文件: https://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/148526

題名:	太陽花學運後的臺灣青年參政者：動機、機遇與政治資本 Youth Political Activists after the Sunflower Movement in Taiwan: Motivations, Opportunities and Political capitals
作者:	李凌風 Li, Ling-Feng
貢獻者:	魏玫娟 Wei, Mei-Chuan 李凌風 Li, Ling-Feng
關鍵詞:	臺灣青年參政動機機遇政治資本政治參與 Taiwan Youth Political Participation Motivation Opportunity Political capital Political Participation
日期:	2023
上傳時間:	2023-12-01 13:40:19 (UTC+8)
摘要:	「參政」在過往認知中被認定為精英事務，參政者亦被視為社會的精英，然而既有研究指出青年屬「政治冷感」群體，遠離政治事務。太陽花學運之後，臺灣青年在政治場域參與增多，青年參政議題也廣受臺灣社會關注。本研究以35歲以下的青年議員參選人和青年政治幕僚為研究對象，透過半結構式訪談，旨在探討太陽花學運之後臺灣青年參政者參政的動機、機遇與政治資本，試圖深入瞭解為何青年決定參政及如何規劃其政治職業生涯。研究發現，太陽花學運的刺激、法律對青年參政門檻的下修、政府與政黨對青年態度變化等因素，令青年更有機會投身政治場域參政。臺灣青年參政除了與其個人生命經驗及政治機遇高度相關外，亦與「太陽花學運」以及對自身對周遭環境與事件關注程度相關。青年參政者對其政治職業生涯的規劃，則是與其政治資本相關，是影響其決定參政跟參選的關鍵因素；而隨著社會對政治的態度轉變以及，也讓臺灣青年把參政當成一份普通工作，而非菁英專屬。本研究在既有政治菁英以及青年參政研究的基礎上進行延展，提出動機、機遇與政治資本因素會影響青年參政者的政治選擇以及政治職涯發展。 "Political participation" has traditionally been seen as an elite affair, with activists seen as members of the social elite. In the past, young people were often categorised as a group of "political apathy", disengaged from political affairs. However, following the Sunflower Movement, young people in Taiwan have become increasingly involved in the political arena, and issues related to youth participation in politics have attracted attention in Taiwanese society. This thesis focuses on young candidates and political aides under the age of 35 as research subjects, using semi-structured interviews as the primary research method. It explores the motivations, opportunities and political capital of young political participants to answer why young people choose to engage in politics and how they plan their political careers. The study's findings suggest that factors such as the stimulus provided by the Sunflower Movement, the lowering of the threshold for youth political participation through legal changes, and changes in government and party attitudes towards youth have created more opportunities for youth engagement in the political arena in Taiwan. Young people's involvement in politics in Taiwan is not only strongly related to their personal life experiences and political opportunities, but also correlates with the impact of the Sunflower Movement and their level of engagement with their environment and events. The political career planning of young political participants is linked to their political capital, which is a critical factor influencing their decisions to engage in politics and run for office. As societal attitudes towards politics evolve, Taiwanese youth increasingly view political participation as a regular activity rather than an exclusive domain of the elite. Building on existing research on political elites and youth political participation, this study extends the analysis to propose that motivations, opportunities, and political capital factors significantly influence the political choices and career development of young political participants.
參考文獻:	中文文獻 Bourdieu, P. (1997). 文化資本與社會煉金術 (包亞明, Trans.). 上海: 上海人民出版社. 陳明通. (1995). 派系政治與臺灣政治變遷. 臺北市: 月旦出版社. 陳新民. (2010). 公法學劄記: 法律出版社. 陳新民. (2022). 憲法學釋論. 臺北: 三民書局. 陳義彥. (1978). 臺灣地區大學生政治社會化之硏究: 嘉新水泥公司文化基金會. 丹尼‧羅伊. (2004). 台灣政治史 (何. 杜嘉芬, Trans.). 臺北: 臺灣商務印書館股份有限公司. 鄧丕雲. (1993). 80 年代台灣學生運動史 (Vol. 4). 臺北: 前衛出版社. 何榮幸. (2014). 學運世代——從野百合到太陽花. 臺北: 時報文化出版企業股份有限公司. 林蔭庭. (1998). 追隨半世紀: 李煥與經國先生 (Vol. 100). 臺北: 天下文化出版股份有限公司. 潘淑滿. (2003). 質性研究: 理論與應用: 臺北市: 心理出版社. 丘為君. (1979). 台灣學生運動: 1949-1979. 臺北縣: 稻鄉出版社. 若林正丈. (1995). 分裂國家與民主化 (洪. 許佩賢, Trans.). 臺北: 月旦出版社股份有限公司. 若林正丈. (1998). 蔣經國與李登輝 (賴香吟, Trans.). 臺北: 遠流出版公司. 石之瑜. (2003). 社會科學方法新論: 五南圖書出版股份有限公司. 臺灣省諮議會. (2001a). 蔡介雄先生史料彙編. 臺中: 臺灣省諮議會. 臺灣省諮議會. (2001b). 台灣省參議會、臨時省議會暨省議會時期口述歷史訪談計畫─張文獻先生訪談錄. 台中: 臺灣省諮議會. 王振寰. (1996). 誰統治台灣?: 轉型中的國家機器與權力結構. 臺北: 巨流圖書公司. 吳律德. (2021). 誰代表青年？九位青年公共參與者的法槌. 臺中: 白象文化事業有限公司. 蕭阿勤. (2008). 回歸現實: 臺灣一九七○ 年代的戰後世代與文化政治變遷. 台北: 中央研究院社會學研究所. 薛化元. (1996). 《自由中國》與民主憲政: 1950 年代台灣思想史的一個考察. 臺北縣: 稻鄉出版社. 楊孟軒. (2023). 逃離中國：現代臺灣的創傷、記憶與認同 (蔡耀緯, Trans.). 臺北: 國立臺灣大學出版中心. 專書章節陳陸輝, & 耿曙. (2004). 台灣民眾統獨立場的持續與變遷. 載於包宗和 & 吳玉山 (編), 重新檢視爭辯中的兩岸關係理論 (pp. 167-202). 台北: 五南圖書公司. 陳陸輝, & 周應龍. (2013). 台灣民眾台灣人認同的持續與變遷. 載於蘇起 & 童振源 (編), 兩岸關係的機遇與挑戰. 台北: 五南出版公司. 海格德, 鄭敦仁. (1992). 臺灣政權的轉變：理論與比較觀點. 載於張京育 (編), 中華民國民主化——過程、制度與影響. 臺北: 國立政治大學國際關係研究中心. 蔣介石. (1951a). 教育與革命建國的關係. 總統蔣公思想言論總集. 臺北：中正文教基金會蔣介石. (1951b). 時代考驗青年青年創造時代. 總統蔣公思想言論總集. 臺北：中正文教基金會蔣介石. (1964). 對黨務工作的檢討指示. 總統蔣公思想言論總集. 臺北：中正文教基金會蔣經國. (1986). 希望儘早解除戒嚴令. 載於國史館 (編), 蔣經國先生全集 (Vol. 15). 臺北: 國史館. 蔣經國. (1987). 正大光明理直氣壯. 載於國史館 (編), 蔣經國先生全集 (Vol. 15). 臺北: 國史館. 雷飛龍. (1992). 台灣的選舉制度與投票行為. 載於張京育 (編), 中華民國民主化——過程、制度與影響. 臺北: 國立政治大學國際關係研究中心. 李宗黃. (1951). 臺灣實施地方自治之新途徑. 載於李宗黃 (編), 台灣地方自治新論. 臺北: 中央文物供應社. 薛化元. (2000). 陳誠與國府統治基礎的奠定—以一九四九年台灣省主席任內為中心的探討. 載於一九四九年：中國的關鍵年代學術討論會論文集. 臺北: 國史館. 中文期刊陳光輝. (2018). 政治學相關科系大學生參與太陽花學運的追蹤分析. 臺灣民主季刊, 15(2), 51-99. 陳陸輝, & 黃信豪. (2007). 社會化媒介、在學經驗與台灣大學生的政治功效意識和政治參與. 東亞研究, 38(1), 1-48. 陳婉琪, & 黃樹仁. (2015). 立法院外的春吶：太陽花運動靜坐者之人口及參與圖象. 臺灣社會學(30), 141-179. 陳義彥, & 陳陸輝. (2004). 台灣大學生政治定向的持續與變遷. 東吳政治學報(18), 1-39. 陳憶寧. (2011). 探索政治議題感知的世代差異-一個媒介效果的觀點. 臺灣民主季刊, 8(2), 139-181. 陳憶寧, & 羅文輝. (2006). 媒介使用與政治資本. 新聞學研究(88), 83-134. 陳正茂. (2013). 滄桑五十年-記民社黨在台灣. 臺北城市科技大學通識學報(2), 269-294. 崔曉倩, & 吳重禮. (2011). 年齡與選舉參與：2008年總統選舉的實證分析. 調查研究-方法與應用(26), 7-44. 關弘昌. (2018). 臺灣青年世代統獨與兩岸經貿交流態度之探索. 遠景基金會季刊, 19(2), 1-40. 胡博硯（2016）. 基本權保障與軍事懲戒制度－兼論新修正陸海空軍懲罰法. 東吳法律學報，27(4)，1-40. 李巧雯. (2007). 從華人從政看美國華人的參政問題(1965-2000). 中興史學(13), 81-111. doi:10.29623/chh.200706.0004 林麗雲. (2016). 太陽花運動中臺大新聞所學生在「E論壇」的實踐. 傳播研究與實踐, 6(1), 251-269. 林南. (2007). 社會資本理論與研究簡介. 社會科學論叢, 1(1), 1-32. 林瓊珠. (2016). 公民意識與政治參與. 民主與治理, 3(2), 1-21. 林三欽. (2003). 試論「行政爭訟實益」之欠缺（上）——兼評大法官釋字第五四六號解釋. 臺灣本土法學雜誌(42), 37-53. 林澤民, & 蘇彥斌. (2015). 台灣快閃政治-新媒體, 政黨與社會運動. 臺灣民主季刊, 12(2), 123-159. 林宗弘. (2015). 再探臺灣的世代政治：交叉分類隨機效應模型的應用，1995-2010. 人文及社會科學集刊, 27(2), 395-436. 劉嘉薇. (2013). 社群, 典則與當局: 大學生政治支持穩定與變遷的邏輯. 中國行政評論, 19(2), 121-155. 佘健源. (2017). 台灣立委選制改革對現任者競選優勢之影響. 經濟論文叢刊, 45(3), 453-494. 湯志傑. (2006). 重探台灣的政體轉型: 如何看待1970 年代國民黨政權的正當化. 台灣社會學, 12(12), 141-190. 王業立. (1996). 我國政黨提名政策之研究. 政治學報(27), 1-36. 王御風. (2011). 陳中和家族與日治高雄產業的發展. 臺灣文獻季刊, 62(4). 王振寰. (1989). 台灣的政治轉型與反對運動. 台灣社會研究季刊, 2(1), 71-116. 巫永平, & 鄭博宇. (2014). 由競選廣告檢視選民之認知特性. 公共事務評論, 15(1), 1-20. 吳親恩, & 李鳳玉. (2015). 年齡、就業情況與政治參與：東亞國家的觀察. 政治學報(59), 81-108. 蕭全政. (2009). 行政院組織改造的部會架構評議. 研考雙月刊, 33(3), 44-57. 蕭全政. (2012). 行政院組織改造之回顧. 研考雙月刊, 36(2), 11-22. 蕭遠. (2011). 網際網路如何影響社會運動中的動員結構與組織型態?-以台北野草莓學運爲個案研究. 臺灣民主季刊, 8(3), 45-85. 肖唐鏢. (2006). 什麼人在當村幹部?——對村幹部社會政治資本的初步分析. 管理世界(9), 64-70. 徐明莉, & 莊文忠. (2020). 臺灣民衆的公民意識與公民參與. 人文及社會科學集刊, 32(3), 333-366. 張卿卿. (2002). 大學生的政治媒介認知, 政治媒介行為與其政治效能與政治參與之間的關係. 選舉研究, 9(2), 37-63. 張淑媚. (2016). 評析《自由中國》雜誌對戰後初期救國團教育 (1952-60) 之論述. 臺灣國際研究季刊, 12(3), 151-171. 張佑宗. (2011). 選舉結果, 政治學習與民主支持-兩次政黨輪替後台灣公民在民主態度與價值的變遷. 臺灣民主季刊, 8(2), 99-137. 張宗坤. (2021). 戰後臺灣 [青年] 論述的發展與流變. 文化研究(32), 308-341. 鄭鴻生. (2001). 青春之歌-追憶 1970 年代臺灣左翼青年的一段如火年華. 台灣社會研究季刊(41), 129-204. 莊文忠, 林瓊珠, 鄭夙芬, & 張鐙文. (2018). 婦女保障名額制度與選舉競爭對女性參政的影響：以2000年至2010年縣市議員選舉為例. 臺灣政治學刊, 22(2), 1-46. 網頁內容曾筠淇. (2022). 爆乳田慎節「奪2813票」當選議員！本尊道謝：唱票人員辛苦了. Retrieved from https://www.ettoday.net/news/20221126/2388585.htm 陳俊華. (2017). 公民投票法大事記. Retrieved from https://www.cna.com.tw/news/firstnews/201712120167.aspx 聯合國. (2022). 聯合國青年議題. Retrieved from https://www.un.org/zh/events/youth/index.shtml 羅暐智. (2017). 國民黨市議員提名鼓勵新人前青年團總團長提出青年參選三種可能. 吳承翰、廖文璞. (2022). 登記初選「領表費」要5萬藍參選人：過去沒這項目. Retrieved from https://tw.news.yahoo.com/%E7%99%BB%E8%A8%98%E5%88%9D%E9%81%B8-%E9%A0%98%E8%A1%A8%E8%B2%BB-%E8%A6%815%E8%90%AC-%E8%97%8D%E5%8F%83%E9%81%B8%E4%BA%BA-%E9%81%8E%E5%8E%BB%E6%B2%92%E9%80%99%E9%A0%85%E7%9B%AE-101514504.html 行政院青年諮詢委員會. (2023). 行政院青年諮詢委員會導覽. 中國國民黨文化傳播委員會. (2022). 青年事務委員會成立！朱立倫：歡迎有志公共事務青年加入國民黨. 中央選舉委員會. (2022a). 111年直轄市長、直轄市議員、縣（市）長、縣（市）議員選舉候選人登記應繳納保證金數額. Retrieved from https://web.cec.gov.tw/central/cms/111news/36682 中央選舉委員會. (2022b). 中華民國憲法增修條文增訂第一條之一條文修正案複決公報. Retrieved from https://referendum.2022.nat.gov.tw/zh-TW/indexP.html 朱真楷 (2022, 2022-02-06). [憲法公民權下修18歲學者意見兩極]. 中國時報研討會論文何明修，黃俊豪. (2012). 第二次政黨輪替後的社會運動復甦：政治機會結構的觀點. 台灣社會學會: 台灣社會學會. 李炳南, & 楊智傑. (2005). 第七次修憲之圖像. 中央研究院政治學籌備處: 中央研究院. 政府公告國史館. (2005). 機密甲1046號. https://ahonline.drnh.gov.tw/thumb.php?identifier=001-016142-00012-071 教育部青年署. (2015). 青年發展政策綱領（核定本）. 台北：中華民國教育部立法院. (2022). 立法院公告. 臺北: 立法院政黨規定民主進步黨. (2017). 民主進步黨2018年直轄市議員提名特別條例. In. 臺北: 民主進步黨. 報紙新聞蘇芳禾 (2017, 2017-11-11). [青年初選門檻高？不吃不喝多年才能選]. 自由時報中央日報 (1968, 1968-04-23). [本屆縣市長省議員選舉當選人素質已提高做到鼓勵青年參政]. 中央日報, p. 3 朱復良 (1968, 1968-04-23). [下屆省議會新貌]. 中央日報, p. 3 學位論文江素慧. (1996). 女性政治菁英之硏究: 以民進黨女性公職人員為例. 臺北: 國立臺灣大學政治學研究所碩士論文. 英文文獻 Books Arnett, J. J. (2014). Emerging adulthood: The winding road from the late teens through the twenties: Oxford University Press. Barber, B. (2012). An Aristocracy of Everyone: The Politics of Education and the Future of America. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Bennett, W. L. (2007). Civic life online: Learning how digital media can engage youth: The MIT Press. Bessant, J., Farthing, R., & Watts, R. (2017). The precarious generation: A political economy of young people: Routledge. Bottomore, T. (1993). Elites and society: Routledge. Bourdieu, P. (2020). Outline of a Theory of Practice (R. Nice, Trans.): Cambridge University Press. Conway, M. M. (2003). Political participation in the United States. Washington, DC: Congrassional Quarterly Press. Downs, A. (1957). An economic theory of democracy. NY: Harper. Eisner, J. (2004). Taking back the vote: getting American youth involved in our democracy: Beacon Press (MA). Erikson, R. S., & Tedin, K. L. (2015). American public opinion: Its origins, content and impact: Routledge. Faulks, K. (2000). Political sociology: a critical introduction. New York: NYU Press. Hazan, R. Y., & Rahat, G. (2010). Democracy within parties: Candidate selection methods and their political consequences: OUP Oxford. Huntington, S. P., & Nelson, J. M. (1976). No easy choice: Political participation in developing countries: Harvard University Press. Inglehart, R. (1990). Culture shift in advanced industrial society. Princeton,NJ: Princeton University Press. Inglehart, R. (1997). Modernization and Postmodernization: Cultural, Economic, and Political Change in 43 Societies: Princeton University Press. Inglehart, R. (2018). Culture shift in advanced industrial society: Princeton University Press. Inglehart, R., & Welzel, C. (2005). Modernization, Cultural Change, and Democracy The Human Development Sequence: Cambridge: Cambridge university press. Jennings, M. K., & Niemi, R. G. (1981). Generations and Politics: A Panel Study of Young Adults and their Parents, . Princeton: Princeton University Press. Lasswell, H. D. (2018). Politics: Who gets what, when, how: Pickle Partners Publishing. Lin, N. (2002). Social capital: A theory of social structure and action (Vol. 19): Cambridge university press. Lowndes, V., Marsh, D., & Stoker, G. (2017). Theory and methods in political science: Macmillan International Higher Education. Manning, B., & Ryan, R. (2004). Youth and citizenship: Australian Government Department of Family and Community Services. Milbrath, L., and M. L. Goel. (1977). Political Participation. Chicago: Rand McNally. Milbrath, L. W., & Goel, M. L. (1977). Political participation: How and why do people get involved in politics? : Rand McNally College Publishing Company. Mosca, G. (1939). The Ruling Class. New York: McGraw-Hill. Newman, J. (2005). Remaking governance: Peoples, politics and the public sphere: Policy Press. Newton, K. (1999). Social and political trust. New York: Oxford University Press. Norris, P. (1997). Passages to power: Legislative recruitment in advanced democracies: Cambridge University Press. Norris, P. (2011). Democratic deficit: Critical citizens revisited: Cambridge University Press. Pickard, S. (2019). Politics, protest and young people: Political participation and dissent in 21st century Britain: Springer. Putnam, R. D. (2000). Bowling alone: The collapse and revival of American community: Simon and schuster. Putnam, R. D. (2016). Our kids: The American dream in crisis: Simon and Schuster. Rigger, S. (2006). Taiwan's rising rationalism: generations, politics, and" Taiwanese nationalism". Washington, D.C.: East-West Center Washington. Schumpeter, J. A. (1942). Capitalism, socialism and democracy. New York: Harper Torchbooks. Sloam, J., & Henn, M. (2019). Youthquake 2017: The rise of young cosmopolitans in Britain: Springer Nature. Twenge, J. M. (2014). Generation me-revised and updated: Why today's young Americans are more confident, assertive, entitled--and more miserable than ever before: Simon and Schuster. Verba, S., & Almond, G. (1963). The civic culture:Political Attitudes Democracy in Five Nations. Princeton: Princeton University Press. Verba, S., & Nie, N. H. (1987). Participation in America: Political democracy and social equality: University of Chicago Press. Weber, M. (1978). Economy and society: An outline of interpretive sociology (Vol. 1): Univ of California Press. Youniss, J., & Yates, M. (1997). Community service and social responsibility in youth: University of Chicago Press. Zukin, C., Keeter, S., Andolina, M., Jenkins, K., & Carpini, M. X. D. (2006). A new engagement?: Political participation, civic life, and the changing American citizen: Oxford University Press. Book chapters Bennett, W. L., Freelon, D., & Wells, C. (2010). Changing citizen identity and the rise of a participatory media culture. In L. R. Sherrod, J. Toreny-Purta, & C. A. Flanagan (Eds.), Handbook of research on civic engagement in youth (pp. 393-424). NJ: Wiley & Sons. Bourdieu, P. (1991). Political representation: Elements for a theory of the political field. In Language symbolic power (pp. 171-202): Harvard University Press. Bruter, M., & Harrison, S. (2009a). The future of our democracies? In The Future of our Democracies (pp. 223-239): Springer. Casey, K. L. (2008). Defining political capital: A reconsideration of Bourdieu’s interconvertibility theory. In Critique: A Worldwide Student Journal of Politics, : Springer. Daloz, J.-P., & Hoffmann-Lange, U. (2018). Elite Attributes and Resources. In The Palgrave Handbook of Political Elites (pp. 461-465): Springer. Gaxie, D. (2018). Political and Social Backgrounds of Political Elites. In The Palgrave handbook of political elites (pp. 489-506): Springer. Ho, M.-s. (2018). From protest to electioneering: Electoral and party politics after the Sunflower Movement. In A new era in democratic Taiwan (pp. 83-103): Routledge. Hoffmann-Lange, U. (2018). Methods of elite identification. In The Palgrave handbook of political elites (pp. 79-92): Springer. Hooghe, M., & Stolle, D. (2005). Youth organisations within political parties: political recruitment and the transformation of party systems. In J. Forbrig (Ed.), Revisiting youth political participation (Vol. 43): Council of Europe. Newton, K., Stolle, D., & Zmerli, S. (2018). Social and political trust. In The Oxford handbook of social political trust (Vol. 37, pp. 961-976). New York: Oxford University Press. O'Toole, T. (2015). Beyond crisis narratives: Changing modes and repertoires of political participation among young people. In Geographies of Politics, Citizenship and Right: Children and Young People as Participants in Politics: Springer Verlag. Olcese, C., & Saunders, C. (2014). British Students in the Winter Protests: Still a New Social Movement? In Higher Education in the UK and the US (pp. 250-271): Brill. Pakulski, J. (2018). Classical elite theory: Pareto and Weber. In The Palgrave handbook of political elites (pp. 17-24): Springer. Paul't Hart, & Karen Tindall. (2009). Leadership by the famous: Celebrity as political capital. In H. P. John Kane, and Paul 't Hart (Ed.), Dispersed Democratic Leadership: Origins, Dynamics, and Implications. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Pickard, S. (2014). Keep them kettled! student protests, policing and anti-social behaviour. In Anti-social behaviour in Britain (pp. 77-91): Springer. Torney-Purta, J., Amadeo, J., & Andolina, M. (2010). A conceptual framework and a multimethod approach for research in civic engagement and political socialization. In L. R. Sherrod, J. Toreny-Purta, & C. A. Flanagan (Eds.), Handbook of research on civic engagement in youth (pp. 497-534). NJ: Wiley & Sons. Wu, C.-l., & Liu, T.-P. (2017). Political Participation in Taiwan. In C. H. Achen & T. Y. Wang (Eds.), The Taiwan voter (pp. 253-273). Michigan: University of Michigan Press. Journal Alcántara Sáez, M. (2017). Political career and political capital. Convergencia, 24(73), 187-204. Alscher, P., Ludewig, U., & McElvany, N. (2022). Civic Education, Teaching Quality and Students’ Willingness to Participate in Political and Civic Life: Political Interest and Knowledge as Mediators. Journal of Youth Adolescence, 1-15. Andolina, M. W., Jenkins, K., Keeter, S., & Zukin, C. (2002). Searching for the meaning of youth civic engagement: Notes from the field. Applied Developmental Science, 6(4), 189-195. Arceneaux, K., & Vander Wielen, R. J. (2023). Do voters prefer educated candidates? How candidate education influences vote choice in congressional elections. Electoral Studies, 82, 102596. Arnett, J. J. (2002). The psychology of globalization. American psychologist, 57(10), 774. Bennett, W. L., & Segerberg, A. (2012). The logic of connective action: Digital media and the personalization of contentious politics. Information, communication society, 15(5), 739-768. Berry, C. (2008). Labour's lost youth: Young people and the labour party's youth sections. The Political Quarterly, 79(3), 366-376. Best, H. (2012). Marx or Mosca? An inquiry into the foundations of ideocratic regimes. Historical Social Research/Historische Sozialforschung, 73-89. Beyerlein, K., & Hipp, J. (2006). A two-stage model for a two-stage process: How biographical availability matters for social movement mobilization. Mobilization: An International Quarterly, 11(3), 299-320. Booth, J. A., & Richard, P. B. (1998). Civil society, political capital, and democratization in Central America. The Journal of Politics, 60(3), 780-800. Borchert, J. (2011). Individual ambition and institutional opportunity: a conceptual approach to political careers in multi-level systems. Regional Federal Studies, 21(2), 117-140. Borchert, J., & Stolz, K. (2011). Institutional order and career patterns: some comparative considerations. Regional Federal Studies, 21(2), 271-282. Bosi, L., Lavizzari, A., & Voli, S. (2021). Comparing young people's participation across political organizations from a life course perspective. Journal of Youth Studies, 1-19. Bruter, M., & Harrison, S. (2009b). Tomorrow’s leaders? Understanding the involvement of young party members in six European democracies. Comparative political studies, 42(10), 1259-1290. Campos, C. F., Hargreaves Heap, S., & Leite Lopez de Leon, F. (2017). The political influence of peer groups: experimental evidence in the classroom. Oxford Economic Papers, 69(4), 963-985. Chan, T. W., & Clayton, M. (2006). Should the voting age be lowered to sixteen? Normative and empirical considerations. Political studies, 54(3), 533-558. Chatard, A., & Selimbegovic, L. (2007). The impact of higher education on egalitarian attitudes and values: Contextual and cultural determinants. Social Personality Psychology Compass, 1(1), 541-556. Chu, Y.-h., & Welsh, B. (2015). Millennials and East Asia's Democratic Future. Journal of Democracy, 26(2), 151-164. Cross, W., & Young, L. (2008). Factors Influencing the Decision of the Young Politically Engaged To Join a Political Party:An Investigation of the Canadian Case. Party Politics, 14(3), 345-369. doi:10.1177/1354068807088126 Dalton, R. J. (2008). Citizenship norms and the expansion of political participation. Political studies, 56(1), 76-98. Dey, E. L. (1997). Undergraduate political attitudes: Peer influence in changing social contexts. The Journal of Higher Education, 68(4), 398-413. Diemer, M. A., & Li, C. H. (2011). Critical consciousness development and political participation among marginalized youth. Child development, 82(6), 1815-1833. Earl, J., Maher, T. V., & Elliott, T. (2017). Youth, activism, and social movements. Sociology Compass, 11(4), e12465. Ekström, M., & Sveningsson, M. (2019). Young people’s experiences of political membership: from political parties to Facebook groups. Information, Communication & Society, 22(2), 155-171. doi:10.1080/1369118X.2017.1358294 Feinstein, B. D. (2010). The dynasty advantage: Family ties in congressional elections. Legislative Studies Quarterly, 35(4), 571-598. Fjellman, E., & R. Sundström, M. (2021). Making a (Political) Career: Young Party Members and Career‐Related Incentives for Party Membership. Scandinavian Political Studies, 44(4), 369-391. French, R. D. (2011). Political capital. Representation, 47(2), 215-230. Geys, B. (2017). Political dynasties, electoral institutions and politicians’ human capital. The Economic Journal, 127(605), F474-F494. Harris, A., Wyn, J., & Younes, S. (2010). Beyond apathetic or activist youth: ‘Ordinary’young people and contemporary forms of participation. Young, 18(1), 9-32. Henn, M., & Foard, N. (2014). Social differentiation in young people's political participation: the impact of social and educational factors on youth political engagement in Britain. Journal of Youth Studies, 17(3), 360-380. Henn, M., Weinstein, M., & Wring, D. (2002). A generation apart? Youth and political participation in Britain. The British Journal of Politics International Relations, 4(2), 167-192. Highton, B., & Wolfinger, R. E. (2001). The first seven years of the political life cycle. American Journal of Political Science, 202-209. Ho, M.-s. (2015). Occupy congress in Taiwan: Political opportunity, threat, and the Sunflower Movement. Journal of East Asian Studies, 15(1), 69-97. Hooghe, M., Stolle, D., & Stouthuysen, P. (2004). Head start in politics: The recruitment function of youth organizations of political parties in Belgium (Flanders). Party Politics, 10(2), 193-212. Howard, M. M., & Gilbert, L. (2008). A cross-national comparison of the internal effects of participation in voluntary organizations. Political studies, 56(1), 12-32. Hsieh, Y.-C., & Skelton, T. (2018). Sunflowers, youthful protestors and political achievements: lessons from Taiwan. Children's Geographies, 16(1), 105-113. Ikeda, K. i., Kobayashi, T., & Hoshimoto, M. (2008). Does political participation make a difference? The relationship between political choice, civic engagement and political efficacy. Electoral Studies, 27(1), 77-88. Inglehart, R. (1971). The silent revolution in Europe: Intergenerational change in post-industrial societies. American Political Science Review, 65(4), 991-1017. Jurajda, Š., & Münich, D. (2015). Candidate ballot information and election outcomes: The Czech case. Post-Soviet Affairs, 31(5), 448-469. Kaim, M. (2021). Rethinking modes of political participation: The conventional, unconventional, and alternative. Democratic Theory, 8(1), 50-70. Kertzer, J. D., & Renshon, J. (2022). Experiments and surveys on political elites. Annual Review of Political Science, 25, 529-550. Kitanova, M. (2020). Youth political participation in the EU: evidence from a cross-national analysis. Journal of Youth Studies, 23(7), 819-836. Kjær, U. (2013). Local political leadership: the art of circulating political capital. Local Government Studies, 39(2), 253-272. Klesner, J. L. (2007). Social capital and political participation in Latin America: evidence from Argentina, Chile, Mexico, and Peru. Latin American research review, 42(2), 1-32. Lake, R., & Huckfeldt, R. (1998). Social networks, social capital, and political participation. Political Psychology, 19(3), 567-584. Lawless, J. L., & Fox, R. L. (2001). Political participation of the urban poor. Social problems, 48(3), 362-385. Light, I. (2004). Social capital’s unique accessibility. Journal of the American planning Association, 70(2), 145-151. Lin, C.-c. (2013). A primary study on party membership of the Kuomintang in Taiwan: From the party workers' perspectives. The Taiwanese Political Science Review, 17(2), 71-114. Maestes, C. D., Maisel, L. S., & Stone, W. J. (2005). National Party Efforts to Recruit State Legislators to Run for the U.S. House. Legislative Studies Quarterly, 30(2), 277-300. doi:https://doi.org/10.3162/036298005X201554 Martikainen, P., Martikainen, T., & Wass, H. J. E. j. o. p. r. (2005). The effect of socioeconomic factors on voter turnout in Finland: A register‐based study of 2.9 million voters. 44(5), 645-669. Miller, W. E., & Stokes, D. E. (1963). Constituency influence in Congress. American political science review, 57(1), 45-56. Nelkin, D. K. (2020). What should the voting age be? Journal of Practical Ethics, 8(2). Newton, K. (2001). Trust, social capital, civil society, and democracy. International political science review, 22(2), 201-214. Ng, H.-Y. (2015). Pathways into Political Party Membership: Case Studies of Hong Kong Youth. Qualitative Report, 20(9), 1527-1545. O'Toole, T., Lister, M., Marsh, D., Jones, S., & McDonagh, A. (2003). Tuning out or left out? Participation and non-participation among young people. Contemporary politics, 9(1), 45-61. Pomante, M. J., & Schraufnagel, S. (2015). Candidate age and youth voter turnout. American Politics Research, 43(3), 479-503. Quintelier, E. (2007). Differences in political participation between young and old people. Contemporary politics, 13(2), 165-180. Rainsford, E. (2017). Exploring youth political activism in the United Kingdom: What makes young people politically active in different organisations? The British Journal of Politics International Relations, 19(4), 790-806. Rainsford, E. (2018). UK political parties’ youth factions: A glance at the future of political parties. Parliamentary affairs, 71(4), 783-803. Roberts, K. (2015). Youth mobilisations and political generations: Young activists in political change movements during and since the twentieth century. Journal of Youth Studies, 18(8), 950-966. Rossi, M. A. (2017). Self‐perpetuation of political power. The Economic Journal. Rothstein, B. (2001). Social capital in the social democratic welfare state. Politics Society, 29(2), 207-241. Sander, T. H., & Putnam, R. D. (2010). Democracy's Past and Future: Still Bowling Alone?-The Post-9/11 Split. Journal of Democracy, 21(1), 9-16. Saunders, C., Grasso, M., Olcese, C., Rainsford, E., & Rootes, C. (2012). Explaining differential protest participation: Novices, returners, repeaters, and stalwarts. Mobilization: An International Quarterly, 17(3), 263-280. Schugurnesky, D. (2000). Citizenship learning and democratic engagement: Political capital revisited. Paper presented at the Adult Education Research Conference. Sevi, S. (2021). Do young voters vote for young leaders? Electoral Studies, 69, 102200. Sigelman, L., & Sigelman, C. K. (1982). Sexism, racism, and ageism in voting behavior: An experimental analysis. Social Psychology Quarterly, 263-269. Sloam, J., Ehsan, R., & Henn, M. (2018). ‘Youthquake’: How and why young people reshaped the political landscape in 2017. Political Insight, 9(1), 4-8. Smith, D. M., & Martin, S. (2017). Political dynasties and the selection of cabinet ministers. Legislative Studies Quarterly, 42(1), 131-165. Stattin, H., & Russo, S. (2023). The Political Reputation of Students in Upper Secondary School: Consequences for Their Collective Political Activities Four Years Later. Political Psychology, n/a(n/a), Early view. Stockemer, D., & Sundström, A. (2018). Age representation in parliaments: Can institutions pave the way for the young? European Political Science Review, 10(3), 467-490. Stoker, L., & Jennings, M. K. (1995). Life-cycle transitions and political participation: The case of marriage. American political science review, 89(2), 421-433. Theocharis, Y. (2011). The influence of postmaterialist orientations on young British people's offline and online political participation. Representation, 47(4), 435-455. Theocharis, Y., & Van Deth, J. W. (2018). The continuous expansion of citizen participation: a new taxonomy. European Political Science Review, 10(1), 139-163. Turner, R. H. (1960). Sponsored and contest mobility and the school system. American sociological review, 855-867. Van Deth, J. W. (2014). A conceptual map of political participation. Acta politica, 49, 349-367. Wang, A. H.-E. (2020). Do social movements encourage young people to run for office? Evidence from the 2014 Sunflower Movement in Taiwan. Journal of Asian African Studies, 55(3), 317-329. Wattenberg, M. P. (2019). Polls and Elections: From the Obama Youthquake of'08 to the Trumpquake of'16: How Young People's Dislike of Hillary Clinton Cost Her the Election. Presidential Studies Quarterly, 49(1), 168-184. Weiss, J. (2020). What is youth political participation? Literature review on youth political participation and political attitudes. Frontiers in Political Science, 2, 1-13. Whiteley, P. F., Seyd, P., Richardson, J., & Bissell, P. (1994). Explaining party activism: The case of the British Conservative Party. British Journal of Political Science, 24(1), 79-94. Whitely, P. F., & Seyd, P. (1996). Rationality and party activism: Encompassing tests of alternative models of political participation. European Journal of Political Research, 29(2), 215-234. Yun, H. J. (2021). Polls and Elections: Beyond Political Capital: Do Social and Economic Capital Matter? Presidential Studies Quarterly, 51(2), 404-425. Report Center, P. R. (2009). Independents Take Center Stage in Obama Era: Trends in Political Values and Core Attitudes: 1987–2009. Retrieved from Washington, DC Kiesa, A., Booth, R. B., Hayat, N., Medina, A & Kawashima-Ginsberg. (2022). CIRCLE Growing Voters: Building Institutions and Community Ecosystems for Equitable Election Participation. Retrieved from Tufts University: http://circle.tufts.edu/circlegrowingvoters Suzuki, S., Kelly Siegel-Stechler, Peter de Guzman, Alberto Medina, Abby Kiesa, Maha Mapara, and Kei, & Kawashima-Ginsberg. (2022). FROM INTEREST TO CANDIDACY: Supporting Young People on Their Path to Running for Office. Retrieved from Tufts University: https://circle.tufts.edu/latest-research/running-for-office Union, I.-p. (2020). Youth participation in national parliaments. Retrieved from Genève: Union, F. (1977). The first use of the term “democratic deficit”. Retrieved from https://federalunion.org.uk/the-first-use-of-the-term-democratic-deficit/ Thesis Lamb, M. (2003). Young Conservatives, Young Socialists and the great youth abstention: youth participation and non-participation in political parties. University of Birmingham, Wu, N.-t. (1987). The politics of a regime patronage system: mobilization and control within and authoritarian regime. (Ph.D), University of Chicago, Chicago. Web pages Conlin, M. (2008). 'Youthquake' shakes up electoral politics. Retrieved from https://www.nbcnews.com/id/wbna22597888 Union, F. (1977). The first use of the term “democratic deficit”. Retrieved from https://federalunion.org.uk/the-first-use-of-the-term-democratic-deficit/
描述:	博士國立政治大學國家發展研究所 107261507
資料來源:	http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0107261507
資料類型:	thesis
顯示於類別:	[國家發展研究所] 學位論文

文件中的檔案:

檔案	描述	大小	格式	瀏覽次數
150701.pdf		4284Kb	Adobe PDF	0	檢視/開啟

在政大典藏中所有的資料項目都受到原著作權保護.

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 © - 回饋