政大機構典藏-National Chengchi University Institutional Repository(NCCUR):Item 140.119/149065
English  |  正體中文  |  简体中文  |  Post-Print筆數 : 27 |  全文筆數/總筆數 : 113311/144292 (79%)
造訪人次 : 50926982      線上人數 : 966
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
    請使用永久網址來引用或連結此文件: https://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/149065


    題名: 能源輿論在泰國之探討
    Public Opinion towards Energy Sources in Thailand
    作者: 梅娜亞
    Meksamanasak, Nathaya
    貢獻者: 施琮仁
    Tsung-Jen Shih
    梅娜亞
    Nathaya Meksamanasak
    關鍵詞: 能源之來源
    捷徑式處理
    輿論
    系統性訊息處理
    Energy Sources
    Heuristic Processing
    Public Opinion
    Systematic Information Processing
    日期: 2023
    上傳時間: 2024-01-02 15:36:05 (UTC+8)
    摘要: 泰國為了提高其能源安全,正在嘗試多元化能源之來源。為達目標且減少潛在的爭議,瞭解公眾意見並改善政策制定者與公眾之間的相互理解是至關重要的。

    本研究應用捷徑式與系統式的訊息處理途徑,來探討泰國的公眾如何理解可再生和不可再生能源。無論公眾是透過涉入報導科學相關議題與能源知識的網路媒體來理解該議題,並建立自己個人意見;或是依賴文化捷徑的感知來構建意見,又或者兩種處理方式有相互作用。

    本研究表明,與科學相關的網路媒體的使用和有更多能源知識的群眾對於支持兩種能源呈正相關。但越熟知能源知識的受試者對不可再生能源的支持度是呈負相關;而在態度的形成中,啟發式線索也發揮了作用。政治意識形態與兩種能源的支持呈正相關,然而受試者感受與自然的和諧共存僅和再生能源呈正相關。

    研究結果也顯示,政治的意識形態調節了與科學相關的網路媒體之使用與對兩種能源的支持度之間的影響。與此同時,受試者感受與自然的和諧共存也調節了科學相關網路媒體的使用,通過對能源知識的暸解,對可再生能源的支持度之間接影響。其次,本研究還探討了在泰國溝通能源問題的理論含義,為往後泰國的能源溝通議題提出建議。
    Thailand is attempting to diversify its energy sources to improve energy security. Understanding public opinion is essential to minimize potential disputes and improve mutual understanding between policymakers and the public.

    This study applies a theory of heuristic and systematic information processing to understand how the Thai public makes sense of renewable and non-renewable energy, whether they build their opinion upon the comprehension of the issue through science-related online media use and energy knowledge or rely on cultural heuristics to build the opinion, or both processings interact.

    The study showed that science-related online media use directly correlated to the support of both energy sources, which is also associated with higher energy knowledge. However, energy knowledge was negatively correlated with the support towards non-renewable energy. The heuristic cues also played a role in attitude formation. Political ideology was positively correlated with the support of both energy sources, while harmony with nature was only positively associated with the support of renewable energy. The findings also revealed that political ideology moderated the effect of science-related online media use and the support towards both energy sources. Meanwhile, harmony with nature moderated the indirect effect of science-related online media use on support of renewable energy through energy knowledge. Theoretical implications and recommendations to communicate energy issues in Thailand are also discussed.
    參考文獻: Achterberg, P., Houtman, D., van Bohemen, S., & Manevska, K. (2010). Unknowing but supportive? Predispositions, knowledge, and support for hydrogen technology in the Netherlands. International Journal of Hydrogen Energy, 35(12), 6075-6083. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2010.03.091
    Allen Wolters, E., Steel, B. S., & Warner, R. L. (2020). Ideology and Value Determinants of Public Support for Energy Policies in the U.S.: A Focus on Western States. Energies, 13(8), 1890. https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/13/8/1890
    Allington, D., Duffy, B., Wessely, S., Dhavan, N., & Rubin, J. (2021). Health-protective behaviour, social media usage and conspiracy belief during the COVID-19 public health emergency. Psychological Medicine, 51(10), 1763-1769. https://doi.org/10.1017/S003329172000224X
    Anderson, A. A. (2017). Effects of social media use on climate change opinion, knowledge, and behavior. In Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Climate Science.
    Ansolabehere, S., & Konisky, D. M. (2009). Public Attitudes Toward Construction of New Power Plants. Public Opinion Quarterly, 73(3), 566-577. https://doi.org/10.1093/poq/nfp041
    Anti-coal power plant rally ends after talks (2018, February 20). Bangkok Post. https://www.bangkokpost.com/thailand/general/1415003
    Audomvongseree, K. (2017). พลังงานไทยไปทางไหนดี [How should Thai energy head to?]. Retrieved March 31, 2023, from https://www.chula.ac.th/cuinside/5125/
    Bang, H.-K., Ellinger, A. E., Hadjimarcou, J., & Traichal, P. A. (2000). Consumer concern, knowledge, belief, and attitude toward renewable energy: An application of the reasoned action theory. Psychology & Marketing, 17(6), 449-468. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/
    10.1002/(SICI)1520-6793(200006)17:6<449::AID-MAR2>3.0.CO;2-8
    Bhanthumnavin, D., & Bhanthumnavin, V. (2014). The empirical development of cognitive, affective, and behavioral tendency measures of attitudes toward nuclear power plants in Thai university students. Progress in Nuclear Energy, 73, 86-95. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pnucene.2013.12.013
    Bidwell, D. (2016). The Effects of Information on Public Attitudes Toward Renewable Energy. Environment and Behavior, 48(6), 743-768. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013916514554696
    Biel, A., & Nilsson, A. (2005). Religious Values and Environmental Concern: Harmony and Detachment. Social Science Quarterly, 86(1), 178-191. http://www.jstor.org/stable/42956056
    Boudet, H., Clarke, C., Bugden, D., Maibach, E., Roser-Renouf, C., & Leiserowitz, A. (2014). “Fracking” controversy and communication: Using national survey data to understand public perceptions of hydraulic fracturing. Energy Policy, 65, 57-67. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2013.10.017
    Bpràp păen fai fáa mài bpen PDP 2023 sà-nĕr rát-tà-baan mài à-nú-mát pêrm rohng fai fáa niw-kliia kà-nàat lék [Adjust the new electricity plan to PDP 2023 and submit it to the new government for approval, to add a small nuclear power plant]. (2023). Energy News Center. Retrieved March 26, 2023, from https://www.energynewscenter.com/พลังงาน-ปรับแผนไฟฟ้าใหม/
    Bronfman, N. C., Jiménez, R. B., Arevalo, P. C., & Cifuentes, L. A. (2015). Public Acceptance of Electricity Generation Sources: The Role of Trust in Regulatory Institutions. Energy & Environment, 26(3), 349-368. https://doi.org/10.1260/0958-305x.26.3.349
    Bronfman, N. C., Jiménez, R. B., Arévalo, P. C., & Cifuentes, L. A. (2012). Understanding social acceptance of electricity generation sources. Energy Policy, 46, 246-252. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2012.03.057
    Brossard, D. (2013). New media landscapes and the science information consumer. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 110(supplement_3), 14096-14101. https://doi.org/doi:10.1073/pnas.1212744110
    Brossard, D., & Nisbet, M. (2007). Deference to Scientific Authority Among a Low Information Public: Understanding U.S. Opinion on Agricultural Biotechnology. International Journal of Public Opinion Research, 19. https://doi.org/10.1093/ijpor/edl003
    Brossard, D., & Scheufele, D. A. (2013). Science, New Media, and the Public. Science, 339(6115), 40-41. https://doi.org/doi:10.1126/science.1232329
    Brossard, D., Scheufele, D. A., Kim, E., & Lewenstein, B. V. (2008). Religiosity as a perceptual filter: examining processes of opinion formation about nanotechnology. Public Understanding of Science, 18(5), 546-558. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963662507087304
    Brown, M. A., Wang, Y., Sovacool, B. K., & D’Agostino, A. L. (2014). Forty years of energy security trends: A comparative assessment of 22 industrialized countries. Energy Research & Social Science, 4, 64-77. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.erss.2014.08.008
    Čábelková, I., Strielkowski, W., Firsova, I., & Korovushkina, M. (2020). Public Acceptance of Renewable Energy Sources: a Case Study from the Czech Republic. Energies, 13(7), 1742. https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/13/7/1742
    Cacciatore, M. A., Scheufele, D. A., & Corley, E. A. (2011). From enabling technology to applications: The evolution of risk perceptions about nanotechnology. Public Understanding of Science, 20(3), 385-404.
    Cao, Y., & Li, H. (2022). Harmony Between Humanity and Nature: Natural Vs. Synthetic Drug Preference in Chinese Atheists and Taoists. Journal of Religion and Health, 61(4), 2743-2752. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10943-021-01314-6
    Carlisle, S. G. (2008). Synchronizing karma: The internalization and externalization of a shared, personal belief. Ethos, 36(2), 194-219.
    Chaiken, S., & Ledgerwood, A. (2012). A theory of heuristic and systematic information processing. In Handbook of theories of social psychology, Vol. 1 (pp. 246-266). Sage Publications Ltd. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781446249215.n13
    Chan, A. K. M., Nickson, C. P., Rudolph, J. W., Lee, A., & Joynt, G. M. (2020). Social media for rapid knowledge dissemination: early experience from the COVID-19 pandemic. Anaesthesia, 75(12), 1579-1582. https://doi.org/10.1111/anae.15057
    Chaves, M. (2010). SSSR Presidential Address Rain Dances in the Dry Season: Overcoming the Religious Congruence Fallacy. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 49(1), 1-14. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-5906.2009.01489.x
    Chawla, Y., Kowalska-Pyzalska, A., & Oralhan, B. (2020). Attitudes and opinions of social media users towards smart meters’ rollout in Turkey. Energies, 13(3), 732. https://doi.org/10.3390/en13030732
    Chen, S., Duckworth, K., & Chaiken, S. (1999). Motivated Heuristic and Systematic Processing. Psychological Inquiry, 10(1), 44-49. http://www.jstor.org/stable/1449522
    Choma, B. L., Hanoch, Y., & Currie, S. (2016). Attitudes toward hydraulic fracturing: The opposing forces of political conservatism and basic knowledge about fracking. Global Environmental Change, 38, 108-117. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2016.03.004
    Chung, J. B., & Kim, E. S. (2018). Public perception of energy transition in Korea: Nuclear power, climate change, and party preference. Energy Policy, 116, 137-144. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2018.02.007
    Crabtree, S. (2009). Religiosity Highest in World's Poorest Nations. Gallup. Retrieved July 8, 2023, from https://news.gallup.com/poll/142727/religiosity-highest-world-poorest-nations.aspx
    Culley, M. R., Carton, A. D., Weaver, S. R., Ogley-Oliver, E., & Street, J. C. (2011). Sun, Wind, Rock and Metal: Attitudes toward Renewable and Non-renewable Energy Sources in the Context of Climate Change and Current Energy Debates. Current Psychology, 30(3), 215-233. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-011-9110-5
    Davison, W. P. (2023). public opinion. In The Editors of Encyclopaedia Britannica (Ed.), Britannica: Encyclopedia Britannica.
    de Best-Waldhober, M., Paukovic, M., Brunsting, S., & Daamen, D. (2011). Awareness, knowledge, beliefs, and opinions regarding CCS of the Dutch general public before and after information. Energy Procedia, 4, 6292-6299. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.egypro.2011.02.644
    de Groot, J. I. M., Steg, L., & Poortinga, W. (2013). Values, Perceived Risks and Benefits, and Acceptability of Nuclear Energy. Risk Analysis, 33(2), 307-317. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1539-6924.2012.01845.x
    Democracy and Public Opinion. (2016). In American Government and Politics in the Information Age. University of Minnesota Libraries Publishing. https://open.lib.umn.edu/americangovernment/chapter/7-1-what-is-public-opinion/
    Devine-Wright, P. (2007). Reconsidering public attitudes and public acceptance of renewable energy technologies: a critical review. Beyond Nimbyism: a multidisciplinary investigation of public engagement with renewable energy technologies, 15. https://geography.exeter.ac.uk/beyond_nimbyism/deliverables/bn_wp1_4.pdf
    Dhammahaso, P. H. (2005). Peace Studies: the Buddhist Path to World Peace. Journal of Peace Studies, 4(Special Issue). https://doi.org/10.14456/jmcupeace.2016.24
    Domahidi, E. (2018). The Associations Between Online Media Use and Users’ Perceived Social Resources: A Meta-Analysis. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 23(4), 181-200. https://doi.org/10.1093/jcmc/zmy007
    Dudo, A., Brossard, D., Shanahan, J., Scheufele, D. A., Morgan, M., & Signorielli, N. (2011). Science on Television in the 21st Century:Recent Trends in Portrayals and Their Contributions to Public Attitudes Toward Science. Communication Research, 38(6), 754-777. https://doi.org/10.1177/0093650210384988
    Dunlap, R. E., Van Liere, K. D., Mertig, A. G., & Emmet Jones, R. (2000). Measuring endorsement of the new ecological paradigm: A revised NEP scale. Journal of Social Issues, 56(3), 425-442. https://doi.org/10.1111/0022-4537.00176
    Dursun, İ., Tümer Kabadayı, E., & Tuğer, A. T. (2019). Overcoming the psychological barriers to energy conservation behaviour: The influence of objective and subjective environmental knowledge. International Journal of Consumer Studies, 43(4), 402-416.
    Electricity Generating Authority of Thailand. (2017). EGAT Wonderland [Pamphlet]. In: Electricity Generating Authority of Thailand.
    Electricity Generating Authority of Thailand. (2023). Annual Report 2022 Electricity Generating Authority of Thailand. https://www.egat.co.th/home/wp-content/uploads/2023/04/EGAT-Annual-Report-2022_2023-04-24.pdf
    Ellis, L., Farrington, D. P., & Hoskin, A. W. (2019). Chapter 3 - Institutional Factors. In L. Ellis, D. P. Farrington, & A. W. Hoskin (Eds.), Handbook of Crime Correlates (Second Edition) (pp. 105-162). Academic Press. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-804417-9.00003-X
    Energy Information Administration. (2023, August 16, 2023,). What is energy?: Sources of energy. Energy Information Administration. Retrieved September 15, 2023, from https://www.eia.gov/energyexplained/what-is-energy/sources-of-energy.php
    Energy Policy and Planning Office. (2015). Thailand Power Development Plan 2018-2037 Revision 1. Retrieved from https://www.eppo.go.th/images/POLICY/ENG/PDP2015_Eng.pdf
    Energy Policy and Planning Office. (2020a). Natural Gas Management Plan 2018-2037. Retrieved from https://www.eppo.go.th/images/Infromation_service/public_relations/PDF/Gasplan2018.pdf
    Energy Policy and Planning Office. (2020b). Thailand Power Development Plan 2018-2037 Revision 1. Retrieved from https://www.eppo.go.th/images/Infromation_service/public_relations/PDP2018/PDP2018Rev1.pdf
    Fairbrother, M. (2012). Rich People, Poor People, and Environmental Concern: Evidence across Nations and Time. European Sociological Review, 29(5), 910-922. https://doi.org/10.1093/esr/jcs068
    Fohringer, J., Dransch, D., Kreibich, H., & Schröter, K. (2015). Social media as an information source for rapid flood inundation mapping. Natural Hazards and Earth System Sciences, 15(12), 2725-2738.
    Foreign & Commonwealth Office. (2011). Role of media in society [Speech transcript]. In GOV.UK. Retrieved June 13, 2023 from https://www.gov.uk/government/speeches/role-of-media-in-society
    Forum for Nuclear Cooperation in Asia. (2011). Public Opinion Survey on Nuclear Energy in Seven FNCA Countries [Survey]. https://www.fnca.mext.go.jp/english/pi/public_opinion_survey.pdf
    Gadavanij, S. (2020). Contentious polities and political polarization in Thailand: Post-Thaksin reflections. Discourse & Society, 31(1), 44-63. https://doi.org/10.1177/0957926519877695
    Gao, H., Barbier, G., & Goolsby, R. (2011). Harnessing the Crowdsourcing Power of Social Media for Disaster Relief. IEEE Intelligent Systems, 26(3), 10-14. https://doi.org/10.1109/MIS.2011.52
    Gifford, R., & Nilsson, A. (2014). Personal and social factors that influence pro‐environmental concern and behaviour: A review. International journal of psychology, 49(3), 141-157.
    Gil de Zúñiga, H., Jung, N., & Valenzuela, S. (2012). Social Media Use for News and Individuals' Social Capital, Civic Engagement and Political Participation. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 17(3), 319-336. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1083-6101.2012.01574.x
    Greeley, A. (1993). Religion and Attitudes toward the Environment. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 32(1), 19-28. https://doi.org/10.2307/1386911
    Greenberg, M. (2009). Energy sources, public policy, and public preferences: Analysis of US national and site-specific data. Energy Policy, 37(8), 3242-3249. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2009.04.020
    Greenpeace. (n.d.). สรุปการขับเคลื่อนคัดค้านโครงการโรงไฟฟ้าถ่านหินกระบี่ - เทพา [Summary of opposition mobilization of Krabi - Thepa power plants]. Retrieved March 13, 2023, from https://www.greenpeace.org/thailand/explore/resist/coal/krabi-coal-powerplant-movement-timeline/
    Gu, X., Wang, C., & Lin, L. (2019). Examining Scientific Literacy through New Media. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 15(12). https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmste/109948
    Gyamfi, S., Derkyi, N. S. A., & Asuamah, E. Y. (2018). Chapter 7 - The Potential and the Economics of Hydropower Investment in West Africa. In A. Kabo-Bah & C. J. Diji (Eds.), Sustainable Hydropower in West Africa (pp. 95-107). Academic Press. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-813016-2.00007-1
    Happer, C., & Philo, G. (2013). The role of the media in the construction of public belief and social change. Journal of Social and Political Psychology, 1(1), 321-336.
    Hayes, A. F. (2013). Introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process analysis: A regression-based approach. Guilford Press.
    Ho, S. S., Brossard, D., & Scheufele, D. A. (2008). Effects of Value Predispositions, Mass Media Use, and Knowledge on Public Attitudes Toward Embryonic Stem Cell Research. International Journal of Public Opinion Research, 20(2), 171-192. https://doi.org/10.1093/ijpor/edn017
    Ho, S. S., & Chuah, A. S. F. (2021). Why support nuclear energy? The roles of citizen knowledge, trust, media use, and perceptions across five Southeast Asian countries. Energy Research & Social Science, 79. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.erss.2021.102155
    Ho, S. S., Leong, A. D., Looi, J., Chen, L., Pang, N., & Tandoc, E. (2019). Science Literacy or Value Predisposition? A Meta-Analysis of Factors Predicting Public Perceptions of Benefits, Risks, and Acceptance of Nuclear Energy. Environmental Communication, 13(4), 457-471. https://doi.org/10.1080/17524032.2017.1394891
    Ho, S. S., Leong, A. D., Looi, J., & Chuah, A. S. F. (2019). Online, offline, or word-of-mouth? Complementary media usage patterns and credibility perceptions of nuclear energy information in Southeast Asia. Energy Research & Social Science, 48, 46-56. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.erss.2018.09.012
    Ho, S. S., Looi, J., Leong, A. D., & Leung, Y. W. (2019). Explicating factual and subjective science knowledge: knowledge as a mediator of news attention and attitudes. Asian Journal of Communication, 29(1), 73-91.
    Ho, S. S., Oshita, T., Looi, J., Leong, A. D., & Chuah, A. S. F. (2019). Exploring public perceptions of benefits and risks, trust, and acceptance of nuclear energy in Thailand and Vietnam: A qualitative approach. Energy Policy, 127(C), 259-268. https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:eee:enepol:v:127:y:2019:i:c:p:259-268
    Ho, S. S., Scheufele, D. A., & Corley, E. A. (2010). Making sense of policy choices: understanding the roles of value predispositions, mass media, and cognitive processing in public attitudes toward nanotechnology. Journal of Nanoparticle Research, 12(8), 2703-2715. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11051-010-0038-8
    Ho, S. S., Xiong, R., & Chuah, A. S. F. (2021). Heuristic cues as perceptual filters: Factors influencing public support for nuclear research reactor in Singapore. Energy Policy, 150. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2020.112111
    Hobman, E. V., & Ashworth, P. (2013). Public support for energy sources and related technologies: The impact of simple information provision. Energy Policy, 63, 862-869. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2013.09.011
    Howell, R. A. (2018). UK public beliefs about fracking and effects of knowledge on beliefs and support: A problem for shale gas policy. Energy Policy, 113, 721-730. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2017.11.061
    Huang, H. (2016). Media use, environmental beliefs, self-efficacy, and pro-environmental behavior. Journal of Business Research, 69(6), 2206-2212. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2015.12.031
    Huber, B., Barnidge, M., Gil de Zúñiga, H., & Liu, J. (2019). Fostering public trust in science: The role of social media. Public Understanding of Science, 28(7), 759-777. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963662519869097
    International Energy Agency. (2023). Renewables 2022. IEA Publications. https://iea.blob.core.windows.net/assets/ada7af90-e280-46c4-a577-df2e4fb44254/Renewables2022.pdf
    Johnson, L. K. (1992). The Buddhist Perception of Nature: Implications for Forest Conservation in Thailand. The Trumpeter, 9(1). https://trumpeter.athabascau.ca/index.php/trumpet/article/view/445
    Kahan, D. M., Slovic, P., Braman, D., Gastil, J., Cohen, G. L., & Kysar, D. A. (2008). Biased assimilation, polarization, and cultural credibility: An experimental study of nanotechnology risk perceptions. Harvard Law School Program on Risk Regulation Research Paper(08-25).
    Kim, K. S., Sin, S. C. J., & Tsai, T. I. (2014). Individual Differences in Social Media Use for Information Seeking. The Journal of Academic Librarianship, 40(2), 171-178. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.acalib.2014.03.001
    Kim, K. S., Sin, S. C. J., & Yoo-Lee, E. Y. (2014). Undergraduates’ use of social media as information sources. College & Research Libraries, 75(4), 442-457.
    Kim, Y., Kim, M., & Kim, W. (2013). Effect of the Fukushima nuclear disaster on global public acceptance of nuclear energy. Energy Policy, 61, 822-828. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2013.06.107
    Kitada, A. (2016). Public opinion changes after the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant accident to nuclear power generation as seen in continuous polls over the past 30 years. Journal of Nuclear Science and Technology, 53(11), 1686-1700. https://doi.org/10.1080/00223131.2016.1175391
    Kitiarsa, P. (2005). Beyond Syncretism: Hybridization of Popular Religion in Contemporary Thailand. Journal of Southeast Asian Studies, 36(3), 461-487. http://www.jstor.org/stable/20072671
    Kostkova, P., Szomszor, M., & Louis, C. S. (2014). #swineflu: The Use of Twitter as an Early Warning and Risk Communication Tool in the 2009 Swine Flu Pandemic. ACM Transactions on Management Information Systems, 5(2), Article 8. https://doi.org/10.1145/2597892
    Kuppako, D. (2014). The Buddhist Cultures in Thai Society: Happy and Harmonious Society. Journal of MCU Social Science Review, 3(3), 92-119. https://so03.tci-thaijo.org/index.php/jssr/article/view/245380
    Kushin, M. J., & Yamamoto, M. (2010). Did social media really matter? College students' use of online media and political decision making in the 2008 election. Mass Communication and Society, 13(5), 608-630.
    Latré, E., Perko, T., & Thijssen, P. (2017). Public opinion change after the Fukushima nuclear accident: The role of national context revisited. Energy Policy, 104, 124-133. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2017.01.027
    Lee, C. J., Scheufele, D., & Lewenstein, B. (2005). Public attitudes toward emerging technologies: Examining the interactive effects of cognitions and affect on public attitudes toward nanotechnology. Science Communication, 27(2), 240-267.
    Lertbumroongchai, W. (2021). นิด้าเผยผล SEA โรงไฟฟ้าภาคใต้ เสนอ 4 ทางเลือกพัฒนาพลังงาน เล็ง “ก๊าซธรรมชาติ” แทนเชื้อเพลิงถ่านหิน [NIDA unveils SEA results, proposing 4 choices and replacing coal with “natural gas]. Retrieved March 13, 2023, from https://theactive.net/news/20210302-6/
    Li, H., & Cao, Y. (2020). For the love of nature: People who prefer natural versus synthetic drugs are higher in nature connectedness. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 71, 101496. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2020.101496
    Li, X. (2005). Diversification and localization of energy systems for sustainable development and energy security. Energy Policy, 33(17), 2237-2243. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2004.05.002
    Li, X., & Liu, Q. (2020). Social Media Use, eHealth Literacy, Disease Knowledge, and Preventive Behaviors in the COVID-19 Pandemic: Cross-Sectional Study on Chinese Netizens. Journal of Medical Internet Research, 22(10), e19684. https://doi.org/10.2196/19684
    Lindell, M., & Perry, R. (1990). Effects of the Chernobyl Accident on Public Perceptions of Nuclear Plant Accident Risks. Risk analysis : an official publication of the Society for Risk Analysis, 10, 393-399. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1539-6924.1990.tb00522.x
    Maier, M., Rothmund, T., Retzbach, A., Otto, L., & Besley, J. C. (2014). Informal Learning Through Science Media Usage. Educational Psychologist, 49(2), 86-103. https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520.2014.916215
    Mayer, F. S., & Frantz, C. M. (2004). The connectedness to nature scale: A measure of individuals’ feeling in community with nature. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 24(4), 503-515. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2004.10.001
    McLeod, J. M., & McDonald, D. G. (1985). BEYOND SIMPLE EXPOSURE:Media Orientations and Their Impact on Political Processes. Communication Research, 12(1), 3-33. https://doi.org/10.1177/009365085012001001
    Morrison, M., Duncan, R., & Parton, K. (2015). Religion Does Matter for Climate Change Attitudes and Behavior. PLoS One, 10(8), e0134868. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0134868
    Moyer, R. M., & Song, G. (2019). Cultural predispositions, specific affective feelings, and benefit–risk perceptions: explicating local policy elites’ perceived utility of high voltage power line installations. Journal of Risk Research, 22(4), 416-431. https://doi.org/10.1080/13669877.2017.1391317
    Mueller-Herbst, J. M., Xenos, M. A., Scheufele, D. A., & Brossard, D. (2020). Saw It on Facebook: The Role of Social Media in Facilitating Science Issue Awareness. Social Media + Society, 6(2), 2056305120930412. https://doi.org/10.1177/2056305120930412
    Murakami, T. (2017). Creating Better Social Acceptance for Electric Power Infrastructure (ERIA Research Project Report 2016, Issue 5). https://www.eria.org/RPR_FY2016_05.pdf
    National Energy Foundation. (2022). Questionnaire – 2022 National Energy Literacy Survey. National Energy Foundation. https://nef1.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/05/NEF-Energy-Literacy-Questionnaire-Final-Study-2022-FINAL.pdf
    National Energy Foundation. (2023). Official White Paper – 2022 National Energy Literacy Survey. National Energy Foundation. https://nef1.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/05/National-Energy-Literacy-Survey-White-Paper-Cicero-NEF-2023-05-17.pdf
    National Renewable Energy Laboratory. (2021). Life Cycle Greenhouse Gas Emissions from Electricity Generation: Update [Fact sheet]. https://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy21osti/80580.pdf
    National Statistical Office of Thailand. (2020). The 2018 Survey On Conditions Of Society, Culture and Mental Health. National Statistical Office of Thailand. http://www.nso.go.th/sites/2014en/Survey/social/religion/SurveyOnConditions/2018/Full%20Report.pdf
    Nimanong, V. (1994). Harmony from the time of the Buddha through the twentieth century. ABAC Journal of Philosophy and Religions, 2(1-2), 45-50. https://repository.au.edu/handle/6623004553/15116
    Nisbet, E. K., Zelenski, J. M., & Murphy, S. A. (2009). The nature relatedness scale: Linking individuals' connection with nature to environmental concern and behavior. Environment and Behavior, 41(5), 715-740.
    Nisbet, M. C., & Goidel, R. K. (2007). Understanding citizen perceptions of science controversy: bridging the ethnographic—survey research divide. Public Understanding of Science, 16(4), 421-440.
    Nisbet, M. C., Scheufele, D. A., Shanahan, J., Moy, P., Brossard, D., & Lewenstein, B. V. (2002). Knowledge, Reservations, or Promise?:A Media Effects Model for Public Perceptions of Science and Technology. Communication Research, 29(5), 584-608. https://doi.org/10.1177/009365002236196
    Noussair, C. N., Trautmann, S. T., van de Kuilen, G., & Vellekoop, N. (2013). Risk aversion and religion. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 47(2), 165-183. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11166-013-9174-8
    Örnek, F. (2015). Culture's effect on students' attitudes towards science. Education Policy, Management and Quality, 7. https://doi.org/10.48127/spvk-epmq/15.7.27
    Owusu, P. A., & Asumadu-Sarkodie, S. (2016). A review of renewable energy sources, sustainability issues and climate change mitigation. Cogent Engineering, 3(1), 1167990. https://doi.org/10.1080/23311916.2016.1167990
    Pew Research Center. (2012). The Global Religious Landscape: Buddhists. P. R. Center. https://www.pewresearch.org/religion/2012/12/18/global-religious-landscape-buddhist/
    Pew Research Center. (2016). The Politics of Climate. Pew Research Center. Retrieved April 22, 2023, from https://www.pewresearch.org/science/2016/10/04/public-opinion-on-renewables-and-other-energy-sources/
    Pew Research Center. (2020). For Earth Day 2020, how Americans see climate change and the environment in 7 charts. Pew Research Center,. Retrieved July 10, from https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2020/04/21/how-americans-see-climate-change-and-the-environment-in-7-charts/
    Pew Research Center. (2022). How Religion Intersects With Americans’ Views on the Environment. https://www.pewresearch.org/religion/2022/11/17/how-religion-intersects-with-americans-views-on-the-environment/
    Phakdeewanich, T. (2023, June 10). Will post-2023 culture shock see progressives thrive? . Bangkok Post. https://www.bangkokpost.com/opinion/opinion/2589071/will-post-2023-culture-shock-see-progressives-thrive-
    Piedmont, R. L. (2014). Inter-item Correlations. In A. C. Michalos (Ed.), Encyclopedia of Quality of Life and Well-Being Research (pp. 3303-3304). Springer Netherlands. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-0753-5_1493
    Pierce, J., Steel, B., & Warner, R. (2010). Knowledge, Culture, and Public Support for Renewable-Energy Policy. Comparative Technology Transfer and Society, 7, 270-286. https://doi.org/10.1353/ctt.0.0047
    Prathat, K. (2017). Buddhism and Thai Society: Tenacity and Challenge of Decades (2548 – 2558 BC.). Journal of Arts Management, 1(2), 103-118. https://so02.tci-thaijo.org/index.php/jam/article/view/138095
    Ren, J., & Sovacool, B. K. (2014). Quantifying, measuring, and strategizing energy security: Determining the most meaningful dimensions and metrics. Energy, 76, 838-849. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2014.08.083
    Robelia, B. A., Greenhow, C., & Burton, L. (2011). Environmental learning in online social networks: Adopting environmentally responsible behaviors. Environmental education research, 17(4), 553-575.
    Scheufele, D. (2006a). Five lessons in nano outreach. Materials Today, 9, 64. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1369-7021(06)71522-X
    Scheufele, D. (2006b). Messages and heuristics: How audiences form attitudes about emerging technologies. In Engaging science: Thoughts, deeds, analysis and action (pp. 20-25).
    Scheufele, D. A., Corley, E. A., Shih, T. J., Dalrymple, K. E., & Ho, S. S. (2009). Religious beliefs and public attitudes toward nanotechnology in Europe and the United States. Nature Nanotechnology, 4(2), 91-94. https://doi.org/10.1038/nnano.2008.361
    Sharpton, T., Lawrence, T., & Hall, M. (2020). Drivers and barriers to public acceptance of future energy sources and grid expansion in the United States. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 126. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2020.109826
    Shi, J. (2018). Buddhist Economics: A Cultural Alternative. In S. Yamash’ta, T. Yagi, & S. Hill (Eds.), The Kyoto Manifesto for Global Economics: The Platform of Community, Humanity, and Spirituality (pp. 417-436). Springer Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-6478-4_23
    Somvichian, K. (n.d.). อนุรักษ์นิยมแบบไทย: ข้อสังเกต [Thai-style conservatism: observations] [Article]. Political Science Library, Chulalongkorn University. http://www.library.polsci.chula.ac.th/dl/4eaef35333b45c9b17583e7ca3e9c2d3
    Spence, A., Poortinga, W., Pidgeon, N., & Lorenzoni, I. (2010). Public Perceptions of Energy Choices: The Influence of Beliefs about Climate Change and the Environment. Energy & Environment, 21(5), 385-407. http://www.jstor.org/stable/43734937
    Stoutenborough, J. W., Sturgess, S. G., & Vedlitz, A. (2013). Knowledge, risk, and policy support: Public perceptions of nuclear power. Energy Policy, 62, 176-184. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2013.06.098
    Stoutenborough, J. W., & Vedlitz, A. (2016). The role of scientific knowledge in the public's perceptions of energy technology risks. Energy Policy, 96, 206-216. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2016.05.031
    Sugiawan, Y., & Managi, S. (2019). Public acceptance of nuclear power plants in Indonesia: Portraying the role of a multilevel governance system. Energy Strategy Reviews, 26, 100427. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esr.2019.100427
    Sutton, J., Palen, L., & Shklovski, I. (2008). Backchannels on the Front Lines: Emergent Uses of Social Media in the 2007 Southern California Wildfires. Proceedings of the 5th International ISCRAM Conference.
    Taber, K. S. (2018). The Use of Cronbach’s Alpha When Developing and Reporting Research Instruments in Science Education. Research in Science Education, 48(6), 1273-1296. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-016-9602-2
    Taipei Times. (2012, March 9). Religious groups join forces against nuclear power use. Taipei Times. https://www.taipeitimes.com/News/taiwan/archives/2012/03/09/2003527359
    Takahashi, B., & Tandoc, E. C. (2015). Media sources, credibility, and perceptions of science: Learning about how people learn about science. Public Understanding of Science, 25(6), 674-690. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963662515574986
    Tantivitayapitak, V. (2018, August 27). ทำไมข่าววิทยาศาสตร์เป็นจุดอ่อนข่าวไทย [Why is science news a weak point in Thai news?]. Sarakadee. https://www.sarakadee.com/blog/oneton/?p=2249
    Tavakol, M., & Dennick, R. (2011). Making sense of Cronbach's alpha. International Journal of Medical Education, 2, 53-55. https://doi.org/10.5116/ijme.4dfb.8dfd
    Teoh, C. W., & Gaur, S. S. (2019). Environmental concern: an issue for poor or rich. Management of Environmental Quality: An International Journal, 30(1), 227-242.
    Ter-Mkrtchyan, A., Wehde, W., Gupta, K., Jenkins-Smith, H. C., Ripberger, J. T., & Silva, C. L. (2022). Portions in portfolios: Understanding public preferences for electricity production using compositional survey data in the United States. Energy Research & Social Science, 91, 102759. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.erss.2022.102759
    Thai Civil Rights and Investigative Journalism. (2015). ไทม์ไลน์ ‘โครงการโรงไฟฟ้านิวเคลียร์ไทย’ [Timeline ‘Thailand’s nuclear power plant’] Thai Civil Rights and Investigative Journalism. Retrieved March 10, 2023, from https://www.tcijthai.com/news/2015/06/scoop/5927
    Thairath. (2023). ผลเลือกตั้ง 2566 [Election’s Results 2023] [Interactive Infographics]. https://www.thairath.co.th/election66/constituencies
    Thomas, M., DeCillia, B., Santos, J. B., & Thorlakson, L. (2022). Great expectations: Public opinion about energy transition. Energy Policy, 162, 112777. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2022.112777
    Tîiap 7 pák gàp ná-yoh-baai lót kâa fai tam dâai rĕu kăai făn [Comparing 7 parties with their policies to reduce electricity costs, can they do it or sell their dreams?]. (2023). Thairath. https://www.thairath.co.th/scoop/theissue/2683608
    U.S. Energy Information Administration. (2022). Nuclear power and the environment. U.S. Energy Information Administration. Retrieved March 10, 2023, from https://www.eia.gov/energyexplained/nuclear/nuclear-power-and-the-environment.php
    U.S. Energy Information Administration. (n.d.). Base load plant. In Glossary. Retrieved March 10, 2023, from https://www.eia.gov/tools/glossary/index.php?id=B
    United Nations. (n.d.). What is renewable energy? Retrieved March 11, from https://www.un.org/en/climatechange/what-is-renewable-energy
    Urbatsch, R., & Wang, Y. (2021). Are religious individuals against renewables? Exploring religious beliefs and support for government investment in energy transitions in the United States. Energy Research & Social Science, 81, 102283. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.erss.2021.102283
    Ursachi, G., Horodnic, I. A., & Zait, A. (2015). How reliable are measurement scales? External factors with indirect influence on reliability estimators. Procedia Economics and Finance, 20, 679-686.
    Visschers, V. H. M., Keller, C., & Siegrist, M. (2011). Climate change benefits and energy supply benefits as determinants of acceptance of nuclear power stations: Investigating an explanatory model. Energy Policy, 39(6), 3621-3629. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2011.03.064
    Walker, G. (1995). Renewable energy and the public. Land Use Policy, 12(1), 49-59. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/0264-8377(95)90074-C
    Wang, S., Wang, J., Lin, S., & Li, J. (2019). Public perceptions and acceptance of nuclear energy in China: The role of public knowledge, perceived benefit, perceived risk and public engagement. Energy Policy, 126, 352-360. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2018.11.040
    We Are Social, & Meltwater. (2023). Digital 2023: Thailand. Retrieved June 15, 2023, from https://datareportal.com/reports/digital-2023-thailand
    What Is Public Opinion? (2016). In American Government and Politics in the Information Age. University of Minnesota Libraries Publishing. https://open.lib.umn.edu/americangovernment/chapter/7-1-what-is-public-opinion/
    Whitehead, A. L., & Perry, S. L. (2020). How culture wars delay herd immunity: Christian nationalism and anti-vaccine attitudes. Socius, 6. https://doi.org/10.1177/2378023120977727
    Whitfield, S. C., Rosa, E. A., Dan, A., & Dietz, T. (2009). The future of nuclear power: value orientations and risk perception. Risk Analysis, 29(3), 425-437. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1539-6924.2008.01155.x
    Winter, S. (2020). Heuristic-Systematic Model. In The International Encyclopedia of Media Psychology (pp. 1-6). https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1002/9781119011071.iemp0202
    Yu, S., Abbas, J., Draghici, A., Negulescu, O. H., & Ain, N. U. (2022). Social Media Application as a New Paradigm for Business Communication: The Role of COVID-19 Knowledge, Social Distancing, and Preventive Attitudes [Original Research]. Frontiers in psychology, 13. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.903082
    Yuenyong, C., & Narjaikaew, P. (2009). Scientific literacy and thailand science education. International Journal of Environmental and Science Education, 4, 335-349.
    Zhu, W., Lu, S., Huang, Z., Zeng, J., & Wei, J. (2020). Study on public acceptance of nuclear power plants: Evidence from China. Human and Ecological Risk Assessment: An International Journal, 26(4), 873-889. https://doi.org/10.1080/10807039.2018.1544030
    Zoellner, J., Schweizer-Ries, P., & Wemheuer, C. (2008). Public acceptance of renewable energies: Results from case studies in Germany. Energy Policy, 36(11), 4136-4141.
    描述: 碩士
    國立政治大學
    國際傳播英語碩士學位學程(IMICS)
    109461017
    資料來源: http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0109461017
    資料類型: thesis
    顯示於類別:[國際傳播英語碩士學程] 學位論文

    文件中的檔案:

    檔案 描述 大小格式瀏覽次數
    101701.pdf1997KbAdobe PDF1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