政大機構典藏-National Chengchi University Institutional Repository(NCCUR):Item 140.119/33191
English  |  正體中文  |  简体中文  |  Post-Print筆數 : 27 |  Items with full text/Total items : 113393/144380 (79%)
Visitors : 51234009      Online Users : 880
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/140.119/33191


    Title: 當代閱聽人研究之理論重構:試論閱聽人的思辨能力
    Authors: 張玉佩
    Yupei Chang
    Contributors: 翁秀琪
    張玉佩
    Yupei Chang
    Keywords: 閱聽人研究
    接收分析典範
    思辨能力
    鄂蘭
    循環文本
    村上春樹
    audience research
    reception analysis
    the critical capability
    Hannah Arendt
    Date: 2002
    Issue Date: 2009-09-17 15:45:12 (UTC+8)
    Abstract: 閱聽人抗拒主流意識形態的批判能力﹐一直是閱聽人研究領域的重要議題。但是﹐現存閱聽人研究典範卻無法提出適切的討論框架﹐接收分析典範因時代變遷而使其概念模式難以適用﹐新典範如觀展／表演典範卻不關心閱聽人的抗拒問題。因此﹐本研究以閱聽人的思辨能力指稱閱聽人藉由與媒介影像互動、進而返回自我主體思考的能動性﹐試圖建構適合當代複雜媒介景象之閱聽人思辨能力的理論框架。
    為了強調思考過程重於思考結果﹐本研究引入政治哲學家鄂蘭的哲學體系﹐視閱聽人的思辨能力為流動變化的過程﹐並以其提出之想像操作機制、普遍可溝通性、想像式巡訪與無家感思考狀態作為研究觀察的參考框架。於實際經驗資料蒐集分析方面﹐本研究持續觀察四年（1998年至2002年）閱聽人於《村上春樹的網路森林》發表循環文本共1,815篇﹐並從鄂蘭的哲學體系出發﹐試圖描繪閱聽人思辨進行的歷程。
    研究首先發現﹐閱聽人研究應當將「閱聽人」的概念回歸到「人」的本質基礎﹐承認閱聽人並非單一、純粹、高同質性的群體﹐並重視其多元、混雜、糾結、交錯的身分認同。再者﹐閱聽人進行思辨時﹐其抗拒解構的對象不只是媒介文本蘊藏的意識形態﹐尚且包括長期自我人生經驗形成的默識與價值體系﹐因此﹐閱聽人思辨能力的呈現是綿延不斷的自我摧毀過程﹐是無所依傍與無家感心靈狀態的保持﹐唯有藉由闡述自我思考結果、與他人辯駁溝通的過程等持續的自我鍛鍊﹐才得以培育養成。
    Reference: 參考書目
    方孝謙(1999.7)：〈什麼是再現？跨學門觀點初探〉。《新聞學研究》﹐60: 115-148.
    王音力(2000)：《鄂蘭》。台北：生智。
    朱全斌(2001.6)：〈從主體、認同看質化的閱聽人研究〉。《資訊傳播與圖書館學》﹐7(4)：69-79。
    江宜樺(2001)：《自由民主的理路》。台北：聯經。
    江宜樺(2000.2)：〈政治判斷如何可能：簡述漢娜．鄂蘭晚年作品的關懷〉。《當代》﹐150：28-43。
    江宜樺(1995)：〈漢娜•鄂蘭論政治參與與民主〉﹐張福建、蘇文流主編﹐《民主理論：古典與現代》﹐pp.123-151。台北：中央研究院中山人文社會科學研究所。
    江宜樺(1993). Politics Aestheticized: An Interpretation of Hannah Arendt’s Theory of Political Action. 《人文及社會科學集刊》6(1): 303-340.
    江宜樺(1987)：《政治﹐行動﹐與判斷—漢娜•鄂蘭政治思想之研究》。台灣大學政治研究所碩士論文。
    吳佳琪(1998.2)：〈海外華人作品的詮釋問題—由「喜福會」談起〉。《當代》﹐126：104-113。
    吳翠珍、關尚仁(1999)：《媒體、公民、素養—媒體公民教育訓練》。台北：富邦文教基金會。
    吳翠珍(1996)：〈媒體教育中的電視素養〉。《新聞學研究》﹐35期。
    李英明(2000)：《網路社會學》。台北：揚智。
    村上春樹(1998)：《地下鐵事件》﹐賴明珠譯。台北：時報文化。
    林宇玲(2001.6)﹕〈由傅柯的自我技術觀點來看網路的主體建構—以世新大學不同性傾向的學生之線上互動經驗為例〉。發表於2001年中華傳播學會香港年會。
    林芳玫(1996)﹕《女性與媒體再現﹕女性主義與社會建構論的觀點》。台北﹕巨流。
    林玲妃、何英煒(2000.6.27)：〈楊致遠﹕投資中時網科交流互利﹕雅虎不考慮與傳統媒體合併 認網路在未來十年會更普遍 發展目標是「無所不在」〉。《中國時報》﹐第三版。
    林福岳(1996)﹕〈閱聽人地理學──以「民族誌法」進行閱聽人研究之緣起與發展〉。《新聞學研究》第52期。http://www.jour.nccu.edu.tw/Mcr/0052/14.asp。
    林鴻祐(1991)：〈布西亞的擬像社會理論〉。《當代》﹐65: 31-47。
    孫秀蕙(1998.7)：〈台灣網際網路發展與問題初探〉。《廣播與電視》﹐3(4)：1-20。
    孫治本(2001.8)﹕〈疆界毀壞與生活風格﹕社會學應如何看待「生活風格現象」 〉。《當代》﹐168﹕26-37。
    翁秀琪(1992)：《大眾傳播理論與實證》。台北：三民。
    翁秀琪(1993)：〈閱聽人研究的新趨勢—收訊分析的理論與方法〉。《新聞學研究》﹐47﹕1-15。
    翁秀琪(2000)：〈多元典範衝擊下傳播研究方法的省思：從口述歷史在傳播研究中的應用談起〉。《新聞學研究》﹐63：9-33。
    高玉芳(2000.9)：〈尋找閱聽人—網際網路閱聽人調查方法及其相關問題之探討〉。《廣播與電視》，15：139-184。
    張文強(1997)﹕〈閱聽人與新聞閱讀：閱聽人概念的轉變〉。《新聞學研究》﹐55﹕291-310。http://www.jour.nccu.edu.tw/Mcr/0055/14.asp。
    張玉佩(2000a)：〈當隱喻碰上認同〉。《新聞學研究》﹐64: 73-101。
    張玉佩(2000b)：〈網路閱聽人：主動/批判/自我展示〉。《當代》﹐159：90-101。
    張玉佩(1995.6)：〈以東方主義理論分梳「喜福會」〉。《當代》﹐110：80-95。
    許均瑞(2000.12)：〈台灣的日本現代文學受容：讀者的村上春樹世界〉。日本大阪大學言語文化研究所碩士論文摘要。http://www.readingtimes.com.tw/authors/murakami/reviews/rview045.htm.
    陳光興(1991)：〈真實—再現—擬仿：布希亞的後現代（媒體）社會學〉。《當代》﹐65: 18-30。
    陳思齊(2000)﹕〈超文本環境下敘事文本類型與超文本結構對閱讀之影響〉。中華傳播學會2000年會暨論文研討會。
    童涵浦(2001)：《從意識形態批判到有效性的建立：Hannah Arendt論「判斷」的政治意義》。台灣大學政治研究所碩士論文。
    黃光玉等(1999)﹕〈「太陽花」網站留言裡的收視回應﹕收訊分析的觀點〉。中華傳播學會1999年年會暨論文研討會。
    黃厚銘(1998)：〈《虛擬化身》導讀〉﹐收錄於Turkle, S.﹐《虛擬化身—網路世代的身分認同》﹐譚天、吳佳真譯。台北：遠流。
    黃瑞琪（2001）：《批判社會學》。台北：三民。
    楊照(1998)：〈記號的反叛—台灣的村上春樹現象〉﹐收錄於鄭粟兒編﹐《遇見100%的村上春樹》﹐pp.13-19。台北：時報文化。
    趙庭輝(1999.1)﹕〈廣電科技、家戶空間與家庭時間的辯論—英國媒體與文化研究的理論性觀點〉。《廣播與電視》﹐13﹕123-148。
    劉維公(2001.8)﹕〈何謂生活風格﹕論生活風格的社會理論意涵〉。《當代》﹐168﹕10-25。
    劉黎兒(2000/10/30)：〈村上存在的理由〉。《中國時報》人間副刊。
    劉黎兒(1998)：〈日本人的村上春樹〉﹐收錄於鄭粟兒編﹐《遇見100%的村上春樹》﹐pp.98-104。台北：時報文化。
    蔡英文(2002)：《政治實踐與公共空間：漢娜．鄂蘭的政治思想》。台北：聯經。
    蕭蘋(2000.9)：〈商機的無限或文化的多元？--網際網路的政經結構､與社會文化現象〉。《廣播與電視》﹐15：119-137。
    遲丕鑫(2000)﹕《電腦網路與網際網路》。台北﹕弘智文化。
    謝國雄(1997)：《純勞動：台灣勞動體制諸論》。台北：中研院社研所籌備處。
    魏玓(1999)：〈全球脈絡下的閱聽人研究﹕理論與檢視的批判〉。《新聞學研究》﹐60﹕93-114。
    Abercrombie, N. and Longhurst, B. (1998). Audiences: A Sociological Theory of Performance and Imagination. London & Thousand Oaks & New Delhi: Sage.
    Aiko, K.. Virtual Communities in Japan. Fttp://ftp.sunsite.udc.edu/academic/comms/papers.
    Alasuutari, P.(1999). 1 Introduction: Three Phases of Reception Studies. In Pertti Alassutari.(Ed.) Rethinking the Media Audience: The New Agenda. pp.1-21.London: Sage.
    Anderson, J. A.(1996). The pragmatics of audience in research and theory . In J. Hay, L. Grossbery & E. Waetella.(Eds.) The Audience and its landscape , pp.75-96. Boulder, CO: Westviews.
    Anderson, J. A.(1996).The pragmatics of audience in research and theory. In J. Hay, L. Grossberg & E. Wartella(Eds.), The audience and its landscape, pp.75-96. Boulder, CO: Westview.
    Ang, I.(1985). Watching Dallas: Soap Opera and the Melodramatic Imagination. London: Methuen.
    Appadurai,A.(1996). Modernity at Large. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
    Appleby, J. et al.(1996[1994]).《歷史的真相》﹐薛絢譯。台北：中正。
    Arendt, H.(1994). Some Question of Moral Philosophy. Social Research, 61(4):739-764.
    Arendt, H.(1984).Thinking and Moral Considerations: A Lecture. Social Research, 51(1):7-37.
    Arendt, H.(1982a).Postscriptum to thinking. In Hannah Arendt: Lectures on Kant’s Political Philosophy, Ronald Beiner(Ed.), pp.3-5. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
    Arendt, H.(1982b〔1970〕).Lectures on Kant’s Political Philosophy. Delivered at the New School For Social Research. In Hannah Arendt: Lectures on Kant’s Political Philosophy, Ronald Beiner(Ed.), pp.7-77. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
    Arendt, H.(1982c〔1970〕).Imagination. Seminar on Kant’s Critique of Judgment, given at the New School for Social Research. In Hannah Arendt: Lectures on Kant’s Political Philosophy, Ronald Beiner(Ed.), pp.79-85. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
    Arendt, H.(1978a). Thinking. The Life of the Mind, v.1. New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.
    Arendt, H.(1978b). Willing. The Life of the Mind, Vol. 2. New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.
    Arendt, H.(1977). Between Past and Future: Eight Exercises in Political Thought. New York: Penguin Books.
    Arendt, H.(1958) The Human Condition. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
    Babbie, E.(1998)：《社會科學研究方法》﹐李美華等譯。台北市﹕時英。
    Barthold, L. S.(2000). Towards an ethics of love: Arendt on the will and St Augustine. Philosophy & Social Criticism, 26(6): 1-20.
    Baym, N. K. (2000). Tune In, Log On: Soaps, Fandom, and Online Community. Thousand Oaks: Sage.
    Beiner, R.(1982). Hannah Arendt on Judging. In Hannah Arendt: Lectures on Kant’s Political Philosophy, Ronald Beiner(Ed.), pp.89-156. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
    Blaikei, N.(1995). Approaches to Social Enquiry. Cambridge: Polity Press.
    Blumler, J. G. and Katz, E.(Eds.) (1974). The Uses of Mass Communications, Current Perspectives in Gratifications Research. Beverly Hills: Sage.
    Cantril, H. et al.(1940). The Invasion from Mars. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
    Curran, J.(1991). Rethinking the media as a public sphere. In P. Dahlgren and C. Sparks(Eds.), Communication and Citizenship, pp.27-57. London: Routledge.
    Curran, J.(1995). The New Revisionism in Mass Communication Research: A Reappraisal. In O. Boyd-Barrett & C. Newbold (Eds.), Approach to Media : A Reader. London: Arnold.
    Disch, L.J. (1996). Hannah Arendt and the Limits of Philosophy. New York: Cornell University Press.
    Elliot, P.(1974). Uses and gratifications research: a critique and a sociological alternative. In Jay G. Blumler and E. Katz (Eds.) The Uses of Mass Communications, Current Perspectives in Gratifications Research, pp.249-268. Beverly Hills,CA : Sage.
    Fiske, J.(1986). MTV: Post-structural post-modern. Journal of Communication Inquiry, 10(1): 74-79.
    Fiske, J.(1987).Television Culture. London: Methuen.
    Fiske, J.(1992). The cultural economy of fandom. In L. Lewis(Ed.),The Adoring Audience: Tan Culture and Popular Media, pp.30-49. London: Routledge.
    Fornäs, J.(2000). The crucial in between: the centrality of mediation in cultural studies. European Journal of Cultural Studies, 3(1): 45-65.
    Foss, S. K. et al.(1996﹝1991﹞)：《當代語藝觀點》﹐林靜伶譯。台北：五南。
    Foster, D. (1997).Community and identity in the electronic village. In David Porter. (Ed.) Internet Culture, pp.23-37. New York and London: Routledge.
    Gantz, W.(1996). An examination of the range and salience of gratification associated with entertainment programming. Journal of Behavioral and Social Sciences, 1:11-48.
    Geertz, C.(1973). The Interpretation of Cultures: Selected Essays. New York: Basic Books.
    Gersch, B.(1998). Gender at the crossroads. Journal of Communication Inquiry, 22(3): 95-100.
    Gibson, T. A.(2000.6). Beyond cultural populism: notes toward the critical ethnography of media audiences. Journal of Communication Inquiry, 24(3): 253-273.
    Gray, A.(1999).Audience and Reception Research in Retrospect: the Trouble with Audiences. In Pertti Alassutari.(Ed.) Rethinking the Media Audience: The New Agenda. pp.22-37.London: Sage.
    Gunkel, D.(2000.3).Rethinking Virtual Reality: Simulation and the Deconstruction of the Image. Critical Studies in Media Communication,17(1): 45-62.
    Hall, S. (1980). Encoding/decoding. In S. Hall, D. Hobson, A. Lowe, and P. Willis(Eds.), Culture, Media, Language, pp.128-139. London: Hutchinson.
    Hall, S.(1992).〈意識形態的再發現—媒體研究中被壓抑者的重返〉﹐黃麗玲譯﹐收錄於《文化﹐社會與媒體》﹐pp.87-136。台北：遠流。
    Harms, J. B. and Dickens, D. R.(1996). Postmodern media studies: analysis or symptom? Critical Studies in Mass Communication, 13: 210-227.
    Hart, S.(1990). Modern Rhetorical Criticism. Texas: Harper Collins.
    Hay, J. , Grossberg, I. and Wartella, E.(Eds.)(1996) The Audience and its Landscape. Boulder, Colorado: Westview Press.
    Hay, J.(1996) Afterword : The Place of the Audience : Beyond Audience Studies. In James Hay et al.(Eds.) The Audience and its Landscape, pp.359-378. Boulder, Colorado: Westview Press.
    Hobson, D.(1982). Crossroad: The Drama of a Soap Opera. London: Methuen.
    Hoijer, B. (1999).To be an audience. In Pertti Alassutari.(Ed.) Rethinking the Media Audience: The New Agenda, pp.179-194. London: Sage.
    Ito, M.(1997).Virtually embodied: the reality of fantasy in a multi-user fungeon. In David Porter. (Ed.) Internet Culture, pp.87-109. New York and London: Routledge.
    Jensen, K. B. (1996) After convergence: constituents of a social semiotics of mass media reception. In Hay, James , Grossberg, Iawrence and Wartella, Ellen.(Eds.) The Audience and its Landscape ,pp.63-74. Boulder, Colorado: Westview Press.
    Jensen, K. B. and K. E. Rosengren (1990). Five traditions in search of the audience. European Journal of Communication, 5:207-238.
    Jensen, K. B.(1993). The Past in the Future: Problem and Potentials of Historical Reception Studies. Journal of Communication, 43(4): 20-28.
    Jones, S. G.(1998). Information , internet, and community. In S. G. Jones (Ed.), Cybersociety 2.0: Revisiting Computer-Mediated Communication and Community, pp. 1-34. Thousand Oskes, CA: Sage.
    Jordan, T.(1999). Cyberpower: the Culture and Politics of Cyberspace and the Internet. London: Routledge.
    Katz, E. and Lazarsfeld, P.(1955) Personal Influence. New York: Free Press.
    Katz, E. and Liebes, T.(1984). Once upon a Time, in Dallas. Intermedia, 12:28-32.
    Landow, G. P.(1992). Hypertext: The convergence of contemporary critical theory and technology. Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press.
    Littlejohn, S. W.(1992). Theories of Human Communication. Belmont: Wadsworth.
    Livingstone, S. M.(2000). On the cutting edge, or otherwise, of media and communication research,. Nordicom Review, 2: 7-13.
    Livingstone, S.(1996). Towards and agenda for audience reception studies. A working paper.
    Livingstone, S.M.(1990).Making sense of television: The psychology of audience interpretation. London: Pergamon.
    Mattus, M.(2000). The Hypertextual Dialogue between Living History and True Histore: Two Perspectives from the World Wide Web on the Holocaust. Nordic Review, 21(2): 329-346.
    May, Derwent.(1990)：《漢娜鄂蘭》﹐黃怡譯。台北：聯經。
    McQuail, D. (1997). Audience Analysis. London: Sage.
    Morley, D. (1999).’To boldly go…’: the ‘third generation’ of reception studies. In Pertti Alassutari.(Ed.) Rethinking the Media Audience: The New Agenda, pp.195-205.London: Sage.
    Morley, D.(1980). The ‘Nationwide’ Audience. London: British Film Institute.
    Morley, D.(1993) Pendulums and pitfalls. Journal of Communication, 14:13-19.
    Morley, D.(1995[1992])：《電視﹐觀眾與文化研究》﹐馮建三譯。台北：遠流。
    Murphy, P. D.(1999.6) Media cultural studies’ uncomfortable embrace of ethnography. Journal of Communication Inquiry, 23(3): 205-221.
    Neolle-Neumann, E.(1994[1991])：《民意—沈默螺旋的發現之旅》﹐翁秀琪等譯。台北：遠流。
    Porter, D. (Ed.) (1997). Internet Culture. New York and London: Routledge.
    Poster, M.(1997). Cyberdemocracy: Internet and The Public Sphere. David Porter.(Ed.) Internet Culture, pp.201-217. New York: Routledge.
    Potter, W. J.(1998). Media Literacy. California: Sage.
    Radway, J.(1987) Reading the Romance: Women, Patriarchy and Popular Literature. London: Verso.
    Reeves, B.(1996).Hemispheres of Scholarship: Psychological and other approaches to studying media audiences. In J. Hay, L. Grossberg & E. Waetella(Eds.),The audience and its landscape, pp.265-279. Boulder, CO: Westview.
    Roscoe, J. et al.(1995). The television audience: a reconsideration of the taken-for-granted terms ‘active’ ‘social’ and ‘critical’. European Journal of Communication, 10(1): 87-108.
    Ruddock, A.(2001). Understanding Audiences: Theory and Method. Sage: Thousand Oaks.
    Saussure, F. de.(1996﹝1973﹞)：〈普通語言學教程〉﹐程曾厚選評。胡明揚（編）：《西方語言學名著選讀》﹐pp.77-120。台北：書林。
    Sayre, H.(1994)：〈表演performance〉﹐收錄於F. Lentricchia & T. McLaughlin (Eds.)﹐張京媛等譯﹐《文學批評術語》。香港：牛津大學。
    Scannel, P.(2000). For-anyone-as-someone-structures. Media, Culture & Society, 22:5-24.
    Scholes, R.(1994[1974]).《文學結構主義》，劉豫譯。台北：桂冠。
    Schroder, K. C. (1999).The best of both worlds? media audience research between rival paradigm. In Pertti Alassutari.(Ed.) Rethinking the Media Audience: The New Agenda, pp.38-68.London: Sage.
    Seiter, E. (1993[1987])：《電視與當代批評理論》﹐Allen, R. C.(Eds.)﹐李天鐸譯﹐pp.31-58。台北：遠流。
    Severin, W. J. and Tankard, J. W.(1992).《傳播理論：起源、方法與應用》﹐羅世宏譯。台北：時英。
    Simmel, G.(2001)：《金錢 性別 現代生活風格》﹐顧仁明譯。台北﹕聯經。
    Sterne, J.(1999). Thinking the Internet: Cultural Studies Versus the Millennium. In Jones, S.(Ed.) Doing Internet Research: Critical Issues and Methods for Examining the Net, pp. 257-287. London: Sage.
    Taylor, L. and Willis, A.(1999).《大眾傳播媒體新論》﹐簡妙如等譯。台北：韋伯。
    Turkle, S.(1998)﹕《虛擬化身﹕網路世代的身分認同》， 譚天、吳佳真譯。台北﹕遠流。
    Warnick, B.(1999). Masculinizing the feminine inviting women on line ca. 1997. Critical Studies in Mass Communication, 16(1): 1-19.
    Watson, N.(1998). Why we argue about virtual community: a case study of the Phish.net fan community. In S. G. Jones.(Ed.) Virtual Culture: Identity & Communication in Cybersociety, pp.102-132. London: Sage.
    Webster, F.(2000).《資訊社會理論》﹐馮建三譯。台北﹕遠流。
    Wilbur, S. P. (1997). An Archaeology of Cyberspaces: Virtuality, Community, Identity. In David Porter. (Ed.) Internet Culture.pp.5-23. New York and London: Routledge.
    Williams, R.(1983). Keywords. New York: Oxford University Press.
    Yar, M.(2000). From actor to spectator: Hannah Arendt’s ‘two theories’ of political judgment. Philosophy & Social Criticism, 26(2): 1-27.
    Zickmund, S.(1997). Approaching the Radical Other: The Discursive Culture of Cyberhate. In Jones, S. G. (Ed.) Virtual Culture, pp.185-205. London:Sage.
    Description: 博士
    國立政治大學
    新聞研究所
    86451503
    91
    Source URI: http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0086451503
    Data Type: thesis
    Appears in Collections:[Department of Journalism] Theses

    Files in This Item:

    File Description SizeFormat
    45150301.pdf11KbAdobe PDF21368View/Open
    45150302.pdf11KbAdobe PDF21141View/Open
    45150303.pdf15KbAdobe PDF21136View/Open
    45150304.pdf22KbAdobe PDF21510View/Open
    45150305.pdf161KbAdobe PDF214192View/Open
    45150306.pdf107KbAdobe PDF23969View/Open
    45150307.pdf318KbAdobe PDF22145View/Open
    45150308.pdf139KbAdobe PDF22169View/Open
    45150309.pdf373KbAdobe PDF22812View/Open
    45150310.pdf89KbAdobe PDF21825View/Open
    45150311.pdf43KbAdobe PDF21384View/Open
    45150312.pdf45KbAdobe PDF21712View/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