English  |  正體中文  |  简体中文  |  Post-Print筆數 : 27 |  Items with full text/Total items : 113311/144292 (79%)
Visitors : 50932601      Online Users : 975
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/140.119/66639


    Title: 虛假霸權：台灣政治學研究中的理性選擇
    Other Titles: Hegemony in Mirage: Rational Choice in Taiwan`s Political Studies
    Authors: 林繼文
    Lin,Jih-Wen
    Contributors: 政治系
    Keywords: 理性選擇;計量政治;政治科學;政治學方法論;改革運動
    rational choice;quantitative political study;political science;political methodology;the Perestroika movement
    Date: 2005-09
    Issue Date: 2014-06-10 17:49:18 (UTC+8)
    Abstract: 本論文的主旨，在於探討理性選擇在台灣政治學研究中扮演的角色。論文首先回顧關於理性選擇的辯論，設定該途徑的狹、廣定義，並據此詳細檢閱被國科會列為評比對象的十九種中文政治學期刊在過去數年所發表的一千五百餘篇論文。結果發現提及理性選擇的論文只有百分之十左右，實際運用的比例更低。本論文也發現，理性選擇理論固然可以用統計工具來印證，但仍有許多論文採取個案研究。反之，許多計量政治的研究和理性選擇是無關的。這種樣態，和美國的政治學有明顯的差距。原因之一，可能是台灣的政治學研究者必須先耗費功夫「了解」事實，才能企圖「解釋」事實，而此種狀況相當程度根植於美國政治和非美國政治的異質性。同理，本論文也論證理性選擇必須和其它途徑相互合作，才可能成為具有解釋力的經驗理論。對理性選擇角色的評判屬於規範問題，但持不同立場的學者，都應對台灣政治學研究的現狀有具體的了解，才能設定合乎實際的改革議程。
    The purpose of this article is to depict the role played by rational choice in Taiwan`s political studies. It reviews the debate about rational choice and specifies the definition of this approach, and then examines more than 1500 articles published in the past few years by Taiwan`s leading political science journals. The percentage of articles minimally related to rational choice is roughly 10%, many of which are methodological discussions rather than applicatory. Some rational choice articles utilized statistics to confirm their hypotheses, but case studies are also prevalent. A significant number of statistical analyses are actually irrelevant to rational choice. The difference between the American and Taiwanese political studies is thus immense. The underlying cause may be the heterogeneity of the concerns of the political scientists in the two places, which forces the latter to focus on "finding" rather than "explaining" facts. Accordingly, to become an empirical theory, rational choice must seek cooperation from other approaches. Whether this outcome is acceptable is a normative issue, but pros and cons of this approach should both be based on a correct understanding of the state of the discipline.
    Relation: 政治科學論叢,25,67-104
    Data Type: article
    Appears in Collections:[政治學系] 期刊論文

    Files in This Item:

    File Description SizeFormat
    67104.pdf1109KbAdobe PDF2711View/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