Loading...
|
Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
https://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/155498
|
| Title: | 選擇性暴露、人際政治討論對政黨情感極化之影響
The Impact of Selective Exposure and Interpersonal Political Discussion on Affective Polarization |
| Authors: | 蔡旻潔
Tsai, Min-Chieh |
| Contributors: | 蕭怡靖
Hsiao, Yi-Ching
蔡旻潔
Tsai, Min-Chieh |
| Keywords: | 情感極化
選擇性暴露
人際政治討論
政黨認同
Affective polarization
Selective exposure
Interpersonal political discussion
Party identification |
| Date: | 2024 |
| Issue Date: | 2025-02-04 16:02:00 (UTC+8) |
| Abstract: | 自2000年臺灣首次政黨輪替以來，政黨競爭逐漸加劇，選民的情感極化程度也日益受到關注。基於選擇性暴露理論，選民是否透過主動選擇媒體而受其內容影響，進一步導致情感極化程度的上升?此外，從社會認同理論的角度出發，人們又是否會傾向進行同質性的政治討論，致使情感極化的加劇？而選民若處在同質性的媒體及政治討論環境的暴露程度或討論頻率越高，是否更激化其情感極化程度？
然而，隨著柯文哲於2019年創立台灣民眾黨，逐漸成為國會第三大黨，2024 年更奪下8席不分區立委的席次，使臺灣國會出現單一政黨不過半之情形。回顧過往臺灣的政治極化研究多是聚焦在統獨立場、民進黨與國民黨黨性間的情感極化討論，尚未有研究納入藍綠兩黨之外的第三政黨進行討論。在目前政黨競爭模式下，不同政黨認同者的情感極化程度又是否存在差異?政黨認同強度是否也會加劇情感極化程度？
為檢驗臺灣選民情感極化程度影響因素，本研究運用「台灣選舉與民主化調查:2024 年總統與立法委員選舉面訪案」(TEDS 2024)的資料，以實證分析目前三黨競爭的政治環境下之極化現象。本研究結果證實有選擇性暴露者、同質性政治討論者、民進黨支持者、政黨認同強度越高者之情感極化程度較高。此外，媒體暴露程度對有選擇性暴露者與情感極化間沒有顯著調節效果影響，政治討論頻率則對同質性政治討論者與情感極化間有調節效果，同質性政治討論者隨政治討論頻率提高，其情感極化程度也隨之提升。
Since Taiwan's first political transition of power in 2000, the intensification of party competition has increasingly drawn attention to the phenomenon of affective polarization among voters. Based on the theory of selective exposure, do voters actively choose media content that influences them, thereby exacerbating their levels of affective polarization? From the perspective of social identity theory, do individuals tend to engage in homogeneous political discussions, which in turn amplify affective polarization? Additionally, does greater exposure to homogeneous media and political discussion environments, or higher frequencies of such discussions, further intensify affective polarization?
After the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP), established by Ko Wen-je in 2019, became the third-largest party in the legislature and secured eight at-large legislative seats in 2024, Taiwan's legislature witnessed a new phenomenon where no single party holds a majority. Previous studies on political polarization in Taiwan have primarily focused on issues of unification versus independence and affective polarization between the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) and the Kuomintang (KMT), with limited attention to the role of third parties. In the current competitive political landscape, do affective polarization levels differ among supporters of various parties? Does the strength of party identification also exacerbate affective polarization?
To examine the factors influencing affective polarization among Taiwanese voters, this study utilizes data from the Taiwan's Election and Democratization Study: the Survey of the Presidential and Legislative Elections, 2024 (TEDS 2024) to conduct an empirical analysis of polarization in the current three-party competition environment. The results reveal that individuals with selective exposure, those engaging in homogeneous political discussions, DPP supporters, and those with stronger party identification exhibit higher levels of affective polarization. Moreover, the degree of media exposure does not have a significant moderating effect on the relationship between selective exposure and affective polarization. In contrast, the frequency of political discussions exerts a moderating effect on the relationship between homogeneous political discussants and affective polarization, with affective polarization intensifying as the frequency of political discussions increases among those engaging in homogeneous discussions. |
| Reference: | 中文部分
三立新聞網，2024，〈柯文哲革命成真？柯粉「開戰深藍爸爸」再嗆國民黨：騙不了人的詐騙集團〉，三立新聞網網站：https://www.setn.com/News.aspx?NewsID=1409894，檢索日期：2024年5月6日。
王宏忠，2012，〈政治意識及政治菁英的論述對於台灣民眾議題立場的影響-對 Zaller 之主流效應及極化效應之檢證〉，《臺灣民主季刊》，9(2): 71-123。
王宏恩，2024，〈2024總統大選：走不出去的兩大黨、崛起但有隱憂的第三選擇〉，報導者網站：https://www.twreporter.org/a/2024-election-wang-austin-horng-en-view，檢索日期：2024年8月26日。
王嵩音，2010，〈台灣選民媒介使用對於候選人形象與評價之影響: 傳統媒介 vs. 新媒介〉，《傳播與管理研究》，10(1): 3-35。
中央社，2019，〈韓國瑜稱9成媒體被民進黨控制 買通就可連任〉，中央社新聞網站：https://www.cna.com.tw/news/aipl/201911270253.aspx，檢索日期：2024年8月16日。
台灣民眾黨，2024，〈【民眾黨臉書更新】媒體集團親藍綠 踐踏台灣民主！〉，台灣民眾黨網站：https://www.tpp.org.tw/newsdetail/3191，檢索日期：2024年8月27日。
台灣政經傳播研究中心，2020a，〈台灣政經傳播研究中心2020年政策報告書：政治極化現象及其因應報告書〉，台北：國立政治大學台灣政經傳播研究中心。
台灣政經傳播研究中心，2020b，〈台灣政經傳播研究中心2020年政策報告書:政治極化再探：以同性婚姻為例〉，台北：國立政治大學台灣政經傳播研究中心。
台灣政經傳播研究中心，2022，〈台灣政經傳播研究中心2022年政策報告書：政治極化之成因及影響〉，台北：國立政治大學台灣政經傳播研究中心。
民報，2022，〈5成9民眾認為媒體政黨色彩非常嚴重 3成4贊成NCC主委改國會推薦〉，民報網站：https://www.peoplenews.tw/articles/d54ad27d10，檢索日期：2024年5月6日。
林希晏，2020，〈「我們家竟然會出了一個民進黨的」 韓國瑜慘敗「家庭失和」災情頻傳〉，風傳媒網站：https://www.storm.mg/article/2180526，檢索日期：2024年5月6日。
林聰吉、游清鑫，2009，〈政黨形象與台灣選民的投票行為: 1996-2008 年總統選舉的實證分析〉，載於《2008年總統選舉：論二次政黨輪替之關鍵選舉》，陳陸輝、黃紀、游清鑫主編，台北：五南。
林聰吉、蕭怡靖，2022，〈人格特質與政黨情感好惡差距〉，《選舉研究》，29(2): 1-46。
吳乃德，1994，〈社會分歧和政黨競爭: 解釋國民黨為何繼續執政〉，《中央研究院民族學研究所集刊》，78: 61-99。
范正祥，2023，〈柯文哲籲建立權責相符總統制 最終盼實施內閣制〉，中央社網站：https://www.cna.com.tw/news/aipl/202310150207.aspx，檢索日期：2024年8月26日。
美麗島電子報，2024，〈美麗島民調：2024年12月國政民調〉，Newtalk新聞網站：https://m.my-formosa.com.tw/DOC_212978.htm，檢索日期：2024年12月31日。
財團法人台灣民意基金會，2022，〈2022 年 6 月全國性民意調查 摘要報告〉，財團法人台灣民意基金會網站：https://www.tpof.org/2月記者會書面資料v3-2/#1672109111387-8e55643e-3583，檢索日期：2024年5月6日。
財團法人台灣媒體觀察教育基金會，2020，〈「2019台灣新聞媒體可信度研究」研究報告〉，財團法人台灣媒體觀察教育基金會網站：https://www.mediawatch.org.tw/news/9911，檢索日期：2024年8月16日。
盛杏湲，2008，〈政黨的國會領導與凝聚力-2000 年政黨輪替前後的觀察〉，《臺灣民主季刊》，5(4): 1-46。
郭兆翊，2023，政治極化與台灣政治: 媒體傳播對政治極化的影響，國立臺灣大學政治學研究所碩士學位論文。
郭建伸，2023，〈柯文哲籲台灣擺脫意識形態泥淖 同時把藍綠下架〉，中央社網：https://www.cna.com.tw/news/aipl/202312300119.aspx，檢索日期：2024年8月26日。
陳陸輝、陳映男，2013，〈台灣大學生的媒體使用與政治效能感〉，《傳播文化》，12: 3-40。
陳陸輝，2024，〈2024年至2028年「選舉與民主化調查」四年期研究規劃(4/4)：. 2024年總統與立法委員選舉面訪案〉，計畫編號：MOST 109-2740-H-004-004-SS4，台北：科技部專題研究計畫。
黃紀，2019，〈2016年至2020年「台灣選舉與民主化調查」四年期研究規劃(3/4)：網路民調實驗平台『政府績效資訊』調查案〉，計畫編號：MOST 105-2420-H-004-015-SS4，台北：科技部專題研究計畫。
游清鑫，2002，〈政黨認同與政黨形象: 面訪與焦點團體訪談的結合〉，《選舉研究》，9(2): 85-115。
張卿卿，2002，〈競選媒體使用對選民競選議題知識與政治效能感的影響－以兩千年總統大選為例〉，《選舉研究》，9(1): 1-39。
張傳賢、黃紀，2011，〈政黨競爭與台灣族群認同與國家認同間的聯結〉，《台灣政治學刊》，15(1): 3-71。
楊宗斌，2024，〈四成三勞工熱衷政治！37%關注選情影響上班！ 每月外快目標12K！選舉兼差財上看889億元！〉，yes123求職網網站：https://www.yes123.com.tw/admin/white_paper/article.asp?id=20240102090340，檢索日期：2024年8月16日。
鄭夙芬，2007，〈“深綠選民” 之探索〉，問題與研究 46(1): 33-60。
劉正山，2009，〈2008 年總統大選競選期間政黨支持者選擇性接觸媒體傾向的分析〉，《選舉研究》，16(2): 51-70。
劉嘉薇，2014，〈民眾政黨認同, 媒介選擇與紅衫軍政治運動參與〉，《政治學報》，58: 101-126。
劉嘉薇，2017，〈網路統獨的聲量研究: 大數據的分析〉，《政治科學論叢》，71: 113-165。
謝佩玲，2020，〈韓粉父母 vs. 英粉子女 大選世代落差待弭平〉，Newtalk新聞網站：https://newtalk.tw/news/view/2020-01-12/353605，檢索日期：2024年5月6日。
謝瓊玉，2019，〈觀點投書：討厭「民進黨」與 討厭「韓國瑜」〉，風傳媒網站：https://www.storm.mg/article/1889161，檢索日期：2024年8月26日。
蕭怡靖、林聰吉，2013，〈台灣政治極化之初探：測量與分析〉，載於《台灣選舉與民主化調查(TEDS)方法論之回顧與前瞻》，黃紀主編，台北：五南。
蕭怡靖，2014，〈從政黨情感溫度計解析台灣民眾的政治極化〉，《選舉研究》，21(2): 1-42。
蕭怡靖、鄭夙芬，2014，〈台灣民眾對左右意識型態的認知: 以統獨議題取代左右意識型態檢測台灣的政黨極化〉，《台灣政治學刊》，18(2): 79-138。
蕭怡靖，2019，〈台灣民眾的黨性極化及其對民主態度的影響〉，《台灣政治學刊》，23(2): 41-85。
英文部分
Abramowitz, Alan I., and Kyle L. Saunders. 2008. “Is Polarization a Myth?.” The Journal of Politics 70(2): 542-555.
Abramowitz, Alan I. 2010. The Disappearing Center: Engaged Citizens, Polarization, and American Democracy. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
Abramowitz, Alan I. 2011. “The 2008 Election: Polarization Continues.” In Controversies in Voting Behavior, 5th eds. Richard G. Niemi., Herbert F. Weisberg., and David C. Kimball. Washington, D.C.: CQ Press.
Alsinet, Teresa, Josep Argelich, Ramón Béjar, and Santi Martínez. 2021."Measuring polarization in online debates." Applied Sciences 11(24): 11879.
Amsalem, Eran, Eric Merkley, and Peter J. Loewen. 2022. “Does Talking to the Other Side Reduce Inter-Party Hostility? Evidence from Three Studies.” Political Communication 39(1): 61-78.
Batto, Nathan F. 2021. “The Impact of Han Kuo-yu's Populist Rhetoric in the 2018 Kaohsiung Mayoral Election.” Journal of Electoral Studies 28(2): 47-95.
Bogardus Emory S. 1925. “Measuring Social Distance.” Journal of Applied Sociology 9: 299-308.
Bond, Robert M., Hillary C. Shulman, and Michael Gilbert. 2018. “Does Having a Political Discussion Help or Hurt Intergroup Perceptions? Drawing Guidance from Social Identity Theory and the Contact Hypothesis.” International Journal of Communication 12: 21.
Butters, Ross, and Christopher Hare. 2022. “Polarized Networks? New Evidence on American Voters’ Political Discussion Networks.” Political Behavior 44(3): 1079-1103.
Cotton, John L. 2013. “Cognitive Dissonance in Selective Exposure.” In Selective Exposure to Communication, eds. Dolf Zillmann and Jennings Bryant, Hillsdale, N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Dalton, Russell J. 2008. “The Quantity and the Quality of Party Systems: Party System Polarization, Its Measurement, and Its Consequences.” Comparative political studies 41(7): 899-920.
Dilliplane, Susanna. 2011. “All the News You Want to Hear: The Impact of Partisan News Exposure on Political Participation.” Public Opinion Quarterly 75(2): 287-316.
DiMaggio, Paul, John Evans, and Bethany Bryson. 1996. “Have American's Social Attitudes Become More Polarized?” American journal of Sociology 102(3): 690-755.
Druckman, James N., and Arthur Lupia. 2016. “Preference Change in Competitive Political Environments.” Annual Review of Political Science 19(1): 13-31.
Eveland Jr, William P., and Myiah H. Hively. 2009. “Political Discussion Frequency, Network Size, and “Heterogeneity” of Discussion as Predictors of Political Knowledge and Participation.” Journal of Communication 59(2): 205-224.
Evans, John H., Bethany Bryson, and Paul DiMaggio. 2001. “Opinion Polarization: Important Contributions, Necessary Limitations.” American Journal of Sociology 106(4): 944-959.
Evans, John H. 2003. “Have Americans' Attitudes Become More Polarized?—An Update.” Social Science Quarterly 84(1): 71-90.
Festinger, Leon. 1957. A Theory of Cognitive Dissonance. Evanston, IL: Row, Peterson & Company.
Fleisher, Richard, and John R. Bond. 2004. “The Shrinking Middle in the US Congress.” British Journal of Political Science 34(3): 429-451.
Fiorina, Morris P., Samual J. Abrams, and Jermy C. Pope. 2005. Culture War: The Myth of a Polarized America. New York, NY: Pearson Longman.
Fiorina, Morris P., and Matthew S. Levendusky. 2006. “Disconnected: The Political Class versus the People.” In Red and Blue Nation? Characteristics and Causes of America’s Polarized Politics, eds. Pietro S. Nivola and David W. Brady. Washington, D.C.: Brookings Institution Press.
Fiorina, Morris P., and Samuel J. Abrams. 2008. “Political Polarization in the American Public.” Annual Review of Political Science 11(1): 563-588.
Fiorina, Morris P., and Samuel J. Abrams. 2009. Disconnect: The Breakdown of Representation in American Politics. Norman, OK: University of Oklahoma Press.
Fiorina, Morris P., and Samuel J. Abrams. 2011. “Where’s the Polarization?” In Controversies in Voting Behavior, 5th eds. Richard G. Niemi, Herbert F. Weisberg and David C. Kimball. Washington, D.C.: CQ Press.
Garrett, R. Kelly. 2013. “Selective Exposure: New Methods and New Directions.” Communication Methods and Measures 7(3-4): 247-256.
Garrett, R. Kelly, and Natalie J. Stroud. 2014. “Partisan Paths to Exposure Diversity: Differences in pro- and Counterattitudinal News Consumption.” Journal of Communication 64(4): 680-701.
Gidron, Noam, James Adams, and Will Horne. 2020. American Affective Polarization in Comparative Perspective. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Han, Jiyoung. 2018.“Partisan media and polarized opinion in South Korea: A review.” In Digital Korea: Digital technology and the change of social life, Kyŏng-hŭi Kim ed. Paju: HanulMplus Incorporated.
Hsiao, Yi-ching., and Chen-hua E. Yu. 2020. “Polarization Perception and Support for Democracy: The Case of Taiwan.” Journal of Asian and African Studies 55(8): 1143-1162.
Huckfeldt, Robert, Jeanette M. Mendez, and Tracy Osborn. 2004. “Disagreement, Ambivalence, and Engagement: The Political Consequences of Heterogeneous Networks.” Political Psychology 25(1): 65-95.
Huang, Chi, and Tzu-ching Kuo. 2022. Actual and Perceived Polarization on Independence-Unification Views in Taiwan. Asian Journal of Communication 32(2): 75-92.
Iyengar, Shanto, and Kyu S. Hahn. 2009. “Red Media, Blue Media: Evidence of Ideological Selectivity in Media use.” Journal of Communication 59(1): 19-39.
Iyengar, Shanto, Gaurav Sood, and Yphtach Lelkes. 2012. “Affect, Not Ideology: A Social Identity Perspective on Polarization.” Public Opinion Quarterly 76(3): 405-431.
Iyengar, Shanto, Yphtach Lelkes, Matthew Levendusky, Neil Malhotra, and Sean. J. Westwood. 2019. “The Origins and Consequences of Affective Polarization in the United States.” Annual Review of Rolitical Science 22(1): 129-146.
Johnson, Benjamin K., Rachel L. Neo, Marieke E.M. Heijnen, Lotte Smits, Caitrina van Veen. 2020. “Issues, involvement, and influence: Effects of selective exposure and sharing on polarization and participation.” Computers in Human Behavior 104: 106155.
Katz, Elihu, and Paul Lazarsfeld. 1955. “Interpersonal Networks: Communicating within the group.” In Personal Influence: The Part Played by People in the Flow of Mass Communication. New York, NY: Free Press.
Kim, Yonghwan. 2015. “Does Disagreement Mitigate Polarization? How Selective Exposure and Disagreement Affect Political Polarization.” Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly 92(4): 915-937.
Kim, Yonghwan. 2019. “How Cross-Cutting News Exposure Relates to Candidate Issue Stance Knowledge, Political Polarization, and Participation: The Moderating Role of Political Sophistication.” International Journal of Public Opinion Research 31(4): 626-648.
Kimball, David C., and Cassie A. Gross. 2007. “The Growing Polarization of American Voters.” In The State of Parties: The Changing Role of Contemporary American Parties, 5th eds. John C. Green., and Daniel J. Coffey. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.
Klapper, Joseph T. 1960. The Effects of Mass Communication. New York, NY: Free Press.
Klar, Samara. 2014. “Partisanship in a Social Setting.” American Journal of Political Science 58(3): 687-704.
Klofstad, Casey A., Anand Edward Sokhey, and Scott D. McClurg. 2013. “Disagreeing about Disagreement: How Conflict in Social Networks Affects Political Behavior.” American Journal of Political Science 57(1): 120-134.
Lazer, David, Brian Rubineau, Carol Chetkovich, Nancy Katz, and Michael Neblo. 2010. “The Coevolution of Networks and Political Attitudes.” Political Communication 27(3): 248-274.
Marchal, Nahema. 2022. ““Be nice or leave me alone”: An intergroup perspective on affective polarization in online political discussions.” Communication Research 49(3): 376-398.
McCarty, Nolan, Keith T. Poole, and Howard Rosenthal. 2006. Polarized America: The Dance of Ideology and Unequal Riches. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
McCoy, Jennifer, Tahmina Rahman, and Murat Somer. 2018. “Polarization and the Global Crisis of Democracy: Common Patterns, Dynamics, and Pernicious Consequences for Democratic Polities.” American Behavioral Scientist 62(1): 16-42.
Min, Hee, and Seongyi Yun. 2018. “Selective exposure and political polarization of public opinion on the presidential impeachment in South Korea: Facebook vs. KakaoTalk.” Korea Observer 49(1): 137-159.
Mutz, Diana C. 2002. “Cross-Cutting Social Networks: Testing Democratic Theory in Practice.” American Political Science Review 96(1): 111-126.
Mutz, Diana C. 2006. Hearing the Other Side: Deliberative Versus Participatory Democracy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Nicholson, Stephen P. 2012. “Polarizing Cues.” American Journal of Political Science 56(1): 52-66.
Nordbrandt, Maria. 2022. “Affective Polarization in Crosscutting Communication Networks: Offline and Online Evidence from Spain.” Frontiers in Political Science 4: 921188.
Parsons, Bryan M. 2015. “The Social Identity Politics of Peer Networks.” American Politics Research 43(4): 680-707.
Pettigrew, Thomas F. 1998. “Intergroup Contact Theory.” Annual Review of Psychology 49(1): 65-85.
Poole, Keith T., and Howard Rosenthal. 1984. “The Polarization of American Politics.” The Journal of Politics 46(4): 1061-1079.
Prior, Markus. 2007. Post-broadcast Democracy: How Media Choice Increases Inequality in Political Involvement and Polarizes Elections. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Prior, Markus. 2013. “Media and Political Polarization.” Annual Review of Political Science 16(1): 101-127.
Reiljan, Andres. 2020. “Fear and Loathing Across Party Lines (Also) in Europe: Affective Polarisation in European Party Systems.” European Journal of Political Research 59(2): 376-396.
Serrano-Contreras, Ignacio-Jesús, Javier García-Marín, and Óscar G. Luengo. 2020. “Measuring online political dialogue: Does polarization trigger more deliberation?. ” Media and Communication 8(4): 63-72.
Sinclair, Betsy. 2012. The Social Citizen: Peer Networks and Political Behavior. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
Somer, Murat, and Jennifer McCoy. 2018a. “Déjà vu? Polarization and Endangered Democracies in the 21st century.” American Behavioral Scientist 62(1): 3-15.
Somer, Murat, and Jennifer McCoy. 2018b. “Transformations through Polarizations and Global Threats to Democracy.” The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science 681(1): 8-22.
Stroud, Natalie J. 2007. “Media Effects, Selective Exposure, and Fahrenheit 9/11.” Political Communication 24(4): 415-432.
Stroud, Natalie J. 2010. “Polarization and Partisan Selective Exposure.” Journal of Communication 60(3): 556-576.
Suk, Jiyoun, David Coppini, Carlos Muñiz, and Hernando Rojas. 2022. “The More You Know, the Less You Like: A Comparative Study of How News and Political Conversation Shape Political Knowledge and Affective Polarization.” Communication and the Public 7(1): 40-56.
Tajfel, Henri, and John C. Turner. 1986. “The Social Identity Theory of Intergroup Behavior.” In Psychology of Intergroup Relations eds. Stephen Worchel and William G. Austin. Chicago, IL: Nelson-Hall.
Theriault, Sean M. 2004. “The Case of the Vanishing Moderates: Party Polarization in the Modern Congress.” Presented at the Annual Meeting of the Midwest Political Science Association, Chicago.
Thomsen, Jens P. F., and Anna H. Thomsen. 2023. “Intergroup Contact Reduces Affective Polarization but not Among Strong Party Identifiers.” Scandinavian Political Studies 46(4): 241-263.
Tsai, Chia-hung, Su-feng Cheng, and Hsin-hao Huang. 2005. “Do Campaigns Matter? The Effect of the Campaign in the 2004 Taiwan Presidential Election.” Japanese Journal of Electoral Studies 20: 115-135.
Tóth Fanni, Sabina Mihelj, Václav Štětka, and Katherine Kondor. 2023. “A Media Repertoires Approach to Selective Exposure: News Consumption and Political Polarization in Eastern Europe.” The International Journal of Press/Politics 28(4): 884-908.
Warner, Benjamin R., and Astrid Villamil. 2017. “A Test of Imagined Contact as a Means to Improve Cross-Partisan Feelings and Reduce Attribution of Malevolence and Acceptance of Political Violence.” Communication Monographs 84(4): 447-465.
Wakefield Research. 2017. “A Country Divided: 10 Per Cent of American Couples Have Ended a Relationship Because of Political Differences… and a THIRD Say They Would Consider Getting a Divorce if Their Spouse Backed Trump” https://wakefieldresearch.com/country-divided-10-per-cent-american-couples-ended-relationship-political-differences-third-say-consider-getting-divorce-spouse-backed-trump/ (accessed August 27, 2024).
Wang, T. Y., Su-Feng Cheng, and Lu-Huei Chen. 2009. “Deep-Green Supporters and Political Tolerance in Taiwan: An Analysis of Kennedy’s Hypothesis.” Issues and Studies 45(1): 1-30.
Wagner, Markus. 2021. “Affective polarization in multiparty systems.” Electoral Studies 69: 102199.
Wojcieszak, Magdalena, and Benjamin R. Warner. 2020. “Can Interparty Contact Reduce Affective Polarization? A Systematic Test of Different Forms of Intergroup Contact.” Political Communication 37(6): 789-811.
Zaller, John. 1992. The Nature and Origins of Mass Opinion. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. |
| Description: | 碩士
國立政治大學
政治學系
111252010 |
| Source URI: | http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0111252010 |
| Data Type: | thesis |
| Appears in Collections: | [政治學系] 學位論文
|
Files in This Item:
| File |
Description |
Size | Format | |
|---|
| 201001.pdf | | 2826Kb | Adobe PDF | 0 | View/Open |
|
All items in 政大典藏 are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved.
|
