Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
https://ah.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/134127| 題名: | 行為經濟學觀點的政策分析與工具設計 －以我國文憑主義為個案之探究 Policy Analysis and Tool Design from the Perspective of Behavioral Economics: A Case Study of Credentialism in Taiwan |
作者: | 賴怡樺 Lai, Yi-Hua |
貢獻者: | 陳敦源<br>林水波 Chen, Don-Yun<br>Lin, Shoei-Po 賴怡樺 Lai, Yi-Hua |
關鍵詞: | 政策工具 行為經濟學 推力 文憑主義 實驗研究法 Policy tools Behavioral economics Nudge Credentialism Experimental research |
日期: | 2021 | 上傳時間: | 2-三月-2021 | 摘要: | 公共政策向來欠缺心理學面向的研究。1990年代興起的行為經濟學，結合經濟學與心理學，透過具體系統性理論化人類不理性的行為，自2010起被大量運用於公共行政與政策領域，帶來心/新的觀點。該新興領域雖已獲得多國政府與學界的廣泛採行，在我國的研究及實務應用則仍待探究。本研究旨在探討行為經濟學應用於政策分析與工具設計的方法，並以我國文憑主義為個案進行實作。研究者首先透過文獻探討釐析行為經濟學應用於政策分析與工具設計的方法，再透由文獻探討與訪談法等資料蒐集，診斷我國的文憑主義問題，聚焦於升學選擇中的適性發展部分，設計行為經濟學的推力工具「生涯發展推力成績通知單」，並藉由角色模擬的網路遊戲實驗檢驗其成效，挑選受試者實施訪談以瞭解實驗中推力工具影響機制的運作情形。研究結果顯示推力工具確可有效舒緩文憑主義，惟其效果在不同屬性的對象間存在變異，故工具的設計與評估皆有再客製化的必要。另本研究發展行為經濟學的政策分析與工具設計操作指引，及針對我國文憑主義的問題建構與政策工具分析等，應有助於相關研究與實務應用的參考。綜上，本研究嘗試研提針對政策分析、工具設計與評估；行為經濟學觀點政策分析與工具設計的理論研究與實務應用；以及我國文憑主義的因應等三個面向的建議。 The field of public policy studies has neglected psychological consideration. Since behavioral economics (BE), combining economics and psychology, got attention in the 1990s, there is much research in public administration and policy applying this approach and theorizing irrational behaviors in human beings to facilitate a novel/psychological viewpoint. This new ground grew and has been extensively adopted in governments and academia internationally, however, it is still insufficient in Taiwan’s context. The aim of this study is to investigate how to use BE approach in policy analysis and tool design (PATD) and to employ this to deal with credentialism. Through reviewing literature with BE applying in PATD, this research constructs a set of operational procedures and guidelines for research and practice communities. Furthermore, this paper diagnoses the problems of credentialism, focuses on the mechanism of adaptive development in pursuing higher-level education, and designs a nudge tool, called “nudge-based career development report card.” The author conducted a role-playing gamified experiment on the internet to examine the effectiveness of the nudge, and interviewed experiment receivers to understand the mechanism for the tool. Results show that the nudge tool is effective to alleviate the symptom of diplomatism, while the effect varies between receivers with different characteristics, and, therefore, the design and evaluation of this report card remain to be customized. This research proposes suggestions for the traditional PATD, the theoretical inspiration and practical application from BE approach, and how to cope with credentialism. |
參考文獻: | 壹、中文部分\n內政部（2019）。歷年全國人口統計資料（年底人口按性別及年齡）。2019年3月18日，取自https://www.ris.gov.tw/app/portal/346\n王震武（2002）。文憑主義的成因及其社會心理基礎－一個歷史觀察。本土心理學研究，17：3-65。\n王震武、林文瑛（1994）。升學制度與升學症候群。收錄於臺灣研究基金會（編），臺灣的教育改革（頁502-539）。臺北：前衛。\n朱敬一、葉家興（1994）。臺灣的「私人興學」現況檢討與政策建議。臺灣研究基金會（主編），臺灣的教育改革（頁106-159）。臺北市：前衛。\n羊憶蓉（1994）。教育與國家發展：臺灣經驗。臺北市：桂冠。\n何英奇（2001）。唯智功績主義與正義之衝突：臺灣文憑主義改革的兩難困境與挑戰。行政院國家科學委員會專題研究計畫（NSC87-2413-H-003-022）。\n吳武典、簡茂發、洪冬桂、舒琮慧、鄒小蘭、張芝萱、吳道瑜（2010）。高中學生生涯發展組型建構及其在升學與生涯輔導上的意義。教育科學研究期刊，55（2）：29-72。\n李政釗（2011）。文憑主義與文憑主義的政治經濟分析：美、日、臺個案研究。東吳大學政治學系碩士論文。臺北市：未出版。\n汪丁丁（2017）。行為社會科學基本問題。上海：上海人民出版社。\n周麗玉（2001）。多元入學方案不等於基本學力測驗。師友，92（2）：15-19。\n松村真宏（2018）。仕掛學：使人躍躍欲試、一舉兩得的好設計。臺北市：遠流。\n林志成（2015）。《十二年國教》明星高中不會被消滅 馬掛保證。2020年11月1日，取自https://www.parenting.com.tw/article/5031508-/\n林忠正、黃璀娟（2009）。補習文化。人文及社會科學集刊，21（4）：587-643。\n邱皓政（2018）。量化研究方法（一）：研究設計與資料分析。臺北：雙葉書廊。\n孫傳釗（2002）。從二元經濟論到篩選理論 讀多爾 的《文憑病 教育、資格和發展》。二十一世紀（網路版），5。2019年3月18日，取自http://www.cuhk.edu.hk/ics/21c/media/online/0205060.pdf\n常鑫、殷紅海（2003）。Daniel Kahneman與行為經濟學。心理科學進展，11（3）：256-261。\n張振成（2001）。高中多元入學方案的評議。師友，404：19-22。\n張雪梅（2006）。大學生的校系選填--填對了嗎？是誰的責任？臺灣高教研究電子報，1：9-17。\n教育部（1994）。中華民國教育統計。臺北市：作者。\n教育部（2019）。15歲以上教育程度─按區域別、性別分。2019年3月18日，取自http://statis.moi.gov.tw/micst/stmain.jsp?sys=100&kind=10&type=1&funid=c01104&rdm=lheeJ7py\n教育部統計處（2018a）。受僱就業者平均每月主要工作收入-按教育程度分。2019年3月18日，取自https://depart.moe.edu.tw/ed4500/cp.aspx?n=002F646AFF7F5492&s=1EA96E4785E6838F#\n教育部統計處（2018b）。失業率-按教育程度分。2019年3月18日，取自https://depart.moe.edu.tw/ed4500/cp.aspx?n=002F646AFF7F5492&s=1EA96E4785E6838F#\n教育部部史室網址：http://history.moe.gov.tw/milestone.asp\n許定邦（2000）。高中高職實施多元入學方案後國中生學習困擾及學習態度之研究。國立彰化師範大學教育研究所碩論文，未出版。\n陳向明（2009）。社會科學質的研究。臺北市：五南。\n陳恭平（2009）。人非聖賢：簡介行為經濟學。人文與社會科學簡訊，10（4）：16-28。\n陳國偉（2003）。我國高級中等學校多元入學方案之研究。國立中山大學教育研究所碩士論文，未出版。\n陳清溪（2013）。十二年國民基本教育政策之探討。教育資料與研究，109：53-77。\n彭臺光、高月慈、林鉦琴（2006）。管理研究中的共同方法變異：問題本質、影響、測試和補救。管理學報，23（1）：77-98。\n黃武雄（1995）。臺灣教育的重建。臺北：遠流。\n黃政傑（1994）。我國公元兩千年高級中等教育改革方向之研究。臺北：國立教育資料館。\n黃春木（2007）。臺灣社會文憑主義的發展與解決對策（1945-2007）。國立臺灣師範大學教育學系博士論文。臺北市：未出版。\n黃毅志、陳怡靖（2005）。臺灣的升學問題：教育社會學理論與研究之探討。臺灣教育社會學研究，5（1）：77-118。\n楊國賜（1996）。綜合回應（三）：我對廣設高中大學的回應意見。教育研究資訊，4（1）：34-39。\n劉家樺、駱明慶、伊慶春（2017）。2001年高中職多元入學方案對升學壓力、時間安排與課外活動和才藝表現的影響。經濟論文，45（2）：165-206。\n盧雪梅（2005）。九年一貫課程成績通知單模式探究：現況與展望。教育研究與發展期刊，1（3）：177-212。\n賴怡樺（2010）。利害關係人觀點之政策問題建構－以低分上大學為例。國立臺灣師範大學教育政策與行政研究所碩士論文，未出版。\n賴怡樺、林水波、陳敦源（2018）。行為主義導向的公共政策研究：以政策工具「推力」為核心的初探。行政暨政策學報，67：1-37。\n薛求知、黃佩蓉、魯直、張曉蓉（2005）。行為經濟學：理論與應用。臺北市：智勝文化。\n謝明瑞（2007）。行為經濟學理論的探討。商學學報，15：1-46。\n謝敏怡（譯）（2019）。有野典男著。有限理性：行為經濟學入門首選！經濟學和心理學的共舞，理解人類真實行為的最佳工具。新北市：遠足文化。\n韓楷檉、楊銀興、陳啟東（2011）。臺灣高中升學輔導實施現況與學生滿意度之調查。教育資料集刊，50：27-48。\n瞿海源（1994）。評論臺灣教育問題。臺灣研究基金會（主編），臺灣的教育改革（頁549-566）。臺北市：前衛。\n簡成熙（1999）。我國升學競爭的機制與變革：以近年來高中入學制度為例。教育研究資訊，7（6）：61-84。\n\n貳、外文部分\nAkerlof, G. A. (1970). The market for ‘lemons’: Quality uncertainty and the market mechanism. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 84: 488-500.\nAkerlof, G. A. (1980). A theory of social custom, of which unemployment may be one consequence. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 94: 749-775.\nAmano, I. (2011). The origins of Japanese credentialism. Victoria, Australia: Trans Pacific Press.\nAmano, I. (2014). Review article: The origins of Japanese credentialism. Educational Studies in Japan: International Yearbook, 8: 163-164.\nArrow, K. J. (1973). Higher education as a filter. Journal of public Economics, 2(3): 193-216.\nBabbie, E. (2004). The practice of social research. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Publishing Company.\nBaker, D. P. (2011). Forward and backward, horizontal and vertical: Transformation of occupational credentialing in the schooled society. Research in Social Stratification and Mobility, 29(1): 5-29.\nBechenbach, F.& Kahlenborn, W. (2016). New perspectives for environmental policies through behavioral economics. Switzerland: Springer.\nBerg, I. (1970). Education and jobs: The great training robbery. New York: Praeger. Reissue with new introduction by the author 2003. New York: Percheron Press.\nBhargava, S. & Loewenstein, G. (2015). Behavioral economics and public policy: Beyond nudging. American Economic Review: Papers & Proceedings, 105(5): 396-401.\nBills, D. B. (2003). Credentials, signals, and screens: Explaining the relationship between schooling and job assignment. Review of Educational Research, 73(4): 441-469.\nBinder, C. (2014). A spillover-based theory of credentialsm. Canadian Journal of Economics, 47(4): 1387-1425.\nBirkland, T. A., (2016). Policy design and policy tools. In An introduction to the policy process: Theories, concepts, and models of public policy making. NY: Taylor & Francis.\nBourdieu, P. & Passeron, J.-C. (1977). Reproduction: In education, society and culture. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.\nBrown, D. K. & Bills, D. B. (2011a). New directions in educational credentialism. Research in Social Stratification and Mobility, 29(1): 1-4.\nBrown, D. K. & Bills, D. B. (2011b). An overture for the sociology of credentialing: Empirical, theoretical, and moral considerations. Research in Social Stratification and Mobility, 29(1): 133-138.\nBrown, D. K. (1995). Degrees of control: A sociology of educational expansion and occupational credentialism. New York, NY: Teacher College Press.\nBrown, D. K. (2001). The social source of educational credentialism: Status cultures, labor markets, and organizations. Sociology of Education, 74(Extra issue: Current of thoughts: Sociology of education at the dawn of the 21th century): 19-34.\nCandel, J. J. l. & Biesbroek, R. (2016). Toward a processual understanding of policy integration. Policy Science, 49: 211-231.\nCartwright, E. (2018). Behavioral economics. New York, NY: Routledge.\nClark, V. P. & Ivankova, N. V. (2016). Mixed methods research: A guide to the field. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.\nCollins, R. (1979). The credential society: A historical sociology of education and stratification. New York: Academic Press.\nCollins, R. (2011). Credential inflation and the future of universities. Italian Journal of Sociology of Education, 2:228-251.\nCongdon, W. J. (2013). Psychology and economic policy. In E. Shafir Ed., The behavioral foundations of public policy. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.\nCook, T. D., & Campbell, D. T. (1979). Quasi-Experimentation: Design and Analysis Issues for Field Settings. Houghton Mifflin.\nCottom, T. M. (2017). Lower Ed: Troubling rise of for-profit colleges in new economy. New York: The New Press.\nCreswell, J. W. (2015). Revisiting mixed methods and advancing scientific practices. In Hesse-Biber, S. & Johnson, R. B. (Ed.), The Oxford handbook of multimethod and mixed methods research inquiry. NY: Oxford University Press.\nDavenport, N. (2007). The rise and rise of credentialism. In A lecturer’s guide to further education (pp.108-125). Montreal: McGill-Queen`s University.\nDore, R. (1976). The diploma disease: Education, qualification and development. London: Allen and Unwin.\nDore, R. (1997a). The argument of the diploma disease: a summary. Assessment in Education, 4(1): 23-32.\nDore, R. (1997b). Reflections on the diploma disease twenty years later. Assessment in Education, 4(1): 189-206.\nElmore, R. F. (1987). Instruments and strategy in public policy. Policy Studies Review, 7(1): 174-186.\nFong, J., Janzow, P, & Peck, K. (2016). Demographic shifts in educational demand and the rise of alternative credentials. Washington, DC: UPCEA.\nFreeman, R. (1976). The overeducated America. New York: Academic Press.\nFry, G. W. (1981). Degreeism: Disease of cure? Higher Education, 10(5): 517-527.\nGopalan, M. & Pirog, M. A. (2017). Applying behavioral insights in policy analysis: Recent trends in the United States. Policy Studies Journal, 45(1): S82-S114.\nHalpern,, D. (2015). Inside the nudge unit. London, United Kingdom: WH Allen.\nHapgood, D. (1971). Diplomaism. New York: Donald W. Brown.\nHellstrom, T. & Jacob, M. (2017). Policy instrument affordances: a framework for analysis. Policy Studies, 38(6), 604-621.\nHood, C. (1983). The tools of government. London: Macmilan.\nHowlett, M, & Fraser, S. (2018). Matching policy tools and their targets: Beyond nudges and utility maximization in policy design. Policy & Politics, 46 (1): 101-124.\nHowlett, M. & Cashore, B. (2009). The dependent variable problem in the study of policy change: Understanding policy change as a methodological problem. Journal of Comparative Policy Analysis, 11(1): 33-46.\nHowlett, M. & Mukherjee, I. (2018). Thirty years of instrument research: What have we learned and where are we going? In Handbook on policy, process and governing Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.\nHowlett, M. (2005). What is a policy instrument? Tools, mixes, and implementation styles. In Eliadis, P., Hill, M. M. & Howlett, M. Ed., Designing government: From instruments to governance. London, Montreal: McGill-Queen`s University Press.\nHowlett, M. (2017). The criteria for effective policy design: character and context in policy instrument choice. Journal of Asian Public Policy, DOI: 10.1080/17516234.2017.1412284\nHowlett, M. (2019). Designing public policies: Principles and instruments. New York, NY: Routledge.\nHowlett, M., & J. Rayner. (2013). Patching vs packaging in policy formulation: Assessing policy portfolio design. Politics and Governance, 1(2), 170-182.\nHowlett, M., & Ramesh, M. (1993). Patterns of policy instrument choice: Policy styles, policy learning and the privatization experience. Review of Policy Research, 12(1-2): 3-24.\nHowlett, M., & S. Fraser. (2018). Matching policy tools and their targets: Beyond nudges and utility maximization in policy design. Policy & Politics, 46(1), 101-124.\nHowlett, M., Ramesh, M. & Perl, A. (2009). Studying public policy: Policy cycles and policy subsystems. New York: Oxford University Press.\nIanole, R. (2017). Applied behavioral economics research and trends. Hershey, PA: IGI Global\nIlon, L. (1997). Educational repercussions of a global system of production. In W. K. Cummings & N. F. McGinn (Eds.) International handbook of education and development: Preparing schools, students and nations for the twenty-first century. Oxford, Pergamon.\nJabbar, H. (2011). The behavioral economics of education: New directions for research. Educational research, 40(9): 446-453.\nJames,O., Jilke, S. R., & Van Ryzin. (2017). Experiments in public management research: Challenges and contributions paperback. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.\nJilke, S., & Van Ryzin, G. (2017). Survey experiments for public management research. In O. James, S. Jilke, & G. Van Ryzin (Eds.), Experiments in public management research: Challenges and contributions (pp. 117-138). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.\nJohn, P. (2018). How far to nudge? Assessing behavioural public policy. Cheltenham/ Northampton: Edward Elgar.\nJohnson, C. (2006). Credentialism and the proliferation of fake degrees: The employer pretends to need a degree; the employee pretends to have one. Hofsta Labor and Employment Law Journal, 23(2): 269-343.\nJohnson, E. J. & D. G. Golstein. (2013). Decisions by default. In E. Shafir Ed., The behavioral foundations of public policy. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.\nKabneman, D. (2011). Thinking, fast and slow. London: Allen Lane.\nKahneman, D. & Tversky, A. (1979). Prospect theory: An analysis of decision under risk. Econometrica, 47 (2): 263–91.\nKatona, G. (1951). Psychological analysis of economic behavior. New York: McGraw-‐Hill.\nKatona, G. (1953). Rational behavior and economic behavior. Psychological Review, 60 (5): 307–18.\nKezar, A. & Bernstein, S. S. (2015). Commercialisation of higher education. In Tracy, B. (Ed.), Handbook of academic integrity. Singapore: Springer.\nKlapp, O. (1969). Collective search for identity. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.\nLabaree, D. (1997). How to succeed in school without really learning: The credentials race in American education. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.\nLandry, R. & Varone, F. (2005). The choice of policy instruments: Confronting the deductive and the interactive approaches. In Designing government: From instruments to governance (pp.109-110). Montreal: McGill-Queen`s University.\nLe Galès, Patrick (2013). Policy instruments and governance. In Mark Bevir edt. The SAGE Handbook of Governance. CA: Sage.\nLin, C.-Y. & Lin, C.-H. (2012). Does higher education expansion reduce credentialism and gender discrimination in education? Soc Indic Res, 109: 279-293.\nLinder, S. H. & Peters, B. G. (1989). Instruments of government: Perceptions and contexts. Journal of Public Policy, 9(1): 35-58.\nLittle, A. W. (1997). The diploma disease twenty years on: An introduction. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 4(1): 5-22.\nLiu, W. (2018). Inefficient signaling, education arms race and education inflation in China. Applied Economics and Finance, 5(6): 61-75.\nLoewenstein, G. & Chater, N. (2017). Putting nudges in perspective. Behavioral Public Policy, 1(1): 26-53.\nLourenco, J. S., E. Ciriolo, S. R. Almeida & T. Xavier. (2016). Behavioral insights applied to policy European report 2016. EUR 27726 EN. European Commission. Doi:10.2760/903938.\nLowe, J. (2000). International examinations: the new credentialism and reproduction of advantage in a globalizing world. Assessment in Education, 7(3): 363-377.\nMises, L. von. (1949). Human action: A treatise on economics. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.\nNinnes, P. (1997). The desire for academic qualifications among migrants minorities: a multi-level analysis. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 4(1): 177-188.\nO’Connor, K. (2002). How to grade for learning: Linking grades to standards (2nd ed). Arlington Heights, IL: Skylight Professional Development.\nOECD (2017). Behavioral insights and public policy: Lessons from around the world. OECD Publishing, Paris. http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/9789264270480-en\nOECD (2019). Population with tertiary education (indicator). doi: 10.1787/0b8f90e9-en (Accessed on 17 March 2019)\nOECD. (2015). Behavioral insights and new approaches to policy design: The views from the field. OECD Publishing, Paris. https://www.oecd.org/gov/regulatory-policy/behavioral-insights-summary-report-2015.pdf\nOliver, A. (2013). Behavioral public policy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.\nOliver, A. (2017). The origins of behavioral public policy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.\nPottenger, M. & Martin, A. (2014). Insight into behavioral public policy. Retrieved May, 1st, 2018, from http://bespoke-production.s3.amazonaws.com/msog/assets/57/a90860db6a11e598e6ffb0dfa6cc94/MSG_Behavioral_Public_Policy_6-14.pdf\nPurnell, J. Q., T. Thompson, M. W. Kreuter & T. D. McBride. (2015). Behavioral economics: ‘Nudging’ underserved populations to be screened for cancer. Public Health Research, Practice, and Policy, 12 (6): 1-9.\nRice, T., Y. Hanoch & Barnes, A. J. (2017). A brief overview of behavioral economics. In Y. Hanoch., A. J. Barnes and T. Rice (Eds.), Behavioral economics and health behaviors: Key concepts and current research. New York: Routledge.\nRiedl, A. (2010). Behavioral and experimental economics do inform public policy. Public Finance Analysis, 66(1): 65-95.\nRiley, J. G. (1975). Competitive signaling. J. Econ. Theory, 10: 175-86.\nRiley, J. G. (1976). Information, screening and human capital. The American Economics Review, 66(2): 254-260.\nSalamon, L. M. & Lund, M. S. (1989). The tools approach: Basic analysis. In L. Salamon ed. Beyond privatization: The tools of government action. Washington, D.C. : Urban Institute Press.\nSalamon, L. M. (2002). The tools of government: A guide to the new governance. New York: Oxford University Press.\nSamson, A. (Ed.) (2020). The Behavioral Economics Guide 2020 (with an Introduction by Colin Camerer). Retrieved from https://www.behavioraleconomics.com.\nSamuelson, W. & Zeckhauser, R. (1988). Status quo bias in decision making. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 1, 7–59.\nSchneider, A. L. & Ingram, H. (1990). The behavioral assumptions of policy tools. Journal of Politics, 52(2): 510-529.\nSchultz, T. W. (1961). Investment in human capital. The American Economic Review, 51(1): 1-17.\nSimon, H. A. (1955). A behavioral model of rational choice. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 69 (1): 99–118.\nSimon, H. A. (1957). Models of man: Social and rational. Oxford, UK: Wiley.\nSpence, M. (1973). Job market signaling. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 87: 355-374.\nStiglitz, J. E. (1975). The theory of “screening,” education and the distribution of income. The American Economic Association, 65(3): 283-300.\nStodt, M. M. & Thielens, W. (1985). Credentialism among graduate students. Research in Higher Education, 22(3): 251-272.\nSunstein, C. R. (2014). Nudging: A very short guide. Journal of Consumer Policy, 37(4): 583-402.\nSunstein, C. R. (2016). The ethics of influence: Government in the age of behavioral science. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.\nSunstein, C. R. (2017). Default rules are better than active choosing (Often). Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 21(8): 600-606.\nSunstein, C. R. (2020). Behavioral science and public policy. Cambridge University Press.\nThaler, R. H. & C. Sunstein. (2008). Nudge: Improving decisions about health, wealth, and happiness. Yale University Press, New Haven.\nThaler, R. H. (1980). Toward a positive theory of consumer choice. Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization, 1(1980)：39-60.\nThaler, R. H. (2016). Behavioral economics: Past, present, and future. American Economic Review, 106(7): 1577-1600.\nThaler, R. H., C. R. Sunstein & J. P. Balz. (2013). Choice architecture. In E. Shafir Ed., The behavioral foundations of public policy. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.\nThrow, L. C. (1976). Generating inequality. Macmillan.\nTummers, L (2019). Public policy and behavior change. Public Administration Review, 79(6): 925-930.\nTversky, A. (1972). Elimination by aspects: A theory of choice. Psychological Review, 79(4), 281-299.\nTyler, W. (1982). Complexity and control: The organizational background of credentialism. British Journal of Sociology of Education, 3(2): 161-172.\nWeber, M. (1916). The religion of China. New York: Free Press.\nWeber, M. (1922). Economy of society. Berkeley: University of California Press.\nWeimer, D. L. & Vining, A. R. (2017). Policy analysis: Concepts and practice (6th ed.). New York: Routledge.\nWeimer, D. L. (2017). Behavioral economics and cost-benefit analysis: Benefit validity when sovereign consumers seen to make mistakes. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.\nWeimer, D. L. (2018). When are nudges desirable? Benefit validity when preferences aren’t consistently revealed. Paper presented at the Public Administration Review (PAR) Symposium on behavioral approaches to bureaucratic red tape and administrative burden, May 23-24, Washington, DC.\nYonezawa, A., Nakamura, Y., Yamamoto, B. and Tokunaga, T. (2018). Japanese education in a global age: Sociological reflections and future directions. Singapore: Springer.\nZhang, Carolyn & Zhong, Raymond (2019). In China, This video game lets you be a tiger Mom or a driven Dad. The New York Times. Retrieved May, 27, 2019, from https://www.nytimes.com/2019/02/12/technology/chinese-parents-video-game.html?_ga=2.20161592.1201673656.1566924351-957150848.1566437593\n | 描述: | 博士 國立政治大學 公共行政學系 101256503 |
資料來源: | http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0101256503 | 資料類型: | thesis |
| Appears in Collections: | 學位論文 |
Files in This Item:
| File | Description | Size | Format | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 650301.pdf | 7.58 MB | Adobe PDF2 | View/Open |
Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.