學術產出-Theses
Article View/Open
Publication Export
-
題名 立法委員之提案專注
The Concentration of Legislators’ Proposals作者 曾筑翎
Tseng, Chu-Ling貢獻者 盛杏湲
Sheng, Shing-Yuan
曾筑翎
Tseng Chu-Ling關鍵詞 提案專注
選區
立法資源
委員會
立法成功
Concentration of proposals
Constituency
Lgislative resources
Committees
Legislative success日期 2023 上傳時間 1-Sep-2023 15:37:29 (UTC+8) 摘要 本文提出提案專注的概念，探討第七、八、九屆立法委員在所屬委員會提案專注的狀況，研究發現為：總體而言，三屆的立法委員提案專注都偏低。具體而言，若個人擔任第一主提案人，並提出十個提案，平均而言，不超過五個提案會送交所屬委員會。而相比第七屆立委，第八屆及第九屆立法委員的提案專注較高。此外，對個別委員而言，不分區立委相較於其他選區類型的立委有較高的提案專注；擔任委員會召集委員、具所屬委員會相關社會經歷背景、有多會期的所屬委員會資歷，則也將有較高的提案專注；若所屬委員會的議題平均有較高的媒體關注度，則委員也將有較高的提案專注，反之則較低；但若所屬委員會的議題媒體關注度低，但專業氛圍高，則立委也將有高的提案專注。另外，提案專注高的人更易獲得立法成功，因為提案專注一方面有助於個人知識的累積，而個人知識增加將讓個人更能夠有憑有據的說服委員會同僚；且另一方面，會選擇提案專注的立委，通常是因為對於該領域的議題較為關注，他們將更有動機推動立法，也因此更易獲得立法成功。
This thesis introduces the concept of the concentration of legislators’ proposals. Explore the concentration of legislators’ proposals in the 7th, 8th, and 9th terms, specifically within their respective committees. We finding that, on the whole, legislators in these three terms exhibit a sightly low concentration of proposals. Specifically, when a legislator serves as the primary proposer and submits ten proposals, on average, less than five of these proposals are referred to their respective committees. However, compared to the 7th-term legislators, those in the 8th and 9th term demonstrate higher the concentration of legislators’ proposals.Furthermore, legislators those who elected from party list show higher concentration of proposals. As for legislative resource, legislators who are committee chair, possess relevant social and experiential backgrounds, and stay in the same committee for multiple legislative sessions also exhibit higher concentration of proposals. Moreover, legislators stay in the committee with high media attention tend to have higher level of concentration of proposals. However, legislators in committees with low media attention but high proportion of professional members also exhibit higher concentration of proposals.Additionally, legislators with higher concentration of proposals are more likely to achieve legislative success. This is attributed that proposal concentration help legislators accumulate legislative knowledge, formulate convincing arguments to persuade committee members. Furthermore, legislators who choose to focus on specific field of legislation are concerned about the issues in that domain, which motivates them to promote legislative proposals and consequently increases their chances of legislative success.參考文獻 中文部分王靖興，2009，〈立法委員的立法問政與選區服務之分析：2000年政黨輪替前後的持續與變遷〉，《台灣政治學刊》13(2)：113-69。內政部統計處，2009，〈97年行政區工商家數_鄉鎮市區〉，社會經濟資料服務平台：https://segis.moi.gov.tw/STAT/Web/Platform/QueryInterface/STAT_QueryProductView.aspx?pid=90AF0FA6330BB4DC260616F22B3831FF&spid=7ED8D58E129BC680，檢索日期：2023 年 4月 1 日。內政部統計處，2013，〈102年12月行政區工商家數_鄉鎮市區〉，社會經濟資料服務平台：https://segis.moi.gov.tw/STAT/Web/Platform/QueryInterface/STAT_QueryProductView.aspx?pid=6AB84331880DAC6483695F2A5D2D3F61&spid=7ED8D58E129BC680，檢索日期：2023 年 4月 1 日。內政部統計處，2018，〈106年12月行政區工商家數_鄉鎮市區〉，社會經濟資料服務平台：https://segis.moi.gov.tw/STAT/Web/Platform/QueryInterface/STAT_QueryProductView.aspx?pid=B3A430C7E47283F50F152A6DD1D037A1&spid=7ED8D58E129BC680，檢索日期：2023 年 4月 1 日。包正豪，2009，〈原住民籍立法委員的代表取向與問政行為：1993-2008之法律提案內容分析〉，《選舉研究》16(1)：95-131。包正豪，2010，〈政黨政治甄補的影響因素：以1992到2008政黨不分區立委提名人選為範例〉，《選舉評論》9：49-82。李文元，2013，〈我國不分區立委選制之探討—立委職能表現之比較〉，東海大學政治學系碩士論文。邱師儀，2020，〈立法委員在委員會發言訴求取向之探究：以第七屆立法院為例〉，《台灣政治學刊》24(1)：1-66。林乃新，2015，〈委員會資深度與召委職位對立法委員立法表現的影響〉，國立政治大學政治學系碩士論文。徐永明、林昌平，2009，〈選舉縱橫資料中地區效果的測量：以民進黨得票率的變化為例1986-2004〉，《人文及社會科學集刊》，21(3)：431 -465 。陳宏義，2021，〈議事透明對委員會運作之影響分析：以我國第七屆至第九屆立法院為例〉，國立政治大學政治學系士論文。陳進郁，2013，〈立法委員的選區考量與立法參與:以農業法案為例〉，國立政治大學政治學系博士論文。張紹勳，2022，《Panel-data迴歸模型: Stata在廣義時間序列的應用》：五南出版。盛杏湲，1999，〈立法問政與選區服務：第三屆立法委員代表行為的探討〉，《選舉研究》6(2)：89-120。盛杏湲，2000a，〈立法委員為什麼遊走在不同的委員會〉，林繼文編《政治制度》：中央研究院中山人文社會科學研究所，83-113。盛杏湲，2000b，〈政黨或選區？立法委員的代表取向與行為〉，《選舉研究》7(2)：37-73。盛杏湲，2001，〈立法委員正式與非正式立法參與之研究：以第三屆立法院為例〉，《問題與研究》40(5)：81-104。盛杏湲，2012，〈媒體報導對企業型政治立法成敗的影響〉，《東吳政治學報》30(1)：1-42。盛杏湲，2014a，〈再探選區服務與立法問政：選制改革前後的比較〉，《東吳政治學報》32(2)：65-116。盛杏湲，2014b，〈選制變革前後立委提案的持續與變遷：一個探索性的研究〉，《台灣政治學刊》18(1)：73-127。盛杏湲，2019，〈立法委員立法成功表現的影響因素〉，黃秀端編《國會立法與國會監督》：五南出版。盛杏湲，2021-2022，《立法院常設委員會的立法影響力》，計畫編號：MOST109-2410-H-004-051-MY2，台北：科技部補助專題研究計畫。黃士豪，2017，〈誰要議題所有權？立法委員立法提案與議題所有權的建立〉，《臺灣民主季刊》14(1)：1-51。黃秀端，1994，《選區服務》，台北：唐山出版社。黃秀端，2000，〈立法院內不同類型委員會的運作方式〉，《東吳政治學報》11：35-70。黃秀端、邱禹捷，2019〈公民監督對立法行為之影響：以公督盟評鑑為例〉，黃秀端編《國會立法與國會監督》：五南出版。趙弘章，2005，〈我國立法院委員會專業化與黨團協商透明化之分析〉，《中山人文社會科學期刊》，13(1)：37-54。廖育嶒，2015，〈「立委評鑑」對立委立法行為的影響－一個探索性的研究〉，《臺灣民主季刊》12(1)：1-59。蕭怡靖，2005，〈我國立法院資深制度之探討：委員會遊走及召集委員資深度之探討〉，《政治科學論叢》25：105-134。蕭怡靖，2007，〈我國立法委員選擇常設委員會之研究：以第五屆立法委員爲例〉，《東吳政治學報》25(3)：131-182。蕭怡靖，2002，〈立法院常設委員會審查功能之實證研究：委員會資深程度與不分區立委角色的影響〉，《月旦法學》86：36-61。蕭怡靖，2008，〈小規模立法委員選區的分配政治—選民對於補助利益的期待〉，《臺灣民主季刊》，5 (4): 47-85。羅清俊、謝瑩蒔，2008，〈選區規模與立法委員分配政策提案的關聯性研究：第三、四屆立法院的分析〉，《行政暨政策學報》，46:1-48。英文部分Anderson, William D., Janet Box-Steffensmeier, and Valerie Sinclair-Chapman. 2003. “The Keys to Legislative Success in the U.S. House of Representatives.” Legislative Studies Quarterly 28 (3): 357-386.Andeweg, Rudy B. 1997. “Role Specialisation or Role Switching? Dutch MPs between Electorate and Executive” The Journal of Legislative Studies 3(1):110-127.Asher, Herbert B. 1973. “The Learning of Legislative Norms.” American Political Science Review 67(2): 499-513.Asher, Herbert B. 1974. “Committees and the Norm of Specialization.” The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science 411: 63-74.Baron, David P. 2000. “Legislative Organization with Informational Committees.” American Journal of Political Science 44(3): 485-505.Carson, Jamie L., and Jeffery A. Jenkins. 2011. “Examining the Electoral Connection across Time.” Annual Review of Political Science 14(1): 25-46.Chiru, Mihail. 2019. "Low-cost Policy Specialisation, District Characteristics and Gender. Patterns of Committee Assignment in Romania." The Journal of Legislative Studies 25(3): 375-393.Cox, Gary W. 2006. "The Organization of Democratic Legislatures." In The Oxford Handbook of Political Economy, eds. Barrry Weingast and Donald Wittman. Oxford: Oxford University.Cox, Gary W., and Mathew D. McCubbins. 2007. Legislative Leviathan: Party Government in the House. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Curry, James M. 2019. “Knowledge, Expertise, and Committee Power in the Contemporary Congress.” Legislative Studies Quarterly 44 (2): 203-237.Deering, Christopher J., and Steven S. Smith. 1997. Committees in Congress (3rd ed.). Washington, DC: CQ Press.Evans, G., and Kerry D. Patterson. 1985. “The Lagrange Multiplier Test for Autocorrelation in the Presence of Linear Restrictions.” Economics letters 17 (3): 237-241.Fenno, Richard, Jr. 1973. Congressmen in Committees. Boston: Little Brown.Fenno, Richard, Jr. 1977. “U.S. House Members in Their Constituencies: An Exploration.” American Political Science Review 71 (3):883-917.Fenno, Richard, Jr. 2003. Home Style : House Members in Their Districts, ed. John R. Hibbing. New York: Longman.Gaddie, Ronald K. and, John C. Kuzenski. 1996. “Institutional and Personal Legislative Specialization in the United States Senate.” Southeastern Political Review 24(1): 3-19.Hall, Richard L.1987. “Participation and Purpose in Committee Decision Making” The American Political Science Review 81(1):105-128.Hall, Richard L.1993. “Participation, Abdication, and Representation in Congressional Committees.” In Congress Reconsidered (5^th ed.), eds. Lawrence C. Dodd and Bruce I. Oppenheimer. Washington, D. C.: A Division of Congressional Quarterly Inc.Hamm, Keith E., Ronald D. Hedlund, and Stephanie Shirley Post. 2011 “Committee Specialization in U.S. State Legislatures during the 20th Century: Do Legislatures Tap the Talents of Their Members?” State Politics & Policy Quarterly 11(3): 299-324.Harris, Tammy, Joseph M. Hilbe, and James W. Hardin. 2014. “Modeling count data with generalized distributions.” Stata Journal 14: 562–579.Hinckley, Barbara. 1988. Stability and Change in Congress (4^th ed.). New York: Harper & Row.Hurwitz, Mark J., Roger J. Moiles, and David W. Rohde. 2001. “Distributive and Partisan Issues in Agriculture Policies in the 104 House.” American Political Science Review 95(4):911-922.Jones, Mark P., Sebastian Saiegh, Pablo T. Spiller, and Mariano Tommasi. 2002. “Amateur Legislators -- Professional Politicians: The Consequences of Party-Centered Electoral Rules in a Federal System.” American Journal of Political Science 46(3): 656-69.Keefer, Philip. 2007. “Clientelism, Credibility, and the Policy Choices of Young Democracies.” American Journal of Political Science 51(4): 804-21.Krehbiel, Keith. 1991. Information and Legislative Organization. Michigan: University of Michigan Press.Leighton, Wayne A., and Edward J. López. 2002 “Committee Assignments and the Cost of Party Loyalty.” Political Research Quarterly 55(1): 59-90.Maltzman, Forrest and Steven S. Smith. 1994. “Principals, Goals, Dimensionality and Congressional Committees.” Legislative Studies Quarterly 19 (4): 457-476.Matthews, Donald R. 1960. U.S. Senators and Their World. New York: A. Knopf and Random House.Mayhew, David. 1975. Congress: the Electoral Connection 〖(2〗^nd ed.). New Haven: Yale University Press.Mayhew, David. 1987. “Congress: The Electoral Connection.” In The American Congress Reader, eds. Steven S. Smith, Jason M. Robert and Ryan J. Vander Wielen. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Moore, Michael K., and Sue Thomas. 1991. “Explaining Legislative Success in the U. S. Senate: The Role of the Majority and Minority Parties.” The Western Political Quarterly 44 (4): 959-70.Nemerever, Zoe, and Daniel Butler. 2020. The Source of the Legislative Professionalism Advantage: Attracting More Knowledgeable Candidates. State Politics & Policy Quarterly 20(4): 416-436.Olson, David M. 1994. Democratic Legislative Institution: A Comparative View. New York: M. E. Sharpe.Oñate, Pablo, and Carmen Ortega. 2019. “Committee Parliamentary Specialization Index. Explaining MPs’ Specialisation in the Spanish Congreso de los Diputados.” The Journal of Legislative Studies 25(3): 394-408.Palanza M. Valeria Carlos G Scartascini, and Mariano Tommasi. 2012. On the institutionalization of Congress(es) in Latin America and beyond [Mimeographed document]. Washington, United States: Inter-American Development Bank.Polsby, Nelson W. 1968. “The Institutionalization of the U.S. House of Representatives.” American Political Science Review 62 (1): 144-168.Rosenthal, Alan. 1973. “Legislative Committee Systems: An exploratory Analysis.” The Western Political Quarterly 26(2):252-62.Searing, Donald D., William G. Jacoby, and Andrew H. Tyner. 2019. “ The Endurance of Politicians’ Values Over Four Decades: A Panel Study.” American Political Science Review 113(1): 226-241.Shepsle, Kenneth A., and Barry R. Weingast. 1995. Positive Theories of Congressional Institutions. eds. Kenneth A. Shepsle and Barry R. Weingast. Michigan: University of Michigan Press.Strøm, Kaare. 1998. “Parliamentary Committees in European Democracies.” The Journal of Legislative Studies 4(1): 21-59.Van Der Slik, Jack R.1989. “The Early Institutionalization of Congress.” Congress& the Presidency 16(1): 1-10.Vicente, Pedro C., and Leonard Wantchekon. 2009. “Clientelism and Vote Buying: Lessons from Field Experiments in African Elections.” Oxford Review of Economic Policy 25(2): 292-305.Vogler, David J. 1977. The politics of Congress 〖(2〗^nd ed.). Boston: Allyn and Bacon.Volden, Craig, and Alan E. Wiseman. 2020.“Foxes vs. Hedgehogs: Issue Specialization and Effective Lawmaking in the U.S. Congress” The Center for Effective Lawmaking. Available athttps://thelawmakers.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/08/Working-Paper-CEL-Foxes-or-Hedgehogs-Specialization-in-Congress.pdf (Accessed: 10 June 2022).Wilson, Rick K. 1999. “Transitional Governance in the United States: Lessons from the First Federal Congress.” Legislative Studies Quarterly 24(4): 543-568.Woods, Neal D., and Michael Baranowski. 2006. “Legislative Professionalism and Influence on State Agencies: The Effects of Resources and Careerism.” Legislative Studies Quarterly 31(4): 585-609.Wooldridge, Jeffrey M. 2009. Introductory econometrics : a modern approach (4th ed.). Mason, Ohio: South Western College Pub.Woon, Jonathan. 2009. “Issue Attention and Legislative Proposals in the U.S. Senate.” Legislative Studies Quarterly 34(1): 29-54. 描述 碩士
國立政治大學
政治學系
109252005資料來源 http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0109252005 資料類型 thesis dc.contributor.advisor 盛杏湲 zh_TW dc.contributor.advisor Sheng, Shing-Yuan en_US dc.contributor.author (Authors) 曾筑翎 zh_TW dc.contributor.author (Authors) Tseng Chu-Ling en_US dc.creator (作者) 曾筑翎 zh_TW dc.creator (作者) Tseng, Chu-Ling en_US dc.date (日期) 2023 en_US dc.date.accessioned 1-Sep-2023 15:37:29 (UTC+8) - dc.date.available 1-Sep-2023 15:37:29 (UTC+8) - dc.date.issued (上傳時間) 1-Sep-2023 15:37:29 (UTC+8) - dc.identifier (Other Identifiers) G0109252005 en_US dc.identifier.uri (URI) http://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/147086 - dc.description (描述) 碩士 zh_TW dc.description (描述) 國立政治大學 zh_TW dc.description (描述) 政治學系 zh_TW dc.description (描述) 109252005 zh_TW dc.description.abstract (摘要) 本文提出提案專注的概念，探討第七、八、九屆立法委員在所屬委員會提案專注的狀況，研究發現為：總體而言，三屆的立法委員提案專注都偏低。具體而言，若個人擔任第一主提案人，並提出十個提案，平均而言，不超過五個提案會送交所屬委員會。而相比第七屆立委，第八屆及第九屆立法委員的提案專注較高。此外，對個別委員而言，不分區立委相較於其他選區類型的立委有較高的提案專注；擔任委員會召集委員、具所屬委員會相關社會經歷背景、有多會期的所屬委員會資歷，則也將有較高的提案專注；若所屬委員會的議題平均有較高的媒體關注度，則委員也將有較高的提案專注，反之則較低；但若所屬委員會的議題媒體關注度低，但專業氛圍高，則立委也將有高的提案專注。另外，提案專注高的人更易獲得立法成功，因為提案專注一方面有助於個人知識的累積，而個人知識增加將讓個人更能夠有憑有據的說服委員會同僚；且另一方面，會選擇提案專注的立委，通常是因為對於該領域的議題較為關注，他們將更有動機推動立法，也因此更易獲得立法成功。 zh_TW dc.description.abstract (摘要) This thesis introduces the concept of the concentration of legislators’ proposals. Explore the concentration of legislators’ proposals in the 7th, 8th, and 9th terms, specifically within their respective committees. We finding that, on the whole, legislators in these three terms exhibit a sightly low concentration of proposals. Specifically, when a legislator serves as the primary proposer and submits ten proposals, on average, less than five of these proposals are referred to their respective committees. However, compared to the 7th-term legislators, those in the 8th and 9th term demonstrate higher the concentration of legislators’ proposals.Furthermore, legislators those who elected from party list show higher concentration of proposals. As for legislative resource, legislators who are committee chair, possess relevant social and experiential backgrounds, and stay in the same committee for multiple legislative sessions also exhibit higher concentration of proposals. Moreover, legislators stay in the committee with high media attention tend to have higher level of concentration of proposals. However, legislators in committees with low media attention but high proportion of professional members also exhibit higher concentration of proposals.Additionally, legislators with higher concentration of proposals are more likely to achieve legislative success. This is attributed that proposal concentration help legislators accumulate legislative knowledge, formulate convincing arguments to persuade committee members. Furthermore, legislators who choose to focus on specific field of legislation are concerned about the issues in that domain, which motivates them to promote legislative proposals and consequently increases their chances of legislative success. en_US dc.description.tableofcontents 第一章 前言 1第二章 文獻回顧 5第一節 提案專注及立法專業連結 5第二節 國會專業及提案專注的關聯 8第三節 提案專注的影響因素 13第四節 台灣立法審查專業相關研究及提案專注之重要性 16第三章 理論建構──立法委員提案專注 19第一節 制度結構對立法院總體提案專注的影響 19第二節 立法委員提案專注影響因素 23一、國會議員的目標及選區對提案專注的影響 24二、立法資源 31三、所屬委員會性質對提案專注的影響 33第三節 提案專注與立法成功 36第四章 研究設計與研究方法 39第一節 研究範圍 39第二節 立法委員整體的提案專注 40第三節 分析模型一──立委提案專注的影響因素 41一、自變數的測量 42二、控制變數 46三、統計分析模型 48第四節 分析模型二──提案專注對立法成功的影響 48一、依變數的測量──立法成功數 49二、自變數的測量──提案專注 50三、控制變數 50四、統計分析模型 52第五章 經驗分析結果 53第一節 立法委員整體的提案專注 53一、各屆提案數及提案專注分布 53二、立委提案專注表現 57三、小結 63第二節 提案專注影響因素分析 64一、目標及選區特質──假設一及假設二 66二、立法資源──假設三、假設四及假設五 67三、委員會性質──假設六及假設七 72四、控制變數 73五、小結 75第三節 提案專注與立法成功的關聯 76一、描述統計資料──立法成功數、提案專注、委員會資深程度 76二、提案專注與立法成功負二項迴歸模型驗證 78三、小結及討論 87第六章 結論 88第一節 研究發現 88第二節 研究限制 91參考書目 94附錄 102表次表1 委員會審查法案的新聞筆數 34表2 委員會成員具所屬委員會相關學經歷背景比例 35表3 委員會分類 36表4 專業學經歷背景分類 45表5 立法委員提案專注度 58表6-1 立法委員提案數分布 60表6-2 立法委員平均提案專注（提案數範圍下） 60表7 提案專注影響因素隨機效果模型 65表8 立法成功數、提案數及提案專注平均值 77表9 提案專注與立法成功負二項迴歸模型 79表10 第七屆立法委員提案專注度及提案成功數排序 86附錄1 立法委員深度訪談 102附錄3 第八屆立法委員提案專注度及提案成功數排序 103附錄4 第九屆立法委員提案專注度及提案成功數排序 104圖次圖1 立法委員提案數及提案專注直方圖 56圖2 各屆各年立法委員提案專注折線圖 63附錄2 普通最小平方迴歸模型殘差散布圖 102 zh_TW dc.format.extent 2527984 bytes - dc.format.mimetype application/pdf - dc.source.uri (資料來源) http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0109252005 en_US dc.subject (關鍵詞) 提案專注 zh_TW dc.subject (關鍵詞) 選區 zh_TW dc.subject (關鍵詞) 立法資源 zh_TW dc.subject (關鍵詞) 委員會 zh_TW dc.subject (關鍵詞) 立法成功 zh_TW dc.subject (關鍵詞) Concentration of proposals en_US dc.subject (關鍵詞) Constituency en_US dc.subject (關鍵詞) Lgislative resources en_US dc.subject (關鍵詞) Committees en_US dc.subject (關鍵詞) Legislative success en_US dc.title (題名) 立法委員之提案專注 zh_TW dc.title (題名) The Concentration of Legislators’ Proposals en_US dc.type (資料類型) thesis en_US dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 中文部分王靖興，2009，〈立法委員的立法問政與選區服務之分析：2000年政黨輪替前後的持續與變遷〉，《台灣政治學刊》13(2)：113-69。內政部統計處，2009，〈97年行政區工商家數_鄉鎮市區〉，社會經濟資料服務平台：https://segis.moi.gov.tw/STAT/Web/Platform/QueryInterface/STAT_QueryProductView.aspx?pid=90AF0FA6330BB4DC260616F22B3831FF&spid=7ED8D58E129BC680，檢索日期：2023 年 4月 1 日。內政部統計處，2013，〈102年12月行政區工商家數_鄉鎮市區〉，社會經濟資料服務平台：https://segis.moi.gov.tw/STAT/Web/Platform/QueryInterface/STAT_QueryProductView.aspx?pid=6AB84331880DAC6483695F2A5D2D3F61&spid=7ED8D58E129BC680，檢索日期：2023 年 4月 1 日。內政部統計處，2018，〈106年12月行政區工商家數_鄉鎮市區〉，社會經濟資料服務平台：https://segis.moi.gov.tw/STAT/Web/Platform/QueryInterface/STAT_QueryProductView.aspx?pid=B3A430C7E47283F50F152A6DD1D037A1&spid=7ED8D58E129BC680，檢索日期：2023 年 4月 1 日。包正豪，2009，〈原住民籍立法委員的代表取向與問政行為：1993-2008之法律提案內容分析〉，《選舉研究》16(1)：95-131。包正豪，2010，〈政黨政治甄補的影響因素：以1992到2008政黨不分區立委提名人選為範例〉，《選舉評論》9：49-82。李文元，2013，〈我國不分區立委選制之探討—立委職能表現之比較〉，東海大學政治學系碩士論文。邱師儀，2020，〈立法委員在委員會發言訴求取向之探究：以第七屆立法院為例〉，《台灣政治學刊》24(1)：1-66。林乃新，2015，〈委員會資深度與召委職位對立法委員立法表現的影響〉，國立政治大學政治學系碩士論文。徐永明、林昌平，2009，〈選舉縱橫資料中地區效果的測量：以民進黨得票率的變化為例1986-2004〉，《人文及社會科學集刊》，21(3)：431 -465 。陳宏義，2021，〈議事透明對委員會運作之影響分析：以我國第七屆至第九屆立法院為例〉，國立政治大學政治學系士論文。陳進郁，2013，〈立法委員的選區考量與立法參與:以農業法案為例〉，國立政治大學政治學系博士論文。張紹勳，2022，《Panel-data迴歸模型: Stata在廣義時間序列的應用》：五南出版。盛杏湲，1999，〈立法問政與選區服務：第三屆立法委員代表行為的探討〉，《選舉研究》6(2)：89-120。盛杏湲，2000a，〈立法委員為什麼遊走在不同的委員會〉，林繼文編《政治制度》：中央研究院中山人文社會科學研究所，83-113。盛杏湲，2000b，〈政黨或選區？立法委員的代表取向與行為〉，《選舉研究》7(2)：37-73。盛杏湲，2001，〈立法委員正式與非正式立法參與之研究：以第三屆立法院為例〉，《問題與研究》40(5)：81-104。盛杏湲，2012，〈媒體報導對企業型政治立法成敗的影響〉，《東吳政治學報》30(1)：1-42。盛杏湲，2014a，〈再探選區服務與立法問政：選制改革前後的比較〉，《東吳政治學報》32(2)：65-116。盛杏湲，2014b，〈選制變革前後立委提案的持續與變遷：一個探索性的研究〉，《台灣政治學刊》18(1)：73-127。盛杏湲，2019，〈立法委員立法成功表現的影響因素〉，黃秀端編《國會立法與國會監督》：五南出版。盛杏湲，2021-2022，《立法院常設委員會的立法影響力》，計畫編號：MOST109-2410-H-004-051-MY2，台北：科技部補助專題研究計畫。黃士豪，2017，〈誰要議題所有權？立法委員立法提案與議題所有權的建立〉，《臺灣民主季刊》14(1)：1-51。黃秀端，1994，《選區服務》，台北：唐山出版社。黃秀端，2000，〈立法院內不同類型委員會的運作方式〉，《東吳政治學報》11：35-70。黃秀端、邱禹捷，2019〈公民監督對立法行為之影響：以公督盟評鑑為例〉，黃秀端編《國會立法與國會監督》：五南出版。趙弘章，2005，〈我國立法院委員會專業化與黨團協商透明化之分析〉，《中山人文社會科學期刊》，13(1)：37-54。廖育嶒，2015，〈「立委評鑑」對立委立法行為的影響－一個探索性的研究〉，《臺灣民主季刊》12(1)：1-59。蕭怡靖，2005，〈我國立法院資深制度之探討：委員會遊走及召集委員資深度之探討〉，《政治科學論叢》25：105-134。蕭怡靖，2007，〈我國立法委員選擇常設委員會之研究：以第五屆立法委員爲例〉，《東吳政治學報》25(3)：131-182。蕭怡靖，2002，〈立法院常設委員會審查功能之實證研究：委員會資深程度與不分區立委角色的影響〉，《月旦法學》86：36-61。蕭怡靖，2008，〈小規模立法委員選區的分配政治—選民對於補助利益的期待〉，《臺灣民主季刊》，5 (4): 47-85。羅清俊、謝瑩蒔，2008，〈選區規模與立法委員分配政策提案的關聯性研究：第三、四屆立法院的分析〉，《行政暨政策學報》，46:1-48。英文部分Anderson, William D., Janet Box-Steffensmeier, and Valerie Sinclair-Chapman. 2003. “The Keys to Legislative Success in the U.S. House of Representatives.” Legislative Studies Quarterly 28 (3): 357-386.Andeweg, Rudy B. 1997. “Role Specialisation or Role Switching? Dutch MPs between Electorate and Executive” The Journal of Legislative Studies 3(1):110-127.Asher, Herbert B. 1973. “The Learning of Legislative Norms.” American Political Science Review 67(2): 499-513.Asher, Herbert B. 1974. “Committees and the Norm of Specialization.” The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science 411: 63-74.Baron, David P. 2000. “Legislative Organization with Informational Committees.” American Journal of Political Science 44(3): 485-505.Carson, Jamie L., and Jeffery A. Jenkins. 2011. “Examining the Electoral Connection across Time.” Annual Review of Political Science 14(1): 25-46.Chiru, Mihail. 2019. "Low-cost Policy Specialisation, District Characteristics and Gender. Patterns of Committee Assignment in Romania." The Journal of Legislative Studies 25(3): 375-393.Cox, Gary W. 2006. "The Organization of Democratic Legislatures." In The Oxford Handbook of Political Economy, eds. Barrry Weingast and Donald Wittman. Oxford: Oxford University.Cox, Gary W., and Mathew D. McCubbins. 2007. Legislative Leviathan: Party Government in the House. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Curry, James M. 2019. “Knowledge, Expertise, and Committee Power in the Contemporary Congress.” Legislative Studies Quarterly 44 (2): 203-237.Deering, Christopher J., and Steven S. Smith. 1997. Committees in Congress (3rd ed.). Washington, DC: CQ Press.Evans, G., and Kerry D. Patterson. 1985. “The Lagrange Multiplier Test for Autocorrelation in the Presence of Linear Restrictions.” Economics letters 17 (3): 237-241.Fenno, Richard, Jr. 1973. Congressmen in Committees. Boston: Little Brown.Fenno, Richard, Jr. 1977. “U.S. House Members in Their Constituencies: An Exploration.” American Political Science Review 71 (3):883-917.Fenno, Richard, Jr. 2003. Home Style : House Members in Their Districts, ed. John R. Hibbing. New York: Longman.Gaddie, Ronald K. and, John C. Kuzenski. 1996. “Institutional and Personal Legislative Specialization in the United States Senate.” Southeastern Political Review 24(1): 3-19.Hall, Richard L.1987. “Participation and Purpose in Committee Decision Making” The American Political Science Review 81(1):105-128.Hall, Richard L.1993. “Participation, Abdication, and Representation in Congressional Committees.” In Congress Reconsidered (5^th ed.), eds. Lawrence C. Dodd and Bruce I. Oppenheimer. Washington, D. C.: A Division of Congressional Quarterly Inc.Hamm, Keith E., Ronald D. Hedlund, and Stephanie Shirley Post. 2011 “Committee Specialization in U.S. State Legislatures during the 20th Century: Do Legislatures Tap the Talents of Their Members?” State Politics & Policy Quarterly 11(3): 299-324.Harris, Tammy, Joseph M. Hilbe, and James W. Hardin. 2014. “Modeling count data with generalized distributions.” Stata Journal 14: 562–579.Hinckley, Barbara. 1988. Stability and Change in Congress (4^th ed.). New York: Harper & Row.Hurwitz, Mark J., Roger J. Moiles, and David W. Rohde. 2001. “Distributive and Partisan Issues in Agriculture Policies in the 104 House.” American Political Science Review 95(4):911-922.Jones, Mark P., Sebastian Saiegh, Pablo T. Spiller, and Mariano Tommasi. 2002. “Amateur Legislators -- Professional Politicians: The Consequences of Party-Centered Electoral Rules in a Federal System.” American Journal of Political Science 46(3): 656-69.Keefer, Philip. 2007. “Clientelism, Credibility, and the Policy Choices of Young Democracies.” American Journal of Political Science 51(4): 804-21.Krehbiel, Keith. 1991. Information and Legislative Organization. Michigan: University of Michigan Press.Leighton, Wayne A., and Edward J. López. 2002 “Committee Assignments and the Cost of Party Loyalty.” Political Research Quarterly 55(1): 59-90.Maltzman, Forrest and Steven S. Smith. 1994. “Principals, Goals, Dimensionality and Congressional Committees.” Legislative Studies Quarterly 19 (4): 457-476.Matthews, Donald R. 1960. U.S. Senators and Their World. New York: A. Knopf and Random House.Mayhew, David. 1975. Congress: the Electoral Connection 〖(2〗^nd ed.). New Haven: Yale University Press.Mayhew, David. 1987. “Congress: The Electoral Connection.” In The American Congress Reader, eds. Steven S. Smith, Jason M. Robert and Ryan J. Vander Wielen. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Moore, Michael K., and Sue Thomas. 1991. “Explaining Legislative Success in the U. S. Senate: The Role of the Majority and Minority Parties.” The Western Political Quarterly 44 (4): 959-70.Nemerever, Zoe, and Daniel Butler. 2020. The Source of the Legislative Professionalism Advantage: Attracting More Knowledgeable Candidates. State Politics & Policy Quarterly 20(4): 416-436.Olson, David M. 1994. Democratic Legislative Institution: A Comparative View. New York: M. E. Sharpe.Oñate, Pablo, and Carmen Ortega. 2019. “Committee Parliamentary Specialization Index. Explaining MPs’ Specialisation in the Spanish Congreso de los Diputados.” The Journal of Legislative Studies 25(3): 394-408.Palanza M. Valeria Carlos G Scartascini, and Mariano Tommasi. 2012. On the institutionalization of Congress(es) in Latin America and beyond [Mimeographed document]. Washington, United States: Inter-American Development Bank.Polsby, Nelson W. 1968. “The Institutionalization of the U.S. House of Representatives.” American Political Science Review 62 (1): 144-168.Rosenthal, Alan. 1973. “Legislative Committee Systems: An exploratory Analysis.” The Western Political Quarterly 26(2):252-62.Searing, Donald D., William G. Jacoby, and Andrew H. Tyner. 2019. “ The Endurance of Politicians’ Values Over Four Decades: A Panel Study.” American Political Science Review 113(1): 226-241.Shepsle, Kenneth A., and Barry R. Weingast. 1995. Positive Theories of Congressional Institutions. eds. Kenneth A. Shepsle and Barry R. Weingast. Michigan: University of Michigan Press.Strøm, Kaare. 1998. “Parliamentary Committees in European Democracies.” The Journal of Legislative Studies 4(1): 21-59.Van Der Slik, Jack R.1989. “The Early Institutionalization of Congress.” Congress& the Presidency 16(1): 1-10.Vicente, Pedro C., and Leonard Wantchekon. 2009. “Clientelism and Vote Buying: Lessons from Field Experiments in African Elections.” Oxford Review of Economic Policy 25(2): 292-305.Vogler, David J. 1977. The politics of Congress 〖(2〗^nd ed.). Boston: Allyn and Bacon.Volden, Craig, and Alan E. Wiseman. 2020.“Foxes vs. Hedgehogs: Issue Specialization and Effective Lawmaking in the U.S. Congress” The Center for Effective Lawmaking. Available athttps://thelawmakers.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/08/Working-Paper-CEL-Foxes-or-Hedgehogs-Specialization-in-Congress.pdf (Accessed: 10 June 2022).Wilson, Rick K. 1999. “Transitional Governance in the United States: Lessons from the First Federal Congress.” Legislative Studies Quarterly 24(4): 543-568.Woods, Neal D., and Michael Baranowski. 2006. “Legislative Professionalism and Influence on State Agencies: The Effects of Resources and Careerism.” Legislative Studies Quarterly 31(4): 585-609.Wooldridge, Jeffrey M. 2009. Introductory econometrics : a modern approach (4th ed.). Mason, Ohio: South Western College Pub.Woon, Jonathan. 2009. “Issue Attention and Legislative Proposals in the U.S. Senate.” Legislative Studies Quarterly 34(1): 29-54. zh_TW
