Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://ah.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/125993


Title: 常民如何思考民主? ――臺灣的社會再現研究
Social Representations of Democracy: A Taiwan Study
Authors: 謝政育
Hsieh, Cheng-Yu
Contributors: 方孝謙
宋文里

Fong, Shiaw-Chian
Soong, Wen-Li

謝政育
Hsieh, Cheng-Yu
Keywords: 社會再現
民主
文化心理學
政治心理學
social representations
democracy
cultural psychology
political psychology
Date: 2019
Issue Date: 2019-09-05 17:43:21 (UTC+8)
Abstract: 本研究的具體問題可分為三個面向,其一是關注「民主」概念的意義建構;其二是關注理想的「民主」與真實的「民主」之間的關係;其三是關注理想的民主體制是否可達成?換句話說,本研究即在探究:常民對於「民主」的思考和想法――關於民主的社會再現(social representations)――反映了這些人有哪些或隱或顯的過去經驗、理解、和實踐,並導向了他們未來的希望、期待或恐懼?
從內容的層面來看,用最通俗的詞彙來說,社會再現就是社會中常民的「共同知識」或「常識」(common sense),而本文要探究的社會再現乃是從後者的日常知識(everyday knowledge)層面開始,一直到更廣泛的共同知識為止。
本文的研究主旨,乃是從文化心理學的角度來探究一般人對於民主的想法與思考,亦即「民主」不只是一種政治體制,同時也是一種生活方式或政治文化,其中必然包含一些難以從政治體制中發現的價值或私領域的面向,這和哲學或思想史的專家角度並不相同,雖然他們的確也指出「民主」概念的繁複性。
由於社會再現的概念本身相當複雜,所以本研究採用質量並用的混合研究方法。研究一為媒體文本的再現,本文以語料庫分析法為主;研究二為使用研究者根據Osgood的語意區分技術所設計的「民主語意區分量表」,以探究臺灣民主化相關事件的排序,以及人們對於民主概念所開展出來的語意空間(semantic space),主要想瞭解一般人在面對去脈絡化的概念時所產生的再現;而研究三則為深度訪談,主要想瞭解難以在前兩種研究方法中探知的面向。
研究一的媒體再現,從詞頻分析來看,發現高頻次詞彙可再依語意分為六大類,主要有「地理區域、時間和事件」、「選舉與投票」、「國家、政府、國會與政黨」、「由人民統治」、「人權、法治與規範」、「經濟與媒體」等六類,其中第一類佔絕大多數的比例。從搭配詞分析來看,本研究指出以《聯合報》來說,搭配詞大致符合學者們所認可的「民主」必要要素,但似乎較缺少強調政府的歸責性與公民社會等部分。而《自由時報》中的「民主」之搭配詞似乎更偏向支持人民的權利,但其實也較缺少政府的歸責性。至於關鍵字脈絡分析,研究者發現政治立場不同,確實會產生不同的社會再現。比如說:聯合報會有較多規範意涵及批判民進黨與讚揚中國的文章,而自由時報則對社會運動或是基本人權多所倡說,並賦予正面意涵。
研究二語意空間的抽象再現,就「事件排序」來說,青年世代與壯年世代的結果頗為接近,而且都認為「解除戒嚴」和民主最相關,但是年長世代則認為「第一次公民直選總統」比「解除戒嚴」要更來得和「民主」相關,這可能是因為他們對於「投票」的感受度不同。而「民主語意區分量表」的部分,三個世代的共識是:民主具有正面意涵,像是有必要的、樂觀的、幸福的等等。而青年世代與壯年世代的共識則偏向人權、正義等與人權有關的保障。其中,有多組詞語的偏向符合一般人對於民主的日常知識,這可視為本量表的效度;另外,有少數幾組詞語(像是很硬/很軟、儒家/道家、基督教/佛教)與一般人對於民主的日常知識不同,不但可指出在我們談論一個社會對象時,日常知識仍有其限制與無法顯現之處,也同時凸顯了本論文使用語意區分量表的目的,就是打開這些難以被媒體或日常知識所再現的維度。
研究三則為常民對於「民主」的社會再現,可以發現社會再現之發生與改變,主要來自於父母同儕和網路的影響。至於現實中的民主與理想中的民主雖有差異,但後者仍可由制度和人為努力而達成,且兩者都讓人有正面感受而有所期待。此外,與社會再現有關的兩個面向:說與做,展現在「選舉可說、政治不可說」以及「社會運動不可說也不可做」上。而在關於暴力的議題上,通常年長世代會認為暴力就是不應存在,不論是在日常生活或是社會運動中;但是青年世代和壯年世代則會認為要看情況區分,若在權力不均等的情況下,為了要表達自己的意見,可以允許暴力存在。更重要的是,在這個議題上,不止讓傳統性與現代性碰了頭,也讓「公領域」和「私領域」碰頭,同時也讓「客觀報導」和「個人價值觀」碰頭。最後,則是本研究浮現出一種新的再現,那就是「民主」作為一種人格特質或是互動關係,這可能是因為傳統性與現代性相互碰撞而產生的新再現。
要之,關於民主的再現,對於常民而言,實際上可能關乎好的生活、好的未來,而不僅止於現在。但是媒體再現通常只限於過去與現在,而且也不引導正面意涵或價值,甚至強調其負面意涵。但這同時也顯現出,常民仍有理性思考的能力,並非對於大眾媒體的內容與價值觀照單全收,也可反過來批判大眾媒體,比如說:對於假新聞就有能力反省。
Recent decades in Taiwan, some people say ‘Democracy cannot be our food,’ or ‘Taiwan has been too democratic.’ This social milieu provides an important opportunity for understanding the social psychology of politics. Through the framework of Moscovici’s social representations theory, how lay people get senses of the term “democracy” was explored. While ‘democracy’ has a long history in political philosophy, studies of democracy in terms of social representations are relatively a new endeavor. These representations are likely to be constructed, maintained and changed by both implicit and explicit processes.
In order to explore different aspects of lay meanings (or common senses) of democracy, all subjects and interviewees were divided into three generations, meanwhile, representations of democracy were also divided into three parts in this thesis: media representations, abstract representations and social representations. Different research methods were used to examine, namely, corpus analysis, semantic differential scale and interview.
It was found that in newspapers, the most important terms associated with ’democracy’ were terms about political institutions, such as election, government and the President. But the results of semantic differential scale and interview indicate that ‘democracy’ is tightly associated with private sphere, ideal future and positive values, which were rarely stated in all newspapers.
The results suggest that lay people can think rationally just like experts do in everyday life, and in this sense, they have shown a societal knowledge and are able to criticize and challenge the media.
Reference: 王石蕃(1999):《傳播內容分析法:理論與實證》。臺北:幼獅文化事業公司。
王紹光(2010):《民主四講》。北京:三聯書局。
何孟樺(2016):《台灣民主化與沒有歷史的人》。國立清華大學社會學研究所,碩士論文。
何清漣(2019):《紅色滲透 : 中國媒體全球擴張的真相》。新北市:八旗文化出版。
吳乃德(2004):〈回憶蔣經國,懷念蔣經國〉。《二十世紀臺灣民主發展:第七屆中華民國史專題論文集》。臺北:國史館。
吳乃德(2013):〈導言:我們共同的故事〉。見胡慧玲 (主編):《百年追求:臺灣民主運動的故事 》。新北市:衛城出版。
宋文里(1995):〈「批判教育學」的問題陳顯〉。《通識教育季刊》(臺灣),2卷4期,1-15。
宋文里(1998):〈不信之信:超自然象徵與情感意義叢結〉。《國家科學委員會研究彙刊:人文與社會科學》(臺灣),8卷1期,84-100。
李酉潭(2011):《自由人權與民主和平 : 台灣民主化的核心價值》。臺北:五南出版社。
林意璇(2015)。《台灣報紙再現同性婚姻的語料庫與論述分析(2005-2014)》。國立政治大學新聞學研究所,碩士論文。
海樹兒犮剌拉菲(2007):《原住民參選立法委員之研究》。國立政治大學民族學研究所,博士論文。
金耀基(1984):《中國民主之困局與發展》。臺北:時報文化。
紀慧君(2018):〈從語料分析探究有機食物之媒體再現:三十年之意義與轉變〉。《中華傳播學刊》(臺灣),34期,209-252。
范會芳(2009):《舒茨現象學社會學:理論建構的邏輯》。鄭州:鄭州大學出版社。
高旭繁、楊國樞(2011)。〈華人心理傳統性與心理現代性研究之回顧與前瞻〉。《彰化師大教育學報》,19期,1-11。
張明貴(2003):《民主理論》。臺北:五南出版社。
郭文平(2015):〈字彙實踐及媒介再現:語料庫分析方法在總體經濟新聞文本分析運用研究〉。《新聞學研究》,125期,,95-142。
郭柏傑(2018):《台灣新聞媒體中的基改食品》。國立臺灣大學生物產業傳播暨發展學研究所,碩士論文。
郭諭陵(2005):《舒茲的現象社會學與教育》。臺北:桂冠圖書公司。
陳雨君(2010):《去政治化的政治 : 台灣政治事件的敘事社會學分析》。國立臺灣大學社會學研究所,碩士論文。
黃信達(2017):《政黨認同之世代差異:以國民黨與民進黨為例》。東海大學政治學研究所,碩士論文。
黃彪(2014):《中國式民主「論述」之初探》。臺北:致知學術。
熊月之(2007):〈自由、民主、總統三詞彙在近代中國的翻譯與使用〉。Retrieved from http://jds.cssn.cn/ztyj/sxs/201605/t20160506_3325425.shtml
劉嘉薇(2018):《臺灣民眾的媒體選擇與統獨立場》。臺北:五南出版社。
謝宗學(2003):〈網際民主與審議民主之實踐:資訊化社會的桃花源村?〉。《資訊社會研究》,4期,87-139。
謝政育(2007):《「心理學」的社會再現:在台灣的初探》。國立清華大學社會學研究所,碩士論文。
闕河嘉、陳光華(2016):〈庫博中文獨立語料庫分析工具之開發與應用〉。見 項潔(主編):《數位人文:在過去、現在和未來之間 》。臺北:國立臺灣大學出版中心。
Abric, J.-C. (1993). Central System, Peripheral System: Their Functions and Roles in the Dynamics of Social Representation. Papers on Social Representations, 2, 75-78.
Aron, R. (1987):《雷蒙‧艾宏:入戲的觀眾》。賴建誠譯。臺北:聯經。
Augoustinos, M., & Walker, I. (1995). Social Cognition: An Integrated Introduction (1 ed.). London: Sage Publications.
Baker, P. (2005). Public discourses of gay men:That’s so gay. New York: Routledge.
Barker, C. (2004):《文化硏究 : 理論與實踐》。羅世宏譯。臺北:五南出版社。
Bauer, M. W., & Gaskell, G. (1999). Towards a Paradigm for Research on Social representations. Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour, 29(2), 163-186.
Bauer, M. W., & Gaskell, G. (2008). Social representations theory: A progressive research programme for social psychology. Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour, 38(4), 335-353.
Bell, D. (2009):《民主先生在中國 : 東方與西方的人權與民主對話》。孔新峰、張言亮譯。臺北縣:左岸文化出版。
Billig, M. (1990). Rhetoric of Social Psychology. In I. Parker & J. Shotter (Eds.), Deconstructing Social Psychology . London: Routledge.
Billig, M. (1991). Ideology and opinions: Studies in rhetorical psychology. New York: Sage Publications.
Billig, M. (1993). Studying the Thinking Society: Social Representations, Rhetoric, and Attitudes. In G. M. Breakwell & D. V. Canter (Eds.), Empirical Approaches to Social Representations. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
Billig, M., Condor, S., Edwards, D., Gane, M., Middleton, D., & Radley, A. (1988). Ideological dilemmas: A social psychology of everyday thinking. New York: Sage Publications.
Bourdieu, P. (1990). The logic of practice (R. Nice, Trans.). Stanford, Calif: Stanford University Press.
Bradbury, M. (2012). Representations of death: A social psychological perspective.New York: Routledge.
Bratton, M. (2010). The Meanings of Democracy: Anchoring the" D-Word" in Africa. Journal of Democracy, 21(4), 106-113.
Bruner, J. (2018):《教育的文化:從文化心理學的觀點談教育的本質》。宋文里譯。臺北:遠流出版社。
Carr, E. H. (2009):《何謂歷史?》。江政寬譯。臺北:博雅書屋。
Chryssides, A., Dashtipour, P., Keshet, S., Righi, C., Sammut, G., & Sartawi, M. (2009). Commentary: We don't share! The social representation approach, enactivism and the fundamental incompatibilities between the two. Culture & Psychology, 15(1), 83-95.
Clemence, A., Doise, W., & Lorenzi-Cioldi, F. (1993). The quantitative analysis of social representations. New York: Routledge.
Creswell, J. W., & Clark, V. L. P. (2010):《混合方法研究導論》。謝志偉、王慧玉譯。臺北:心理出版社。
Dahl, R. A. (2006)《民主及其批判》。李培元譯。臺北縣:韋伯文化國際。
Diamond, L. (1999). Developing democracy: Toward consolidation. Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press.
Doise, W. (1986). Levels of Explanation in Social Psychology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press
Doise, W. (1993). Debating social representations. In G. M. Breakwell & D. V. Canter (Eds.), Empirical Approaches to Social Representations. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Douglas, J. D. (1970). Understanding Everyday Life. In J. D. Douglas (Ed.), Understanding Everyday Life: Towards the Reconstruction of sociological Knowledge. Chicago: Aldine Publishing Company.
Douglas, M. (1986). How Institutions Think. London: Syracuse University Press.
Duveen, G. (2000). The Power of Ideas. In G. Duveen (Ed.), Social Representations: Explorations in Social Psychology. Oxford: Polity Press.
Duveen, G. (2001). Genesis and Structure: Piaget and Moscovici. In F. Buschini & N. Kalampalikis (Eds.), Penser la Vie, le Social, la Nature. Paris: Editions de la Maison des Sciences de l'homme.
Duveen, G. (2013). Culture and Social Representations. In S. Moscovici, S. Jovchelovitch, & B. Wagoner (Eds.), Development as a Social Process. London: Routledge.
Duveen, G., & Lloyd, B. (1990). Introduction. In G. Duveen & B. Lloyd (Eds.), Social Representations and the Development of Knowledge . Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Elcheroth, G., Doise, W., & Reicher, S. (2011). On the Knowledge of Politics and the Politics of Knowledge: How a Social Representations Approach Helps Us Rethink the Subject of Political Psychology. Political Psychology, 32(5), 729-758.
Emiliani, F., & Passini, S. (2017). Everyday Life in Social Psychology. Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour, 47(1), 83-97.
Farr, R. (1990). Social Representations as Widespread Beliefs. In C. Fraser & G. Gaskell (Eds.), The Social Psychological Study of Widespread Beliefs. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
Farr, R. (1993). Theory and Method in the Study of Social Representations. In G. M. Breakwell & D. V. Canter (Eds.), Empirical Approaches to Social Representations. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
Flick, U. (1995). Social Representations. In J. A. Smith, R. Harré, & L. V. Langenhove (Eds.), Rethinking Psychology. London: Sage Publications.
Foucault, M. (1992):《規訓與懲罰 : 監獄的誕生》。劉北成譯。臺北:桂冠圖書公司。
Gadamer, H.-G. (1975). Truth and Method (G. Barden & J. Cumming, Trans.). New York: Continuum Publishing Corporation.
Geertz, C. (2002):《地方知識 : 詮釋人類學論文集》。楊德睿譯。臺北:麥田出版。
Gervais, M.-C., & Jovchelovitch, S. (1998). The health beliefs of the Chinese community in England: A qualitative research study. London: Health Education Authority.
Glaveanu, V. P. (2014). Thinking through Creativity and Culture: Toward an Integrated Model (1 ed.). New Brunswick: Transaction Publishers.
Gough, B., McFadden, M., & McDonald, M. (2013). Critical social psychology: An introduction. New York: Macmillan International Higher Education.
Greenwood, J. D. (1994). Realism, identity and emotion: Reclaiming social psychology. New York: Sage.
Greenwood, J. D. (1999). From Volkerpsychologie to cultural psychology: The once and future discipline? Philosophical Psychology, 12(4), 503-514.
Höijer, B. (2011). Social representations theory. Nordicom review, 32(2), 3-16.
Hachour, H. (2008). A Communicational Approach to collective Knowledge Generation: Episteme and Praxis. Paper presented at the Knowledge Generation, Communication and Management, Orlando, United States. http://www.iiis.org/CDs2008/CD2008SCI/KGCM2008/PapersPdf/G790PW.pdf
Hepburn, A. (2003). An introduction to critical social psychology. New York: Sage.
Herzlich, C. (1973a). Health and illness: A social psychological analysis. New York: Academic Press.
Herzlich, C. (1973b). Health and Illness: A Social Psychological Analysis (D. Graham, Trans.). New York: Academic Press.
Hewstone, M., & Augoustinos, M. (1998). Social Attributions and Social Representations. In U. Flick (Ed.), The Psychology of the Social . Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Himmelweit, H. T. (1990). Societal Psychology: Implications and Scope. In H. T. Himmelweit & G. Gaskell (Eds.), Societal Psychology. Newbury Park: Sage Publications.
Howarth, C. (2006). A social representation is not a quiet thing: Exploring the critical potential of social representations theory. British Journal of Social Psychology, 45(1), 65-86.
Huntington, S. P. (2014):《第三波 : 二十世紀末的民主化浪潮》。劉軍寧譯。臺北:五南出版社。
Jahoda, G. (1992). Crossroads between culture and mind: continuities and change in theories of human nature.Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Jaspars, J. (1986). Forum and focus: A personal view of European Social Psychology. European Journal of Social Psychology, 16(1), 3-15.
Jodelet, D. (1988). Représentations Sociales: Phénomènes, Concept et Théorie. In S. Moscovici (Ed.), Psychologie Sociale. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France.
Jodelet, D. (1991). Madness and Social Representations: Living With the Mad in One French Community (T. Pownall, Trans.). Berkeley: University of California Press.
Jodelet, D. (2008). Social representations: The beautiful invention. Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour, 38(4), 411-430.
Jovchelovitch, S. (2007). Knowledge in context: Representations, community and culture. New York: Routledge.
Kuhn, T. (2004):《科學革命的結構》。王道還譯。臺北:遠流出版社。
Kurlantzick, J. (2015):《民主在退潮 : 民主還會讓我們的世界變得更好嗎?》。湯錦台譯。臺北:如果出版。
Liu, J. H., Goldstein-Hawes, R., Hilton, D., Huang, L.-L., Gastardo-Conaco, C., Dresler-Hawke, E., . . . Abraham, S. (2005). Social representations of events and people in world history across 12 cultures. Journal of cross-cultural psychology, 36(2), 171-191.
Liu, J. H., & Hilton, D. J. (2005). How the past weighs on the present: Social representations of history and their role in identity politics. British Journal of Social Psychology, 44(4), 537-556.
Liu, J. H., & Sibley, C. G. (2015). Representations of world history. In G. Sammut, E. Andreouli, G. Gaskell, & J. Valsiner (Eds.), The Cambridge Handbook of Social Representations . Cambridge: Cambridge University Press
Liu, L. (2003). Quality of life in China: A social representational approach.Unpublished PHD thesis, London School of Economics and Political Science.
László, J. (2008). The science of stories: An introduction to narrative psychology. New York: Routledge.
Magioglou, T. (2014). Introduction: Societal Political Psychology in Paris. In T. Magioglou (Ed.), Culture and Political Psychology: a Societal Perspective. Charlotte: Information Age Publishing.
Markova, I. (2000). Amédée or how to get rid of it: Social representations from a dialogical perspective. Culture & Psychology, 6(4), 419-460.
Markova, I. (2004). Introduction: Trust/risk and trust/fear. In I. Markova (Ed.), Trust and democratic transition in post-communist Europe. New York: Oxford University Press.
Markova, I. (2016). The Dialogical Mind. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Mead, G. H. (1995):《心靈,自我與社會》。胡榮、王小章譯。臺北:桂冠圖書公司。
Miller, P. H. (2008):《發展心理學理論:從過去到現在》。程景琳、林慧資、胡肇勳譯。臺北:學富文化事業有限公司。
Moscovici, S. (1973). Foreword (D. Graham, Trans.). In C. Herzlich (Ed.), Health and Illness: A Social Psychological Analysis. London: Academic Press.
Moscovici, S. (1976). La Psychanalyse, Son Image et Son Public . Paris: Presses Universitaires de France.
Moscovici, S. (1981). On Social Representations. In J. Forgas (Ed.), Social Cognition: Perspectives on Everyday Understanding. London: Academic Press.
Moscovici, S. (1984a). The Myth of the Lonely Paradigm: A Rejoinder. Social Research, 51(4), 939-967.
Moscovici, S. (1984b). The Phenomenon of Social Representations. In R. M. Farr & S. Moscovici (Eds.), Social Representations. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Moscovici, S. (1988). Notes Towards a Description of Social Representations. European Journal of Social Psychology, 18(3), 211-250.
Moscovici, S. (1989). Des Représentations Collectives aux Représentations Sociales: Elements pour une Histoire. In D. Jodelet (Ed.), Les Représentations Sociales. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France.
Moscovici, S. (1990a). The Origins of Social Representations: A response to Michael. New Ideas in Psychology, 8(3), 383-388.
Moscovici, S. (1990b). Social Psychology and Developmental Psychology: Extending the Conversation. In G. Duveen & B. Lloyd (Eds.), Social Representations and the Development of Knowledge. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Moscovici, S. (1991). New Problems for Social psychology in a New Europe. European Bulletin of Social Psychology, 2, 2-10.
Moscovici, S. (1993). The Invention of Society: Psychological Explanations for Social Phenomena (W. D. Halls, Trans.). Oxford: Polity Press.
Moscovici, S. (1998). The History and Actuality of Social Representations. In U. Flick (Ed.), The Psychology of the Social. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Moscovici, S. (2000a). Ideas and their development: A dialogue between Serge Moscovici and Ivana Marková. Social representations. Explorations in social psychology. Cambridge: Polity Press.
Moscovici, S. (2000b). Society and Theory in Social Psychology. In G. Duveen (Ed.), Social Representations: Explorations in Social Psychology. Oxford: Polity Press.
Moscovici, S. (2008). Psychoanalysis: Its Image and Its Public (D. Macey, Trans.). Cambridge: Polity Press.
Moscovici, S., & Hewstone, M. (1983). Social Representations and Social Explanations: From the ‘Naïve’ to the ‘Amateur’ Scientist. In M. Hewstone (Ed.), Attribution Theory : Social and Functional Extensions. Oxford: Blackwell.
Nora, P. (1996). General introduction: Between memory and history. In Lawrence D. Kritzman(Ed.), Realms of memory: rethinking the French past. New York: Columbia University Press
Nora, P. (2012):《記憶所繫之處》。戴麗娟譯。臺北:行人文化。
Osgood, C. E., Suci , G. J., & Tannenbaum, P. H. (1957). The measurement of meaning. Urbana: University of Illinois Press.
Philogène, G. (1999). From Black to African American: A New Social Representation. Westport: Praeger Publishers.
Pickering, W. S. F. (1999). What Do Representations Represent? The Issue of Reality. In W. S. F. Pickering (Ed.), Durkheim and Representations. New York: Routledge.
Ritzer, G. (2000):《社會學理論》。馬康莊、陳信木譯。臺北:巨流圖書公司。
de Rosa, A. S. d. (2013). Research fields in social representations: snapshot views from a meta-theoretical analysis. In A. S. D. Rosa (Ed.), Social Representations in the 'Social Arena' . London: Routledge.
Rose, R., Mishler, W., & Haerpfer, C. (1998). Democracy and its alternatives: Understanding post-communist societies. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press Press.
Rose, R., & Shin, D. C. (2001). Democratization backwards: The problem of third-wave democracies. British journal of political science, 31(2), 331-354.
Sammut, G., Andreouli, E., Gaskell, G., & Valsiner, J. (2015). Social representations: a revolutionary paradigm? In G. Sammut, E. Andereouli, G. Gaskell & J. Valsiner(Ed.), The Cambridge Handbook of Social Representations. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Sartori, G. (1987). The theory of democracy revisited. Chatham, N.J. : Chatham House Publishers.
Schutz, A. (1970). On Phenomenology and Social Relations. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Schutz, A., & Luckmann, T. (1973). The Structure of the Life-World (R. M. Zaner & H. T. Engelhardt, Trans.). Evanston: Northwestern University Press.
Sen, A. K. (1999). Democracy as a universal value. Journal of Democracy, 10(3), 3-17.
Shweder, R. A. (1990). Cultural Psychology—What Is It? . In J. W. Stigler, R. A. Shweder, & G. Herdt (Eds.), Cultural Psychology: Essays on Comparative Human Development. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Tileagǎ, C. (2013). Political Psychology: Critical Perspectives. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Tolman, C. (1994). Psychology, society and subjectivity: An introduction to German critical psychology. New York: Routledge.
Van Dijk, T. A. (1991). The Interdisciplinary Study of News as Discourse. In K. B. Jensen & N. W. Jankowski (Eds.), A Handbook of Qualitative Methodologies for Mass Communication Research . New York: Routledge.
Van Dijk, T. A. (1997). Opinions and ideologies in the press. In A. Bell. & P. Garrett(Eds.), Approaches to media discourse. Mass. : Blackwell Publishers.
Wagner, W. (1998). Social representations and beyond: Brute facts, symbolic coping and domesticated worlds. Culture & Psychology, 4(3), 297-329.
Wagner, W., & Hayes, N. (2005). Everyday Discourse and Common Sense. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
Wagoner, B. (2017). The Constructive Mind: Bartlett's Psychology in Reconstruction . Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Williams, R. (2003):《關鍵詞 : 文化與社會的詞彙》。劉建基譯。臺北:巨流圖書公司。
Winnicott, D. W. (2009):《遊戲與現實》。朱恩伶譯。臺北:心靈工坊文化出版。
Description: 博士
國立政治大學
傳播學院博士班
994515021
Source URI: http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0994515021
Data Type: thesis
Appears in Collections:[傳播博士班] 學位論文

Files in This Item:

File SizeFormat
502101.pdf4244KbAdobe PDF8View/Open


All items in 學術集成 are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved.


社群 sharing