學術產出-Theses
Article View/Open
Publication Export
-
題名 從議題所有權看競選廣告-以2012總統大選為例
Political advertising in the 2012 presidential campaign:from a view of issue ownership作者 許倍甄
Hsu, Pei Chen貢獻者 俞振華
Yu, Eric Chen Hua
許倍甄
Hsu, Pei Chen關鍵詞 議題所有權
議題聚合
議題入侵
政黨認同
廣告策略日期 2012 上傳時間 30-Oct-2012 15:24:35 (UTC+8) 摘要 本文主旨乃透過議題所有權的角度，探討政黨競選廣告的策略。民眾認知構成議題所有權的形成，而台灣民主化時程尚短，本文觀察台灣民眾是否可以基於過去觀察政黨競爭的經驗，建立議題所有權認知。而如果民眾確實對於政黨具有議題所有權認知，則該認知是長期穩定的，還是短期浮動的？此外，本研究透過議題所有權、議題聚合、及議題入侵等三項概念分析國民兩黨在2012年的總統大選電視競選廣告，並藉以探討政黨是否善用其議題所有權。 筆者透過t檢定以及相關統計圖表，分析台灣民眾2006-2012年的議題所有權認知，以及透過內容分析法，分析2012年總統大選中，政黨電視廣告議題策略運用。研究結果發現，台灣民眾具有長期而穩定的議題所有權認知，且民眾的政黨支持和議題所有權認知有其關聯性。大部分民眾還會偏向認為他們所支持的政黨，處理各項議題的能力較好，這樣的認知在政黨認同上有明顯的差異性。而在2012年國民兩黨的電視競選廣告策略方面，這次無論是在位者或是挑戰者，所採用的都是議題聚合策略，把主力放在民眾所關心的議題上，不過由於候選人角色不同，廣告的表現形式也有所不同。在位者（馬陣營）的廣告策略為議題聚合形式搭配正面廣告或攻守俱備的廣告，著重在自身政績的傳達；而挑戰者（蔡陣營）的廣告策略為議題聚合形式搭配負面廣告或攻守俱備的手法，著重在傳達馬政府執政不佳以及自身領導形象，台灣此次的競選中強調議題聚合現象的比例十分的高。 參考文獻 中文資料張卿卿，2000，〈美國政治競選廣告效果研究的回顧〉，《廣告學研究》，14：1-29。張卿卿，2002，〈競選媒體使用對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。張卿卿，2009，〈競選廣告之效果探討：以議題所有權策略為例〉，《中華傳播學刊》，16：94-128。張卿卿，2010，〈競選廣告與議題/特質所有權任知〉，《傳播與社會學刊》，11(1)：31-70。鈕則勳，2001，〈以語意觀點解析公元2000年總統大選扁陣營之電視競選廣告〉，《人文學報》，5(25)：83-104。鈕則勳，2003，〈政黨輪替後國民黨之廣告策略：以2001年選舉之攻擊廣告為例〉，《理論與政策》，17(1)：53-86鈕則勳，2004，〈2002年選舉馬英九的競選廣告策略：領導品牌之政治行銷〉，《華岡社科學報》，18：61-86鈕則勳，2007，〈競選廣告初探：以2004年總統大選陳呂陣營為例〉，《台灣民主季刊》，4(1)：141-178陳靜芬，1997，〈一九九六年總統大選期間之議題探析-議題設定理論的觀點〉，政治大學碩士論文。劉正山，2009，〈2008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。倪炎元，2009，《公關政治學》，台北，商周出版。陳兆熙，1984，《美國民意、大眾傳播與政治》，台北，文中。鈕則勳，2002，《競選傳播策略：理論與實務》，台北，韋伯文化。鄭自隆，1992，《競選文宣策略廣告、傳播與政治行銷》，台北，遠流。鄭自隆，1995，《競選廣告 -- 理論、策略、研究案例》，台北：正中。 英文資料Abbe, O. G., Goodliffe, J., Herrnson, P. S., and Patterson, K. D. 2003. “Agenda Setting in Congressional Elections: The impact of Issues and Campaigns on Voting behavior”. Political Research Quarterly 56: 419-430.Aldrich, John H., and John D. Griffin. 2003. “The Presidency and the Campaign: Creating Voter Priorities in the 2000 Election” In Michael Nelson, ed., The Presidency and the Political System, 7th ed.Washington DC: Congressional Quarterly.Ansolabehere, S., & Iyengar, S. 1994. “Riding the Wave and Claming the Ownership over issue”. Public opinion Quarterly 58(3): 335-337.Ansolabehere, S, Iyengar S. 1997. Going Negative: How Political Advertising Divides and Shrinks the American Electorate., New York: Free Press.Baker, et al. 2010. “Research Synthesis: AAPOR Report on Online Panels.” Public Opinion Quarterly 74(4): 711-81.Belanger, E. 2003. “Issue Ownership by Canadian Political Parties 1953-2001”. Canadian Journal of Political sxience 36: 539-558Benoit, W. L. 2004. “Political Party Affiliation and Presidential Campaign discourse.” Communication Quarterly 52(2): 81-97.Budge, Ian and Farlie, Dennis. 1983. Explaining and predicting elections : issue effects and party strategies in twenty-three democracies. London: Allen & Unwin.Campbell, M. C. 1995. “When Attention-getting Advertising Tactics Elicit Consumer Inferences of Manipulative Intent: The Important of Balancing Benefit and Investments.” Journal of Consumer Research 4(3): 225-255.Chang, C. 2003. “Party Bias in Political Advertising Processing: Results From an Experiment Involving the 1998 Taipei Mayor Election.” Journal of Advertising 32(2): 55-67.Chang, C. 2007. “The Interplay of Candidate-Initiated and Journalist-Initiated Agendas in the 1996 and 2004 Taiwan Presidential Elections.”Asian Journal of Communication 17(1): 1-23.Cohen, G. L. 2003. “Party Over Policy: The Dominating Impact of Group Influence on Political Beliefs.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 85(5): 808-822.Damore, D. F. 2004. “The Dynamics of Issue Qwnership in Presidential Campaigns.” Political Research Quarterly 57(3): 391-397.Damore, D. F. 2005. “Issue Convergence in Presidential Campaigns.” Political Behavior 27(1): 71-97.Denton, Robert E. jr. & Woodward, Gary C. 1990. “Political Communication in America”. New York, Westport, London: Praeger.Dewey, J. 1954. “The Public And Its Problems.” Athens, OH: Swallow Press.Hayes, D. 2005. “Candidate Qualities Through a Partisan Lens: A theory of trait ownership.” American Journal of Political Science 49(4): 908-923.Iyengar, S., McGrady, J. 2007. “Media politics: A citizen’s guide.” New York: W. W. Norton.Johnson-Cartee, K. S., Copeland, G. A. 1991. Negative Political Advertising: Coming of Age. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Johnson-Cartee, K. S., Copeland, G. A. 1997. “The Manipulation of the American Voter.” London: Praeger.Kaid, L. L., Johnston, A. 1993. “Negative Versus Positive Television Advertising in U.S. Presidential Campaigns, 1960-1988.” Journal of Communication 41(3): 53-64.Kaid, L. L. 1997. “Effects of the Television Spots on Images of Dole and Clinton.” American Behavioral Scientist 40(8): 1085-1094.Kaplan, N., Park, D. K., Ridout, T. N. 2006. “Dialogue in American Political Campaigns? An Examination of Issue Convergence in Candidate Television Advertising.” American Journal of Political Science 50(3): 724-436.King, P., McCombs, M. 1994. “The Party Agenda in the 1992 Taiwan Legislative Election: A Content Analysis of the Television Political Party Advertisements.” Asian Journal of Communication 4(1): 77-98.Lazarsfeld, P., Berelson, B., Gaudet, H. 1948. The People’s Choice. New York: Columbia University Press.Norpoth, Helmut, and Bruce Buchanan. 1992. “Wanted: The Education President, Issue Trepassing by Political Campaigns.” Public Opinion Quarterly 56: 87-99.Petrocick, J. R. 1996. “Issue Ownership in Presidential Elections, With a 1980 Case Study.” American Journal of Political Science 40(3): 825-850.Petrocick, J. R., Benoit, W. L., Hansen, G. J. 2003-4. “Issue Ownership and Presidential Campaigning, 1952-2000.” Political Science Quarterly 118(4): 599-626.Pfau, Michael, and H. C. Kenski 1990. “Attack Politics: Strategy and Defense.New York: Prager.Rich, Roland. 2007. Pacific Asia in Quest for Democracy. Co, Bouder: Lynne Rienner Publisher.Riker, William H. 1993. “The Specification of Issues.” In William H. Riker, ed., Agenda Formation. Ann Anbor: University of Michigan Press.Sellers, P. J. 1998. “Strategy and Background in Congressional Campaigns.” The American Political Science Review 92(1): 159-171Shaw, Daron R. 1999. “The Effect of TV Ads and Candidate Appearances on Statewide Presidential Votes, 1988-1996.” American Political Science Review 93:345-362.Sigelman, L., Buell, Jr, E. H. 2004. “Avoidance or Engagement? Issue Convergence in U.S. Presidential Campaigns, 1960-2000.” American Journal of Political Science 48(4): 650-661.Thorson, E., Christ, W. G. 1991. “Effects of Issue-Image Strategies, Attack and Support Appeals, Music, and Visual Content in Political Commercials.” Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media 35(4): 465-486. 描述 碩士
國立政治大學
政治研究所
98252015
101資料來源 http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0098252015 資料類型 thesis dc.contributor.advisor 俞振華 zh_TW dc.contributor.advisor Yu, Eric Chen Hua en_US dc.contributor.author (Authors) 許倍甄 zh_TW dc.contributor.author (Authors) Hsu, Pei Chen en_US dc.creator (作者) 許倍甄 zh_TW dc.creator (作者) Hsu, Pei Chen en_US dc.date (日期) 2012 en_US dc.date.accessioned 30-Oct-2012 15:24:35 (UTC+8) - dc.date.available 30-Oct-2012 15:24:35 (UTC+8) - dc.date.issued (上傳時間) 30-Oct-2012 15:24:35 (UTC+8) - dc.identifier (Other Identifiers) G0098252015 en_US dc.identifier.uri (URI) http://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/55067 - dc.description (描述) 碩士 zh_TW dc.description (描述) 國立政治大學 zh_TW dc.description (描述) 政治研究所 zh_TW dc.description (描述) 98252015 zh_TW dc.description (描述) 101 zh_TW dc.description.abstract (摘要) 本文主旨乃透過議題所有權的角度，探討政黨競選廣告的策略。民眾認知構成議題所有權的形成，而台灣民主化時程尚短，本文觀察台灣民眾是否可以基於過去觀察政黨競爭的經驗，建立議題所有權認知。而如果民眾確實對於政黨具有議題所有權認知，則該認知是長期穩定的，還是短期浮動的？此外，本研究透過議題所有權、議題聚合、及議題入侵等三項概念分析國民兩黨在2012年的總統大選電視競選廣告，並藉以探討政黨是否善用其議題所有權。 筆者透過t檢定以及相關統計圖表，分析台灣民眾2006-2012年的議題所有權認知，以及透過內容分析法，分析2012年總統大選中，政黨電視廣告議題策略運用。研究結果發現，台灣民眾具有長期而穩定的議題所有權認知，且民眾的政黨支持和議題所有權認知有其關聯性。大部分民眾還會偏向認為他們所支持的政黨，處理各項議題的能力較好，這樣的認知在政黨認同上有明顯的差異性。而在2012年國民兩黨的電視競選廣告策略方面，這次無論是在位者或是挑戰者，所採用的都是議題聚合策略，把主力放在民眾所關心的議題上，不過由於候選人角色不同，廣告的表現形式也有所不同。在位者（馬陣營）的廣告策略為議題聚合形式搭配正面廣告或攻守俱備的廣告，著重在自身政績的傳達；而挑戰者（蔡陣營）的廣告策略為議題聚合形式搭配負面廣告或攻守俱備的手法，著重在傳達馬政府執政不佳以及自身領導形象，台灣此次的競選中強調議題聚合現象的比例十分的高。 zh_TW dc.description.tableofcontents 第一章 緒 論 1第一節 研究背景 1第二節 研究動機與目的 3第二章 文獻檢閱 7第一節 議題所有權之認知與定義 7第二節 競選廣告之效果 10第三節 議題所有權與競選廣告策略 12第四節 議題所有權之廣告效果 17第三章 研究架構與方法 21第一節 研究架構與資料來源 21第二節 研究方法 22第三節 研究假設與預期發現 26第四章 研究結果分析 27第一節 台灣民眾所關心的議題 27第二節 台灣民眾議題所有權認知 31第三節 台灣民眾議題所有權認知與政黨支持 35第四節 國民黨選舉廣告議題策略分析 46第五節 民進黨選舉廣告議題策略分析 59第六節 電視競選廣告議題策略分析 67第五章 結 論 79第一節 研究發現 79第二節 研究限制 81附錄一－相關問卷題目 82附錄二－議題所有權競選廣告效應 84參考書目 87 zh_TW dc.language.iso en_US - dc.source.uri (資料來源) http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0098252015 en_US dc.subject (關鍵詞) 議題所有權 zh_TW dc.subject (關鍵詞) 議題聚合 zh_TW dc.subject (關鍵詞) 議題入侵 zh_TW dc.subject (關鍵詞) 政黨認同 zh_TW dc.subject (關鍵詞) 廣告策略 zh_TW dc.title (題名) 從議題所有權看競選廣告-以2012總統大選為例 zh_TW dc.title (題名) Political advertising in the 2012 presidential campaign:from a view of issue ownership en_US dc.type (資料類型) thesis en dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 中文資料張卿卿，2000，〈美國政治競選廣告效果研究的回顧〉，《廣告學研究》，14：1-29。張卿卿，2002，〈競選媒體使用對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。張卿卿，2009，〈競選廣告之效果探討：以議題所有權策略為例〉，《中華傳播學刊》，16：94-128。張卿卿，2010，〈競選廣告與議題/特質所有權任知〉，《傳播與社會學刊》，11(1)：31-70。鈕則勳，2001，〈以語意觀點解析公元2000年總統大選扁陣營之電視競選廣告〉，《人文學報》，5(25)：83-104。鈕則勳，2003，〈政黨輪替後國民黨之廣告策略：以2001年選舉之攻擊廣告為例〉，《理論與政策》，17(1)：53-86鈕則勳，2004，〈2002年選舉馬英九的競選廣告策略：領導品牌之政治行銷〉，《華岡社科學報》，18：61-86鈕則勳，2007，〈競選廣告初探：以2004年總統大選陳呂陣營為例〉，《台灣民主季刊》，4(1)：141-178陳靜芬，1997，〈一九九六年總統大選期間之議題探析-議題設定理論的觀點〉，政治大學碩士論文。劉正山，2009，〈2008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。倪炎元，2009，《公關政治學》，台北，商周出版。陳兆熙，1984，《美國民意、大眾傳播與政治》，台北，文中。鈕則勳，2002，《競選傳播策略：理論與實務》，台北，韋伯文化。鄭自隆，1992，《競選文宣策略廣告、傳播與政治行銷》，台北，遠流。鄭自隆，1995，《競選廣告 -- 理論、策略、研究案例》，台北：正中。 英文資料Abbe, O. G., Goodliffe, J., Herrnson, P. S., and Patterson, K. D. 2003. “Agenda Setting in Congressional Elections: The impact of Issues and Campaigns on Voting behavior”. Political Research Quarterly 56: 419-430.Aldrich, John H., and John D. Griffin. 2003. “The Presidency and the Campaign: Creating Voter Priorities in the 2000 Election” In Michael Nelson, ed., The Presidency and the Political System, 7th ed.Washington DC: Congressional Quarterly.Ansolabehere, S., & Iyengar, S. 1994. “Riding the Wave and Claming the Ownership over issue”. Public opinion Quarterly 58(3): 335-337.Ansolabehere, S, Iyengar S. 1997. Going Negative: How Political Advertising Divides and Shrinks the American Electorate., New York: Free Press.Baker, et al. 2010. “Research Synthesis: AAPOR Report on Online Panels.” Public Opinion Quarterly 74(4): 711-81.Belanger, E. 2003. “Issue Ownership by Canadian Political Parties 1953-2001”. Canadian Journal of Political sxience 36: 539-558Benoit, W. L. 2004. “Political Party Affiliation and Presidential Campaign discourse.” Communication Quarterly 52(2): 81-97.Budge, Ian and Farlie, Dennis. 1983. Explaining and predicting elections : issue effects and party strategies in twenty-three democracies. London: Allen & Unwin.Campbell, M. C. 1995. “When Attention-getting Advertising Tactics Elicit Consumer Inferences of Manipulative Intent: The Important of Balancing Benefit and Investments.” Journal of Consumer Research 4(3): 225-255.Chang, C. 2003. “Party Bias in Political Advertising Processing: Results From an Experiment Involving the 1998 Taipei Mayor Election.” Journal of Advertising 32(2): 55-67.Chang, C. 2007. “The Interplay of Candidate-Initiated and Journalist-Initiated Agendas in the 1996 and 2004 Taiwan Presidential Elections.”Asian Journal of Communication 17(1): 1-23.Cohen, G. L. 2003. “Party Over Policy: The Dominating Impact of Group Influence on Political Beliefs.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 85(5): 808-822.Damore, D. F. 2004. “The Dynamics of Issue Qwnership in Presidential Campaigns.” Political Research Quarterly 57(3): 391-397.Damore, D. F. 2005. “Issue Convergence in Presidential Campaigns.” Political Behavior 27(1): 71-97.Denton, Robert E. jr. & Woodward, Gary C. 1990. “Political Communication in America”. New York, Westport, London: Praeger.Dewey, J. 1954. “The Public And Its Problems.” Athens, OH: Swallow Press.Hayes, D. 2005. “Candidate Qualities Through a Partisan Lens: A theory of trait ownership.” American Journal of Political Science 49(4): 908-923.Iyengar, S., McGrady, J. 2007. “Media politics: A citizen’s guide.” New York: W. W. Norton.Johnson-Cartee, K. S., Copeland, G. A. 1991. Negative Political Advertising: Coming of Age. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Johnson-Cartee, K. S., Copeland, G. A. 1997. “The Manipulation of the American Voter.” London: Praeger.Kaid, L. L., Johnston, A. 1993. “Negative Versus Positive Television Advertising in U.S. Presidential Campaigns, 1960-1988.” Journal of Communication 41(3): 53-64.Kaid, L. L. 1997. “Effects of the Television Spots on Images of Dole and Clinton.” American Behavioral Scientist 40(8): 1085-1094.Kaplan, N., Park, D. K., Ridout, T. N. 2006. “Dialogue in American Political Campaigns? An Examination of Issue Convergence in Candidate Television Advertising.” American Journal of Political Science 50(3): 724-436.King, P., McCombs, M. 1994. “The Party Agenda in the 1992 Taiwan Legislative Election: A Content Analysis of the Television Political Party Advertisements.” Asian Journal of Communication 4(1): 77-98.Lazarsfeld, P., Berelson, B., Gaudet, H. 1948. The People’s Choice. New York: Columbia University Press.Norpoth, Helmut, and Bruce Buchanan. 1992. “Wanted: The Education President, Issue Trepassing by Political Campaigns.” Public Opinion Quarterly 56: 87-99.Petrocick, J. R. 1996. “Issue Ownership in Presidential Elections, With a 1980 Case Study.” American Journal of Political Science 40(3): 825-850.Petrocick, J. R., Benoit, W. L., Hansen, G. J. 2003-4. “Issue Ownership and Presidential Campaigning, 1952-2000.” Political Science Quarterly 118(4): 599-626.Pfau, Michael, and H. C. Kenski 1990. “Attack Politics: Strategy and Defense.New York: Prager.Rich, Roland. 2007. Pacific Asia in Quest for Democracy. Co, Bouder: Lynne Rienner Publisher.Riker, William H. 1993. “The Specification of Issues.” In William H. Riker, ed., Agenda Formation. Ann Anbor: University of Michigan Press.Sellers, P. J. 1998. “Strategy and Background in Congressional Campaigns.” The American Political Science Review 92(1): 159-171Shaw, Daron R. 1999. “The Effect of TV Ads and Candidate Appearances on Statewide Presidential Votes, 1988-1996.” American Political Science Review 93:345-362.Sigelman, L., Buell, Jr, E. H. 2004. “Avoidance or Engagement? Issue Convergence in U.S. Presidential Campaigns, 1960-2000.” American Journal of Political Science 48(4): 650-661.Thorson, E., Christ, W. G. 1991. “Effects of Issue-Image Strategies, Attack and Support Appeals, Music, and Visual Content in Political Commercials.” Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media 35(4): 465-486. zh_TW
