批評與偏袒：公民如何評價台灣民主品質

Criticism and Bias: How Citizens Evaluate the Quality of Democracy in Taiwan

郝為之(Wei-Chih Hao)

指導教授 ： 張佑宗

國立臺灣大學/社會科學院/政治學研究所/碩士(2012年)

https://doi.org/10.6342/NTU.2012.02092

摘要

民主品質是民主近代研究新興的概念，將民主視為政治系統製造的主要產品，包括產品的製造程序、產品的實質內容、產品的滿意度與回應性等各層面皆是構成民主良善的品管標準，透過專業機構或公民眼底民主樣貌的評鑑，便可提醒政府施政的缺失之處；然而許多案例證明公民民主品質的主觀評價並非直接反映政府的民主表現，而會受到其他因素影響，民主品質可能的影響變因便是本文關注的焦點。
本文以民主品質的「批判者」與「偏袒者」代稱「批判性公民」與「選舉贏家」，檢驗兩者是否影響公民的民主品質評價，其假設為：批判性公民可能因其挑剔性格在民主品質評價上依高標準而給予批評；選舉贏家則因與權威當局同屬勝選陣營，不欲對己選舉抉擇自我否定，常以較為寬容的態度看待政權表現而有所偏袒。
透過2011年「亞洲民主動態調查」第三波台灣區域的實證資料作統計分析，發現民主品質評價的「批判者」與「偏袒者」確實有其影響效果，在「程序」、「內容」、「結果」、「治理」品質評價上見於批判性公民的嚴苛評分與選舉贏家的偏袒心態。此外，評價指標越是抽象則越易受到主觀好惡感受的影響，具體事項的評價內容則少見個人觀感左右，由此可知公民主觀的民主品質未必如想像的公正，存在太多因素干擾民主品質的評價。

關鍵字

民主品質 ； 批判性公民 ； 選舉贏家

並列摘要

The quality of democracy is the new concept of democratic research in modern times. People study the quality of democracy views democracy as the main product of political system. The procedure, content and outcome of political system are the criteria for measuring what a good democracy is. The study in quality of democracy can remind government of the shortcoming they have. However, it was evident that in many cases democratic evaluations from people didn’t directly reflect the performance of government. The evaluation of the quality of democracy may be affected by other factors. As a result, this article focuses on how citizens evaluate the quality of democracy.
In this article, we use “Critics” and “The biased” of quality of democracy to be the substitutes for “critical citizens” and “election winners.” What we want to know is whether “Critics” and “The biased” may affect the evaluation of citizens or not. The hypothesis here is that critical citizens may have low evaluations because of their high standards of democracy and election winners may have high evaluation because of bias which exists between electee and voter.
By using data from the third wave of the Asia Barometer Survey in Taiwan 2011, this article reveals that “Critics” and “The biased” of the quality of democracy actually have real impact on the dimension of the quality of democracy including procedure, content, result, and governance. Furthermore, the more abstract the indices of evaluation are, the more easily the indices of evaluation will be influenced by personal subjective perception. The specific indices of evaluation are less influenced by personal subjective perception. In conclusion, the quality of democracy may not be as fair as our imagination. There are too many factors that intervene in the evaluations of the quality of democracy.

並列關鍵字

quality of democracy ； critical citizens ； election winners

參考文獻

吳乃德，2005，〈麵包與愛情：初探台灣民眾民族認同的變動〉，《台灣政治學刊》，9(2)：5-39。

吳重禮，2008，〈台灣民眾威權懷舊的初探：蔣經國政府施政的比較評價〉，《選舉研究》，15(2)：119-142。

張佑宗，2009，〈選舉輸家與民主鞏固─台灣2004年總統選舉落選陣營對民主的態度〉，《台灣民主季刊》，6(1)：41-72。

張佑宗，2011，〈選舉結果、政治學習與民主支持一兩次政黨輪替後台灣公民在民主態度與價值的變遷〉，《台灣民主季刊》，8(2)：99-137。

張傳賢，2009，〈民主的脆弱性與鞏固：一個敗者同意的視角〉，《政治科學論叢》，42：43-84。