Title

中間選民的迷思與隱性選民之政黨傾向初探

Translated Titles

Myth of Independent Voters and the Prediction of Closet Partisans' Party Identification in Taiwan

DOI

10.6683/TPSR.201612.20(2).65-123

Authors

劉正山(Frank C. S.);蔡艾真(Ai-jhen Tsai)

Key Words

政黨認同 ; 中間選民 ; 動機推論理論 ; 隱性選民 ; 選舉預測 ; party identification ; independent voters ; partisan mobilized reasoning ; closet voters ; election forecast

PublicationName

台灣政治學刊

Volume or Term/Year and Month of Publication

20卷2期(2016 / 12 / 01)

Page #

65 - 123

Content Language

繁體中文

Chinese Abstract

一般來說「中間選民」指的是一群自稱不特別偏向某一個政黨或政治立場的選民。然而,選民在調查訪問中口頭所表述的「無意見」、「沒有政黨傾向」不見得是真心話。這個現象可能(已經)使一般選舉調查,就政黨支持者分布的描述出現失真的現象,甚至進一步會造成對於選情的誤判。本研究從概念釐清與「動機推論理論」(partisan-motivated reasoning)視野出發,重新檢討這個現象,並從「隱性選民」(closetpartisan)角度,觀察這些民意調查中這些政黨傾向未表態的民眾的真實意向分布。我們首先設計一組間接測量政黨傾向電訪題,並在 103年 1 月份蒐集了有全國代表性的電訪資料(受訪人數 N =1,072)。我們將這些題目的藍綠分數組成指標(index),以此得分的分布作為辨別藍綠選民的基準,用它來推判隱性選民的政營支持傾向。我們再以電話追訪,將他們在第二次受訪時所表述的真實政黨意向與我們的辨別結果作比較。我們更進一步與四位得分偏向中間點的隱性選民進行深度訪談,深入瞭解他們論述政黨的方式。透過這一系列的分析,本研究一方面提出有效間接測量黨性的電訪題,有助於降低當前政黨題項目無反應比例愈來愈高所帶來的衝擊,另一方面得以為台灣「中間選民」到底是多還是少的這個未解之謎提供線索,以及為動機推論理論的發展提供經驗證據。

English Abstract

Researchers of partisan voters have been assuming that there is a solid difference between "independent" voters and partisan voters (including leaners). This is hardly the case in the Taiwan context, a democracy with a two-party presidential system, where over 40 percent of voters are partisans, but claim to be independent in most telephone surveys. Pollsters, researchers, and journalists have been calculating the distribution of party supporters by either omitting these "independent" voters due to the unavailability of the data, or simply applying counterintuitive formulae to guess the distribution of the respondents with missing data. This study avoid the definition of these not-so-well-defined "independent" voters, but takes aim at these "invisible" or "closet" voters and attempts to the partisan orientation behind their ambivalent answers to telephone surveys. With this in mind, we took a series of steps, including qualitative and quantitative ones. First, we used a representative sample, conducted in January 2014 (N=1,072) in Taiwan via an RDD telephone survey. This survey included the conventional party identification question plus a series of theory-based alternative questions that we evaluated as triggering respondents' mobilized reasoning regarding the two major political parties, the Kuomintang (KMT) and Democratic Progressive Party (DPP). We then created an index for partisan respondents of the two political camps, and applied the score patterns to the closet respondents. In another follow up survey (March 2014) that targeted the closet respondents, we found that the correctness of prediction using the index was about 70%. We then targeted and interviewed the most ambivalent closet voters and explored how their partisan mobilized reasoning was (and failed to be) triggered by the alternative survey questions. We concluded with a few survey questions that future electoral studies can use for probing closet voters. The rich implications of the findings for improving the accuracy of predicting partisan votes, the debates about the characteristics of independent voters, and the development of partisan motivated reasoning theories are discussed

Topic Category 社會科學 > 政治學
Reference
  1. 王中天(2010)。獨立選民的類型及其投票行為:台灣 2008年總統選舉的觀察。選舉與研究,17(2),35-69。
    連結:
  2. 吳乃德(2002)。認同衝突與政治信任:現階段台灣族群政治的核心難題。台灣社會學,4,75-118。
    連結:
  3. 吳重禮、許文賓(2003)。誰是政黨認同者與獨立選民?以2001 年台灣地區選民政黨認同的決定因素為例。政治科學論叢,18,101-140。
    連結:
  4. 俞振華、林啟耀(2013)。解析台灣民眾統獨偏好:一個兩難又不確定的選擇。台灣政治學刊,17(2),165-230。
    連結:
  5. 張傳賢、黃紀(2011)。政黨競爭與台灣族群認同與國家認同間的聯結。台灣政治學刊,15(1),3-71。
    連結:
  6. 莊天憐(2001)。我國獨立選民的發展與變遷(1989-1999)。選舉研究,8(1),71-115。
    連結:
  7. 莊淑媚、洪永泰(2011)。特定政黨不認同:台灣地區民意調查中關於政黨認同的新測量工具。選舉研究,18(2),1-29。
    連結:
  8. 陳陸輝(2000)。台灣選民政黨認同的持續與變遷。選舉研究,7(2),109-141。
    連結:
  9. 劉正山(2009)。2008 年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。
    連結:
  10. 劉正山、朱淑華(2012)。不中間的中間選民:以質性方法初探有政黨傾向選民隱藏政黨傾向的原因。東吳政治學報,30(4),177-233。
    連結:
  11. 蔡佳泓(2014)。縣市長支持之研究:多層次貝氏統計之應用。應用經濟論叢,96,69-103。
    連結:
  12. TVBS 民調中心,2014,〈台中市長選情民調〉,http://home.tvbs.com.tw/static/FILE_DB/PCH/201407/20140731201647333.pdf,查閱時間:2014/09/03。TVBS Poll Center. 2014.“Taizhong shizhang xuanqing mindiao” [Electoral survey of Mayor of Taichung City]. (Accessed on September 3, 2014).
  13. 中國評論新聞網,2007,〈馬英九推軍事政策:確保台海無戰事〉,http://hk.crntt.com/doc/1004/4/1/1/100441143.html?coluid=7&kindid=0&docid=100441143,查閱時間:2013/12/30。China Review News. 2007. “Ma ying-jiu tui junshi zhengce: quebao tai hai wu zhanshi” [Ma's military policy: Ensuring no war in the Strait]. (Accessed on December 30, 2013).
  14. 中國評論新聞網,2012,〈立報社論:敗選怪罪王雪紅,未必有理〉,http://mag.chinareviewnews.com/doc/1019/8/4/3/101984336.html?coluid=7&kindid=0&docid=101984336,查閱時間:2014/12/03。China Review News. 2012. “Li bao shelun: baixuan guaizui wang xuehong, weibi youli” [Editorial: It may be reasonable to blame Wang Xue-Hong for KMT's lost in election]. (Accessed on December 3, 2014).
  15. 今日新聞網,2012,〈HTC 吃定台灣人?梁文傑:這樣的企業,挺他幹嘛?〉,http://www.nownews.com/n/2012/08/20/175613,查閱時間:2014/12/03。NOW news. 2012. “HTC chi ding taiwan ren? liang wen-jie: zheyang de qiye, ting ta gan ma?” [HTC taking advantage of Taiwanese people? Liang Wen-Jie: Why do we keep supporting such kind of corporation?]. (Accessed on December 3, 2014).
  16. 李鴻典,2004,〈阿扁提出黨徽國徽說亂了親中陣腳〉,http://www.southnews.com.tw/polit/polit_00/polit_09/01204.htm,查閱時間:2013/12/16。Li, Hung-tien. 2004. “A-bian tichu danghui guohui shuo luan le qinzhong zhenjiao” [Chen Shui-Bien disturbed pro-China camp with his linkage between KMT and ROC symbols]. (Accessed on December 16, 2013).
  17. 林欣芳、羅添斌,2013,〈募兵爛攤子 監委籲馬別丟給下任〉,http://news.ltn.com.tw/news/focus/paper/741373,查閱時間:2013/12/30。Lin, Hsin-fang, and Tian-bin Lo. 2013. "Mubing lan tanzi jianwei yu ma bie diugei xiaren"[The Executive Yuan members warned Ma: Don't leave the problematic military recruitment policy to the next term]. (Accessed on December 30, 2013).
  18. 政治大學選舉研究中心,2013,〈重要政治態度分布趨勢圖〉,http://esc.nccu.edu.tw/app/news.php?class=203,查閱時間:2013/10/18。Election Study Center, National Chengchi University. 2013. “Zhongyao zhengzhi taidu fenbu qushitu”[Trends in Core Political Attitudes among Taiwanesses]. (Accessed on October 18, 2013).
  19. 陳雅蘭,2010,〈王雪紅:HTC 是中國人創立的品牌〉,http://edn.udn.com/news/view.jsp?aid=297745&cid=47#,查閱時間:2014/12/03。Chen, Ya-lan. 2010. “Wang xue-hong: HTC shi zhongguo ren chuangli de pinpai” [Wang Xui-Hong: HTC is the brand name created by Chinese]. (Accessed on December 3, 2014).
  20. 劉康彥,2014,〈民調/中彰投藍天變綠地 林佳龍贏胡志強 28個百分點〉,http://www.ettoday.net/news/20140625/371413.htm,查閱時間:2014/09/03。Liu, Kang-yan. 2014. “Mindiao/ zhong zhang tou lantian bian ludi lin jia-long ying hu zhi-qiang 28 ge baifendian” [Polls: Central Taiwan turning green: Ling Jia-Ling wining over Hu Zhi-Qiang by 28 percent].(Accessed on September 3, 2014).
  21. 謝文華、張文川,2007,〈大中至正再見 自由廣場今掛牌〉,http://www.libertytimes.com.tw/2007/new/dec/8/today-fo4.htm,查閱時間:2013/10/17。Hsieh, Wen-hua, and Wen-chuan Chang. 2007. “Da zhong zhi zheng zaijian ziyou guangchang jin guapai” [Goodbye “Da Zhong Zhi Zheng”; hello “Liberty Square”]. (Accessed on October 17, 2013).
  22. ETtoday 東森民調雲,2014,〈決戰中台灣 2014 台中彰化南投縣市長參選人支持度調查〉, http://www.ettoday.net/survey/survey.php?id=67,查閱時間:2014/09/03。ETtoday. 2014. "Juezhan zhong taiwan 2014 taizhong zhanghua nantou xianshizhang canxuanren zhichidu diaocha."[Final battle in central Taiwan: Support rates of central Taiwan cities and counties' candidates]. (Accessed on September 3, 2014).
  23. 台灣指標民調,2014,〈民眾的政黨傾向與印象評價〉,http://www.tisr.com.tw/?page_id=486,查閱時間:2014/12/01。Taiwan Indicators Survey Research. 2014.“Minzhong de zhengdang qingxiang yu yinxiang pingjia” [Party Identification Tracking in Taiwan]. (Accessed on December 1, 2014).
  24. Bartels, Larry M.(2014).Remembering to Forget: A Note on the Duration of Campaign Advertising Effects.Political Communication,31(4),532-544.
  25. Burnham, Walter Dean(1970).Critical Elections and the Mainsprings of American Politics.New York, NY:Norton.
  26. Campbell, Angus,Converse, Philip E.,Miller, Warren E.,Stokes, Donald E.(1960).The American Voter.Chicago, IL:The University of Chicago Press.
  27. Dennis, Jack(1992).Political Independence in America, 3: In Search of Closet Partisans.Political Behavior,14(3),261-296.
  28. Dennis, Jack(1988).Political Independence in America, part II: Towards a Theory.British Journal of Political Science,18(2),197-219.
  29. Dilliplane, Susanna(2011).All the News You Want to Hear: The Impact of Partisan News Exposure on Political Participation.Public Opinion Quarterly,75(2),287-316.
  30. Jimenez, Guillermo C.(2009).Red Genes, Blue Genes: Exposing Political Irrationality.Brooklyn, NY:Autonomedia.
  31. Johnston, Richard(2006).Party Identification: Unmoved Mover or Sum of Preferences?.Annual Review of Political Science,9(1),329-351.
  32. Key, V. O. Jr.(1966).The Responsible Electorate: Rationality in Presidential Voting. 1936-1960.Cambridge, MA:Harvard University Press.
  33. Kim, Yonghwan,Chen, Hsuan-Ting,de Zúñiga, H. Gil(2013).Stumbling upon news on the Internet: Effects of incidental news exposure and relative entertainment use on political engagement.Computers in Human Behavior,29(6),2607-2614.
  34. Kleinnijenhuis, Jan,van Hoof, Anita M. J.,Oegema, Dirk(2006).Negative News and the Sleeper Effect of Distrust.Harvard International Journal of Press-Politics,11(2),86-104.
  35. Leeper, Thomas J.,Slothuus, Rune(2014).Political Parties, Motivated Reasoning, and Public Opinion Formation.Political Psychology,35,129-156.
  36. Levendusky, Matthew(2013).How Partisan Media Polarize America.Chicago, IL:University of Chicago Press.
  37. Levendusky, Matthew(2013).Why Do Partisan Media Polarize Viewers?.American Journal of Political Science,57(3),611-623.
  38. Magleby, David B.,Nelson, Candice(2012).Independent leaners as policy partisans: An examination of party identification and policy views.The Forum,10(3),1-17.
  39. Miller, Arthur H.,Wattenberg, Martin P.(1983).Measuring Party Identification, Independent or No Partisan Preference.American Journal of Political Science,27(1),106-121.
  40. Petrocik, John R.(1974).An Analysis of Intransitivities in the index of Party Identifcation.Political Methodology,1(3),31-47.
  41. Sniderman, Paul M.(ed.),Highton, Benjamin(ed.)(2011).Facing the Challenge of Democracy: Explorations in the Analysis of Public Opinion and Political Participation.Princeton, NJ:Princeton University Press.
  42. 朱曉玉(2004)。桃園=Taoyuan,銘傳大學公共事務研究所在職專班=Graduate School of Public Affairs, Ming Chuan University。
  43. 余忠威(2012)。台北=Taipei,國立台北大學公共行政暨政策學系=Graduate School of Public Administration and Policy, National Taipei University。
  44. 吳欣禪(2010)。台北=Taipei,國立台灣師範大學政治研究所=Graduate School of Political Science, National Taiwan Normal University。
  45. 吳皇昇(2011)。台北=Taipei,國立政治大學政治學研究所=Graduate School of Political Science, National Chengchi University。
  46. 初文卿(2004)。隱性選民研究-以 2003 年花蓮縣長補選為例。師大政治論叢,2,29-65。
  47. 洪永泰(2014)。誰會勝選?誰能凍蒜?預知政治版圖,讓民調數字告訴你。台北=Taipei:遠見天下文化=Commonwealth Publishing press。
  48. 徐火炎(1993)。選舉競爭與政治分歧結構的變遷:國民黨與民進黨勢力的消長。人文及社會科學集刊,6(1),37-75。
  49. 張君慧(2012)。高雄=Kaohsiung,國立中山大學政治學研究所=Graduate School of Political Science, National Sun Yat-Sen University。
  50. 張傳賢(2012)。政黨認同、負面資訊的競爭與選民投票抉擇:2010 年五都選舉的實證研究。台灣政治學刊,19(2),37-70。
  51. 陳恆明(1986)。中華民國政治符號之研究。台北=Taipei:台灣商務印書館=The Commercial Press。
  52. 薛立梅(2011)。台北=Taipei,國立政治大學行政管理碩士學程=Graduate School of Eminent Public Administrators, National Chengchi University。
Times Cited
  1. 黃則鳴(2017)。臺灣核廢料政策之論述分析—2011年至2016年。臺灣大學公共事務研究所學位論文。2017。1-159。