Post on 30-Aug-2019
Na
t iona l Chengch i U
nive
rsi t
y
I
102 7
Na
t iona l Chengch i U
nive
rsi t
y
II
Na
t iona l Chengch i U
nive
rsi t
y
III
RI-1999
RI-2003
Na
t iona l Chengch i U
nive
rsi t
y
IV
Abstract
The purpose of this research is to understand the power relationship between
husbands and wives, including the factors and the transition during 1999-2003 within
the process of Taiwans democratization, especially the context of culture. Researcher
adopts family decision-making as an important index. Base on the resources theory,
the exchange theory and the theory of resources in culture context, the main
questions of this research are: 1. Does the proportion of family decision-making
change? 2. The situation that the more resources one has, the more power in making
decision one has would increase.
The results are as follows. The proportion of family decision-making does not
change significantly, however, the situation that one has more resources would have
more power in making decision does increase. Nevertheless, the research tells us
that some personal characteristics like ones ethnic group, do not have the same
result as research in past. How will Taiwans democratization influence these factors,
or change their nature in the process of decision-making? That could be a good
research direction in the future.
Key words: Taiwan, democratization, the power of husbands and wives, family
decision-making, resources differences
Na
t iona l Chengch i U
nive
rsi t
y
V
1
1
3
4
4
7
10
15
15
16
18
22
22
28
49
53
Na
t iona l Chengch i U
nive
rsi t
y
VI
60
60
61
75
75
Na
t iona l Chengch i U
nive
rsi t
y
VII
1 15
1 6
2 RI-1999RI-2003 22
3 RI-1999RI-2003 23
4 RI-1999RI-2003 24
5 RI-1999RI-2003 25
6 RI-1999RI-2003 26
7 27
8 RI-1999RI-2003 28
9 RI-1999RI-2003 29
10 RI-1999RI-2003 30
11 RI-1999RI-2003 31
12 RI-1999RI-2003 32
13 RI-1999RI-2003 34
14 RI-1999RI-2003 34
15 RI-1999RI-2003 35
16 RI-1999RI-2003 42
Na
t iona l Chengch i U
nive
rsi t
y
VIII
17 RI-1999RI-2003 42
18 RI-1999RI-2003 43
Na
t iona l Chengch i U
nive
rsi t
y
1
2011 6 24
2008
1
1996
20
only game in townLinz1990158
Freedom House
1996 politic rights
civil liberties 2005-2006
1 1
Larry Diamond
1 2011 6 24
http://www.chinareviewnews.com/crn-webapp/doc/docDetailCreate.jsp?coluid=98&kindid=2994&docid=101
743877
http://www.chinareviewnews.com/crn-webapp/doc/docDetailCreate.jsp?coluid=98&kindid=2994&docid=101743877http://www.chinareviewnews.com/crn-webapp/doc/docDetailCreate.jsp?coluid=98&kindid=2994&docid=101743877Na
t iona l Chengch i U
nive
rsi t
y
2
Diamond
Diamond
1999171-174
(family decision-making) David Easton
instrumental
affectiveeconomic
social
1999
Na
t iona l Chengch i U
nive
rsi t
y
3
2008
RI-1999
RI-2000RI-2003RCI-2004RCI-2005
RCI-2007
Na
t iona l Chengch i U
nive
rsi t
y
4
democracydemos
kratosrule by the peopleSorensen1993
16
Joseph A.
Schumpeter
Sorensen199310-12 Samuel P. Huntington
Huntington19915-13
Huntington Schumpeter
Larry Diamond electoral
democracyminimalistDiamond1996
21
ODonnell and Schmitter19868
Karl199622
Robert A. Dahl polyarchy
Na
t iona l Chengch i U
nive
rsi t
y
5
Dahl19711-32(1)
(2)(3)(4)
(5)(6)(7)
Dahl1989221
201136
Sorensen Dahl
competitionparticipationliberties
Sorensen199313Diamond liberal democracy
Diamond199621
Alexis de Tocqueville
Bova
1997112-116
Na
t iona l Chengch i U
nive
rsi t
y
6
Dahl
1-1 7-7
7-71-1
Sorensen200320-21 1
1
1-7 1-7
1-2.5
3-5.5
5.5-7
McColm, R. Bruce (1991). The Comparative Survey of Freedom: 1991. Freedom
Review, 22(1), 14.
1972
2
2
Sorensen200321-25
Na
t iona l Chengch i U
nive
rsi t
y
7
Robert O. Blood and
Donald M. Wolfe 1960 Husband and Wives
2000
2005Chen and Yi2006
R. E. Cromwell and D. H. Olson1975
baseprocess
outcome
J. M. Steil1997
1989
Na
t iona l Chengch i U
nive
rsi t
y
8
1989
115-116 Sarah F. Berk1985
Mirowsky1985
1991
1989
2000
final say
20052008
Blood and Wolfe1960
Richard Centers, Bertram H. Raven and Aroldo Rodrigues1971
Constantina Safilios-Rothschild1970
1989121
javascript:;Na
t iona l Chengch i U
nive
rsi t
y
9
Blood and Wolfe1960husband dominant
typewife dominant typeequalitarian of syncretic
typeautonomic type
1989
Eshleman1981
Blood and Wolfe1960
1987188
Na
t iona l Chengch i U
nive
rsi t
y
10
feminism
Gender MainstreamingGM
stakeholders
200933-34
gender parity
1995 1996
2000
Na
t iona l Chengch i U
nive
rsi t
y
11
2006
1.
1989
3
2.
1990
1996
2002
1993
20072002
3.
3 1995
1999 500 41
2000
http://taiwanpedia.culture.tw/web/content?ID=1002412013/9/10
http://taiwanpedia.culture.tw/web/content?ID=100241Na
t iona l Chengch i U
nive
rsi t
y
12
2002
20072007
2006
Olson and DeFrain2003213
Warner et al.1986Mirowsky
1985
4
1.
Blood and Wolfe
1960
1984
4 2005
48http://mail.nhu.edu.tw/~society/e-j/48/48-45.htm
http://mail.nhu.edu.tw/~society/e-j/48/48-45.htmNa
t iona l Chengch i U
nive
rsi t
y
13
1989
19972003 Hyman
Rodman 1967 1972
2.
the principle of least interestOlson and DeFrain2003
3.
rewardcost
Investment modelEquity
theoryOutcome-interdependence theory
Sprecher1998
rewardscosts Mirowsky1985
McDonald1980
Na
t iona l Chengch i U
nive
rsi t
y
14
Whyte1995
Rodman1970
Wesley R. Burr1973
5
5 2008
http://www.npf.org.tw/post/1/86732013/8/22
http://www.npf.org.tw/post/1/8673Na
t iona l Chengch i U
nive
rsi t
y
15
1
1
Na
t iona l Chengch i U
nive
rsi t
y
16
Panel Study of Family
Dynamics PSFD
(panel)
6
6
1998
() ()
Gary Becker (Chicago)Angus Deaton
(Princeton)Robert Hauser (Wisconsin) Cheng Hsiao (USC)Ronald Lee (Berkeley)William Parish
(Chicago) George Tiao (Chicago) James Vaupel (Max Plank) Arthur Wolf (Stanford)
1999
Na
t iona l Chengch i U
nive
rsi t
y
17
PSFD
1000
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
RI-1999RI-2003
https://psfd.sinica.edu.tw/plan_01.htm
https://psfd.sinica.edu.tw/plan_01.htmNa
t iona l Chengch i U
nive
rsi t
y
18
PSFD 1999
1996 RI-1999
RI-2003
7
PSFD
1989
PSFD
7 Huntington
two-turnover test
Huntington1991266-267
Huntington
Huntington19911082000
RI-2003
1996 2000
Na
t iona l Chengch i U
nive
rsi t
y
19
200016-17
PSFD
2005
2000
20072004
Bielby1984
PSFD
Na
t iona l Chengch i U
nive
rsi t
y
20
2006261PSFD
200018
50000 5000-50000
5000 5000-50000 50000
5000
5000 5000
RI-1999 RI-2003
multinominal logistic
regression RI-1999
RI-2003
Na
t iona l Chengch i U
nive
rsi t
y
21
p
Na
t iona l Chengch i U
nive
rsi t
y
22
PSFD RI-1999 RI-2003
RI-1999
1953~1964 999
842 41 374 44.4%
468 55.6%192 22.8%RI-2003
1964~1976 1152
719 30 362 50.3%
357 49.7%249 34.6%
2-6
2RI-1999RI-2003
RI-1999 RI-2003
24 50 79 22 26 44
15.7% 32.7% 51.6% 23.9% 28.3% 47.8%
52 127 239 61 100 218
12.4% 30.4% 57.2% 16.1% 26.4% 57.5%
13 34 54 14 20 46
12.9% 33.7% 53.5% 17.5% 25.0% 57.5%
7 17 31 5 16 20
12.7% 30.9% 56.4% 12.2% 39.0% 48.8%
1 5 6 1 1 2
8.3% 41.7% 50.0% 25.0% 25.0% 50.0%
24 47 131 9 3 10
11.9% 23.3% 64.9% 40.9% 13.6% 45.5%
59 151 234 71 94 217
Na
t iona l Chengch i U
nive
rsi t
y
23
3RI-1999RI-2003
13.3% 34.0% 52.7% 18.6% 24.6% 56.8%
20 56 78 29 75 122
13.0% 36.4% 50.6% 12.8% 33.2% 54.0%
24 63 112 23 25 61
12.1% 31.7% 56.3% 21.1% 22.9% 56.0%
69 169 285 80 130 254
13.2% 32.3% 54.5% 17.2% 28.0% 54.7%
10 22 42 4 15 33
13.5% 29.7% 56.8% 7.7% 28.8% 63.5%
3 7 4 2 3 4
21.4% 50.0% 28.6% 22.2% 33.3% 44.4%
75 164 340 86 132 271
13.0% 28.3% 58.7% 17.6% 27.0% 55.4%
13 46 45 10 19 34
12.5% 44.2% 43.3% 15.9% 30.2% 54.0%
16 36 53 9 17 37
15.2% 34.3% 50.5% 14.3% 27.0% 58.7%
11 32 34 12 14 27
14.3% 41.6% 44.2% 22.6% 26.4% 50.9%
44 137 198 51 111 181
11.6% 36.1% 52.2% 14.9% 32.4% 52.8%
54 86 216 46 48 141
15.2% 24.2% 60.7% 19.6% 20.4% 60.0%
RI-1999 RI-2003
41 33 83 28 22 48
26.1% 21.0% 52.9% 28.6% 22.4% 49.0%
69 85 265 86 87 237
16.5% 20.3% 63.2% 21.0% 21.2% 57.8%
18 28 56 19 24 46
17.6% 27.5% 54.9% 21.3% 27.0% 51.7%
8 21 25 7 18 20
14.8% 38.9% 46.3% 15.6% 40.0% 44.4%
3 4 5 1 1 2
Na
t iona l Chengch i U
nive
rsi t
y
24
4RI-1999RI-2003
25.0% 33.3% 41.7% 25.0% 25.0% 50.0%
32 36 129 9 2 11
16.2% 18.3% 65.5% 40.9% 9.1% 50.0%
80 111 260 88 91 237
17.7% 24.6% 57.6% 21.2% 21.9% 57.0%
29 40 84 49 70 126
19.0% 26.1% 54.9% 20.0% 28.6% 51.4%
40 44 113 28 21 69
20.3% 22.3% 57.4% 23.7% 17.8% 58.5%
91 118 318 110 125 268
17.3% 22.4% 60.3% 21.9% 24.9% 53.3%
10 23 40 6 15 36
13.7% 31.5% 54.8% 10.5% 26.3% 63.2%
1 6 6 2 2 5
7.7% 46.2% 46.2% 22.2% 22.2% 55.6%
100 122 358 109 124 293
17.2% 21.0% 61.7% 20.7% 23.6% 55.7%
18 30 57 19 21 32
17.1% 28.6% 54.3% 26.4% 29.2% 44.4%
27 29 50 15 15 38
25.5% 27.4% 47.2% 22.1% 22.1% 55.9%
11 26 36 14 15 27
15.1% 35.6% 49.3% 25.0% 26.8% 48.2%
62 93 224 78 99 197
16.4% 24.5% 59.1% 20.9% 26.5% 52.7%
76 69 217 55 49 150
21.0% 19.1% 59.9% 21.7% 19.3% 59.1%
RI-1999 RI-2003
28 15 112 24 14 57
18.1% 9.7% 72.3% 25.3% 14.7% 60.0%
77 31 304 81 34 277
18.7% 7.5% 73.8% 20.7% 8.7% 70.7%
20 11 67 16 9 60
Na
t iona l Chengch i U
nive
rsi t
y
25
5RI-1999RI-2003
20.4% 11.2% 68.4% 18.8% 10.6% 70.6%
11 7 35 6 11 25
20.8% 13.2% 66.0% 14.3% 26.2% 59.5%
1 2 9 1 1 2
8.3% 16.7% 75.0% 25.0% 25.0% 50.0%
27 15 152 8 1 11
13.9% 7.7% 78.4% 40.0% 5.0% 55.0%
87 43 312 83 39 271
19.7% 9.7% 70.6% 21.1% 9.9% 69.0%
30 15 108 44 33 161
19.6% 9.8% 70.6% 18.5% 13.9% 67.6%
33 22 143 23 8 77
16.7% 11.1% 72.2% 21.3% 7.4% 71.3%
94 43 377 103 57 323
18.3% 8.4% 73.3% 21.3% 11.8% 66.9%
16 8 49 6 7 42
21.9% 11.0% 67.1% 10.9% 12.7% 76.4%
4 1 8 3 0 5
30.8% 7.7% 61.5% 37.5% .0% 62.5%
91 46 432 102 56 349
16.0% 8.1% 75.9% 20.1% 11.0% 68.8%
29 12 64 13 11 42
27.6% 11.4% 61.0% 19.7% 16.7% 63.6%
24 12 69 15 6 43
22.9% 11.4% 65.7% 23.4% 9.4% 67.2%
16 12 47 15 8 34
21.3% 16.0% 62.7% 26.3% 14.0% 59.6%
61 39 274 68 42 245
16.3% 10.4% 73.3% 19.2% 11.8% 69.0%
73 21 259 52 23 165
20.7% 5.9% 73.4% 21.7% 9.6% 68.8%
RI-1999 RI-2003
13 39 105 8 26 61
Na
t iona l Chengch i U
nive
rsi t
y
26
6RI-1999RI-2003
8.3% 24.8% 66.9% 8.4% 27.4% 64.2%
38 94 293 36 90 279
8.9% 22.1% 68.9% 8.9% 22.2% 68.9%
7 25 70 10 12 61
6.9% 24.5% 68.6% 12.0% 14.5% 73.5%
5 13 33 4 11 27
9.8% 25.5% 64.7% 9.5% 26.2% 64.3%
1 2 9 1 1 3
8.3% 16.7% 75.0% 20.0% 20.0% 60.0%
23 36 145 7 3 12
11.3% 17.6% 71.1% 31.8% 13.6% 54.5%
30 117 306 45 96 282
6.6% 25.8% 67.5% 10.6% 22.7% 66.7%
11 31 110 11 52 160
7.2% 20.4% 72.4% 4.9% 23.3% 71.7%
16 41 144 16 19 79
8.0% 20.4% 71.6% 14.0% 16.7% 69.3%
42 122 365 47 118 331
7.9% 23.1% 69.0% 9.5% 23.8% 66.7%
6 19 50 0 13 41
8.0% 25.3% 66.7% .0% 24.1% 75.9%
0 3 10 1 2 5
.0% 23.1% 76.9% 12.5% 25.0% 62.5%
51 122 415 47 121 358
8.7% 20.7% 70.6% 8.9% 23.0% 68.1%
10 30 66 9 15 43
9.4% 28.3% 62.3% 13.4% 22.4% 64.2%
10 26 68 5 11 42
9.6% 25.0% 65.4% 8.6% 19.0% 72.4%
7 21 46 9 14 29
9.5% 28.4% 62.2% 17.3% 26.9% 55.8%
30 96 256 27 92 242
7.9% 25.1% 67.0% 7.5% 25.5% 67.0%
34 66 266 27 45 184
9.3% 18.0% 72.7% 10.5% 17.6% 71.9%
Na
t iona l Chengch i U
nive
rsi t
y
27
RI-1999 RI-2003
25 18 113 20 14 63
16.0% 11.5% 72.4% 20.6% 14.4% 64.9%
62 55 307 75 45 286
14.6% 13.0% 72.4% 18.5% 11.1% 70.4%
24 17 63 12 10 66
23.1% 16.3% 60.6% 13.6% 11.4% 75.0%
11 12 31 1 12 29
20.4% 22.2% 57.4% 2.4% 28.6% 69.0%
2 3 7 1 0 4
16.7% 25.0% 58.3% 20.0% .0% 80.0%
37 26 140 9 1 14
18.2% 12.8% 69.0% 37.5% 4.2% 58.3%
69 68 315 71 49 295
15.3% 15.0% 69.7% 17.1% 11.8% 71.1%
22 25 109 33 37 165
14.1% 16.0% 69.9% 14.0% 15.7% 70.2%
33 32 136 26 11 82
16.4% 15.9% 67.7% 21.8% 9.2% 68.9%
84 75 373 81 68 348
15.8% 14.1% 70.1% 16.3% 13.7% 70.0%
11 12 51 4 7 42
14.9% 16.2% 68.9% 7.5% 13.2% 79.2%
4 2 8 2 1 6
28.6% 14.3% 57.1% 22.2% 11.1% 66.7%
87 78 421 86 67 366
14.8% 13.3% 71.8% 16.6% 12.9% 70.5%
22 21 63 15 12 44
20.8% 19.8% 59.4% 21.1% 16.9% 62.0%
21 17 69 8 7 53
19.6% 15.9% 64.5% 11.8% 10.3% 77.9%
13 13 51 9 11 37
16.9% 16.9% 66.2% 15.8% 19.3% 64.9%
63 64 258 59 45 257
16.4% 16.6% 67.0% 16.3% 12.5% 71.2%
61 40 261 45 31 181
Na
t iona l Chengch i U
nive
rsi t
y
28
2-6 RI-1999 RI-2003
RI-1999 RI-2003 RI-1999
RI-2003
RI-2003 RI-1999
RI-2003 RI-1999
RI-2003 RI-1999
RI-2003
RI-1999
PSFD 1999
multicollinearity
7
7
16.9% 11.0% 72.1% 17.5% 12.1% 70.4%
Na
t iona l Chengch i U
nive
rsi t
y
29
RI-1999 RI-2003
1 1
-.032 1 .080* 1
.007 .390** 1 .063 .519** 1
-.006 .266** .029 1 -.006 .098** -.062 1
-.082* -.222** .037 -.118** 1 -.142** -.155** .000 -.072 1
*0.05 ()
** 0.01 ()
0.80Pedhazur1982
0.80
8-12
8RI-1999RI-2003
RI-1999 RI-2003
VS.
VS.
VS.
VS.
.041 .420 .001 .299 .205 .489 -.328 .354
Na
t iona l Chengch i U
nive
rsi t
y
30
-.100 .524 .110 .372 .200 .562 -.572 .432
ref
-.105 .420 -.524 .306 1.391** .643 -1.009 .864
-.016 .332 -.079 .232 .068 .285 -.376 .230
ref
.029 .486 .102 .367 .742 .671 .325 .479
.124 .417 .023 .313 .907 .570 .412 .368
ref
1.863 1.276 2.257** 1.134 .645 .958 -1.282 .751
-.451 .339 -.172 .260 .151 .408 -.023 .325
-.314 .482 .723* .329 .163 .530 .064 .430
ref
-.141 .460 .833*** .298 -.500 .408 .170* .402
-.092 .255 .486** .193 -.142 .251 .138** .219
ref
*p
Na
t iona l Chengch i U
nive
rsi t
y
31
-.302 .476 -.555 .377 .132 .505 -.471 .411
ref
-.279 .364 -.276 .337 .929 .599 -1.518 1.114
-.140 .284 -.023 .255 -.181 .243 -.215 .232
ref
.536 .459 -.413 .380 .755 .572 .171 .480
.081 .408 -.560* .316 .988** .476 .302 .369
ref
-.674 .226 .911 .834 .276 .930 -1.023 .363
-.727** .288 -.341 .287 -.093 .336 .203 .349
-.650* .393 .149 .357 .443 .435 .715 .441
ref
-.354 .416 .763** .319 .457 .386 .293 .397
-.220 .221 .175 .212 .578 .221 .292 .219
ref
*p
Na
t iona l Chengch i U
nive
rsi t
y
32
-.005 .436 -.129 .513 .155 .516 -1.028** .512
ref
-.286 .366 -.289 .496 1.318** .619 -.374 1.178
.046 .273 -.007 .372 .004 .246 -.205 .309
ref
-.095 .406 .034 .531 .581 .607 -.258 .652
-.258 .344 -.476 .460 .962* .507 .067 .468
ref
.343 .917 .417 1.204 .380 .932 -1.730 .468
-.509* .285 -.229 .401 -.181 .340 .085 .474
.144 .356 .497 .485 .024 .453 .753 .566
ref
.037** .351 .890 .427 .435 .374 .204 .495
.254 .221 .303 .316 .557 .226 .053 .294
ref
*p
Na
t iona l Chengch i U
nive
rsi t
y
33
-.152 .471 -.063 .324 -.281 .529 -.051 .365
-.730 .648 .034 .398 -.033 .616 -.711 .471
ref
.846* .480 .317 .333 2.448*** .760 -.087 .861
.081 .406 .451* .257 .660* .381 .217 .235
ref
-.352 .604 -.421 .376 .815*** .457 -.371 .501
-.286 .525 -.302 .319 .750 .320 .154 .385
ref
-.427 .413 -.030 .887 .552 1.234 -1.182 .623
-.441 .420 -.213 .277 -.101 .522 .202 .365
-.333 .554 .241 .343 .513 .631 .437 .464
ref
.150 .531 .630** .317 .925** .471 .789** .391
.248 .304 .456** .203 1.169 .316 .512** .221
ref
*p
Na
t iona l Chengch i U
nive
rsi t
y
34
-.386 .361 -.754** .340 1.541** .744 -.638* .387
-.110 .437 -.299 .425 1.155 .799 -.602 .493
ref
.692* .373 -.014 .395 1.010* .596 -1.414 .282
.171 .306 .043 .297 .071 .270 -.314 .288
ref
-.098 .460 -.251 .449 .933 .648 .225 .607
-.163 .403 -.375 .380 .908 .560 .246 .461
ref
.057 .932 .516 .946 1.100 .959 -1.579 .370
-.685** .304 -.273 .329 .356 .408 .353 .439
-.161 .389 .433 .402 .814* .494 .861 .531
ref
.288 .376 .641* .381 .258 .429 .428 .430
.205 .233 .571** .253 .046 .238 .138 .272
*p
Na
t iona l Chengch i U
nive
rsi t
y
35
RI-1999RI-2003
RI-1999
RI-2003
Burr
RI-1999 RI-2003
13-15
13RI-1999RI-2003
RI-1999 RI-2003
172 5
20.4% 0.7%
428 414
50.8% 57.6%
238 295
28.3% 41.0%
206 24
24.5% 3.3%
460 445
54.6% 61.9%
158 249
18.8% 34.6%
14RI-1999RI-2003
Na
t iona l Chengch i U
nive
rsi t
y
36
RI-1999
108 46 2
13.2% 5.6% 0.2%
93 306 27
11.3% 37.3% 3.3%
4 105 129
0.5% 12.8% 15.7%
RI-2003
0 5 0
0.0% 0.7% 0.0%
23 337 53
3.2% 47.3% 7.4%
1 100 194
0.1% 14.0% 27.2%
15RI-1999RI-2003
RI-1999
16 5 1
7.9% 1.1% 0.6%
8 38 4
3.9% 8.6% 2.5%
0 16 15
0.0% 3.6% 9.7%
28 15 0
13.9% 3.4% 0.0%
18 92 7
8.9% 20.8% 4.5%
1 44 49
0.4% 9.9% 31.8%
62 25 1
30.8% 5.6% 0.6%
65 162 16
32.3% 36.7% 10.3%
Na
t iona l Chengch i U
nive
rsi t
y
37
3 44 61
1.4% 9.9% 31.8%
201 441 154
14 5 1
7.1% 1.1% 0.6%
17 53 4
8.6% 11.8% 2.6%
1 22 24
0.5% 4.9% 15.6%
23 16 0
11.7% 3.5% 0.0%
13 62 7
6.6% 13.8% 4.5%
0 31 33
0.0% 6.9% 21.5%
67 25 1
34.1% 5.5% 0.6%
59 182 14
30.1% 40.6% 9.1%
2 52 69
1.0% 11.6% 45.0%
196 448 153
13 8 1
6.7% 1.8% 0.6%
14 59 7
7.2% 13.4% 4.5%
0 19 22
0.0% 4.3% 14.3%
7 6 0
3.6% 1.3% 0.0%
7 23 2
3.6% 5.2% 1.3%
1 14 13
0.5% 3.1% 8.4%
80 32 1
41.4% 7.2% 0.6%
68 206 16
35.2% 46.9% 10.4%
Na
t iona l Chengch i U
nive
rsi t
y
38
3 72 91
1.5% 16.4% 20.1%
193 439 153
13 3 0
6.4% 0.6% 0.0%
10 21 3
4.9% 4.6% 1.9%
0 6 8
0.0% 1.3% 5.2%
23 11 0
11.3% 2.4% 0.0%
12 76 8
5.9% 16.8% 5.2%
1 28 23
0.4% 6.2% 15.1%
71 32 2
34.9% 7.1% 1.3%
70 202 16
34.4% 44.8% 10.5%
3 71 92
1.4% 15.7% 60.5%
203 450 152
18 6 1
8.9% 1.3% 0.6%
19 49 4
9.4% 10.9% 2.5%
0 14 17
0.0% 3.1% 6.6%
17 7 0
8.4% 1.5% 0.0%
8 38 5
3.9% 8.4% 3.2%
1 23 20
0.4% 5.1% 12.8%
71 32 1
35.1% 7.1% 0.6%
65 212 18
32.1% 47.2% 11.5%
Na
t iona l Chengch i U
nive
rsi t
y
39
3 68 90
1.4% 15.1% 57.6%
202 449 156
RI-2003
- - -
9 55 4
40.9% 14.5% 1.7%
0 14 25
0.0% 3.6% 11.1%
0 1 0
0.0% 0.2% 0.0%
3 70 14
13.6% 18.4% 6.2%
0 22 60
0.0% 5.8% 26.7%
0 4 0
0.0% 1.1% 0.0%
9 162 29
40.9% 42.7% 12.9%
1 51 92
4.5% 13.4% 41.1%
22 379 224
- - -
9 67 6
40.9% 16.2% 2.4%
0 19 43
0.0% 4.6% 17.6%
- - -
2 72 15
9.1% 17.4% 6.1%
0 19 53
0.0% 4.6% 21.8%
0 5 0
Na
t iona l Chengch i U
nive
rsi t
y
40
0.0% 1.2% 0.0%
10 173 31
45.4% 41.8% 12.7%
1 58 95
4.5% 14.0% 39.1%
22 413 243
- - -
8 66 6
40.0% 16.9% 2.5%
0 15 37
0.0% 3.8% 15.6%
- - -
0 32 7
0.0% 8.2% 2.9%
1 7 25
5.0% 1.7% 10.5%
0 4 0
0.0% 1.0% 0.0%
11 200 38
55.0% 51.2% 16.1%
0 66 123
0.0% 16.9% 52.1%
20 390 236
- - -
7 36 0
31.8% 8.5% 0.0%
0 9 11
0.0% 2.1% 4.9%
- - -
3 79 13
13.6% 18.8% 5.8%
0 16 39
0.0% 3.8% 17.5%
0 5 0
Na
t iona l Chengch i U
nive
rsi t
y
41
0.0% 1.1% 0.0%
11 208 36
50.0% 49.5% 16.2%
1 67 123
4.5% 15.9% 50.9%
22 420 222
- - -
8 52 4
33.3% 12.6% 1.7%
1 17 29
4.1% 4.1% 12.4%
- - -
1 39 7
4.1% 9.4% 3.0%
0 10 29
0.0% 2.4% 12.4%
0 5 0
0.0% 1.2% 0.0%
14 221 37
58.3% 53.6% 15.8%
0 68 127
0.0% 16.5% 54.5%
24 412 233
RI-1999RI-2003
RI-1999 20.4% RI-2003 0.7%
RI-1999 24.5% RI-1999 3.3%
RI-1999 50.8% RI-2003 57.6% RI-1999
54.6% RI-2003 61.9%
RI-1999 28.3% RI-2003 41.0% RI-1999 18.8%
RI-2003 34.6%
Na
t iona l Chengch i U
nive
rsi t
y
42
Michielutte1972
in school
Eckland1968
Haller1981
RI-1999 33.7%
RI-2003 25.4% RI-1999 66.2%
RI-2003 74.5% RI-1999 RI-2003
RI-1999 13.2%
RI-2003 0.0% RI-1999 37.3%
RI-2003 47.3% RI-1999 15.7% RI-2003
27.2%
RI-1999 RI-2003
RI-2003
RI-1999 71
RI-2003
Na
t iona l Chengch i U
nive
rsi t
y
43
RI-1999RI-2003
RI-2003
RI-1999
16-18
16RI-1999RI-2003
RI-1999 RI-2003
77 58
9.1% 8.1%
392 386
46.6% 53.7%
368 275
43.7% 38.2%
17RI-1999RI-2003
RI-1999
32 179 161
3.8% 21.4% 19.2%
45 213 207
5.4% 25.4% 24.7%
RI-2003
Na
t iona l Chengch i U
nive
rsi t
y
44
29 176 157
4.0% 24.5% 21.8%
29 210 118
4.0% 29.2% 16.4%
18RI-1999RI-2003
RI-1999
5 26 25
6.4% 6.9% 7.0%
6 18 29
7.8% 4.7% 8.1%
13 56 36
16.9% 14.8% 10.1%
19 81 50
24.7% 21.4% 14.0%
14 88 93
18.2% 23.2% 26.1%
20 110 123
26.0% 29.0% 34.6%
77 379 356
7 33 38
9.5% 8.7% 10.4%
4 29 38
5.4% 7.6% 10.4%
13 39 27
17.8% 10.2% 7.4%
13 54 42
17.8% 14.2% 11.6%
11 100 93
15.0% 26.3% 25.6%
25 124 124
34.2% 32.7% 34.2%
73 379 362
9 34 36
12% 9.1% 10.1%
7 27 37
Na
t iona l Chengch i U
nive
rsi t
y
45
9.3% 7.2% 10.4%
7 21 8
9.3% 5.6% 2.2%
5 18 13
6.6% 4.8% 3.6%
15 113 107
20.0% 30.2% 30.3%
32 161 152
42.6% 46.0% 43.1%
75 374 353
3 9 19
4.1% 23.5% 5.1%
4 21 15
5.4% 5.4% 4.1%
11 46 31
14.8% 12.0% 8.4%
10 50 35
13.5% 13.1% 9.5%
15 119 110
20.2% 31.1% 30.1%
31 137 156
41.8% 35.8% 42.6%
74 382 366
7 35 28
9.1% 9.1% 7.7%
6 28 33
7.7% 7.2% 9.1%
8 31 16
10.3% 8.1% 4.4%
5 33 24
6.4% 8.5% 6.6%
17 107 114
22.1% 27.7% 31.4%
34 151 147
44.1% 39.2% 40.6%
77 385 362
RI-2003
Na
t iona l Chengch i U
nive
rsi t
y
46
9 32 30
16.9% 9.3% 12.7%
3 19 16
5.6% 5.5% 6.8%
5 46 25
9.4% 13.4% 10.6%
9 65 23
16.9% 18.9% 9.7%
12 74 70
22.6% 21.5% 29.7%
15 107 71
28.3% 31.1% 30.2%
53 343 235
10 51 38
17.8% 13.6% 14.9%
4 27 17
7.1% 7.2% 6.6%
8 37 28
14.2% 9.8% 11.0%
7 62 21
12.5% 16.5% 8.2%
9 81 74
16.1% 21.6% 29.1%
18 116 76
32.1% 31.0% 29.9%
56 374 254
10 43 30
17.5% 12.1% 12.5%
5 25 22
8.7% 7.0% 9.1%
5 18 15
8.7% 5.1% 6.2%
3 24 8
5.2% 6.7% 3.3%
13 98 88
22.8% 27.6% 36.6%
21 147 77
36.8% 41.4% 32.1%
Na
t iona l Chengch i U
nive
rsi t
y
47
57 355 240
9 19 20
17.3% 5.2% 7.8%
0 8 7
0.0% 2.2% 2.7%
5 42 25
9.6% 11.6% 9.7%
9 50 20
17.3% 13.8% 7.8%
13 100 100
25.0% 27.7% 39.1%
16 142 84
30.7% 39.3% 32.8%
52 361 256
6 36 29
10.5% 9.9% 11.2%
3 23 16
5.2% 6.3% 6.2%
6 20 18
10.5% 5.5% 7.0%
5 25 13
8.7% 6.9% 5.0%
16 104 97
28.1% 28.8% 37.7%
21 153 84
36.8% 42.3% 32.6%
57 361 257
RI-1999 RI-2003
RI-1999 9.1% RI-2003 8.1%
RI-1999 43.7% RI-2003
38.2% RI-1999 46.6% RI-2003 53.7%
RI-1999 RI-2003
RI-1999 3.8% 5.4% RI-2003 4.0%
Na
t iona l Chengch i U
nive
rsi t
y
48
4.0% RI-1999 19.2% 24.7% RI-2003
21.8% 16.4% RI-1999 21.4% 25.4%
RI-2003 24.5% 29.2%
RI-2003 RI-1999
Na
t iona l Chengch i U
nive
rsi t
y
49
1999
Monshipouri199512
Mainwairing1992298
O`Donnell and Schmitter19869
Hsiao199271
O`Donnell and Schmitter198610
1950
1950
1968
1986
1994192-219
1987
201143
1996
Na
t iona l Chengch i U
nive
rsi t
y
50
RI-1999 RI-2003
PSFD
1996
1996 PSFD
1998 1999
8
1996
PSFD RI-1999 RI-2003
PSFD
PSFD
8 PSFD https://psfd.sinica.edu.tw/check.htm
https://psfd.sinica.edu.tw/check.htmNa
t iona l Chengch i U
nive
rsi t
y
51
9
1989144
1990179-180
200516
9
20009
Na
t iona l Chengch i U
nive
rsi t
y
52
RI-2003 RI-1999
1994
1999 RI-1999RI-2003
RI-1999
41 RI-2003 30
1996
1-2
Na
t iona l Chengch i U
nive
rsi t
y
53
Georg Sorensen 2003
2005
9 59-117
2006
19 2
255-280
1989
115-151
2005
1041-94
2011
2000
2459-88
1990
2009
4532-38
Na
t iona l Chengch i U
nive
rsi t
y
54
1999
11 4 475-528
2006
2007
34109-143
1994
1999
4131-173
1991
1994
1997
2003
200714735-40
2000
241-58
1993
4985-98
Na
t iona l Chengch i U
nive
rsi t
y
55
2008
1984
1987
2004
7 47-88
20028921-29
20071475-34
2005
2008
Bearden, William O. and Michael J. Etzel(1982). Reference Group Influence on
Product and Brand Purchase Decisions, Journal of Consumer Research, 9(2),
183-194.
Berk, Sarah F.(1985). The Gender Factory: The Apportionment of Work in American
Households. New York: Plenum Press.
Bielby, D. D. V. and Bielby W. T.(1984). Work Commitment Sex Role Attitudes and
Womens Employment, American Sociological Review, 49, 234-247.
Blackwell, Roger D., Paul W. Miniard and James F. Engel(2001). Consumer
javascript:;Na
t iona l Chengch i U
nive
rsi t
y
56
Behavior(9th edition). Ohio: Mike Roche.
Blood, Robert O. and Donald M. Wolfe(1960). Husbands and Wives: The Dynamics of
Married Living. New York: Free Press.
Bova, Russell(1997). Democracy and Liberty: The Cultural Connection. Journal of
Democracy, 8(1), 112-126.
Burr, Wesley R.(1973). Theory construction and the sociology of the family, New York:
Wiley-Interscience.
Centers, Richard, Bertram H. Raven and Aroldo Rodrigues(1971). Conjugal Power
Structure: A Reexamination. American Sociological Review, 36(2), 264-278.
Chen, Yu-Hua and Chin-Chun Yi(2006). Wifes Decision-Making Power in a Chinese
Context: A Marital Dyadic Perspective. Japanese Journal of Family Sociology,
17(2), 110-123.
Cromwell, R. E. and D. H. Olson(1975). Power in Families. New York: Halsted.
Dahl, Robert A.(1971). Polyarchy: Participation and Opposition. New Haven and
London: Yale University Press.
Dahl, Robert A.(1989). Democracy and its Critics. New Haven and London: Yale
University Press.
Diamond, Larry(1996). Is The Third Wave Over? Journal of Democracy, 7(3), 20-37.
Diamond, Larry(1999). Developing Democracy: Toward Consolidation. Johns Hopkins
University Press.
Eckland, Bruck K.(1968). Theories of Mate Selection, Eugenics Quarterly, 15(2),
71-84.
Na
t iona l Chengch i U
nive
rsi t
y
57
Eshleman J. Ross(1981). The Family: An Introduction(3rd Editon). Allyn and Bacon,
Inc.
Haller, Max(1981). Marriage, Women and Social Stratification: A Theoretical
Critique, American Journal of Sociology, 86, 766-795.
Hsiao, Hsin-Huang Michael(1992). The Rise of Social Movements and Civil Protests.
In Tun-Jen Cheng and Stephan Haggard(Eds). Political Change in Taiwan (57-72).
Boulder & London: Lynne Rienner Publishers.
Huntington, Samuel P.(1991). The Third Wave: Democratization in the Late Twentieth
Century. Norman and London: University of Oklahoma Press.
Karl, Terry Lynn(1996). Dilemmas of Democratization in Latin America. In Roderic
Ai Camp(Ed), Democracy in Latin America: Patterns and Cycles(21-46). Delawre: A
Scholarly Resources Inc.
Linz, Juan J.(1990). "Transitions to Democracy. Washington Quarterly, 13(3),
143164.
Mainwaring, Scott(1992). Transitions to Democracy and Democratic Consolidation:
Theoretical and Comparative Issues. In Scott Mainwaring, Guillermo ODonnell
and J. Samuel Valenzuela(Eds.). Issues in Democratic Consolidation(294-341).
Indiana: Uuniversity of Notre Dame Press.
McDonald, Gerald W.(1980). Family Power: The Assessment of a Decade of Theory
and Research. Journal of Marriage and Family, 42(4), 841-854.
Michielutte, Robert(1972). Trends in Educational Homogamy, Sociology of
Education, 45, 288-302.
Mirowsky, J.(1985). Depression and Marital Power: An Equity Model. American
Na
t iona l Chengch i U
nive
rsi t
y
58
Journal of Sociology, 91(3), 557-592.
Monshipouri, Mahmood(1995). Democratization, Liberalization & Human Rights in
the Third World. London: Lynne rienner publishers.
ODonnell, Guillermo and Philippe C. Schmitter(1986). Transitions from Authoritarian
Rule: Tentative Conclusions about Uncertain Democracies. Baltimore and London:
The Johns Hopkins University Press.
Olson, D. and J. DeFrain(2003). Marriages and Families: Intimacy, Diversity and
Strengths. New York: McGraw Hill.
Pedhazur, E. J.(1982). Multiple Regression in Behavioral Research(2nd ed.), Fort Worth:
Holt, Rinehart & Winston.
Rodman, Hyman(1970). Marital power and the theory of resources in cultural context,
Detroit: Merrill-Palmer Institute.
Safilios-Rothschild, Constantina(1970). The Study of Family Power Structure: A
Review 1960-1969. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 32(4), 539-552.
Sorensen, Georg(1993). Democracy and Democratization: Processes and Prospects in
a Changing World. Oxford: Westview Press.
Sprecher, S.(1998). Social exchange theories and sexuality. Journal of Sex Research,
35(1), 32-44.
Steil, J. M.(1997). Martial Equality: Its Elationship to The Well-being of Husbands and
Wives. Thousnad Oaks, Calif.: Sage.
Warner, Rebecca L., Gary R. Lee and Janet Lee(1986). Social Organization, Spousal
Resources and Marital Power: A Cross-Cultural Study. Journal of Marriage and
the Family, 48(1), 121-128.
Na
t iona l Chengch i U
nive
rsi t
y
59
Whyte, Martin King(1995). From Arranged Marriaged to Love Matches in Urban
China, in Family Formation and Dissolution: Perspectives from East and West,
edited by Chin-Chun Yi. Taipei: Academia Sinica.
Na
t iona l Chengch i U
nive
rsi t
y
60
1972-76 6 5
1976-77 5 5
1977-79 5 4
1979-80 5 5
1980-81 5 6
1981-87 5 5
1987-88 5 4
1988-89 5 3
1989-90 4 3
1990-91 3 3
1991-92 5 5
1992-93 3 3
1993-94 4 4
1994-96 3 3
Na
t iona l Chengch i U
nive
rsi t
y
61
1996-98 2 2
1998-00 2 2
2000-02 1 2
2002-04 2 2
2004-05 2 1
2005-06 1 1
2006-07 2 1
2007-08 2 1
2008-09 2 1
2009-10 1 2
2010-13 1 2
http://www.freedomhouse.org/
A.
1.
(1)
(
http://www.freedomhouse.org/Na
t iona l Chengch i U
nive
rsi t
y
62
)
(2)
(3)
(4)
(5)
(6)
(7) /
(8)
(9) (
)
(10)
2.
(1)
(2)
Na
t iona l Chengch i U
nive
rsi t
y
63
(3)
(4)
(5)
(6)
(7) /
(8)
(9) (
)
(10)
3.
(1) (
)
(2)
(3)
(4)
Na
t iona l Chengch i U
nive
rsi t
y
64
(5) (
)
(6)
( gerrymandering)
(7) (
)
B.
1.
(1)
(2)
(3)
2.
(1)
(2)
(3)
Na
t iona l Chengch i U
nive
rsi t
y
65
3.
(1) /
(2)
(3)
(4)
4.
(1)
(2)
(3)
C.
1.
(1)
(2)
(3)
Na
t iona l Chengch i U
nive
rsi t
y
66
2.
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
(5)
(6)
(7) (TICPI)
3. between elections
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
(5)
Na
t iona l Chengch i U
nive
rsi t
y
67
(6)
1.
(1)
(2)
(3)
2.
(1)
(2)
(3)
D.
1. (
)
(1)
(2) (
)
Na
t iona l Chengch i U
nive
rsi t
y
68
(3)
(4)
(5)
(6)
(7)
(8)
2.
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
(5)
(6)
3.
(1)
Na
t iona l Chengch i U
nive
rsi t
y
69
(2)
(3)
4. ()
5.
(1)
(2)
E.
1.
(1) ()
(2)
(3)
(4)
2. ()
(1)
(2)
(3)
Na
t iona l Chengch i U
nive
rsi t
y
70
(4)
3.
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
(5)
(6) ()
F.
1.
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
(5)
2.
Na
t iona l Chengch i U
nive
rsi t
y
71
(1) ()
(2)
(3)
(4)
(5)
(6)
(7)
3.
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
(5)
(6)
4.
(1) ()
Na
t iona l Chengch i U
nive
rsi t
y
72
(2)
(3) ()
(4)
(5) (
)
(6) 1951 1967
G.
1.
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
2.
(1)
(2)
Na
t iona l Chengch i U
nive
rsi t
y
73
(3)
(4)
(5)
3.
(1) ()
(2)
(3)
(4) ()
(5)
(6) //
4.
Na
t iona l Chengch i U
nive
rsi t
y
74
Na
t iona l Chengch i U
nive
rsi t
y
75
http://www.freedomhouse.org/2011
71-81
http://www.freedomhouse.org/Na
t iona l Chengch i U
nive
rsi t
y
76
1996.2
1996.8
1996.12
1997.8
1999.12-2000.5
1988.6
1990.3
1990.10
1995.2 1016-1020
1995.2
1996.1
1997.3
1997.5
Na
t iona l Chengch i U
nive
rsi t
y
77
1997.6
1998.3
1993.1
1993.3
1993.5
1997.3
1999.6
2000.5
2006