長久以來，質性研究遭受過於主觀與不夠嚴謹的批評。紮根理論因應這樣的氛圍而生，紮根理論之研究途徑企圖藉由發展系統性的分析模式以理解「過程」、「情境」及「行動」等概念，並對上述批判作出反駁。然而，因為 Strauss 與 Corbin 兩位原作者在論述上的衝突，開啟了一連串對於概念性與方法論上的爭辯與困惑。因此，本文企圖重新審視紮根理論的不同途徑以便釐清其認識論上的矛盾。同時，本文建議以不同「情境」作為驅動個人行動的主要論述，以便對「譯碼典範」作出修正。最後，我..

Qualitative research has been criticized for the lack of objectivity and scientific rigor. In response to such criticism, grounded theory emerged as a philosophical and analytical approach to studying the process, action, and context of social phenomena. Nevertheless, the controversy between Strauss and Corbin, the founders of grounded theory, has provoked never-ending academic debates. Confusions are inevitably derived respectively from both theoretical foundations and methodological applications. This research is to clarify..

自 Dittmer 開啟戰略三角的國際政治理論後，三邊戰略探討便成為頗具詮釋力的理論模型。從冷戰時期的「美、蘇、中」戰略三角到近期的其它戰略三角，如「美、中、歐盟」、「美、中、印度」等等，族衍甚繁。 然而在東亞區域間的「美、中、台」戰略三角，隨著「中國崛起」的世界性影響與美國的東亞區域霸權穩定與利益，更使「美、中、台」戰略三角凸顯其重要性與區域霸權穩定或轉移的關鍵。以「美、蘇、中」戰略三角為立論基礎的 Dittmer 戰略三角論，是基於..

Since Lowell Dittmer proposed the theory of strategic triangle, the theory has become a powerful explanatory model that developed various triangles from the US-Soviet Union-China strategic triangle in the Cold War to the other more recent triangles like the US-China-EU and the US-China- India. Among various triangles, the US-China-Taiwan triangle has evolved into a relatively more critical one in terms of its impact on the regional hegemonic stability or shift in East Asia due to the rise of China that is shaking the US hegem..

傳統國際關係研究在討論霸權的相關課題時，多是探索霸權相對權力優勢的消長，認為失去權力優勢的霸權，將難逃新興國家的挑戰，霸權交替萌起於無可避免的霸權戰爭。國關學界依順國際政治是一種權力競爭的思路，多是以物質權力作為評量霸權的基準，相對忽視權威暨治理正當性等因素在構成霸業的作用，進而忽略霸權領導的治理權威，霸權如何維繫霸業的討論，更限縮在有限的強制宰制，忽視正當性對強化霸權統御的作用。 本文試圖檢驗權威在霸權治理過程中所扮演的角色與作用，以..

IR studies on hegemony have paid much attention on the relative decline and uprising of powers, which has constituted the perspective that the factors of uneven-growth will cause the downfall of hegemony and the rising power will replace the old one after the former poses great challenges to the declining hegemon and wins the hegemonic war. Though the term of hegemony has deeply implied the characters of leadership, IR generally defines the hegemony as an international order within which one state constitute her dominance wit..

自 90 年代中期以來，學界對於恐怖主義的研究正日益深化，反恐措施也推陳出新。不過，恐怖主義攻擊卻未因此減少，反而從過去盛行的中東地區和發展中國家蔓延到威權的前蘇聯各國以及已開發國家。參與者也從過去的反殖民建國訴求者，擴大為宗教和其他激進運動的獻身者;手段上更普遍地採取自殺攻擊，而不在乎組織形象聲名狼藉和人員的損失。似乎強大的國家，其安全與反擊措施越嚴厲，越激發攻擊者的鬥志。這種「越挫越奮」的異常現象，對傳統的國關理論構成了不小的挑戰。 ..

National security is traditionally comprehended in terms of the rationalist approach, of which the physical boundaries and the static “Self” of nation states are taken for granted. The concept of “security dilemma” is accordingly understood as the conflicting tendency between nations in the process of defense build-up. However, this article argues that another type of “security dilemma” should not be ignored: the more the units increase its physical capabilities, the less secure they are, d..

從印度和巴基斯坦在 1998 年決定進行「全面對話」(Composite Dialogue)，到 2004 年 2 月印巴「全面對話」正式開展，期間受到兩國情勢及事件的阻撓，並在 2006 年 7 月中斷數月。印度和巴基斯坦也花很多時間和精力在討論對話條件以及所包括的議題。本文的焦點為 2003 年及 2006 年 「全面對話」兩次復談協商的過程。本文將「全面對話」復談協商過程視為協調賽局，並分析、檢驗內部因素與外部壓力如何影響印巴對於復談協商的意願、相關合..

India and Pakistan agreed to undertake “Composite Dialogue” in 1998. However, the dialogue did not take place substantially until February 2004. In the interim, the two countries were deterred from launching the dialogue officially by various kinds of domestic situations and events. In July of 2006, the dialogue was disrupted again for several months due to terrorism. In the meantime, India and Pakistan spent a lot of time and efforts in negotiating the conditions for the resumption of the dialogue and issues to b..