本文主要的目的在於爬梳社會科學方法論中因果機制分析的發展和演進，並進一步評估政治學研究中如何運用因果機制來進行解釋以及討論相關的解釋效力的問題。本文將具體評析政治學國際關係領域中民主和平論之論點，以此來衡量政治學運用因果機制解釋的優勢和侷限。因果機制研究層面上，本文聚焦在機制的定義和類型、機制的觀察性、因果機制與因果關係、法則和中介變數的差異、機制的層次、機制的運作和測量、機制的路徑圖。因果機制運用層面上，本文側重於民主和平論的源起和演進、 民主和平論的重要論述、對於民主和平論的挑戰以及現實主義因果機制的補充解釋。最後，本文針對民主和平論的相關論辯提出因果機制的補充解釋。
The main purpose of this paper is to parse out the development and evolution of causal mechanism and to further evaluate how political research adopts the method of causal mechanism to explain and discuss the explanatory effect in the field of qualitative methods. Our focus is to shed light on the causal mechanism of democratic peace theory in the field of international relations and to gauge its advantages and restraints. On the dimension of causal mechanism, this paper focuses on the definition of mechanism, observation of causal mechanism, the difference between causal mechanism, causality, laws and intervening variables, level of analysis, operationalization and measurement of causal mechanism, and roadmap of causal mechanism. This paper applies the analysis of causal mechanism to the origin and evolution of democratic peace theory, the challenges of realism over democratic peace theory, and the responses from democratic peace theory. Finally, we offer an alternative explanation to the debate between democratic peace theory and realism.
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..
不論從當前的理論或是實務發展來看，中國在2010年以來的對外主要 作為均以其一帶一路倡議以及亞洲基礎設施投資銀行作為分析要點，而美 國的對應則聚焦在歐巴馬總統開始，並在川普與拜登時期成熟的印太戰略 上。學界與政策界對兩國互動的研析，不外乎是基於這樣的戰略架構討 論。不過，中國如何在近年發展之中逐漸形成一套在亞洲地區的策略，用 以應對美國及其盟友的印太戰略，目前並沒有一套較完整的架構解析。本 文認為，雖然在政策偏向、對外原則以及價值觀等面向，中國並沒有採用 美國及其盟國所主張的「印太戰略」..
From either theory or practice, the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) and Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB) have been identified as two major foreign behaviors of China. To respond, the United States adopts the Indo Pacific Strategy which started in the Obama administration and developed in Trump and Biden administrations. Though scholars and policy practitioners apply the aforementioned strategies to analyze US-China relations, the understanding of China’s strategy in Asia is still underdeveloped. This paper argues that while ..
請輸入想查詢的期刊標題、關鍵字、作者相關資訊. Please enter the journal title, keywords, and author-related information you want to query.