近年來民主政治在全球所遭遇的挑戰可說是前所未有，無論是Diamond指出的民主衰退現象，還是 Foa與Mounk提出的民主解體概念，無疑都是對民主政治的示警。然而西方學者近年的研究發現是否也出現在台灣？台灣民眾對民主是否堅信不疑？有哪些可能的因素影響著台灣民眾對民主的支持？
本研究旨在探討2018~2019年間台灣年輕網民對民主的支持是否受到經濟因素及中國因素影響，透過網路調查作為實證檢驗的資料來源，並提出假設建構絕對支持民主之模型，第一階段先以卡方檢定檢驗自變數與絕對支持民主間之相關性，第二階段再以二元勝算對數迴歸分析驗證本研究之假設，檢視各自變數是否如筆者預期地影響台灣選民對民主的絕對支持。
研究結果發現：經濟現況評價、統一後的經濟生活評價以及是否接受條件式統一，均為顯著影響台灣民眾絕對支持民主的因素，本文的發現再次確認經濟與中國因素對台灣民眾民主支持的影響力。

In recent years, democratic politics globally have faced unprecedented challenges. Whether it is the democratic recession phenomenon pointed out by Diamond or the concept of democratic deconsolidation proposed by Foa and Mounk, they undoubtedly serve as warnings to democratic politics. However, have the findings of Western scholars in recent years also emerged in Taiwan? Do the Taiwanese people have unwavering faith in democracy? What are the possible factors influencing the support for democracy among the Taiwanese population?
This study aims to explore whether the support for democracy among young Taiwanese netizens between 2018 and 2019 is influenced by economic factors and the China factor. Online surveys are used as the data source for empirical verification and hypothesis construction. The first stage employs chi-square tests to examine the correlation between independent variables and absolute support for democracy. In the second stage, binary logistic regression analysis is conducted to validate the hypotheses of this study, examining whether the variables have the expected impact on Taiwanese voters' absolute support for democracy.
The research findings reveal that the evaluation of economic conditions, post-unification economic life evaluation, and acceptance of conditional unification are all significant factors influencing Taiwanese people's absolute support for democracy. These findings once again confirm the influence of economic and China-related factors on the support for democracy among the Taiwanese population.

目 錄
論文審定書……………………………………………………………………………………… i
誌謝………………………………………………………………………………………………… ii
中文摘要……………………………………………………………………………………….…iii
英文摘要………………………………………..………………………………………….……iv
第 一 章 緒 論 ………………………………………………………………………… 1
第一節 研究動機與目的………………………………………………………1
第二節 章節安排………………………………………………………………….4
第 二 章 文 獻 回 顧 ………………………………………………………………5
第一節 民主支持…………………………………………………………………..5
第二節 經濟、中國因素與民主支持……………………………………8
第三節 其他影響民主支持因素………………………………………… 11
第四節 小結…………………………………………………………………………16
第 三 章 研 究 設 計………………………………………………………………18
第一節 研究流程與研究架構 …………………………………………...19
第二節 資料來源與研究限制……………………………………………..21
第三節 假設、變數與測量 …………………………………………..…..25
第四節 分析方法…………………………………………………………………42
第 四 章 研 究 發 現………………………………………………………………43
第一節 相關性檢驗…………………………………………………………....43
第二節 二元勝算對數分析的結果 ……………………………………51
第 五 章 結 論………………………………………………………………………… 58
參考文獻…………………………………………………………………………………….…65
一、 中文部分 ………………………………………………………………………65
二、 英文部分 ………………………………………………………………………67
附錄 …………………………………………………………………………………………….73
附錄一 資料編碼與資料分析說明………………………………………………73

中文部分
王靖興、孫天龍，2005，〈台灣民眾民主政治評價影響因素之分析〉，《臺灣民主季刊》，2(3)：55-79。
林聰吉，2007，〈政治支持與民主鞏固〉，《政治科學論叢》，(34)：71-104。
林聰吉，2007，〈解析台灣的民主政治：以民主支持度與滿意度為觀察指標〉，《選舉研究》，14(1)：61-84。
林瓊珠，2012，〈穩定與變動：台灣民眾的「台灣人/中國人」認同與統獨立場之分析〉，《選舉研究》，19(1)：97-127。
林奕孜，2021，〈臺灣所得分配與民主制度的評價－是異例嗎？〉，《臺灣民主季刊》，18(4)：43-74。
吳親恩，2007，〈台灣民眾的政治信任差異：政治人物、政府與民主體制三個面向的觀察〉，《臺灣政治學刊》，11(1)：147-200。
吳親恩，2009，〈經濟議題與民主體制評價--東亞國家的觀察〉，《臺灣民主季刊》，6(1)：1-39。
邱俊廷，2018，〈中國經濟發展與兩岸統一：以2015年兩岸關係與國家安全民意調查探討〉，中國政治學會2018年會暨「智慧國家的崛起：科技對安全、治理與發展的衝擊與契機」國際學術研討會發表之論文，10月20日至10月21日，台北：國立台灣大學。
胡佛、朱雲漢，2008，「第二波『亞洲民主動態調查』」，行政院國家科學委員會專案計畫，台北：國立台灣大學東亞民主研究中心。
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〉，《臺灣政治學刊》，17(2)：165-230。
黃信豪，2011，〈民主態度的類型：台灣民眾兩次政黨輪替後的分析〉，《選舉研究》，18(1)：1-34。
黃信豪，2014，〈再探台灣民眾的政治信任－檢驗「批判性公民」解釋〉，《臺灣民主季刊 》，11(1)：153-193。
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〉，《選舉研究》，6(1)：41-72。
張佑宗，2011，〈選舉結果、政治學習與民主支持－兩次政黨輪替後台灣公民在民主態度與價值的變遷〉，《臺灣民主季刊》，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。
盛治仁，2003，〈台灣民眾民主價值及政府治理信任感研究—黨輪替代前的比較〉，《選舉研究》，10(1)：115-169。
陳文俊，1998，〈台灣地區學生的政治文化：中、大學生的政治態度與台灣民主化之前景〉，《國立中山大學社會科學季刊》，1(3)：23-60。
陳光輝，2010，〈民主經驗與民主價值－兩個世代台灣大學生之比較〉，《臺灣民主季刊》，7(4)：1-45。
陳義彥、陳陸輝，2002，〈台灣大學生政治定向的持續與變遷〉發表於2001年台灣選舉與民主化調查國際學術研討會。臺北：國立政治大學選舉研究中心。
陳陸輝，2003，〈政治信任、施政表現與民眾對台灣民主的展望〉，《台灣政治學刊》，7(2)：149-188。
陳陸輝，2019，〈台灣的民主治理與政治支持〉，《東亞研究》，50(1):119-152。
陳陸輝、陳奕伶，2014，〈兩岸關係與臺灣民眾政治支持的解析〉，《民主與治理》，1(1)：87-109。
游清鑫、蕭怡靖，2007，〈以新選民的政治態度論台灣民主政治的未來〉，《臺灣民主季刊》，4(3)：109-151。
趙永茂，1995，〈九七後香港對台灣的可能影響〉，《問題與研究》，34(4)：45-57。
趙永茂，2002，〈台灣地方菁英的民主價值取向──一九九三年與二○○一年調查結果之比較分析〉，《政治科學論叢》，(17)：57-80。
蔡佳泓，2009，〈台灣民眾的民主評價：以2004年為例的驗證性因素分析〉，《政治科學論叢》，3(1)：151-184。
蔡昌言，2011，〈民主鞏固因素之影響性分析-臺灣與其他東亞民主國家的比較〉，《問題與研究》，50(4)：1-29。
劉正山，2018，《民意調查資料的R實戰手冊》，台北市：五南出版

英文部分
Anderson, Christopher J., and Christine Guillory. 1997. “Political Institution and Satisfaction with Democracy: A Cross-National Analysis of Consensus and Majoritarian System.” American Political Science Review, 91(1): 66-81.
Ake, Claude. 1993. “The Unique Case of African Domocracy.” Internation Affairs, 69(2): 239-244.
Ake, Claude. 1996. Democracy and Development in Africa. Washington, DC: Bookings Institution Press.
Beetham, David. 1999. Democracy and Human Rights. Cambridge: Policy Press.
Bratton Michael. 1998. “Second Elections in Africa.” Journal of Democracy, 9(3): 51-66.
Bratton Michael and Mattes Robert. 2001. “Support for Democracy in Africa: Intrinsic or Instrumental?” British Journal of Political Science, 31(3): 447-474.
Bratton Michael, Mattes Robert, and Gyimah-Boadi E. 2005. Public Opinion, Democracy, and Market Reform in Africa. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Bratton Michael, and Mattes Robert . 2007. “Learning about Democracy in Africa: Awareness, Performance, and Experience.” American Journal of Political Science, 51(1): 192-217.
Brennan Jason. 2016. Against Democracy. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Canache, Damarys, Jeffery J. Mondak, and Mitchell A. Seligson . 2001. “Meaning and Measurement in Cross-National Research on Satisfaction with Democracy.” Public Opinion Quarterly, 65(4): 506-528.
Clarke Harold D., Nitish Dutt, and Allan Korngerg. 1993. “The Political Economy of Attitudes toward Polity and Society in Western European Democracies.” Journal of Politics, 55(4): 998-1021.
Diamond Larry J., 1994. “Rethinking civil society: Toward democratic consolidation.” Journal of democracy, 5(3): 4-17.
Diamond Larry J.,1999. Developing democracy: Toward consolidation. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.
Diamond Larry J., 2015. “Facing Up to the Democratic Recession.” Journal of Democracy, 26(1):141-155.
Daltorn, Russell J. 1999. “Political Support in Advanced Industrial Democracies.” Critical Citizens: Global Support for Democratic Government, ed. Pippa Norris. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Dahl, Robert. 1971. Polyarchy. New Haven: Yale University Press.
Easton David. 1965. A Systems Analysis of Political Life. New York: Wiley.
Easton David. 1975. “A Re-Assessment of the Concept of Political Support.” British Journal of Political Science, 5(4): 435-437.
Elster, Jon. 1993. “The Necessity and Impossibility of Simultaneous Economic and Political Reform.” Constitutionalism and Democracy: Transitions in the Contemporary World, eds. Douglas Greenberg, Stanley N. Katz, Melanie Beth Oliviero and Steven C. Wheatley. New York: Oxford University Press.
Fukuyama Francis. 1992. The End of History and the Last Man. New York: Free Press.
Gibsom James L. 1996. “A Mile Wide But an Inch Deep: The Structure of Democratic Commitments in the Former USSR.” American Journal of Political Science, 40(2): 396-420.
Greskovits, Bela. 1998. The Political Economy of Protest and Patience: East European and Latin American Transformations Compared. Budapest: Central European University Press.
Gunther, Richard, Diamandouros Nikiforos P., and Hans Jürgen Puhle. 1996. “Democratic Consolidation: Debate–O’Donnell’s “Illusions”: A Rejoinder.” Journal of Democracy, 7(4): 151-159.
Huntington, Samuel. 1991. The Third Wave: Democratization in the Late Twentieth Century. Oklahoma: University of Oklahoma Press.
Inglehart, Ronald. 2003. “How Solid is Mass Support for Democracy and How do we Measure it?” PS: Political Science and Politics, 36(1): 51-57.
Inglehart, Ronald, and Welzel Christian. 2005. Modernization, Cultural Change, and Democracy: The Human Development Sequence. New York: Cambridge University Press.
King Gary, Ori Rosen, Martin Tanner, and Alexander F. Wagner. 2008 “Ordinary Economic Voting Behavior in the Extraordinary Election of Adolf Hitler.” The Journal of Economic History, 68(4): 951-996.
Kitschelt, Herbert. 1992. “The Formation of Party Systems in East Central Europe.” Politics and Society, 20(1): 7-50.
Lagos, Marta. 2001. “Between Stability and Crisis in Latin America.” Journal of Democracy, 12(1): 137-145.
Linde, Jonas and Joakim Ekman. 2003. “Satisfaction with democracy: A note on a frequently used indicator in comparative politics.” European Journal of Political Research, 42(3): 391-408.
Linz Juan J., and Alfred Stepan. 1996. Problems of Democratic Transition and Consolidation: Southern Europe, South America, and Post-Communist Europe. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.
Listhaug, O. 1998. “The dynamics of trust in politicians.” Citizens and the State (pp. 261–297). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Lipset, Seymour M. 1959. “Some Social Requisites of Democracy, Economic Development and Political Legitimacy.” American Political Science Review, 53(1): 69-105
Misher, William and Richard Rose. 1997. “Trust, Distrust, and Skepticism: Popular Evaluations of Civil and Political Institutions in Post-Communist Societies.” Journal of Democracy, 59(2): 418-451.
Misher, William, and Richard Rose. 2005. “What Are the Political Consequences of Trust? A Test of Cultural and Institutional Theories in Russia.” Comparative Political Studies, 38(9): 1050-1078.
Norris Pippa. 1999. “Institution Explanation for Political Support,” in Pippa Norris ed., Critical Citizens: Global Support for Democratic Government (pp. 217-235). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Pereira, Luiz Carlos Bresser, José María Maravall, and Adam Przeworski. 1993. Economic Reforms in New Democracies: A Social-Democratic Approach, New York: Cambridge University Press.
Przeworski, Adam. 1991. Democracy and the Market: Political and Economic Reforms in Eastern Europe and Latin America. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Przeworski, Adam and Fernando Limongi .1997. “Development and Democracy.”In Democracy's Victory and Crisis, ed Axel Hadenius. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Przeworski, Adam, Michael Alvarez, Jose A. Cheibub, and Fernando Limongi. 1996. “What Makes Democracies Endure?” Journal of democracy,7(1): 39-55.
Richard Rose, Mishler Willian, and Haerpfer Christian. 1998. Democracy and Its Alternatives: Understanding Post-Communist Societies. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.
Rokeach M. 1968. Beliefs, Attitudes, and Values, A Theory of Organization and Change. California: Jossey-Bass Inc.
Rose-Ackerman, Susan. 2005. From Elections to Democracy: Building Accountable Government in Hungary and Poland. London: Cambridge University Press.
Schumpeter Joseph A. 1976. Capitalism, Socialism, Democracy. London: Allen and Unwin.
Schedler, Andreas. 1997. “Concepts of Democratic Consolidation.” Paper presented at the 1997 Annual Meeting of the Latin American Studies Association (LASA), April 17-19, Continental Plaza Hotel, Guadalajara, Mexico.
Schedler, Andreas. 1998. “What is Democratic Consolidation?” Journal of Democracy, 9(2): 91-107.
Schedler, Andreas, and Rodolfo Sarsfield. 2007. “Democrats with adjectives: Linking direct and indirect measures of democratic support.” European journal of political research, 46(5): 637-659.
Svolik, Milan. 2008. “Authoritarian Reversals and Democratic Consolidation.” American Political Science Review, 102(2): 153-168.
Tocqueville Alexis. 1996. Democracy in America. New York: Harper.
Wagner, Alexander F., Schneider, Friedrich, and Martin Halla. 2009. “The quality of institutions and satisfaction with democracy in Western Europe -- A panel analysis.” European Journal of Political Economy, 25(1): 30-41.
Wright, Joseph. 2008. “Political Competition and Democratic Stability in New Democracies.” British Journal of Political Science, 38: 221-245.
Yascha Mounk, and Roberto Stefan Foa. 2016. “The Danger of Deconsolidation: The Democratic Disconnect.” Journal of Democracy, 27(3): 5-17.