本文針對2000年5月20日以後到2008年3月22日之前的候選人支持度民調，利用一階自身相關迴歸模型，藉由探究各種因素的影響，找出影響泛藍與泛綠候選人民調支持度的可能原因，並進而探究這些原因對雙方支持度差異的影響，試圖解釋雙方陣營之間差距的波動。
為探究民調支持度及差異的變化，本文蒐集了上述時間點內的許多重要事件，利用對事件的分類，將之分為六項（政府施政、經濟、兩岸與統獨、候選人個人議題、政黨與其他），一一檢視各類事件的影響程度，並加入了媒體機構效應、候選人提名與否以及選舉期別的不同等因素，以及事件在經過時間的影響之下，對民調支持度的變化原因作一闡述。
研究結果發現，媒體立場對於民調結果的影響並不明顯。而候選人被提名與否會影響候選人支持度的不同，不同的選舉期間的民調對於泛藍候選人支持度與雙方陣營的差異是存在著相異性的。
此外對藍綠雙方支持度皆有影響的議題為兩岸與統獨議題，但實際上影響雙方差距變化程度的卻是候選人個人議題。
而當政府施政議題與兩岸統獨議題越接近民調時間時，對於民調支持度的變化作用力會越大。

This research attempts to find out the possible reasons which affect to the polling supports of pan-blue and pan-green’s presidential candidates by first-order autoregressive model since May 20th 2000 to March 22nd 2008. We explore the effect of these factors and how the factors to affect the degree of both candidates’ supports. We try to explain the fluctuating of both sides’ degree.
To exploring the change of the polling supports and degree, this research collects many significant events during the said period. We view the degree of each category’s effect by sorting out government’s policy, economy, ideologies of independence and unification, the personal issues of candidates, parties’ issue and others to explain the reasons of polling supports’ change in addition I add the effect of media organ, candidates nominating or not, the difference of each election, and the time effect.
From the results of this research, the effect of media positions for polling outcomes is not significant, but the candidates nominating or not and the difference of each election affect to pan-blue’s supports and both sides’ degree.
Besides, the issue of ideologies of independence and unification influences to pan-blue and pan-green’s candidates, but the candidates personal issues affects the change of the both sides’ degree.
When the events of government policy and ideologies of independence and unification are happened more nearly at the polling time, the effect to the change of the polling supports will be greater.

第一章 緒論…………………………………………………………………………1
第一節 研究動機………………………………………………………………1
第二節 研究目的………………………………………………………………4
第三節 研究問題………………………………………………………………6
第四節 章節安排………………………………………………………………7
第二章 文獻整理……………………………………………………………………8
第一節 社會心理學途徑的研究發展…………………………………………8
第二節 國內針對2004年與2008年總統選舉的研究……………………..16
第三節 文獻檢討……………………………………………………………..20
第三章 研究設計與研究方法……………………………………………………..26
第一節 研究假設與變項測量………………………………………………..26
第二節 研究方法……………………………………………………………..34
第三節 資料來源……………………………………………………………..36
第四章 資料處理與分析…………………………………………………………..38
第一節 資料處理與描述……………………………………………………..38
第二節 敘述性統計…………………………………………………………..46
第三節 模型結果分析………………………………………………………..50
第五章 結論………………………………………………………………………..77
第一節 研究發現……………………………………………………………..77
第二節 研究限制與貢獻……………………………………………………..80
參考文獻……………………………………………………………………………..82

中文部份

Damodar N. Gujarati著，費劍平、孫春霞譯，謝京叡審訂，2009，《計量經濟學（下）：第四版》，台北市：縱橫圖書出版

林茂文，2006，《時間數列分析與預測：管理與財經應用三版》，台北市：華泰出版社

施純純、徐永明，2002，〈報紙議題、事件與民意的流動：以台灣2000年總統選舉為例〉，《台灣政治學刊》，第六期：241-285

徐火炎，2005，〈認知動員、文化動員與台灣2004年總統大選的選民投票行為－選舉動員類型的初步探討〉，《台灣民主季刊》，第二卷，第四期：31-66

張佑宗，2006，〈選舉事件與選民的投票抉擇：以台灣2004年總統選舉為分析對象〉，《東吳政治學報》，第二十二期：121-160

黃秀端，2005，〈候選人形象、候選人情感溫度計、與總統選民投票行為〉，《台灣民主季刊》，第二卷，第四期：1-30

楊亦農，2005，《時間序列分析：經濟與財務上之應用》，台北：雙葉書廊

鄭夙芬、陳陸輝、劉嘉薇，2005，〈2004年總統選舉中的候選人因素〉，《台灣民主季刊》，第二卷，第二期：31-70

蔡佳泓、徐永明、黃琇庭，2007，〈兩極化政治：解釋台灣2004總統大選〉，《選舉研究》，第十四卷，第一期：1-31

英文部分

Abramson, Paul R. 1983. Political Attitudes in America: Formation and Changes. San Francisco: W. H. Freeman and Company Press.

Budge﹐I..﹐Crewe﹐I.﹐and Farile﹐D. eds. 1976.Party Identification and Beyond. New York：John Wiley ＆ Sons

Campbell, Angus., Philip E. Converse, Warren E. Miller, and Donald E. Stokes. 1960. The American Voter. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.

Converse, P. E. 1964. The Nature of Belief System in Mass Publics. In D. E. Apter（Ed.）, Ideology and Discontent. New York: Free﹐206-261

Dalton, Russell J. 1984. “Cognitive Mobilization and Partisan Dealignment in Advanced Industrial Democracies.”Journal of Politics, Vol. 46:264-84.

Dalton, Russell J. 1996. Citizen Politic: Public Opinion and Political Parties in Advanced Industrial Democracies. 2nd ed. Chatham, NJ: Chatham House.

Danver, David. 2003. Elections and Voters in Britain. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.

Edward, G. Carmines, and James, A. Stimson. 1986. “On the Structure and Sequence of Issue Evolution.”American Political Science Review, Vol. 80, No. 3:901-20

Fiorina, Morris P. 1981. Retrospective Voting in American National Elections. New Haven, Conn: Yale University Press.

Gelman, Andrew, and Gary King. 1993. “Why are American Presidential Election Campaign Polls so Variable When Votes Are so Predictable？” British Journal of Political Science, Vol. 23, No. 1: 409-51.

George, Alexander L., and Andrew Bennett. 2005. Case Studies and Theory Development in the Social Science. Cambridge, MA and London, England: MIT Press.

George, Alexander L., and Timothy J. McKeown. 1985. “Case Studies and Theories of Organizational Decision Making.” Advances in Information Processing in Organizations 2: 21-58.

Grag﹐D.﹐Adams. 1997. “Abortion：Evidence of an Issue Evolution.” American Journal of Political Science, Vol. 41, No. 3:718-737

Himmelveit﹐H. T.﹐P. Humphreys and M. Jaeger.1985. How Voter Decide. Milton Keynes：Open University Press.

Inglehart, Ronald. 1970. “Cognitive Mobilization and European Identity.”Comparative Politics. Vol. 3, No.1:45-70.

Inglehart, Ronald. 1977. The Silent Revolution：Changing Values and Political Styles Among Western Publics. Princeton：Princeton University Press.

Inglehart, Ronald. 1990. Cultural Shift in Advanced Industrial Society. Princeton：Princeton University Press.

Kelly, Stanley, Jr. and Todd W. Mirer. 1974. “The Simple Act of Voting.”American Political Science Review, Vol. 68, No. 2:572-91

Lodge, Milton, and Patrick Stroh. 1995. “Inside the Mental Voting Booth: An Impression-Driven Process Model of Candidate Evaluation.”In Shanto Iyengar and William J. McGuire（eds.）, Explorations in Political Psychology （pp.225-63）. Durham and London: Duke University Press.

Luttbeg, Norman R., and Michael M. Gant. 1995. American Electoral Behavior: 1952-1992. 2nd ed. Itasca, Illinois: F. E. Peacock Publisher Inc.

Markus, Gregory B., and Philip E. Converse. 1979. “A Dynamic Simultaneous Equation Model of Electoral Choice.”American Political Science Review, Vol. 73, No. 4:1055-70.

Milbrath, L., and Goel, M. L. 1977. Plitical Participation. Chicago: Rand McNally.

Miller, Arthur H., Martin P. Wattenberg, and Oksana Malanchuk. 1986. “Schematic Assessments of Presidential Candidates.”American Political Science Review, Vol. 80,No. 2:521-40.

Miller, Warren E., and J. Merrill Shanks. 1996. The New American Voter. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Neimi, Richard G., Herbert F. Weisberg. 1993. Classics in Voting Behavior. Washington, DC: Congressional Quarterly Press.

Page, Benjamin I., and Calvin C. Jones. 1979. “Reciprocal Effects of Policy Preferencs, Party Loyalties and the Vote.” American Political Science Review, Vol. 73, No. 4:1071-89

Rosenstone, S. J., and Hansen, J. M. 1993. Mobilization, Participation, and Democracy in America. New York: Macmillan.

Tulia, G. Falleti. 2006. “Theory-Guided Process-Tracing in Comparative Politics: Something Old, Something New.” APSA-CP, Newsletter of the Organized Section in Comparative Politics of the American Political Science Association. Vol. 17, Issue. 1: 9-14.

Wattenberg, Martin P. 1991. The Rise of Candidate-Centered Politics: Presidential Elections of the 1980s. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

Zaller, John. 1992. The Nature and Origins of Mass Opinion. New York: Cambridge University Press.

網路資源

中央選舉委員會網站 http://www.cec.gov.tw/
聯合知識庫（UDN） http://udndata.com.ezproxy.lib.nsysu.edu.tw:8080/library/
TVBS民調中心 http://www.tvbs.com.tw/news/news_poll.asp?p=1&k=0
聯合民調中心 http://udn.com/survey/index.shtml
年代民調中心 http://survey.eracom.com.tw/item/i24.xml
中時民調中心 http://survey.chinatimes.com/