「臺灣人」的意涵：臺灣人民族認同之概念化

The Meaning of ＂Taiwanese＂: Conceptualizing the Components of Taiwanese National Identity

過去「臺灣人／中國人」的認同研究，常以受訪者認為自己是「臺灣人」、「中國人」或「兩者都是」三項擇一的答案作為測量項目，導致測量項目過度簡化的問題。因此，本研究以Rawi Abdelal等人的「社會認同（social identity）」概念，提出一個新的臺灣人民族認同測量模型，並用最小平方途徑之結構方程式（Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling, PLS-SEM），發展以「民族規範（national norms）」、「民族親密度（national closeness）」及「民族目的（national purposes）」等三個潛在獨立變項，及「國家認同」潛在依變項的社會心理學分析架構。結果顯示，三個潛在獨立變項均與「國家認同」呈現顯著正相關；其中，「民族規範」具有最高的整體影響力（total effect）。其次，自稱為「臺灣人」受訪者比自稱「中國人」的受訪者呈現顯著差異。「臺灣人」的「民族目的」強度比「中國人」高，而「中國人」在「民族規範」強度比「臺灣人」高。再者，比較整體影響力和外權重（outer weights）過後，發現自稱「臺灣人」和「兩者都是」的受訪者亦有顯著差異。這兩群受訪者雖都強調「國家建立（state-building）」（「民族目的」之中的測量指標），但對「國家認同」的意涵是有不同。自稱「臺灣人」受訪者的立場是親臺灣，反統一；而「兩者都是」受訪者的立場則是親「中華民國」和兩岸民主統一。其他變項，例如年齡、教育和「社會接觸（social contacts）」對於自稱「臺灣人」和「兩者都是」的受訪者具有調節效應，但強度不足以改變原有因果路徑。

One of the problems with empirical studies of Taiwanese/Chinese identity in Taiwan is the use of over-simplified measurements based on responses to a question involving three choices: is your nationality Taiwanese, Chinese, or both? This study attempts to produce a new model with a more fine-grained conceptualization of national identity in Taiwan. The model is derived from Rawi Abdelal et al.'s idea of social identity, and applies Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM) to survey data, to develop a social psychological framework using three independent latent variables: ＂national norms,＂ ＂national closeness,＂ and ＂national purposes,＂ and a single dependent latent variable: ＂state identity.＂ The results of this re-analysis show all three of the independent variables have significant positive correlations with the dependent variable ＂state identity.＂ Of the independent variables, national norms has the highest total effect. For respondents self-identifying as Taiwanese (T respondents) and respondents self-identifying as Chinese (C respondents), there were significant differences in two dimensions: national purposes and national norms. The strength of T respondents' national purposes is higher than C respondents while the strength of C respondents' national norms is higher than T respondents. In addition, a comparison of total effect value and outer weight found that T respondents and respondents self-identifying as both Taiwanese and Chinese (B respondents) also differed. Both T and B respondents stress on ＂state-building,＂ a component of the latent variable national purposes. For the dependent variable state identity, however, B and T respondents differ. T respondents take a pro-Taiwan and anti-unification stance. B respondents, however, take a pro-＂Republic of China＂ and prodemocratic unification stance. Variables such as age, education, and social contacts all have moderating effects for both T and B respondents but not great enough to change the path direction.