國
立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
59
參考文獻
中文：
謝復生，2013，《實證政治理論》，台北：五南。
英文：
Aarts, K., and Thomassen, J. 2008. “Satisfaction with Democracy: Do institutions matter?” Electoral Studies, 27(1): 5-18.
Aldrich, J. H. 1995. Why Parties? The Origin and Transformation of Political Parties in America. University of Chicago Press.
Almond, G., and Verba, S. 1963. The Civic Culture: Political Attitudes and Democracy in five countries. Princeton: Princeton University.
Anderson, C. J., and Guillory, C. A. 1997. “Political Institutions and Satisfaction with Democracy: A Cross-national Analysis of Consensus and Majoritarian Systems.”
American Political Science Review, 91(1): 66-81.
Armingeon, K., and Guthmann, K. 2014. “Democracy in Crisis? The Declining Support for National Democracy in European Countries, 2007–2011.” European Journal of Political Research, 53(3): 423-442.
Blais, A., Morin-Chassé, A., and Singh, S. P. 2017. “Election Outcomes, Legislative Representation, and Satisfaction with democracy.” Party Politics, 23(2): 85–95.
Bormann, Nils-Christian and Golder, M. 2013. “Democratic Electoral Systems around the World, 1946-2011.” Electoral Studies, 32: 360-369.
Brandenburg, H., and Johns, R. 2014. “The Declining Representativeness of the British Party System, and Why It Matters.” Political Studies, 62(4): 704-725.
‧
Canache, D., Mondak, J. J., and Seligson, M. A. 2001. “Meaning and Measurement in Cross-national Research on Satisfaction with Democracy.” Public Opinion Quarterly, 65(4): 506-528.
Cheibub, Jose Antonio. 2007. Presidentialism, Parliamentarian, and Democracy. New York. Cambridge University Press.
Clarke, H. D., Dutt, N., and Kornberg, A. 1993. “The Political Economy of Attitudes Toward Polity and Society in Western European Democracies.” The Journal of Politics, 55(4): 998-1021.
Constantatos, C., and Perrakis, S. 1997. “Vertical Differentiation: Entry and Market Coverage with Multiproduct Firms.” International Journal of Industrial Organization, 16(1): 81-103.
Dahl, R. A. 1989. Democracy and Its Critics. New Haven: Yale University Press.
Dalton, R. J. 1985. “Political Parties and Political Representation Party Supporters and Party Elites in Nine Nations.” Comparative Political Studies, 18(3): 267-299.
Dalton, R. J. 2004. Democratic Choices, Democratic Challenges: The Erosion of Political Support in Advanced Industrial Democracies. New York: Oxford
University Press
Dalton, R. J. 2008. “The Quantity and the Quality of Party Systems Party System Polarization, Its Measurement, and Its Consequences.” Comparative Political Studies, 41(7): 899-920.
Downs, A. 1957. “An Economic Theory of Political Action in a Democracy.” Journal of Political Economy, 65(2): 135-150.
Easton, D. 1965. A Framework for Political Analysis Vol. 25. Englewood Cliffs, NJ:
Prentice-Hall.
‧
Easton, D. 1975. “A Re-assessment of The Concept of Political Support.” British Journal of Political Science, 5(4): 435-457.
Erikson, R. S., MacKuen, M. B., and Stimson, J. A. 2002. The Macro Polity. Cambridge University Press.
Ezrow, L., and Xezonakis, G. 2011. “Citizen Satisfaction with Democracy and Parties’
Policy Offerings.” Comparative Political Studies, 44(9): 1152-1178.
Fuchs, D. 1999. “The Democratic Culture of United Germany.” In Critical Citizens:
Global Support for Democratic Government, ed. Pippa Norris. New York: Oxford
University Press.
Fuchs, D., and Klingemann, H. D. 1995. “Citizens and the State: A Changing Relationship.” In Citizens and the State, eds. D Fuchs and HD Klingemann. New York: Oxford University Press.
Fuchs, D., Guidorossi, G., and Svensson, P. 1995. “Support for the Democratic System.”
In Citizens and the State, eds. D Fuchs and HD Klingemann. New York: Oxford University Press.
Golder, M. 2005. “Democratic electoral Systems Around the World, 1946-2000.”
Electoral Studies, 24: 103-121.
Golder, M., and Stramski, J. 2010. “Ideological Congruence and Electoral Institutions.”
American Journal of Political Science, 54(1): 90-106.
Holmberg, S. 1999a. “Down and Down We Go: Political Trust in Sweden.” In Critical Citizens: Global Support for Democratic Government, ed. Pippa Norris. New York:
Oxford University Press.
Holmberg, S. 1999b. “Collective Policy Congruence Compared.” In Policy Represen tation in Western Democracies, eds. Warren Miller, Roy Pierce, Jacques
‧
Thomassen, Richard Herrera, Sören Holmberg, Peter Esaisson, and Bernhard Wessels. Oxford University Press.
Hotelling, H. 1929. “Stability in Competition.” The Economic Journal, 39(153): 41-57.
Karp, J. A., and Bowler, S. 2001. “Coalition Government and Satisfaction with Democracy: An Analysis of New Zealand's Reaction to Proportional Representation.” European Journal of Political Research, 40(1)”: 57-79.
Kaase, M. 1988. “Political Alienation and Protest.” In Comparing Pluralist Democracies, ed. M Dogan. Boulder: Westview Press.
Klingemann, H. D. 1999. “Mapping Political Support in the 1990s: A Global Analysis.”
In Critical Citizens: Global Support for Democratic Government, ed. Pippa Norris.
New York: Oxford University Press.
Kumlin, S., and Esaiasson, P. 2012. “Scandal Fatigue? Scandal Elections and Satisfaction with Democracy in Western Europe, 1977–2007.” British Journal of Political Science, 42(2): 263-282.
Lancaster, K. 1975. “Socially Optimal Product Differentiation.” The American Economic Review, 65(4): 567-585.
Leiter, D., and Clark, M. 2015. “Valence and Satisfaction with Democracy: A Cross‐ national Analysis of Nine Western European Democracies.” European Journal of Political Research, 54(3): 543-562.
Lijphart, A. 1984. Democracies: Patterns of Majoritarian and Consensus Government in Twenty-one Countries. New Haven: Yale University Press.
Lijphart, A. 1999. Patterns of Democracy: Government Forms and Performance in Thirty-six Countries. Yale University Press.
‧
Mediterranean Model of Democracy? The Southern European Democracies in Comparative Perspective.” West European Politics, 11(1): 7-25.Linde, J., and Ekman, J. 2003. “Satisfaction with Democracy: A Note on A Frequently Used Indicator in Comparative Politics.” European Journal of Political Research, 42(3): 391-408.
Lipset, Seymour Martin, and Rokkan, Stein 1967. Party Systems and Voter Alignments:
Cross-national Perspectives. Free Press.
Listhaug, Ola. 1995. “The Dynamics of Trust in Politicians”. In Citizens and the State, eds. D Fuchs and HD Klingemann. New York: Oxford University Press.
Lockerbie, B. (1993). “Economic Dissatisfaction and Political Alienation in Western Europe.” European Journal of Political Research, 23(3): 281-293.
Mansbridge, J. 2003. “Rethinking Representation.” American Political Science Review, 97(4): 515-528.
McDonald, M. D., and Budge, I. 2005. Elections, Parties, Democracy: Conferring the Median Mandate. Oxford University Press on Demand.
Merkl, P. H. 1988. “Comparing Legitimacy and Values Among Advanced Democratic Countries.” Comparin Pluralist Democracies, ed. M. Dogan. Boulder: Westview.
Miller, A. H., and Listhaug, O. 1990. “Political Parties and Confidence in Government:
A Comparison of Norway, Sweden and the United States.” British Journal of Political Science, 20(3): 357-386.
Miller, A. H., and Listhaug, O. 1998. “Policy Preferences and Political Distrust: a Comparison of Norway, Sweden and the United States.” Scandinavian Political Studies, 21(2): 161-187.
‧
Norris, P. 1999. Critical Citizens: Global Support for Democratic Government. New York: Oxford University Press.
Pitkin, H. F. 1967. The Concept of Representation. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Powell Jr, G. B. 1987. “The Competitive Consequences of Polarized Pluralism.” In The Logic of Multiparty Systems, ed. MJ Holler. Boston: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Powell Jr, G. B. 2004. “Political Representation in Comparative Politics.” Annual Review of Political Science, 7: 273-296.
Rae, D. 1971. The Political Consequences of Electoral Laws (2nd ed.). New Haven:
Yale University Press.
Raudenbush, S. W., and Bryk, A. S. 2002. Hierarchical Linear Models: Applications and Data Analysis Methods. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.
Reher, S. 2015. “Explaining Cross‐national Variation in the Relationship Between Priority Congruence and Satisfaction with Democracy.” European Journal of Political Research, 54(1): 160-181.
Rohrschneider, R., and Whitefield, S. 2012. The Strain of Representation: How Parties Represent Diverse Voters in Western and Eastern Europe. New York: Oxford
University Press.
Rose, R., Mishler, W., and Haerpfer, C. 1998. Democracy and Its Alternatives:
Understanding Post-Communist Societies. Cambridge: JHU Press.
Ruiz-Rufino, R. 2013. “Satisfaction with Democracy in Multi-Ethnic Countries: The Effect of Representative Political Institutions on Ethnic Minorities.” Political Studies, 61(1): 101-118.
Sanders, D., Clarke, H., Stewart, M., and Whiteley, P. 2014. “Output-Oriented Legitimacy: Individual-and System-Level Influences on Democracy Satisfaction.”
‧
In Elections and Democracy: Representation and Accountability, ed. Jacques Thomassen. New York: Oxford University Press.
Sartori, Giovanni. 1976. Parties and Party Systems: A Framework for Analysis. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Schmitt, H. 1983. “Party Government in Public Opinion: A European Cross‐National Comparison.” European Journal of Political Research, 11(4): 353-376.
Shaked, A., and Sutton, J. 1987. “Product Differentiation and Industrial Structure.” The Journal of Industrial Economics, 36(2): 131-146.
Singh, S. P. 2014. “Not All Election Winners are Equal: Satisfaction with Democracy and the Nature of the Vote.” European Journal of Political Research, 53(2): 308-327.
Stecker, C., and Tausendpfund, M. 2016. “Multidimensional Government‐Citizen Congruence and Satisfaction with Democracy.” European Journal of Political Research, 55(3): 492-511.
Stimson, J. A., MacKuen, M. B., and Erikson, R. S. 1995. “Dynamic Representation.”
American Political Science Review, 89(03): 543-565.
Thomassen, J., and Schmitt, H. 1999. “Issue Congruence.” In Political Representation and Legitimacy in the European Union, eds. Hermann Schmitt and Jacques
Thomassen. New York: Oxford University Press.
Wagner, A. F., Schneider, F., and Halla, M. 2009. “The Quality of Institutions and Satisfaction with Democracy in Western Europe—A Panel Analysis.” European Journal of Political Economy, 25(1): 30-41.
Wauthy, X. 1996. “Quality Choice in Models of Vertical Differentiation.” The Journal of Industrial Economics, 44(3): 345-353.
‧ 國
立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
66
Weil, F. D. 1989. “The Sources and Structure of Legitimation in Western Democracies:
A consolidated Model Tested with Time-Series Data in Six Countries Since World War II.” American Sociological Review, 54(5): 682-706.
Wessels, B. 1999. “System Characteristics Matter: Empirical Evidence from Ten Representation Studies.” In Policy Representation in Western Democracies, eds.
Warren Miller, Roy Pierce, Jacques Thomassen, Richard Herrera, Sören Holmberg, Peter Esaisson, and Bernhard Wessels. New York: Oxford University Press.
‧
‧ 國
立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
68
33 Taiwan 0 1 0 0 0 0 1
34 Thailand 1 0 0 0 0 0 1
35 Turkey 0 0 0 0 1 0 1
36 U. S. A. 0 1 0 0 0 0 1
總計 7 10 9 5 5 2 38
備註：1 表示有調查資料，0 表示無調查資料。
‧ 國
立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
69
附表 2 人口特徵變數基本統計量（按國家分）
國家名稱 年齡 教育程度 性別
Mean SD 1 2 3 4 5 男性 女性 樣本數
Australia 54.13 16.95 0.0364 0.0616 0.1521 0.4952 0.2546 0.4786 0.5214 3,876 Austria 51.20 17.38 0.0341 0.1275 0.6295 0.0522 0.1566 0.5060 0.4940 1,000 Brazil 41.61 15.82 0.3466 0.2018 0.3584 0.0788 0.0143 0.4758 0.5242 3,136 Bulgaria 49.47 16.94 0.0261 0.1235 0.5934 0.0331 0.2239 0.4855 0.5145 999 Canada 52.90 16.73 0.0308 0.1074 0.3360 0.4268 0.0989 0.4372 0.5628 3,458 Czech Republic 46.31 16.84 0.1652 0.3440 0.3305 0.0498 0.1106 0.4942 0.5058 1,651 Finland 50.92 19.67 0.0631 0.0896 0.5508 0.1388 0.1577 0.5003 0.4997 1,587 France 52.35 17.86 0.1556 0.0835 0.4587 0.1881 0.1141 0.4489 0.5511 2,014 Germany 56.76 17.85 0.0049 0.0523 0.6732 0.1716 0.0980 0.4934 0.5066 1,889 Great Britain 54.13 17.32 0.2218 0.0805 0.2845 0.3102 0.1030 0.4416 0.5584 1,567 Greece 50.94 15.62 0.1619 0.0726 0.2601 0.3621 0.1433 0.5967 0.4033 1,024 Hong Kong 48.74 16.33 0.1658 0.1551 0.3307 0.3111 0.0373 0.4559 0.5441 1,044 Iceland 46.72 16.88 0.2479 0.0618 0.2443 0.4460 0.0000 0.5091 0.4909 1,479 Ireland 44.75 16.14 0.0793 0.1668 0.3292 0.4247 0.0000 0.4997 0.5003 1,853 Israel 45.26 17.29 0.0523 0.1982 0.3047 0.3304 0.1144 0.4857 0.5143 1,017 Japan 57.95 16.07 0.0016 0.1418 0.5269 0.3121 0.0176 0.4739 0.5261 1,937 Kenya 35.70 13.22 0.6336 0.0000 0.3311 0.0311 0.0042 0.4983 0.5017 1,200 Mexico 38.42 14.52 0.2866 0.3630 0.2185 0.1202 0.0118 0.4703 0.5297 1,197 Montenegro 43.44 15.34 0.0942 0.0649 0.5455 0.2764 0.0188 0.5524 0.4476 925
‧ 國
立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
70
New Zealand 53.24 18.49 0.2775 0.0369 0.2474 0.3368 0.1014 0.4554 0.5446 1,223 Norway 47.13 16.38 0.0188 0.2125 0.3378 0.2596 0.1713 0.5072 0.4928 1,727 Philippines 43.97 15.95 0.4292 0.0000 0.4725 0.0958 0.0025 0.5000 0.5000 1,200 Poland 47.35 17.67 0.0250 0.4997 0.3398 0.0479 0.0875 0.4539 0.5461 1,919 Portugal 53.85 17.45 0.4074 0.2268 0.2602 0.1057 0.0000 0.4263 0.5737 1,499 Romania 50.10 17.12 0.0881 0.4441 0.2894 0.1599 0.0185 0.4893 0.5107 2,283 Serbia 52.26 17.49 0.2869 0.2032 0.4185 0.0850 0.0064 0.4853 0.5147 1,568 Slovakia 50.98 16.74 0.0821 0.2934 0.4681 0.0279 0.1284 0.4270 0.5730 1,150 Slovenia 51.14 18.47 0.2244 0.2077 0.3110 0.2421 0.0148 0.4597 0.5403 1,031 South Africa 40.53 15.27 0.1485 0.3815 0.3500 0.0708 0.0492 0.4400 0.5600 1,300 South Korea 44.80 15.31 0.0723 0.0662 0.3198 0.4959 0.0458 0.4960 0.5040 1,000 Sweden 50.46 17.32 0.0506 0.1145 0.4735 0.2530 0.1084 0.5108 0.4892 832 Switzerland 50.25 17.60 0.0266 0.0648 0.5632 0.1277 0.2177 0.4830 0.5170 4,391 Taiwan 47.90 16.31 0.2133 0.3612 0.3617 0.0638 0.0000 0.5044 0.4956 1,826 Turkey 40.15 15.52 0.4214 0.1340 0.3152 0.1165 0.0129 0.5101 0.4899 1,086 U. S. A. 45.41 17.09 0.0459 0.1090 0.4710 0.2895 0.0845 0.4292 0.5708 1,929 備註：教育程度，1：小學及以下，2：國（初）中，3：高中（職），4：大學，5：碩、博士。
‧ 國
立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
71
附表 3 政治類變數基本統計量（按國家分）
國家民稱 上次選舉投票 誰掌權有沒有差異 投不投票有沒有差異 經濟狀況
有 沒有 1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 5 較差 一樣 較好 樣本數
Australia 0.9857 0.0143 0.0783 0.1039 0.1960 0.3079 0.3139 0.0648 0.0813 0.1912 0.3342 0.3285 0.2748 0.4532 0.2720 3,868 Austria 0.9239 0.0761 0.1450 0.1138 0.2578 0.1732 0.3102 0.1234 0.0973 0.2638 0.2207 0.2949 0.3313 0.5385 0.1303 975 Brazil 0.9259 0.0741 0.0477 0.0302 0.1230 0.2034 0.5957 0.0551 0.0373 0.1218 0.1827 0.6032 0.2821 0.4814 0.2365 3,066 Bulgaria 0.7029 0.2971 0.1249 0.0650 0.1706 0.1929 0.4467 0.1025 0.0680 0.1878 0.2081 0.4335 0.4287 0.5005 0.0708 975 Canada 0.8896 0.1104 - - - 0.2349 0.4269 0.3382 3,371 Czech Republic 0.6826 0.3174 0.0805 0.0986 0.2085 0.3152 0.2971 0.0896 0.1170 0.2533 0.3074 0.2327 0.4826 0.4530 0.0644 1,552 Finland 0.8187 0.1813 0.0262 0.0396 0.1775 0.3212 0.4355 0.0345 0.0760 0.2230 0.3227 0.3438 0.6516 0.3071 0.0412 1,553 France 0.9389 0.0611 0.1198 0.1420 0.3066 0.2563 0.1752 0.0669 0.0921 0.2284 0.2968 0.3159 0.8236 0.1421 0.0344 1,978 Germany 0.8467 0.1533 0.1205 0.1269 0.2021 0.2960 0.2544 0.1066 0.1174 0.1924 0.2942 0.2894 0.1473 0.6476 0.2051 1,833 Great Britain 0.8191 0.1809 0.0977 0.1167 0.1816 0.2859 0.3180 0.0870 0.0936 0.1963 0.3004 0.3226 0.2751 0.3067 0.4182 1,516 Greece 0.8557 0.1443 0.1892 0.1064 0.2217 0.1970 0.2857 0.1329 0.1102 0.1821 0.1959 0.3789 0.8699 0.0745 0.0556 1,007 Hong Kong 0.8581 0.1419 0.1126 0.0726 0.2537 0.2074 0.3537 0.3219 0.1490 0.2146 0.1146 0.2000 0.5183 0.3672 0.1145 1,013 Iceland 0.9194 0.0806 0.0405 0.0440 0.1519 0.2660 0.4976 0.0413 0.0455 0.1908 0.2638 0.4587 0.1299 0.4637 0.4064 1,378 Ireland 0.8991 0.1009 - - - 0.0383 0.1559 0.1023 0.3632 0.3403 0.7977 0.1556 0.0467 1,671 Israel 0.8569 0.1431 0.1050 0.0584 0.1079 0.1624 0.5663 0.0753 0.0476 0.1447 0.1804 0.5520 0.5688 0.3006 0.1306 988 Japan 0.8084 0.1916 0.0410 0.2606 0.1516 0.2908 0.2560 0.0447 0.2226 0.1804 0.3448 0.2075 0.1692 0.6752 0.1556 1,921 Kenya 0.8994 0.1006 0.2416 0.0516 0.0206 0.0215 0.6647 0.2218 0.0482 0.0292 0.0232 0.6776 0.5183 0.1515 0.3302 1,175 Mexico 0.8228 0.1772 0.0561 0.0743 0.2142 0.3204 0.3351 0.0601 0.0792 0.2263 0.2950 0.3394 0.3264 0.4130 0.2606 1,155 Montenegro 0.8874 0.1126 0.0529 0.0989 0.1414 0.1506 0.5563 0.0878 0.0681 0.1824 0.1409 0.5208 0.9376 0.0011 0.0613 897
‧ 國
立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
72
New Zealand 0.9494 0.0506 0.0543 0.0441 0.1256 0.2793 0.4966 0.0394 0.0268 0.1206 0.2504 0.5628 0.2102 0.2609 0.5289 1,142 Norway 0.8974 0.1026 0.0474 0.1112 0.2313 0.3320 0.2781 0.0264 0.0633 0.1757 0.3462 0.3884 0.0753 0.7622 0.1625 1,686 Philippines 0.8557 0.1443 0.0950 0.0740 0.2952 0.2532 0.2826 0.0479 0.0589 0.2489 0.2431 0.4012 0.0619 0.6915 0.2466 1,180 Poland 0.6054 0.3946 0.0863 0.0440 0.1700 0.2086 0.4912 0.1467 0.0698 0.2149 0.1879 0.3806 0.3773 0.4428 0.1799 1,818 Portugal 0.7606 0.2394 0.1183 0.0595 0.1743 0.2358 0.4122 0.0891 0.0661 0.1573 0.2303 0.4572 0.5246 0.3454 0.1300 1,462 Romania 0.7399 0.2601 0.0530 0.0484 0.1554 0.2093 0.5338 0.0528 0.0620 0.1831 0.2221 0.4800 0.3555 0.5862 0.0583 2,180 Serbia 0.7751 0.2249 0.0862 0.0489 0.1281 0.1525 0.5843 0.0739 0.0603 0.1640 0.1776 0.5243 0.5540 0.3866 0.0595 1,547 Slovakia 0.7015 0.2985 0.1201 0.0623 0.2420 0.1824 0.3932 0.1562 0.0816 0.2476 0.1872 0.3274 0.2357 0.6371 0.1272 1,116 Slovenia 0.7427 0.2573 0.0760 0.0390 0.1510 0.1630 0.5710 0.0913 0.0582 0.1886 0.2006 0.4614 0.8549 0.1163 0.0288 1,006 South Africa 0.7338 0.2662 0.0199 0.0263 0.1210 0.2930 0.5398 0.0182 0.0404 0.1396 0.2847 0.5170 0.4154 0.3612 0.2233 1,218 South Korea 0.7780 0.2220 0.0747 0.0926 0.1705 0.2737 0.3884 0.0407 0.0490 0.1804 0.2753 0.4546 0.5856 0.3737 0.0407 958 Sweden 0.9712 0.0288 0.0301 0.0675 0.2265 0.4048 0.2711 0.0133 0.0446 0.1448 0.3848 0.4125 0.1773 0.5463 0.2764 767 Switzerland 0.7427 0.2573 - - - 0.5005 0.4271 0.0725 4,264 Taiwan 0.8975 0.1025 0.1624 0.0644 0.1681 0.1772 0.4279 0.1459 0.0501 0.1550 0.1897 0.4593 0.4382 0.3858 0.1760 1,773 Turkey 0.9125 0.0875 0.0636 0.0215 0.0730 0.1993 0.6427 0.0280 0.0103 0.0905 0.1828 0.6884 0.5441 0.3283 0.1276 1,066 U. S. A. 0.7274 0.2726 0.0604 0.0572 0.1959 0.2836 0.4028 0.0470 0.0345 0.1478 0.2595 0.5112 0.2787 0.4023 0.3190 1,909 備註：1、「誰掌權有沒有差異」和「投不投票有沒有差異」，1：幾乎沒有差異，5：有很大的差異。
‧
固定效果（Fixed Effects）常數項 -0.863 0.029 <0.001 -1.225 0.234 <0.001
Deviance 42260.056 39678.711 備註：1、模型 2-3 排除加拿大、愛爾蘭、和瑞士等 3 國的資料。2、模型 2-4 除前面 3 國外，另排除香港、肯亞、土耳其等 3 國，共排除 6 國。3、代表性 為 0-10 的整數值，0：代表性最高，10：代表性最差。