VAA，全名為Voting Advice Application，是一種投票諮詢系統，專門替選民向政黨或候選人蒐集資訊，並提供投票建議的網站，隨著資訊技術演進，網路的便利性使其成為主要的資訊流通管道，政黨或候選人爭相在網路上尋求曝光，連帶影響選民上網尋求投票相關的資訊，這也使得VAA成為新的研究課題。然而過往多數的相關研究，都是以問卷調查的方式來進行，在變數控制上可能不夠精確，且這些研究多數是以政治參與的相關理論來進行分析，對於VAA所提供的資訊形式並未細究。
本研究以台灣自行研發的VAA網站:iVoter為案例，透過實驗研究法中的「隨機化實驗控制組後測設計（Randomized control-group posttest design）」，以實驗設計的方式觀察三組受測者接收VAA提供的不同資訊形式之後，在投票意願、政治興趣及資訊蒐集習慣上是否有不同的反應。並嘗試以資訊理論的角度來解釋VAA如何作用，提出所謂「問題解決導向資訊」的概念，來分析哪一種資訊形式才是真正對使用者有影響的。研究結果發現:其一，在實驗組1中使用VAA接收到問題解決導向資訊的受測者，滿足了其在投票決策上的需求，故投票意願會高於其兩組。其二，但也因為VAA提供的資訊有其目的上的侷限，故雖然受測者接收問題解決導向資訊，但實驗組1的政治興趣卻非最高。其三，在資訊蒐集習慣上，實驗組1由於接受了最完整的問題解決導向資訊，所以未來繼續使用VAA做為投票參考依據的意願也最高。
關鍵字: Voting advice applications、投票意願、實驗研究、資訊形式、政治興趣

Voting advice application (VAA) is a kind of system that can help voters making decision in elections. VAA also collects the information of parties and candidates then organize it and supply it to users on internet. However, in the last decade, the research method of most of VAA researches is questionnaire or survey. And theses researches usually adopt the theories about political participation to explain the effect of VAA.
In this research, the main case we analysis is iVoter which was developed by Taiwan independently in 2010. We through the experiment research: randomized control-group posttest design, divide subjects into three groups and supply them different information. Then we will observe their reaction to test the effect of VAA. We also adopt the information theories and propose the new concept: problem-solving oriented information. There are three research findings in this research. First, the experimental group 1 which received the problem-solving oriented information has strong willingness to vote in election in 2018 and 2020. Second, the political interest of experimental group 1 is lower than other two groups. Final, experimental group 1 has strong willingness to keep using VAA as the advisor in the future.
Keywords: Voting advice applications, Voting intention, Experiment research, Information form, Political interest

第一章 緒論..........................................................................1
第一節 研究動機與背景...................................................................................1
第二節 研究目的...............................................................................................4
第三節 章節安排...............................................................................................5
第二章 文獻回顧..................................................................7
第一節 VAA的發展與介紹.............................................................................7
第二節 VAA研究整理.....................................................................................10
第三節 投票意願與資訊形式..........................................................................14
第四節 研究假設..............................................................................................18
第三章 研究設計................................................................21
第一節 實驗研究法與研究設計......................................................................21
第二節 研究限制..............................................................................................30
第四章 實驗結果分析........................................................32
第一節 資訊形式與投票意願..........................................................................39
第二節 資訊形式與政治興趣..........................................................................52
第三節 資訊形式與資訊蒐集習慣..................................................................56
第五章 結論........................................................................59
第一節 研究發現..............................................................................................59
第二節 研究檢討..............................................................................................65
參考文獻...............................................................................68
中文部分..................................................................................................................68
英文部分..................................................................................................................69
網路資料..................................................................................................................74
附錄.......................................................................................75
附錄一:施測前指導語............................................................................................75
附錄二:施測紙本問卷............................................................................................76

參考文獻
中文參考文獻：
1. 王宏恩、洪永泰(2013)。iVoter資訊的效用。收錄於：網路民主：台灣iVoter投票諮詢網站建置紀實，P. 129。台北市：五南出版社。
2. 邱皓政(2008)。量化研究法(一)：研究設計與資料處理(修訂版)。台灣台北： 雙葉書廊。P. 3-4。
3. 洪敬富、陳柏奇(2012)。茉莉花革命浪潮下對當前中國國家：社會關係的再檢視— 網路政治中的公民維權與黨國維權雙重分析視角。臺灣民主季刊，9，P. 195-244。
4. 陳芳哲(2005)。偏遠地區的數位落差，以阿里山達邦社區為例。嘉義：南華大學社會學碩士論文。
5. 陳柏宇、廖達琪(2013)。選民投票諮詢平台的各國案例。收錄於：網路民主：台灣iVoter投票諮詢網站建置紀實，P. 7。台北市：五南出版社。
6. 陳泰穎、張仲君(2010)。縮減數位落差，積極創新為關鍵。取自：數位典藏與學習電子報。
7. 項靖(2005)。數位化治理與資訊政策。台北：秀威出版。
8. 彭芸(2004)。我國大學生的媒介使用、社會資本與政治信任對象之關連性。新聞學研究，79，P. 91-133。
9. 楚樹龍、唐虹(2006)。政治學概論。中國：清華大學出版社。P. 180。
10. 廖達琪、洪永泰、林繼文、林福仁、劉正山、陳柏宇、王宏恩、李承訓、陳麗璇(2013)。網路民主：台灣iVoter投票諮詢網站建置紀實。台北市：五南出版社。
11. 劉正山、洪永泰(2013)。iVoter 會員素描。收錄於：網路民主：台灣iVoter投票諮詢網站建置紀實，P. 61。台北市：五南出版社。
英文參考文獻
1. Campbell, Donald T. & Stanley, Julian C. (1963). Experimental and Quasi-Experimental Design for Research. Skokie: Rand McNally.
2. Chiou, Wen-Bin, Lee, Chun-Chia & Liao, Da-Chi (2015). Facebook effects on social distress: Priming with online social networking thoughts can alter the perceived distress due to social exclusion. Computers in Human Behavior, 49, P. 230-236.
3. Enyedi, Zsolt (2015). The Influence of Voting Advice Applications on Preferences, Loyalties and Turnout: An Experimental Study. Political Study Association, 64, 4, P. 1000-1015.
4. Ferejohn, John A. (Editor) & Kuklinski, James H (Editor) (1990). Information and Democratic Processes. Publisher: University of Illinois Press (September 1, 1990), P. 391- 394.
5. Fischer, M. Valentin, Tschochohei, Philipp, Anders, Laura, Breuer, K. Dana, Hermida Carrillo, Alejandro & Diefenbach, Sarah (2017). Exploring the Social Media Impact of Voting Advice Apps: A Case Study on the Representation of the Wahl-O-Mat on Twitter. i-com, 16, 3, P. 279-286.
6. Garzia, Diego & Marschall, Stefan (2012). Voting Advice Applications under review： The state of research. International Journal of Electronic Governance, 5, P. 203-221.
7. Garzia, Diego. & Trechsel, Alexander.H. (2017). Voting Advice Applications and Electoral Participation： A Multi-Method Study. Political Communication, 34, P.424-433.
8. Giddens, Anthony (1985). The Nation-State and Violence. University of California Press.
9. Hamelink, Cees J. (1991). Communication： The Most Violated Human Right. Stockholm: Inter Press Service Dispatch.
10. Hirzalla, Fadi, van Zoonen, Liesbet & de Ridder, Jan (2010)。Internet Use and Political Participation： Reflections on the Mobilization / Normalization Controversy. The Information Society An International Journal, 27, 1, P.1-15.
11. Howard, Frederick. (1993). Computer Networks and The Emergence of Global Civil Society” in Global Networks：Computers and International Communication edited by Linda M. Harasim. Cambridge, MA：MIT Press.
12. Huckfeldt, Robert & Sprague, John (1987). Networks in Context： The Social Flow of Political Information. The American Political Science Review, 81, P. 1197-1216.
13. Hyman, Ray (1982). “Quasi-Experimentation: Design and Analysis Issues for Field Settings” Book Review. Journal of Personality Assessment, 46, P. 96-97.
14. Israel, Jonas (2016). Cognitive dissonance and the effects of Voting Advice Applications on voting behavior: evidence from the European Elections 2014. Journal of Elections, Public Opinion and Parties, 27, 1, P. 56-74.
15. Ivask, Pille (2017). The effect of voting advice applications on Estonian voters' voting behavior. (Master's thesis, University of Tartu Faculty of Social Sciences Johan Skytte Institute of Political Studies)
16. Iyengar, Shanto. (1990). “Shortcuts to Political Knowledge: The Role of Selective Attention and Accessibility.” In Information and Democratic Processes, eds. Ferejohn, John A. and Kuklinski, James H. Urbana: University of Illinois Press, P.160-161.
17. Jordan, Tim (1999). Cyberpower： The Culture and Politics of Cyberspace and the Internet. Psychology Press.

18. Kann, Mark E., Berry, Jeff, Gant. Connor. & Zager, Phil (2007). The Internet and youth political participation. First Monday, 12, 8.
19. Liao, Da-chi, Chen, Bo-yu & Jensen, Michael J. (2016). Political Behavior and Technology: Voting Advice Applications in East Asia. UK: Palgrave Macmillan.
20. Loader, Brian (2007). Young Citizens in the Digital Age： Political Engagement, Young People and New Media. Routledge Press.
21. Lupia, Arthur (2015). Uninformed: Why People Seem to Know So Little about Politics and What We Can Do about It. UK: Oxford University Press. P. 1-60.
22. Mahéo, Valérie-Anne (2017). Information Campaigns and (Under)Privileged Citizens： An Experiment on the Differential Effects of a Voting Advice Application. Political Communication, 34, 4, P. 511-529.
23. Matthew, Wall, Sudulich, Maria Laura, Rory, Costello & Leon, Enrique (2009). Picking your party online – An investigation of Ireland's first online voting advice application. Information Polity, 14, P. 203-218.
24. Morris, Dick. (1999). Vote.com： How Big-Money Lobbyists and the Media are Losing Their Influence, and the Internet is Giving Power to the People. Wisconsin: Renaissance Books.
25. Norris, Pippa (2001). Digital Divide： Civic Engagement, Information Poverty, and the Internet Worldwide. Cambridge University Press.
26. Oates, Sarah, Owen, Diana & Gibson, Rachel K. (2006). The Internet and Politics: Citizens, Voters and Activists. New York：Routledge.
27. Pianzola, Joëlle (2014). Selection biases in Voting Advice Application research. Electoral Studies, 36, P. 272-280.
28. Prensky, Marc (2001)。Digital Natives, Digital Immigrants. On the Horizon, 9, P. 1-6.

29. Rice, Ronald E. (1987). Computer-Mediated Communication and Organizational Innovation Journal of Communication, 37, P. 65-94.
30. Saldarini, Robert A. & DeRobertis, Eugene M. (2003). The Impact of Technology Induced Anonymity on Communications and Ethics： New Challenges for IT Pedagogy. Journal of Information Technology Impact, 3, 1, P. 3-10.
31. Salter, Lee (2003). “ Democracy, New Social Movements, and the Internet： A Habermasian Analysis." In Michael D. Ayers and Martha McCaughey (eds.), Cyberactivism： Online Activism in Theory and Practice (P. 117-44). New York： Rout1edge.
32. Schultze, Martin (2013). Effects of Voting Advice Applications (VAAs) on Political Knowledge about Party Positions. Paper prepared for the ECPR General Conference 2013, 4th – 7th September, Bordeaux/France.
33. Smith, Adam (1995). An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations. UK: Oxford University Press.
34. Stanley, Julian C. (1966). The Influence of Fisher’s “The Design of Experiments” on Educational Research Thirty Years Later. American Educational Research Journal, 3, 3, P. 223-229.
35. Tolbert, Caroline J. & McNeal, Ramona S. (2003). Unraveling the Effects of the Internet on Political Participation? Political Research Quarterly, 6, 2, P. 175-185.
36. Trechsel, Alexander H. (2010). The impact of Voting Advice Applications on Voting. The Internet, Policy & Politics Conferences.
37. Trechsel, Alexander H., Pianzola, Joelle, Schwerdt, Guido, Vassil, Kristjan & Alvarez, Michael R. (2012). The Effect of Voting Advice Applications (VAAs) on Political Preferences - Evidence from a Randomized Field Experiment. APSA 2012 Annual Meeting Paper, 15 Jul 2012.
38. Trechsel, Alexander H., Levin, Ines, Vassil, Kristjan & R. Alvarez, Michael (2012). Voting Advice Applications: How Useful? For Whom? Journal of Information Technology & Politics, 11, 1, P. 82-101.
39. Tsapatsoulis, Nicolas & Agathokleous, Marilena (2017). Voting Intention: 'I prefer not to say' versus 'I am undecided'. Source: 11th ECPR General Conference, 2017,Universitetet i Oslo, Oslo, Norway, 6-9 September.
40. Van de Pol, Jasper (2018). Same but different: A typology of Voting Advice Application users in first- and second-order elections. Acta Politica, P.1–20
41. Van de Pol, Jasper, Holleman, Bregje, Kamoen, Naomi, Krouwel, Andre & de Vreese, Claes (2016). Voting wiser: The effect of Voting Advice Applications on political understanding. Publisher: Political Communication & Journalism (ASCoR, FMG).
42. Wang, Austin (2015). The connection and effectiveness of iVoter in Taiwan’s 2012 legislative election. Political Behavior and Technology, edited by Da-chi Liao, Bo-yu Chen and Michael J. Jensen.
 
網路資料：
1. iVoter官方網站： http：//iVoter.tw/。
2. Stemwijzer官方網站： https：//stemwijzer.nl/
3. 朱立倫官方網站： http：//onetaiwan.tw/
4. 宋楚瑜官方網站： http：//www.soong.tw/
5. 沃草議題實驗室網站：https：//lab.watchout.tw/。
6.何秉一(2010)。網路民主在數位時代的可能性。取自： http：//society.nhu.edu.tw/e-j/90/24.htm
7. 章英華、朱瑞玲、杜素豪、廖培珊(2016)。台灣社會變遷基本調查計畫2014第六期第五次：公民權組。取自： https：//srda.sinica.edu.tw/search/gensciitem/1762
8. 蔡英文官方網站： http：//iing.tw/