题名

「科學視覺化」轉向？以1980年代科普雜誌《牛頓》為析論核心

并列篇名

A Shift Toward "Scientific Visualization": Taking the popular science magazine Newton in the 1980s as the core of analysis

DOI

10.30386/MCR.202310.0019

作者

張耀仁(Yao-Jen Chang)

关键词

《牛頓》 ； 科學視覺化 ； 科學傳播 ； 新興科普刊物 ； Newton Magazine ； Science Communication ； Scientific Visualization ； Translation Popular Science Magazines

期刊名称

新聞學研究

卷期/出版年月

157期（2023 / 10 / 01）

页次

95 - 162

内容语文

繁體中文;英文
中文摘要

本研究以《牛頓》為析論核心，透過社會與歷史條件的爬梳、深度訪談以及視覺框架分析，從中探究1980年代臺灣科學視覺化現象，研究發現：一、就科學視覺化成因而言：1980年代，國民所得提升、加諸官方宣導「書香社會」，高單價的《牛頓》打破時人對於科普雜誌訴諸文字的理解，形成「嘆為觀止」的視覺感受，可稱之為視覺創新「表現」之一環，促成精美印刷、圖片彩印的科普出版風潮。二、就科學視覺化認知而言：《牛頓》認為圖解科學較照片真切；《科學眼》則堅持攝影比圖片更加真實，兩者皆旨在「求真」，也就是視圖片與照片為客觀、中立超然的載體，旨在佐證科學理論。三、就科學視覺化實踐而言：《牛頓》自製專欄的圖片依循日文版視覺框架，建構科學視覺化內容，無論就圖像配色、表徵形式以及符號象徵，皆與日本一致。但在意識形態的表徵上，試圖加入自身所處情境的元素，也讓讀者看見與日文版不同的視覺意象。
英文摘要

Compared to recent specific and micro-focused research on scientific visualization in European and American academic circles, before 2019 there have been few systematic studies in the field of science communication in Taiwan. By 2020, the East Asian Science, Technology and Society: An International Journal had published a special issue titled "Thinking and Acting with Diagrams" to discuss scientific visualization. Yin-Chung Au (區曣中) (2022) subsequently analyzed the visual representation of European and American biology through a literature review, but neither of these two studies closely relate to how scientific visualization is presented in Taiwan. This study accordingly takes Newton magazine as the object of analysis and includes popular science magazines from the same period, particularly Science Eye. Through exploring historical and social conditions and conducting in-depth interviews and text analysis, the following three research questions are understood. (1) What historical and social conditions contributed to the scientific visualization phenomenon of Newton in the 1980s? (2) How did the editors of Newton and other popular science magazines from the same period perceive and practice scientific visualization? (3) What are the practical outcomes of scientific visualization in popular science magazines in Taiwan? From the literature review, this study mainly refers to the following inquiries. (1) Through Mithcell (1994) and Boehm (1994, cited in Bertolini, 2015), their advocacy of "the turn to Pictorial/Iconic" is not only concerned with "pictorial representation", let alone "Pictorial presence", but also the rediscovery of post-linguistics and post-semiotics related to vision, installation, discourse, and even body intertextuality. Three orientations of visualization research are sorted out from this: visual representation/representation, visual thinking, and knowledge visualization. (2) In contrast to visual cultural studies that advocate for "the turn to Pictorial/Iconic", scientific visualization research has only gradually received attention since the late 1980s. This study mainly refers to Daston & Galison's (2007) analysis of "objectivity" behind scientific visualization, including: the capture of the "truth-to-nature" through artistic representation of nature, the depiction of nature through mechanical objectivity, and the cultivation of "trained judgment" with interpretive expertise. (3) In the 1960s, under the influence of the "strong program", researchers began to focus on laboratory data recording, interpersonal interaction, equipment operation, and other aspects involved in scientific visualization. This means treating scientific images as a "process of inscription" (Latour, 1990) involving representational device (RD) and representational object (RO). Following the perspective of "inscription", Pauwels (2006c) points out that the exploration of scientific visualization involves not only concrete materials or abstract concepts but also social and technological conditions, as well as conditions related to the functioning of media and user feedback. (4) The methodology of scientific visualization can be divided into the following three aspects. First, from visual language to immutable mobiles: Rudwick (1976) notes that the emergence of "visual language" means that followers of the geological community must learn the rules of this language through professional training to accept and understand the norms, thereby achieving scientific communication through representation. Continuing this concept, Lynch (1990) discusses how scientists manipulate biological images and classify photographs as diagrams, stating that diagrams are a "simplification" and also an "idealization" of photographs. Latour (1990) proposes the concept of "immutable mobiles", which refers to the ability of "images" to bring different things together in time and space - that is, on the one hand, the image defines objects, and on the other hand, it can be carried and moved to anywhere. Second, the classification of visualized scientific knowledge: Eppler & Burkhard (2006) classify knowledge visualization into six forms: heuristic sketches, conceptual diagrams, visual metaphors, knowledge animations, knowledge maps, and scientific charts. Third, a new attempt at analyzing scientific visual frameworks: Rodriguez & Dimitrova (2011) apply Goffman's (1974) framework theory to visual exploration and construct four analysis systems for visual frameworks, including (1) denotative systems: descriptions made through picture titles, captions, and related texts; (2) stylistic-semiotic systems: the presentation of stylistic conventions and social meanings; (3) connotative systems: examining the presentation of icons, indices, and symbols, with symbols being the focus of analysis due to their social significance; and (4) ideological representation: examining cultural conditions and social factors to explore the economic and political interests in the visual framework. In terms of research methodology, this study considers the "analytical framework influencing the production of scientific visualization," as Pauwels (2006c) outlined. Since the concepts and aspects involved are relatively concrete, this framework forms the basis of analysis. It incorporates Latour's (1990) interpretation of drawing and Burri & Dumit's (2008) suggestions on exploring scientific visualization. Eppler & Burkhard's (2006) classification of knowledge visualization is also integrated, along with the scientific visualization framework elements suggested and compiled by Rodriguez & Dimitrova (2011) and Wardekker & Lorenz (2019). Three aspects are analyzed separately: (1) social and historical conditions (Pauwels - social and technological production process); (2) media operation (Pauwels - media, visual representation); and (3) execution of scientific visualization style (Pauwels - referent, form/execution). The study presents the following findings. (1) The causes of scientific visualization: In the 1980s, the increase in Taiwan's national income and the official promotion of a "reading society" led to the high-priced magazine Newton breaking people's understanding of popular science magazines as relying solely on text and thus forming a "breathtaking" visual experience. This is one aspect of visual innovation "representation", which promoted the trend of high-quality printing and color printing of images in popular science publishing. (2) The cognition of scientific visualization: Newton believes that graphic illustrations are more realistic than photographs, while Science Eye insists that photography is more truthful than graphics. Both aim for the pursuit of truth and consider graphics and photographs as objective, neutral carriers to support scientific theories. (3) The practice of scientific visualization: Taiwan's editors made the images in columns of Newton follow the visual framework of the Japanese version to construct scientific visualization content. Whether it is the color matching, representational form, or symbolic representation, they are all consistent with Japan's Newton. However, in terms of ideological representation, an attempt was made to incorporate elements of their own context, which also allow readers to see visual imagery different from the Japanese version.
主题分类 社會科學 > 傳播學
参考文献
  1. 沈錦惠(2014)。隱喻即視覺化的語藝行動：網路時代談視覺語藝的古典根源。中華傳播學刊，26，63-106。
    連結：
  2. 林果顯(2016)。「欲迎還拒」：戰後臺灣日本出版品進口管制體系的建立(1945-1972)。國立政治大學歷史學報，45，193-250。
    連結：
  3. 林果顯(2022)。1950年代臺灣的日本出版品進口談判。國史館館刊，71，135-182。
    連結：
  4. 張文瑜(2005)。傳播學的建構：談問卷資料為什麼和如何被視覺化。中國廣告學刊，10，57-70。
    連結：
  5. 張耀仁(2021)。欠缺模式下的科普出版「傳奇」：析論 1980 年代臺灣科普套書之傳播策略及其知識觀。新聞學研究，149，155-196。
    連結：
  6. 郭力昕(2008)。人道主義攝影的感性化與政治化：閱讀 1980 年代關於蘭嶼的兩部紀實攝影經典。文化研究，6，9-42。
    連結：
  7. 楊亨利,趙逢毅(2011)。基於知識本體之文獻多維度關聯視覺化導覽平臺。電子商務學報，13(1)，27-54。
    連結：
  8. (1983)。牛頓中文國際發刊辭。牛頓，1，扉頁。
  9. (1987)。編輯室手札。人間，22，7。
  10. (1983)。編輯室報告。牛頓，8，142。
  11. (1985)。牛頓科學季。牛頓，23，扉頁。
  12. 〈沒圖沒真相〉（無日期）。取自 https://pttpedia.fandom.com/zh/wiki/%E6%B2%92%E5%9C%96%E6%B2%92%E7%9C%9F%E7%9B%B8
  13. (1989)。莊讀友，您好。科學眼，59，144。
  14. (1984)。牛頓雜誌社誠徵儲備人才。牛頓，18，封底。
  15. (1985)。牛頓雜誌社誠徵儲備人才：噴畫製作。牛頓，28，142。
  16. (1984)。編後語。科學眼，1，144。
  17. (1984).中華民國七十三年出版年鑑.臺北市:中國出版公司.
  18. (1983)。細菌：人類和病原菌永無止境的戰爭。牛頓，5，58-85。
  19. (1984)。板塊構造說：探討不斷移動的地球外殼。牛頓，6，56-79。
  20. Baigrie, B.(Ed.)(1996).Picturing knowledge: Historical and philosophical problems concerning the use of art in science.Toronto, CA:University of Toronto Press.
  21. Balkir, N.(2009).Perceptions of visual culture in Turkish pre-service art teacher preparation.International Journal for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning,3,2.
  22. Bertolini, M.(2015).The “pictorial turn” as crisis and the necessity of a critique of visual culture.Philosophy Study,5(3),121-130.
  23. Bloor, D.(1976).Knowledge and social imagery.London, UK:Routledge & Kegan Paul.
  24. Boehm, G.(Ed.)(1994).Was ist ein bild?.München, DE:Fink.
  25. Bolinska, A.(2016).Successful visual epistemic representation.Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A,56,153-160.
  26. Boykoff, M. T.(2011).Who speaks for the climate? Making sense of media reporting on climate change.Cambridge, UK:Cambridge University Press.
  27. Brunet, F.(2013).(Re)defining Visual Studies.InMedia,3
  28. Bucchi, M.,Saracino, B.(2016).“Visual science literacy”: Images and public understanding of science in the digital age.Science Communication,38(6),812-819.
  29. Burri, R. V.,Dumit, J.(2008).Social studies of scientific imaging and visualization.The handbook of science and technology studies,Cambridge, MA:
  30. Card, S. K.,Mackinlay, J. D.,Shneiderman, B.(1999).Readings in information visualization: Using Vision to think.Los Altos, CA:Morgan Kaufmann.
  31. Chao, H. K.,Maas, H.(2020).Thinking and acting with diagrams.East Asian Science, Technology and Society: An International Journal,14(2),191-197.
  32. Cooter, R.,Pumfrey, S.(1994).Separate spheres and public places: Reflections on the history of science popularization and science in popular culture.History of Science,32,237-267.
  33. Cross, N.(1982).Designerly ways of knowing.Design Studies,3(4),221-227.
  34. Dansereau, D. F.,Simpson, D. D.(2009).A picture is worth a thousand words: The case for graphic representations.Professional Psychology: Research and Practice,40(1),104-110.
  35. Daston, L.,Galison, P.(2007).Objectivity.Cambridge, MA:Routledge.
  36. Eppler, M. J.,Burkhard, R. A.(2006).Knowledge Visualization.Encyclopedia knowledge management,Hershey, PA:
  37. Evagorou, M.,Erduran, S.,Mäntylä, T.(2015).The role of visual representations in scientific practices: From conceptual understanding and knowledge generation to ‘seeing’ how science works.International Journal of STEM Education,2(1),1-13.
  38. Ferguson, E. S.(1977).The mind’s eye: Nonverbal thought in technology.Educational Horizons,57(1),42-46.
  39. Frigg, R.,Hunter, M.(2010).Introduction.Beyond mimesis and convention: Representation in art and science,London, UK:
  40. Goffman, E.(1974).Frame analysis: An essay on the organization of experience.Cambridge, MA:Harvard University Press.
  41. Goldschmidt, G.(1991).The dialectics of sketching.Creativity Research Journal,4(2),123-143.
  42. Goldschmidt, G.(1994).On visual design thinking: The vis kids of architecture.Design Studies,15(2),158-174.
  43. Gomez-Romero, J.,Molina-Solana, M.,Oehmichen, A.,Guo, Y.(2018).Visualizing large knowledge graphs: A performance analysis.Future Generation Computer Systems,89,224-238.
  44. Hackett, E. J.(Ed.),Amsterdamska, O.(Ed.),Lynch, M.(Ed.),Wajcman, J.(Ed.)(2008).The handbook of science and technology studies.Cambridge, MA:The MIT Press.
  45. Hentschel, K.(2014).Visual cultures in science and technology: A comparative history.Cambridge, UK:Cambridge University Press.
  46. Hüppauf, B.(Ed.),Weingart, P.(Ed.)(2008).Science images and popular images of the sciences.New York:Routledge.
  47. Killen, C. P.,Kjaer, C.(2012).Understanding project interdependencies: The role of visual representation, culture and process.International Journal of Project Management,30(5),554-566.
  48. Kuo, L. H.(2007).Politicising documentary photography: Ren Jian and Guan Xiao-Rong in late 1980s Taiwan.Javnost / The Public,14(3),49-64.
  49. Lakoff, G.,Johnson, M.(1999).Philosophy in the flesh: The embodied mind and its challenge to Western thought.New York, NY:Basic Books.
  50. Lakoff, G.,Johnson, M.(1980).Metaphors we live by.Chicago, IL:University of Chicago Press.
  51. Latour, B.(1987).Science in action: How to follow scientists and engineers through society.Cambridge. MA:Harvard University Press.
  52. Latour, B.(1990).Drawing things together.Representation in scientific practice,London, UK:
  53. Lynch, M.(1990).The externalized retina: Selection and mathematization in the visual documentation of objects in the life sciences.Representation in scientific practice,London, UK:
  54. Lynch, M.(2006).The production of scientific images vision and re-vision in the history, philosophy, and sociology of science.Visual cultures of science: Rethinking representational practices in knowledge building and science communication,Hanover, NH:
  55. Lynch, M.,Woolgar, S.(1990).Introduction: Sociological orientations to representational practice in science.Representation in scientific practice,London, UK:
  56. Mahony, M.,Hulme, M.(2012).The colour of risk: An exploration of the IPCC’s “burning embers” diagram.Spontaneous Generations: A Journal for the History and Philosophy of Science,6(1),75-89.
  57. Mithcell, W. J. T.(1994).Picture theory.Chicago, IL:The University of Chicago press.
  58. Mithcell, W. J. T.(1986).Iconography: Image, test, ideology.Chicago, IL:University of Chicago Press.
  59. Moran, M.,Tegano, D.(2005).Moving toward visual literacy: Photography as a language of teacher inquiry.Early Childhood Research & Practice,7
  60. Morgan, M. S.(2020).Inducing visibility and visual deduction.East Asian Science, Technology and Society: An International Journal,14(2),225-252.
  61. O’Neill, S. J.,Smith, N.(2014).Climate change and visual imagery.Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Climate Change,5,73-87.
  62. Palatinus, D. L.(2010).From the pictorial turn to the embodiment of vision.American and British Studies Annual,3,127-136.
  63. Pauwels, L.(2006).A theoretical framework for assessing visiual representational practices in knowledge building and science communications.Visual cultures of science: Rethinking representational practices in knowledge building and science communication,Hanover, NH:
  64. Pauwels, L.(2006).Introduction: The role of visual representation in the production of scientific reality.Visual cultures of science: Rethinking representational practices in knowledge building and science communication,Hanover, NH:
  65. Pauwels, L.(Ed.)(2006).Visual cultures of science: Rethinking representational practices in knowledge building and science communication.Hanover, NH:Dartmouth College Press.
  66. Rodriguez, L.,Dimitrova, D.(2011).The levels of visual framing.Journal of Visual Literacy,30(1),48-65.
  67. Romer, E. D.,Bobkina, J.(2021).Exploring critical and visual literacy needs in digital learning environments: The use of memes in the EFL/ESL university classroom.Thinking Skills and Creativity,40
  68. Roth, W. H.,Pozzer-Ardenghi, L.,Han, J. Y.(2005).Critical graphicacy: Understanding visual representation.Dordrecht, Netherlands:Springer.
  69. Roth, W. M.,McGinn, M. K.(1998).Inscriptions: Toward a theory of representing as social practice.Review of Educational Research,68(1),35-59.
  70. Rudwick, M.(1976).The emergence of a visual language for geological science 1760-1840.History of Science,14,149-195.
  71. Sanders-Bustle, L.(Ed.)(2003).Image, inquiry, and transformative practice: engaging learners in creative and critical inquiry through visual representation.New York, NY:P. Lang.
  72. Schneider, B.,Nocke, T.(2014).Image politics of climate change: Introduction.Image politics of climate change: Visualizations, imaginations, documentations,Bielefeld, DE:
  73. Secord, J. A.(2004).Knowledge in Transit.Isis,95(4),654-672.
  74. Simon, J.,Zarzoso, A.(2013).Visual representations in science.Endeavour,37(3),121-122.
  75. Smith, M.(Ed.)(2008).Visual culture studies: Interviews with key thinkers.Thousand Oaks, CA:SAGE Publications Inc.
  76. Star, S. L.,Griesemer, J. R.(1989).Institutional Ecology, ‘Translations’ and Boundary Objects: Amateurs and Professionals in Berkeley’s Museum of Vertebrate Zoology, 1907-39.Social Studies of Science,19(3),387-420.
  77. Tergan, S. O.(Ed.),Keller, T.(Ed.)(2005).Knowledge and information visualization.Berlin, DE:Springer-Verlag.
  78. Tibbetts, P.(1990).Representation and the realist-constructivist controversy.Representation in scientific practice,London, UK:
  79. Tversky, B.(2011).Visualizing thought.Cognitive Science,3,499-535.
  80. Ursyn, A.(Ed.)(2016).Knowledge visualization and visual literacy in science education.Hershey, PA:Information Science Reference.
  81. Valdés, J. J.,Romero, E.,Barton, A. J.(2012).Data and knowledge visualization with virtual reality spaces, neural networks and rough sets: Application to cancer and geophysical prospecting data.Expert Systems with Applications,39(18),13193-13201.
  82. van Beek, Metze, T.,Kunseler, E.,Huitzing, H.,Blois, F.,Wardekker, A.(2020).Environmental visualizations: Framing and reframing between science, policy and society.Environmental Science & Policy,114,497-505.
  83. Wardekker, A.,Lorenz, S.(2019).The visual framing of climate change impacts and adaptation in the IPCC assessment reports.Climatic Change,156,273-292.
  84. Ware, C.(2005).Visual thinking for design.Los Altos, CA:Morgan Kaufmann.
  85. Whitley, R.(1985).Knowledge producers and knowledge acquirers: Popularisation as a relation between scientific fields and their production.Expository science: Forms and functions of popularization,Dordrecht, NL:
  86. 丁松筠(1984)。1984 年「牛頓｣獻言 2。牛頓，10，144。
  87. 中國出版公司（編）(1981).中華民國出版年鑑.臺北市:中國出版公司.
  88. 中華民國年鑑社（編）(1981).中華民國年鑑.臺北市:正中書局.
  89. 王振昌（2020 年 11 月 18 日）。〈從懶人包和圖卡，看社會淺碟化〉，《聯合報》，A12 版。
  90. 出版年鑑編輯委員會（編）(1986).中華民國七十五年出版年鑑.臺北市:中國出版公司.
  91. 本刊編輯部(1980)。如何提高攝影在雜誌中的品質。綜合月刊，139，135-144。
  92. 石永貴(1984)。1984 年「牛頓｣獻言 1。牛頓，9，147。
  93. 行政院主計處（2008）。《中華民國臺灣地區國民所得統計摘要》。取自「行政院主計總處電子書平臺」https://ebook.dgbas.gov.tw/public/Data/36311514329.pdf
  94. 吳啟元(1984)。新興科普刊物崛起的影響及其前景。新書月刊，15，86-91。
  95. 宋晶宜（1983 年 10 月 17 日）。〈科學雜誌良性競爭：國外版有後來居上之勢，讀者可更快吸收到新知〉，《民生報》，3 版。
  96. 李傳楷,李幸懋(1989)。細說登革熱：從經典登革熱到一發不可收拾的出血性登革熱。牛頓，71，18-35。
  97. 李嘉(1983)。Newton 科學雜誌的新里程碑。牛頓，1，46-51。
  98. 李賢鎧(1984)。1984 年「牛頓｣獻言 2。牛頓，10，146。
  99. 沈君山(1984)。1984 年「牛頓｣獻言 1。牛頓，9，144。
  100. 辛鬱(2009).神奇跑馬燈：科學月刊四十年人．事流變.臺北市:文史哲.
  101. 周成功(1984)。一點感想：科學月刊獲頒金鼎獎之後。科學月刊，180，904-905。
  102. 周成功(1985)。推動科學普及工作的兩隻手。科學月刊，187，484-485。
  103. 周珊瑢(1980)。臺灣有那些通俗科學刊物？。大眾科學，1(3)，10-13。
  104. 林孝信（1990 年 3 月 19 日）。〈替科學雜誌打分數〉，《中國時報》，18 版。
  105. 林孝信(1990)。下一個二十年：如何更成熟而不老化？。科學月刊，241，18-20。
  106. 林春輝(1984)。「科學眼」雜誌發刊辭。科學月刊，1，3。
  107. 林清玄(1980).在暗夜中迎曦.臺北市:時報文化.
  108. 胡錦標(1984)。1984 年「牛頓｣獻言 2。牛頓，10，147。
  109. 區曣中（2022）。〈生物學中的視覺化表徵〉，《華文哲學百科》。取自http://mephilosophy.ccu.edu.tw/entry.php?entry_name=生物學中的視覺化表徵
  110. 張之傑(1980)。一人譯一文運動。科學月刊，125，2。
  111. 張之傑(2008)。臺灣綜合科普刊物之回顧與展望。國家圖書館館訊，115，3-8。
  112. 張蕙芬,呂葵玲,鄭淑蓮(1984)。機器人：「人造人」可能嗎？。牛頓，18，12-25。
  113. 張耀仁(2020).臺灣報導文學傳播論：從「人間副刊」到《人間》雜誌.臺北市:五南.
  114. 梁森昌(1984)。如何提高攝影在雜誌中的品質。綜合月刊，139，135-144。
  115. 陳文咸(1984)。1984 年「牛頓｣獻言 2。牛頓，10，147。
  116. 陳汝勤(1984)。1984 年「牛頓｣獻言 1。牛頓，9，145。
  117. 陳國成(1990)。科月走出自己的道路。科學月刊二十周年紀念文集
  118. 陳淑美(2019)。資料視覺化技術於政府資料分析之應用。主計月刊，758，84-91。
  119. 陳學祈(2021)。那些年，我們都買的大套書：「臺灣出版史料調查與研究系列講座」座談記錄。文訊，423，40-48。
  120. 傅維信(1996)。「科普」出版品的引進與興起。書香月刊，57，5-6。
  121. 黃明川(1986)。攝影視覺與臺灣現象。雄獅美術，183，86-92。
  122. 塗紹基(1984)。地震：環太平洋地震帶上的福爾摩沙。牛頓，17，54-73。
  123. 楊玉齡,張蕙芬(1984)。B 型肝炎在臺灣：向長期困擾國人的病毒挑戰。牛頓，14，8-25。
  124. 楊澤(1994).七○年代：理想繼續燃燒.臺北市:時報文化.
  125. 賈亦珍（1984 年 12 月 11 日）。〈市場胃納有限，外籍兵團壓境：科學雜誌苦戰的時候到了〉，《民生報》，9 版。
  126. 賈亦珍（1983 年 5 月 9 日）。〈以畫面和淺顯文字深入基層：大眾化科學雜誌具教育意義〉，《民生報》，7 版。
  127. 漢聲雜誌社(1984).漢聲小百科.臺北市:英文漢聲.
  128. 趙哲聖（2021 年 3 月 19 日）。〈娛樂至死，鮭魚萬萬歲？〉，《聯合報》，A15版。
  129. 劉源俊(1990)。二十年來的科學月刊。科學月刊，241，9-14。
  130. 蔣夢麟(1954)。中華科學畫報發刊弁言。中華科學畫報，1，2。
  131. 蕭阿勤(2008).回歸現實：臺灣 1970 年代的戰後世代與文化政治變遷.臺北市:中央研究院社會學研究所.
  132. 聯經出版編輯部（編）(2011).中華民國發展史：文學與藝術.臺北市:國立政治大學.
  133. 聯經出版編輯部（編）(2011).中華民國發展史：文學與藝術.臺北市:國立政治大學.
  134. 顏崑陽(1984)。1984 年「牛頓｣獻言 1。牛頓，10，148。
print cancel