當代社會的科學議題，涉及龐大且跨領域的知識範圍，包含知識本質的科學不確定性，以及專家利害關係人作為知識代言者的論述與立場偏誤，最終使科技政策論辯過程並非以學術研究成果作為基礎。雖近期社會脈絡中的科學研究趨勢，已逐漸涵容公眾參與及提升決策品質的方向。基於實證以提升決策品質漸成顯學，然而實務上作為實證決策的科學證據常僅片面與間接地出現在公眾決策的場合中。本研究實踐以知識為主體的科學參與為目標，回顧其背景理論與研究方法，並以人機協作的混合文獻研究法為主要工具，以萊克多巴胺肉品進口爭議、大崙尾山碳中和複層林營造案兩個背景知識本質相異，但都具爭議且被社會關注之議題為研究案例。分析結果顯示，此類爭議議題均始於上位政策，均有大量專家參與論辯，但專家間存在領域學理或學術社群的對立，致使社會衝突無法透過常態的專業知識機制得到解決。本研究亦確認文獻回顧技術的混合運用，可有效處理爭議性科學議題的關鍵問題，並識別爭議之本質，該方法具有公眾協作的良善效益，因此提出民主治理機制的調整方向，以實踐低成本的科技民主參與。

In contemporary society, scientific issues span vast interdisciplinary knowledge, entailing inherent uncertainties and biases from experts and stakeholders. This reality often disconnects technological policy debates from academic research. Recent trends in scientific research favor public participation and decision-making quality, but evidence-based decision-making still struggles, presenting fragmented scientific evidence in public policymaking. This study explores practical scientific participation, utilizing a hybrid literature study method with human-computer collaboration. It examines two socially significant cases: the ractopamine-treated meat import dispute and the Dalunweishan carbon-neutral forest project. Analysis shows these issues, stemming from higher-level policies, involve extensive expert debates but suffer from unresolved conflicts within expert communities. The study confirms that combining literature review techniques effectively tackles contentious scientific topics, identifying dispute essences and promoting public collaboration. It suggests adjustments in democratic governance to enable low-cost, technological democratic participation.

丁振豐 (2000)。整合分析 Meta-Analysis。載於劉真（主編），教育大辭書。文景書局。https://terms.naer.edu.tw/detail/5429ebd9dfbdaff52ddd61c4991eeb5b/
天良行 (2021)。大崙頭尾山造林工作監工日誌。臺北市立美術館。https://www.tfam.museum/File/files/01news/210505_20TBEVENT/05_%E8%87%BA%E5%8C%97%E5%B8%82%E6%9E%97%E6%A5%AD%E6%8A%80%E5%B8%AB%E5%85%AC%E6%9C%83%E7%9B%A3%E5%B7%A5%E6%97%A5%E8%AA%8C-%E6%A0%B8%E5%AE%9A.pdf, https://web.archive.org/web/20231008103230/https://www.tfam.museum/File/files/01news/210505_20TBEVENT/05_%E8%87%BA%E5%8C%97%E5%B8%82%E6%9E%97%E6%A5%AD%E6%8A%80%E5%B8%AB%E5%85%AC%E6%9C%83%E7%9B%A3%E5%B7%A5%E6%97%A5%E8%AA%8C-%E6%A0%B8%E5%AE%9A.pdf
日本食品安全委員會 (2004)。塩酸ラクトパミンの食品健康影響評価について。食品安全委員会。http://www.fsc.go.jp/hyouka/hy/hy-ractopamine-hyouka.pdf, https://web.archive.org/web/20041114190408/http://www.fsc.go.jp/hyouka/hy/hy-ractopamine-hyouka.pdf
王元才 (2021，7月13日)。針對北市府工務局大崙頭、大崙尾山區造林說明回覆。環境資訊中心。https://e-info.org.tw/node/231652, https://web.archive.org/web/20231005050041/https://e-info.org.tw/node/231652
王松永 (2014)。森林、木材利用與地球暖化防止之推廣手冊（王松永、葉民權、蔡明哲、卓志隆、邱祈榮、楊德新、羅盛峰主編）。行政院農業委員會林務局。
立法院民眾黨黨團 (2020)。萊克多巴胺對人體影響及標章規範公聽會。立法院民眾黨黨團。https://www.tpp.org.tw/newsdetail/699, https://web.archive.org/web/20221205122926/https://www.tpp.org.tw/newsdetail/699
立法院社會福利及衛生環境委員會 (2020)。立法院第10屆第2會期社會福利及衛生環境委員會「政府宣布開放含萊克多巴胺豬肉進口，對國人健康之影響與危害」公聽會。立法院議事轉播IVOD網際網路多媒體隨選視訊系統。https://ivod.ly.gov.tw/Play/Full/1M/13072
立法院經濟委員會 (2020)。審查「行政院農業委員會函，為修正該會101年9月7日農防字第1011473960號公告，請查照案。」公聽會報告。立法院經濟委員會https://www.ly.gov.tw/Pages/Detail.aspx?nodeid=43853&pid=204247
行政院農業委員會 (2023)。臺灣 2050 淨零轉型 「自然碳匯」 關鍵戰略行動計畫（核定本）。行政院。https://ws.ndc.gov.tw/Download.ashx?u=LzAwMS9hZG1pbmlzdHJhdG9yLzEwL3JlbGZpbGUvMC8xNTQ1Ni8yMmRlYzg4NS0yNDZhLTQxZWYtYWIwMi0yMmM0N2Y5NTU3N2QucGRm&n=MDlf6Ieq54S256Kz5Yyv6Zec6Y215oiw55Wl6KGM5YuV6KiI55WrKOaguOWumuacrCkucGRm&icon=.pdf
吳淑燕 (2005)。大崙頭語蝶 生態環境• 蝴蝶觀察。蝶(2005-3)，34-37。https://doi.org/10.29747/BUTTERFLY.200509.0003
李俊璋 (2019)。食用肉品暴露萊克多巴胺之健康風險評估。衛生福利部食品藥物管理署。
李根政 (2018)。台灣山林百年紀。天下雜誌。
李根政. (2021，9月28日)。北美館碳中和展覽走味的美意：大崙尾山伐木造林，為何爭議？。報導者。https://www.twreporter.org/a/opinion-taipei-biennial-afforestation-dispute, https://web.archive.org/web/20210928040545/https://www.twreporter.org/a/opinion-taipei-biennial-afforestation-dispute
杜文苓 (2010)。環評決策中公民參與的省思：以中科三期開發爭議爲例。公共行政學報(35)，29-60。https://doi.org/10.30409/JPA.201006_(35).0002
杜文苓、李翰林 (2011)。環境資訊公開的民主實踐課題-以霄裡溪光電廢水汙染爭議爲例。臺灣民主季刊，8(2)，59-98。https://doi.org/10.6448/TDQ.201106.0059
杜文苓、施佳良 (2014)。環評知識的政治角色－檢視六輕健康風險評估爭議 [The Political Role of Scientific Knowledge in the Environmental Impact Assessment: Examining the Health Risk Assessment Disputes of the 6th Naphtha]。臺灣民主季刊，11(2)，91-138。
杜懿祺、盧佳君、賴律翰、林招膨、黃慶順 (2015)。我國婦女乳房 X 光癌症篩檢陽性發生率之多變數分析。台灣應用輻射與同位素雜誌，11(4)，1201-1207。
林定薇. (2011)。台北市內雙溪地區之土地利用適宜性評估 [碩士論文，國立臺灣大學]。http://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/jspui/handle/123456789/10291
林幸助、溫國彰、林子皓、許皓捷. (2021，4月14日)。第一階段：生態報告。三接與藻礁保育、能源轉型關係〈對焦會議〉，國立臺灣大學霖澤館1301多媒體教室。https://smctw.tw/wp-content/uploads/2019/09/%E4%B8%89%E6%8E%A5%E8%88%87%E8%97%BB%E7%A4%81%E4%BF%9D%E8%82%B2%E5%B0%8D%E7%84%A6%E6%9C%83%E8%AD%B0%EF%BC%8D%EF%BC%8D%E6%96%87%E6%92%AD%E7%A8%BF.pdf
林俊成、黃曜謀、王培蓉、詹為巽 (2020)。臺北市政府工務局大地工程處108 年度臺北市林地整體發展建議委託專業服務案成果報告書。臺北市政府工務局大地工程處。https://www- ws.gov.taipei/001/Upload/356/relfile/16485/117660/fe620b36-0cbd-4bb8-b876-9979aa781d9f.pdf, https://web.archive.org/web/20231005044510/https://www-ws.gov.taipei/001/Upload/356/relfile/16485/117660/fe620b36-0cbd-4bb8-b876-9979aa781d9f.pdf
林書帆 (2021，8月9日)。大崙尾山整形記｜怎樣才算是好的森林？。我們的島。https://ourisland.pts.org.tw/content/8106, https://web.archive.org/web/20231005045859/https://ourisland.pts.org.tw/content/8106
林陳涌 (2015)。科學課程與STS。台灣科技與社會研究學會。http://sts.org.tw/archives/88
林照真 (2009)。台灣科學社群40年風雲：記錄六、七0年代理工知識份子與《科學月刊》。國立交通大學出版社。
邱祈榮 (2021，8月29日)。針對北美館「儲回大地的藝術」碳中和複層林營造案七點公開訴求。環境資訊中心。https://e-info.org.tw/node/230795, https://web.archive.org/web/20231005050138/https://e-info.org.tw/node/230795
胡逸翮、岳修平 (2019)。社群媒體之食品安全風險溝通行為研究—以新浪微博為例。圖書資訊學刊，17(1)，151-183。https://doi.org/10.6182/jlis.201906_17(1).151
孫依婷 (2021，5月19日)。減碳造林惹議 大崙尾山不當砍伐事件 北市大地處諾公開計畫資料。深度低碳社會。http://ddpp.ntu.edu.tw/selected-articles/domestic-news/1291-new-1100519-5.html, https://web.archive.org/web/20231005045537/http://ddpp.ntu.edu.tw/selected-articles/domestic-news/1291-new-1100519-5.html
孫義方 (2020)。森林動態樣區 全球研究與臺灣的參與。載於誰在森林LONGSTAY?仔細聆聽、用心觀察，看生態學家如何解讀森林密碼 (第1版，頁18-41)。行政院農業委員會林務局。
徐仕璿 (2021)。運用臺北市大崙尾山步道公民科學資料探討氣候變化對植物物候之影響 [碩士論文，國立臺灣大學]。https://doi.org/10.6342/NTU202100917
徐寶琛 (2003)。本省崩塌地適生原生植物的採種、撒播之研究。文化大學機構典藏。http://ir.lib.pccu.edu.tw/handle/987654321/662
柴松林 (1996)。從環境主義到綠色消費主義。消費者保護研究，2，87-96。https://tpl.ncl.edu.tw/NclService/JournalContentDetail?SysId=A96025169
高佩懃、陳璽尹、徐美苓、劉華美、周桂田 (2020)。在專家，媒體與公眾之間：作為科技風險溝通途徑的新興科技媒體中心。傳播研究與實踐，10(1)，51-78。https://doi.org/10.6123/JCRP.202001_10(1).0003
國家發展委員會 (2022)。臺灣2050淨零排放路徑及策略總說明。行政院https://www.ndc.gov.tw/Content_List.aspx?n=DEE68AAD8B38BD76
張坤城 (2021)。108年臺北市大崙頭山林地示範區調查及營造成果報告書。臺北市政府工務局大地工程處。https://www-ws.gov.taipei/Download.ashx?u=LzAwMS9VcGxvYWQvMzU2L3JlbGZpbGUvMTY0ODUvMTE5MTMwLzg0ZjY1MDk5LTI2MDUtNDliYi04ODI3LTA2MzZmM2M1ZmM5ZS5wZGY%3D&n=MTA45bm06Ie65YyX5biC5aSn5bSZ6aCt5bGx5p6X5Zyw56S656%2BE5Y2A6Kq%2F5p%2Bl5Y%2BK54ef6YCg5oiQ5p6c5aCx5ZGK5pu4LnBkZg%3D%3D&icon=..pdf, https://web.archive.org/web/20231009060814/https://www-ws.gov.taipei/Download.ashx?u=LzAwMS9VcGxvYWQvMzU2L3JlbGZpbGUvMTY0ODUvMTE5MTMwLzg0ZjY1MDk5LTI2MDUtNDliYi04ODI3LTA2MzZmM2M1ZmM5ZS5wZGY%3D&n=MTA45bm06Ie65YyX5biC5aSn5bSZ6aCt5bGx5p6X5Zyw56S656%2BE5Y2A6Kq%2F5p%2Bl5Y%2BK54ef6YCg5oiQ5p6c5aCx5ZGK5pu4LnBkZg%3D%3D&icon=..pdf#
張坤城、邱清安 (2022)。108年度臺北市大崙頭山林地示範區調查及營造委託專業服務案（111年度續約）成果報告書。https://www-ws.gov.taipei/Download.ashx?u=LzAwMS9VcGxvYWQvMzU2L3JlbGZpbGUvMTY0ODUvMTE5MTMwL2U2NzI3Mzk3LTY0NjktNDJjMS1hOWM0LTJhMzExNTk2ZmJmZC5wZGY%3d&n=5oiQ5p6c5aCx5ZGKLTEwOOW5tOW6puiHuuWMl%2bW4guWkp%2bW0memgreWxseael%2bWcsOekuuevhOWNgOiqv%2bafpeWPiueHn%2bmAoOWnlOiol%2bWwiOalreacjeWLmeahiCgxMTHlubTluqbnuozntIQpLnBkZg%3d%3d&icon=..pdf, https://web.archive.org/web/20231005045402/https://www-ws.gov.taipei/Download.ashx?u=LzAwMS9VcGxvYWQvMzU2L3JlbGZpbGUvMTY0ODUvMTE5MTMwL2U2NzI3Mzk3LTY0NjktNDJjMS1hOWM0LTJhMzExNTk2ZmJmZC5wZGY%3d&n=5oiQ5p6c5aCx5ZGKLTEwOOW5tOW6puiHuuWMl%2bW4guWkp%2bW0memgreWxseael%2bWcsOekuuevhOWNgOiqv%2bafpeWPiueHn%2bmAoOWnlOiol%2bWwiOalreacjeWLmeahiCgxMTHlubTluqbnuozntIQpLnBkZg%3d%3d&icon=..pdf
張瀚文 (2012)。文獻探討 literature review。載於胡述兆（主編），圖書館學與資訊科學大辭典。漢美圖書。https://terms.naer.edu.tw/detail/a039e478f8171be4a8414e964f33e80d/?seq=5
教育部 (2018)。十二年國民基本教育課程綱要：國民中小學暨普通型高級中等學校。教育部https://www.naer.edu.tw/ezfiles/0/1000/attach/63/pta_18538_240851_60502.pdf
梁聖岳 (2022，7月21日)。種樹造林，可以為台灣增加多少森林碳匯？聽眾提問與講者回應整理紀錄。財團法人地球公民基金會。https://www.cet-taiwan.org/info/story/4187, https://web.archive.org/web/20221120014239/https://www.cet-taiwan.org/info/story/4187
畢恒達 (1995)。生活經驗研究的反省：詮釋學的觀點。本土心理學研究(4)，224-259。https://doi.org/10.6254/1995.4.224
莊文忠 (2018)。循證的政策制定與資料分析：挑戰與前瞻。文官制度季刊，10(2)，1-20。
莫季雍 (2013)。各國科學傳播發展。載於臺灣科普傳播事業發展計畫-計畫辦公室。
郭幸榮、劉興旺 (2012)。近代育林思維之發展趨勢與作業調適。臺灣林業雙月刊，38(3)，3-15。https://www.forest.gov.tw/MagazineFile.aspx?fno=5985
陳阿興 (2021a)。【臺北市立美術館「2020 台北雙年展」作品《儲回大地的藝術》碳中和複層林營造案】期末成果報告。臺北市立美術館。https://www.tfam.museum/File/files/01news/210505_20TBEVENT/%E8%87%BA%E5%8C%97%E5%B8%82%E7%AB%8B%E7%BE%8E%E8%A1%93%E9%A4%A8%E3%80%8C2020%E5%8F%B0%E5%8C%97%E9%9B%99%E5%B9%B4%E5%B1%95%E3%80%8D%E4%BD%9C%E5%93%81%E3%80%8A%E5%84%B2%E5%9B%9E%E5%A4%A7%E5%9C%B0%E7%9A%84%E8%97%9D%E8%A1%93%E3%80%8B%E7%A2%B3%E4%B8%AD%E5%92%8C%E8%A4%87%E5%B1%A4%E6%9E%97%E7%87%9F%E9%80%A0%E6%A1%88_%E6%9C%9F%E6%9C%AB%E5%A0%B1%E5%91%8A1215s.pdf, https://web.archive.org/web/20231008105459/https://www.tfam.museum/File/files/01news/210505_20TBEVENT/%E8%87%BA%E5%8C%97%E5%B8%82%E7%AB%8B%E7%BE%8E%E8%A1%93%E9%A4%A8%E3%80%8C2020%E5%8F%B0%E5%8C%97%E9%9B%99%E5%B9%B4%E5%B1%95%E3%80%8D%E4%BD%9C%E5%93%81%E3%80%8A%E5%84%B2%E5%9B%9E%E5%A4%A7%E5%9C%B0%E7%9A%84%E8%97%9D%E8%A1%93%E3%80%8B%E7%A2%B3%E4%B8%AD%E5%92%8C%E8%A4%87%E5%B1%A4%E6%9E%97%E7%87%9F%E9%80%A0%E6%A1%88_%E6%9C%9F%E6%9C%AB%E5%A0%B1%E5%91%8A1215s.pdf
陳阿興 (2021b)。【臺北市立美術館「2020 臺北雙年展」作品《儲回大地的藝術》碳中和複層林營造案】規劃報告。臺北市立美術館。https://www.tfam.museum/File/files/01news/210505_20TBEVENT/04_109EX1042_%E8%A4%87%E5%B1%A4%E6%9E%97%E7%87%9F%E9%80%A0%E8%A6%8F%E5%8A%83%E5%A0%B1%E5%91%8A%E6%9B%B8.pdf, https://web.archive.org/web/20231008093155/https://www.tfam.museum/File/files/01news/210505_20TBEVENT/04_109EX1042_%E8%A4%87%E5%B1%A4%E6%9E%97%E7%87%9F%E9%80%A0%E8%A6%8F%E5%8A%83%E5%A0%B1%E5%91%8A%E6%9B%B8.pdf
陳恒安 (2011)。【STS 四不】首部曲：STS不是科普也不是科技與人文大師對話。科學發展，84-86。https://ejournal.stpi.narl.org.tw/sd/download?source=10006/10006-15.pdf&vlId=A995E5EA-B30E-4FD7-AF76-511AE9526675&nd=0&ds=0
陳敦源、劉宜君、蕭乃沂、林昭吟 (2011)。政策利害關係人指認的理論與實務：以全民健保改革爲例。國家與社會(10)，1-65。https://doi.org/10.30174/JSS.201106.0001
陳瑞麟 (2019)。一個另類的STS方法論。科技醫療與社會(28)，9-53。https://doi.org/10.6464/TJSSTM.201904_(28).0001
陳震菖 (2016)。鄰近火成岩與沉積岩母質化育土壤之性質與碳儲存量差異 [碩士論文，國立臺灣大學]。http://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/jspui/handle/123456789/51247
陳麗玉、吳祥鳴 (2016)。保安林經營管理問題研析、對策與展望。台灣林業，42(3)，49-58。https://kmweb.moa.gov.tw/redirect_files.php?theme=knowledgebase&id=474138
彭慰 (1995)。書目計量法 Bibliometrics。載於胡兆述（主編），圖書館學與資訊科學大辭典。漢美圖書。https://terms.naer.edu.tw/detail/87d91ccc52ab7d56a5590a57b51bcc44/
黃俊儒、楊文金、靳知勤、陳恒安 (2008)。誰的STS?-【科學教育】與【科學研究】的【同】與【不同】。科學教育學刊，16(6)，585-603。https://doi.org/10.6173/CJSE.2008.1606.02
黃思敏 (2020)。北美館2020台北雙年展：聚焦氣候變遷、省思藝術產業碳排放。環境資訊中心。https://e-info.org.tw/node/228162, https://web.archive.org/web/20231005044051/https://e-info.org.tw/node/228162
廖英凱、劉湘瑤 (2023)。以系統性文獻分析與書目計量法探討萊克多巴胺爭議中的科學研究與論證。圖書資訊學刊，21(1)，103-136。https://doi.org/10.6182/jlis.202306_21(1).103
廖鎮洲 (2021，4月26日)。北市雙年展「儲回大地的藝術」如何演變為「大崙尾砍伐事件」。環境資訊中心。https://e-info.org.tw/node/230739, https://web.archive.org/web/20231005043546/https://e-info.org.tw/node/230739
臺北市立美術館 (2020)。2020台北雙年展導覽手冊。臺北市立美術館。https://www.tfam.museum/File/Exhibition/Main/677/20201120231118478979.pdf, https://web.archive.org/web/20231005041338/https://www.tfam.museum/File/Exhibition/Main/677/20201120231118478979.pdf
臺北市立美術館 (2021a)。「2020台北雙年展」作品《儲回大地的藝術》碳中和複層林營造案決標公告。臺北市立美術館。https://web.pcc.gov.tw/tps/atm/AtmAwardWithoutSso/QueryAtmAwardDetail?pkAtmMain=NTMyOTk0OTI=, https://web.archive.org/web/20240221084021/https://web.pcc.gov.tw/tps/atm/AtmAwardWithoutSso/QueryAtmAwardDetail?pkAtmMain=NTMyOTk0OTI=
臺北市立美術館 (2021b，四月27日)。本館「2020台北雙年展」之「儲回大地的藝術」計畫說明。臺北市立美術館。https://www.tfam.museum/News/News_page.aspx?ddlLang=zh-tw&id=1512, https://web.archive.org/web/20231005041827/https://www.tfam.museum/News/News_page.aspx?ddlLang=zh-tw&id=1512
臺北市林業技師公會 (2021，四月27日)。臺北市林業技師公會說明。臺北市立美術館。https://www.tfam.museum/File/files/01news/210427_ArtsofComingDowntoEarth/%E9%99%84%E4%BB%B6_%E8%87%BA%E5%8C%97%E5%B8%82%E6%9E%97%E6%A5%AD%E6%8A%80%E5%B8%AB%E5%85%AC%E6%9C%83%E8%AA%AA%E6%98%8E.pdf, https://web.archive.org/web/20231005041928/https://www.tfam.museum/File/files/01news/210427_ArtsofComingDowntoEarth/%E9%99%84%E4%BB%B6_%E8%87%BA%E5%8C%97%E5%B8%82%E6%9E%97%E6%A5%AD%E6%8A%80%E5%B8%AB%E5%85%AC%E6%9C%83%E8%AA%AA%E6%98%8E.pdf
臺北市政府工務局大地工程處 (2019)。翻譯字彙對照。臺北市政府工務局大地工程處。https://www.geo.gov.taipei/News_Content.aspx?n=289255CDD89637A7&s=03718871695953D7, https://web.archive.org/web/20231009090541/https://www.geo.gov.taipei/News_Content.aspx?n=289255CDD89637A7&s=03718871695953D7
臺北市政府工務局大地工程處 (2021a)。永續城市，給臺北一個健康的森林。臺北市政府工務局大地工程處。https://www.geo.gov.taipei/News_Content.aspx?n=23285747C0511EC4&s=1EB501F7085B8122&sms=72544237BBE4C5F6, https://web.archive.org/web/20210507073716/https://www.geo.gov.taipei/News_Content.aspx?n=23285747C0511EC4&sms=72544237BBE4C5F6&s=1EB501F7085B8122
臺北市政府工務局大地工程處 (2021b)。臺北市 20 種原生木本植物推薦。臺北市政府工務局大地工程處。https://www.geo.gov.taipei/cp.aspx?n=6D22646E4785BB49&s=93B4639A2437D804, https://web.archive.org/web/20220523062315/https://www.geo.gov.taipei/cp.aspx?n=6D22646E4785BB49&s=93B4639A2437D804
臺北市政府工務局大地工程處 (2022)。人工林演變成生長不佳的次生林Q&A懶人包。臺北市政府工務局大地工程處。https://www-ws.gov.taipei/001/Upload/356/relfile/16485/117660/13195bc1-c334-4c88-adda-053a880e6ced.pdf, https://web.archive.org/web/20231005045006/https://www-ws.gov.taipei/001/Upload/356/relfile/16485/117660/13195bc1-c334-4c88-adda-053a880e6ced.pdf
臺北市政府工務局大地工程處 (2023)。永續森林專區。臺北市政府工務局大地工程處。https://www.geo.gov.taipei/cp.aspx?n=6D22646E4785BB49, https://web.archive.org/web/20231005044118/https://www.geo.gov.taipei/cp.aspx?n=6D22646E4785BB49
臺北市政府公民參與委員會 (2022)。臺北市政府公民參與委員會104年至111年第4季會議紀錄。臺北市政府研究發展考核委員會。https://www-ws.gov.taipei/Download.ashx?u=LzAwMS9VcGxvYWQvNTQ0L3JlbGZpbGUvMTMxOTcvODkxMTU4OS9mYTVkODQ0Yy03MGQzLTQ5MDAtODYzYi0wYTVkNzhkOWRjZTkucGRm&n=6Ie65YyX5biC5pS%2f5bqc5YWs5rCR5Y%2bD6IiH5aeU5ZOh5pyDMTA05bm06IezMTEx5bm056ysNOWto%2bacg%2bitsOe0gOmMhC5wZGY%3d&icon=..pdf, https://web.archive.org/web/20231017172703/https://www-ws.gov.taipei/Download.ashx?u=LzAwMS9VcGxvYWQvNTQ0L3JlbGZpbGUvMTMxOTcvODkxMTU4OS9mYTVkODQ0Yy03MGQzLTQ5MDAtODYzYi0wYTVkNzhkOWRjZTkucGRm&n=6Ie65YyX5biC5pS%2f5bqc5YWs5rCR5Y%2bD6IiH5aeU5ZOh5pyDMTA05bm06IezMTEx5bm056ysNOWto%2bacg%2bitsOe0gOmMhC5wZGY%3d&icon=..pdf
臺北市政府公民參與委員會公民參政組 (2022)。臺北市政府公民參與委員會公民參政組公民參政組會議紀錄。臺北市政府研究發展考核委員會。https://www-ws.gov.taipei/Download.ashx?u=LzAwMS9VcGxvYWQvNTQ0L3JlbGZpbGUvMTMxOTcvODkxMTU4OS84OTY0NjViOS1iMWQxLTQzZDgtYWRhOC00YjU2ZjcxNDlkMzUucGRm&n=5bel5L2c57WEMV%2flhazmsJHlj4PmlL%2fntYTmnIPorbDntIDpjIQucGRm&icon=..pdf, https://web.archive.org/web/20231017172932/https://www-ws.gov.taipei/Download.ashx?u=LzAwMS9VcGxvYWQvNTQ0L3JlbGZpbGUvMTMxOTcvODkxMTU4OS84OTY0NjViOS1iMWQxLTQzZDgtYWRhOC00YjU2ZjcxNDlkMzUucGRm&n=5bel5L2c57WEMV%2flhazmsJHlj4PmlL%2fntYTmnIPorbDntIDpjIQucGRm&icon=..pdf
趙金祁 (1996)。科學救國與科教興國。科學教育月刊，187，2-10。https://www.sec.ntnu.edu.tw/uploads/asset/data/625641e2381784d09345c153/1996-187-01(02-10).pdf
劉文旋 (2012)。科學知識社會學：在哲學與社會學之間。載於黃之棟、黃瑞祺、李正風（主編），科技與社會：社會建構論、科學社會學和知識社會學的視角（頁33-63）。群學出版。
劉湘瑤、張俊彥 (2018)。論自然科學課程綱要中的【素養】內涵。科學教育月刊，413，2-9。https://doi.org/10.6216/SEM.201810_(413).0001
蔡明月 (2003)。資訊計量學與文獻特性。國立編譯館。
蔡明月 (2004)。論資訊計量學。圖書館學與資訊科學，30(2)。
蔡明月、(2012)。「資訊社會」之知識地圖建構。圖書館學與資訊科學，38(1)。https://jlis.glis.ntnu.edu.tw/ojs../index.php/jlis/article/view/577
蔡清田 (2010)。課程改革中的「素養」(competence) 與「能力」(ability)。教育研究月刊，200，93-104。
蔡清田 (2011)。課程改革中的「素養」(competence) 與「知能」(literacy) 之差異。教育研究月刊，203，84-96。
衛生福利部臺北醫院 (2016)。Terbutaline用藥指導單張。衛生福利部臺北醫院。https://www.tph.mohw.gov.tw/public/dept_ufile/b3/9ea79da355020efa5f2001d8d133a1b5.pdf
鄭婷宇、耿璐、李柏鋒 (2020)。數位時代下的民主現場-開放科技和開放文化。臺灣民主季刊，17(1)，121-129。
黎芸靈 (2008)。國家在風險治理的角色—以奈米國家型計畫為例 [碩士論文，國立臺灣大學]。http://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/jspui/handle/123456789/9873
賴羿鳴 (2015)。內雙溪自然中心戶外教學方案「森林背包客棧」對國小高年級學童環境教育之成效研究 [碩士論文，國立中興大學]。https://hdl.handle.net/11296/g37gyy
賴羿鳴、曾喜育、曾彥學 (2015)。內雙溪自然中心戶外教學方案【森林背包客棧】對國小高年級學童環境教育之成效研究。林業研究季刊，37(3)，181-193。
錢建文、王文心、蘇偉碩 (2020)。拒毒豬、顧健康！揭穿瘦肉精萊克多巴胺的安全神話：科學證據彙編。新國際理論與實踐中心。
戴東源 (2012)。為何科學知識需要社會學的分析？：科學知識社會學初探。載於黃之棟、黃瑞祺、李正風（主編），科技與社會：社會建構論、科學社會學和知識社會學的視角（頁3-31）。群學出版。
謝豐吉、趙育隆、劉湘瑤 (2010)。探究不同團體對焚化處理爭議之觀點及心理模式。環境與管理研究，11(1)，100-125。http://nhuir.nhu.edu.tw/retrieve/8039/3042110105.pdf 
AAAS. (1951). Appendix A: The Arden House Statement. In S. G. Kohlstedt, M. M. Sokal, & B. V. Lewenstein (Eds.), The Establishment of Science in America: 150 Years of the American Association for the Advancement of Science (pp. 167-169). Rutgers University Press. https://books.google.com.tw/books?id=8JgEZkM8OVwC&pg=PA167&lpg=PA167&dq=1951+Arden+House+Statement&source=bl&ots=wtZUCxedTV&sig=ACfU3U1MwNJPgMWvEH8WaElKpfkyuPZ4vg&hl=zh-TW&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwi51L_W7KzmAhWFxYsBHee_AdYQ6AEwCnoECAkQAQ#v=onepage&q=1951%20Arden%20House%20Statement&f=false, https://www.aaas.org/resources/policy-aaas-arden-house-statement
Aikenhead, G. S. (2005). Research into STS science education. Educación Química, 16(3), 384-397. https://doi.org/10.22201/fq.18708404e.2005.3.66101
Aikenhead, G. S. (2006). Science education for everyday life: Evidence-based practice. Teachers College Press.
Aldridge, J. E., Meyer, A., Seidler, F. J., & Slotkin, T. A. (2005). Developmental exposure to terbutaline and chlorpyrifos: pharmacotherapy of preterm labor and an environmental neurotoxicant converge on serotonergic systems in neonatal rat brain regions. Toxicology and applied pharmacology, 203(2), 132-144. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.taap.2004.08.002
Alemanno, A., & Capodieci, G. (2012). Testing the Limits of Global Food Governance: The Case of Ractopamine. European Journal of Risk Regulation, 3(3), 400-407. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1867299X00002294
Alexander, P. A. (2020). Methodological Guidance Paper: The Art and Science of Quality Systematic Reviews. Review of Educational Research, 90(1), 6-23. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654319854352
Amazon.com. (2023). What is GPT? Amazon.com. Retrieved October 1 from https://aws.amazon.com/what-is/gpt/
https://web.archive.org/web/20231016032316/https://aws.amazon.com/what-is/gpt/
Amirshokoohi, A. (2010). Elementary Pre-Service Teachers' Environmental Literacy and Views toward Science, Technology, and Society (STS) Issues. Science Educator, 19(1), 56-63.
Andretta, I., Kipper, M., Lehnen, C. R., Demori, A. B., Remus, A., & Lovatto, P. A. (2012). Meta-analysis of the relationship between ractopamine and dietary lysine levels on carcass characteristics in pigs [Article]. Livestock Science, 143(1), 91-96. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.livsci.2011.09.004
Anitha, K., Verchot, L. V., Joseph, S., Herold, M., Manuri, S., & Avitabile, V. (2015). A review of forest and tree plantation biomass equations in Indonesia [Review]. Annals of Forest Science, 72(8), 981-997. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13595-015-0507-4
Arvai, J. L., Campbell, V. E. A., Baird, A., & Rivers, L. (2004). Teaching Students to Make Better Decisions About the Environment: Lessons From the Decision Sciences. The Journal of Environmental Education, 36(1), 33-44. https://doi.org/10.3200/joee.36.1.33-44
Arvai, J. L., Gregory, R., & McDaniels, T. L. (2001). Testing a structured decision approach: value-focused thinking for deliberative risk communication. Risk Analysis, 21(6), 1065-1076. https://doi.org/10.1111/0272-4332.216175
Ascui, F., & Lovell, H. (2012). Carbon accounting and the construction of competence. Journal of Cleaner Production, 36, 48-59. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2011.12.015
Atkin, J. M., & Helms, J. (1993). Getting Serious About Priorities in Science Education1. Studies in Science Education, 21(1), 1-20. https://doi.org/10.1080/03057269308560012
Azure. (2023). Azure OpenAI Service REST API reference. https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/azure/ai-services/openai/reference#completions, https://web.archive.org/web/20230719000803/https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/azure/ai-services/openai/reference#completions
Baba, V. V., & HakemZadeh, F. (2012). Toward a theory of evidence based decision making. Management Decision, 50(5), 832-867. https://doi.org/10.1108/00251741211227546
Balami, S., Vasutová, M., Godbold, D., Kotas, P., & Cudlín, P. (2020). Soil fungal communities across land use types [Review]. Iforest-Biogeosciences and Forestry, 13, 548-558. https://doi.org/10.3832/ifor3231-013
Banta, H. D. (2003). CONSIDERATIONS IN DEFINING EVIDENCE FOR PUBLIC HEALTH : The European Advisory Committee on Health Research World Health Organization Regional Office for Europe. International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care, 19(3), 559-572. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0266462303000515
Barnes, B., & Edge, D. O. (1982). Science in context: readings in the sociology of science. MIT Press.
Bartelt-Hunt, S., Snow, D. D., Damon-Powell, T., & Miesbach, D. (2011). Occurrence of steroid hormones and antibiotics in shallow groundwater impacted by livestock waste control facilities [Article]. Journal of Contaminant Hydrology, 123(3-4), 94-103. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jconhyd.2010.12.010
Barton, D. (2007). Literacy: An introduction to the ecology of written language. Blackwell Publishing.
Bencze, L., Pouliot, C., Pedretti, E., Simonneaux, L., Simonneaux, J., & Zeidler, D. (2020). SAQ, SSI and STSE education: defending and extending “science-in-context”. Cultural Studies of Science Education, 15(3), 825-851. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11422-019-09962-7
Bernal, J. D. (1939). The social function of science. The Social Function of Science. https://archive.org/details/in.ernet.dli.2015.188098
Berry, M. D., Gainetdinov, R. R., Hoener, M. C., & Shahid, M. (2017). Pharmacology of human trace amine-associated receptors: Therapeutic opportunities and challenges. Pharmacology & Therapeutics, 180, 161-180. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pharmthera.2017.07.002
Blackburn, S. (2008). Boyle, Robert. In S. Blackburn (Ed.), The Oxford Dictionary of Philosophy (2 rev. ed.). London: Oxford University Press.
Bodmer, W. F. (1985). The public understanding of science: report of the Royal Society's ad hoc group. In. London: The Royal Society.
Bodmer, W. F. (1997). The public understanding of science. In Biotechnology and world health : Risks and benefits of vaccines and other medical products produced by genetic engineering : proceedings of a WHO meeting (pp. 19-22). World Health Organization. https://apps.who.int/iris/handle/10665/63726
Bodmer, W. F. (2010). Public Understanding of Science: The BA, the Royal Society and COPUS. Notes and Records of the Royal Society, 64(suppl_1). https://doi.org/10.1098/rsnr.2010.0035
Bonney, R., Ballard, H., Jordan, R., McCallie, E., Phillips, T., Shirk, J., & Wilderman, C. C. (2009). Public Participation in Scientific Research: Defining the Field and Assessing Its Potential for Informal Science Education. A CAISE Inquiry Group Report. C. f. A. o. I. S. E. (CAISE). https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED519688
Bonney, R., Cooper, C. B., Dickinson, J., Kelling, S., Phillips, T., Rosenberg, K. V., & Shirk, J. (2009). Citizen Science: A Developing Tool for Expanding Science Knowledge and Scientific Literacy. BioScience, 59(11), 977-984. https://doi.org/10.1525/bio.2009.59.11.9
Bornmann, L., & Leydesdorff, L. (2014). Scientometrics in a changing research landscape: bibliometrics has become an integral part of research quality evaluation and has been changing the practice of research. EMBO reports, 15(12), 1228-1232. https://doi.org/10.15252/embr.201439608
Bose, T., Reina, A., & Marshall, J. A. R. (2017). Collective decision-making. Current Opinion in Behavioral Sciences, 16, 30-34. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cobeha.2017.03.004
Bradt, D. A. (2009). Evidence-Based Decision-Making (Part 1): Origins and Evolution in the Health Sciences. Prehospital and Disaster Medicine, 24(4), 298-305. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1049023X00007019
Braun, M. (2009). The evolution of emissions trading in the European Union – The role of policy networks, knowledge and policy entrepreneurs. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 34(3), 469-487. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aos.2008.06.002
Brindis-Santos, A. I., Palma-López, D. J., Mata-Zayas, E. E., & Palma-Cancino, D. J. (2021). Impacts of oil palm cultivation on soil organic carbon stocks in Mexico: evidence from plantations in Tabasco State. Cahiers Agricultures, 30, 47. https://doi.org/10.1051/cagri/2021033
Brossard, D., & Lewenstein, B. V. (2009). A critical appraisal of models of public understanding of science: Using practice to inform theory. In L. Kahlor & P. Stout (Eds.), Communicating Science: New Agendas in Communication (pp. 25-53). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203867631
Brown, S., & Lugo, A. E. (2017). Trailblazing the Carbon Cycle of Tropical Forests from Puerto Rico [Review]. Forests, 8(4), 18, Article 101. https://doi.org/10.3390/f8040101
Brownson, R. C., Gurney, J. G., & Land, G. H. (1999). Evidence-Based Decision Making in Public Health. Journal of Public Health Management and Practice, 5(5), 86-97. https://doi.org/10.1097/00124784-199909000-00012
Bryant, C. (2003). Does Australia need a more effective policy of science communication? International Journal for Parasitology, 33(4), 357-361. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0020-7519(03)00004-3
Bullock, R. C. L., & Hanna, K. S. (2012). Community forestry: a way forward. In R. C. L. Bullock & K. S. Hanna (Eds.), Community Forestry: Local Values, Conflict and Forest Governance (pp. 173-180). Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511978678.009
Burkard, M. (2012). The Ractopamine Dispute in the Codex Alimentarius Commission. European Journal of Risk Regulation, 3(4), 610-613. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1867299X0000670X
Burns, T. W., O'Connor, D. J., & Stocklmayer, S. M. (2016). Science Communication: A Contemporary Definition. Public understanding of science, 12(2), 183-202. https://doi.org/10.1177/09636625030122004
Bybee, R. W. (1997). Towards an understanding of scientific literacy. Scientific Literacy: An international symposium, Kiel, Germany.
Cairney, P. (2016). The Politics of Evidence-Based Policy Making. Palgrave Macmillan.
Cairney, P. (2017). The Politics of Evidence-Based Policy Making. In Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Politics: Oxford University Press.
Centner, T. J., Alvey, J. C., & Stelzleni, A. M. (2014). Beta agonists in livestock feed: Status, health concerns, and international trade [Article]. Journal of Animal Science, 92(9), 4234-4240. https://doi.org/10.2527/jas.2014-7932
Chambers, L. W. (1997). Evidence-Based Healthcare: How to Make Health Policy and Management Decisions. CMAJ: Canadian Medical Association Journal, 157(11), 1598-1599. https://doi.org/10.1177/030802269706001110
Chellappandi, P., & Vijayakumar, C. S. (2018). Bibliometrics, Scientometrics, Webometrics/Cybermetrics, Informetrics and Altmetrics--An Emerging Field in Library and Information Science Research. Shanlax International Journal of Education, 7(1), 5-8.
Chen, C. (2006). CiteSpace II: Detecting and visualizing emerging trends and transient patterns in scientific literature. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 57(3), 359-377. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.20317
Chen, C. (2010). Information visualization. WIREs Computational Statistics, 2(4), 387-403. https://doi.org/10.1002/wics.89
Chen, C. (2014). The Citespace Manual Version 1.01.
Chen, W.-C., Wang, Y.-C., Shen, J.-L., Chen, H.-Y., Chang, C.-H., Tsai, F.-J., Lin, W.-Y., & Chen, Y.-H. (2015). Potential genitourinary toxicity and lithogenic effect of ractopamine. Journal of Food and Nutrition Research, 3, 670-674. https://doi.org/10.12691/jfnr-3-10-9
Cleary, J., Peters, T. J., Sharp, D., & Hamilton, W. (2007). Clinical features of colorectal cancer before emergency presentation: a population-based case-control study. Fam Pract, 24(1), 3-6. https://doi.org/10.1093/fampra/cml059
Collins, H. M., & Evans, R. (2016). The Third Wave of Science Studies. Social studies of science, 32(2), 235-296. https://doi.org/10.1177/0306312702032002003
Collins, H. M., & Evans, R. (2017). Why democracies need science. John Wiley & Sons.
Consensus. (2021). https://consensus.app/
Creswell, J. W. (1998). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five traditions. Sage Publications, Inc.
Cross, M. A. K. D. (2013). Rethinking epistemic communities twenty years later. Review of International Studies, 39(1), 137-160. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0260210512000034
Cross, R. T. (1999). The public understanding of science: implications for education. International journal of science education, 21(7), 699-702. https://doi.org/10.1080/095006999290354
Cruz, F. L., de Carvalho, E. B., Ramos, E. M., Pereira, L. J., & Zangeronimo, M. G. (2021). Relationship between beta-adrenergic agonists, calpain system activity and beef texture: A systematic review. Journal of Animal Physiology and Animal Nutrition, 105(3), 442-451. https://doi.org/10.1111/jpn.13479
Davis, H. E., & Belk, K. E. (2018). Managing meat exports considering production technology challenges [Article]. Animal Frontiers, 8(3), 23-29. https://doi.org/10.1093/AF/VFY007
Davis, R. (2009). The elusive gentleman scientist. Scitable. https://www.nature.com/scitable/blog/student-voices/the_elusive_gentleman_scientist/, https://web.archive.org/web/20090817030604/http://www.nature.com/scitable/blog/student-voices/the_elusive_gentleman_scientist
Davis, W. (1937). Popularization of Science. Nature, 139(3518), 578-579. https://doi.org/10.1038/139578d0
Day, R. A. (1998). How to write and publish scientific papers. Instituto Oswaldo Cruz, 93(3), 000-000. https://doi.org/10.1590/S0074-02761998000300029
de Castilhos Ghisi, N., Zuanazzi, N. R., Fabrin, T. M. C., & Oliveira, E. C. (2020). Glyphosate and its toxicology: A scientometric review. Science of the Total Environment, 733, 139359. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.139359
DeBoer, G. E. (2000). Scientific literacy: Another look at its historical and contemporary meanings and its relationship to science education reform. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 37(6), 582-601. https://doi.org/10.1002/1098-2736(200008)37:6<582::Aid-tea5>3.0.Co;2-l
deLeon, P. (1990). Participatory Policy Analysis: Prescriptions and Precautions. Asian Journal of Public Administration, 12(1), 29-54. https://doi.org/10.1080/02598272.1990.10800227
Delgado-Rodriguez, M., & Sillero-Arenas, M. (2018). Systematic review and meta-analysis. Medicina Intensiva, 42(7), 444-453. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.medin.2017.10.003
Dennis, M. A. (2017). Big Science. In Encyclopædia Britannica. London: Encyclopædia Britannica, inc.
DePoy, E., & Gitlin, L. N. (2016). Introduction to Research: Understanding and Applying Multiple Strategies (Fifth ed.). Elsevier Inc. https://www.sciencedirect.com/book/9780323261715/introduction-to-research
Díaz-Vallejo, E. J., Seeley, M., Smith, A. P., & Marín-Spiotta, E. (2021). A meta-analysis of tropical land-use change effects on the soil microbiome: Emerging patterns and knowledge gaps [Review]. Biotropica, 53(3), 738-752. https://doi.org/10.1111/btp.12931
Dierkes, M., & von Grote, C. (Eds.). (2000). Between Understanding and Trust: The Public, Science and Technology. Routledge.
Division, N. (2010). Residue Evaluation of Certain Veterinary Drugs - Joint FAO/WHO Expert Committee on Food Additives (JECFA). Meeting 2010 – Evaluation of Data on Ractopamine Residues in Pig Tissues. FAO JECFA Monographs 9. FAO/WHO.
dos Santos, W. L. P., & Mortimer, E. F. (2002). Humanistic science education from Paulo Freire’s ‘Education as the practice of freedom’perspective. International Organization for Science and Technology Education (IOSTE) symposium–PR,
Dwivedi, Y. K., Kshetri, N., Hughes, L., Slade, E. L., Jeyaraj, A., Kar, A. K., Baabdullah, A. M., Koohang, A., Raghavan, V., Ahuja, M., Albanna, H., Albashrawi, M. A., Al-Busaidi, A. S., Balakrishnan, J., Barlette, Y., Basu, S., Bose, I., Brooks, L., Buhalis, D., . . . Wright, R. (2023). Opinion Paper: “So what if ChatGPT wrote it?” Multidisciplinary perspectives on opportunities, challenges and implications of generative conversational AI for research, practice and policy. International Journal of Information Management, 71, 102642. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2023.102642
Edwards, D. P., Socolar, J. B., Mills, S. C., Burivalova, Z., Koh, L. P., & Wilcove, D. S. (2019). Conservation of Tropical Forests in the Anthropocene [Review]. Current Biology, 29(19), R1008-R1020. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cub.2019.08.026
EFSA. (2009). Safety evaluation of ractopamine [Article]. EFSA Journal, 7(4), Article 1041. https://doi.org/10.2903/j.efsa.2009.1041
Eisenhart, M., Finkel, E., & Marion, S. F. (1996). Creating the conditions for scientific literacy: A re-examination. American Educational Research Journal, 33(2), 261-295. https://doi.org/10.3102/00028312033002261
Elicit. (2021). https://elicit.com/
Estabrooks, C. A. (1998). Will evidence-based nursing practice make practice perfect? Can J Nurs Res, 30(1), 15-36. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9726180
FAO. (2012, 6 July 2012). UN food safety body sets limits on veterinary growth promoting drug https://www.fao.org/news/story/pt/item/150953/icode/
https://web.archive.org/web/20120719125123/http://www.fao.org/news/story/ru/item/150953/icode/
Farley, K. A. (2007). Grasslands to tree plantations: Forest transition in the andes of Ecuador [Review]. Annals of the Association of American Geographers, 97(4), 755-771. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8306.2007.00581.x
Ferreira, M. S. d. S., Garbossa, C. A. P., Oberlender, G., Pereira, L. J., Zangeronimo, M. G., Sousa, R. V. d., & Cantarelli, V. d. S. (2013). Effect of ractopamine on lipid metabolism in vivo-a systematic review [Article]. Brazilian Archives of Biology and Technology, 56(1), 35-43. https://doi.org/10.1590/S1516-89132013000100005
Feyerabend, P. K. (1978). Science in a free society. New Left Books.
Fischer, F. (2009). Democracy and Expertise: Reorienting Policy Inquiry. Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199282838.001.0001
Fischhoff, B., & Davis, A. L. (2014). Communicating scientific uncertainty. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 111(Supplement 4), 13664-13671. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1317504111
Fishburn, P. C. (1983). Research in decision theory: A personal perspective. Mathematical Social Sciences, 5(2), 129-148. https://doi.org/10.1016/0165-4896(83)90014-8
Fourez, G. (1997). Scientific and technological literacy as a social practice. Social studies of science, 27(6), 903-936. https://doi.org/10.1177/030631297027006003
Fulford, I., & Ng, A. (2023). ChatGPT Prompt Engineering for Developers. DeepLearning.AI. https://learn.deeplearning.ai/chatgpt-prompt-eng, https://web.archive.org/web/20230427164600/https://learn.deeplearning.ai/chatgpt-prompt-eng/lesson/1/introduction
Gallagher, J. J. (1971). A broader base for science teaching. Science Education, 55(3), 329-338. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.3730550312
Garbossa, C. A. P., Carvalho Júnior, F. M., Silveira, H., Faria, P. B., Schinckel, A. P., Abreu, M. L. T., & Cantarelli, V. S. (2015). Effects of ractopamine and arginine dietary supplementation for sows on growth performance and carcass quality of their progenies [Article]. Journal of Animal Science, 93(6), 2872-2884. https://doi.org/10.2527/jas.2014-8824
Garg, A. X., Hackam, D., & Tonelli, M. (2008). Systematic Review and Meta-analysis: When One Study Is Just not Enough. Clinical Journal of the American Society of Nephrology, 3(1), 253-260. https://doi.org/10.2215/cjn.01430307
Gatford, K. L., Blasio, M. J. D., Roberts, C. T., Nottle, M. B., Kind, K. L., Wettere, W. H. E. J. v., Smits, R. J., & Owens, J. A. (2009). Responses to maternal GH or ractopamine during early-mid pregnancy are similar in primiparous and multiparous pregnant pigs [Article]. Journal of Endocrinology, 203(1), 143-154. https://doi.org/10.1677/JOE-09-0131
Gawande, A. (2016). The Mistrust of Science. The New Yorker. https://www.newyorker.com/news/news-desk/the-mistrust-of-science
Gidaya, N. B., Lee, B. K., Burstyn, I., Michael, Y., Newschaffer, C. J., & Mortensen, E. L. (2016). In utero exposure to β-2-adrenergic receptor agonist drugs and risk for autism spectrum disorders. Pediatrics, 137(2), e20151316. https://doi.org/10.1542/peds.2015-1316
Gold, J. I., & Shadlen, M. N. (2007). The Neural Basis of Decision Making. Annual Review of Neuroscience, 30(Volume 30, 2007), 535-574. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.neuro.29.051605.113038
Golivets, M. (2011). Aesthetic values of forest landscapes [Master's thesis, Swedish University of Agricultural Science]. https://stud.epsilon.slu.se/3203/1/Golivets_M_110902.pdf
Gray, J. A. M. (2004). Evidence based policy making. BMJ (Clinical research ed.), 329(7473), 988-989. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.329.7473.988
Green, B. N., Johnson, C. D., & Adams, A. (2006). Writing narrative literature reviews for peer-reviewed journals: secrets of the trade. Journal of chiropractic medicine, 5(3), 101-117. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0899-3467(07)60142-6
Gregory, R., Slovic, P., & Flynn, J. (1996). Risk perceptions, stigma, and health policy. Health & Place, 2(4), 213-220. https://doi.org/10.1016/1353-8292(96)00019-6
Griscom, H. P., & Ashton, M. S. (2011). Restoration of dry tropical forests in Central America: A review of pattern and process [Review]. Forest Ecology and Management, 261(10), 1564-1579. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foreco.2010.08.027
Guo, L. B., & Gifford, R. M. (2002). Soil carbon stocks and land use change: a meta analysis [Review]. Global Change Biology, 8(4), 345-360. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1354-1013.2002.00486.x
Gyau Baffour Awuah, K., & Bijimi, C. K. (2023). Discovering the core stakeholders in the Nigerian urban water supply system. Sustainable Water Resources Management, 10(1), 8. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40899-023-00986-0
Haddaway, N. R., Woodcock, P., Macura, B., & Collins, A. (2015). Making literature reviews more reliable through application of lessons from systematic reviews. Conservation Biology, 29(6), 1596-1605. https://doi.org/10.1111/cobi.12541
Hammersley, M. (2020). Reflections on the Methodological Approach of Systematic Reviews. In O. Zawacki-Richter, M. Kerres, S. Bedenlier, M. Bond, & K. Buntins (Eds.), Systematic Reviews in Educational Research: Methodology, Perspectives and Application (pp. 23-39). Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-27602-7_2
Haro-Carrión, X., Loiselle, B., & Putz, F. E. (2021). Tree Species Diversity, Composition and Aboveground Biomass Across Dry Forest Land-Cover Types in Coastal Ecuador [Review]. Tropical Conservation Science, 14, 1940082921995415, Article 1940082921995415. https://doi.org/10.1177/1940082921995415
Haskins, R., & Margolis, G. (2015). Show Me the Evidence: Obama's Fight for Rigor and Results in Social Policy. Brookings Institution Press. http://www.jstor.org/stable/10.7864/j.ctt7zsvr9
Hérubel, J.-P. V. M. (1999). Historical Bibliometrics: Its Purpose and Significance to the History of Disciplines [Dictionary of Bibliometrics, Virgil Diodato; Bibliometrics: An Annotated Bibliography, Mary K. Sellen]. Libraries & Culture, 34(4), 380-388. http://www.jstor.org/stable/25548766
Hess, D. J. (1997). Science studies: An advanced introduction. NYU press.
Hodson, D. (2003). Time for action: Science education for an alternative future. International journal of science education, 25(6), 645-670. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690305021
Hodson, D. (2005). What is scientific literacy and why do we need it? Multiple perspectives on education and society in Newfoundaland and Labrador, 33(1-2). http://www.mun.ca/educ/faculty/mwatch/fall05/hodson.htm
https://www.mun.ca/educ/faculty/mwatch/Multiple%20Perspectives%202007.pdf%20revised.pdf
Hodson, D. (2010). Science Education as a Call to Action. Canadian Journal of Science, Mathematics and Technology Education, 10(3), 197-206. https://doi.org/10.1080/14926156.2010.504478
Holbrook, J., & Rannikmae, M. (2007). The Nature of Science Education for Enhancing Scientific Literacy. International journal of science education, 29(11), 1347-1362. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690601007549
Holbrook, J., Rannikmae, M., Coll, R., & Taylor, N. (2009). The Meaning of Scientific Literacy. International Journal of Environmental and Science Education, 4(3), 275-288.
Hong, Q. N., & Pluye, P. (2018). Systematic reviews: A brief historical overview. Education for Information, 34(4), 261-276. https://doi.org/10.3233/EFI-180219
Hood, W. W., & Wilson, C. S. (2001a). The Literature of Bibliometrics, Scientometrics, and Informetrics. Scientometrics, 52(2), 291-314. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1017919924342
Hood, W. W., & Wilson, C. S. (2001b). The Literature of Bibliometrics, Scientometrics, and Informetrics. Scientometrics, 52(2), 291. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1017919924342
Huang, L., Zhou, M., Lv, J., & Chen, K. (2020). Trends in global research in forest carbon sequestration: A bibliometric analysis. Journal of Cleaner Production, 252, 119908. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.119908
Hurd, P. D. (1958). Science literacy: Its meaning for American schools. Educational leadership, 16(1), 13-16. http://www.ascd.org/ASCD/pdf/journals/ed_lead/el_195810_hurd.pdf
Hutchison, B. G. (1993). Critical appraisal of review articles. Can Fam Physician, 39, 1097-1102. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8499790
Irwin, A. (1995). Citizen science: A study of people, expertise and sustainable development. Routledge.
Ivancheva, L. (2008). Scientometrics Today: A Methodological Overview. COLLNET Journal of Scientometrics and Information Management, 2(2), 47-56. https://doi.org/10.1080/09737766.2008.10700853
Iyengar, S., & Massey, D. S. (2019). Scientific communication in a post-truth society. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 116(16), 7656-7661. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1805868115
Jacobs, N. (2002). Co-term network analysis as a means of describing the information landscapes of knowledge communities across sectors [Article]. Journal of Documentation, 58(5), 548-562. https://doi.org/10.1108/00220410210441577
JECFA. (2004). Evaluation of certain veterinary drug residues in food. Sixty-second report of the Joint FAO/WHO Expert Committee on food additives [Article]. World Health Organization technical report series, 925, 1-72. https://www.who.int/publications/i/item/9241209259
JECFA. (2006). Evaluation of certain veterinary drug residues in food. Sixty-sixth report of the Joint FAO/WHO Expert Committee on Food Additives [Article]. World Health Organization technical report series(939), 1-80, backcover. https://www.who.int/publications/i/item/9789241599397
Jenkins, E. W. (1992). School science education: towards a reconstruction. Journal of curriculum studies, 24(3), 229-246. https://doi.org/10.1080/0022027920240302
Jenkins, E. W. (1999). School science, citizenship and the public understanding of science. International journal of science education, 21(7), 703-710. https://doi.org/10.1080/095006999290363
Jorgensen, D. L. (1999). Participant observation: A methodology for human studies [參與觀察法] (王昭正 & 朱瑞淵, Trans.). 弘智文化.
Kaushal, N. (2018). Relevance of evidence based decision making: Cases in ancient and current scenarios. Management Dynamics, 18(2), 9-18. https://doi.org/10.57198/2583-4932.1032
Kerr, N. L., & Tindale, R. S. (2004). Group Performance and Decision Making. Annual Review of Psychology, 55(Volume 55, 2004), 623-655. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.55.090902.142009
Kloos, B., Hill, J., Thomas, E., Wandersman, A., Elias, M. J., & Dalton, J. H. (2012). Community psychology: Linking individuals and communities. Wadsworth/Cengage Learning.
Knight, D. (2006). Public understanding of science: a history of communicating scientific ideas. Routledge.
Kolkman, M. J., Kok, M., & Van der Veen, A. (2005). Mental model mapping as a new tool to analyse the use of information in decision-making in integrated water management. Physics and chemistry of the earth, Parts A/B/C, 30(4-5), 317-332. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pce.2005.01.002
Kolkman, M. J., van der Veen, A., & Geurts, P. A. T. M. (2007). Controversies in water management: Frames and mental models. Environmental Impact Assessment Review, 27(7), 685-706. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eiar.2007.05.005
Kosinski, M. (2023). Theory of mind might have spontaneously emerged in large language models. arXiv. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2302.02083
Kumar, V., Rahman, Z., & Kazmi, A. A. (2016). Stakeholder identification and classification: a sustainability marketing perspective. Management Research Review, 39(1), 35-61. https://doi.org/10.1108/MRR-09-2013-0224
Landauer, T., Foltz, P., & Laham, D. (1998). An Introduction to Latent Semantic Analysis. Discourse Processes, 25(2-3), 259-284. https://doi.org/10.1080/01638539809545028
Lau, J., Ioannidis, J. P. A., & Schmid, C. H. (1998). Summing up evidence: one answer is not always enough. The Lancet, 351(9096), 123-127. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0140-6736(97)08468-7
Laugksch, R. C. (2000). Scientific literacy: A conceptual overview. Science Education, 84(1), 71-94. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1098-237X(200001)84:13.0.CO;2-C
Laverty, S. M. (2016). Hermeneutic Phenomenology and Phenomenology: A Comparison of Historical and Methodological Considerations. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 2(3), 21-35. https://doi.org/10.1177/160940690300200303
Lean, I. J., Thompson, J. M., & Dunshea, F. R. (2014). A meta-analysis of zilpaterol and ractopamine effects on feedlot performance, carcass traits and shear strength of meat in cattle [Article]. PLoS One, 9(12), Article e115904. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0115904
Legrenzi, P., Girotto, V., & Johnson-Laird, P. N. (1993). Focussing in reasoning and decision making. Cognition, 49(1-2), 37-66. https://doi.org/10.1016/0010-0277(93)90035-t
Li, Y., & Guo, M. (2021). Scientific Literacy in Communicating Science and Socio-Scientific Issues: Prospects and Challenges [Systematic Review]. Frontiers in Psychology, 12. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.758000
Likens, G. E. (2010). The role of science in decision making: does evidence-based science drive environmental policy? Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment, 8(6), e1-e9. https://doi.org/10.1890/090132
Liu, P., Yuan, W., Fu, J., Jiang, Z., Hayashi, H., & Neubig, G. (2023). Pre-train, prompt, and predict: A systematic survey of prompting methods in natural language processing. ACM Computing Surveys, 55(9), 1-35. https://doi.org/10.1145/3560815
Liu, S., Wright, A. P., Patterson, B. L., Wanderer, J. P., Turer, R. W., Nelson, S. D., McCoy, A. B., Sittig, D. F., & Wright, A. (2023). Using AI-generated suggestions from ChatGPT to optimize clinical decision support. Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association, 30(7), 1237-1245. https://doi.org/10.1093/jamia/ocad072
Liu, X. (2013). Expanding Notions of Scientific Literacy: A Reconceptualization of Aims of Science Education in the Knowledge Society. In N. Mansour & R. Wegerif (Eds.), Science Education for Diversity: Theory and Practice (pp. 23-39). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-4563-6_2
Liu, X., Grandy, D. K., & Janowsky, A. (2014). Ractopamine, a livestock feed additive, is a full agonist at trace amine-associated receptor 1 [Article]. Journal of Pharmacology and Experimental Therapeutics, 350(1), 124-129. https://doi.org/10.1124/jpet.114.213116
Liu, X., Trogisch, S., He, J.-S., Niklaus, P. A., Bruelheide, H., Tang, Z., Erfmeier, A., Scherer-Lorenzen, M., Pietsch, K. A., Yang, B., Kühn, P., Scholten, T., Huang, Y., Wang, C., Staab, M., Leppert, K. N., Wirth, C., Schmid, B., & Ma, K. (2018). Tree species richness increases ecosystem carbon storage in subtropical forests. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 285(1885), 20181240. https://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2018.1240
Loewenstein, G. F., & Jane, M. (1990). Dynamic processes in risk perception. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 3(2), 155-175. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00056370
Loewenstein, G. F., Weber, E. U., Hsee, C. K., & Welch, N. (2001). Risk as feelings. Psychological bulletin, 127(2), 267-286. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.127.2.267
Loneragan, G. H., Thomson, D. U., & Scott, H. M. (2014). Increased mortality in groups of cattle administered the β-adrenergic agonists ractopamine hydrochloride and zilpaterol hydrochloride [Article]. PLoS One, 9(3), Article e91177. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0091177
Lorenzano, P. (2010). Logic and Methodology of Science: An
Introduction to the Philosophy of Science. In P. Lorenzano, H.-J. Rheinberger, E. Ortiz, & C. D. Galles (Eds.), History and Philosophy of Science and Technology (Vol. 1). Encyclopedia of Life Support Systems. https://books.google.com.tw/books?id=kZ7EDAAAQBAJ
Marchant-Forde, J. N., Jr., D. C. L., Pajor, E. A., Richert, B. T., & Schinckel, A. P. (2003). The effects of ractopamine on the behavior and physiology of finishing pigs [Article]. Journal of Animal Science, 81(2), 416-422. https://doi.org/10.2527/2003.812416x
Marín-Spiotta, E., & Sharma, S. (2013). Carbon storage in successional and plantation forest soils: a tropical analysis [Review]. Global Ecology and Biogeography, 22(1), 105-117. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1466-8238.2012.00788.x
Mayer, M., Prescott, C. E., Abaker, W. E. A., Augusto, L., Cécillon, L., Ferreira, G. W. D., James, J., Jandl, R., Katzensteiner, K., Laclau, J. P., Laganière, J., Nouvellon, Y., Paré, D., Stanturf, J. A., Vanguelova, E. I., & Vesterdal, L. (2020). Tamm Review: Influence of forest management activities on soil organic carbon stocks: A knowledge synthesis [Review]. Forest Ecology and Management, 466, 25. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foreco.2020.118127
McCurdy, R. C. (1958). Toward a population literate in science. The Science Teacher, 25(7), 366-408.
Merton, R. K. (1973). The sociology of science: Theoretical and empirical investigations. University of Chicago press.
Meyfroidt, P., & Lambin, E. F. (2011). Global Forest Transition: Prospects for an End to Deforestation. In A. Gadgil & D. M. Liverman (Eds.), Annual Review of Environment and Resources (Vol. 36, pp. 343-371). Annual Reviews. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-environ-090710-143732
Moher, D., Liberati, A., Tetzlaff, J., Altman, D. G., & Group*, P. (2009). Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. Annals of internal medicine, 151(4), 264-269, W264. https://doi.org/10.7326/0003-4819-151-4-200908180-00135
Moher, D., Tetzlaff, J., Tricco, A. C., Sampson, M., & Altman, D. G. (2007). Epidemiology and reporting characteristics of systematic reviews. PLoS Med, 4(3), 0447-0455. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.0040078
Mueller, M. P., & Tippins, D. J. (2012). Citizen Science, Ecojustice, and Science Education: Rethinking an Education from Nowhere. In B. J. Fraser, K. Tobin, & C. J. McRobbie (Eds.), Second International Handbook of Science Education (pp. 865-882). Springer Netherlands. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4020-9041-7_58
Mulrow, C. D. (1987). The medical review article: state of the science. Annals of internal medicine, 106(3), 485-488. https://doi.org/10.7326/0003-4819-106-3-485
Murphy, P. K., Knight, S. L., & Dowd, A. C. (2017). Familiar Paths and New Directions. Review of Educational Research, 87(1), 3-6. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654317691764
N’Gbala, F. N. G., Guéi, A. M., & Tondoh, J. E. (2017). Carbon stocks in selected tree plantations, as compared with semi-deciduous forests in centre-west Côte d’Ivoire. Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment, 239, 30-37. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agee.2017.01.015
Nichol, J. E., & Abbas, S. (2021). Evaluating Plantation Forest vs. Natural Forest Regeneration for Biodiversity Enhancement in Hong Kong. Forests, 12(5), 593. https://doi.org/10.3390/f12050593
Oberg, J. (1979). The failure of the 'science' of UFOlogy. New Scientist, 84(1179), 102-105. https://www.debunker.com/texts/ObergCuttySark.html
OECD. (2016). PISA 2015 Results (Volume I). https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264266490-en
Oliver, K., Innvar, S., Lorenc, T., Woodman, J., & Thomas, J. (2014). A systematic review of barriers to and facilitators of the use of evidence by policymakers. BMC Health Services Research, 14(1), 2. https://doi.org/10.1186/1472-6963-14-2
Oliver, K., Lorenc, T., & Innvær, S. (2014). New directions in evidence-based policy research: a critical analysis of the literature. Health Research Policy and Systems, 12(1), 34. https://doi.org/10.1186/1478-4505-12-34
Orszag, P. R. (2009). Open Government Directive. Retrieved from https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/open/documents/open-government-directive
Osareh, F. (1996). Bibliometrics, Citation Analysis and Co-Citation Analysis: A Review of Literature I. Libri, 46(3), 149-158. https://doi.org/10.1515/libr.1996.46.3.149
OSTP. (2015). FACT SHEET: Empowering Students and Others through Citizen Science and Crowdsourcing. Washionton, D.C.: The White House Retrieved from https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/sites/default/files/microsites/ostp/citizen_science_backgrounder_03-23-15.pdf
Ouyang, W., Wang, Y., Lin, C., He, M., Hao, F., Liu, H., & Zhu, W. (2018). Heavy metal loss from agricultural watershed to aquatic system: A scientometrics review. Science of the Total Environment, 637-638, 208-220. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2018.04.434
Oxman, A. D. (1994). Checklists for review articles. BMJ (Clinical research ed.), 309(6955), 648-651. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.309.6955.648
Oxman, A. D., Cook, D. J., & Guyatt, G. H. (1994). Users' guides to the medical literature. VI. How to use an overview. Evidence-Based Medicine Working Group. Jama, 272(17), 1367-1371. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.272.17.1367
Oxman, A. D., & Guyatt, G. H. (1991). Validation of an index of the quality of review articles. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 44(11), 1271-1278. https://doi.org/10.1016/0895-4356(91)90160-B
Paquette, A., & Messier, C. (2010). The role of plantations in managing the world's forests in the Anthropocene [Review]. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment, 8(1), 27-34. https://doi.org/10.1890/080116
Paul, J., Ueno, A., & Dennis, C. (2023). ChatGPT and consumers: Benefits, Pitfalls and Future Research Agenda. International Journal of Consumer Studies, 47(4), 1213-1225. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijcs.12928
Pella, M. O., O'Hearn, G. T., & Gale, C. W. (1966). Referents to scientific literacy. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 4(3), 199-208. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.3660040317
Perna, R., Loughan, A., Perkey, H., & Tyson, K. (2014). Terbutaline and associated risks for neurodevelopmental disorders. Child Development Research, 2014. https://doi.org/10.1155/2014/358608
Perrigo, B. (2023, APRIL 13). The A to Z of Artificial Intelligence. TIME. https://time.com/6271657/a-to-z-of-artificial-intelligence/, https://web.archive.org/web/20231017170739/https://time.com/6271657/a-to-z-of-artificial-intelligence/
Peters, H. P., & Dunwoody, S. (2016). Scientific uncertainty in media content: Introduction to this special issue. Public understanding of science, 25(8), 893-908. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963662516670765
Petersen, I., Heinrichs, H., & Peters, H. P. (2010). Mass-Mediated Expertise as Informal Policy Advice. Science, Technology, & Human Values, 35(6), 865-887. https://doi.org/10.1177/0162243909357914
Peterson, E. M., Wooten, K. J., Subbiah, S., Anderson, T. A., Longing, S., & Smith, P. N. (2017). Agrochemical Mixtures Detected on Wildflowers near Cattle Feed Yards [Article]. Environmental Science and Technology Letters, 4(6), 216-220. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.estlett.7b00123
Phillips, B., Ball, C., Sackett, D., Badenoch, D., Straus, S., Haynes, B., Dawes, M., & Howick, J. (2009). Oxford Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine: Levels of Evidence (March 2009). Oxford Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine. https://www.cebm.ox.ac.uk/resources/levels-of-evidence/oxford-centre-for-evidence-based-medicine-levels-of-evidence-march-2009, https://web.archive.org/web/20200922122645/https://www.cebm.ox.ac.uk/resources/levels-of-evidence/oxford-centre-for-evidence-based-medicine-levels-of-evidence-march-2009
Pickett, W., & Goy, J. (2005). Evidence-Based Decision Making in Agricultural Health and Safet. Journal of Agricultural Safety and Health, 11(4), 387-389. https://doi.org/10.13031/2013.19717
Pigott, T. D., & Polanin, J. R. (2020). Methodological guidance paper: High-quality meta-analysis in a systematic review. Review of Educational Research, 90(1), 24-46. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654319877153
Poletto, R., Cheng, H. W., Meisel, R. L., Garner, J. P., Richert, B. T., & Marchant-Forde, J. N. (2010). Aggressiveness and brain amine concentration in dominant and subordinate finishing pigs fed the β-adrenoreceptor agonist ractopamine [Article]. Journal of Animal Science, 88(9), 3107-3120. https://doi.org/10.2527/jas.2009-1876
Poletto, R., Cheng, H. W., Meisel, R. L., Richert, B. T., & Marchant-Forde, J. N. (2011). Gene expression of serotonin and dopamine receptors and monoamine oxidase-A in the brain of dominant and subordinate pubertal domestic pigs (Sus scrofa) fed a β-adrenoreceptor agonist [Article]. Brain Research, 1381, 11-20. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.brainres.2010.11.035
Poletto, R., Meisel, R. L., Richert, B. T., Cheng, H. W., & Marchant-Forde, J. N. (2010). Behavior and peripheral amine concentrations in relation to ractopamine feeding, sex, and social rank of finishing pigs [Article]. Journal of Animal Science, 88(3), 1184-1194. https://doi.org/10.2527/jas.2008-1576
Polgar, S., & Thomas, S. A. (2019). Introduction to Research in the Health Sciences. Elsevier.
Potočnik, J. (2007). Summary of the Science in Society session on Public Engagement in Science. Portuguese Presidency Conference,
Poulsen Nautrup, B., Van Vlaenderen, I., & Mah, C. K. (2020). The effect of immunization against gonadotropin-releasing factor in market gilts: Meta-analyses of parameters relevant for pig producers, pork packers and retailers/consumers [Article]. Research in Veterinary Science, 131, 159-172. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rvsc.2020.04.012
Prasad, A. (2016). The Contest Over Meaning: Hermeneutics as an Interpretive Methodology for Understanding Texts. Organizational Research Methods, 5(1), 12-33. https://doi.org/10.1177/1094428102051003
Priest, S. (2014). Critical Science Literacy. Bulletin of Science, Technology & Society, 33(5-6), 138-145. https://doi.org/10.1177/0270467614529707
Radhakrishnan, S., Erbis, S., Isaacs, J. A., & Kamarthi, S. (2017). Novel keyword co-occurrence network-based methods to foster systematic reviews of scientific literature. PLoS One, 12(3), e0172778. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0172778
Ramírez-Montoya, D. M. S., & Lugo-Ocando, J. (2020). Systematic review of mixed methods in the framework of educational innovation [Article]. Comunicar, 28(65), 9-20. https://doi.org/10.3916/C65-2020-01
Ramirez, L. F., & Belcher, B. M. (2019). Stakeholder perceptions of scientific knowledge in policy processes: A Peruvian case-study of forestry policy development. Science and Public Policy, 46(4), 504-517. https://doi.org/10.1093/scipol/scz003
Ratcliffe, M. (1997). Pupil decision‐making about socio‐scientific issues within the science curriculum. International journal of science education, 19(2), 167-182. https://doi.org/10.1080/0950069970190203
Rayson, P., & Garside, R. (2000). Comparing corpora using frequency profiling. The Workshop on Comparing Corpora, Hong Kong.
Read, D., & Morgan, M. G. (1998). The Efficacy of Different Methods for Informing the Public About the Range Dependency of Magnetic Fields from High Voltage Power Lines. Risk Analysis, 18(5), 603-610. https://doi.org/10.1023/B:RIAN.0000005934.44033.5e
Reid, J. L., Fagan, M. E., & Zahawi, R. A. (2018). Positive site selection bias in meta-analyses comparing natural regeneration to active forest restoration. Science Advances, 4(5), eaas9143. https://doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.aas9143
Renn, O., Webler, T., Rakel, H., Dienel, P., & Johnson, B. (1993). Public participation in decision making: a three-step procedure. Policy sciences, 26(3), 189-214. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00999716
Rhodes, M. C., Seidler, F. J., Abdel-Rahman, A., Tate, C. A., Nyska, A., Rincavage, H. L., & Slotkin, T. A. (2004). Terbutaline is a developmental neurotoxicant: effects on neuroproteins and morphology in cerebellum, hippocampus, and somatosensory cortex. Journal of Pharmacology and Experimental Therapeutics, 308(2), 529-537. https://doi.org/10.1124/jpet.103.060095
Ritter, M. J., Johnson, A. K., Benjamin, M. E., Carr, S. N., Ellis, M., Faucitano, L., Grandin, T., Salak-Johnson, J. L., Thomson, D. U., Goldhawk, C., & Calvo-Lorenzo, M. S. (2017). Review: Effects of Ractopamine Hydrochloride (Paylean) on welfare indicators for market weight pigs [Article]. Translational Animal Science, 1(4), 533-558. https://doi.org/10.2527/tas2017.0060
Roberts, D. A. (2007). Scientific literacy/science literacy. In S. K. Abell & N. G. Lederman (Eds.), Handbook of Research on Science Education (pp. 743-794). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Ross, J. A. (1981). Improving Adolescent Decision-Making Skills. Curriculum Inquiry, 11(3), 279-295. https://doi.org/10.2307/1179805
Ross, S. (2006). Scientist: The story of a word. Annals of Science, 18(2), 65-85. https://doi.org/10.1080/00033796200202722
Roth, W.-M., & Lee, S. (2004). Science education as/for participation in the community. Science Education, 88(2), 263-291. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.10113
Rousseau, D. M., & Olivas‐Luján, M. R. (2015). Evidence-Based Management. In Wiley Encyclopedia of Management (pp. 1-3). https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118785317.weom110013
Rowe, G., & Frewer, L. J. (2000). Public participation methods: a framework for evaluation. Science, Technology, & Human Values, 25(1), 3-29. https://doi.org/10.1177/016224390002500101
Rowe, G., & Frewer, L. J. (2016). A Typology of Public Engagement Mechanisms. Science, Technology, & Human Values, 30(2), 251-290. https://doi.org/10.1177/0162243904271724
Rutherford, F. J., & Ahlgren, A. (1991). Science for All Americans: Project 2061. Oxford University Press. http://www.project2061.org/publications/sfaa/
Sachett, A., Bevilaqua, F., Chitolina, R., Garbinato, C., Gasparetto, H., Magro, J. D., Conterato, G. M., & Siebe, A. M. (2018). Ractopamine hydrochloride induces behavioral alterations and oxidative status imbalance in zebrafish [Article]. Journal of Toxicology and Environmental Health - Part A: Current Issues, 81(7), 194-201. https://doi.org/10.1080/15287394.2018.1434848
Sackett, D. L. (1995). Applying overviews and meta-analyses at the bedside. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 48(1), 61-66; discussion 67-70. https://doi.org/10.1016/0895-4356(94)00085-5
Sadler, T. D., & Donnelly, L. A. (2006). Socioscientific Argumentation: The effects of content knowledge and morality. International journal of science education, 28(12), 1463-1488. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690600708717
Sallam, M. (2023). ChatGPT Utility in Healthcare Education, Research, and Practice: Systematic Review on the Promising Perspectives and Valid Concerns. Healthcare, 11(6), 887. https://doi.org/10.3390/healthcare11060887
Sang, P. M., Lamb, D., Bonner, M., & Schmidt, S. (2013). Carbon sequestration and soil fertility of tropical tree plantations and secondary forest established on degraded land. Plant and Soil, 362(1), 187-200. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11104-012-1281-9
Santos, W. L. P. D. (2009). Scientific literacy: A Freirean perspective as a radical view of humanistic science education. Science Education, 93(2), 361-382. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.20301
Segen, J. C. (1992). Gentleman scientist. In The Dictionary of Modern Medicine. https://books.google.com.tw/books?id=FbSlyyshjOoC&pg=PA246
Sengupta, I. N. (1992). Bibliometrics, informetrics, scientometrics and librametrics: an overview. Libri, 42(2), 75-98. https://doi.org/10.1515/libr.1992.42.2.75
Shamos, M. H. (1995). The Myth of Scientific Literacy. Rutgers University Press.
Shanmugam, S., Dalal, R. C., Joosten, H., Raison, R. J., & Joo, G. K. (2018). SOC Stock Changes and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Following Tropical Land Use Conversions to Plantation Crops on Mineral Soils, with a Special Focus on Oil Palm and Rubber Plantations [Review]. Agriculture, 8(9), 17, Article 133. https://doi.org/10.3390/agriculture8090133
Shen, B. S. P. (1975). Science Literacy and the Public Understanding of Science. In Communication of Scientific Information (pp. 44-52). Karger Publishers. https://doi.org/10.1159/000398072
Siarova, H., Sternadel, D., & Szőny, E. (2019). Research for CULT Committee – Science and Scientific Literacy as an Educational Challenge. Brussels: European Parliament, Policy Department for Structural and Cohesion Policies
Singh, A. K., Liu, W. J., Zakari, S., Wu, J. E., Yang, B., Jiang, X. J., Zhu, X. A., Zou, X., Zhang, W. J., Chen, C. F., Singh, R., & Nath, A. J. (2021). A global review of rubber plantations: Impacts on ecosystem functions, mitigations, future directions, and policies for sustainable cultivation [Review]. Science of the Total Environment, 796, 18, Article 148948. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2021.148948
Sismondo, S. (2007). An Introduction to Science and Technology Studies [科學與技術研究導論] (林宗德, Trans.). 群學.
Siyanbola, W., Adeyeye, A., Olaopa, O., & Hassan, O. (2016). Science, technology and innovation indicators in policy-making: the Nigerian experience. Palgrave Communications, 2(1), 16015. https://doi.org/10.1057/palcomms.2016.15
Slavin, R. E. (1995). Best evidence synthesis: an intelligent alternative to meta-analysis. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 48(1), 9-18. https://doi.org/10.1016/0895-4356(94)00097-a
Slotkin, T. A., Skavicus, S., & Seidler, F. J. (2018). Developmental neurotoxicity resulting from pharmacotherapy of preterm labor, modeled in vitro: Terbutaline and dexamethasone, separately and together. Toxicology, 400, 57-64. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tox.2018.03.001
Slovic, P. (1987). Perception of risk. Science, 236(4799), 280-285. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.3563507
Slovic, P., Finucane, M. L., Peters, E., & MacGregor, D. G. (2004). Risk as analysis and risk as feelings: some thoughts about affect, reason, risk, and rationality. Risk Analysis, 24(2), 311-322. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0272-4332.2004.00433.x
Snyder, H. (2019). Literature review as a research methodology: An overview and guidelines. Journal of Business Research, 104, 333-339. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2019.07.039
Socientize. (2014). Green paper on Citizen Science for Europe: Towards a society of empowered citizens and enhanced research. European Commission Retrieved from https://ec.europa.eu/digital-single-market/en/news/green-paper-citizen-science-europe-towards-society-empowered-citizens-and-enhanced-research
Soeters, P., Bozzetti, F., Cynober, L., Elia, M., Shenkin, A., & Sobotka, L. (2016). Meta-analysis is not enough: The critical role of pathophysiology in determining optimal care in clinical nutrition. Clinical Nutrition, 35(3), 748-757. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clnu.2015.08.008
Spurgeon, D. (1986). Editorial. Impact of Science on Society, 144, 337-339.
Stephenson, N. L., Das, A. J., Condit, R., Russo, S. E., Baker, P. J., Beckman, N. G., Coomes, D. A., Lines, E. R., Morris, W. K., Rüger, N., Álvarez, E., Blundo, C., Bunyavejchewin, S., Chuyong, G., Davies, S. J., Duque, Á., Ewango, C. N., Flores, O., Franklin, J. F., . . . Zavala, M. A. (2014). Rate of tree carbon accumulation increases continuously with tree size. Nature, 507(7490), 90-93. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature12914
Stilgoe, J., Lock, S. J., & Wilsdon, J. (2014). Why should we promote public engagement with science? Public understanding of science, 23(1), 4-15. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963662513518154
Stocklmayer, S. M., & Gilbert, J. K. (2002). New experiences and old knowledge: Towards a model for the personal awareness of science and technology. International journal of science education, 24(8), 835-858. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690210126775
Stocklmayer, S. M., & Rennie, L. J. (2017). The Attributes of Informal Science Education: A Science Communication Perspective. In P. G. Patrick (Ed.), Preparing Informal Science Educators: Perspectives from Science Communication and Education (pp. 527-544). Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-50398-1_26
Sun, L., Wang, S., Lin, X., Tan, H., & Fu, Z. (2016). Early Life Exposure to Ractopamine Causes Endocrine-Disrupting Effects in Japanese Medaka (Oryzias latipes) [Article]. Bulletin of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology, 96(2), 150-155. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00128-015-1659-5
Tamkin, A., Brundage, M., Clark, J., & Ganguli, D. (2021). Understanding the capabilities, limitations, and societal impact of large language models. arXiv. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2102.02503
Thelwall, M. (2008). Bibliometrics to webometrics. Journal of Information Science, 34(4), 605-621. https://doi.org/10.1177/0165551507087238
Thomas, G., & Durant, J. (1987). Why should we promote the public understanding of science? In M. Shortland (Ed.), Scientific Literacy Papers (pp. 1-14). Department for External Studies, University of Oxford.
Thompson, D. F., & Walker, C. K. (2015). A Descriptive and Historical Review of Bibliometrics with Applications to Medical Sciences. Pharmacotherapy: The Journal of Human Pharmacology and Drug Therapy, 35(6), 551-559. https://doi.org/10.1002/phar.1586
Tseng, Y.-H., & Tsay, M.-Y. (2013). Journal clustering of library and information science for subfield delineation using the bibliometric analysis toolkit: CATAR. Scientometrics, 95(2), 503-528. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-013-0964-1
Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1981). The framing of decisions and the psychology of choice. Science, 211(4481), 453-458. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.7455683
Tyrväinen, L., Silvennoinen, H., & Kolehmainen, O. (2003). Ecological and aesthetic values in urban forest management. Urban Forestry & Urban Greening, 1(3), 135-149. https://doi.org/10.1078/1618-8667-00014
van Eck, N. J., & Waltman, L. (2010). Software survey: VOSviewer, a computer program for bibliometric mapping. Scientometrics, 84(2), 523-538. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-009-0146-3
Varela-Losada, M., Vega-Marcote, P., Pérez-Rodríguez, U., & Álvarez-Lires, M. (2015). Going to action? A literature review on educational proposals in formal Environmental Education. Environmental Education Research, 22(3), 390-421. https://doi.org/10.1080/13504622.2015.1101751
Verlet-Bottéro, S., 蕭麗虹, & 蔡明君. (2020, November). 儲回大地的藝術：研討會暨工作坊 http://bambooculture.com/project/3768, https://web.archive.org/web/20231005042525/http://bambooculture.com/project/3768
von Winterfeldt, D. (2013). Bridging the gap between science and decision making. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 110 Suppl 3(Supplement 3), 14055-14061. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1213532110
Wang, C., Zhang, W., Li, X., Wu, J., & McGill, B. (2021). A global meta‐analysis of the impacts of tree plantations on biodiversity. Global Ecology and Biogeography, 31(3), 576-587. https://doi.org/10.1111/geb.13440
Weible, C. M. (2008). Expert-Based Information and Policy Subsystems: A Review and Synthesis. Policy Studies Journal, 36(4), 615-635. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1541-0072.2008.00287.x
Weinberg, A. M. (1961). Impact of Large-Scale Science on the United States: Big science is here to stay, but we have yet to make the hard financial and educational choices it imposes. Science, 134(3473), 161-164. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.134.3473.161
WHO. (n.d.). Evidence-informed policy-making. Copenhagen WHO Retrieved from https://www.euro.who.int/en/data-and-evidence/evidence-informed-policy-making/evidence-informed-policy-making
https://who-sandbox.squiz.cloud/en/data-and-evidence/evidence-informed-policy-making/about-us, https://web.archive.org/web/20240221014831/https://who-sandbox.squiz.cloud/en/data-and-evidence/evidence-informed-policy-making/about-us
Winkler, R. L. (1982). State of the Art: RESEARCH DIRECTIONS IN DECISION MAKING UNDER UNCERTAINTY*. Decision Sciences, 13(4), 517-533. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-5915.1982.tb01176.x
Witter, F. R., Zimmerman, A. W., Reichmann, J. P., & Connors, S. L. (2009). In utero beta 2 adrenergic agonist exposure and adverse neurophysiologic and behavioral outcomes. American journal of obstetrics and gynecology, 201(6), 553-559. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajog.2009.07.010
Wooten, K. J., Sandoz, M. A., & Smith, P. N. (2018). Ractopamine in particulate matter emitted from beef cattle feedyards and playa wetlands in the Central Plains [Article]. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry, 37(4), 970-974. https://doi.org/10.1002/etc.4036
Wynne, B. (2003). Seasick on the Third Wave? Subverting the Hegemony of Propositionalism:Response to Collins & Evans (2002). Social studies of science, 33(3), 401-417. https://doi.org/10.1177/03063127030333005
Yan, E., & Ding, Y. (2012). Scholarly network similarities: How bibliographic coupling networks, citation networks, cocitation networks, topical networks, coauthorship networks, and coword networks relate to each other. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 63(7), 1313-1326. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.22680
Yang, S., Yuan, Q., & Dong, J. (2020). Are scientometrics, informetrics, and bibliometrics different? Data Science and Informetrics, 1(01), 50. https://doi.org/10.4236/dsi.2020.11003
Yates, J. F., & de Oliveira, S. (2016). Culture and decision making. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 136, 106-118. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.obhdp.2016.05.003
Yi, H., & Xi, Z. (2008). Trends of DDT research during the period of 1991 to 2005. Scientometrics, 75(1), 111-122. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-007-1828-3
Yore, L. D. (2012). Science Literacy for All: More than a Slogan, Logo, or Rally Flag! In K. C. D. Tan & M. Kim (Eds.), Issues and Challenges in Science Education Research (pp. 5-23). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-3980-2_2
Zaitseva, N. V., Shur, P. Z., Atiskova, N. G., Kiryanov, D. A., & Kamaltdinov, M. R. (2014). Health risk assessment of exposure to ractopamine through consumption of meat products. International Journal of Advanced Research, 2(9), 538-545.
Zeidler, D. L. (2014). Socioscientific issues as a curriculum emphasis: Theory, research, and practice. In N. G. Lederman & S. K. Abell (Eds.), Handbook of Research on Science Education (Vol. 2, pp. 697-726). Routledge.
Zeidler, D. L., Applebaum, S. M., & Sadler, T. D. (2011). Enacting a Socioscientific Issues Classroom: Transformative Transformations. In T. D. Sadler (Ed.), Socio-scientific Issues in the Classroom: Teaching, Learning and Research (pp. 277-305). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-1159-4_16
Zeidler, D. L., Sadler, T. D., Simmons, M. L., & Howes, E. V. (2005). Beyond STS: A research-based framework for socioscientific issues education. Science Education, 89(3), 357-377. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.20048
Zhang, Y., Fei, X., Liu, F., Chen, J., You, X., Huang, S., Wang, M., & Dong, J. (2022). Advances in Forest Management Research in the Context of Carbon Neutrality: A Bibliometric Analysis. Forests, 13(11). https://doi.org/10.3390/f13111810
Zhuang, Z., Zhao, Y., Wu, Q., Li, M., Liu, H., Sun, L., Gao, W., & Wang, D. (2014). Adverse effects from clenbuterol and ractopamine on nematode Caenorhabditis elegans and the underlying mechanism [Article]. PLoS One, 9(1), Article e85482. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0085482