議會作為政策協商和施政監督的主要場域，充滿了不同政黨間的對抗和辯論，這樣的對抗產生使用策略性話語進行論述的誘因。本研究專注於台灣立法院中國家科學及技術委員會的質詢記錄，利用 LDA 主題模型探討議會質詢過程中，行動者如何策略性地運用賦名框架以建立合法性並取得競爭優勢，引導政策討論的範圍和焦點。特別關注框架中的時間性論述，發現行動者在面對不同政黨的受眾時，會採用更多過去經驗、現在疑慮等時間性論述說明對政策的懷疑，用以佐證對未來發展的擔憂；然而，在與同政黨的受眾溝通時，行動者則更傾向於著重於特定版本和有利的過去內容，以此延伸對未來多元發展的豐富想像，來號召受眾的支持。

As a primary arena for policy deliberation and governmental oversight, the parliament brims with confrontation and debate among diverse political parties, fostering the use of strategic discourse for argumentation. This study focuses on the inquiry records of the National Science and Technology Council within Taiwan's Legislature, utilizing LDA （Latent Dirichlet Allocation） topic modeling to investigate how actors strategically employ framing through naming practices to establish legitimacy and gain competitive advantage, guiding the scope and focus of policy discussions during parliamentary inquiries. Of particular interest is the temporal discourse within the framing, revealing that when addressing audiences from different political parties, actors tend to utilize more past experiences and present concerns in temporal discourse to elucidate skepticism toward policies, substantiating worries about future developments. Conversely, when engaging with audiences from the same political party, actors tend to emphasize specific versions and favorable past content, thereby extending rich imaginations of diverse future developments to rally support from the audience.

Bail, C. A. 2014. The cultural environment: Measuring culture with big data. Theory and Society, 43(3): 465-482.
Balogun, J., Jacobs, C., Jarzabkowski, P., Mantere, S., & Vaara, E. 2014. Placing strategy discourse in context: Sociomateriality, sensemaking, and power. Journal of management studies, 51(2): 175-201.
Benford, R. D. & Snow, D. A. 2000. Framing processes and social movements: An overview and assessment. Annual Review of Sociology: 611-639.
Blei, D.M., Ng, A.Y., & Jordan, M.I. 2003. Latent dirichlet allocation. Journal of Machine Learning Research, 3: 993–1033.
Busby, E. C., Gubler, J. R., & Hawkins, K. A. 2019. Framing and blame attribution in populist rhetoric. Journal of Politics, 81(2): 616-630.Chong & Druckman, 2007
Choi, H., & Ahn, J. 2015. How does the general public understand science and technology issues? A case on the nuclear power issue using topic modeling approach. Journal of Technology Innovation, 23(4): 151-175
Christiansen, J. K., & Varnes, C. J. 2007. Making decisions on innovation: meetings or networks?. Creativity and Innovation Management, 16(3): 282-298.
Clarke, I., Kwon, W., & Wodak, R. 2012. A context‐sensitive approach to analysing talk in strategy meetings. British Journal of Management, 23(4): 455-473.
Cornelissen, J. P., & Werner, M. D. 2014. Putting framing in perspective: A review of framing and frame analysis across the management and organizational literature. Academy of Management Annals, 8(1): 181-235.
Dehler-Holland, J., Okoh, M., & Keles, D. 2022. Assessing technology legitimacy with topic models and sentiment analysis: The case of wind power in Germany. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 175: 121354.DiMaggio, P., Nag, M., & Blei, D. 2013. Exploiting affinities between topic modeling and the sociological perspective on culture: Application to newspaper coverage of US government arts funding. Poetics, 41(6): 570-606.
Entman, R. M. 1993. Framing: Toward clarification of a fractured paradigm. Journal of Communication, 43(4): 51–58.
Falchetti, D., Cattani, G., & Ferriani, S. 2022. Start with “why,” but only if you have to: The strategic framing of novel ideas across different audiences. Strategic Management Journal, 43(1): 130-159.
Fligstein, N., Stuart Brundage, J., & Schultz, M. 2017. Seeing like the Fed: Culture, cognition, and framing in the failure to anticipate the financial crisis of 2008. American Sociological Review, 82(5): 879-909.
Gamson, W. A., & Modigliani, A. 1989. Media discourse and public opinion on nuclear power: A constructionist approach. American Journal of Sociology, 95(1): 1-37.
Garud, R., H. A. Schildt, and T. K. Lant. 2014. “Entrepreneurial Storytelling, Future Expectations, and the Paradox of Legitimacy.” Organization Science 25 (5): 1479–1492.
Gioia, D. A., Corley, K. G., & Hamilton, A. L. 2013. Seeking qualitative rigor in inductive research notes on the Gioia methodology. Organizational Research Methods, 16(1): 15- 31.
Giorgi, S., & Weber, K. 2015. Marks of distinction: Framing and audience appreciation in the context of investment advice. Administrative Science Quarterly, 60(2): 333-367.
Goffman, E. 1974. Frame analysis: An essay on the organization of experience. Boston, MA: North Eastern University Press.
Granqvist, N., & Gustafsson, R. 2016. Temporal institutional work. Academy of Management Journal, 59: 1009–1035.
Hannigan, T. R., Haans, R. F., Vakili, K., Tchalian, H., Glaser, V. L., Kaplan, S., & Jennings, P. D. 2019. Topic modeling in management research: Rendering new theory from textual data. Academy of Management Annals, 13(2): 586-632.
Hatch, M. J., & Schultz, M. 2017. Toward a theory of using history authentically: Historicizing in the Carlsberg group. Administrative Science Quarterly, 62: 657–697.
Hernes, T., Hendrup, E., & Schäffner, B. 2015. Sensing the momentum: A process view of change in a multinational corporation. Journal of Change Management, 15: 117–141.
Hoppmann, J., Anadon, L. D., & Narayanamurti, V. 2020. Why matter matters: How technology characteristics shape the strategic framing of technologies. Research Policy, 49(1): 103882.
Jarzabkowski, P., & Seidl, D. 2008. The role of meetings in the social practice of strategy. Organization studies, 29(11) : 1391-1426.
Kaplan, S., & Orlikowski, W. J. 2013. Temporal work in strategy making. Organization Science, 24: 965–995.
Kaplan, S., & Vakili, K. 2015. The double-edged sword of recombination in breakthrough innovation. Strategic Management Journal, 36(10): 1435-1457
Kaplan, S. 2008. Framing contests: Strategy making under uncertainty. Organization Science, 19(5): 729-752.
Kobayashi, V., Mol, S. T., Berkers, H., Kismihók, G., & Den Hartog, D. N. 2018. Text mining in organizational research. Organizational Research Methods, 21(3): 733-765.
Madureira, L., Popovič, A., & Castelli, M. 2021. Competitive intelligence: A unified view and modular definition. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 173: 121086.
Maricut‐Akbik, A. 2021. Q&A in legislative oversight: A framework for analysis. European Journal of Political Research, 60(3): 539-559.
Mohr, J. W., & Bogdanov, P. 2013. Introduction—Topic models: What they are and why they matter. Poetics, 41(6): 545-569.
Nadkarni, S., & Chen, J. 2014. Bridging yesterday, today, and tomorrow: CEO temporal focus, environmental dynamism, and rate of new product introduction. Academy of Management Journal, 57(6): 1810-1833.
Nyberg, D., & Wright, C. 2016. Performative and political: Corporate constructions of climate change risk. Organization, 23: 617–638.
Nyberg, D., Wright, C., & Kirk, J. 2020. Fracking the future: The temporal portability of frames in political contests. Organization Studies, 41(2): 175-196.
Polletta, F., & Ho, M. K. 2006. Frames and their consequences. In R. E. Goodin & C. Tilly (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of contextual political analysis: 189–209. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Proksch, S. O. and J. B. Slapin. 2011. “Parliamentary Questions and Oversight in the European Union.” European Journal of Political Research 50, 1: 53-79.
Rasch, B. E. 2009. Opposition parties, electoral incentives and the control of government ministers: Parliamentary questioning in Norway. Parlamente, Agendasetzung und Vetospieler: Festschrift für Herbert Döring: 199-214.
Rozenberg, Olivier and Shane Martin. 2011. “Questioning Parliamentary Questions.” The Journal of Legislative Studies, 17: 3: 394-404.
Schultz, M., & Hernes, T. 2013. A temporal perspective on organizational identity. Organization Science, 24: 1–21.
Snow, D. A. 2008. Elaborating the discursive contexts of framing: Discursive fields and spaces. In N. K. Denzin (Ed.), Studies in symbolic interaction (Vol. 30, pp. 3–28). Bingley, UK: Emerald Group Publishing.
Suominen, A., Toivanen, H., & Seppänen, M. 2017. Firms' knowledge profiles: Mapping patent data with unsupervised learning. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 115: 131-142.
Vliegenthart, R., & Walgrave, S. 2011. Content matters: The dynamics of parliamentary questioning in Belgium and Denmark. Comparative Political Studies, 44(8): 1031-1059.