青少年憂鬱情緒與不適應行為的性別差異

Abstract

本研究整合量性、質性研究方法探討青少年憂鬱與不適應行為表現及其相關因素之性別差異。調查研究對象來自國民健康局九十二年度科技研究發展計畫「探討台北市高關懷青少年憂鬱症相關因素之前驅研究」（DOH92-HP-1307）抽樣之國三學生樣本，男生208名、女生103名。質性訪談對象來自台北市某市立國中之個案輔導學生，男、女各2名。主要研究結果為： 1. 男生有22.7％屬憂鬱組（BDI-II≥17）；女生29.7％屬憂鬱組。女生平均（13.27±8.86）略高於男生（12.18±8.87），但平均數t檢定無顯著差異，只在哭泣、自殺意念等特定題目上的表現有顯著差異。 2. 在一年內曾有一項以上不適應行為者，男生有54.2％；女生有33.3％，男、女有顯著差異。男、女主要的差異在於攻擊型行為。男生攻擊型行為多於非攻擊型；女生則二者百分比相近。 3. 憂鬱情緒與不適應行為項目數的皮爾森積差相關分析結果，男女皆達到顯著正相關。憂鬱高低與不適應行為有無的交叉表分析顯示，憂鬱組有不適應行為的人數百分比高於正常組，但是在行為時間點及類型上有性別差異。 4. 憂鬱情緒之多元迴歸分析的顯著因素有性別差異，但解釋力最高的因素皆為神經質人格：男生的顯著因素（及其解釋量）有神經質人格（45.3％）、自傷因應（6.4％）、同儕壓力（3.2％）、情緒支持（2.0％）；女生有神經質人格（41.8％）、課業壓力（5.0％）、外向性人格（3.6％）、兩性壓力（2.3％）。 5. 不適應行為之多元迴歸分析的顯著因素有性別差異：攻擊型行為迴歸分析的顯著因素（及其解釋量）男生有家庭壓力（11.8％）、自傷因應（2.8％）；女生有自傷因應（18.0％）、直接行動（5.4％）、目前補習科目數（2.9％）。非攻擊型行為迴歸分析的顯著因素男生有自傷因應（16.2％）、家中小孩數（4.3％）；女生有自傷因應（27.7％）、師長支持（3.6％）。 6. 男、女情緒行為模式受到不同的關鍵事件影響，事件的對象、衝突的焦點、對事件的知覺等都有所不同；即使憂鬱與行為表現相似，受訪者各自的生命主題卻有個別差異（尋求同儕歸屬、權力抗衡、性別角色認同與兩性化發展、受排擠與疏離等），隱含情緒行為的社會化機制同時存在性別差異和性別特質的個別差異。相同的是，青少年男、女皆在人我關係中發展自我認同。 結論：影響青少年憂鬱與不適應行為的顯著因素有性別差異，受到性別社會化機制的影響。因而提出性別主流化的國中生輔導建議。

Objectives & Methodology: the objectives of this research are: 1) to examine the gender differences in adolescents’ depressive mood, maladjusted behaviors and relevant factors; 2) to explore the possible social impact of life events on gender differences. This research approaches the above objectives by using a mixed methodology of combining quantitative and qualitative method. The quantitative data were collected from a grade 9 sample of a DOH project on adolescents’ depressive disorders (DOH92-HP-1307), with 208 boys and 103 girls of Taipei junior high schools; data were tested with student’s t test, crosstable chi-square analysis, Pearson’s correlation analysis and multiple stepwise regression. The qualitative data were collected by conducting in-depth interviewing with 2 boys and 2 girls. Results: the major findings of the study were: 1) 22.7% boys were grouped as depressive (BDI-II≥17); whereas 29.7% girls were. Girls scored average (13.27±8.86) higher than boys (12.18±8.87), thought not significantly different on t test, they scored differently at specific items, such as crying, suicidal thinking. 2) 54.2% boys and 33.3% girls had at least one item of maladjusted behavior, and boys had more behavioral items than girls with statistic significance. Their discrepancies were mainly on aggressive behavioral items, not on nonaggression; boys were more aggressive than girls. 3) Both boys and girls had their BDI-II scores positive related with maladaptive behavioral items (as Pearson’s correlation coefficients revealed). The depressive groups had higher percentage of persons who conducted maladaptive behavior(s) (by crosstable chi-square test), and there were gender differences on time periods (behaviors in the past one year or two weeks) and behavioral types (aggression or nonaggression). 4) Boys and girls have diverse significant factors in depressive-mood multiple regressions: significant factors (and variance explained) of boys’ BDI-II scores were: neuroticism (45.3%), injury coping (6.4%), peer stress (3.2%) and emotional support (2.0%); where significant factors of girls’ BDI-II scores were neuroticism (41.8%), scholastic stress (5.0%), extroversion (3.6%) and dating stress (2.3%). 5) Boys and girls have diverse significant factors in maladaptive-behavior multiple regressions: significant factors (and variance explained) of boys’ aggressive behaviors were: family stress (11.8%) and injury coping (2.8%); where significant factors of girls’ aggressive behaviors were injury coping (18.0%), direct-action coping (5.4%) and hours of after-school classes (2.9%). And significant factors of boys’ non-aggressive behaviors were: injury coping (16.2%) and sibling numbers (4.3%); where significant factors girls’ non-aggressive behaviors were injury coping (27.7%) and teachers support (3.6%). 6) The emotion-conduct patterns of boys and girls were respectively affected by different influential life events, with distinct subjects, dissimilar conflict issues and perception. Even they expressed their mood or behaved similarly, the objects interviewed individually disclosed their own “life themes”, (“life themes” such as “seeking belongingness in peer groups”, “contending for authority”, “gender role identification”, “androgyny”, “ostracized and alienation” and so on), which might imply that sex differences and also variation within each sex (i.e. diversity of gender traits constructed in individuals) coexist in the socialization process of emotion-conduct patterns among adolescents. Conclusion: There are gender differences among the significant factors influencing on adolescents’ depressive mood and maladapted behaviors, which might be induced by the impact of gender socialization. And some gender mainstreaming perspectives were proposed on school guidance for junior high students.