Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
The Association Between Positive Youth Development and Neighborhood Contextual Factors in Taiwan
Youth Positive Development,Neighborhood Collective Efficacy,HLM,GIS,
|Publication Year :||2019|
|Abstract:||近年來許多研究放置在鄰里效應(neighborhood effect)和社區制度性資源對少年發展產生作用。然而國內青少年正向發展之研究尚在起步，探討促進正向發展之脈絡因子研究不足。本研究探討鄰里脈絡資源、鄰里氛圍及社會規範、活動參與對不同區域少年正向發展之影響，期提供國內研究及方案政策之重要參考。以「Bronfenbrenner (1975)生態理論」及「鄰里效應」為引領之理論架構，探討個體層次的家庭資本、鄰里效能、課外活動參與以及集體層次的區域資源點、可近性、經濟程度對不同區域少年正向發展的影響作用，以回應以下研究問題：(1)少年正向發展與鄰里資源是否關聯? (2)鄰里之集體層次和個體層次變項是否有調節作用，例如家庭和課外活動調節少年正向發展的程度? (3)這些關聯之間是否存在集體層次的脈絡差異。以全國就讀8年級之學生為對象，共回收來自24個行政區，共1,163份有效問卷。本研究分別以整體少年正向發展、五大子面向(能力、自信、品格、連結、關愛)為依變項建置多層次迴歸模型。結果顯示少年的正向發展在行政區之間的平均值沒有顯著差異，集體層次的脈絡因子影響有限，主要的影響在於個體層次內與主要照顧者的關係滿意度、課外活動參與、主觀鄰里凝聚力、鄰里控制力等項。本研究顯示與主要照顧者滿意度、鄰里效能對少年發展有正向作用、而課外活動參與特別有助於都會區少年的正向發展，然硬體設備資源對少年沒有顯著影響。在實務建議方面呼應兒少發展權的重要性，重視少年發展方案活動；同時，也應注重鄰里效能氛圍之促進，與促進家庭資本有同等的重要性。|
A lot of studies have focused on the impact of neighborhood effects and community institutional resources on adolescent development. However, related studies in Taiwan are still limited. This study aims to examine the association between youth positive development (PYD) and neighborhood contextual factors. By applying the theortical framework of ecological systems and neighborhood effects, this study proposes following research questions: (1) is there any correlation between PYD and neighborhood resources? (2) Is there any moderating effect between collective level and individual level variables, such as family and extracurricular activities? (3) Are there any differences between these contextual factors in explaining the relationship between various aspects of the PYD? This study applies multilevel regression models to test htpotheses. Individual data were collected from the 8th graders lived in Taipei city, Taipei county, Keelung county, Taoyuan, Hsinchu, and Miaoli by self-administrated questionnaires. Twenty-four schools were sampled, with 2 classes per school, and a total of 1,163 participants. The results show that no differences were found in the average PYD score among students from various districts. Main effects were found in the individual level variables, including the relationship satisfaction with the main caregivers and the perceived neighborhood collective efficacy. Moreover, the participation of extracurricular activities was related to PYD, especially for adolescents from urban area. However, neighborhood facilities had no significant effects on adolescents’ PYD. It echoed the importance of facilitating positive youth development by providing activities, rather than recreational facilities. We should also try to bring up public attention to promot neighborhood cohesion, which is equally important to the positive youth development as family capitals.
|Appears in Collections:||社會工作學系|
Files in This Item:
|2.97 MB||Adobe PDF|
Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.