請用此 Handle URI 來引用此文件:
http://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/jspui/handle/123456789/798
完整後設資料紀錄
DC 欄位 | 值 | 語言 |
---|---|---|
dc.contributor.advisor | 趙儀珊 | |
dc.contributor.author | Yu-Chuan Chian | en |
dc.contributor.author | 簡彧川 | zh_TW |
dc.date.accessioned | 2021-05-11T05:05:44Z | - |
dc.date.available | 2019-07-03 | |
dc.date.available | 2021-05-11T05:05:44Z | - |
dc.date.copyright | 2019-07-03 | |
dc.date.issued | 2019 | |
dc.date.submitted | 2019-05-14 | |
dc.identifier.citation | 中文文獻
江文慈(2012):〈大學生人際互動情緒表達壓抑的探究〉。《教育心理學報》, 43,657-679。 黃蘭媖(2014):《修復式司法試行方案成效評估暨案件評估指標之研究期末報告》,法務部專題研究成果報告,報告編號S1020207。未出版。 張玉芳(2017):〈華語道歉策略的差別效應研究〉。《臺灣華語教學研究》,14,101-124。 黃囇莉(2005):〈人際和諧與人際衝突〉。見楊國樞、黃光國、楊中芳(編):《華人本土心理學(下冊)》,頁521-566。台北:遠流出版社。 黃囇莉、鄭琬蓉與黃光國(2008):〈邁向發聲之路: 上下關係中 “忍” 的歷程與自我之轉化〉。《本土心理學研究》,29,3-76。 廖玲燕(1999):《台灣本土社會讚許量表之編製及其心理歷程分析》(未出版之碩士論文)。國立臺灣大學,台北市。取自https://hdl.handle.net/11296/496674 鍾晨玉(2017):《殺人與傷人事件屬性對他人看待被害人家屬不仇恨言論之影響探討》(未出版之碩士論文)。國立臺灣大學,台北市。取自https://hdl.handle.net/11296/78w529 瞿海源、畢恆達、劉長萱、楊國樞(2015):《社會及行為科學研究法:質性研究法》(第一版)。臺北:東華書局。 英文文獻 Adams, G. S., & Inesi, M. E. (2016). Impediments to forgiveness: Victim and transgressor attributions of intent and guilt. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 111(6), 866-881. Allan, A., Allan, M. M., Kaminer, D., & Stein, D. J. (2006). Exploration of the association between apology and forgiveness amongst victims of human rights violations. Behavioral Sciences & the Law, 24, 87-102. Allan, A., & Carroll, R. (2017). Apologies in a legal setting: Insights from research into injured parties’ experiences of apologies after an adverse event. Psychiatry, Psychology and Law, 24, 10-32. Anderson, J. C., Linden, W., & Habra, M. E. (2006). Influence of apologies and trait hostility on recovery from anger. Journal of Behavioral Medicine, 29, 347-358. Bandes, S. (2000). When victims seek closure:Forgiveness, vengeance and the role of government. Fordham Urban Law Journal, 27, 1599-1606. Barrile, L. G. (2015). I forgive you, but you must die: Murder victim family members, the death penalty, and restorative justice. Victims & Offenders, 10, 239-269. Baumeister, R. E., Bratslavsky, E., Muraven, M., & Tice, D. M. (1998). Ego depletion: Is the active self a limited resource?. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74, 1252-1265. Baumeister, R. F., Stillwell, A., & Wotman, S. R. (1990). Victim and perpetrator accounts of interpersonal conflict: Autobiographical narratives about anger. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 59, 994. Bergstrom, M. J., & Nussbaum, J. F. (1996). Cohort difference in interpersonal conflict: Implications for the older patient-younger care provider interaction. Health Communication, 8, 233-248. Blackhart, G. C., Brown, K. E., Clark, T., Pierce, D. L., & Shell, K. (2012). Assessing the adequacy of postexperimental inquiries in deception research and the factors that promote participant honesty. Behavior Research Methods, 44, 24-40. doi:10.3758/s13428-011-0132-6 Bonanno, G. A. (2004). Loss, trauma, and human resilience: Have we underestimated the human capacity to thrive after extremely aversive events?. American Psychologist, 59, 20. Carroll, R., Allan, A., & Halsmith, M. (2018). Apologies, mediation and the law: Resolution of civil disputes. Australasian Dispute Resolution Journal, 29, 21-32. Carroll, R., & Vines, P. E. (2017). Special issue on apologies: Introduction. Oñati Socio-legal Series, 7, 365-369. Cicchetti, D. V., & Feinstein, A. R. (1990). High agreement but low kappa: II. Resolving the paradoxes. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 43, 551-558. Chung, S., & Lee, S. (2017). Crisis management and corporate apology: The effects of causal attribution and apology type on publics’ cognitive and affective responses. International Journal of Business Communication, 54, 1-21 doi: 10.1177/2329488417735646. Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum. Crowne, D. P., & Marlowe, D. (1960). A new scale of social desirability independent of psychopathology. Journal of Consulting Psychology, 24, 349. Daly, K. (2003). Mind the gap: Restorative justice in theory and practice. In von Hirsch, A., Roberts, J. V., Bottoms, A. E., Roach, K., & Schiff, M. (Eds.), Restorative Justice and Criminal Justice: Competing or Reconcilable Paradigms? (pp. 219-236). Oxford, UK: Hart Publishing. Davis, R. C., & Smith, B. E. (1994). Victim impact statements and victim satisfaction: An unfulfilled promise? Journal of Criminal Justice, 22, 1-12. DeVellis, R. F. (2012). Scale development: Theory and applications (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage publications. Dhami, M. K. (2012). Offer and acceptance of apology in victim-offender mediation. Critical Criminology: An International Journal, 20, 45-60. Dhami, M. K. (2016). Effects of a victim's response to an offender's apology: When the victim becomes the bad guy. European Journal of Social Psychology, 46, 110-123. doi:10.1002/ejsp.2145 Dziuban, C. D., & Shirkey, E. C. (1974). When is a correlation matrix appropriate for factor analysis? Some decision rules. Psychological Bulletin, 81, 358. Exline, J. J., Worthington Jr, E. L., Hill, P., & McCullough, M. E. (2003). Forgiveness and justice: A research agenda for social and personality psychology. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 7, 337-348. Fehr, R. and Gelfand, M. J. (2010). When apologies work: How matching apology components to victims’ self-construals facilitates forgiveness. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Process, 113, 37-50. Fehr, R., Gelfand, M. J., & Nag, M. (2010). The road to forgiveness: A meta-analytic synthesis of its situational and dispositional correlates. Psychological Bulletin, 136, 894-914. Fincham, F. D., Jackson, H., & Beach, S. R. (2005). Transgression severity and forgiveness: Different moderators for objective and subjective severity. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 24, 860-875. Gallo Jr, P. S., Smith, S., & Mumford, S. (1973). Effects of deceiving subjects upon experimental results. The Journal of Social Psychology, 89, 99-107. Goldberg, L. R. (1992). The development of markers for the Big-Five factor structure. Psychological Assessment, 4, 26-42. Gosling, S. D., Rentfrow, P. J., & Swann, W. B. (2003). A very brief measure of the Big-Five personality domains. Journal of Research in Personality, 37, 504-528. doi:10.1016/s0092-6566(03)00046-1 Hayes, A. F. (2013). Introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process analysis: A regression-based approach. New York: Guilford Publications. Holmes, J. (1989). Sex differences and apologies: One aspect of communicative competence1. Applied Linguistics, 10, 194-213. Hertwig, R., & Ortmann, A. (2008). Deception in experiments: Revisiting the arguments in its defense. Ethics & Behavior, 18, 59-92. Howat, G., & London, M. (1980). Attributions of conflict management strategies in supervisor–subordinate dyads. Journal of Applied Psychology, 65, 172-175. doi:10.1037/0021-9010.65.2.172 Kassin, S. M. (2005). On the psychology of confessions: Does innocence put innocents at risk?. American Psychologist, 60, 215-228. Leunissen, J.M. (2014). All Apologies: On the Willingness of Perpetrators to Apologize (Doctoral dissertation, Erasmus University, Rotterdam). Retrieved from http://hdl.handle.net/1765/50318 Leunissen, J. M., De Cremer, D., Reinders Folmer, C. P., & van Dijke, M. (2013). The apology mismatch: Asymmetries between victim's need for apologies and perpetrator's willingness to apologize. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 49, 315-324. doi:10.1016/j.jesp.2012.12.005 Lewicki, R. J., Polin, B., & Lount, R. B. (2016). An exploration of the structure of effective apologies. Negotiation and Conflict Management Research, 9, 177-196. Lowe, M., Willan, V. J., Khan, R., Brooks, M., Robinson, P., Graham-Kevan, N., ...Bryce, J. (2016). Predictors of engagement with support services in a sample of UK victims of violent crime. British Journal of Community Justice, 13, 21-34. McCullough, M. E., Fincham, F. D., & Tsang, J. A. (2003). Forgiveness, forbearance, and time: The temporal unfolding of transgression-related interpersonal motivations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 84, 540-557. McCullough, M. E., Rachal, K. C., Sandage, S. J., Worthington Jr, E. L., Brown, S. W., & Hight, T. L. (1998). Interpersonal forgiving in close relationships: II. Theoretical elaboration and measurement. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 75, 1586-1603. Moon, B. B., & Rhee, Y. (2012). Message strategies and forgiveness during crises: Effects of causal attributions and apology appeal types on forgiveness. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 89, 677-694. Noakes, M. A., & Rinaldi, C. M. (2006). Age and gender differences in peer conflict. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 35, 881-891. doi:10.1007/s10964-006-9088-8 Nudelman, G., & Nadler, A. (2017). The effect of apology on forgiveness: Belief in a just world as a moderator. Personality and Individual Differences, 116, 191-200. doi:10.1016/j.paid.2017.04.048 O'Connor, B. P. (2000). SPSS and SAS programs for determining the number of components using parallel analysis and Velicer's MAP test. Behavior Research Methods, Instrumentation, and Computers, 32, 396-402. Ohtsubo, Y., & Watanabe, E. (2009). Do sincere apologies need to be costly? Test of a costly signaling model of apology. Evolution and Human Behavior, 30, 114-123. doi:10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2008.09.004 Paulhus, D. L. (1984). Two-component models of socially desirable responding. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 46, 598. Rizvi, S., & Bobocel, D. R. (2016). Promoting forgiveness through psychological distance. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 7, 875-883. doi:10.1177/1948550616662122 Scher, S. J., & Darley, J. M. (1997). How effective are the things people say to apologize? Effects of the realization of the apology speech act. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 26, 127-140. Selye, H. (1956). The stress of life. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill. Shafa, S., Harinck, F., & Ellemers, N. (2017). Sorry seems to be the hardest word: Cultural differences in apologizing effectively. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 47, 553-567. Slocum, D., Allan, A., & Allan, M. M. (2011). An emerging theory of apology. Australian Journal of Psychology, 63, 83-92. Strahan, R., & Gerbasi, K. C. (1972). Short, homogeneous versions of the Marlow‐Crowne social desirability scale. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 28, 191-193. Struthers, C. W., Eaton, J., Santelli, A. G., Uchiyama, M., & Shirvani, N. (2008). The effects of attributions of intent and apology on forgiveness: When saying sorry may not help the story. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 44, 983-992. Weiner, B. (1995). Judgments of responsibility: A foundation for a theory of social conduct. New York: The Guilford Press. Wilson, T. D., & Gilbert, D. T. (2003). Affective forecasting. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 35, 345-411. Worthington Jr, E. L., & Wade, N. G. (1999). The psychology of unforgiveness and forgiveness and implications for clinical practice. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 18, 385-418. Zechmeister, J. S., & Romero, C. (2002). Victim and offender accounts of interpersonal conflict: Autobiographical narratives of forgiveness and unforgiveness. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 82, 675-686. | |
dc.identifier.uri | http://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/handle/123456789/798 | - |
dc.description.abstract | 在我國犯罪案件中時常可見加害人向被害人道歉,且世界各國在修復式正義的浪潮中亦愈發重視道歉作為處理衝突、侵害事件的手段。本研究目的在檢視模擬犯罪事件發生原因可否歸責加害人的情況之下,加害人不同焦點的道歉方式是否對被害人反應造成不同影響。本研究採取模擬犯罪事件的實驗,以虛假實驗招募參與者後在實驗中冤枉參與者偷竊。研究結果發現參與者的道歉前負向情緒到被害人正向反應的連結會受到事件發生原因與加害人道歉焦點的雙重調節作用,且道歉前負向情緒預測被害人正、負向反應的效果會受到參與者主觀傷害嚴重性的中介與親和性格的調節。最後我們討論本研究結果如何應用於修復式司法、本研究設計的限制以及所能給予未來研究的啟發。 | zh_TW |
dc.description.provenance | Made available in DSpace on 2021-05-11T05:05:44Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 ntu-108-R05227105-1.pdf: 1837153 bytes, checksum: 0b646baca7852cf37f85773872f0afdd (MD5) Previous issue date: 2019 | en |
dc.description.tableofcontents | 第一章 研究背景 1
第二章 文獻回顧 2 第一節 加害人道歉與被害人心理歷程 2 第二節 被害人反應 9 第三節 研究問題與假設 12 第三章 前導式研究 15 第一節 研究方法 15 第二節 前導研究結果 17 第四章 正式研究 20 第一節 研究方法 20 第二節 研究結果 37 第三節 小結 58 第五章 綜合討論 59 第一節 主要發現 59 第二節 本研究的限制 62 第三節 本研究的貢獻 67 第四節 結語 69 參考文獻 70 附錄 81 附錄一 前導研究虛擬情境與問卷 81 附錄二 PEI、揭露與訪談大綱 85 | |
dc.language.iso | zh-TW | |
dc.title | 模擬犯罪事件中加害人有效道歉之內容及被害人反應 | zh_TW |
dc.title | The Content of Effective Apologies by Offenders and Victims’ Reactions in a Mock Crime Event | en |
dc.date.schoolyear | 107-2 | |
dc.description.degree | 碩士 | |
dc.contributor.oralexamcommittee | 許瑛玿,李怡青 | |
dc.subject.keyword | 道歉,犯罪被害人,犯罪加害人,道歉焦點,被害人反應, | zh_TW |
dc.subject.keyword | apology,victims,offenders,the focus of apology,victims’ reaction, | en |
dc.relation.page | 86 | |
dc.identifier.doi | 10.6342/NTU201900767 | |
dc.rights.note | 同意授權(全球公開) | |
dc.date.accepted | 2019-05-15 | |
dc.contributor.author-college | 理學院 | zh_TW |
dc.contributor.author-dept | 心理學研究所 | zh_TW |
顯示於系所單位: | 心理學系 |
文件中的檔案:
檔案 | 大小 | 格式 | |
---|---|---|---|
ntu-108-1.pdf | 1.79 MB | Adobe PDF | 檢視/開啟 |
系統中的文件,除了特別指名其著作權條款之外,均受到著作權保護,並且保留所有的權利。