請用此 Handle URI 來引用此文件:
http://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/jspui/handle/123456789/88435
完整後設資料紀錄
DC 欄位 | 值 | 語言 |
---|---|---|
dc.contributor.advisor | 林萬億 | zh_TW |
dc.contributor.advisor | Wan-I Lin | en |
dc.contributor.author | 鄭元棻 | zh_TW |
dc.contributor.author | Yuan-Fen Cheng | en |
dc.date.accessioned | 2023-08-15T16:17:27Z | - |
dc.date.available | 2023-11-09 | - |
dc.date.copyright | 2023-08-15 | - |
dc.date.issued | 2023 | - |
dc.date.submitted | 2023-07-27 | - |
dc.identifier.citation | 王國羽、呂朝賢(2004)。世界衛生組織身心障礙人口定義概念之演進:兼論我國身心障礙人口定義系統問題與未來修正方向。社會政策與社會工作學刊,8(2),193-235。
石泱(2010)。成功老化、活躍老化與生產老化對我國老人福利政策的省思社區發展季刊,132,234-251。 朱芬郁(2007)。高齡者活躍老化初探。北縣終身教育學刊,30,16-24。 江亮演、應福國(2005)。美國老人福利政策的新趨勢。社區發展季刊,110, 369-378。臺北市老人福利手冊(2010),臺北市政府出版。 行政院衛生署(2008)。身心障礙等級。取自於:https://rb.gy/hz7dul 行政院衛生署(2012)。新制身心障礙鑑定簡介。取自於:https://rb.gy/hz7dul 吳明烈、詹明娟(2010)。中高齡學習者休閒態度與活躍老化之關係研究。成人及 終身教育,27:17-28。 吳明隆(2013)。SPSS統計應用學習實務-問卷分析與應用統計。臺北:易習圖書。 呂寶靜(2001)。老人照顧-老人、家庭、正式服務。臺北:五南。 李世代(2003)。老年人的身心特質(上)。中華民國老人福祉協會。 李世代(2010)。活躍老化的理念與本質。社區發展季刊,132,59-72。 李宗派(2004)。老化理論與老人保健(II)。身心障礙研究,2(2),77-94。 李宗派(2007)。老化概念(II):行為科學之老化理論與老化理論研究趨勢。臺灣老人保健學刊,3(2),25-61。 李瑞金(2010)。活力老化—銀髮族的社會參與。社區發展季刊,132,123-132。 李德治(2016)。多變量分析-專題及論文常用的統計方法。臺北:雙葉書廊。 沙依仁(1996)。高齡學。臺北:五南圖書。 沙依仁(2005)。高齡社會的影響、問題及政策。社區發展季刊,110,56-65。 周玟琪、林萬億(2008)。從成功、活力與生產的老化觀點初探我國志願服務社會參與現況與影響因素。取自於:http://140.112.20.30/Aging2025/images/9/94/412.pdf。 周耕妃(2014)。抉擇之愛~雙重老化智能障礙者家庭父母之愛與痛。台中,東海大學社會工作系碩士論文,未出版。 林伯彥(2012)。「個人與社會功能量表—照護者中文版本」之發展與驗證。臺灣精神醫學雜誌,26(3),207-220。 林金定、吳佳玲、李志偉、嚴嘉楓、張茂榕、賴朝英(2001)。臺灣地區智能障礙者醫療照護政策發展。行政院衛生署委推研究計畫報告。 林昭吟、林季平(2004)。身心障礙者提前老化現象與健康照護需求之研究。臺北︰內政部社會司委託研究。 林萬億(2019)。社會福利。臺北:五南圖書出版股份有限公司。 林麗惠(2012)。活躍老化指標建構及其對老人教育政策之啟示。成人及終身教育學刊,19,77-111。 邱皓政(2008)。量化研究法(二)統計原理與分析技術。臺北:雙葉書廊。 邱皓政(2016)。量化研究與統計分析-SPSS資料分析範例。臺北:五南。 邱滿艷(2019)。智能障礙者生活狀況與服務認知、使用及滿意之情形 - 以臺南市為例。社區發展季刊,168,72-86。 姚卿騰(2014)。從我國高齡者生活狀況調查分析談成功老化的應用。新北市終身學習期刊,9,80-90。 姚開屏(2000)。臺灣版世界衛生組織生活品質問卷之發展與應用,臺灣醫學,6(2),193-200。 姚開屏(2005)。臺灣簡明版世界衛生組織生活品質問卷之發展及使用手冊。臺北:台大心理系。 施世駿(2002)〈生命歷程對社會政策效果的探討〉。《社會政策與社會工作學刊》, 6(1),101-157。 洪櫻純、秦秀蘭、梁慧雯、陳美蘭(2015)。老人學。臺北:揚智文化事業股份有限公司。 徐慧娟、江浙西、陸玓玲、陳正芬(2016)。建構本土性活躍老化指標架構 (104-107年),105年度衛生福利部國民健康署委託科技研究計畫。 徐慧娟、張明正(2004)。臺灣老人成功老化與活躍老化現況:多層次分析。臺灣社會福利學刊,3(2):1-36。 國家發展委員會(2013)。臺灣經濟論衡-全球人口老化之現況與趨勢。取自:https://reurl.cc/em2V6L 國家發展委員會(2014)。臺灣經濟論衡-人口老化專輯。取自:https://tinyurl.com/ykyc6ujl 國家發展委員會(2018)。中華民國人口推估(2018至2065年)。取自:https://tinyurl.com/yaqpxfg4 張玉萍(2011)。高齡者社會參與及生活品質關係之研究-以高雄市樂齡學習資源中心為例。未出版碩士論文,國立屏東教育大學。 許淑敏、邱啟潤(2004)。家庭照顧者的壓力源與因應行為--以一個支持團體為例。護理雜誌,50(5),47-55。 陳勻秋(2011)。健康狀況、健康促進、社會支持與生活滿意度之研究-以金門縣老年人為例。未出版碩士論文,國立高雄大學。 陳伶珠(2010)。「礙」到老?中高齡終身障礙者老化經驗初探。社會政策與社會工作學刊,14(1), 118-162。 陳伶珠、黃源協(2008)。身心障礙老人的健康與醫療利用—以南投縣爲例。長期照護雜誌,12(1),42-56。 陳佑淵(2007)。國小退休教師社會參與及生活品質之相關研究。未出版碩士論文,國立中正大學。 陳佳雯、張妤玥、高旭繁、陸洛(2013)。本土心理學研究,40,87-140。 陳妮葦、林藍萍、林金定(2015)。智能障礙者老化對健康與未來照護需求之影響。身心障礙研究季刊,13(1),26-34。 陳奎安(2015)。智能障礙者活躍老化發展:社會參與及生活安全調查。國防醫學院,未出版碩士論文。 陳美花(2006)。身心障礙福利機構管理者對智障老人照顧需求認知之研究。實踐大學家庭研究與兒童發展研究所碩士論文。臺北:實踐大學。 陳淑芳、李期田、鍾嘉明、林儒詣、李貴美、陳敬吾、黃建龍、陳存壽(2006)。智能障礙者高齡化之安置照顧服務探討,臺灣老人保健學刊,2(1),80-95。 陳毓璟(2010)。老人寄宿所模式在活力老化學習之成效研究。健康促進與衛生教育學報,33:91-114。 陳肇男、林惠玲(2015)。家庭、社會支持與老人心理福祉:二十世紀末的臺灣經驗。臺北:聯經。 陳燕禎(2015)。老人福利服務-理論與實務。臺北,雙葉書廊。 曾煥裕、李孟芬、劉曉春、石泱、李淑華、林筱倩、李明芝編譯(2012)。社會老人學。臺北,洪葉文化。 舒昌榮(2008)。由積極老化觀點論我國因應高齡社會的主要策略:從「人口政策白皮書」談起。社區發展季刊,122:215-235。 黃芳誼(2015)。成功老化之實徵性研究:以美國養老院老人生命歷程為例。新社會政策雙月刊,40,66-79。 楊士萱、游慧瑜、吳美霖(2017)。一位高齡智障者對老年生活期待的個案研究。身心障礙研究,15(1),25-30。 楊培珊、梅陳玉蟬(2016)。臺灣老人社會工作-理論與實務。臺北:雙葉書廊。 楊培珊、羅鈞令、陳奕如(2009)。創意老化的發展趨勢與挑戰。社區發展季刊,125,408-423。 葉至誠(2018)。老人社會工作。臺北:秀威資訊。 葉肅科(2000)。社會老年學與福利政策應用。東吳社會學報,9,77-122。 廖以誠、葉宗烈、楊延光、盧豐華、張智仁、柯慧貞、駱重鳴(2004)。臺灣老年憂鬱量表之編製與信、效度研究。臺灣精神醫學,18(1),30-40。 劉文瑜、王鐘賢、何靖雯(2013)。應用ICF架構探討智能障礙者的老化。物理治療期刊,38(2),126-136。 衛生福利部(2018)。中華民國105年身心障礙者生活狀況及需求調查報告。衛生福利部編印。 衛生福利部(2021)。身心障礙者人數統計。取自:https://dep.mohw.gov.tw/dos/lp-2976-113.html 衛生福利部(2021)。身心障礙者鑑定表。取自於:https://www-ws.pthg.gov.tw/Upload/2015pthg/82/ckfile/df61ef66-da2d-4de3-b318-37f12ca6ec71.pdf 衛生福利部(2021)。高齡社會白皮書(核定本)。取自:https://www.oldpeople.org.tw/pop/rows/%E9%AB%98%E9%BD%A1%E6%94%BF%E7%AD%96%E7%99%BD%E7%9A%AE%E6%9B%B8 衛生福利部(2023)。中華民國110年身心障礙者生活狀況及需求調查報告。衛生福利部編印。 衛生福利部(2023)。身心障礙者人數按年齡及類別分。取自於:https://dep.mohw.gov.tw/DOS/cp-5337-62357-113.html 鄭元棻、林萬億、沈志勳(2019)。從社會支持角度探討臺灣雙重老化智能障礙者家庭照顧者之照顧負荷,臺灣社會工作學刊,22,1-40。 鄭惠珠(2015)。遇見生命:運用生命歷程概念建構老人學相關課程學習進程與效果。福祉科技與服務管理學刊,3(1),51-60。 盧宸緯(2008)。從活躍老化觀點談戶外休閒的重要性。學校體育,18(3):35-41。 蕭文高(2010)。活躍老化與照顧服務:理論、政策與實務。社區發展季刊,132,41-58。 鍾國文(1998)。老人退休調適之研究。中原學報,26(4),109-115。 簡春安、鄒平儀(2004)。社會工作研究法。臺北:巨流圖書公司。 顏志龍、鄭中平(2016)。給論文寫作者的統計指南。臺北:五南。 嚴嘉楓、林金定(2009)。智能障礙青少年健康情形與醫療利用及其相關因素之研究。身心障礙研究季刊,7(2),94-120。 嚴嘉楓、林金定、羅慶徽(2009)。世界衛生組織“國際功能、身心障礙與健康分類系統(ICF)規劃與推動”架構之認知態度調查。身心障礙研究季刊,7(2),144-154。 AAIDD. (2021). Definition of Intellectual Disability. 取自於:https://www.aaidd.org/intellectual-disability/definition Abbott, S., Mcconkey, R. (2006). The barriers to social inclusion as perceived by people with intellectual disabilities. Journal of Intellectual Disabilities, 10(3) 275‒287. Albrecht, G. (1992). The disability business: Rehabilitation in America. London: Sage. Arber, S., Evandrou, M. (1993). Ageing, Independence and the Life Course. London: Jessica Kingsley Publisher. Asch, A., & Fine, M. (1988). Shared dreams: A left perspective on disability rights and reproductive rights. In M. Fine & A. Asch (Eds.), Women with disabilities: Essays in psychology, culture and politics. Philadelphia: Temple University Press. Atchley, R. C. (2000). The Social Force in Later Life. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth. Atchley, R.C. & Barusch, A.S. (2004) Social Forces and Aging: An Introduction to Social Gerontology. 10th Edition, Wadsworth Publishing, Belmont. Babbie, E. R.(2021). 社會科學研究方法. ( 林秀雲譯;第15版). 雙葉書廊。(原著出版於1975) Baltes, P.B., Baltes, M.M. (1990). Psychological perspectives on successful aging: the model of selective optimization with compensation. In: Baltes PB & Baltes MM, eds. Successful Aging: Perspectives from the Behavioral Sciences. Cambridge University Press, NY: 1-34. Barnes, C., & Mercer, G. (2005). Disability, work, and welfare: Challenging the social exclusion of disabled people. Work, Employment & Society, 19(3), 527-545. Beange, H., McElduff, A.& Baker, W. (1995). Medical disorders of adults with mental retardation: a population study. American Journal of Mental Retardation, 99(6), 595-604. Bengtson, V. L., Parrott, T. M., & Burgess, E. O. (1996). Progress and pitfalls in gerontological theorizing. Gerontologist, 36(6), 768-72. Doi: 10.1093/geront/36.6.768. Biazus-Sehn, L. F., Schuch, F. B., Firth, J., Stigger, F. (2020). Effects of physical exercise on cognitive function of older adults with mild cognitive impairment: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Archives of Gerontology and Geriatrics, 89(2020): 104048. Bielderman, J. H. (2016). Active ageing and quality of life: Community-dwelling older adults in deprived neighbourhoods, Gildeprint Drukkerijen, ISBN: 978-90-367-8657-7. Bigby, C. (2002). Ageing People with a Lifelong Disability: Challenges for the Aged Care and Disability Sectors. Journal of Intellectual and Developmental Disability,27(4), 231-241. Brashler, R. (2006). Social work practice and disability issues. In S. Gehlert & T. A. Browne (Eds.), Handbook of Health Social Work (pp. 448-468). Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons, Inc. Burke, E., McCarron, M., Carroll, R., McGlinchey, E., McCallion. P. (2014). What It's Like to Grow Older: The Aging Perceptions of People With an Intellectual Disability in Ireland. American Journal on Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities, 52(3), 205–219. Butler, R. N., & Gleason, H. P. (1982). Productive Aging: Enhancing Vitality in Later Life. New York: Springer. Buys, L., Aird, R., & Miller, E. (2012a). Active Ageing Among Older Adults with Lifelong Intellectual Disabilities: The Role of Familial and Nonfamilial Social Networks. Families in society: The Journal of contemporary social services, 93(1), 55-64. Buys, L., Aird, R., & Miller, E. (2012b). Service providers’ perceptions of active ageing among older adults with lifelong intellectual disabilities. Journal of Intellectual Disability Research, 56(12), 1133–1147. Buys, L., Miller, E. (2006). The meaning of “active ageing” to older Australians: Exploring the relative importance of health, participation and security. 39th Australian Association of Gerontology Conference, 2006. Canrinus, M., & Lunsky, Y. (2003). Successful Aging of Women with Intellectual Disabilities: The Toronto Experience. Journal on Developmental Disabilities, 10(1), 73-78. Caro, F. G., Bass, S. A., & Chen, Y. P. (1993). Achieving a productive aging society. Westport, CT: Auburn House. Chambers, P. (2004). The case for critical social gerontology in social work education and older women. Social Work Education. 23(6), 745-758. Charlton, J. I. (1998). Nothing About Us Without Us: Disability Oppression and Empowerment. University of California Press. Chin, W. C., Liu, C. Y., Lee, C. P., & Chu, C. L. (2014). Validation of Five Short Versions of the Geriatric Depression Scale in the Elder Population in Taiwan. Taiwanese Journal of Psychiatry (Taipei), 28(3), 156-163. Clarke, A., & Warren, L. (2007). Hope, fears and expectations about the future: what do older people’s stories tell us about active ageing? Ageing and Society, 27, 465-488. Connolly, B. H. (2006). Issues in aging in individuals with life long disabilities. n Revista Brasileira de Fisioterapia, 10(3), 249-262. Cowgill, D. O. & Holmes, L. D. (1972). Aging and Modernization. New York Appleton Century Crofts, 305-323. Crain, W. (2014). Theories of Development Concepts and Applications (Sixth Edition). Psychology Press. Creswell, J. W. (1994). Research Design: Qualitative & Quantitative Approaches. Newbury Park: Sage. Crowther, M. R., Parker, M. W., Achenbaum, W. A., Larimore, W. L. & Harold G Koenig, H. G. (2002), Rowe and Kahn’s Model of Successful Aging Revisited: Positive Spirituality- The Forgotten Factor. The Gerontologist, 42(5) 613-620. Daniels, N., Rose, S., & Daniels Zide, E. (2008). Disability, adaptation, and inclusion. In K. Brownlee & A. Cureton (Eds.), Disability and Disadvantage (pp. 54-81). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press. Davey, J. A. (2002). Active ageing and education in mid and later life. Ageing and Society, 22, 95-113. Davis, L. J. (1997). Introduction. In L. J. Davis (Ed.), The disability studies reader. New York: Routledge. Degener, T. (2016). Disability in a Human Rights Context. Laws, 5(3), 35. https://doi.org/10.3390/laws5030035 Degener, T. (2017). A new human rights model of disability. In Routledge Handbook of Disability Law and Human Rights. Degener, T. (2017). A new human rights model of disability. In V. Della Fina, R. Cera, & G. Palmisano (Eds.), The United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (pp. 41-59). Cham: Springer International. Devellis, R. F. & Thorpe, C. T. (2021). Scale Development Theory and Applications. Sage Publications, 5th , New York. Devellis, R. F.(2016). Scale Development Theory and Applications(Applied Social Research Methods). Sage Publications, 4th, New York. Elder GH, Jr, Johnson MK, Crosnoe R. The emergence and development of life course theory. In: Mortimer JT, Shanahan MJ, editors. Handbook of the life course. New York: Kluwer Academic/Plenum; 3–19. Farkas, J. I., & Hogan, D. P. (1995). The demography of changing intergenerational relationships. In V. L. Bengtson, K. W. Schaie, & L. M. Burton (Eds.), Adult intergenerational relations: Effects of societal change (pp. 1–29). New York: Springer. Fereshtehnejad, S. M. & Lökk, J. (2014). Active Aging for Individuals with Parkinson’s Disease: Definitions, Literature Review, and Models. Parkinsons Dis, 2014, 1-8. DOI:10.1155/2014/739718. Finkelstein, V. (1991). Disability: An administrative challenge? In M. Oliver (Ed.), Social work: Disabled people and disabling environments. London: Jessica Kingsley. Folstein, M. F., Folstein, S. E., McHugh, P. R. (1975). "Mini-mental state". A practical method for grading the cognitive state of patients for the clinician. Journal of Psychiatry Research, 12(3), 189-198. Fraser, N. & Gordon, L. (1994). A genealogy of dependency: Tracing a keyword of the U.S. welfare state. Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society, 19(2), 309-336. Gilson, S. F., & DePoy, E. (2002). Theoretical approaches to disability content in social work education. Journal of Social Work Education, 38(1) , 153-165. Gorsuch, R. L. (1983). Factor Analysis (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Assciates. Green, F. P. & Others. (1995). Nondisabled adults' perceptions of relationships in the early stages of arranged partnerships with peers with mental retardation. Education and Training in Mental Retardation and Develpmental Disabilities, 30(2), 91-108. Gritzer, G., & Arluke, A. (1985). The making of rehabilitation: A political economy of medical specialization, 1890-1980. Berkeley: University of California Press. Hagestad, G. O. & Dannefer, D. (2001). “Concepts and Theories of Aging.” Chapter One in Binstock, Robert, George, Linda (Eds.), Handbook of Aging and the Social Sciences. New York, NY: Academic. Haider, S. I., Ansari, Z., Vaughan, L, Matters, H., Emerson, E. (2013). Health and wellbeing of Victorian adults with intellectual disability compared to the general Victorian population. Research in Developmental Disabilities. 34(11). 4034 – 4042. Halek, M., Holle. D., & Bartholomeyczik, S. (2017). Development and evaluation of the content validity, practicability and feasibility of the Innovative dementia-oriented Assessment system for challenging behaviour in residents with dementia. BMC Health Services Research 17(1), 554-580. Harding, S. (1997). Feminism & methodology. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press. Haynes, S. N., Richard, D. C. S., & Kubany, E. S.(1995). Content Validity in Psychological Assessment: A Functional Approach to Concepts and Methods. Psychological Assessment, 7(3), 238-247. Heller, T., & Heumen, L. V. (2021). Aging in individuals with intellectual and developmental disabilities. In Glidden, L. M., Abbeduto, L., McIntyre, L., & Tassé, M.J. (Eds.), APA handbook of intellectual and developmental disabilities: Clinical and educational implications: Prevention, intervention, and treatment (pp. 507–523). American Psychological Association. Henderson, C. M., Acquilano, J. P., Meccarello, J. C., Davidson, P. W., Robinson, L. M., & Janocki, M. P. (2009). Health Status and Activities of Daily Living and Walking in Older People with Intellectual Disabilities. Journal of Policy and Practice in Intellectual Disabilities. 6, 282-286. Henson, R. K. (2001). Understanding Internal Consistency Reliability Estimates: A Conceptual Primer on Coefficient Alpha. Measurement and Evaluation in Counseling and Development, 34, 177-189. Herzog, A. R., & Morgan, J. N. (1992). Age and gender differences in the value of productive activities: Four different approaches. Research on Aging, 14,169-198. Herzog, A. R., Kahn, R. L., Morgan, J. N., Jackson, J. S., & Antonucci, T. C. (1989). Age differences in productive activities. Journal of Gerontology, 44(4), 129-138. https://doi.org/10.1093/geronj/44.4.S129 Hewitt, A., Lightfoot, E., Bogenschutz, M., McCormick, K., Sedlezky, L, & Doljanac, R. (2010). Parental Caregivers' Desires for Lifetime Assistance Planning for Future Supports for Their Children with Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities. Journal of Family Social Work, 13(5), 420-434, DOI:10.1080/10522158.2010.514678. Holstein, E. V., Wiesel, I., & Legacy, C. (2020). Mobility justice and accessible public transport networks for people with intellectual disability. Applied Mobilities, 7(2), 146-162. Holstein, M., & Minkler, M. (2003). Self, society and the "new gerontology". The Gerontologist, 43(6), 787-796. Hooyman, N. R., Kiyak, H. A. (2012). 社會老人學 II:社會取向. (黃久秦、白惠文、陳毓璟、李昆樺、周鉦翔、黃玟娟、劉立凡、梁翠梅、張江清、劉慧俐譯). 華騰文化。(原著出版於2011) Horkheimer, M. (1982). Critical Theory Selected Essays. New York: Continuum Publishing. Hsieh, K., Heller, T., Miller, A. B. (2001). Risk factors for injuries and falls among adults with developmental disabilities. Journal of Research in Intellectual Disabilities, 45(1), 76-82. DOI: 10.1046/j.1365-2788.2001.00277. Hsu, H. C. (2007). Exploring elderly people’s perspective on successful aging in Taiwan. Ageing & Society, 27(1), 87-102. Hsu, H. C. (2021). Handbook of Active Ageing and Quality of Life. Successful Aging and Active Aging in Taiwan: From Concept to Application: Micro and Macro Perspectives. 521-535. Hutchison, P., & Roeher, G. A. Institute. (1990). Making Friends: Developing relationships between people with disabilities and Other members of the community. Downsview, Ont. : G. Allan Roeher Institute. Hutchison, T., P. Morrison, K. Mikhailovich(2006) A Review of the Literature on Active Ageing. Healthpact Research Centre for Health Promotion and Wellbeing, University of Canberra. Ingstad, B., & Reynolds-Whyte, S. (1995). Disability and culture: An overview. In B. Ingstad, & S. Reynolds-Whyte (Eds.), Disability and culture (pp. 3-31). Berkeley: University of California Press. International Council on Active Aging. (2006). Active Aging Week 2006. Retrieved 8 September, 2006, from: http://www.icaa.cc/aaw.htm Janicki MP, Hogg JH. International research perspectives on aging and mental retardation: An introduction. Australia and New Zealand Journal of Developmental Disabilities 1989;15: 161- 164. Kerschner, H. & Pegues, J. A. (1998). Productive aging: a quality of life agenda. Journal of American Dietetic Association, 98(12), 1445-1448. Kotwal, N. & Prabhakar, B. (2017). Physical Needs and Adjustments Made by the Elderly. Home and Community Science, 3(2), 115-221. Kuhn, T. (2017). 科學革命的結構. (程樹德,傅大為,王道還譯:第3版).遠流。(原著出版於1962) Kuypers, J. A., & Bengtson, V. L.(1973). Social Breakdown and Competence: A Model of Normal Aging. Human Development, 16(3), 181–201. Lawson, A., & Beckett, A. E. (2021). The social and human rights models of disability: towards a complementarity thesis. The International Journal of Human Rights, 25(2), 348-379, DOI: 10.1080/13642987.2020.1783533 Lemon, B. W., Bengtson, V. L., Peterson, J. A. (1972). An Exploration of the Activity Theory of Aging: Activity Types and Life Satisfaction Among In-movers to a Retirement Community. Journal of Gerontology, 27(4), 511–523. Doi: doi.org/10.1093/geronj/27.4.511 Lifshitz, H. & Merrick, J. (2003). Aging and intellectual disability in Israel: a study to compare community residence with living at home, Health & social care in the community, 11(4), 364-371. Linton, S. (1998). Disability studies: Not disability studies. Disability and Society, 13, 525-541. Lippold, Y., & Burns, J. (2009). Social support and intellectual disabilities: a comparison between social networks of adults with intellectual disability and those with physical disability. Journal of Intellectual Disability Research, 53(5), 463-473. Llewellyn, G., Balandin, S., Dew, A. & McConnell, D. (2004) Promoting healthy, productive ageing: plan early, plan well. Journal of Intellectual & Developmental Disability, 29, 366–369. Lynn, M. R. (1986). Determination and Quantification of Content Validity. Nurse Research.35, 382-385. Lynott, R. J., & Lynott, P. P. (1996). Tracing the course of theoretical development in the sociology of aging. The Gerontologist, 36(6), 749–760. Macdonald, S. J & Deacon, L. (2019). Disability theory and social work practice. In: The Routledge Handbook of Social Work Theory. Routledge, London. ISBN 9780415793438 Mackelprang, R., & Salsgiver, R. (1996). People with disabilities and social work: Historical and contemporary issues. Social Work, 41(1), 7-14. Marmot, M. (2004). Status syndrome. Significance, 1(4), 150-154. McDonald, A. (2010). Social Work with Older People. Oxford, United Kingdom. Mégret, F. (2008). The Disabilities Convention: Towards a Holistic Concept of Rights. The International Journal of Human Rights, 12(2), 1-19. DOI:10.1080/13642980801954363. Mittler, P. (2012). It's Our Convention: Use It or Lose It? Disability, CBR & Inclusive Development, 23(2), 7-21. Mittler, P. (2015). The UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities: Implementing a Paradigm Shift. Journal of Policy and Practice in Intellectual Disabilities, 12(2), 79-89. Morrow-Howell, N., Hinterlong, J., & Sherraden, M. (Eds.). (2001). Productive aging: Concepts and challenges. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press. Mpofu, E., & Conyers, L. M. (2004). A representational theory perspective of minority status and people with disabilities: Implications for rehabilitation education and practice. Rehabilitation Counseling Bulletin, 47(3), 142-151. Nachmias, C. K., & Nachmias, D. (2003). 最新科學研究方法(潘明宏、陳志瑋譯). 韋伯文化國際出版有限公司。(原著出版於1996) Nelson, H. W. (2000). Injustice and Conflict in Nursing Homes: Toward Advocacy and Exchange. Journal of Aging Studies, 14(1), 39-61. Neuman, W. L. (2014). 當代社會研究法:質化與量化取向(王佳煌、潘中道、蘇文賢、江吟梓:第2版). 學富文化事業有限公司。(原著出版於2013) Oliver, M. (1983). Social work with disabled people. Basingstoke: Macmillan. Oliver, M. (1990). The politics of disablement: A sociological approach. New York: St. Martin’s Press. Oliver, M. (1996). Understanding disability: From theory to practice. Basingstoke: Macmillan. Olkin, R. (1999). What psychotherapists should know about disability. New York: The Guilford Press. O'Reilly, P., & Caro, F. G. (1994). Positive aging: An overview of the literature. Journal of Aging and Social Policy, 6(3), 39-71. Paúl C, Ribeiro O, Teixeira L. (2012). Active ageing: an empirical approach to the WHO model. Current Gerontology and Geriatrics Research, 2012, 1-10. doi:10.1155/2012/382972. Pfeiffer, D. (1996). Understanding disability policy: [A review of] Michael Oliver, Understanding Disability: From Theory to Practice (New York: St. Martin’s Press, 1995). Policy Studies Journal, 24, 157-159. Pfeiffer, D., & Yoshida, K. (1995). Teaching disability studies in Canada and the USA. Disability & Society, 10, 475-500. Quinn, G., & Degener, T. (2002). Human Rights and Disability: The current use and future potential of United Nations human rights instruments in the context of disability. United Nations. Quinn, P. (1995). Social work and disability management policy: Yesterday, today, and tomorrow. Social Work in Health Care, 20(3), 67-82. Reppermund, S., &Trollor, J. N. (2016). Successful ageing for people with an intellectual disability. Current Opinion in Psychiatry, 29(2), 149-154. Roberts, E., Bishop, A., Ruppert-Stroescu, M., Clare, G., Hermann, J., Singh, C., Balasubramanan, M., Struckmeyer, K. M., Kang. M., Slevitch, L.(2017). Active Aging for L.I.F.E. -An Intergenerational Public Health Initiative Addressing Perceptions and Behaviors Around Longevity, Independence, Fitness, and Engagement. Topics in Geriatric Rehabilitation, 33(3), 211-222. Rose, A. M. (1965). The subculture of the aging: A framework for research in social gerontology. Older people and their social world. Davis Company, Philadelphia. Rowe, J.W., &Kahn, R.L. (1987). Human aging: usual and successful. Science, 237, 143-149. Rowe, J.W., &Kahn, R.L. (1997). Successful aging. Gerontologist, 37, 433-440. Rowe, J.W., &Kahn, R.L. (1998). The structure of successful aging. In: Rowe, J.W. & Kahn, R.L., (eds) Successful Aging. NY: Dell Publishing: 36-52. Rubin, A. & Babbie, E. R. (2016). 社會工作研究方法. (李政賢譯,第1版). 五南。(原著出版於2016) Ryff, C. D., & Singer, B. (2009). Understanding healthy aging: Key components and their integration. In V. L. Bengston, D. Gans, N. M. Pulney, & M. Silverstein (Eds.), Handbook of theories of aging, 117-144. Springer Publishing Company. Schalock, R. L., Luckasson. R., & Tassé, M. J. (2021). Intellectual Disability: Definition, Diagnosis, Classification, and Systems of Supports, 12th Edition. Schepens, H. R. M. M., Puyenbroeck, J. V., & Maes, B. (2020). How to improve the quality of life of elderly people with intellectual disability: A systematic literature review of support strategies. Journal of Applied Research in Intellectual Disabilities, 32(3):483-521. doi: 10.1111/jar.12559. Shakespeare, T. (2006). Disability Rights and Wrongs. Routledge. Sheets, D. (2005). Aging with Disabilities: Ageism and More.Generations,29(3),37-41. Sheikh, J. I., & Yesavage, J. A. (1986). Geriatric Depression Scale (GDS): Recent evidence and development of a shorter version. Clinical Gerontologist: The Journal of Aging and Mental Health, 5(1-2), 165–173. Stiker, H. (1982). A history of disability. Paris: Aubier Montaigne. Street, D. A. (2007). Sociological approaches to understanding age and aging. In J. A. Blackburn & C. N. Dulmus (Eds.), Handbook of gerontology: Evidence-based approaches to theory, practice, and policy, 143–168. John Wiley & Sons, Inc. Streiner, D. L. (1994). Figuring out factors: The use and misuse of factor analysis. Canadian Journal of Psychiatry, 39(3), 135-140. Tashakkori, A., & Teddlie, C. (2003). Handbook of Mixed Methods in Social and Behavioral Research. Thousand Oaks: Sage. Tavakol, M., & Dennick, R. (2011). Making sense of Cronbach's alpha. International journal of medical education, 2, 53-55. Teyhen, D. S., Riebel, M. A., McArthur, D .R., Savini, M., Jones, M. J., Goffar, S. L., Kiesel, K. B., & Plisky, P. J. (2014). Normative data and the influence of age and gender on power, balance, flexibility, and functional movement in healthy service members. Military Medicine, 179(4), 413-420. DOI: 10.7205/MILMED-D-13-00362. Thanakwang, K., Isaramalai, S. A., Hatthakit, U. (2014). Development and psychometric testing of the active aging scale for Thai adults. Clinical Interventions in Aging, 9, 1211-1221. The AAIDD Ad Hoc Committee on Terminology and Classification. (2010). 智能障礙:定義、分類和支持系統(鄭雅莉譯,第11版). 臺北市:財團法人心路社會福利基金會。(原著出版於2010) Thomas, C. (2007). Sociologies of Disability and Illness: Contested Ideas in Disability Studies and Medical Sociology. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. Thorpe, L., Davidson, P., & Janicki, M.P. (2001). Healthy Ageing - Adults with Intellectual Disabilities- Biobehavioural Issues. Journal of Applied Research in Intellectual Disabilities, 14, 218–228. Todd, S., &Read. S. (2010) Thinking about death and what it means: The Perspectives of People with an Intellectual Disability. International Journal of Child Health and Human Development, 3, 87-92. Todd, S., Evans, G., &Beyer, S. (1990). More recognised than known: The social visibility and attachment of people with developmental disabilities. Australia and New Zealand Journal of Developmental Disabilities, 16(3), 207-218. Torres S. (1999). A culturally-relevant theoretical framework for the study of successful ageing. Ageing & Society, 19, 33–51. Doi: 10.1017/s0144686x9900724. United Nations (2019). World Population Prospects, 取自:https://population.un.org/wpp2019/DataQuery/ Verdonschot, M. M. L., Reichrath, L. P. E., Buntinx, W. H. E., &Curfs, L. M. G. (2009). Community participation of people with an intellectual disability: a review of empirical findings. Journal of Intellectual Disability Research, 53(4):303-318. Webber. R., Bowers. B., & McKenzie-Green. B. (2010). Staff responses to age-related health changes in people with an intellectual disability in group homes. Disability & Society, 25(6), 657–671. Wendell, S. (1996). The rejected body: Feminist philosophical reflections on disability . New York: Routledge. Wendell, S. (1997) Toward a feminist theory of disability. In L. J. Davis (Ed.), The disability studies reader (pp. 260-278). New York: Routledge. World Health Organization. (2000). Healthy Ageing - Adults with Intellectual Disabilities: Summative Report. 取自:https://www.who.int/mental_health/media/en/20.pdf World Health Organization. (2002). Active ageing : a policy framework. World Health Organization. 取自於: http://www.who.int/inf-fs/en.fact252.html. World Health Organization. (2007). Global Age-friendly Cities: A Guide. 取自於:https://www.who.int/ageing/publications/Global_age_friendly_cities_Guide_English.pdf World Health Organization. (2020). Decade of Healthy Ageing Connection Series No. 1 - COVID-19. 取自於: https://www.who.int/publications/m/item/decade-connection-series-no1 World Health Organization. (2021). Decade of Healthy Ageing: Plan of Action. 取自於: https://cdn.who.int/media/docs/default-source/decade-of-healthy-ageing/final-decade-proposal/decade-proposal-final-apr2020-en.pdf?sfvrsn=b4b75ebc_25&download=true Yesavage, J. A., Brink, T. L, Rose, T. L, Lum, O., Huang, V., Adey, M., & Leirer, V. O. (1982). Development and validation of a geriatric depression screening scale: a preliminary report. 17(1), 37-49. Zames Fleischer, D., & Zames, F. (2001). The Disability Rights Movement: From Charity to Confrontation. Philadelphia: Temple University Press. | - |
dc.identifier.uri | http://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/jspui/handle/123456789/88435 | - |
dc.description.abstract | 本研究目標為建構智能障礙者活力老化量表,研究採用質量混合方法,主要包含三個階段:內容效度-專家小組、焦點團體和量表施測。重要結果如下述:
1.內容效度-專家小組:本研究邀請共6位學者專家參與評估量表的內容效度。使用I-CVI≥0.78、S-CVI/UA≥0.8、S-CVI/Ave≥0.9為檢驗標準,作為保留、刪除或調整題目的參考。本研究總量表S-CVI/UA=0.89、S-CVI/Ave=0.98,皆達標準;I-CVI部分,刪除一題I-CVI=0.5之題目,其他有8題之I-CVI為0.83≥0.78,故依照學者專家建議修改題目。 2.焦點團體:本研究邀請專業工作者參與焦點團體,以檢視本研究所發展之量表在實務場域進行的可行性、用詞的適當性等,共進行2次焦點團體,參與的工作者共10位,每次焦點團體約2小時。焦點團體討論結果用於修改和改進量表與指導手冊。 3.量表施測:研究聘請機構/協會的專業工作者作為研究守門員(訪員),使用量表進行面對面訪問智能障礙者(年齡35歲以上,能夠清楚表達自己想法)。施測時間範圍約為35-50分鐘;透過訪員施測後之回饋,本研究得知智障者多能完全理解量表的文字敘述方式。此外,根據結果亦可了解,本量表的施測可以在單次面訪中完成,因此不會造成智障者專注力不集中或使其產生心理壓力或情緒起伏等負面影響。 本研究根據世界衛生組織所提出的活力老化政策架構(Active ageing : a policy framework)為基礎,建構智能障礙者活力老化量表,以了解和評估高齡智能障礙者的活力老化狀況和需求。而本量表的使用可以提供專業工作者評估智障者活力老化各面向狀況,並為他們提供適切的支持與福利服務。如能進一步收集常模並建立資料庫,可提高量表的有效性及參考性,為政府和相關機構提供更精準的參考標準,滿足智障者在活力老化上的需求,提高其生活品質。 | zh_TW |
dc.description.abstract | The main objective of this study is to develop an Active Aging Scale for persons with intellectual disabilities. The research employed a Mixed-Methods approach consisting of three stages: content validity - expert panel, focus groups, and scale administration. The main results are as follows:
1.Content validity - expert panel: six scholars and experts were invited to assess the content validity of the scale. The criteria for evaluation included I-CVI ≥ 0.78, S-CVI/UA ≥ 0.8, and S-CVI/Ave ≥ 0.9, which determined whether items should be retained, deleted, or modified. The overall S-CVI/UA and S-CVI/Ave of the scale were 0.89 and 0.98, respectively, meeting the standards. Regarding I-CVI, one item with an I-CVI of 0.5 was removed, and another eight items had an I-CVI of 0.83 ≥ 0.78, therefore, the suggested modifications by the expert panel were implemented. 2.Focus groups: professional practitioners were invited to participate in focus groups to assess the feasibility and appropriateness of the developed scale in practical. Two focus group sessions were conducted, with each session lasting approximately two hours, 5 participants. The outcomes of the focus group discussions were used to modify and improve the scale and its accompanying manual. 3.Testing the developed scale: professional practitioners (from organizations/associations) hired, serving as research gatekeepers (interviewers) and conducted face-to-face interviews with persons with intellectual disabilities aged 35 and above who were able to express their thoughts clearly. The assessment duration for the scale were about 35 to 50 minutes. Feedback from the interviewers indicated that persons with intellectual disabilities could fully understand the wording and descriptions of the scale. Additionally, it was found that the scale could be completed in a single face-to-face interview without causing a lack of concentration, psychological pressure, or emotional fluctuations among individuals with intellectual disabilities. Based on the policy framework of active aging proposed by the World Health Organization, this study developed an Active Aging Scale for persons with intellectual disabilities to understand and assess their active aging status and special needs. The use of this scale allows professional practitioners to evaluate various aspects of active aging in persons with intellectual disabilities and provide appropriate support and services. Further collection of normative data and the establishment of a database would enhance the effectiveness and referential value of the scale, providing more accurate reference standards for governments and relevant institutions to meet the active aging needs of persons with intellectual disabilities and improve their quality of life. | en |
dc.description.provenance | Submitted by admin ntu (admin@lib.ntu.edu.tw) on 2023-08-15T16:17:27Z No. of bitstreams: 0 | en |
dc.description.provenance | Made available in DSpace on 2023-08-15T16:17:27Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 0 | en |
dc.description.tableofcontents | 口試委員會審定書 i
謝辭 ii 中文摘要 iii 英文摘要 iv 第一章 緒論 1 第一節 研究背景 2 第二節 研究重要性與研究動機 6 第三節 研究目的 11 第二章 文獻探討 13 第一節 智能障礙者與老化 14 第二節 老化相關理論 18 第三節 老化政策架構觀點 32 第四節 身心障礙相關理論 41 第五節 臺灣高齡智障者現況 51 第六節 國內外活力老化相關研究 54 第七節 小結 61 第三章 研究方法 67 第一節 研究典範選取與研究步驟 67 第二節 研究架構與研究步驟 71 第三節 量表變項的操作型定義 74 第四節 研究測量工具 79 第五節 資料蒐集 81 第六節 資料分析方法 86 第七節 研究倫理 90 第四章 研究結果 95 第一節 內容效度-專家小組 95 第二節 項目分析 97 第三節 信度分析 103 第四節 因素分析 104 第五節 樣本描述性分析 111 第六節 平均數差異檢定 125 第七節 相關分析 137 第五章 研究結論與建議 139 第一節 研究發現 139 第二節 研究建議 148 第三節 研究限制 152 參考文獻 153 附件一 焦點團體知情同意書 177 附件二 量表指導手冊 179 附件三 內容效度-專家小組 199 附件四 專家意見統整、I-CVI 213 附件五 量表版本三 233 附件六 量表版本四 249 附件七 焦點團體建議統整表 265 圖目錄 圖 2-1 成功老化模型 33 圖 2-2 活力老化決定因素 38 圖 3-1 研究步驟圖 73 表目錄 表 2-1 智能障礙程度分級 17 表 2-2 臺灣智能障礙者人口現況(單位:%) 53 表 2-3 智障者與一般老年人老化現象比較 62 表 2-4 1980年代後老化相關政策架構 66 表 3-1 焦點團體成員專業表 83 表 3-2 量表施測回收狀況-以居住地、服務場域分類 85 表 4-1 內容效度-專家小組背景 95 表 4-2 心理健康分量表項目分析 98 表 4-3 自我照顧分量表項目分析 99 表 4-4 健康維持分量表項目分析 100 表 4-5 社會支持分量表項目分析 101 表 4-6 社會參與分量表項目分析 102 表 4-7 分量表、總量表刪題前後信度 103 表 4-8 心理健康分量表KMO與BARTLETT檢定 104 表 4-9 心理健康分量表因素分析結果摘要表 105 表 4-10 自我照顧分量表KMO與BARTLETT檢定 105 表 4-11 自我照顧分量表因素分析結果摘要表 106 表 4-12 健康維持分量表KMO與BARTLETT檢定 106 表 4-13 健康維持分量表因素分析結果摘要表 107 表 4-14 社會支持分量表KMO與BARTLETT檢定 107 表 4-15 社會支持分量表因素分析結果摘要表 108 表 4-16 社會參與分量表KMO與BARTLETT檢定 108 表 4-17 社會參與分量表因素分析結果摘要表 109 表 4-18 量表版本三刪題狀況 110 表 4-19 高齡智障者人口特質描述性統計 112 表 4-20 分量表描述性統計 114 表 4-21 社會參與(二)-社會環境決定因素描述性統計-1 117 表 4-22 社會參與(二)-社會環境決定因素描述性統計-2 118 表 4-23 社會參與(三)-健康與社會服務決定因素描述性統計 119 表 4-24 安全(一)-物理環境決定因素描述性統計 121 表 4-25 安全(二)-經濟決定因素描述性統計 122 表 4-26 專業工作者評估描述性統計 124 表 4-27 性別與分量表獨立樣本T檢定 126 表 4-28 健康狀況T檢定 127 表 4-29 自評健康狀況ANOVA分析 129 表 4-30 教育程度ANOVA分析 131 表 4-31 障礙程度ANOVA分析 134 表 4-32 工作狀況 ANOVA分析 136 表 4-33 分量表相關分析 138 | - |
dc.language.iso | zh_TW | - |
dc.title | 智能障礙者活力老化量表之建構 | zh_TW |
dc.title | Construction of the Active Aging Scale for Persons with Intellectual Disabilities | en |
dc.type | Thesis | - |
dc.date.schoolyear | 111-2 | - |
dc.description.degree | 博士 | - |
dc.contributor.coadvisor | 趙曉芳 | zh_TW |
dc.contributor.coadvisor | Shiau-Fang Chao | en |
dc.contributor.oralexamcommittee | 林昭吟;陳政智;黃志忠;楊培珊 | zh_TW |
dc.contributor.oralexamcommittee | Chao-Yin Lin;Cheng-Chih Chen;Chih-Chung Huang;Pei-Shan Yang | en |
dc.subject.keyword | 智能障礙者,高齡智障者,活力老化,活力老化量表, | zh_TW |
dc.subject.keyword | persons with intellectual disabilities,older adults with intellectual disabilities,active aging,scale of active aging, | en |
dc.relation.page | 281 | - |
dc.identifier.doi | 10.6342/NTU202302214 | - |
dc.rights.note | 同意授權(限校園內公開) | - |
dc.date.accepted | 2023-07-31 | - |
dc.contributor.author-college | 社會科學院 | - |
dc.contributor.author-dept | 社會工作學系 | - |
顯示於系所單位: | 社會工作學系 |
文件中的檔案:
檔案 | 大小 | 格式 | |
---|---|---|---|
ntu-111-2.pdf 目前未授權公開取用 | 4.81 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。