請用此 Handle URI 來引用此文件:
http://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/jspui/handle/123456789/36839完整後設資料紀錄
| DC 欄位 | 值 | 語言 |
|---|---|---|
| dc.contributor.advisor | 沈瓊桃 | |
| dc.contributor.author | Jui-Chi Keng | en |
| dc.contributor.author | 耿瑞琦 | zh_TW |
| dc.date.accessioned | 2021-06-13T08:18:35Z | - |
| dc.date.available | 2013-07-27 | |
| dc.date.copyright | 2011-07-27 | |
| dc.date.issued | 2011 | |
| dc.date.submitted | 2011-07-20 | |
| dc.identifier.citation | 內政部家庭暴力及性侵害防治委員會(2010)。性侵害事件通報案件數(通報單位.案發地點.兩造關係)。 取得日期:2010.06.06。網址:http://dspc.moi.gov.tw/ct.asp?xItem=2336&ctNode=776&mp=1。
王珮玲(2010)。親密伴侶暴力案件保護令成效與相關因素之研究:以禁制、遷出及遠離令為例。社會政策與社會工作學刊,14(2),1-47。 王燦槐(1999)。約會暴力—兩性平等關係的殺手。兩性平等教育季刊,6,50-54。 江文賢(2001)。大學生約會暴力現象與相關因素之研究。國立彰化師範大學輔導與諮商研究所碩士論文。 行政院經濟建設委員會(2011)。都市及區域發展統計彙編。取得日期:2011.02.13。網址:http://www.cepd.gov.tw/m1.aspx?sNo=0000486。 林淑敏、李宗派(2002)。變質的親密關係—青少年約會暴力的認知與探討。社區發展季刊,103,157-169。 孫頌賢、李宜玫(2009)。暴力的代間傳遞:原生家庭暴力經驗與依戀系統對大學生約會暴力行為的預測比較。家庭教育與諮商學刊,7,23-43。 修慧蘭(2002)。大學生約會暴力行為之研究。國科會專題研究計畫(NSC 90-2413-H-004-010-SSS)。台北市:國立政治大學心理系。 修慧蘭、孫頌賢(2003)。大學生約會暴力行為之測量與調查。教育與心理研究,26,471-499。 陳金燕(2003)。自我覺察在諮商專業中之意涵:兼論自我覺察督導模式。應用心理研究,18,59-87。 陳皎眉、王叢桂、孫倩如(2006)。社會心理學。台北市:雙葉。 郭豫珍(2004)。Hirschi控制理論的原初觀點與發展:家庭與父母管教方式在子女非行控制上的角色。犯罪學期刊,7(1),49-80。 蔡德輝、楊士隆(2006)。犯罪學。台北市:五南。 譚子文(2009)。社會控制理論依附和參與要素之關連性研究。犯罪與刑事司法研究,13,51-81。 Arriaga, X. B., & Foshee, V. A. (2004). Adolescent dating violence: Do adolescents follow in their friends’, or their parents’, footsteps? Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 19(2), 162-184. Ashford, J. B., Lecroy, C. W., & Lortie, K. L. (2006). Human behavior in the social environment.(Third Edition.). Belmont, CA: Thomson Brooks/Cole. Barter, C. (2009). In the name of love: partner abuse and violence in teenage relationships. British Journal of Social Work, 39, 211-233. Bandura, A. (1977). Social learning. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall. Bergman, L. (1992). Dating violence among high school students. Social Work, 37(1), 21-27. Boeringer, S. B., Shehan, C. L., & Akers, R. L. (1991). Social context and social learning in sexual coercion and aggression: Assessing the contribution of fraternity membership. Family Relations, 40, 58-64. Coll, K. M., Stewart, R. A. (2006). Ada county family violence court grant project: Comprehensive evaluation report. 取得日期:2011.03.02.網址: http://www.isc.idaho.gov/Eval_72506.pdf. Coll, K. M., Stewart, R. A., Morse, R., Moe, A. (2010). The value of coordinated services with court-referred clients and their families: An outcome study. Child Welfare, 89(1), 61-79. DeKeseredy, W. S. (1990). Women abuse on dating relationships: The contribution of male peer support. Sociological Inquiry, 60(3), 236-243. DeKeseredy, W. S., & Kelly, K. (1995). Sexual abuse in Canadian university and college dating relationships: The contribution of male peer support. Journal of Family Violence, 10(1), 41-53. Department of Justice Canada. (2003).取得日期:2010.06.06.網址: http://canada.justice.gc.ca/eng/pi/fv-vf/facts-info/dati-freq.html. Fallon, B. J., & Bowles, T. V. (1996). The effect of family structure and family functioning on adolescents’ perceptions of intimate time spent with parents, siblings, and peers. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 26(1), 25-43. Fallon, B. J., & Bowles, T. V. (2001). Family functioning and adolescent help-seeking behavior. Family Relations, 50(3), 239-245. Feiring, C., Deblinger, E., Hoch-Espada, & Haworth, T. (2002). Romantic relationship aggression and attitudes in hogh school student: The role of gender, grade, and attachment and emotional styles. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 31(5), 373-385. Forbes, G. B. (2001). Experences with sexual coercion in college males and females: Role of family conflict, sexist attitudes, acceptance of rape myths, self-esteem, and the big-five personality factors. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 16(9), 865-889. Foshee, V. A., Benefield, T. S., Ennett, S. T., Bauman, K. E., & Suchindran, C. (2004). Longitudinal Predictors of serious physical and sexual dating violence victimization during adolescence. Preventive Medicine, 39, 1007-1016. Foshee, V. A., Benefield, T., Suchindran, C., Ennett, S. T., Bauman, K. E., Karriker-Jaffe, K. J., & et al. (2009). The development of four types of adolescent dating abuse and selected demographic correlates. Journal of Research on Adolescence, 19(3), 380-400. Gaertner, A. E., Fite, P. J., & Colder, C. R. (2010). Parenting and friendship Quality as predictors of internalizing and externalizing symptoms in early adolescence. Journal of Family Study, 19, 101-108. Gardner, M., & Steinberg, L. (2005). Peer influence on risk taking, risk preference, and risky decision making in adolescence and adulthood: An experimental study. Developmental Psychology, 41(4), 625-635. Gover, A. R. (2004). Risky lifestyles and dating violence: A theoretical test of violent victimization. Journal of Criminal Justice, 32(2), 171-180. Gray, H. M., & Foshee, V. (1997). Adolescent dating violence. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 12(1), 126-141. Greenfeld, L. Al, Rand, M. R., Craven, D., Klaus, P. A., Perkins, C. A., Ringel, C., et al. (1998). Violence by intimates (NCJ Publication No. 167237). Washington, DC: Department of Justice. Gryl, F. E., Stith, S. M., & Bird, G. W. (1991). Close dating relationships among college students: Difference by use of violence and by gender. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 8, 243-264. Gwartney-Gibbs, P. A., Stockard, J., & Bohmer, S. (1987). Learning courtship aggression: The influence of parents, peers, and personal experiences. Family Relatons, 36, 276-282. Hamby, S., & Jackson, A. (2010). Size does matter: the effects of gender on perceptions of dating violence. Sex Roles, 63, 324-331. Hilton, N. Z., Harris, G. T., & Rice, M. E. (2003). Adolescents’ perceptions of the seriousness of sexual aggression: Influence of gender, traditional attitudes, and self-report experience. Sexual Abuse: A Journal of Research and Treatment, 15(3), 201-214. Jackson, S. M. (1999). Issues in the dating violence research: A review of the literature. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 4(2), 233-247. Kaiser, H. F. (1974). Little Jiffy, Mark IV. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 34, 111-117. Kaura, S. A., & Lohman, B. J. (2009). Does acceptability of violence impact the relationship between satisfaction, victimization, and commitment levels in emerging adult dating relationships? Journal of Family Violence, 24, 349-359. Kim, K. L., Jackson, Y., Hunter, H. L., & Conrad, S. M. (2009). Interparental conflict and adolescent dating relationships: The role of perceived threat and self-blame appraisals. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 24(5), 844-865. Kinsfogel, K. M., & Grych, J. H. (2004). Interparental conflict and adolescent dating relationships: integrating cognitive, emotional, and peer influences. Journal of Family Psychology, 18(3), 505-515. Laible, D., Carlo, G., Torquati. J., & Ontai, L. (2004). Children’s perceptions of family relationship as assessed in doll story completion task: links to parenting, social competence, and externalizing behavior. Social Development, 13(4), 551-569. Leadbeater, B. J., Banister, E. M., Eills W.E., & Yeung R. (2008). Victimization and relational aggression in adolescent romantic relationships: the influence of parental and peer behaviors, and individual adjustment. Journal of Youth Adolescence, 37, 359-372. Lehrer, J. A., Lehrer, V. L., Lehrer, E. L., & Oyarzun, P. B. (2007). Prevalence of and risk factors for sexual victimization in college women in Chile. International Family Planning Perspectives, 33(4), 168-175. Levinson, D. J. (1986). A conception of adult development. American Psychologist, 41(1), 3-13. Lewis, S. F., & Fremouw, W. (2001). Dating violence: A critical review of the literature. Clinical Psychology Review, 21(1), 105-127. Lloyd, S. A. (1991). The darkside of courtship: Violence and sexual exploitation. Family Relations, 40, 14–20. Magdol, L., Moffitt, T. E., Caspi, A., & Silva, P. A. (1998). Developmental antecedents of partner abuse: A prospective-longitudinal study. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 107(3), 375-389. Miller, S., Gorman-Smith, D., Sullivan, T., Orpinas, P., & Simon, T. R. (2009). Parent and peer predictors of physical dating violence perpetration in early adolescence: Test of moderation and gender differences. Journal of Clinical Child and Adolescent Psychology, 38(4), 538-550. Neufeld, J., McNamara, J. R., & Ertl, M. (1999). Incidence and prevalence of dating partner abuse and its relationships to Dating practices. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 14(2), 125-137. Noller, P., Seth-Smith, M., Bouma, R., & Schweitzer, R. (1992). Parent and adolescent perceptions of family functioning: a comparison of clinic and non-clinic families. Journal of Adolescence, 15(2), 101-114. O’Keefe, M. (1998). Factors mediating the link between witnessing interparental violence and dating violence. Journal of Family Violence, 13(1), 39-57. O’Keefe, M. (2005).Teen Dating Violence: A Review of Risk Factors and Prevention Efforts. 取得日期:2010.06.06. 網址: http://new.vawnet.org/category/Main_Doc.php?docid=409. O’ Leary, K. D., Slep, A. M., Avery-Leaf S., & Cascardi, M. (2008). Gender differences in dating aggression among multiethnic high school students. Journal of Adolescent Health, 42, 473-479. Prospero, M. (2006). The role of perceptions in dating violence among young adolescents. Journal of interpersonal violence, 21(4), 470-484. Reed, E., Raj, A., Miller, E., & Silverman, J. G. (2010). Losing the “gender” in gender-based violence: The missteps of research on dating and intimate partner violence. Violence Against Women, 16(3), 348-354. Reitzel-Jaffe, D., & Wolfe, D. A. (2001). Predictors of relationship abuse among young men. Journal of Interpersonal violence, 16(2), 99-115. Rubin, A., & Babbie, E. R. (2008). Research methods for social work(sixth edition.). Belmont, CA: Thomson Brooks/Cole. Shen, A. Chiung-Tao (2008). Coping strategies of Dating Violence: A National Study of Taiwanese College Students. Family Aggression: Causes & Consequences: First Biennial Conference of the International Family Aggression Society. UK: University of Central Lancashire, Preston. Shen, A. C. T. (in press). Predictors of dating violence among Chinese adolescents: The role of gender-role beliefs and justification of violence. Journal of Interpersonal Violence. Spriggs, A. L., Halpern, C. T., Herring, A. H., & Schoenbach, V. J. (2009). Family and school socioeconomic disadvantage: interactive influence on adolescent dating victimization. Social Science & Medicine, 68, 1956-1965. | |
| dc.identifier.uri | http://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/jspui/handle/123456789/36839 | - |
| dc.description.abstract | 約會關係是青少年晚期階段中,一個相當普遍與重要的活動。在彼此分享親密感的同時,也必須學習並處理約會關係中可能產生的暴力行為。本研究希望從經歷約會暴力者的角度出發,探討家庭及同儕因素是否顯著影響大學生對約會暴力的自我覺察,並比較兩因素影響程度之高低。
本研究以量化之研究典範進行研究,採用問卷調查法進行施測,研究樣本以分層隨機抽樣方法,抽取23間大專院校不同通識課程領域的修課學生,目前現有或曾有約會經驗者參與研究。測量工具包括家庭功能量表、同儕影響力量表以及約會暴力量表,並使用SPSS統計軟體進行多項式邏輯斯迴歸分析(multinomial logistic regression),釐清在控制背景變項的情況下,家庭與同儕對約會暴力自我覺察之關連。 本研究共計回收666份有效問卷。研究結果發現大專院校學生的約會暴力盛行率為60.5%,其中,有遭受暴力經驗者佔所有有約會暴力經驗大學生的51.8%;施加暴力則佔44.3%,且以控制行為的約會暴力經驗盛行率最高、次之為肢體暴力、最後則為性暴力。在約會暴力自我覺察的結果中,發現在控制變項的情況下,性別、學業成績、與同儕影響力對約會暴力自我覺察的程度有顯著的預測能力。男性對施加約會暴力行為以及施加控制行為的覺察上,較能夠發現此行為屬於暴力的一種。當有經歷約會暴力經驗的大學生成績越佳時,他們比較能夠覺察到自己所施加的約會暴力和控制行為,以及自己所遭受的肢體暴力是一種暴力行為。另外,當同儕越支持約會暴力,大學生的約會暴力受暴自我覺察程度越低。但同儕影響力卻無法預測約會暴力施暴的結果。 根據研究結果,研究者建議未來除了需要加強青少年的約會暴力教育,更需要將重點置於大學生對控制行為的自我覺察,以及女性大學生對約會暴力的自我覺察。研究指出,控制行為的盛行率雖然比例最高,但大學生對控制行為此約會暴力的自我覺察反而最低。除此之外,女性相較於男性,對特定約會暴力的自我覺察亦較低,顯示未來需要針對這些部分進行觀念的強化。另外,我們也需要加強同儕對約會暴力的正確態度,以減緩同儕對約會暴力的支持。從同儕對約會暴力態度的角度切入,提升大學生的自我覺察能力。最後,我們可以透過整合約會暴力通報與危機之介入並促進法律之合法性,以保障有約會暴力經驗者能夠獲得適切的資源與協助。 | zh_TW |
| dc.description.abstract | This paper focuses on violent dating experiences college students have, and examines whether two factors, family function and peer influence, will significantly predict perceptions of dating violence.
This study employed a quantitative research method and the data were collected by questionnaire survey. The researcher selected a stratified random sample of college students who had dating relationships from 23 universities. The measurements included family functioning scale, informal support scale, and dating violence scale. Analysis was conducted by SPSS for 16.0. Data analysis adopted multinomial logistic regression to examine the relationships between independent and dependent variables. There were 666 effective questionnaires received. The prevalence of dating violence was about 60.5%. The proportion of dating violence victimistion was 51.8%, and the proportion of dating violence perpetration was 44.3%. For different types of dating violence, the most common type was controlling behavior, followed by physical violence, and the last was sexual violence. For the perception of dating violence, this study found gender, grade, and peer influence could significantly predict perception of dating violence. Male college students had a greater degree of awareness of dating violence and controlling behavior than female college students did. Students with better grades also had a greater degree of awareness of dating violence, controlling behavior, and physical abuse. When peers of college students are more supportive of dating violence, the students will have a lower degree of awareness of dating violence victimistion. However, peers’ support for dating violence could not predict awareness of dating violence perpetration. The research results suggest that we should educate teenagers about dating violence, focusing on the awareness of controlling behavior, and reinforcing the awareness of dating violence for females. On the one hand, the prevalence of controlling behavior is the highest, but college students have the lowest degree of awareness concerning this. On the other hand, females have a lower degree of awareness of dating violence than males. Therefore, we need to concentrate on those issues. We also have to promote the opposition towards dating violence and reduce support for dating violence. Last but not the least, we could collaborate with different systems to provide supporting service and legitimate to provide help for suitable assistance. | en |
| dc.description.provenance | Made available in DSpace on 2021-06-13T08:18:35Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 ntu-100-R98330001-1.pdf: 2225507 bytes, checksum: bf03d46838ea8db57f0848953c3c8c76 (MD5) Previous issue date: 2011 | en |
| dc.description.tableofcontents | 謝誌 i
摘要 iii Abstract iv 第一章 緒論 1 第一節 研究重要性與研究背景 1 第二節 研究目的與名詞解釋 4 第二章 文獻回顧 7 第一節 約會暴力自我覺察之相關理論 7 第二節 約會暴力之盛行率與自我覺察 9 第三節 經歷約會暴力者之家庭親職功能與同儕影響 13 第三章 研究方法 21 第一節 研究架構與研究假設 21 第二節 研究對象與資料收集方法 24 第三節 變項及測量工具 30 第四節 資料處理與統計分析方法 35 第五節 研究倫理 36 第四章 研究結果與分析 37 第一節 預試結果 37 第二節 正式施測資料及工具檢測 42 第三節 正式施測研究結果分析 50 第五章 結論與建議 119 第一節 結論與討論 119 第二節 研究建議 131 第三節 研究限制 133 第四節 研究貢獻與未來研究方向 135 參考文獻 139 附錄一:樣本分析表 145 附錄二:統計方法及變項分析表 146 附件三:家庭親職功能量表授權同意書 147 附件四:同儕影響力量表授權同意書 148 附件伍:研究問卷 149 | |
| dc.language.iso | zh-TW | |
| dc.subject | 同儕影響 | zh_TW |
| dc.subject | 約會暴力 | zh_TW |
| dc.subject | 自我覺察 | zh_TW |
| dc.subject | 家庭親職功能 | zh_TW |
| dc.subject | peer influence | en |
| dc.subject | dating violence | en |
| dc.subject | intimate partner violence | en |
| dc.subject | self-perception | en |
| dc.subject | family function | en |
| dc.title | 家庭親職功能與同儕影響力對大學生約會暴力自我覺察之研究 | zh_TW |
| dc.title | Parental functions and Peer Influence on College Students’ Perception of Dating Violence | en |
| dc.type | Thesis | |
| dc.date.schoolyear | 99-2 | |
| dc.description.degree | 碩士 | |
| dc.contributor.oralexamcommittee | 王珮玲,修慧蘭 | |
| dc.subject.keyword | 約會暴力,自我覺察,家庭親職功能,同儕影響, | zh_TW |
| dc.subject.keyword | dating violence,intimate partner violence,self-perception,family function,peer influence, | en |
| dc.relation.page | 154 | |
| dc.rights.note | 有償授權 | |
| dc.date.accepted | 2011-07-20 | |
| dc.contributor.author-college | 社會科學院 | zh_TW |
| dc.contributor.author-dept | 社會工作學研究所 | zh_TW |
| 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-100-1.pdf 未授權公開取用 | 2.17 MB | Adobe PDF |
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。
