Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
http://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/jspui/handle/123456789/37613
Full metadata record
???org.dspace.app.webui.jsptag.ItemTag.dcfield??? | Value | Language |
---|---|---|
dc.contributor.advisor | 林以正(Yi-Cheng Lin) | |
dc.contributor.author | Chuan-Zhong Deng | en |
dc.contributor.author | 鄧傳忠 | zh_TW |
dc.date.accessioned | 2021-06-13T15:34:58Z | - |
dc.date.available | 2008-07-16 | |
dc.date.copyright | 2008-07-16 | |
dc.date.issued | 2008 | |
dc.date.submitted | 2008-07-11 | |
dc.identifier.citation | 王為蒨(2006)。「華人的均衡自我觀與心理適應」第一屆中庸與其心理學相關研究集思會(安徽黃山)的口頭論文報告。
王飛雪、伍秋萍、梁凱怡、陳俊(2005)。中庸思維與衝突場景應對策略選擇關係的研究。「本土心理學研究網社論文」。廣州:中山大學心理研究所。 王飛雪、李華香(2005)。「人際衝突中的中庸行動研究」(未發表之碩士論文)。廣州:中山大學心理研究所。 余德慧(1991)。中國人的人際痛苦及其分析。見高尚仁、楊中芳(主編):「中國人、中國心—人格與社會篇」。台北:遠流出版公司。 吳佳煇(2006)。中庸讓我的生活更好:中庸思維對生活滿意度的影響。「華人心理學報」,7(1),163-176。 吳佳煇(2007)。 自我拿捏的本質:自我變異與自我確定。「華人心理學報」, 7(2),259-282。 吳佳煇、林以正(2005)。中庸思維量表的編製。「本土心理學研究」,24,247-300。 吳怡(1976)。「中庸誠的哲學」。台北:東大圖書公司。 李亦園(1988)。和諧與均衡:民間信仰中的宇宙詮釋。見林治平(主編):「現代人心靈的真空與其補償」,頁5-24。台北:宇宙光出版社。 李敏隆、楊國樞(1998)。中國人的忍:概念分析與實徵研究。「本土心理學研究」,3,3-68。 肖崇好(2005a)。自我監控理論評價。「心理科學」,28(4),1010-1013。 肖崇好(2005b)。自我監控概念的重構。「心理科學進展」,13(002),186-193。 林升棟(2002)。「尋找中庸自我的研究—從心理學視角對和諧社會理論研究的回應」(未發表之博士論文)。廣州:中山大學心理研究所。 林升棟、楊中芳(2006)。自我是一分為二的嗎?—以西方自我圖式的研究為例。 「心理學探新」,26(3),43-47。 林以正、黃金蘭、李怡真(2007)。「進退之間的拿捏:由忍的情境變異性探討華人自主與和諧的辯證關係」東西思想文化傳統中的「自我」與「他者」學術研討會(台北)的口頭報告論文。 邱德修(1996)。「學庸釋義」。台北:合記圖書出版社。 金樹人(2005)。「心理位移辯證效果之敘事分析」。國科會研究計畫結案報告(計畫編號:932413H003001。) 張德勝、金耀基、陳海文、陳建民、楊中芳、趙志裕、伊沙白(2001)。論中庸理性:工具理性、價值理性和溝通理性之外。「社會學研究」,2,33-48。 陳心怡(2000)。「貝氏憂鬱量表第二版指導手冊」。台北:中國行為科學社。 陳兆榮(1975)。「中庸探微」。台北:正中。 陳依芬(2008)。「忍的情緒調控策略及其對心理適應之影響」(未發表之碩士論文)。台北:台灣大學心理研究所。 黃光國(1995)。兵家與陰謀。見黃光國(主編):「知識與行動:中華文化傳統的社會心理詮釋」,頁362-393。台北:心理。 黃光國(2005a)。從社會心理的角度看:儒家文化傳統的內在結構。見國立台灣大學(主編):「儒家關係主義—文化反思與典範重構」,頁47-96。台北:國立台灣大學。 黃光國(2005b)。關係與面子:華人社會中的衝突化解模式。見國立台灣大學(主編):「儒家關係主義—文化反思與典範重構」,頁97-132。台北:國立台灣大學。 黃金蘭、林以正、楊中芳(2008)。「中庸量表的修訂」(未發表之論文)。台北:台灣科技大學。 楊中芳(2001)。中國人的世界觀:中庸實踐思維初探。見楊中芳(主編):「如何理解中國人:文化與個人論文集」,頁269-287。台北:遠流。 趙志裕(2000)。中庸思維的測量:一項跨地區研究的初步結果。「香港社會科學學報」,18,33-55。 劉勝(2006)。「人際冒犯行為的合情合理判斷與中庸實踐思維的關係研究」(未發表之碩士論文)。廣州:中山大學心理研究所。 鄭思雅、李秀麗、趙志裕(1999)。辯證思維與現代生活。「香港社會科學學報」,15,1-25。 錢穆(1985)。中國文化中的中庸之道。見錢穆(主編):「中華文化十二講」,頁99-114。台北:東大。 簡潔(1999)。「顛覆厚黑學」。台北:宏文館。 Bem, S. L. (1975). Sex role adaptability: One consequence of psychological androgyny. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 31(4), 634-643. Bonanno, G. A., Papa, A., Lalande, K., Westphal, M., & Coifman, K. (2004). The importance of being flexible. The ability to both enhance and suppress emotional expression predicts long-term adjustment. Psychological Science, 15(7), 482-487. Cheng, C. (2001). Assessing coping flexibility in real-life and laboratory settings: A multimethod approach. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 80(5), 814-833. Cheng, C. (2005). Processes underlying gender-role flexibility: Do androgynous individuals know more or know how to cope? Journal of Personality, 73(3), 645-673. Cheng, C., & Cheung, M. W. L. (2005). Cognitive processes underlying coping flexibility: Differentiation and integration. Journal of Personality, 73(4), 859-886. Cheng, C., Chiu, C., Hong, Y., & Cheung, J. S. (2001). Discriminative facility and its role in the perceived quality of interactional experiences. Journal of Personality, 69(5), 765-785. Cheng, C., Hui, W. M., & Lam, S. K. (1999). Coping style of individuals with functional dyspepsia. Psychosomatic Medicine, 61(6), 789-795. Cheng, C., Hui, W. M., & Lam, S. K. (2004). Psychosocial factors and perceived severity of functional dyspeptic symptoms: A psychosocial interactionist model. Psychosomatic Medicine, 66(1), 85-91. Chien, C. P., & Cheng, T. A. (1985). Depression in Taiwan:epidemiological survey utilizing CES-D. Seishin Shinkeigaku Zasshi, 87(5), 335-338. Chiu, C. (1991). Responses to injustice in popular Chinese sayings and among Hong Kong Chinese students. The Journal of Social Psychology, 131(5), 655-665. Diener, E., Emmons, R. A., Larsen, R. J., & Griffin, S. (1985). The Satisfaction With Life Scale. Journal of Personality Assessment, 49(1), 71-75. Folkman, S., Schaefer, C., & Lazarus, R. S. (1979). Cognitive processes as mediators of stress and coping. In V. Hamilton & D. M. Warburton (Eds.), Human stress and cognition (pp. 265-298). London: Wiley. Gall, M. D. (1969). The relationship between masculinity-femininity and manifest anxiety. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 25(3), 294-295. Gan, Y. Q., Liu, Y., & Zhang, Y. L. (2004). Flexible coping responses to severe acute respiratory syndrome-related and daily life stressful events. Asian Journal of Social Psychology, 7(1), 55-66. Gan, Y. Q., Zhang, Y. L., Wang, X. L., Wang, S. A., & Shen, X. Q. (2006). The coping flexibility of neurasthenia and depressive patients. Personality and Individual Differences, 40(5), 859-871. Gangestad, S. W., & Snyder, M. (2000). Self-monitoring: Appraisal and reappraisal. Psychol Bulletin, 126(4), 530-555. Gray, S. W. (1957). Masculinity-femininity in relation to anxiety and social acceptance. Child Development, 28(2), 203-214. Hewitt, P. L., Flett, G. L., Sherry, S. B., Habke, M., Parkin, M., Lam, R. W., et al. (2003). The interpersonal expression of perfection: Porfectionistic self-presentation and psychological distress. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 84(6), 1303-1325. Higgins, E. T. (2000). Making a good decision: Value from fit. American Psychologist, 55(11), 1217-1230. Higgins, E. T., Idson, L. C., Freitas, A. L., Spiegel, S., & Molden, D. C. (2003). Transfer of value from fit. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 84(6), 1140-1153. Ho, D. Y. F., & Chiu, C. Y. (1994). Component ideas of individualism, collectivism, and social organization: An application in the study of Chinese culture. In U. Kim, H. C. Triandis, C. Kagitcibas, G.. Choi, & G.. Yoon (Eds.), Individualism and collectivism: Theory, method, and applications (pp. 137-156). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Holmes, J. A., & Stevenson, C. A. (1990). Differential effects of avoidant and attentional coping strategies on adaptation to chronic and recent-onset pain. Health Psychology, 9(5), 577-584. Krames, L., England, R., & Flett, G. L. (1988). The role of masculinity and femininity in depression and social satisfaction in elderly females. Sex Roles, 19(11), 713-721. Lazurus, R. S., & Folkman, S. (1984). Stress, appraisal, and coping. New York: Springer. Lennox, R. D., & Wolfe, R. N. (1984). Revision of the self-monitoring scale. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 46(6), 1349-1364. Li, Y. Y. (1992). In search of equilibrium and harmony: On the basic value orientation of traditional Chinese peasants. In C. Nakane & C. Chiao (Eds.), Home Bound: Studies in East Asian Society (pp. 127–148). Hong Kong: The Center for East Asian Cultural Studies. Linville, P. W. (1987). Self-complexity as a cognitive buffer against stress-related illness and depression. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 52(4), 663-676. Marx, E. M., & Schulze, C. C. (1991). Interpersonal problem-solving in depressed students. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 47(3), 361-370. McFarland, C., & Buehler, R. (1997). Negative affective states and the motivated retrieval of positive life events: The role of affect acknowledgment. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 73(1), 200-214. Paulhus, D. L., & Martin, C. L. (1987). The structure of personality capabilities. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 52(2), 354-365. Paulhus, D. L., & Martin, C. L. (1988). Functional flexibility: A new approach to interpersonal flexibility. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 55(1), 88-101. Peng, K. (1997). Naive dialecticism and its effects on reasoning and judgment about contradiction. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan. Peng, K., & Nisbett, R. E. (1999). Culture, dialectics, and reasoning about contradiction. American Psychologist, 54(9), 741-754. Rafaeli-Mor, E., & Steinberg, J. (2002). Self-complexity and well-being: A review and research synthesis. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 6(1), 31-58. Ring, K., & Wallston, K. (1968). A test to measure performance styles in interpersonal relations. Psychological Report, 22(1), 147-154. Showers, C. J., & Kling, K. C. (1996). Organization of self-knowledge: implications for recovery from sad mood. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70(3), 578-590. Showers, C. J., & Zeigler-Hill, V. (2007). Compartmentalization and integration: The evaluative organization of contextualized selves. Journal of Personality, 75, 1181-1204. Snyder, M. (1974). Self-monitoring of expressive behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 30(4), 526-537. Snyder, M., & Gangestad, S. (1986). On the nature of self-monitoring: Matters of assessment, matters of validity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51(1), 125-139. Spencer-Rodgers, J., Peng, K., Wang, L., & Hou, Y. (2004). Dialectical self-esteem and East-West differences in psychological well-being. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 30(11), 1416-1432. Wu, C., & Yao, G. (2006). Analysis of factorial invariance across gender in the Taiwan version of the Satisfaction with Life Scale. Personality and Individual Differences, 40(6), 1259-1268. | |
dc.identifier.uri | http://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/jspui/handle/123456789/37613 | - |
dc.description.abstract | 「在不同情況下,個體達到特定目標的合宜行為」是拿捏概念的核心想法。西方的觀點認為,拿捏行為者能在跨情境下展現合宜的社會行為,因此,拿捏行為有利於個人的心理適應。然而,拿捏行為與心理適應的關係還需考慮「監控機制」所帶來的影響。個體用來監控拿捏行為的主要思維往往影響了拿捏行為的展現,良好的監控機制才能導致拿捏行為與心理適應的正向關係。而西方研究對於此「監控機制」的討論是較少的。因此,本研究的主要目的在於探討監控機制對於拿捏行為的重要性,並且認為以「中庸思維」當做拿捏行為的監控機制將有助於個體的心理適應狀態。本研究採團體施測的方式請參與者填寫問卷,進行兩個實徵研究來探討中庸思維對拿捏行為與心理適應的調節作用。研究一使用「策略—情境適配度」當作拿捏行為的測量指標,並預期策略—情境適配度與中庸思維有交互作用。然而,迴歸分析顯示策略—情境適配度與中庸思維的交互作用未達顯著,研究一的假設未得到支持。研究二則修正策略—情境適配度在本土概念上的不足,並以華人重視的情緒調節策略,忍,作為研究二中拿捏行為的測量指標;並且預期「中庸思維」對「忍耐的拿捏行為」與「心理適應」有調節作用。迴歸分析的結果顯示,中庸的調節作用在心理適應指標上得到部份的支持,研究二的交互作用趨勢圖顯示,高拿捏的情況下,如果個體具備中庸思維,則此人的心理適應較好;而高拿捏的又低中庸的情況則顯示個體的心理適應是比較差的。此結果顯示了中庸思維對於拿捏行為的重要性,高拿捏者尚須具備中庸思維才有良好的健康狀態。文章的最後則針對本研究的限制與不足提出討論,並對後續研究提出可能的建議。 | zh_TW |
dc.description.abstract | The primary feature of Self-handing behavior is “to express appropriate behavior in various situations”. Though previous studies regarding Self-handing behavior have already pointed out that Self-handing behavior is associated with psychological adjustment, however, the essential “monitoring mechanisms” underlying Self-handing behavior had yet to be explored. We suspected that Zhong-Yong thinking style could be one of the monitoring mechanisms, and it should bring about positive outcomes of Self-handing behavior. We postulated that people with high Self-handing behavior and high Zhong-Yong thinking would end up with better psychological adjustment. Two studies were conducted to examine the moderating effect of Zhong-Yong thinking style over Self-handing behavior on psychological adjustment, Study 1 used “strategy-situation fit” as Self-handing behavior index, but did not support the hypothesis. In order to rule out the possibility that scenarios used in Study 1 may not take the participants’ cultural background into account, study 2 used “Ren (忍, forebearance) questionnaire”- which is more indigenous by nature, to index Self-handing behavior. Results of regression analysis showed that there was a significant interaction effect of Zhong-Yong thinking and Ren Self-handing behavior in predicting psychological adjustment. It partly supported the moderator hypothesis for Zhong-Yong thinking style. That is, compared to people with high Ren Self-handing behavior and low Zhong-Yong thinking, people with high Ren Self-handing behavior and high Zhong-Yong thinking have higher level of psychological adjustment. It shows how Zhong-Yong thinking style plays a crucial role for Self-handing behavior-more Self-handing behavior is good for us if only we are also prone to think in a Zhong-Yong way. Limitations of this study and suggestions for future research were also discussed. | en |
dc.description.provenance | Made available in DSpace on 2021-06-13T15:34:58Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 ntu-97-R94227115-1.pdf: 3155370 bytes, checksum: 3b4499a072cde5e8b7406709f27526e3 (MD5) Previous issue date: 2008 | en |
dc.description.tableofcontents | 第一章 緒論………………………………………………………1
第二章 文獻探討…………………………………………………4 第一節 拿捏行為的討論…………………………………………5 第二節 華人文化下的拿捏觀點…………………………………21 第三節 研究問題與假設…………………………………………32 第三章 研究一:中庸與拿捏行為的研究………………………34 第一節 研究目的…………………………………………………34 第二節 研究方法…………………………………………………34 第三節 研究結果…………………………………………………39 第四節 討論………………………………………………………42 第四章 研究二:中庸與忍拿捏行為的研究……………………44 第一節 人際衝突中的忍耐研究…………………………………44 第二節 研究假設…………………………………………………47 第三節 研究目的與研究方法……………………………………48 第四節 研究結果…………………………………………………51 第五章 結果與討論………………………………………………57 第一節 結果整理…………………………………………………57 第二節 討論………………………………………………………58 第三節 研究限制與後續研究建議………………………………62 參考文獻 ……………………………………………………………69 附錄 …………………………………………………………………76 表圖目次 表3-1 研究一中的各量表描述性統計 ………………………… 39 表3-2 研究一中各量表的相關係數 …………………………… 40 表3-3 中庸思維與情境—策略適配度對心理適應的交互作用…41 表4-1 研究二中的各量表描述性統計 ………………………… 51 表4-2 研究二中各量表的相關係數 …………………………… 52 表4-3 中庸—吳氏與忍拿捏行為的交互作用……………………53 表4-4 中庸—楊氏與忍拿捏行為的交互作用……………………53 圖4-1 研究二中庸思維(吳氏)對忍—拿捏行為與華人幸福感 的調節效果…55 圖4-2 研究二中庸程度(楊氏)對忍—拿捏行為與CES-D憂鬱 的調節效果...55 | |
dc.language.iso | zh-TW | |
dc.title | 中庸思維對拿捏行為與心理適應的調節效果 | zh_TW |
dc.title | The Moderating Effect of Zhong-Yong Thinking (Style) over Self-handing Behavior on Psychological Adjustment | en |
dc.type | Thesis | |
dc.date.schoolyear | 96-2 | |
dc.description.degree | 碩士 | |
dc.contributor.oralexamcommittee | 楊中芳(Chung-Fang Yang),王麗斐(Li-Fei Wang) | |
dc.subject.keyword | 拿捏,中庸思維,調控機制, | zh_TW |
dc.subject.keyword | Self-handing behavior,Zhong-Yong thinking,monitoring mechanism, | en |
dc.relation.page | 91 | |
dc.rights.note | 有償授權 | |
dc.date.accepted | 2008-07-11 | |
dc.contributor.author-college | 理學院 | zh_TW |
dc.contributor.author-dept | 心理學研究所 | zh_TW |
Appears in Collections: | 心理學系 |
Files in This Item:
File | Size | Format | |
---|---|---|---|
ntu-97-1.pdf Restricted Access | 3.08 MB | Adobe PDF |
Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.