跳到主要內容

臺灣博碩士論文加值系統

(3.239.4.127) 您好!臺灣時間:2022/08/20 07:37
字體大小: 字級放大   字級縮小   預設字形  
回查詢結果 :::

詳目顯示

: 
twitterline
研究生:張美齡
研究生(外文):Mei-Ling, Chang
論文名稱:家庭教育中心志工性別角色、投入志願服務程度與婚姻調適之研究
論文名稱(外文):A Study Among Sex Roles, Contribution Level of Volunteering and Marriages Accommodation of the Family Education Centers'' volunteers.
指導教授:王以仁王以仁引用關係
學位類別:碩士
校院名稱:國立嘉義大學
系所名稱:家庭教育研究所
學門:教育學門
學類:其他教育學類
論文種類:學術論文
論文出版年:2002
畢業學年度:90
語文別:中文
論文頁數:113
中文關鍵詞:家庭教育中心志工性別角色投入志願服務程度婚姻調適
外文關鍵詞:Family Education Centers'' volunteersex rolecontribution level of volunteeringmarriage accommodation
相關次數:
  • 被引用被引用:48
  • 點閱點閱:2108
  • 評分評分:
  • 下載下載:691
  • 收藏至我的研究室書目清單書目收藏:21
本研究旨在探討台灣地區家庭教育中心志工個人背景變項、性別角色、投入志願服務程度的不同,對其婚姻調適之影響,並進一步探討這些變項對婚姻調適之預測作用。本研究目的有五:
一、瞭解家庭教育中心志工性別角色、投入志願服務程度及婚姻調適的現況。
二、探討家庭教育中心志工的個人背景變項與婚姻調適間之關係。
三、瞭解不同性別、性別角色的家庭教育中心志工在其婚姻調適上是否有交互作用,若無則探討其婚姻調適是否因性別或性別角色的不同而有差異。
四、探討家庭教育中心志工投入志願服務程度與婚姻調適間之關係。
五、探討家庭教育中心志工的個人背景變項、投入志願服務程度及其性別角色,對其婚姻調適的預測作用。
本研究係抽取台灣地區家庭教育中心志工,合計196名為有效樣本,以「性別角色量表」及「婚姻調適量表」為主要研究工具,並採取描述性統計、二因子多變項變異數分析、單因子多變項變異數分析、Hotelling’s T²、逐步多元迴歸等方法進行統計分析,並加上焦點座談,來與研究結果相互驗證。
本研究獲得之主要結論如下:
一、家庭教育中心志工的婚姻調適現況
(一)家庭教育中心志工在整體婚姻調適量表上的得分是稍偏負向的。
(二)由「意見一致性」、「凝聚力」、「婚姻滿意度」各層面每題的平均得分可知:以在「意見一致性」的得分較高,在「凝聚力」的得分較低。
二、不同背景變項之家庭教育中心志工在婚姻調適之差異情形
(一)不同婚齡之家庭教育中心志工在婚姻調適各層面上均未達顯著差異。
(二)不同教育程度之家庭教育中心志工在婚姻調適上達顯著差異,其中高中(職)及大學(大專)的婚姻滿意度均顯著高於研究所以上,可看出學歷最高(研究所以上)婚姻滿意度,反低於大學(大專)及高中(職)。
(三)不同子女數之家庭教育中心志工在婚姻調適上未達顯著差異。
(四)不同家庭支持度之家庭教育中心志工在婚姻調適上達顯著差異,其中家庭支持度還好者在意見一致性、凝聚力、婚姻滿意度等層面均顯著高於很支持者,可看出家庭很支持者在婚姻調適三層面上反低於還好者。
三、性別、性別角色對婚姻調適之交互作用
家庭教育中心志工的性別與性別角色對婚姻調適各層面(意見一致
性、凝聚力、婚姻滿意度)上之交互作用,均未達顯著差異水準。
四、不同性別之家庭教育中心志工在婚姻調適各層面之差異情形
家庭教育中心志工因性別不同,對婚姻調適中意見一致性及凝聚力二層面,未達顯著差異。但在婚姻滿意度達顯著,平均分數女性高於男性。
五、不同性別角色之家庭教育中心志工在婚姻調適之差異情形
不同性別角色之家庭教育中心志工在婚姻調適上達顯著差異,其中男
性化在意見一致性、凝聚力、婚姻滿意度等層面,顯著高於兩性化。
六、不同投入志願服務變項之家庭教育中心志工在婚姻調適的差異情形
(一)不同志工服務年資之家庭教育中心志工,在婚姻調適上未達顯著差異。
(二)不同每週值班時數之家庭教育中心志工,在意見一致性及凝聚力二層面並無顯著差異,唯有在婚姻滿意度上達顯著差異(每週值班1-4小時的志工,顯著高於每週值班5小時以上者)。
(三)不同在職訓練時數之家庭教育中心志工,在婚姻調適上未達顯著差異。
(四)不同在職訓練滿意度家庭教育中心志工,在婚姻調適上未達顯著差異。
七、以家庭教育中心志工個人背景變項、性別角色、投入志願服務程度對婚姻調適做預測分析,結果發現:家人很支持、兩性化或男性化對婚姻調適三層面具預測力,其預測解釋量在11.2%~14.7%。
最後,根據以上研究結果,研究者對家庭教育中心志工以及各縣市地區家庭教育中心提出數項建議,以做為未來從事這類相關研究與工作上之參考。
The purpose of this research was to study the volunteers of Taiwan Area Family Education Centers on their personal background variables, sex roles, and contribution level of volunteering to learn the influence on their marriage accommodation. This research as well included a further exploration for these variables’ predictive function on their marriage accommodation. There were five objectives in this research:
1.To understand current status of the volunteers’ sex roles, contribution level of volunteering and their marriages accommodation.
2.To research the relation between the variables of volunteers’ personal background and their marriage accommodation.
3.To understand if there was any correlation on volunteers’ marriage accommodation in terms of their genders and sex roles. If none, a study was made to look for possible variance in their marriage accommodation due to the difference of their genders or sex roles.
4.To research the relation between the volunteers’ contribution level of volunteering and their marriages accommodation.
5.To research the predictive function of the volunteers’ personal background variables, contribution level of volunteering and their sex roles to the marriage accommodation.
This research took total 196 volunteers of Taiwan Area Family Education Centers as effective samples. It also utilized “Sex Role Quantitative Table” and “Marriage Accommodation Quantitative Table” as main research tools. In addition, it adopted the methods of Descriptive Statistics, two-way MANOVA, one-way MANOVA, Hotelling’s T², stepwise multiple regression to proceed with the statistical analysis. Furthermore, focus interviews were held to interactively verify the research result.
The main conclusions obtained by this research were,
1.Current marriage accommodation status of the Family Education Centers’ volunteers:
a)The volunteers’ marks on the overall Marriage Accommodation Quantitative Table are slightly slanting toward the negative side.
b)In the average marks of the questions among the aspects of “Concurrence”, “Condensing Force” and “Marriage Satisfaction”, it was noted : The marks in “ Concurrence” were higher while the ones in “Condensing Force” were lower.
2.The difference situation of marriage accommodation among the Family Education Centers’ volunteers with different background variables:
a)There was no significant difference on each individual aspect of the marriage accommodation among the Family Education Centers’ volunteers with different marriage age.
b)There was significant difference in the marriage accommodation among the Family Education Centers’ volunteers with different education levels. Among them, marriage satisfaction of the volunteers with secondary high school (occupational high) or university (college) background was significantly higher than the one with graduate school background. It was observed that the marriage satisfaction of the volunteers with highest education background (equal and higer than graduate school) was reversely lower than the one with university (college) or secondary high school ( occupational high) background.
c)There was no significant difference in the marriage accommodation among the Family Education Centers’ volunteers with different number of children.
d)There was significant difference in the marriage accommodation among the Family Education Centers’ volunteers with different family support levels. Among them, the volunteers with medium support indicated significantly higher marks than the ones with high support in terms of the three aspects: concurrence, condensing force and marriage satisfaction. It was observed that marriage accommodation’s three aspects of the volunteers with high family support were lower than the ones with medium support.
3.The interaction of gender and sex roles to marriage accommodation:
There is no significant level of difference in the marriage accommodation of each aspect (Concurrence, Condensing Force, Marriage Satisfaction) among the Family Education Centers’ volunteers in interaction of their genders and sex roles.
4.The difference situation of marriage accommodation on each individual aspect among the Family Education Centers’ volunteers with different genders:
The different genders among the Family Education Centers’ volunteers did not make significant difference to the marriage accommodation in terms of the two aspects: concurrence and condensing force. However, it was significant on the aspect of marriage satisfaction. Female’s average marks was higher than male’s.
5.The difference situation of marriage accommodation among the Family Education Centers’ volunteers with different sex roles:
The different sex roles among the Family Education Centers’ volunteers made significant difference to the marriage accommodation. In this, the masculinity showed higher marks than androgyny ones in the aspects of concurrence, condensing force and marriage satisfaction.
6.The difference situation of marriage accommodation among the Family Education Centers’ volunteers with different variables of contribution level of volunteering:
a)There was no significant difference in the marriage accommodation among the Family Education Centers’ volunteers with different volunteering service seniority.
b)There was no significant difference in the marriage accommodation among the Family Education Centers’ volunteers with different weekly on-duty hours in terms of the two aspects: concurrence and condensing force. However, it was significantly different in marriage satisfaction (The one with 4 weekly on-duty hours was significantly higher than the one with 5 weekly on-duty hours).
7.Based on the volunteers’ personal background variables, their sex roles, contribution level of volunteering, a predictive analysis was made against the marriage accommodation. The result indicated that: High support from family, androgyny or the Masculinity showed predictive power to the three aspects of the marriage accommodation. Their predictive explanatory amount was between 11.2% ~ 14.7%.
In the end, based on above research result, the researcher presented a number of suggestions to the Family Education Centers’ volunteers and the counties’ or cities’ local Family Education Centers for their reference of future researches and tasks in this similar field.
第一章 緒論
  第一節 研究背景與動機……………………………………… 1
  第二節 研究目的與問題……………………………………… 4
  第三節 名詞釋義……………………………………………… 6
第二章 文獻探討
  第一節 婚姻調適及其相關研究……………………………… 8
  第二節 性別角色及其相關研究………………………………15
  第三節 志願服務及其相關研究………………………………27
第三章 研究方法
  第一節 研究架構………………………………………………30
  第二節 研究假設………………………………………………32
  第三節 研究對象………………………………………………34
  第四節 研究工具………………………………………………39
  第五節 實施程序………………………………………………44
  第六節 資料處理………………………………………………48
第四章 研究結果與分析
  第一節 不同背景變項之家庭教育中心志工在婚姻調適上
      的差異情形……………………………………………50
  第二節 不同性別、性別角色之家庭教育中心志工在婚姻
      調適上的交互作用及差異情形………………………59
  第三節 不同投入志願服務變項之家庭教育中心志工在婚
      姻調適上的差異情形…………………………………63
  第四節 家庭教育中心志工個人背景變項、性別角色、投
      入志願服務程度對婚姻調適之預測分析……………68
  第五節 焦點座談內容分析……………………………………74
第五章 結論與建議
  第一節 結論……………………………………………………84
  第二節 建議……………………………………………………88
參考書目
  壹、中文書目……………………………………………………92
  貳、西文書目……………………………………………………95
附錄
  附錄一、預試問卷…………………………………………… 102
  附錄二、正式問卷…………………………………………… 106
  附錄三、性別角色量表使用同意書………………………… 110
  附錄四、婚姻調適量表使用同意書………………………… 111
  附錄五、家庭教育中心志工婚姻調適之平均數、標準差及等
      級表………………………………………………… 112
圖目次
  圖3-1-1研究架構圖……………………………………………30
  圖3-5-1本研究實施程序甘特圖………………………………45
表目次
  表2-1-1 Huston性別角色矩陣……………………………… 18
  表3-3-1台灣地區家庭教育中心志願服務工作(諮詢輔導
     、推廣活動)人數一覽表……………………………35
  表3-3-2本研究抽樣中心及樣本分配情況……………………36
  表3-3-3本研究受試者背景資料一覽表………………………37
  表3-4-1性別角色量表男性、女性特質分配表………………40
  表4-1-1家庭教育中心志工之婚姻調適現況分析表…………50
  表4-1-2不同婚齡之家庭教育中心志工在婚姻調適之差異
      情形……………………………………………………52
  表4-1-3不同教育程度之家庭教育中心志工在婚姻調適之
差異情形………………………………………………54
  表4-1-4不同子女數之家庭教育中心志工在婚姻調適之差
異情形…………………………………………………55
表4-1-5不同家庭支持度之家庭教育中心志工在婚姻調適
之差異情形……………………………………………57
表4-2-1性別與性別角色在婚姻調適各層面上的交互作用
分析……………………………………………………59
表4-2-2不同性別之家庭教育中心志工在婚姻調適之差異
情形……………………………………………………60
表4-2-3不同性別角色之家庭教育中心志工在婚姻調適各
層面之差異情形………………………………………61
表4-3-1不同志工服務年資之家庭教育中心志工在婚姻調
適之差異情形…………………………………………64
表4-3-2不同每週值班時數之家庭教育中心志工在婚姻調
適各層面之差異情形…………………………………65
表4-3-3不同在職訓練時數之家庭教育中心志工在婚姻調
適之差異情形…………………………………………66
表4-3-4不同在職訓練滿意度之家庭教育中心志工在婚姻
調適之差異情形………………………………………67
表4-4-1家庭教育中心志工性別角色、投入志願服務及個
人背景變項對其「意見一致性」之逐步多元迴歸
分析摘要表……………………………………………69
表4-4-2家庭教育中心志工性別角色、投入志願服務及個
人背景變項對其「凝聚力」之逐步多元迴歸分析
摘要表…………………………………………………70
表4-4-3家庭教育中心志工性別角色、投入志願服務及個
人背景變項對其「婚姻滿意度」之逐步多元迴歸
分析摘要表……………………………………………71
表4-4-4個人背景變項、性別角色及投入志願服務程度對
其婚姻調適層面之逐步多元迴歸分析綜合摘要表…72
表5-5-1個人背景變項、性別角色、投入志願服務程度與
婚姻調適之差異及相關考驗結果……………………87
壹、中文書目
王麗蓉(民81)。婦女參與志願服務工作模式研究。台北:台北市政府社會局。
朱岑樓(民80)。婚姻研究。台北:東大。
伊慶春(民80)。台北地區婚姻調適的一些初步研究發現。國家科學委員會研究彙刊:人文及社會科學,1(2),151-173。
宋世雯(民89)。成人參與志願服務之工作投入與滿足之相關研究。國立高雄師範大學成人教育研究所碩士論文。
李美枝(民73)。女性心理學。台北:大洋。
李然堯(民72)。中國兒童性別角色發展之研究。國立台灣師範大學教育研究所碩士論文。
何青蓉(民75)。國中生知覺的父母管教態度、性別角色與個人性別角色的關係。國立政治大學教育研究所碩士論文。
吳淑玲(民88)。台南市國小學生家庭因素、性別角色與其自我概念生活適應之相關研究。國立台南師範學院國民教育研究所碩士論文。
林邦傑(民70)。性別角色與自我防衛、生活適應、認知能力的關係。中華心理學刊,23(2),107-158。
林美珠(民83)。家庭主婦參與志願服務對家庭關係之影響。東海大學社會工作研究所碩士論文。
林惠雅(民80)。社會的發展。輯於蘇建文(主編):發展心理學。台北:心理。
常宏文譯(民72)。歐洲志願工作者的角色和一九八二年的活動計劃。社會福利活動志願工作專家組成之特別委員會提出的綜合報告。
陳儀珊(民78)。婦女志願工作者之研究。東海大學社會工作研究所碩士論文。
教育部社會教育司(民80)。加強推行家庭教育強化親職教育功能計畫。台北:教育部。
張老師月刊(民74)。八○年代的男性自覺。張老師月刊,89,51。
張春興(民78)。張氏心理學辭典。台北:東華。
張瑞真(民90)。國小未婚教師性別角色、成就動機與婚姻態度之研究。國立嘉義大學家庭教育研究所碩士論文。
曾華源(民72)。督導志願工作者基本原則之探討。台北市志願服務協會成立週年紀念刊,24-25。
曾溫純(民75)。已婚職業婦女的角色壓力與婚姻適應研究。東吳大學社會學研究所碩士論文。
彭懷真(民85)。婚姻與家庭。台北:巨流。
游慧卿(民75)。性別角色在個人、家庭、社會價值間的差異與生活適應的關係。國立臺灣師範大學輔導研究所碩士論文。
楊世瑞(民76)。性別角色認定課程對國中女生性別角色認定、自尊與生活適應之影響研究。國立台灣師範大學輔導研究所碩士論文。
蔡美儀(民81)我國女性教育主管性別角色、自我概念、社會支持與工作適應之關係。國立政治大學教育研究所碩士論文。
蔡漢賢(民71)。志願服務的理論與實務。中華民國社區發展研究訓練中心(叢書之五)。
劉惠琴(民70)。大學女生的性別角色與事業態度之關係研究。國立台灣師範大學輔導研究所碩士論文。
鍾任琴(民79)。救國團基層社會團務組織氣氛與義務工作同志工作滿足之相關研究。國立政治大學教育研究所碩士論文。
鍾鳳嬌(民78)。母親就業、性別角色、事業觀、生活滿意度與國中生性別角色、生活適應之關係。國立高雄師範學院教育研究所研士論文。
戴智慧(民74)。已婚職業婦女的生活壓力與休閒型態、婚姻滿意、生理健康、心理健康及工作滿意五者的關係。國立政治大學心理研究所研士論文。
謝秀芬(民81)。實驗社區婦女參與志願服務之研究。台北:中華民國社區發展研究訓練中心。
謝坤鐘(民82)。職業婦女婚姻角色衝突、婚姻適應與婚姻滿足之研究。中國文化大學兒童福利研究所碩士論文。
謝銀沙(民81)。已婚婦女個人特質、婚姻溝通與婚姻調適相關之研究。國立台灣師範大學家政教育研究所碩士論文。
藍采風(民75)。婚姻關係與適應(三版)。台北:張老師。
蘇信如(民74)。志願服務組織運作之研究。國立臺灣大學社會學研究所碩士論文。
貳、西文書目
Abbott, D. A. & Brody, G. H.(1985). The relation of child age, gender, and number of children to the marital adjustment of wives. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 47, 77-48.
Adams, G. R., & Gullotta, T.(1989). Adolescent life experience(1st ed.). Monterey, California : Brook/Cole Publishing Company.Anderson, S. A., Russell, C.S., & Schumm, W. R.(1983). Perceived marital qualitty and family lifecycle categories : A further analysis. Journal of Marriage and
the Family, 45, 127-139.
Bandura, A.(1977). Social learning theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Bem, S. L.(1974). The measurement of psychological androgyny. Journal of Consulting Psychology, 42, 155-162.
Bem, S. L.(1975). Sex role adaptability: One consequence of psychological androgyny. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 31, 634-643.
Bem, S. L.(1977). On the utility of alternative procedures for assessing psychological androgyny. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 45, 196-205.
Berzins, J. I.(1975). New perspectives on sex role and personality dimensions. Presented at the annual meeting of the American Psychological Association, Chicago, Aug.
Block, J. H.(1973). Conceptions of sex role: Some cross-cultural and longitudinal perspectives. American Psychologist, 28, 512-526.
Bowen, G. L.& Orthner, D. K.(1983). Sex role congruency and marital quality. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 45, 223-230.
Bronstein, P.(1984). Differences in mother’s and father’s behavior toward children: A cross-cultural comparison. Development Psychology, 20(6), 995-1003.
Broverman, I. K., Broverman, D. M., Clarkson, F. E., Rosenkrantz, P. S., & Vogel, S. R.(1970). Sex-role tereotypes and clinical judgments of mental health. Journal of Clinical and Consulting Psychology, 34, 1-7.
Burgess, E. W., Locke, H. J. & Thomes, M. M.(1963). The family from institution to companionship(3rd ed.). New York : American Book Company.
Cosentino, F., & Heilbrun, A. B.(1964). Anxiety correlates of sex-role identity in college students. Psychological Reports, 14, 729-730.
Davidson, B., & Sollie, D. L.(1987). Sex Role Orientation and Marital Adjustment, 15(1), 59-70.
Ellen, P.(1985). Androgyny - A goal for counseling? Journal of Counseling and Development, 63, 567-571.
Erikson, E. H.(1963). Children and society(2nd ed.). New York: Norton.
Eshleman, J. R.(1981). The family : An introduction. Allyn and Bacon, Inc.
Fagot, B. I. & Hagan, R.(1991). Observations of parent reactions to sex-stereotyped behavior : Age and sex effects. Child Development, 62, 617-628.
Fagot, B. I. & Leinbach, M. D.(1989). The young child’s gender schema : Environmental input, internal organization. Child Development, 60, 663-672.
Gaesser, D. L. & Whitbourne, S. K.(1985). Work indentity and marital adjustment in blur-collar men. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 47, 747-751.
Gardner, H.(1982). Development psychology(2nd ed.). Boston, Toronto: Little, Brown and Company.
Gutowski, M., Salamon, L. M., & Pittman, K.(1984). The pittsburgh non-profit sector in a time of government retrenchment. Washington, D. C. : Urban Institute Press.
Hampson, S.(1986). Sex roles and personality. In J. D. Hargreaves & A. M. Colley(Eds.). The psychology of sex roles(chap 3). London: Harper Publishers.
Haring-Hidore, M., Stock, W. A., Okun, M. A.. & Witter, R. A.(1985). Marital status and subjective well-being : A research synthesis. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 47, 947-953.
Harlook, E. B.(1978). Child development(6th ed). New York: McGrow-Hill.
Heilbrun, A. B.(1968). Sex role, instrumental expressive behavior, and psychopathology, 73, 131-136.
Helmreich, R., Wilhelm, J. & Stapp, J.(1975). The life history questionnaire(short form): Instrument, norms, and intercorrelations. Catalog of Selected Documents in Psychology, 5, 327-328.
Huston, A. C.(1983). Sex-typing. In P. H. Mussen(Ed.). Handbook of Child Psychology: Vol 4. Socialization, personality, and social development, 387-467.
Jones, W. H., Chernovetz, M. E., & Hansson, R. O.(1978). The enigma of androgyny: Differential implications for males and females? Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 46, 298-313.
Juhari, R.(1998)Marital quality as a function of gender-role egalitarianism among the Malay-Muslim student couples in the midwest region of the United States of America. Dissertation Abstracts International.Section B : The Sciences and Engineering. Vol 58(9-B), 4754.
Kelly, J. A., Furman, W. & Young, V.(1978). Problems associated with the typological measurement of sex roles and androgyny. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology. 46(6), 1574-1576.
Kelly, J. A., Caudill, S., Hathorn, S. & O’Brien, C. G.(1977). Socially undesirable sex-correlated characteristics : implications for androgyny and adjustment. Journal of Consulting Psychology, 45, 843-851.
Kitson, G. & Sussman, M. B.(1982). Marital complaints, demographic characteristics, and symptoms of marital stress in divorce. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 44, 87-101.
Kolhberg, L.(1966). A cognitive-developmental analysis of children’s sex-role concepts and attitudes. In E. E. Maccoby(Ed.). The developmental of sex differences.(pp.82-176). Standford, California: Standford University Press.
Kolhberg, L.(1969). Stage and Sequence: The cognitive development approach to socialization. In D. A. Goslin(Ed.). Handbook of socialization theory and research. Chicago: Rand McNally.Langlois, J. H. & Downs, A. C.(1980). Mothers, fathers, and peers as socialization agents of sex-typed play behavior in young children. Child Development, 51, 1217-1247.
Lerner, R. M. & Shea, J. A.(1982). Social behavior in adolescence. In B. B. Woman(Ed.). Handbook of developmental psychology,(pp. 503-525). Englewood Cliffs, N. J. : Pretice-Hill, Inc.
Liebert, R. M., Wicks-Nelson, R., & Kail, R.V.(1986). Development psychology.(4th ed). Englewood Cliffs, N. J. : Pretice-Hall, Inc.
Linda, J. & Peter, M.(1973). Traditional sex-determined role standards and sex stereotypes. Journal of Personality and Social Psycholoty, 25(1), 28-34.
Mason, K. O., Czajka, J. L., and Arber, S.(1976). Change in U.S. women’s sex-role attitudes, 1964-1974. American Sociological Review, 41, 573-596.
McCoy, D. B.(1990). The impact of socialization on personality formation and gender role development. ERIC No. : ED 340476.
Measor, J. & Sikes, P. J.(1993). Gender and schools. NY: Cassel.
Mirowsky, J.(1985). Depression and marital power : An equity model. American Journal of Sociology, 91(3), 557-592.
Mischel, W.(1970). Sex typing and socialization. In P. H. Musse(Ed.). Carmichael’s manual of child psychology. (3rd ed). Vol. 2, 3-72. New York: Wiley.
Murstein, B. I., & Williams, P. D.(1983). Sex roles and marriage adjustment. Small Group Behavior, 14(1), 77-94.
Naylor, H. H.(1979). Volunteers, resource for human service. Project Share.
Nevill, D. D.(1975, May). Sex roles and personality correlates. Paper presented at the meeting of the American Psychological Association, Chicago.
Orlofsky, J. L. & O’Heron, C. A.(1987). Stereotypic and nonstereotypic sex role trait and behavior orientation : implications for personal adjustment. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 44, 1034-1042.
Rheingold, H. L. & Cook, K. V.(1975). The contents of boys’ and girls’ rooms as an index of parents’ behavior. Child Development, 46, 459-463.
Rollins, B. C. & Feldman, H.(1970)Marital satisfaction over the family life cycle. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 32, 20-28.Schaffer, D. F.(1980). Sex role issues in mental health. Reading, Mass: Adison-Wesley.
Schaninger, C. M. & Buss, W. C.(1986). A longitudinal comparison of consumption and finance handeling between happily married and divorced couples. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 48, 129-136.
Schau, G. G., Kahn, L., Diepild, J. H. & Cherry, F.(1980). The relationships of parental expectations and preschool children’s verbal sex typing to their sex-typed toy play behavior. Child Development, 51, 170-266.
Shaffer, D. R.(1988). Social and personality development. (2nd ed). Brook/Cole Publishing Company.
Shaw, J. S.(1982). Psychological androgyny and stressful life events. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 43, 145-153.
Spanier, B. G.(1976). Measuring dyadic adjustment : New scale for assessing the quality of marriage and similar dyads. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 38, 15-28.
Spanier, G. B., Sauer, W., & Larzelere, R.(1979). An empirical evaluation of the family life cycle. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 41, 27-38.
Spence, J. T., Helmreich, R. & Stapp, J.(1975). Ratings of self peers on sex role attributes and their relation to self-esteem and conceptions of masculinity and femininity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 32(1), 29-39.
Taylor, M. C. & Hall, J. A.(1982). Psychological androgyny: Theories, methods, and conclusions. Psychological Bulletin, 92(2), 347-366.
Waring, E., McElrath, D., Lefcoe, D., & Weisz, G.(1981). Dimensions of intimacy in marriage. Psychiatry, 48, 147-151.
Wilson, M. R. & Filsinger, E. E.(1986). Religiosly and marital adjustment : Multidimensional interrelationship. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 48, 147-151.
Woods, M. M.(1975). The relation of sex role categories to autobiographical factors. Presented at the annual meeting of the American Psychological Association, Chicago, Aug.
Ziegler, B. L.(1982). The relationship of sex roles and marital adjustment. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Western Psychological Association (62), Sacramento, California.
QRCODE
 
 
 
 
 
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               
第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁 top