跳到主要內容

臺灣博碩士論文加值系統

(3.236.84.188) 您好!臺灣時間:2021/07/30 02:29
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:鄭琇方
研究生(外文):Siou-Fang Jheng
論文名稱:兒童在Tell-Me-A-Story中之核心衝突關係主題研究
論文名稱(外文):The study of Core Conflictual Relationship Theme of children in Tell-Me-A-Story
指導教授:林美珠林美珠引用關係
指導教授(外文):Meei-Ju Lin
學位類別:碩士
校院名稱:國立花蓮教育大學
系所名稱:諮商與輔導研究所
學門:社會及行為科學學門
學類:心理學類
論文種類:學術論文
論文出版年:2007
畢業學年度:95
語文別:中文
論文頁數:165
中文關鍵詞:Tell-Me-A-Story (TEMAS)核心衝突關係主題
外文關鍵詞:Tell-Me-A-Story (TEMAS)Core Conflictual Relationship Theme (CCRT)
相關次數:
  • 被引用被引用:2
  • 點閱點閱:1608
  • 評分評分:
  • 下載下載:202
  • 收藏至我的研究室書目清單書目收藏:0
本研究嘗試使用核心衝突關係主題(CCRT)方法進行九十三名國小兒童在投射測驗Tell-Me-A-Story(TEMAS)的敘說分析。經由兩階段抽取清晰關係事件及類別判定的計分後,進行CCRT之三個主要成份─願望(W)、他人反應(RO)及自我反應(RS)的描述性統計,及不同性別、年級的兒童在TEMAS的CCRT各成份的差異分析,並將CCRT各成份與TEMAS原有的人格功能計分進行相關分析。
研究結果發現,本研究參與兒童在TEMAS的25張圖卡上,約有75%的故事可抽取出進行CCRT分析的關係事件,共有1,752個關係事件,平均每個兒童有18.83個故事。而不同的TEMAS圖卡會引出兒童不同的敘說情況及引出不同典型的CCRT組成。本研究出現最多的重要他人是父母及祖父母,其次為「自己」,願望是「達到目標和幫助他人」及「感到好和舒適」,「遠離和避免衝突」則次之。出現最多的他人反應為「拒絕和對抗」及「混亂苦惱的」,自我反應則為「失望沮喪」及「尊重和接受」。以上各成份並非對應出現,而是兒童對不同的重要他人會有不同的願望,而願望會對應到不同的他人反應及自我反應。
此外,因為圖卡及變項數量多,一一探討則太過繁瑣故以圖卡加總後之總分進行各式統計,因為每張圖片的故事數量並不相等,分析結果受會圖片特質影響,故僅提供一個概括的可能情形。本研究發現不同性別與年級的兒童在CCRT上並未有明顯差異。而「認定自我與獨立」、「達到目標和幫助他人」等願望、「有幫助的」他人反應與「有幫助的」、「尊重和接受」等自我反應與TEMAS之人格功能有較多相關存在;而「對抗和傷害其他人」、「被愛和被理解」等願望、「壞的」他人反應及「對抗和傷害他人」自我反應與各項TEMAS人格功能間則無任何相關。
最後,針對研究結果提出可能解釋及討論、對研究過程提出檢討,並對後續研究可使用的TEMAS圖卡、研究程序及應用於臨床兒童衡鑑上提出建議。
This study attempted to use Core Conflictual Relationship Theme(CCRT) method to proceed the narrative analysis of the projective test - Tell-Me-A-Story(TEMAS) with 93 elementary school children. After extracting clear relational episodes(REs) and category scoring, descriptive statistics of third essential components of CCRT - wish(W), responses from the other(RO) and responses of the self(RS) were proceeded. The variances of different gender, grade of children in various components of CCRT in the TEMAS, and the correlations between various components of CCRT and the personality functions shown in the TEMAS were also investigated.
The results of this study were that of the 25 cards in the TEMAS, approximately 75% of story from children could be extracted into 1,752 REs, with each child had 18.83 stories in average. Different TEMAS cards caused different narratives and different CCRT composition in children. This study showed that parents and the grandparents were that of “important person,” and next was “the self.” The mostly occurred of Ws were “to achieve & help others” and “to feel good and comfortable.” The mostly occurred of ROs were “rejecting & opposing” and “ upset.” The mostly occurred of RSs were “disappointed & depressed” and “respected & accepted.” Various components of the CCRT did not appear corresponsively, children had different Ws related to different important others, and different Ws were corresponded to different ROs and RSs.
In addition, various statistics were proceeded after summing the total score of the cards; due to the quantity of story on each card is not certainly equal, therefore, the result of analysis would be affected by the characteristics of the cards, thus only providing a broad possible situation. This study found that there was no obvious difference on the CCRT between different gender and grade in children; but there were more correlations between “to assert self & be independent” and “to achieve & help others” of the Ws, “helpful” of the ROs, “helpful,” and “respected & accepted” of the RSs and personality functions of TEMAS.
Based on these results of this study, explanations and discussions were presented, and recommendations were made for the use of TEMAS cards and implications for the future research of clinical child assessment.
目 次
目 次   …………………………………………………………………Ⅰ
表 目 次   …………………………………………………………………Ⅱ
圖 目 次   …………………………………………………………………Ⅳ

第一章   緒論…………………………………………………………… 1
第一節 研究動機及目的……………………………………………… 1
第二節 研究問題……………………………………………………… 5
第三節 名詞解釋……………………………………………………… 6

第二章 文獻探討……………………………………………………… 7
第一節 核心衝突關係主題…………………………………………… 7
第二節 TEMAS的發展理論與實徵研究…………………………………24

第三章 研究方法…………………………………………………………36
第一節 研究對象…………………………………………………………36
第二節 研究工具與施測方法……………………………………………37
第三節 資料處理與分析…………………………………………………45
第四節 研究流程…………………………………………………………50

第四章 研究結果…………………………………………………………52
第一節 TEMAS圖片所抽取之CCRT各項成份的描述性統計……………52
第二節 不同性別與年級的兒童在CCRT各成份之差異分析……………74
第三節 TEMAS人格功能與CCRT各成份的相關情形……………………80

第五章 討論與建議………………………………………………………86
第一節 研究結果之討論…………………………………………………86
第二節 結論與建議………………………………………………………100

參考文獻    ……………………………………………………………………106
附錄一     CCRT之願望、他人反應、自我反應的三個版本內容…………111
附錄二     CCRT版本一之願望、正負向他人反應與自我反應之
類別成份清單……………………………………………………114
附錄三     TEMAS圖片內容與預定引出之人格功能………………………116
附錄四 TEMAS計分功能…………………………………………………118
附錄五     判讀TEMAS之專家之判讀版本及建議…………………………121
附錄六 TEMAS亞洲版之人格功能記分準則 ……………………………124
附錄七 CCRT兩階段評定原則與範例……………………………………135
附錄八 Tell-Me-A-Story(TEMAS)訓練手冊………………………146
附錄九 研究參與之家長與兒童同意書……………………………………149
附錄十 兒童在TEMAS各圖卡之願望所對應之他人反應的
交叉分析……………………………………………………………150
附錄十一 兒童在TEMAS各圖卡之願望所對應之自我反應的
交叉分析……………………………………………………………158

表  目  次
表 3-1-1 TEMAS施測對象基本資料摘要表…………………………………………36
表 3-2-1 國內專家判讀TEMAS白人版引出之人格功能結果………………………39
表 3-2-2 兒童在TEMAS亞洲版引出之人格功能結果………………………………41
表 3-2-3 TEMAS亞洲版之信度與TEMAS編制報告對照……………………………42
表 3-3-1 CCRT第一階段評分一致性………………………………………………48
表 4-1-1 兒童在TEMAS之關係事件可計分的數量及比例…………………………53
表 4-1-2 兒童在TEMAS各圖卡之重要他人…………………………………………55
表 4-1-3 兒童在TEMAS各圖卡上的願望與比率……………………………………58
表 4-1-4 兒童在TEMAS各圖卡上的他人反應與比率………………………………61
表 4-1-5 兒童在TEMAS各圖卡上的自我反應………………………………………64
表 4-1-6 兒童在TEMAS各圖卡之正負向他人反應與自我反應……………………66
表 4-1-7 願望各群組之對應的他人反應……………………………………………68
表 4-1-8 願望各群組之對應的自我反應……………………………………………69
表 4-1-9 兒童在TEMAS各圖卡之核心衝突關係主題………………………………70
表 4-2-1 不同性別的兒童在CCRT之願望差異情形 ………………………………74
表 4-2-2 不同性別的兒童在CCRT之他人反應差異情形……………………………75
表 4-2-3 不同性別的兒童在CCRT之自我反應差異情形……………………………75
表 4-2-4 不同性別的兒童在CCRT之正負向他人反應與自我反應差異情形………76
表 4-2-5 低中高年級兒童在CCRT之願望差異情形…………………………………76
表 4-2-6 低中高年級兒童在CCRT之他人反應差異情形……………………………77
表 4-2-7 低中高年級兒童在CCRT之自我反應差異情形……………………………78
表 4-2-8 低中高年級兒童在CCRT之自我反應差異情形……………………………79
表 4-3-1 CCRT願望群組與TEMAS人格功能間的相關摘要…………………………81
表 4-3-2 CCRT他人反應群組與TEMAS人格功能間的相關摘要……………………82
表 4-3-3 CCRT自我反應群組與TEMAS人格功能間的相關摘要……………………83
表 5-1-1 本研究研究結果與過去相似研究之比較摘要……………………………90
表 5-1-2 本研究CCRT之願望群組名稱轉換…………………………………………91
表 5-1-3 本研究CCRT之他人反應群組名稱轉換……………………………………92
表 5-1-4 本研究CCRT之自我反應群組名稱轉換……………………………………92

圖 目  次
圖 3-4-1 研究流程圖……………………………………………………………………50
中文部份:
王碧朗(民90)。依附理論─探索人類情感的發展。教育研究資訊,9(3),68-85。
呂宏曉譯(2004)。短期精神動力心理治療-核心衝突關係主題法。臺北市:心理。Book, H. E. (1998). How to Practice Brief Psychodynamic Psychotherapy - The Core Conflictual Relationship Theme Method.
彭舜譯(2001)。精神分析引論。台北市:城邦。Freud, S. (1919). Introductory lectures on Psycho-Analysis.
葉重新(民90)。教育研究法。台北市:心理。
鄭玄藏譯(2003)。短期心理治療-心理動力取向。臺北市:心理。Mander, G.著。(2000). A Psychodynamic Approach to Brief Therapy.
成蒂、林方晧譯(1996)。短期心理治療。台北市:心理。Wolberg, L. R. (1979). Handbook of Short-term Psychotherapy.
林美珠、劉秋木(民93)。兒童在Tell-Me-A-Story上所呈現的人格側影之初探。測驗學刊,51(2),249-284。
林玉華、繁雪梅譯(2004)。當代精神分析導論─理論與實務(第三版)。台北市:五南。. Bateman, A. & Holmes, J. (1995). Introductiopn to Psychoanalysis Contemporary and practice.
張本聖、洪志美譯(1993)。心理衡鑑大全(第四版)。臺北市:雙葉。Groth-Marnat,G(2003). Handbook of Psychological Assessment.
劉秋木、林美珠(民89)。從詮釋學觀點看主題統覺測驗(TAT)故事的解釋。國家科學委員會研究彙刊:人文及社會科學,10(2),217-231。
車先蕙、李璨如、帥文慧、陳正文、張明玲等譯(1997)。人格理論(第二版)。台北市:揚智。Schultz, D. & Schultz, S. E. (1994). Theories of Personality(6th ed.).
徐孟弘、杜宜展、柳雅梅、林秋先譯(2003)。故事治療─說故事在兒童心理治療上的運用。台北市:五南。Gardner, R. A. (1993). Storytelling in psychotherapy with children.





英文部份:
Arlow, J. A. (n.d.). The process and meaning of insight in psychoanalyttc psychotherapy. The Psychoanalytic Connection. Retrieved November 08, 2006, from the World Wide Web: www.psychoanalysis.net/IPPsa/Arlow/I-7
Albani, C., Pokorny, D., Blaser, G., & Grüninger, S. et al. (2002). Reformulation of the core conflictual relationship theme (CCRT) categories: The CCRT-LU category system. Psychotherapy Research, 12(3), 319-338.
Bowlby, J. (1998). A secure base : Clinical applications of attachment theory. London: Routledge.
Bellak, L., & Abrams, D. M. (1997). The Thematic Apperception Test, the Children's Apperception Test, and the Senior Apperception Technique in clinical use (6th ed). Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
Barber, J. P., Crits-Christoph, P., & Luborsky, L. (1998). A guide to the CCRT standard categories and their classification. In L. Luborsky, & P. Crits-Christoph (Eds.), Understanding transference (2nd ed.). (pp43-54). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
Carmen, V. I. (1981). Fantasies of bilingual children: An exploration into relationship of bilingualism, self-concept and parental interaction. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, City University of New York, NY.
Costantino, G., & Malgady, R. G. (2000). Multicultural and cross-cultural utility of the TEMAS(Tell-Me-A-Story ) test. In R. H. Dana (Eds.), Handbook of cross-cultural and multicultural personality assessment. (pp. 481-513). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Costantino, G., Malgady, R. G., & Rogler, L. H. (1988). TEMAS (Tell-Me-A-Story) manual. LA: Western Psychological Servicse.
Cohen, R. J., Swerdilk, M. K., & Smith, D. k. (1992). Psychologiacl testing and assessment: An introduction to tests and measurement second edition. Caifornia: Mayfield Publishing Company.
Chang, C. F., Hsueh, H. C., Liu, S. N., & Wen, J. K. (2000). The study on core conflictual relationship of short-term counseling. The Kaohsiung Journal of Medical Sciences,16(9), 468-475.
Costantino, G., Colon-Malgady, G., Malgady, R. G., & Perez, A. (1991). Assessment of attention deficit disorder using a thematic apperception technique. Journal of Personality Assessment, 57, 87-95.
Costantino, G., Malgady, R. G., Colon-Malgady, G., & Bailey, J. (1992). Clinical utility of TEMAS with nonmiority children. Journal of Personality Assessment, 59(3), 433-438.
Costantino, G., Malgady, R. G., Rogler, L. H., & Tsui, E. C. (1988). Discriminant analysis of clinical outpatients and public school children by TEMAS: A thematic apperception test for Hispanics and Blacks. Journal of Personality Assessment, 52(4), 670-678.
Drapeau, M., & Perry, C. (2004). Childhood trauma and adult interpersonal functioning: A study using the Core Conflictual Relationship Theme Method (CCRT). Child Abuse & Neglect, 28(10), 1049.
Dahlbender, R. W., Albani, C., Pokorny, D., & Kachele, H.(1998). The connected central relationship patterns (CCRP): A structural version of the CCRT. Psychotherapy Research, 8(4), 408-425.
Diguer, L., Lefebvere, R., Drapeau, M., Luborsky, L., Rousseau, J. P., Hebert, E. et al. (2001). The core conflictual relationship themes of psychotic, borderline, and neurotic personality organizations. Psychotherapy Research, 11(2), 169-186.
Elsa Beatriz, C. S. (1996). Socio-cognitive correlates to school achievement using the TEMAS (Tell-Me-A-Story) culturally sensitive test with sixth, seventh, and eighth grades at-risk Puerto Rican students. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, New School for Social Research, NY.
Flanagan, R. (1999). Objective and projective personality assessment: The TEMAS and the Behavioral Assessment System for Children, Self-report of Personality. Psychological Report, 84, 865-867.
Flanagan, R., & Di Giuseppe, R. (1999). Critical review of the TEMAS: A step within the development of thematic apperception instruments. Psychology in the Schools, 36, 21-30.
Gesek, G. J. (1996). A review and critique of the Tell-Me-A-Story (TEMAS) Apperceptive Test. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Southwest Educational Research Association, New Orleans, LA.
Grenyer, B. F. S., & Luborsky, L. (1998). Positive versus negative CCRT patterns. In L. Luborsky, & P. Crits-Christoph (Eds.), Understanding transference (2nd ed.). (pp55-63). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
Hasse, L. A. (2001). The traumatic effects of witnessing domestic violence on children's emotional functioning. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, California School of Professional Psychology - Berkeley/Alameda, California.
Jenuwine, M. J. (2001). Narratives of suicidal adolescents. Dissertation Abstracts International: Section B: The Sciences and Engineering, 61(10-B), 5567. Retrieved December 30, 2006, from database (PsycINFO) on the World Wide Web: http:// www.apa.org/psycinfo/
Karin, G. E, (2001). Attachment and object relations theories: Understanding adolescent mother-infant relationships. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, The University of Western Ontario, Canada.
Luborsky, L. (1998). The early life of the idea for core conflictual relationship theme method. In L. Luborsky, & P. Crits-Christoph (Eds.), Understanding transference (2nd ed.). (pp3-13). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
Luborsky, L. (1998). A guide to the CCRT method. In L. Luborsky, & P. Crits-Christoph (Eds.), Understanding transference (2nd ed.). (pp15-42). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
Luborsky, L. (1998). The Relationship Anecdotes Paradigm(RAP) interview as a versatile source of narratives. In L. Luborsky, & P. Crits-Christoph (Eds.), Understanding transference (2nd ed.). (pp109-120). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
Luborsky, L., & Crits-Christoph, P. (Eds.). (1998). Understanding transference (2nd ed.). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
Luborsky, L., & Diguer, L. (1998). The reliability of the CCRT method: Results from eight samples. In L. Luborsky, & P. Crits-Christoph (Eds.), Understanding transference (2nd ed.). (pp97-107). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
Luborsky, L., Diguer, L., Andrusyna, T., Friedman, S., Tarca, C., Popp, C., et al. (2004). A method of choosing CCRT scorers. Psychotherapy Research, 14(1), 127-134.
Luborsky, L., Luborsky, E., Diguer, L., Schmidt, K., Diguer, L., & Faude, J. et al. (1998). Stability of the CCRT from age 3 to 5. In L. Luborsky, & P. Crits-Christoph (Eds.), Understanding transference (2nd ed.). (pp233-252). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
Polimeni, Anne-Maree. (2004). Narratives of women’s hospital experiences: The impact of powerlessness on personal identity. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Swinburne University of Technology, Hawthorn VIC, Australia.
Popp, C., Luborsky, L., & Crits-Christoph, P. (1998). The parallel of the CCRT from working narrative with the CCRT from dream. In L.
Luborsky, & P. Crits-Christoph (Eds.), Understanding transference (2nd ed.). (pp175-186). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
Renee, k. E. (1996). Children of alcoholics/substance abusing parents: Delay of gratification, achievement motivation, and aggression. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Adelphi University, NY.
Ritzler, B. (1993). TEMAS (Tell-Me-A-Story). Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 11, 381-389.
Roten, Y., Drapeau, M., Stigler, M., & Despland, J. (2004). Yet another look at the CCRT: the relation between core conflictual relationship themes and defensive functioning. Psychotherapy Research, 14(2), 252-260.
Teri, E.L. (1998). Differential validation of the TEMAS (Tell-Me-A-Story) with Rorschach as criterion: A comparison of projective methods. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Long Island University, The Brooklyn Center, NY.
Tomkins, S. (1987). Scricpt theory: Differential magnification of affects. In H. E. Howe, Jr., & R. A. Diensbier (Eds.), Nebrasska Symposium on Motivation (Vol. 26, pp. 201-236). Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press.
Virginia, S. A. (2006). Using the CCRT to interpret the TAT: Understanding the phenomenon of "card pull". Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Adelphi University, NY.
Wilczek, A., Weinryb, R. M., Barber, J. P., Gustavsson, J. P., & Asberg.M. (2000). The core conflictual relationship theme (CCRT) and psychopathology in patients selected for dynamic psychotherapy. Psychotherapy Research, 10(1), 100-113.
QRCODE
 
 
 
 
 
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               
第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁 top