臺灣博碩士論文加值系統

本文以「經濟發展與婦女家庭地位：台灣的家庭結構、婦女就業型態與家庭權力結構之關聯」計畫所蒐集之516對夫妻配對資料為分析對象，除了探討台灣家庭決策及家務分工概況，勾勒台灣婦女在家庭權力結構中的相對位置及其演變趨勢外，重點在於針對夫妻權力研究提出反省，一來發展多維度婦女家庭地位分數，修正過往權力指標建構欠缺理論依據的缺點，二來應用多層模型於台灣婦女家庭地位研究，改善過往夫妻配對資料與統計分析方法未能正確對應的缺點，推進國內夫妻配對研究進度。主要研究結論包含以下六項：
一、婦女家庭地位之指標選擇
夫妻權力研究應發展多維度家庭地位分數，研究者若無法綜合考慮權力展現面向或指標的相對重要性，那麼婦女家庭地位研究結論將隨研究者挑選主題或指標不同而出現重大偏誤。
二、婦女家庭地位之指標權重
本研究應用層級分析法，彙整台灣社會學及性別研究學者意見發展權值。有別於過往，本研究建構之婦女家庭地位分數特色是，不僅賦予不同決策及分工指標不同權重，更同時整合家庭決策與家務分工於婦女家庭地位概念中，有利於完整呈現婦女在家庭內的生活處境。
三、多維度婦女家庭地位分數下的台灣家庭圖像
多維度地位概念下的台灣家庭圖像明顯偏向夫權，與過往只考慮單一指標的結論不同，要迎接平權家庭時代來臨，仍有一段路要走。
四、台灣家庭研究有必要同步蒐集夫妻意見
夫妻針對婦女家庭地位回答不一致比例超過三成，顯示夫妻權力研究有必要同步蒐集妻子與丈夫意見，即調查應該以「配對」而非「個人」做為分析單位，以避免結論偏誤。
五、多層模型下的婦女家庭地位影響機制
本研究應用多層模型於夫妻配對資料分析，結果顯示，婦女家庭地位確實受到傳統父權規範與資源規則的雙重影響，不過，在台灣夫妻權力關係中，丈夫地位受上層結構規範保障，故只有妻子才需要積極作為爭取權力，這使得在夫妻關係中，是「她」的資源發揮效應，總是「她」試圖影響「他」，這是過去研究未能釐清的部分。其次，妻子挑戰傳統的動力主要來自現代化觀念認知與經濟實力後盾，符合資源論看法，但資源論對於丈夫在妻子爭取權力過程中的微妙角色的反省不足，未來應多注意丈夫在妻子突破傳統框架的「過程」中的把關角色。
六、其他
研究顯示，台灣夫妻高比例回答不一致主要是因為夫妻特質差異及未衝突等脈絡因素造成，不存在女性或男性傾向誇大自己地位或符合傳統規範形象等系統性回答偏差，初步指向歧異觀點的適用性。未來只要是涉及夫妻關係事實的研究，理論上就應該同步蒐集夫妻意見，才不致造成研究結論偏誤。若因夫妻配對資料取得困難，只能以不具夫妻關係受訪者做為分析對象，研究者也應該清楚夫妻單方意見不代表家庭全貌，瞭解非配對樣本分析的推論限制。

Using 516 couple data gathered from The Economic Development and Women’s Family Status in Taiwan conducted in 1995-1996, this dissertation aims to provide a better measurement of marital power and use multilevel model to correctly analyze dyadic couple data. The main findings include the following:
1. Marital Power with Weighted Composite
The analysis of the family decision-making patterns and the division of household labor in Taiwan points to the necessity to develop a multidimensional women’s family status index. If the researcher fails to give a comprehensive consideration to the marital power relationship, significant bias will arise from the different selection of study subjects or indicators.
In 2007, scholars related to family and gender studies have invited to participate in the study of Developing Weight Schemes for Marital Power Measurement in Three Chinese Societies. Applying the technique of Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP), three levels of weights were calculated and transformed.
The results show that the study of family decision-making power is of absolute importance to observe women’s family status in Taiwan.
Among the five types of decisions, the most revealing decision item that reflects women’s power is that whether they can say no to family norms（weight equal to 0.290）, followed by whether women can take part in the decision-making of major economic issues of the family (0.250), occupation related issues (0.243), child related issues (0.170) and daily expense management (0.047).
As to household labor items, husband’s involvement in shopping for commodity and making small repairs around the house is of limited value to judge the conjugal marital power; in contrast, women''s status in a society can be inferred by looking at husband‘s involvement in activities that are time- and labor-consuming, such as preparing the meal and doing household cleaning. Final weights are calculated by multiplying each indicator’s weight at three levels.
By assigning different weight and score to each of the indicators, an integrated marital power score in representing women’s family status can be developed. The result shows that Taiwan is still a patriarchic society , among the 516 families, about 3/4 are patriarchic, 20% are even powered, and only 2% are matriarchic. This finding is different from the past studies in which only limited indicators were considered.
2. The Analysis of Dyadic Couple Data
Results show that various degrees of discrepancy exist among couples'' answers on household division of labor in various family stages, and the family decision items. After converting the indicators into women’s family status scores, more than 30% of the answers from husbands and wives are inconsistent, showing that it is indeed necessary to use “dyad” as the unit for analysis instead of “individual”
Multilevel modeling, also commonly referred to as hierarchical liner modeling, is a relatively new statistical technique that is particularly useful for the analysis of dyadic data. Using 516 couple data, the APIM multilevel model developed by David A. Kenny was utilized to analyze women’s family status in Taiwan
Findings regarding the mechanisms that influence women’s family status show that husband’s family status is given and protected by traditional patriarchic norms, the three factors that prevent the development of even-powered marital relationships are living arrangement, Hakka culture, and being encouraged to have children.
Personal resources are crucial for a woman to break free from traditional norm and her husband’s superior status. With regard to the factors to account for the higher women’s family status, it was demonstrated by both husband’s and wife’s answers that women’s better education, women’s modern sex-role attitudes (cognitive resource), and women’s relative income (financial resource) are significant. The critical role of the influence of the husband’s sex-role attitudes and findings from 17 couples’in-depth interviews are also discussed.
The dissertation concludes that efforts ought to be made to include conjugal unit, instead of one spouse, in the study of marital interaction in Taiwan. Recommendations for future studies have also been proposed.

口試委員會審定書 i
中文摘要 ii
英文摘要 v
第一章 研究動機與主旨 1
第二章 婦女家庭地位相關討論 7
第一節 理論與實證對話 7
第二節 夫妻權力研究反思 18
第三節 夫妻配對研究 26
第三章 資料來源與研究設計 35
第一節 資料來源 35
第二節 主要分析策略 38
第三節 主要變項說明 50
第四節 樣本結構說明 56
第四章 婦女家庭地位指標之選擇 61
第一節 台灣家庭決策模式 61
第二節 台灣家務分工模式 70
第五章 婦女家庭地位建構之權重 79
第一節 婦女家庭地位指標權值研究 81
第二節 多維度權力概念下的台灣婦女家庭地位 96
第六章 婦女家庭地位之共識與歧見 103
第一節 夫妻配對資料使用必要性評估 103
第二節 夫妻回答不一致模式初探 112
第三節 多層模型之夫妻配對資料分析 117
第七章 婦女家庭地位：規範與資源 129
第一節 夫妻權力展現：指標檢討 129
第二節 夫妻權力來源：賦予地位 vs. 取得地位 140
第三節 質化研究下之夫妻不一致回答 147
第八章 結論與檢討 151
第一節 研究結論 151
第二節 討論與建議 164
參考文獻 文獻-1
附錄一 聚合觀點下的夫妻不一致資料處理反省 附錄1-1
附錄二 層級分析法說明 附錄2-1

中文部份

王舒芸、余漢儀(1997)奶爸難為－雙薪家庭之父職角色初探。婦女 與兩性學刊8:115-149。
王重能(2001)家庭的內生形成與權力分割。國立台灣大學經濟學研究所碩士論文。
孔祥明(1999)婆媳過招為哪樁？婆婆、媳婦與兒子（丈夫）三角關係的探討。應用心理研究4:57-96。
伊慶春(1987)夫妻權力與婚姻調適之研究：初步分析。行政院國家科學委員會專題研究計劃報告。
伊慶春、蔡瑤玲(1989)台灣地區夫妻權力的分析：以家庭決策為例。台灣社會現象的分析－家庭、人口、政策與階層，中央研究院三民主義研究所叢刊，頁115-151。
伊慶春(1991)台北地區婚姻調適的一些初步研究發現。國科會人文及社會科學彙刊1(2): 151-173。
伊慶春、楊文山、蔡瑤玲(1992)夫妻衝突處理模式的影響因素：丈夫、妻子、和夫妻配對樣本的比較。中國社會學刊16：25-54。
伊慶春、呂玉瑕(1996)經濟發展與婦女家庭地位：台灣的家庭結構、婦女就業型態與家庭權力結構之關聯。行政院國家科學委員會專題研究計劃。中央研究院三民主義研究所。
伊慶春(1999) 華人家庭夫妻權力的比較研究。發表於「第六屆現代化與中國文化研討會－走向21世紀的中國社會學人類學」。中國，江蘇。
沙吉才(1995)當代中國婦女家庭地位研究。天津：天津人民出版社。
周玉慧、謝雨生(2003)夫妻間支持授受互動及其影響。發表於「夫妻對偶互動關係研究」學術研討會。台北：中央研究院中山人文社會科學研究所。
李美玲、楊亞潔、伊慶春(2000)家務分工：就業現實還是平等理念？臺灣社會學刊24：59-88。
呂玉瑕(1984)婦女就業與家庭角色、權力結構之關係。中央研究院民族學研究所集刊56：111-43。
呂玉瑕、伊慶春(2005)社會變遷中的夫妻資源與家務分工：台灣七○年代與九○年代社會文化脈絡的比較。台灣社會學10：41-94。
余強生、盧彥戎(2002)以互動式AHP法為基礎的一個群體決策模式：以畢業旅遊行程選擇為例。發表「 2002年管理新思維學術研討會」，台北，2002年11月18日。
林雅容(2005)經濟變動中女性養家者的夫妻權力：以東石漁村為例。台大社工學刊11：1-44。
唐先梅(1997)家事分工理論模型－從層級觀點的思索。空大生活科學學報3：63-90。
唐先梅(1999)從家務工作的本質談雙薪家庭夫妻家事分工。應用心理研究4:131-173。
唐先梅（2003）雙薪家庭夫妻家務分工及家務公平觀之研究－都會區與非都會區之比較。台灣農村研究創刊號：109-138。
徐安琪(1992)中外婦女家庭地位的比較。社會(1)。
徐安琪(2001)婚姻權力模式：城鄉差異及其影響因素。台大社會學刊29：251-282。
徐安琪（2005）夫妻權力和婦女家庭地位的評價指標：反思與檢討。社會學研究(4)。
陶春芳、蔣永萍(1993)中國婦女社會地位概觀。北京：中國婦女出版社。
陳玉華、伊慶春、呂玉瑕(2000)婦女家庭地位之研究:以家庭決策模式為例。臺灣社會學刊24：1-58。
陳玉華、伊慶春(2003)Do Couple Data Matter?以華人家庭決策的影響模式為例。發表於「夫妻對偶互動關係研究」學術研討會。台北：中央研究院中山人文社會科學研究所。
陳富美、利翠珊(2004)不同情感組型夫妻在家事分工上的差異：對偶資料的分析。應用心理研究24：95-114。
陳素櫻(1979)夫妻價值類型與主婦家庭角色間的關係。台灣大學社會學研究所碩士論文。
黃宗堅、葉光輝、謝雨生(2003)夫妻關係中權力與情感的運作分析：以衝突解決模式為例。發表於「夫妻對偶互動關係研究」學術研討會。台北：中央研究院中山人文社會科學研究所。
黃信豪(2005)多層次模式估計於選民投票行為的應用：以TEDS2004為例。台灣選舉與民主化調查國際學術研討會。「台灣選舉與民主化調查」規劃與推動委員會。
張雷、雷靂、郭伯良(2002)多層線性模型應用。北京：教育科學出版社。
單藝斌(2004)女性地位評價方法研究。北京：九州出版社。
董秀珠、楊連謙、林萬億(2004)當丈夫不再為經濟的靠山時：夫妻間的權力與運作過程。應用心理研究24：147-180。
劉清榕(1976)台灣鄉村結構變遷中之農家主婦。台灣銀行季刊27(1)：216-238。
賴爾柔(1973)台灣農村家庭決策之研究。台灣大學農業推廣學研究所碩士論文。
賴爾柔、黃馨慧(1995) 已婚男性參與家事分工之研究。發表於「大型社會調查研究經驗交流暨變遷中的台灣社會」研討會。台北：中央研究院民族學研究所。
鄧振源、曾國雄(1989)分析層級法的內涵特性與應用(上)。中國統計學報27(6)：5-27。.
鄧振源、曾國雄(1989)分析層級法的內涵特性與應用(下)。中國統計學報27(7)：1-20。
簡文吟、薛承泰(1996)台灣地區已婚婦女就業型態及其影響因素。人口學刊17：113-134。
簡文吟、伊慶春(2004)共識與歧見：夫妻配對研究的重要性。台灣社會學7：89-122。
簡文吟、伊慶春(2007) 兩岸三地婦女家庭地位－台灣、上海、香港之比較研究。發表於「台灣與東亞社會比較研究」研討會。台北：台灣社會學年會。
簡文吟、伊慶春(2008)台灣夫妻互動模式的持續與變遷：家庭決策與家庭分工的分析。發表於「台灣的社會變遷，1985-2005：台灣社會變遷調查計畫第十一次研討會(第二階段)」研討會。台北：中央研究院社會學研究所。
蔡明璋(2004)台灣夫妻的家務工作時間：親密關係的影響。台灣社會學8：99-131。
蕭英玲(2005)台灣的家務分工：經濟依賴及性別的影響。台灣社會學刊34：115-145。

英文部份

Atkins, David C. (2005) Using Multilevel Models to Analyze Couple and Family Treatment Data : Basic and Advanced Issues. Journal of Family Psychology.19(1):98-110.
Ballweg, John A. (2001) Husband-Wife Response similarities on evaluative and Non-evaluative survey questions. The Public Opinion Quarterly 33(2):249-254.
Barnett, R. C., & Baruch, G. K. (1987). Determinants of fathers’ participation in family work. Journal of Marriage and the family, 49: 29-40.
Becker, Gary (1991) 家庭論。王文娟、李華夏、吳惠林、鄒繼礎合譯。台北：立緒。
Berk, Sarah F. (1985) The Gender Factory: The Apportionment of Work in American Households. New York: Plenum.
Blood, Robert O. Jr. & Donald M. Wolfe (1960) Husbands and Wives. New York: The Free Press.
Booth, Alan and Susan Welch (1978) Spousal Consensus and its Correlates: A Reassessment. Journal of Marriage and the Family 40:23-32.
Boserup, Ester (1970) Woman''s Role in Economic Development. New York: St. Martin''s Press.
Brody, Charles J. and Lala C. Steelman(1985) Sibling Structure and Parental Sex-Typing of Children’s Household Tasks. Journal of Marriage and the Family 47(2):265-273.
Bradley, Karen and Diana Khor (1993) Toward an Integration of theory and research of the status of women. Gender and Society 7(3):347-378.
Burr, Wesley R., Louise Ahem and Elmer Knowles (1977) An Empirical Test of Rodman''s Theory of Resources in Cultural Context. Journal of Marriage and the Family 39(3): 505-514.
Campbell, Lorne and Deborah A. Kashy (2002) Estimating actor, partner, and interaction effect for dyadic data using PROC MIXED AND HLM: A user-friendly guide. Personal relationships 9: 327-342.
Card, Josefina Jayme (1978) The Correspondence of Data Gathered from Husband and Wife: Implications for Family Planning Studies.Social Biology25(3):196-204.
Centers, R., B. Raven and A. Rodrigues (1971) Conjugal Power Structure: A Re-Examination. American Journal of Sociology 36:264-278.
Chen, Yu-Hua and Chin-Chun Yi (2006) Wife’s Decision-Making Power in a Chinese Context : A Marital Dyadic Perspective. Japanese Journal of Family Sociology 17(2):110-123.
Cheung, J. Cabigon, A. Chamratrithirong, P.F. McDonald, S. Syed, A. Cherlin and P. Smith (1985) International Population Conference, Florence, Volume 3 (Liege, Belgium: International Union for the Scientific Study of Population):293-308.
Chang,Chin-Fen(2006)Explanations of Gender-Based Household Labor Divisions:A Cross-National Study.Japanese Journal of Family Sociology17(2):81-94.
Chu, C.Y. Cyrus, Ching-Fan Chung, Chung-Nen Wang and Ruoh-Rong Yu (2001) "The Decision ''Power'' in Endogenously-Formed Families," 「華人家庭動態資料庫」學術研討會，中央研究院經濟所，2001年7月。
Coltrane. Scott (2000) Research on Household Labor:Modeling and Measuring the Social Embeddedness of Routine Family Work. Journal of Marriage and the Family 66:1272-1286.
Cormwell, R. E. AND S.G. Wieting (1975) Multidimensionality of Conjugal Decision making Indices: Comparative analyses of five samples. Journal of comparative family studies 6: 139-152.
Condran, John G. and Jerry G. Bode. (1982). Rashomon, working wives, and family division of labor: Middletown, 1980. Journal of Marriage and the Family 44 :421–426.
Coverman, S. (1985) Explaining Husband''s Participation in Domestic Labor. The Sociological Quarterly 26: 817.
Deal, James E. (1995) Utilizing Data from Multiple Family Members: A Within-Family Approach Journal of Marriage and the Family 57:1109-1120.
DeMaris, Alfred (2001) The Influence of Intimate Violence on Transitions out of Cohabitation. Journal of Marriage and Family 63: 235-246.
Diefenbach, Heike (2002) Gender Ideologies, Relative Resources, and Gender ideologies, relative resources, and the division of housework in intimate relationships: a test of Hyman Rodman''s theory of resources in cultural context. International Journal of Comparative Sociology43:45-64.
Douglas, S. P. and Y. Wind (1978) Examining Family Role and Authority Patterns:Two Methodological issues. Journal of Marriage and the Family 40:35-47.
Ericksen, Julia A., William L. Yancey and Eugene P. Ericksen (1979) The Division of Family Roles. Journal of Marriage and Family 41(2): 301-303.
Eshleman, J, Ross (1981) The Family: An Introduction. (3rd Edition) Allyn and Bacon, Inc.
Fisher, Lawrence、Ronald F. Kokes、Donald C. Random、Susan L. Phillips and Pamela
Rude (1985) Alternative Strategies for Creating “Relational” Family Data.Family Process 24:213-222.
Fuwa, Makiko (2004) Macro-level Gender Inequality and the Division of Household in 22 Countries. American Sociological Review 69:751-767.
Gallin, R. (1984) The Entry of Chinese Women into the Rural Labor Force: A Case Study from Taiwan. Signs 9(3): 383-397.
Godwin, D. and J. Scanzoni (1989) Couple Consensus during Marital Joint Decision-Making: A Context, Process, Outcome Model. Journal of Marriage and the Family, SI (November): 943-956.
Golden, Bruce L. , Edward A. Wasil and Patrick T. Harker (eds.) The Analytic Hierarchy Process. Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg.
Goode, William (1964) The Family, Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Hawkins, James L. and Carol Weisberg Dizie W. Ray (1980) Spouse Differences in Communication Style :Preference, Perception ,Behavior. Journal of Marriage and the Family 42:585-593.
Heer, D. M. (1962) Husband and Wife Perceptions of Family Power Structure.Marriage and Family Living 24:65-67.
Heer, David M. (1963) The measurement and Bases of Family Power: An Overview.Marriage and Family Living 25(2):133-139.
Hill, Wayne & John Scanzoni (1982) Approach for Assessing Marital Decision-Making Processes. Journal of Marriage and the Family 44(4): 927-941.
Hiller, D. (1984) Power dependence and division of family work. Sex Roles, 10:1003-1019.
Huber, Joan and Glenna D. Spitze(1983)Sex Stratification: Children, Housework, and Jobs. New York: Academic Press.
Kamo, Yoshinori (1988) Determinants of Household Division of Labor: Resource, Power and Ideology. Journal of Family Issues 9(2):177-200.
Kenny, A. David (1988) The Analysis of Data from Two-Person Relationships. In Duck, Steve (eds.) Handbook of Personal Relationships : Thory, Research and Interventions. John Wiley and Sons.
Kenny, A. David and Deborah A. Kashy (1991) Analyzing Interdependence in Dyads. In Montgomery, M. Barnara and Steve Duck (eds.) Studying Interpersonal Interaction . The Guilford Press.
Kenny, A. David, Deborah A. Kashy and William L. Cook (2006) Dyadic Data Analysis. The Guilford Press.
Kluwer, Esther S., Jose A.M. Heesink, And Evert Van De Vliert (1997) The Marital Dynamics of Conflict over the Division of Labor. Journal of Marriage and the Family 59(3):635-653.
Komter, A. (1989) Hidden Power in marriage. Gender and Society 3: 187-216.
Kreft, Ita and Jan De Leeuw (2006)多層次模型分析導論。邱皓政譯。台北：五南出版社。
Larson, Lyle E. (1974) System and Subsystem Perception of Family Roles. Journal of Marriage and the Family 36(1): 123-138.
Maret, E. and B. Finlay (1984) The Distribution of Household Labor among Women in Dual-Earner Families. Journal of Marriage and Family 46(2): 357-364.
McDonald, Gerald W. (1980) Family Power: The assessment of a Decade of Theory and Research 1970-1979. Journal of Marriage and the Family 42: 841-854
Mirowsky, John (1985) Depression and Marital Power: An Equity Model. American Journal of Sociology 91(3): 557-592.
Ochs, Eric P. And Yitzchak M.Binik (1999) The Use of Couple Data Determine the Reliability of Self-Reported Sexual behavior. The Journal of Sex Research 36(4):374-384.
O''Rourke, Maureen E. And Barbara B. Germino(2000) From Two Perspectives to One Choice: Blending Couple and Individual Views of Prostate Cancer Treatment Selection. Journal of Family Nursing 6(3):231-251.
Pampel, F. C. and Tanaka, K. (1986) Economic Development and Female Labor Force Participation: Reconsideration. Social Forces 64(3): 599-618.
Pimentel, Ellen Efron (2000) Just How Do I Love Thee? Marital Relations in Urban China. Journal of Marriage and the Family 62:32-47.
Quarm, Daisy (1981) Random Measurement Error as a Source of Discrepancies Between the Reports of Wives and Husbands Concerning Marital Power and Task Allocation. Journal of Marriage and the Family 43: 521-535.
Rank, M. (1982) Determinations of Conjugal influence in wives’ employment decision making. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 44(3): 591-604.
Raudenbush, S. W., Robert T. Brennan and Rosalind C. Barnett(1995) A Multivariate Hierarchical Model for Studying Psychological Change Within Married Couples. Journal of Family Psychology,9(2):161-174.
Rexroat, Cynthia and Constance Shehan (1987) The Family Life Cycle and Spouses’ Time in Housework. Journal of Marriage and the Family 49(4):737-750.
Rodman, H. (1967) Marital Power in France, Greece, Yugoslavia and the United States: A cross-National Discussion. Journal of Marriage and the Family. 29(2):320-324.
Rodman, H. (1972) Marital Power and the Theory of resources in cultural context. Journal of comparative family studies 3(1):50-69.
Safilios-Rothschild, Constantina (1969) Family Sociology or Wives’ Family Sociology？A Cross- Cultural Examination of Decision-Making. Journal of Marriage and the Family 31:290-301.
Safilios-Rothschild, Constantina (1970) The Study of Family Power Structure:A Review 1960-1969.Journal of Marriage and the Family 32:539-552.
Safilios-Rothschild, Constantina (1976) A Macro- and Micro-examination of Family Power and Love. Journal of Marriage and the Family 37(May): 355-362.
Saaty, T. L. (1980) Analytic Hierarchy Process, McGraw-Hill, New York, NY.
Scanzoni, J. (1979) Social Process and Power in Families. In Wesley R. Burr et al. (eds.), Contemporary Theories about the Family (Vol. 1), pp.295-316. New York: Free Press.
Schwartz, S. H. and Galit Sagie (2000) Value Consensus and Importance: A Cross-National Study. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology 31(4): 465-497.
Spanier, Graham and Robert A. Lewis (1980) Marital Quality: A Review of the Seventies. Journal of Marriage and the Family 42:825-839.
Steenbergen, Marco and Bradford Jones (2002) Modeling Multilevel Data Structures. American Journal of Political Science 46:218-237.
Szinovacz, Maximiliane E. (1983) Using Couple Data as a Methodological Tool: The Case of Marital Violence. Journal of Marriage and the Family 45:633-644.
Szinovacz, Maximiliane (1987) Family Power. In Marvin B. Sussman and Suzanne K. Steinmetz (eds.) Handbook of Marriage and the Family. New York: Plenum Press.
Szinovacz, Maximiliane E. And Lance C. Egley (1995) Comparing One-Partner Couple Data on Sensitive Marital Behaviors: The Case of Marital Violence.Journal of Marriage and the Family 57: 995-1100.
Teachman, Jay D., Karen Carver, And Randal Day(1995)A Model For the Analysis of Paired Data. Journal of Marriage and the Family 57:1011-1024.
Thomson, Elizabeth and Richard Williams (1982) Beyond Wives’ Family Sociology: A Method for Analyzing Couple Data. Journal of Marriage and the Family 44：999-1008.
Thomson, Linda and Alexis J.Walker (1982) The Dyad as the Unit of Analysis: Conceptual and Methodological Issues. Journal of Marriage and the Family 44:889-900
Thomson, Elizabeth, Elaine McDonald and Larry L. Bumpass (1990) Fertility Desires and Fertility: Hers, His and Theirs. Demography 273(4):579-588.
Tichenor, V.J. (1999) Status and Income as gendered resources: the case of marital power. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 61(3): 638-650.
Vanes, J. C. AND P. M. Shingi (1972) Response Consistency of Husband and Wife for Selected Attitudinal Items. Journal of Marriage and the Family 34(4): 741-749.
Vanfossen, Beth and Frances Rothstein(1997)The Impact of Development,the Commercialization of Agriculture, and Economic Dependency on Women’s Participation in Agricultural Production. The International Journal of Sociology and Social Policy 17:116-161.
Walker, A.J. (1996) Couples watching television: gender, power and the remote control. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 58(4): 813-823.
Warner, R.L. , G. R. Lee and J. Lee (1986) Social Organization, Spousal resources and Marital Power: A Cross Cultural Study. Journal of Marriage and the Family 48 (1):121-128.
Wolf，Diane Lauren (1992) Factory Daughtors－Gender，Household Dynamics，and Rural Industrialization in Java.University of California Press，Ltd.
Yi, Chin-Chun and Wen Shan Yang (1995) The Perceives Conflict and Decision Making Patterns among Husbands and Wives in Taiwan. Pp.129-168 in Family Formation and Dissolution: Perspectives from East and West.Taipei：Academia Sinica.
Yi, Chin-Chun(2000)The Transition of Family Structure and Female''s Domestic Status in Taiwan. Pp.227-250 in National Science Council, Taipei, Boon Office (ed.), Conference Prague 1999, Transitional Societies in Comparison: East Central Europe vs. Taiwan, Frankfurt: Peter Lang.
Yi, Chin-Chun and Yu-Hua Chen (2001) Developing More Equal Relations Within the Household: A Comparison of Taiwan and China," paper presented at Globalization and Its Challenges in the 21st Century, International Studies Association. Hong Kong.