跳到主要內容

臺灣博碩士論文加值系統

(18.97.9.172) 您好!臺灣時間:2025/02/10 02:37
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:蔡仲雯
研究生(外文):TSAI, CHUNG-WEN
論文名稱:手足結構對於青少年偏差行為之關聯性探討
論文名稱(外文):The influence of sibling structure on adolescent delinquency
指導教授:陳易甫陳易甫引用關係
指導教授(外文):CHEN, YI-FU
口試委員:戴翠莪馬國勳
口試委員(外文):TAI, TSUI-OMA, KUO-HSUN
口試日期:2019-07-11
學位類別:碩士
校院名稱:國立臺北大學
系所名稱:社會學系
學門:社會及行為科學學門
學類:社會學類
論文種類:學術論文
論文出版年:2019
畢業學年度:107
語文別:中文
論文頁數:55
中文關鍵詞:手足手足結構青少年偏差行為出生排行序
外文關鍵詞:siblingadolescent delinquencysibling structurebirth order
相關次數:
  • 被引用被引用:0
  • 點閱點閱:465
  • 評分評分:
  • 下載下載:30
  • 收藏至我的研究室書目清單書目收藏:2
本研究主要目的在於探討手足結構對於青少年偏差行為之影響與關聯性。在探討家庭與青少年偏差行為相關研究中,大部分學者都將焦點放在父母對於青少年偏差行為之討論,而忽略了手足對於青少年影響的重要性。因此本研究試圖與以往談論家庭對於青少年偏差行為的重心不同,而是將焦點放在手足對於青少年之影響,以期建構一個更加完整的架構來解釋家庭與青少年偏差行為之關聯性。本研究資料是以「台灣教育長期追蹤資料庫」(Taiwan Education Panel Survey,簡稱TEPS)2005年第三波調查之學生與家長問卷,研究對象為台灣地區94學年度就讀高中、高職、五專二年級之學生(N=12,643),並運用多元迴歸分析方式進行資料處理。
研究發現將青少年性別進行區分後,對於男性青少年而言,身為獨生子和長子的保護作用最大,其偏差行為程度相較於有年長手足之青少年來得低。而對於女性青少年而言,若是身為家中的長女,其偏差行為程度與身為妹妹者相比則會來得低,對於女性青少年而言,身為長女的保護效果最大。
當考慮到出生序與性別時,對於男性青少年而言,可以知道哥哥姊姊都有的青少年其偏差行為相較於長子而言來得更偏差,而將年長手足區分性別之後,受限於資料的收集,較無法解釋性別與出生序的影響力。不過對於女性青少年而言,有姊姊之女性青少年其相較於長女而言,其偏差行為更加的明顯。這表示對於女性青少年而言,她們的行為受到姊姊的影響很大。



Previous studies have focused on how peers and family influence adolescent delinquency. Here, researchers have emphasized the importance of parental influences. Parents exert influence through both modeling and parenting. On the other hand, previous studies on peer influence have consistently demonstrated that youths who affiliate with deviant peers tend to adopt their delinquency through the social learning process. However, most of these studies have ignored the influence of other family members, especially siblings. This is a notable omission since siblings are the second closest members (next to parents) to youths in the family context. Siblings are also the first peers to these youths. Because previous studies have not investigated the importance of this intersection, this study explored the influence of siblings on adolescent delinquency. This research therefore proposed a sibling structure concept consisting of two version of conceptualization. The first version involves a delinquency comparison between only children and children with siblings. This demonstrates how being an only child affects adolescent delinquency. The second version involves a consideration of birth order when children have one or more siblings. Here, there are three categories (i.e., only child, child with older siblings, and child with younger siblings). This study thus expanded on the traditional dichotomous view of the sibling effect to further our understanding of adolescent research. This study’s data were taken from the Taiwan Education Panel Study (TEPS) (a large panel study in Taiwan). Specifically, the fourth-wave dataset was used because it contained sibling-related measurements. These data were collected from eleventh-grade students and their parents. The final analytic sample contained 12,643 adolescents after list-wise deletion. Multiple regression models were then used to test the effects of sibling structure. Analyses were separately conducted according to sex to explore any relevant differences in these effects. Results indicated no significant difference in adolescent delinquency between only children and those with siblings. However, the delinquency levels of non-first-born children were higher than those of first born and only children when birth order was considered. The sex-based analysis indicated that being an only child and first- born played a protective factor for males. In addition, having siblings resulted in more deviance than being an only child. In regard to birth order, the delinquency levels of older children were lower than those of non-first-born children. For female adolescents, there were different results. That is, being an only child had no effect on adolescent delinquency in this context. However, the delinquency levels of first-born adolescents were lower than those of non-first-born adolescents when birth order was considered. There was no significant difference between being an only child and being a non-fist-born child for female adolescents. Lastly, older sisters generally had higher levels of delinquency for female adolescents.


壹、 動機與前言 1
貳、 文獻回顧 5
第一節 偏差行為在台灣青少年的情況 5
第二節 影響偏差行為的原因 8
(一) 家庭因素影響 8
(二) 同儕影響 10
(三) 同儕框架中,手足的影響 11
第三節 手足結構與偏差行為之關聯 13
(一) 手足結構為何? 13
(二) 手足樣態的相關討論及文獻 14
參、 資料分析與統計方法 19
第一節 資料來源 19
第二節 分析策略 21
第三節 變項說明 22
(一) 依變項:青少年偏差行為 22
(二) 自變項:手足結構 22
(三) 控制變項 25
第四節 研究架構及假設 27
肆、 研究結果分析 28
第一節 描述性統計 28
第二節 手足結構與青少年偏差行為之相關性 30
第三節 迴歸分析結果 32
伍、 結論與討論 40
第一節 年長手足與青少年之關係 40
第二節 不同性別之青少年,手足樣態的組成與其偏差行為之關聯性 42
陸、 研究貢獻與限制 46
參考文獻 48

中文
大紀元(2001)。管教不嚴、過于溺愛致獨生子女犯罪率高于非獨生子女。2001年6月8日,取自http://www.epochtimes.com/b5/1/6/8/n96775.htm。

大紀元(2008)。計劃生育政策降低中國的人口素質。2008年5月22日,取自http://www.epochtimes.com/b5/8/5/22/n2126380.htm。

台灣自殺防治中心(2017):民國83年至106年全國自殺死亡趨勢。台北市:台灣自殺防治中心

吳武典. (1997). 國中偏差行爲學生學校生活適應之探討. 教育心理學報, (29), 25-49.

吳齊殷, & 李文傑. (2001). 青少年友誼網絡的特質與變遷: 長期追蹤研究. 發表於中央研究院社會學研究所主辦之 [青少年生命力成與生活調適] 研討會, 28-29.

周愫嫻. (1995). 正式與非正式社會控制對青少年偏差行為的嚇阻效果. 犯罪學期刊, (1), 31-50.

周新富. (2006). Coleman 社會資本理論在臺灣地區的驗證. 當代教育研究.

周震歐, & 趙碧華. (1996). 青少年逃學逃家行為的社會心理因素分析. 犯罪學期刊, (2), 79-98.

李美枝, & 鐘秋玉. (1996). 性別與性別角色析論. 本土心理學研究, (6), 260-299.

李文傑, & 吳齊殷. (2004). 棒打出壞子?: 青少年暴力行為的連結機制. Taiwanese Sociology, (7), 1-46.

林青瑩. (1999). 青少年偏差行為的家庭因素之分析研究. 公民訓育學報, (8), 409-455.

林朝夫. (1993). 偏差行為輔導與個案研究.

邱震寰, 郭千哲, 陳喬琪, 李明濱, 林俊宏, 林純綺, & 黃蒂. (2004). 自殺企圖者之流行病學特徵. 北市醫學雜誌, 1(2), 200-207.

侯崇文(2000)。青少年偏差行為─社會控制理論與社會學習理論的整合。犯罪學期刊,6,35-62。

侯崇文. (1996). 巨視社會控制, 微視社會控制與青少年犯罪. 犯罪學期刊, (2), 15-48.

侯崇文. (2001). 家庭結構, 家庭關係與青少年偏差行為探討. 應用心理研究, 11, 25-43.

張春興. (1996)。教育心理學。台北, 東華。

張楓明、譚子文(2011)。個人信念,負向生活事件,偏差同儕與青少年初次偏差行為關聯性之實證研究。青少年犯罪防治研究期刊,3(1),133-159。

陳羿足, & 董旭英. (2002). 探討家庭因素與青少年偏差行為之關聯性--重新思考 [家庭氣氛] 的測量內涵及建構一個家庭解釋模型的新方向.

劉珠利. (2005). 台灣年輕女性性別角色特質之研究-以高中高職畢 (肄) 業女性為例. 東吳社會工作學報, (13), 45-84.

陳慧如. (2004). 自我控制, 青少年自我中心與偏差行為之關係. 成功大學教育研究所學位論文, 1-117.

黃俊傑, & 王淑女. (2001). 家庭, 自我概念與青少年偏差行為. 應用心理研究, (11), 45-68.

廖經台. (2002). 影響青少年偏差行為的家庭因素分析. 社會科學學報,(1), 29-41.

衛生署 (2018):2104年高中高職五專學生健康行為調查報告。台北市:衛生署。

衛生福利部國民健康署(2018):民國106年青少年吸菸行為調查。台北市:衛生福利部國民健康署。

嬰兒&母親(2010)。啟動「獨生子女」風潮。2010年9月28日,取自https://www.mababy.com/knowledge-detail?id=660。

譚子文, & 范書菁. (2010). 依附關係, 參與傳統活動, 社會緊張因素與台灣地區青少年外向性偏差行為及內向性偏差行為關聯性之研究. 輔導與諮商學報, 32(1), 17-42.

譚子文、張楓明(2013a)。依附關係、低自我控制及接觸偏差同儕與青少年偏差行為關係之研究。當代教育研究季刊,21(4),81-120。

譚子文、張楓明(2013b)。依附關係、低自我控制與青少年偏差行為關聯性之研究。
中華輔導與諮商學報,36,67-90。

Jannan, M., & 林碧清. (2011). 只能被欺負嗎? 零霸凌, 這樣做就對了!. 台北市: 推守文化創意.


英文
Ardelt, M., & Day, L. (2002). Parents, siblings, and peers: Close social relationships and adolescent deviance. The Journal of Early Adolescence, 22(3), 310-349.

Bandura, A. (1978). Social learning theory of aggression. Journal of communication, 28(3), 12-29.

Barnes, G. M., Hoffman, J. H., Welte, J. W., Farrell, M. P., & Dintcheff, B. A. (2006). Effects of parental monitoring and peer deviance on substance use and delinquency. Journal of Marriage and Family, 68(4), 1084-1104.

Belmont, L., Stein, Z. A., & Wittes, J. T. (1976). Birth order, family size and school failure. Developmental Medicine & Child Neurology, 18(4), 421-430.

Blake, J. (1974). Can we believe recent data on birth expectations in the United States?. Demography, 11(1), 25-44.

Bourdieu, P., & Nice, R. (1977). Outline of a Theory of Practice(Vol. 16). Cambridge: Cambridge university press.

Brook, J. S., Brook, D. W., & Whiteman, M. (1999). Older sibling. correlates of younger sibling drug use in the context of parent- child relations. Genetic, Social, and General Psychology Monographs, 125, 451-468.

Brook, J. S., Whiteman, M., Gordon, A. S., & Brenden, C. (1983). Older. brother’s influence on young sibling’s drug use. Journal of Psychology, 114, 83-90.

Carlson, M. J., & Corcoran, M. E. (2001). Family structure and children’s behavioral and cognitive outcomes. Journal of Marriage and Family, 63(3), 779-792.

Clark, R. D., & Shields, G. (1997). Family communication and delinquency. Adolescence, 32(125), 81.

Coloroso, B. (2003). The bully, the bullied and the bystander.

Falbo, T., & Polit, D. F. (1986). Quantitative review of the only child literature: Research evidence and theory development. Psychological Bulletin, 100(2), 176.

Fenton, N. (1928). The only child. The Pedagogical Seminary and Journal of Genetic Psychology, 35(4), 546-556.

Gecas, V., & Seff, M. A. (1990). Families and adolescents: A review of the 1980s. Journal of Marriage and Family, 52(4), 941.

Hanusek, E. (1992). The trade-off between child quantity and quality. The Journal of Political Economy, 1, 84-117.

Huijsmans, T., Eichelsheim, V. I., Weerman, F., Branje, S. J., & Meeus, W. (2018). The Role of Siblings in Adolescent Delinquency Next to Parents, School, and Peers: Do Gender and Age Matter?. Journal of Developmental and Life-Course Criminology, 1-23.

Jang, S. J., & Thornberry, T. P. (1998). Self-esteem, delinquent peers, and delinquency: A test of the self-enhancement thesis. American Sociological Review, 586-598.

Jiao, S., Ji, G., Jing, Q., & Ching, C. C. (1986). Comparative study of behavioral qualities of only children and sibling children. Child Development, 357-361.

Lawson, T., & Heaton, T. (1999). Realist explanations of crime and deviance. In Crime and Deviance (pp. 138-161). Palgrave, London.

Rowe, D. C., & Farrington, D. P. (1997). The familial transmission of. criminal convictions. Criminology, 35, 177-201.

Rowe, D. C., & Gulley, B. L. (1992). Sibling effects on substance use and delinquency. Criminology, 30(2), 217-234.

Salmivalli, C. (1999). Participant role approach to school bullying: Implications for interventions. Journal of adolescence, 22(4), 453-459.

Slomkowski, C., Rende, R., Conger, K. J., Simons, R. L., & Conger, R. D. (2001). Sisters, brothers, and delinquency: Evaluating social influence during early and middle adolescence. Child Development, 72, 271-283.

Sutton, J., & Smith, P. K. (1999). Bullying as a group process: An adaptation of the participant role approach. Aggressive Behavior: Official Journal of the International Society for Research on Aggression, 25(2), 97-111.

Whiteman, S. D., McHale, S. M., & Soli, A. (2011). Theoretical perspectives on sibling relationships. Journal of family theory & review, 3(2), 124-139.

Yang, B., Ollendick, T. H., Dong, Q., Xia, Y., & Lin, L. (1995). Only children and children with siblings in the People's Republic of China: Levels of fear, anxiety, and depression. Child development, 66(5), 1301-1311.


QRCODE
 
 
 
 
 
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               
第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁 top