跳到主要內容

臺灣博碩士論文加值系統

(44.192.94.177) 您好!臺灣時間:2024/07/21 19:53
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:Mohammad Gusnaldi Putra
研究生(外文):MOHAMMAD
論文名稱:頭巾的認知:台灣多元文化態度的個案研究
論文名稱(外文):The Perception of Hijabs: A Case Study on Multicultural Attitude in Taiwan
指導教授:張智惠張智惠引用關係
指導教授(外文):CHANG CHIH-HUI
口試委員:陳建志鄧佳恩
口試委員(外文):CHRIS C.C. CHENCHIA-EN TENG
口試日期:2024-01-30
學位類別:碩士
校院名稱:大葉大學
系所名稱:英語學系碩士班
學門:人文學門
學類:外國語文學類
論文種類:學術論文
論文出版年:2024
畢業學年度:112
語文別:英文
論文頁數:119
中文關鍵詞:頭巾
外文關鍵詞:hijabs
相關次數:
  • 被引用被引用:0
  • 點閱點閱:22
  • 評分評分:
  • 下載下載:3
  • 收藏至我的研究室書目清單書目收藏:0
中文摘要

這項研究的主題是頭巾的感知台灣多元文化態度的個案研究。本 研究的目的是了解台灣人對頭巾的看法。台灣從單一民族到多元 民族的轉變,經常與憲法愛國主義以及國家認同的問題相關,因 此常被視為對基於漢族中國文化的傳統文化政策構成威脅(王麗榮,2003)。當前研究旨在調查人們對於外來文化中頭巾的看法。研 究方法為質性研究。研究工具包括問卷調查(隨機的Google調查)和開放式問題。問卷包括背景問題和五點李克特量表的問題。開放式問題使用案例研究方法進行分析。本研究的參與者204名來自不同背景的台灣人。在204名回應者中,110名(53.9%)為女性,94名(46.1%)為男性。大多數參與者信奉道教/佛教,共116人(56.9%)。年齡範圍在16至46歲之間。就教育層次而言,大部分為本科學生。本研究的自變量包括宗教、性別、年齡組別及受教育背景。

關鍵詞:宗教、文化、頭巾、多元文化態度、刻板印象、性別、教育背景

ABSTRACT

The topic of this study is “The Perception of Hijabs: A Case Study on Multicultural Attitude in Taiwan”. The purpose of this study is to find out people in Taiwan whose perception of Hijabs. The change of Taiwan from a mono-ethnic to multi-ethnic is often related to “constitutional patriotism” and to the question of the national identity and has thus often been seen as posing a threat to a traditional cultural policy based on the Han-Chinese culture (Wang, 2003). The present study is aimed to investigate people’s perception towards one of the foreign culture hijabs. The research method were qualitative. The research instruments were questionnaire (Google survey) and open ended question. The questionnaire includes background questions and questions on five-point Likert scale. The open-ended question is analyzed. Participants in this study were 204 Taiwanese people with different backgrounds. Among 204 respondents, 110 (53.9 %) are females, while 94 (46.1%) are male. Most of the participants are Taoist/Buddhism, 116 (56.9 %). The range of age groups is between 16 and 46. As for educational groups, most of them are of undergraduate. The independent variables in this study are religion, gender, age group, and education level.

Keywords: Religion, culture, hijabs, multicultural attitude, stereotype, gender, education background

TABLE OF CONTENTS

COVER PAGE
SIGNATURE PAGE
ABSTRACT i
中文摘要 ii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS iii
TABLE OF CONTENTS iv
LIST OF TABLES vii
CHAPTER I. INTRODUCTION 1
1.1 Background and Motivation of the Study 1
1.1.1 The Culture of Taiwan 1
1.2 Significance of the Study 3
1.3 Purpose of the Study 3
1.4 Research Questions 4
1.5 Definition of Specific Terminology in the Research 4
1.6 Organization of The Study 6
CHAPTER II. LITERATURE REVIEW 8
2.1 Introduction 8
2.2 Culture and Religion 9
2.2.1 Definition of Culture 10
2.2.2 Definition of Religion 12
2.2.2.1 Islam 14
2.3 Hijabs 16
2.4 Cross-Culture Communication 19
2.4.1 High-Context Communication 21
2.4.2 Low - Context Communication 24
2.5 Stereotype Image 26
2.5.1 Stereotype Image of Religion Towards Hijabs 28
2.5.2 Stereotype Image of Gender Towards Hijabs 30
2.5.3 Stereotype Image of Educational Background towards Hijabs 31
2.5.4 Stereotype Image of Age Group Towards Hijabs 32
2.6 Summary 34
CHAPTER III. METHODOLOGY 35
3.1 Survey Research Methods 35
3.2 Case Study Approach 35
3.3 Design of the Current Study 36
3.3.1 Realibility and Validity of the Questions 37
3.3.2 Data Collection Procedure 38
3.3.3 The Research Participants 38
3.4 Data Analysis 41
CHAPTER IV. ANALYSIS AND RESULTS 42
4.1 Data Analysis 42
4.1.1 Survey of the Current Study 43
4.1.1.1 Significant Relationship between Religion and Questions 45
4.1.1.2 Significant Relationship between Gender and Questions(Q1-Q10) 58
4.1.1.3 Significant Relationship between Age Group and Questions (Q1-Q10) 70
4.1.1.4 Significant Relationship between Level of Education and Questions (Q1-Q10) 82
4.1.2 Discussion on first impression of participants toward women with hijabs 95
4.2 Results 96
CHAPTER V、CONCLUSIONS 101
5.1 The Purpose of the Study 101
5.2 Research Method 101
5.3 Findings 101
5.4 Implications from the study 103
5.5 Limitations of the study 103
Appendix A: A Survey on Hijab Perception’s questionnaire 111
Appendix B: Test of Validity and Realibility 117



LIST OF TABLES
Table 3.1 Table of Data Validity 37
Table 3.2 Table of Data Reliability 38
Table 3.3 Percentage of Participants’ Gender 39
Table 3.4 Percentage of Participants’ Religion 39
Table 3.5 Age Group of Participants 40
Table 3.6 Education Level of Participants 40
Table 4.1 Frequency and Intensity Classification Table 43
Table 4.2 Relationship between Religion and Q1 45
Table 4.3 Relationship of Significance between Religion and Q1 46
Table 4.4 Relationship between Religion and Q2 46
Table 4.5 Relationship of Significance between Religion and Q2 47
Table 4.6 Relationship between Religion and Q3 47
Table 4.7 Relationship of significance between Religion and Q3 48
Table 4.8 Relationship between Religion and Q4 48
Table 4.9 Relationship of significance between Religion and Q4 49
Table 4.10 Relationship between Religion and Q5 ……………………………… 50
Table 4.11 Relationship of significance between Religion and Q5 50
Table 4.12 Relationship between Religion and Q6 51
Table 4.13 Relationship of significance between Religion and Q6 52
Table 4.14 Relationship between Religion and Q7 52
Table 4.15 Relationship of significance between Religion and Q7 53
Table 4.16 Relationship between Religion and Q8 54
Table 4.17 Relationship of significance between religion and Q8 54
Table 4.19 Relationship of significance between Religion and Q9 56
Table 4.20 Relationship between Religion and Q10 57
Table 4.21 Relationship of significance between Religion and Q10 57
Table 4.22 a significant value relationship between religion and all questions. 58
Table 4.23 Relationship of significance between Gender and Q1 59
Table 4.24 Relationship of significance between Gender and Q1. 59
Table 4.25 Relationship between Gender and Q2. 60
Table 4.26 Relationship of significance between Gender and Q2.. 60
Table 4.27 Relationship between Gender and Q3. 61
Table 4.28 Relationship of significance between Gender and Q3. 61
Table 4.29 Relationship between Gender and Q4 .......................................................62
Table 4.30 Relationship of significance between Gender and Q4 . 62
Table 4.31 Relationship between Gender and Q5 .......................................................63
Table 4.32 Relationship of significance between Gender and Q5. 63
Table 4.33 Relationship between Gender and Q6. 64
Table 4.34 Relationship of significance between Gender and Q6 . 65
Table 4.35 Relationship between Gender and Q7 65
Table 4.36 Relationship of significance between gender and Q7. 66
Tabl 4.37Relationship between Gender and Q8 66
Table 4.38 Relationship of significance Between Gender and Q8 67
Table 4.39 Relationship between Gender and Q9 67
Table 4.40 Relationship of significance between Gender and Q9 68
Table 4.41 Relationship between Gender and Q10 .....................................................68
Table 4.42 Relationship of significance between Gender and Q10 69
Table 4.43 Table of summary result of the question. 69
Table 4.44 Relationship between Age Group and Q1 70
Table 4.45 Relationship of Significance between Age Group and Q1. 70
Table 4.46 Relationship between Age Group and Q2 . 71
Table 4.47 Relationship of significance between Age Group and Q2. 71
Table 4.48 Relationship between Age Group and Q3. 72
Table 4.49 Relationship of significance between Age Group and Q3 72
Table 4.50 Relationship between Age Group and Q4 73
Table 4.51 Relationship of significance between Age Group and Q4 73
Table 4.52 Relationship between Age Group and Q5. 74
Table 4.53 Relationship of significance between Age Group and Q5 75
Table 4.54 Relationship between Age Group and Q6. 75
Table 4.55 Relationship of significance between Age Group and Q6. 76
Table 4.56 Relationship between Age Group and Q7 76
Table 4.57 Relationship of significance between Age Group and Q7. 77
Table 4.58 Relationship between Age Group and Q8 78
Table 4.59 Relationship of significance between Age Group and Q8 78
Table 4.60 Relationship between Age Group and Q9 79
Table 4.61 Relationship of significance between Age Group and Q9 79
Table 4.62 Relationship between Age Group and Q10 80
Table 4.63 Relationship of significance between Age Group and Q10 80
Table 4.64 a significant value relationship between Age Group and all questions. 81
Table 4.65 Relationship between Level of Education and Q1. 82
Table 4.66 Relationship of Significance between Level of Education and Q1 83
Table 4.67 Relationship between Level of Education and Q2 83
Table 4.68 Relationship of significance between Level of Education and Q2 84
Table 4.69 Relationship between Level of Education and Q3 84
Table 4.70 Relationship of significance between Level of Education and Q3 85
Table 4.71 Relationship between Level of Education and Q4 85
Table 4.72 Relationship of significance between Age Group and Q4 86
Table 4.73 Relationship between Level of Education and Q5 87
Table 4.74 Relationship of significance between Level of Education and Q5 87
Table 4.75 Relationship between level of education and Q6 88
Table 4.76 Relationship of significance between Level of Education and Q6 89
Table 4.77 Relationship between Level of Education and Q7 89
Table 4.78 Relationship of significance between Age Group and Q7 90
Table 4.79 Relationship between Level of Education and Q8 90
Table 4.80 Relationship of significance between Level of Education and Q8. 91
Table 4.81 Relationship between Level of Education and Q9 92
Table 4.82 Relationship of significance between Level of Education and Q9 92
Table 4.83 Relationship between Level of Education and Q10 93
Table 4.84 Relationship of significance between Level of Education and Q10 93
Table 4.85 Table of summary result of the question 94
Table 4.86 the mapping of the participants’s first impressions 96









REFERENCES
Abu-Lughod, L. (2015). Do Muslim women need saving? (Vol. 15). SAGE Publications Sage UK: London, England.
Aliaga, M., & Gunderson, B. (2005). Interactive Statistics Student Solutions Manual TI-83 Plus/Silver Edition Manual. Addison Wesley Publishing Company Incorporated.
Alizadeh, O. (2021). Humanitarian behavior across high-/low-context cultures: a comparative analysis between Switzerland and Colombia. Journal of International Humanitarian Action, 6(1), 1–10.
Adler, N. J., Doktor, R., & Redding, S. G. (1986). From the Atlantic to the Pacific century: Cross-cultural management reviewed. Journal of Management, 12(2), 295-318.
Banks, James A. and McGee-Banks, C.A. (1989) Multicultural Education: Issues and Perspectives. Toronto: Allyn & Bacon, 1989.
Boli, J., & Elliott, M. A. (2008). Façade diversity: The individualization of cultural difference. International Sociology, 23(4), 540–560.
Brah, A., & Phoenix, A. (2004). Ain’t I am woman? Revisiting intersectionality. Journal of International Women Studies, 5(3), 75–86
Bosacki, Sandra Leanne. 2005. “Religiosity in Children and Youth: Psychoeducational Approaches.” Comprehensive handbook of multicultural school psychology, 611–50.
Bullock, K. (2002). Rethinking Muslim women and the veil: Challenging historical & modern stereotypes. IIIT.
Chakravorty, M. (2014). In stereotype: South Asia in the global literary imaginary. Columbia University Press.
Chang, H. (2016). Autoethnography as method (Vol. 1). Routledge.
Colzato, L. S., van Beest, I., van den Wildenberg, W. P. M., Scorolli, C., Dorchin, S., Meiran, N., Hommel, B. (2010). God: Do I have your attention? Cognition, 117(1), 87–94.
Dandy, J., & Pe-Pua, R. (2010). Attitudes to multiculturalism, immigration and cultural diversity: Comparison of dominant and non-dominant groups in three Australian states. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 34(1), 34–46.
Doyon, J. K., Hajnal, A., Surber, T., Clark, J. D., & Kelty-Stephen, D. G. (2019). Multifractality of posture modulates multisensory perception of stand-on-ability. PloS One, 14(2), e0212220.
Dudley, J. R. (2016). Spirituality Matters in Social Work. Spirituality Matters in Social Work. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315797144
Eagly, A. H., & Chaiken, S. (2007). The advantages of an inclusive definition of attitude. Social Cognition, 25(5), 582–602.
Efron, R. (1969). What is perception? In Proceedings of the Boston Colloquium for the Philosophy of Science 1966/1968 (pp. 137–173). Springer.
Esposito, J. L. (1999). The oxford history of Islam. Oxford University Press.
Ferdman, B. M. (2017). Paradoxes of inclusion: Understanding and managing the tensions of diversity and multiculturalism. The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 53(2), 235–263.
Foucault, M. (2013). Religion and culture. Routledge.
Fowler Jr, F. J. (2014). The problem with survey research. SAGE Publications Sage CA: Los Angeles, CA.
Fromkin, D. (2007). Europe’s last summer: who started the Great War in 1914? Vintage.
Galbraith, J. K. (1997). The good society: the human agenda. HMH.
Geertz, C. (1991). The year of living culturally. New Republic, 205(17), 30–36.
Geertz, C. (2000). The interpretation of cultures (1973). New York: Basic.
Gudykunst, W. B., Matsumoto, Y., Ting-Toomey, S., Nishida, T., Kim, K., & Heyman, S. (1996). The influence of cultural individualism-collectivism, self-construals, and individual values on communication styles across cultures. Human Communication Research, 22(4), 510-543.
Hall, E.T. (1976). Beyond culture. Garden City, NY: Anchor Books, Doubleday.
Hall, E. T., & Whyte, W. F. (1960). Intercultural communication: A guide to men of action. Human Organization, 19(1), 5-12.
Hofstede, G. (1980). Culture and organizations. International Studies of Management & Organization, 10(4), 15–41.
Hofstede, G. (2001). Culture's Consequences: Comparing Values, Behaviors, Institutions, and Organizations Across Nations. Sage Publications.
Hoft, Nancy. (1999). “Global Issues, Local Concerns.” Technical communication, 46(2): 145.
Hurn, B. J., & Tomalin, B. (2013). Cross-Cultural Communication: Theory and Practice. Palgrave Macmillan.
Itoh, Y. (1991). Socio-cultural backgrounds of Japanese interpersonal communication style. Civilisations, (39), 101–128. https://doi.org/10.4000/civilisations.1652
Jain, S. (2014). Religion & its role and function in international law. Available at SSRN 2462687.
Kassin, S., Fein, S., & Markus, H. R. (2020). Social Psychology. Cengage Learning.
Khadka, J., Gothwal, V. K., McAlinden, C., Lamoureux, E. L., & Pesudovs, K. (2012). The importance of rating scales in measuring patient-reported outcomes. Health and Quality of Life Outcomes, 10(1), 1. https://doi.org/10.1186/1477-7525-10-80
Korol, L., Fietzer, A. W., & Ponterotto, J. G. (2018). The relationship between multicultural personality, intergroup contact, and positive outgroup attitudes toward Asian Americans. Asian American Journal of Psychology, 9(3), 200.
Krause, N., Ellison, C. G., Shaw, B. A., Marcum, J. P., & Boardman, J. D. (2001). Church-based social support and religious coping. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 40, 637– 656. doi:10.1111/0021-8294 .00082
Kroeber, A. L., & Kluckhohn, C. (1952). Culture: A critical review of concepts and definitions. Papers. Peabody Museum of Archaeology & Ethnology, Harvard University.
Leavy, P. (2017). Research design: Quantitative, qualitative, mixed methods, arts-based, and community-based participatory research approaches. Guilford Publications.
Leedy, P. D., & Ormrod, J. E. (1980). Practical research. Macmillan New York.
Li, C. N., & Thompson, S. A. (1989). Mandarin Chinese: A functional reference grammar. Univ of California Press.
Litchmore, R. V. H., & Safdar, S. (2016). Meanings of the hijab: Views of Canadian Muslim women. Asian Journal of Social Psychology, 19(3), 198–208.
Macrae, C. N., Stangor, C., & Hewstone, M. (1996). Stereotypes and stereotyping. Guilford Press.
Madani, M. I. M. (1996). Hijab: The Islamic Commandments of Hijab. Al Saadawi Publications.
Matsumoto, D., Kudoh, T., & Takeuchi, S. (1996). Changing patterns of individualism and collectivism in the United States and Japan. Culture & Psychology, 2(1), 77-107.
Mir, S. (2014). Muslim American Women on Campus: Undergraduate Social Life and Identity. The University of North Carolina Press.
Morgan, David. (2010). “Religion and Material Culture.” The Matter of Belief.
Mujtaba, B. G., & Balboa, A. (2009). Comparing Filipino and American task and relationship orientations. Journal of Applied Management and Entrepreneurship, 14(2), 82.
Myers, A., & Hansen, C. (2006). Experimental psychology. Thomson Wadsworth.
Pazhoohi, F., & Burriss, R. P. (2016). Hijab and “hitchhiking”: A field study. Evolutionary Psychological Science, 2(1), 32–37.
Pitts-Taylor, V. (2008). Cultural Encyclopedia of the Body. Bloomsbury Publishing USA.
Rassool, C. (2000). The rise of heritage and the reconstitution of history in South Africa. Kronos: Journal of Cape History, 26(1), 1–21.
Riessman, C. K. (1993). Narrative Analysis. SAGE Publications.
Salleh, L. M. (2005). High/low context communication: The Malaysian Malay style. In Proceedings of the 2005 Association for Business Communication Annual Convention (Vol. 111). Association for Business Communication Irvine, CA.
Schutz, W. C. (1958). FIRO: A three-dimensional theory of interpersonal behavior.
Scott, J. W. (2007). The Politics of the Veil. Princeton University Press.
Shrigley, R. L., Koballa Jr, T. R., & Simpson, R. D. (1988). Defining attitude for science educators. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 25(8), 659–678.
Swanborn, P. (2010). Case study research: What, why and how? Case Study Research, 1–192.
Tajfel, H. (1978). Differentiation between social groups: Studies in the social psychology of intergroup relations. London: Academic Press.
Thijs, J., & Verkuyten, M. (2013). Multiculturalism in the classroom: Ethnic attitudes and classmates’ beliefs. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 37(2), 176–187.
Thomas, D. R. (2017). Feedback from research participants: are member checks useful in qualitative research? Qualitative Research in Psychology, 14(1), 23–41.
Ting-Toomey, S., & Chung, L. C. (2005). Understanding intercultural communication. Oxford University Press New York.
Verkuyten, M. (2007). Religious group identification and inter-religious relations: A study among Turkish-Dutch Muslims. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 10(3), 341–357.
Victor, C. G., & Treschuk, J. V. (2020). Critical literature review on the definition clarity of the concept of faith, religion, and spirituality. Journal of Holistic Nursing, 38(1), 107–113.
Vogt, W. P., Gardner, D. C., Haeffele, L. M., & Vogt, E. R. (2014). Selecting the right analyses for your data: Quantitative, qualitative, and mixed methods. Guilford Publications.
Wang, Li-Jung (2003) Towards multiculturalism?: identity, difference and citizenship in cultural policy in Taiwan (1949-2002). PhD thesis, University of Warwick.
Wellman Jr, J., Corcoran, K., & Stockly, K. (2020). High on God: how Megachurches won the heart of America. Oxford University Press.
Williams, R. H., & Vashi, G. (2007). Hijab and American Muslim women: Creating the space for autonomous selves. Sociology of Religion, 68(3), 269–287.
Winckler, E. A. (1994). Cultural policy on postwar Taiwan. In Cultural change in postwar Taiwan (pp. 22-46).
Yip, G. S. (2004). Using strategy to change your business model. Business Strategy Review, 15(2), 17-24.
Yoshino, K. (2006). Covering: The Hidden Assault on Our Civil Rights. Random House.


QRCODE
 
 
 
 
 
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               
第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁 top