臺灣博碩士論文加值系統

在成就動機的研究中，華人向來被視為努力取向的群體，然而關於努力之具體內涵的實徵研究卻很少。反觀西方Carol Dweck之成就動機理論，其理論以「智力內隱理論」為主軸，提出個體會因相信智力本質觀或智力增進觀而引發不同的成就目標，並因此產生不同的歸因模式與學習策略。此以「智力概念」為核心的成就動機模式往往忽略了努力信念所扮演的角色，因此本研究目標之一在檢驗上述理論是否能夠適用於台灣地區青少年的學習模式；目標之二則為探討三種由華人文化而衍伸出之努力信念在成就動機模式中的角色。
本研究以台灣地區之998位國中學生、學業成就不同的兩組高中學生為樣本，分別以「失敗後的能力、努力歸因模式」及「自我設限、拖延閒混」等學習策略為效標變項，採用階層迴歸分析依序檢驗西方成就動機慣用之「智力本質觀」、「三種成就目標取向」之預測模式是否在華人區域的青少年中也能成立，結果發現本土樣本的結果與西方模式相距甚遠，而且有發展上的差異性。國中組的結果較符合西方模式的預測：本地國中生會因其智力本質觀的想法而將失敗歸因為能力不足，而非努力還不夠、且智力本質觀也會讓學生較有自我設限或拖延閒混的學習型態。而高中樣本的結果則較不符合西方模式的預測：僅有後區塊高中學生會因為智力本質觀的想法而傾向將失敗歸因為能力不足。
本研究接著探討「努力美德信念」、「努力永遠有用、成果沒有極限」、「努力本質觀」等三種本土努力信念，是否在排除了西方的概念之後，仍對與成就有關之青少年歸因、行為與情緒具預測力，結果發現本土的努力信念的確具有獨特的貢獻，且不同努力信念之角色不盡相同。「努力是美德」的信念能預測失敗後的低努力歸因；「努力永遠有用、成果沒有極限」的信念則不但能預測低努力歸因，也可以預測低能力歸因。而「努力本質觀」則是在控制西方預測變項後，仍可以預測中學生的自我設限傾向。
本研究結果顯示西方的成就動機模式不完全適用於本地不同年齡及學業成就的中學生，此外，對於努力信念的探討亦發現努力包含複雜的信念，在研究時須加以區分。

第一章 緒論
前言 1
西方成就動機模式 3
華人文化的成就目標 10
第二章 研究方法
受試者 18
測量工具 19
第三章 結果
分析流程 28
性別差異檢定結果 28
分析結果（一）：目標取向的分析結果 29
分析結果（二）：檢驗西方理論架構的分析結果 33
分析結果（三）：「努力信念」的分析結果 57
第四章 討論
智力／努力信念在失敗後歸因型態中的角色 71
智力／努力信念在自我設限與拖延閒混中的角色 78
努力信念在不努力產生罪惡感中的角色 82
華裔青少年的成就目標 83
研究限制與未來發展 85
徵引文獻 87

王素華（1998）。《情境因素、教師評語及歸因歷程在學童能力與努力覺知中所扮演的角色》（未發表之碩士論文）。台北：國立台灣大學心理學研究所。
孫亦君、蔣治邦（1994）。作業難度與回饋方式對歸因的影響。《中華心理學刊》，36，47-57。
黃光國（2001）。儒家關係主義與華人臉面觀的分析。台北：未發表。
Ames, C. (1992). Classrooms: Goals, structures, and student motivation. Journal of Educational Psychology, 84, 261-271.
Barker, G. P., & Graham, S. (1987). Developmental study of praise and blame as attributional cues. Journal of Educational Psychology, 79, 62-66.
Cole, D. A., Martin, J. M., Peeke, L. A., Seroczynski, A. D., & Fier, J. (1999). Children’s over- and underestimation of academic competence: A longitudinal study of gender difference, depression, and anxiety. Child Development, 70, 459-473.
Covington, M. V. (2000). Goal theory, motivation, and school achievement: An integrative review. Annual Review of Psychology, 51, 171-200.
Diner, C. I., & Dweck, C. S. (1978). An analysis of learned helplessness: Continuous change in performance, strategy, and achievement cognition following failure. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 36, 451-461.
Dweck, C. S. (1999). Self-theories: Their role in motivation, personality, and development. Philadelphia, PA: Psychology Press.
Dweck, C. S., & Leggett, E. L. (1988). A social-cognitive approach to motivation and personality. Psychological Review, 95, 256-273.
Elliot, A. J., & Harackiewicz, J. M. (1996). Approach and avoidance achievement goals and intrinsic motivation: A mediational analysis. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70, 968-980.
Elliott, J. G., & Bempechat, J. (2002). The culture and contexts of achievement motivation. In J. Bempechat and J. G. Elliott (eds.), Learning in culture and context: Approaching the comeplexities of achievement motivation in student learning (pp.7-26). San Francisco, CA: Wiley Periodicals.
Grant, H., & Dweck, C. S. (2001). Cross-cultural response to failure: Considering outcome attributions with different goals. In F. Salili, C. Chiu, & Y. Hong (Eds.), Student motivation: The culture and context of learning (pp.203-219). NY: Kluwer Academic / Plenum Publishers.
Hau, K., & Salili, F. (1993). Measurement of achievement attribution: A review of instigation methods, question contents, and measurement formats. Educational Psychology Review, 5, 377-422.
Hong, Y. (2001). Chinese students’ and teachers’ inferences of effort and ability. In F. Salili, C. Chiu, & Y. Hong (Eds.), Student motivation: The culture and context of learning (pp.105-112). New York: Kluwer Academic / Plenum Publishers.
Hong, Y., Chiu, C., & Dweck, C.S. (1995). Implicit theories of intelligence: Reconsidering the role of confidence in achievement motivation. In M. H. Kernis (Ed.), Efficacy, agency, and self-esteem (pp. 197-217). NY: Plenum Press.
Hong, Y., Chiu, C., Dweck, C. S., Lin, D. M., & Wan, W. (1999). Implicit theories, attributions, and coping: A meaning system approach. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 77, 588-599.
Kaplan, A., Middleton, M. J., Urdan, T., & Midgley, C. (2002). Achievement goals and goal structures. In C. Midgley (Ed.), Goals, goal structures, and patterns of adaptive learning (pp. 21-53). Mahwah, NJ: LEA Press.
Lay, K.-L. & Tseng, H.-Y. (2003, April). The effect of verbal disciplines in the context of school failure: Relationship-specific or content-specific? Paper presented at the biennial meeting of the Society for Research in Child Development, Tampa, Florida.
Li, J. (2002). Learning models in different cultures. In J. Bempechat and J. G. Elliott (eds.), Learning in culture and context: Approaching the comeplexities of achievement motivation in student learning (pp.45-63). San Francisco, CA: Wiley Periodicals.
Martin, A. J., Marsh, H. W., & Debus, R. L. (2001). Self-handicapping and defensive pessimism: Exploring a model of predictors and outcomes from a self-protection perspective. Journal of Educational Psychology, 93, 87-102.
Midgley, C.; Kaplan, A,; Middleton, M.; Maehr, M. L.; Urdan, T.; Anderman, L. H., Anderman, E.; & Roeser, R. (1998). The development and validation of scales assessing students'' achievement goal orientations. Comtemporary Educational Psychology, 23, 113-131.
Mueller, M., & Dweck, C. S., (1998). Praise for intelligence can undermine children’s motivation and performance. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 75, 33-52.
Nicholls, J. G. (1990). What is ability and why are we mindful of it? A developmental perspective. In R. Sternberg & J. Kolligian (Eds.), Competence considered (pp. 11-40). New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
Nicholls, J. G. (1984). Achievement motivation: Conceptions of ability, subjective experience, task choice, and performance. Psychological Review, 91, 328-346.
Nicholls, J. G., & Miller, A. T. (1984). Reasoning about the ability of self and others: A developmental study. Child Development, 55, 1990-1999.
Pomerantz, E. M., & Ruble, D. N. (1997). Distinguishing multiple dimensions of conceptions of ability: Implications for self evaluation. Child Development, 68, 1165-1180.
Pomerantz, E. M., & Saxon, J. L. (2001). Conceptions of ability as stable and self-evaluation process: A longitudinal examination. Child Development, 72, 152-173.
Salili, F., & Hau, T. (1994). The effect of teachers’ evaluative feedback on Chinese students’ perception of ability: A cultural and situational analysis. Educational studies, 20, 223-236.
Stevenson, H. W., Lee, S., Chen, C., Stigler, J., Hsu, C. C., & Kitamura, S. (1990). Contexts of achievement: A study of American, Chinese, and Japanese children. Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development, 55, (1-2).
Tweed, R. G., & Lehman, D. R. (2002). Learning considered within a culture context. American Psychologist, 57, 89-99.
Urdan, T. and Midgley, C. (2001) Academic self-handicapping: What we know, what more there is to learn. Educational Psychology Review, 13, 115-138.
Urdan, T., Ryan, A. M., Anderson, E. M., & Gheen, M. H. (2002). Goals, goal structures, and avoidance behaviors. In C. Midgley (Ed.), Goals, goal structures, and patterns of adaptive learning (pp. 55-83). Mahwah, NJ: LEA Press.
Wigfield, A., Eccles, J. S., Iver, D. M., Reuman, D. A., & Midgley, C. (1991). Transitions during early adolescence: Changes in children’s domain-specific self-perceptions and general self-esteem across the transition to Junior high school. Developmental Psychology, 27, 552-565.