Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://ah.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/110881
題名: 高齡退休人口幸福感之研究 - 以台北地區為例
Study of happiness of retired seniors - the case of Taipei area
作者: 李連達
貢獻者: 鄭宇庭
李連達
關鍵詞: 幸福指數
高齡人口
日期: 2017
上傳時間: 11-Jul-2017
摘要: 隨著醫療科技與技術日新月異的進步,死亡率大幅降低,高齡社會已然成為 台灣相當重要的議題之一,而政府亦相當積極地針對高齡社會提出各種方針與政 策,目的無非希望使高齡人口在日常生活起居能夠更自在與便利,使其對於生活 感到滿意與快樂。為了解此一族群之幸福感,本研究期望建立一幸福指數計分架 構,透過此架構,了解高齡族群幸福感之組成因素,與因素間之相關性。\n\n本研究之幸福指數架構,參考 OECD 每年針對會員國進行的美好生活指數 (Better Life Index)、台灣行政院主計處施行之國民幸福指數、與經濟日報針對 各縣市計算之縣市幸福指數,同時納入行政院提出之高齡人口政策方針面向,建 構一能夠以個人為計算單位之高齡退休人口幸福指數。\n\n高齡退休人口之幸福架構涵蓋三領域,財務領域、健康領域與生活品質領域。 本研究共收回 500 份問卷,三領域之平均得分分別為 69 分、82 分與 77 分,整 體之幸福指數總分,經加權平均後為 72 分。\n\n分析發現,財務領域、健康領域與生活品質領域,三領域間相互存在相關性, 學歷與年齡僅同時與財務領域得分與幸福指數總分存在相關性,與健康領域得分 和生活品質得分無顯著相關性,而年齡與生活品質之主觀滿意度存在相關性。
參考文獻: 一、中文文獻\n1. 中央研究院人文社會科學研究中心,2014。2014年主觀幸福感之研究,6 - 9,\n台北,行政院主計總處。\n2. 行政院主計總處,2014。2014年國民幸福指數年報,3-13,台北,行政院主\n計總處。\n3. 吳佩璇、蘇麗萍,2015。國民幸福指數統計結果與施政應用,國土及公共治\n理,3(1):92-100。\n4. 國家發展委員會,2015。人口政策白皮書-少子女化、高齡化及移民,23 - 33、\n101-115。\n5. 經濟日報幸福大未來,2016。縣市幸福指數大調查報告,網址:\nhttp://edn.udn.com/ACT/2016/happy/2016.pdf,上網日期:2016-09-30。\n6. 盧耀華、蘇貞瑛,2015。幸福指數的探討,科學發展,509 期,頁 12-14。\n二、英文文獻\n1. Campbell, A. (1976). Subjective measures of well-being. American, Psychologist, 31, 117-124.\n2. Campbell, A. (1981). The sense of nell-being in America. New York: McGraw-Hill.\n3. Diener, E. (1984). Subjective well-being, Psychological Bulletin, 95, 542-575. \n4. Diener, E. (1994). Assessing subjective well-being: Progress and opportunities,\nSocial Indicators Research, 31, 103-157.\n5. Diener, E. (2009). Introduction—The Science of Well-Being: Reviews and Theoretical Articles by Ed Diener. In E. Diener (Ed.), The Science of Well Being. (pp. 1-10). Netherlands: Springer Science+Business Media B.V.\n6. Diener, E., Diener, M., & Diener, C. (1994). Factors predicting the subjective well-being of nations. Manuscript submitted for publication.\n7. Diener, E., Sandvik, E., Seidlitz, L., & Diener, M. (1993). The relationship between income and subjective well-being: Relative or absolute? Social\nIndicators Research, 28, 195–223.\n8. Diener, E., Suh, E. M., Lucas, R. E., & Smith, H. L. (1999). Subjectivewell-\nbeing: Three decades of progress, Psychological Bulletin, 125, 276-302.\n9. Diener, E., Suh, E., Smith, H., & Shao, L. (in press). Nationai and cultural differences in reported well-being: Why do they occur? Social Indicators Research.\n10. Dolan, P., Peasgood, T. & White, M. (2008). Do we really know what makes us happy A review of the economic literature on the factors associated with subjective well-being, Journal of Economic Psychology, 29(1), pp. 94-122.\n11. Inglehart, R. (1990). Culture shift in advanced industrial society. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press\n12. Latten, J.J. (1989). Life-course and satisfaction, equal for every-one? Social Indicators Research, 21, 599-610.\n13. Myers, D. G., & Diener, E. (1995). Who is Happy? American Psychological Society, 6 ,10-17.\n14. OECD, (2015). How’s Life? 2015: Measuring Well-being, OECD Publishing, Paris.\n15. Ryff, C. D. (1989). Happiness is everything, or is it? Explorations on the meaning of psychological well-being. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 57, 1069–1081.\n16. Steptoe, A., Demakakos, P. Oliveira de, C. (2012). The psychological well-being, health and functioning of older people in England. In: Banks, J and Nazroo, J\nand Steptoe, A., (eds.) The dynamics of ageing: Evidence from the English Longitudinal Study of Ageing, 2002-10 (Wave 5), (98 - 182).\n17. Stock, W.A., Okun, M.A., Haring, M.J., & Witter, R.A. (1983). Age and subjective well-being: A meta-analysis. In R.J. Light (Ed.), Evaluation studies: Review annual (Vol. 8, 279-302). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
描述: 碩士
國立政治大學
企業管理研究所(MBA學位學程)
104363021
資料來源: http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0104363021
資料類型: thesis
Appears in Collections:學位論文

Show full item record

Google ScholarTM

Check


Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.