Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
https://ah.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/141373| 題名: | 台灣人個人與社會取向自我觀對其道德觀之影響 Study of how individual and social oriented self-views affect Taiwanese moral principle |
作者: | 彭韡 Peng, Wei |
貢獻者: | 黃傳永<br>傅如馨 Huang, Chuan-Yung<br>Fu, Ju-Hsin 彭韡 Peng, Wei |
關鍵詞: | 自我觀 道德基礎理論 Self-view Moral Foundation Theory |
日期: | 2022 | 上傳時間: | 1-Aug-2022 | 摘要: | 道德觀是人們在社會生活中，用以衡量是非對錯的準繩，不僅影響個體對政治議題的判斷，也體現在人們身處於世，如何評價自己與他人的行為表現。自我觀則是一個人如何看待自己以及自己與社會間的互動關係。是故，一個個體的道德觀，有很大的程度會受其自我觀影響。\n隨著全球化、自由化、民主化，過去數十年間台灣的社會環境有了重大的轉變，學者們認為，台灣人的與社會間的互動關係，從傳統農業社會的集體導向，變成揉雜了同時帶有西方工商社會色彩，以及傳統東方農業社會色彩的雙文化取向。\n為了研究當代台灣人的自我觀與道德觀，本研究募集了474位受試者，蒐集年齡、性別、政治傾向、國家認同、宗教背景及教育程度等基本資料，並進行個人／社會取向自我觀及道德基本原則量表的施測。迴歸分析的結果顯示，個體對不同道德基本原則的態度，會受到不同自我觀的影響，政治傾向是預測個體的自我觀、道德觀最佳的指標，年齡雖然無法用以作為區辨個體在自我觀上的傾向，卻同樣對預測個體的道德觀有顯著的貢獻。 Morality is the criterion individual used to distinguish right from wrong in social life, it not only affects individuals’ position on political issues, but also how individual evaluate their own and others’ behavior. Self-view is how a person sees himself/herself and the interactions between himself/herself and the society. Thus, an individual’s morality is often affected by its self-view.\nWith globalization, liberalization, and democratization, Taiwan has undergone significant changes in the past few decades. Scholars believe that the interaction within Taiwanese society has changed from the collective orientation of the traditional agricultural society to a dual cultural orientation with the western industrial and commercial society and the traditional eastern agricultural society.\nIn order to study the self-view and morality of contemporary Taiwanese, this study recruited 474 subjects, collected basic information such as age, gender, political inclination, national identity, religion and education level, and examined with Individual/Social Orientation Self-View Questionnaire, and the Moral Foundations Questionnaire. The results of regression analysis show that individuals` attitudes towards different moral foundation will be affected by different dimension of self- views. Political inclination is the best indicator for predicting an individual`s self-view and morality. Although age cannot be used to distinguish whether an individual’s self- view is more individual-oriented or social oriented. However, it makes a significant contribution to predicting an individual`s morality. |
參考文獻: | 危芷芬、黃光國（1998）。積極義務與消極義務：台美大學生道德判斷的文化比較研究。中華心理學刊，40，137-153。\n江昱明（2007）。華人社會中的道德判斷：血緣縱貫軸之義務與道德理據的動態變化。國立中正大學心理學研究所博士論文。\n行政院（2021）。110年性別平等觀念電話民意調查。取自行政院性別平等委員會網站。https://reurl.cc/V5Vm46\n邱皓政（2017）。多元迴歸的自變數比較與多元共線性之影響：效果量、優勢性與相對權數指標的估計與應用。臺大管理論叢，27(3)，1-44。\n邱皓政（2019）：量化統計與研究分析（六版）：SPSS與R資料分析範例解析。五南。\n金耀基（1988）。人際關係中人情之分析。楊國樞（主編），中國人的心理，頁75-104。桂冠。\n吳昭儀（2004）。大學生的共依附與愛情態度之相關研究。國立臺灣師範大學教育心理與輔導研究所。\n吳明燁、周玉慧（2009）。台灣青少年的道德信念：社會依附的影響。台灣社會學，17，61-100。\n邵于玲、郭姿吟（2018）。個人道德認同、慈善動機對公益運動賽會參與意願之影響，臺灣運動心理學報，1-20。\n林松宏、葉誌崇、吳祥發（2002）。中美會計專業人員之價值觀、社會心理態度、宗教觀與道德判斷之跨文化比較研究，成功大學學報，37，137-167。\n林家興（2021）。精神分析治療的理論與實務。心理出版社。\n政治大學選舉研究中心（2022）。臺灣民眾政黨偏好分佈（1992~2021）。取自政治大學選舉研究中心網頁https://esc.nccu.edu.tw/upload/44/doc/6965/Party202112.jpg。\n政治大學選舉研究中心（2022）。臺灣民眾臺灣人／中國人認同趨勢分佈（1992~2021）。取自政治大學選舉研究中心網頁https://esc.nccu.edu.tw/upload/44/doc/6960/People202112.jpg。\n胡舜皓（2020）。大學生個人與社會取向自我觀對失志之相關研究。國立政治大學輔導與諮商碩士學位學程。\n高旭繁、陸洛（2006）。夫妻傳統性／現代性的契合與婚姻適應的關聯。本土心理學研究，25，45-98。\n高旭繁、楊國樞（2011）。華人心理傳統性與心理現代性研究之回顧與前瞻。彰師大教育學報，19，1-11。\n高國祥（2014）。道德基礎量表與相關變相之探究。國立臺南大學教育學系測驗統計碩博士班。\n馬慶強（1997）。中國人之感性與認知方面的道德發展：一個七階段發展理論。本土心理學研究，7，166-212。\n許苔意（2017）。青少年父母教養方式、雙元自主發展與完美主義傾向之相關研究。國立高雄師範大學諮商心理與復健諮商研究所。\n陸洛（2007）。個人取向與社會取向的自我觀:概念分析與實徵測量。美中教育評論，4(2)，1-23。\n陸洛（2011）。現代華人的雙文化自我與雙重陷落。本土心理學研究，36，155-168。\n陸洛、高旭繁、陳芬憶（2006）。傳統性、現代性孝道觀念及其對幸福感的影響：一項親子對偶設計。本土心理學研究，25，197-232。\n陸洛、翁克成（2007）。師生的心理傳統性與現代性、關係契合性對師生互動品質及學生心理福祉的影響。本土心理學研究，27，81-118。\n陳文俊（2003）。藍與綠—台灣選民的政治意識形態初探。選舉研究，10(1)，41-80。\n陳舜文、邱振訓（2011）。道德判斷的「雙重歷程模式」：認知、情緒與文化的整合觀點。本土心理學研究，36，33-76。\n張泰銓、雷庚玲（2018）。臺灣青少年是否認為努力與學業成就關乎道德？，中華心理學刊，151-172。\n程小危（1991）。道德判斷發展研究的泛文化性探討。楊中芳、高尚仁（編）。中國人．中國心：發展與教學篇。台北：遠流。\n黃光國（1985）。四十年來台灣心理學的發展。中國論壇十週年專輯，120-136。\n黃光國（1988）。人情與面子：中國人的權力遊戲。黃光國（主編），中國人的權力遊戲，頁7-55。臺北：巨流圖書公司。\n黃光國（1991）。儒家思想與現代化：理論分析與實徵研究。中國人．中國心：傳統篇，150-192。臺北市：遠流。\n黃光國（1995）。儒家價值觀的現代轉化：理論分析與實徵研究。本土心理學研究，3，276-338。\n黃光國（1998）。兩種道德：台灣社會中道德思維研究的再詮釋。本土心理學研究，9，121-175。\n黃光國（2011）。論「含攝文化的心理學」。本土心理學研究，36，79-110\n傅仰止（2020）。台灣社會變遷基本調查計畫2018第七期第四次：宗教組(D00170_1)【原始數據】取自中央研究院人文社會科學研究中心調查研究專題中心學術調查研究資料庫。\n葉紹國（1996）。道德推理中關懷導向與正義導向思考之區辨及其在中國社會實踐的特徵。本土心理學研究，5，264-311。\n楊中芳（1984）。價值變遷與送禮行為。楊國樞（主編），中國人的心理，頁383-414。\n楊中芳（1987）。試論大陸社會心理學研究之發展方向。社會學研究，4，62-89。\n楊中芳（1989）。試論中國人的道德發展：一個自我發展的觀點。楊國樞、黃光國（編）：中國人的心理與行為，1-48。桂冠。\n楊中芳（1991）。試論中國人的「自己」：理論與研究方向，見楊中芳、高尚仁（編）：中國人．中國心：人格與社會篇，93-145。遠流。\n楊中芳（2001）。如何研究中國人：心理學研究本土化論文集。遠流。\n楊國樞（1985）。家庭因素與子女行為：台灣研究的評析。第二次現代化與中國文化國際研討會發表之論文。\n楊國樞（1993a）。中國人的社會取向：社會互動的觀點。中國人，中國心：人格與社會篇，93-145。遠流。\n楊國樞（1993b）。我們為什麼要建立中國人的本土心理學？。本土心理學研究，1，6-88。\n楊國樞（1994）。傳統價值觀與現代價值觀能否同時並存。中國人的價值觀—社會科學觀點。桂冠。\n楊國樞、余安邦、葉明華（1991）。中國人的個人傳統性與現代性：概念與測量。楊國樞、黃光國（編）：中國人的心理與行為，1-48。桂冠。\n楊國樞、葉光輝（1991）。孝道的心理學研究：理論方法及發現。中國人．中國心：傳統篇，194-260。遠流。\n趙志裕（1991）。義：中國社會的公平觀。中國人．中國心：傳統篇，262-285。遠流。\n衛福部（2021）。家庭暴力事件通報案件統計。取自衛福部保護服務司網站。https://dep.mohw.gov.tw/dops/lp-1303-105-xCat-cat01.html\n劉淑慧、劉安真、吳珍梅（1999）。大學生道德判斷量表之編製。中國測驗學會測驗年刊，46，89-118。\n劉靖國（2002）。國民教育階段學童之儒家道德判斷與現代道德判斷之研究。臺南師範學院國民教育研究所碩士論文，台南市。\n謝宜儒（2020）。道德決策判斷：以道德基礎理論探討道德基本原則如何形塑個體的政治意識形態、社會議題之態度與司法判決。國立中央大學認知與神經科學研究所博士論文。\n瞿海源（2015）。台灣社會變遷基本調查計畫1991第二期第二次：家庭、教育組（限制版）（R090005）【原始數據】取自中央研究院人文社會科學研究中心調查研究專題中心學術調查研究資料庫。\nAhlenius, H., & Tännsjö, T. (2012). Chinese and Westerners Respond Differently to the Trolley Dilemmas. Journal of Cognition and Culture, 12(3-4), 195-201.\nAndrejevic, M., Feuerriegel, D., Turner, W., Laham, S., & Bode, S. (2020). Moral judgements of fairness-related actions are flexibly updated to account for contextual information. Scientific Reports, 10, 17828.\nArutyunova, K. R., Alexandrov, Y. I., Znakov, V. V., & Hauser, M. D. (2013). Moral Judgments in Russian Culture: Universality and Cultural Specificity. Journal of Cognition and Culture, 13(3-4), 255-285.\nBastian, B., Vauclair, M., Loughnan, S., Bain, P., Ashokkumar, A., Becker, M., Bilewicz, M., Collier-Baker, E., Crespo, C., Eastwick, P., Fischer, R., Friese, M., Gómez, A., Guerra, V., Guevara, J., Hanke, K., Hooper, N., Huang, L., Junqi, S., Swann, W. (2019). Explaining illness with evil: pathogen prevalence fosters moral vitalism. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences. 286(1914): 20191576.\nCushman, F., Young, L., & Hauser, M. D. (2006). The Role of Conscious Reasoning and Intuition in Moral Judgment: Testing Three Principles of Harm. Psychological Science, 17(12), 1082 – 1089.\nEdwards, C. P. (1986). Cross-cultural research on Kohlberg’s stages: The basis for consensus. In S. Modgil (Eds.), Cognitive development and epistemology. Academic Press.\nEkici, H., Yücel, E., & Cesur, S. (2021). Deciding between moral priorities and COVID-19 avoiding behaviors: A moral foundations vignette study. Current Psychology.\nEllemers, N., Toorn, J. v. d., Paunov, Y., & Leeuwen, T. v. (2019). The Psychology of Morality: A Review and Analysis of Empirical Studies Published From 1940 Through 2017. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 1088868318811759.\nGilligan, C. (1977). In a different voice: Women’s conceptions of self and of morality. Harvard Educational Review, 47(4), 481-517.\nGold, N. Colman, A. M., & Pulford, B. D. (2014). Cultural differences in responses to real-life and hypothetical trolley problems. Judgement and Decision Making, 9(1), 65-76.\nGraham, J., Haidt, J., Koleva, S., Motyl, M., Iyer, R., Wojcik, S. P., & Ditto, P. H. (2013). Moral Foundations Theory: The pragmatic validity of moral pluralism. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 47, 55-130.\nGraham, J., Haidt, J., & Nosek, B. A. (2009). Liberals and conservatives rely on different sets of moral foundations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 96(5), 1029 - 1046.\nGraham, J., Meindl, P., Beall, E., Johnson, K. M., & Zhang L. (2016). Cultural differences in moral judgment and behavior, across and within societies. Current Opinion in Psychology, 8, 125-130.\nGraham, J., Nosek, B. A., Haidt, J., Iyer, R., Koleva, S., & Ditto, P. H. (2011). Mapping the moral domain. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 101(2), 366-285.\nHaidt, J. (2013). The righteous mind: Why good people are divided by politics and religion. Vintage.\nHaidt, J., & Baron, J. (1996). Social roles and the moral judgement of acts and omissions. European Journal of Social Psychology, 26(2), 201-218.\nHaidt, J., & Graham, J. (2007). When Morality Opposes Justice: Conservatives Have Moral Intuitions that Liberals may not Recognize. Social Justice Research, 20(1), 98-116.\nHaidt, J., & Joseph, C. (2004). Intuitive ethics: how innately prepared intuitions generate culturally variable virtues. Daedalus, 133(4), 55-66.\nHaidt, J., & Joseph, C. (2007). The moral mind: How five sets of innate intuitions guide the development of many culture-specific virtues, and perhaps even modules. The innate mind, 3, 367-391.\nHaidt, J. & Kesebir, S. (2010). Morality. In S. T. Fiske, D. T. Gilbert & G. Lindzey (Eds.), Handbook of Social Psychology. Hobeken.\nHauser, M. D., Tonnaer, F., & Cima, M. (2009). When Moral Intuitions Are Immune to the Law: A Case Study of Euthanasia and the Act-Omission Distinction in The Netherlands, Journal of Cognition and Culture, 9, 149-169.\nHelmreich, R. L., Spence, J. T., Beane, W. E., Lucker, G., W., & Matthews, K. A. (1980). Making it in Academic Psychology: demographic and personality correlates of attainment. Journal of personality and social psychology, 39(5), 896-908.\nHo, D. Y. F. (1974). Face, social expectations, and conflict avoidance. In J. L. M. Dawson & W. J. Lonner (Eds.), Readings in Cross-cultural Psychology. Hong Kong University Press.\nHo, D. Y. F. (1976). On the concept of face. American Journal of Psychology, 10, 867-884.\nHo, D. Y. F. (1980). Face and stereotyped notions about Chinese face behavior. Philippine Journal of Psychology, 13.\nHofmann, W., Wisneski, D. C., Brandt, M. J., & Skitka, L. J. (2014). Morality in everyday life. SCIENCE, 345, 1340 - 1343. doi: 10.1126/science.1251560.\nHsu, F. L. K. (1971). A hypothesis on kinship and culture. In F. L. K. Hsu (Ed), Kinship and Culture. Aldine.\nHwang, K. K. (1977). The Dynamic process of coping with interpersonal conflicts in Chinese society. Proceeding of the National Science Council, 2(2), 198-208.\nJin, W., & Peng, M. (2020). The Effects of Social Perception on Moral Judgment. Frontiers in Psychology, 11.\nKagitcibasi, C. (1990). Family and socialization in cross-cultural perspective: A model of change. In J. Berman (Ed.), Cross-cultural perspective: Nebraska symposium an motivation (pp. 135-200). Nebraska University Press.\nKim, K. R., Kang, J.-S., & Yun, S. (2012). Moral Intuitions and Political Orientation: Similarities and Differences between South Korea and the United States, Psychological Reports, 111(1), 173-185.\nKohlberg, L. (1969). Stage and sequence: The cognitive development approach to socialization. In Goslin (Ed.), Handbook of socialization theory (pp. 347-480). Rand McNally.\nKohlberg, L. (1981). Essays on moral development, Vol. 1: The philosophy of moral development. Harper & Row.\nKohlberg, L. (1984). Essays on moral development, Vol. 2: The psychology of moral development. Harper & Row.\nKroll, W., & Petersen, K. H. (1965). Study of values test and collegiate football teams. Research Quarterly, 36(4), 441–447.\nLee, S. W. S., Tang, H., Wan, J., Mai, X., & Liu, C. (2015). A cultural look at moral purity: wiping the face clean. Frontiers in Psychology, 6, 577.\nLei, L., Huang, X., Zhang, S., Yang, J., Yang, L., & Xu, M. (2020). Comparison of prevalence and associated factors of anxiety and depression among people affected by versus people unaffected by quarantine during the COVID-19 epidemic in Southwestern China. Medical Science Monitor, 26, e924609.\nNisan, M., & Kohlberg, L. (1982). University and Variation in moral judgement: A longitudinal and cross-sectional study in Turkey. Child Development, 53, 865-876.\nPigaiani, Y., Zoccante, L., Zocca, A., Arzenton, A., Menegolli, M., Fadel, S., Ruggeri, M., & Colizzi, M. (2020). Adolescent lifestyle behaviors, coping strategies and subjective wellbeing during the COVID-19 pandemic: An online student survey. Healthcare, 8(4), 472.\nSchnall, S., Benton, J., & Harvey, S. (2008). With a Clean Conscience : Cleanliness Reduces the Severity of Moral Judgments. Psychological Science, 19(12), 1219 - 1222.\nShweder, R. A. (1982). Liberalism as destiny. Contemporary Psychology, 27, 421-424.\nShweder, R. A., & Bourne, E. J. (1982). Does the Concept of the Person Vary Cross-Culturally? . In A. J. Marsella & G. M. White (Eds.), Cultural Conceptions of Mental Health and Therapy, 97-137.\nShweder, R. A., Mahapatra, M., & Miller, J. G. (1987). Culture and moral development. In J. W. Stigler, R. A. Shweder & G. herdt (eds.), The Emergence of Morality in Young Children. Cambrige University Press.\nShweder, R. A., Much, N. C., Mahapatra, M., & Park, L. (1997). The "big three" of morality (autonomy, community, divinity) and the "big three" explanations of suffering. In A. M. Brandt & P. Rozin (Eds.), Morality and health (pp. 119-169). Taylor & Frances/Routledge.\nSnarey, J. (1982). The social and moral development of kibbutz founders and sabras: A longitudinal and cross-sectional cross-cultural study (Doctoral dissertation). Harvard University.\nSnarey, J. (1985). Cross-cultural universality of social-moral development: a critical review of Kohlbergian research. Psychological Bulletin, 97(2), 202-232.\nTietjen, A., & Walker, L. (1984). Moral reasoning and leadership among men in a Papua New Guinea village. Unpublished manuscript, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada.\nTriandis, H. C. (1989). The Self and Social Behavior in Differing Cultural Contexts. Psychological Review, 96(3), 506-520.\nTull, M. T., Edmonds, K. A., Scamaldo, K. M., Richmond, J. R., Rose, J. P., & Gratz, K. L. (2020). Psychological outcomes associated with stay-at-home orders and the perceived impact of COVID-19 on daily life. Psychiatry Research, 289, 113098.\nVasudev, J. (1983). A study of moral reasoning at different life-stage in India. Unpublished manuscript, University of Pittsburgh, PA.\nVauclair, C. M., & Fischer, R. (2011). Do cultural values predict individuals’ moral attitudes? A cross-cultural multilevel approach. European Journal of Social Psychology, 41, 645-657.\nVine, I. (1986). Moral maturity in socio-cultural perspective: Are Kohlberg’s stages universal? In S. Modgil & C. Modgil (Eds.), Lawrence Kohlberg: Consensus and controversy. Philadelphia & London: Falmer Press.\nWang, P. W., Ko, N. Y., Chang, Y. P., Wu, C. F., Lu, W. H., & Yen, C. F. (2020). Subjective deterioration of physical and psychological health during the COVID-19 pandemic in Taiwan: Their association with the adoption of protective behaviors and mental health problems. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 17 (18), 6827.\nWeinreich-Haste, H., & Locke, D. (Eds.) (1983). Morality in the making: thought, action, and the social context. Chichester: John Wiley.\nYeh, K. H., & Bedford, O. (2003). A test of the dual filial piety model. Asian Journal of Social Psychology, 6, 215-228.\nZhong, C. B., & Liljenquis, K. (2006). Washing Away Your Sins: Threatened Morality and Physical Cleansing. Science, 313(5792), 1451-1452. | 描述: | 碩士 國立政治大學 輔導與諮商碩士學位學程 107172009 |
資料來源: | http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0107172009 | 資料類型: | thesis |
| Appears in Collections: | 學位論文 |
Files in This Item:
| File | Description | Size | Format | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 200901.pdf | 1.82 MB | Adobe PDF2 | View/Open |
Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.