1. NCCU Academic Hub
  2. Publications
  3. College of Social Science
  4. Theses
  5. Item

Publications-Theses

Article View/Open

Publication Export

Google ScholarTM

NCCU Library

Citation Infomation

Related Publications in TAIR

題名 生命歷程手足結構之變遷——生育率轉型與人口老化的意涵
Sibling Structures Across Life Courses: Insights into Fertility Transition and Population Ageing
作者 吳紹琦
Wu, Shao-Chi
貢獻者 陳信木
吳紹琦
Shao-Chi Wu
關鍵詞 手足
生育率轉型
微視模擬
生命歷程
Sibling
Fertility Transition
Micro-simulation
Life Course
日期 2024
上傳時間 4-Feb-2025 15:51:20 (UTC+8)
摘要 手足是當代生育率轉型之下的重要主題，雖經過半個多世紀以來的生育率與死亡率下降，但手足在今天依然是社會中的普遍經驗，且與手足的感情有機會隨著手足規模縮小而變得親密，和手足的共存時間更是會持續因為預期壽命上升而延長。本研究即是在此一架構下，運用微視模擬（micro-simulation）的方法探究時期間與生命歷程間的手足結構差異，包括手足的數量、性別、年齡等特徵會如何在不同年度的生育和死亡水準下變動，放在個人的一生中又會有如何不同的發展軌跡。研究結果呈現出隨著時期發展，手足數量隨著生育率轉型急速下降；手足年齡間隔在1980年代以前縮小，以後略為擴大；與手足的共存時間則延長，但存在性別差異。對生命歷程的分析則顯示出一生中經歷手足增加和死亡的機會都下降，特別是成長時期經歷手足夭折的風險幾乎消失；而生命後期擁有兄弟姐妹四類手足的比例比過往更加均衡。將手足放在家庭的脈絡下，本研究另外分析了手足對母親照顧支持圖像的長期差異，整體上因為手足規模縮小，現在的子女平均需要比過去負擔更多的照顧責任，但較不會面對手足先於母親離世的狀況，子女可以共同照顧母親直至母親臨終。這些結果揭示了未來需要對手足間的相互支持有更多關注；與此同時，增加中的無子女及無手足者將會是越來越重要的家庭議題，親屬網絡則可以是切入他們家庭生活的重要視角；最後，在高齡照顧上則要面對正在發生的老老照顧現象。
Sibship has become increasingly significant in the context of fertility and mortality decline because greater intimacy among siblings is more likely with smaller sibling groups and longer periods of coexistence due to the extended life expectancy. Additionally, having siblings remains common in contemporary Taiwanese society after fertility started decreasing approximately seventy years ago. Building on these understandings, this study employs micro-simulation to analyze how sibship sizes as well as the configurations of sex and age evolve over time and across the life course. The results indicate that sibship size has declined alongside decreasing fertility rates. The age gap among siblings narrowed until the 1980s but has slightly widened since then. The duration of coexistence with siblings has increased over time, albeit with variations by sex. Regarding life course changes, the likelihood of gaining or losing a sibling has decreased. Younger individuals are now less likely to lose a sibling, while older individuals experience a more balanced sibling configuration of sex and age. Considering sibling structures as part of the broader family context, this study also explores the transformation of upward support from children to mothers. With shrinking sibship sizes, the burden of supporting the older generation has increased for each child over time. However, this pressure does not escalate throughout the life course due to the reduced risk of losing a sibling before their mother’s death. These results highlight three key issues. First, further research is needed to investigate whether and how siblings support one another. Second, family life must be reexamined in the context of an increasing number of individuals without children or siblings. Lastly, the emerging phenomenon of elderly children caring for elderly parents, which may compromise their well-being, demands greater attention.
參考文獻 內政部戶政司，2013，《人口政策白皮書：少子女化高齡化及移民》。臺北：內政部戶政司。 古允文、詹宜璋，1998，〈臺灣地區老人經濟安全與年金政策：社會排除觀點初探〉。《人文及社會科學集刊》10(2): 191-225。 何華欽，2007，〈政府移轉對老人家戶的貧窮減輕效果：以1990至2000年為例〉。《臺大社會工作學刊》15: 89-120。 李敦仁、余民寧，2005，〈社經地位、手足數目、家庭教育資源與教育成就結構關係模式之驗證：以TEPS資料庫資料為例〉。《臺灣教育社會學研究》5(2): 1-47。 郭蕙如，2007，《媽媽們的故事：女性之育兒養女經驗變遷》。臺北市：國立政治大學社會學系碩士論文。 陳信木、林佳瑩，2010，〈臺灣生育率變遷對於人口成長的慣性作用〉。《人口學刊》40: 1-39。 陳淑美、林佩萱，2010，〈親子世代的財務支援、照顧需要對老人居住安排與生活滿意度影響之研究〉。《住宅學報》19(1): 29-58。 曾瀝儀、張金鶚、陳淑美，2006，〈老人居住安排選擇—代間關係之探討〉。《住宅學報》15 (2): 45-64。 楊靜利，1999，〈老年人的居住安排—子女數量與同居傾向因素之探討〉。《人口學刊》20: 167-183。 劉千嘉，2018，〈高齡家庭與高齡照顧者的特性: 2010年人口與住宅普查資料的應用〉。《人口學刊》56: 81-119。 衛生福利部，2024，《中華民國111年老人狀況調查報告》。臺北：衛生福利部。 鄭清霞，2009，〈臺灣經濟家戶組成與特性的變遷──1976年至 2004年〉。《臺灣社會福利學刊》7 (2): 47-100。 薛承泰，1996，〈臺灣地區單親戶的數量、分佈與特性：以1990年普查為例〉。《人口學刊》17: 1-30。 薛承泰，2008，〈臺灣家庭變遷與老人居住型態：現況與未來〉。《社區發展季刊》121: 47-56。 薛承泰、王嘉寧，2001，〈臺灣「頂客族」的形成與特質〉。《人口學刊》22: 19-48。 Attias-Donfut, C., Ogg, J., and Wolff, F. C., 2005, “European Patterns of Intergenerational Financial and Time Transfers.” European Journal of Ageing 2(3): 161–173. Becker, G. S., 1981, A Treatise on the Family. Cambridge, MA and London, England: Harvard University Press. Blake, J., 1981, “Family Size and the Quality of Children.” Demography 18(4): 421–442. Blake, J., 1985, “Number of Siblings and Educational Mobility.” American Sociological Review 50(1): 84–94. Blau, P. M., and Duncan, O. D., 1967, The American Occupational Structure. New York: John Wiley and Sons. Cantor, M., 1979, “Neighbors and Friends: An Overlooked Resource in the Informal Support System.” Research on Aging 1(4): 434-463. Davies, K., 2015, “Siblings, Stories, and the Self: The Sociological Significance of Young People’s Sibling Relationships.” Sociology 49: 679-695. Descartes, L., 2007, “Exchange in Adult Sibling Relationship: Support and Tension.” International Journal of Sociology of the Family 33(2): 303-325. Elder, G. H., Johnson, M. K., and Robert, C., 2003, “The Emergence and Development of Life Course Theory.” Pp. 3-19 in Handbook of the Life Course, edited by J. T. Mortimer and M. J. Shanahan. New York: Springer. Furstenberg, F. F., 1990, “Divorce and the American Family.” Annual Review of Sociology 16 (1): 379-403. Goetting, A., 1986, “The Developmental Tasks of Siblingship over the Life Cycle.” Journal of Marriage and Family 48(4): 703-714. Granovetter, M. S., 1973, “The Strength of Weak Ties.” American Journal of Sociology 78(6): 1360–1380. Haupt, A., Kane, T. T., and Haub, C., 2011, PRB's Population Handbook (6th Edition). Washington, D.C.: Population Reference Bureau. Hauser, R. M., and Sewell, W. H., 1986, “Family Effects in Simple Models of Education, Occupational Status, and Earnings: Findings from the Wisconsin and Kalamazoo Studies.” Journal of Labor Economics 4(3): S83–S115. Krishnamoorthy, S., 1979, “Family Formation and the Life Cycle.” Demography 16(1): 121-129. LaPiere, R. T., 1934, “Attitudes and Actions.” Social Forces 13(2): 230-237. Lawrence, M. B., 2007, “Socioeconomic Factors and Substandard Parenting.” Social Service Review 81(3): 485-522. Légaré, J., 2005, “Economics, Social, and Cultural Consequences of the Aging of the Population.” Pp. 327-336 in Demography: Analysis and Synthesis, Volume III, edited by G. Caselli, J. Vallin, and G. Wunsch. Amsterdam: Elsevier. Murphy, M., 2011, “Long-Term Effects of the Demographic Transition on Family and Kinship Networks in Britain.” Population and Development Review 37: 55-80. Parish, W. L. and Willis R. J, 1993, “Daughters, Education, and Family Budgets Taiwan Experiences.” The Journal of Human Resources 28(4): 863-898. Sewell, W. H., and Hauser, R. M., 1992, “The Influence of The American Occupational Structure on the Wisconsin Model.” Contemporary Sociology 21(5): 598–603. Sewell, W. H., Haller, A. O., and Portes, A., 1969, “The Educational and Early Occupational Attainment Process.” American Sociological Review 34(1): 82-92. Simmel, G., 1902b, “The Number of Members as Determining the Sociological Form of the Group. II.” American Journal of Sociology 8(2): 158-196. Simmel, G., 1950, “Sociability—An Example of Pure, or Formal, Sociology.” Pp. 40-57 in The Sociology of Georg Simmel, edited by K. H. Wolff. Glencoe, Illinois: The Free Press. Verdery, A. M., 2015, “Links Between Demographic and Kinship Transitions.” Population and Development Review 41 (3): 465-484. White, L., 2001, “Sibling Relationships over the Life Course: A Panel Analysis.” Journal of Marriage and Family 63(2): 555-568. Wingens, M., 2022, Sociological Life Course Research. New York: Springer.
描述 碩士
國立政治大學
社會學系
112254001
資料來源 http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0112254001
資料類型 thesis
dc.contributor.advisor 陳信木zh_TW
dc.contributor.author (Authors) 吳紹琦zh_TW
dc.contributor.author (Authors) Shao-Chi Wuen_US
dc.creator (作者) 吳紹琦zh_TW
dc.creator (作者) Wu, Shao-Chien_US
dc.date (日期) 2024en_US
dc.date.accessioned 4-Feb-2025 15:51:20 (UTC+8)-
dc.date.available 4-Feb-2025 15:51:20 (UTC+8)-
dc.date.issued (上傳時間) 4-Feb-2025 15:51:20 (UTC+8)-
dc.identifier (Other Identifiers) G0112254001en_US
dc.identifier.uri (URI) https://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/155469-
dc.description (描述) 碩士zh_TW
dc.description (描述) 國立政治大學zh_TW
dc.description (描述) 社會學系zh_TW
dc.description (描述) 112254001zh_TW
dc.description.abstract (摘要) 手足是當代生育率轉型之下的重要主題，雖經過半個多世紀以來的生育率與死亡率下降，但手足在今天依然是社會中的普遍經驗，且與手足的感情有機會隨著手足規模縮小而變得親密，和手足的共存時間更是會持續因為預期壽命上升而延長。本研究即是在此一架構下，運用微視模擬（micro-simulation）的方法探究時期間與生命歷程間的手足結構差異，包括手足的數量、性別、年齡等特徵會如何在不同年度的生育和死亡水準下變動，放在個人的一生中又會有如何不同的發展軌跡。研究結果呈現出隨著時期發展，手足數量隨著生育率轉型急速下降；手足年齡間隔在1980年代以前縮小，以後略為擴大；與手足的共存時間則延長，但存在性別差異。對生命歷程的分析則顯示出一生中經歷手足增加和死亡的機會都下降，特別是成長時期經歷手足夭折的風險幾乎消失；而生命後期擁有兄弟姐妹四類手足的比例比過往更加均衡。將手足放在家庭的脈絡下，本研究另外分析了手足對母親照顧支持圖像的長期差異，整體上因為手足規模縮小，現在的子女平均需要比過去負擔更多的照顧責任，但較不會面對手足先於母親離世的狀況，子女可以共同照顧母親直至母親臨終。這些結果揭示了未來需要對手足間的相互支持有更多關注；與此同時，增加中的無子女及無手足者將會是越來越重要的家庭議題，親屬網絡則可以是切入他們家庭生活的重要視角；最後，在高齡照顧上則要面對正在發生的老老照顧現象。zh_TW
dc.description.abstract (摘要) Sibship has become increasingly significant in the context of fertility and mortality decline because greater intimacy among siblings is more likely with smaller sibling groups and longer periods of coexistence due to the extended life expectancy. Additionally, having siblings remains common in contemporary Taiwanese society after fertility started decreasing approximately seventy years ago. Building on these understandings, this study employs micro-simulation to analyze how sibship sizes as well as the configurations of sex and age evolve over time and across the life course. The results indicate that sibship size has declined alongside decreasing fertility rates. The age gap among siblings narrowed until the 1980s but has slightly widened since then. The duration of coexistence with siblings has increased over time, albeit with variations by sex. Regarding life course changes, the likelihood of gaining or losing a sibling has decreased. Younger individuals are now less likely to lose a sibling, while older individuals experience a more balanced sibling configuration of sex and age. Considering sibling structures as part of the broader family context, this study also explores the transformation of upward support from children to mothers. With shrinking sibship sizes, the burden of supporting the older generation has increased for each child over time. However, this pressure does not escalate throughout the life course due to the reduced risk of losing a sibling before their mother’s death. These results highlight three key issues. First, further research is needed to investigate whether and how siblings support one another. Second, family life must be reexamined in the context of an increasing number of individuals without children or siblings. Lastly, the emerging phenomenon of elderly children caring for elderly parents, which may compromise their well-being, demands greater attention.en_US
dc.description.tableofcontents 第一章、前言 1 第二章、人口轉型與家庭結構變遷 5 第一節、親子關係之變遷：少生、不生、與晚生 6 第二節、配偶關係之變遷：不婚、晚婚、與離婚 13 第三節、手足關係之變遷：普遍、長期、與韌性 18 第四節、小結：手足的當代重要性 23 第三章、研究問題與方法 27 第一節、研究問題與視角 27 第二節、研究方法與資料來源 29 第三節、手足關係「內容」的限制 35 第四章、手足結構的長期與生命歷程發展 37 第一節、手足結構之時期變遷 37 第二節、手足結構之生命歷程變遷 44 第三節、小結 54 第五章、手足與親代的交互作用：以老年母親的照顧支持為例 57 第一節、母親生命歷程之子女數量 59 第二節、母親生命歷程之子女性別及年齡特徵 63 第三節、小結 71 第六章、結論與討論 73 參考文獻 79 附錄一、穩定人口理論 83 附錄二、胎次鉅視模擬 85 附錄三、婚姻狀態生命表 87 附錄四、年齡別胎次遞進率 91zh_TW
dc.format.extent 34597472 bytes-
dc.format.mimetype application/pdf-
dc.source.uri (資料來源) http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0112254001en_US
dc.subject (關鍵詞) 手足zh_TW
dc.subject (關鍵詞) 生育率轉型zh_TW
dc.subject (關鍵詞) 微視模擬zh_TW
dc.subject (關鍵詞) 生命歷程zh_TW
dc.subject (關鍵詞) Siblingen_US
dc.subject (關鍵詞) Fertility Transitionen_US
dc.subject (關鍵詞) Micro-simulationen_US
dc.subject (關鍵詞) Life Courseen_US
dc.title (題名) 生命歷程手足結構之變遷——生育率轉型與人口老化的意涵zh_TW
dc.title (題名) Sibling Structures Across Life Courses: Insights into Fertility Transition and Population Ageingen_US
dc.type (資料類型) thesisen_US
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 內政部戶政司，2013，《人口政策白皮書：少子女化高齡化及移民》。臺北：內政部戶政司。 古允文、詹宜璋，1998，〈臺灣地區老人經濟安全與年金政策：社會排除觀點初探〉。《人文及社會科學集刊》10(2): 191-225。 何華欽，2007，〈政府移轉對老人家戶的貧窮減輕效果：以1990至2000年為例〉。《臺大社會工作學刊》15: 89-120。 李敦仁、余民寧，2005，〈社經地位、手足數目、家庭教育資源與教育成就結構關係模式之驗證：以TEPS資料庫資料為例〉。《臺灣教育社會學研究》5(2): 1-47。 郭蕙如，2007，《媽媽們的故事：女性之育兒養女經驗變遷》。臺北市：國立政治大學社會學系碩士論文。 陳信木、林佳瑩，2010，〈臺灣生育率變遷對於人口成長的慣性作用〉。《人口學刊》40: 1-39。 陳淑美、林佩萱，2010，〈親子世代的財務支援、照顧需要對老人居住安排與生活滿意度影響之研究〉。《住宅學報》19(1): 29-58。 曾瀝儀、張金鶚、陳淑美，2006，〈老人居住安排選擇—代間關係之探討〉。《住宅學報》15 (2): 45-64。 楊靜利，1999，〈老年人的居住安排—子女數量與同居傾向因素之探討〉。《人口學刊》20: 167-183。 劉千嘉，2018，〈高齡家庭與高齡照顧者的特性: 2010年人口與住宅普查資料的應用〉。《人口學刊》56: 81-119。 衛生福利部，2024，《中華民國111年老人狀況調查報告》。臺北：衛生福利部。 鄭清霞，2009，〈臺灣經濟家戶組成與特性的變遷──1976年至 2004年〉。《臺灣社會福利學刊》7 (2): 47-100。 薛承泰，1996，〈臺灣地區單親戶的數量、分佈與特性：以1990年普查為例〉。《人口學刊》17: 1-30。 薛承泰，2008，〈臺灣家庭變遷與老人居住型態：現況與未來〉。《社區發展季刊》121: 47-56。 薛承泰、王嘉寧，2001，〈臺灣「頂客族」的形成與特質〉。《人口學刊》22: 19-48。 Attias-Donfut, C., Ogg, J., and Wolff, F. C., 2005, “European Patterns of Intergenerational Financial and Time Transfers.” European Journal of Ageing 2(3): 161–173. Becker, G. S., 1981, A Treatise on the Family. Cambridge, MA and London, England: Harvard University Press. Blake, J., 1981, “Family Size and the Quality of Children.” Demography 18(4): 421–442. Blake, J., 1985, “Number of Siblings and Educational Mobility.” American Sociological Review 50(1): 84–94. Blau, P. M., and Duncan, O. D., 1967, The American Occupational Structure. New York: John Wiley and Sons. Cantor, M., 1979, “Neighbors and Friends: An Overlooked Resource in the Informal Support System.” Research on Aging 1(4): 434-463. Davies, K., 2015, “Siblings, Stories, and the Self: The Sociological Significance of Young People’s Sibling Relationships.” Sociology 49: 679-695. Descartes, L., 2007, “Exchange in Adult Sibling Relationship: Support and Tension.” International Journal of Sociology of the Family 33(2): 303-325. Elder, G. H., Johnson, M. K., and Robert, C., 2003, “The Emergence and Development of Life Course Theory.” Pp. 3-19 in Handbook of the Life Course, edited by J. T. Mortimer and M. J. Shanahan. New York: Springer. Furstenberg, F. F., 1990, “Divorce and the American Family.” Annual Review of Sociology 16 (1): 379-403. Goetting, A., 1986, “The Developmental Tasks of Siblingship over the Life Cycle.” Journal of Marriage and Family 48(4): 703-714. Granovetter, M. S., 1973, “The Strength of Weak Ties.” American Journal of Sociology 78(6): 1360–1380. Haupt, A., Kane, T. T., and Haub, C., 2011, PRB's Population Handbook (6th Edition). Washington, D.C.: Population Reference Bureau. Hauser, R. M., and Sewell, W. H., 1986, “Family Effects in Simple Models of Education, Occupational Status, and Earnings: Findings from the Wisconsin and Kalamazoo Studies.” Journal of Labor Economics 4(3): S83–S115. Krishnamoorthy, S., 1979, “Family Formation and the Life Cycle.” Demography 16(1): 121-129. LaPiere, R. T., 1934, “Attitudes and Actions.” Social Forces 13(2): 230-237. Lawrence, M. B., 2007, “Socioeconomic Factors and Substandard Parenting.” Social Service Review 81(3): 485-522. Légaré, J., 2005, “Economics, Social, and Cultural Consequences of the Aging of the Population.” Pp. 327-336 in Demography: Analysis and Synthesis, Volume III, edited by G. Caselli, J. Vallin, and G. Wunsch. Amsterdam: Elsevier. Murphy, M., 2011, “Long-Term Effects of the Demographic Transition on Family and Kinship Networks in Britain.” Population and Development Review 37: 55-80. Parish, W. L. and Willis R. J, 1993, “Daughters, Education, and Family Budgets Taiwan Experiences.” The Journal of Human Resources 28(4): 863-898. Sewell, W. H., and Hauser, R. M., 1992, “The Influence of The American Occupational Structure on the Wisconsin Model.” Contemporary Sociology 21(5): 598–603. Sewell, W. H., Haller, A. O., and Portes, A., 1969, “The Educational and Early Occupational Attainment Process.” American Sociological Review 34(1): 82-92. Simmel, G., 1902b, “The Number of Members as Determining the Sociological Form of the Group. II.” American Journal of Sociology 8(2): 158-196. Simmel, G., 1950, “Sociability—An Example of Pure, or Formal, Sociology.” Pp. 40-57 in The Sociology of Georg Simmel, edited by K. H. Wolff. Glencoe, Illinois: The Free Press. Verdery, A. M., 2015, “Links Between Demographic and Kinship Transitions.” Population and Development Review 41 (3): 465-484. White, L., 2001, “Sibling Relationships over the Life Course: A Panel Analysis.” Journal of Marriage and Family 63(2): 555-568. Wingens, M., 2022, Sociological Life Course Research. New York: Springer.zh_TW