Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
Title: 心理師能力評量表之編製及其信效度分析
Other Titles: The Construction, Reliability and Validity Study of Psychologist Competency Rating Scale
Authors: 林家興
Chia-Hsin Lin
Min-Pei Lin
Pei-Chuan Huang
Wei-Hsuan Hu
Shan-Nan Jiang
Issue Date: Sep-2015
Publisher: 國立臺灣師範大學教育心理學系
Department of Educational Psychology, NTNU
Abstract: 在心理師能力本位的國際潮流下,國內心理師培育系所和實習機構督導缺少一份實用且具信效度的能力評量表;本研究主要目的在於編製一份有助於評量全科心理師專業能力的評量表,作為心理師教育工作者、臨床督導,以及個別心理師作為評量專業能力發展的客觀工具。本研究以林家興與黃佩娟(2013)發展的心理師能力指標作為編製心理師能力評量表的藍本,以不同專業發展階段的諮商和臨床心理師(含實習心理師)297 人為研究對象。研究結果顯示,心理師能力評量表全量表及各分量表內部一致性係數皆大於 .93,且根據結構方程模式考驗量表的建構效度,顯示量表之六個因素整體模式適配度佳,心理師能力架構和內涵包括:衡鑑診斷與概念化能力、介入能力、諮詢能力、研究與評鑑能力、督導能力及管理能力等六向度;群組分數差異分析顯示,在心理師能力的六個向度上,性別沒有顯著差異,但博士層級和碩士層級兩組,以及高低執業年資兩組都有顯著差異。本研究並建立百分等級常模作為分數解釋和應用的依據。研究者根據研究結果提出實務應用和未來研究建議。
Under the global trend of competence-based approach to the training of psychologists, there is a lack of a feasible, valid, and reliable competency rating scale among psychologist training institutes in Taiwan. The purpose of the study was to construct an objective rating scale to be used in assessing general psychologist’s professional competencies by educators, clinical supervisors, and psychologiststhemselves. The rating scale was based on competency benchmarks developed by Lin and Huang (2013), and was constructed and used as the research instrument. A total of 297 counseling and clinical psychologists (including psychology interns) in various developmental stages were recruited as research participants. The results of the study showed that the scale has a high level of internal consistency as indicated by full scale’s and subscales’ alphas being greater than .93. A structural equation modeling analysis was conducted to test the construct validity of the scale. The six-factor model was found to be a good fit. The scale is comprised of six competences: assessment, diagnosis, and conceptualization; intervention; consultation; research and evaluation; supervision; and management. The study also showed that there were significant mean differences on the full scale and 6 subscales scores between doctoral level and master’s level psychologists; and between senior and junior psychologists. This result indicated that the scale has a good differential validity. Percentile rank norms were established for easy interpretation of the scores. Suggestions for practical applications and future study based on the current study results were also presented.
Other Identifiers: 2FC99E46-4265-8F24-B019-01E3EC70B530
Appears in Collections:教育心理學報

Files in This Item:
File SizeFormat 
ntnulib_ja_A0201_4701_063.pdf1.03 MBAdobe PDFView/Open

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