臺北市高中階段資優生與一般同儕的同理心反應研究－以多向度結構模式為基礎

Abstract

本研究以Davis(1996)同理心多向度結構模式為基礎，旨在探討誘發關注焦點的不同和學生身份對同理心內在情感的對應式產出、反應式產出、內在認知產出、人際產出的助人行為之影響。研究方法以實驗研究法為主，採取2X3因子實驗設計，藉由誘發不同關注焦點為操弄自變項（情緒焦點、困境焦點、不指定焦點）且將學生身份（資優生、一般同儕）納入另一自變項，探討對各面向同理心反應的影響。 研究對象為臺北市高中男生，經招募而自願同意參與本研究，正式樣本共406位，包括192位資優生和214位一般同儕。依T-IRI測得的同理心內在傾向高低做為配對變項，先形成數組配對組，再從各組隨機分派到各個實驗處理組別，確保在實驗操弄前六細格各組的同理心內在傾向變異情形具同質性，且各組組內的同理心內在傾向呈常態分配。實驗實施程序，先請受試者觀賞自製影片暖身，再各自傾聽錄音檔（包括用以誘發不同關注焦點的指導語，以及高中生call in傾訴心聲的廣播），藉此引發同理心反應，並於影音檔結束立即在研究者自編的「多面向同理心反應量表」自陳作答。 研究結果顯示關注焦點和學生身份對他人感同身受的「沮喪」強烈程度有顯著交互作用影響：在一般同儕中，關注困境焦點組感同身受的沮喪情緒明顯大於不指定焦點的對照組，也明顯大於情緒焦點組；在關注情緒焦點的情況下，資優生感同身受的沮喪情緒顯著大於一般同儕；在關注困境焦點的情況下，一般同儕感同身受的沮喪情緒則顯著大於資優生。然而，關注焦點和學生身份並未共同對任一種同理心內在情感的反應式產出-同理關懷或個人身心憂急，有交互作用影響：僅有關注焦點對同理關懷有顯著影響：在一般同儕中，指定關注困境焦點的同理關懷程度顯著大於對照組。不過，關注焦點和學生身份對助人意願的有無並未有顯著差異；但是，對助人行為的展現形式卻有顯著差異，然事後比較卻無顯著差異。僅有學生身份的不同對助人行為的展現形式有顯著差異影響，包括：偏好情感表達展現的人數，一般同儕中的百分比顯著多於資優生群體內的百分比；以問題解決為展現形式的人數，資優生群體內的百分比顯著多於一般同儕。資優生面對他人負向情緒時，會從中區辨並判斷目標對象所感受到的主體負向情緒類型為何，故感同身受的情緒類型僅有與目標對象整體的負向情緒類型一致者才會特別強烈。至於，誘發不同關注焦點對於資優生的影響，也只有在感同身受對方負向情緒的主體情緒類型時才有顯著影響：在關注情緒焦點的情況下，資優生感同身受「沮喪」的情緒強度明顯大於一般同儕。 根據研究結果，可回應研究動機對實務現場觀察所帶來的疑惑：過去資優生較易受到同儕或師長誤解為沒有同理心，可能來自於其同理心人際產出的助人行為展現形式與一般同儕具有顯著的差異，較偏向顧慮他人長遠性福祉和積極解決造就困境的問題本質，屬於問題解決表達的助人展現形式；然而，一般同儕所偏好的同理心展現形式是情感表達形式，屬於立即性的正向情感回饋，也許正因此造就兩方對同理心所引發的人際產出有認知落差。最後，研究者建議在同理心的培養上，高中階段的資優生與一般同儕可從共通的同理心基模去培養、充實，但在觀點取替能力的強化上，需有區分性的引導為宜。Based on Davis' (1996) multidimensional approach to empathy, the purpose of this study is to explore the effect of manipulated different focus of attention and varied students on empathy outcomes. These empathy outcomes here include: parallel and reactive outcomes, which are both derived from intrapersonal affective outcomes; attribution judgment, derived from intrapersonal non-affective outcomes; interpersonal outcomes, discussed here only in regard to helping behavior based on empathy. The study mainly uses Experimental Research method, and adopts 2x3 factorial experimental design to manipulate the differences in the focus of attention considered as an independent variable (including being concerned about the other’s emotions, concerned about the other’s plight, and being the control group with no interventions), and adds varied students (categorized as gifted students and regular students) into a background variable to discuss the influences on the dependent variable, multidimentional empathy outcomes. A total of 406 senior high school students from Taipei City were recruited as the participants in this study, including 192 gifted students (excelling in mathematics) and 214 regular students. The participants were volunteers after the researcher got into contact with them personally and delivered the informed consent for them. In order to control gender difference in empathy, the participants are all male. The experiment proceeded as follows. First of all, according to dispositional empathy measured by testing via T-IRI, the Taiwanese version of the International Reactivity Index, which was developed by Chiang (2009), all of the participants were separated in several matching groups. Then, participants in each matching group were randomly assigned to three experimental treatment groups to ensure that the six sub-groups created via the two student categories and three foci (emotional focus, problematic focus, and no specified focus of attention) show a normal distribution within each group, and the variability of dispositional empathy between the groups is consistent with homogeneity. Next, the participants were primed by viewing homemade videos. Next, the participants were primed by viewing homemade videos. This was done to have participants receive various instructions in order to manipulate differences in the participants' focus of attention and to induce the participants’ vicarious affective arousal and other reactions of multidimensional empathy by listening to a program broadcast which consisted of a senior high school student calling the radio station and telling the audience of his plight; depression. The instruction and the broadcast program were merged into one audio tape-recorded in sequence according to the experimental procedure. After listening to the audio tape, the participants immediately answered the "Multidimensional Empathy Scale" in order to report their vicarious emotions, feelings, thoughts and their motivation to take some action in response to the object's need. The results support that: (a) With respect to parallel outcomes from intrapersonal affective outcome, there was significant interaction effect between the manipulated “focus of attention” and the various students on empathy outcomes. Moreover, for regular students, when they observed depression in others, being concerned about the other’s plight significantly enhanced the participants' more vicarious affective arousal than being in the control group did; being concerned about the other’s plight also significantly enhanced the participants' more vicarious affective arousal than being concerned about the other’s emotions did. As for being concerned about the emotions of others, gifted students could significantly feel more vicarious affective arousal in the observer of the target's depression than regular students could. However, when being concerned about the other’s plight, regular students could significantly feel more vicarious affective arousal in the observer of the target's depression than gifted students could. (b) Regarding, regarding reactive outcomes from intrapersonal affective outcome, “empathic concern” and “personal distress”, there were no significant interaction effects between the manipulated “focus of attention” and the various students on empathy outcomes. There was only a significant effect of the manipulated “focus of attention” on empathic concern：For regular students, being concerned about the other’s plight indeed significantly enhanced the participants' empathic concern than being the control group without interventions. (c) And, there was no significant interaction effect between the manipulated “focus of attention” and the varied students on volunteering to help the needy target either. (d) Yet, concerning the forms of helping behavior based on empathy, there was significant interaction effect between the manipulated “focus of attention” and the various students. Furthermore, there was only a significant effect of the various students on the forms of helping behavior based on empathy, and the results of post-hoc comparison： Among the participants who have a tendency to respond in expressive support, the percentage of regular students is greater than that of the gifted students; but among the participants who have a tendency to respond in the form of problem-solving based instrumental support, the percentage of gifted students is greater than that of regular students. (e) In addition, in face of other’s negative emotions, gifted students could distinguish from the different types of emotions and judge main type out of the other's negative emotions. Finally, recommendations are given regarding how to enhance empathy and future research direction based on the result of this study.