「關係受害情境之同儕介入角色與行為量表」之發展研究

Abstract

本研究之目的為編製《關係受害情境之同儕介入角色與行為量表》，藉以探討國中生對於不同角色之旁觀者捍衛行為能否減輕關係受害之負向情緒的看法。 本研究以立意抽樣選取研究參與者。在量表發展的第一階段，以16名18-26歲之成年人（8名男性及8名女性）作為訪談對象，藉以瞭解其於國中時期關係受害經驗的共同現象，並以訪談分析結果作為編製量表題目之基礎。第二階段以192名國中生（男性101名，女性91名）進行量表的預試分析，藉以確定正式量表之題項。第三階段為正式量表之信度及效度檢核，研究參與者為581名國中生，包含323名男性（56%）與258名女性（44%），年齡介於12至15歲（M=14.17, SD= .80）。研究結果如下： 一、 《關係受害情境之同儕介入角色與行為量表》全量表共計36題，包括「好朋友」、「高人氣同儕」、「一般同學」三個分量表，採用Likert五點量表計分。 二、 信度考驗結果：各分量表內部一致性之Cronbach’s α值介於 .89 ~ .95之間，再測信度介於 .53 ~ .68之間，顯示本量表具有良好之內部一致性與穩定性。 三、 效度考驗結果：本量表具有良好之建構效度及區辨效度。 四、 國中學生針對不同旁觀者角色採取「反抗攻擊者能減輕負向情緒」的想法、與不同旁觀者角色「支持受害者能減輕負向情緒」之想法具有顯著性別差異。 五、 關係受害程度較高的國中生針對不同的「旁觀者角色」與不同類型的「捍衛行為」能否減輕負向情緒之想法具有顯著差異。The purpose of this study was to develop the Assessment Scale of Peer Intervention in Relational Victimization (ASPI: RV) to investigate how adolescents evaluate if the defending behaviors of bystanders could reduce their negative emotions of relational victimization. There were different groups of participants recruited to take part in three phases of scale development. Firstly, 16 adults (8 males and 8 females, age range of 18 to 26) were individually interviewed to share their personal experiences of relational victimization happened during adolescence. The analysis results of the interview data provided the basis of developing the scale items. Secondly, a sample of 192 junior-high-school students (101 males and 91 females) was piloted, and the item selection was based on the analysis results of the pilot data. Thirdly, the final version of ASPI: RV was administrated to 581 students (56% males and mean ages was 14.17), to test the reliability and validity of the scale. The findings of this study were as follows: 1. The ASPI: RV consists of three subscales by roles of defenders: best friend, most popular peer, and classmates. Participants rated 36 items on a 5-point Likert-type scale, ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree). 2. The Cronbach’s α of the subscales were from .89 to .95 and the test-retest reliability coefficients were between .53 and .68. These results indicated that the ASPI: RV has good reliability. 3. The validity analysis results demonstrated that the ASPI: RV has acceptable construct validity and discriminant validity. 4. There were significant gender differences in how students evaluated the defending behaviors (i.e., bully-resisting and victim-supporting), among different roles (i.e., best friend, most popular peer, and classmates), could reduce their negative emotions of relational victimization. 5. For the students with high levels of relational victimization, there were significant differences in how they evaluated if different types of roles as well as defending behaviors could reduce their negative emotions of relational victimization.