政大機構典藏-National Chengchi University Institutional Repository(NCCUR):Item 140.119/133979

政大機構典藏-National Chengchi University Institutional Repository(NCCUR):Item 140.119/133979

English | 正體中文 | 简体中文 | Post-Print筆數 : 27 | 全文笔数/总笔数 : 113656/144643 (79%)
造访人次 : 51694585 在线人数 : 405

RC Version 6.0 © Powered By DSPACE, MIT. Enhanced by NTU Library IR team.

搜寻范围

查询小技巧：

您可在西文检索词汇前后加上"双引号"，以获取较精准的检索结果

若欲以作者姓名搜寻，建议至进阶搜寻限定作者字段，可获得较完整数据

进阶搜寻

主页 ‧ 登入 ‧ 上传 ‧ 说明 ‧ 关于政大典藏 ‧ 管理

到手机版

政大機構典藏 > 教育學院 > 輔導與諮商碩士學位學程 > 學位論文 > Item 140.119/133979

请使用永久网址来引用或连结此文件: https://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/133979

题名:	華人親子間應得感、心理分離對情緒勒索之影響：以意識形態差異為例 The effects of Psychological Entitlement, Psychological Separation on emotional blackmail in Chinese parent- child relationship: An example of ideological differences
作者:	黃囇莉 Huang, Li-Li
贡献者:	陳婉真 Chen, Wan- Chen 黃囇莉 Huang, Li-Li
关键词:	心理分離親子衝突應得感情緒勒索意識形態價值觀 Conflict between parents and children Emotional Blackmail Ideology Psychological Entitlement Psychological Separation Values
日期:	2021
上传时间:	2021-02-01 14:30:41 (UTC+8)
摘要:	近年來，台灣在某些政治/社會議題上呈現世代間衝突，親代/權威者的「情緒勒索」成為新流行的用語，華人傳統社會是以義務為基礎之社會(duty-based society)，但現代民主社會乃是以權利為基礎的 (righted-based)，因而台灣社會正面臨這樣的傳統/現代之意識轉化。鑒於此，本論文旨在探究大學生與其父母之價值觀/意識形態差異所引發之衝突，在衝突中親代是否使用情緒勒索，情緒勒索的本土化方式，以及子女如何應對對父母的情緒勒索，影響子女面對情緒勒索的心理因素，以及這些因素對親子關係之影響。本研究進行了兩個研究，一為質性研究，另一為量化研究。質性研究深度訪談18位20多歲年輕人，根據他們的敘說，與父母在價值觀/意識型態上最顯著的差異關於同志(婚姻)的支持，或台灣獨立/與中國大陸關係的議題。差異係源自子代的參考架構已從父母轉移至同儕，媒體使用/閱聽與資訊來源，子代的直接經驗與參與活動。面對子代在價值觀/意識形態的差異，親代甚少體認子代具獨立思考，會生氣、憤怒，甚而不理，進而威脅，訴諸子代未盡義務的情緒勒索，進而影響親子關係。子代因與父母在心理分離不等的程度而有不同之反應方式。量化研究則是以大學生/研究生423位為研究參與者，以問卷為研究工具，以翻譯或新編擬之量表探究子代與父親/母親間之價值觀/意識形態差異，父親/母親之情緒勒索方式，子女之反應方式，以及影響情緒勒索及親子關係之各種因子。研究結果顯示：確認同志婚姻、台灣獨立/與中國之關係是親子衝突之主要來源；父親用較多生氣、不理的情緒勒索、母親用較多訴諸義務的情緒勒索。子代在心理分離上，「衝突獨立者」最多，多用陽奉陰違方式以保持家人和諧，或直接衝突、蒙受被斷絕經濟支持的風險。論文最後也對未來研究方向提出建議。 In recent years, Taiwan has presented generational conflicts on certain political/social issues and make parental/authoritative "emotional blackmail" become a new buzzword. The traditional Chinese society is a duty-based society. However, modern democratic society is right- based, therefore, Taiwan is facing such a transformation of traditional/modern consciousness. Due to this transition, this thesis attempts to explore the conflicts caused by differences in values/ideologies between college students and their parents, whether parents use emotional blackmail in the conflict or not, the indigenous ways of emotional blackmail, how children respond to emotional blackmail against their parents, the psychological factors that influence children face emotional blackmail, and the effects of these factors on the parent-child relationship. This thesis conducted two studies, one is a qualitative study, and the other is a quantitative study. A qualitative study conducted in-depth interviews with 18 young people in their 20s. According to their narratives, the most significant differences in values/ideologies from their parents were related to the support of LGBT (same-sex marriage), or Taiwan independence/relationship with mainland China. The difference comes from the reference framework of the young generation has shifted from parents to peers, media usage/reading and information sources, the young’s direct experience and participation in activities. Faced with the differences in values/ideologies of the young, parents seldom realize that the young have the ability to think independently, they will be angry, and even ignore them, and then threat the young, resort to not fulfilling obligations of the young. Eventually, emotional blackmail affects parents and children relationship. Children react differently due to the degree of psychological separation from their parents. Another quantitative study with 423 college students/graduate students as participant using questionnaire as instrument was conducted. The questionnaire includes translated or newly compiled scales to explore differences in values/ ideologies between the young and their fathers/mothers, the ways fathers/mothers use to practice emotional blackmail, how children react, and various factors that affect emotional blackmail and parent-child relationship. The results of the study show that same-sex marriage, Taiwan’s independence/relationship with China are the main sources of parent-child conflicts; fathers resort mostly to more anger and ignorance, and mothers resort to more obligations in practicing emotional blackmail. In terms of psychological separation of the young, "conflict independent" is the most. They often use “Yang-Feng-Yin-Wei” to maintain family harmony, or directly conflict with parents and endure the risk of being cut off from financial support. At the end of the thesis, future research directions are suggested.
參考文獻:	文崇一(1989)。《中國人的價值觀》。臺北：東大圖書館。王乾任 (2018)。〈產值衰退下的奮力掙扎：2017 年臺灣出版產業回顧〉。《台灣出版與閱讀》，1，16-18。王叢桂（1993）。〈三個世代大學畢業工作者的價值觀〉。《本土心理學研究》，(2)，206-250。doi:10.6254/1993.2.206 王叢桂(2005)。〈華人價值研究〉。見楊國樞、黃光國、楊中芳(主編)：《華人本土心理學》，頁633- 664。臺北：遠流。王叢桂、羅國英（2011）。〈工作目的價值觀的變與不變：十年之後〉。《中華輔導與諮商學報》，(31)，101-126。doi:10.7082/CJGC.201112.0102 杜玉蓉譯（2000）。《情緒勒索》。台北 : 智庫文化。杜玉蓉譯（2017）。《情緒勒索》。台北 : 究竟。周玉慧、朱瑞玲（2013）。〈分殊或趨同？台灣民眾價值觀之變遷及其影響因素〉。見葉光輝（主編）：《華人的心理與行為：全球化脈絡下的研究反思》，頁253- 288。台北市：中央研究院民族學研究所。周慕姿(2017)。《情緒勒索----那些在伴侶、親子、職場間，最讓人窒息的相處》。台北：寶瓶文化。洪福源、邱紹一、林鋐宇、鄭光燦(2013)。〈大學生應得權益感量表中文版之發展〉，《中正教育研究》，12卷1期，71-105。洪福源、邱素玲、鄭光燦(2012)。〈大學生學業應得權益感研究：量表發展與相關變項分析-------以台灣背部與中部地區八所大學為例〉，《教育研究與發展期刊》，8卷4期，頁141–174。孫世維（1998）。〈大學生在分離－個體化與相關家庭因素〉。《中華心理衛生學刊》，11(2），21－58。曾怡雅 (2010)。《大學生分離個體化、父母依附、及生涯自我認同狀態之相關研究》。交通大學教育所碩士論文。許詩淇、黃囇莉（2009）。〈天下無不是的父母？－華人父母角色義務對親子衝突與親子關係的影響〉。《中華心理學刊》，51(3)，295-317。doi:10.6129/ CJP.2009.5103.02 游銘仁、吳靜吉(2019)。〈應得權益感與創新行為關係之研究：以創意自我效能為中介變項〉，《科技管理學刊》，24卷1期，1–29。陳映羽，王嘉伶 (2017)。〈職場之情緒勒索對第一線員工服務破壞行為之影響〉。《北商學報》，32，41-71。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。黃囇莉（2007）。〈M型政黨vs.鐘型意識－台灣國族認同之意識型態及其心理基礎〉。《中華心理學刊》，49(4)，451-470。doi:10.6129/CJP.2007.4904.08 黃囇莉、朱瑞玲（2007）。〈是亂流？還是潮起、潮落？─尋找臺灣的「核心價值」及其變遷〉。《台灣的社會變遷1985～2005：台灣社會變遷調查計畫第十一次研討會》。台北：中央研究院，社會學研究所。黃囇莉、朱瑞玲(2012)。〈是亂流？還是潮起、潮落？――尋找台灣的「核心價值」及其變遷〉。見朱瑞玲、瞿海源、張苙雲(主編)：《台灣的社會變遷1985―2005：心理、價值與宗教，台灣社會變遷基本調查系列三之2》，頁1-36。臺北：中研院社會學研究所。黃囇莉、黃光國（1979）。〈權威及獨斷人格對中美斷交事件知覺的影響〉。《中央研究院民族學研究所集刊》，48 期，155~196 。黃囇莉、鄭琬蓉、黃光國(2008)。〈邁向發聲之路：上下關係中忍的歷程與自我之轉化〉，《本土心理學刊》，29期，3-76。蕭阿勤 (2005)。〈世代認同與歷史敘事：台灣一九七○ 年代 [回歸現實] 世代的形成〉，《台灣社會學》，9，1- 58。雷霆、楊國樞(1986)。〈大學生價值觀的變遷：二十年後〉。見瞿海源、章英華主編，《台灣社會與文化變遷》，頁479-512。中央研究院民族學研究所專刊乙種第十六號。台北：中央研究院民族學研究所。楊國樞、黃囇莉(1986)。〈大學生人生觀的變遷：二十年後〉。見瞿海源、章英華主編，《台灣社會與文化變遷》，頁443-478。中央研究院民族學研究所專刊乙種第十六號。台北：中央研究院民族學研究所。楊國樞(1988)。〈中國大學生的價值取向及其變遷〉。見楊國樞(著)：《中國人的蛻變》，頁235-280。臺北：桂冠。 Adonor, T.W., Frenkel-Brunswik, E., Levinson, D.J. & Sanford, R.N. (1950). The authoritarian personality. New York: Harper. Ainsworth, M.,& Bowlby, J. (1991). An Ethological Approach to Personality Development. American Psychologist, 46(4), 333-341. Allport, G.W., P. E.Vernon, and G. Lindzey (1960). Study of Values: Manual and test booklet (3rd ed.). Boston: Houhgton Mifflin. Allport, G. W. (1961). Pattern and growth in personality. New York: Holt, Reinhart & Winston. Altemeyer, B. (1998). The other ‘thoritarian personality’. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 30, 47-92. Bar-Kalifa, E., Bar-Kalifa, L., Rafaeli, E., George-Levi, S., & Vilchinsky, N.(2016). Relational entitlement moderates the associations between support matching and perceived partner responsiveness. Journal of Research in Personality, 65, 1–10. Blos, P. (1967). The second individuation process of adolescence. Psychoanalytic Study of Child, 72, 162-186. Brindley, T. A. (1989). Socio-psychological Values in the Republic of China (I). Asian Thought and Society, 14(41-42), 98-115. Brindley, T. A.(1990). Socio-psychological Values in the Republic of China (II). Asian Thought and Society, 15(43), 1-16. Buss, D. M., Gomes, M., Higgins, D. S., & Lauterbach, K. (1987). Tactics of manipulation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 52, 1219– 1229. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.52.6.1219 Campbell, K. W., Bonacci, A. M., Shelton, J., Exline, J. J., & Bushman, B. J. (2004). Psychological entitlement: Interpersonal consequences and validation of self-report measure. Journal of Personality Assessment, 83, 29-45. Candel, O. S., & Turliuc, M. (2017). An overview of the research of psychological entitlement. Definitions and conceptual characteristics. Revista de Psihologie, 63(4), 257–268. Chen, S. (2010). Relations of Machiavellianism with emotional blackmail orientation of salespeople. Procedia: Social and Behavioral Sciences, 5, 294– 298. http:// dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2010.07.091 Chowning, K., & Campbell, N.(2009). Development and validation of a measure of academic entitlement: Individual differences in students’ externalized responsibility and entitled expectations, Journal of Educational Psychology, 101, 4, 982–997. Emmons, R.A. (1984). Factor Analysis and Construct Validity of the Narcissistic Personality Inventory. Journal of Personality Assessment, 48, 291-300. Forward, S. (1997). Emotional blackmail. NY: HaperCollins Publishers Inc. Forward, S., & Frazier, D. (1997). Emotional blackmail: When the people in your life use fear, obligation, and guilt to manipulate you. New York, NY: HarperCollins. George-Levi, S., Vilchinsky, N., Tolmacz, R., & Liberman, G.(2014). Testing the concept of relational entitlement in the dyadic context: Further validation and associations with relationship satisfaction. Journal of Family Psychology, 28, 2, 193–203. Gottman, J. M. (1999). The marriage clinic: A scientifically based marital therapy. New York, NY: Norton. Grichting, Wolfgang L. (1971) The Value System in Taiwan 1970: A Preliminary Report. Taipei: Wolfgang L. Grichting. Hoffman, J. A. (1984). Psychological separation of late adolescents from parents. Journal of counseling psychology, 31(2), 170-178. Hofstede, G. (1980). Culture’s consequence: International differences in work-related values. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage. Hsu, H. Y., Huang, L. L. & Hwang, K. K.(2019). Liberal–conservative dimension of moral concerns underlying political faction formation in Taiwan. Asian Journal of Social Psychology, 22, 301-315. DOI: 10.1111/ajsp.12367. Jost, J. T., Nosek, B. A. & Gosling, S. D. (2008). Ideology: Its resurgence in social, personality, and political psychology. Perspectives on Psychological Sciences, 3(2), 126-136. Kantor, D., & Lehr, W. (1975). Inside the family. SanFrancisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. Karnani, S. R., & Zelman, D. C. (2019). Measurement of emotional blackmail in couple relationships in Hong Kong. Couple and Family Psychology: Research and Practice, 8 (3), 165–180. Kraut, R. E. & Lewis, S. H. (1975). Alternate models of family influence on student political ideology. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 31(5), 791-800. Knee, C. R., Canevello, A., Bush, A. L., & Cook, A. (2008). Relationship-contingent self-esteem and the ups and downs of romantic relationships. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 95(3), 608–627. https://doi.org/10.1037 /0022-3514.95.3.608 Kingshott, B. F., Bailey, K., & Wolfe, S. E.(2004). Police culture, ethics and entitlement Theory. Criminal Justice Studies, 17, 2, 187–202. Levin, S.(1970). On the psychoanalysis of attitudes of entitlement. Bulletin of the Philadelphia Association for Psychoanalysis, 20, 1–10. Lewis, S. H. & Kraut, R. E. (1972). Correlates of Student Political Activism and Ideology. Journal of social issues, 28(4), 131-149. Liu, C. (2010). The relationship between employees’ perception of emotional blackmail and their wellbeing. Procedia: Social and Behavioral Sciences, 5, 299–303. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2010.07.092 Liu, C., & Jhuang, S. (2016). The study of emotional blackmail toward consumer purchasing intention: Moderating variables of self-esteem. The Marketing Review, 13, 185–215. Liu, J. H., Huang, L.L., & Mcfedries, C. (2008) Cross-Sectional and Longitudinal Differences in Social Dominance Orientation and Right Wing Authoritarianism as a Function of Political Party Preferences and Societal Change. Asian Journal of Social Psychology, 11, 116-126. Mannheim, K. (1952).The Problem of Generations` in Mannheim, K.: Mannheim’ Essays on the Sociology of Knowledge. London: RKP (first published 1923). Markus, H. R., & Kitayama, S. (1991). Culture and the self: Implications for cognition, emotion, and motivation. Psychological Review, 98(2), 224–253. DOI: 10.1037/ 0033-295X.98.2.224 Mahler, M. S., Pine, F., & Bergman, A. (1975). The psychological birth of the human infant. NY: Basic Books. Metzger, T.A.（1981）〈新儒學（理學）政治文化中「自我」與「權威」〉。見Kleinman, A. & Lin, T.Y.（Eds.）（1981）. Normal & Abnormal Behavior in Chinese Culture. Boston: D. Reidel Publishing Company. Meyer, W. (1991). A case of restricted entitlement. Clinical Social Work Journal, 19( 3), 223–235. Minuchin, S. (1974). Families and family therapy. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Morf, C., & Rhodewalt, F. (2001). Unraveling the paradoxes of narcissism: A dynamic self- regulatory processing model. Psychological Inquiry, 12, 4, 2001, p. 177–196. Morris, C. W. (1956). Varieties of Human Value. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Rokeach, M. (1973). The nature of human values. New York, NY: The Free Press. Roinson, J Oyserman, D., Coon, H. M., Kemmelmeier, M. (2002). Rethinking individualism and collectivism: Evaluation of theoretical assumptions and meta-analyses. Psychological Bulletin, 128, 3-72..P., Shaver, P.R. & Wrightsman, L.S.(2013). Measurement of personality and social psychological attitudes. New York: Academic Press. Sauer, R. J. (1982). Family enmeshment. FamilyTherapy, 9, 299–304 Schwartz, S. H. (1992). Universals in the content and structure of values: Theory andempirical tests in 20 countries. In M. Zanna (Ed.), Advances in experimental socialpsychology, Vol. 25 (pp. 1-65). New York, NY: Academic Press. Schwartz, S. H. (1994). Are there universal aspects in the content and structure of values? Journal of Social Issues, 50, 19-45. Schwartz, S. H. (1996). Value priorities and behavior: Applying a theory of integrated value systems. In C. Seligman, J. M. Olson, & M. P. Zanna (Eds.), The psychology of values: The Ontario symposium, Vol. 8 (pp. 1-24). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum. Scott, W. A. (1965). Values and organizations. Chicago: Rand McNally. Stagner, R. (1936). Fascist attitudes: An exploratory study. Journal of Social Psychology, 6, 309-319. Tolmacz, R., & Mikulincer, M. (2011). The sense of entitlement in romantic relationships –Scale construction, factor structure, construct validity, and its associations with attachment orientations. Psychoanalytic Psychology, 28(1), 75–94. Tolmacz, R., Efrati, Y., & Ben-David, B. (2016). The sense of relational entitlement among adolescents toward their parents (SREap) – Testing an adaptation of the SRE. Journal of Adolescence, 53, 127–140. Triandis, H.C. (1989). The self and social behavior in differing cultural contexts. Psychological review, 96(3), 506-520. Tomlinson, E. (2012). An integrative model of entitlement beliefs. Employee Responsibilities and Rights Journal, 25, 2, 67–87. Twenge, J. (2006). Generation me: Why today`s young Americans are more confident, assertive, entitled-and more miserable than ever before. New York: Free Press. Twenge, J. & Campbell, W. K. (2009). The narcissism epidemic: Life in the age of entitlement. New York: Free Press. Żemojtel-Piotrowska, M.,P iotrowski, J., Cliton, A.(2015). Agency, communion and entitlement. International Journal of Psychology, 51, 3, 196- 204. Żemojtel-Piotrowska, M.,P iotrowski, J., Cliton, A., Cieciuch, J., Rozyckatran,J., & HA, T.(2017). Entitlement and subjective well-being: A three-nations study. Health Psychology Report, 2, 140–149.
描述:	碩士國立政治大學輔導與諮商碩士學位學程 107172002
資料來源:	http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0107172002
数据类型:	thesis
DOI:	10.6814/NCCU202100131
显示于类别:	[輔導與諮商碩士學位學程] 學位論文

文件中的档案:

档案	描述	大小	格式	浏览次数
200201.pdf		3819Kb	Adobe PDF2	1	检视/开启

在政大典藏中所有的数据项都受到原著作权保护.

社群 sharing

著作權政策宣告 Copyright Announcement

1.本網站之數位內容為國立政治大學所收錄之機構典藏，無償提供學術研究與公眾教育等公益性使用，惟仍請適度，合理使用本網站之內容，以尊重著作權人之權益。商業上之利用，則請先取得著作權人之授權。
The digital content of this website is part of National Chengchi University Institutional Repository. It provides free access to academic research and public education for non-commercial use. Please utilize it in a proper and reasonable manner and respect the rights of copyright owners. For commercial use, please obtain authorization from the copyright owner in advance.

2.本網站之製作，已盡力防止侵害著作權人之權益，如仍發現本網站之數位內容有侵害著作權人權益情事者，請權利人通知本網站維護人員(nccur@nccu.edu.tw)，維護人員將立即採取移除該數位著作等補救措施。
NCCU Institutional Repository is made to protect the interests of copyright owners. If you believe that any material on the website infringes copyright, please contact our staff(nccur@nccu.edu.tw). We will remove the work from the repository and investigate your claim.

DSpace Software Copyright © 2002-2004 MIT & Hewlett-Packard / Enhanced by NTU Library IR team Copyright © - 回馈