摘要
目的:探讨四种父母教养方式对大学生成就动机的影响。方法:于2005-08/2005-10随机抽取湖北省四所高校的500名大学生作为被试。采用由作者编制的父母教养方式问卷,该问卷共40个题项。由专制型教养方式、民主型教养方式、溺爱型教养方式和忽视型教养方式4个分问卷构成。各分问卷的信度系数在0.61～0.86之间,且各分问卷都有较好的信、效度。由Gjesme.T和Nyard.R编制的“成就动机测量表”,包括两个分量表:追求成功动机和避免失败动机,该量表具有较高的信度和效度。以班为单位团体测试的方式,要求被试逐项填写,两份问卷一次完成。结果:共发放问卷500份,回收有效问卷485份熏问卷回收率为97%。①不同居住地的大学生在民主型教养方式和追求成功上的得分存在差异(S大城市=41.0000±6.5683,S小城镇=37.6476±5.7267,S农村=39.0271±5.6027,F=6.281,P<0.05鸦S大城市=9.3750±1.6850,S小城镇=8.2423±2.2924,S农村=8.8235±2.3022,F=7.007熏P<0.01)。在父母教养方式和成就动机其他各分问卷上的得分均不存在差异。②大学生在专制型、忽视型和溺爱型父母教养方式分问卷上的得分与其成就动机量表上追求成功分量表的得分存在显著负相关(r=-0.121,-0.162,-0.156,P<0.01,P<0.001),民主型教养方式分问卷的得分与成就动机量表上避免失败分量表的得分存在显著正相关(r=-0.196,P<0.001)。③将485名大学生在成就动机量表中得到的总分从高分到低分排序,由高到低取总人数的27%作为高成就动机组,由低到高取总人数的27%作为低成就动机组。高、低成就动机组在民主型教养方式和忽视型教养方式上的得分差异极其显著(40.0826±5.3721,36.5950±5.7177,t=4.890,P<0.001;18.7438±5.1889,20.9917±5.6796,t=-3.214,P<0.001),在其他教养方式上的得分差异不显著。④大学生成就动机与教养方式各维度的回归分析结果,大学生成就动机与民主型教�
AIM： To analyze the effect of four types of parental educatiooal styles on achievement motivation level of college students.
METHODS： 500 college students were randomly selected from four universities in Hubei province from August to October 2005. Parenting Style Scale created by author was adopted, which consisted of 40 questions and 4 secondary scales including authoritarian, democratic, indulgence and neglecting patterns. The reliability coefficients of 4 secondary scales were between 0.61-0.86, and the reliability and validity of the scale were suitable. The Scale of Achievement Motivation created by Gjesme. T and Nyard. R was composed of 2 subscales： motivation of pursuing success and avoiding failure, which also had acceptable reliability and validity. The students were asked to fill in two scales at one time and each class was regarded as a unit.
RESULTS： 500 questionnaires were sent out, and 485 valid questionnaires were retrieved with the receiving rate of 97%. ① There were significant differences among different family locations in scores of democratic parenting style and pursuing success （Sbig city=41.000 0±6.568 3, Small town=37.647 6±5.726 7, Scountryside=39.027 1±5.602 7, F=6.281, P 〈 0.05; Sbig city=9.375 0±1.685 0, Ssmall town=8.242 3±2.292 4, Scountryside=8.823 5±2.302 2, F = 7.007, P 〈 0.01）. No difference was found in other items. ② Significant negative correlation between authoritarian, indulgence and neglecting parenting styles and pursuing success was found （r=-0.121, -0.162, -0.156, P 〈 0.01, P 〈 0.001）, and significant positive correlation between democratic parenting style and avoiding failure was found （r=-0.196, P 〈 0.001）. ③ The scores of achievement motivation scale of 485 students were arranged from higher to lower, and 27% of the whole population from high to low were selected as high achievement motivation group, and 27% of the whole population from low to high were selected as low achievement motivation group. There were significant di
出处
《中国临床康复》
CSCD
北大核心
2006年第46期50-52,共3页
Chinese Journal of Clinical Rehabilitation
基金
湖北省教育厅人文社科研究项目基金资助(2005y226)
湖北省教育厅省级教研项目基金资助(20050364)~~
