高中生独生与非独生子女人格特质的比较研究

本文运用Y—G人格测验量表对高中生独生与非独生子女的人格特质和人格类型进行了比较研究。结果表明,独生与非独生子女具有许多共同的人格特质,如乐观、自信、开朗活泼,干事效率高,喜好人际交往,具有社会指导性等优点,但也明显存在主观性强、合作性差的弱点。二者人格特质的差异是,独生子女在神经质上优于非独生子女,而合作精神却比非独生子女差;在人格类型上,独生子女B和B'型人格少于非独生子女,问题行为者较少。     

独生子女社交倾向性的元分析研究

元分析(meta-analysis)方法是目前国际上非常流行的一种综合大量献的统计方法,它比传统的综合方法更有效、更客观。元分析主要包括效应值大小(effect size)和齐性检验(test of homogeneity)等问题。本研究就80年代以来,我国有关独生子女与非独生子女社交倾向性的研究进行了元分析统计。其结果显示我国独生子女与非独生子女在社交倾向性上无显差异。     

独生子女非智力人格因素特点的研究

独生子女与非独生子女的人格是否有差异的问题,是独生子女特异性的核心问题。在这个问题上,心理学界长期以来存在两种截然不同的观点。自独生子女问题研究先驱、美国心理学家博汉农(E·W·Bohannon),首先揭示独生子女人格特异性以来,美国的霍尔(S·Hall)、德国的内怀特(E·Neter)和苏联的布隆斯基等人的研究,无一不强调独生子女的人格特异性,视独生子女为“问题儿童”。     

独生子女人格特征的研究

问题人格是决定一个人适应环境的独特行为模式和思维模式,它给人的行为以特色、并使一个人与别人的行为有稳定的差异.从这个意义上说,独生子女与非独生子女的人格是否有差异的问题,是独生子女特异性的核心问题。自1898年美国心理学家博汉农(E·W·Bohannon)发表《家庭中的独生子女》以来,在独生子女人格特异性问题上,心理学界长期存在两种截然不同的观点。霍尔(S·Hall)、内     

城市独生子女与非独生子女未成年人犯罪的主要特征比较

本文运用全国未成年犯抽样调查资料,对独生子女与非独生子女犯罪的主要特征进行了比较.研究发现城市独生子女与非独生子女未成年犯在犯罪时的年龄、刑期、重新犯罪比例、犯罪类型的多数方面、犯罪目的、犯罪时的心理状态等方面均不存在显著差异.独生子女的文化程度高于非独生子女,犯强奸罪的比例是独生子女高于非独生子女,犯盗窃罪的是非独生子女高于独生子女.笔者认为,从整体上看,将独生子女作为特殊的未成年人犯罪群体的论点值得商榷.     

成年独生子女自尊水平和主观幸福感的特点及二者间的关系

运用滚雪球式方便取样方法对城市的100位成年独生子女和100位成年非独生子女进行了自尊水平和主观幸福感的测查。结果发现:(1)独生子女的自尊水平和主观幸福感的亚维度——生活满意度均显著高于非独生子女;(2)独生子女的主观幸福感和自尊水平呈现异质性,表现出显著性别和婚姻状况的差异;(3)与非独生子女不同,独生子女自尊水平与主观幸福感之间不存在显著关联。     

独生子女研究生择偶观研究

择偶观是指人们在挑选配偶过程中所持有的价值判断和态度倾向。本研究采用自编量表对独生子女研究生的择偶观进行了调查与分析。研究结果表明：独生子女研究生的择偶观与非独生子女相比,并无显著差异。     

加强独生子女个性心理研究

随着我国计划生育政策的实施,独生子女的教育问题已上升为社会的普遍问题。探讨独生子女的个性心理特征并实施教育这一课题,也受到了人们的极大关注。国外对独生子女的研究,本世纪初就已开始,近十多年来更是一个热门问题。归纳起来,主要有两种倾向:一是认为独生子女是“问题儿童”;他们从医学和个性心理学角度出发得出独生子女在性格方面必然比非独生子女差的结论。二是认为独生子女并非“问题儿童”;他们同广泛的家庭环境联系起来认为独生子女并非“天生”、“必然”具备不良个性心理特点。前一论点停留在独生子女本身的研究,后一论点注意用联系、发     

我国独生子女群体的婚姻稳定性分析

本文基于2000年全国0 95‰人口普查数据和2005年上海1%人口抽样调查资料,运用logstic回归分析等定量方法,就我国独生子女群体的婚姻稳定性进行了初步的分析.本文认为,独生子女总体的婚姻较为稳定,但与非独生子女群体相比,独生子女尤其是第一代低龄独生女性婚姻不稳定的比例较高;独生子女的婚姻稳定程度与就业状况、受教育程度等个人特征密切相关,与父母婚姻的稳定性等家庭背景也有一定的联系.     

西安市小学生中独生与非独生子女个性品质的比较研究

本文研究了西安城区１０所小学７８７名独生与非独生子女个性品质方面的情况。我们设计了有１８个行为项目的教师问卷（每项按五等评分）及家长问卷;对结果进行了因素分析,据所聚类的项目内容,将所得四个因素命名为人际关系、自我中心、学习动力和独立性,进行多变量的变异数分析结果表明,独生子女的自我中心和学习动力比非独生子女强烈;而独立性却比非独生子女差．这说明独生子女在个性品质方面既有缺点,也有优点,不能说得一无是处;关键在于正确的教育思想和方法。     

Not Only But Also

Since the early years of psychological research, investigators in psychology have made use of mathematical models of psychological phenomena. Models are now routinely used to represent and study cognitive processes, the structure of psychological measurements, the structure of correlational relationships among variables, the nature of change over time, and many other topics and phenomena of interest. All of these models, in their attempt to provide a parsimonious representation of psychological phenomena, are wrong to some degree and are thus implausible if taken literally. Such models simply cannot fully represent the complexities of the phenomena of interest and at best provide an approximation of the real world. This imperfection has implications for how we specify, estimate, and evaluate models, and how we interpret results of fitting models to data. Using factor analysis and structural equation models as a context, I examine some implications of model imperfection for our use of models, focusing on formal specification of models; the nature of parameters and parameter estimates; the relevance of discrepancy functions; the issue of sample size; the evaluation, development, and selection of models; and the conduct of simulation studies. The overall perspective is that our use and study of models should be guided by an understanding that our models are imperfect and cannot be made to be exactly correct.     

Embedding If and Only If

Some left-nested indicative conditionals are hard to interpret while others seem fine. Some proponents of the view that indicative conditionals have No Truth Values (NTV) use their view to explain why some left-nestings are hard to interpret: the embedded conditional does not express the truth conditions needed by the embedding conditional. Left-nestings that seem fine are then explained away as cases of ad hoc, pragmatic interpretation. We challenge this explanation. The standard reasons for NTV about indicative conditionals (triviality results, Gibbardian standoffs, etc.) extend naturally to NTV about biconditionals. So NTVers about conditionals should also be NTVers about biconditionals. But biconditionals embed much more freely than conditionals. If NTV explains why some left-nested conditionals are hard to interpret, why do biconditionals embed successfully in the very contexts where conditionals do not embed?     

But It's Only An Inkblot

The nature of the Rorschach is discussed using data from three temporal consistency studies with children of different ages, plus two other studies in which the retest reliability question was approached by experimental manipulation. It is postulated that the test response reflects the basic psychological styles or response tendencies that have developed within the personality, plus representations of the more private world of the person. The challenge for interpretation and research is to differentiate which of the test elements reflect each of these features, and to determine how they merge to create the response during a very brief time interval.     

In Favor of Being Only Humean

The twin conceptions of (1) natural law as causal structure and (2) explanation as passage from phenomenon to cause, are two sides of a certain philosophical coin, to which I shall offer an alternative – Humean – currency. The Humean alternative yokes together a version of the regularity conception of law and a conception of explanation as passage from one regularity, to another which has it as an instance but of which it is not itself an instance. I will show that the regularity conception of law is the basis of a distinguished branch of physical mechanics; thus the Humean conception of law, like its better-loved rival, enjoys the support of a venerated tradition in mechanical theory – in fact, that strand which culminates in quantum theory. I shall also offer an account of explanatory asymmetry, a natural companion to the Humean conception of explanation as passage from one regularity to another of greater scope, as an alternative to van Fraassen's unsatisfactory account. My account of asymmetry is just as free of reliance on context as it is free of reliance on cause. I shall thus proclaim that explanatory asymmetry is at once a reality deserving of philosophical treatment – one not to be given over to the care of psychology or linguistics – and at the same time susceptible of an account worthy of Hume.