摘要
目的:根据人口比例、地理位置、生产方式、语言文字状况等方面来选择了汉族与壮族民族作为研究的对象,比较汉族与壮族青年的人格结构。方法:于2005-07/2005-09在广州、湛江、东莞、天津、西安、长沙、沈阳、南宁等地进行样本采集。在汉族被试中发放问卷共1370份,在壮族被试中发放问卷共440份。具体操作是:在当地学校开家长会期间,在不同年级中采用整群随机抽样的方法选取某一班级的家长进行团体施测。汉族被试者平均年龄(33.1±0.3)岁,壮族被试者平均年龄(32.2±0.8)岁。选用的量表是中国人人格形容词评定量表(简式)。该量表包括了“外向活跃”、“严谨自制”、“温顺随和”、“热情豪爽”、“淡泊诚信”、“精明干练”、“善良友好”7个分测验,采用6级评分,要求被试对每一个项目做1～6分(即“完全不符合自己的情况”到“完全符合自己的情况”)的评定。分析两个民族与“‘大七’人格结构模型”的拟合度、两个民族人格结构的均值。结果:在汉族被试者中发放问卷共1370份,回收问卷1368份,问卷回收率99.85%。在壮族被试中发放问卷共440份,回收问卷431份,问卷回收率98.0%。根据回答量表的有效情况,筛选汉族有效被试共985名,壮族有效被试共307名。①汉族的人格结构与“大七人格结构模型”拟合良好,而壮族则拟合不良,拟合优度指数分别为0.84,0.62。②壮族在“外向活跃”、“温顺随和”、“热情豪爽”“善良友好”4个人格结构因子上的得分均显著高于汉族(44.70±5.58,43.26±6.78;31.62±4.62,30.39±4.96;31.72±3.98,30.80±4.63;18.92±4.19,18.36±4.04;F=7.91,10.43,6.84,3.16,P<0.01,0.05)。两族在“严谨自制”、“淡泊诚信”、“精明干练”这几个方面没有差异。结论:汉族与壮族因各自生态环境的相似性与差异性而导致了文化形态的异与同,从而导致了两个民族所形成的行为方式的共性与个性,而在本调查中则具体体现为两个民族人格结构的异同。
AIM： To compare the personality structure between Han and Zhuang youths based on the population, geography, productivity and language. METHODS： Altogether 1 370 Han＇s adults and 440 Zhuang＇s adults were selected as subjects measured with the Chinese Personality Adjective Rating Scale （short-version） during July to September in 2005. The Han＇s subjects were selected from Guangzhou, Zhanjiang, Dongguan, Tianjin, Xi＇an, Changsha and Shengyang. And the Zhuang＇s subjects were selected from Nanning. The idiographic operation was that genearch were selected from one class to be subjects using cluster sampling during patriarchal meetings of the local schools. The average age of Han was （33.1±0.3） years and Zhuang was （32.2±0.8） years. The scale included seven subtests, namely ＂extroversion＂, ＂preciseness＂, ＂gentleness＂, ＂not seek fame and wealth＂, ＂enthusiasm＂, ＂canniness＂ and ＂kind-amity＂. The score was accounted on 6-point scale, arranging from completely unmatched to complete matched. The numeric values of fit index between the Big Seven-Factor Model of Chinese Personality and the two nationalities, and the mean of the personality structure between the two nationalities were analyzed. RESULTS： All 1 370 Han adults had completed the assessment and 1 368 effective questionnaires were called back, with 99.85% validity. And 440 Zhuang adults had completed the assessment and 431 effective questionnaires were called back, with 98.0% validity. After ineligible questionnaires were excluded, totally 985 questionnaires of Han and 307 questionnaires of Zhuang were involved in the result analysis. （1）The fit index between Han and Big Seven-Factor Model of Chinese Personality was good, while the fit index between Zhuang and Big Seven-Factor Model of Chinese Personality was bad. The goodness of fit index were 0.84 and 0.62, respectively. （2）Zhuang＇s means were higher than Han＇s in four personality structure factors, including ＂extroversion＂, ＂gentleness＂, ＂enthusiasm＂ and ＂kind-amity＂ （44.70± 5.58, 43.26±6.78; 31.62±4.62, 30.39±4.96; 31.72±3.98, 30.80±4.63; 18.92±4.19, 18.36±4.04; F =7.91, 10.43, 6.84, 3.16; P 〈 0.01,0.05）. No difference had been found on the ＂preciseness＂, ＂not seek fame and wealth＂ and ＂canniness＂ between them. CONCLUSION： The comparability and otherness of ecology environment between Han and Zhuang bring on the sameness and dissimilarity of certain culture patterns, and then make them have common or different mental and behavioral methods, which in our investigation are the similarities and differences between the two nationalities.
出处
《中国组织工程研究与临床康复》
CAS
CSCD
北大核心
2007年第30期5955-5957,5961,共4页
Journal of Clinical Rehabilitative Tissue Engineering Research
