首页> 外文学位 >Interpersonal problem-solving styles of aggressive and victimized children: The aggressor/victim system.
【24h】

Interpersonal problem-solving styles of aggressive and victimized children: The aggressor/victim system.

机译:积极进取和受害儿童的人际解决问题风格:侵略者/受害者系统。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例

摘要

The main purpose of this study was to gain insight into the interpersonal problem-solving styles of aggressive and victimized children and to use this insight to help explain the stability of the aggressor/victim relationship. It was thought that aggressive and victimized children would have some similar limitations in their problem-solving styles and other differences that would be complementary. In order to help explain why these children have opposite behaviors despite their similar problem-solving limitations, personality characteristics of aggressive and victimized children were also examined.;Questionnaires containing story-completion tasks and Likert ratings of personality characteristics were administered to 138 fourth, fifth, and sixth graders from three different Massachusetts schools. Children's levels of aggression and victimization were assessed through peer nominations. Aggressors, victims, aggressive victims and comparison children were compared in terms of the following five aspects of problems solving (taken from the story completion tasks): (1) problem definition, (2) information-seeking, (3) evaluation of response options, (4) beliefs about abilities, and (5) consequential thinking. Based on the Likert scale questionnaires, children were also compared in terms of personality characteristics, self-esteem, and locus of control.;Results showed that both problem-solving and personality characteristics independently contributed to aggression and victimization. Aggressive children generally fell into a predicted pattern of problem-solving styles and personality characteristics, but victims did so only sometimes. However, although the results for victims were usually not as strong as expected, they were often in the hypothesized direction. In terms of problem-solving, as predicted, aggression was related to defining problems in hostile ways and not seeking additional information before deciding on responses in ambiguous situations. However, contrary to prediction, victimization was not related to problem definition and information-seeking. Moreover, as expected, aggression was related to favoring aggressive solutions, while victimization was related to favoring submissive solutions. Finally, as predicted, aggression was related to believing that aggressive solutions would be successful and easy to enact, but contrary to prediction, victimization was related to thinking that submissive solutions would be hard to enact. In addition, victimization was related to thinking that submissive solutions would be successful only when participants showed both aggression and victimization. In terms of personality characteristics, as predicted, victimization was positively related to shyness and aggression was negatively related to shyness. Moreover, aggression was positively related to impulsivity, but contrary to prediction, victimization was not negatively related to impulsivity.;There were three additional important findings of this study. First, aggressors actively disapproved of assertive, but non-aggressive, solutions (i.e., positive problem solving) even more than they disapproved of submissive solutions. Second, children's problem-solving styles often depended on their levels of both aggression and victimization. In other words, aggressors and victims were often not only different from each other, but also different from a group of aggressive victims. Finally, problem-solving and personality characteristics were related to aggression and victimization in different ways depending on the type of aggression and victimization (i.e., physical, verbal, or relational). Results are discussed in terms of the supported and unsupported aspects of the proposed model, and in terms of implications for future research and interventions aimed at reducing peer aggression.
机译:这项研究的主要目的是深入了解侵略性和受害儿童的人际关系解决方式,并利用此洞察力来说明侵略者/受害者关系的稳定性。人们认为,积​​极进取和受害的孩子在解决问题的方式上会有一些类似的局限性,而其他方面的差异将是相辅相成的。为了帮助解释为什么这些儿童尽管在解决问题上有相似的局限性,但他们却表现出相反的行为,还对好斗和受害儿童的人格特征进行了研究。138名第四,第五名被调查者包含了故事完成任务和李克特的人格特征评分以及来自马萨诸塞州三所不同学校的六年级学生。通过同伴提名评估儿童的攻击和受害程度。从解决问题的以下五个方面(从故事完成任务中得出)比较了侵略者,受害者,侵略性受害者和比较儿童:(1)问题的定义,(2)寻求信息,(3)评估应对方案,(4)关于能力的信念和(5)结果思维。根据李克特量表,还对儿童的人格特征,自尊和控制源进行了比较。结果表明,解决问题和人格特征均独立地导致了侵略和受害。富于攻击性的孩子通常会陷入解决问题的风格和个性特征的预期模式,但受害者有时只是这样做。但是,尽管对受害者的调查结果通常不如预期的那么好,但往往是在假设的方向上进行的。就解决问题而言,正如预期的那样,侵略性与以敌对的方式定义问题有关,而不是在模棱两可的情况下决定作出反应之前未寻求其他信息。但是,与预测相反,受害与问题定义和信息寻求无关。而且,正如预期的那样,侵略与赞成积极的解决方案有关,而受害与赞成顺从的解决方案有关。最后,正如预料的那样,侵略与认为积极的解决方案将是成功且易于制定有关,但与预测相反,受害与认为顺从的解决方案将难以制定有关。此外,受害与认为只有当参与者表现出侵略性和受害性时,顺从性解决方案才会成功有关。如预期的那样,就人格特征而言,受害与害羞成正相关,而侵略与害羞成负相关。此外,侵略性与冲动性呈正相关,但与预测相反,受害与冲动性不呈负相关。本研究还有三个重要发现。首先,侵略者对主动但非侵略性的解决方案(即积极的问题解决方案)的积极反对甚至比他们对顺从性解决方案的反对更为积极。其次,儿童解决问题的方式通常取决于他们的攻击性和受害程度。换句话说,侵略者和受害者常常不仅彼此不同,而且与一群侵略性受害者不同。最后,解决问题和人格特征与侵略和受害有不同的方式,取决于侵略和受害的类型(即身体,语言或关系)。根据提议的模型的受支持和不受支持的方面,以及对旨在减少同伴攻击的未来研究和干预措施的意义,讨论了结果。

著录项

  • 作者

    Bernstein, Judith Yael.;

  • 作者单位

    Brandeis University.;

  • 授予单位 Brandeis University.;
  • 学科 Psychology Behavioral.;Psychology Social.;Education Elementary.;Psychology Developmental.;Psychology Personality.
  • 学位 Ph.D.
  • 年度 1999
  • 页码 217 p.
  • 总页数 217
  • 原文格式 PDF
  • 正文语种 eng
  • 中图分类
  • 关键词

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号