Objective: To develop the Interpersonal Responsibility Questionnaire(IRQ) for Chinese individuals and ex-amine its reliability and validity. Methods: Based on traditional Chinese culture, combing literature review and data of open-ended questionnaire survey, after the following content analysis, the theoretical structure frame of the IRQ came into being. According to the theoretical construct, the preliminary version of IRQ was made and tested for psychometrics suit-ableness in Chinese adults from different provinces all over the country. Results: The IRQ consisted of 29 items which fell into six dimensions, namely respect and avoidance of interference, concern and consideration, accountability for righteous-ness and offering helping, treasuring and commitment to relationship, avoidance of trouble and impairment for others and re-liability and integrity. The α coefficients of the IRQ and its sub-dimensions were between 0.698 and 0.933; the coefficients of test-retest reliability of the IRQ and its sub-dimensions were between 0.633 and 0.859. Correlation coefficients of the IRQ and its sub-dimensions were between 0.517 and 0.878, and confirmatory factor analysis showed that the structure of IRQ was reasonable. Correlation analysis indicated that IRQ and its sub-dimensions were positively correlated with consci-entiousness, agreeableness, social connectedness, prosocial tendency and three sub-dimensions of empathy, negatively cor-related with one sub-dimension of egocentrism. Conclusion: Beyond desirable measurement qualities, the Interpersonal Responsibility Questionnaire is shown to be empirically useful in further research.
|
1 陈来. 中华文明的核心价值:国学流变与传统价值观. 北京:生活·读书·新知三联书店, 2015. 51-53
2 梁漱溟. 中国文化要义. 上海:上海人民出版社, 2005. 70-73
3 黎红雷."仁义礼智信":儒家道德教化思想的现代价值. 齐鲁学刊, 2015, 5:5-12
4 景海峰. 仁义礼智信与中华文化的核心价值. 马克思主义与现实, 2012, 4:188-194
5 何垚, 黄希庭.《论语》中的人际责任感及其启示. 西南大学学报(社会科学版), 2017, 43(1):94-101
6 许纪霖. 现代中国的家国天下与自我认同现代中国的家国天下与自我认同. 复旦学报(社会科学版), 2015, 57(5):46-53
7 周明洁, 张建新. 中国社会现代化进程和城市现代化水平与中国人群体人格变化模式. 心理科学进展, 2007, 15(2):203-210
8 李明, 叶浩生. 责任心的多元内涵与结构及其理论整合. 心理发展与教育, 2009, 25(3):123-128
9 虞亚君, 张奇勇, 周炎根. 我国大学生社会责任感 20年研究综述. 扬州大学学报(高教研究版), 2014, 18(6):48-51
10 钟华, 郭永玉. 利他人格研究述评. 华东师范大学学报(教育科学版), 2008, 26(1):68-73
11 Jackson JJ, Bogg T, Walton KE, et al. Not all conscientiousness scales change alike:a multi-method, multi-sample study of age differences in the facets of conscientiousness. Journal of Personality & Social Psychology, 2009, 96(2):446-459
12 Jackson JJ, Wood D, Bogg T, et al. What Do Conscientious People Do? Development and Validation of the Behavioral Indicators of Conscientiousness (BIC). Journal of Research in Personality, 2010, 44(4):501-511
13 Roberts BW, Lejuez C, Krueger RF, et al. What is conscientiousness and how can it be assessed? Developmental Psychology, 2012, 50(5):1315-1330
14 王燕. 当代大学生责任观调查报告. 青年研究, 2003, 1:18-23
15 姜勇, 鹿丽娟. 幼儿责任心维度构成的探索性与验证性因子分析. 心理科学, 2000, 23(4):417-421
16 丁强, 卢家楣, 陈宁. 青少年责任感问卷的编制. 中国临床心理学杂志, 2014, 22(5):831-834
17 杨国枢. 中国人的社会取向:社会互动的观点. 见:杨宜音. 中国社会心理学评论(第一辑). 北京:社会科学文献出版社, 2005. 21-54
18 李明, 耿进昂. 责任意识的社会与文化心理学分析. 南京师大学报(社会科学版), 2010, 5(3):111-115
19 黄四林, 韩明跃, 张梅. 人际关系对社会责任感的影响. 心理学报, 2016, 48(5):578-587
20 黄希庭. 再谈人格研究的中国化. 西南师范大学学报(人文社会科学版), 2004, 30(6):5-9
21 黄希庭. 构建和谐社会呼唤中国化人格与社会心理学研究. 心理科学进展, 2007, 15(2):193-195
22 吴明隆. 问卷统计分析实务. 重庆:重庆大学出版社, 2010. 158-191
23 邱郑皓. 量化研究法(三):测量原理与量表发展技术. 台北:双叶书廊, 2012. 3-11
24 王孟成, 戴晓阳, 姚树桥. 中国大五人格问卷的初步编制 Ⅲ:简式版的制定及信效度检验. 中国临床心理学杂志, 2011, 19(4):454-457
25 王宇中. 心理评定量表手册(1999-2010). 郑州:郑州大学出版社, 2011
26 张凤凤, 董毅, 汪凯, 等. 中文版人际反应指针量表(IRI-C) 的信度及效度研究. 中国临床心理学杂志, 2010, 18(2):155-157
27 寇彧, 洪慧芳, 谭晨, 等. 青少年亲社会倾向量表的修订. 心理发展与教育, 2007, 23(1):112-117
28 黄光国, 胡先缙. 人情与面子:中国人的权力游戏. 北京:中国人民大学出版社, 2010
29 汪风炎, 郑红. 中国文化心理学. 广州:暨南大学出版社, 2008. 121-124
|