同居題項設計：家庭動態調查追蹤資料的研究

于若蓉; 廖培珊

doi:10.7014/SRMA.2021100001

山西大学，您好！

感谢采购，人社期刊库｜人社论文库，期间：2025/01/01~2025/12/31

感谢试用，科学期刊库｜科学论文库，期间：2024/10/20~2025/01/20

浏览高级检索

关闭
检索检索高级检索出版物检索
浏览期刊主题浏览核心期刊浏览期刊拼音浏览

关闭

查询符号(半角)	查询符号意义说明
空格	表示为「AND」两个查询词之交集
双引号 ( " " )	片语以双引号标示开始及结束，而且只寻找出现顺序相同的字词，例： " image process "
?	表示一个字母切截，输入两个?表两个字母，依此类推，例：输入「Appl?」，查得结果应为appl e , appl y … ( 常用于英文字查询 )
*	表示不限字母切截，由0~n. 例：输入「appl*」，查得结果应为appl e , appl es , appl y , appl ied , appl ication … ( 常用于英文字查询 )
AND、OR、NOT	布尔逻辑组合关键字，用来扩大或缩小查询范围的技巧。 (1) AND ：缩小查询范围 (2) OR ：扩大查询范围(3) NOT：排除不相关的范围

DOI 是数位物件识别码（ D igital O bject I dentifier ）的简称，
为物件在网路上的唯一识别码，可用于永久连结并引用目标物件。

使用DOI作为永久连结

每个DOI号前面加上「 http://dx.doi.org/ 」便成为永久网址。
如以DOI号为 10.5297/ser.1201.002 的文献为例，此文献的永久连结便是： http://dx.doi.org/ 10.5297/ser.1201.002 。
日后不论出版单位如何更动此文献位置，永久连结所指向的位置皆会即时更新，不再错失重要的研究。

引用含有DOI的文献

有DOI的文献在引用时皆应同时引用DOI。若使用APA、Chicago以外未规范DOI的引用格式，可引用DOI永久连结。

DOI可强化引用精确性、增强学术圈连结，并给予使用者跨平台的良好使用经验，目前在全世界已有超过五千万个对象申请DOI。如想对DOI的使用与概念有进一步了解，请参考（）。

ACI:

数据来源：Academic Citation Index，简称ACI

台湾最大的引用文献资料库，目前收录台湾与港澳地区所出版的人文学、社会学领域学术期刊之书目资料与参考文献，总期刊量超过690种，每年定期公布收录期刊的影响指数(Impact Factor)等指标给大众，并提供专家学者与学术单位实用的计量与分析功能。

五年影响指数（5-Year Impact Factor）：某一期刊前五年所出版的文章在当年度的平均被引用次数。

公式：（前五年发表论文在统计年的被引用次数）÷（前五年论文产出论文总篇数）

例如：A期刊2017年之五年影响指数

(A期刊2012-2016年发表论文在2017年的被引总次数)/(A期刊2012-2016年发表的论文总数)

什么是预刊文章？

为提供读者最前线之学术资讯，于期刊文献获同意刊登后、纸本印制完成前，率先于网路线上发表之文章即为预刊文章。预刊文章尚未有卷期、页次及出版日期资讯，但可藉由DOI号识别。 DOI号是文献的数位身份证字号，不论预刊或正式出版皆不会改变，读者可点击DOI连结，或于DOI号前面加上「 http://dx.doi.org/ 」连结到文献目前最新版本。

如何引用预刊文章？

请使用预刊文章的线上发表日期及DOI号来引用该篇文献。

引用范例(视不同引文格式规范可能有所差异)：

作者姓名。文章篇名。期刊名称。 YYYY/MM/DD线上预先发表。

doi:DOI 号

来源数据

P7 - 43

社会科学 > 社会科学综合

DOI： 10.7014/SRMA

书目管理工具

相关连结

问题回报

全文下载

同居题项设计：家庭动态调查追踪资料的研究

Design of Cohabitation Questions: Findings from the Panel Study of Family Dynamics

于若蓉(Ruoh-Rong Yu) ；廖培珊(Pei-Shan Liao)

调查研究-方法与应用； 47 期 (2021 / 10 / 01) ， P7 - 43

繁体中文 DOI： 10.7014/SRMA.2021100001

同居；题项设计；访员效应；第三人在场效应；家庭动态调查； cohabitation ； questionnaire design ； interviewer effect ； third-party presence effect ； Panel Study of Family Dynamics

0 个人觉得这篇文章赞

摘要 │ 参考文献 (65) │ 被引用文献 (1) │ 国际计量

摘要〈TOP〉

并列摘要〈TOP〉

In a society which lacks a registration system for cohabitation, whether an individual is cohabiting with someone relies on self-reported information. The quality of the self-reported information matters for estimates of proportions of cohabitation. Such information is also important for research in the fields of demography and family studies on the topics of, for example, reproductive behavior and gender equality. Cohabitation is often asked as one of the options for marital status, while some see it a type of living arrangement. In some societies, however, cohabitation is considered to be a sensitive issue because it is not a legal marital status, and thus respondents might under-report cohabitation when asked relevant questions. In Taiwan, self-reported survey data are the main source of information for habitation. This response option is often combined with being married due to its sensitivity, or viewed as a distinct option in the marital status question. It is important to understand whether the design of cohabitation question affects respondents' self-reported behavior. Using panel data from the Taiwan Panel Study of Family Dynamics (PSFD), this study examines the effects of changes in the cohabitation question on the respondents' answers. The PSFD is a longitudinal survey project initiated in 1999. Up till the survey conducted in 2014, the question on marital status contained seven answer options: unmarried, cohabiting, married, separated, divorced, widowed, and other. Starting with the 2016 PSFD survey, the seven-option marital status question has been revised into a two-question version. The question on marital status is asked first with six mutually exclusive options: unmarried, married, separated, divorced, widowed, and others. Respondents who select the options legally compatible with cohabitation (including ＂unmarried,＂ ＂divorced,＂ and ＂widowed＂) are then asked whether they are cohabiting with someone. The difference in the probability of reporting cohabitation between the 2014 and 2016 in-person surveys is analyzed based on the sample who are legally compatible with the cohabitation status. For this analytical purpose, the sample of the 2014 survey is confined to the respondents who chose ＂unmarried,＂ ＂divorced,＂ ＂widowed,＂ or ＂cohabiting＂ from the question on marital status. As to the sample of the 2016 survey, it is limited to the respondents who selected ＂unmarried,＂ ＂divorced,＂ or ＂widowed＂ when answering the first item. Using the merged data, the random-effects logit model is applied to analyze the respondents' likelihood of reporting cohabitation. In addition to analyzing the effects of changes in question design, we also explore whether interviewer characteristics and third-person presence matter for the respondents' likelihood of answering cohabitation. Interviewer characteristics include the interviewers' gender, age, and interviewing experience. The dummies on third-person presence contain three categories: presence of direct family member(s), presence of non-direct family member(s), and no third-person presence. The findings indicate that the probability of reporting cohabitation is about seven times higher in the 2016 survey with the revised question on marital status than that in the 2014 survey with the original design. With respect to interviewer effects, none of the interviewer variables is significant. The results on third-person presence effects reveal that the presence of direct family member(s) is associated with a lower probability of reporting cohabitation than that of no third-person presence. The presence of non-direct family member(s) shows an opposite effect. These findings suggest that who the third person is matters for the respondents' self-reporting of cohabitation. This study not only contributes to our understanding of the effects of question design for cohabitation on the respondents' answers, but also provides implications for improving the design of the cohabitation question.

参考文献 ( 65 ) 〈TOP〉

Yang, Meng-Li,Yu, Ruoh-Rong(2011).Exploring the Relationship between Telephone Interviewers’ Psychological Traits and Performance.Survey Research—Method and Application,25,7-46.
连结：
杜素豪, Suhao(2001)。问卷访问中第三者在场的访答效应。调查研究，9，11-40。
连结：
侯佩君, Pei-chun,杜素豪, Su-hao,廖培珊, Pei-shan,洪永泰, Yung-tai,章英华, Ying-hwa(2008)。台湾乡镇市区类型之研究：「台湾社会变迁基本调查」第五期计画之抽样分层效果分析。调查研究—方法与应用，23，7-32。
连结：
黄淑玲, Shu-ling,李思贤, Szu-hsien Tony,赵运植, Yun-chin(2012)。台湾人性态度与性价值观分析：性别、世代与三种集群的差异。台湾性学学刊，18(1)，83-114。
连结：
Aquilino, William S.(1993).Effects of Spouse Presence During the Interview on Survey Responses Concerning Marriage.Public Opinion Quarterly,57(3),358-376.

被引用文献 ( 1 ) 〈TOP〉

潘淑满,刘一龙,林雅容,林东龙(2023)。敏感性问题访问调查的挑战：以妇女遭受亲密伴侣暴力为例。台大社会工作学刊，48，37-67。

国际计量

〈TOP〉

E-mail ：

文章公开取用时，将寄通知信至您填写的信箱地址