親密感之日常社會互動基礎：一個縱貫式的研究

林以正; 黃金蘭

doi:10.6129/CJP.2006.4801.03

山西大学，您好！

感谢采购，人社期刊库｜人社论文库，期间：2024/01/01~2024/12/31

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

P35 - 52

社会科学 > 心理学

DOI： 10.6129/CJP

书目管理工具

相关连结

问题回报

全文下载

亲密感之日常社会互动基础：一个纵贯式的研究

The Process of Transforming Daily Social Interactions to Relationship Intimacy: A Longitudinal Study

林以正(Yi-Cheng Lin) ；黄金兰(Chin-Lan Huang)

中华心理学刊； 48 卷 1 期 (2006 / 03 / 01) ， P35 - 52

繁体中文 DOI： 10.6129/CJP.2006.4801.03

修订罗彻斯特互动量表；亲密感；自我表露；回应； Revised Rochester Interaction Record ； intimacy ； self-disclosure ； responsiveness

0 个人觉得这篇文章赞

摘要 │ 参考文献 (72) │ 被引用文献 (11) │ 国际计量

摘要〈TOP〉

并列摘要〈TOP〉

In the past three decades, the debate of which factor, self-disclosure or partner responsiveness, plays the central role in the process of intimacy is still on and the dynamics among these factors remain unknown. According to Reis & Shaver (1988), however, the intimacy process begins when one person expresses personally revealing feelings or information to another person. To become intimate, the discloser must also feel understood, validated, cared for by the listener. Thus, this theory suggests that the specific combination of self-disclosure and perceived partner responsiveness plays an essential role in the development of relationship intimacy. Although the model does provide an insightful perspective, little empirical research has yet been done to test this model. The current study is design to test this theoretical model, looking at the role of self-disclosure and partner responsiveness in the process of transforming daily social interactions to relationship intimacy. Furthermore, a longitudinal follow-up was conducted, in which both relationship intimacy and social interaction data were collected both in the Fall and Spring semesters. Participants recorded their daily social interactions using the Revised Rochester Social Interaction Record and their relationship intimacy with the interaction partners were measured by a Q-sort method. Because this study was a simulated within-subject design, hierarchical within-subject regression analyses were conducted, which ruled out individual differences and permitted us to focus exclusively on relationship processes. Two regression analyses were first conducted for the two cross-sectional phases separately. In both cases, the simple effects as well as the unique effects of self-disclosure and perceived partner responsiveness were all significant. The results supported the hypothesis that both self-disclosure and perceived partner responsiveness are functional in the process of intimacy. The consistent results from both semesters also indicate that this correlation pattern was reliable. Cross-lag analysis showed that all the variables in time 1 were predictive of all the variables in time 2, indicating that the causal directions might not be linear nor unidirectional. Nonetheless, there were other trends especially worth noting. First, the highest correlation was between two relationship intimacy indices, whereas the interaction indices were relatively less reliable compared to the relationship intimacy. Second, both cross-sectional and cross-lag analyses showed that perceived partner responsiveness had relatively stronger effect sizes than did self-disclosure. The theoretical implications of these results were discussed. In addition, the contributions of the current methodology to the study of personal relationships and relationship processes were also discussed.

参考文献 ( 72 ) 〈TOP〉

林以正(1999)。华人的社会比较：比较什麽，与谁比较，为何比较。本土心理学研究，11，93-125。
连结：
Altman, I.,Taylor, D. A.(1973).Social penetration: The development of interpersonal relationships.New York:Holt, Rinehart, & Winston.
Bem, D. J.(1972).V.Advances in experimental social psychology,6,1-62.
Berg, J. H.,Archer, R. L.(1982).Responses to self-disclosure and interaction goals.Journal of Experimental Social Psychology,18,501-512.
Berg, J. H.,Archer, R. L.(1980).Disclosure or concern: A second look at liking for the norm-breaker.Journal of Personality.

被引用文献 ( 11 ) 〈TOP〉

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