中學生偏差行為組型的異質性分析：社會心理學觀點的詮釋

An Investigation of the Heterogeneity of Deviant Subgroups among High School Students: An Interpretation from Sociopsychology

10.6251/BEP.20150423

吳中勤(Chung-Chin Wu)

台灣教育長期追蹤資料庫 ； 次群體 ； 偏差行為 ； 潛在類別分析 ； deviance ； latent class analysis ； subgroups ； TEPS

教育心理學報

47卷4期（2016 / 06 / 01）

525 - 546

繁體中文

青少年群體中可能存在著異質性的次群體，反映出次群體成員不同的偏差行為組型。近來，國外研究採個人取向分析，確實發現了青少年群體在偏差行為表現上的異質性，但國內仍缺乏相關研究討論。國外研究亦指出，男女生會表現出不同的偏差行為組型，但對國內青少年而言，性別對偏差行為組型的影響仍未知。本研究目的主要在於：1. 檢視青少年群體在偏差行為上的異質性；2. 探究青少年次群體所表現出的偏差行為組型；3. 瞭解性別對不同次群體的影響。同時，也進一步比較偏差行為組型與性別影響在不同教育階段的異同。研究發現，在不同教育階段中，1. 青少年群體在偏差行為上確實存在著異質的次群體。2. 次群體間呈現出不盡相同的偏差行為組型；3. 整體而言，青少年女性較可能出現非對抗性的偏差行為，在偏差行為表現上也相對單純而短暫；反之，青少年男生則較可能出現包含對抗性行為之多重偏差行為組型，在偏差行為表現上較為複雜，部分偏差行為也具相對穩定性。

There are subcultures existed in adolescent’s population, it may be form heterogeneous subgroups, and reflect distinct deviant patterns of subgroup membership. Recently, foreign researches adopted person-centered approaches and found the heterogeneity of deviance in adolescent’s population. However, there are dearth of domestic researches to investigate about it. Foreign researches also indicated different patterns of deviance between males and females. But, it is remain unclear the effect of gender on the patterns of deviance for domestic adolescents. The main purposes of present study were as following: (1) to examine the heterogeneity of deviance in adolescent’s population. (2) to investigate the patterns of deviance performed by adolescents’ subgroups. (3) to realize the effect of gender on different subgroups. Meanwhile, the comparisons of both the patterns of deviance and the effect of gender are made among education levels. Results indicated that, among education levels, (1) there are heterogeneous subgroups on deviance existed in adolescent’s population. (2) there are distinct deviant patterns appeared from among subgroups. (3) in general, girls are more likely presented non-confrontation deviance, and it is also relatively simple and transient than boys. In contrast, boys are more likely performed multiple deviant patterns including confrontation deviance than girls. The deviance is more complex and part of deviances are relatively stable.

1. 李文傑(2012)。偏差友伴與偏差行為：友伴的影響效果確實存在嗎？。調查研究─方法與應用，28，119-160。
   連結：
2. 周愫嫻(2004)。社會階級與少年偏差行為關係。犯罪學期刊，7(1)，31-48。
   連結：
3. 施宇峰、潭子文(2011)。依附關係和自我概念之關聯性研究。台中教育大學學報，25(1)，1-27。
   連結：
4. 張映芬、程炳林(2011)。國中生動機涉入之分類結構及其相關因素探討。教育心理學報，43(2)，521-546。
   連結：
5. 張楓明(2006)。社會控制理論之「參與因素」對青少年偏差行為抑制性之實証研究。犯罪學期刊，9(2)，73-100。
   連結：
6. 郭芳君、潭子文、董旭英(2011)。內在性自我控制、復原力對不同類型青少年偏差行為之交互作用效應。教育與社會研究，22，1-37。
   連結：
7. 陳景圓、董旭英(2006)。家庭、學校及同儕因素與國中聽覺障礙學生偏差行為之關聯性研究。特殊教育研究學刊，30，181-201。
   連結：
8. 潭子文、張楓明(2013)。依附關係、低自我控制與青少年偏差行為關聯性之研究。中華輔導與諮商學報，36，67-90。
   連結：
9. 內政部警政署（2014）：警政統計通報-103 年第45 週。取自內政部警政署網站http://www.npa.gov.tw/NPAGip/wSite/ct?xItem=71881&ctNode=12594&mp=1，2014 年11 月30 日。[National Police Agency, Ministry of Interior (November, 2014). The report of statistics of police administration.Retrieved from http://www.npa.gov.tw/NPAGip/wSite/ct?xItem=71881&ctNode=12594&mp=1]
10. Achenbach, T. M.(1982).Developmental psychopathology.New York, NY:Wiley.
11. Agnew, R.(1992).Foundation for a general strain theory of crime and delinquency.Criminology,30(1),47-87.
12. Annis, H. M.,Chan, D.(1983).The differential treatment model: Empiricalevidence from a personality typology of adult offenders.Criminal Justice and Behavior,10(2),159-173.
13. Barnett, O. W.,Miller-Perrin, C. L.,Perrin, R. D.(1997).Family violence across the lifespan: An introduction.Thousand Oaks, CA:Sage.
14. Clark, S. L.(2010).Los Angeles,University of California, Los Angeles.
15. Cohen, A. K.(1955).Delinquent boys: The Culture of the Gang.Glencoe, IL:Free Press.
16. Coleman, J. M.(1996).Emotional and behavioral disorders.Needham Heights, MA:Allyn and Bacon.
17. Cullen, F. T.(Ed.),Wright, J. P.(Ed.),Blevins, K. R.(Ed.)(2006).Taking stock : The status of criminological theory.New Brunswick, NJ:Transaction.
18. Fischer, C. S.(1995).The subcultural theory of urbanism: A 20th-year assessment.American Journal of Sociology,101(3),543-577.
19. Gibbs, J. J.,Giever, D.,Martin, J. S.(1998).Parental management and self-control: An empirical test of Gottfredson and Hirschi's general theory.Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency,35(1),40-70.
20. Gottfredson, M. R.,Hirschi, T.(1990).A general theory of crime.Standford, CA:Stanford University.
21. Hagan, F. E.(2010).Crime types and criminals.Thousand Oaks, CA:Sage.
22. Hancock, G. R.(Ed.),Samuuelson, K. M.(Ed.)(2008).Advances in latent variable mixture models.Charlotte, NC:Information Age.
23. Hirschi, T.(2002).Causes of delinquency.New Brunswick, NJ:Transaction.
24. Kaufman, J. M.(2009).Gendered responses to serious strain: The argument for a general strain theory of deviance.Justice Quarterly,26(3),410-444.
25. Kim, Y. K.,Muthén, B. O.(2009).Two-part factor mixture modeling: Application to an aggressive behavior measurement instrument.Structural Equation Modeling,16(4),602-624.
26. Kinch, J. W.(1962).Continuities in the study of delinquent types.Journal of Criminal Law & Criminology,53(3),323-328.
27. Krohn, M. D.,Lizotte, A. J.,Hall, G. P.(2009).Handbook on crime and deviance.New York, NY:Springer.
28. McCabe, D. L.,Trevino, L. K.(1997).Individual and contextual influences on academic dishonesty: A multicampus investigation.Research in Higher Education,38(3),379-396.
29. McCabe, D. L.,Trevino, L. K.,Butterfield, K. D.(2001).Cheating in academic institutions: A decade of research.Ethics & Behavior,11(3),219-232.
30. McNeal, R. B.(1999).Parental involvement as social capital: Differential effectiveness on science achievement, truancy, and dropping out.Social Forces,78(1),117-144.
31. Moon, B.,Blurton, D.,McCluskey, J. D.(2008).General strain theory and delinquency: Focusing on the influences of key strain characteristics on delinquency.Crime & Delinquency,54(4),582-613.
32. Muthén, B.,Asparouhov, T.(2006).Item response mixture modeling: Application to tobacco dependence criteria.Addictive Behaviors,31(6),1050-1066.
33. Muthén, B.,Muthén, L. K.(2000).Integrating person-centered and variable-centered analyses: Growth mixture modeling with latent trajectory classes.Alcoholism-Clinical and Experimental Research,24(6),882-891.
34. Nagin, D. S.(2005).Group-Based Modeling of Development.London, England:Harvard University.
35. Nylund, K. L.,Asparoutiov, T.,Muthén, B. O.(2007).Deciding on the number of classes in latent class analysis and growth mixture modeling: A Monte Carlo simulation study.Structural Equation Modeling,14(4),535-569.
36. Oxnam, P.,Vess, J.(2006).A personality-based typology of adolescent sexual offenders using the millon adolescent clinical inventory.New Zealand Journal of Psychology,35(1),36-44.
37. Pekrun, R.(2000).A social-cognitive, control-value theory of achievement emotions.Motivational psychology of human development,Oxford, England:
38. Schmalleger, F.,Bartollas, C.(2008).Juvenile delinquency.Boston, MA:Pearson.
39. Siegel, L. J.,Welsh, B. C.(2008).Juvenile delinquency : The core.Belmont, CA:Thomson/Wadsworth.
40. Stefurak, T.,Calhoun, G. B.(2007).Subtypes of female juvenile offenders: A cluster analysis of the millon adolescent clinical inventory.International Journal of Law and Psychiatry,30(2),95-111.
41. Stefurak, T.,Calhoun, G. B.,Glaser, B. A.(2004).Personality typologies of male juvenile offenders using a cluster analysis of the millon adolescent clinical inventory introduction.International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology,48(1),96-110.
42. Steinberg, L.(2008).A social neuroscience perspectiveon adolescent risk-taking.Developmental Review,28,78-106.
43. Taylor, J.,Kemper, T. S.,Loney, B. R.,Kistner, J. A.(2009).Recidivism in subgroups of severe male juvenile offenders.Psychology Crime & Law,15(5),395-408.
44. Wang, J.,Wang, X.(2012).Structural equation modeling: Application using Mplus.West Sussex, England:Wiley.
45. Williams, K. S.(2008).Textbook on criminology.Oxford, NY:Oxford Unviersity.
46. 林秀勤、張憲庭、游錦雲(2009)。霸凌現象與學生偏差行為對友善校園影響之研究。初等教育學刊，32，75-103。
47. 邱皓政(2008)。潛在類別模式：原理與技術。台北=Taipei, Taiwan:五南=Wu Nan。
48. 張苙雲(2003)。台灣教育長期追蹤資料庫：資料使用手冊。台北=Taipei, Taiwan:中央研究院=Academia Sinica。
49. 張楓明、潭子文(2011)。個人信念、負向生活事件、偏差同儕與青少年初次偏差行為關聯性之實證研究。青少年犯罪防治研究期刊，3(1)，133-160。
50. 黃俊傑、王淑女(2001)。家庭、自我概念與青少年偏差行為。應用心理學研究，11，45-68。
51. 潭子文(2011)。台灣地區高中生依附關係、自我概念與偏差行為關聯性之研究。青少年犯罪防治研究期刊，3(1)，41-80。

1. 陳玉娟(2021)。學校管理模式與學生偏差行為關係之研究：以教師教學投入與教學支援為中介變項。教育科學研究期刊，66(3)，1-30。
2. 吳中勤(2022)。社會風險決策實驗任務之編修與效度檢驗。中華輔導與諮商學報，64，99-129。
3. 張昱騰(2021)。偏差行為國中生之道德疏離研究。學生事務與輔導，60(2)，22-42。
4. 趙子揚,宋曜廷(2019)。中學生考試壓力與個人特性：潛在類別分析。教育科學研究期刊，64(3)，203-235。
5. (2022)。接觸偏差同儕對偏差行為影響的心理歷程之潛在群體差異分析。教育與心理研究，45(1)，95-128。