寵「物」之外：以場域論探討國父紀念館遛狗者社交行為

Beyond the ＂Pets＂: A Field Theory Analysis of Dog Walkers' Social Interaction in Dr. Sun Yat-sen Memorial Hall Park

10.6267/JTLS.2016.22(2)2

邱啟新(Chih-Sin Chiu)；黃嫈凱(Ying-Kai Huang)

休閒性遛狗 ； 場域論 ； 生活空間 ； 都會公園 ； 社會互動 ； recreational dog walking ； field theory ； life space ； urban park ； social interaction

觀光休閒學報

22卷2期（2016 / 08 / 01）

151 - 181

繁體中文

本文以質性研究法探討國父紀念館暨中山公園遛狗者之社交表現、社群關係及休閒意涵，方法包含以飼主與非飼主為對象之半結構訪談、行為觀察、環境分析與檔案分析。透過場域論，發現遛狗者社交行為是心理場域在引力作用下形成社會場域，再由公園實質場域鞏固之結果。飼主受各自生活空間驅使，以飼主與寵物犬形成之單位彼此接觸，組成溜狗者之主社交系統，飼主與非飼主間亦形成含三種接觸模式之次社交系統；飼主在實質場域支持下以非約定式遛狗會與約定式狗聚深化社會關係。本文補強象徵互動論遛狗研究對個體能動性、社群關係與生態脈絡探討之不足，指出社會互動之引力、團體動能與環境因素。結論歸納以遛狗建立社交之關鍵原則與後續研究建議。

Drawing upon field theory, this paper explores dog walkers’ social interaction in Dr. Sun Yat-sen Memorial Hall Park and its implications for leisure studies. Qualitative research methods include behavioral observation, environmental analysis, semi-structured interviews, and archival research. Social interaction occurs within the social fields when dog walkers encounter one another in psychological fields, namely life spaces. The process forms the first-level socialization system. There is a secondary socialization system created among dog walkers and non-dog walkers. The physical field of the park facilitates the social fields among dog walkers in terms of public gatherings and planned parties. This paper responds to the gap of symbolic interactionism of dog walking research by uncovering the roles of individuals’ agency, community formation, and ecological context. It specifically discusses the importance of the forces, group dynamics, and physical settings. This study suggests the existence of a set of principles underlying dog walking-based socialization, and provides suggestions for further studies.

1. 李鴻昌、陳渝苓(2009)。新休閒夥伴：寵物家人的概念建構與休閒互動之質化分析。運動休閒餐旅研究，4(3)，114-129。
   連結：
2. Appleton, J.(1975).The experience of landscape.New York:John Wiley and Sons.
3. Bronfenbrenner, U.(1979).The ecology of human development: Experiments by nature and design.Cambridge, MA:Harvard University.
4. Cain, A. O.(1983).A study of pets in the family system.New perspectives on our lives with companion animals,Philadelphia, PA:
5. Chandler, C. K.,Fernando, D. M.,Minton, C. A. B.,Portrie-Bethke, T. L.(2015).Eight domains of pet-owner wellness: Valuing the owner-pet relationship in the counseling process.Journal of Mental Health Counseling,37(3),268-282.
6. Eddy, J.,Hart, L. A.,Boltz, R. P.(1988).The effects of service dogs on social acknowledgments of people in wheelchairs.Journal of Psychology,122(1),39-45.
7. Geertz, C.(1973).The interpretation of cultures.New York:Basic Books.
8. Gibson, J. J.(1979).The ecological approaches to visual perception.Boston, MA:Houghton Mifflin.
9. Goffman, E.(1963).Behavior in public places: Notes on the social organization of gatherings.New York:Free.
10. Goffman, E.(1959).The presentation of self in everyday life.New York:Anchor.
11. Goffman, E.(1961).Encounters: Two studies in the sociology of interaction - Fun in games and role distance.Indianapolis, IN:Bobbs-Merrill.
12. Goffman, E.、徐江敏譯、李姚軍譯(1992)。日常生活的自我表演。台北=Taipei, Taiwan:桂冠=Gueikuan。
13. Hargrave, C.(2015).In-practice management of stress in cats and dogs-Improving the welfare of companion animals and practice finances.Companion Animal,20(5),292-299.
14. Hart, L. A.,Hart, B. L.,Bergin, B.(1987).Socializing effects of service dogs for people with disabilities.Anthrozoös,1(1),41-44.
15. Hobman, E. V.,Walker, I.(2015).Stasis and change: Social psychological insights into social-ecological resilience.Ecology and Society,20(1),39-52.
16. Ittleson, W. H.,Franck, K. A.,O'Hanlon, T. J.(1976).The nature of environmental experience.Experiencing the environment,New York:
17. Lewin, K.(1951).Field theory in social science.New York:Harper and Brothers.
18. Lincoln, Y. S.,Guba, E. G.(1985).Naturalistic inquiry.Beverly Hills, CA:Sage.
19. Mader, B.,Hart, L. A.,Bergin, B.(1989).Social acknowledgments for children with disabilities: Effects of service dogs.Child Development,60(6),1529-1534.
20. McNicholas, J.,Collis, G. M.(2000).Dogs as catalysts for social interactions: Robustness of the effect.British Journal of Psychology,91(1),61-70.
21. Messent, P. R.(1983).Social facilitation of contact with other people by pet dogs.New perspectives on our lives with companion animals,Philadelphia, PA:
22. Noble, H.,Smith, J.(2015).Issues of validity and reliability in qualitative research.Evidence-Based Nursing,18(2),34-35.
23. Petersen, A.(2011).Missoula, MT,University of Montana.
24. Robins, D. M.,Sanders, C. R.,Cahill, S. E.(1991).Dogs and their people: Pet-facilitated interaction in a public setting.Journal of Contemporary Ethnography,20(1),3-25.
25. Rossbach, K. A.,Wilson, J. P.(1992).Does a dog's presence make a person appear more likable? Two studies.Anthrozoos: A Multidisciplinary Journal of the Interactions of People and Animals,5(1),40-51.
26. Sussman, M.(Ed.)(1985).Pets and the family.New York:Haworth.
27. Tannen, D.(2004).Talking the dog: Framing pets as interactional resources in family discourse.Research on Language and Social Interaction,37(4),399-420.
28. 尹德月(2009)。Taipei, Taiwan，國立台灣師範大學美術學系=National Taiwan Normal University。
29. 吳怡伶(2006)。Taipei, Taiwan，世新大學口語傳播學研究所=Shih Hsin University。
30. 周樺暄(2009)。Taipei, Taiwan，國立台北科技大學建築與都市設計研究所=National Taipei University of Technology。
31. 游婉婷、湯幸芬(2012)。飼主對寵物的依附關係與寂寞感、憂鬱情緒之探討。旅遊健康學刊，11(1)，45-64。
32. 謝佳書(2009)。New Taipei City, Taiwan，輔仁大學社會學系=Fu Jen Catholic University。

1. (2024)。動物倫理日常化的建構：都市公眾養雞的戰術與反身性思考。地理研究，80，101-131。