台灣人愛情風格量表再修訂－以大學生族群為本

A Revision of the Scale of Taiwanese Love Styles Based on College Samples

10.6308/JCPRC.25.02

卓紋君(Wen-Chun Cho)；顏欣怡(Shin-Yi Yan)

大學生 ； 愛情 ； 愛情風格量表 ； love styles ； college students ； love

諮商心理與復健諮商學報

25期（2013 / 05 / 01）

65 - 87

繁體中文

國內卓紋君於2004年發展出以台灣人為本的愛情風格量表，將之細分為八種，其內涵頗符合國人的現況；之後也有許多研究者運用該量表探討不同的愛情議題。然而仔細檢視，該量表當出的施測對象涵蓋年齡分布廣泛，介於15歲到55歲；並非完全針對大學生族群，且不一定有交往對象；在測驗題數上亦嫌冗長；就信、效度而言，原量表也具有再改善的空間。研究者考量大學生的愛情是其生命發展的重點，且於輔導實務上亦值得關切；因此本研究旨在以大學生為主要的施測對象，據此修訂台灣人愛情風格量表，以利其廣為運用。本研究的受試者為目前處於戀愛關係中達三個月以上的台灣大學生，以網路填答方式回收682份問卷。透過特別加入的三題社會期許題，來過濾問卷，最後得到556份有效問卷，有效問卷比率為81.52%。根據主成分分析，使用直交轉軸的最大變異法，結果顯示：台灣大學生愛情風格量表仍分為八種，唯下列前兩類的風格名稱因其內涵而略有更動；分別為執守奉獻型、擔憂佔有型、悲觀保留型、真情投入型、婚姻目的型、游移手段型、肉體感官型、與浪漫表達型。個別的解釋變異量介於7.714%至5.698%之間，總累積解釋變異量為53.362%。在信度部份，全量表的內部一致性信度為.744，而各分量表的介於.817至.670之間，屬於可接受的範圍。八種愛情風格的顯著相關性超過.30的類型為婚姻目的型與真情投入型（r=.397**）、游移手段型與悲觀保留型（r=.331**）、悲觀保留型與真情投入型（r=-.312**），三組皆為低度相關。而愛情風格與性別的t-考驗顯示，執守奉獻型、游移手段型、與肉體感官型等三種愛情風格有顯著差異，且男生平均得分顯著高於女性。整體而言，初步所修訂之大學生版的台灣人愛情風格量表具有可接受的信度與效度，未來可運用於實務工作，用以測量與探討大學生的愛情風格。

Since Cho (2004) developed the Scale of Taiwanese Love styles many studies used her scale to explore love issues with different population. After closely examining her scale we found that the sample she collected ranged from ages of 15 to 51, did not focus on college students only, nor excluded non-dating individuals; the items of the scale were lengthy and its validity needs to be improved. As we concerned about the developmental task of college population, i.e., intimacy and love, and the application of Cho's scale to this young population this study aimed to revise the scale based on college students and to examine the validity of the new scale. An internet survey was then conducted to 682 college students with Cho's scale and a sample of 556 was attained after a screening process. The valid rate was 81.52%. According to the principal component analyses with varimax rotation, eight factors were extracted and accounted for 53.362% of the total variance. Whereas Cronbach α of the total scale was 744, each factor's α ranged from .817to .670. Two of the love styles, i.e., Adherent and Sacrificing style and Worrisome and Possessive style, were renamed due to the content change. Whereas Marriage-Purposeful style was significantly correlated with Sincere and Devoted style (r=.397**), Vagrant and Strategic style was correlated with Pessimistic and Reserved style (r=.331**), Pessimistic and Reserved style was negatively correlated with Sincere and Devoted style (r=-.312**). The t-tests showed that males scored higher than females on Adherent and Sacrificing style, Tangible and Strategic style and Sexual and Sensible style. In summary, the revision scale of love styles possessed satisfactory validity and reliability. The application to college population was also addressed in the end.

1. 李偉民、簡上淇、李新民(2008)。高雄地區高中職校學生正向情緒與愛情態度之研究。台灣性學學刊，14，35-53。
   連結：
2. 卓紋君(2004)。台灣人愛情風格分析研究。中華輔導學報，16，71-117。
   連結：
3. 韋麗文（民國 98 年2 月13 日）。失業情人2 成情感也失落。聯合晚報。取自http://mag.udn.com/mag/life/printpage.jsp?f_ART_ID=177420
4. Buss, D. M.,Schmitt, D. P.(1993).Sexual strategies theory: An evolutionary perspective on human mating.Psychological Review,100,204-232.
5. Erikson, E. H.(1959).Identity and the life cycle.New York:International University Press.
6. Gangestad, S. W.,Simpson, J. A.(2000).The evolution of human mating: Tradeoffs and strategic pluralism.Behavioral and Brain Sciences,23,573-587.
7. Gonzaga, G. C.,Campos, B.,Bradbury, T.(2007).Similarity, convergence, and relationship satisfaction in dating and married couples.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,93,34-48.
8. Lee, J. A.(1976).The colors of love.New York:Bantam Book.
9. Tang, N.(2011).Manoa,University of Hawaii.
10. Weigel, D. J.(2008).A dyadic assessment of how couples indicate their commitment to each other.Personal Relationships,15,17-39.
11. 吳明隆(2009)。SPSS 操作與應用：問卷統計分析實務。台北:五南。
12. 吳齊殷譯、DeVellis, R. F.(1999)。量表的發展：理論與應用。台北:弘智。
13. 林永貞(2012)。碩士論文(碩士論文)。高雄市，高雄師範大學。
14. 胡玉珍(2010)。碩士論文(碩士論文)。台北市，台灣師範大學。
15. 徐佩瑜(2004)。碩士論文(碩士論文)。台北市，台灣師範大學。
16. 黃毓萍(2007)。碩士論文(碩士論文)。高雄市，高雄師範大學。
17. 賴妮蔚(2006)。碩士論文(碩士論文)。台北市，台灣師範大學。
18. 賴保禎、賴美玲(2004)。賴氏人格量表。台北:心理出版社。
19. 顏欣怡(2011)。碩士論文(碩士論文)。高雄市，高雄師範大學。
20. 蘇巧因(2008)。碩士論文(碩士論文)。台北市，中國文化大學。

1. (2018)。愛情關係中獲取安全感的方式之研究。教育與心理研究，41(1)，93-118。