西南交通大学学报(社会科学版)
西南交通大學學報(社會科學版)
서남교통대학학보(사회과학판)
JOURNAL OF SOUTHWEST JIAOTONG UNIVERSITY(SOCIAL SCIENCES)
2014年
3期
126-132
,共7页
大学生%主观幸福感%SWBS-CC20%元分析
大學生%主觀倖福感%SWBS-CC20%元分析
대학생%주관행복감%SWBS-CC20%원분석
college students%subjective well-being%SWBS-CC20%meta-analysis
利用元分析方法对采用“中国城市居民主观幸福感量表简本”(SWBS-CC20)以大学生为被试的研究成果进行分析,结果表明:大学生总体主观幸福感显著低于全国常模;大学生主观幸福感总体水平无差异;文理科大学生、男女大学生主观幸福感总体水平均无差异;女生家庭氛围体验满意度优于男生,理科生目标价值体验满意度劣于文科生;学位论文报告的大学生知足充裕因子与全国常模相比较的差异要大于期刊文献与全国常模的差异;大学生知足充裕、社会信心、成长进步、自我接受4个因子与全国常模之间的差异随着数据收集年份的推移而越来越大;地域因素对大学生主观幸福感无影响。
利用元分析方法對採用“中國城市居民主觀倖福感量錶簡本”(SWBS-CC20)以大學生為被試的研究成果進行分析,結果錶明:大學生總體主觀倖福感顯著低于全國常模;大學生主觀倖福感總體水平無差異;文理科大學生、男女大學生主觀倖福感總體水平均無差異;女生傢庭氛圍體驗滿意度優于男生,理科生目標價值體驗滿意度劣于文科生;學位論文報告的大學生知足充裕因子與全國常模相比較的差異要大于期刊文獻與全國常模的差異;大學生知足充裕、社會信心、成長進步、自我接受4箇因子與全國常模之間的差異隨著數據收集年份的推移而越來越大;地域因素對大學生主觀倖福感無影響。
이용원분석방법대채용“중국성시거민주관행복감량표간본”(SWBS-CC20)이대학생위피시적연구성과진행분석,결과표명:대학생총체주관행복감현저저우전국상모;대학생주관행복감총체수평무차이;문이과대학생、남녀대학생주관행복감총체수평균무차이;녀생가정분위체험만의도우우남생,이과생목표개치체험만의도렬우문과생;학위논문보고적대학생지족충유인자여전국상모상비교적차이요대우기간문헌여전국상모적차이;대학생지족충유、사회신심、성장진보、자아접수4개인자여전국상모지간적차이수착수거수집년빈적추이이월래월대;지역인소대대학생주관행복감무영향。
A meta-analysis was applied to determine the level of college students’subjective well-being and the local scale,Subjective Well-being Scale for Chinese Citizen-Brief,was adopted in the studies.The total sample size was 2756.The results show that:the general subjective well-being of college students are significantly worse than that in the norm of the whole country, and the genders and majors both have no difference in this respect;With respect to the factor of“family atmosphere”,girl college students are significantly better than boy college students,and for the one of “goal value”,students majoring in liberal arts are significantly better than students majoring in science.Compared with the nationwide norms,dissertations report the difference of“satisfaction”factor is larger than that in the papers of academic journals.The differences of“satisfaction”,“social confidence”,“growth progress”and “self-acceptance”are more and more significant year by year.The regions of participants have no effect on college students’subjective well-being.