全血捐血者之人口學特徵、捐血動機、人格特質
對捐血意願及行為影響之探討-以台南捐血中心為例

研究背景及目的本業務範圍雲林、嘉義及台南地區，人口分散，外移人口多，根據2010年主計處統計，雲林縣及嘉義縣老化指數分別高達99.14%及105.6%，老年人口多，醫療用血需求也大，但募血方面更加不易(捐血年齡限制65歲)。在全血捐血者族群中有一群定期忠誠捐血者，捐血成為個人習慣，只要捐血間隔一到即會捐血，所以若能再聚焦在定期捐血者捐血動機、人格特質等方面探討，以期望找出可強化捐血者內在捐血動機，才能思考策略將其運用在流失的捐血者，讓他們再次回捐。本研究目的在了解全血捐血者人口學特徵、捐血動機、人格特質，透過捐血者捐血意願對定期與不定期捐血者捐血行為之差異與影響。研究方法本研究參考王雲龍(2006)問卷修改部份內容做為本研究架構，其中捐血者之捐血動機、人格特質為自變項，捐血意願為中介變項，捐血行為依變項。採結構式問卷，以李克特尺度五點計分法填寫。問卷施測時間為101年4月2日至4月14日的捐血活動，針對全血捐血者進行問卷施測，填寫問卷後當場回收。統計方法以SPSS19.0統計軟體分析及AMOS19.0檢定本研究架構，接著以T檢定、單因子變異數分析，檢定人口學特徵之性別、職業、教育程度、血型、宗教信仰與捐血意願間之差異分析。複迴歸分析人口學特徵、捐血動機、人格特質對捐血意願之影響。最後以二項對數迴歸分析人口學特徵、捐血動機、人格特質是否經由捐血意願來影響定期與不定期捐血者捐血行為。研究結果本研究回收問卷計947份，回收率83.8%。扣除資料不全與無效回答的問卷56 份，實際有效問卷891 份，有效回收率為78.8%。以Amos分析整體模式，潛在變項捐血者動機對捐血意願的標準化迴歸係數為1.03(p<.0005)，大於捐血者人格特質標準化迴歸係數0.61(p=0.042)，即對捐血意願的影響力捐血動機大於捐血者人格特質，為影響捐血者捐血意願最重要的因素。透過捐血意願影響捐血者一年內捐血次數的標準化迴歸係數-0.02(p值=0.582)，未達統計上顯著影響，顯示本模式透過捐血意願對捐血者一年內捐血次數(捐血行為)預測失敗。模式一、以複迴歸分析捐血動機、教育程度、職業、性別對於捐血意願模式具顯著影響(p<.0005)，校正後的解釋力為29.6%。當捐血動機的平均分數每增加一分，則捐血者捐血意願會增加0.388分；當教育程度高中職以下相較於五專及大學以上，則捐血者捐血意願會降低1.011分；當職業為學生相較於服務業、工人及其它職業，則捐血者捐血意願會降低1.901分；當性別男性相較於女性，捐血者捐血意願會增加1.259分。模式二、以複迴歸分析捐血者人格特質、性別、職業、宗教信仰對於捐血意願模式具顯著影響(p<.0005)，校正後的解釋力為19.2%。當捐血者人格特質的平均分數每增加一分，則捐血者捐血意願會增加0.379分；當職業為學生相較於服務業、工人及其它職業，則捐血者捐血意願會降低2.945分；當性別男性相較於女性，捐血者捐血意願會增加1.818分。結論與建議人口學特徵中，定期與不定期捐血者以性別、職業、宗教信仰及年齡對於捐血者捐血行為具有顯著差異。捐血動機、捐血者人格特質會影響捐血意願，但捐血意願對一年內捐血次數(捐血行為)卻未達統計上顯著影響，顯示無法透過捐血意願對捐血行為產生影響，該結果可能與定期與不定期捐血行為歸類有關，一年內捐血次數，捐血者彼此間差異不大，建議未來研究者改成捐血總次數，再進行捐血意願對捐血行為之預測。二種迴歸模式對捐血意願影響力，其一、捐血動機大於教育程度大於職業大於性別，教育程度高中職以下相較於五專及大學以上，則捐血者捐血意願會降低；職業為學生相較於服務業、工人及其它職業，則捐血者捐血意願會降低；男性捐血意願相較於女性高。其二、捐血者人格特質大於職業大於性別，學生捐血意願相較於服務業、工人及其它職業低，男性捐血意願相較於女性高。

關鍵字

捐血動機；捐血者人格特質；捐血意願；捐血行為

並列摘要

Study background and purpose Tainan blood center contains Yunli, Chiayi and Tainan area which the population is very dispersion and high relocation. According “Accounting and Statistics Agency” reports in 2010 showed that the aging index in Yunlin country and Chiayi country are 99.14% and 105.6%, respectively. However, the aging people is more, the medical blood demand is increase. It is difficult to recruitment blood in this aging region because the upper limitation of blood donation age is 65 years old. There are repeat blood donors who have the “good habit” of continued donation and donate regularly in Taiwan. In order to encourage the lapsed donors return to donate, we need to investigate the regular donor’ s internal motivation and personality traits that can apply to the lapsed blood donors. The purpose of this study is to understand the effects and differences between regular and non-regular donor’s characteristics, motivation and personality traits on whole blood donor’s behavior. Study design and method The framework of this study is modified from Wang Yun-Lung’s questionnaires (2006). The independent variables are motivation and personality traits, intervening variable is donation willing and independent variable is donor’s behavior. The questionnaires were responded with Likert’s five-point scale method and collected from donors who donate whole blood in campaign from April 2 to April 14, 2012. Statistical analysis is conducted with SPSS 19.0 and AMOS 19.0. The respondent’s demographic variables including gender, occupation, education, blood type, religious and donation willing were and tested with T test and One Way ANOVA. The population characteristics, donation willing and personality traits were tested by multiple regression model. Binary logistic regression analysis donors’ demographic characteristics, donation motivation and personality traits that are the influence of donating willing on donor’s behavior. Result A total of 947 (83.8% of total) questionnaires were collected and 891 gave complete responses （response rate of 78.8%）after deleting 56 invalid questionnaires. Analysis the study model by Amos, the Beta of the motivation for donation willing is 1.03 (p<0.0005) and is greater than the donors’ characteristics （the Beta is 0.61, p= 0.042）. The result means that the effect of donation willing which motivation is more important than donors’ characteristics. The Beta of the blood donations in a year for donors’ willing is -0.02 (p = 0.582, no significance) indicate that it is failure to predict the blood donations in a year by donation willing. Model 1: In a multiple regression model, blood donation motivation, education, occupation and gender affect blood donation willing (p<0.005) and the explanatory power after the mode was adjusted is 29.6%. While the donation motivation increase 1 point, the donation willing increase 0.388 point. The donation willing in education level is under high school is lower 1.011 point than college-educed. The donation willing in occupation is student is lower 1.901 point than the occupation is service, industry and others. The donation willing of male is more 1.259 point than female. Model 2: Multiple regression analysis indicated that donors’ characteristics, gender, occupation and religious affect blood donation willing (p<0.005) and the explanatory power after the mode was adjusted is 19.2%. While the donors’ characteristics increase 1 point, the donation willing increase 0.379 point. The donation willing in occupation is student is lower 2.945 point than the occupation is service, industry and others . The donation willing of male is more 1.818 point than female. Suggest and conclusion In the demographic characteristics, it is difference between regular and non-regular donors in gender, occupation, religious and age. Donation motivation and personality traits affect donation willing but the blood donations in a year is not . Donation willing does not affect blood donation behavior and maybe due to the classification groups of donation behavior. No statistically significant differences were found between regular and non-regular donors in the blood donations in a year, we suggest that total number of donations instant of the blood donation a year in the future. The effect of donation willing in 2 regression models indicate two conclusions. First, donation motivation is greater than education, occupation and gender in the order. The donation willing of the education level is college above is greater than it is under high school and male is higher than female. However, the donation willing in occupation is student is lower than the occupation is service, industry and others. Second, personality traits is greater than occupation and gender in the order. The donation willing in occupation is student is lower than the occupation is service, industry and others but male is higher than female.