- 學位論文
自我揭露量表之中文化信效度研究
The Reliability and Validity of the Self-Disclosure Scale-Taiwanese Version
摘要
自我揭露是研究親密關係發展與建立的重要因子，因國內用於評估自我揭露的量表大多來源於自編量表或翻譯、參考Jourard(1958)研發之自我揭露量表(SDI)，該量表主要以所揭露資訊類型的親密程度和揭露的誠實程度方面測量自我揭露的深度，因有越來越多研究者指出自我揭露涵蓋各種不同維度面向，僅以話題親密度面向評估自我揭露的多寡或深淺可能太過片面，且自我揭露目前並沒有統一定義，會因不同研究主題及對象差異研究者需要收集的資料不盡相同。本研究希望能提供一個具信效度且涵蓋自我揭露的不同面向且不同於目前台灣所用之自我揭露量表的選擇，研究針對Lawrence R. Wheeless於1976年發表的自我揭露量表進行中文化翻譯，參考Brislin(1986)提出的翻譯模式，藉由翻譯、回覆翻譯和檢驗來確認翻譯適切性，並評估翻譯量表和原文量表間的「語意同等性」確保原量表欲表達並之涵義並未於翻譯與回覆翻譯過程中流失或偏離本意，此外翻譯後之中文量表經專家效度、內部一致性信度分析、驗證性因素分析並以性別、外向性人格、人際信任程度作為效標進行效標關聯效度檢驗，以確保量表翻譯後的信、效度。研究結果顯示:(1)中文化自我揭露量表內部一致性分析中，α係數介於.805-.855，量表整體內部一致性高，若刪除題1與題15皆可使α係數微幅上升，後續研究者使用該翻譯量表時，若希望減少題目數量，可考慮將此二題項刪除；(2)在驗證性因素分析中，所有分量表的組成信度(CR)皆高於.6，與內部一致性信度分析結果一致。平均變異抽取量(AVE)偏低，介於.34-.55，刪除因素負荷量低於.3的題15、25、26後整體可達AVE大於.36的標準，顯示題項刪除後量表具有收斂(聚合)效度，且刪除題項後不影響量表區別效度，故建議後續研究者可將此3題刪除以確保量表建構效度。(3)各分量表與各效標的關係型態與文獻結果相似，具效標關聯效度。
並列摘要
Self-disclosure is an important factor in studying the development and establishment of intimate relationships. Most of the scales used domestically to assess self-disclosure are either self-compiled, translated versions of Jourard's (1958) developed Self-Disclosure Inventory (SID), or adaptations based on that inventory. The scale (SID) measures the degree of self-disclosure through the intimacy represented by the disclosed content and the honesty during disclosure. Because more and more researchers are pointing out that self-disclosure encompasses various dimensions, evaluating the quantity or depth of self-disclosure solely based on the intimacy of topics may be too one-sided. Furthermore, there is currently no unified definition of self-disclosure, which leads researchers to collect different data depending on the research topic and participants. In summary, this study aims to provide an effective and reliable scale that covers various dimensions of self-disclosure, and differing from the self-disclosure scales currently used in Taiwan. The purpose of the study is to translate Lawrence R. Wheeless's self-disclosure scale, published in 1976, into Chinese. The translation process follows the translation model proposed by Brislin (1986), which involves translation, back-translation, and re-evaluation to confirm the appropriateness of the translation﹐and evaluate the "translation equivalence" between the translated scale and the original scale to ensure that the intended meanings of the original scale are not lost or deviated due to the translation and back-translation process. Furthermore, expert validity assessment, internal consistency reliability analysis, and confirmatory factor analysis were conducted on the translated Chinese scale﹐and criterion-related validity was examined using gender, extraversion personality trait, and level of interpersonal trust as criteria. Everything is done to ensure the reliability and validity of the scale. The research results indicate that (1) Internal consistent reliability αs were .805 to .855, indicating high overall internal consistency of the scale. If items 1 and 15 are deleted, the alpha coefficient would slightly increase. For future researchers who wish to reduce the number of items in the translated scale, it may be considered to delet these two items﹔(2) In the confirmatory factor analysis, the composite reliability (CR) of all sub-scales is above .6, consistent with the results of internal consistency reliability analysis. The average variance extracted (AVE) is relatively low, ranging from .34 to .55. After deleting items 15, 25, and 26 due to their factor loadings being below .3, the overall AVE meets the standard of being greater than .36. The results demonstrate that after deleting these items, the scale exhibits convergent validity, and deleting these items does not affect the discriminate validity of the scale. Therefore, it is suggested that future researchers may delet these three items to ensure the construct validity of the scale﹔(3) The relationship patterns between each subscale and the various criteria are similar to past studies, indicating criterion-related validity.