Development and Validation of the Social Hierarchy Scale

「內在社會階級構念量表」之發展與編製

游琇婷(Hsiu-Ting Yu) ； 蔡亞平(Annie Y. Tsai) ； 余創豪(Chong-Ho Yu)

《測驗學刊》 62卷3期 (2015/09) Pp. 181-208

摘要

本研究討論及發展編製「內在社會階級構念量表」（SHS），以作為測量內在社會階級構念（social hierarchy）的工具。本研究討論過去文獻中對於內在社會階級構念的定義以及此構念和其他相關構念與理論的關係，並以此作為編製此量表的依據和藍圖。本量表的編製過程共使用四個樣本，總樣本數為1,063 人。研究中描述包含題目選取、項目分析、信效度檢驗，以及因素結構分析等編製過程。所編製的「內在社會階級構念量表」採用李克特氏七點量表評分，共計32 題且包含兩個分量表。兩個16 題的分量表之向度結構也以因素分析進行驗證。本量表在兩項信度指標（內部一致性、重測信度）以及四項效度指標（內容效度、建構效度、聚合效度，以及區辨效度）的檢驗均有良好的信效度表現。結論亦針對本量表用於社會科學研究和其他可能的應用進行討論。

關鍵字

文化差異 ； 內在社會階級構念 ； 測驗編製

並列摘要

The Social Hierarchy Scale (SHS) was developed as a measurement tool of the construct of social hierarchy. Its development began with a comprehensive literature review and an in-depth discussion of the definition and practices of social hierarchy. Four samples, a combined total of 1,063 participants, were involved during the course of developing the scale. The processes of items’ formation, selection, evaluation, and inclusion in the final scale are detailed. The final SHS consisted of 32 items using a 7- point Likert scale rating scheme. The two subscales, each with 16 items, are also confirmed by factor analyses. The psychometric properties of the scale have been confirmed to meet quality standards by two measures of reliability (internal reliability and testretest reliability) and four measures of validity (content validity, construct validity, convergent validity, and discriminate validity). This research concludes with a discussion of the importance of developing the SHS from an indigenous approach, as well as possible contributions to and applications in social science.

並列關鍵字

cultural difference ； scale development ； social hierarchy

參考文獻

Bennett, J. B.(1988).Power and influence as distinct personality traits: Development and validation of a psychometric measure.Journal of Research in Personality.22,361-394.

Blader, S.,Chen, Y.(2012).Differentiating the effects of status and power: A justice per-spective.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology.102,994-1014.

Bond, M. H.(Ed.)(1996).The handbook of Chinese psychology.Hong Kong, China:Oxford University Press.

(Chang, W. C., & Koh, J. B. K. (2004). Attitude toward group: Institutional interdependence, affective interdependence and collective-self -identification as dimensions of allocentrism (Unpublished manuscript). Singapore: National University of Singapore).

Chao, R. K.(1994).Beyond parental control and authoritarian parenting style: Understan-ding Chinese parenting through the cultural notion of training.Child Development.65,1111-1119.