本文選題：獨(dú)立自我 + 依存自我��； 參考：《四川師范大學(xué)》2017年碩士論文

【摘要】：跨文化研究表明,個(gè)體主義文化背景下,個(gè)體在羞恥感應(yīng)對(duì)中傾向于防御,而集體主義文化背景下,個(gè)體在羞恥感應(yīng)對(duì)中傾向于修復(fù)。本文認(rèn)為這一差異受到不同自我建構(gòu)的影響。Markus和Kitayama的自我建構(gòu)理論認(rèn)為:文化塑造自我建構(gòu),自我建構(gòu)影響認(rèn)知、行為及情感,文化、自我建構(gòu)及認(rèn)知行為情感三者之間形成一種動(dòng)態(tài)的交互影響的環(huán)形系統(tǒng)。本文以這一理論為基礎(chǔ),在同一文化背景下,通過(guò)研究一和研究二探討自我建構(gòu)與羞恥感應(yīng)對(duì)策略選擇之間的聯(lián)系。研究一在自我建構(gòu)啟動(dòng)條件下,先探討自我建構(gòu)對(duì)道德羞恥感、能力羞恥感的影響,結(jié)果發(fā)現(xiàn):(1)能力羞恥情境中,被試在獨(dú)立自我啟動(dòng)之下羞恥感受相對(duì)更高;(2)道德羞恥情境中,被試在依存自我啟動(dòng)之下羞恥感受相對(duì)更高。研究二在自我建構(gòu)啟動(dòng)條件下,依次喚起道德羞恥感、能力羞恥感,再呈現(xiàn)羞恥感應(yīng)對(duì)策略供被試表達(dá)其選擇傾向性,結(jié)果發(fā)現(xiàn):(1)依存自我啟動(dòng)下與獨(dú)立自我啟動(dòng)下相比,個(gè)體羞恥應(yīng)對(duì)模式里“尋求支持”這一修復(fù)型策略的所占據(jù)的地位更高,同時(shí)“否認(rèn)”這一防御型策略所占據(jù)的地位更低。(2)獨(dú)立自我啟動(dòng)之下,個(gè)體在能力羞恥情境中,相比于道德羞恥情境中,其羞恥應(yīng)對(duì)模式里防御型策略所占據(jù)的地位更低。(3)依存自我啟動(dòng)之下,個(gè)體在道德羞恥情境中,相比于能力羞恥情境中,其羞恥應(yīng)對(duì)模式里防御型策略所占據(jù)的地位更低。(4)獨(dú)立自我啟動(dòng)之下或者在依存自我啟動(dòng)之下,個(gè)體在高羞恥情境中相比于低羞恥情境中,其羞恥應(yīng)對(duì)模式里防御型策略所占據(jù)的地位都更高。結(jié)論:(1)依存自我相比于獨(dú)立自我,在道德羞恥體驗(yàn)方面有認(rèn)知加工優(yōu)勢(shì),而獨(dú)立自我相比于依存自我,在能力羞恥體驗(yàn)方面有認(rèn)知加工優(yōu)勢(shì)。(2)個(gè)體在依存自我啟動(dòng)之下相比于在獨(dú)立自我啟動(dòng)之下,更側(cè)重于選擇修復(fù)型策略,同時(shí)傾向于弱化防御型策略。(3)獨(dú)立自我啟動(dòng)之下,個(gè)體在能力羞恥情境中相比道德羞恥情境中更傾向于弱化防御型策略。(4)依存自我啟動(dòng)之下,個(gè)體在道德羞恥情境中相比能力羞恥情境中更傾向于弱化防御型策略。(5)無(wú)論在獨(dú)立自我還是依存自我啟動(dòng)之下,個(gè)體在高羞恥情境中相比低羞恥情境中都更側(cè)重于選擇防御型策略。
[Abstract]:Cross-cultural studies show that in the context of individualism, individuals tend to defend in coping with shame, while in the context of collectivism, individuals tend to repair in response to shame. This paper holds that this difference is influenced by different self-construction. Markus and Kitayama's self-construction theory holds that: culture shapes self-construction, self-construction influences cognition, behavior and emotion, culture, Self-construction and cognitive-behavioral emotion form a dynamic interactive ring system. Based on this theory and under the same cultural background, this paper explores the relationship between self-construction and shame coping strategy selection through research 1 and 2. First of all, under the condition of self-construction, the influence of self-construction on the sense of moral shame and the sense of shame of ability is explored. The results show that in the situation of shame of ability, In the context of independent self-priming, the sense of shame was higher than that of self-priming, and the sense of shame was higher under self-priming. The second study, under the condition of self-construction priming, evokes moral shame, ability shame, and then presents shame coping strategies for participants to express their preferences. The results show that: 1) dependency self-priming is compared with independent self-priming. In the individual shame coping model, the "seek support", a repair strategy, occupies a higher position, while "deny" this defensive strategy occupies a lower position. 2) under the independent self-priming, the individual is in the ability shame situation. Compared with the situation of moral shame, the defensive strategy occupies a lower position in the model of shame coping than that in the context of moral shame, and the individual in the context of moral shame, compared with the situation of shame of ability, is under the self-initiation of dependency. In the shame coping model, the defensive strategy occupies a lower position.) under the independent self-priming or the dependent self-priming, the individual is in the high shame situation than in the low shame situation. The defensive strategy occupies a higher position in the shame coping mode. Conclusion (1) compared with the independent self, the dependent self has the advantage of cognitive processing in the moral shame experience, while the independent self is relative to the dependent self. In the aspect of ability shame experience, there is cognitive processing advantage. (2) individuals under dependency self-priming are more focused on selecting restorative strategies than on independent self-priming, and tend to weaken defense-type strategies under independent self-priming. Individuals tend to weaken defense-type strategies under self-initiation than in moral shame situations. Individuals tend to weaken defensive strategies in moral shame situations than in ability shame situations. Individuals in high shame situations are more focused on defensive strategies than in low shame situations.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：四川師范大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2017
【分類號(hào)】：B848

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前8條

1 李阿特;汪鳳炎;;大學(xué)生羞恥心的結(jié)構(gòu)及問(wèn)卷編制[J];心理與行為研究;2013年02期

2 楊玲;李磊;袁彥;;自我意識(shí)情緒的跨文化研究進(jìn)展及展望——對(duì)內(nèi)疚、羞恥的探討[J];寧波大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào)(教育科學(xué)版);2012年03期

3 姚卿;陳榮;趙平;;自我構(gòu)念對(duì)想象廣告策略的影響與分析[J];心理學(xué)報(bào);2011年06期

4 劉艷;;自我建構(gòu)研究的現(xiàn)狀與展望[J];心理科學(xué)進(jìn)展;2011年03期

5 汪智艷;張黎黎;高雋;錢銘怡;;中美大學(xué)生羞恥體驗(yàn)的異同[J];中國(guó)心理衛(wèi)生雜志;2009年02期

6 錢銘怡,劉嘉,張哲宇;羞恥易感性差異及對(duì)羞恥的應(yīng)付[J];心理學(xué)報(bào);2003年03期

7 歐永寧;論毛澤東的批評(píng)與自我批評(píng)思想[J];郴州師范高等專科學(xué)校學(xué)報(bào);2002年06期

8 錢銘怡,劉興華,朱榮春;大學(xué)生羞恥感的現(xiàn)象學(xué)研究[J];中國(guó)心理衛(wèi)生雜志;2001年02期

相關(guān)碩士學(xué)位論文 前6條

1 羅鑫;說(shuō)服策略對(duì)不同自我構(gòu)念消費(fèi)者的購(gòu)買意向的影響[D];湖南師范大學(xué);2014年

2 段和剛;自我建構(gòu)、調(diào)節(jié)定向和時(shí)間距離對(duì)沖動(dòng)性購(gòu)買的影響[D];湖南師范大學(xué);2014年

3 鄒燕華;關(guān)系情境下自我建構(gòu)對(duì)社會(huì)比較后情緒的影響[D];江西師范大學(xué);2014年

4 田穎;蒙漢大學(xué)生自我構(gòu)念對(duì)知覺(jué)影響的實(shí)驗(yàn)研究[D];內(nèi)蒙古師范大學(xué);2014年

5 劉翳菲;自我構(gòu)念的啟動(dòng)效應(yīng)及其對(duì)自我增強(qiáng)的影響[D];鄭州大學(xué);2013年

6 鄭靜;大學(xué)生文化取向?qū)ψ晕医?gòu)影響的研究[D];重慶師范大學(xué);2013年

，

本文編號(hào)：1846638