PSYCH OpenIR  > 社会与工程心理学研究室
企业员工心理灵活性、D型人格及焦虑、抑郁的关系研究
其他题名A Study of the Relationship among Psychological Flexibility,Type D personality,Anxiety and Depression in Enterprise Employee
郭慧娜
学位类型同等学力硕士
2015-07
学位授予单位中国科学院研究生院
学位授予地点北京
学位专业心理学
关键词企业员工 心理灵活性 D型人格 焦虑 抑郁
摘要曾经吵得沸沸扬扬的富士康“连跳事件”虽然属于极端事件,但却反映出员工的心理问题不容忽视,因此,本研究聚焦于企业员工这个职业群体并聚焦于心理灵活性、D型人格与焦虑、抑郁的关系。目的:分析心理灵活性、D型人格及焦虑抑郁的关系。探讨D型人格者长期经历消极情感的倾向以及在社交中维持自我压抑的状态与心理灵活性及焦虑、抑郁的关系,尝试为D型人格个体情绪和社交问题的干预提供新的思路。方法:通过整群随机抽样的方法,在某体检中心从两家大型企业集团体检人群中抽取400人作为被试,采用接纳与行动问卷AAQ-Ⅱ(the Acceptance and Action Questionnaire,AAQ-Ⅱ)、认知融合问卷 (Cognitive Fusion Question-naire,CFQ)、D型人格问卷(Type D Persionality,Ds-14)、抑郁自评量表(Self-rating depression scale,SDS)、焦虑自评量表(Self-Rating Anxiety Scale ,SAS)进行测试。对数据进行了描述性统计分析、单因素方差分析、Pearson相关分析、多元回归分析以及中介效应检验等。 研究得到以下结果: 第一, 在企业员工中,SAS总分高于全国常模、SDS总分低于全国常模,且差异比较均显著(P<0.01);AAQ-Ⅱ总分、CFQ总分与SAS及SDS总分均呈正相关(P<0.01);以SAS总分为因变量,分别以AAQ-Ⅱ总分及CFQ总分为自变量进行回归分析,二者均进入回归方程,AAQ-Ⅱ回归系数β为0.606,判定系数R2为0.367,CFQ回归系数β为0.520,判定系数R2为0.270;以SDS总分为因变量进行回归分析,AAQ-Ⅱ回归系数为0.541,判定系数为0.291,CFQ回归系数为0.423,判定系数为0.179。NA、SI总分与SAS、SDS总分均呈正相关(P<0.01),分别以SAS、SDS为因变量进行回归分析,NA及SI均进入回归方程。以SAS为因变量,NA的回归系数为0.593,判定系数为0.351,SI的回归系数为0.428,判定系数为0.183;以SDS为因变量,NA的回归系数为0.609,判定系数为0.371,SI的回归系数为0.421,判定系数为0.177。 第二,根据DS-14问卷得分情况将被试分为四个组:D型人格组(NA≥10分且SI≥10分);消极情感组(NA≥10分且SI<10分);社交抑制组(NA<10分且SI≥10分);无消极情感无社交抑制组(NA<10分且SI<10分)。分别对四组AAQ-Ⅱ总分、CFQ总分进行差异比较,结果显示:D型人格组AAQ-Ⅱ量表总分、CFQ量表总分均最高,其次为消极情感组、社交抑制组和无消极情感无社交抑制组;各组两两比较结果显示:AAQ-Ⅱ量表总分除D型人格组较消极情感组、消极情感组较社交抑制组差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)外,其余各比较组均在P<0.01的水平上差异有统计学意义;CFQ量表总分除D型人格组较消极情感组差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)外,其余各比较组均在P<0.01的水平上差异有统计学意义。 AAQ-Ⅱ、CFQ总分与NA及SI总分均呈正相关(P<0.01);以AAQ-Ⅱ总分为因变量进行回归分析表明:NA总分及SI总分均进入回归方程,多元回归系数为0.651,判定系数R2为0.423;以CFQ总分为因变量,只有NA总分进入回归方程,多元回归系数为0.603,判定系数R2为0.363。 第三,经验性回避在消极情感与焦虑、抑郁之间的中介效应占总效应的比例分别为41.29%、26.94%,在社交抑制与焦虑之间的中介效应占总效应的比例分别为52.24%、45.04%;认知融合在消极情感与焦虑之间的中介效应占总效应的比例为25.96%、在社交抑制与焦虑、抑郁之间的中介效应占总效应的比例分别为38.10%、28.40%;在消极情感与抑郁之间,认知融合的中介效应不存在。 本研究可以得出以下结论: 第一,在企业员工中,焦虑总分高于全国常模、抑郁总分低于全国常模;经验性回避、认知融合、D型人格两维度与焦虑、抑郁均呈正相关并对焦虑、抑郁均有良好的预测作用。 第二,在企业员工中,经验性回避、认知融合与D型人格两维度显著正相关;D型人格两维度对经验性回避、认知融合均有良好的预测作用;D型人格个体的心理灵活性最差,消极情感倾向、社交抑制倾向越明显则心理灵活性越差、心理越僵化,其中消极情感倾向的个体比社交抑制倾向的个体心理灵活性更差。 第三,经验性回避、认知融合分别部分中介D型人格两维度与焦虑、抑郁的关系,D型人格两维度对焦虑、抑郁的影响有一部分是通过影响经验性回避、认知融合的水平来实现的;在消极情感与抑郁的关系中认知融合的中介效应不存在。
其他摘要This study focused on the relationship among psychological flexibility , type D personality, anxiety and depression. Methods Totally 400 people from two large enterprise groups examined at one medical examination center were selected by cluster random sampling and interviewed using the Acceptance and Action Questionnaire(AAQ-Ⅱ), Cognitive Fusion Questionnaire(CFQ),Type D Personality Questionnaire (Ds-14), Self-Rating Anxiety Scale (SAS) and Self-rating depression scale(SDS). Z test ,correlation analysis and regression analysis were implemented. Results : First, the differences were significant between the employees and the Chinese norm about the score of SAS and SDS(P<0.01).There were positive correlation among AAQ-Ⅱ,CFQ,SAS and SDS (P<0.01).To SAS,the regression coefficient of AAQ-Ⅱwas 0.606,the coefficient of determination was 0.367, the regression coefficient of CFQ was 0.520,the coefficient of determination was 0.270. Also to SDS,the coefficients of AAQ-Ⅱwere 0.541and 0.291,the coefficients of CFQ were 0.423 and 0.179. Second,in the AAQ - II and CFQ, type D personality group scored the highest, followed by the NA group, SI group, the group without NA and SI the lowest; FOR AAQ-Ⅱ,through paired comparisons method, there was no significant difference between type D personality group and negative affectivity group or social inhibition group or negative affectivity group ,but the other comparisons are all statistically significant at the level of P <0.01.For CFQ,there was no difference between type D group and NA group(P <0.05),the other comparisons are all significant(P <0.01).The total score of AAQ-Ⅱand the score of CFQ were moderately positive correlated with NA and SI - two dimensions of type D personality . The predictive power of NA and SI to AAQ-Ⅱwas 0.651,the predictive power of NA to CFQ was 0.603. Third,there were positive correlation among AAQ-Ⅱ,CFQ,NA,SI,SAS and SDS(P<0.01).The ratio of medium effect among EA,NA and SAS,SDS were 41.29%,26.94%. The ratio among EA,SI and SAS,SDS were 52.24%,45.04%.Among CF,NA and SAS,the ratio was 25.96%.The ratio among CF,SI,SAS and SDS were 38.10%,28.4%.There was no medium effect among CFQ,NA and SDS. Conclusion: First, the score of SAS was higher than the Chinese norm,and the score of SDS was lower than the norm. There were positive correlation among psychological flexibility,anxiety,and depression.Anxiety,,depression could be perfectly predictived by. psychological flexibility. Second, psychological flexibility was significantly correlated with Type D persionality;The Type D persionality people of enterprise staff had the worst psychological flexibility;The more tendencies of NA and SI,the more score of AAQ – II,CFQ would be,that is the worse of psychological flexibility and the worse of psychological rigidity; psychological flexibility in NA was more worse in SI. Third,there were medium effect among experiential avoidance, type D personality ,anxiety and depression.There was no medium effect amongCF,NA and depression.
学科领域健康心理学
语种中文
文献类型学位论文
条目标识符http://ir.psych.ac.cn/handle/311026/20570
专题社会与工程心理学研究室
作者单位中国科学院心理研究所
推荐引用方式
GB/T 7714
郭慧娜. 企业员工心理灵活性、D型人格及焦虑、抑郁的关系研究[D]. 北京. 中国科学院研究生院,2015.
条目包含的文件
文件名称/大小 文献类型 版本类型 开放类型 使用许可
企业员工心理灵活性、D型人格及焦虑、抑郁(1316KB)学位论文 开放获取CC BY-NC-SA请求全文
个性服务
推荐该条目
保存到收藏夹
查看访问统计
导出为Endnote文件
谷歌学术
谷歌学术中相似的文章
[郭慧娜]的文章
百度学术
百度学术中相似的文章
[郭慧娜]的文章
必应学术
必应学术中相似的文章
[郭慧娜]的文章
相关权益政策
暂无数据
收藏/分享
所有评论 (0)
暂无评论
 

除非特别说明,本系统中所有内容都受版权保护,并保留所有权利。