進階搜尋


下載電子全文  
系統識別號 U0084-0602201316054900
論文名稱(中文) 性雙重標準之外顯與內隱態度測量研究
論文名稱(英文) Explicit and Implicit Attitude of Sexual Double Standards Measurement Study
校院名稱 樹德科技大學
系所名稱(中) 人類性學研究所
系所名稱(英) Graduate School of Human Sexology
學年度 101
學期 1
出版年 102
研究生(中文) 許哲禕
研究生(英文) Che-Yi Hsu
電子信箱 chazhsu@gmail.com
學位類別 碩士
語文別 中文
口試日期 2013-01-15
論文頁數 91頁
口試委員 指導教授-施俊名
委員-陳國彦
委員-魏慧美
中文關鍵字 性雙重標準  內隱態度  內隱聯結測驗 
英文關鍵字 Sexual Double Standard  Implicit Attitude  Implicit Association Test 
學科別分類
中文摘要 本研究旨在探討個人性自主意識抬頭下,社會大眾對於男女性行為是否仍存有雙重標準。國外許多研究發現性雙重標準允許男性可以比女性擁有更多性自由,更證實因為性雙重標準而使得男性比女性擁有更多性伴侶的機會,進而造成男女在性實踐上更加不平等。此外,態度除了認知成份、情感成份與行為成份外,還同時存在外顯與內隱態度兩種,所衍生出的測量方法因而區分為外顯問卷調查法與內隱態度測量法。由於問卷調查這類的自陳量表常因社會期望或同儕壓力影響下而使得評量結果有所失準,因此,Greenwald、McGhee與Schwartz(1998)提出內隱聯結測驗的構想,企圖更真實地捕捉受試者內心的真正想法。
為比較性雙重標準外顯與內隱測量上的差異,本研究以樹德科技大學為研究場域,依照性別及不同學院別(應用社會學院、設計學院、管理學院、資訊學院)抽取共96位大學生為研究對象,分別以性雙重標準的外顯問卷與內隱聯結測驗進行探究,並將所得結果進行比較及分析兩者程度上的差異。研究結果顯示:外顯測量與內隱測量雖有共同一致的發現但亦有相異之處。相同的地方在於兩種測量技術均發現受試者除了性別與學院之外,其餘的個人背景變項並無明顯差異。其中,男大學生的性雙重標準明顯高於女大學生,而資訊學院的大學生的性雙重標準亦明顯高於應用社會學院的大學生。至於相異的地方在於外顯測量所測得的性雙重標準,無論男女大學生皆一致地對男性性行為持較正面的看法,但內隱測量卻呈現男女大學生各自對同性別的性行為持較正面的態度,形成所謂的「內團體偏私」之現象。由上述結果可以推論男性長久以來在社會有形與無形的鼓勵下,對性採取較為主動積極的態度,同時亦被灌輸女性守貞的重要性;另一方面,女性雖受社會各方的性壓迫而欲極力反撲,但本身卻會透過教化過程把此觀念合理化,像是寬容男性的性行為,而苛責女性的性行為,形成對性既趨又避的矛盾心態。因此,建議未來可以針對男女大學生進行更多性/性別教育以改善此問題。
英文摘要 The purpose of this study is to explore whether the public have the double standards about sexual behavior when people pay more attention to sexual self-consciousness. Many studies have found that sexual double standards allow men to have more sexual freedom than women and may cause unequal sexual practices where a man dominates a woman. In addition, attitudes consist not only of cognitive, behavioral, and affective components, but also include the explicit and implicit attitude. It is easy to imagine how to measure an explicit attitude – ask respondents how they feel. An implicit attitude, however, is not measured by introspection. The varieties of methods used for implicit attitude measurement do not depend on the respondent’s ability to self-report their attitude. One such implicit attitude measure is the Implicit Association Test (IAT) developed by Greenwald, McGhee, and Schwartz(1998) in order to capture the true attitude from the subject's mind.
To understand the relationship between explicit and implicit sexual double standard, 96 undergraduate students enrolled full-time at Shu-Te University conducted two IAT experiments, followed by the sexual double standard scale. The results showed explicit and implicit measurement had found many similarities but also differences. Both two methods showed that among the undergraduate students’ background variables only gender and college differences were found between male and female in terms of sexual double standard. Male students were significantly higher than female students to have sexual double standards and students from college of informatics were also significantly higher than students from college of applied social sciences to have sexual double standards. The most notable difference in the results of two methods that explicit measurement showed all students whatever their gender had express positive opinions to male sexual behaviors but implicit measurement showed that students had a more positive attitude toward sexual behavior of their same gender. We could infer from these results that men are often expected to enjoy more sexual freedom and neglect women’s sexual response when they were younger. On the other hand, women are encouraged to be more sexually restricted and internalize these values that cause ambivalent feelings that can be likened to approach-avoidance behavior to sex. Therefore, it’s recommended that educators should develop more sexual and gender lessons for male and female students to improve sexual self-consciousness.
論文目次 中文摘要 i
英文摘要 ii
誌謝 iv
表目錄 vii
圖目錄 viii
第一章 緒論 1
第一節 研究背景與動機 1
第二節 研究目的 3
第三節 名詞釋義 4
第四節 研究範圍與限制 5
第二章 文獻探討 7
第一節 態度的意涵、類型及其測量方式 7
第二節 性雙重標準的意涵、理論、測量及其相關研究 11
第三節 探討以內隱聯結測驗測量性雙重標準之可行性 18
第三章 研究設計與實施 27
第一節 研究架構 27
第二節 研究假設 28
第三節 研究流程 30
第四節 研究程序 31
第五節 研究工具 46
第四章 研究結果 51
第一節 性雙重標準之內隱態度(詞彙)分析 51
第二節 性雙重標準之內隱態度(圖像)分析 55
第三節 性雙重標準之外顯態度分析 58
第四節 性雙重標準之內隱態度相關分析 62
第五節 性雙重標準之內隱態度(詞彙)與外顯態度相關分析 63
第六節 性雙重標準之內隱態度(圖像)與外顯態度相關分析 65
第五章 研究結論與建議 67
第一節 研究結論 67
第二節 研究建議 68
參考文獻 70
壹、中文部份 70
貳、外文部份 70
附錄 77
附錄一 性雙重標準外顯問卷 77
附錄二 受試者招募公告 78
附錄三 性心理實驗受試者同意書 79
附錄四 實驗用名字與詞彙 80
參考文獻 壹、中文部份
內政部戶政司(2010)。全國姓名分析。臺北:內政部戶政司。
朱蘭慧(2003)。男性性別角色刻板印象之形成與鬆動。應用心理研究,17,85-119。
卓淑玲、鄭昭明、陳學志、梁庚辰(2008)。情緒標準刺激與反應常模的基礎研究。行政院國家科學委員會專題研究成果報告(計畫編號:97-2420-H-002-220-MY3),未出版。
張春興(1998)。現代心理學(初版二十五刷)。臺北:東華。
張春興(2006)。張氏心理學辭典。台北:東華。
許馨如(2006)。護理人員與大學生對於愛滋病的知識與內隱及外顯態度之探討。輔仁大學心理與輔導學系碩士論文,未出版,臺北市。
郭生玉(2004)。教育測驗與評量。臺北:精華。
塗沅澂(2002)。個體對同性戀所持態度之外顯測量與內隱測量比較。輔仁大學心理與輔導學系碩士論文,未出版,臺北市。
貳、外文部份
Barash, D. P., & Lipton, J. E. (2001). The myth of monogamy. NY: Freeman.
Baumeister, R. F., & Twenge, J. M. (2002). Cultural suppression of female sexuality. American Psychological Association, 6(2), 166-203.
Brown, A. S., Gray, N. S., & Snowden, R. J. (2009). Implicit measurement of sexual preferences in child sex abusers: Role of victim type and denial. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 21(2), 166-180.
Buss, D. M. (1989). Sex differences in human mate preferences: Evolutionary hypotheses tested in 37 cultures. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 12(1), 1-49.
Conell, R. W. (1987). Gender and power: Society, the person, and sexual politics. CA: Stanford University.
Crawford, M., & Popp, D. (2003). Sexual double standards: A review and methodological critique of two decades of research. Journal of Sex Research, 40(1), 13-26.
Devos, T., Blanco, K., Rico, F., & Dunn, R. (2008). The role of parenthood and college education in the self-concept of college students: Explicit and implicit assessments of gendered aspirations. Sex Roles, 59(3-4), 214-228.
Dilorio, J. A. (1989). Being and becoming coupled: The emergence of female subordination in heterosexual relationships. In B. J. Risman & P. Schwartz (Eds.), Gender in intimate relationships: A microstructural approach (pp. 94-107). CA: Wadsworth.
Eagly, A. H., Wood, W., & Diekman, A. B. (2000). Social role theory of sex differences and similarities: A current appraisal. In T. B. Ecke & H. M. Trautner (Eds.), The developmental social psychology of gender. NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Eichler, M. (1980). The double standard: A feminist critique of feminist social science. NY: St. Martin's.
Fasula, A. M. (2005). Keeping the girls "safe" and powerless: The sexual double standard and adolescent African American women's sexual risk. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Emory University, Atlanta, Georgia.
Fazio, R. H., Jackson, J. R., Dunton, B. C., & Williams, C. J. (1995). Variability in automatic activation as an unobstrusive measure of racial attitudes: A bona fide pipeline? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 69(6), 1013-1027.
Fazio, R. H., & Olson, M. A. (2003). Implicit measures in social cognition research: Their meaning and use. Annual Review of Psychology, 54, 297-327.
Gagnon, J. H. (1977). Human sexualities. IL: Scott, Foresman.
Gagnon, J. H. (1990). The explicit and implict use of the scripting perspective in sex research. Annual Review of Sex Research, 1(1), 1-43.
Gagnon, J. H., & Simon, W. (1973). Sexual conduct: The social sources of human sexuality. IL: Aldine Publishing Co.
Gagnon, J. H., & Simon, W. (1984). Sexual scripts. Society, 22, 52-60.
Gagnon, J. H., & Simon, W. (1987). A sexual scripts approach. In Geer & W. O'Donahue (Eds.), Theories of human sexuality (pp. 363-383). NY: Plenum.
Gawronski, B., & Bodenhausen, G. V. (2005). Accessibility effects on implicit social cognitions: The role of knowledge activation versus retrieval processes. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 89(5), 672-685.
Gawronski, B., & Bodenhausen, G. V. (2006). Associative and propositional processes in evaluation: An Integrative review of implicit and explicit Attitude change. Psychological Bulletin, 132(5), 692-731.
Gawronski, B., LeBel, E. P., & Peters, K. R. (2007). What do implicit measures tell us? Perspectives on Psychological Science, 2(2), 181-193.
Gray, N. S., Brown, A. S., MacCulloch, M. J., Smith, J., & Snowden, R. J. (2005). An implicit test of the associations between children and sex in pedophiles. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 114(2), 304-308.
Gray, N. S., & Snowden, R. J. (2009). The implicit association test as a measure of sexual interest. In D. Thornton & D. R. Laws (Eds.), Cognitive approaches to the assessment of sexual interest in sexual offenders (pp. 101). WS: John Wiley & Sons.
Greene, K., & Faulkner, S. (2005). Gender, belief in the sexual double standard, and sexual talk in heterosexual dating relationships. Sex Roles, 53(3), 239-251.
Greenwald, A. G., & Banaji, M. R. (1995). Implicit social cognition: Attitudes, self-esteem, and stereotypes. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 102(1), 4-27.
Greenwald, A. G., Banaji, M. R., & Nosek, B. A. (2003). Understanding and using the implicit association test: I. An improved scoring algorithm. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 85(2), 197-216.
Greenwald, A. G., McGhee, D. E., & Schwartz, J. L. K. (1998). Measuring individual differences in implicit cognition: The implicit association test. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74(6), 1464-1480.
Herold, E. S., & Milhasen, R. R. (1999). Does the sexual double standard still exist? Perception of university women. Journal of Sex Research, 36(4), 361-368.
Holland, J., Ramazanoglu, C., Sharpe, S., & Thomson., R. (2004). The male in the head: Young people, heterosexuality and power. London: The Tufnell.
Hyde, J. S., & Oliver, M. B. (2000). Gender differences in sexuality: Results from meta-analysis. In C. B. Travis & J. W. White (Eds.), Sexuality, society, and feminism (pp. 57-78). DC: American Psychological Association.
Hynie, M., & Lydon, J. E. (1995). Women's perceptions of female contraceptive behavior: Experimental evidence of the sexual double standard. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 19(4), 563-581.
Jellison, W. A., McConnell, A. R., & Gabriel, S. (2004). Implicit and explicit measures of sexual orientation attitudes: Ingroup preferences and related behaviors and beliefs among gay and straight men. Society for Personality and Social Psychology, 30(5), 629-642.
Jessor, S. L., & Jessor, R. (1975). Transition from virginity to nonvirginity among youth: Asocial-psychological study over time. Developmental Psychology, 11(4), 473-484.
Kelly, J., & Bazzini, D. G. (2001). Gender, sexual experience, and the sexual double standard: Evaluations of female contraceptive behavior. Sex Roles: A Journal of Research, 45(11-12), 785-799.
Komarovsky, M. (1976). Dilemmas of masculinity: A study of college youth. NY: Norton.
Lai, Y., & Hynie, M. (2011). A tale of two standards: An examination of young adults' endorsement of gendered and ageist sexual double standards. Sex Roles, 64(5-6), 360-371.
Lane, K. A., Goh, J. X., & Driver-linn, E. (2012). Implicit science stereotypes mediate the relationship between gender and academic participation. Sex Roles, 66(3-4), 220-234.
Laumann, E. O., Gagnon, J. H., Michael, R. T., & Michaels, S. (1994). Sex in America. IL: University of Chicago.
Lehmiller, J. J., VanderDrift, L. E., & Kelly, J. R. (2011). Sex Differences in Approaching Friends with Benefits Relationships. Journal of Sex Research, 48(2/3), 275-284.
MacCorquodale, P. (1989). Gender and sexual behavior. In K. McKinney & S. Sprecher (Eds.), Human sexuality: The societal and interpersonal context (pp. 91-112). NJ: Ablex.
MacKinnon, C. A. (1989). Toward a feminist theory of the state. MA: Harvard University.
MacKinnon, C. A. (2002). Pleasure under patriarchy. In C. L. Williams & A. Stein (Eds.), Sexuality and gender (pp. 33-43). MA: Blackwell Publishers.
Marks, M. J., & Fraley, R. C. (2005). The sexual double standard: Fact or fiction? Sex Roles, 52(3-4), 175-186.
Milhausen, R. R., & Herold, E. S. (2001). Reconceptualizing the sexual double standard. Journal of Psychology & Human Sexuality, 13(2), 63-83.
Mischel, W. A. (1966). A social-learning view of sex differences in behavior. In E. E. Maccoby (Ed.), The development of sex differences. CA: Stanford University.
Muehlenhard, C. L. (1988). "Nice women" don't say yes and "real men" don't say no: How miscommunication and the double standard can cause sexual problems. Women and Therapy, 7(2-3), 95-108.
Muehlenhard, C. L., & Quackenbush, D. M. (1998). Sexual double standard scale. In C. M. Davis, W. L. Yarber, R. Bauserman, G. Schreer & S. L. Davis (Eds.), Handbook of sexuality-related measures (pp. 186-188). CA: Sage.
Murstein, B. I., & Mercy., T. (1994). Sex, drugs, relationships, contraception, and fears of disease on a college campus over 17 years. Adolescence, 29(114), 303-322.
Neumann, R., Hülsenbeck, K., & Seibt, B. (2004). Attitudes towards people with AIDS and avoidance behavior: Automatic and reflective bases of behavior. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 40(4), 543-550.
Nosek, B. A., & Banaji, M. R. (2001). The go/no-go association task. Social Cognition, 19(6), 625-664.
Nunes, K. L., Firestone, P., & Baldwin, M. W. (2007). Indirect assessment of cognitions of child sexual abusers with the implicit association test. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 34(4), 454-475.
O'Sullivan, L. F. (1995). Less is more: The effects of sexual experience on judgements of men's and women's personality characteristics and relationship desirability. Sex Roles, 33(3-4), 159-181.
Reisen, C. A., & Poppen, P. J. (1995). College women and condom use: Importance of partner relationship. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 25(17), 1485-1498.
Reiss, I. L. (1960). Premarital sexual standards in America. NY: Free.
Reiss, I. L. (1964). The scaling of premarital sexual permissiveness. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 26(2), 188-198.
Sahl, D., & Keene, J. R. (2010). The sexual double standard and gender differences in pedictors of perceptions of adult-teen sexual relationships. Sex Roles, 62(3-4), 264-277.
Sakaluk, J. K., & Milhausen, R. R. (2012). Factors influencing university students' explicit and implicit sexual double standards. Journal of Sex Research, 49(5), 464-476.
Snitow, A., Stansell, C., & Thompson, S. (1983). Powers of desire: The politics of sexuality. NY: Monthly Review.
Snowden, R. J., Wichter, J., & Gray, N. S. (2008). Implicit and explicit measurements of sexual preference in gay and heterosexual men: A comparison of priming techniques and the implicit association task. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 37(4), 558-565.
Sprecher, S., Mckinney, K., & Orbuch, T. L. (1987). Has the double standard dissppeared? An experimental test. Social Psychology Quarterly, 50(1), 24-31.
Trivers, R. L. (1972). Parental investment and sexual selection. In B. Campbell (Ed.), Sexual selection and the descent of man. IL: Aldine Publishing Co.
Weinberg, M. S., Lottes, I. L., & Shaver, F. M. (1995). Swedish or American heterosexual college youth: Who is more permissive? Archives of Sexual Behavior, 24(4), 409-437.
White, M. J., & White, G. B. (2006). Implicit and explicit occupational gender stereotypes. Sex Roles, 55(3-4), 259-266.
Wilson, T. D., Lindsey, S., & Schooler, T. Y. (2000). A model of dual attitudes. Psychological Review, 107 (1), 101-126.
Young, M., Penhollow, T. M., & Bailey, W. C. (2010). Hooking-up and condom provision: Is there a double standard? American Journal of Health Studies, 25(3), 156-164.
Ziegert, J. C., & Hanges, P. J. (2005). Employment discrimination: The role of implicit attitudes, motivation, and a climate for racial bias. Journal of Applied Psychology, 90(3), 553-562.
論文全文使用權限
  • 同意授權瀏覽/列印電子全文服務,於2014-02-18起公開。


  • 如您有疑問,請與我們聯絡
    審核問題辦理:請洽各系系助
    圖書館資料修正:圖書館採編組組員  林彥儀  電話:(07)6158000 轉2307  電子郵件:pat3288@stu.edu.tw
    系統問題處理:圖書館採編組組長  蘇雅屏  電話:(07) 6158000 轉2301  電子郵件:sqavb@stu.edu.tw