不同心理韧性高中生的日常情绪状态与情绪自我调节方式  

Daily emotional states and emotional self-regulation strategies among high school students with different resilience levels

作　　者：席居哲[1] 左志宏[2] WU Wei 

机构地区：[1]华东师范大学心理与认知科学学院,上海200062 [2]华东师范大学学前教育与特殊教育学院,上海200062 [3]Department of Psychology and Center for Research Methods and Data Analysis, University of Kansas, Lawrence, KS 660457556, USA

出　　处：《中国心理卫生杂志》2013年第9期709-714,共6页Chinese Mental Health Journal

基　　金：国家社会科学基金青年项目(08CSH026);上海市教育科学研究项目(B08013);上海市浦江人才计划项目(12PJC037);上海市妇联家庭文明建设重点课题(JW1303)

摘　　要：目的:比较高、中、低心理韧性水平高中生的日常情绪状态及情绪自我调节方式。方法:选取202名高中生,施测青少年心理韧性量表(RSCA)、正负情绪情感量表(PANAS)和情绪调节方式问卷(ERQ)。依据RSCA得分分为高(n=87)、中(n=61)、低心理韧性组(n=54),比较不同心理韧性组日常情绪状态及积极、消极情绪的调节方式差异。结果:高心理韧性组PANAS积极情绪情感得分高于中、低心理韧性组[(33.3±6.2)vs.(30.8±5.2),(29.4±6.9);P<0.001],低心理韧性组PANAS消极情绪情感得分高于高、中心理韧性组[(27.5±7.7)vs.(22.3±6.0),(24.0±7.3);P<0.001]。在积极情绪调节方式上,高心理韧性组ERQ重视得分高于低心理韧性组[(3.4±0.6)vs.(3.0±0.8);P<0.05],宣泄得分高于中、低心理韧性组[(3.2±0.7)vs.(3.0±0.6),(2.8±0.9);P<0.01],而抑制得分低于中、低心理韧性组[(1.4±0.5)vs.(1.6±0.5),(1.8±0.8);P<0.01];在消极情绪调节方式上,高心理韧性组抑制得分低于中、低心理韧性组[(2.2±0.7)vs.(2.5±0.6),(2.6±0.8);P<0.05],而低心理韧性组重视得分高于高、中心理韧性组[(2.1±0.7)vs.(1.8±0.5),(1.9±0.5);P<0.001)]。结论:不同心理韧性高中生日常情绪状态存在差异,高心理韧性高中生倾向于对积极情绪采用更多的重视、宣泄和更少的减弱调节,对消极情绪则采用更少的重视和抑制调节。Objective：To explore the differences in daily emotional states and self-regulation strategies among high school students with high,intermediate,and low resilience.Methods：Totally 202 high school students were selected and divided into the high,intermediate,and low resilience groups （n =87,61,54,respectively） according to the scores of the Resilience Scale for Chinese Adolescents （RSCA）.There daily emotional state and emotional selfregulation strategies were measured with the Positive Affect and Negative Affect Schedule （PANAS） and Emotion Regulation Questionnaire （ERQ） respectively.Analysis of covariance with covariate of gender was conducted to test group differences in daily emotional states and self-regulation strategies for positive and negative emotions.Results：The students with high resilience reported higher PANAS positive affect scores than those with intermediate and low resilience [（33.3 ± 6.2） vs.（30.8 ± 5.2）,（29.4 ± 6.9） ; P ＜ 0.001].In contrast,students with low resilience reported higher PANAS negative affect scores than those with high and intermediate resilience [（27.5 ±7.7）vs.（22.3 ±6.0）,（24.0 ± 7.3） ; P ＜ 0.001].When experiencing positive emotions,the students with high resilience had higher ERQ rumination scores than those with low resilience [（3.4 ± 0.6） vs.（3.0 ± 0.8）,P ＜ 0.05],and higher ERQ revealing scores [（3.2 ± 0.7） vs.（3.0 ± 0.6）,（2.8 ± 0.9） ; P ＜ 0.01] and lower ERQ suppression scores [（1.4 ±0.5） vs.（1.6 ± 0.5）,（1.8 ± 0.8） ; P ＜ 0.01] than those with low and intermediate resilience.When experenerving negative emotions,the students with high resilience had lower suppression scores than those with low and intermediate resilience [（2.2 ± 0.7） vs.（2.5 ± 0.6）,（2.6 ± 0.8） ; P ＜ 0.05],while the students with low resilience had higher rumination scores than those with high and intermediate resilience [（2.1 ± 0.7） vs.（1.8 ± 0.5）,（1.9 ±0.5）;P ＜0.001].Conclusion

关 键 词：心理韧性 高中生 日常情绪状态 情绪自我调节方式 横断面研究 

分 类 号：B844.2[哲学宗教—发展与教育心理学] B842.6[哲学宗教—心理学]