京都大学 / 新制・課程博士 / 博士(薬科学) / 甲第23838号 / 薬科博第153号 / 新制||薬科||17(附属図書館) / 京都大学大学院薬学研究科薬科学専攻 / (主査)教授 金子 周司, 教授 山下 富義, 教授 掛谷 秀昭 / 学位規則第4条第1項該当 / Doctor of Pharmaceutical Sciences / Kyoto University / DFAM

本研究試圖整合成人依附理論與Benjamin的SASB人際行為環複模式，主要研究目的有二，研究目的一：探討伴侶間的人際行為是否會影響個人在愛情關係中依附特質的展現，研究目的二：探討伴侶間的人際行為對個人在愛情關係中依附風格、依附特質改變的影響情形。在本研究中，在伴侶間人際行為的內涵包括親和性（又分成滋潤性與破壞性）與互依性（又分成自主性與控制性）等人際行為，伴侶間互動層次共測量個體自陳對方提供行為、實際對方提供行為，個體的尋求行為、以及提供-尋求行為之間的互補性（亦分成個體自陳伴侶間的互補性、以及實際伴侶間的互補性）。依附特質的測量包括個體自陳在愛情中與伴侶間的焦慮與逃避依附特質等，並可組合出安全型、焦慮/矛盾型、逃避型、與錯亂型等四種依附風格。 本研究採取「追蹤研究法」，平均間隔約12.49週，進行兩個時間點的測量，邀請正在約會關係中的大學生伴侶雙方共234人接受單獨的成人依附特質量表(ECR)、伴侶間人際行為量表(SASB模式)的測量，並同時詢問其壓力事件調查表與測驗大學生身心健康調查表(GHQ)，以作為排除影響依附風格改變的干擾變項，兩個時間點皆完成測驗且未分手者共計199人。研究目的一的分析對象為第一個時間受測者，但必須是正在談戀愛而未分手的大學生，共計232人符合標準，其中男性佔35％，女性佔65%，，而完整的配對資料共76對，故有152人可進行實際伴侶間互動的分析。 研究目的二的受測者除了兩個時間點皆受測且未分手外，還必須排除在兩個時間點遭受重大壓力者與GHQ量表上表現出身心健康狀況不佳者，共計有效受試者為183人，伴侶雙方皆完成測驗的共計63對，故有126人可進行實際伴侶間互動的分析。本研究亦針對個體自陳對方提供行為、以及各人際行為的親和性與互依性指標、提供與尋求行為的互補性指標等，進行信效度的檢驗。 本研究結果可分成兩大部分。第一，在人際行為對愛情依附特質與風格改變的影響方面，可發現部分伴侶間人際行為的確可對依附特質造成影響：1. 「親和性」人際行為最能影響愛情依附特質，並與依附風格、依附特質改變最有關連；2.「滋潤性親和」不同於「破壞性親和」對依附特質的影響；3.個體在愛情關係中的依附特質，主要受到個體「主觀認知」到的伴侶間人際互動，而並不一定會受到「實際」伴侶間人際互動的影響；4. 逃避特質則較明顯受到伴侶間滋潤性親和人際行為的影響，而焦慮依附特質較受到伴侶間破壞性人際行為的影響，但焦慮依附特質的改變與伴侶人際行為關連性較低。第二，對個體在關係中單向的人際行為而言，親和性比互依性人際行為更能影響愛情依附特質，甚至與依附風格、依附特質的改變更有關連；但互依性指標（自主性）對依附特質並非沒有影響力，而是會顯現在雙向人際行為的互補性當中。 最後乃說明本研究的討論與限制，並提出未來在研究上與伴侶諮商實務上的建議。 / This study tried to integrate adult attachment theory and Benjamin’s Structural Analysis of Social Behavior Models (SASB). There were two major purposes of the study: The first one was to, discussing whether the impact of dating couples’ interpersonal behaviors on romantic attachment characteristics for college students. The Second was to, discussing the impact of dating couples’ interpersonal behaviors on the change of attachment styles and characteristics. In this study, the content of dating couples’ interpersonal behaviors includes affiliation (best and worst) and interdependence (autonomy and control) behaviors. The interactions of dating couples were measured by self reporting partner’s providing behaviors, actual partner’s providing behaviors, subjects’ seeking behaviors, the complements of self reporting dating relationship with providing-seeking behaviors, and the complements of actual dating relationship with providing-seeking behaviors. The measurement of attachment characteristics included anxiety and avoidance trait, which could be combined to four attachment styles: secure, anxious-ambivalent, avoidant, disoriented / disorganized. The study took ‘panel study’, and the average interval of test-retest time points was about 12.49 weeks. Total subjects were 234, who were measured by ECR and couples’ interpersonal behaviors (SASB model). Questionnaires of stress events, and GHQ were interference variables for the use of the purpose of the second study. There were 232 subjects composed of 35% male and 65% female in the purpose of first study. These subjects who were all measured in the first timing were falling in love and not yet breaking-up. There were 76 pairs complete matching data, so 152 subjects could process the analysis of actual dating relationship. There were 183 subjects in the purpose of the second study. Besides subjects who were measured in the two time points were falling in love and not yet breaking-up, it had to eliminate two interference variables. There were 63 pairs complete matching data, so 126 subjects could process the analysis of actual dating relationship. There were two major results in this study. First, couples’ interpersonal behaviors had the impact on attachment characteristics: 1. affiliation interpersonal behaviors could affect romantic attachment characteristics, and was related to the change of attachment styles and attachment characteristics. 2. The impact on attachment characteristics was different between ‘best affiliation’ and ‘worst affiliation’. 3. Self reporting couples’ interpersonal behaviors had impact on attachment characteristics. On the contrary, actual couples’ interpersonal behaviors had no impact. 4. ‘Best affiliation’ had impact on avoidance attachment characteristics, and ‘worst affiliation’ had impact on anxiety attachment characteristics. The association between the change of anxiety attachment characteristics and couples’ interpersonal behaviors was low. Second, for one-way interpersonal behavior in dating relationship, affiliation behaviors affected romantic attachment characteristics more than interdependence. Even affiliation behaviors were more related to the change of attachment styles and attachment characteristics than interdependence. The complement of couples’ autonomy interpersonal behaviors also affected attachment characteristics. In addition, implication for adult attachment research and couple therapy in dating relationship was discussed. Research limitation was also explicated.