本研究採用2013年度台灣社會變遷基本調查計畫數據進行分析，旨在探討在不同災害經驗下，心理資源變化、災害風險知覺與身心狀態的關係，並探討資源獲得是否能作為災後的保護因子，從而降低災害經驗對身心狀態的影響。研究結果發現：（1）資源的流失能部分中介災害經驗（財產損失、心理創傷）下的身心狀態，結果支持Hobfoll的資源保留理論；（2）資源的獲得能降低災害經驗（財產損失）下的無法控制感；（3）對於身心狀態，地震經歷頻率與資源獲得的交互作用能調節身心狀態，即不論經歷頻率多寡，資源的獲得愈多，身心狀態便愈好。控制災害經驗與心理資源獲得的情況下，個體覺得地震發生可能性愈高，身心狀態就愈差。上述結果僅出現在地震災害樣本中，淹水災害則無上述發現。詳細討論見內文。 / The aim of the study is to examine the relationships between change in psychological resources, risk perception and psychological adjustment under different disaster experiences. Using the data from Taiwan Social Change Survey 2013 to test the hypnosis: whether psychological resources gain can directly influenced one’s psychological adjustment, or the resources gain can indirectly reduce the impact of disaster by altering the risk perception. Results showed that: 1) Resources loss can partially mediate the effect between the disaster experiences and psychological adjustment. 2) Resources gain can moderate the effect between disaster loss experiences to risk perception, victims who gain more resources, their controllability of future disaster is higher. 3) Resources gain can moderate the effect between frequency of experiencing disaster and psychological adjustment. After controlling the disaster experience and resources gain, the likelihood of Earthquake recurrence that one believes, can predict his/her psychological adjustment. The above results only found in case of the earthquake disaster, but not in flooding.

以機率或頻率方式呈現訊息對風險知覺評估的影響，過去的研究有不一致的結果，原因可能來自於判斷事件與受試者的自我相關程度不同，而引發捷思或系統性的訊息處理歷程。實驗一發現當事件的自我相關程度高，受試者會採用系統性的認知處理，而事件的自我相關程度低時，受試者會採用捷思性的認知處理。實驗二詢問受試者認為以機率或頻率方式呈現訊息何者較清楚明確，結果發現有77.5％的受試者認為以頻率方式呈現訊息較以機率方式呈現訊息清楚明確。實驗三操弄「事件自我相關程度」與「機率或頻率方式呈現訊息」，結果發現當事件為高自我相關時，機率或頻率方式呈現訊息在風險知覺的判斷上沒有差異；而當事件為低自我相關時，則頻率方式呈現訊息的「風險知覺」與「事件聯想負向詞數量」均大於機率方式呈現訊息。另外，當事件為低自我相關時，訊息明確度與事件聯想負向詞數量對風險知覺有顯著的預測力。以上的結果支持不同事件自我相關程度會引發捷思或系統性訊息處理，而頻率方式呈現訊息較機率方式呈現訊息清楚明確的原因，與Slovic等人(2000)提出頻率較具體，容易想像的推論符合，但不支持Gigerenzer和Edwards (2003)認為機率的參照類別不清楚的假設。此外，自我相關程度與可得性捷思為影響頻率或機率方式呈現訊息對風險知覺判斷結果不一致的重要變項。

社會工作者處於人身安全高度危險的工作環境中，國內相關的研究卻不豐富。本研究以處在高風險工作環境中的社會工作者為對象，瞭解他們目前遭受案主暴力對待的現況、回應方式，及對暴力風險的知覺情形。研究以郵寄問卷方式進行，資料蒐集範圍包括臺北市家庭暴力暨性侵害防治中心、各區社會福利服務中心、區域級以上醫療及精神醫療院所，發出231份問卷，回收有效問卷共計165份，回收率為71.43％。 首先，研究發現81.8％的社會工作者生涯中曾遭受某種形式的暴力攻擊，其中心理傷害80.6％、身體傷害16.4％、財產損害26.1％，經常發生的地點在「辦公處所」。研究尚發現44％的社工員經驗到多種形式的暴力，更有72％經驗到一次以上，顯見案主的暴力威脅並非偶發事件，高風險領域社會工作者確實面臨案主暴力威脅；邏輯迴歸分析發現，機構年資不長、工作經驗較短者面對暴力的可能性較高。其次，平均而言工作者身體風險知覺較心理及財務風險知覺為高，進一步以迴歸分析發現，尚未取得證照、保護性服務工作者、機構年資低、工作經驗較短者其風險意識較高。第三，受暴經驗與風險知覺有關，過去曾有受暴經驗的社工員整體風險知覺較高。最後，有關正式通報的情形，百分之五十七點四的受訪者表示遭遇心理傷害時會通報、受身體傷害和財務損害者則有近八成會通報，受到「形而外且具體」傷害時呈報上級的情形則更為普遍。 研究建議如下：實務上，機構應有清楚的政策及通報流程以增加暴力事件的可見度、提供員工情緒支持及教育訓練以提昇工作者風險意識及減緩工作恐懼感；工作者本身應改變信念並增加實務工作知能，避免將暴力事件地下化、私有化，及強化與案主工作時的應對技巧。另外，在教育養成上應有更多人身安全的訓練與關注，以避免社會工作學生因過度擔心阻礙其投入職場的信心。最後，政府政策應針對第一線人身安全高風險的社工員給予實質性保障、儘速將人身安全納入社工師法或專門立法，強調暴力「零容忍」的相關政策，以維護社工人員的尊嚴與生命安全。 / Although social workers are at risk of client violence in the workplace, little research on the situation has been done in Taiwan. The present study surveyed 165 social workers practicing in high risk fields in Taipei in terms of their experiences, reaction, and perception of client violence. The following are the findings. First, a prevalence rate of client violence (81.8％) was found. About eighty percent of social workers had experienced some type of psychological assault by clients during their work. Physical attack was reported by 27 workers (16.4％). Property damage was reported by 43 workers (26.1％). In multiple logistic regression, psychological assault was associated with two variables—less seniority and less social work experience. Second, on the average, scores of physical risk perception was much higher than the other two perceptions. Multiple regression showed that workers who were less senior, worked at protection service, with less social work experience, or without license, had higher scores of risk perception. Third, a significant positive correlation existed between client violence and risk perception. Finally, results indicated that only 57.4％ of the subjects who suffered psychological assault had decided to report their experience formally. On the contrary, nearly eighty percent would report when they encountered physical attack or property damage – especially external and concrete harm. Implications for practice, training and policy were discussed.

本研究欲瞭解在模擬招募情境中，兩個薪資特徵-「變動薪資比例」 與「加薪型態」，分別對組織吸引力之影響，並探討此兩組關係中「風險 知覺」的中介效果與「性格變項（核心自我評價）」的調節效果。本研究 採2x2 受試者間之實驗設計，所操弄的二個獨變項為：1.變動薪資比例 （高、低）；2.加薪型態（高機率低加薪、低機率高加薪），依變項為整 體「組織吸引力」及其三個向度（組織正向情感、雇主評價、求職行動 意圖）。 本研究之受試者為139 位大學應屆畢業生，研究結果顯示：「變動薪 資比例」越高，受試者感受的「風險知覺」越高；但「加薪型態」與受 試者的「風險知覺」無顯著關係。當受試者的「風險知覺」較高時，其 組織正向情感、雇主評價則較低；然而，變動薪資比例、加薪型態與組 織吸引力無顯著關係。雖然核心自我評價並沒有調節「變動薪資比例」 或「加薪型態」與組織吸引力的關係；可是核心自我評價卻調節「風險 知覺」與整體組織吸引力與其二個子向度（組織正向情感、求職行動意 圖）的關係。 研究者分別就結果加以討論，提出可能的解釋，並說明本研究之限 制與貢獻。 / This paper presents an experimental investigation of the influences of type of variable pay ratio and type of pay increases on overall organizational attraction and its three dimensions: affection, intentions toward the company and company prestige. A 2x2 between subjects design was used. Two independent variables were types of variable pay ratio (high/ low) and types of pay increases (high probability, small pay increases/ low probability, large pay increases). The dependent variable was organizational attraction. Risk perception and core self-evaluation were mediating and moderating variable, respectively. The sample comprised 139 college students approaching graduation. The results demonstrated that higher variable pay ratio caused higher risk perception but type of pay increases did not. Higher risk perception caused lower affection, company prestige; however, type of variable pay ratio and type of pay increases did not. Core self-evaluation did not mediate the relationship between type of variable pay ratio and risk perception, but it mediated the relationship between risk perception and overall organizational attraction and its two of three dimensions (affection, intentions toward the company). Based on the results, alternative explanation, limits, and implications were discussed.

八八水災於2009年重創南台灣，遷村易安全地而居成為政府防災風險管理的工作重要任務之一，但政策執行時卻遭遇眾多原住民部落不願離家的抗拒，我們由此現象關注到原住民族群特殊的所在依附感，欲透過所在依附感的角度，探討其與風險知覺、防災準備行為、心理健康及心理症狀間的關係。過去文獻對防災準備行為的影響因子並無一致定論，本研究除檢驗災難風險知覺與防災準備行為的關係外，同時認為所在依附感可能對風險知覺與防災準備行為有所影響。由於關切八八原住民災民於災後的心理反應，我們將所在依附感、災難風險知覺、防災準備行為視為災後心理反應的保護因子，檢驗三保護因子分別對生活滿意度、創傷後壓力疾患症狀、憂鬱症狀的影響。本研究於災後約12-15個月，以563名八八災後回鄉居住原住民倖存者為樣本，使用所在依附量表、水災防災準備行為量表、創傷後壓力診斷量表、中文版流行病學研究中心憂鬱量表、TLSA調查中的生活滿意度指標等量表蒐集資料。結果顯示：1. 防災準備方面：生計依附感能夠顯著正向預測防災準備行為、風險可能性與風險擔心度均負向預測防災準備行為，生計依附感同時在風險知覺與防災準備行為間扮演中介變項角色，宗譜傳承及認同向度依附對防災準備行為無顯著預測力；2. 生活滿意度方面：生計依附感對生活滿意度具顯著正向預測力，但此預測力在同時考量防災準備行為時，則下降至不顯著，兩向度風險知覺、防災準備行為均無法顯著預測生活滿意度；3. PTSD症狀方面：三向度所在依附感、兩向度風險覺知、防災準備行為均無法顯著預測PTSD症狀；4. 憂鬱症狀方面：防災準備行為對憂鬱症狀具顯著負向預測力，三向度所在依附感、兩向度風險知覺均對憂鬱症狀不具顯著預測力。 / The aim of this study is to examine relationships between place attachment, risk perception, flood preparedness, mental health, and psychological symptoms after 88 flood disaster in 2009. In particular, investigation focused on three dimensions of place attachment, viz. genealogical, economic, and identity-related. Contextualized scales for place attachment, risk perception, and flood preparedness were developed. Besides, PDS, CES-D, Life Satisfaction Scale were also used in this study. Validity and reliability of the scales were established. Data were collected 12-15 months after the flood from 537 survived and still living in the same homeland aboriginals. Results show, 1. Flood preparedness: economic place attachment predicts flood preparedness positively; two dimensions of risk perception predict flood preparedness negatively, while economic place attachment plays a role as mediator in flood preparedness. 2. Life satisfaction: economic place attachment slightly predicts life satisfaction positively under no consideration to flood preparedness, whereas overall place attachment, risk perception, and flood preparedness have no influence on life satisfaction. 3. PTSD: Neither place attachment, risk perception, nor flood preparedness is related to PTSD. 4. Depression: flood preparedness shows negative impact on depression symptoms; however, place attachment and risk perception do not.