本研究以確立中文版『社會問題解決量表-修正版（簡稱SPSI-R）』之因素結構及探討社會問題解決與憂鬱、壓力之關係為主要目的。 『社會問題解決』一詞指稱發生在日常生活中的問題解決歷程，社會問題解決模式與SPSI-R將社會問題解決歷程分為五個向度（因素）：「正向問題定向」、「負向問題定向」、「理性問題解決風格」、「衝動/粗心風格」、「逃避風格」。 本研究根據理論與過去文獻探索性因素分析結果，提出三種可能適合描述華人樣本社會問題解決的因素結構：五因素一階（原理論之模型）、四因素一階、五因素二階模型。以台灣大學生為樣本，採用驗證性因素分析，結果顯示五因素一階的因素結構為最佳模型，支持原模式之理論架構與SPSI-R五因素結構在華人樣本的可類比性。同時刪除第42題因其無法確切反應逃避風格因素之意涵。 採用本研究所確立的SPSI-R五因素結構探討社會問題解決與憂鬱關係，發現排除問題風格後，負向問題定向可顯著預測憂鬱；排除問題定向後，逃避風格可顯著預測憂鬱，顯示負向問題定向與逃避風格對憂鬱有獨特之預測力。探討社會問題解決對壓力—憂鬱關係的影響，結果顯示衝動/粗心風格為日常問題與憂鬱之調節變項。此結果支持社會問題解決模式中，分殊不同向度的必要性，並提供臨床上憂鬱之問題解決治療方案可採行的策略。 / Confirmatory factor analysis was used to investigate the generalizability of the factor structure of the Social Problem-Solving Inventory- Revised (SPSI-R; D’Zurilla, Nezu, & Mayden-Olivares, 2002) The SPSI-R is based on a theoretical model and was modified by empirical data consisting of five factors – positive problem orientation, negative problem orientation, rational problem solving style, impulsivity/carelessness style, avoidance style. According to the theory model and empirical data with Chinese sample, the present study proposed another two alternative model. Thus, three different model were tested. With the sample of 916 Taiwanese undergraduate students, the results showed that the original five factor model which was proposed by D’Zurilla et al. was the best for SPSI-R in the sense of goodness of fit. This finding supports the Generalizability of SPSI-R in Taiwanese. Using the five-factor model of SPSI-R to examine the relation between SPSI-R and depression. Negative problem orientation and avoidance style were both significantly related to depression even after partialing out the variance of “Style” and “Orientation” respectively. While exploring the influence of SPSI-R on the relationship of stress and depression, a support was found for the moderator hypothesis which assumes that social problem solving interacts with everyday problems to influence the level of depression. Therefore, the findings in present study supported the distinction of five factors in SPSI-R. The implications of these results for social problem solving theory and assessment are also discussed.