Filial piety is one of the important values circulated in the Chinese world, and filial piety to the father and son is the ideal model of the traditional parent-child relationship. In Chinese society, if parents fulfill their role obligations, it is natural for their children to repay them with filial piety. However, if parents do not fulfill their duties, are children still obliged to be filial? And, can parents demand filial piety from their children? Such issues are often debated in society, and different people have different judgments. The purpose of this research is to explore the influence of parents' "violation of role obligations" on "parents' right to filial piety" and "children's filial piety obligations", and to explore the respective effects and roles of "reciprocal filial piety" and "authoritarian filial piety" from the perspective of dual filial piety, and its moderating effect on parental violations of role obligations. This study targets adults between 18 and 65 years old, collecting data through paper and online questionnaires. In the pilot study 1, participants were asked to fill in the role obligations of their parents, including positive and negative duties, for use in the pilot study 2. At the same time, the participants were asked about the filial behavior of their children and compiled the filial behavior into a "filial duty scale" for use in formal research. The purpose of the pilot study 2 is to find out which ones are in line with the voluntary behaviors of "good parents" or "bad parents", and select the more discriminatory ones to use in the contextual story of formal research. In formal research, it used situational stories to manipulate parents into violating their role obligations, including two situations of "verbal and physical violence" and "abandoning children", and used "fulfilling basic needs" (parents meet the basic needs of their children) as a control group. The research procedure asked participants to fill out the filial piety belief scale, parental relationship survey, and parental relationship satisfaction survey, and after reading the situational stories, answer the children's filial piety obligations and parents' right to demand their children's filial piety (parental rights). The results showed that when parents violated their role obligations, people would expect their children to have less filial obligations and lower parental rights. This seems to show that in the current society, people tend to think that if the father is not kind, the son may not be filial. In addition, in terms of the moderating effect of dual filial piety on parents' violation of role obligations, only one item is significant, that is, authoritarian filial piety and father's violation of role obligations have a significant interaction effect on father's rights. Further, for those who hold a higher authoritarian belief in filial piety, once the father violates his role obligations (verbal and physical violence, abandoning children), it will be judged that the father's right to demand filial piety from his children will be greatly reduced. In fact, under normal circumstances (parents provide basic needs) the higher the authoritarian filial piety is, the more likely the parents are to ask their children to do filial piety. However, once the father violates his role obligations (verbal and physical violence, abandoning children), there is no longer any significant difference in the level of authoritarian filial piety beliefs. Finally, the research results are further discussed, and research limitations and future research directions are discussed.
第一章 緒論 1
第二章 文獻回顧 5
(一) 父母違反角色義務與子女盡孝 5
(二) 雙元孝道模型 8
(三) 雙元孝道對父母違反角色義務之效果的調節作用 13
(四) 研究假設與概述 17
第三章 前導研究 21
(一) 前導研究一 21
(二) 前導研究二 28
第四章 正式研究 35
(一) 研究說明 35
(二) 研究參與者 35
(三) 研究程序 36
(四) 研究工具 37
(五) 資料分析方式 41
第五章 研究結果 43
(一) 操弄檢核 43
(二) 子女孝順義務與父母權利的相關變項 44
(三) 父母違反角色義務對子女孝順義務與父母權利之效果 48
(四) 以階層迴歸分析孝道信念的調節效果 51
第六章 研究結論與建議 64
(一) 父母不慈,子還要孝嗎? 64
(二) 孝道信念運作的範疇特定性 65
(三) 本研究對親子關係研究的啟發 67
(四) 研究限制與未來方向 69
參考文獻 71
附錄 1 雙元孝道量表使用同意書 76
附錄 2 前導研究一問卷 77
附錄 3 前導研究二問卷(以好父母版本為例) 80
附錄 4 正式研究問卷(以父親組言行暴力版本為例) 84
林茜雯(2018):《成年子女孝道觀念及焦慮對照顧老年父母角色反轉傾向之影響》(碩士論文,國立臺灣大學),華藝線上圖書館。
林惠雅(2014):〈青少年知覺父母教養行為,服從義務性與服從管教之關聯探討〉。《應用心理研究》,60,219-271。
石藏文信(2020):《好想殺死父母》(Miyako譯:初版)。光現出版社。(原著出版年:2015)
江俊宏、黃囇莉、黃光國(2012):〈要不要聽父母的話?——科系選擇的後悔及其影響因素〉。《教育與心理研究》,35(4),77。
朱瑞玲(1993):〈中國人的慈善觀念〉。 《中央研究院民族學研究所集刊》,(75),105-132。
吳俊艷、吳俊蓉(2007):〈中國傳統孝文化探析〉。《雲南師範大學學報(對外漢語教學與研究版)》,5(4),61-66。
卓馨怡、利翠珊(2008):〈成年子女的孝道責任與焦慮:親子關係滿意度的影響〉。《本土心理學研究》,(30),155-197。
陳舜文(1999):〈“仁”與“禮”:台灣民眾的家庭價值觀與工作態度〉。《應用心理研究》,(4),205-227。
許詩淇、黃囇莉(2009):〈天下無不是的父母?華人父母角色義務對親子衝突與親子關係的影響〉。《中華心理學刊》,51(3),295-317。
許詩淇(2015):《倫理本位文化中的親子角色義務與親子互動》(博士論文,國立臺灣大學),華藝線上圖書館。
許詩淇、簡晉龍、陳貽照(2020):〈只問盡義,不求享權?華人親子角色義務對權利正當性之影響〉。《本土心理學研究》,(53),55-101。
郭鈞揚(2015):《臺灣中老年人孝道期望,孝道信念與幸福感受之相關研究》(碩士論文,中山醫學大學),華藝線上圖書館。
黃光國(1998):〈兩種道德:臺灣社會中道德思維研究的再詮釋〉。《本土心理學研究》,(9),121-175。
黃士哲、葉光輝(2011):〈父母教養方式對青少年雙元孝道信念的影響效果:中介歷程的探討〉。《本土心理學研究》,(39),119-164。
黃志忠(2013):〈老人主要照顧者施虐傾向及其危險因子之研究〉。《中華心理衛生學刊》,26(1),95-139。
葉光輝(1997):〈台灣民眾之孝道觀念的變遷情形〉。見張苙雲、呂玉瑕、王甫昌(主編),《九〇年代的台灣社會:社會變遷基本調查研究系列二(下)》,頁171-214。中央研究院。
葉光輝(2005):〈孝道的心理與行為〉。見楊國樞、黃光國、楊中芳(主編),《華人本土心理學(下冊)》,頁293-329。遠流出版社。
葉光輝(2009a):〈華人孝道雙元模型研究的回顧與前瞻〉。《本土心理學研究》,(32),101-148。
葉光輝(2009b):〈再論華人孝道雙元模型的幾個關鍵性議題〉。《本土心理學研究》,(32),207-248。
歐芷貝(2014):《觀點轉換,他人取向,及利社會行為之關係》(碩士論文,國立中正大學),華藝線上圖書館。
楊國樞(1988):〈孝道的社會態度與行為:理論與測量〉。《中央研究院民族學研究所集刊》,(65),171-227。
顏志龍、鄭中平(2019):《給論文寫作者的統計指南:傻瓜也會跑統計(三版)》。五南出版社。
Abby(2016年5月15日):〈性別觀察:豬哥亮的「浪子回頭」與謝金燕的「家醜外揚」〉。女人迷。https://womany.net/read/article/10695
Yahoo新聞(2017年3月28日):〈謝金燕帶19歲兒見外公,病榻守候豬哥亮三代團圓〉。https://tw.news.yahoo.com/%E8%AC%9D%E9%87%91%E7%87%95%E5%B8%B619%E6%AD%B2%E5%85%92%E8%A6%8B%E5%A4%96%E5%85%AC%E7%97%85%E6%A6%BB%E5%AE%88%E5%80%99%E8%B1%AC%E5%93%A5%E4%BA%AE%E4%B8%89%E4%BB%A3%E5%9C%98%E5%9C%93-115233449.html
Bary, W.T.D. (1998). Asian values and human rights: A Confucian communitarian perspective. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Chiu, C. Y., Dweck, C. S., Tong, J. Y. Y., & Fu, J. H. Y. (1997). Implicit theories and conceptions of morality. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 73(5), 923.
Cicirelli, V. G. (1983). A comparison of helping behavior to elderly parents of adult children with intact and disrupted marriages. The Gerontologist, 23(6), 619-625.
Freeman, H., Newland, L. A., & Coyl, D. D. (2010). New directions in father attachment. Early Child Development and Care, 180, 1-8.
Fuligni, A. J. (2001). Family obligation and the academic motivation of adolescents from Asian, Latin American, and European backgrounds. New Directions for Child and Adolescent Development, 2001(94), 61-76.
Hewlett, B. S. (2004). Fathers in forager, farmer, and pastoral cultures. In M. E. Lamb (Ed.), The role of the father in child development (pp. 182-195). John Wiley & Sons Inc.
Kelly, D. (2000). Freedom as an Asian value. In M. Jacobsen & O. Bruun (Eds.), Human rights and Asian values: Contesting national identities and cultural representations in Asia. London, UK: Curzon Press.
Miller, J. G. (1994). Cultural diversity in the morality of caring: Individually oriented versus duty-based interpersonal moral codes. Cross-Cultural Research, 28(1), 3-39.
Roberta M. Gilbert. (2016). Extraordinary Relationships: A New Way of Thinking About Human Interactions. Audible Studios on Brilliance audio.
Sedikides, C., & Brewer, M. B. (2015). Individual self, relational self, collective self. Psychology Press.
Shwalb, D. W., Nakazawa, J., Yamamoto, T., & Hyun, J.-H. (2004). Fathering in Japanese, Chinese, and Korean Cultures: A Review of the Research Literature. In M. E. Lamb (Ed.), The role of the father in child development (pp. 146–181). John Wiley & Sons Inc.
Sung, K. T. (1995). Measures and dimensions of filial piety in Korea. The Gerontologist, 35(2), 240-247.
Yeh, K. H., & Bedford, O. (2003). A test of the dual filial piety model. Asian Journal of Social Psychology, 6(3), 215-228.
Yeh, K. H., & Bedford, O. (2004). Filial belief and parent-child conflict. International Journal of Psychology, 39(2), 132-144.