【作者】 黄慧；

【导师】 何昭红；

【作者基本信息】 广西师范大学 ， 思想政治教育， 2011， 硕士

【摘要】 自2004年Luthans和Youssef等人提出了积极心理资本(简称心理资本)概念以来,心理学、教育学及管理研究者开始关注个体的正向情绪和正向特质,其中包括爱、乐观、希望、快乐、韧性、心流、幸福感等重要概念。心理资本也日益受到心理健康研究者的关注与重视。所谓心理资本,就是个体一般积极性的核心心理要素(Luthans F, Avolio B.J, Walumbwa F.O, and Li W,2005),包括个体心理与行为的积极性及个人优势、符合组织环境要求的心理状态、良好的自我认知与评价以及可以通过投资与开发来获取四个方面。心理资本包括四个维度：自我效能、韧性、希望与乐观。本研究在对心理资本与心理健康的相关概念、理论及其国内外研究现状述评的基础上,进行了两个问题的研究：首先,对心理资本问卷进行信度与效度检验；其次,采用心理资本问卷和心理症状自评量表(SCL-90),对689名大学生进行了调查研究。本研究主要探讨了以下三个问题：(1)大学生心理资本在人口统计学变量上的差异,(2)大学生心理健康状况在人口统计学变量上的差异,(3)大学生心理资本与心理健康状况的关系。研究证实了提出的研究假设,获得的主要结论如下：1.本研究中的心理资本问卷包括四个维度：自我效能、韧性、希望与乐观。量表具有良好的信效度。2.大学生心理资本整体均值为5.169,各因子平均得分均在量表的中点值3.5以上,处于中上水平。因子得分最高的是希望(5.549),得分最低的是韧性(4.670),即大学生的希望最好,自我效能最低。从性别因素上看,男生的自我效能感与韧性水平高于女生,显示出明显的性别特征。从学科因素上看,文科与理工科在乐观因子上存在显著差异,文科大学生比理工科乐观。从年级因素上看,不同年级大学生在心理资本总体、韧性和希望差异极其显著,而在自我效能和乐观上无显著差异。在心理资本总分上,大一学生得分明显比大四学生高,而与大二、大三无显著差异,这反映出大四学生心理资本水平明显低于其他年级。在韧性维度上,大一学生得分明显比大三、大四学生高。在希望维度上,大一学生得分明显比大二、大四学生高。三年级大学生乐观水平最高,二年级乐观水平最低,两者之间差异显著。在自我效能感因子上一、二年级间差异显著,前者比后者自信。从生源地的因素上看,在自我效能维度上非农村大学生优于农村。而是否独生子女、家庭收入、家庭类型、父母亲职业大学生在心理资本总体与各因素项上均无显著差异。3.被调查大学生的心理健康的总体均分、各因子均分均高于全国常模,表明其心理健康水平低于全国水平。从性别因素上看,男生的心理健康总体水平明显高于女生,因子分只在偏执、精神病性与敌对三项无显著差异。从年级因素上看,年级之间的心理健康水平存在着显著的差异,因素项只有恐怖差异不显著。其中大一学生心理健康水平最高,大二最低,由好到差依次为：大一、大四、大三、大二。民族、子女数、学科、父母月收入、单双亲、父母亲职业上无显著差异。4.大学生心理资本与总体心理健康呈极显著相关,心理资本水平较高的大学生,心理健康状况较为良好。大学生心理资本对心理健康具有一定的预测作用,不过,预测力并不很强,心理资本只能解释总体心理健康较少的主差变异(16.4%)。韧性与乐观与心理健康的关系更为密切。论文最后从积极心理学的角度提出了如何通过开发与培育大学生的心理资本来促进心理健康的学校建议与个人建议。更多还原

【Abstract】 Since Luthans and Youssef had proposed the concept of positive psychological capital (short for psychological capital) in 2004, psychology, education and management researchers began to pay attention to the positive emotions and traits of individual, including love, optimism, hope, happiness, resilience, flow, the sense of happiness, and other important concepts. Psychological capital increasingly arouses the attention of psychological health researchers.Psychological capital, is the core mental element of general initiative for individuals (Luthans F, Avolio B.J, Walumbwa F.O, and Li W,2005), including the following four aspects, the initiative of individual psychology and behavior and personal advantage, the psychological state meet requirements of organizational environment, a good self-awareness and evaluation and the acquisition through investment and development. Four dimensions are included psychological capital:self-efficacy, resilience, hope and optimism.This research, based on the related concepts, theories and the current research situation of psychological capital and psychological health, conducted a study on two problems:firstly, the reliability and validity of psychological capital questionnaire was tested; secondly,689 college students was investigated by using psychological capital questionnaires and psychological symptom check list (SCL-90).This study focused on the following three questions:(1) the differences of psychological capital in demographic variables, (2) the differences of psychological health in demographic variables, (3) the relationship between psychological capital and psychological health status. The proposed hypothesis is confirmed in this research and the main conclusions are as follows:1. The questionnaire of psychological capital in this research includes four dimensions: self-efficacy, resilience, hope and optimism. The scale has good reliability and validity.2. The overall mean of psychological capital was 5.169; the mean scores of each factor were above 3.5, the midpoint value of the scale, in the middle or upper levels. The factor of hope got the highest score (5.549), and the factor of resilience got the lowest score (4.670), that is to say hope is the best and self-efficacy is the worst for university students. From gender perspective, levels of self-efficacy and resilience of male students were higher than females, significantly characterized by gender. From discipline perspective, significance was showed in the factor of optimism between liberal arts students and science and engineering students, liberal arts students were more optimistic than science and engineering. From grade perspective, students in different grades showed significance in overall psychological capital, resilience and hope, while in self-efficacy and optimism factors there was no significant difference. On the total score of psychological capital, freshman students scored significantly higher than the senior; while compared with the sophomore, junior, no significant difference existed, which reflecting the psychological capital level of senior students was significantly lower than other grades. On the dimension of resilience, freshman scored significantly higher than the junior and senior. On the hope dimension, freshmen scored significantly higher than sophomores, seniors. The juniors were the highest in optimistic level while the sophomores were the lowest; which showed a significant difference between the two. The factor of self-efficacy in the junior and senior had a significant difference, the former are more confident than the latter. From area perspective, students from non-rural areas were better than from rural on the dimension of self-efficacy.There were no significant differences in the overall psychological capital and factors in the items of whether the only child or not, family income, family type, or parental occupation.3. College students investigated in this research scored higher than the national norm in the overall psychological capital mean of and means of each factor, indicating their psychological health status is lower than the national average level. From gender perspective, the general level of psychological health status of male was significantly higher than female; while no significant difference showed in the factor scores of paranoid, psychosis and hostility item. From grade perspective, among different grade, level of psychological health existed significant differences, while only the factor of terror items was not significant. In which the highest level of psychological health was freshman, and sophomore the lowest. From good to bad status respectively:freshman, senior, junior, and sophomore. On nationality, number of children, discipline, parental income, single parents, and parental occupation items, there was no significant difference.4. The study showed a highly significant negative correlation between psychological capital and general psychological health, students with higher levels of psychological capital, have a better psychological health status. Psychological capital plays a certain but not very strong role in predicting psychological health; psychological capital can only explain few variance and variation (16.4%) of overall psychological health. Resilience and optimism has a more closely relationship psychological health. Finally, from the perspective of positive psychology, the paper put forward suggestions from both school and individual levels on how to promote psychological health of college students by develop and nurture their psychological capital,更多还原