第五章 結論與建議
第二節 研究建議與限制
一、 對大學生的建議
1. 主動與手足建立良好關係依據本研究結論，大學生的手足正向關係比中間值還低，並且填答「從 未」最多的題目是「這位手足與我談論他/她的感覺或私人問題」。建議大 學生可以主動跟手足建立良好的關係，例如與手足分享自己的心情、聊聊 自己遇到的問題，以提升手足之間的正向情感與互動。
2. 改變認知，正向看待父母對自己的關愛
依據本研究結論，雖然大學生傾向知覺父母偏愛自己，但仍有部分大 學生知覺父母偏愛手足，當知覺父母偏愛手足，手足正向關係下降、負向 關係上升。雖然很難改變父母的偏愛情形，但可以改變自己的認知。或許，
父母已經盡力做到無所偏愛。或是，雖然在某方面看似父母偏愛手足，但 可能在其他地方父母已經多給自己一點了，建議可以正向看待父母對自己 的關愛。
二、 對大學生父母的建議
1. 父母對子女的手足關係扮演了重要的角色
依據本研究結論，大學生知覺父母偏愛自己，手足正向關係最多。然 而，當有一方知覺父母偏愛自己，另一方很可能知覺父母偏愛手足，而手 足正向關係較少。此外，知覺父母無所偏愛，大學生的手足負向關係最少。
若要減少子女之間的手足負向關係、增進子女的手足正向關係，父母對子 女的手足關係扮演了重要的角色，尤其是母親的影響大於父親。
2. 了解子女的特質，讓每位子女知覺父母無所偏愛
依據本研究結論，女大學生比男大學生更傾向知覺父親偏愛自己，身 為老大或老么比出生序居中的大學生更覺得母親偏愛自己。父親可以檢視
是否過於偏愛女兒，忽略了兒子。母親則可以檢視是否過於偏愛老大與老 么，忽略了居中子女。盡量讓每位子女感覺到父母的疼愛與支持肯定無所 偏愛。
三、 對家庭教育工作者的建議
1. 將家庭視為一整個系統依據本研究結論，子女知覺父母的偏愛情形，會影響其手足關係。推 展家庭教育活動時，必須將家庭視為一整個系統，父母對子女的手足關係 也扮演了重要的角色。也因為家人互動是環環相扣、互相影響，雖然比較 少針對「手足關係」的教育活動，但可以融入「親職教育」活動，同樣可 引導父母促進子女的手足關係。
四、 研究限制與對未來研究的建議
1. 研究對象受限於研究者時間與經費，採立意取樣與滾雪球的方式尋找樣本，並 非隨機抽樣，故本研究結果無法推論至全國的大學生。未來若能使用經隨 機抽樣的大型資料庫，採次級資料分析，才能夠推論。
2. 研究工具
由於本研究翻譯國外量表，有些題目可能無法確實反映華人文化下的 手足關係。例如：預試問卷進行因素分析後，發現手足負向關係其中一題
「我會管這位手足，要他/她聽我的」反而落入正向關係的因素。或許是因 為在華人文化下，「管」也是愛的表現。故於正式問卷中，將該題目改為
「我支配這位手足」，才落在手足負向關係的因素中。此外，正式問卷進 行因素分析後，發現本翻譯量表之題目，無法全部對應原量表之次面向，
故不適合針對次面向進行分析。
因此，建議未來研究能發展適用於臺灣文化特質的手足關係量表，尤
其是針對成人的手足關係，國內特別缺乏適用於成人手足關係的量表。
3. 研究變項
本研究之迴歸模型對手足負向關係的解釋力低於手足正向關係，表示 能解釋手足正向與負向關係的變項不同，建議未來研究能再加入更能解釋 手足負向關係的變項，例如：與手足的「聯繫頻率」。因為即使不同住，
也可能有很多互動機會，或許會比本研究之變項「手足同住與否」更能解 釋手足負向關係。
參考文獻
Adler, A. (1997). Individual psychology: The science of living. In C. Brett (Eds.), Understanding Life: an Introduction to the Psychology of Alfred Adler. (pp.
1-16). Oxford, England: Oneworld Publications.
Anderson, E. R., Hetherington, E. M., Reiss, D., & Howe, G. (1994). Parents' nonshared treatment of siblings and the development of social competence during adolescence. Journal of Family Psychology, 8(3), 303-320. doi:
10.1037/0893-3200.8.3.303
Arnett, J. (2007). Afterword: Aging out of care-toward realizing the possibilities of emerging adulthood. New Directions for Youth Development, 2007(113), 151-161.
doi:10.1002/yd.207
Bedford, V. H. (1998). Sibling relationship troubles and well-being in middle and old age. Family Relations, 47(4), 369-376.
Boll, T., Ferring, D., & Filipp, S.-H. (2003). Perceived parental differential treatment in middle adulthood: Curvilinear relations with individuals’ experienced
relationship quality to sibling and parents. Journal of Family Psychology, 17, 472 – 487.
Boll, T., Ferring, D., & Filipp, S.-H. (2005). Effects of parental differential treatment on relationship quality with siblings and parents: Justice evaluations as mediators.
Social Justice Research, 18(2), 155-182. doi: 10.1007/s11211-005-7367-2 Boll, T., Michels, T., Ferring, D., & Filipp, S.-H. (2010). Trait and state components
of perceived parental differential treatment in middle adulthood: A longitudinal study. Journal of Individual Differences, 31(3), 158-165. doi:
10.1027/1614-0001/a000024
Branje, S. T., van Lieshout, C. M., Van Aken, M. G., & Haselager, G. T. (2004).
Perceived support in sibling relationships and adolescent adjustment. Journal of Child Psychology & Psychiatry, 45(8), 1385-1396.
doi:10.1111/j.1469-7610.2004.00845.x
Brody, G. H. (1998). Sibling relationship quality: Its causes and consequences. Annual Review of Psychology, 49, 1-24.
Brody, G. H., Stoneman, Z., & McCoy, J. K. (1992). Associations of maternal and paternal direct and differential behavior with sibling relationships:
Contemporaneous and longitudinal analyses. Child Development, 63, 82 – 92.
Brody, L. R., Copeland, A. P., Sutton, L. S., Richardson, D. R.,& Guyer, M. (1998).
Mommy and daddy like you best: Perceived family favouritism in relation to affect, adjustment and family process. Journal of Family Therapy, 20, 269–291.
doi: 10.1111/1467-6427.00087
Burr, W. R., Day, R. D., & Bahr, K. S. (1993). Family Science (7. Family development. pp.180-205). CA: Brook/Cole Publishing Company.
Cicirelli, V. G. (1994). The longest bond: The sibling life cycle. Handbook of Developmental Family Psychology and Psychopathology, 45-59. New York:
John Wiley & Son.
Cicirelli, V. G. (1995). Sibling relationships across the life span. NY: Plenum.
Conger, K. J., & Conger, R. D. (1994). Differential parenting and change in sibling differences in delinquency. Journal of Family Psychology, 8(3), 287-302. doi:
10.1037/0893-3200.8.3.287
Criss, M. M., & Shaw, D. S. (2005). Sibling relationships as contexts for delinquency training in low-income families. Journal of Family Psychology, 19(4), 592-600.
doi: 10.1037/0893-3200.19.4.592
Daniels, D., & Plomin, R. (1985). Differential experience of siblings in the same family. Developmental Psychology, 21, 747–760.
Duck, S. (2007). human relationships(4th ed.). CA: SAGE.
Finzi-Dottan, R., & Cohen, O. (2011). Young adult sibling relations: The effects of perceived parental favoritism and narcissism. Journal of Psychology, 145(1), 1-22. doi: 10.1080/00223980.2010.528073
Ihinger-Tallman, M. & Hsiao, Y. L. (2003). Sibling relationships. In J. J. Ponzetti, Jr.
(Ed.), International Encyclopedia of Marriage and Family Relationships (2nd edition, vol.4) (pp.1504-1511). New York: Macmillan Reference USA.
Jensen, A. C., Whiteman, S. D., Fingerman, K. L., & Birditt, K. S. (2013). “Life still isn't fair”: Parental differential treatment of young adult siblings. Journal of Marriage and Family, 75(2), 438–452. doi: 10.1111/jomf.12002
Kowal, A. K., Krull, J. L., & Kramer, L. (2006). Shared understanding of parental differential treatment in families. Social Development, 15, 276–295.
doi: 10.1046/j.1467-9507.2006.00341.x
Kramer, L., & Bank, L. (2005). Sibling relationship contributions to individual and family well-being: Introduction to the special issue. Journal of Family
Psychology, 19(4), 483-485. doi: 10.1037/0893-3200.19.4.483
Krejcie, R. V., & Morgan, D. W. (1970). Determining sample size for research activities. Educational and Psychological Measurement,30, 607-610.
Lanthier, R., Stocker, C., & Furman, W. (2000). Short-form adult sibling relationship questionnaire.
McHale, S. M., & Pawletko, T. M. (1992). Differential treatment of siblings in two family contexts. Child Development, 63, 68–81.
McHale, S. M., Crouter, A. C., McGuire, S. A., & Updegraff, K. A. (1995).
Congruence between mothers' and fathers' differential treatment of siblings:
Links with family relations and children's well-being. Child Development, 66(1), 116-128. doi: 10.1111/1467-8624.ep9503233311
McHale, S. M., Updegraff, K. A., & Whiteman, S. D. (2012). Sibling relationships and influences in childhood and adolescence. Journal of Marriage and Family, 74(5), 913–930. doi: 10.1111/j.1741-3737.2012.01011.x
McHale, S. M., Updegraff, K. A., Jackson-Newsom, J., Tucker, C. J., & Crouter, A. C.
(2000). When does parents’ differential treatment have negative implications for siblings? Social Development, 9, 149–172.
McHale, S. M., Updegraff, K. A., Shanahan, L., Crouter, A. C., & Killoren, S. E.
(2005). Siblings’ differential treatment in Mexican American families. Journal of Marriage and Family, 67, 1259–1274.
Milevsky, A., Smoot, K., Leh, M., & Ruppe, A. (2005). Familial and Contextual Variables and the Nature of Sibling Relationships in Emerging
Adulthood. Marriage & Family Review, 37( ), 2 - . doi: 0. 00 002v n0 0
Rauer, A. J., & Volling, B. L. (2007). Differential parenting and sibling jealousy:
Developmental correlates of young adults’ romantic relationships. Personal Relationships, 14, 495–511.
Riggio, H. R. (2006). Structural features of sibling dyads and attitudes toward sibling relationships in young adulthood. Journal of Family Issues, 27, 1233–1254.
doi:10.1177/0192513X06289103
Riggio, H.R. (2000). Measuring attitudes toward adult sibling relationships: The lifespan sibling relationship scale. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 17, 707-728.
Sanders, R. (2011). Sibling in practice. In J. Caspi (Eds.), Sibling Development:
Implications for Mental Health Practitioners. (pp. 17-40). New York, NY:
Springer Publishing.
Shanahan, L., McHale, S. M., Crouter, A. C., & Osgood, D. W. (2008). Linkages between parents’ differential treatment, youth depressive symptoms, and sibling relationships. Journal of Marriage & Family, 70(2), 480-494. doi:
10.1111/j.1741-3737.2008.00495.x
Sherman, A. M., Lansford, J. E., & Volling, B. L. (2006). Sibling relationships and best friendships in young adulthood: Warmth, conflict, and well-being. Personal Relationships, 13(2), 151-165. doi:10.1111/j.1475-6811.2006.00110.x
Smith, S. R., Hamon, R. R., Ingoldsby, B. B., & Miller, J. E. (2009). Family systems theory. In Exploring Family Theories (pp. 123-139). New York, Oxford : Oxford University Press.
Spitze, G., & Trent, K. (2006). Gender differences in adult sibling relations in two-child families. Journal of Marriage and Family,68(4), 977-992.
Stocker, C. M., Lanthier, R. P., & Furman, W. (1997). Sibling relationships in early adulthood. Journal of Family Psychology, 11, 210–221.
Suitor, J. J., & Pillemer, K. (2000). Did mom really love you best? Developmental histories, status transitions, and parental favoritism in later life families.
Motivation & Emotion, 24(2), 105-120.
Suitor, J. J., Sechrist, J., Plikuhn, M., Pardo, S. T., & Pillemer, K. (2008).
Within-family differences in parent–child relations across the life course. Current Directions in Psychological Science (Wiley-Blackwell), 17(5), 334-338. doi:
10.1111/j.1467-8721.2008.00601.x
Suitor, J. J., Sechrist, J., Plikuhn, M., Pardo, S. T., Gilligan, M., & Pillemer, K. (2009).
The role of perceived maternal favoritism in sibling relations in midlife. Journal of Marriage & Family, 71(4), 1026-1038. doi:
10.1111/j.1741-3737.2009.00650.x
Suitor, J. J., Sechrist, J., Steinhour, M., & Pillemer, K. (2006). “I’m sure she chose me!” Accuracy of children’s reports of mothers’ favoritism in later life families.
Family Relations, 55(5), 526-538. doi: 10.1111/j.1741-3729.2006.00423.x Suitor, . ., & Pillemer, K. (200 ). Mothers’ favoritism in later life: The role of
children’s birth order. Research on Aging, 29, 32–55.
Tucker, C. J., McHale, S. M., & Crouter, A. C. (2003). Dimensions of mothers' and fathers' differential treatment of siblings: Links with adolescents' sex-typed personal qualities. Family Relations, 52(1), 82.
Tucker, C. J., Updegraff, K. & Baril, M. E. (2010). Who's the boss? Patterns of control in adolescents' sibling relationships. Family Relations, 59, 520–532.
doi: 10.1111/j.1741-3729.2010.00620.x
Van Volkom, M. (2006). Sibling relationships in middle and older adulthood: A review of the literature. Marriage and Family Review, 40, 151-170. doi:
10.1300/J002v40n02_08
Van Volkom, M., Machiz, C., & Reich, A. E. (2011). Sibling relationships in the college years: Do gender, birth order, and age spacing matter. North American Journal of Psychology, 13(1), 35-50.
Voorpostel, M., & Blieszner, R. (2008). Intergenerational solidarity and support between adult siblings. Journal of Marriage and Family, 70, 157 – 167. doi:
10.1111/j.1741-3737.2007.00468.x
Walster, E., Walster, G. W., & Berscheid, E. (1978).Equity: Theory and research.
Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
Weaver, S. E., Coleman, M., & Ganong, L. H. (2003). The sibling relationships in young adulthood: Sibling functions and relationship perceptions as influenced by sibling pair composition. Journal of Family Issues, 24, 245–263.
White, L. (2001). Sibling relationships over the life course: A panel analysis. Journal of Marriage and Family, 63, 555–568.
Whiteman, S. D., Bernard, J. M. B., & Mchale, S. M. (2010). The nature and
correlates of sibling influence in two-parent African American families. Journal
of Marriage and Family 72, 267 – 281.
Whiteman, S. D., McHale, S. M., & Crouter, A. C. (2011). Family relationships from adolescence to early adulthood: Changes in the family system following
firstborns' leaving home. Journal of Research on Adolescence, 21(2), 461-474.
Whiteman, S. D., McHale, S. M., & Soli, A. (2011). Theoretical perspectives on sibling relationships. Journal of Family Theory & Review, 3, 124–139. doi:
10.1111/j.1756-2589.2011.00087.x
附錄
附錄一：專家委員名單
問卷效度審查專家委員名單（依姓名筆劃排序）
專家姓名 服務單位 職稱
杜宜展 國立高雄餐旅大學師資培育中心暨餐旅教育研究所 副教授
周麗端 國立臺灣師範大學人類發展與家庭學系 副教授兼系主任 林如萍 國立臺灣師範大學人類發展與家庭學系 教授
陳富美 輔仁大學兒童與家庭學系 副教授
黃朗文 東吳大學社會學系 副教授
黃淑滿 臺灣首府大學幼兒教育學系 助理教授
潘恩伶 國立臺灣師範大學人類發展與家庭學系 助理教授
蕭英玲 輔仁大學兒童與家庭學系 副教授兼系主任
魏秀珍 國立臺灣師範大學人類發展與家庭學系 副教授
附錄二：專家效度審查問卷
【大學生的手足關係：知覺父母偏愛之影響】專家諮詢卷
老師您好：
非常感謝老師於百忙之中擔任本研究之問卷效度審查委員，您惠賜的寶貴 意見對本研究有很重要的幫助！
本諮詢問卷包括「研究概要說明」與「問卷初稿」。請老師針對問卷初稿 字句的通順流暢、意思表達清晰度給予建議。並針對各題目所表達的意涵在分 量表內的適切性勾選您的看法：適用、需修正、刪除。各分量表下方空白處可 供老師撰寫整體修正意見。由於是翻譯國外量表，故附上原文以利對照。
請老師填寫完問卷後，通知我前往領取，或以附上的回郵信封寄回。您的 熱心指導，將使我獲益良多，再次致上我最誠摯的感謝！
敬祝 身體安康 事事順心
國立臺灣師範大學人類發展與家庭學系 碩 士 生：王婷儀 敬上
指導教授：周麗端 博士
中華民國 102 年 3 月
大學生的手足關係：知覺父母偏愛之影響調查問卷（初稿）
第二部分 知覺父母偏愛量表
Do you think your father favors you or this sibling more?
1 2 3 4 5
□ □ □ 2 我與這位手足比較，爸爸與這位手足更親 近。
Do you think yourfather is closer to you or this sibling?
1 2 3 4 5
□ □ □ 3 我與這位手足比較，爸爸更喜歡跟這位手 足相處。
Our father enjoyed doing things with us.
1 2 3 4 5
□ □ □ 4 我與這位手足比較，爸爸更容易覺察這位 手足的想法或感受。
Our father was sensitive to what we thought or felt.
1 2 3 4 5
二、支持肯定
□ □ □ 5 我與這位手足比較，爸爸給予這位手足的 支持比較多。
Do you think your father supports you or this sibling more?
1 2 3 4 5
□ □ □ 6 我與這位手足比較，爸爸更以這位手足為 榮。
Our father was proud of the things we did.
1 2 3 4 5
□ □ □ 7 我與這位手足比較，爸爸對這位手足喜歡 1 2 3 4 5
做的事更感興趣。
Our father showed interest in the things we liked to do.
Do you think your mother favors you or this sibling more?
1 2 3 4 5
□ □ □ 9 我與這位手足比較，媽媽與這位手足更親 近。
Do you think your mother is closer to you or this sibling?
1 2 3 4 5
□ □ □ 10 我與這位手足比較，媽媽更喜歡跟這位手 足相處。
Our mother enjoyed doing things with us.
1 2 3 4 5
□ □ □ 11 我與這位手足比較，媽媽更容易覺察這位 手足的想法或感受。
Our mother was sensitive to what we thought or felt.
1 2 3 4 5
二、支持肯定
□ □ □ 12 我與這位手足比較，媽媽給予這位手足的 支持比較多。
Do you think your mother supports you or this sibling more?
1 2 3 4 5
□ □ □ 13 我與這位手足比較，媽媽更以這位手足為 榮。
Our mother was proud of the things we did.
1 2 3 4 5
□ □ □ 14 我與這位手足比較，媽媽對這位手足喜歡 做的事更感興趣。
Our mother showed interest in the things we liked to do.
1 2 3 4 5
第三部分 大學生手足關係量表
How much do you talk to this sibling about things that are important to you?
1 2 3 4 5
□ □ □ 2. 這位手足向我談及對他/她重要的事。
How much does this sibling talk to you about things that are important to him or her?
1 2 3 4 5
□ □ □ 3. 我與這位手足談論我的感覺或私人問題。
How much do you discuss your feelings or personal issues with this sibling?
1 2 3 4 5
□ □ □ 4. 這位手足與我談論他/她的感覺或私人問 題。
How much does this sibling discuss his or her feelings or personal issues with you?
1 2 3 4 5
□ □ □ 5. 我能夠理解這位手足。
How much do you really understand this sibling?
1 2 3 4 5
□ □ □ 6. 這位手足能夠理解我。
How much does this sibling really understand you?
1 2 3 4 5
二、情緒支持 emotional support
二、情緒支持 emotional support