师生冲突应对策略 ——中美大学生对比研究

师生冲突应对策略 ——中美大学生对比研究

论文摘要

在跨文化交际中,冲突应对策略早已受到中西方学者的广泛关注和研究。虽然以学生作为调查对象而展开的跨文化人际冲突研究不少,但以大学教学中师生就教学方法内容等不同意见而产生的冲突进行的研究还不多,相关的专著和论文也甚少。通过对90名中国大学生和42名美国大学生的问卷调查,本文尝试找出这两个文化群体各自在师生教学冲突中的应对策略偏好,比较其中的相似和差异,并找出面子、冲突解决目标和对教师的信任度这三大因素各自对中美大学生冲突策略的影响力。本文首先介绍了选题的意义、研究的现状、师生冲突的消极影响及本研究的必要性。文章第二部分首先对“冲突”和“冲突应对策略”进行了定义上的总结。在本次研究中,师生冲突的概念被界定为在大学教学环境中师生因具有不同教学目标或行为而产生的问题、摩擦、不赞同或矛盾等。而冲突应对策略是个体在不同冲突情境下显示出来的较稳定的因应模式。冲突应对策略的分类有多种,在相关文献回顾之后,根据Ting-Toomey和Oetzel(2001)基于文化差异的情境冲突模型,本文采用了他们所提出的八种冲突应对策略作为研究对象,既融合、妥协、通融、支配、回避、消极对抗、第三者帮助和情绪表达。其次,由于文化、个体及情境因素均会影响个人的冲突方式,同时为克服对文化差异过度概化并对立的缺点,在回顾并结合了中西方有关理论研究后,论文提出了以面子、冲突解决目标和对教师的信任度三大因素作为对中美大学生冲突应对策略的预测因素,兼顾到了文化因素、个体因素和情境因素。围绕中美大学生冲突应对策略的偏好、影响因素及异同,论文提出了六个研究问题及两个假设,根据前人的量表设计了调查问卷,并采用SPSS社会科学统计软件进行了相关的定量分析研究。研究结果发现,中美大学生在冲突应对策略偏好上有一定的相似性,既融合与消极对抗分别为最常用和最不常用的方式。冲突中在自我和他者面子的关注程度上,中美大学生均偏向于自我面子的关注,而且中国学生更甚于美国学生,但这两个面子维度均能在中美两国大学生的冲突应对策略上起到比较好的预测能力。在冲突解决目标维度上,虽然中美大学生都更注重师生关系维护,但两个维度对中国及美国大学生冲突方式的影响非常有限,无法起到预测作用。对老师的信任度这一因素在中国大学生方面有较好的预测力,而在美国大学生方面预测力则不佳。虽然中美大学生样本所报告的行为既有差异也有相似之处,但从文化整体意义系统的角度来看,其中所蕴涵的动机与意义仍颇为不同,需要定性研究做进一步的解释与验证。

论文目录

  • Acknowledgements
  • Abstract
  • 摘要
  • Chapter One Introduction
  • 1.1 Research Background
  • 1.2 Statement and Significance of the Problem
  • Chapter Two Literature Review
  • 2.1 Defining Conflict and Conflict Management Style
  • 2.1.1 Defining Conflict
  • 2.1.2 Defining Conflict Management Style
  • 2.2 Contributing Factors Affecting Cross-Cultural Conflict Styles
  • 2.2.1 The Individualism-Collectivism Variable at The Cultural Level
  • 2.2.2 Self-Construal at The Individual Level
  • 2.2.3 The Situational Level
  • 2.3 Rationale for Two Sets of Independent Variables
  • 2.3.1 Western Research Perspective
  • 2.3.2 Chinese Indigenous Research Perspective
  • 2.4 Defining The Independent Variables
  • 2.4.1 Face Concern
  • 2.4.2 Conflict Resolution Goal
  • 2.4.3 Trust-Distrust Distinction
  • Chapter Three Methodology
  • 3.1 Participants
  • 3.1.1 Chinese Participants
  • 3.1.2 American Participants
  • 3.2 Survey Design
  • 3.3 Procedures
  • Chapter Four Results and Discussion
  • 4.1 The First Research Question
  • 4.2 The Second Research Question
  • 4.3 The Third Research Question
  • 4.4 The Fourth Research Question
  • 4.5 The First Hypothesis
  • 4.6 The Second Hypothesis
  • 4.7 The Fifth Research Question
  • 4.8 The Sixth Research Question
  • Chapter Five Conclusions
  • 5.1 Summary
  • 5.2 Limitations
  • 5.3 Directions for Further Research
  • References
  • APPENDIX 1 Questionnaire (English Version)
  • APPENDIX 2 Questionnaire (Chinese Version)
  • 相关论文文献

    • [1].Review of The Theoretical and Empirical Study on the Interest Conflict Between City Groups[J]. China City Planning Review 2016(02)
    • [2].The cultural conflict in Daisy Miller[J]. 科技视界 2014(19)
    • [3].New conflict representation model in generalized power space[J]. Journal of Systems Engineering and Electronics 2012(01)
    • [4].个体为何代表群体而行动?——评One for All:The Logic of Group Conflict[J]. 公共行政评论 2014(06)
    • [5].The Conflict and the Balance between the Right to Development and the Right to the Environment——Perspective and Reflection Based on China[J]. The Journal of Human Rights 2017(01)
    • [6].The Study on Cultural Conflict and Compatibility between China and America from the Study of “the Joy Luck Club”[J]. 校园英语 2020(01)
    • [7].Patterns of human-wildlife conflict and compensation practices around Daxueshan Nature Reserve, China[J]. Zoological Research 2018(06)
    • [8].Downscaling and Disaggregating NAO-conflict Nexus in Pre-industrial Europe[J]. Chinese Geographical Science 2016(05)
    • [9].Conflict Resolution[J]. 中国多媒体与网络教学学报(电子版)中学版 2015(02)
    • [10].写出“讲故事”的材料让读者“一见如故”[J]. 应用写作 2018(07)
    • [11].The Conflict and Unity in A Passage to India[J]. 科技视界 2017(13)
    • [12].The Influence of Stereotypes on Communication between Cultures conflict from the Perspective of Uncertainly Avoidance-level——taking Crash as an example[J]. 校园英语 2019(22)
    • [13].New method for measuring the degree of conflict among general basic probability assignments[J]. Science China(Information Sciences) 2012(02)
    • [14].Interpretation on Cultural Conflicts between America and China and the Conflict Root Cause Reflected in The Joy Luck Club[J]. 海外英语 2016(20)
    • [15].On Academic Conflict in Medical Research Articles[J]. 海外英语 2013(08)
    • [16].Best Practice Rules about Conflict of Interest[J]. 科技致富向导 2011(09)
    • [17].Exploring the relationship between climate change and violent conflict[J]. Chinese Journal of Population,Resources and Environment 2018(03)
    • [18].Aware conflict detection of non-uniform memory access system and prevention for transactional memory[J]. Journal of Central South University 2012(08)
    • [19].A Cultural Analysis on Conflict of GUASHA[J]. 校园英语 2012(12)
    • [20].英汉互译实践与分析(三)[J]. 译苑新谭 2019(01)
    • [21].编辑荐书[J]. IT经理世界 2010(10)
    • [22].性格决定打喷嚏方式[J]. 英语画刊(高级版) 2017(25)
    • [23].Vehicle conflict resolution algorithm at non-signalized crossing based on inter-vehicle communication[J]. Journal of Beijing Institute of Technology 2013(01)
    • [24].UN-World Bank New Joint Study Launched at CIIS[J]. China International Studies 2018(06)
    • [25].Managing Conflict in the Workplace[J]. 大舞台 2010(01)
    • [26].Research on engineering-oriented constraints conflict detection in collaborative design of wire harness technology[J]. Computer Aided Drafting,Design and Manufacturing 2012(02)
    • [27].Research on conflict resolution of collaborative design with fuzzy case-based reasoning method[J]. 重庆邮电大学学报(自然科学版) 2009(02)
    • [28].The Analysis of Oedipus' Conflict Personalities[J]. 商情(教育经济研究) 2008(06)
    • [29].A multi-objective multi-memetic algorithm for network-wide conflict-free 4D flight trajectories planning[J]. Chinese Journal of Aeronautics 2017(03)
    • [30].Information for Authors[J]. Science China Materials 2015(12)

    标签:;  ;  ;  ;  ;  ;  

    师生冲突应对策略 ——中美大学生对比研究
    下载Doc文档

    猜你喜欢