| 中文摘要 |
本研究的目的在於修訂IGIPS-III，增加團體歷程研究的實用性，取得可接受的信、效度。研究者先對原量表的某些項目進行高、中、低顯著性區段的操作型定義，然後對實際團體的逐字稿進行評分，根據人際歷程的原則進行討論、修改、整併、以及新增項目。後邀請四位國內具團體實務經驗的學者，進行專家效度的檢核，再根據專家的意見進行修訂。修訂完成後，再取約三十分鐘團體歷程，以考驗其一致性信度。研究結果，在效度方面，專家的CVI 平均為0.84（0.71~0.94），而各項目的CVI則介於0.67~1.00。在信度方面，ICC介於0.73~0.97（當高、中、低顯著性分別設定為1,2,3時），以及介於0.63~0.98（當高、中、低顯著性分別設定為1,3,5時）；以上均顯示修訂後的量表具有良好的信、效度。之後，研究者編寫使用手冊後，訓練一位修習過團體心理治療的博士班學生，ICC係數值（0.51~0.94）顯示本量表具備研究實務上的實用性。本量表業經不斷地討論與修訂，不僅在信、效度上已得到實務上運用的價值，且修訂後的量表不論在實務上以及理論上都更具有實用性。 |
| 英文摘要 |
The purpose of the study is to modify the IGIPS-III to enhance its applicability, and to improve its reliability and validity.First, some items from the original scale were divided into high, medium and low significant segments, and the respective operational definitions were delineated. Actual transcripts from the group were then rated. Finally, the researchers evaulated the result based on the interpersonal process theory, and items were then revised, combined, or added. Four group counseling experts in Taiwan were invited to review the revised version. Their comments were used to modify the scale again. Once the modification was completed the modified version was applied to rate a thirty-minute group process to examine its reliability. For validity, the experts’ average of CVI is 0.84 （0.71~0.94）and the CVI of each item falls between 0.67 and 1.00. For reliability, the ICC falls between 0.73 and 0.97 when high, middle, and low segments are set to be 1, 2, and 3; while the ICC falls between 0.63 and 0.98 when high, middle, and low segments are set to be 1, 3, and 5. Results show that the IGIPS-III-R possesses adequate validity and reliability. Furthermore, after the researchers finished editing the training manual, a doctoral student who has studied advance group counseling class was trained to use the modified Scale. The ICC falls between 0.51and 0.94, suggesting that the modified Scale has stronger applicability for training and group process research. |
本站僅提供期刊文獻檢索。
