研究生: |
李雅惠 |
---|---|
論文名稱: |
大學生同居態度、同居經驗與心理福祉之研究 A Study on university students’ cohabitation attitude, experience, and psychological well-being |
指導教授: | 周麗端 |
學位類別: |
碩士 Master |
系所名稱: |
人類發展與家庭學系 Department of Human Development and Family Studies |
論文出版年: | 2006 |
畢業學年度: | 94 |
語文別: | 中文 |
論文頁數: | 170 |
中文關鍵詞: | 大學生 、同居態度 、同居經驗 、心理福祉 、社會支持 |
英文關鍵詞: | university students, cohabitation attitude, cohabitation experience, psychological wellbeing, social support |
論文種類: | 學術論文 |
相關次數: | 點閱:410 下載:141 |
分享至: |
查詢本校圖書館目錄 查詢臺灣博碩士論文知識加值系統 勘誤回報 |
中文摘要
本研究在探討大學生的同居態度,及大學生同居經驗與心理福祉之相關研究。採分層叢集非隨機抽樣台灣公私立大專院校之學生進行問卷調查,刪除廢卷共得2,869份有效的樣本。研究工具包含『同居態度量表』、『社會支持量表』、『心理福祉量表』以及『同居經驗問卷』、『個人基本資料』,並以SPSS11.5進行資料分析,再以描述統計、t考驗、單因子變異數分析、多元階層迴歸分析、區別分析來進行統計考驗。分析結果如下:
一、現況
1.大學生對同居之態度傾向較為開放接受。
2.大學生有同居經驗的比例約為8%。
3.大學生最主要決定同居之原因為希望與對方在一起的時間可以更長。
4.在同居關係中,大學生感受到最主要的困擾與壓力為擔心自己或對方懷孕。
5.不同同居經驗之大學生在心理福祉上並無顯著差異存在。
6.在同居關係中,知覺人際關係變疏遠之同居大學生的心理福祉顯著低於知覺
人際關係未改變或變更好之同居大學生。
7.相較於主動尋求父母的支持,大學生主動尋求朋友支持的程度較高。
二、同居態度之分析
1.相較於女大學生,男大學生對同居之態度顯著較為開放。
2.基督教信仰之大學生對同居之態度比無宗教信仰、佛教、道教以
及民間信仰之大學生來的顯著保守。
3.獨自在外租屋之大學生的同居態度比與家人同住或居住學生宿舍之
大學生來的顯著開放。
4.父母離婚之大學生對同居之態度較父母維持婚姻之大學生來的開放。
5.有同居經驗之大學生對同居之態度較從未有同居經驗之大學生來的
開放。
三、同居經驗之分析
1.一年級之大學生在有同居經驗的比例上顯著低於二、三、四年級之大
學生。
2.男大學生有同居經驗之比例上顯著高於女大學生。
3.不同學校類型之大學生在同居經驗上有顯著差異,但經由事後比較無
任兩組有顯著差異。
4獨自在外租屋之大學生在有同居經驗的比例上顯著高於與家人同住、
居住學生宿舍之大學生。
四、社會支持之分析
正與戀人同居之大學生主動尋求家人支持的程度顯著低於從未有過同居經驗之大學生。
五、影響同居態度之因素
影響同居態度的因素是性別、宗教信仰、戀愛經驗、性別角色態度以及同居經驗,其中以性別、戀愛經驗的影響力最大。
六、影響心理福祉之因素
影響大學生心理福祉的因素是同居經驗、知覺可支持家人數、主動尋求家人支持、主動尋求朋友支持,其中以主動尋求家人支持的影響力最大。
七、區別同居經驗之因素
大學生的戀愛經驗、性別角色態度、父母關係和諧度以及家庭社經地位對於同居經驗有顯著區別力。
本研究根據以上結果提出相關建議給予未來研究、大學生、大學生之家庭以及學校教育。
關鍵字:大學生/同居態度/同居經驗/心理福祉/社會支持
Abstract
This paper aims to explore cohabitation attitude, cohabitation experience, and the corresponding level of psychological wellbeing for university students. Stratified cluster random sampling is applied to a pool of students currently enrolled in public and private universities and colleges in Taiwan to secure 2,869 valid questionnaire samples (not including invalid samples). Research tools include Cohabitation Attitude Scale, Social Support Scale, Psychological Wellbeing Scale, and Cohabitation Experience Questionnaire, and Personal Information Sheet. SPSS 11.5 is used in data analysis, followed by statistical testing via the means of descriptive statistics, t-test, one-way analysis of variance, multiple hierarchical regression analysis, and discriminant analysis. Analysis results are as follows:
Ⅰ. The Current Situation
1. University students tend to have a more open attitude and higher acceptance toward the idea of cohabitation.
2. Approximately 8% of university students have cohabitation experience.
3. For university students, the greatest motivation in their decisions of cohabitation is the prospect of more time together with their lovers.
4. For university students, the greatest fear and worry in cohabitation is the prospect of pregnancy.
5. There is no marked difference in the level of psychological wellbeing for university students with different cohabitation experience.
6. For university students currently practicing cohabitation, those who perceive their interpersonal relationships as becoming diluted tend to have a markedly lower level of psychological wellbeing than those who perceive improvement or no difference in their interpersonal relationships.
7. A greater number of university students choose friend support over parental support.
Ⅱ. Cohabitation Attitude Analysis
1. Compared to females, male university students have a markedly more open attitude toward the idea of cohabitation.
2. University students with Christian belief tend to display a markedly more conservative attitude toward the idea of cohabitation than those who believe in Buddhism, Taoism, and folk beliefs and those without religious belief.
3. University students who live alone in a rental home have a markedly more open attitude toward the idea of cohabitation than those who live with family or in a dormitory.
4. University students of divorced parents tend to have a more open attitude toward the idea of cohabitation than those of married parents.
5. University students with cohabitation experience tend to have a more open attitude toward the idea of cohabitation than those with no such experience.
Ⅲ. Cohabitation Experience Analysis
1. Compared to sophomores, juniors, and seniors, a markedly lower number of freshmen have cohabitation experience.
2. Compared to females, a markedly higher number of male university students have cohabitation experience.
3. There are marked differences in cohabitation experience between students of universities of different nature, yet posteriori comparison shows no marked difference between any two groups of university students.
4. Compared to university students who live with family or in a dormitory, a markedly greater number of those who live alone in a rental home have cohabitation experience.
Ⅳ. Social Support Analysis
Compared to university students with no cohabitation experience, a markedly lower number of those currently practicing cohabitation would actively seek family support.
Ⅴ. Factors affecting Cohabitation Attitude
Factors involved in cohabitation attitude include gender, religious belief, love experience, gender role attitude, and cohabitation experience. Gender and love experience are the top two influential factors.
Ⅵ. Factors affecting Psychological Wellbeing
Factors involved in psychological wellbeing include cohabitation experience, perceived number of available family support, active pursuit of family support, and active pursuit of friend support. Active pursuit of family support is the most influential factor.
Ⅶ. Differentiating Factors in Cohabitation Experience
Factors such as love experience, gender role attitude, level of harmony between parents, and family social-economic status all serve to differentiate cohabitation experience for university students.
Based on the findings above, this paper provides suggestions for future research, university students, and family and school education for university students.
Key Words: university students, cohabitation attitude, cohabitation experience, psychological wellbeing, social support
中文參考文獻
人間雜誌(1986)。大學生性行為、性知識、性態度問卷調查。時報週刊,419。
井敏珠(1992)。已婚職業婦女生活壓力與因應策略﹑社會支持之研究。國立政治大學教育研究所碩士論文,未出版,台北市。
何嘉雯(1998)。臺北縣市大學生親子關係、婚姻態度與婚前性行為、同居行為之研究。中國文化大學碩士論文,未出版,台北市。
吳明隆(2006)。SPSS統計應用學習實務。台北市:知成數位科技。
吳明隆、涂金堂(2005)。SPSS與統計應用分析(二版)。台北市:五南。
吳昱廷(2000)。同居伴侶家庭的生活與空間-異性戀VS男同性戀同居伴侶的比較分析。國立台灣大學碩士論文,未出版,台北市。
吳淑敏(2003)。婦女幸福感之研究。教育學刊,20,p119-140。
巫雅菁(2001)。大學生幸福感之研究。國立高雄師範大學碩士論文,未出版,高雄市。
李美枝(1986)。社會心理學。台北:大洋出版社。
李素菁(2002)。青少年家庭支持與幸福感之相關研究 : 以臺中市立國中生為例。私立靜宜大學碩士論文,未出版,台北。
李清茵(2004)。家庭互動行為、心理需求滿足、關係滿意度與幸福感之關係。國立屏東師範學院碩士論文,未出版,屏東市。
李婷婷(1998)。工作特性、日韻律、工作壓力、心理健康與自評績效之相關性研究。國立交通大學碩士論文,未出版,新竹市。
李碧娥(1999)。未婚女性於第一孕期施行人工流產手術的經驗歷程與照護需求。高雄醫學院碩士論文,未出版,高雄市。
屈寧英(2003)。高中生生活壓力、社會支持、行為模式與幸福感相關性之
研究。國立台灣師範大學碩士論文,未出版,台北市。
林子雯(1996)。成人學生多重角色與幸福感之相關研究。國立高雄師範大學碩士論文,未出版,高雄市。
林育丞(2003)。鄉村社區居民幸福感與休閒行為之研究。私立朝陽科技大
學碩士論文,未出版,台中縣。
林婉玉(2003)。未婚青少女學生墮胎的相關照護需求之探討。南華大學碩士論文,未出版,花蓮市。
林清山(2003)。心理與教育統計學。台北市:東華書局。
林淑貞(1994)。我國大學生對婚姻態度與家庭生活態度及其相關因素之研究。國立台灣師範大學碩士論文,未出版,台北市。
林榮豐(2001)。慢性頸部疼痛病患人格特質、心理健康與頸部非器質性症狀之相關性探討。 私立高雄醫學大學碩士論文,未出版,高雄市。
邱富琇(2003)。兒童之親子溝通、壓力因應方式與其幸福感之相關研究。國立高雄師範大學碩士論文,未出版,高雄市。
邱皓政(2002)。量化研究與統計分析(二版)。台北市:五南。
侯玉波(2003)。社會心理學。台北:五南出版社。
施協志(2003)。國中學生性別、年級、編班與壓力因應、自重感、幸福感之相關研究。國立中正大學碩士論文,未出版,嘉義縣。
施建彬(1995)。幸福感來源與相關因素之探討。國立高雄醫學院碩士論文,未出版,高雄市。
柯澍馨、何嘉雯(2004)。大學生親子關係、婚姻態度與同居行為之研究-以台北縣市私立大學學生為例。華岡農科學報,13,57-74。
徐光國(1996)。社會心理學。台北:五南出版社。
徐新娣(2004)。台北縣大學生擇偶條件之研究。國立台灣師範大學碩士論文,未出版,台北市。
時蓉華(1996)。社會心理學。台北:東華出版社。
晏涵文(2002)。兩性關係與性教育。國立空中大學。
翁慧娟(1993)。個人取向、集體取向與心理健康之關係。國立政治大學碩士論文,未出版,台北市。
張春興(1989)。張氏心理學辭典(第六版)。台北:東華書局。
許忠信(2003)。老年人的生活型態、社會疏離感和幸福感之研究。國立高雄師範大學碩士論文,未出版,高雄市。
許連高(譯)(1991)。Mireille Dewevre-Fourcade著。同居。台北:遠流出版社。
許齡臻、陳泓劭、林松甫(2003)。師院生性態度與性行為之相關性調查研究-台中師院為取樣分析。社會科學教育研究,8,91-134。
郭淑菁(2003)。登山社員休閒涉入、休閒滿意與幸福感之研究。私立大葉大學碩士論文,未出版,彰化縣。
陳金定(2004)。兩性關係與教育。台北:心理出版社。
陳香仁(2001)。現代日本社會中婚姻與同居生活之研究。私立淡江大學碩士論文,未出版,台北縣。
陳淑姬(2001)。高職護理學校轉型教職員工的心理健康、不確定感和因應策略間之關係。國立台北護理學院碩士論文,未出版,台北市。
陳鈺萍(2004)。國小教師幸福感之相關因素研究。國立屏東師範學院碩士論文,未出版,屏東市。
陳騏龍(2001)。國小學童情緒智力與幸福感、人際關係及人格特質之相關研究。國立屏東師範學院碩士論文,未出版,屏東市。
陳嬿竹(2003)。網路與真實人際關係、人格特質及幸福感之相關研究。國立屏東師範學院碩士論文,未出版,屏東市。
陸洛(1998)。中國人幸福感之內涵、測量及相關因素探討。Proceedings of the National Science Council, 8(1), 115-137。
陸洛(譯)(1997)。Argyle著。幸福心理學。台北市:巨流出版社。
單懷聖(1995)。台北市高級中等學校學生婚姻與家庭生活態度及其相關因素之研究。中國文化大學碩士論文,未出版,台北市。
彭懷真(1998)。婚姻與家庭。台北市:巨流圖書。
彭懷真等(譯)(1991)。Peter, J. O.著。社會學辭典。台北市:五南出版社。
曾慈慧(2002)。景觀環境與福祉及復癒之關係研究。國立台灣大學博士論文,未出版,台北市。
曾肇文(1996)。國小學童學校壓力、因應方式、社會支持與學校適應之相關研究。國立新竹師範學院碩士論文,未出版,新竹市。
曾艷秋(2002)。已婚婦女生活目標、目標社會支持與幸福感之相關研究 : 以高雄市育有國小子女之已婚婦女為例。國立高雄師範大學碩士論文,未出版,高雄市。
黃倩倩(1996)。臺北縣市大學生性別角色、自我概念與婚姻態度之相關研究。中國文化大學碩士論文,未出版,台北市
黃資惠(2002)。國小兒童幸福感之研究。國立臺南師範學院。碩士論文,未出版,台南市。
黃慧貞(1982)。生活壓力歸因型及社會支援與大學生的憂鬱症。國立台灣大學碩士論文,未出版,台北市。
楊昭慧(1992)。臺北市某女子學院三專夜間部學生從事婚前性行為之意向研究理性行為論之驗證。國立臺灣師範大學碩士論文,未出版,台北市。
楊敏翔(1996)。員工特質、工作特性、服務氣候與福祉氣候對員工滿意度與顧客滿意度關係之研究。私立中原大學碩士論文,未出版,中壢市。
楊雅筠(2002)。老年人友誼支持與幸福感之研究:以臺北市老人服務中心為例。中國文化大學碩士論文,未出版,台北市。
楊語芸(譯)(1997)。Deaux, K., Dane, F. C.,& Wrightsman, L. S.著。九O年代社會心理學。台北市:五南出版社。
楊靜利(2004)。同居生育意涵與台灣同居人數估計。台灣社會學刊,32,189-213。
董智慧(1998)。單身類型、社會支持與心理健康之分析研究。國立彰化師範大學碩士論文,未出版,彰化市。
廖梓辰(2002)。家庭人際互動與家庭和諧、幸福感之相關研究。國立屏東師範學院碩士論文,未出版,屏東市。
劉恆妏(2003)。中學教師性別角色、婚姻態度對其生涯轉變之相關研究。國立暨南國際大學碩士論文,未出版,南投縣。
劉敏珍(2000)。老年人之人際親密、依附風格與幸福感之關係研究。國立高雄師範大學碩士論文,未出版,高雄市。
潘慧玲(2004)。教育論文格式。台北市:雙葉書廊。
蔡文輝(1998)。婚姻與家庭。台北市:五南出版社。
蔡文輝、李紹嶸(1998)。簡明英漢社會學辭典。台北市:五南。
蔡坤良(2003)。小琉球漁村老人生命意義感、死亡態度與幸福感之研究。私立南華大學碩士論文,未出版,嘉義縣。
蔡姿娟(1998)。國中生社會支持、生活適應與寂寞感之研究。國立高雄師範大學碩士論文,未出版,高雄市。
蔡詩薏(2001)。家庭生命週期、性別角色態度、自我開放程度與夫妻婚姻滿意度及其差異之研究。國立成功大學碩士論文,未出版,台南市。
蕭佳華(2002)。中部地區國小教師性別角色刻板化態度與性別平等意識相關因素之研究。國立台中師範學院碩士論文,未出版,台中市。
蕭雅云(2002)。高中生生涯成熟與幸福感之相關研究-以高雄地區為例。國立高雄師範大學碩士論文,未出版,高雄市。
賴保貞、張欣戊與幸曼玲(1988)。發展心理學。台北縣:國立空中大學。
謝明華(2002)。國小學童之父親參與、幸福感及學業成就之相關研究。國立彰化師範大學碩士論文,未出版,彰化市。
簡晉龍(2002)。自我建構與主觀幸福感:自尊與相融和諧的角色。國立政治大學碩士論文,未出版,台北市。
闕美華(2000)。國中小教師情緒智慧、社會支持與工作滿意之研究。國立彰化師範大學碩士論文,未出版,彰化市。
顏映馨(1999)。大學生的生活風格、人際親密和幸福感之研究。國立高雄師範大學碩士論文,未出版,高雄市。
羅凱南(2001)。社會支持、人格特質、個人屬性對老年人心理幸福滿足感影響之研究。國立政治大學碩士論文,未出版,台北市。
蘇倩雪(2002)。屏東地區高職學生性別角色態度、家庭價值觀與婚姻態度之研究。國立屏東師範學院碩士論文,未出版,屏東市。
西文參考文獻
Andrew, F.M. & Whitey, S. B. (1976). Social indicators of well-being: Americans’ pereptions of life quality. New York: Plenum.
Aren, M. (1994). The subjective well-being of the previously married: The importance of unmarried cohabitation and time since windowhood or divorce. Social Force. 73(2), 665-692.
Argyle, M. (2001). The psychology of happiness. New York: Taylor & Francis.
Axinn,W. G., Thornton, A. (1996). The influence of parents’ marital dissolutions on children’s attitudes toward family formation. Demography, 3(1), 66-81
Axinn,W. G.., Thornton, A. (1993). Mothers, children, and cohabitation: The intergenerational effect of attitudes and behavior. American Sociological Review, 58(2), 233-246.
Barber, J. S., & Axinn, W. G. (1998). Gender role attitudes and marriage among young women. The Sociological Quarterly, 39(1), 11-31.
Bradburn, N. M. (1969). The structure of psychological well-being. Chicago: Aldine.
Bumpass, L. L., Sweet, J. A. (1989). Children’s experience in single-parient families : implication of cohabitation and marital transitions. Family Planning Perspectives. 21, 256-260.
Bumpass, L. L., Sweet, J. A., & Cherlin, A. (1991) .The role of cohabitation in declining rates of marriage. Journal of Marriage & Family , 53 (4), 913-927.
Bumpass, L. L., Sweet, J.A. (1995). The changing character of stepfamilies: Implications of cohabitation and nonmarital childbearing. Demography, 32(3), 425-436.
Campell, A., Converse, P. E. & Rodgers, W. L. (1976). The quality of American life: Perceptions, evaluations, and satisfactions. New York : Russell Sage Foundation.
Cheng, H., & Furman, A. (2003). Personality, self-esteem, and demographic predictions of happiness and depression. Personality and Individual Differences, 34, 921-942.
Cherlin, A.J., Kiernan, K. E., & Lindsay, C. (1995). Parental divorce in childhood and demographic outcomes in young adulthood. Demography. 32 (3), 299-329.
Clarkberg, M., Stolzenberg, R. M., & Waite, L. (1995). Attitudes, values, and entrance into cohabitational versus marital unions. Social Forces, 74(2), 609-634.
Cox, F. D. (2002). Human intimacy : Marriage, the family, and it’s meaning .United State : Wadsworth Group.
Cramer, D. (1993). Live alone, marital status, gender and health. Journal of Coummunity and Applied Social Psychology. 3, 1-15.
Cunningham, J. D., & Antill, J. K. (1994). Cohabitation and marriage: Retrospective and predictive comparisons. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 11, 77-93.
Cutrona, C. E. (1996). Social support in couples: Marriage as a resource in times of stress. Thousand Oaks, CA:Sage.
Diener, E. (1984). Subjective well-being. Psychological Bulletin, 95, 542-575.
Diener, E., Richard, E.L., & Smith. (1999). Subjective well-being: Three decades of progress. Psychological Bulletin, 125(2), 276-302.
Diener, Oishi & Lucas, (2003).Personality, culture, and subjective well-being :emotional and cognitive evaluations of life. Annual Review of Psychology; 2003, 54(1) , 403-425.
Edmondson, B. (1997). New life stage: Trial marriage. Forecast, 17, 7.
Erikson, E.H.(1959). Identity and the life cycle. New York: International University Press.
Etaugh & Malstrom (1981). The effect of marital status of person perception. Journal of Marriage & Family, 43, 801-805.
Friedman, H. F. (1998). Encyclopedia of Mental health. San Diego : Academic Press.hill.
Hills, P. & Argyle, M.,(2002).The Oxford Happiness Questionnaire: A compact scale for the measurement of psychological well-being. Personality and Individual Differences, 33, 1073-1082.
Horwitz, A. V. & White, (1998). The relationship of cohabition and mental health: a study of a young adult cohort. Journal of Marriage and Family, 60, 505-514.
Jacques, J. M.& Chason, K. J. (1978). Cohabitation: A test of reference group theory among black and white college student. Journal of Comparative Family Studies, 19(2), 147-165.
Jahoda, M. (1958). Current concepts of positive mental health. New York: Basic Books.
Karen, B. C. (2003). Factors influencing the entrance into cohabiting unions. Marriage and Family, 51, 873-893.
Keyes, Corey L. M., Shmotkin, D. & Ryff, C.D. (2002). Optimizing well-being: the empirical encounter of two traditions. Journal of personality and social psychology. 82(6), 1007-1022.
Knoester, Chris. (2003). Transitions in young adulthood and the relationship between parents and offspring well-being. Social Forces, 81, 1431-1457.
Knox, D., Schacht, C.(2000). Choices in relationships:An introduction to marriage and the Family. Australia: Wadsworth.
Knox, D., Zusman, M. E., Snell, S., & Cooper, C. (1999). Characteristics of college students who cohabit. College Student Journal, 33(4), 510-512.
Macklin, E. (1978). Nonmarital Heterosexual Cohabitation. Marriage and Family Review, 1, 1-12.
Macklin, E. J. (1972). Heterosexual cohabitation among unmarried college students. The Family Coordinator, 21, 463-472.
Mahler, K. (1996). Completed, premarital pregnancies more likely among cohabitation women than among singles. Family Planning Perspectives, 28(4), 179-180.
Martin, P. D., Martin, M. & Martin, D. (2001). Adolescent premarital sexual activity, cohabitation, and attitudes toward marriage. Adolescence, 36, 601-610.
Michele (2003). The relationship between youth attitude toward cohabitation and parent Ccurrent marital status, past living arrangement, faith maturity level, and current grade. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Southern Baptist, Louisiana.
Nock, S. L. (1995). A comparison of marriages and cohabitating relationships. Journal of Family Issues, 16(1), 53-76.
Noll, R. (1996). Peer relationships and emotional well-being of youngsters with sick cell disease. Child Development, 67, 423-436.
Oropesa, R. S. (1996). Normative beliefs about marriage and cohabitation : A comparision of non-Latino whites, mexican Americans, and Puerto Ricans. Journal of Marriage and Family, 58, 49-62.
Parducci, A. (1995). Happiness, pleasure, and judgment: The contextual theory and its applications.New Jersey:L. Erlbaum Associates.
Peterman, D.J., Ridley, C. D., & Anderson S. M. (1974). A comparison of cohabitating and non-cohabiting college students. Journal of Marriage and Family, 344-354.
Richard, S., Luciano, L., Gerald, R. W., & William, L. B. (1993). The Dictionary of Family Psychology and Family Therapy.Calif: Sage Publication.
Robert, B., Diener, E. & Tamir, M. (2004). The psychology of subjective well-being. Daedalus, 133(2), 18-26.
Ronald & Christine (1993). Marriage, family, and intimate relations. Tex. : Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
Ross, C. E. (1995). Reconceptualizing marital status as a continunof social attachment, Journal of Marriage & Family, 57(1), 129-141.
Ryff, C.D., (2002). Optimizing well-being : The empirical encounter of two traditions. Journal of Personality and Social Psychological, 82(6), 1007-1022.
Sanley, S. M.& Markman, H. J.(1997). Marriage in the 90s:A nationalwide Radom Phone Survey.Retrieved Septemper, 28, 2004, from http://www.prepinc.com/main/docs/marriage_90s_1997.pdf#search='Stanley %26%20Markman%281997%29
Sarason, I. G., Levin, H. M., Basham, R. B., & Sarason, B. R. (1983). Assessing social support : The social support questionnaire. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 44, 127-139.
Seltzer, J. A. (2000). Families formed outside of marriage. Journal of Marriage and Family, 62, 1247~1268.
Shumaker, S. A. & Brownell, A. (1984). Toward a theory of social support, Journal of Social Issues, 40, 11-36.
Shumaker, S. A., & Brownell, A. (1984). Toward a theory of social support:Closing conceptual gaps. Journal of Social Issues, 40, 11-36.
Spanier, G. B. (1983). Married and Unmaried Cohabitation in the United States:1980. Journal of marriage and Family, 45(2), 277-288.
Stack & Eshlemana (1998). Matital status and happiness:a 17 nation study. Journal of Marriage & Family, 60, 527-36.
Starbuck, G. H. (2002). Families in context. London : Wadsworth.
Strong, Leslie D. (1978). Alternative marital and family forms : Their relative attractiveness to college students and correlates of willingness to participate in nontraditional forms. Journal of Marriage and Family, 40 (3), 493-514.
Tanfer (1987). Parents of premarital cohabitation among nevre-married women in the United State. Journal of Marriage and Family 49, 483-497.
Tasker, F. L.& Richards, M. M. (1994). Adolescents’ attitudes toward marriage and marital prospects after parental divorce : A review. Journal of Adolescent Research, 9(3), 340-362.
Thornton, A., Axinn, W. G. & Hill, D. H. (1992). Reciprocal effects of religiosity, cohabitation, and marriage. American Journal of Sociology, 98, 628-651.
Thornton, A., Axinn, W. G., & Teachman, J. D.(1995). The influence of school enrollment and accumulation on cohabitation and marriage in early adulthood. American Sociological Review, 60(5), 762-775.
Thornton, Arland. (1989) Changing Attitudes Toward Family Issues. Journal of marriage. Journal of Marriage and Family, 40(2), 393-401.
Trost, J. (1975). Married and unmarried cohabitation:The case of Sweden, with some comparison. Journal of Marriage and Family, 37(3), 677-682.
Trost, J. (1978). Attitudes toward and occurrence of Cohabitation without Marriage, Journal of Marriage and the Family, 40(2),393-400.
Turner, R. J. (1983). Direct, indirect and moderating effects of social support on psychological distress and associated conditions. Journal Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 54(4), 416-423.
Waite (2000). In The ties that bind : perspectives on marriage and cohabitation. New York : Aldine de Gruyter.
Wessman, A. E., & Ricks, D. F., (1966). Mood and personality.New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
White.H., (1998). The relationship of cohabitation and mental health:A study of a young adult cohort.Journal of Marriage and the Family, 60(2), 505-514.
Wood, W., Rodes, N., & Whelan, M. (1989). Sex differences in positive well-being : A consideration of emotional style and marital status. Psychological Bulletin, 106, 249-264.