ISSN 1671-3710
CN 11-4766/R
主办：中国科学院心理研究所
出版：科学出版社

心理科学进展 ›› 2018, Vol. 26 ›› Issue (1): 42-55.doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1042.2018.00042

• 元分析 • 上一篇    下一篇

 过度“分享”负性事件与性别、心理健康和关系质量： 对共同反刍的元分析

 赖丽足1;  任志洪1,2,3;  陶 嵘1   

  1.  (1青少年网络心理与行为教育部重点实验室, 华中师范大学心理学院, 湖北省人的发展与心理健康重 点实验室, 武汉 430079) (2福州大学人文社会科学学院, 福州 350108) (3 Department of Counseling Psychology, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Wisconsin 53704, USA)
  • 收稿日期:2017-02-10 出版日期:2018-01-15 发布日期:2017-11-28
  • 通讯作者: 陶嵘, E-mail: 163tr@163.com
  • 基金资助:
     2016年度国家社会科学基金重大项目（16ZDA232）。

 A meta-analysis on Co-Rumination

 LAI Lizu1; REN Zhihong1,2,3; TAO Rong1   

  1.  (1 Key Laboratory of Adolescent Cyberpsychology and Behavior (CCNU), Ministry of Education; School of Psychology, Central China Normal University; Key Laboratory of Human Development and Mental Health of Hubei Province, Wuhan 430079,China) (2 School of Humanities and Social Sciences, Fuzhou University, Fuzhou 350108, China) (3 Department of Counseling Psychology, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Wisconsin 53704, USA)
  • Received:2017-02-10 Online:2018-01-15 Published:2017-11-28
  • Contact: TAO Rong, E-mail: 163tr@163.com
  • Supported by:
     

PDF (PC)

4986

摘要：   共同反刍是二元关系中的新概念, 指两个人过度讨论负性事件, 关注消极情绪。共同反刍是否具有性别差异, 对心理健康的影响是否具有两面性是目前研究热点。本研究对共同反刍的性别差异, 与内化问题、关系质量的相关关系进行元分析, 结果显示：(1)共同反刍的性别差异显著, 女性相对于男性更加容易发生共同反刍(g = 0.57, p < 0.001); 青少年时期性别分化最明显(g青少年 = 0.75, g成年人 = 0.32, p < 0.001), 而且共同反刍的对象不同, 性别差异大小也不同。(2)共同反刍与内化问题呈显著弱相关(r = 0.15, p < 0.001), 控制反刍后合并相关系数为r = 0.08(p < 0.001), 研究设计(横断/纵向)、年龄、共同反刍对象不是显著的调节变量。(3)共同反刍与关系质量具有中等强度的相关(r = 0.42, p < 0.001)。未来应进行更多的纵向研究和实验探索共同反刍与内化问题、关系质量的因果关系及其机制, 并且开发更多形式的测量工具。

关键词: 元分析, 共同反刍, 性别差异, 内化问题, 关系质量

Abstract:   Co-rumination refers to excessively discussing personal problems within a dyadic relationship. The meta-analysis examined how co-rumination was correlated with gender, mental health, and relationship quality. Our results revealed (1) Female co-ruminate more than male (g = 0.57, p < 0.001), which appeared most significantly in adolescents, especially for friends; (2) co-rumination was significantly correlated with mental health (r = 0.15, p < 0.001); and this effect is still significantafter controlling the rumination (partial correlation r = 0.08, p < 0.001); (3) age, study design, and co-ruminator didn’t moderate the aggregated correlation; (4) The aggregated correlation between co-rumination and relationship quality was also significant (r = 0.42, p < 0.001). Future research should further examine the causal relationship between co-rumination and mental health.

Key words: meta-analysis, co-rumination, gender difference, internalizing problems, relationship quality

中图分类号: