http://dx.doi.org/10.6129/CJP.2010.5203.03
Chinese Journal of Psychology 2010, Vol.52, No.3, 265-285
駱月絹（國立台灣大學心理學系）；黃囇莉（國立清華大學學習科學研究所）；林以正（國立台灣大學心理學系）；黃光國（國立台灣大學心理學系）
摘要
Snyder（1994, 2000）的盼望理論（hope theory）強調以未來成功的想像激勵個體積極向前，這是一種「提昇式盼望」，包含主控思考與路徑思考兩因子。但華人文化中的盼望，強調在失敗、受苦後產生的柔性、沉靜的力量，本研究稱之為「寧靜盼望」，包含超越順應與努力不懈兩因子。本研究以此雙元盼望概念中的四因子編制新量表，且以兩個實證研究檢測新量表的建構效度。研究一以267位台灣大學生為對象，以問卷調查法蒐集資料。問卷中除了四因子的測量變項外，還包括樂觀、自我效能、自尊、內控傾向、防衛型悲觀及社會讚許等效標變項。結果顯示：台灣大學生在四盼望因子上均有偏高傾向，從模式競爭中得到高階雙因子（提昇式盼望與寧靜盼望）四因素（主控思考、路徑思考、超越順應及努力不懈）的模型具有更好的模型適配度。另外顯示，新盼望量表具有良好的聚歛效度與區辨效度。研究二以665位台灣大學生為對象，以問卷調查法蒐集資料。測量的變項包含盼望四因子、生活滿意、正向情緒、無望感及心理憂鬱，以檢視新量表的增益效度。結果顯示，增加超越順應與努力不懈兩因子後，比原有的提昇式盼望增加了對正、負向心理適應的總預測力；其中，提昇式盼望對正向心理適應（生活滿意度）有較高預測；而寧靜盼望則對負向心理適應（如無望感）有較高預測，較不導致負向心理適應問題。最後，本論文從文化觀點討論，增加寧靜盼望具有補足西方盼望理論之意義。
關鍵詞：文化比較、主控思考、努力、防衛型悲觀、盼望
The Duality of Hope: The Development and Validation of a New Scale
Yueh-Chuan Luo（Department of Psychology, National Taiwan University）；Li-Li Huang（Institute of Learning Sciences, National Tsing-Hua University）；Yi-Cheng Lin（Department of Psychology, National Taiwan University）；Kwang-Kuo Hwang（Department of Psychology, National Taiwan University）
Abstract
The Hope Theory (Snyder, 1994, 2000) emphasizes that the imagination of future success inspires individuals to go forwards. Hope includes two factors, agency thinking and pathway thinking, and can be termed as “enhanced hope.” However, Chinese culture values the strengths of flexibility and calmness derived from the persistence in face of failure and suffering. This culture-specific consideration is proposed and termed as “peaceful hope.” It includes transcendental adaptation and persisting effort. In this article, duality of hope and four factors, namely agency thinking, pathway thinking, transcendental adaptation, and persisting effort, were constructed to develop a new scale. Then, two empirical studies were conducted to test their validity. In study 1, a survey was conducted and Taiwanese college students ( N = 267) were asked to complete a questionnaire that included the scales for four hope factors and other criteria variables, such as optimism, self efficacy, internal control, defensive pessimism, and social desirability. The results showed that participants had high tendency to the four hope factors. Through models competing, a higher-order model with two hopes (enhanced hope, peaceful hope) combing four factors (agency thinking, pathway thinking, transcendental adaptation, and persisting effort) and fitting indicators was undisputed and accepted. In addition, the new Hope Scale exhibited good convergent and discriminate validities. In study 2, in order to test the increase validity of the new Hope Scale, another survey using the questionnaire was conducted. Data was collected from 665 Taiwan college students. In the questionnaire, besides the scale for four hope factors, scales for measuring life satisfaction, positive affection, hopelessness, and depression were also included. The results indicated that two peaceful hope factors (transcendental adaptation and persisting effort) explain additional variance over and above the contribution of the original enhanced Hope Scale in predicting both positive and negative adaptation. The enhanced hope predicted more positive adaptation (life satisfaction), while peaceful hope showed stronger negative correlation with negative adaptation (hopelessness). That is to say, peaceful hope led to less hopelessness. Finally, we discuss cultural aspects of hope research as the eastern peaceful hope component advances and complement the western hope theory.
Keywords: agency thinking, cultural comparison, defensive pessimism, effort, hope
