簡易檢索 / 詳目顯示

研究生: 蔡淑妃
Tsai Shu-Fei
論文名稱: ADHD學童於人際互動的社會訊息處理歷程之研究
A study of the Social Information Processing of Adolescents with Attention-Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder
指導教授: 洪儷瑜
Hung, Li-Yu
學位類別: 碩士
Master
系所名稱: 特殊教育學系
Department of Special Education
論文出版年: 2000
畢業學年度: 88
語文別: 中文
論文頁數: 220
中文關鍵詞: ADHD社會訊息處理
英文關鍵詞: ADHD
論文種類: 學術論文
相關次數: 點閱:558下載:86
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
  • ADHD學童於人際互動的社會訊息處理歷程之研究
    摘 要
    本研究旨利用Crick和Dodge所提出的社會訊息處理歷程理論,藉由與人際適應不佳一般學童、適應良好的一般學童之比較,探討人際適應不佳ADHD學童在人際互動的表現,並探討人際適應程度與社會訊息處理歷程之關係。研究對象為大台北地區15名具有醫生診斷之ADHD國中男生且其社交地位為被拒絕,再以年齡、性別、家庭結構等條件,於ADHD學童所就讀班級中找出社交地位被拒絕與受歡迎學童各15名。研究者採用半結構式晤談,瞭解ADHD學童在線索編碼、線索分析、目標設定、解決方法搜尋與反應決定等步驟之處理。所得資料經分類後,以χ2和百分比進行分析。本研究結果臚列於下:
    (一) ADHD學童比人際適應不佳一般學童在「衝突情境」中較多人設定負向目標,且解決方法數比較少,但因不同情境而有異;其他社會訊息處理步驟兩組間則無明顯差異。
    (二) ADHD學童比人際適應不佳一般學童在「進入團體情境」中有較多人以客觀線索為主且預期初始反應會產生好的結果,然而這些差異會隨情境而不同,至於其他步驟則兩組間無明顯差異。
    (三) 人際適應良好的學童與人際適應不佳學童在「衝突情境」中的線索分析、初始反應之評估與替代方法有顯著差異,然有情境之差異;而其他步驟不因人際適應程度而有差異。
    (四) 人際適應良好學童與人際適應不佳學童在「進入團體情境」中的初始反應方法和自我效能有顯著差異,惟差異情形因情境而有不同;而其他步驟不因人際適應程度而有差異。
    (五) 三組學童的社會訊息處理歷程有情境之特定性,且三組間在進入團體情境比在衝突情境的社會訊息處理歷程有較多相似處。
    (六) 在衝突情境中,有負向目標的ADHD學童會導致負向行為,然而兩組一般學童則無人設定負向目標;有正向目標的適應良好學童出現正向行為的比率高於兩組不適應學童。
    (七) 在進入團體情境中,兩組適應不佳學童對消極性方法之結果預期比適應良好學童正向。
    根據上述結果,本研究對ADHD學童之介入與未來的研究提出幾點建議。
    關鍵字:ADHD、社會訊息處理歷程

    A study of the Social Information Processing of Adolescents with Attention-Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder
    Shu-Fei Tsai
    Abstracts
    The purpose of this study was to explore the social information processing of adolescents clinically diagnosed with ADHD on the basis of Crick and Dodge’s (1994) model. The participants of this study were 15 junior high school students with ADHD and rejected by their classmates who were measured by sociometrics. The other two matched groups of participants were selected from the same classes of those with ADHD but were measured as rejected or popular, which would be referred as normal-rejected (NR) and normal-popular (NP). All the participants were interviewed in the semi-structured procedure with the videotape of two social stimulation situations, the conflict and peer entry situations. Five components of the social information processing proposed by Crick and Dodge were collected from the interview: encoding and interpretation of cues, clarification of goals, response access and decision-making. The statistical methods of percentage and χ2 were utilized in the study, and seven major findings were concluded as follows:
    1.In conflict situations, the adolescents with ADHD were found with significantly more negative clarification of goals and less number of methods than NR ones.
    2.In peer entry situations, the adolescents with ADHD were found with significantly more objective encoding and predicting initial behavioral responses to have positive outcomes than NR ones.
    3.In conflict situations, the adolescents with ADHD were found significantly different from NR ones in interpretation of cues, response evaluation and other methods.
    4.In peer entry situations, the adolescents with ADHD were found significantly different from NP ones in initial behavioral responses and self-efficacy evaluation.
    5.Adolescents’ competence of the social information processing was found as situation-depended. The similarity was found among three groups of participants more in peer entry situations than that in conflict situations.
    6.In conflict situations, more adolescents of ADHD have negative goals, which they tend to have negative behavioral responses; however, none of the normal ones have negative goals. The NP adolescents who have positive goals tend to have more positive responses than the rejected ones.
    7.In peer entry situations, the rejected adolescents tend to predict passive behavioral responses to have the positive results than NP ones. So, NP adolescents have less passive responses in the peer entry situations.
    Implications for intervention and further research are recommended on basis of the results of this study.
    Keywords: ADHD, social information processing

    目 次 第一章 緒論……………………………………………………….………第一節 研究動機………………………………………………………第二節 研究目的與問題………………………………………………第三節 研究假設………………………………………………………第四節 名詞解釋…………………………………………………..… 0101081011 第二章 文獻探討………………………………………………………….第一節 注意力缺陷過動症……………………………………………第二節 ADHD學童之人際適應…………………………………………第三節 人際關係之理…………………………………………………第四節 社會訊息處理能力之探討…………………………………… 1515222636 第三章 研究方法……………………………………………………….…第一節 研究架構………………………………………………………第二節 研究對象………………………………………………………第三節 研究工具………………………………………………………第四節 研究程序………………………………………………………第五節 資料處理與分析……………………………………………… 474749525659 第四章 研究結果……….…………………………………………….… 第一節 ADHD學童、人際適應不佳一般學童於「衝突情境」 社會訊息處理各步驟之比較………………………………… 第二節 ADHD學童、人際適應不佳一般學童於「進入團體情境」 社會訊息處理各步驟之比較………………………………… 第三節 人際適應不佳學童、人際適應良好一般學童於「衝突情境」 社會訊息處理各步驟之比較………………………………….第四節 人際適應不佳學童、人際適應良好一般學童於「進入團體情境」社會訊息處理各步驟之比較………………………….第五節 三組學童之社會訊息處理歷程……………………………… 656587107125148 第五章 討論…….…………………………………………………….…第一節 ADHD學童社會訊息處理歷程之探討…………………………第二節 社會訊息處理歷程與人際適應之關係………………………第三節 各組學童社會訊息處理歷程之探討….……………………… 163163169174 第六章 結論與建議.……………………………………………….….…第一節 結論……………………………………………………………第二節 研究限制………………………………………………………第三節 建議…………………………………………………………… 179179183185 參考文獻…………………………………………………..……………… 一、中文部份…………………………………………………………… 二、英文部份…………………………………………………………… 190190193 附錄…………………………………………………………………………附錄一 社交計量問卷……………………………………….…………附錄二 人際互動情境……………….………………………..………附錄三 情境腳本………………………..………………….…………附錄四 訪談大綱…..……………………………………….……….…附錄五 晤談流程圖………………………………………….…………附錄六 衝突情境一(撞到)之晤談結果…………..……….…………附錄七 衝突情境二(絆倒)之晤談結果…………………….…………附錄八 進入團體情境一(聊天)之晤談結果…………………….……附錄九 進入團體情境二(打籃球)之晤談結果………………….…… 202202203204206208209212215218 表 次 表3-2-1表3-2-2表3-2-3表4-1-1表4-1-2表4-1-3表4-1-4表4-1-5表4-1-6表4-1-7表4-1-8表4-1-9表4-1-10表4-1-11表4-1-12表4-1-13表4-1-14表4-1-15表4-1-16表4-1-17表4-1-18表4-1-19表4-1-20表4-2-1表4-2-2表4-2-3表4-2-4表4-2-5表4-2-6表4-2-7表4-2-8表4-2-9表4-2-10表4-2-11表4-2-12表4-2-13表4-2-14表4-2-15表4-2-16表4-2-17表4-2-18表4-2-19表4-2-20表4-3-1表4-3-2表4-3-3表4-3-4表4-3-5表4-3-6表4-3-7表4-3-8表4-3-9表4-3-10表4-3-11表4-3-12表4-3-13表4-3-14表4-3-15表4-3-16表4-3-17表4-3-18表4-3-19表4-3-20表4-4-1表4-4-2表4-4-3表4-4-4表4-4-5表4-4-6表4-4-7表4-4-8表4-4-9表4-4-10表4-4-11表4-4-12表4-4-13表4-4-14表4-4-15表4-4-16表4-4-17表4-4-18表4-4-19表4-4-20 受試者之年級分佈與基本資料……………………………………….…..同學平人際適應良好一般學童受歡迎的理由………………………………同學童ADHD學童和人際適應不佳一般學童被拒絕的理由………….……「衝突情境一」二組人際適應不佳學童線索編碼之比較…………………「衝突情境一」二組人際適應不佳學童線索分析之比較…………………「衝突情境一」二組人際適應不佳學童目標設定之比較…………………「衝突情境一」二組人際適應不佳學童方法數之比較……………………「衝突情境一」二組人際適應不佳學童初始反應之比較…………………「衝突情境一」二組人際適應不佳學童對初始反應之評估之比較………「衝突情境一」二組人際適應不佳學童對初始反應結果預期之比較……「衝突情境一」二組人際適應不佳學童對初始反應自我效能之比較……「衝突情境一」二組人際適應不佳學童替代方法之比較…………………「衝突情境一」二組人際適應不佳學童方法選擇之比較…..……………「衝突情境二」二組人際適應不佳學童線索編碼之比較…………………「衝突情境二」二組人際適應不佳學童線索分析之比較…………………「衝突情境二」二組人際適應不佳學童目標設定之比較…………………「衝突情境二」二組人際適應不佳學童方法數之比較……………………「衝突情境二」二組人際適應不佳學童初始反應之比較…………………「衝突情境二」二組人際適應不佳學童對初始反應之評估之比較………「衝突情境二」二組人際適應不佳學童對初始反應結果預期之比較……「衝突情境二」二組人際適應不佳學童對初始反應自我效能之比較……「衝突情境二」中二組人際適應不佳學童替代方法之比較……..………「衝突情境二」二組人際適應不佳學童方法選擇之比較…………………「進入團體情境一」二組人際適應不佳學童線索編碼之比較……………「進入團體情境一」二組人際適應不佳學童線索分析之比較……………「進入團體情境一」二組人際適應不佳學童目標設定之比較……………「進入團體情境一」二組人際適應不佳學童方法數之比較………………「進入團體情境一」二組人際適應不佳學童初始反應之比較……………「進入團體情境一」二組人際適應不佳學童對初始反應之評估之比較….「進入團體情境一」二組人際適應不佳學童對初始反應結果預期之比較「進入團體情境一」二組人際適應不佳學童對初始反應自我效能之比較「進入團體情境一」二組人際適應不佳學童替代方法之比較……………「進入團體情境一」二組人際適應不佳學童方法選擇之比較…...………「進入團體情境二」二組人際適應不佳學童線索編碼之比較……………「進入團體情境二」二組人際適應不佳學童線索分析之比較……………「進入團體情境二」二組人際適應不佳學童目標設定之比較……………「進入團體情境二」二組人際適應不佳學童方法數之比較………………「進入團體情境二」二組人際適應不佳學童初始反應之比較……………「進入團體情境二」二組人際適應不佳學童對初始反應之評估之比較…「進入團體情境二」二組人際適應不佳學童對初始反應結果預期之比較「進入團體情境二」二組人際適應不佳學童對初始反應自我效能之比較「進入團體情境二」二組人際適應不佳學童替代方法之比較…………….「進入團體情境二」二組人際適應不佳學童方法選擇之比較…….………「衝突情境一」人際適應佳、不佳學童線索編碼之比較……………..…..「衝突情境一」人際適應佳、不佳學童線索分析之比較……………..…..「衝突情境一」人際適應佳、不佳學童目標設定之比較……………..…..「衝突情境一」人際適應佳、不佳學童方法數之比較……………………..「衝突情境一」人際適應佳、不佳學童初始反應之比較………………...「衝突情境一」人際適應佳、不佳學童對初始反應之評估之比較………「衝突情境一」人際適應佳、不佳學童對初始反應結果預期之比較……「衝突情境一」人際適應佳、不佳學童對初始反應自我效能之比較……「衝突情境一」人際適應佳、不佳學童替代方法之比較………….……...「衝突情境一」人際適應佳、不佳學童方法選擇之比較…………………「衝突情境二」人際適應佳、不佳學童線索編碼之比較…………………..「衝突情境二」人際適應佳、不佳學童線索分析之比較………………….「衝突情境二」人際適應佳、不佳學童目標設定之比較…………………..「衝突情境二」人際適應佳、不佳學童方法數之比較…………………….「衝突情境二」人際適應佳、不佳學童初始反應之比較…………………「衝突情境二」人際適應佳、不佳學童對初始反應之評估之比較………「衝突情境二」人際適應佳、不佳學童對初始反應結果預期之比較……「衝突情境二」人際適應佳、不佳學童對初始反應自我效能之比較……「衝突情境二」人際適應佳、不佳學童替代方法之比較…………………「衝突情境二」人際適應佳、不佳學童方法選擇之比較…………………「進入團體情境一」人際適應佳、不佳學童線索編碼之比較……………「進入團體情境一」人際適應佳、不佳學童線索分析之比較……………「進入團體情境一」人際適應佳、不佳學童目標設定之比較……………「進入團體情境一」人際適應佳、不佳學童方法數之比較………………「進入團體情境一」人際適應佳、不佳學童初始反應之比較……………「進入團體情境一」人際適應佳、不佳學童對初始反應之評估之比較…「進入團體情境一」人際適應佳、不佳學童對初始反應結果預期之比較「進入團體情境一」人際適應佳、不佳學童對初始反應自我效能之比較「進入團體情境一」人際適應佳、不佳學童替代方法之比較……………「進入團體情境一」人際適應佳、不佳學童方法選擇之比較……………「進入團體情境二」人際適應佳、不佳學童線索編碼之比較…….……..「進入團體情境二」人際適應佳、不佳學童線索分析之比較……………「進入團體情境二」人際適應佳、不佳學童目標設定之比較……………「進入團體情境二」中人際適應佳、不佳學童方法數之比較……………「進入團體情境二」人際適應佳、不佳學童初始反應之比較……………「進入團體情境二」人際適應佳、不佳學童對初始反應之評估之比較….「進入團體情境二」人際適應佳、不佳學童對初始反應結果預期之比較「進入團體情境二」人際適應佳、不佳學童對初始反應自我效能之比較「進入團體情境二」人際適應佳、不佳學童替代方法之比較……………「進入團體情境二」人際適應佳、不佳學童方法選擇之比較……..…… 50515166676869707172737475767778798081828384858788899091929394959697979899100101102103104105107108109110111112113114115116117118119120121122123124125126128129130131132133134135136137137138139140141142143144145146 圖 次 圖2-1圖2-2圖2-3圖5-1圖5-2圖5-3圖5-4圖5-5圖5-6 Argyle社交技巧模式………………………………………………Dodge社會互動模式………………………………………………社會訊息處理模式…………………………………………………ADHD學童在衝突情境之社會訊息處理歷程………………..….人際適應不佳一般學童在衝突情境之社會訊息處理歷程.……..人際適應良好一般學童在衝突情境之社會訊息處理歷程…..…..ADHD學童在進入團體情境之社會訊息處理歷程………………人際適應不佳一般學童在進入團體情境之社會訊息處理歷程….人際適應良好一般學童在進入團體情境之社會訊息處理歷程…. 303238149151153155157159

    參考文獻
    一、 中文部分
    過動兒校園另類炸彈。(民87年10月1日)。中央日報,第10版。
    他們不是壞小孩。(民85年7月13日)。中國時報,第40版。
    過動兒需有適當醫療和教育輔導。(民88年11月28日)。中國時報,第15版。
    過動兒需要矯治。(民75年4月26日)。聯合報,第6版。
    過動兒打人,同學集體缺課。(民88年11月26日)。聯合報,第五版。
    過動兒學校強迫轉學。(民89年5月19日)。聯合晚報,第5版。
    王意中(民83):注意力不足過動症兒童與同儕之遊戲行為研究。高雄醫學院行為科學研究所碩士論文。
    王瑪麗(民74):人際問題解決訓練對國中女生人際問題解決能力、態度與人際適應的影響。國立台灣師範大學輔導研究所碩士論文。
    宋維村(民71):注意力不足過動症後群:綜論。中華民國神經精神醫學會會刊,8(1),12-21。
    周文君、王雅琴、陳永成(民82):兒童活動量表在注意力不足過動症之臨床應用。中華精神醫學,7(3),162-170。
    林幼青(民85):探討學校情境中注意力不足過動症候群孩童行為特性。高雄醫學院行為科學研究碩士論文。
    洪榮照(民87):兒童攻擊行為相關因素與認知行為策略輔導效果之研究。國立彰化師範大學特殊教育研究所博士論文。
    洪儷瑜(民82):注意力缺陷及過動學生的人際關係及其相關問題研究。特殊教育研究學刊,9。
    洪儷瑜(民86):青少年社會行為之多元評量表。台北:師大書苑。
    洪儷瑜(民87):ADHD學生的教育與輔導。台北:心理。
    洪儷瑜(民88):少叫多教-談社會技巧訓練。迎千禧談特教,中華民國特殊教育年刊88年,台灣師範大學印行。
    洪儷瑜、涂春仁(民85):Coie & Dodge社會計量地位分類公式之修正。測驗年刊,43,103-114。
    洪儷瑜、張郁雯、蔡明富、鄭紀瑩(民88):過動行為篩選表對ADHD在不同診斷標準之比較研究。教育與心理測驗學術研討會手冊,12,17-18。
    涂春仁(民88):社交測量軟體。台北:永吉國中。
    教育部(民87):身心障礙及資賦優異學生鑑定原則鑑定基準。台北:教育部。
    章淑婷(民78):幼兒人際問題解決能力及其同儕關係之研究。國立台灣師範大學家政教育研究所碩士論文
    張黛眉(民79):影響小學學童攻擊應行為以致社交地位之認知相關變項。台大心理學研究所碩士論文。
    黃于軒(民82):社會認知技巧訓練對國中攻擊傾向學生輔導效果之研究。國立台灣師範大學教育心理與輔導研究所碩士論文。
    蔡麗芳(民81):社交技巧訓練對國小兒童社交技巧、問題行為及同儕接納之影響效果實驗研究。國立台灣師範大學教育心理與輔導研究所碩士論文。
    鄭惠霙(民86):國小六年級注意力缺陷及過動症學童社會技能及其教學訓練效果之研究。國立台灣師範大學特殊教育研究所碩士論文。
    謝淑芬(民80):人際問題解決之認知歷程、攻擊信念與攻擊行為之研究。國立台灣師範大學教育心理與輔導研究所碩士論文。
    二、西文部分
    American Psychiatric Association. (1994). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disordrers(4th ed.).Washihgton, DC:Author.
    Anastopoulos, A. D., & Barkley, R. A. (1992). Attention deficit-hyperactivity disorder. In C. E. Walker & M. C. Roberts (Eds,). Handbook of clinical child psychology (2nd ed.). New York: J. Wiley & Sons.
    Argyle, M. (1985). Social behavior problems and social skills training in adolescent. In B. H. Schneider, K. H. Rubin, & J. E. Leidingham (Eds.), Children’s peer relations: issues in assessment and intervention. (pp. 207-224). New York: Spring-Verlag.
    Arnold, L. E., & Jensen, P. S. (1995). Attention-deficit disorders. In H. I. Kaplan & B. J. Sadock(Eds.), Comprehensive of textbook of psychiatry, IV(6th ed.). (pp. 2295-2310). Baltimore, MD: Williams & Wilkins.
    Asher, S. R., & Renshaw, P. D. (1981). Children without friends:social knowledge and social-skill training. In S. R. Asher & J. M. Gottman (Eds.), The development of children’s friendships. (pp. 273-296). Cambridge University Press.
    Asher, S. R., & Parker, J. G. (1989). Significance of peer relationship problems in childhood. In B. H. Schneider, G. Attilli, J. Nadel, & R. P. Weissberg(Eds.), Social competence in developmental perspective (pp. 5-23). Netherlands: Kluwer Academic.
    Barkley, R. A. (1997). Attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder. In E. J. Mash & L. G. Terdal (Eds.), Assessment of childhood disorders(3rd ed) (pp. 71-129). New York: Guilford Press.
    Barkley, R. A. (1998). Attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder:a handbook for diagnosis and treatment. New York: Guiford Press.
    Berk, L. E. (1993). Infants, children, and adolescents (pp. 473-474). MA: Allyn & Bacon.
    Bieman, K. L., & Welsh, J. A. (1997). Social relationship deficits. In E. J. Mash & L. G. Terdal (Eds.), Assessment of childhood disorders(3rd ed) (pp. 328-365). New York: Guilford Press.
    Clark, M. L., Cheyne, J. A., Cunnimngham, C. E., & Siegel, L.S. (1988). Dyadic peer interaction and task orientation in attention-deficit-disordered children. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 16(1), 1-15.
    Coie, J. D., & Kupersmidt, J. B. (1983). A behavioral analysis of emerging social status in boys groups. Child Development, 54, 1386-1399.
    Crick, N. R., & Dodge, K. A. (1989). Children’s perceptions of peer entry and conflict situations: Social strategies , goals, and outcome expectations. In B. Schneider, J. N adel, G. Attili, & R. Weissberg(Eds.), Social competence in developmental perspective(pp. 396-399). Norwell, MA:Kluwer.
    Crick, N. R., & Dodge, K. A. (1994). A review and reformulation of social information-processing mechanisms in children’s social adjustment. Psychological Bulletin, 115(1), 74-101.
    Crick, N. R., & Dodge, K. A. (1996). Social information-processing mechanisms in reactive and proactive aggression. Child Development, 67, 993-1002.
    deHaas, P. A. (1986). Attention styles and peer relationships of hyperactive and normal boys and girls. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 14(3), 457-467.
    DePaul, G. J., & Stoner, G. (1994). ADHD in the schools: assessment and intervention strategies. New York: Guilford Press.
    Dodge, K. A. (1985). Facets of social interaction and the assessment of social competence in children. In B. H. Schneider, K. H. Rubin, & J. E. Leidingham (Eds.), Children’s peer relations: issues in assessment and intervention. (pp. 3-22). New York: Spring-Verlag.
    Dodge, K. A., Petti, G. S., McClaskey, C. L., & Price, J. M. (1986). Social competence in children. Mongraphs of the Society for Research in Child Development, 51(2).
    Dodge, K. A., & Price, J. M. (1994). On the relation between social information processing and socially competent behavior in early school-aged children. Child Development, 65, 1385-1397.
    Erwin, P. (1993). Friendship and peer relations in children (pp. 24-26). Chichester, England: John Wiley & Sons.
    Flicek, M. (1992). Social status of boys with both academic problems and attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 20(4), 353-366.
    Guevremont, D. C. (1990). Social skills and peer relationship training. In R. Barkely (Ed.), Attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder: A handbook for diagnosis and treatment(pp.540-572). NY: Guilford Press.
    Guevermont, D. C., & Dumas, M. C. (1994). Peer relationship problems and disruptive behavior disorders. Journal of Emotional and Behavioral Disorders, 2(3), 164-172.
    Heilveil, I., & Clark, D. (1990). Personality Correlates of Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No ED 331 269).
    Johnston, C., Pelham, W. E., & Murphy, H. A. (1985). Peer relationships in ADHD and normal children: a developmental analysis of peer and teacher ratings. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 13(1), 89-100.
    Kauffman, J. M. (1997). Characteristics of emotional and behavioral disorders of children and youth (pp. 248-249, 306-310). NJ: Prentice-Hall.
    Klein, A. R., & Young, R. D. (1979). Hyperactive boys in their classroom: assessment of teacher and peer perceptions, interactions, and classroom behavior. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 7(4), 425-442.
    King, C. A., & Young, R. D. (1981). Peer popularity and peer communication patterns: hyperactive versus active but normal boys. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 9(4), 465-482.
    Kwak, K. & Kim, M. (1999). Korean Journal of Developmental Psychology[On- line], 12(1), 1-13., Abstract from: PsycINFO: Journal Article: 1999-11931-001.
    Landau, S., & Milich, R. (1988). Social communication patterns of attention-deficit-disordered boys. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 16(1), 69-81.
    Matthys, W., Cuperus, J. M., & Van Engeland, H. (1999). Deficient social problem-solving in boys with ODD/CD, with ADHD, and with both disorders. Journal of American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry, 38(3), 311-321.
    Milich, R., & Landau, S. (1982). Socialization and peer relations in hyperactive children. In K. D. Gradow & I. Bialer (Eds.), Advances in learning and behavioral disabilities, 1, 283-339.
    Moor, L. A., Hughes, J. N. & Robinson, M. (1992). A comparison of the social information-processing abilities of rejected and accepted hyperactive children. Journal of Clinical Child Psychology, 21(2), 123-131.
    Nelson, D. A., & Crick, N. R. (1999). Rose-colored glasses: examining the social information-processinf of prosocial young adolescents. Journal of Early Adolescence, 19, 17-22.
    Ollendisk, T. H., Weist, M. D., Borden, M. C., & Greence, R. W. (1992). Sociometric status and academic, behavioral, and psychological adjustment: a five-year longitudinal study. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 60(1), 80-87.
    Parker, J. G. & Asher, S. R. (1987). Peer Relations and later personal adjustment: Are low accepted children at risk? Psychological Bulletin, 102, 357-389.
    Pelham, W. E., & Bender, M. E. (1982). Peer relationships in hyperactive children: Description and treatment. In K. D. Gadow & I. Bialer(Eds.), Advance in learning and behavioral disabilities (Vol. 1, pp. 365-436)Greenwich, CT:JAI Press.
    Pope, A. W., Bierman, K. L., & Mumma, G. H. (1989). Relations between hyperactive and aggressive behavior and peer relations at three elementary grade levels. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 17(3), 253-267.
    Quiggle, N., Garber, J., Panak, W., & Dodge, K. A. (1992). Social informaition-processing in aggressive and depressed children. Child Development, 63, 1305-1320.
    Renshaw, P. D. (1981). The roots of peer interaction research: a historical analysis of 1930. In S. R. Asher & J. M. Gottman (Eds.), The development of children’s friendships. (pp. 1-25). Cambridge University Press.
    Richard, B. A., & Dodge, K. A. (1982). Social maladjustment and problem solving in school-aged children. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 50(2), 226-233.
    Rubin, K. H., Coplan, R. J., Nelson, L. J., & Lagace-Seguin, D. G. (1999). Peer relationships in chilhood. In M. H. Bornstein & M. E. Lamb(Eds.), Development psychology: An advanced textbook. (4th ed.). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
    Rubin, K. H., & Ross, H. S. (1982). Introduction: some reflations on the state of the art: the study of peer relationships and social skills. In Rubin, K. H., & Ross, H. S(Eds.), Peer relationships and social skills in childhood (pp. 1-8). NY: Springer-Verlag.
    Schwastz, D., Dodge. K. A., Coie, J. D., Hubbard, J. A., Cillessen, A. H. N., Lemerise, E. A., & Bateman, H.(1998). Social-cognition and behavioral correlates of aggression and victimization in boys' play group. Journal of Abnormal Child Pshchology, 26(6), 431-440.
    Shaffer, D. R. (1994). Social and development (3rd ed.). Pacific Grove,CA:Boooks/Cole.
    Seligman, M., Reivich, K., Jaycow, L., & Gilliam, J.,洪莉譯(民88):教孩子學習樂觀,(The optimistic child).台北:五南。
    Silver, L. B. (1992). Attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder: a clinical guide to diagnosis and treatment. American Psychiatric Press.
    Slaby, R. G., & Guerra, N. G. (1988). Cognitive mediators of aggression in adolescent offenders: 1. Assessment. Developmental Psychology, 24, 580-588.
    Steeves, J. (1993). Social status of gifted student in Taiwan, ROC, as assessed by their age/grade peers. 特殊教育研究學刊,9.
    Stewart, J., & Buggey, T.(1994). Social Status and Self-Esteem: Children With ADHD and Their Peers. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No ED400 630).
    Waldman, I. D. (1996). Aggressive boy’s hostile perceptual and response biases: the role of attention and impulsivity. Child Development, 67, 1015-1033.
    Whalen, C. K. (1983). Hyperactivity, learning problems, and the attention deficit disorders. In T. H. Ollendick & M. Hersen (Eds.), Handbook of child psychopathology. (pp. 151-152). NY: Plenum.

    QR CODE