教师支持、同伴支持、心理韧性与情绪智力的关系：超常与常态儿童的比较

doi:10.12139/j.1672-0628.2025.02.006

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

本研究考察教师支持与同伴支持对情绪智力的影响以及心理韧性的中介作用在超常与常态儿童群体间的差异，对改善超常儿童学习生活环境、为超常与常态儿童提供针对性教育支持、促进超常与常态儿童的协同发展与健康成长具有重要意义。采用情绪智力自陈量表、教师支持量表、同伴支持量表和心理韧性量表对292名超常儿童和322名常态儿童进行测量。结果表明：(1)教师支持与同伴支持均正向预测超常与常态儿童情绪智力，但教师支持对超常儿童的预测作用较常态儿童更弱，而同伴支持对超常儿童的预测作用较常态儿童更强；(2)心理韧性在超常儿童教师支持与情绪智力间不发挥中介作用而在常态儿童中发挥部分中介作用，在超常儿童同伴支持与情绪智力间发挥部分中介作用而在常态儿童中发挥完全中介作用。

关键词: 超常儿童, 情绪智力, 教师支持, 同伴支持, 心理韧性

Abstract:

Comparing the influence of teacher and student support on emotional intelligence and the mediating role of resilience between gifted and nongifted children was conducive to providing differentiated and targeted educational support for gifted children, and promoting coordinated development and healthy growth for both gifted and nongifted children. The Emotional Intelligence Scale, Teacher Support Scale, Student Support Scale, and 10-item Connor-Davidson Resilience Scale were used to measure 292 gifted and 322 nongifted children. The results showed that: 1) both teacher support and student support positively predicted the emotional intelligence of gifted and nongifted children, but the predictive effect of teacher support on gifted children was weaker than that of nongifted children, while the predictive effect of student support was stronger; 2) resilience did not mediate the relationship between teacher support and emotional intelligence of gifted children but played partially mediation role in nongifted children, and resilience partially mediated the relationship between student support and emotional intelligence of gifted children but played completely mediation role in nongifted children.

Key words: gifted children, emotional intelligence, teacher support, student support, resilience

程黎, 陈啸宇, 刘玉娟. 教师支持、同伴支持、心理韧性与情绪智力的关系：超常与常态儿童的比较[J]. 心理与行为研究, 2025, 23(2): 185-192.

Li CHENG, Xiaoyu CHEN, Yujuan LIU. The Relationship Between Teacher Support, Student Support, Resilience, and Emotional Intelligence: Comparison of Gifted and Nongifted Children[J]. Studies of Psychology and Behavior, 2025, 23(2): 185-192.

图/表 8

参考文献 0

	程黎, 陈啸宇, 张嘉桐. 美国超常儿童教育教师准备标准解析及启示. 中国特殊教育, 2022, (11): 62- 71. DOI
	程黎, 李达棋, 刘海龙, 吴怡霖, 邵鑫雅. 超常儿童创造力促进的实证研究——基于数学创造性课堂环境的构建. 中国特殊教育, 2023, (12): 79- 89. DOI
	程黎, 王美玲. 国内外超常儿童概念的发展及启示. 中国特殊教育, 2021, (10): 65- 69, 76. DOI
	管童, 朱永新. 普通学校开展超常儿童教育的现实需要、主要特征以及路径选择. 中国特殊教育, 2022, (10): 3- 8. DOI
	刘玉娟. 为超常儿童提供适宜的课程——基于对超常儿童理论及已有课程模式的分析. 中国特殊教育, 2023, (11): 73- 80, 72.
	桑青松, 李海澜, 刘思义, 舒首立, 刘正奎. 心理韧性集体咨询对校园受欺凌小学生状态焦虑的影响. 心理与行为研究, 2019, 17 (3): 333- 339.
	孙琬琰. 中小学生学校人际关系与幸福感的关联: 情绪调节能力的中介作用. 中国健康心理学杂志, 2023, 31 (1): 148- 156.
	王才康, 何智雯. 父母养育方式和中学生自我效能感、情绪智力的关系研究. 中国心理卫生杂志, 2002, 16 (11): 781- 782, 785. DOI
	习近平. 高举中国特色社会主义伟大旗帜为全面建设社会主义现代化国家而团结奋斗——. 在中国共产党第二十次全国代表大会上的报告, 2022,
	曾丽红. 教师支持与校园欺凌的关系: 特质情绪智力的中介作用. 中国健康心理学杂志, 2022, 30 (10): 1524- 1529.
	张娜, 唐科莉, 李美娟. 构建超常儿童鉴别体系: 国际经验与本土思考. 中国特殊教育, 2023, (2): 88- 96. DOI
	张雨青, 查子秀, 龚正行, 程念祖, 刘彭芝. 托尼非文字智力测验(TONT-2)的初步修订. 心理科学, 2003, 26 (2): 330- 331, 333. DOI
	Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice–Hall.
	Bildiren, A. The examination of nonverbal tests in the identification of giftedness. TALENT, 2018, 8 (2): 99- 113.
	Campbell-Sills, L., & Stein, M. B. Psychometric analysis and refinement of the Connor-Davidson Resilience Scale (CD-RISC): Validation of a 10-item measure of resilience. Journal of Traumatic Stress, 2007, 20 (6): 1019- 1028. DOI
	Chen, S. T. Chinese adolescents’ emotional intelligence, perceived social support, and resilience—The impact of school type selection. Frontiers in Psychology, 2019, 10, 1299. DOI
	Chen, X. Y., & Cheng, L. Emotional intelligence and creative self-efficacy among gifted children: Mediating effect of self-esteem and moderating effect of gender. Journal of Intelligence, 2023, 11 (1): 17. DOI
	Cheng, L., Chen, X. Y., Fu, W. Q., Ma, X. C., & Zhao, M. J. (2021). Perceptions of inclusive school quality and well-being among parents of children with disabilities in China: The mediation role of resilience. International Journal of Disability, Development and Education, 68(6), 806–821.
	Forsblom, L., Peixoto, F., & Mata, L. Perceived classroom support: Longitudinal effects on students’ achievement emotions. Learning and Individual Differences, 2021, 85, 101959. DOI
	French, L. R., Walker, C. L., & Shore, B. M. Do gifted students really prefer to work alone. Roeper Review, 2011, 33 (3): 145- 159. DOI
	Gere, D. R., Capps, S. C., Mitchell, D. W., & Grubbs, E. Sensory sensitivities of gifted children. The American Journal of Occupational Therapy, 2009, 63 (3): 288- 295. DOI
	Guignard, J. H., Bacro, F., & Guimard, P. School life satisfaction and peer connectedness of intellectually gifted adolescents in France: Is there a labeling effect. New Directions for Child and Adolescent Development, 2021, 2021 (179): 59- 74. DOI
	Haddow, S., Taylor, E. P., & Schwannauer, M. Positive peer relationships, coping and resilience in young people in alternative care: A systematic review. Children and Youth Services Review, 2021, 122, 105861. DOI
	Kassis, W., Vasiou, A., Govaris, C., Favre, C., Aksoy, D., & Graf, U. Social and individual factors predicting students’ resilience: A multigroup structural equation model. Education Sciences, 2024, 14 (1): 15.
	Kitano, M. K., & Lewis, R. B. Resilience and coping: Implications for gifted children and youth at risk. Roeper Review, 2005, 27 (4): 200- 205. DOI
	Kumpfer, K. L. (1999). Factors and processes contributing to resilience: The resilience framework. In M. D. Glantz & J. L. Johnson (Eds.), Resilience and development: Positive life adaptations (pp. 179–224). New York: Springer.
	Longobardi, C., Settanni, M., Lin, S. Y., & Fabris, M. A. Student-teacher relationship quality and prosocial behaviour: The mediating role of academic achievement and a positive attitude towards school. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 2021, 91 (2): 547- 562. DOI
	Ma, Q. Q. The role of teacher autonomy support on students’ academic engagement and resilience. Frontiers in Psychology, 2021, 12, 778581. DOI
	Moreira, A. L., Yunes, M. Â. M., Nascimento, C. R. R., & Bedin, L. M. Children’s subjective well-being, peer relationships and resilience: An integrative literature review. Child Indicators Research, 2021, 14 (5): 1723- 1742. DOI
	Mueller, C. E. Protective factors as barriers to depression in gifted and nongifted adolescents. Gifted Child Quarterly, 2009, 53 (1): 3- 14. DOI
	Patrick, H., Ryan, A. M., & Kaplan, A. Early adolescents’ perceptions of the classroom social environment, motivational beliefs, and engagement. Journal of Educational Psychology, 2007, 99 (1): 83- 98. DOI
	Renzulli, J. S. What makes giftedness?: Reexamining a definition. Phi Delta Kappan, 2011, 92 (8): 81- 88. DOI
	Romano, L., Tang, X., Hietajärvi, L., Salmela-Aro, K., & Fiorilli, C. Students’ trait emotional intelligence and perceived teacher emotional support in preventing burnout: The moderating role of academic anxiety. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 2020, 17 (13): 4771. DOI
	Sabouripour, F., & Roslan, S. B. Resilience, optimism and social support among international students. Asian Social Science, 2015, 11 (15): 159- 170.
	Schutte, N. S., Malouff, J. M., Hall, L. E., Haggerty, D. J., Cooper, J. T., Golden, C. J., & Dornheim, L. Development and validation of a measure of emotional intelligence. Personality and Individual Differences, 1998, 25 (2): 167- 177. DOI
	Tortosa Martínez, B. M., Pérez-Fuentes, M. D. C., & Molero Jurado, M. D. M. Mediating role of emotional intelligence in the relationship between resilience and academic engagement in adolescents: Differences between men and women. Psychology Research and Behavior Management, 2023, 16, 2721- 2733. DOI
	VanTassel-Baska, J., & Brown, E. F. Toward best practice: An analysis of the efficacy of curriculum models in gifted education. Gifted Child Quarterly, 2007, 51 (4): 342- 358. DOI
	Vogelaar, B., Resing, W. C. M., Stad, F. E., & Sweijen, S. W. Is planning related to dynamic testing outcomes? Investigating the potential for learning of gifted and average-ability children. Acta Psychologica, 2019, 196, 87- 95. DOI
	Wang, K. F., & Kong, F. Linking trait mindfulness to life satisfaction in adolescents: The mediating role of resilience and self-esteem. Child Indicators Research, 2020, 13 (1): 321- 335. DOI
	Werner, E. E. (2000). Protective factors and individual resilience. In J. P. Shonkoff & S. J. Meisels (Eds.), Handbook of early childhood intervention (pp. 115–132). Cambridge, United Kingdom: Cambridge University.

	超常儿童		常态儿童
	人数(n)	年龄(M±SD)	人数(n)	年龄(M±SD)
男生	149	8.15±1.18	162	8.20±1.16
女生	143	8.00±1.11	160	8.09±1.11
总计	292	8.08±1.15	322	8.15±1.14

	超常儿童		常态儿童
	人数(n)	年龄(M±SD)	人数(n)	年龄(M±SD)
男生	149	8.15±1.18	162	8.20±1.16
女生	143	8.00±1.11	160	8.09±1.11
总计	292	8.08±1.15	322	8.15±1.14

变量	1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9	10	11
1.情绪感知		0.69^***	0.75^***	0.66^***	0.42^***	0.49^***	0.54^***	0.47^***	0.59^***	0.10	0.12^*
2.理解和推理自身情绪	0.64^***		0.69^***	0.74^***	0.50^***	0.52^***	0.56^***	0.51^***	0.59^***	0.06	0.03
3.理解和推理他人情绪	0.69^***	0.73^***		0.73^***	0.54^***	0.52^***	0.63^***	0.56^***	0.62^***	0.11	0.07
4.情绪运用	0.61^***	0.68^***	0.74^***		0.44^***	0.46^***	0.56^***	0.49^***	0.55^***	0.13^*	0.04
5.教师情感支持	0.50^***	0.51^***	0.60^***	0.50^***		0.72^***	0.57^***	0.56^***	0.37^***	0.06	−0.06
6.教师学业支持	0.46^***	0.50^***	0.55^***	0.45^***	0.73^***		0.50^***	0.45^***	0.31^***	0.16^**	0.02
7.同伴情感支持	0.39^***	0.43^***	0.56^***	0.40^***	0.59^***	0.48^***		0.80^***	0.48^***	0.17^**	−0.04
8.同伴学业支持	0.38^***	0.37^***	0.48^***	0.38^***	0.53^***	0.39^***	0.81^***		0.44^***	0.17^**	−0.09
9.心理韧性	0.50^***	0.62^***	0.59^***	0.52^***	0.36^***	0.32^***	0.37^***	0.32^***		0.02	0.09
10.性别	0.08	0.04	0.12^*	−0.01	0.19^**	0.22^**	0.13^*	0.11	−0.03		−0.07
11.年级	0.13^*	0.03	0.04	0.03	0.00	0.08	−0.01	−0.03	0.03	−0.05
12.M_超常	3.83	4.08	3.94	4.11	4.08	4.49	3.83	3.66	3.72
13.SD_超常	0.65	0.64	0.71	0.74	0.90	0.72	0.98	1.07	0.75
14.M_常态	3.75	3.97	3.88	4.01	3.91	4.28	3.72	3.60	3.66
15.SD_常态	0.61	0.63	0.78	0.82	1.03	0.89	1.01	1.11	0.73

变量	1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9	10	11
1.情绪感知		0.69^***	0.75^***	0.66^***	0.42^***	0.49^***	0.54^***	0.47^***	0.59^***	0.10	0.12^*
2.理解和推理自身情绪	0.64^***		0.69^***	0.74^***	0.50^***	0.52^***	0.56^***	0.51^***	0.59^***	0.06	0.03
3.理解和推理他人情绪	0.69^***	0.73^***		0.73^***	0.54^***	0.52^***	0.63^***	0.56^***	0.62^***	0.11	0.07
4.情绪运用	0.61^***	0.68^***	0.74^***		0.44^***	0.46^***	0.56^***	0.49^***	0.55^***	0.13^*	0.04
5.教师情感支持	0.50^***	0.51^***	0.60^***	0.50^***		0.72^***	0.57^***	0.56^***	0.37^***	0.06	−0.06
6.教师学业支持	0.46^***	0.50^***	0.55^***	0.45^***	0.73^***		0.50^***	0.45^***	0.31^***	0.16^**	0.02
7.同伴情感支持	0.39^***	0.43^***	0.56^***	0.40^***	0.59^***	0.48^***		0.80^***	0.48^***	0.17^**	−0.04
8.同伴学业支持	0.38^***	0.37^***	0.48^***	0.38^***	0.53^***	0.39^***	0.81^***		0.44^***	0.17^**	−0.09
9.心理韧性	0.50^***	0.62^***	0.59^***	0.52^***	0.36^***	0.32^***	0.37^***	0.32^***		0.02	0.09
10.性别	0.08	0.04	0.12^*	−0.01	0.19^**	0.22^**	0.13^*	0.11	−0.03		−0.07
11.年级	0.13^*	0.03	0.04	0.03	0.00	0.08	−0.01	−0.03	0.03	−0.05
12.M_超常	3.83	4.08	3.94	4.11	4.08	4.49	3.83	3.66	3.72
13.SD_超常	0.65	0.64	0.71	0.74	0.90	0.72	0.98	1.07	0.75
14.M_常态	3.75	3.97	3.88	4.01	3.91	4.28	3.72	3.60	3.66
15.SD_常态	0.61	0.63	0.78	0.82	1.03	0.89	1.01	1.11	0.73

模型	χ²/df	CFI	TLI	RMSEA	SRMR
M1	2.46	0.97	0.96	0.07	0.06
M2	2.13	0.98	0.97	0.06	0.06
M3	2.13	0.98	0.97	0.06	0.06
M4	2.02	0.98	0.97	0.06	0.06
M5	2.11	0.98	0.97	0.06	0.06