The Effect of Different Environmental Cultivation on the Memory and Cerebral Plasticity of Juvenile and Adult Mice

Studies of Psychology and Behavior ›› 2013, Vol. 11 ›› Issue (5): 618-621.

Previous Articles Next Articles

The Effect of Different Environmental Cultivation on the Memory and Cerebral Plasticity of Juvenile and Adult Mice

Yang Zhanjun¹, Shi Weilin¹, Zhu Yue¹, Bai Wenzhong²

1 College of Life Science , Huaiyin Normal University , Huaian 223300;
2 College of Life Science , Hebei Normal University , Shijiazhuang 050016

Received:2013-06-21 Online:2015-01-21 Published:2013-09-20

不同培养环境对幼、成年小鼠记忆及脑可塑性变化的影响

杨占军¹,仕琳¹,朱越¹,白文忠²

1、淮阴师范学院生命科学院，淮安 223300
2、河北师范大学生命科学院，石家庄 050016

通讯作者: 金盛华，男，北京师范大学心理学院教授，博士，主要研究方向为应用社会心理学。E-mail: jshpsych@126.com。
作者简介:张玉柱，男，内蒙古师范大学教育科学学院副教授，博士。
基金资助:
*基金项目：内蒙古自然基金项目：高校教师职业幸福感的心理机制及其在高校人力资源管理中的应用研究(2013MS1011)；内蒙古高校人文社科重点研究基地——心理教育中心项目：高校教师心理和谐与职业幸福感研究（NMGJDXLZD005）。

Abstract

Abstract: To explore the structure of university teacher’s occupational well-being and develop a questionnaire based on the qualitative interview. 254 university teachers participated in trial test and 728 participated in formal a questionnaire survey. EFA and CFA were used in data analysis. The results showed that the questionnaire of occupational well-being is consisted of second order 6 dimensions: development of students, friendly relationship, job satisfaction, job achievement, job autonomy and value realization. The model’s fitness indexes were all up to standard. The questionnaire’s coefficient of internal consistency (α) is 0.959, and part-questionnaire’s is 0.878—0.938. The questionnaire’s Guttmann split-half reliability is 0.851, and part-questionnaire’s is 0.845—0.897. The questionnaire’s reliability and validity both met psychometrics criterion, so it can be used to measure university teachers′ occupational well-being.

Key words: university teachers, occupational well-being, questionnaire development, reliability, validity.

摘要： 以质性访谈为基础，探索高校教师职业幸福感的心理结构并编制《高校教师职业幸福感问卷》。对254名高校教师进行试测，对728名高校教师进行正式问卷调查。使用探索性因素分析和验证性因素分析方法对调查结果进行分析。结果表明：高校教师职业幸福感是一个包括学生发展、友好关系、工作满意、工作成就、工作自主、价值实现六个因子的二阶因子模型。模型的各项拟合指数均符合好的拟合标准；问卷的内部一致性系数(α)为0.959，各分问卷的内部一致性系数(α)介于0.878－0.938之间；问卷的Guttman分半信度为0.851，各分问卷的分半信度介于0.845－0.897之间。问卷的信度和效度均满足心理测量学要求，可以作为高校教师职业幸福感的有效测量工具。

关键词: 高校教师, 职业幸福感, 问卷编制, 信度, 效度。

CLC Number:

Yang Zhanjun, Shi Weilin, Zhu Yue, Bai Wenzhong. The Effect of Different Environmental Cultivation on the Memory and Cerebral Plasticity of Juvenile and Adult Mice[J]. Studies of Psychology and Behavior, 2013, 11(5): 618-621.

杨占军,仕琳,朱越,白文忠. 不同培养环境对幼、成年小鼠记忆及脑可塑性变化的影响[J]. 心理与行为研究, 2013, 11(5): 618-621.

References

蔡玲丽. (2010). 高校教师职业幸福感的影响因素及增进策略. 教育理论与实践, 30(12), 39-41.
曹俊军. (2006). 论教师幸福的追寻. 教师教育研究, 18(5), 35-39.
高良, 郑雪. (2009). 当代西方幸福感研究的问题与方向. 自然辩证法通讯, 31(1), 84-88.
霍姆斯. (2006). 教师的幸福感：关注教师的身心健康及职业发展. 北京: 中国轻工业出版社.
卢清, 成云. (2008). 教师职业幸福感研究综述. 江苏教育研究(理论版), 15(2), 27-29.
苗元江. (2003). 心理学视野中的幸福: 幸福感理论与测评研究. 南京: 南京师范大学.
束从敏. (2003). 幼儿教师职业幸福感研究. 南京: 南京师范大学.
檀传宝. (2002). 论教师的幸福. 教育科学, 18(1), 39-43.
王传金. (2008). 教师职业幸福研究: 以C市的小学为例. 上海: 上海师范大学.
王传金. (2009). 论教师职业幸福实现的要素. 教师教育研究, 21(2), 39-44.
王登峰, 崔红. (2008). 中国人的人格特点(VI): 人际关系. 心理学探新, 28(4), 41-45.
王佳艺, 胡安安. (2006). 主观工作幸福感研究述评. 外国经济与管理, 28(8), 49-55.
文峰. (2006). 工作幸福感的结构和相关研究. 广州: 暨南大学.
吴明隆. (2009). 结构方程模型: AMOS的操作与应用. 重庆: 重庆大学出版社. 40-46.
肖杰. (2004). 小学教师职业幸福感的调查与思考. 上海: 华东师范大学.
许用. (2008). 澳门公务员工作幸福感研究. 广州: 暨南大学.
杨建周. (2009). 论高校教师的职业精神和职业幸福. 教育与职业, 21, 47-48.
Campbell, A., Converse, E. P., & Rodgers, L. W. (1976). The quality of American life. New York: Russell Sage Foundation. 78.
Danna, K., & Griffin, R. W. (1999). Health and well-being in the workplace: A review and synthesis of the literature. Journal of Management, 25(3), 357-384.
Klusmann, U., Kunter, M., Trautwein, U., Ludtke, O., & Baumert, A.J. (2008). Teachers’ occupational well-being and quality of instruction: The important role of self-regulatory patterns. Journal of Educational Psychology, 100(3), 702-715.
Lu, L., & Shih, B. J. (1997). Sources of happiness: A qualitative approach. The Journal of Social Psychology, 137(2), 181-187.
Ryff, C. D. (1989). Happiness is everything, or is it? Explorations on the meaning of psychological well-being. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 57(6), 1069-1081.
Ryff, C. D., & Keyes, C. M. L. (1995). The structure of psychological well-being revisited. Journal of Personality and Social Psycho-logy, 69(4), 719-727.
Saaranen, T., Tossavainen, K., Hannele, T., Kiviniemi, V., & Harri, V. (2007). Occupational well-being of school staff members: A structural equation model. Health Education Research, 22(2), 248-260.
Van Horn, J. E., Taris, W. T., Schaufeli, B. W., & Schreurs, P. J. G. (2004). The structure of occupational well-being: A study among Dutch teachers. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 77(3), 365-375.

[1]	MIAO Xiuying, CHI Lizhong. The Impact of the Affect Heuristic on Risky Choice [J]. Studies of Psychology and Behavior, 2022, 20(3): 325-331.
[2]	LU Fang, FU Shuying. The Development of Rural Children’s Social Development Questionnaire [J]. Studies of Psychology and Behavior, 2022, 20(2): 248-254.
[3]	WANG Yanli, CHEN Hong. The Development of Sense of Gain Questionnaire Among Urban Community Residents [J]. Studies of Psychology and Behavior, 2021, 19(5): 665-670.
[4]	WANG Gang, BAI Wei, WU Guolai. The Effects of Effort-Reward Imbalance on Turnover Intention Among Rural Teachers: A Moderated Mediating Model [J]. Studies of Psychology and Behavior, 2021, 19(1): 118-124.
[5]	LIU Wen, MENG Xiangrui, CHE Hanbo, ZHANG Jiaqi, SHEN Yi. Development, Psychometric Reliability and Validity of Pupils’ Creative Personality Questionnaire Based on Teacher’s Descriptions [J]. Studies of Psychology and Behavior, 2020, 18(5): 624-630.
[6]	WANG Zhanqi, ZHANG Xingli. The Validity and Reliability of the Chinese Version of the Creative Achievement Questionnaire [J]. Studies of Psychology and Behavior, 2020, 18(3): 390-397.
[7]	ZHANG Lina, LU Haidong. Development of Chinese High School Students Perceived Classroom Teaching Approaches Scale [J]. Studies of Psychology and Behavior, 2019, 17(6): 773-779.
[8]	HAO Jiajia, CHEN Yinghe, LIU Tuo, BAI Xuejun. The Development of General Thinking Test for Children [J]. Studies of Psychology and Behavior, 2019, 17(5): 620-626.
[9]	DAI Binrong. The Development of the Rural Children's Social Adaptation Scale [J]. Studies of Psychology and Behavior, 2019, 17(4): 504-511.
[10]	MA Huixia, LIU Huifang, ZHAI Yongfang, LI Guifang. Revision and Verification of the Test of Self-Conscious Affect for Adolescents [J]. Studies of Psychology and Behavior, 2019, 17(2): 240-245.
[11]	YANG Hongbo, ZHAO Xuan. QualityAnalysis in National Teacher Certification Examination Based on Multivariate Generalizability Theory [J]. Studies of Psychology and Behavior, 2019, 17(2): 253-258.
[12]	WANG Gang, FAN Yong, HUANG Xu, LIU Xianqiang, WANG Delin. Effects of Government Support, Organizational Support and Competency on Occupational Well-being Among Kindergarten Teachers: Mediating Effect of Occupational Identity [J]. Studies of Psychology and Behavior, 2018, 16(6): 801-809.
[13]	GUO Jing, WANG Ying, JI Lili, JIA Liping, LU Guohua. Development and Validation of Psychological Crisis Vulnerability Scale [J]. Studies of Psychology and Behavior, 2018, 16(6): 847-853.
[14]	LUO Jie, ZHOU Yuan, CHEN Wei, PAN Yun, ZHAO Shouying. A Multivariate Generalizability Analysis of the Adolescent Student Burnout Inventory [J]. Studies of Psychology and Behavior, 2018, 16(5): 665-669,712.
[15]	CHEN Qiu-yan, ZHANG Chen-guang, CHENG Ke. Revision of Posttraumatic Growth Inventory Among Teachers in Wen-chuan Earthquake [J]. Studies of Psychology and Behavior, 2018, 16(5): 670-677.

The Effect of Different Environmental Cultivation on the Memory and Cerebral Plasticity of Juvenile and Adult Mice

不同培养环境对幼、成年小鼠记忆及脑可塑性变化的影响

PDF (PC)

Knowledge

Abstract

Cite this article

share this article

References

Related Articles 15

Recommended Articles

Metrics

Comments