西北师范大学
硕士学位论文
二语写作焦虑与三个学习者因素之间关系的路径分析研究
姓名：王蕾
申请学位级别：硕士
专业：英语语言文学
指导教师：王琦
2008-05-29
摘要
写作焦虑的研究始于上世纪七十年代，Daly和Mille于1975年首次提出了这个概念，它是指学习者在写作过程中所表现出来的焦虑行为，如逃避写作任务，担心自己的作文被他人阅读和评议等。以往写作焦虑的研究主要关注写作焦虑与相关的学习者因素之间的关系，Fahimeh Marefat (2006)认为语言水平越高则写作焦虑越低，Nor Shidrah Mat Daud等人(2005)的研究发现学生感到焦虑情绪是因为缺乏写作技巧，而Pajares和Johnson（1994）则认为写作焦虑的产生是由于学生不够自信，但并不会影响写作成绩， Jones（1982）认为，英语写作水平低主要是母语写作能力低，Pajares（1996）的研究表明自我效能会直接影响焦虑继而间接影响最终的写作成绩。已往的研究很少将母语写作能力看作是二语写作焦虑的相关因素进行分析，对二语写作焦虑与其相关因素之间关系的路径分析则更为鲜见。鉴于此，本研究试从二语写作焦虑与二语水平、二语写作自我效能和母语写作能力的关系入手，通过路径分析探讨它们的关系及其对二语写作教学的意义。
本论文包括八个部分：引言，文献综述，理论框架，研究方法，数据收集与分析，结果与讨论，教学启示，研究不足。引言与文献综述部分介绍了二语写作焦虑的研究概况，对已有研究中的二语写作焦虑的相关因素和研究方法进行了整理。本研究以Tobias模式、社会认知理论中的自我效能理论及Cheng的二语写作焦虑理论作为研究的理论依据，采用Cheng(2004)编写的二语写作焦虑量表及二语写作自我效能量表（Zimmerman & Martinez-Pons,1990）做问卷调查，以受试的中文作文得分及TEM4成绩作为母语写作能力和二语水平的考查依据，最后用SPSS软件对数据依次作出相关分析，回归分析和路径分析,回答了以下三个研究问题：1）学生在进行二语写作时是否有焦虑情绪及其三个层面—生理焦虑、规避行为和认知焦虑的水平如何；2）二语写作焦虑及其三个层面与三个学习者因素即二语水平、二语写作自我效能和母语写作能力之间是否相关；3）二语写作焦虑与三个因素之间存在着怎样的因果关系。
研究结果表明，学生进行二语写作时体验到焦虑情绪（mean=59.10）。二语写作焦虑与三个因素显著负相关（-.485**, -394**, -.276*），二语水平、自我效能和母语写作能力越高，二语写作焦虑则越低。具体到焦虑的三个层面，生理焦虑与二语水平和自我效能显著负相关（-.302*, -.319*），规避行为与三个因素没有显著负相关（-.232, -.036, -.164），认知焦虑与二语水平和自我效能显著负相关（-.402**, -.260*），二语水平和自我效能越高，生理焦虑和认知焦虑就越低，而规避行为焦虑的变化与三个因素没有太大关系。回归分析表明三个因素对二
语写作焦虑水平变化的联合解释量为27% (R2=.270)，说明二语写作焦虑水平的变化受到这三个因素的影响。但是三个因素对焦虑的三个层面变化的联合解释量不高，分别为13.1%，6.7%和17% (R2=.131, .067, .170)。路径分析表明，自我效能和二语水平直接影响焦虑水平(β=-.371,-.203)，这说明焦虑水平高是因为自我效能和二语水平太低；母语写作能力通过二语水平或自我效能间接影响焦虑水平，良好的母语写作能力可以提高二语水平和自我效能(β=.349,.330)，而较高的二语水平和自我效能可以降低焦虑水平(β=-.371,-.203)，因此母语写作能力高就会降低焦虑水平；自我效能也通过二语水平间接影响焦虑水平，良好的自我效能可以提高二语水平(β=.367)，而较高的二语水平可以降低焦虑水平(β= -.371)，因此自我效能高就会降低焦虑水平。
以上分析结果使我们对二语写作焦虑与二语水平、二语写作自我效能和母语写作能力之间的关系有了较清晰的认识，对二语写作教师改进教学方法，采用有效策略降低二语写作焦虑有借鉴指导意义。首先，教师应采取有效策略不断提高学生的二语语言综合运用水平，布置不限时作文练习，调整评阅作文方式，尽量多做正面评价或提出改进建议，适当采用无时间限制也无评分的写作练习方式。第二，教师可以对二语写作焦虑水平较高的学生作个别心理辅导，帮助他们竖立信心，相信自己能够通过不懈的练习提高写作能力继而提高写作的自信，提高其二语写作自我效能以降低二语写作焦虑尤其是生理焦虑。第三，教师和教学大纲制定人员应该考虑到母语写作能力在二语写作教学中的重要性，重视学生母语写作能力的提高以最终降低二语写作焦虑水平。
关键词：二语写作焦虑;写作自我效能;二语水平;母语写作能力;路径分析
ABSTRACT
Writing anxiety is a construct created by Daly and Miller (1975) which has been conceived of as “a situation and subject-specific individual difference that is concerned with a person’s general tendency to approach or avoid writing accompanied by some amount of evaluation”. A number of researches have aimed to explore the complicated relationships among writing anxiety and various factors, thus to investigate the impact on the final writing performance. Fahimeh Marefat (2006) found that anxiety tends to be higher with lower language proficiency. Nor Shidrah Mat Daud et al’s study (2005) found that the subjects suffered anxiety as a result of their lack of writing skill. In Pajares & Johnson’s study (1994), it was found that writing anxiety tends to be higher with lower writing self-confidence but is not predictive of writing performance. Pajares et al (1996) found that self-efficacy had a strong direct effect on anxiety, which, in turn, had a modest effect on performance. Yet learner’s L1 writing competence and L2 writing self-efficacy have been rarely considered as associated factors of L2 writing anxiety, and there were even less studies which adopted a path analysis
to examine the causal relationships between L2 writing anxiety and associated learner factors. By employing Cheng’s SLWAI (Cheng, 2004) and L2 writing self-efficacy scale (Zimmerman&Martinez-Pons,1990), the present study aims to find out through a path model the relationships between L2 writing anxiety and three learner factors—L2 proficiency, L2 writing self-efficacy and L1 writing competence so as to throw some light on pedagogies of L2 writing.
This paper consists of eight parts: introduction, literature review, theoretical frameworks, methodology, results and analysis, conclusion and discussion, implications and limitations of the present study. The first two parts introduced researches on L2 anxiety and demonstrated several associated factors of L2 writing anxiety covered in the available studies and their methodology as well. With Tobias’ model, self-efficacy theory in social cognitive science and Cheng’s L2 writing anxiety theory as theoretical frameworks, the present study conducted correlation analysis, regression analysis and path analysis, aiming to find out 1) whether learners experience L2 writing anxiety and to what extent they experience somatic anxiety, behavior avoidance anxiety or cognitive anxiety which are three dimensions of L2 writing anxiety; 2) whether there are correlations between L2 writing anxiety including its three dimensions and three factors; and 3) whether there are causal relationships between
L2 writing anxiety and three factors. In the part of methodology, instruments and detailed procedures to examine L2 writing anxiety and each of the three factors are introduced.
The results show that subjects feel anxious when writing in second language (mean=59.10). L2 writing anxiety is significantly negatively correlated with three factors (-.485**, -.394**, -.276*),
which indicates that students with higher L2 proficiency, self-efficacy or L1 writing competence tend to experience lower anxiety. With regard to three dimensions of L2 writing anxiety, somatic anxiety is significantly correlated with L2 proficiency (-.302*) and L2 writing self-efficacy (-.319*), and similarly, cognitive anxiety is significantly negatively correlated with them (-.402**, -.260*), while there is no significant negative correlation between avoidance behavior and three learner factors (-.232, -.036, -.164), which demonstrates that students with higher L2 proficiency or self-efficacy tend to experience lower somatic anxiety and cognitive anxiety. Regression analysis shows that three factors together can account for 27% (R2=.270) of the variance of L2 writing anxiety, which indicates that three factors can affect L2 writing anxiety, but their effect on three dimensions of anxiety is not obvious, for three factors can account for only 13.1%, 6.7%, 17% of the variance of three dimensions (R2=.131, .067, .170). The final path model shows that there are causal relationships between three factors and L2 writing anxiety: 1) L2 proficiency and self-efficacy yield a direct effect on L2 writing anxiety (β=-.371,-.203), which indicates that low level of self-efficacy or inadequate L2 proficiency can cause high level of anxiety; 2) L1 writing competence has an indirect effect on L2 writing anxiety via the effect of L2 proficiency or L2 writing self-efficacy, which demonstrates that good L1 writing competence can improve L2 proficiency and self-efficacy(β=.349, .330) which in turn alleviate anxiety (β=-.371, -.203); 3) L2 self-efficacy has an indirect effect on L2 writing anxiety through the effect of L2 proficiency, which indicates that good self-efficacy can improve L2 proficiency (β=.367) which in turn alleviate anxiety (β=-.371).
Therefore, the relationships between L2 writing anxiety and three factors are clearer so that implications can be made to help teachers improve their strategies so as to alleviate students’ L2 writing anxiety. Firstly, students’ comprehensive L2 proficiency should be continuously enhanced and teachers are recommended to give L2 composition assignments without time limit and to adjust their ways of evaluating compositions, giving more positive remarks or suggestions, for example. Secondly, teachers need to help build students’ self-confidence in L2 writing, highlighting the merits in their L2 composition, and making them more self-confident that their L2 writing ability can no doubt be improved as long as they believe in themselves. Thirdly, it seems quite urgent for both our teachers and syllabus-makers to give enough attention to the importance of L1 writing competence in the teaching process of L2 writing.
Key words: L2 writing anxiety; writing self-efficacy; L2 proficiency; L1 writing competence; path analysis
独创性声明
本人声明所呈交的论文是我个人在导师指导下进行的研究工作及取得的研究成果。尽我所知，除了文中特别加以标注和致谢的地方外，论文中不包括其他人已经发表或撰写过的研究成果，也不包含为获得西北师范大学或其他教育机构的学位或证书而使用过的材料。与我一同工作的同志对本研究所做的任何贡献均已在论文中作了明确的说明并表示了谢意。
签名：日期：
关于论文使用授权的说明
本人完全了解西北师范大学有关保留、使用学位论文的规定，即：学校有权保留送交论文的复印件，允许论文被查阅和借阅；学校可以公布论文的全部或部分内容，可以采用影印、缩印或其他复制手段保存论文。
（保密的论文在解密后应遵守此规定）
签名：导师签名：日期：
Chapter One Introduction
1.1 Significance of the present study
Writing is a demanding activity especially for learners of a second or foreign language and yet it is a skill that they should master. Writing anxiety is a construct created by Daly and Miller (1975) which has been conceived of as “a situation and subject-specific individual difference that is concerned with a person’s general tendency to approach or avoid writing accompanied by some amount of evaluation”. Fahimeh Marefat (2006) concluded that anxiety tends to be higher with lower language proficiency. Nor Shidrah Mat Daud et al’s study (2005) found that the subjects suffered anxiety as a result of their lack of writing skill. In Pajares & Johnson’s study (1994), it was found that writing anxiety tends to be higher with lower writing self-confidence but is not predictive of writing performance. Pajares et al (1996) found that self-efficacy had a strong direct effect on apprehension, which, in turn, had a modest effect on performance. Fruitful studies of foreign language anxiety have been conducted by quite a few overseas researchers but there are not many domestic researches, especially those with regard to the affecting and associated factors and those conducted through path analysis.
The motivation for this study comes from the author's talk with some of the college students，both English majors and non-majors, who have to take many English tests or exams from middle school to college. In these tests or exams, students are usually required to write a composition to evaluate their writing skill thus to judge students’ English proficiency levels. Some people enjoy the experience of putting pen to paper, whereas panic would seize the others who consider it a difficult, uncomfortable and even dreadful experience. Whenever asked to write a composition, they would feel very nervous and have no idea of how to organize the whole composition, and are afraid of being evaluated and judged by teachers. As a teacher of these anxious students, the author wants to find out why students are so anxious, how their remaining anxiety can be channeled more productively so that it is necessary to conduct researches to make out the associated factors and the causal relationships between them so as to find ways to alleviate students’ anxiety, at the same time to provide some implications for the methodology adopted by our teachers when giving classes of writing. Thus the present study is rather useful for L2 writing teachers and is hopefully expected to throw some light to student anxieties in general and suggest ways in which teachers across
disciplines can help students reduce other kinds of anxieties not just that experienced with writing.
1.2Purpose of the present study
The present study aims to examine the relationships between L2 writing anxiety and each of the three learner factors, namely, L2 writing self-efficacy, L2 proficiency and L1 writing competence, as well as to find out whether there exist causal links between L2 writing anxiety and these three learner factors. The differences of the present study from the previous ones lie in that learner’s L1 writing competence is hypothesized and examined as an important factor associated with L2 writing anxiety, which has not been attached much attention to by the available studies. As far as the research method is concerned, the more complex regression analysis and path analysis, are adopted to reveal the direct or indirect causal relationships of the three factors with learner’s L2 writing anxiety, besides the commonly used statistical method—descriptive analysis and correlation analysis.
Chapter Two Literature review
2.1 General introduction of anxiety and second language anxiety
Anxiety is the subjective feeling of tension, apprehension, nervousness, and worry associated with an arousal of the autonomic nervous system, which often shows in the form of negative feelings of having no confidence in oneself, nervousness and worrying. It is part of normal human experience and a feeling of tension associated with a sense of threat of danger when the source of the danger is not known, and can be described as a state of uneasiness and apprehension or fear caused by the anticipation of something threatening (Scovel, 1991). To be more specific, it is the “subjective, consciously perceived feelings of apprehension and tension, accompanied by or associated with activation or arousal of the autonomic nervous system.” (Spielberger, 1983). Anxiety can be divided into three categories: trait anxiety, state anxiety, and situation-specific anxiety. Trait anxiety is conceptualized as relatively stable personality while state anxiety is seen as a response to a particular anxiety-provoking stimulus such as an important test (Spielberger, 1983). Situation-specific anxiety has been used to emphasize the multi-faceted nature of some anxieties (MacIntyre & Gardner, 1991).
Language anxiety is generally viewed to be in the sitiation-specific anxiety associated with attempts to learn an second language and communicate in it. When anxiety is limited to the language learning situation, it falls into the category of specific anxiety reactions. In brief, foreign language anxiety is a distinctive complex of self-perceptions, beliefs, feelings, and behaviors related to classroom language learning arising from the uniqueness of the language learning process (Horwitz et al., 1986). According to Horwitz et al (1986), foreign language anxiety is the threat to an individual's self-concept caused by the inherent limitation of communicating in an imperfectly mastered second language. From this perspective, foreign language anxiety is most clearly associated with listening and speaking. Many researchers both at home and abroad have carried out studies in this area. Actually, the subjective feelings and behavioral responses of the anxious foreign language learners can be evoked in any specific area of language learning, including listening, speaking, reading and writing. They often experience apprehension, worry and even dread. As a result, they may have difficulty in concentrating their minds, become forgettable and sweat.
2.2 Development of studies on writing anxiety and its measurement
The studies of writing anxiety started from the 1970s, when writing apprehension was seen as an independent construct—a distinct form of anxiety, unique to written communication. Writing apprehension or anxiety is a construct created by Daly and Miller (1975) which has been conceived of as “a situation and subject-specific individual difference that is concerned with a person’s general tendency to approach or avoid writing accompanied by some amount of evaluation”. They made the first systematic attempt to assess writing apprehension which had been identified as an important construct for understanding the factors that influence students’ development of writing skills. The instrument is a 26-item questionnaire known as the Daly-Miller Writing Apprehension Test (WAT). Later, the scale was widely used by many researchers both at home and abroad to measure subjects’ writing anxiety and has been evaluated by Bline, Meixner, Nouri, and Pearce (2001), who adopted factor analysis and comparability analysis to investigate the impact of item order on the number of factors and the underlying factor structure stability of the writing anxiety construct. The results indicate that this is a valid tool for measuring second language writing anxiety. Since then, a large number of studies have emerged, studying how writing apprehension influences and relates to a wide range of human behaviors and attitudes.
Studies on writing apprehension have mainly been conducted with first language learners, particularly native speakers of English in the United States. However, second language writers are often assumed to have more apprehension than first language writers, to monitor their own output more, to be more likely to edit prematurely, and to have more negative attitudes toward writing in their second language than first language writers (Phinney, 1991).
2.3 Writing anxiety studies on associated factors
A number of researches have aimed to explore the complicated interactions among writing apprehension and various factors, thus to investigate the impact on the final writing performance. The following is a detailed review of the previous studies in terms of different factors examined as well as the different analytical method employed, thus suggesting a difference and significance of the present study due to the difference lying not only in the factors chosen but also in the employment of both descriptive analysis and more complex causal model—path analysis.
2.3.1 Writing anxiety and writing performance and proficiency
Fahimeh Marefat (Fahimeh, 2006) conducted a study to discover the relationship between writing apprehension and student performance. Eighty-six Iranian graduate male and female students majoring in TEFL, Regional Studies and Arabic literature in Allameh Tabatabaii University participated in this study. The Daly-Miller Writing Apprehension Inventory was administered, and the learners were asked to share with the researcher their feeling about writing. It concluded that correlation between anxiety and proficiency was curvilinear.
In Nor Shidrah Mat Daud et al’s study (Nor Shidrah Mat Daud et al, 2005), it was examined in what way anxiety is related to performance using the deficit hypothesis as its guiding principle, finding that the subjects suffered anxiety as a result of their lack of writing skill, and that the better students experienced less anxiety than the weaker ones, which is in accordance with the Deficit Hypothesis, which stated that one fails to perform well due to insufficiently developed skill (MacIntyre, 1995; Sparks and Ganschow, 1991).
2.3.2 Writing anxiety and writing self-efficacy
Pajares & Johnson (1994) investigated the relationships among self-confidence and writing performance in 30 undergraduate preservice teachers over one semester. They pointed out that students’ beliefs about their own composition skills and the pre-performance measure were the only significant predictors. Writing apprehension was negatively correlated with writing self-confidence but was not predictive of writing performance, general self-confidence was correlated with writing self-confidence, expected outcomes, apprehension, and performance but was not predictive of writing performance in the regression model.
Pajares et al (1996) used path analysis to test the influence of writing self-efficacy, writing apprehension, and writing aptitude on the essay-writing performance of 181 9th grade students. A model that also included gender accounted for 53% of the variance in performance. They found that both aptitude and students’ self-efficacy beliefs had strong direct effects on performance. Aptitude also had a strong direct effect on self-efficacy, which largely mediated the indirect effect of aptitude on performance. Self-efficacy had a strong direct effect on apprehension, which, in turn, had a modest effect on performance. Girls and boys did not differ in aptitude or performance, but girls reported lower writing self-efficacy.
Native English-speaking Hispanic students of lower aptitude and performance scores lower self-efficacy, and higher apprehension. Results support the hypothesized role of self-efficacy in A. Bandura’s (1986) social cognitive theory. It’s worth noting that both descriptive analysis and path analysis are employed to assess the data collected.
Patricia et al’s study (1996) found that low-apprehensive writers reported more positive and successful experiences with categories of influence, whereas high-apprehensive writers reported more failure and negative experiences. High- apprehensive writers believed that the ability to produce good writing is an innate quality rather than a process, and they did not realize that writers sometimes need to accept less than perfect papers. Furthermore, high-apprehensive writers seemed to be teacher dependent, had a sense of isolation regarding their writing self-efficacy beliefs, and lacked involvement and commitment.
2.3.3 Writing anxiety and other factors
Cheng’s research (Cheng, 2002) investigated the relationships among students’ perceptions of their second language writing anxiety and various learner differences and among L2 writing anxiety and other forms of language anxiety. Four language anxiety scales and a background information questionnaire were used to collect data. Regression analysis results indicated that perceived L2 writing competence predicts L2 writing anxiety better than L2 writing achievement does. Correlation analysis results suggested that L2 writing anxiety is distinct from L1 writing anxiety. ANOV A results demonstrated that female students in this study reported experiencing significantly higher levels of L2 writing anxiety than male students. No significant difference in reported anxiety level was found among freshmen, sophomore, and juniors, although L2 writing anxiety appeared to increase linearly with increased time of study, these findings suggest that , for teachers, to foster students positive and realistic perception of their writing competence is as important as developing students’ writing skill. Furthermore, the results indicate a need for further research on the development of L2 writing anxiety and the relationship between L1 and L2 anxiety.
2.4 Methodologies adopted in earlier studies
As far as the reviewed researches are concerned, descriptive statistic method such as factor analysis correlation analysis and regression analysis is used primarily, as reviewed above. However, cause and effect relationships have been difficult to disentangle as such. More complex causal models with which to test
hypothesized relationships—such as path analysis—have not been constructed enough. The studies with more complex method, that is, path model and structural equation model, account only a few, such as in Pajares (Pajares et al., 1996), and three domestic studies (Ma Guanghui et al, 1999; Qin Xiaoqin et al, 2002, Wang Lifei, 2003), the latter three studies focusing on writing ability, writing motivation and native language competence rather than writing anxiety.
Chapter Three Theoretical frameworks
3.1 Tobias’ model
Tobias (1979, 1980, 1986, in MaIntyre, 1999) presents a model of the cognitive effects of anxiety arousal on language learning. According to this model, anxiety occurs in the three stages of language learning: input, processing and output. Anxiety arousal is associated with self-related cognition; thought of failure, worry over how one is performing in the situation, and self-deprecating thoughts.
At the input stage, anxiety acts like a filter preventing some information from getting into the cognitive processing system. Relaxed students will be better able to gather information because they do not experience this kind of anxiety interference. While as for anxious students, words or phrases cannot enter this processing system, so they cannot be processed or used. As for the processing stage, anxiety acts as distraction. Anxious students may not be able to learn new words, phrases, grammar, and so on. Research study on language learning strategies shows that deeper processing of language input facilitates learning. During the output stage, anxiety arousal can influence the quality of second language communication, including speaking, writing, etc. many people have had the experience of “freezing-up” in important exams. They know the correct answer, but they cannot recall it. Similar effects can be observed in speaking or writing in a second language. If a student becomes embarrassed by this gaffe, anxiety may increase and make further communication much more difficult.
3.2 Social cognitive theories with regard to the conception of learner’s self-efficacy
Bandura defines perceived self-efficacy as “people's beliefs about their capabilities to produce designated levels of performance that exercise influence over events that affect their lives. Self-efficacy beliefs determine how people feel, think, motivate themselves and behave. Such beliefs produce these diverse effects through four major processes. They include cognitive, motivational, affective and selection processes.” (Bandura, 1994).
Bandura's social cognitive theory stands in clear contrast to theories of human functioning that overemphasize the role that environmental factors play in the development of human behavior and learning. Behaviorist theories, for example, show scant interest in self-processes because theorists assume that
human functioning is caused by external stimuli. Because inner processes are viewed as transmitting rather than causing behavior, they are dismissed as a redundant factor in the cause and effect process of behavior and unworthy of psychological inquiry. For Bandura, a psychology without introspection cannot aspire to explain the complexities of human functioning. It is by looking into their own conscious mind that people make sense of their own psychological processes. To predict how human behavior is influenced by environmental outcomes, it is critical to understand how the individual cognitively processes and interprets those outcomes. More than a century ago, William James(1981) argued that "introspective observation is what we have to rely on first and foremost and always" (p. 185). For Bandura (1986), “a theory that denies that thoughts can regulate actions does not lend itself readily to the explanation of complex human behavior” (p. 15).
Similarly, social cognitive theory differs from theories of human functioning that overemphasize the influence of biological factors in human development and adaptation. Although it acknowledges the influence of evolutionary factors in human adaptation and change, it rejects the type of evolutionism that views social behavior as the product of evolved biology but fails to account for the influence that social and technological innovations that create new environmental selection pressures for adaptiveness have on biological evolution (Bussey & Bandura 1999). Instead, the theory espouses a bidirectional influence in which evolutionary pressures alter human development such that individuals are able to create increasingly complex environmental innovations that, "in turn, create new selection pressures for the evolution of specialized biological systems for functional consciousness, thought, language, and symbolic communication" (p. 683). This bidirectional influence results in the remarkable intercultural and intracultural diversity evident in our planet.
A strong sense of efficacy enhances human accomplishment and personal well-being in many ways. People with high assurance in their capabilities approach difficult tasks as challenges to be mastered rather than as threats to be avoided. Such an efficacious outlook fosters intrinsic interest and deep engrossment in activities. They set themselves challenging goals and maintain strong commitment to them. They heighten and sustain their efforts in the face of failure. They quickly recover their sense of efficacy after failures or
setbacks. They attribute failure to insufficient effort or deficient knowledge and skills which are acquirable. They approach threatening situations with assurance that they can exercise control over them. Such an efficacious outlook produces personal accomplishments, reduces stress and lowers vulnerability to depression. Most courses of action are initially organized in thought. People's beliefs in their efficacy shape the types of anticipatory scenarios they construct and rehearse. Those who have a high sense of efficacy, visualize success scenarios that provide positive guides and supports for performance. Those who doubt their self-efficacy, visualize failure scenarios and dwell on the many things that can go wrong. It is difficult to achieve much while fighting self-doubt. A major function of thought is to enable people to predict events and to develop ways to control those that affect their lives. Such skills require effective cognitive processing of information that contains many ambiguities and uncertainties. In learning predictive and regulative rules people must draw on their knowledge to construct options, to weight and integrate predictive factors, to test and revise their judgments against the immediate and distal results of their actions, and to remember which factors they had tested and how well they had worked.
3.3 Measuring of second language writing apprehension
3.3.1 Writing Apprehension Test and its second language version
Research on writing apprehension mainly adopts the second language version of the Daly-Miller Writing Apprehension Test (WAT) as the primary tool, which is known as SLWAT. This is a 26-item questionnaire, including 13 positively worded items and 13 negatively worded items, scored on a 5-point scale, which asks the subjects to agree or disagree with statements about writing like “I look forward to writing down my ideas” or “Expressing my ideas through writing seems to be a waste of time.” The questionnaire produces a single score which can be taken as an index of writing apprehension, with a low score indicating a high level of apprehension (Phinney, 1991). However, as Cheng (2004) concluded, use of the WAT may create some difficulty in teasing apart the conceptual or causal links between anxiety and self-confidence, a subject of much research and discussion in the field of L2 learning (Horwitz et al., 1986; MacIntyre, Clément, D?rnyei, & Noels, 1998; Oxford, 1999). Thus more and more researchers advocate a multidimensional approach to anxiety conceptualization and measurement.
3.3.2 Second Language Writing Anxiety Inventory
Because of some shortages of WAT and its second language version, namely, the SLWAT, many researchers have made efforts to amend it. From the multidimensional perspective, anxiety is not a unitary, unidimensional phenomenon but involves various response dimensions. Cheng (2004) developed a self-report L2 writing anxiety measure to estimate the degree to which a student feels anxious when writing in English, that is, the Second Language Writing Anxiety Inventory (SLWAI).
Cheng chose three groups of EFL students majoring in English in Taiwan participated in the present study. Only English majors were recruited due to the concern that students otherwise might not have sufficient English writing experiences to provide rich information regarding their writing anxiety experiences. Firstly the study conducted an item generation procedure, in which a 27-item preliminary version of L2 writing anxiety questionnaire is resulted. The step followed is scale development and validation.
In addition to a demographic questionnaire and the preliminary 27-item L2 writing anxiety questionnaire, 10 other measurement instruments were used as validity criteria or the newly developed scale (SLWAI) in the study. The 10 instruments were adapted from existing instruments with good reliability and validity. Statements of the original instruments were modified to suit the EFL learning context in Taiwan. To facilitate the reading and responding processes, all of the instruments were translated into Chinese. All of the measurement instruments adopted a 5-point Likert response format (in all but one case, 1=strongly disagree; 2=disagree; 3= no strong feelings either way; 4=agree; 5= strongly agree). Furthermore, the quality of a timed essay was used as an index of the participants’ English writing performance. The 10 instruments are, English use anxiety scale (EUAS), English classroom anxiety scale (ECAS), English writing apprehension/attitude test (EWAT), English writing block questionnaire (EWBQ), English writing self-efficacy scale (EWSS), personal report of communication apprehension-college (PRCA-C), test anxiety scale (TAS), math anxiety scale (MAS), English writing motivation scale (EWMS), state anxiety scale (SAS), and index of English writing performance.
First of all, an exploratory factor analysis was employed to help select items to form the subscales, with the resulting make-up of the three subscales comprised seven items on the Somatic Anxiety subscale, seven items on the Avoidance Behavior subscale, and eight items on the Cognitive Anxiety subscale. As a
result, the final version of the SLWAI consisted of 22 items, scored on a 5-point response scale ranging from 1 to 5. Seven of the items are negatively worded and require reverse scoring before being summed up to yield total scores either for the SLWAI total scale or for the three individual subscales. A higher score obtained thereupon indicates a higher level of L2 writing anxiety, or more specifically, a higher degree of physiological arousal, avoidance tendency, or fear/worry associated with L2 writing.
Then the reliability analysis and validity analysis were conducted respectively. For the former, Cronbach’s coefficient α was calculated, yielding a reliability estimate of .91 for both of the two administrations of the scale and for each of the three subscales, with α values indicating the three subscales of the SLWAI had good internal consistency. Test-retest reliability estimates of the three subscales were also found to be satisfactory. As to the latter, factor analysis was conducted to examine whether items on the SLWAI were distinguishable from beliefs about ability to write in the L2, while correlation analysis with other anxiety-related measures as well as other criterion-related measures were conducted to further look into the convergent and discriminant validity of the 22-item SLWAI, the result being an evidence of adequate criterion-related validity.
It is worth noting that there are three subscales in this Inventory which makes its multidimensional quality which is unique as to other scales existed before. The make-up of the three subscales comprises seven items on Somatic Anxiety subscale which is defined mainly by items relating to increased physiological arousal (Items 2,6,8,11,13,15,19), seven items on the Avoidance Behavior subscale which is comprised of items indicative of avoidance behavior ( Items 4,5,10,12,16,18,22) and eight items on the Cognitive Anxiety subscale which is a subjective component that deal with perception of arousal, especially worry or fear of negative evaluation (Items 1,3,7,9,14,17,20,21). It adopts a 5-point Likert response format (1= strongly disagree; 2= disagree; 3= neither agree nor disagree; 4= agree; 5= strongly agree). Seven of them (1, 4, 7, 17, 18, 21, 22) are negatively worded and required reverse scoring before being summed up to the total scores. A higher score obtained indicated a higher level of L2 writing anxiety, or more specifically, a higher degree of physiological arousal, avoidance tendency, or fear associated with L2 writing anxiety. For each subject, an anxiety score is derived from summing his or her rating of the twenty-two items. In the study, Y. S. Cheng demonstrated that the total scale and the subscales of the
SLWAI had good internal consistency reliability (ɑ=.91), respectable test-retest reliability(r= .85) and adequate convergent and discriminant validity, and satisfactory criterion- related validity. According to Cheng, SLWAI was distinct from L2 investigating relationships between L2 writing anxiety and self-confidence or self-efficacy.
The merit of Cheng’s study lies in developing a three-dimensional self-report measure of second language writing anxiety that conforms to most anxiety researchers’ recognition of anxiety as a complex phenomenon as well as accumulation evidence on the superiority of a multidimensional approach to anxiety analysis and research. Given the findings of this study, the SLWAI appears to hold the potential of research and diagnostic utility. The multidimensional nature of the SLWAI makes it possible to investigate the relationships between different facets of L2 writing anxiety and aspects of writing performance and practices, using the three subscales. From a theoretical and methodological standpoint, this approach seems to be more promising than the use of a unidimensional measure of anxiety in advancing our knowledge of the antecedents, dynamics, and consequences of L2 writing anxiety, which might be masked otherwise. From a diagnostic perspective, use of the multidimensional version of the SLWAI may help to identify the specific facets, if any, of L2 writing anxiety that hinder writing performance or steer learners away from the road to success in L2 writing. By introducing a multidimensional measure, the study constitutes a step forward in the assessment of L2 writing anxiety and opens up some interesting avenues for future investigation.
Chapter Four Methodology
4.1 Research questions
The present study is to examine the relationships between L2 writing anxiety and each of the three learner factors, namely, L2 writing self-efficacy, L2 proficiency and L1 writing competence, as well as to find the causal links between L2 writing anxiety and these three factors. My research questions are as followed:
1) What is the writing anxiety like among L2 learners and what its three sub-types like—Somatic anxiety, Avoidance Behavior and Cognitive Anxiety, considered respectively?
2) Are there correlations between L2 writing anxiety including its three sub-types and three learner factors？
3) Are there causal relationships between L2 writing anxiety and three learner factors?
4.2 Subjects
Subjects in the present study are 60 EFL students from 3 normal classes majoring in English at Zhixing College of Northwest Normal University in Lanzhou, Gansu Province. Only English majors are chosen in account of the concern that students otherwise might not have sufficient English writing experiences to provide rich information regarding their writing anxiety experiences. Of the 60 subjects, 34 students are juniors, and the other 26 students are seniors who have taken part in the TEM 4 in 2007 and 2006 respectively.
4.3 Instruments
Subjects will be administered a battery of instruments, including Second Language Writing Anxiety Inventory (SLWAI), a scale of learner’s L2 writing self-efficacy and an L1 writing test.
4.3.1 Second Language Writing Anxiety Inventory
The Second Language Writing Anxiety Inventory (SLWAI) made by Cheng (2004) is used to measure the degree to which a student feels anxious when writing in English. This SLWAI contains twenty-two items falling into three subscales, adopting a 5-point Likert response format (I=strongly disagree; 2=disagree; 3=neither agree nor disagree; 4=agree; 5=strongly agree). Seven of them (1，4, 7, 17, 18, 21, 22) are negatively worded and required reverse scoring before being summed up to the total scores.
焦虑症的病因 焦虑是人们对情境中的一些特殊刺激而产生的正常心理反应，只是每个人经历的时间长短不一或程度不同。只有当焦虑原因不存在或不明显，焦虑症状很突出而其他症状不突出，焦虑的持续时间及程度均超过一定的范围，以致影响正常的生活、学习、工作时，才可以认为患了焦虑，又称为焦虑性神经症。焦虑症是什么原因引起的？ 焦虑症这种心理疾病在当今社会越来越普遍，许多现代人都患有焦虑，致病的原因各不相同，所患的焦虑症也是各种各样。很多人由于对自己的症状不了解而未能对自身的症状进行正确的诊断，从而耽误了治疗，最终使自己终生都活在了焦虑症的阴影之中。那么要想对焦虑症进行及时有效的治疗，就要对焦虑的原因进行一定的了解，下面南宁江岭医院失眠科专家为大家具体介绍焦虑的原因。 (1)、遗传因素： 多年来的研究证明，焦虑症倾向作为一种人格特征，至少有一部分是由遗传决定的;引起焦虑症直接原因是社会或环境因素，但其潜在的原因是遗传;惊恐障碍与广泛性焦虑具有不同的遗传病因学背景。(2)、生化及内分泌因素： 焦虑症患者血中乳酸盐含量增高，而血中乳酸盐含量可能与焦虑发作有关，但其机制尚未完全清楚。同时焦虑症患者肾上腺素能系统、多巴胺、5-HT及R氨基丁酸4种神经递质系统在脑的不同部位存在着
不同水平相互作用，这种复杂的细胞间信号的相互作用，借助于第二信使在亚细胞水平加以整合在脑和身体的各部位引起不同的变化，形成广泛性焦虑的各种临床表现在对有关受体研究中也发现惊恐发作出现心悸、颤抖、多汗等症状均为肾上腺素受体大量兴奋的征象，而肾上腺素能受体阻滞剂如心得安有减轻惊恐发作与焦虑的作用。(3)、躯体疾病或者生物功能障碍：病人的焦虑症状可以由躯体因素而引发。 (4)、认知过程：或者是思维，在焦虑症状的形成中起着极其重要的作用。研究发现，病人比一般人更倾向于把模棱两可的、甚至是良性的事件解释成危机的先兆，更倾向于认为坏事情会落到他们头上。通过上文对于焦虑的原因的相关介绍，相信广大读者对焦虑的原因这一问题已经有了一定的了解，在了解了焦虑的原因之后，就要和自身的病症进行对比，从而找出自己的焦虑的原因，之后再针对病因对其进行有效地治疗，只有这样才能保证对自身焦虑症的治疗快速而有效。 专家指出：焦虑症是一种心理疾病，它在现在社会中越来越流行，日常我们对于紧急时间的焦虑情绪的反应并不属于，只有当人们的焦虑情绪超过了一定的界限与持续时间，才会被判断为焦虑症这种心理疾病，希望广大读者能够引起注意。那么焦虑症成因都有哪些？下面就为您具体介绍。 １.焦虑症成因之环境因素：外界环境的剧烈变化或未知的充满风险
浅析当前社会心理与社会问题 摘要：社会问题与人类社会的发展相伴相生，当前，随着我国经济社会的持续快速发展，人民生活水平得到较大改善与提高，但同时因发展不均衡、地域差异、收入分配差异、文化差异等因素导致的社会规范、社会公平、公共安全等社会问题也相继出现，且日益突出，并由此产生了焦躁浮躁、公平正义感缺失、仇官仇富等相应的社会心态，在一定程度上影响了社会和谐稳定。本文通过对当前社会心态与社会问题的分析研究，寻求培养健康社会心态的方法和途径。 主题词：社会心理；社会问题；心态 一、当前社会问题概述 当前我国社会问题主要内容包括：改革开放以来，当代中国发生巨大变化，生产力提高，经济发展，综合国力增强，文化繁荣，人民生活水平得到较大改善与提高，中国人民的建设事业取得空前的成就。但是，我国现阶段的社会发展不均衡，人口众多，地域辽阔，东西南北、城市农村的经济、文化差异较大，在社会改革转型过程中，社会现象较复杂，我们在取得巨大成就的同时，也面临挑战与问题。 从社会学的角度看，我们所碰到的社会问题，是由于社
会关系或社会环境失调，使社会全体或部分成员的共同生活受到不良影响，社会进步发生障碍的社会现象。在人类历史的发展中，古代社会也有社会问题，当然，许多内容与今天不一样。现在有当代的社会问题，未来，人类社会同样会有社会问题，只不过许多内容也会与今天不一样。我们今天面临的社会问题，有的是历史遗留下来的，有的是在社会前进中新发生的，这些问题可归纳成五类：即社会规范问题；社会平等问题；社会组织问题；公共安全问题；人口与生态环境问题。 二、相对应的社会心态 “社会心态”被历史性地写入“十二五”规划。党和政府把“弘扬科学精神，加强人文关怀，注重心理疏导，培育奋发进取、理性平和、开放包容的社会心态”作为一项重要工作，纳入未来五年经济、社会发展的大政方针中。 当前，我国社会心态的主流是好的，人们的精神风貌、价值观积极向上，人心普遍思富、思安、思稳、思和。但我们必须清楚地看到，在经济体制深刻变革、社会结构深刻变动、利益格局深刻调整、思想观念深刻变化的大背景下，很多人因工作、学习、生活、前程、财富，往往表现出一种焦虑不安、浮躁不定，紧张不已的情绪，这种情绪在社会生活中表现出急功近利、盲目攀比、狭隘极端、迷茫失落等消极行为，在一定程度上影响了社会和谐稳定。因此，我们应准
女孩焦虑的因素分析 在平常人想来，小孩子即使有什么不痛快，哭一场就万事大吉了。殊不知，如今巨大的社会压力已经传导到小孩子身上，让他们在不知不觉中陷入焦虑的怪圈。而一些小女孩由于天生敏感、内向，焦虑问题表现得尤为突出。其中，学习和朋友这两个问题最易让小女孩感到焦虑。 “也不知道怎么了，这孩子成绩原来一直很好，心理素质也不错。可最近一段时间，一到考试前就生病，老喊肚子疼，要上厕所。”对于抱着此类问题前来求助的家长，心理咨询师提醒：“最近几年，有这类问题的孩子越来越多。这是儿童焦虑的典型表现。学习焦虑已经影响到很多孩子的日常生活。” 在那些平时成绩很好的或是把成绩看得很重的孩子身上，这种焦虑表现得尤为突出，女孩通常会比男孩更加早慧，因此也更容易出现问题。她们上课时害怕老师提问，总担心考试失败，有的对考试感到恐惧，甚至一进考场就发晕。考试前有些焦虑是正常的，但如果这种情况持续两三个月仍不能缓解，就是一种病态了。 另外，女孩对人际关系的焦虑往往比男孩严重得多。由于她们天生多愁善感，自尊心又容易受到伤害，在人际关系上就容易表现出过分紧张与不安，害怕生人或不敢与人交往。这一问题若长期得不到解决，终将成为孩子成长的绊脚石。 当然，由于孩子还没有完全定性，想要摆脱焦虑的困扰也是完全可能的，最主要的还是家长要摆正心态。首先要创造一个良好的家庭氛围，用全部的情感来呵护孩子。鼓励孩子和不同的人打交道，遇到问题时，告诉孩子解决的方法并让她自己去解决，但同时应不断关注其进程。 其次，对孩子的能力要有一个准确的预期，要不断告诉孩子“只要尽自己最大努力就好”，更多地关注其学习的过程，而不是一次两次的成绩。最后，如果孩子真的已经开始焦虑，应尽量帮她们放松，做一些呼吸训练，如果还是不能缓解焦虑，一定要及时征求专科医生的意见。
大学生焦虑状况及相关因素调查分析 调研结果表明：女大学生的焦虑发生率高于男生；二、三年级学生的焦虑发生率较高于其他年级；各种外界因素不同程度不同比例地刺激学生发生焦虑，焦虑情绪与性别、年级、生活经历等因素密切相关。建议加强心理健康教育，家庭多给予子女鼓励，注重提高大学生自身素质。 标签：大学生；焦虑状况；相关因素；调查研究 一、引言 焦虑是一种较为常见的负性情绪状态，对个体的心理调适具有阻碍作用[1]。焦虑症曾被称为心脏神经官能症、激惹心脏、神经循环衰竭、血管运动性神经症、自主神经功能紊乱等各种名称。经外部研究数据的表明人们患焦虑症的机率为1.48‰，女性多于男性，约2：1[2]。美国的资料显示，广泛性焦虑症患病率男性为2%，女性为4.3%。惊恐发作的患病率男性为1.3%，女性为3.2%，广泛性焦虑症大多起病于20-40岁，而惊恐发作多发生于青春后期或成年早期[3]。焦虑症的具后在很大程度上与个体素质有关，如处理得当，大多数患者能在半年内好转。一般来说，病程短、症状较轻、病前社会适应能力完好、病前个性缺陷不明显者预后较好，反之预后不佳。也有人认为，有晕厥、激越、现实解体、癔症样表现及自杀观念者，常提示预后不佳。大学生作为一个具有较高智力和追求的社会群体，在新的教育体制和就业形势下，比普通群体面临更的多的机遇和挑战也承受更大的心理压力和冲突，他们是更易于遭受侵袭的群体。 二、对象与方法 1、研究对象 采用分层整群随机抽样方法，选取随机抽取广州在校大学生作为研究对象进行问卷调查。一共发放了500份调查文件，收回有效问卷491份，有效问卷回收率为99.75%。其中男生252人，女生239人，大一145人，大二143人，大三101人，大四91人。 2、研究方法 （1）研究工具。焦虑自评量表（Self-Rating Anxiety Scale SAS）由华裔教授Zung编制（1971），SAS采用4级评分，主要评定症状出现的频度，其标准为：“1”表示没有或很少时间有；“2”表示有时有；“3”表示大部分时间有；“4”表示绝大部分或全部时间都有。共20个条目，得分50—59分为轻度焦虑，60—69分为中度焦虑，70分以上为重度焦虑[4]。 （2）研究程序。采用分层整群随机抽样，以宿舍为单位抽取被试，当场发放问卷当场收回，数据统计为excel软件。
浅析当代大学生的焦虑心理问题 文章摘要：当代社会，大学生不同程度的都存在着一定的心理健康问题，其中， 以焦虑心理最为突出。焦虑心理作为一种消极情绪，往往会导致大学生一系列的 身心问题和行为问题，并影响大学生的正常社会发展。本文通过对一系列大学生 焦虑现象的分析，揭示造成当代大学生焦虑心理的原因，并从当代大学生产生焦 虑心理的根源出发，提出合理有效的应对策略。 关键词：当代大学生焦虑心理原因分析应对策略 一、大学生焦虑心理的表现及影响 （一）焦虑心理的表现 当下社会，是一个大转型的社会，是政治、经济、文化面临巨大改革，巨大 进步的社会。而进步是需要付出一定代价的，表现在现实生活中就是各行业各个 而大学生是最敏锐的感受到层次的人都需要适应转型时期的各种紧张性刺激。 【1】 这种时代信息的社会群体，正是由于这样的不确定性，使得当代大学生面临较于 常人更大的心理压力，更易产生焦虑心理。大学生焦虑心理主要体现在学习、工 作以及恋爱生活中出现紧张、厌烦、恐惧、焦躁等心理现象。 （二）焦虑心理的影响 焦虑是个体预料将会有某种不良后果产生或模糊的威胁、危险出现而自觉难 以应付时，由紧张、焦虑、烦恼、恐惧、焦急等感受交织而成的复杂情绪状态。 适度的焦虑在一般生活场景中具有积极意义，而持续严重的焦虑会导致机体【2】 免疫机能下降，内分泌调节紊乱，从而损害身心健康。相关调查结果显示，当代 大学生心理情绪状况不容乐观，特别是焦虑心理问题，对于当代大学生的消极影 响是巨大的。现实迫切的要求我们了解大学生心理现状和分析焦虑心理产生的原 因来及时有效地缓解当代大学生的焦虑心理，促进当代大学生身心健康发展。二、大学生焦虑心理产生的原因 遗传因素、成熟水平、身体健康状况和个体人格特质等身心方面的因素对当 代学生焦虑心里的影响是不容忽视的，而家庭、学校以及其他的外在社会因素对 焦虑心理的影响也是巨大的，值得我们关注！ （一）社会大环境影响
引起焦虑的五种因素 焦虑是一种困扰着各个年龄段的人精神性疾病，患者对待事情经常会表现出忧愁思虑，忧愁担心的状态。通常表现为一种缺乏明显客观原因的内心不安或无根据的恐惧，是人们遇到某些事情如挑战、困难或危险时出现的一种正常的情绪反应。焦虑通常情况下与精神打击以及即将来临的、可能造成的威胁或危险相联系，主观表现出感到紧张、不愉快，甚至痛苦以至于难以自制，严重时会伴有植物性神经系统功能的变化或失调。焦虑症患者在事情解决的情况下还会考虑担忧这些事情，比如说害怕以后还会出现这种情况等等。关于这个问题其实大多数人关心的是其成因和解决办法，其成因又是解决办法的前提，所以这就需要我们从各个角度去寻找焦虑症成因。只有找到焦虑症的成因，我们才能有针对性的进行预防和治疗。 据了解，引起焦虑的因素有很多，不同的人不同的流派都有不同的观点。据我所知焦虑症包括几种具体形式其中主要有泛虑症、恐惧症和强迫症。而其成因我认为可以概括为以下五点： 环境因素:剧烈变化或未知的充满风险的新环境对人的影响很大，此时个人的惯常行为方式无法适应这一特殊情景，易使人感到焦虑。 意外刺激：如失去挚爱或遭受失败等。意外的天灾人祸会引起紧张、焦虑、失落感、绝望感，认为自己一切都完了。 精神因素：轻微的挫折和不满等精神因素可为诱发因素。心理分析学派认为，焦虑症是由于过渡的内心冲突对自我威胁的结果。基于“学习理论”的学者认为焦虑是一种习惯性行为，由于致焦虑刺激和
中性刺激间的条件性联系使条件刺激泛化，形成广泛的焦虑。还有学者提出，遗传素质是本病的重要心理和生理基础，一旦产生较强的焦虑反应，通过环境的强化或自我强化，形成焦虑症。 遗传因素显示遗传在焦虑症的发生中起重要作用，其血缘亲属中同病率为15%，远高于正常居民；双卵双生子的同病率为2.5%，而单卵双生子为50%。有人认为焦虑症是环境因素通过易感素质共同作用的结果，易感素质是由遗传决定的。 性格认知因素：有的人自卑、自信心不足，胆小怕事，谨小慎微，对轻微挫折或身体不适容易紧张，焦虑或情绪波动。有的人在工作、生活健康方面均追求完美化。稍不如意，就十分遗憾，心烦意乱，长吁短叹，老担心出问题，惶惶不可终日。 以上五种因素都很重要而我个人认为其中环境因素最为重要，我们都知道环境对一个人的影响是潜移默化和深远持久的，我们每个人从出生开始就处在一个个不同的环境中，它对我们每个人的影响都是巨大的，所以我个人认为在以上五个因素中环境因素最为重要。 下面我以大学生这个群体为例，主要简述一下影响大学生焦虑情绪产生的环境因素：我们知道如今社会高速发展"生活节奏的加快以及学习和工作的压力加大"使人们易产生各种心理问题，尤其对于心理发展尚未完全成熟"社会经历较少的大学生来说"更易出现各种心 理障碍，他们不良情绪的产生既有个体自身内在环境因素的影响"也有外界环境因素的影响。其主要表现在生理和心理两个方面。当然我这里说的都是关于生理和心理环境的方面。
大学生焦虑影响因素及应对策略 段琳 摘要：近年来，随着教育制度的改革、经济的发展，大学生的教育方式得到完善，但部 分学生的适应能力减弱，大学生焦虑成为了值得社会关注的问题，影响因素需要探究，以找 出合适的应对策略，针对不同的大学生焦虑状况给与适当的帮助。 关键词：大学生焦虑；焦虑影响因素；焦虑应对策略 焦虑是变态情绪之一，又称心理异常。一般认为焦虑是指个体由于预期不能达到目标或者不能克服障碍的威胁，使得其自尊心与自信心受挫，或使失败感和内疚感增加而形成的紧张不安、带有恐惧感的情绪状态。 一、大学生焦虑影响因素 焦虑和焦虑症是大学生中常见的心理问题。由于近年来，教育体制的改革，上学费用的增高，学业竞争力增大，人际关系复杂，就业困难等给大学生心理上带来的巨大冲击和压力，大学生已经作为焦虑症表现者的主要群体而备受社会关注。在籍大学生中，不同专业和年级的大学生在经济、学习、就业、人际交往等影响因素上存在显著性差异。其中主要因素有以下几个方面。 (一)家庭经济困境与生活环境 一方面目前有3.1%的学生表示“家庭困难，交不起学费”是其目前焦虑的最大原因。进入大学以后，学费、生活费对于生活在贫困地区和贫困家庭中的学生无疑是一笔高昂的费用，沉重的经济负担给学生带来的心理压力是不容忽视的。沉重的心理压力会导致心情抑郁、内心焦虑。为了缓解经济压力，部分学生会选择勤工俭学，但勤工俭学会使许多学生产生强烈的自卑感，害怕同学知道，而且勤工俭学会占用学生很多时间，耽误学业。安心的学习和打工之间的矛盾是贫困学生焦虑情绪的主要来源。大学生之中也不乏有很多攀比现象，而有些贫困的学生为了维护自己的自尊心便向家里索要，但看到自己父母辛勤操劳又内心不安，一系列的矛盾都会使学生产生焦虑心理。另一方面由于学生在进入大学校园前父母对自己总是无微不至的照顾，事事考虑周到，而大学生需要培养独立自主的生活意识，遇事需要自己独立思考与解决，但部分学生适应能力差，远离父母后，生活、学习难以协调，则会导致学生产生焦虑心理。 (二)人生目标及价值观 大学生的学习方式和学习时间较自由，初入大学的学生一时无法适应，以前大部分事不需要自己规划，只需要按部就班，而现在学习很自由，没有人会干预，会使部分大学生一时迷失了方向，生活和学习目标变的不明确。当意识到应该对自己的未来进行规划时，问题又会连续出现，应该确立怎样的目标、确立目标后如何进行实践和发展、发展过程中遇到的问题应该怎么合理解决，一系列的认识与实践之间的差距会导致大学生内心深层焦虑。上大学以前，由于生活圈子的狭窄，对社会的理解和涉及面受限，学生没有时间思考价值观的问题，所以对于价值观的看法也很狭隘。而进入大学后，所有事情都要自己妥善处理，随着时间的推移，学生对于价值观的看法也发生了改变，对于自己生活的世界，最重要的东西是什么，
焦虑症的心理治疗和案例解析 焦虑症的心理治疗和案例解析。 关键词：焦虑、恐惧症、失眠、疑病症、惊恐发作。 作者于飞，心理咨询师、催眠治疗师、心理督导师，综合正心疗法创立者，擅长焦虑症、强迫症、社交恐惧症的疗愈。 一、综合论述 01、焦虑情绪的解析 焦虑情绪是指向未来，是担心有不好的事情会发生。 担心的对象多种多样，比如犯错、失败、被质疑、被否定、被贬低、被嘲笑、被冷落、被疏远、生病、意外、死亡...... 以无意识的、快速的、自动化的、习惯性的、模式化的思维逻辑推理、画面想象的形式存在，引发焦虑情绪体验。 焦虑情绪同时也在推动着上述思维形式。 思维形式和情绪感受交互影响，相互促进、恶性循环。02、焦虑症状的解析 焦虑反映在思维上：担心有不好的事情会发生。 焦虑反映在情绪上：紧张、不安。 焦虑反映在身体上：胸闷、呼吸短促、肩颈僵硬、头晕脑胀、头沉、心跳加快、呼吸困难、肠胃不适、失眠多梦......
焦虑反映在表现上：坐立不安、瞻前顾后、犹豫不决…… 焦虑反映在人际上：敏感、多疑，猜忌、回避...... 思维形式推动着焦虑情绪，焦虑情绪引发身体不适和外在的不良症状表现，影响着自己对自己的感觉和看法，以及他人对自己的看法，自己和他人对自己的看法又影响着情绪变化...... 思维形式和内容、情绪感受、身体反应、外在表现、外界人际关系评价等交互影响，相互促进、恶性循环......以上任何一个方面，都可以成为新的诱发因素，引发一个新的恶性循环。 举例：自己担心某人会怀疑、否定自己，从而感到情绪紧张，从而身体僵硬、胸闷、呼吸短促、表情不自然，感到不舒服，他人看到自己紧张不自然，感觉自己心里有鬼、不真诚...... 03、常见的焦虑形式 广泛性焦虑：经常或持续的无明确对象和固定内容的提心吊胆及紧张不安，肌肉紧张，难以忍受而又无法摆脱。是习惯性的对事物的消极预期和灾难化联想，以及习惯性的焦虑情绪和回避做法。是一种谨小慎微、严防意外发生的身、心状态。 躯体症状：焦虑情绪引起的身体不适感，如胸闷气短、肩颈僵硬、头晕脑胀、头沉、心跳加快、呼吸困难、肠胃不适......很多当事人一开始的时候会以为是躯体疾病，跑到医院检查又发现不了什么实质性的问题，医生往往会给一个轻微病症的诊断，有的医生会建议去看心理科，后来才知道是焦虑的躯体症状。
焦虑症（焦虑障碍） 一：概念：焦虑是一种不愉快的、痛苦的情绪状态，同时伴有躯体方面的不舒服体验。焦虑症是一种以焦虑情绪为主要表现的神经症，是以广泛性焦虑障碍（慢性焦虑障碍）和惊恐障碍（急性焦虑障碍）为主要临床表现，常伴有头晕，胸闷，心悸，呼吸困难，口干，尿频，尿急，出汗，震颤和运动性不安等。 其紧张程度与现实情况不相符。（即无相应的脑或躯体器质性疾病的基础.........）(1)急性焦虑障碍：主要表现为惊恐样发作，多在夜间睡梦中发生，有濒死的感觉。患者心脏剧烈地跳动，胸口憋闷，喉头有堵塞感和呼吸困难，还会诱发四肢麻木、口周发麻、面色苍白、腹部坠胀等。一般急性焦虑发作持续几分钟或数小时，当发作过后或适当治疗后，症状可以缓解或消失。 (2)慢性焦虑障碍：基本特征为泛化且持续的焦虑，不局限于特定的外部环境。病程多在6个月以上。一般慢性焦虑的典型表现为五大症状，即心慌、疲惫、神经质、气急和胸痛。此外还有紧张、呼吸急促、出冷汗、晕厥、嗳气、恶心、口干、腹胀、便秘、尿频急等。 二.焦虑症的症状有哪些?主要内容总结如下： 1、多种躯体不适表现：心悸、心慌、胸闷、气短、心前区不适或疼痛，心跳和呼吸次数加快，全身疲乏感，生活和工作能力下降，简单的日常家务工作变得困难不堪，无法胜任，加重患者的担忧和焦虑。还有失眠、早醒、梦魇等睡眠障碍，而且颇为严重和顽固。此外，还可有消化功能紊乱症等。 绝大多数轻度焦虑症病人还有手抖、手指震颤或麻木感、阵发性潮红或冷感，月经不调、停经、性欲减退、尿意频急、头昏、眩晕、恐惧、晕厥发作等。 2、病理性焦虑情绪：持续性或发作性出现莫名其妙的恐惧、害怕、紧张和不安。有一种期待性的危险感，感到某种灾难降临，甚至有死亡的感受。 多数患者还同时伴有忧郁症状，对目前、未来生活缺乏信心和乐趣。有时情绪激动，失去平衡，经常无故地发怒，与家人争吵，对什么事情都看不惯，不满意。轻度焦虑症有认识方面的障碍，对周围环境不能清晰地感知和认识，思维变得简单和模糊，整天专注于自己的健康状态，担心疾病再度发作。 3、精神运动性不安：坐立不安、心神不定、搓手顿足、踱来走去、小动作增多、注意力无法集中、自己也不知道为什么如此惶恐不安。 三：为什么会得焦虑症呢？ 目前病因尚不明确。研究表明，焦虑症与遗传因素、个性特点、不良事件、应激因素、躯体疾病、认知等均有关系。 机体的素质（遗传，家庭素质） 环境因素 精神因素，如长期面临威胁或处于不利环境的人，易焦虑。 个性特征：内向、自卑、羞怯、敏感、多疑、孤独、怯懦 不良认知导致焦虑：1.读心术：即使没有他人在想什么的充分证据，你也以为自己知道人们在想什么。例如，“他认为我是个失败者”。 2.预测未来：你对未来进行预测——事情会变得更糟或者前面有危险。例如，“我会考不过这次考试”，或者“我不会得到这份工作”。 3.灾难化：你相信已经发生的或者即将发生的事情是如此的糟糕和难以忍受，以至于你不能够承受它。例如，“如果我失败了，那将太可怕了”。 4.贴标签：你给自己或他人以整体的负性评价。例如，“我是不受欢迎的”，或者“他是个极讨厌的人”。
篇一：云南师范大学呈贡校区学生社会焦虑调查报告李新朝 云南师范大学呈贡校区学生社会焦虑调查报告教育科学与管理学院2013级教育学专业一、调查背景 随着经济社会发展和竞争加剧，社会焦虑不再是“弱势群体”的 专利，而渐成一种普遍心态。在许多人看来，身边往往危机四伏，总有原因让人感到不安。通过本次问卷调查，我们希望能帮人们分析造成这种现象的一些原因。 二、摘要 大学生普遍存在社会焦虑现象，且较严重。三、关键词社会焦虑、大学生四、调查对象 云南师范大学呈贡校区2013级教育学专业100名本科生，其中男生18人，女生62人。五、调查方法 本次研究主要采用问卷调查的方法，共发放了100份调查问卷，回收问卷78份，回收率为78%，有效问卷78份，有效率为100%。六、研究工具 本次调查问卷由两部份组成：第一部分为大学生的基本情况；第二部分为社会焦虑量表。问卷由20道选择题组成，得分越高焦虑程度越高。七、数据分析与统计 问卷调查结果用spss17.0中文版进行分析。八、研究结果 （一）大学生社会焦虑总体情况 表2焦虑得分平均分 1、由表1可知，焦虑得分在40-49和50-59这两个阶段的人数最多，占总人数的75.7%。 2、由表2可知，焦虑得分平均分为51.8205。 3、分析：大学生普遍存在社会焦虑现象，且较严重。 （二）大学生社会焦虑情况分析 表3性别和焦虑得分相关分析 表7独生子女和焦虑得分相关分析 表8性别和独生子女卡方检验分析： 1、由表3、表4、表6可知性别、年级、生源地和焦虑得分的皮尔逊相关系数均大于0.05，所以性别、年级、生源地和大学生的社会焦虑现象并无明显的关系。 2、由表5可知，是否担任学生干部和焦虑得分的皮尔逊相关系数小于0.05，可见是学生是否担任学生干部和其社会焦虑程度存在一定的关系。 九、结论 社会焦虑特属于某些社会或时代，它是一种广泛的心神不安和精神不定，是 一种弥漫于社会不同阶层的焦虑，它不会轻易消退，不容易通过心理的调适而化解，人们所焦虑的对象或有不同，但在其性质和内容上又存在着一些共性。这种社会性的焦虑往往直接由物质的原因而起，也突出地表现于物质生活，表现于担心自己及家庭物质生活的现状和前景。如果我们对自己的社会焦虑情况不了解和解决，它将会影响到我们正常的生活。对于这一现象的解决我认为我们的政府应：1、努力实现充分就业。就业是民生之本，充分就业应当是任何社会优先考虑的目标。政府应创造条件，让每一位社会劳动成员都能获得一份有稳定报酬的职
龙源期刊网 https://www.doczj.com/doc/2e13433549.html, 大学生焦虑心理的影响因素分析 作者：祝纳杰薛兰 来源：《北京教育·高教版》2008年第05期 焦虑是个体预料将会有某种不良后果产生或模糊的威胁、危险出现而自觉难以应付时，由紧张、忧虑、烦恼、恐惧、焦急等感受交织而成的复杂的情绪状态。当前，大学生出现的种种心理问题常以焦虑、抑郁等形式反映出来。调查显示，有16.51%的大学生存在中度以上的焦虑、抑郁等心理问题，已严重影响学生的全面发展。本文主要探析造成大学生产生焦虑心理的家庭、学校以及其他社会因素。 一、社会环境因素的影响 一是在市场经济冲击下，一股经商热潮涌入学校。不容否认，经商使大学生在经济上、人格上向“自立”迈进了一大步，也使其观念有了新的发展和进步。然而，这股“商风”也使得一些大学生走入歧途，高消费、攀比风、弃学经商等并不罕见，为钱而以身试法者亦有人在。也有一部分学生没有能处理好经商、打工等活动与学习之间的关系，考试前临时抱佛脚，从而引发考试焦虑的发生。二是现代社会所需的人才已经不仅仅是一个“大学生”而已，除了对专业素养要求之外，英语水平、计算机应用水平、人际交往能力等都是衡量人才的重要砝码。大学生为了能在社会上有充分的竞争力，纷纷自觉加强了对学习的要求。不少学生一下很难适应如此高强度的要求，出现了应激方面的问题，如紧张、焦虑、不安和疲劳。三是大众传媒对个体的社会化和群体心理的影响作用非常大，特别是其中的一些不健康的内容或倾向，对大学生产生了直接或间接的消极影响。如过多的色情、凶杀内容宣传，对某些所谓“时尚”的推波助澜，对某些黑色、颓废思想的不正确宣传等，都会使那些自控力差、批判力不强的大学生盲从并趋之若鹜。而当他们在某些方面不能获得满足，就会出现焦虑不安的情绪。同时，舆论导向过多、过频的转向，甚至前后矛盾，则更使得某些大学生不知所措，增加了焦虑心理。 二、校园环境因素的影响 一是生活空间的拥挤。有学者的调查报告指出：在同样大的房间内，三人居住比两人居住有更多的不满，女生比男生的不满倾向更明显。二是噪音的干扰。在噪音条件下，人们易出现烦躁不安、疲劳、迟钝，甚至严重的焦虑状态。在高校周边环境区内，交通、商店、饭店、商贩等噪音源及学校扩展基建的工业噪音等，对大学生的情绪影响不小。三是校园精神文明建设
术前焦虑的相关因素与干预措施 术前焦虑越来越成为影响患者身心健康的危险因素。为引起人们的高度重视，本文归纳总结了近年来学者们对术前焦虑的相关因素与干预措施的研究，以期医护和卫生保健人员及时进行入院、术前、出院前的全面预防，最大限度的降低术前焦虑的发生率。 标签：术前焦虑；相关因素；预防 手术对患者来讲是一种应激源。这种应激引起的应激反应有积极情绪和消极情绪之分。本文讨论的是因手术而引起的焦虑。即个体所体验到的焦虑其原因不是来自于外界的危险事物，而是由于意识到因自己的本能冲动有可能导致某种危险所产生的。可见，这种焦虑的来源是潜意识的本能［1］。因此术前焦虑是普遍存在的，而且术前焦虑对人体有危害。不少学者进行了探讨及干预措施的研究，等者给予归纳综合，以期最大限度的降低术前焦虑的发生率。 1术前焦虑的临床表现及危害 11手术所致焦虑因人而异大多数患者对手术有顾虑和害怕，特别是越临 近手术日期，患者的心理负担越重，焦虑和恐惧愈明显，甚至坐卧不安，食不甘味，夜不能寐。焦虑主要表现为睡眠障碍，躯体疼痛，乏力，手足刺痛，多汗，胃痛，消化不良，头晕等［2］。 12手术创伤是一种威胁性刺激，对个体来说，无论在心理和生理上都会产生更强烈的反应。已有的神经电生理学证据验证了这一负性偏向［3］。 2术前焦虑的相关因素 21生理因素手术创伤与焦虑情绪均可作为应激源引起患者的应激反应， 并与手术存在协同增加患者的应激水平使患者的神经内分泌激素水平升高幅度更大。从而影响机体的免疫功能及疾病的预后［4］。 22心理因素患者术前存在复杂的心理问题，主要是对手术的恐惧、焦虑， 担心手术的效果，疾病的性质，要不要输血，手术费用，术后是否疼痛以及身体形象的改变等。近代的研究证明，中枢神经结构在情绪发生中起着极大的作用，特别是丘脑，下丘脑，边缘系统，网状结构的机能，任何因素影响到这些结构均会引起患者情绪变化，甚至出现强迫症［5］。 23家庭及社会因素家庭支持被认为是一个重要因素，它包括家人的支持，
摘自《常用心理评估量表手册 戴晓阳 状态—特质焦虑问卷（S T A I） 【概述】 状态—特质焦虑问卷 （state-trait anxiety inventory, STAI）, 由Charles D Spielberger 等人编制。S T A I 首版（S T A I—FormX）于1970年问世，曾经过2000项研究。1979年，Spielberger等人对首版进行了修订，修订版的S T A I—F o r m Y于1980年译成中文。 Spielberger 等人编制S T A I的目的，旨在为临床学家、行为学家和内科学家提供一种工具，以区别评定短暂的焦虑情绪状态和人格特质性焦虑倾向，为不同的研究目的和临床实践服务。S T A I适用于具有焦虑症状的成年人，可广发应用于评定内科、外科、心身疾病及精神病人的焦虑情绪；也可用来筛查高校学生、军人和其他职业人群的有关焦虑问题；以及评价心理治疗、药物治疗的效果。 Cattle和Spielberger提出了状态焦虑（state anxiety）和特质焦虑 （trait anxiety）的概念。 特质焦虑指个体对广泛的威胁性刺激作出焦虑反应的一种相对稳定的行为倾向；而状态焦虑是觉察到危险性刺激而产生的一种短暂的情绪状态，
包括个体的紧张、担心、不安、困扰及自主神经系统的过度兴奋。状态—特质焦虑问卷就是试图将状态焦虑与特质焦虑这两种不同性质的焦虑区分开来，以便为临床实践和研究提供更有效的测量工具。 【内容及实施方法】 状态—特质焦虑问卷由评价两种不同焦虑类型的分量表组成，共40个条目。第1~20项为状态焦虑分量表（S T A I—F o r m Y-I，S-AI），其中半数为描述负性情绪的条目，半数为描述正性情绪条目，主要用于评定个体即刻的或最近某一特定时间或情境的恐惧、紧张、忧虑和神经质的体验或感受。第21~40项为特质焦虑分量表（S T A I—F o r m Y-I，T-A I），用于评定较稳定的焦虑、紧张性人格特质，其中有11项为描述负性情绪的条目，9项描述正性情绪。该问卷又自我评定来完成。评定无时间限制，一般在10~20分钟可完成所有条目的回答。可用于个人或集体测验，受试者一般须具有初中文化水平。S T A I采用四点评分法。S-AI：1=完全没有，2=有些，3=中等程度，4=非常明显；其中10 项为反向计分。T-A I：1=几乎没有，2=有些，3=经常，4=几乎总是如此；也有10项为反向计分。 【测量学指标】 Spielberger 在高中生、大学生、新兵和成年工作人员的大样本人群中进行了S T A I现场测试，制定了常模。通过测试发现：S-AI和T-A I的题-总净相关系数在0.46~0.61（M=0.52）。S-AI和T-A I评分的相关系数为0.59~0.75.原作者对该量表进行了重测信度检验，发现T-A I的稳定性较高，两次评分的相关系数为0.73~0.86
我们可能会经常听说过，某某学生又想不开，可能是压力太大引起的，其实在现代的社会发展中，家长们对孩子们的学习是非常重视的，也因此，孩子们的压力也是非常大的，然而患上心理上的各种疾病的现象也是很常见的，其中考试焦虑症是最为典型的一种心理疾病，对此广州协佳医院精神科的王颖主任给我们分享了这样一个案例。 “李兵今天中午、晚上都不想吃东西，吃下去的全吐了。劝他去看病他不去，说是没病，还坚持要去课室复习，准备考试。再望望李兵，只见那原本消瘦的脸上满含着忧郁，一副有气无力的样子，看上去身体很是虚弱。 李兵是医学系四年级的学生，学习很刻苦，成绩却不太理想。每逢考试他都很拼命，开夜车是常事，考试后又常因成绩不好而懊恼不已。李兵沉默了片刻，开始诉说。“昨天考第一科，我考得很糟，心里非常失望。我花了很多时间去复习，没想到还是考不好。晚自习时，我开始复习下一科，可老是走神。 昨晚一晚都没睡好，总在想白天的考试，越想越自责。今早很早就醒了，我不敢多睡，匆匆去课室看书；可越看越觉得很多内容都没记住，心慌得厉害，脑子也不听使唤了。午饭我一点胃口也没有，但还是强迫自己吃点，没吃下多少，就忍不住全吐了出来。晚餐也是这样。我很害怕，我可能读不下去了。”他紧锁着眉头，不安地说。” 王颖主任分析，听了他的叙述以后，确定他患的事考试焦虑症，这是考试时常见的一种心理现象。就多数人来说，面临重要的或关键性的考试，总会引起一些心理压力，产生一定程度的考试焦虑，这是正常的，
也是无害的。但严重的考试焦虑则会产生极大的危害，使人出现注意力分散、记忆过程受干扰、思维过程受阻等问题，并威胁着人的身心健康。 那么患上考试型焦虑症我们应该怎么办呢？王颖主任给了以下几 个意见： 自我心理调节方法，如果学生在生活及学习中，能常常保持放松、平静，那么当应对考试或是重大考试时，自然能良好面对。放松心情，调整好自己的心态，减轻自己的压力。 心理阅读，“书籍是人进步的阶梯”，而心理读本更是心灵成长不可或缺的重要通道，每个人的心灵都不可能一尘不染，尤其在当前这个浮躁、浮夸的时代。给大家推荐几本心灵图书《淡定是修炼出来的》、《生命的重建》、《你变了，世界就变了》。 主动参与社外活动，对于学生来说，学士是很重要的，但是也得讲究劳逸结合，适当的参加一些社会活动，心情好了，学习自然就有积极性了，良性循环，面对考试也就不容易产生焦虑了。也可以自己适当的做一些运动，有助于消除紧张和焦虑。 通过上述一个案例的介绍，相信大家对此都有一定的了解，我们在学习的同时也要注意好自己的身心健康，要调整好自己的心态，不要心浮气躁，让自己放松下来。
广泛性焦虑障碍 一、定义 广泛性焦虑障碍（GAD）是一种以焦虑为主要临床表现的精神障碍，患者常常有原因不明的提心吊胆、紧张不安，并有显着的自主神经功能紊乱症状、肌肉紧张及运动性不安。患者往往能够认识到这些担忧是过度和不恰当的，但不能控制，因难以忍受而感到痛苦。病程不定，但趋于波动并称为慢性。 多数GAD患者合并有抑郁障碍或其他焦虑障碍，称为共病现象。常见的共病有抑郁障碍、惊恐障碍、强迫障碍等，共病造成GAD的诊断和治疗困难。 二、流行病学 GAD是最常见的焦虑障碍，终生患病率约为%%，在普通人群中年患病率%%，45—55岁年龄组比例最高，女性患者是男性患者的2倍。GAD常为慢性病程，国外资料显示患者在明确诊断前已经有10年病程者并不少见。 三、病因与发病机制 1.遗传：荟萃分析表明GAD有家族聚集性，遗传度大约为32%。 2.神经生物学： （1）神经影像学：目前研究的重点是杏仁核，研究发现GAD的青少年杏仁核体积增大，前额叶背内测体积也增加；杏仁核、前扣带回和前额叶背内测活动增加，并与焦虑的严重程度正相关；而前额叶背外侧活动相对下降。（2）神经生化 ①去甲肾上腺素的作用：去甲肾上腺素的作用?焦虑伴有警觉程度增高和 交感神经活动增强的表现，提示患者的肾上腺素能活动增加。某些可以降低去甲肾上腺素能活动的药物如可乐定，有减轻焦虑的作用。? ②?5-羟色胺的作用：??5-羟色胺释放增加时，出现明显焦虑反应。??? ③γ-氨基丁酸的作用：γ-氨基丁酸有抗焦虑的作用。焦虑也许与γ-氨基 丁酸的功能不足有关。 ④乳酸盐的作用：静脉注射乳酸盐可以引起惊恐发作，是焦虑症研究的重 大进展之一。乳酸盐的致焦虑作用已在制造焦虑模型及检验抗焦虑药物的疗效中得到应用。 ⑤另外，尚有研究发现，广泛性焦虑症患者的血浆肾上腺素、促肾上腺皮 质激素及白细胞介素Ⅱ均高于正常对照组，而皮质醇却低于对照组。待焦虑症状缓解后，上述各生理指标均恢复正常。 3．心理学理论 行为主义理论认为，焦虑是对某些环境刺激的恐惧而形成的一种条件反射。心理动力学理论认为，焦虑源于内在的心理冲突，是童年或少年期被压抑在潜意识中的冲突在成年后被激活，从而形成焦虑。在临床上，一些焦虑障碍的患者病前有应激性生活事件，特别是威胁性事件更易导致焦虑发作。近来的研究显示童年时期发展的不安全的依恋关系、对照料者的矛盾情感、父母的过度保护、被虐待和威胁、与养育者过多分离均可能是焦虑产生的原因。 四、临床表现 GAD起病缓慢，可与一些心理社会因素有关，尽管部分患者可自行缓解，但多表现为反复发作，症状迁延，病程漫长者社会功能下降。 1.精神性焦虑：精神上的过度担心是焦虑症状的核心。表现为对未来可能发生 的、难以预料的某种危险或不幸事件经常担心。有的患者不能明确意识到他担心的对象或内容，而只是一种提心吊胆、惶恐不安的强烈内心体验，称为
当前文化焦虑问题 朱泽厚（前中共宣传部部长） 编者按:推进中国民主、科学事业的中坚英才,中国民主思想的重镇、中共贵州省委前书记、中宣部前部长、本刊编委朱厚泽同志,2010年5月9日于北京逝世,享年80岁。这篇文章经作者生前多次修改,准备在本刊发表。作者希望几位学者和他共同讨论这个问题,但相关文章没有准备好,等待不及,先发此文,以为纪念。 广义的说,凡地球上的非自然存在,以及打上人类印记的自然存在,都可以叫做文化。从社会存在的意义上说,文化就是历史演进过程的积淀及其轨迹。 在西方许多国家,文化和文明在词义上是相通的。在中国的汉语中,往往把一定的文化类型,把凝固在一定的社会结构中,并存续一段历史时期的文化,称为文明,不仅涵盖一定文化的特征,还涵盖一定文化发展的程度。为区分文明的物质和精神的属性,或为强调它的政治和制度的层面,又区分为物质文明——精神文明,以及政治文明——制度文明等等。 文明差异和文化交流 为说明这个问题,我想稍微离开各个国家、各个民族具体的历史,一般性地考察文明发展进程的全球态势。 无疑,各种文明总是在一定人群、一定的地域基础上发展起来的,总是以一定的自然环境为背景,又以一定的人群作载体。因此,在这个基础上产生的种种文明,势必存在着文化的差异,存在着各自的特点和风貌。但是,在一个横断面上对它们进行的观察,又无法比较出它们的高低优劣。比如各个民族的文学艺术,你怎么比啊?因为习俗和审美的不同,这个民族喜欢这个,另一个民族喜欢那个。 然而,由于资源(自然的,人文的)聚集不平衡的绝对性,在人类历史发展的不同时期,不同地区,不同国家的文明的发展又是不平衡的。既有相对走在前头的,也有相对发展靠后的;既有处于中心区域的,也有处于边陲的。文明发展程度不一,就会产生“文明的落差”。这与流水的落差一样,必然会从高端向低端流动,从中心向周边扩散。或周边地带也会被中心地区吸引,主动去学习和接受高端文化,以提升自己。 中国历史上曾是东方文明的中心,日本派“遣唐使”学习唐朝文化,是吸纳高端文明的例证;而闻名世界的“丝绸之路”,则深深刻录了这种文明流淌和扩散的轨迹。 当然,文化交流现象还不仅仅由于“文明落差”引起的。相对先进的民族向相对落后的民族吸收文化营养,以丰富自己文化内涵的现象,也是屡见不鲜的。中国中原地区自汉至唐,从西域各民族那里不仅学习了佛法,而且学习了许多种植技术——如西瓜、核桃、棉花等等,还学习了音乐、舞蹈、杂技、绘画等许多文化艺术。而《西游记》描写唐僧取经,玄奘最后回到长安,关起门来译经,是因为发现了和我们不同的印度文化,觉得它很值得我们去了解、去吸取。这种不同文化相互流动、相互影响、取长补短的历史现象,也是不可忽视的。 总之,文化的交流、扩散、转移、相互接纳、互补、融合,是人类文明发展不可遏制的历史主流。不同的地域、环境和人群孕育出不同的文明,决定了文明的多样性;而文明的差异,特别是自然资源和人文资源聚集的不平衡,又决定了文化交流的必然性。 在人类文明发展到资本主义出现的时代,因文明落差而引起的文化交流,就是所谓全球 化的过程。什么是全球化?定义很多。我认为全球化就是指当今世界人类的活动已经或正在急速地、大规模地超越民族国家的政治疆界和自然地域界限,从经济、文化、政治、社会的
国内外外语学习焦虑的研究现状综述 摘要：本文梳理了国内外对外语学习焦虑的文献，描述了焦虑对英语学习所产 生的研究成果与研究现状。 一、焦虑的含义 根据《现代汉语辞典》和《辞海》的解释，焦虑是指处于紧张、担忧的状态和特质，是个体对某件是或问题感到忧惧或烦恼的情绪状态。心理学家把焦虑分为状态焦虑(state anxiety) 和特质焦虑(trait anxiety)。前者指的是遇到具体问题面对某一特定的情景或事件才产生的一种焦虑，是一种心理状态，可随着时间的流逝而消失。后者指的是有些人具有焦虑倾向，对一些本不应当产生焦虑的事情，容易产生焦虑，是一种心理素质。焦虑常常与不自在、沮丧、自我怀疑相联系（Brown1994,P14）。Stern 曾提出“情感对外语教学的作用至少与认知因素同等重要，甚至更为重要”。 二、国内外外语学习焦虑已有研究成果 国外对焦虑做了大量的研究，并取得了很多成就。最有代表性的是美国Horwit 教授，Horwitz MacIntyre & Gardner(1986) 最先把外语学习焦虑看作是外语学习中的一种单独的、特别的现象。 1、导致学生学习焦虑的因素分析 有学者认为导致学生焦虑的因素是多方面的, 个人的性格, 自我概念外语基础知识与能力、文化背景知识以及环境等。也有学者认为应试教学的目标，教师的教学方式，学生的经济状况，学生的学习动机和性格特点都是造成学生学习焦虑的诱因。Horwitz 认为自尊是诱发焦虑的一个重要原因。外语学习会对人的自尊构成威胁，因为只有在外语课堂上才会出现学生们一张口就出错的现象，所以许多学生担心出错后会引起别人的讥笑，从而丢失自己的面子和尊严。Young 在回顾前人对焦虑的研究基础上，总结了导致焦虑产生的六大原因：1. 学习者自身及相互之间的因索，主要指学习者之间的相互竞争及学习者对自己的期望过低。2. 学习者对学习语言的看法，如果这种看法是错误的，会诱发焦虑。3. 教师对怎样教语言的看法，教师关于教语言的看法也会导致焦虑情绪的产生。如教师在课堂上不断纠正学生的错误，学生会产生畏惧心理而害怕发言。4. 教师与学生之间的关系。5. 课堂活动；如学生在课堂上被单独叫起来回答问题很容易导致焦虑产生。6. 语言测试。不管是测试项目还是形式都会让学生感到焦虑。通过对上述产生外语课堂学习焦虑的原因的分析，可以归纳为三类：1. 学习者自身的心理素质和对语言学习的认识；例如学习者面对压力时的处理方式会直接影响到2. 学习者与教师间的课堂关系；3. 来自管理者等外界对评价结果的错误解释和利用。对于学生课堂学习活动不正确的评价或者偏见会导致学生对课堂学习的兴趣和动力。 2、外语学习焦虑对外语学习的影响 关于焦虑与外语学习的关系目前尚没有统一的认识。Howitz、MacIntyre 等认为焦虑是导致外语学习成绩差的原因之一，而Sparks&Ganschow 则认为是由于外语学习者成绩差导致学习者外语学习的焦虑。Horwitz 认为促进型焦虑只适用于较简单的外语学习任务。而妨碍型焦虑（debilitating anxiety）对学生的学业成绩、考试成绩、口头和书面表达能力、自信心、自尊心等都存在负面影响，不仅会影响学生们的课 堂参与度而且还可能导致学生用逃避学习的方式来回避焦虑。Young 发现外语学习焦虑的典型外在行为表现为“语音变调：不能正常地发出语言的语音和节奏；站起来回答问题时有‘冻僵’的感觉；忘掉才学过不久的词汇；根本说不出话，只是保持沉默不语甚至逃课”等等。可以看出，学者们将外语学习焦虑对外语学习的影响主要归纳为体现在学习者的学习动机、学习行为和身体反应方面。Horwits 等（1986）设计了外语课堂焦虑量表（foreign language classroom anxiety scale）, 简称FLCAS。许多国外的研究者都采用了这一量表，他们以不同语言的学习者为研究对象，但大多都得出一致的结果，即外语焦虑与外语学习成绩呈负相关。国内学者也做了一些相关的研究，但是对于焦虑的影响也没有取得一致的看法。薛利芳的研究认为英语学习焦虑对学生的听、说、读、写能力的确有负面影响；发现外语学习焦虑与听力成绩无显著相关。与此同时，国内学者王立飞则认为有益焦虑是一个积极因素，是诸多通往成功的关键因素之一，它与竞争紧密相连。适度对完成语言学习任务的害怕和担心，是非常必要的，而且也是应当受到鼓励的。参考文献：[1] 高越：《非英语专业大学生外语学习情感因素定量分析》，《山西农业大学学报》( 社会