论文部分内容阅读
目的调查不同贫困程度学生的心理健康状况,为贫困学生的心理辅导工作提供依据。方法采用症状自评量表(SCL-90)测量9名1类贫困学生,18名2类贫困学生,36名3类贫困学生和170名非贫困学生,比较4组学生SCL-90测量的结果。统计方法采用单因素方差分析,多重比较采用LSD-t检验。结果4组之间在SCL-90量表的总分、总均分、躯体化症状、强迫症状、人际关系敏感、焦虑症状、恐怖和精神病性症状因子差异均有显著性(F=2.688或7.176,P=0.000或0.047),其中以躯体化症状和人际关系敏感因子差异最有显著性(F=6.154,7.176,P=0.000)。LSD-t检验发现1、2、3类贫困学生组与非贫困学生组在人际关系敏感因子差异有显著性(P<0.05或0.01);1类贫困学生组与非贫困学生组除敌对因子外,其余各因子差异均有显著性(P<0.05或0.001)。结论贫困学生的心理健康水平低于非贫困学生,贫困程度较重的学生心理问题更显著,人际关系敏感是贫困学生的主要心理问题。
Objective To investigate the mental health status of students with different levels of poverty and provide the basis for the psychological counseling of poor students. Methods Nine SCL-90 students, 18 students with 2 types of poverty, 36 students with 3 types of poverty and 170 non-poor students were measured by SCL-90. . Statistical methods using one-way analysis of variance, multiple comparison using LSD-t test. Results There were significant differences in total score, total score, somatization symptom, obsessive-compulsive symptom, interpersonal sensitivity, anxiety symptom, horror and psychotic symptom factors between the four groups in the SCL-90 scale (F = 2.688 or 7.176 , P = 0.000 or 0.047). The most significant difference was somatization and interpersonal sensitivity (F = 6.154, 7.176, P = 0.000). LSD-t test found that there was a significant difference (P <0.05 or 0.01) in the interpersonal sensitivity factors between the poor students in class 1, 2 and non-poor students; the students in group 1 and non-poor students except the hostile factor , The rest of the differences were significant (P <0.05 or 0.001). Conclusion The mental health of impoverished students is lower than that of non-impoverished students. The psychology of students with heavier poverty is more obvious, and the interpersonal sensitivity is the main psychological problem of impoverished students.