福建省高校贫困大学生心理健康水平与人格特征

Personality and mental health of poverty college students in Fujian province

目的:了解贫困生的心理健康现状和人格特征。方法:于2005-09/11随机抽取福州大学、福建师范大学、福建农林大学、福建中医学院、闽江学院2002-2004级学生2400名。男1478名,女922名,平均(20±1)岁。根据2004-11-04福建省福州市政府办公厅正式下发的《福州市人民政府关于提高城区城镇及农村居民最低生活保障标准的通知》中的规定,即城镇多人户每人每个月210元、单人户230元;农村多人户每人每月155元、单人户175元,本文把家庭人均月收入较少,有一定数额债务,只能缴纳部分学杂费,基本生活费接近于当地居民最低生活保障线(如上规定,本文以230元为基准)的学生定为“贫困生”。采用精神症状自评量表和16种人格因素问卷对高校贫困生的心理健康和人格特征进行调查。结果:发放问卷2400份,收回有效问卷2111份。其中贫困生539份。①贫困生精神症状自评量表的躯体化、强迫、人际敏感、抑郁、焦虑、敌对、恐怖、偏执、精神病性、其他、总症状指数得分均高于非贫困生(贫困生:1.61±0.56,2.02±0.64,1.92±0.63,1.71±0.56,1.65±0.58,1.73±0.68,1.57±0.62,1.81±0.65,1.67±0.54,1.76±0.63,1.74±0.49;非贫困生:1.48±0.45,1.89±0.56,1.79±0.57,1.61±0.51,1.54±0.50,1.61±0.56,1.44±0.49,1.66±0.54,1.54±0.46,1.61±0.53,1.62±0.41,P<0.01)。男女贫困生之间各因子分差异均不显著(P>0.05)。②福建省高校贫困大学生的心理问题检出率为24.5%,其中轻度心理问题(2≤因子分<3)为22.6%;中度心理问题(3≤因子分<4)为1.7%;重度心理问题(4≤因子分<5)为0.2%。心理问题以强迫、人际敏感、偏执、忧郁、敌对、焦虑等心理问题最为突出。③16种人格因素问卷中,贫困生乐群性、聪慧性、兴奋性、敏感性、怀疑性上得分低于非贫困生,有恒性、忧虑性、独立性得分高于非贫困生(贫困生:5.20±1.77,4.70±1.93,5.49±1.87,6.46±1.79,4.29±1.71,4.60±1.63,6.64±1.82,5.07±1.82;非贫困生:5.39±1.74,4.95±1.99,5.82±1.91,6.66±1.75,4.55±1.77,4.36±1.69,6.43±1.94,4.89±1.77,P<0.05～0.01)。④影响贫困生心理健康水平的主要人格因素按其影响作用从大到小有怀疑性、忧虑性、稳定性、兴奋性、自律性。结论:福建省高校贫困大学生的心理健康状况令人担忧,其人格特征对心理健康水平有重要影响。

AIM： To know the personality and mental health of the poverty college students. METHODS： 2 400 students of grade 2002, 2003 and 2004 were randomly selected from Fuzhou University, Fujian Normal University, Fujian Agriculture and Forestry University, Fujian Traditional Chinese Medical University and Minjiang College from September to November 2005, including 1 478 schoolboys and 922 schoolgirls with an average age of （20±1） years. According to the prescript of the Message＇ from Fuzhou City Government of Improving the Lowest Life Guarantee Standard of Residents in the City, Town and Country issued by the office of Fuzhou Government in November 4^th 2004, 210 Yuan was provided for each one in many-persons family every month and 230 Yuan for single-person family in the town; 155 Yuan was provided for each one in many-persons family every month and 175 Yuan for single-person family in the country. Poverty college student was defined in the paper as the following： Students with lower average family member month income and some debts, who could only afford part of tuition their basic cost of living closed to the lowest life guarantee line in the local residents （230 Yuan was taken as the baseline） were considered as the poverty students. SCL-90 and 16PF were adopted to study the mental health and personality of poverty college students. RESULTS： 2 400 questionnaires were sent out, and 2 111 valid ones were taken back. （1） The scores of somatization. compulsion, interpersonal sensitivity, depression, anxiety, hostility, phobia, paranoid, schizophrenia and others as well as the total score of symptom indexes in SCL-90 of poverty college students were significantly higher than those of non-poverty college students [Poverty college students： 1.61±0.56,2.02±0.64,1.92±0.63,1.71±0.56,1.65±0.58,1.73±0.68, 1.57±0.62,1.81±0.65,1.67±0.54,1.76±0.63,1.74±0.49; Non-poverty college students： 1.48±0.45,1.89±0.56,1.79±0.57,1.61±0.51,1.54±0.50,1.61±0.56,1.44±0.49,1.66±0.54,1.54±0.46,1.61±0.53,1.62±0.41 ,P 〈 0.05,P 〈 0.01 ,P 〈 0.001 ）. There was no significant difference in factor score between poverty female students and poverty male students （P 〉 0.05）. （2） The examined rate of psychological problem in poverty college students of Fujian Province was 24.5%, and that of slight psychological problems was 22.6%, and that of moderate psychological problems was 1.7%, and that of severe psychological problems was 0.2%. Among sub-specific factors, the psychological problems were prominent in obsessive-compulsive, interpersonal sensitivity, paranoid, depression, hostility, anxiety, etc. （3） Compare to non-poverty university students, the scores of poverty university students on sociality, intelligence, excitability, sensitivity, suspicion were distinctly lower, while the marks on permanence, anxiety, independence were significantly higher （Poverty college students： 5.20±1.77,4.70±1.93,5.49±1.87,6.46±1.79,4.29±1.71,4.60±1.63,6.64±1.82,5.07±1.82; Non-poverty college students：5.39±1.74,4.95±1.99,5.82±1.91,6.66±1.75,4.55±1.77,4.36±1.69,6.43±1.94,4.89±1.77,P 〈 0.05,P 〈 0.01, P 〈 0.001 ）. （4） The primary personality factors that influenced the mental health of the poverty students were suspicion, anxiety, stability, excitability, self-discipline. CONCLUSION： The mental health of poverty college students in Fujian Province is worrying, and their personality has an important influence on their mental health.