攻击行为儿童与普通儿童自我延迟满足的比较

Comparison of serf-imposed delay of gratification between aggressive children and normal children

目的 比较攻击行为儿童与普通儿童自我延迟满足能力的差异及延迟策略的使用特点,以期为攻击行为儿童的发展教育和行为矫正提供循证依据.方法 采用经典的自我延迟满足实验比较24名攻击性儿童及24名班次、年龄、性别相匹配的普通儿童的延迟满足能力,并采用时间取样观察法,记录儿童延迟行为编码,比较两组儿童延迟策略水平的差异.用χ2检验分析攻击组儿童与对照组儿童延迟满足的目的性差异,用独立样本t检验分析两组儿童延迟策略的差异.结果 两组儿童延迟满足能力的差异有显著性（χ2=13.50,P＜0.01）,对照组儿童比攻击组儿童在等待过程中表现出更多的目的性,攻击组儿童的等待多是茫然无目的的或者干脆放弃;攻击组儿童[（22.38 ± 11.29）分]与对照组儿童[（28.21 ±3.05）分]延迟策略的使用都突出表现为问题解决策略;对照组儿童在等待过程中更多地使用问题解决策略[（28.21±3.05）分]及自我控制策略[（0.71±1.08）分],延迟策略水平高于攻击组[分别为（22.38±11.29）分,（0.13±0.45）分]（P＜0.05）.结论 攻击行为儿童自我延迟满足能力较差,行为目的性较弱,延迟策略水平低于普通儿童.

Objective To compare the differences of self-imposed delay of gratification and the characteristics of delay strategy between aggressive children and normal children, in order to provide evidence-based basis for aggressive children＇s education and behavior modification. Methods Using the classical self-imposed delay of gratification task to compare the ability of delay of gratification between 24 aggressive children and 24 class-, age-, gender-matched normal controls. Recording children＇ s delay behavior coding to compare their differences of delay strategy by using the time sampling observation method. The differences of purpose of delay of gratification was analyzed with χ2 test. The differences of their delay strategy was analyzed with the independent sample t -test. Results A significant difference was found between two groups on delay of gratification（χ2 = 13. 50, P 〈0.01）. The controls showed more purpose during the waiting process than the aggressive children whose waiting was mostly without purpose or they simply gave up. The problem-solving strategy was hightlighted in the use of delay strategy for both the aggressive children（22. 38 ±11. 29） and the controls（ 28. 21 ± 3. 05）. The control group children used more problem-solving strategy（28.21 ±3.05） and self-control strategy（0. 71 ± 1.08） during the waiting task. Their level of delay strategy was higher than the aggressive groups （ （22. 38 ± 11. 29）, （0. 13 ± 0. 45） ） （P 〈 0. 05）. Conclusion The aggressive children are less capable of self-imposed delay of gratification,the purpose of behavior is weaker and the level of delay strategy is lower than normal children.