目的: 系统探讨不同家庭结构(核心、单亲、再婚、双亲缺失)对中国大学生抑郁与焦虑情绪障碍的风险影响。方法: 采用多阶段分层整群抽样方法,对江苏省22 711名大学生进行问卷调查,使用抑郁自评量表(SDS)与焦虑自评量表(SAS)对学生的心理状态进行评估,并基于有向无环图(DAG)科学识别和控制混杂因素,通过多因素Logistic回归矫正混杂因素后分析家庭结构对大学生情绪障碍的独立影响。结果: 本研究共纳入22 711名大学生,其中核心家庭占88.1%。结果显示,非核心家庭(单亲、再婚、双亲缺失)大学生的抑郁与焦虑量表得分及症状阳性率均显著高于核心家庭(P<0.001)。经DAG识别并校正混杂因素后,多因素Logistic回归分析表明,与核心家庭相比,单亲、再婚及双亲缺失家庭发生抑郁的aOR分别为1.351、1.327和1.526,发生焦虑的aOR分别为1.490、1.532和2.000(P<0.05)。结论: 非核心家庭结构是大学生情绪障碍的独立风险因素,本研究为高校开展面向特定家庭背景学生的精准心理干预提供了重要实证依据。 |
Objective: To systematically investigate the impact of different family structures(nuclear, single-parent, remarried, and parents-absent) on the risk of depression and anxiety among Chinese university students. Methods: A multi-stage stratified cluster sampling method was employed to survey 22 711 university students in Jiangsu Province, China. Psychological status was assessed using the Self-Rating Depression Scale(SDS) and the Self-Rating Anxiety Scale(SAS). A directed acyclic graph(DAG) framework was applied to identify and control for potential confounding variables. Multivariable Logistic regression models were then used to estimate the independent effects of family structure on emotional disorders after adjustment for confounders. Results: Among the 22 711 participants, 88.1% were from nuclear families. Students from non-nuclear family structures(single-parent, remarried, and parents-absent) exhibited significantly higher SDS and SAS scores, as well as higher prevalence rates of depressive and anxiety symptoms, compared with those from nuclear families(P<0.001). After adjusting for confounders identified via DAG, multivariate Logistic regression analysis showed that, compared with nuclear families, the adjusted odds ratios(aOR) for depression were 1.351, 1.327, and 1.526 for single-parent, remarried, and parents-absent families, respectively. The corresponding aOR for anxiety were 1.490, 1.532, and 2.000, respectively(P<0.05). Conclusion: Non-nuclear family structures are independent risk factor for depression and anxiety among university students. These findings provide important empirical evidence to support the development of targeted psychological interventions for students from diverse family backgrounds in higher education settings. |
[1] REPETTI R L,TAYLOR S E,SEEMAN T E.Risky families:Family social environments and the mental and physical health of offspring[J].Psychol Bull,2002,128(2):330-366.
[2] 李岩,李跃,李雨婷,等.家庭结构和教养方式对青少年抑郁情绪的影响[J].心理学通讯,2024,7(2):138-143.
[3] 邹宇春,董炤昕,姬英姿,等.我国现代化进程中家庭结构与婚姻变迁趋势分析[J].青年发展论坛,2025,35(5):14-26.
[4] 张晔榕.大学生心理健康与干预对策探析[J].吕梁学院学报,2025,15(6):92-95.
[5] NYER M,FARABAUGH A,FEHLING K,et al.Relationship between sleep disturbance and depression,anxiety,and functioning in college students[J].Depress Anxiety,2013,30(9):873-880.
[6] 王甫勤.家庭背景与青少年教育期望:基于心理健康的中介作用分析[J].家政学刊,2024,1(4):283-295.
[7] 杨雪,宋佳殷.家庭教养方式、亲子关系与青少年社会心理发展[J].人口学刊,2025,47(1):78-93.
[8] BETHELL C D,GARNER A S,GOMBOJAV N,et al.Social and relational health risks and common mental health problems among US children:the mitigating role of family resilience and connection to promote positive socioemotional and school-related outcomes[J].Child Adolesc Psychiatr Clin N Am,2022,31(1):45-70.
[9] 梁洁.广东某高校大学生家庭环境、物质主义与心理健康的关系研究[J].南昌大学学报(医学版),2021,61(6):60-65.
[10] ZUNG W W K.A self-rating depression scale[J].Arch Gen Psychiatry,1965,12(1):63.
[11] ZUNG W W K.A rating instrument for anxiety disorders[J].Psychosomatics,1971,12(6):371-379.
[12] 曹雨滋,袁驰,刘刚,等.有向无环图在观察性研究多因素分析协变量选择中的应用[J].华西医学,2025,40(12):2045-2052.
[13] 郑卫军,王晓燕,王憓.基于因果关系图进行多因素回归分析的变量筛选[J].中国卫生统计,2014,31(5):908-910.
[14] 吴雨薇.论原生家庭对个体发展的影响——从家庭系统理论出发[J].泉州师范学院学报,2017,35(3):88-92.
[15] 李贵金.全环境育人背景下大学生心理危机干预策略研究[J].科教文汇,2024(21):181-184.
[16] 张满燕,袁勇贵.青少年心理健康与家庭功能相关性的研究进展[J].东南大学学报(医学版),2019,38(3):545-550.
[17] 马锦华.社会和谐视角下小学生心理和谐状况深层价值思考[J].洛阳师范学院学报,2016,35(4):53-56.
[18] 高月红.试论高校毕业生就业困难群体的心理问题与调适[J].劳动保障世界(理论版),2011(8):78-80.
[19] 邓敏,陈旭,李健.大学生依恋特质基本维度的构建与培养策略[J].黑龙江高教研究,2019,37(4):99-103.
[20] 董耀辉,卫平民.高职院校提前招生新生心理健康影响因素的研究[J].现代医学,2020,48(7):833-836. |