Braithwaite V
Research School of the Social Sciences, The Australian National University, Canberra.
Gerontologist. 1996 Feb;36(1):42-53. doi: 10.1093/geront/36.1.42.
Lawton, Kleban, Moss, Rovine & Glicksman's (1989) construction of caregiving appraisal is examined through a principal components analysis and varimax rotation of a data set based on in-depth quantitative interviews with 144 caregivers. Five caregiving appraisal dimensions were identified. Two dealt specifically with the provision of care: "task load caregiving" and "dysfunctional caregiving." The remaining three were primarily concerned with social supportiveness: "intimacy and love," "social captivity," and "social distance." "Dysfunctional caregiving" was the only type of appraisal that had significant bivariate relationships with poor mental health, low psychological well-being and subsequent institutionalization. A sixth dimension identified in this analysis, "inner strength and efficacy," represented psychological resources. Its independence from the appraisal measures supports Lawton et al.'s (1989) assumption that resources and appraisals can be measured separately. In contrast, social resources are better conceptualized as an integral part of caregiving appraisals.
通过对144名照料者进行深入定量访谈所得到的数据集进行主成分分析和方差最大化旋转，研究了劳顿、克莱班、莫斯、罗文和格利克斯曼（1989年）对照料评估的构建。确定了五个照料评估维度。其中两个维度专门涉及照料的提供：“任务负荷照料”和“功能失调照料”。其余三个维度主要涉及社会支持性：“亲密与关爱”、“社会束缚”和“社会距离”。“功能失调照料”是唯一一种与心理健康不佳、心理幸福感低以及随后入住机构有显著双变量关系的评估类型。该分析中确定的第六个维度“内在力量与效能”代表心理资源。它与评估指标的独立性支持了劳顿等人（1989年）的假设，即资源和评估可以分别进行测量。相比之下，社会资源更适合被概念化为照料评估的一个组成部分。
