Korean Journal of Culture and Social Issue (한국심리학회지 : 문화 및 사회문제)

Korean Psychological Association of Culture and Social Issues (한국문화및사회문제심리학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Development and Validation of Attitude Toward Unification of Korea (ATU-K) Scale

통일에 대한 태도 척도 개발 및 타당화 연구

  • 최훈석 (성균관대학교 심리학과) ;
  • 이하연 (성균관대학교 심리학과 BK21 교육연구팀) ;
  • 권영미 (성균관대학교 심리학과) ;
  • 박주화 (통일연구원 통일정책연구실)
  • Received : 2021.05.06
  • Accepted : 2021.07.05
  • Published : 2021.08.31
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

The present study was conducted to develop and validate a psychological scale that measures individuals' attitude toward unification of Korea (ATU-K). Building on major theoretical perspectives on the structure of attitude and the attitude-behavior link, we specified two sub-components each representing the cognitive and the affective dimension of people's attitude toward unification. In a survey that involved a stratified sample of Korean adults (N = 1,500), we found strong evidence showing the construct validity of the ATU-K scale. We also found evidence for the convergent and discriminant validity of the scale. In a second survey involving another stratified sample of 1,500 Korean adults, we found the utility of the ATU-K scale in predicting people's intention to engage in unification-oriented behaviors (personal/collective). We also found that the ATU-K scale fares better in predicting the intention vis-a-vis the other measures of unification-related beliefs reported in previous research. We discuss implications of our findings and directions for future research.

본 연구는 국민들의 남북 통일에 대한 태도를 측정하는 도구를 개발하고 타당화 할 목적으로 실시되었다. 태도의 구조 및 태도와 행동의 관계에 관한 심리학 이론을 토대로 통일태도의 하위 차원인 인지와 정서 차원을 규정하고, 성별, 연령대, 거주지역을 기준으로 인구비례 할당표집을 이용하여 총 3,000명의 자료를 수집하였다. 조사 1(N = 1,500)의 결과, 본 연구에서 개발한 통일태도 척도(ATU-K)는 선행연구에서 보고된 통일관련 태도와 개념적으로 수렴하였고, 진보-보수 정치성향 및 한민족정체성과는 변별됨을 확인하였다. 조사 2(N = 1,500)에서는 통일을 지향하는 개인행동과 집단행동 의도를 준거변수로 설정하여 ATU-K 척도의 준거관련 타당도를 확인하였다. 또한 ATU-K 척도는 통일지향 행동의도를 예측함에 있어 선행연구에서 보고된 통일관련 태도점수보다 예측력이 높았다. 본 연구의 결과를 한국에서 통일과 관련된 학술 및 실용연구에 적용하는 방안과 장래연구 과제를 논의하였다.

Keywords

References

  1. 김지범, 강정한, 김석호, 김창환, 박원호, 이윤석, ... 김솔이 (2019). 한국종합사회조사 2003-2018. 성균관대학교 출판부.
  2. 김학재, 강채연, 김범수, 김병로 김희정, 이성우, ... 조용신 (2020). 2019 통일의식조사. 서울대학교 통일평화연구원.
  3. 박인조, 민경환 (2005). 한국어 감정단어의 목록 작성과 차원 탐색. 한국심리학회지: 사회 및 성격, 19(1), 109-129.
  4. 박주화, 김갑식, 이민규, 최훈석, 박형인, 현인애, 권영미 (2018). 평화의 심리학: 한국인의 평화인식. 통일연구원.
  5. 박주화, 이민규, 조원빈 (2017). 남북통합에 대한 국민의식조사. 통일연구원.
  6. 박주화, 이민규, 최훈석, 권영미, Steven Sloman, Eran Halperin (2019). 2019 한국인의 평화의식. 통일연구원.
  7. 양계민, 정진경 (2005). 북한이탈주민과의 접촉이 남한 사람들의 신뢰와 수용에 미치는 영향. 한국심리학회지: 문화 및 사회문제, 11(1), 97-115.
  8. 윤광일 (2019). 대북 및 통일 정책 선호의 개인 성향과 가치 기반. 국방연구(안보문제 연구소), 62(4), 25-66. https://doi.org/10.23011/JNDS.2019.62.4.002
  9. 은기수 (2010). 통일과 북한에 관한 사회조사의 동향과 실태. 통일과 평화, 2(2), 35-75.
  10. 이내영 (2014). 한국인의 통일의식의 결정요인. 평화연구, 22(1), 167-206.
  11. 정은미 (2013). 남북한 주민들의 통일 의식 변화: 2011-2013년 설문조사 분석을 중심으로. 통일과 평화, 5(2), 74-104.
  12. 채정민, 김종남 (2008). 사람중심의 통일교육 모델의 제안: 통일 단계에 따라. 한국심리학회지: 문화 및 사회문제, 14(1), 519-544.
  13. 최훈석, 이하연, 정지인 (2019). 층소된 사회정체성 구조에서 정체성 불확실성과 내집단 동일시, 남북한 화해 태도 및 행동의도 간 관계. 한국심리학회지: 사회 및 성격, 33(4), 45-59. https://doi.org/10.21193/KJSPP.2019.33.4.003
  14. Abelson, R. P., Kinder, D. R., Peters, M. D., & Fiske, S. T. (1982). Affective and semantic components in political person perception. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 42, 619-630. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.42.4.619
  15. Abelson, R. P., & Levi, A. (1985). Decision making and decision theory. In G. Lindzey & E. Aronson (Eds.), The handbook of social psychology (3rd Ed., Vol. 1, pp. 231-309). Random House.
  16. Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behaviour and Human Decision Processes, 50, 179-211. https://doi.org/10.1016/0749-5978(91)90020-T
  17. Ajzen, I. (2001). Nature and operation of attitudes. Annual Review of Psychology, 52, 27-58. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.52.1.27
  18. Ajzen, I., & Fishbein, M. (2005). The influence of attitudes on behavior. In D. Albarracin, B. T. Johnson, & M. P. Zanna (Eds.), The handbook of attitudes (pp. 173-221). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.
  19. Atkinson, J. W. (Ed.). (1958). Motives in fantasy, action, and society: A method of assessment and study. Van Nostrand.
  20. Bar-Tal, D., & Halperin, E. (2013). The psychology of intractable conflicts: Eruption, escalation, and peacemaking. In L. Huddy, D. O. Sears, & J. S. Levy (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of political psychology (pp. 923-956). Oxford University Press.
  21. Bentler, P. M., & Bonnett, D. G. (1980). Significance tests and goodness of fit in the analysis of covariance structures. Psychological Bulletin, 88, 588-606. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.88.3.588
  22. Bohner, G., & Dickel, N. (2011). Attitudes and attitude change. Annual Review of Psychology, 62, 391-417. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.121208.131609
  23. Breckler, S. J., & Wiggins, E. C. (1989). Affect versus evaluation in the structure of attitudes. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 25, 253-271. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-1031(89)90022-X
  24. Cumming, G. (2009). Inference by eye: Reading the overlap of independent confidence intervals. Statistics in Medicine, 28, 205-220. https://doi.org/10.1002/sim.3471
  25. Eagly, A. H., & Chaiken, S. (1998). Attitude structure and function. In D. T. Gilbert, S. T. Fiske, & G. Lindzey (Eds.), The handbook of social psychology (4th Ed., pp. 269-322). McGraw-Hill.
  26. Edwards, K. (1990). The interplay of affect and cognition in attitude formation and change. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 59, 202-216. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.59.2.202
  27. Fabrigar, L. R., MacDonald, T. K., & Wegener, D. T. (2005). The structure of attitudes. In D. Albarracin, B. T. Johnson, & M. P. Zanna (Eds.), The handbook of attitudes (pp. 79-125).
  28. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers. Feather, N. T. (1982). Actions in relation to expected consequences: An overview of a research program. In N. T. Feather (Ed.), Expectations and actions: Expectancy-value models in psychology (pp. 53-95). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.
  29. Fishbein, M., & Ajzen, I. (1975). Belief, attitude, intention, and behavior: An introduction to theory and research. Addison-Wesley.
  30. Gardner, P. L. (1996). The dimensionality of attitude scales: A widely misunderstood idea. Journal International Journal of Science Education, 18, 913-919. https://doi.org/10.1080/0950069960180804
  31. Hogg, M. A., Abrams, D., & Brewer, M. B. (2017). Social identity: The role of self in group processes and intergroup relations. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 20, 570-581. https://doi.org/10.1177/1368430217690909
  32. Hogg, M. A., & Hains, S. C. (1996). Intergroup relations and group solidarity: Effects of group identification and social beliefs on depersonalized attraction. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70, 295-309. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.70.2.295
  33. Hu, L. T., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling, 6, 1-55. https://doi.org/10.1080/10705519909540118
  34. Krosnick, J. A., Boninger, D. S., Chuang, Y. C., Berent, M. K., & Carnot, C. G. (1993). Attitude strength: One construct or many related constructs? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 65, 1132-1151. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.65.6.1132
  35. Krosnick, J. A., Judd, C. M., & Wittenbrink, B. (2005). The measurement of attitudes. In D, Albarracin, B. T. Johnson, & M. P. Zanna (Eds.), The handbook of attitudes (pp. 21-76). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.
  36. Krosnick, J. A., & Petty, R. E. (2014). Attitude strength: An overview. In R. E. Petty & J. A. Krosnick (Eds.), Attitude strength: Antecedents and consequences (pp. 1-24). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.
  37. Lee, W. Y., & Lee, H. (2019). The Perception of the Integration of North and South Korea. Historical Social Research, 44, 293-307. https://doi.org/10.12759/hsr.44.2019.4.293-307
  38. Lavine, H., Sullivan, J. L., Borgida, E., & Thomsen, C. J. (1996). The relationship of national and personal issue salience to attitude accessibility of foreign and domestic policy issues. Political Psychology, 17, 293-316. https://doi.org/10.2307/3791812
  39. Mitchell, T. R. (1974). Expectancy models of job satisfaction, occupational preference and effort: A theoretical, methodological, and empirical appraisal. Psychological Bulletin, 81, 1053-1077. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0037495
  40. Ronkko, M., & Cho, E. (2020). An updated guideline for assessing discriminant validity. Organizational Research Methods. https://doi.org/10.1177/1094428120968614
  41. Rosenberg, M. J. (1953). The experimental investigation of a value theory of attitude structure. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Michigan.
  42. Rosenberg, M. J., & Hovland, C. I. (1960). Cognitive, affective, and behavioral components of attitudes. In C. I. Hovland & M. J. Rosenberg (Eds.), Attitude organization and change (pp. 1-14). Yale University Press.
  43. Rotter, J. B. (1954). Social learning and clinical psychology. Prentice-Hall, Inc. https://doi.org/10.1037/10788-000
  44. Russell, J. A. (2009). Emotion, core affect, and psychological construction. Cognition and Emotion, 23, 1259-1283. https://doi.org/10.1080/02699930902809375
  45. Russell, J. A., & Pratt, G. (1980). A description of the affective quality attributed to environments. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 38, 311-322. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.38.2.311
  46. Schimmack, U., & Crites, S. L., Jr. (2005). The structure of affect. In D. Albarracin, B. T. Johnson, & M. P. Zanna (Eds.), The handbook of attitudes (pp. 397-435). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.
  47. Sears, D. O. (2001). The role of affect in symbolic politics. In J. H. Kuklinski (Ed.), Citizens and politics: Perspectives from political psychology (pp. 14-40). Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511896941
  48. Shnabel, N., Nadler, A., Ullrich, J., Dovidio, J. F., & Carmi, D. (2009). Promoting reconciliation through the satisfaction of the emotional needs of victimized and perpetrating group members: The needs-based model of reconciliation. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 35, 1021-1030. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167209336610
  49. Skitka, L. J., Mullen, E., Griffin, T., Hutchinson, S., & Chamberlin, B. (2002). Dispositions, scripts, or motivated correction? Understanding ideological differences in explanations for social problems. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 83, 470-487. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.83.2.470
  50. Stammel, N., Bockers, E., Neuner, F., Chhim, S., Taing, S., & Knaevelsrud, C. (2017). The readiness to reconcile inventory: Assessing attitudes toward reconciliation in victims of war and conflict. European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 33, 436-444. https://doi.org/10.1027/1015-5759/a000304
  51. Tajfel, H., & Turner, J. C. (1986). The social identity theory of intergroup behavior. In S. Worchel, & W. G. Austin (Eds.), Psychology of intergroup relations (pp. 7-24). Nelson-Hall.
  52. Thompson, M. M., Zanna, M. P., & Griffin, D. W. (1995). Let's not be indifferent about (attitudinal) ambivalence. In R. E. Petty & J. A. Krosnick (Eds.), Attitude strength: Antecedents and consequences (pp. 361-386). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.