: :. 1..,.., 1-2, (1980, 1983).,...,, (M oghadam, Rosen and Carpent er 1989)..,,.. 2... 1.
.,,,,, (1989)., (M artin 1984).,,. 1.8, 2.3. 9012, 3,,,. 11.915.7%, 47.4%. 47.8%.( 1989).. (M artin and Ickovics 1987).. ( 3.9 ) 5,. (1983)..,,,,,,,,,,,,, tics, (Blount, Lubin an d Curry 1992). 1960 (1974), (M oghadam, Rosen and Carpent er 1989).,,,. 1960 ( 1975).,,.,,,. (1984), (611.30)(749.15) (454.29), (1991).
,,. 2. (1991). 15C(pres s ), (phy sical strain ) 17C(h ard ship ) (adv er sity )20C (1987). 1930Han s S ely e, S ely e. (Stressor )" (non specific reaction ) (S ely e 1956)., (S ely e 1970). 1930A dolf M ey er (M ey er 1951), H olm es (1950) 43 (SRE ), (SRRS ). H olm es Rahe (H olm es & Rahe, 1967, 1970, 1971, 1974). Holm es. Holm es (1967),,. H olm es (1967),, (1972, 1981). (1984) (19-65 )..., ;.
.. 1.. 2. 100 6, 1, 250., 6 250. 3.. 48, 5, 0-4. 30 30. Cronbach ' s =.89. 4. 1994. 11. 1-1313.,. 500 (80% )188, 201. 5. SP S S/ P C< sup> +</ sup>. 1). 2) t - test. 3). 4).. 1.,,,,,,,,.
25-45 32.1, 25-46 34.7. 30 (13-15 ). 7.4 9.6. 90%. 42.8% 19.4%. 30.3% 28.2%. 80.6%, 59.0%. M artin Ickovics (1987). 100-159. 75.6%. 53.2%. 0-33 6.7 0-25 3.6. 7.4 6.7. 3. 84.1%. < 1>. < 1> ( ) (n=201) (n=188) t- values (P ) 25-29 30-34 35-39 40 32.1 (25-45 ) 20.9(42) 55.2(111) 12.9(26) 10.9(22) 34.7(27-46 ) 49.5(93) 17.6(33) 13.8(26) 6.55(.000) * * * 1-5 6-10 11-15 16 7.4(1-23) 42.3(85) 38.7(78) 10.5(21) 8.5(17) 9.6 (1-25) 28.7(54) 41.5(78) 18.6(35) 11.2(21) 5.80(.000) * * 97.5(196) 2.5(5) 90.4(170) 9.6(18) 1.20(.001)** 42.8(86) 18.9(38) 18.9(38) 28.2(53) 19.1(36) 20.7(39) 1.6( 3) 30.3(57) 2.38(.044) * *
(n=201) (n=188) t- values (P ) 980.6(162) 11.9(24) 2.( 4) 5.5(11) 59.0(111) 26.1(49) 2.7( 5) 17.0(32 2.67(.30) * * 100 100-150 150-200 200 13.4(27) 60.7(122) 21.4(43) 4.5( 9) 12.8(24) 42.0(79) 28.2(53) 17.0(32) 3.69(.018) * * 0(0) 0(0) 24.4(49) 75.6(152) 2.1( 4) 4.3( 8) 53.2(100) 40.4(76) - 8.12(.000) * * 1-5 6-10 11-15 16 6.7 (0-33) 535(108) 26.5(53) 13.0(26) 7.0(14) 3.6 (0-25) 82.4(155) 16.0(30) 1.1( 2) 5( 1) - 7.21(.000) * * 45.3(91) 38.8(78) 15.4(31) 5(1) * p<.05 * * p<.005 2. 1) 2) 3) 4). 1) 0-1923- 136 47.08 ( 23.34), 3-129 36.56 ( 20.78) < 2>. < 2> (n=201) (n=188) t value(p) 47.08 36.56-4.72(.000) ( ) 20.78 23.34
2) < 3> 1) 2) 3) 4) 5) 6) 7) 8) 9) 10). < 3> (n =201) (n =188) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10,, 40% (1989).,, M artin (1984),., 13, 15, (1984).,.,, 2-3,. 55-58, 43-53 50 ( 1989).., M ogh adam, Rosen an d Carpent er (1989).
( 1987). < 4> 25-29 30-34 35-39 40-46 (n=201) (n=188) 37.86 F =3.377 * 31.15 F =1.944 50.13 34.83 44.81 35.72 52.27 42.70 1-5 6-10 11-15 16 43.87 50.42 39.90 57.00 F =2.829 * 31.92 38.88 33.89 40.49 F =1.592 46.45 74.60 F =7.282 36.40 38.00 F =.100 45.28 50.92 51.63 43.03 F =1.396 36.43 38.06 38.13 37.67 34.61 F =.226 47.30 52.13 22.75 42.18 F =2.019 35.63 34.12 34.00 47.69 F =2.47 100 100-150 150-200 200 43.67 47.00 49.79 46.11 F =.384 41.86 38.33 34.62 33.95 F =.859 51.75 45.85 F =2.357 47.00 35.30 39.31 31.64 F =2.256 41.75 53.23 47.13 F =5.279 * * P<.05
M oghadam, Rosen an d Carpent er (1989)1) 2) 3) 4) 5). < 5> 1) 2) 3) 4) 5) 6) 7) 8) 9) 10).,, (1989). < 5> Multiple R R 2 Beta F (P ) 0.25357 0.30257 0.31873 0.08430 0.10155 0.11159 0.30676 0.17343-0.23501 6.518(.0000) 3.381(.0009) - 2.061(.0400) 3), 16(F =2.829, P <.05), 40(F =3.377, P <.05), (F =7.282, P <.05), (F =5.279, P <.05). 5. (1991),, 30 20,,. 40,,. (1988), (1991), Jalow ice (1981). 40. (1991), (1984),,,. 4)
. F orw ard st epw ise,. < 5>...,.. 1.. 1994 10 411 30, 6 250, 250.. SP S S/ P C< sup > +</ sup >., t - t est,.. 1. 0-19247.09 ( 23.34), 36.56 ( 20.78) (t =4.70, P <.000). 2. 1) 2) 3) 4) 5) 6) 7) 8) 9) 10) 1) 2) 3) 4) 5) 6) 7) 8) 9) 10). 3. 40(F =3.377, P <.05), (F =7.282, P <.05), (F =5.279, P <.05),. 4.,.,
,,,,,,..,.,. 2.. 1.. 2.. 3.. 1. (1992)... 2. (1975)... 3. (1991).., 10, 10-28. 4. (1974)..., 156. 5. (1983)... 6. (1991)... Vol X, - 18. 7. (1984)... 8. (1980).. 9. (1992)... 10. (1991)... 11. (1991)... 12. (1984)... 13. (1989).., 28 (3), 83-90. 14., (1981)..
, V ol. 20. No. 2, 62-77. 15. (1989). 12. 16. H olm es T.H., an d Rahe R. H.(1967). T he S ocial Readju stm ent Rating S cale. Journal of P sy chosom atic Research 11, 213-218. 17. H olm es T.H., W yler A.R. an d M asu da M.(1971). M agnitude of Life Ev ent s and S eriou sn ess of Illn ess. P sy ch osom atic M edicin e, Vol. 33 (2), 115-122. 18. Lubin G.I., Blount W. and Curry A.(1992). F am ily S eparation s in the Milit ary, Milit ary M edicin e, Vol, 157, F eb, 76-80. 19. M arin A., Ickov ics R.(1987). T he Im pact of Employm ent on the psy ch ological W ll- b ein g of Arm y w iv es : lon gitu dinal Surv ey Stu dy. Military M edicin e, Vol, 152, oct, 500-503. 20. M artin A.(1984). Life S atisfaction for Milit ary W iv es. Milit ary M edicine, V ol. 149, sep, 512-514. 21. M oghadam, Rosen an d Carpenter (1989). Im pact of Milit ary Life Stress on the Quality of Life Military W iv es. Milit ary M edicin e, Vol. 154. 116-120. 22. M ey er A.(1951). T he Life Ch art an d th e Obligation of Specifyin g P ositiv e Dat a in P sy chophth ologic Diagn osis. T he John s Hopking Press, 52-56. 23. Rahe R.H. et al.(1974). A M odel for Life Chang es an d Illnes s research. Archiv es of General P sy chiatry, V ol. 31, 1972-1977. 24. Rah e R.H.(1970). Prediction of Nex t F uture Health Chan ge from Subject s Precedin g Life Ch ang es. Journal or P sy chosom atic Research, Vol. 14, 401-406. 25. Rahe R.H., Lind E.(1971). P sy chosocial F act or s and Sudden Cardiac Death, A Pilot Stu dy. Journal of P sy chosom atic Research, Vol. 15, 19-24. 26. S ely e H an s (1970). T h e Stress Syndrom e. Am erican Journ al of Nur sing, Vol, 65 (3), 97-99. 27. St okes A. Gordon E.(1988). Dev elopm ent of In strum ent t o m easure stress in the older A dult. Nur sing Research, Jan/ F eb,, Vol. 37, Nol, 16-19. - A b s t ract - A Com parativ e S tudy of the S tre s s Lev el betw een M ilitary W iv e s and Civ ilian W ie s P ark, Youn g Suk P ark, Youn g Suk : Departm ent of Nur sing T he Graduat e S ch ool Yon sei Univ er sity
H ou sew ife play s a significant r ole in m aint ainin g a health family life. If sh e can n ot function adequately du e to high stress, it w ill affect quality of life of the hou sehold m em bers. It also int erferes w ith th e norm al process of family dev elopm ent. F utherm ore, dy sfunctional fam ily w ill hav e effect s on m or ale of th e servicem en in m ilitary. T his is a descriptive study. T h e m ain purpose of this study is t o com pare the lev el and types of stress b etw een a group of milit ary w iv es an d a group of civilian w iv es and provide a data w hich can be u sed t o dev elop a stres s m anag em ent program. S am ple con sist w ith 250 m ilit ary w iv es an d 250 civilian w iv es residin g in m etro S eoul area. Dat a collection w a s done durin g Oct ober 4, 1994- N ov em ber 30, 1994. Stress w as m ea sured w ith th e in strum ent dev eloped by th e researcher. T h e cronbach ' s score of the in strum ent w as.91. T h e dat a w as analy zed by u sing SP S S - P C. T h e result s of this study are : 1. T h e stress score w as 47.09 for m ilitary w iv es, 36.56 for civilian w iv es. T he rang e of score w as 0-192. T he stres s lev el of milit ary w iv es w as great er th an civilian w iv es. (t =4.80, P <.000) 2. T he rank order of stressor s of m ilit ary w iv es w ere 1) m ov e 2) residential environm ent 3) purch ase of hou se 4) holiday s. T he rank order of stressor s of civilian w iv es w er e 1) hu sb and lat e r eturn after w ork 2) argum ent s w ith hu sband 3) holiday s 4) hu sband ' s drinking problem. T h e result sh ow s that the m ain stres sors of m ilit ary w iv es are frequ ent m ov es, residential environm ent, un cert ainty of the future, un safe w ork environm ent of hu sban d, and th e lack of priv at e life w hich are all associat ed w ith th e milit ary. T herefore, it is urgently n eeded t o distribute this fact s through m ilitary journal t o un derstand the charact eristic of th e stress of m ilit ary w iv es, and t o dev elope appropriate health care program t o lessen the stress.