상담학연구 * -,, ,,....,.,.,... * 2011 ( ) (NRF B00234). (Corresponding Author): / / Tel: /

Similar documents
Journal of Educational Innovation Research 2016, Vol. 26, No. 2, pp DOI: * The Mediating Eff

지난 2009년 11월 애플의 아이폰 출시로 대중화에 접어든 국내 스마트폰의 역사는 4년 만에 ‘1인 1스마트폰 시대’를 눈앞에 두면서 모바일 최강국의 꿈을 실현해 가고 있다

상담학연구 * Shelton(1990) Eden(2001).. D 480,, 425..,... * (Corresponding Author): / / ( ) 1370 Tel: /

Journal of Educational Innovation Research 2019, Vol. 29, No. 2, pp DOI: 3 * Effects of 9th

:,,.,. 456, 253 ( 89, 164 ), 203 ( 44, 159 ). Cronbach α= ,.,,..,,,.,. :,, ( )

Journal of Educational Innovation Research 2018, Vol. 28, No. 3, pp DOI: The Effect of Caree

歯14.양돈규.hwp

歯5-2-13(전미희외).PDF

Journal of Educational Innovation Research 2019, Vol. 29, No. 1, pp DOI: - K * The Analysis

Journal of Educational Innovation Research 2018, Vol. 28, No. 3, pp DOI: * Strenghening the Cap

상담학연구,, SPSS 21.0., t,.,,,..,.,.. (Corresponding Author): / / / Tel: /

. (2013) % % 2. 1% (,, 2014).. (,,, 2007). 41.3% (, 2013). (,,,,,, 2010)... (2010),,, 4.,.. (2012), (2010),., (,, 2009).... (, 2012).


,,,.,,,, (, 2013).,.,, (,, 2011). (, 2007;, 2008), (, 2005;,, 2007).,, (,, 2010;, 2010), (2012),,,.. (, 2011:,, 2012). (2007) 26%., (,,, 2011;, 2006;



27 2, 17-31, , * ** ***,. K 1 2 2,.,,,.,.,.,,.,. :,,, : 2009/08/19 : 2009/09/09 : 2009/09/30 * 2007 ** *** ( :


., (, 2000;, 1993;,,, 1994), () 65, 4 51, (,, ). 33, 4 30, 23 3 (, ) () () 25, (),,,, (,,, 2015b). 1 5,


Journal of Educational Innovation Research 2017, Vol. 27, No. 1, pp DOI: The Effects of Pare

,......

歯유성경97.PDF

230 한국교육학연구 제20권 제3호 I. 서 론 청소년의 언어가 거칠어지고 있다. 개ㅅㄲ, ㅆㅂ놈(년), 미친ㅆㄲ, 닥쳐, 엠창, 뒤져 등과 같은 말은 주위에서 쉽게 들을 수 있다. 말과 글이 점차 된소리나 거센소리로 바뀌고, 외 국어 남용과 사이버 문화의 익명성 등

특수교육논총 * ,,,,..,..,, 76.7%.,,,.,,.. * 1. **

<30392EB9DAB0A1B6F72CC1A4B3B2BFEE2E687770>

. 45 1,258 ( 601, 657; 1,111, 147). Cronbach α=.67.95, 95.1%, Kappa.95.,,,,,,.,...,.,,,,.,,,,,.. :,, ( )

Journal of Educational Innovation Research 2018, Vol. 28, No. 4, pp DOI: 3 * The Effect of H

노동경제논집 38권 3호 (전체).hwp


Journal of Educational Innovation Research 2018, Vol. 28, No. 1, pp DOI: * A Study on the Pe

가족스트레스와 가정생활만족도 간의 관계에서 자아분화의 매개효과

한국성인에서초기황반변성질환과 연관된위험요인연구

Journal of Educational Innovation Research 2017, Vol. 27, No. 2, pp DOI: * Review of Research

Journal of Educational Innovation Research 2018, Vol. 28, No. 3, pp DOI: * The Structural Rel

Journal of Educational Innovation Research 2017, Vol. 27, No. 1, pp DOI: * The

상담학연구. 10,,., (CQR).,,,,,,.,,.,,,,. (Corresponding Author): / / 567 Tel: /

Journal of Educational Innovation Research 2016, Vol. 26, No. 3, pp DOI: * Relationship Betw

Journal of Educational Innovation Research 2018, Vol. 28, No. 1, pp DOI: * A Analysis of

서론 34 2

상담학연구 : *.,,,,, (N=495)..,.,.. * (2013). (Corresponding Author): / / / Tel: /

상담학연구 * ,. SAS,,, Sobel test., (,, ), (, ), (, ) (,, ).,,,.,.. * (Corresponding Author): / / / Tel: / j

.. IMF.. IMF % (79,895 ). IMF , , % (, 2012;, 2013) %, %, %


Kor. J. Aesthet. Cosmetol., 라이프스타일은 개인 생활에 있어 심리적 문화적 사회적 모든 측면의 생활방식과 차이 전체를 말한다. 이러한 라이프스 타일은 사람의 내재된 가치관이나 욕구, 행동 변화를 파악하여 소비행동과 심리를 추측할 수 있고, 개인의

Journal of Educational Innovation Research 2016, Vol. 26, No. 3, pp DOI: * The Effect of Boa

.,,,,,,.,,,,.,,,,,, (, 2011)..,,, (, 2009)., (, 2000;, 1993;,,, 1994;, 1995), () 65, 4 51, (,, ). 33, 4 30, (, 201



Journal of Educational Innovation Research 2017, Vol. 27, No. 2, pp DOI: : Researc

상담학연구 :, ,,.,,,.,.,.,. (Corresponding Author): / / 250 Tel: /

Kor. J. Aesthet. Cosmetol., 및 자아존중감과 스트레스와도 밀접한 관계가 있고, 만족 정도 에 따라 전반적인 생활에도 영향을 미치므로 신체는 갈수록 개 인적, 사회적 차원에서 중요해지고 있다(안희진, 2010). 따라서 외모만족도는 개인의 신체는 타

Journal of Educational Innovation Research 2018, Vol. 28, No. 4, pp DOI: * A Research Trend

(5차 편집).hwp

상담학연구. 9., , 21..,,,,,,... (Corresponding Author): / / 154 Tel: /

Journal of Educational Innovation Research 2016, Vol. 26, No. 3, pp DOI: Awareness, Supports

인문사회과학기술융합학회


DBPIA-NURIMEDIA

- * (32 ), ,,,, * 2013 ( ) (KRF-2013S1A3A ). :,, 3 53 Tel : ,

Journal of Educational Innovation Research 2018, Vol. 28, No. 1, pp DOI: A study on Characte

DBPIA-NURIMEDIA

,......

<C7D1B1B9B1B3C0B0B0B3B9DFBFF85FC7D1B1B9B1B3C0B05F3430B1C733C8A35FC5EBC7D5BABB28C3D6C1BE292DC7A5C1F6C6F7C7D42E687770>

Journal of Educational Innovation Research 2018, Vol. 28, No. 4, pp DOI: A Study on Organizi

,......

8(2)-4(p ).fm

DBPIA-NURIMEDIA

DBPIA-NURIMEDIA

54 한국교육문제연구제 27 권 2 호, I. 1.,,,,,,, (, 1998). 14.2% 16.2% (, ), OECD (, ) % (, )., 2, 3. 3


,126,865 43% (, 2015).,.....,..,.,,,,,, (AMA) Lazer(1963)..,. 1977, (1992)

Journal of Educational Innovation Research 2018, Vol. 28, No. 1, pp DOI: Parents Perception

ÀÌÁÖÈñ.hwp

Journal of Educational Innovation Research 2018, Vol. 28, No. 2, pp DOI: : - Qualitative Met

Journal of Educational Innovation Research 2018, Vol. 28, No. 4, pp DOI: * A S

<31335FB1C7B0E6C7CABFDC2E687770>

Journal of Educational Innovation Research 2016, Vol. 26, No. 3, pp DOI: * The Grounds and Cons

#Ȳ¿ë¼®

<31372DB9CCB7A1C1F6C7E22E687770>

Journal of Educational Innovation Research 2017, Vol. 27, No. 3, pp DOI: (NCS) Method of Con


저작자표시 - 비영리 - 변경금지 2.0 대한민국 이용자는아래의조건을따르는경우에한하여자유롭게 이저작물을복제, 배포, 전송, 전시, 공연및방송할수있습니다. 다음과같은조건을따라야합니다 : 저작자표시. 귀하는원저작자를표시하여야합니다. 비영리. 귀하는이저작물을영리목적으로이용할

다문화 가정의 부모

:,,,. (,, ), (,,,, ),,. 559 ( 205, 203, 151; 132, 427).,,,.,.,,,,.,,,,..,. :,, ( )

44-6대지.08김정희-5

歯5-4-26(황혜리,김미경).PDF

歯제7권1호(최종편집).PDF

Journal of Educational Innovation Research 2017, Vol. 27, No. 4, pp DOI: A Study on the Opti

도비라

380 Hyun Seok Choi Yunji Kwon Jeongcheol Ha 기존 선행연구에서는 이론연구 (Ki, 2010; Lee, 2012), 단순통계분석 (Lee, 2008), 회귀분석 (Kim, 2012)과 요인분석 (Chung, 2012), 경로분석 (Ku,

<3132C8ABBCF8C7FD2E687770>

Journal of Educational Innovation Research 2017, Vol. 27, No. 4, pp DOI: * A Study on Teache

<313120B9DABFB5B1B82E687770>

상담학연구 , , ,, ( ),.,., 15 19,, 30, (Corresponding Author): / Tel: /

Journal of Educational Innovation Research 2016, Vol. 26, No. 2, pp DOI: * Experiences of Af

학교폭력사건 처리과정에 개입한 전문상담교사의 경험연구

27 2, 1-16, * **,,,,. KS,,,., PC,.,,.,,. :,,, : 2009/08/12 : 2009/09/03 : 2009/09/30 * ** ( :

05_최운선_53~67,68.hwp

232 도시행정학보 제25집 제4호 I. 서 론 1. 연구의 배경 및 목적 사회가 다원화될수록 다양성과 복합성의 요소는 증가하게 된다. 도시의 발달은 사회의 다원 화와 밀접하게 관련되어 있기 때문에 현대화된 도시는 경제, 사회, 정치 등이 복합적으로 연 계되어 있어 특

Transcription:

* -,,. 273 207 480,,....,.,.,... * 2011 ( ) (NRF-2011-330-B00234). (Corresponding Author): / / 50 410 Tel: 02-2123-2437 / E-mail: lee82@yonsei.ac.kr

. 20 40 500 61.6%. 58.9% (, 2013. 1. 10). 10 9 (, 2012. 8. 26) (, 2012. 9. 28).. 760, 44% (40%), (25%), (18%), (8%) (, 2012. 7. 6). (2009) 35.8%, 52.7% (,,, 2009). 35.6%, 71.3% 29.5%, 72.5%. 10.9%, 24.8%,,,, (,,, 2009).,., (,, 2012)., (Choate, 2007;,, 2009 ). (,, 2010), (,, 2012) (,, 2010;, 1998) (,, 2009). (,, 2010),.

(,,,, 2007). (Herman & Polivy, 1980). (, 2003;,, 2006; Polivy & Herman, 1985).,,.,. (Stein, et al., 1991;,, 2001 )... (Cattarin & Thompson, 1994; Stice & Hoffman, 2004; Shroff & Thompson, 2006 ).,,,, (, 2006;,,, 2007). (,, 2005;,,, 2007;, 2008;, 2010; Attie & Brooks-Gunn, 1989; Corning, Krumm, & Smitham, 2006; Stice & Shaw, 2002)..,,,,,, (2007). (2010),,., (Heinberg & Thompson, 1992; Keery, den Berg, & Thompson, 2004; Stormer & Thompson, 1996).,. (Coopersmith, 1967), (Rosenberg, 1965). (Leary, Schreindorfer & Haupt, 1995; Polivy & Herman, 2002; Striegel-

Moore & Cachelin, 2001;, 2008 ).,,,, (2008), Thompson (1999).,, (2010).,.,.,.,,.,.. (Weltzin et al., 2005), (,,, 2008 ).,,.,,. (2010). 1) 1) (2010).,,...,, (p.51,, 2013), (2013) (p.51).,, -

(, 2003) (, 2010). (, 2009) (between-groups design) (critical), (cross-culturally),., ( ) (,, 2010), (Vohs, Heatherton, & Herrin, 1999) (Rapp- Paglicci, Dulmus, & Wodarski, 2004), (stressors),,, (Compas, Wagner, Slavin, & Vannatta, 1986; Rosen, Compas, & Tacy, 1993) (sample-specific), (2010) (p.810 ) (Heppner, Wampold, & Kivlighan, 2008). (, 2006).,.,,..., (, 2005) (, 1993)., (Weltzin et al., 2005), (,, 2012). (,, 2010), (,,, 2008).. (2010), 1, 2.

...,?,,,? 8 497. 17 480. 273 (56.9%), 207 (43.1%), 1 5 19 16.56 (SD=0.74). 1 264 (55.0%), 2 159 (33.1%), 3 33 (6.9%), 24 (5.0%). 464 (96.7%),, 10 (2.1%), 6 (1.2%). (,, ) 1.. Rosenberg(1965) (1974). (self-worth) (self- (n = 273) (n = 207) 31-140kg 38-97kg (SD) 64.66kg(11.12) 53.56kg(8.08) 157-190cm 150-189cm (SD) 173.77cm(5.39) 161.58cm(5.20) (BMI) 8.59-42.73 15.97-38.86 (SD) 21.39(3.40) 22.10(19.87)

acceptance) 5, 5 4. (1 ) (4 ).. Rosenberg (1965) Cronbach s.82, Cronbach s.80. Thompson, Heinberg, Tantleff(1991) (Physical Appearance Comparison Scale; PACS) 5 Tiggemann McGill(2004) (Specific Attributes Comparison Scale; SACS) 3. PACS 5 (2008) (,, 2010, ). (1 ) (5 ). Thompson (1991) Cronbach s.78, (2010).66, Cronbach s.71. SACS,, 5 (1 ) (5 ). 1 ( ), 4 ( ) 3 5 5 3. 3, 5,. Tiggemann McGill (2004) Cronbach s.81, (2010).80, Cronbach s.81. (Eating Disorder Inventory-2: EDI-2) (1997) (Garner, 1991;, 1997 ). EDI-2 8 3 91.,,,,,,,,,,. (1997) 7, 7, 9 23. 9 (1 ) (6 ). (1997) Cronbach s.76 Cronbach s.84.

(2001). 5, 5, 5 15. (1 ) (7 ), (1 ) (7 ). (2010). (2001) Cronbach s.75,.92. Cronbach s.84,.94. Cronbach s a,.,. 2 7 West, Finch Curran(1995), Mahalanobis d-squared.,,,. Anderson Gerbing(1988) 2,. Russel, et al.,(1988) 3 (item-parcel)..,, RMSEA, TLI, CFI. RMSEA.05.08,.10 (Hu & Bentler, 1999)., TLI CFI.90.95 (, 2007). (Bootstrap) 10,000 95%.. PASW Statistic 18.0 AMOS 18.0.,, 2.,,,,..

M SD - 2.84.48 -.17** - 2.66.72 -.27**.44** - 3.54.93 -.12*.52**.53** - 2.91 1.38. *p<.05, **p<.01.,,, 3.., (df = 59, N=480)= 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 1-2.65** - 3.59**.63** - 4 -.15** -.19** -.09* - 5 -.04 -.06.02.42** - 6 -.19** -.16** -.12**.63**.31** - 7 -.23** -.23** -.18**.29**.13**.51** - 8 -.27** -.26** -.23**.26**.13**.47**.79** - 9 -.13** -.13** -.13**.28**.07.38**.55**.59** - 10 -.12* -.12* -.07.39**.22**.54**.44**.37**.35** - 11 -.11* -.08 -.12**.38**.21**.56**.56**.49**.41**.76** - 12 -.10* -.08 -.15**.27**.16**.49**.48**.39**.32**.72**.76** - 13 -.07 -.06 -.05.30**.17**.50**.48**.40**.34**.69**.75**.83** - M 2.78 2.87 2.89 2.80 2.69 2.50 3.18 3.78 3.66 3.08 3.03 2.52 2.92 SD.48.59.61.85.75.98 1.14 1.11.94 1.42 1.50 1.54 1.65.01 -.20.10 -.13 -.13.13.35 -.25 -.08.21.23.74.42 -.11 -.16 -.18 -.22.20 -.63 -.08 -.08.44 -.73 -.81 -.33 -.83. 1, 2, 3 3, 4, 5 2. 6 7, 8, 9 3, 10, 11, 12, 13 2. *p<.05, **p<.01.

1 1.00.79 2 1.31.08 16.37.83*** 3 1.22.08 15.66.75*** 1 1.00.36 2 2.12.29 7.27.67*** 3.45.47 7.36.94*** 1 1.00.64 2 1.65.11 15.22.88*** 3 1.72.11 15.28.90*** 1 1.00.88 2.89.04 23.37.82*** 1 1.04.04 27.21.89*** 2 1.10.04 26.44.88***. ***p<.001. 219.672(p=.000) TLI=.941, CFI=.955 RMSEA=.075. 4.75.83,.36.94,.64.90,.82.89. (p<.001). 13 4. 5 TLI CFI.90 RMSEA.09. =83.221.05.

df TLI CFI RMSEA 223.218 60.941.954.075 306.439 62.914.932.091 83.221..,,, 3.. ( = -.21, p<.001) ( =-.21, p<.001).. ( =.53, p<.001) ( =.42, p<.001),. ( =.34, p<.001). (Bootstrap) 6..05.,,.

-.21*** -.21*** -.21*** -.11*** (-.17 -.06) -.32*** -.20*** (-.27 -.13) -.20***.53***.53***.42***.18*** (.13.25).61***.34***.34***. ***p<.001. ( ), 7.,,,.,,,,.., 8. M SD - -.28** -.33** -.15* 2.82.47 -.09 -.44**.42** 2.93.67 -.24**.28** -.43** 4.04.81 -.08.49**.47** - 3.43 1.33 M 2.86 2.45 3.15 2.52 SD.49.69.82 1.29.,. *p<.05, **p<.01

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 1 -.71**.64** -.20** -.05 -.28** -.27** -.33** -.22** -.23** -.18* -.11 -.09 2.77.48 2.61** -.67** -.31** -.08 -.28** -.30** -.31** -.24** -.23** -.15* -.05 -.03 2.86.57 3.57**.61** - -.16* -.00 -.21** -.14* -.21** -.17* -.11 -.16* -.09 -.00 2.84.55 4 -.11 -.10 -.02 -.33**.62**.27**.23**.30**.30**.32**.18**.24** 3.08.82 5 -.02 -.05.04.48** -.33**.16*.11.05.16*.18**.17*.13 2.75.66 6 -.13* -.08 -.03.56**.30** -.50**.46**.29**.46**.47**.35**.35** 2.90.92 7 -.23** -.21** -.19**.13*.08.36** -.79**.41**.39**.43**.35**.34** 3.75 1.06 8 -.25** -.25** -.22**.10.11.32**.71** -.46**.38**.44**.30**.29** 4.32.97 9 -.07 -.06 -.07.11.04.28**.49**.54** -.28**.32**.15*.16* 4.06.86 10 -.03 -.03 -.01.37**.25**.52**.36**.24**.28** -.76**.68**.64** 3.50 1.39 11 -.07 -.03 -.07.31**.20**.54**.53**.39**.33**.73** -.69**.68** 3.60 1.39 12 -.09 -.10 -.16**.23**.13*.51**.46**.33**.31**.72**.78** -.83** 3.03 1.57 13 -.05 -.09 -.05.22**.16**.50**.45**.34**.33**.69**.75**.80** - 3.49 1.62 M 2.79 2.88 2.93 2.58 2.64 2.20 2.74 3.36 3.35 2.76 2.60 2.13 2.48 SD.48.60.65.81.81.92.99 1.03.87 1.36 1.44 1.39 1.53. 1, 2, 3 3, 4, 5 2. 6 7, 8, 9 3, 10, 11, 12, 13 2.,. *p<.05, **p<.01 M SD df TLI CFI RMSEA 148.532 59.934.950.075 151.836 59.914.935.087 9. TLI.934, CFI.950, RMSEA.075, TLI.914, CFI.935, RMSEA

(n=273) (n=207) 1 1.00.76 1.00.83 2 1.34.12 11.14.81*** 1.27.10 12.79.87*** 3 1.34.12 10.88.75*** 1.07.09 11.67.77*** 1 1.00.38 1.00.35 2 1.65.30 5.47.62*** 2.28.49 4.71.65*** 2.74 2.74 5.54.91*** 3.75.80 4.68.95*** 1 1.00.60 1.00.50 2 1.61.16 9.85.83*** 2.03.28 7.28.89*** 3 1.63.16 9.93.87*** 2.20.30 7.28.89*** ***p <.001 1 1.00.88 1.00.83 2.87.05 17.23.81***.97.07 13.29.80*** 1.98.05 20.58.89*** 1.20.08 15.33.88*** 2 1.05.05 19.54.87*** 1.22.08 14.95.87***.087. 10..75-.81,.38-.91,.60-.87,.81-.89,.001..77-.87,.35-.95,.50-.89,.80-.88,.001.. 11 TLI.890-.935, CFI.912-.950,

df TLI CFI RMSEA (N=273) (N=207) 150.201 60.935.950.074 219.128 62.890.912.097 68.927 152.971 60.916.935.087 174.120 62.902.922.094 21.149 RMSEA.074-.097 2. 2, TLI, CFI, RMSEA. =68.927, =21.149.05..,,, 4. ( =-.11, p>.05). ( =-.27, p<.001).. ( =.39, p<.001) ( =.49, p<.001),,. ( =.34, p<.001),. ( =-.34, p<.01) ( =-.21, p<.01)

.. ( =.48, p<.001) ( =.32, p<.01),. ( =.29, p<.01),. 12.,.05.,. (p<.05).,,.., (n=273) (n=207) -.11 -.11 -.34*** -.34*** -.27*** -.04 (-.11.01) -.31*** -.21* -.16*** (-.26 -.09) -.37*** -.16** (-.26 -.06) -.16** -.22*** (-.32 -.12) -.22***.39**.39**.48***.48***.49***.14** (.07.22).62***.32***.14** (.06.24).46***.35**.35**.29**.29**. *p<.05, **p<.01, ***p<.001

df TLI CFI RMSEA 303.198 120.926.943.057 316.411 129.930.942.055 13.213. (, 2000). (, 2007). 13. 13.213, 9.05.,.. (,,, 2012). 148.55, (df=13, p<.05). TLI -.040, CFI -.042, RMSEA.014.. (M.I),,,., 72.295 (df=8, p<.05) TLI=-.019, CFI= -.020, RMSEA=.007.. df TLI CFI RMSEA 316.411 129.930.942.055 464.961 142.890.900.069 148.55 388.706 137.911.922.062 72.295

,,..,,,.,. (2008), (2010) Thompson (1999) Leary, Schreindorfer Haupt(1995), Polivy Herman(2002), Striegel-Moore Cachelin(2001) (, 2008 ), Keery, den Berg Thompson (2004)..,,. (,, 2010).,..,.,.,..,. Piaget (, 2012).

.,,,.,,., (2010). (2010),.,.,.,, (2012) (2012)..., (,, 2012; Weltzin et al., 2005),....,

...,., (drive for muscularity) (,, 2012; McCreary, Sasse, 2000; Parent & Moradi, 2011)., (,, 2012).,.,..,,,,,,,,, (2013). :. (2003).. :., (2010).. (4), 791-815., (2010).. 153-181., (2012). :. (4), 929-948.,,, (2007).. (4), 471-480. (2006)..,.,, (2008). : (gender difference). 71-95.,,,, (1993).. :., (2010).,,. (1), 363-377.

, (2005). (Body Shape Questionnaire: BSQ) -. (4), 1163-1174., (2009). :. (3), 141-165. (2009).,.,, (2007). -. (1), 73-91. (1998)., (2007). :. (2003).,. (2010).,. (2008).,,,. (3), 885-901. (2010). :,,. (4), 1103-1122. (2012. 8. 26). 90%. http://www.anewsa.com/ detail.php?number=385295&thread=10r03.,, (2012). :. (2012. 7. 6).,. http://www.edaily.co.kr/news/ NewsRead.edy?SCD=JE51&newsid=015284865995 91896&DCD=A00505&OutLnkChk=Y., (2006).. (4), 727-741., (2012). :. 62-84. (1997).. (1), 87-100. (2006)..,.,, (2009). :. (1974).. (1), 107-130.,, (2012). :. (2), 55-77. (2005).,. (2013. 1. 10). 3,? http://www.ebuzz.co.kr/news/shoop/ 2703968_3025.html. (2012. 9. 28).!. http://kmomnews.hankyung.com/news/ apps/news.sub_view?popup=0&nid=05&c1=05&c2

=01&c3=00&nkey=201209281434551., (2001).. (4), 795-807., (2012).. (6), 3111-3129. (2000).. (1), 161-177. Anderson, J. C., & Gerbing, D. W. (1988). Structural equation modeling in practice: A review and recommended two-step approach. Psychological Bulletin, 103, 411-423. Attie, I., & Brooks-Gunn, J. (1989). Development of eating problem in adolescent girls: A longitudinal study. Developmental Psychology, 25, 70-79. Compas, B. E., Wagner, B. M., Slavin, L. A., & Vannatta, K. (1986). A prospective study of life events, social support, and psychological symptomatology during the transition from high school to college. American Journal of Community Psychology, 14, 241-257. Coopersmith, S. (1967). Parental characteristics related to self-esteem. In S. Coopersmith (Ed.), Antecedents of self-esteem (pp.96-117). San Francisco, CA: Freeman. Corning, A. F., Krumm, A. J., & Smitham, L. A. (2006). Differential social comparison processes in women with and without eating disorder symptoms. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 53, 338-349. Herman, C. P., & Polivy, J. (1980). Restrained eating. In A. B. Stunkard (Ed.), Obesity (pp.208-225). Philadelphia: Saunders. Heinberg, L. J., & Thompson, J. K. (1992). The effects of figure size feedback (positive vs. negative) and target comparison group (particularistic vs. universalistic) on body image disturbance. International Journal of Eating Disorders, 12, 441-448. Heppner, P. P., Wampold, B. E., & Kivlighan, D. M. (2008). Research design in counseling (3rd ed.). Belmont, CA: Thompson Higher Education. 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), 1-55. Keery, H., van den Berg, P., & Thompson. J. K. (2004). An evaluation of the Tripartite Influence Model of body dissatisfaction and eating disturbance with adolescent girls. Body Image, 1, 237-251. Leary, M. R., Schreindorfer, L. S., & Haupt, A. L. (1995). The role of low self-esteem and behavioral problems: Why is low self-esteem dysfuncional? Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 14, 297-314. McCreary, D. R., & Sasse, D. K. (2000). An exploration of the drive for muscularity in adolescent boys and girls. Journal of American College Health, 48, 297-304. Parent, M. C., & Moradi, B. (2011). His biceps become him: A test of objectification theory's application to drive for muscularity and propensity for steroid use in college men. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 58, 246-256. Polivy, J., & Herman, C. P. (1985). Dieting and binging: A causal analysis. American Psychologist, 40, 193-201. Polivy, J., & Herman, C. P. (2002). Causes of eating

disorders. Annual Review of Psychology, 53, 187-213. Rapp-Paglicci, L. A., Dulmus, C. N., & Wodarski, J. S. (2004). Handbook of preventive interventions for children and adolescents (Ed.). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley. Rosen, J. C., Compas, B. E., & Tacy, B. (1993). The relation among stress, psychological symptoms, and eating disorder symptoms: A prospective analysis. International Journal of Eating Disorders, 14, 153-162. Rosenberg, M. (1965). Society and adolescent self image. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. Russell, D. W., Kahn, J. H., Spoth, R., & Altmaier, E. M. (1998). Analyzing data from experimental studies: A latent variable structural equation modeling approach. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 45, 18-29. Shroff, H., & Thompson, J. K. (2006). The tripartite influence model of body image and eating disturbance: A replication with adolescent girls. Body Image, 3, 17-23. Stice, E., & Shaw, H. E. (2002). Role of body dissatisfaction in the onset and maintenance of eating pathology: A synthesis of research findings. Journal of Psychosomatic Research, 53, 985-993. Stice, E., & Hoffman, E. (2004). Eating disorder prevention programs. In J. K. Thompson (Ed.), Handbook of eating disorders and obesity (pp.33-57). New York: Wiley. Stormer, S. M., & Thompson, J. K. (1996). Explanations of body image disturbance: A test of maturational status, negative verbal commentary, social comparison, and sociocultural hypotheses. International Journal of Eating Disorders, 19, 193-202. Striegel-Moore, R. H., & Cachelin, F. M. (2001). Etiology of eating disorders in woman. The Counseling Psychologist, 29, 635-661. Thompson, J. K., Heinberg, L. J., & Tantleff, S. (1991). The Physical Appearance Comparison Scale (PACS). Behavior Therapist, 14, 174. Thompson, J. K., Heinberg, L, J., Altabe, M., & Tantleft-Dunn, S. (1999). Exacting beauty: Theory, assessment, and treatment of body image disturbance. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. Tiggemann, M., & McGill, B. (2004). The role of social comparison in the effect of magazine advertisements on women s mood and body dissatisfaction. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 23, 23-44. Vohs, K. D., Heatherton, T. F., & Herrin, M. (1999). Disordered eating and the transition to college: A prospective study. International Journal of Eating Disorders, 29, 280-288. Weltzin, T. E., Weisensel, N., Franczyk, D., Burnett, K., Klitz, C., & Bean, P. (2005). Eating disorders in men update. The Journal of Men s Health and Gender, 2, 186-193. West, S. G., Finch, J. F., & Curran, P. J. (1995). Structural equation model with nonnormal variables: Problems and remedies. In R. H. Hoyle (Ed), Structural equation modeling: Concepts, issues, and applications (pp.56-75). Thousand Oaks: Sage. : 2013. 04. 15. : 2013. 06. 15. : 2013. 06. 15.

Mediating Effects of Physical Comparison and Body Dissatisfaction in the Relationship between Self-Esteem and Restrained Eating among Male and Female High School Students Gyeongsang University Yonsei University Dongguk University The relations among self-esteem, physical comparison, body dissatisfaction, and restrained eating have been established with university students. The current study purports to confirm the aforementioned relations with high school male and female students. Participants were 480 high school students in Gyeongsangnam-do area. We created a research model and an alternative model based on previous research and examined which model could better explain high school students restrained eating. In addition, a multi-group analysis was performed to investigate gender differences. Main study results are as follows. First, with high school students, the research model which hypothesized physical comparison and body dissatisfaction as partial mediators was found to be a better model compared to the alternative model. Second, the mediating effects of both physical comparison and body dissatisfaction in the relationship between self-esteem and restrained eating were significant. Third, the research model was found to be a better model than the alternative one both in the male and female high school students. Finally, latent means analyses by gender were not to be calculated because partial scalar invariance was dismissed in the multi-group analysis. Implications and limitations of the study were discussed. Key words : high school male/female students, self-esteem, restrained eating, physical comparison, body dissatisfaction, multi-group analysis