精神障碍者民事行为能力标准化评定初步研究

发布时间：2018-05-21 21:18

本文选题：司法精神病学 + 民事行为能力　；参考：《苏州大学》2009年硕士论文

【摘要】： 目的:(1)探讨并确定精神障碍者民事行为能力的概念及其评定分级;(2)探讨精神障碍者民事行为能力的评定要点及考量指标;(3)编制精神障碍者民事行为能力评定量表,完成量表信效度的初步研究。方法:从司法精神病学实践出发,结合我国民事法律相关规定,参考国内外民事行为能力评定标准研究成果,明确民事行为能力的概念及评定分级;归纳并确定民事行为能力的六个主要考量指标:处境认识、争端理解、结果认识、信息利用、决定交流、环境功能,并在人身损害赔偿和合同纠纷鉴定案例中进行验证。将上述六条考量指标细化,经咨询、讨论后确定量表初稿,按照民事行为能力评定的逻辑顺序制定民事行为能力标准化评定量表,并进行横断面研究,对该量表的信度、效度及实用性进行初步检验。同时运用健康问题与疾病定量测试法(RTHD)量化被鉴定人精神症状。结果:(1)民事行为能力宜实行三级评定。(2)六条民事行为能力考量指标在人身损害赔偿案件及合同纠纷案件中与专家鉴定结论具有较高的相关性,相关系数在0.632～0.876和0.703～0.834之间(p=0.000),各条目内部相关性也较高,相关系数在0.575～0.911和0.712～0.877之间;(3)断面研究显示,我们编制出的量表总分及各条目的评分者一致性较高,kendall和谐系数为0.649～0.977,P0.05;按照专家结论分成三组,三组的得分分别为:完全民事行为能力组2.45±3.297、限制民事行为能力组12.56±4.788、无民事行为能力组25.44±4.054,三组得分差异有统计学意义(F=146.116,P=0.000);全量表Cronbachα=0.9787;分半信度r=0.9741,P=0.000;量表各条目与总分的相关系数在0.7443～0.9414。量表得分结论与专家鉴定结论一致性较高(kappa=0.726,P=0.000);判别回代显示88.5%的样本划分正确。结论:初步研究表明,精神障碍者民事行为能力评定量表具有较好的信、效度,可开展进一步研究。
[Abstract]:Objective: to explore and determine the concept of civil capacity of mental disorders and its evaluation classification. (2) to explore the main points of assessment and evaluation index of civil capacity of mental disorders and to develop the rating scale for civil capacity of mental disorders. To complete a preliminary study of the reliability and validity of the scale. Methods: based on the practice of judicial psychiatry and the relevant provisions of civil law in our country, the concept and classification of civil capacity were defined by referring to the research results of domestic and foreign civil capacity evaluation standards. Six main measures of civil capacity are summarized and determined: situational cognition, dispute understanding, result cognition, information utilization, decision communication, environmental function, and verified in the case of personal injury compensation and contract dispute appraisal. After consulting and discussing, the first draft of the scale is determined, and the standardized rating scale of civil capacity is established according to the logical order of the evaluation of civil capacity, and the cross-sectional study is carried out to determine the reliability of the scale. The validity and practicability were preliminarily tested. At the same time, the method of quantitative testing of health problems and diseases was used to quantify the mental symptoms. Results: (1) A three-level assessment of civil capacity should be carried out. (2) six indexes for the evaluation of civil capacity have a high correlation with the expert appraisal conclusions in personal injury compensation cases and contract disputes cases. The correlation coefficient was between 0.632n 0.876 and 0.703 / 0.834, and the correlation between each item was also high. The correlation coefficient was 0.575n0.911 and 0.7120.7877) cross-sectional study showed that, The total score of the scale and the consistency of each item were higher than that of the others, and the coefficient of harmony was 0.649 ~ 0.977g / P0.05. according to the expert conclusion, we were divided into three groups. The scores of the three groups were 2.45 卤3.297, 12.56 卤4.788 and 25.44 卤4.054, respectively. The differences among the three groups were statistically significant (P < 0.05); Cronbach 伪 was 0.9787; the split-half reliability was r 0.9741 P0.000; the correlation coefficient between each item and the total score was 0.74430.941414. The score of the scale was in good agreement with the conclusion of expert identification, and the discriminant back generation showed that 88.5% of the samples were correctly classified. Conclusion: the preliminary study shows that the rating scale of civil capacity of mental disorders has good reliability and validity, and can be further studied.
【学位授予单位】：苏州大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2009
【分类号】：D919.3

【参考文献】