국내 관계중독의 연구 동향과 관련 변인에 대한 메타분석 = The research trends of relationship addicition in korea & meta analysis of variables related to relationship addiction

국문 초록 (Abstract)

이 연구의 목적은 관계중독 관련 연구의 동향을 분석하고, 메타분석을 통해 관계중독과 관련된 변인의 상관관계 효과크기를 체계적으로 탐색하는데 있다. 관계중독과 관련한 연구로서 학술지에 게재된 논문 총 53편을 출판연도, 연구대상, 연구주제 및 연구방법, 척도, 관련 변인군에 대해 분석하였다. 또한 논문 53편 중 32편을 메타분석 및 메타ANOVA를 실시하였다. 분석결과로 첫째, 국내 관계중독에 대한 연구는 꾸준히 되고 있으며, 학술지에 게재되는 논문의 수도 상대적으로 계속 증가하였다. 둘째, 연구대상이 초기에는 대학생․성인초기 중심에서 점차 전연령성인을 대상으로 하는 연구의 수도 증가하며, 연애경험의 유무, 결혼유무, 성별등 다양한 대상으로 제한하여 연구하고 있음을 확인하였다. 셋째, 논문 44편(83.0%)이 양적연구이며, 연구주제도 변인 간 관계연구가 42편(79.2%)으로 가장 많았다. 관계중독을 측정하기 위한 척도로는 ‘Susan Peabody(2005)개발, 이수현(2009)이 번안한 척도를 우상우(2014)가 한국판으로 타당화한 관계중독 척도(RAQ-30)’가 25편(59.52%)으로 가장 많이 사용되었다. 넷째, 연구변인에서는 관계중독을 종속변인으로 연구한 논문이 28편(66.7%)으로 대다수를 차지하였다. 다섯째, 관련 변인의 결과로 관계중독에 영향을 미치는 독립변인으로 가족관련 41.1%, 매개변인에는 정서관련 33.3%, 종속변인으로 데이트폭력과 관련된 변인이 64.3%로 가장 많이 연구되었다.
여섯째, 메타분석으로 알아본 관계중독 관련 변인의 효과크기는 보호요인에서는 심리내적요인 중 정서관련(–0.72), 심리외적요인 중 관계관련(-0.45)이 가장 큰 효과크기로, 위험요인에서는 심리내적요인 중 정서관련(0.62), 심리외적요인의 관계관련(0.52)이 가장 큰 효과크기를 나타냈다. 일곱째, 연구 대상의 연령별, 성별, 척도별 조절효과를 살펴보면, 연구 대상 연령별에 따른 효과크기의 차이가 있다고 나타났으며, 그 외 결과는 유의한 차이가 없는 것으로 나타났다. 마지막으로 출판편향은 보호요인이 우측편향, 위험요인은 유의미한 차이가 없는 것으로 나타났다. 마지막으로 본 연구를 통해 알아본 국내 관계중독의 연구 동향과 관련 변인 간의 효과크기를 분석한 결과를 바탕으로 연구의 시사점, 한계점, 후속연구에 대한 제언을 논의하였다.

목차 (Table of Contents)

• Ⅰ. 서 론 ························································································· 1
• 1. 연구의 필요성 및 목적····························································· 01
• 2. 연구 문제····················································································· 06
• Ⅱ. 이론적 배경 ·········································································· 07
• 1. 관계중독······················································································· 07
• 1) 관계중독의 개념····································································· 07
• 2) 관계중독의 유형······································································· 09
• 3) 관계중독의 관련변인 ····························································· 10
• 2. 메타분석······················································································· 12
• 1) 메타분석의 개념 및 특성····················································· 12
• 2) 메타분석의 절차 및 방법······················································· 13
• 3) 효과크기의 산출······································································· 13
• 4) 효과크기의 해석······································································· 14
• 5) 효과크기의 동질성 검정 및 이질성 검정··························· 15
• Ⅲ. 연구방법 ················································································ 17
• 1. 국내 관계중독 연구동향··························································· 17
• 1) 분석 대상 논문 선정과 분석절차 ······································· 17
• 2) 분류기준 ····················································································· 17
• 2. 국내 관계중독과 관련변인의 메타분석 연구······················· 23
• 1) 자료 수집 및 선정··································································· 23
• 2) 자료코딩 ····················································································· 24
• 3) 자료분석 ····················································································· 24
• Ⅳ. 연구결과 ················································································ 27
• 1. 국내 관계중독 연구동향····························································· 27
• 2. 관계중독 관련 변인들에 대한 메타분석································· 35
• Ⅴ. 논의 ························································································· 46
• 1. 논의 및 결론················································································· 46
• 2. 의의 및 시사점 ············································································· 53
• 3. 한계점 및 제언 ············································································· 54
• 참고문헌 ························································································ 55
• ABSTACT ·················································································· 61
• 부 록 ························································································ 63