本文關注當代良態科學中測量方法學的議題。首先闡明科學哲學家Alexandrova Anna對良態測量方法學提出的哲學分析，以及她針對建構效度驗證程序所提出的挑戰與改善策略。其次，筆者將以一個良態測量：Spirituality Index of Well-Being（以下簡稱SIWB。）為例，對Alexandrova的哲學進行兩面向分析。第一， Alexandrova的論述是否符合SIWB的科學實作發展歷程。第二，Alexandrova提出的改善策略在實作上的可行性。筆者認為即便SIWB符合Alexandrova的論述，但在實作上，Alexandrova的改善策略將因沒有考量到實際操作策略的操作人員所面臨的困難與挑戰，而降低了其原初想透過改善策略達到的策略目的可能。
本文架構如下：第壹章闡明Alexandrova如何分析良態測量方法學。第貳章簡述SIWB的發展歷程，第參章分析SIWB是否符合Alexandrova的論述範圍。第肆章筆者將說明，實作上Alexandrova的改善策略如何忽略了策略操作的考量，進而影響了策略的可行性。

The purpose of this paper is to focus on the methodological issue of measuring Well-Being in practice. I approach this topic in two ways. Firstly, I will summarize Alexandrova’s argument about the construct validation of measuring Well-Being in practice. Then, I would use the Spirituality Index of Well-Being (SIWB) and its’ Chinese version (SIWB-C) to examine the practicability of Alexandrova’s improvement strategy in practice. I argue that even SIWB fit with Alexandrova’s analysis, the practicability of Alexandrova’s strategy would decrease since the strategy undermined the question of how to operate the strategy.
The thesis divides into four parts. Chapter 1 shall focus on Alexandrova’s examination of measuring Well-Being and her strategy of improvement. Chapter 2 will concentrate on the scientific process of SIWB. Chapter 3 shall show how SIWB fits with Alexandrova’s argument. Finally, I shall show how Alexandrova’s strategy undermines the question of how to operate it, which will decrease its practicability.

目錄
論文電子檔著作權授權書.......................................i
論文審定同意書.............................................ii
誌謝.....................................................iii
中文摘要..................................................iv
英文摘要...................................................v
目錄......................................................vi
圖目錄..................................................viii
表目錄....................................................ix
序論.......................................................1
第壹章 Alexandrova 針對良態測量提出的哲學分析................2
第一節 建構效度驗證程序隱含的邏輯.....................4
第二節 迴避理論......................................7
第三節 證據式主觀主義...............................12
第四節 Alexandrova的改善策略........................21
第五節 小結........................................24
第貳章 Spiritual index of Well-Being的研究歷程.............25
第一節 綜觀SIWB的科學研究歷程........................25
第二節 微觀SIWB研究者如何處理效度....................36
第三節 小結........................................39
第參章 SIWB具有迴避理論的現象...............................41
第一節 SIWB的建構效度隱含邏輯........................41
第二節 SIWB的迴避理論...............................44
第三節 SIWB的證據式主觀主義..........................49
第四節 小結........................................56
第肆章 分析Alexandrova改善策略的可行性......................57
第一節 論述說明.....................................57
第二節 實作上，改善策略可能遭遇到的困難...............62
第三節 設想反駁.....................................72
第四節 小結........................................77
結語......................................................78
參考文獻..................................................79
附錄一 SIWB的中文版研究................................附錄頁1
附錄二 發展在地靈性認知與照護策略的評估工具的部分研究成果說明...附錄頁18


圖目錄
圖1 : Conceptual Framework of Health-related Spirituality. ..31

表目錄
表1：The Positive and Negative Affect Schedule ............9
表2：Spiritual Index of Well-Being........................28
表3：心靈安適指數量表..................................附錄頁3
表4：發展在地靈性認知與照護策略的評估工具—人體試驗計畫許可書...附錄頁29
表5：發展在地靈性認知與照護策略的評估工具—訪談大綱......附錄頁30

參考文獻
Alexandrova, A. &. Haybron, D.M. (2016). Is Construct Validation Valid? Philosophy of Science, Vol.83(5), 1098–1109.
Alexandrova, A. (2017). A Philosophy for the Science of Well-Being, Oxford.
Brislin, R.W. (1986). The wording and translation of research instruments. In: Lonner WJ, Berry JW, editors. Field Methods in Cross-Cultural Research. Beverly Hills: Sage, 137–164.
Cronbach, L.J. & Meehl, P.E. (1955). Construct validity in psychological tests.Psychological Bulletin, Vol.52(4), 281– 302.
Daaleman, T.P., Cobb, A. K.& Frey, B.B. (2001). Spirituality and Well-Being: An Exploratory Study of the Patient Perspective. Social Science and Medicine, Vol.53,119-127.
Daaleman, T.P., Frey, B.B., Dennis, W.& Stephanie, A.S. (2002). The Spirituality Index of Well-Being: Development and Testing of a New Measure. Journal of Family Practice, Vol.51(11)
Daaleman, T.P. and Frey, B.B. (2004a). The Spirituality Index of Well-Being: A New Instrument for Health-Related Quality of Life Research. Annals of Family Medicine, Vol.2(5),499-503.
De Vet, H.C., Terwee, C.B., Mokkink, L.B., & Knol, D.L. (2011). Measurement in medicine: A practical guide. Cambridge.
Diener, E., Robert A.E., Randy J.L & Sharon, G. (1985). The Satisfaction With Life Scale, Journal of Personality Assessment, Vol.49(1), 71-75
Diener, E. (2000). Subjective well-being, the science of happiness and a proposal for a national index. Am Psychol, Vol.55,34–43
Diener, E., Lucas, R., Schimmack, U. & John, H. (2008). Well-Being for Public Policy. Oxford.
Dorsey, D. (2012) Subjectivism without desire. Philosophical Review, Vol 121.No.5,407-442.
Frey, B.B.& Daaleman, T.P. (1999) Toward a Patient-Centered Measure of Spirituality.The Behavioral Measurement Letter, Vol.6(2).
Frey, B.B., Jennifer, T.P., Lisa, M.E., and Diane, M. (2004b). Cognitive Spirituality and Hope in Catholic High School Students. Catholic Education. A Journal of Inquiry and Practice, Vol.7(4), 479-491.
Frey, B. B., Daaleman, T. P., & Peyton, V. (2005). Measuring a Dimension of Spirituality for Health Research: Validity of the Spirituality Index of Well-Being. Research on Aging, Vol.27(5), 556-577.
Lee, Y.H. & Salman, A. (2016). Evaluation of using the Chinese version of the Spirituality Index of Well-Being (SIWB) scale in Taiwanese elders. Applied Nursing Research, Vol.32,206-211.
Lonner, W. J., & Berry, J.W. (Eds.). (1986). Field Methods in Cross-Cultural Research. Beverly Hills: Sage,137–164.
Pavot, W., & Diener, E. (1993). Review of the Satisfaction with Life Scale. Psychological Assessment, Vol.5, 164-172.
Pavot, W., & Diener, E. 2008, The Satisfaction With Life Scale and the emerging construct of life satisfaction, The Journal of Positive Psychology, Vol.3(2), 137–152.
Pavot, W. & Diener, E. (2009) Review of the Satisfaction With Life Scale. In E. Diener (Ed.) Social Indicators Research Series Vol 39. Assessing Well-Being: The Collected Works of Ed Diener, 101-117.
Tang, S.T., Dixon, J. (2002). Instrument translation and evaluation of equivalence and psychometric properties: the Chinese Sense of Coherence Scale. J Nurs Meas. Vol.10(1),59–76.
Watson, D., Clark, L. A., & Tellegen, A. (1988). Development and validation of brief measures of positive and negative affect: The PANAS scales. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, Vol.54(6),1063–1070.
Wilson, I.B. & Cleary, P.D. (1995). Linking Clinical Variables With Health-Related Quality of Life. Journal of the American Medical Association, Vol.273(1), 59-64.
Wu, L.F. & Kuo, M. (2016). Randomized controlled trial of a six-week spiritual reminiscence intervention on hope, life satisfaction, and spiritual well-being in elderly with mild and moderate dementia. International Journal of Geriatric Psychiatry.Vol.31, 120–127.
Wu, L.F., Yang, S. H., & Koo, M. (2017). Psychometric properties of the Chinese version of Spiritual Index of Well-Being in elderly Taiwanese, BMC Geriatrics, Vol.17 (3).
李茂能（2009）。圖解式結構方程模型軟體AMOS之簡介。URL= https://www.slideserve.com/biana/amos。
李國揚 (2019)。〈認知證成及其結構〉，《華文哲學百科》（2019 版本），王一奇（編）。URL=http://mephilosophy.ccu.edu.tw/entry.php?entry_name=認知證成及
其結構。
李瑞全（2012）。醫藥之良好狀態（wellbeing）之分析：生活品質、生活質量與
生命質素，《應用倫理評論》，101年52期，頁141-152。
吳麗芬、楊淑慧、林鉅勝、張曼萍（2015）。住院老年人心靈安適的相關因素初探，中科大學報第2卷第1期，頁117-134。
國家教育研究院，《國家教育研究院雙語詞彙、學術名詞暨辭書資訊網》。URL= https://terms.naer.edu.tw/
楊淑慧、吳麗芬、林鉅勝（2016）。安養中心老年住民心靈安適相關因子探討，臺灣老年醫學暨老年學雜誌，第11卷第4期，頁249-261。
楊淑慧、吳麗芬、謝承恩、林鉅勝（2018）。運用結構方程模型探討榮民之家老年男性住民生活品質的預測因子。臺灣老年醫學暨老年學雜誌，第13卷第1期，頁45-57。