本研究之研究目的為：（一）編製未來時間觀量表及未來目標量表，分析其信、效度。（二）考驗未來目標是否為未來時間觀與自我調整學習策略之中介變項。（三）檢驗Miller和Brickman（2004）之理論觀點，即個人目標導向是否為未來目標與自我調整學習策略之中介變項。（四）考驗本研究建構的「未來取向之自我調整學習歷程模式」與國內學生的觀察資料是否適配。
為完成上述研究目的，本研究首先以驗證性因素分析考驗未來時間觀量表與未來目標量表之建構效度。其次，採用結構方程模式（SEM）中介變項考驗未來目標中介模式與個人目標導向中介模式是否成立。最後，考驗本研究所建構的「未來取向之自我調整學習歷程模式」與國內學生的觀察資料是否適配。研究工具包括研究者自編的未來時間觀量表及未來目標量表；研究者修訂的個人目標導向量表；研究者採用的自我調整學習策略量表。另外，本研究共抽取兩批樣本，第一批預試樣本234人用以考驗新編量表之信度；第二批正式樣本739人用以檢驗各模式之適配度，抽樣範圍為台灣地區休息教育學程之大學生。蒐集所得資料將以SEM進行分析考驗。
本研究發現如下：
一、本研究所建構的未來時間觀二階驗證性因素分析模式及四向度未來目標驗證性因素分析模式皆具有理想的適配度，亦即未來時間觀量表及未來目標量表具有良好的信、效度。
二、本研究所建構的未來目標中介模式獲得觀察資料之支持，即未來目標可能是未來時間觀與自我調整學習策略中介變項。因此，未來時間觀可能會透過未來目標對自我調整學習策略產生間接效果。
三、本研究依據Miller和Brickman（2004）之觀點所建立的個人目標導向中介模式獲得觀察資料之支持，即個人目標導向是未來目標與自我調整學習策略中介變項。因此，未來目標會透過個人目標導向對自我調整學習策略產生間接效果。
四、本研究所建構的「未來取向之自我調整學習歷程模式」可用以解釋國內大學生的觀察資料。分析結果顯示：未來時間觀對未來目標有直接效果；未來目標對個人目標有直接效果；個人目標對自我調整學習策略有直接效果。另外，未來時間觀會透過未來目標及個人目標導向對自我調整學習策略產生間接效果；而未來目標會透過個人目標導向對自我調整學習策略產生間接效果。
本研究根據研究結果進行討論，並提供教學輔導及未來研究之建議。

The purposes of this study were to (a) developed the Future Time Perspective Questionnaire (FTPQ) and the Future Goal Questionnaire (FGQ) ,and analyze their reliability and validity, (b) test if future goal is the mediator variable of future time perspective and self-regulated learning strategies, (c) test the theory of Miller and Brickman, if individual goal orientations is the mediator variable of future goal and self-regulated learning strategies, (d) test model fit of the self-regulated learning process model of future orientation that developed on this study.
To attain these goals above, the study first used the confirm factor analysis to test the construct validity of FTPQ and FGQ. Second, according to the properties of the mediator variable of Baron and Kenny, the study used the structural equation model (SEM) to test if the future goal model and the individual goal orientations model bring into existence. At last, the study test if the self-regulated learning process model of future orientation fitted the empirically observed data well. The instruments used in the study include the FTPQ, the FGQ, the Individual Goal Orientation Scale and Self-Regulated Learning Strategies Scale. Besides, we collect two groups of samples. The first group were 234 students to test the reliability scale. The second group were 739 students to test the model fit of the models on the study. All students are collegians in Taiwan who take the class about the teacher education program. The statistical methods used to analyze the data collected were SEM.
The results of this study were summarized as following: (a) The second-order confirm factor analysis of future time perspective and the confirm factor analysis of 4-dimensions future goal structure fitted the empirically observed data well. It means that FTPQ and FGQ developed on this study both have good reliability and validity. (b) The future goal model fitted the empirically observed data well. The results of analysis showed that future goal could be the mediator variable of future time perspective and self-regulated learning strategies. It means that future time perspective had indirect effects on self-regulated learning strategies through future goal. (c) The individual goal orientations model developed base on the theory of Miller and Brickman, fitted the empirically observed data well.
The results of analysis showed that individual goal orientations could be the mediator variable of future goal and self-regulated learning strategies. It means that future goal had indirect effects on self-regulated learning strategies through individual goal orientations. (d) The analysis of self-regulated learning process model of future orientation fitted the empirically observed data well. The results of analysis showed that self-regulated learning process model of future orientation could be used to explain the empirically observed data. Future time perspective had direct effects on future goal, future goal had direct effects on individual goal orientations, and individual goal orientations had direct effects on self-regulated learning strategies, Besides, future time perspective had indirect effects on self-regulated learning strategies through future goal and individual goal orientations, and future goal had indirect effects on self-regulated learning strategies through individual goal orientations.
Based on the findings of this study, suggestions for teaching, educational guidance and further studies were proposed.

參考書目
一、中文部分
危芷芬（2005）。角色義務與個人選擇：生活目標的建構與衝突。華人本土心理學研究追求卓越延續計畫報告。
余安邦（1992）。成就動機與成就觀念：華人文化心理的探索。載於楊國樞、黃光國和楊中芳（編），華人本土心理學（頁665-711）。台北：遠流。
李玫蓉（2004）。國中生向表現目標、文化價值觀與適應性學習組型之關係。國立成功大學教育研究所碩士論文。
林宗鴻（譯）（2003）。M . Jerry著。人格心理學。臺北：揚智。
林易慧（2005）。課室目標線索與個人目標導向對國小學童解題成就及自我調整學習之影響。國立成功大學教育研究所碩士論文。
林宴瑛（2006）。個人目標導向、課室目標結構與自我調整學習策略之關係及潛在改變量分析。國立成功大學教育研究所碩士論文。
施淑慎（2005，10月）。教室目標結構與成就目標取向對國小學童自我阻礙行為及考試焦慮之預測作用。論文發表於台灣心理學會主辦之「台灣心理學會第四十四屆年會」，中壢。
陳正昌、程炳林、陳新豐、劉子鍵（2005）。多變量分析方法－統計軟體應用（四版）。台北：五南。
陸洛（2005）。個人取向與社會取向的自我觀：概念、測量、及其適應功能。華人本土心理學研究追求卓越延續計畫報告。
彭淑玲、程炳林（2005）。四向度課室目標結構、個人目標導向與課業求助行為之關係。師大學報：教育類，50（2），69-95。
程炳林（2002）。多重目標導向、動機問題與調整策略之交互作用。師大學報：教育類，47（1），36-58。
程炳林（2003）。四向度目標導向模式之研究。師大學報：教育類，48（1），15-40。
楊岫穎（2003）。國中生自我設限的情境及歷程因素之研究。國立成功大學教育研究所碩士論文。
楊國樞（1992）。中國人的社會取向：社會互動的觀點。載於楊國樞和黃光國（編），中國人的心理與行為（頁87-141）。臺北：桂冠。
楊國樞、余安邦和葉明華（1991）。中國人的個人傳統性與現代性：概念與測量。載於楊國樞和黃光國（編），中國人的心理與行為（頁241-306）。臺北：桂冠。
葉光輝（2005）。個體化與關係自主性：華人青少年的兩種自主性發展取向的構念效度研究。華人本土心理學研究追求卓越延續計畫報告。
劉潔玲（2002）。從中國傳統文化思想及價值觀論目標取向理論在華人社會的應用。教育研究資訊，10（3），183-203。
謝岱陵（2003）。國中生四向度目標導向之中介效果分析。國立成功大學教育研究所碩士論文。
蘇嘉鈴、程炳林（2005）。國中生行動導向、目標導向與動機調整策略之關係。教育心理學報，36（4），395-415。

二、英文部分
Ames, C. (1992). Classroom: Goals, structures, and student motivation. Journal of Educational Psychology, 84(3), 261-271.
Ames, C., & Archer, J. (1988). Achievement goals in the classroom: Students’ learning strategies and motivation processes. Journal of Educational Psychology, 80(3), 260-267.
Bandura A. (1986). Social foundations of though and action: A social cognitive theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Baron, R. M., & Kenny, D. A. (1986). The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51(6), 1173-1182.
Bembenutty, H., Karabenick, S. A. (2003). Academic delay of gratification, future goals, and self-regulated learning. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational research Association, Chicago.(ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 479 131)
Bembenutty, H., Karabenick, S. A. (2004). Inherent association between academic delay of gratification, future time perspective, and self-regulated learning. Educational Psychology Review, 16(1), 35-57.
Brickman S., Miller R. B., & Roedel T. D. (1997). Goal valuing and future consequence as predictors of cognitive engagement. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational research Association, Chicago.
Daltrey M. H., & Langer P. (1984). Development and evaluation of a measure of future time perspective. Perceptual and Motor Skill, 58, 719-725.
De Volder M. L., & Lens J. (1982).Academic achievement and future time perspective as a cognitive-motivational conceot. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 42, 566-571.
Deci E. L., & Ryan R. M. (2000). The ”what” and the ”why” of goal pursuits: Human needs and the self-determination of behavior. Psychological Inquiry, 11, 227-268.
Dweck, C. S. (1986). Motivation Processes affecting learning. American Psychologist, 41, 1040-1048.
Elliot, A. J. (1999). Approach and avoidance motivation and achievement goals. Educational Psychologist, 34(3), 169-189.
Elliot, A., & Church, M. (1997). A hierarchical model of approach and avoidance achievement motivation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 72, 218-232.
Elliot, A., & Harackiewicz, J. (1996). Approach and avoidance achievement goals and intrinsic motivation: A mediational analysis. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70, 968-980.
Elliot, A., & McGregor, H. (2001). A 2×2 achievement goal framework. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 76, 501-519.
Gjesme T. (1983). On the concept of future time orientation: Considerations of some functions’ and measurements’ implications. International Journal of Psychology, 18, 443-461.
Husman J., & Lens J. (1999). The role of the future in student motivation. Educational Psychology, 34(2), 113-125.
Husman J., McCann E., & Crowson H. M. (2000). Volitional strategies and future time perspective: embracing the complexity of dynamic interactions. International Journal of Educational Research, 33, 777-799.
Malmberg L-E., & Norrgard N. (1999). Adolescents’ ideas of normative life span development and personal future goals. Journal of Adolescence, 22, 33-47.
Markus H. R., & Kitayama S. (1991). Culture and the self: Implicatiom for cognition, emotion, and motivation. Psychological Review, 98, 224-253.
Markus H. R., & Kitayama S. (2003). Culture, self and the Reality of the Social. Psychological Inquiry, 14(3), 277-283.
Middleton, M. J., & Midgley, C. (1997). Avoiding the demonstration of lack of ability: An underexplored aspect of goal theory. Journal of Educational Psychology, 89(4), 710-718.
Miller R. B., & Brickman S. J. (2004). A model of future-oriented motivation and self-regulation. Educational Psychology Review, 16(1), 9-33.
Miller R. B., DeBacker, T. K., & Greene B. A. (1999). Perceived instrumentality and academics: link to task valuing. Journal of Instructional Psychology, 26(4), 250-260.
Nelson-Le Gall, S. (1981). Help-seeking: An understudied problem-solving skill in children . Development Review, 1, 224-246.
Newman, R. S. (2002). How self-regulated learning cope with academic difficulty: The role of adaptive help seeking. Theory into Practice, 41(2), 132-138.
Nicholls, J. (1984). Achievement motivation: Conceptions of ability, subjective experience, task choice, and performance. Psychological Review, 91 , 328-346.
Nurmi J. E. (1991). How do adolescents see their future? A review of the development of future orientation and planning. Development Review, 11, 1-59.
Nuttin J., & Lens J. (1985). future time perspective and motivation: Theory and research method. Leuven & Hillsdale, NJ: Leuven University Press & Erlbaum.
Peetsma T. T. D. (2000). Future time perspective as a predictor of school investment. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 44(2), 177-192.
Phalet K., Andriessen I., & Lens W. (2004). How future goals enhance motivation and learning in multicultural classroom. Educational Psychology Review, 16(1), 59-89.
Pintrich, P. R. (1999). Taking control of research on volitional control: Challenges for future theory and research. Learning and Individual Difference, 11(3), 335-355.
Pintrich, P. R. (2000a). The role of goal orientation in self-regulated learning. In M. Boekaerts, P. R. Pintrich, & M. Zeidner (Eds.), Handbook of self-regulation (pp. 451-502). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
Pintrich, P. R. (2000b). Multiple goals , multiple pathways: The role of goal orientation in learning and achievement. Journal of Educational Psychology, 92(3), 544-555.
Pintrich, P. R. (2000c). An achievement goal theory perspective on issues in motivation terminology, theory, and research. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 25, 92-104.
Radosevich, D. J., Vaidyanathan, V. T., Yeo, S., & Radosevich, D. M. (2004). Relating goal orientation to self-regulatory processes: A longitudinal field test. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 29, 207-229.
Raynor J. O. (1981). Future orientation and achievement motivation: Toward atheory of personality functioning and change. In G. d’Ydewalle & M. Lens(Eds.), Cognition in human motivation and learning(pp. 199-231). Leuven & Hillsdale, NJ: Leuven University Press & Erlbaum.
Roeser, R. W., Midgley, C., & Urdan, T. (1996). Perception of the school psychological environment and early adolescent’s self appraisals and academic engagement: The mediating role of goals and belonging. Journal of Educational Psychology, 88, 408-422.
Rubio, D. M., Berg-Weger, M., & Tebb, S. S. (2001). Using structural equation modeling to test for multidimensionality. Structural Equation Modeling, 8(4), 613-626.
Seijts G. H.( 1998). The importance of future time perspective in theories of work motivation. The Journal of Psychology, 132(2), 154-168.
Shell D. F., & Husman J. (2001). The multivariate dimensionality of personal control and future time perspective beliefs in achievement and self-regulation. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 26, 481-506.
Simons J., & Lens W. (2000). Wanting to have versus wanting to be: The effect of perceived instrumentality on goal orientation. The British Psychological Society, 9, 335-351.
Simons J., Vansteenkiste M., Lens W., & Lacante M. (2004). Placing motivation and future time perspective theory in a temporal perspective. Educational Psychology Review, 16(2), 121-139.
Skaalvik, E. (1997). Self-enhancing and Self-defeating ego orientations: Relations with task and avoidance orientation, achievement, self-perceptions, and anxiety. Journal of Education Psychology, 89, 71-81.
Urdan, T. (1997). Achievement goal theory: Past result, future directions. In M. Maehr & P. Pintrich (Eds.), Advances in motivation and achievement (Vol. 10, pp. 99-141). Greenwich , CT: JAI.
Urdan, T., & Midgley, C. (2001). Academic self-handicapping: What we know, what more there is to learn. Education Psychology Review, 13(2), 115-138.
Vansteekiste M., Lens J., Soenens B., & Matos L. (2005). Examining the motivational impact of intrinsic versus extrinsic goal framing and autonomy-supportive versus internally controlling communication style on early adolescents’ academic achievement. Child Development, 72(2), 483-501.
Vansteenkiste M., Simons J., Lens W., Sheldon K. M., & Deci E. L. (2004). Motivatiig learning, performance and persistence: The synergistic role of intrinsic-goal content autonomy-supportive context. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 87, 246-260.
Wigfield, A. ＆ Eccles, J. S. (2000). Expectancy-value theory of achievement motivation. Contemporary educational psychology, 25, 68-81.
Wolters, C. A. (2003). Regulation of motivation: Evaluating an underemphasized aspect of self-regulated learning. Educational Psychologist, 38(4), 189-205.
Wolters, C. A. (2004). Advancing achievement goal theory: Using goal structures and goal orientation to predict students’ motivation, cognition, and achievement. Journal of Educational Psychology, 96(2), 236-250.
Wolters, C. A., Yu, S. L., & Pintrich, P. R. (1996). The relation between goal orientation and students’ motivational beliefs and self-regulated learning. Learning and Individual Differences, 8, 211-238.
Yang K. S.(1996). Psychological transformation of the Chinese people as a result of social modernization. In M. H. Bond (Ed.) The handbook of Chinese Psychology, 19-39. Hong Kong: Oxford University Press.
Yang K. S.(2002). Beyond Maslow’s culture-bond, linear theory: Apreliminary statement of the Double-Y model of basic human needs. In J. Berman(Ed.),Nebraska symposium on motivation, Cross- cultural differents in perspectives on the self, 49, Lincoln, NE: University of Nebraska Press.
Zimmerman, B. J. (2000). Attaining self-regulation: A social cognitive perspective. In M. Boekaerts, P. R. Pintrich, & M. Zeidner (Eds.), Handbook of self-regulation (pp. 13-39). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.