Skip navigation

DSpace

機構典藏 DSpace 系統致力於保存各式數位資料(如:文字、圖片、PDF)並使其易於取用。

點此認識 DSpace
DSpace logo
English
中文
  • 瀏覽論文
    • 校院系所
    • 出版年
    • 作者
    • 標題
    • 關鍵字
  • 搜尋 TDR
  • 授權 Q&A
    • 我的頁面
    • 接受 E-mail 通知
    • 編輯個人資料
  1. NTU Theses and Dissertations Repository
  2. 理學院
  3. 心理學系
請用此 Handle URI 來引用此文件: http://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/jspui/handle/123456789/52889
完整後設資料紀錄
DC 欄位值語言
dc.contributor.advisor鄭伯壎(Bor-Shiuan Cheng)
dc.contributor.authorJia-Wei Chenen
dc.contributor.author陳嘉瑋zh_TW
dc.date.accessioned2021-06-15T16:32:31Z-
dc.date.available2015-08-20
dc.date.copyright2015-08-20
dc.date.issued2015
dc.date.submitted2015-08-13
dc.identifier.citationAryee, S., Budhwar, P. S., & Chen, Z. X. (2002). Trust as a mediator of the relationship between organizational justice and work outcomes: Test of a social exchange model. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 23(3), 267-285.
Berscheid, E., & Walster, E. H. (1978). Interpersonal attraction (second ed.). Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
Boss, R. W. (1978). Trust and managerial problem solving revisited. Group & Organization Management, 3(3), 331-342.
Butler, J. K. (1991). Toward understanding and measuring conditions of trust: Evolution of a conditions of trust inventory. Journal of management, 17(3), 643-663.
Carroll, J. S. (1978). Causal attributions in expert parole decisions. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 36(12), 1501-1511.
Chen, X. P., Eberly, M. B., Chiang, T. J., Farh, J. L., & Cheng, B. S. (2014). Affective Trust in Chinese Leaders Linking Paternalistic Leadership to Employee Performance. Journal of Management, 40(3), 796-819.
Coleman, J. S. (1990). Foundations of social theory. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Colquitt, J. A., Scott, B. A., & LePine, J. A. (2007). Trust, trustworthiness, and trust propensity: a meta-analytic test of their unique relationships with risk taking and job performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92(4), 909-927.
Cook, J., & Wall, T. (1980). New work attitude measures of trust, organizational commitment and personal need non‐fulfilment. Journal of Occupational Psychology, 53(1), 39-52.
Deutsch, Morton. 'Trust and suspicion.' Journal of conflict resolution (1958): 265-279.
Deutsch, M. (1962). Cooperation and trust: Some theoretical notes.
Dirks, K. T., & Ferrin, D. L. (2002). Trust in leadership: meta-analytic findings and implications for research and practice. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87(4), 611-628.
Dirks, K. T., Lewicki, R. J., & Zaheer, A. (2009). Reparing relationships within and between organizations: building a conceptual foundation. Academy of Management Review, 34(1), 68-84.
Dirks, K. T., Kim, P. H., Ferrin, D. L., & Cooper, C. D. (2011). Understanding the effects of substantive responses on trust following a transgression. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 114(2), 87-103.
Folkes, V. S. (1984). Consumer reactions to product failure: An attributional approach. Journal of consumer research, 398-409.
Giffin, K. (1967). The contribution of studies of source credibility to a theory of interpersonal trust in the communication process. Psychological bulletin, 68(2), 104.
Gillespie, N. (2012). 17 Measuring trust in organizational contexts: an overview of survey-based measures. Handbook of research methods on trust, CH17.
Golembiewski, R. T., & McConkie, M. (1975). The centrality of interpersonal trust in group processes. In C. L. Cooper (Ed.), Theories of group processes. New York: Wiley.
Good, D. (2000). Individuals, interpersonal relations, and trust. Trust: Making and breaking cooperative relations, 31-48.
Jackson, Susan E. (Ed), (1992). Diversity in the workplace: Human resources initiatives. The professional practice series., (pp. 13-29). New York, NY, US: Guilford Press, xxvi, 356 pp.
Jones, A. P., James, L. R., & Bruni, J. R. (1975). Perceived leadership behavior and employee confidence in the leader as moderated by job involvement.Journal of Applied Psychology, 60(1), 146-149.
Kee, H. W., & Knox, R. E. (1970). Conceptual and methodological considerations in the study of trust and suspicion. Journal of Conflict Resolution, 357-366.
Kim, P. H., Dirks, K. T., Cooper, C. D., & Ferrin, D. L. (2006). When more blame is better than less: The implications of internal vs. external attributions for the repair of trust after a competence-vs. integrity-based trust violation. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 99(1), 49-65.
Kim, P. H., Dirks, K. T., & Cooper, C. D. (2009). The repair of trust: A dynamic bilateral perspective and multilevel conceptualization. Academy of Management Review, 34(3), 401-422.
Kim, P. H., Ferrin, D. L., Cooper, C. D., & Dirks, K. T. (2004). Removing the shadow of suspicion: the effects of apology versus denial for repairing competence-versus integrity-based trust violations. Journal of Applied Psychology, 89(1), 104-118.
Krosgaard, M. A., Brodt, S. E., & Whitener, E. M. (2002). Trust in the face of conflict: the role of managerial trustworthy behavior and organizational context.Journal of Applied Psychology, 87(2), 312-319.
Kruglanski, A. W. (1970). Attributing trustworthiness in supervisor-worker relations. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 6(2), 214-232.
Larson, C . E., & LaFasto, F. M. J. (1989). Teamwork: What must go right/what can go wrong. Newbury Park, CA: Sage
Larzelere, R. E., & Huston, T. L. (1980). The dyadic trust scale: Toward understanding interpersonal trust in close relationships. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 595-604.
Lawler, E. (1992). The ultimate advantage: Creating the high-involvement organization. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass
Lewicki, R. J., McAllister, D. J., & Bies, R. J. (1998). Trust and distrust: New relationships and realities. Academy of Management Review, 23(3), 438-458.
Lewick, R., & Bunker, B. B. (1996). Developing and maintaining trust in work relationships. Trust in Organizations: Frontiers of Theory and Reach, 114-139.
Lewis, J. D., & Weigert, A. (1985). Trust as a social reality. Social forces, 63(4), 967-985.
Lount, R. B., Zhong, C. B., Sivanathan, N., & Murnighan, J. K. (2008). Getting off on the wrong foot: The timing of a breach and the restoration of trust. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 34(12), 1601-1612.
McFall, L. (1987). Integrity. Ethics, 5-20.
March, J. G., & Shapira, Z. (1987). Managerial perspectives on risk and risk taking. Management science, 33(11), 1404-1418.
Malhotra, D., & Murnighan, J. K. (2002). The effects of contracts on interpersonal trust. Administrative Science Quarterly, 47(3), 534-559.
Mayer, R. C., Davis, J. H., & Schoorman, F. D. (1995). An integrative model of organizational trust. Academy of management review, 20(3), 709-734.
Mayer, R. C., & Gavin, M. B. (2005). Trust in management and performance: who minds the shop while the employees watch the boss?. Academy of Management Journal, 48(5), 874-888.
Newcomb, T. M. (1956). The prediction of interpersonal attraction. American psychologist, 11(11), 575.
Reeder, G. D., & Brewer, M. B. (1979). A schematic model of dispositional attribution in interpersonal perception. Psychological Review, 86(1), 61-79.
Riker, W. H. 1974. The nature of trust. In J. T. Tedeschi (Ed.), Perspectives on social power: 63-81. Chicago: Aldine.
Rousseau, D. M., Sitkin, S. B., Burt, R. S., & Camerer, C. (1998). Not so different after all: A cross-discipline view of trust. Academy of Management Review, 23(3), 393-404.
Rosen, B., & Jerdee, T. H. (1977). Influence of subordinate characteristics on trust and use of participative decision strategies in a management simulation.Journal of Applied Psychology, 62(5), 628-631.
Rotter, J. (1967). A new scale for the measurement of interpersonal trust. Journal of Personality, 35(4), 651-665.
Schoorman, F. D., Mayer, R. C., & Davis, J. H. (2007). An integrative model of organizational trust: Past, present, and future. Academy of Management Review, 32(2), 344-354.
Schlenker, B. R., Helm, B., & Tedeschi, J. T. (1973). The effects of personality and situational variables on behavioral trust. Journal of personality and social psychology, 25(3), 419-427.
Schweitzer, M. E., Hershey, J. C., & Bradlow, E. T. (2006). Promises and lies: Restoring violated trust. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 101(1), 1-19.
Sitkin, S. B., & Roth, N. L. (1993). Explaining the limited effectiveness of legalistic “remedies” for trust/distrust. Organization science, 4(3), 367-392.
Solomon, L. (1960). The influence of some types of power relationships and game strategies upon the development of interpersonal trust. The Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 61(2), 223-230.
Takaku, S. (2001). The effects of apology and perspective taking on interpersonal forgiveness: A dissonance-attribution model of interpersonal forgiveness. The Journal of Social Psychology, 141(4), 494-508.
Tomlinson, E. C., Dineen, B. R., & Lewicki, R. J. (2004). The road to reconciliation: Antecedents of victim willingness to reconcile following a broken promise. Journal of Management, 30(2), 165-187.
Tomlinson, E. C., & Mayer, R. C. (2009). The role of causal attribution dimensions in trust repair. Academy of Management Review, 34(1), 85-104.
Weiner, B. (Ed.). (1974). Achievement motivation and attribution theory. General Learning Press.
Weiner, B. (1986). An attributional model of motivation and emotion. New York: Springer-Verlag.
Zand, D. E. (1972). Trust and managerial problem solving. Administrative science quarterly, 229-239.
dc.identifier.urihttp://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/jspui/handle/123456789/52889-
dc.description.abstract信任是人與人之間相處的重要資產,沒有信任便無法產生合作;同樣地,信任在組織內也是十分常見的議題,且信任的學術研究也未曾停歇過,在在都顯示信任的重要性。然而信任發展的階段,將無可避免地經歷到信任破壞,因此如何修復信任便是一項重要的研究議題,傳統以來信任修復的研究泰半集中於修復其被破壞的因素,也就是提高信任者對於被破壞因素的正向知覺程度。但應同時考慮其他因素來評估信任程度,因此本研究以跨因素的角度探討信任修復,透過實驗法控制可能的外部干擾已達到正確的因果推論。本研究的目的有三個,首先為再次驗證相同因素內信任修復的效果,其次為探討跨因素之間的信任修復效果是否存在,以及是否在特定的破壞情境下,信任的修復效果有差異。研究結果發現同因素以及跨因素的信任修復皆存在,以及在因誠信因素下降所造成的信任破壞,使用提升誠信因素的修復效果會小於使用提升能力因素的修復效果。結合以上研究結果,填補了信任修復在跨因素修復效果上的研究缺口,讓其他研究者能夠更進一步地去探討信任修復;而在實務上,當人們遭遇到信任破壞時,能夠有更多信任修復的選擇,並且能選出修復效果較佳的選擇。zh_TW
dc.description.abstractTrust is a valuable asset between humans; there would be no cooperation if there was no mutual trust. Similarly, trust is a common issue in organizations, and there have been studies on trust. All of these indicate the importance of trust. However, at the period of developing trust, one will definitely encounter the decline of trust, so how to repair trust is a significant research area. In the past, the studies on repairing trust used to be centered upon fixing the cause of decline, that is, elevating the awareness of the causes. Nevertheless, one cannot determine the estimation of trust by one single factor. Other factors should also be taken into consideration. Thus, this study focuses on the repair through cross-factors, and possible external interference will be controlled by experiments to achieve correct reasoned conclusion. The current study has three purposes. First, this study examines the effect of repair because of the same factor. Secondly, this study discusses whether the effect of recovery because different factors exists. Lastly, this study compares the differences between effects of recovery in designated situations. The results indicate that the same factor as well as cross-factor of the recovery of trust exists. Furthermore, when trust is damaged because the level of trust decreases, the repair effect of heightening integrity is less significant than that of heightening the factor of abilibty. The above research results combined fill up the void of repairing trust because of different factors. In this way, other scholars may further explore the issue of trust repair. In practice, when humans encounter the damage of trust, they can have more choices to recover it, and select choices much more effective.en
dc.description.provenanceMade available in DSpace on 2021-06-15T16:32:31Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1
ntu-104-R01227128-1.pdf: 2875190 bytes, checksum: 7accd166e7df09cd8b6c79a1c96853d6 (MD5)
Previous issue date: 2015
en
dc.description.tableofcontents第一章、文獻回顧與假設....................................................................................1
第一節、前言…………………………………..…….......…………....1
第二節、信任…………………………………..……......………..…....3
第三節、信任破壞………………………………………..…….…….12
第四節、信任修復……………………………………........................13
第二章、研究方法..............................................................................................17
第一節、研究樣本………...………………………………...........…17
第二節、研究工具與實驗流程……………………….…….......…..17
第三章、研究結果..............................................................................................26
第一節、描述統計分析…………….................…....…………....….26
第二節、信任修復操弄檢核……………….........................…….…27
第三節、三因子混和設計分析…………………….....................….28
第四章、討論......................................................................................................33
第一節、實驗結果討論……………..……….............…..……....….33
第二節、綜合討論…………………………...…………..............….36
第三節、研究限制與建議………………………....….....…....…….37
第四節、實務意涵及未來研究方向………….........…….........……42
參考文獻…………………………………………………..................................44
dc.language.isozh-TW
dc.title初期關係之信任修復:類別內外的修復效果zh_TW
dc.titleTrust Repair in Burgeoning Relationship: The Repair Effect of Cross Factorsen
dc.typeThesis
dc.date.schoolyear103-2
dc.description.degree碩士
dc.contributor.oralexamcommittee吳宗祐(Tsung-Yu Wu),姜定宇(Ding-Yu Jiang),林姿葶(Tzu-Ting Lin)
dc.subject.keyword信任,信任修復,能力,誠信,zh_TW
dc.subject.keywordTrust,Trust repair,Ability,Integrity,en
dc.relation.page49
dc.rights.note有償授權
dc.date.accepted2015-08-13
dc.contributor.author-college理學院zh_TW
dc.contributor.author-dept心理學研究所zh_TW
顯示於系所單位:心理學系

文件中的檔案:
檔案 大小格式 
ntu-104-1.pdf
  目前未授權公開取用
2.81 MBAdobe PDF
顯示文件簡單紀錄


系統中的文件,除了特別指名其著作權條款之外,均受到著作權保護,並且保留所有的權利。

社群連結
聯絡資訊
10617臺北市大安區羅斯福路四段1號
No.1 Sec.4, Roosevelt Rd., Taipei, Taiwan, R.O.C. 106
Tel: (02)33662353
Email: ntuetds@ntu.edu.tw
意見箱
相關連結
館藏目錄
國內圖書館整合查詢 MetaCat
臺大學術典藏 NTU Scholars
臺大圖書館數位典藏館
本站聲明
© NTU Library All Rights Reserved