請用此 Handle URI 來引用此文件:
http://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/jspui/handle/123456789/88864
完整後設資料紀錄
DC 欄位 | 值 | 語言 |
---|---|---|
dc.contributor.advisor | 戚樹誠 | zh_TW |
dc.contributor.advisor | Shu-Cheng Chi | en |
dc.contributor.author | 鄒禮恩 | zh_TW |
dc.contributor.author | Li-En Tsou | en |
dc.date.accessioned | 2023-08-16T16:06:22Z | - |
dc.date.available | 2023-11-09 | - |
dc.date.copyright | 2023-08-16 | - |
dc.date.issued | 2023 | - |
dc.date.submitted | 2023-08-07 | - |
dc.identifier.citation | 周麗芳、任金剛、林守紀(2013)。轉型領導與建言行為:文化價值觀的關鍵角色。組織與管理,6(2),115-159。
林守紀、周麗芳、任金剛、曾春榮(2017)。員工建言行為:回顧與未來。人力資源管理學報,17(1),1-33。 邱雅暖、張婉菁(2018)。真誠領導與服務導向組織公民行為之關係:結構方程模式分析。人力資源管理學報,18(2),99-130。 洪贊凱、曾鈺雯(2012)。從印象管理觀點探討組織個體政治技巧與建言行為之關係。人力資源管理學報,12(2),1-23。 紀乃文、李學佳(2018)。員工為何建言?探討員工利社會動機與印象管理動機對建言行為的影響:求成型焦點、情感性組織承諾與公民行為壓力的干擾效果。管理學報,35(1),1-25。 胡金生、黃希庭(2006)。華人社會中的自謙初探。心理學報,29,1392-1395。 高鈺涵(2022)。組織倫理氛圍與領導者-成員交換品質能否提升員工建言行爲?探討心理安全感之中介效果[未出版之碩士論文]。國立臺灣大學。 張仁和、孫蒨如、葉光輝(2019)。華人本土自我研究的回顧與前瞻。本土心理學研究,51,3-31。 戚樹誠、陳淑貞、楊美玉、朱志傑、賴璽方(2016)。臺灣組織行為的實證發現:一項國內管理期刊論文的 30 年回顧。管理學報,33(1),1-34。 許功餘、王登峰、楊國樞(2001)。臺灣與大陸華人基本性格向度的比較。本土心理學研究,16,185-224。 楊國樞(2005)。華人社會取向的理論分析。載於楊國樞、黃光國、楊中芳(主編),華人本土心理學(頁173-213)。遠流。 鄭伯壎、樊景立(2001)。初探華人社會的社會取向:台灣與大陸之比較研究。中華心理學刊,43,207-221。 謝冰瑩、李鍌、劉正浩、邱燮友、賴炎元、陳滿銘(2006)。新譯四書讀本(五版)。三民。 謝威士、汪鳳炎(2022)。謙虛型人格特質的結構及其量表編製。心理研究,15(3),211-219。 簡忠仁、鄭伯壎、連玉輝(2019)。真誠崇拜或真誠感染?真誠領導的雙路徑模式。中華心理學刊,61(1),1-23。 Bolino, M., Long, D., & Turnley, W. (2016). Impression management in organizations: Critical questions, answers, and areas for future research. Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior, 3, 377–406. Burris, E. R., Detert, J. R., & Romney, A. C. (2013). Speaking up vs. being heard: The disagreement around and outcomes of employee voice. Organization Science, 24(1), 22–38. Cai, H., Sedikides, C., Gaertner, L., Wang, C., Carvallo, M., Xu, Y., ... Jackson, L. E. (2011). Tactical self-enhancement in China: Is modesty at the service of self-enhancement in East Asian culture? Social Psychological and Personality Science, 2(1), 59-64. Chen, T., Leung, K., Li, F., & Ou, Z. (2015). Interpersonal harmony and creativity in China. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 36(5), 648–672. Cheng, J. W., Lu, K. M., Chang, Y. Y., & Johnstone, S. (2013). Voice Behavior and Work Engagement: The Moderating Role of Supervisor-Attributed Motives. Asia Pacific Journal of Human Resources, 51, 81–102. Davis, D. E., Hook, J. N., Worthington, E. L., Jr., Van Tongeren, D. R., Gartner, A. L., Jennings, D. J., & Emmons, R. A. (2011). Relational humility: Conceptualizing and measuring humility as a personality judgment. Journal of Personality Assessment, 93(3), 225–234. Detert, J. R., & Burris, E. R. (2007). Leadership behavior and employee voice: Is the door really open? Academy of Management Journal, 50(4), 869–884. Frazier, M. L., & Bowler, W. M. (2015). Voice climate, supervisor undermining, and work outcomes: A group-level examination. Journal of Management, 41(3), 841–863. Fuller, J. B., Barnett, T., Hester, K., Relyea, C., & Frey, L. (2007). An exploratory examination of voice behavior from an impression management perspective. Journal of Managerial Issues, 19(1), 134–151. Gao, G. (1998). "Don't take my word for it."—Understanding Chinese speaking practices. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 22(2), 163–186. Gardner, W. L., Avolio, B. J., Luthans, F., May, D. R., & Walumbwa, F. (2005). "Can you see the real me?" A self-based model of authentic leader and follower development. The Leadership Quarterly, 16(3), 343–372. Guenter, H., Schreurs, B., van Emmerik, I. H., & Sun, S. (2017). What does it take to break the silence in teams: Authentic leadership and/or proactive followership? Applied Psychology: An International Review, 66(1), 49–77. Hsiung, H.-H. (2012). Authentic Leadership and Employee Voice Behavior: A Multi-Level Psychological Process. Journal of Business Ethics, 107(3), 349-361. LePine, J. A., & Van Dyne, L. (1998). Predicting voice behavior in work groups. Journal of Applied Psychology, 83(6), 853–868. Leung, K., Koch, P.T. & Lu, L. (2002). A Dualistic Model of Harmony and its Implications for Conflict Management in Asia. Asia Pacific Journal of Management, 19, 201–220. Liang, J., Farh, C. I. C., & Farh, J.-L. (2012). Psychological antecedents of promotive and prohibitive voice: A two-wave examination. Academy of Management Journal, 55(1), 71–92. McClean, E. J., Burris, E. R., & Detert, J. R. (2013). When does voice lead to exit? It depends on leadership. Academy of Management Journal, 56(2), 525–548. Milliken, F. J., Morrison, E. W., & Hewlin, P. F. (2003). An exploratory study of employee silence: Issues that employees don't communicate upward and why. Journal of Management Studies, 40(6), 1453–1476. Morrison, E. W. (2014). Employee voice and silence. Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior, 1, 173–197. Morrison, E. W., & Milliken, F. J. (2000). Organizational silence: A barrier to change and development in a pluralistic world. The Academy of Management Review, 25(4), 706–725. Owens, B. P., Johnson, M. D., & Mitchell, T. R. (2013). Expressed humility in organizations: Implications for performance, teams, and leadership. Organization Science, 24(5), 1517–1538. Sagiv, L., & Schwartz, S. H. (2022). Personal values across cultures. Annual Review of Psychology, 73, 517–546. Takeuchi, R., Chen, Z., & Cheung, S. Y. (2012). Applying uncertainty management theory to employee voice behavior: An integrative investigation. Personnel Psychology, 65(2), 283–323. Tett, R. P., Toich, M. J., & Ozkum, S. B. (2021). Trait activation theory: A review of the literature and applications to five lines of personality dynamics research. Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior, 8, 199–233. Van Dyne, L., & LePine, J. A. (1998). Helping and voice extra-role behaviors: Evidence of construct and predictive validity. Academy of Management Journal, 41(1), 108–119. Walumbwa, F. O., & Schaubroeck, J. (2009). Leader personality traits and employee voice behavior: Mediating roles of ethical leadership and work group psychological safety. Journal of Applied Psychology, 94(5), 1275–1286. Walumbwa, F. O., Wang, P., Wang, H., Schaubroeck, J., & Avolio, B. J. (2010). Psychological processes linking authentic leadership to follower behaviors. The Leadership Quarterly, 21(5), 901–914. Wei, X., Zhang, Z.-X., & Chen, X.-P. (2015). I will speak up if my voice is socially desirable: A moderated mediating process of promotive versus prohibitive voice. Journal of Applied Psychology, 100(5), 1641–1652. Zhou, Q., & Chen, K. (2022). Exploring the impact of leader humility on different types of voice: The role of employee other-oriented motivations. Journal of Management & Organization, 1-20. | - |
dc.identifier.uri | http://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/jspui/handle/123456789/88864 | - |
dc.description.abstract | 本研究檢視華人文化下的自謙構念意涵,明確區辨實性自謙及虛性自謙為兩個不同構念,並以印象管理觀點探討虛性自謙在真誠領導與建言行為間可能的中介效果;其中,研究者推論真誠領導負向影響虛性自謙,虛性自謙負向影響建言行為。透過兩階段的問卷調查研究設計(間隔一個月),於台灣某非營利組織蒐集七十一份員工樣本後,經迴歸分析發現,真誠領導與虛性自謙不存在關聯性,虛性自謙與促進型建言呈現正向(而非原本預測的負向)關係,虛性自謙與建言行為、抑制型建言不存在關聯性。研究結果不支持本研究所提之中介假說。文末,研究者針對華人自謙的理論構念、自謙量表的信效度、本研究發現進行討論,並提出本研究限制及未來研究方向的建議。 | zh_TW |
dc.description.abstract | The present study examines the meanings of Chinese self-modesty construct and differentiates superficial self-modesty from authentic self-modesty. Drawing on an impression management perspective, the researcher investigated a possible mediation effect of authentic leadership with voice behavior via superficial self-modesty, proposing that authentic leadership negatively affects superficial self-modesty and superficial self-modesty negatively affects voice behavior. Through a two-stage survey research design with an interval of one month, a sample of 71 employees from a non-for-profit organization in Taiwan was collected. Regression analyses showed that no relationship was found between authentic leadership and superficial self-modesty. Superficial self-modesty was found positively (rather than negatively) related to promotive voice. Also, no relationship was found between superficial self-modesty and voice behavior, and between superficial self-modesty and prohibitive voice. That is, the mediation hypothesis was not supported. At the end, the researcher discusses Chinese self-modesty as a theoretical construct, the reliability and validity of the self-modesty scale, and the current research findings and proposes study limitations and future research directions. | en |
dc.description.provenance | Submitted by admin ntu (admin@lib.ntu.edu.tw) on 2023-08-16T16:06:22Z No. of bitstreams: 0 | en |
dc.description.provenance | Made available in DSpace on 2023-08-16T16:06:22Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 0 | en |
dc.description.tableofcontents | 口試委員會審定書 i
誌謝 ii 中文摘要 iii 英文摘要 iv 第一章 緒論 1 第一節 研究背景與動機 1 第二節 研究目的與問題 3 第三節 研究流程 5 第二章 文獻回顧及研究假說 6 第一節 虛性自謙 6 第二節 建言行為 10 第三節 真誠領導 13 第三章 研究方法 16 第一節 研究架構 16 第二節 測量工具 17 第三節 資料蒐集與分析方法 20 第四章 研究結果 21 第一節 樣本結構之敘述統計 21 第二節 研究變項之敘述統計 22 第三節 假說驗證 24 第五章 討論與建議 26 第一節 研究發現與理論意涵討論 26 第二節 研究限制與未來研究建議 29 參考文獻 30 | - |
dc.language.iso | zh_TW | - |
dc.title | 謙或虛?華人虛性自謙之初探:某非營利組織員工樣本的探討 | zh_TW |
dc.title | Modesty or Superficiality? A Preliminary Exploration of Chinese Superficial Self-Modesty: Analyzing a Sample of Employees from a Non-for-Profit Organization | en |
dc.type | Thesis | - |
dc.date.schoolyear | 111-2 | - |
dc.description.degree | 碩士 | - |
dc.contributor.oralexamcommittee | 賴璽方;朱志傑 | zh_TW |
dc.contributor.oralexamcommittee | Hsi-Fang Lai;Chih-Chieh Chu | en |
dc.subject.keyword | 虛性自謙,自謙,建言,印象管理,真誠領導, | zh_TW |
dc.subject.keyword | superficial self-modesty,self-modesty,voice,impression management,authentic leadership, | en |
dc.relation.page | 33 | - |
dc.identifier.doi | 10.6342/NTU202303479 | - |
dc.rights.note | 同意授權(全球公開) | - |
dc.date.accepted | 2023-08-10 | - |
dc.contributor.author-college | 管理學院 | - |
dc.contributor.author-dept | 商學研究所 | - |
顯示於系所單位: | 商學研究所 |
文件中的檔案:
檔案 | 大小 | 格式 | |
---|---|---|---|
ntu-111-2.pdf | 994.24 kB | Adobe PDF | 檢視/開啟 |
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。