請用此 Handle URI 來引用此文件：
http://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/jspui/handle/123456789/98066完整後設資料紀錄
| DC 欄位 | 值 | 語言 |
|---|---|---|
| dc.contributor.advisor | 鄭伯壎 | zh_TW |
| dc.contributor.advisor | Bor-Shiuan Cheng | en |
| dc.contributor.author | 游嘉倩 | zh_TW |
| dc.contributor.author | Jia-Qian You | en |
| dc.date.accessioned | 2025-07-23T16:39:28Z | - |
| dc.date.available | 2025-07-24 | - |
| dc.date.copyright | 2025-07-23 | - |
| dc.date.issued | 2025 | - |
| dc.date.submitted | 2025-07-19 | - |
| dc.identifier.citation | 任金剛、樊景立、鄭伯壎、周麗芳（2003）：〈高階主管之家長式領導與組織效能：一項個人與組織層次的分析〉（報告編號 89-H-FA01-2-4-4）。教育部華人本土心理學研究追求卓越計畫研究報告，教育部。
余英時（1976）：史學與傳統。時報文化。 吳宗祐、周麗芳 & 鄭伯壎（2008）：〈主管的權威取向及其對部屬順從與畏懼的知覺對威權領導的預測效果〉。《本土心理學研究》，30，65–115。https://doi.org/10.6254/2008.30.65 吳宗祐、徐瑋伶、鄭伯壎（2002 ）：〈怒不可遏或忍氣吞聲：華人企業主管威權領導與部屬憤怒反應〉。《本土心理學研究》， 18，3-49。 https://doi.org/10.6254/IPRCS.200212_(18).0001 周婉茹（2009）：《專權與威嚴領導的效果：心理賦能的中介與仁慈領導的調節》（未出版之碩士論文），國立臺灣大學。 周婉茹（2016）：《教誨而非謾罵》 （未出版之博士論文），國立臺灣大學。 周婉茹、周麗芳、鄭伯壎、任金剛（2010a）：〈專權與尚嚴之辨：再探威權領導的內涵與恩威並濟的效果〉。《本土心理學研究》， 34，223–284。 周婉茹、鄭伯壎 、連玉輝（2014）：〈威權領導:概念源起、現況檢討及未來方向〉。《中華心理學刊》，56（2），165–189。https://doi.org/10.6129/CJP.20140103 林姿葶 & 鄭伯壎（2007）：〈性別與領導角色孰先孰後？主管－部屬性別配對、共事時間及家長式領導〉。《中華心理學刊》，49（4），433-450. https://doi.org/10.6129/CJP.2007.4904.07 梁漱溟（1963）：《中國文化要義》。 正中書局。 陳惠馨（2006）：〈儒家、法家思想在中國傳統法制的融合過程。《傳統個人、家庭、婚姻與國家——中國法制史的研究與方法》。 台北：五南圖書出版股份有限公司。 楊國樞（1981）：〈中國人的性格與行為：形成及蛻變〉，《中華心理學刊》（台灣），23（1)，39–55。 楊國樞（1985）：〈現代生活態度研討會論文集〉。台北：中華文化復興運動推行委員會。 楊國樞（1993）: 〈中國人的社會取向：社會互動的觀點〉。《中國人的心理與行為：理念與方法篇（一九九二）》。 桂冠圖書公司。 楊國樞（1998）：〈家族化歷程, 泛家族主義及組織管理〉。 楊國樞 & 余安邦（1993）：《中國的人的心理及行為：理念方法篇》。桂冠图书公司出版。 樊景立 & 鄭伯壎（2000）：〈華人組織的家長式領導：一項文化觀點的分析〉。《本土心理學研究》，13，126-180。 蔡忠道（2003）：〈秦漢之際思想析論>。《人文藝術學報》（台南)，2， 1–32。 鄭伯壎（1995）：〈家長威權與領導行為之關係：一個臺灣民營企業主持人的個案研究〉。《中央研究院民族學研究所集刊》，79，119–173。 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（2)，207–221。https://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S1048984314000034 鄭伯壎、樊景立 & 周麗芳（2006）：《家長式領導：模式與證據》。華泰文化。 鄭伯壎、周麗芳（2005）：《家長式領導三元模式：現代轉化及其影響機制──威權領導：法家概念的現代轉化》。行政院國家科學委員會專題研究計畫成果報告，報告編號 NSC94-2413-H-002-003-PAE。台北：行政院國家科學委員會。 鄭昱宏、周婉茹、周德賢 & 鄭伯壎（2019）: 〈教練威權領導一定不好嗎？一項權變概念的提出與驗證〉。中華心理學刊，61（2）。https://doi.org/10.6129/CJP.201906_61（2).0002 Ahmad Bodla, A., Tang, N., Van Dick, R., & Mir, U. R. (2019). Authoritarian leadership, organizational citizenship behavior, and organizational deviance: Curvilinear relationships. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 40(5), 583–599. https://doi.org/10.1108/LODJ-08-2018-0313 Aiken, L. S., West, S. G., & Reno, R. R. (1991). Multiple regression: Testing and interpreting interactions. Sage. Bellah, R. N. (1970). Father and son in Christianity and Confucianism. In W. A. Sadler (Ed.), Personality and religion. The role of religion in personality development, New York (pp. 146-167). Harper and Row, Harper Forum Books. Bennett, R. J., & Robinson, S. L. (2000). Development of a measure of workplace deviance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 85(3), 349. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.85.3.349 Biggart, N. W., & Hamilton, G. G. (1984). The power of obedience. Administrative Science Quarterly, 29(4), 540–549. https://doi.org/10.2307/2392938 Buckingham, D. (2008). Introducing identity. MA: The MIT Press, 1–24. https://doi.org/10.1162/dmal.9780262524834.001 Burke, P. J. (1991). Identity processes and social stress. American Sociological Review, 56(6), 836. https://doi.org/10.2307/2096259 Burke, P. J., & Reitzes, D. C. (1981). The link between identity and role performance. Socil Psychology Quarterly, 44(2), 83. https://doi.org/10.2307/3033704 Burke, P. J., & Stets, J. E. (2009). Identity theory. Nueva York : Oxford University Press. Burke, P. J., & Tully, J. C. (1977). The measurement of role identity. Social Forces, 55(4), 881. https://doi.org/10.2307/2577560 Chan, S. C. H., Huang, X., Snape, E., & Lam, C. K. （2013). The Janus face of paternalistic leaders: Authoritarianism, benevolence, subordinates’ organization‐based self‐esteem, and performance. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 34(1), 108–128. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.1797 Chen, C. C., & Farh, J.L. (2010). Developments in understanding Chinese leadership: Paternalism and its elaborations, moderations, and alternatives. Oxford Handbook of Chinese Psychology.(pp. 599-622). https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199541850.013.0036 Chen, L., & Sun, J. (2017). The positive effects of authoritarian leadership on subordinates: A moderated mediation model. Academy of Management Annual Meeting Proceedings, 2017(1), 1–1. Business Source Elite. https://doi.org/10.5465/AMBPP.2017.13854abstract 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. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206311410604 Chen, Z. J., Davison, R. M., Mao, J. Y., & Wang, Z. H. (2018). When and how authoritarian leadership and leader renqing orientation influence tacit knowledge sharing intentions. Information & Management, 55(7), 840–849. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.im.2018.03.011 Chiu, C., & Yang, C. (1987). Chinese subjects’ dilemmas: Humility and cognitive laziness as problems in using rating scales. Bulletin of the Hong Kong Psychological Society. Chou, W.-J., & Cheng, B.-S. (2014). Opening the black box: A two-dimensional model of authoritarian leadership and task performance. Chinese Journal of Psychology, 56(4), 397–414. APA PsycInfo. https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=psyh&AN=2015-04412-002&site=ehost-live&scope=site Chu,T.S. （1961). Law and society in traditioanl china. Mouton. Cohen, J., Cohen, P., West, S. G., & Aiken, L. (2013). Applied multiple regression/correlation analysis for the behavioral sciences. Routledge. DeGroot, T., Kiker, D. S., & Cross, T. C. (2000). A meta-analysis to review organizational outcomes related to charismatic leadership. Canadian Journal of Administrative Sciences (Canadian Journal of Administrative Sciences), 17(4), 356–371. Business Source Elite. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1936-4490.2000.tb00234.x DeLamater, J., & Ward, A. (2013). Handbook of social psychology. Springer Netherlands. https://link.springer.com/10.1007/978-94-007-6772-0 Farh, J. L., Earley, P. C., & Lin, S. C. (1997). Impetus for action: A cultural analysis of Justice and organizational citizenship behavior in Chinese society. Administrative Science Quarterly, 42(3), 421. https://doi.org/10.2307/2393733 Gao, L., Janssen, O., & Shi, K. (2011). Leader trust and employee voice: The moderating role of empowering leader behaviors. The Leadership Quarterly, 22(4), 787–798. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2011.05.015 Giacalone, R., & Greenberg, J. (1997). Antisocial behavior in organizations. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Graham Moore, B. E. (1986). Absenteeism: New Approaches to Understanding, Measuring, and Managing Employee Absence. JSTOR. Greenberg, J. (1990). Employee theft as a reaction to underpayment inequity: The hidden cost of pay cut. In occupational crime (pp. 99-106). Routledge. Gruys, M. L., & Sackett, P. R. (2003). Investigating the dimensionality of counterproductive work behavior. International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 11(1), 30–42. https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-2389.00224 Gu, J., Wang, G., Liu, H., Song, D., & He, C. （2018). Linking authoritarian leadership to employee creativity: The influences of leader–member exchange, team identification and power distance. Chinese Management Studies, 12(2), 384–406. https://doi.org/10.1108/CMS-10-2017-0294 Hamilton, G. G. (1990). Patriarchy, patrimonialism, and filial piety: A comparison of China and Western Europe. British Journal of Sociology, 77–104. https://doi.org/10.2307/591019 Hollinger, R. C., & Clark, J. P. (1982). Formal and informal social controls of employee deviance. The Sociological Quarterly, 23(3), 333–343. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1533-8525.1982.tb01016.x Hsu,F.L.K. (1971). Psycho-social homeostasis and Jen: Conceptual tools for advancing psychological anthropology. American Anthropologist, 73, 23–44. Jiang, H., Chen, Y., Sun, P., & Li, C. (2019). Authoritarian leadership and employees’ unsafe behaviors: The mediating roles of organizational cynicism and work alienation. Current Psychology, 38(6), 1668–1678. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-017-9726-1 Jiang, H., Chen, Y., Sun, P., & Yang, J. (2017). The relationship between authoritarian leadership and employees’ deviant workplace behaviors: The mediating effects of psychological contract violation and organizational cynicism. Frontiers in Psychology, 8, 732. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2017.00732 Jinyun Duan, Yuanyuan Gong, Chun Hui, & Yue Xu. (2018). Authoritarian leadership and employee voice: The effect of employee integrity. Academy of Management Annual Meeting Proceedings, 2018(1), 1–1. Business Source Elite. https://doi.org/10.5465/AMBPP.2018.15840abstract Kiazad, K., Restubog, S. L. D., Zagenczyk, T. J., Kiewitz, C., & Tang, R. L. (2010). In pursuit of power: The role of authoritarian leadership in the relationship between supervisors’ machiavellianism and subordinates’ perceptions of abusive supervisory behavior. Journal of Research in Personality, 44(4), 512–519. APA PsycInfo. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrp.2010.06.004 Koveshnikov, A., Ehrnrooth, M., & Wechtler, H. (2020). The three graces of leadership: Untangling the relative importance and the mediating mechanisms of three leadership styles in Russia. Management & Organization Review, 16(4), 791–824. Business Source Elite. https://doi.org/10.1017/mor.2020.2 Powers, W. T. (1973). Behavior: The control of perception. Aldine. Li, R., Chen, Z., Zhang, H., & Luo, J. (2021). How do authoritarian leadership and abusive supervision jointly thwart follower proactivity? A social control perspective. Journal of Management, 47(4), 930–956. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206319878261 Li, Y., & Sun, J. (2015). Traditional Chinese leadership and employee voice behavior: A cross-level examination. Leadership Quarterly, 26(2), 172–189. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2014.08.001 Malachowski, D. (2005). Wasted time at work costing companies billions. San Francisco Chronicle, 11(3). Malik, A., Sinha, S., & Goel, S. (2021). A qualitative review of 18 years of research on workplace deviance: New vectors and future research directions. Human Performance, 34(4), 271–297. https://doi.org/10.1080/08959285.2021.1948548 Marcus, B., Taylor, O. A., Hastings, S. E., Sturm, A., & Weigelt, O. (2016). The structure of counterproductive work behavior: A review, a structural meta-analysis, and a primary study. Journal of Management, 42(1), 203–233. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206313503019 McCall, G. J., & Simmons, J. L. (1978). Identities and interactions. New York: Free Press. Min,Wu, & Erica,Xu. (2012). Paternalistic leadership: From here to where? 收入 Handbook of Chinese organizational behavior: Integrating theory, research and practice.In X. Huang&M. H. Bond （Eds.), (pp 449–466). Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar. Muth´en, B., & Muth´en, L. (2017). Mplus (1st ed.). Los Angeles, CA: Muth´en&Muth´en. Niu, C., Wang, A., & Cheng, B. (2009). Effectiveness of a moral and benevolent leader: Probing the interactions of the dimensions of paternalistic leadership. Asian Journal of Social Psychology, 12(1), 32–39. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-839X.2008.01267.x Ones, D. S., & Dilchert, S. (2013). Counterproductive work behaviors: Concepts, measurement, and nomological network. In K. F. Geisinger, B. A. Bracken, J. F. Carlson, J.-I. C. Hansen, N. R. Kuncel, S. P. Reise, & M. C. Rodriguez（Eds.）,APA handbook of testing and assessment in psychology, Vol. 1: Test theory and testing and assessment in industrial and organizational psychology(pp.643–659). American Psychological Association. https://doi.org/10.1037/14047-035 Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Lee, J.-Y., & Podsakoff, N. P. (2003). Common method biases in behavioral research: A critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88(5), 879–903. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.88.5.879 Puffer, S. M. (1987). Prosocial behavior, noncompliant behavior, and work performance among commission salespeople. Journal of Applied Psychology, 72(4), 615–621. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.72.4.615 Qu, T. (1965). Law and society in traditional China ([Rev.]). Mouton. Redding, G. (1990). The spirit of Chinese capitalism. Walter de Gruyter. Redding, S. G., & Hsiao, M. (1990). An empirical study of overseas Chinese managerial ideology. International Journal of Psychology, 25(3–6), 629–641. https://doi.org/10.1080/00207599008247917 Robinson, S. L., & Bennett, R. J. (1995). A typology of deviant workplace behaviors: A multidimensional scaling study. Academy of Management Journal, 38(2), 555-572. https://doi.org/10.2307/256693 Rosse, J. G., & Hulin, C. L. (1985). Adaptation to work: An analysis of employee health, withdrawal, and change. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 36(3), 324–347. https://doi.org/10.1016/0749-5978（85)90003-2 Salancik, G. R., & Pfeffer, J. (1977). Who gets power—And how they hold on to it: A strategic-contingency model of power. Organizational Dynamics, 5(3), 3–21. https://doi.org/10.1016/0090-2616(77)90028-6 Schaubroeck, J. M., Shen, Y., & Chong, S. (2017). A dual-stage moderated mediation model linking authoritarian leadership to follower outcomes. Journal of Applied Psychology, 102(2), 203–214. https://doi.org/10.1037/apl0000165 Schuh, S. C., Zhang, X., & Tian, P. (2013). For the good or the bad? Interactive effects of transformational leadership with moral and authoritarian leadership behaviors. Journal of Business Ethics, 116(3), 629–640. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-012-1486-0 Shu, C.-Y., Chiang, Y.-H., & Lu, C.-H. (2018). Authoritarian leadership supervisor support and workers’ compulsory citizenship behavior. International Journal of Manpower, 39(3), 468–485. Business Source Elite. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJM-10-2016-0191 Silin, R. H. (1976). Leadership and values: The organization of large-scale Taiwanese enterprises. Harvard Univ Asia Center. Skaja, H. G., & Smith, R. J. (1985). China’s cultural heritage: The Ch’ing dynasty, 1644-1922. Philosophy East and West, 35(3), 323. https://doi.org/10.2307/1399164 Spector, P. E., Fox, S., Penney, L. M., Bruursema, K., Goh, A., & Kessler, S. (2006). The dimensionality of counterproductivity: Are all counterproductive behaviors created equal? Journal of Vocational Behavior, 68(3), 446–460. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvb.2005.10.005 Stets, J. E., & Burke, P. J. (2000). Identity theory and social identity theory. Social Psychology Quarterly, 63(3), 224. https://doi.org/10.2307/2695870 Stewart, F. (2001). Internet acceptable use policies: Navigating the management, legal, and technical issues. In The Privacy Papers(pp.409–418) .Auerbach Publications. Swann Jr, W. B. (1983). Self-verification: Bringing social reality into harmony with the self Social psychological perspectives on the self ,2, (pp.33–66).Hillsdale. Swann Jr, W. B., Johnson, R. E., & Bosson, J. K. (2009). Identity negotiation at work. Research in Organizational Behavior, 29, 81–109. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.riob.2009.06.005 Swann, W. B., & Ely, R. J. (1984). A battle of wills: Self-verification versus behavioral confirmation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 46(6), 1287–1302. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.46.6.1287 Thoits, P. A. (1986). Multiple identities: Examining gender and marital status differences in distress. American Sociological Review, 51(2), 259. https://doi.org/10.2307/2095520 Wang, A. C., Chiang, J. T. J., Tsai, C. Y., Lin, T. T., & Cheng, B. S. (2013). Gender makes the difference: The moderating role of leader gender on the relationship between leadership styles and subordinate performance. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 122(2), 101–113. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.obhdp.2013.06.001 Wang, H., & Guan, B. (2018). The positive effect of authoritarian leadership on employee performance: The moderating role of power sistance. Frontiers in Psychology, 9, 357. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.00357 Wang, Y., Xie, Y., & Xie, H. Q. (2022). Do authoritarian leaders also have “fans”? The relationship between authoritarian leadership and employee followership behavior in the Chinese context. Management Decision, 60(5), 1237–1256. https://doi.org/10.1108/MD-11-2020-1566 Whitley, R. (1992). Business systems in East Asia: Firms, markets and societies. Sage. Wong, S. (1988). Emigrant entrepreneurs: Shanghai industrialists in Hong Kong. Oxford University Press. Wu, M., Huang, X., Li, C., & Liu, W. (2012). Perceived interactional justice and Trust-in-supervisor as mediators for paternalistic leadership. Management & Organization Review, 8(1), 97–121. Business Source Elite. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1740-8784.2011.00283.x Wu, T., Liu, Y., Hua, C., Lo, H., & Yeh, Y. (2020). Too unsafe to voice? Authoritarian leadership and employee voice in Chinese organizations. Asia Pacific Journal of Human Resources, 58(4), 527–554. Business Source Elite. https://doi.org/10.1111/1744-7941.12247 Zappalà, S., Sbaa, M. Y., Kamneva, E. V., Zhigun, L. A., Korobanova, Z. V., & Chub, A. A. (2022). Current approaches, typologies and predictors of deviant work behaviors: A scoping review of reviews. Frontiers in Psychology, 12, 674066. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.674066 Zhang, A., Tsui, A., & Wang, D. (2011). Leadership behaviors and group creativity in Chinese organizations: The role of group processes. Leadership Quarterly, 22(5), 851–862. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2011.07.007 Zhao, H., Su, Q., Zhang, L., & Zhong, J. (2022). Understanding the influence of dual authoritarian leadership on employee creativity: The type of leadership and the role of event. Current Psychology: A Journal for Diverse Perspectives on Diverse Psychological Issues. APA PsycInfo. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-022-03498-w Zhao, H., Su, Q., Zhang, L., & Zhong, J. (2022). Understanding the influence of dual authoritarian leadership on employee creativity: The type of leadership and the role of event. Current Psychology: A Journal for Diverse Perspectives on Diverse Psychological Issues. APA PsycInfo. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-022-03498-w Zheng, Y., Graham, L., Farh, J.-L., & Huang, X. (2021). The impact of authoritarian leadership on ethical voice: A moderated mediation model of felt uncertainty and leader benevolence. Journal of Business Ethics, 170(1), 133–146. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-019-04261-1 Zheng, Y., Huang, X., Graham, L., Redman, T., & Hu, S. (2020). Deterrence effects: The role of authoritarian leadership in controlling employee workplace deviance. Management & Organization Review, 16(2), 377–404. Business Source Elite. https://doi.org/10.1017/mor.2019.50 Zoghbi Manrique De Lara, P. (2006). Fear in organizations: Does intimidation by formal punishment mediate the relationship between interactional justice and workplace internet deviance? Journal of Managerial Psychology, 21(6), 580–592. https://doi.org/10.1108/02683940610684418 | - |
| dc.identifier.uri | http://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/jspui/handle/123456789/98066 | - |
| dc.description.abstract | 本研究採用知覺控制理論（Perceptual Control Theory, PCT）探討部屬偏差行為（人際導向/組織導向）與主管威權領導行为的關係，以及這種關係是否及如何受到主管面子取向的調節。研究透過問卷調查法，收集354 名組織成員和126 名主管資料，採用驗證性因素分析和多層次結構方程模型進行檢驗。結果顯示，部屬的人際偏差行為和面子取向的交互作用會正向預測主管的專權領導，部屬的組織偏差行為和面子取向的交互作用會負向預測主管的專權領導。綜觀而論，本研究揭示了部屬偏差行為是組織中主管威權領導的重要預測因素。 | zh_TW |
| dc.description.abstract | In this study, perceptual control theory （ PCT) was used to investigate the relationship between subordinates' deviant behavior（interpersonal/organizational orientation) and supervisor's authoritarian leadership, and this relationship whether and how this relationship is regulated by supervisor's face orientation. A total of 354 employees and 126 executives from Taiwan enterprises were collected through a questionnaire survey. Confirmatory factor analysis and multi-level structural equation model were used to test the results. The results show that the interaction between subordinate's interpersonal deviance behavior and face orientation positively predicts the authoritarian leadership of the supervisor, while the interaction between subordinate's organizational deviance behavior and face orientation negatively predicts the authoritarian leadership of the supervisor. In summary, this study reveals that subordinate's deviant behavior is an important predictor of the supervisor's authoritarian leadership in the organization. | en |
| dc.description.provenance | Submitted by admin ntu (admin@lib.ntu.edu.tw) on 2025-07-23T16:39:28Z No. of bitstreams: 0 | en |
| dc.description.provenance | Made available in DSpace on 2025-07-23T16:39:28Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 0 | en |
| dc.description.tableofcontents | 目次
誌謝 ii 摘要 iv Abstract v 第一章 緒論 1 第二章 文獻回顧 6 第一節 威權領導 6 第二節 偏差行為 14 第三節 偏差行為與威權領導 15 第三章 研究方法 28 第一節 施測程序 28 第二節 研究樣本 29 第三節 研究工具 29 第四章 研究結果 36 第一節 測量模式檢驗 36 第二節 相關係數矩陣 36 第三節假設檢驗 40 第五章 討論 46 第一節 研究結果 46 第二節 理論貢獻 47 第三節 實務意涵 48 第四節 研究限制 49 第五節 未來的研究方向 49 第六節 結論 51 參考文獻 52 附錄 63 附錄一 63 附錄二 65 表次 表 3 1 主管的樣本組成（N = 120） 30 表 3 2 部屬樣本組成（N = 324） 31 表 4 3 測量模式值適合度比較（N = 324） 37 表 4 4 各變項描述統計值與相關係數（N = 324） 38 表 4 5 跨層次分析結果 42 圖次 圖1 Robinson和 Bennett關於工作場所偏差行為的分類 16 圖2研究架構圖 27 圖 3部屬人際偏差行為與主管的面子取向對主管專權領導之交互作用 43 圖 4部屬組織偏差行為與主管的面子取向對主管專權領導之交互作用 43 | - |
| dc.language.iso | zh_TW | - |
| dc.subject | 偏差行為 | zh_TW |
| dc.subject | 面子取向 | zh_TW |
| dc.subject | 威權領導 | zh_TW |
| dc.subject | face orientation | en |
| dc.subject | authoritarian leadership | en |
| dc.subject | deviant behavior | en |
| dc.title | 主管對部屬偏差行為的知覺對其威權領導之展現的預測 | zh_TW |
| dc.title | The Prediction of Managers' Perception of Subordinates' Deviant Behavior on Their Authoritarian Leadership | en |
| dc.type | Thesis | - |
| dc.date.schoolyear | 113-2 | - |
| dc.description.degree | 碩士 | - |
| dc.contributor.coadvisor | 吳宗祐 | zh_TW |
| dc.contributor.coadvisor | Tsung-Yu Wu | en |
| dc.contributor.oralexamcommittee | 郭建志;林姿葶 | zh_TW |
| dc.contributor.oralexamcommittee | Chien-Chih Kuo;Tzu-Ting Lin | en |
| dc.subject.keyword | 威權領導,偏差行為,面子取向, | zh_TW |
| dc.subject.keyword | authoritarian leadership,deviant behavior,face orientation, | en |
| dc.relation.page | 66 | - |
| dc.identifier.doi | 10.6342/NTU202501970 | - |
| dc.rights.note | 同意授權(限校園內公開) | - |
| dc.date.accepted | 2025-07-21 | - |
| dc.contributor.author-college | 理學院 | - |
| dc.contributor.author-dept | 心理學系 | - |
| dc.date.embargo-lift | 2030-07-17 | - |
| 顯示於系所單位： | 心理學系 | |
文件中的檔案：
| 檔案 | 大小 | 格式 | |
|---|---|---|---|
| ntu-113-2.pdf 未授權公開取用 | 1.05 MB | 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。