主管差序對待幅度與部屬效能：平均德行領導的調節效果

Chun-Cheng Kuo; 郭均誠

請用此 Handle URI 來引用此文件： http://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/jspui/handle/123456789/63415

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.author	Chun-Cheng Kuo	en
dc.contributor.author	郭均誠	zh_TW
dc.date.accessioned	2021-06-16T16:40:17Z	-
dc.date.available	2017-10-12
dc.date.copyright	2012-10-12
dc.date.issued	2012
dc.date.submitted	2012-09-24
dc.identifier.citation	王榮春、陳彰儀（2003）。部屬觀點之領導互動論：部屬對主管領導行為的知覺因素與互動內涵初探。「應用心理研究」，20，181-215。任金剛、林明村、陳以亨（2002）。「華人員工歸類之標準與實徵研究」。第四屆華人心理學家學術研討會論文。台北：中央研究院。李美枝（1993）。從有關公平判斷的研究結果看中國人之人己關係的界限。「本土心理學研究」，1，267-300。周婉茹、周麗芳、鄭伯壎、任金剛（2010）。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。周麗芳（2006）。「華人工作團隊之社會關係與成員效能：多元向度、多重網絡的探討」（未發表之博士論文）。台北：國立台灣大學心理學研究所。周麗芳、鄭伯壎、樊景立、任金剛、黃敏萍（2006）。家長式領導。見鄭伯壎、姜定宇（主編）：「華人組織行為：議題、作法及出版」，頁46-83。台北：華泰。林姿葶、鄭伯壎（2012）。華人領導者的噓寒問暖與提攜教育：仁慈領導之雙構面模式。「本土心理學研究」，37，253-302。林家五、張國義、劉貞妤、林裘緒、陳筱華（2009）。差序對待知覺與同事間信任對公平態度與政治行為之影響。「本土心理學研究」，31，143-175。林鉦棽（2003）。以組織承諾及工作滿足為實徵切入分析組織公民行為與員工工作考績之結構模式比較。「人力資源管理學報」，3（2），93-113。姜定宇、張菀真（2010）。華人差序式領導與部屬效能。「本土心理學研究」，33，109-177。凌文輇（1991）。中國人的領導與行為。見楊中芳、高尚仁（主編）：「中國人，中國心－人格與社會篇」，頁409-448。台北：遠流。徐瑋伶（2004）。「海峽兩岸企業主管之差序式領導：一項歷程性的分析」（未發表之博士論文）。台北：國立台灣大學心理學研究所。徐瑋伶、黃敏萍、鄭伯壎、樊景立（2006）。德行領導。見鄭伯壎、姜定宇（主編）：「華人組織行為：議題、作法及出版」，頁122-149。台北：華泰。徐瑋伶、鄭伯壎、郭建志、胡秀華（2006）。差序式領導。見鄭伯壎、姜定宇（主編）：「華人組織行為：議題、作法及出版」，頁84-121。台北：華泰。徐瑋伶、鄭伯壎、黃敏萍（2002）。華人企業領導人的員工歸類與管理行為。「本土心理學研究」，18，51-94。許金田、胡秀華、凌孝綦、鄭伯壎、周麗芳（2004）。家長式領導與組織公民行為的關係：上下關係品質之中介效果。「交大管理學報」，24（2），119-149。陳介玄、高承恕（1991）。台灣企業運作的社會秩序：人情關係與法律。「東海學報」，32，219-232。費孝通（1948）。「鄉土中國與鄉土重建」。上海：觀察社。黃光國（1985）。人情與面子：中國人的權力遊戲。見李亦園、楊國樞、文崇一（主編）：「現代化與中國化論集」，頁125-153。台北：桂冠。黃敏萍（2007）。組織領導。見鄭伯壎、姜定宇、鄭弘岳（主編）：「組織行為研究在台灣：回顧與展望」（二版），頁248-279。台北：華泰。黃敏萍、鄭伯壎、徐瑋伶、周麗芳（2003）。「家長式領導之德行領導－構念效度之建立」。教育部華人本土心理學研究追求卓越計畫研究報告（編號：89-H-FA01-2-4-4）。台北：教育部。楊國樞（2002）。「華人心理的本土化硏究」。台北：桂冠。楊國樞、余安邦、葉明華（1991）。中國人的個人傳統性與現代性：概念與測量。見楊國樞、黃光國（主編）：「中國人的心理與行為」，頁213-240。台北：桂冠。溫福星（2007）。「階層線性模式：原理、方法與應用」。台北：雙葉。廖卉、莊璦嘉（2008）。多層次理論模型的建立及研究方法。見陳曉萍、徐淑英、樊景立、鄭伯壎（主編）：「組織與管理研究的實證方法」，頁381-410。台北：華泰。樊景立、鄭伯壎（1997）。華人自評式績效考核中的自謙偏差：題意、謙虛價值及自尊之影響。「中華心理學刊」，39，103-118。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。鄭伯壎（1989）。工作取向領導行為、組織特性及部屬效能：權變研究途徑。「中華心理學刊」，31，19-31。鄭伯壎（1995a）。家長權威與領導行為之關係：一個台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（1995b）。差序格局與華人組織行為。「本土心理學研究」，3，142-219。鄭伯壎（2004）。華人文化與組織領導：由現象描述到理論驗證。「本土心理學研究」，22，195-251。鄭伯壎（2006）。整合分析。見鄭伯壎、姜定宇（主編）：「華人組織行為：議題、作法及出版」，頁188-232。台北：華泰。鄭伯壎（2007）。台灣組織行為研究：過去、現在、未來。見鄭伯壎、姜定宇、鄭弘岳（主編）：「組織行為研究在台灣：回顧與展望」（二版），頁2-67。台北：華泰。鄭伯壎、周麗芳、黃敏萍、樊景立、彭泗清（2003）。家長式領導的三元模式：中國大陸企業組織的證據。「本土心理學研究」，20，209-250。鄭伯壎、周麗芳、樊景立（2000）。家長式領導：三元模式的建構與測量。「本土心理學研究」，14，3-64。鄭伯壎、林姿葶、鄭弘岳、周麗芳、任金剛、樊景立（2010）。家長式領導與部屬效能：多層次分析觀點。「中華心理學刊」，52，1-23。鄭伯壎、莊仲仁（1981）。基層軍事幹部有效領導行為之因素分析：領導績效、領導角色與領導行為的關係。「中華心理學刊」，23，97-106。鄭伯壎、謝佩鴛、周麗芳（2002）。校長領導作風、上下關係品質及教師角色外行為：轉型式與家長式領導的效果。「本土心理學研究」，17，105-161。錢淑芬（1992）。軍隊組織的領導與輔導之研究。「復興崗學報」，48，349-378。 Adams, J. S. (1963). Towards an understanding of inequity. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 67, 422-436. Adler, N. J. (1991). International dimensions of organizational behavior (2nd ed.). Boston, MA: PWS-KENT. Bagozzi, R. P., & Heatherton, T. F. (1994). A general approach to representing multifaceted personality constructs: Application to state self‐esteem. Structural Equation Modeling, 1, 35-67. Bandura, A. (1969). Principles of behavior modification. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston. Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A cognitive social theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Pretince Hall. Barney, J. B., & Zhang, S. (2009). The future of Chinese management research: A theory of Chinese management versus a Chinese theory of management. Management and Organization Review, 5, 15-28. Bartko, J. J. (1976). On various intraclass correlation reliability coefficients. Psychological Bulletin, 83, 762-765. Bliese, P. D. (2000). Within-group agreement, non-independence, and reliability: Implications for data aggregation and analysis. In K. J. Klein & S. W. J. Kozlowski (Eds.), Multilevel theory, research, and methods in organizations: Foundations, extensions, and new directions (pp. 349-381). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Boies, K., & Howell, J. M. (2006). Leader–member exchange in teams: An examination of the interaction between relationship differentiation and mean LMX in explaining team-level outcomes. The Leadership Quarterly, 17, 246-257. Cervone, D. (2004). The architecture of personality. Psychological Review, 111, 183-204. Chan, D. (1998). Functional relations among constructs in the same content domain at different levels of analysis: A typology of composition models. Journal of Applied Psychology, 83, 234-246. Chen, G., & Bliese, P. D. (2002). The role of different levels of leadership in predicting self- and collective efficacy: Evidence for discontinuity. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87, 549-556. Chen, X. P., Eberly, M. B., Chiang, T. J., Farh, J. L., & Cheng, B. S. (in press). Affective trust in Chinese leaders: Linking paternalistic leadership to employee performance. Journal of Management. Cheng, B., Farh, J., Chang, H., & Hsu, W. (2002). Guanxi, zhongcheng, competence and managerial behavior in the Chinese context. Chinese Journal of Psychology, 44, 151-166. Cheng, B. S., Chou, L. F., Wu, T. Y., Huang, M. P., & Farh, J. L. (2004). Paternalistic leadership and subordinate responses: Establishing a leadership model in Chinese organizations. Asian Journal of Social Psychology, 7, 89-117. Cheng, B. S., Huang, M. P., & Chou, L. F. (2002). Paternalistic leadership and its effectiveness: Evidence from Chinese organizational teams. Journal of Psychology in Chinese Societies, 3, 85-112. Crosby, F. (1976). A model of egoistical relative deprivation. Psychological Review, 83, 85-113. Crosby, F. (1984). Relative deprivation in organizational settings. Research in Organizational Behavior, 6, 51-93. Dansereau, F., Cashman, J., & Graen, G. (1973). Instrumentality theory and equity theory as complementary approaches in predicting the relationship of leadership and turnover among managers. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 10, 184-200. Dansereau, F., Graen, G., & Haga, W. J. (1975). A vertical dyad linkage approach to leadership within formal organizations: A longitudinal investigation of the role making process. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 13, 46-78. Davis, J. A. (1966). The campus as a frog pond: An application of the theory of relative deprivation to career decisions of college men. American Journal of Sociology, 72, 17-31. 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, 421-444. Firebaugh, G. (1980). Groups as contexts and frog ponds. In K. H. Roberts & L. Burstein (Eds.), Issues in aggregation (pp. 43-52). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Gerstner, C. R., & Day, D. V. (1997). Meta-analytic review of leader-member exchange theory: Correlates and construct issues. Journal of Applied Psychology, 82, 827-844. Graen, G. (1976). Role-making processes within complex organizations. In M. D. Dunnette (Ed.), Handbook of industrial and organizational psychology (pp. 1201-1245). Chicago: Rand McNally. Graen, G., Novak, M. A., & Sommerkamp, P. (1982). The effects of leader—member exchange and job design on productivity and satisfaction: Testing a dual attachment model. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 30, 109-131. Graen, G. B., & Scandura, T. A. (1987). Toward a psychology of dyadic organizing. Research in Organizational Behavior, 9, 175-208. Graen, G. B., & Uhl-Bien, M. (1995). Relationship-based approach to leadership: Development of leader-member exchange (LMX) theory of leadership over 25 years: Applying a multi-level multi-domain perspective. The Leadership Quarterly, 6, 219-247. Graves, L. M., Ruderman, M. N., Ohlot, P. J., & Weber, T. J. (2012). Driven to work and enjoyment of work: Effects on managers' outcomes. Journal of Management, 38, 1655-1680. Hair, J. F., Anderson, R. E., Tatham, R. L., & Black, W. C. (1998). Multivariate data analysis (5th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall. Henderson, D. J., Wayne, S. J., Shore, L. M., Bommer, W. H., & Tetrick, L. E. (2008). Leader–member exchange, differentiation, and psychological contract fulfillment: A multilevel examination. Journal of Applied Psychology, 93, 1208-1219. Hofmann, D. A. (1997). An overview of the logic and rationale of hierarchical linear models. Journal of Management, 23, 723-744. Hofmann, D. A., & Gavin, M. B. (1998). Centering decisions in hierarchical linear models: Implications for research in organizations. Journal of Management, 24, 623-641. Hofstede, G. H. (1980). Culture's consequences: International differences in work-related values. Beverly Hills, CA: SAGE. Hooper, D. T., & Martin, R. (2008). Beyond personal Leader-Member Exchange (LMX) quality: The effects of perceived LMX variability on employee reactions. The Leadership Quarterly, 19, 20-30. James, L. R. (1982). Aggregation bias in estimates of perceptual agreement. Journal of Applied Psychology, 67, 219-229. James, L. R., Demaree, R. G., & Wolf, G. (1984). Estimating within-group interrater reliability with and without response bias. Journal of Applied Psychology, 69, 85-98. Katz, D. (1964). The motivational basis of organizational behavior. Behavioral Science, 9, 131-146. Katz, D., & Kahn, R. L. (1978). The social psychology of organizations (2nd ed.). New York: Wiley. Kelley, H. K. (1968). Two functions of reference groups. In H. H. Hyman & E. Singer (Eds.), Readings in reference group theory and research (pp. 77-83). New York: Free Press. Klein, K. J., Dansereau, F., & Hall, R. J. (1994). Levels issues in theory development, data collection, and analysis. Academy of Management Review, 19, 195-229. Kozlowski, S. W. J., & Hattrup, K. (1992). A disagreement about within-group agreement: Disentangling issues of consistency versus consensus. Journal of Applied Psychology, 77, 161-167. Landis, R. S., Beal, D. J., & Tesluk, P. E. (2000). A comparison of approaches to forming composite measures in structural equation models. Organizational Research Methods, 3, 186-207. Liden, R. C., Erdogan, B., Wayne, S. J., & Sparrowe, R. T. (2006). Leader‐member exchange, differentiation, and task interdependence: Implications for individual and group performance. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 27, 723-746. Liden, R. C., & Graen, G. (1980). Generalizability of the vertical dyad linkage model of leadership. Academy of Management Journal, 23, 451-465. McFarland, C., & Buehler, R. (1995). Collective self-esteem as a moderator of the frog-pond effect in reactions to performance feedback. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 68, 1055-1070. McGrath, J. E. (1964). Social psychology: A brief introduction. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston. Mischel, W. (1973). Toward a cognitive social learning reconceptualization of personality. Psychological Review, 80, 252-283. Moscovici, S. (2000). Social representations: Explorations in social psychology. Cambridge: Polity Press. Motowidlo, S. J., & Van Scotter, J. R. (1994). Evidence that task performance should be distinguished from contextual performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 79, 475-480. Murphy, K. R., & Cleveland, J. N. (1990). Performance appraisal: An organizational perspective. Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon. Nunnally, J. C., & Bernstein, I. H. (1994). Psychometric theory (3rd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill. Organ, D. W. (1988). Organizational citizenship behavior: The good soldier syndrome. Lexington, MA: Lexington Books. Organ, D. W. (1997). Organizational citizenship behavior: It's construct clean-up time. Human Performance, 10, 85-97. Pellegrini, E. K., & Scandura, T. A. (2008). Paternalistic leadership: A review and agenda for future research. Journal of Management, 34, 566-593. Pervin, L. A., Cervone, D., & John, O. P. (2005). Personality: Theory and research (9th ed.). New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons. Raudenbush, S. W., & Bryk, A. S. (2002). Hierarchical linear models: Applications and data analysis methods (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE. Redding, S. G. (1990). The spirit of Chinese capitalism. New York: Walter de Gruyter. Schriesheim, C. A., Castro, S. L., & Cogliser, C. C. (1999). Leader-member exchange (LMX) research: A comprehensive review of theory, measurement, and data-analytic practices. The Leadership Quarterly, 10, 63-113. Sias, P. M., & Jablin, F. M. (1995). Differential superior‐subordinate relations, perceptions of fairness, and coworker communication. Human Communication Research, 22, 5-38. Silin, R. H. (1976). Leadership and values: The organization of large-scale Taiwanese enterprises. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Smith, C., Organ, D. W., & Near, J. P. (1983). Organizational citizenship behavior: Its nature and antecedents. Journal of Applied Psychology, 68, 653-663. Smith, P. B., & Peterson, M. F. (1988). Leadership, organizations, and culture: An event management model. Beverly Hills, CA: SAGE. Smith, P. B., & Wang, Z. M. (1996). Chinese leadership and organizational structures. In M. H. Bond (Ed.), The handbook of Chinese psychology (pp. 322-337). New York: Oxford University Press. Smith, R. J. (1994). China's cultural heritage: The Qing dynasty. Boulder, CO: Westview Press. Stewart, G. L., & Barrick, M. R. (2000). Team structure and performance: Assessing the mediating role of intrateam process and the moderating role of task type. Academy of Management Journal, 43, 135-148. Van Breukelen, W., Van Der Leeden, R., Wesselius, W., & Hoes, M. (2012). Differential treatment within sports teams, leader-member (coach-player) exchange quality, team atmosphere, and team performance. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 33, 43-63. Van Scotter, J. R., & Motowidlo, S. J. (1996). Interpersonal facilitation and job dedication as separate facets of contextual performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 81, 525-531. Vroom, V. H. (1964). Work and motivation. New York: Wiley. Wagner, W., Duveen, G., Farr, R., Jovchelovitch, S., Lorenzi‐Cioldi, F., Markova, I., & Rose, D. (1999). Theory and method of social representations. Asian Journal of Social Psychology, 2, 95-125. Weber, M. (1964). The theory of social and economic organization (A. M. Henderson & T. Parsons, Trans.). New York: Free Press. Weber, M. (1968). The types of legitimate domination. In G. Roth & C. Wittich (Eds.), Economy and society (Vol. 3, pp. 212-216). New York: Bedminster. Werner, J. M. (1994). Dimensions that make a difference: Examining the impact of in-role and extrarole behaviors on supervisory ratings. Journal of Applied Psychology, 79, 98-107. Westwood, R. (1997). Harmony and patriarchy: The cultural basis for 'paternalistic headship' among the overseas Chinese. Organization Studies, 18, 445-480. Wu, J. B., Tsui, A. S., & Kinicki, A. J. (2010). Consequences of differentiated leadership in groups. Academy of Management Journal, 53, 90-106.
dc.identifier.uri	http://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/jspui/handle/123456789/63415	-
dc.description.abstract	近年來許多國外的領導理論，如領導者─部屬交換關係與轉型式領導，都一再強調領導行為的差異程度在團體內的重要性。然而，過去家長式領導的研究議題，多集中在對偶層次與團體層次之直接效果的探討，忽略了家長式領導行為在團體內之差異幅度對部屬效能的影響。為了補足此一缺口，本研究試圖從主管展現差序幅度後所引發的角色規範之社會表徵機制，探討仁慈領導與威權領導的差序對待幅度對部屬效能的影響。此外，考量到領導者須展現合宜的行為，以彰顯其領導的正當性，本研究亦納入平均德行領導的概念，探討其與主管差序對待幅度間的交互作用效果。以跨層次模式分析軍事組織中的172個連隊（包含172位連隊長與516位排長），結果發現：威權領導差序幅度與客位組織公民行為具有顯著正相關，且平均德行領導對主管差序對待幅度與部屬效能間的關係具有負向調節效果。當平均德行領導低時，威權領導差序幅度與部屬客位組織公民行為、工作績效具有顯著正相關，而仁慈領導差序幅度則與部屬主位組織公民行為具有顯著正相關。當平均德行領導高時，主管差序對待幅度與部屬效能無顯著相關。最後，本研究針對結果進行討論，並提出理論與實務意涵、研究限制及未來研究方向。	zh_TW
dc.description.abstract	Many western leadership theories, for example, LMX and transformational leadership, have been made in recent years and all emphasized on the importance of leadership divergence in the group. However, most of the paternalistic leadership (PL) researches in the past just focused on the direct outcome of dyad level and group level, but overlooked the influence on subordinate effectiveness, which caused by the differences of PL in the group. In order to complement the weakness in the field, this study demonstrates the social representations resulted from supervisor’s leadership differentiation and discusses the influence of benevolent leadership differentiation as well as authoritarian leadership differentiation on subordinate effectiveness. In addition, considering proper behavior of leaders are required to manifest their leading legitimacy, the study also brings into the concept of average moral leadership. This concept will be used to argue its interaction effect with leadership differentiation made by supervisors. A total of 172 companies in the military system (including 172 company commanders and 516 platoon commanders) were analyzed using cross-level approaches. A significant positive correlation was observed between the leadership differentiation and etic organization citizenship behaviors (OCB-etic). On the other hand, negative moderating effects, which caused by the average moral leadership, exist between supervisor leadership differentiation and subordinate effectiveness. When average moral leadership is low, not only authoritarian leadership differentiation and OCB-etic, job performances are significantly positive correlated, but also benevolent leadership differentiation is in significantly positive correlated to the emic organization citizenship behaviors (OCB-emic). When average moral leadership is high, there is no significant correlation between leadership differentiation and subordinates’ effectiveness. Lastly, this study provides further arguments, theory contributions, and managerial implications. Limitations and future research directions are also discussed.	en
dc.description.provenance	Made available in DSpace on 2021-06-16T16:40:17Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 ntu-101-R99227126-1.pdf: 669448 bytes, checksum: 702502fec1dd76c7b7e6a8afb7458b28 (MD5) Previous issue date: 2012	en
dc.description.tableofcontents	致謝...........................................................................................ⅰ 中文摘要...................................................................................ⅱ 英文摘要...................................................................................ⅲ 第一章緒論.............................................................................1 第二章文獻探討.....................................................................4 第一節家長式領導........................................................................4 第二節差序對待............................................................................8 第三節領導行為之團體內差異..................................................10 第四節家長式領導差序對待幅度..............................................14 第五節差序對待幅度與部屬效能之關係..................................16 第六節平均德行領導的調節效果..............................................19 第七節研究架構..........................................................................22 第三章研究方法...................................................................24 第一節研究樣本..........................................................................24 第二節研究工具..........................................................................25 第三節資料分析..........................................................................32 第四章研究結果...................................................................36 第一節驗證性因素分析..............................................................36 第二節相關分析..........................................................................36 第三節階層線性模式分析..........................................................39 第五章討論與建議...............................................................47 第一節研究結果..........................................................................47 第二節理論與管理實務意涵......................................................50 第三節研究限制..........................................................................53 第四節未來研究方向..................................................................54 第五節結論..................................................................................57 參考文獻...................................................................................58 附錄一部屬問卷...................................................................69 附錄二主管問卷...................................................................72
dc.language.iso	zh-TW
dc.title	主管差序對待幅度與部屬效能：平均德行領導的調節效果	zh_TW
dc.title	Leadership Differentiation and Subordinate Effectiveness: The Moderating Effect of Average Moral Leadership	en
dc.type	Thesis
dc.date.schoolyear	100-2
dc.description.degree	碩士
dc.contributor.oralexamcommittee	周麗芳(Li-Fang Chou),姜定宇(Ding-Yu Jiang),黃敏萍(Min-Ping Huang)
dc.subject.keyword	家長式領導,差序幅度,平均德行領導,部屬效能,跨層次分析,	zh_TW
dc.subject.keyword	paternalistic leadership,leadership differentiation,average moral leadership,subordinate effectiveness,cross-level approaches,	en
dc.relation.page	75
dc.rights.note	有償授權
dc.date.accepted	2012-09-25
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-101-1.pdf 目前未授權公開取用	653.76 kB	Adobe 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。