博碩士論文 etd-0113119-143601 詳細資訊


[回到前頁查詢結果 | 重新搜尋]

姓名 嚴珮華(Pei-Hua Yen ) 電子郵件信箱 E-mail 資料不公開
畢業系所 人力資源管理研究所(Institute of Human Resource Management)
畢業學位 碩士(Master) 畢業時期 107學年第2學期
論文名稱(中) 主管的馬基維利信念對部屬幸福感之影響- 部屬中庸思維的調節效果
論文名稱(英) The influence of supervisors’ Machiavellianism belief on subordinates’ well-being: The moderating effect of subordinates’ belief on Zhong-Yong
檔案
  • etd-0113119-143601.pdf
  • 本電子全文僅授權使用者為學術研究之目的,進行個人非營利性質之檢索、閱讀、列印。
    請遵守中華民國著作權法之相關規定,切勿任意重製、散佈、改作、轉貼、播送,以免觸法。
    論文使用權限

    紙本論文:不公開

    電子論文:使用者自訂權限:校內校外均不公開

    論文語文/頁數 中文/79
    統計 本論文已被瀏覽 5635 次,被下載 0 次
    摘要(中) 近年來企業日益重視「協調、協商、說服、社交感知」等社會技巧,而高馬基維利信念的個人能夠敏銳察覺情勢變化,具有良好敏捷的適應能力與彈性的社交手段,其特質與企業重視的社會技巧相符,因此極易被企業識別並拔擢為領導者;然而,馬基維利信念亦具有自利、人際操弄、道德觀薄弱等特點,當個人對馬基維利信念的認同程度越高,其越可能為了自身利益而對他人採取操弄、傷害的行為策略;換言之,當高馬基維利信念領導者的個人利益與企業或部屬的利益互相衝突時,該領導者將可能對企業或部屬進行操弄並造成傷害。
    而當部屬受到主管馬基維利信念所造成的情緒或利益上的傷害時,其亦可能以不同的方因應此負向影響。對華人而言,中庸思維是最具代表性的文化概念,此一思維方式強調全局思考、陰陽並存、內外和諧的思維特點,能使個人具有較為靈活彈性的認知與整合能力,有助於個人在面對負向事件與情緒時發揮緩衝調節的作用,因此,縱使主管的馬基維利信念可能會對部屬的職場幸福感產生負向的影響,但部屬亦有可能因為中庸思維而調節減弱此一負向的影響。
    本研究針對307位台灣企業員工,探討主管的馬基維利信念對部屬的職場幸福感的影響,同時進一步探討部屬的中庸思維在主管的馬基維利信念與部屬的職場幸福感之間的調節效果。研究結果發現:(1)主管的馬基維利信念無法顯著預測部屬的職場幸福感;(2)部屬的中庸思維無法調節主管的馬基維利信念與部屬的職場幸福感之關係。
    最後,依據結果進行探討,並對研究限制、未來研究方向提出說明與建議。
    摘要(英) In recent years, enterprises are paying more and more attention to social skills such as "coordination, negotiation, persuasion, social perception". Individuals with high Machiavellianism belief can be keenly aware of changes in the situation, and have agile adaptability and flexible social strategy. These traits are consistent with the social skills that enterprises value, so high Machiavellianism individuals are easy to be identified by the enterprises and become supervisors. However, Machiavellianism belief are also characterized by self-interest, interpersonal manipulation, and weak morality. The more individuals agree with Machiavellianism belief, the more likely they are to manipulate and harm others for their own interests. In other words, when the personal interests of the high Machiavellianism supervisors conflict with the interests of the enterprises or subordinates, the supervisors may manipulate and injure the enterprises or subordinates.
    When the subordinate is injured by the high Machiavellianism supervisor, the subordinate may deal with these negative injuries in different ways. For Chinese, Zhong-Yong is the most representative cultural concept. It emphasizes the thinking of global perspectives, yin and yang, and internal and external harmony. It enables individuals to have better cognitive and integration skills and plays a role of buffer adjustment when individuals deal with negative emotions or events. Therefore, even if the Machiavellianism belief of supervisors may have a negative impact on the subordinates’ well-being, the subordinates may also adjust to weaken it because of the belief on Zhong-Yong.
    This study aimed at 307 Taiwanese employees to discuss the influence of supervisors’ Machiavellianism belief on subordinates’ well-being, and further explore the moderating effect of subordinates’ belief on Zhong-Yong. The results are asiv
    follows:(1) the supervisors’ Machiavellianism belief will not affect on subordinates’ well-being; (2) subordinates’ belief on Zhong-Yong cannot regulate the relationship between the supervisors’ Machiavellianism belief and the subordinates’ well-being.
    According to the results, the discussion, limitation, further research directions are noted in the end.
    關鍵字(中)
  • 馬基維利
  • 幸福感
  • 華人幸福感
  • 調節作用
  • 中庸思維
  • 關鍵字(英)
  • Chinese Well-being
  • well-being
  • moderating effect
  • Zhong-Yong
  • Machiavellianism
  • 論文目次 論文審定書 ........................................................................................................................ i
    摘 要 ................................................................................................................................. ii
    Abstract ............................................................................................................................. iii
    第一章 緒論 .................................................................................................................. 1
    第一節 研究背景 ...................................................................................................... 1
    第二節 研究目的 ...................................................................................................... 3
    第二章 文獻探討 .......................................................................................................... 4
    第一節 馬基維利信念 .............................................................................................. 4
    第二節 幸福感 ........................................................................................................ 14
    第三節 中庸思維 .................................................................................................... 22
    第四節 主管的馬基維利信念、部屬的職場幸福感及中庸思維的關係 ............ 29
    第三章 研究方法 ........................................................................................................ 31
    第一節 研究架構與假設 ........................................................................................ 31
    第二節 研究對象 .................................................................................................... 32
    第三節 研究工具 .................................................................................................... 35
    第四章 研究結果 ........................................................................................................ 42
    第一節 各變項間的相關程度 ................................................................................ 42
    第二節 主管的馬基維利信念對部屬的職場幸福感之影響 ................................ 45
    第三節 部屬的中庸思維在主管的馬基維利信念對部屬的職場幸福感之影響中
    的調節效果 ................................................................................................ 50
    第五章 結論與建議 .................................................................................................... 55
    第一節 研究結果 .................................................................................................... 55
    第二節 結果討論 .................................................................................................... 56
    第三節 研究限制與建議 ........................................................................................ 57
    參考文獻 ........................................................................................................................ 58
    一、中文部分 ............................................................................................................ 58
    二、英文部分 ............................................................................................................ 62
    參考文獻 一、中文部分
    王念慈、蔡智勇(2009)。工作壓力對於家庭氣氛與幸福感之研究:以高工作壓力
    群為例。發表於「2009年健康與管理學術研討會」。新竹:元培科技大學、台
    灣健康管理學會。
    王軼楠(2008)。如何與上級處好關係?──中庸視角下的華人衝突化解模式研
    究。發表於「第七屆中國社會心理學會年會」。天津:中國社會心理學會。
    余民寧、謝進昌、林士郁、陳柏霖、曾筱婕(2011)。教師主觀幸福感模式建構與
    驗證之研究。測驗學刊,57(1),55-85。
    余思賢、林以正、黃金蘭、黃光國、張仁和(2010)。長期取向與心理適應之關聯。
    中華心理衛生學刊,23,347-375。
    呂健忠譯(2012)。君主論(Machiavelli,N. The Prince, 1513)。台灣:暖暖
    書屋。
    何雅萍(2010)。業務人員人格特質與應酬行為對銷售績效影響之研究。淡江大學
    企業管理學系碩士論文。
    李怡真(2009)。安適幸福感的構念發展與情緒調控機制之探討。台灣大學心理學
    研究所博士論文。
    李新民、陳密桃(2006)。實用智能、緣分信念與心理健康、工作表現之相關: 以
    幼兒教師為例。中華心理學刊,48(2),183-202。
    李新民、陳密桃(2009a)。緣份信念與心理幸福感的關係—聚合構念為因與果的
    結構方程模式分析初探。測驗學刊,56(4),457-489。
    李旭梅、林如玉(2016)。以資源保存理論,論心理資本、幸福感與組織公民行為
    之關聯性。人力資源管理學報,16(1),69-89。
    李華香(2005)。人際衝突中的中庸行動研究。廣州中山大學心理學系碩士論文。
    余英時(2003)。朱熹的歷史世界:宋代士大夫政治文化的研究(上冊)。台灣:
    允晨文化。
    林惠彥、陸洛、吳珮瑀、吳婉瑜(2012)。快樂的員工更有生產力嗎?組織支持與
    工作態度之雙重影響。中華心理學刊,54(4),451-469。
    林升棟、楊中芳(2006)。陰陽轉換思維的再探研。發表於「第六屆中國社會心理
    學會年會」。黃山:中國社會心理學會。
    林升棟(2008a)。陰陽轉換思維之測量。發表於「第七屆中國社會心理學會年會」。
    天津:中國社會心理學會。
    林升棟(2008b)。從人際衝突情境的作答反應測量中庸思維。發表於「第七屆中
    國社會心理學會年會」。天津:中國社會心理學會。
    林瑋芳(2008)。傳統性與現代性的區隔與整合對心理適應之影響。台灣大學心
    理學系暨心理學研究所碩士論文。
    韋慶旺(2008)。權力差異和社會動機對談判行為和結果的影響。浙江大學心理學
    系博士論文。
    周麗芳(2018)。華人職場中的員工幸福感:本土文化取徑的研究與介入。科技部
    專題研究計畫。
    吳宗德(2008)。《中庸》思想淵源及其儒學發展的內在關係—兼論《中庸》在先
    秦儒學思想史中的地位。文學前瞻,2008年8月,第8期,1-22。
    吳佳煇、林以正(2005)。中庸思為量表的編制。本土心理學研究,24,247-299。
    吳佳煇(2006a)。中庸讓我生活得更好:中庸思維對生活滿意度之影響。華人心
    理學報,7,163-176。
    吳勝濤、李 娟(2009)。中庸與堅韌的情感功能差異──災區研究的一點副產品
    及思考。發表於「第三屆中庸心理學研究研討會」。廈門:廈門大學。
    柯秉欣(2006)。大專生生活態度及馬基維利主義對網路倫理之實證研究。中正大
    學企業管理研究所碩士論文。 洪蘭譯(2009)。真實的快樂( Martin E. P. Seligman. Authentic Happiness,
    (2004))。台北:遠流。
    侯木章(2008)。中階主管的人格特質、領導風格及情緒智力與工作績效關聯之研
    究—以台灣半導體業為例。成功大學管理研究所碩士論文。
    高旭繁(2013)。通往華人幸福之路:性格特質與文化價值的雙重作用。本土心理
    學研究,2013年6月,第39期,165-214。
    高瞻、黃金蘭、林以正、黃敏兒、楊中芳(2010)。中庸實踐思維與憂鬱徵狀的相
    關研究。發表於「中庸心理學研究小型研討會」。廣州:中山大學心理學系。
    徐克謙(1998)。從「中」字的三重含義看中庸思想。孔孟月刊,37期,頁5-9。
    孫蒨如(2008)。中國人的陰陽思維。發表於「第七屆中國社會心理學會年會」。
    天津:中國社會心理學會。
    陸洛(1998)。中國人幸福感之內涵、測量及相關因素探討。國家科學委員會研究
    彙刊:人文及社會科學,第8巻,第1期,115-137。
    陳姿秀、羅新興、戚樹誠(2003)。馬基維利主義傾向者對主管與同事的差別評價:
    以國軍軍官為實證對象。中華管理評論,第6巻,第5期,97-107。
    陳密桃、李新民(2007)。台灣地區國小教師的實用智能、緣分信念、內團體偏私
    與心理健康、工作表現之潛在關聯。教育學看,29,37-72。
    陳建勳、凌媛媛、劉松博(2010)。領導者中庸思維與組織績效:作用機制與情境
    條件研究。南開管理評論,2,132-141。
    許潔虹、李紓、孫悅(2008)。陰陽轉換思維與概率思維的關係研究。發表於「第
    七屆中國社會心理學會年會」。天津:中國社會心理學會。
    張珮琦(2008)。個人背景及幸福感與工作滿意、組織承諾、離職意向之關聯。中
    央大學人力資源管理研究所碩士論文。
    張仁和、林以正、黃金蘭、黃郁喬(2009)。心理位移日記書寫法對情緒表達衝突
    的轉變分析─以負向事件為書寫材料。財團法人「張老師」基金會專題研究
    計畫。
    張仁和、黃金蘭、林以正(2010)。心理位移書寫之位格特性驗證與療癒效果分析。
    中華輔導與諮商學報,28,29-60。
    黃韞臻、林淑惠(2008)。大學生幸福感之組成與比較。國立台中技術學院學報,
    9(2),19-31。
    黃守正、郭育良、柯德鑫、鄭雅文(2003)。職場社會心理特質與自覺健康狀態之相關,中華職業醫學雜誌,10(4),235-244。
    黃金蘭、林以正、楊中芳(2012)。中庸信念—價值量表之修訂。本土心理學研究,38,3-41。
    黃金蘭、林以正、余思賢(2009)。中庸思維與困境遊戲中的行為。發表於「第三屆中庸心理學研究研討會」。廈門:廈門大學。
    傅佩榮(2012)。大學中庸新解。台灣:清涼音。
    楊國樞(1999)。中國人之基本性格向度、結構及效應的系統性研究。國科會特
    約研究計畫成果報告,報告編號NSC86-2143-H002-026。台北:行政院國家科
    學委員會。
    楊中芳(2001)。如何理解中國人:文化與個人論文集。台北:遠流出版公司。
    楊中芳(2010)。一個中庸、各自表述。本土心理學研究,34,159-165。
    楊中芳、趙志裕(1997)。中庸實踐思維初探。發表於「第四屆華人心理與行為科
    技學術研討會」。南港:中央研究院民族學研究所、台灣大學心理系。
    楊中芳(2010)。中庸實踐思維體系探研的初步進展。本土心理學研究,34,3-96。
    楊中芳總校訂譯(1997)。性格與社會心理測量總覽(上、下)(John P. Robinson,
    Phillip R. Shaver, & Lawrence S. Wrightsman. Measures of Personality
    and Social Psychological Attitudes,(1991))。台北:遠流。
    廖國鋒、吳華春(2003)。從正義知覺與關係品質的觀點探討領導者權力對員工工
    作投入影響之實證研究。人力資源管理學報,3(2),1-25。
    趙志裕(2000)。中庸思維的測量:一個跨地區研究的初步結果。香港社會科學學
    報,18,33-35。
    蔡培村、武文瑛(2004)。領導學:理論、實務與研究。高雄市:麗文。
    劉仲矩(1995)。馬基維利傾向與工作成效及工作滿足關係之研究-以壽險業務人
    員為例。淡江大學國際企業學研究所碩士論文。
    鄧傳忠(2008)。中庸思維對拿捏行為與心理適應的調節效果。台灣大學心理學研
    究所,碩士論文。
    鄭芬蘭、楊晴閔、黃秋華(2008)。兒童馬基人格、人際欺騙與同儕關係。花蓮教
    育大學學報,27,133-159。
    鄭思雅、李秀麗、趙志裕(1999)。辨證思維與現代生活。香港社會科學學報,15,
    1-25。
    蔡旻蓉(2014)。營建業從業人員苛責式領導與部屬職涯承諾關聯性:部屬馬基維利人格傾向調節效果。高雄應用科技大學土木工程與防災科技研究所碩士論文。
    謝孟蓉(2012)。高績效人力資源實務、員工幸福感及員工態度與行為之關係。中山大學人力資源管理研究所碩士論文。
    鍾文彬(2010)。探討中階主管人格特質、領導風格與工作績效之關聯性—以Y公司為例。中央大學人力資源管理研究所碩士論文。
    二、英文部分
    Abraham zaleznik (1977, May ).Managers and Leaders: Are They Different? Harvard Business Review, 2004, January 01.
    Aiken, L. S., & West, S. G. (1991). Multiple regression: Testing and interpreting interactions. London: Sage.
    Argyle, M., & Lu, L. (1990). The happiness of extraverts. Personality and Individual Difference, 11(10), 1011-1017.
    Argyle,M., Martin, M., & Lu, L. (1995). Testing for stress and happiness: The role of social and cognitive factors. D. C.: Taylor and Francis.
    Avolio, B. J., Reichard, R. J., Hannah, S. T., Walumbwa, F. O., & Chan, A. (2009). A mental-analytic review of leadership impact research: Experimental and quasi-experimental studies. Leadership Quarterly, 20, 764-784.
    Avolio, B. J., Walumbwa, F. O., & Weber, T. J. (2009). Leadership: Current theories, research, and future directions. Annual Review of Psychology, 60,421-499.
    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.
    Bass, B. M. (1990). (3rd ed.). Bass and Stogdill’s handbook of leadership: Theory, research,and managerial applications. New York:Free Press
    Bedell, K., Hunter, S., A., & Vert, A.(2006). A historiometric examination of Machiavellianism and a new taxonomy of leadership. Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies, 12(4), 50-72.
    Cho, L. F.(周麗芳), Chu, C. C., Yeh, H. C., & Chen, J.(2013). Work stress and employee’s well-being:The critical role of Zhong-Yong.Asian Journal of Social Psychology.
    Christie, R., & Geis, F. L.(1970).Studies in Machiavellianism. New York:
    Academic Press.
    Cheng, C., & Cheung, M. W. L. (2005). Cognitive processes underlying
    coping flexibility: Differentiation and integration. Journal of
    Personality, 73, 859-886.
    Corzine, J. B., Buntzman, G. E., & Busch, E. T. 1999 Machiavellianism in U. S. bankers. International Journal of Organization analysis,
    7(1) :72-83.
    Cummins, R. A. (2000). Objective and subjective quality of life: An interactive model. Social Indicators Research, 52, 55-72.
    David J. Deming, The Growing Importance of Social Skills in the Labor Market, NBER Working Papers (August 2015),http://www.nber.org/papers/w21473.
    Deluga, R. J. (2001). American presidential Machiavellianism: Implications for charismatic leadership and rated performance. The Leadership Quarterly, 12, 339-363.
    De Vellis, R. F. (1991).Social development. Newbury Park, NJ: Sage Pulication.
    Diener,E. (1984). Subjective ewll-being.psychological Bulletin. 95:542-575.
    Diener, E., & Ryan, K.(2009) Subjective well-being: A general overview. South African Journal of Psychology, 39, 391-406.
    Drory, A., & Gluskinos, U. M. (1980). Machiavellianism and Leadership. Journal of Applied Psychology, 65(1), 81-86.
    Durkheim, E. (1951). Suicide: A study in sociology. New York: Free Press.
    Efraty, D., Sirgy, M. J., & Claiborne, C. B. (1991). The effects of personal alienation on organizational identification: A quality-of work life model. Journal of Business and Psychology,6, 57-78.
    Fehr, B., Samsom, D., & Paulhus, D. L. (1992). The construct of Machiavellianism:Twenty years later. NJ:Erlbaum.
    Gable, M., Hollon, C., & Dangello, F. (1992). Managerial structuring of work as a moderator of the Machiavellianism and job performance relationship. The Journal of Psychology, 126(3) :317-325.
    Graham, J. H.(1996). Machiavellian project managers: do they perform better?
    International Journal of Project Management, 14(2), 67-74.
    Greenhaus, J. H., Bedian, A. G., & Mossholder, K. W. (1987). Work experiences, job performances, and feelings of personal and family well-being. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 31, 200-215.
    Headey, B., & Wearing, A. (1989). Personality, Life events, and subjective well-being: Toward a dynamic equilibrium model. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 57(4), 731-739.
    Headey, B., & Wearing, A. (1991).Subjective well-being and coping with adversity. Social Indicators Research, 22, 327-349.
    Holahan, C. K. (1988). Relation of life at age 70 to activity participation and health and psychological well-being among terman’s gifted men and women. Psychology and Aging, 3(3), 286-291.
    Hotard, S. R., McFatter, R. M., McWhirter, R. M., & Stegall, M. E. (1989). Interactive effects of extraversion, neuroticism, and social relationship on subjective well-being. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 57(2), 321-331.
    Hunt, S. D., & Chonko, L. B. (1984). Marketing and Machiavellianism. Journal of Marketing, 48:30-42.
    Hsu, C. J. (許忠仁) (2006). Development of an indigenous Chinese personality inventory based on the principle of yin-yang and the five elements and on the ancient Chinese text “Jen Wu Chih”. A PhD
    dissertation, Ohio State University.
    Ilies, R., Dimotakis, N., & Peter, I. D. (2010). Psychological and Physiological Reactions to High Workloads: Implications for Well-Being. Personnel Psychology, 63, 407-736.
    Ip, P. K., (2009). Developing a concept of workplace well-being for Great
    China. Social Indicator Research, 91, 59-77.
    Kanji, G. K., & Chopra, P. K. (2009). Psychosocial system for work well-being: On measuring work stress by causal pathway. Total Quality Management and Business Excellence, 20(5), 563-580.
    Keyes, C. L. M., Shmotkin, D. & Ryff, C. D. (2002). Optimizing well-being: The empirical encounter of two traditions. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 82(2), 1007-1022.
    Keyes, C. L. M., & Shapiro, A. D. (2003).Social Well-Being in the United States: A Descriptive Epidemiology. In Brim, O. G., Ryff, C. D., & Kessler, R. C. (2003). How Healthy Are We?:A National Study of Well-Being at Midlife.New York:Chicago Press.
    Keyes, C. L. M., & Magyar-Moe, J. L. (2003). The measurement and utility of adult subjective well-being. In S. J. Lopez & C. R. Snyder (Eds.), Positive psychological assessment: A handbook of models and measures. Washington: American Psychological Association.
    Keyes, C. L. M. (2007). Psychological Well-Being. Encyclopedia of Gerontology(Second Edition), 399-406.
    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’Machiavelliansism and subordinates’perceptions of abusive supervisory behavior. Journal of Research in Personality, 44(4), 512-519.
    Kitayma, S., & Markus, H. R. (2000).The pursuit of happiness and the realization of sympathy: Cultural patterns of self, social relations, and well-being.Cambridge, MA:The MIT Press.
    Layard. (2006). Happiness: Lessons from a new sciencw. London: Penguin.
    Levinson, H. (1965). Reciprocation:the relationship between man and organization. Administrative Science Quarterly, 9, 370-390.
    Lu, L. (1995). The relationship between subjective well-being and
    psychosocial variables in Taiwan. The Journal of Social Psychology,
    135, 351-357。
    Lu, L. (2005). In Pursuit of Happiness: The Cultural Psychological Study of SWB. Chinese Journal of Psychology, 47(2), 2005.
    Lu, L. (2008). The individual-oriented and social-oriented Chinese bicultural self: Testing the theory. The Journal of Social Psychology, 148, 347-374.
    Lucas, R. E., Clark, A. E., Georgellis, Y., & Diener, E. (2003). Reexamining adaption and the set point model of happiness: Reactions to changes in marital status. Journal of Personality & Social Psychology, 84, 527-539.
    Lucas, R. E., Clark, A. E., Georgellis, Y., & Diener, E. (2004). Unemployment alters the set point for life satisfaction. Psychological Science, 15, 8-13.
    Lyubomirsky, S., Sheldon, K. M., & Schkade, D. (2005). Pursuing Happiness: The Architecture of Sustainable Change. Review of General Psychology, 9(2), 111-131
    Macrosson, W. D. K, & Hemphill, D. J. (2001). Machiavellianism in Belbin team roles.Journal of Managerial Psychology, 16(5) :355-363.
    Macky, K., & Boxall, P. (2008). High-involvement work processes, work intensification and employee well-being: a study of New Zealand worker experiences. Asia Pacific Journal of Human Resources, 46(1), 38-55.
    McCleskey Jim (2013). The Dark Side of Leadership: Measurement,
    Assessment, and Intervention. Business Renaissance Quarterly, Summer/Fall 2013, Vol.8, p35-53.
    Mick, D. G.(1996). Are studies of dark side variable confounded by socially desirable responding? The case of materialism. Journal of Consumer Research, 23, 106-119.
    Nikbakhsh, R., & Abadi, A. G. M. (2014). Organization citizenship behavior and well-being in coaches. Indian Journal of Fundamental and Applied Life Sciences, 4, 3825-3838.
    Page, Kathryn M., & Vella-Brodrick, Dianne A.(2009). The ‘What’ , ’Why’ and ‘How’ of Employee Well-being: A New Model. Social Indicators Research 90(3), 441-458.
    Patric, R., Pascal M., Christian, G., & Jean, C. A.(2012).Social representation theory. In Paul A. M. Van Lange, Arie W. Kruglanski, and E. Tory Higgins(Eds.), Handbook of Theories of Social Psychology volumn 2,477-497.SAGE Publications Ltd.
    Rim, Y. (1993). Values, happiness and family structure variable. Personality and Individual Difference, 15(5), 595-598.
    Rissa, K., & Kaustia, T. (2007). Well-being creates productivity -- The Druvan-model. Helsinki, Finland: Helsinki Centre for Occupational Safety.
    Robbins, S. P. (2001). Organizational Behavior. (9th ed.).New Jersey: Prentice Hall.
    Robert, S., & Wyer, Jr.(2012).A Theory of Information Processing. In Paul A. M. Van Lange, Arie W. Kruglanski, and E. Tory Higgins(Eds.), Handbook of Theories of Social Psychology volumn 1,156-177.SAGE Publications Ltd.
    Ryan, R. M. & Deci, E. L. (2001). On happiness and human potentials: A review of research on hedonic and eudaimonic well-being. Annual review of psychology, 52(1), 141-166.
    Ryff, C. D., & Singer B. (1998). The contours of positive human health. Psychological Inquiry, 9, 1-28.
    Ryff, C. D., & Singer, B. H. (2008). Know thyself and become what you are: A eudaimonic approach to psychological well-being. Journal of Happiness Studies, 9, 13-39.
    Schulte, P., & Vainio, H (2010). Well-being at work-overview and perspective. Scandinavian journal of work, environment & health, 422-429.
    Shin, D. & Johnson, D. (1978). Avowed happiness as an overall assessment of the quality of life. Social Indicators Research, 5(1), 475-492.
    Simonton, D, K. (1986). Presidential Personality: Biographical use of the gough adjective check list. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51(1), 149-160.
    Skakon,J., Nielsen, K., Borg, V., & Guzman, J. (2010). Are leaders’ well-being, behaviours and style associated with the affective well-being of their employees? A systematic review of three decades of research. Work and Stress, 24(2), 107-139.
    Stone, M. J., & Kozma, A. (1985). Structural relationship among happiness scales: A second order factorial study. Socail Indicatiors Research, 17, 19-28.
    Thoits, P. A. (1982). Conceptual, methodological and theoretical problem in studying social support as a buffer against life stress. Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 23, 145-159.
    Timothy A. Judge, Ronald F. Piccolo, & Tomek Kosalka (2009). The bright and dark sides of leader traits: A review and theoretical extension
    of the leader trait paradigm. The Leadership Quarterly, 20(6), 855-875.
    Taris, T. W., & Schreurs, P. J.(2009). Well-being and organizational performance: An Organizational-level test of the happy-productive worker hypothesis. Work & Stress, 23(2), 120-136.
    Veenhoven, R. (1994). Is happiness a trait? Tests of the theory that a better society does not make people any happier. Social Indicators Research, 32, 101-160.
    Warr, P. (1999).Well-being and the workplace. In D. Kahneman, E. Diener, & N. Schwarz(Eds), Well-being: The foundations of hedonic psychology (pp.392-412). NY, US:Russell Sage Foundation.
    Wilson, D. S., Near, D., & Miller, R. R, (1996). Machiavellianism: A synthesis of the evolutionary and psychological literatures. Psychological Bulletin, 119(2), 285-299.
    Wright, T. A. & Staw, B. M. (1999). Affect and favorable work outcomes: Two longitudinal tests of the happy-productive worker thesis. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 20(1), 1999, 1-23.
    Wright, T. A. & Cropanzano, R.(2004). The role of psychological well-being in job performance: A fresh look at an age-old guest. Organizational Dynamics, 33, 338-351.
    Zettler, I., Friedrich, N., & Hilbig, B. E. (2011). Dissecting work commitment: the role of Machiavellianism. Career Development International, 16(1), 20-35.
    口試委員
  • 周麗芳 - 召集委員
  • 李明彥 - 委員
  • 任金剛 - 指導教授
  • 口試日期 2019-02-13 繳交日期 2019-02-14

    [回到前頁查詢結果 | 重新搜尋]


    如有任何問題請與論文審查小組聯繫