Responsive image
博碩士論文 etd-1126119-222132 詳細資訊
Title page for etd-1126119-222132
論文名稱
Title
如何從不當督導中恢復?探討主管每日不當督導、員工恢復需求與每日下班後休閒活動之關係:員工人格特質及休閒時間自主權的干擾效果
How to Recover from Abusive Supervisor? Exploring the Relationship between the Need For Recover of Employees and Daily Off-job Activities: Moderation Effects of Personal Characters and Control During Leisure Time of Employees
系所名稱
Department
畢業學年期
Year, semester
語文別
Language
學位類別
Degree
頁數
Number of pages
44
研究生
Author
指導教授
Advisor
召集委員
Convenor
口試委員
Advisory Committee
口試日期
Date of Exam
2019-12-20
繳交日期
Date of Submission
2019-12-26
關鍵字
Keywords
休閒時間自主權、外向性、神經質、休閒活動、恢復需求、不當督導
Abusive Supervision, Need For Recovery, Off-Job Activity, Extraversion, Neuroticism, Control During Leisure Time
統計
Statistics
本論文已被瀏覽 5843 次,被下載 0
The thesis/dissertation has been browsed 5843 times, has been downloaded 0 times.
中文摘要
不當督導在許多研究當中已針對此行為發展出許多前因及後果變相,但尚未對於被不當督導之員工的恢復需求,以及在下班後選擇從事哪些休閒活動。因此本研究探討被不當督導與恢復需求之關係,而在高度恢復需求的員工將會在下班後選擇哪種休閒活動來進行?另外探討是否有「恢復悖論」之存在?最後納入外向性、神經質人格特質及休閒時間自主權來干擾此段關係之強弱。本研究資料收集方式採用經驗抽樣法,共有206位企業在職員工的受測者,進行連續10個工作日填答上下班問卷,有效配對資料共獲得1717筆。經多層次路徑分析假設檢驗結果發現:(1)被不當督導之員工會產生高度恢復需求;(2)高度恢復需求將選擇從事低投入活動,而不去進行社交活動;(3)高外向性員工將選擇社交活動;(4)外向性、神經質及休閒時間自主權干擾後皆產生「恢復悖論」。
Abstract
Nowadays, many research studies have been carried out on the causes and consequences of abusive supervision. However, there are few discussions of the need for recovery of the employees who are under abusive supervision. Therefore, this paper examines the causal link between these two factors: the employees who are under abusive supervision and their need for recovery. As well as what kind of activity will employees with high recovery needs choose after work? Moreover, this study explores whether there is a "recovery paradox"? and whether extraversion, neuroticism and the control during leisure time cause moderating effect or not. The method of data collection in this study was experience sampling method. A ten-consecutive-day questionnaire survey was conducted by 206 current employees, and 1717 effective samples have been collected. After the path analysis hypothesis, the results are as follow:(1)Employees who are under abusive supervision will have high demand of need of recovery.(2)Employees with high demand of need of recovery will do low-effort activity rather than social activity.(3)Employees with high extraversion prefer social activity.(4)The moderating effect of extraversion, neuroticism and control during leisure time will cause recovery paradox.
目次 Table of Contents
論文審定書 i
論文公開授權書 ii
摘要 iii
第一章 緒論 1
第二章 理論與假設 4
第一節 每日不當督導與恢復需求的關係:努力-恢復模式的觀點 4
第二節 每日恢復需求與每日下班後休閒活動的關係:努力恢復模式與恢復悖論的競爭觀點 5
第三節 每日恢復需求與每日下班後休閒活動的關係:外向性、神經質及休閒時間自主權的干擾效果 6
第三章 研究方法 10
第一節 研究對象與施測程序 10
第二節 研究工具 11
第三節 資料分析方式 14
第四章 研究結果 14
第一節 主要變數敘述統計分析 14
第二節 驗證性因素分析 15
第三節 假設檢定 15
第五章 討論與建議 19
第一節 結果討論與理論意涵 19
第二節 管理意涵與建議 21
第三節 研究限制與未來研究建議 23
參考文獻 24
附錄 30
參考文獻 References
吳宗祐、鄭伯壎(2006)。工作投入、調節他人情緒能力與情緒勞動之交互作用對情緒耗竭的預測效果。中華心理學刊,48,69-87。
吳宗祐(2008)。由不當督導到情緒耗竭:部屬正義知覺與情緒勞動的中介效果。中華心理學刊,50,201-221。
吳宗祐、甘雅菱、溫宗霖、廖紘億(2016)。被主管苛責,找奧客出氣?由自我控制損害與社會學習之觀點探討主管不當督導到服務人員情緒宣洩的心理機制。人力資源管理學報,16(3),61-92。
洪贊凱,卓明德,洪詩晴(2011)。主管知覺互動不正義、主管不當督導與部屬績效關係之研究-主管與部屬適配的干擾角色以及情緒耗竭的中介歷程。中原企管評論,9(3),67-92。
胡昌亞、鄭瑩妮(2014)。不當督導研究回顧與前瞻。中華心理學刊,56(2),191-214。
紀乃文、蔡宜衿(2018)。主管下班別LINE我:探討下班後用通訊軟體交辦困難工作對員工後續負向心情、壓力狀態及任務績效的影響:領導成員交換關係與員工親和性特質的干擾效果。管理學報,35(3),303-331。
陳淑貞、楊美玉(2016)。第三者對代理主管不當督導的反應行為:情感與認知機制的中介影響。人力資源管理學報,16(2),1-23。
高日光(2009)。破壞性領導會是組織的害群之馬嗎?中國組織情境的破壞性領導行為研究。管理世界,9,124-132,147。
梁欣光、陳彥君(2018)。揮之不去:以反芻思考認知的觀點連結不當督導與部屬長期負向情感狀態。人力資源管理學報,18(1),35-56。
彭台光、高月慈、林鉦棽(2006)。管理研究中的共同方法變異:問題本質、影響、測試和補救。管理學報,23(1),77-98。
Binnewies, C., Sonnentag, S., & Mojza, E. J. (2009). Daily performance at work: Feeling recovered in the morning as a predictor of day-level job performance. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 30(1), 67-93.
Binnewies, C., Sonnentag, S., & Mojza, E. J. (2009). Feeling recovered and thinking about the good sides of one’s work. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 14, 243-256.
Bakker, A. B. (2011). An evidence-based model of work engagement. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 20(4), 265-269.
Bakker, A. B., Demerouti, E., Oerlemans, W., & Sonnentag, S. (2013). Workaholism and daily recovery: A day reconstruction study of leisure activities. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 34(1), 87-107.
Bennett, A. A., Bakker, A. B., & Field, J. G. (2018). Recovery from work-related effort: Ameta-analysis. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 39, 262-275.
Costa, P. T., & McCrae, R. R. (1992). Normal personality assessment in clinical practice: The NEO Personality Inventory. Psychological Assessment, 4(1), 5-13.
Carstensen, L. L., Pasupathi, M., Mayr, U., & Nesselroade, J. R. (2000). Emotional Experience in Everyday Life across the Adult Life Span. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 79, 644-655.
Cropley, M. & Millward, L.J. (2009). How do individuals ‘switch-off’ from work during leisure? A qualitative description of the unwinding process in high and low ruminators. Leisure Studies, 28, 333-347.
Chi, S.C.S. and Liang, S.G. (2013). When Do Subordinates’ Emotion-Regulation Strategies Matter? Abusive Supervision, Subordinates’ Emotional Exhaustion, and Work Withdrawal. The Leadership Quarterly, 24, 125-137.
Duffy, M. K., Ganster, D., & Pagon, M. (2002). Social Undermining in the Workplace. Academy of Management Journal, 45, 331-351.
Demerouti, E., Bakker, A. B., Geurts, S. A. E., & Taris, T. W. (2009). Daily recovery from work-related effort during non-work time. In S. Sonnentag, P. Perrewe, & D. Ganster (Eds.), Research in occupational stress and well being: Current perspectives on job-stress recovery (Vol. 7, pp. 85–123). Bingley, UK: JAI Press.
Demerouti, E., Bakker, A.B., Sonnentag, S. & Fullagar, C.J. (2012). Work-Related Flow and Energy at Work and at Home: A Study on the Role of Daily Recovery. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 33, 276-295.
Fischer, A. H., Rodriguez Mosquera, P. M., van Vianen, A. E. M., & Manstead, A. S. R. (2004). Gender and culture differences in emotion. Emotion, 4(1): 87-94.
Geurts, S. A. E., & Sonnentag, S. (2006). Recovery as an explanatory mechanism in the relation between acute stress reactions and chronic health impairment. Scandinavian Journal of Work, Environment and Health, 32, 482-492.
Grandey, A., Kern, J., & Frone, M. (2007). Verbal Abuse from Outsiders versus Insiders: Comparing Frequency, Impact on Emotional Exhaustion, and the Role of Emotional Labor. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 12, 63-79.
Harvey P., Stoner, J., Hochwarter, W., & Kacmar, C. (2007). Coping with Abusive Supervision: The Neutralizing Effects of Ingratiation and Positive Affect on Negative Employee Outcomes. The Leadership Quarterly, 18, 264-280.
Jian, Z., Kwan, H. K., Qiu, Q., Liu, Z. Q., & Yim, F. H.-K. (2012). Abusive Supervision and Frontline Employees’ Service Performance. The Service Industries Journal, 32, 683-698.
Kelley, H. H. (1971). Attribution in social interaction. New York: General Learning Press,
Kaplan, S. (1995). The Restorative Benefits of Nature: Toward an Integrative Framework. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 15(3), 169-182.
Kanfer, R. & Heggestad, E.D. (1997). Motivational traits and skills: A person-centered approach to work motivation. Research in Organizational Behavior, 19, 1-56.
Lucas, R. E., & Fujita, F. (2000). Factors influencing the relation between extraversion and pleasant affect. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 79(6), 1039-1056.
Lucas, R. E., & Diener, E. (2001). Understanding extraverts' enjoyment of social situations: The importance of pleasantness. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 81(2), 343-356.
Liu, J., Kwan, H. K., Wu, L. Z., & Wu, W. (2010). Abusive supervision and subordinate supervisor directed deviance: The moderating role of traditional values and the mediating role of revenge cognitions. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 83(4), 835-856.
McCrae, R. R., & Costa, P. T. (1987). Validation of the five-factor model of personality across instruments and observers. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 52(1), 81-90.
Meijman, T. F., & Mulder, G. (1998). Psychological aspects of workload. In P, J, D, Drenth, & H. Thierry (Eds.), Handbook of Work and Organizational Psychology: Vol. 2 Work Psychology, 5-33. Hove, UK: Psychology Press.
Mackey, J. D., Frieder, R. E., Brees, J. R., & Martinko, M. J. (2017). Abusive supervision: A meta-analysis and empirical review. Journal of Management, 43(6), 1940-1965.
Oerlemans, W. G. M., Bakker, A. B., & Demerouti, E. (2014). How feeling happy during off-job activities helps successful recovery from work : a day reconstruction study. Work and Stress, 28(2), 198-216.
Press, A. L. (1991). Women watching television: Gender, class, and generation in the American television experience. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.
Ragsdale, J. M. & Beehr, T. A. (2016). A rigorous test of a model of employees’ resource recovery mechanisms during a weekend. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 37, 911-932.
Shinn, M., M.H.Rosario & D.E. Chestnut(1984). Coping with job stress and burnout in the human services. Journal of personality and social psychology, 46(4).
Spector, P. E., & O’Connell, B. J. (1994). The contribution of personality traits, negative affectivity, locus of control and type A to the subsequent reports of job stressors and job strains. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 67, 1-12.
Sonnentag, S. (2001). Work, Recovery Activities, and Individual Well-Being: A Diary Study. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 6, 196-210.
Sonnentag, S., & Bayer, U. V. (2005). Switching off mentally: Predictors and consequences of psychological detachment from work during off-job time. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 10, 393-414.
Sonnentag, S. & Zijlstra, F.R. (2006). Job Characteristics and Off-Job Activities as Predictors of Need for Recovery, Well-Being, and Fatigue. Journal of Applied Psychology, 91, 330-350.
Sonnentag, S., & Fritz, C. (2007). The Recovery Experience Questionnaire: Development and validation of a measure assessing recuperation and unwinding at work. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 12, 204-221.
Sonnentag, S., Binnewies, C., & Mojza, E. J. (2008). Did you have a nice evening? A day-level study on recovery experiences, sleep, and affect. Journal of Applied Psychology, 93, 674-684.
Sonnentag, S., Kuttler, I., & Fritz, C. (2010). Job stressors, emotional exhaustion, and need for recovery: A multi-source study on the benefits of psychological detachment. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 76(3), 355-365.
Schmeck, R. R., & Lockhart, D. Introverts and extroverts require different learning environments. Retrieved 2013.
Stults-Kolehmainen, M.A., Sinha, R. (2014). The Effects of Stress on Physical Activity and Exercise. Sports Med, 44, 81-121.
Schmidt, S. J. (2016). Personality Diversity: Extrovert and Introvert Temperaments. Journal of Food Science Education, 15(3), 73-74.

Sonnentag, S. (2018). The recovery paradox: portraying the complex interplay between job stressors, lack of recovery, and poor well-being. Res. Organ. Behav. 38, 169-185.
Tepper, B. J., (2000). Consequences of Abusive Supervision. Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 43, No. 2, 178-190.
Tepper, B. J., Duffy, M. K., & Shaw, J. D. (2001). Personality moderators of the relationship between abusive supervision and subordinates’ resistance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86: 974-983.
Tepper, B. J., Duffy, M. K., Hoobler, J., & Ensley, M. D. (2004). Moderators of the Relationships Between Coworkers' Organizational Citizenship Behavior and Fellow Employees' Attitudes. Journal of Applied Psychology, 89(3), 455-465.
Tepper, B.J. (2007). Abusive Supervision in Work Organizations: Review, Synthesis, and Research Agenda. Journal of Management, 33, 261-289.
Trougakos, J. P., Beal, D. J., Green, S. G., & Weiss, H. M. (2008). Making the break count: An episodic examination of recovery activities, emotional experiences, and positive affective displays. Academy of Management Journal, 51(1), 131-146.
ten Brummelhuis, L. L., & Bakker, A. B. (2012). A resource perspective on the work-home interface:The work-home resources model. The American Psychologist, 67, 545-556.
Tepper, B. J., Duffy, M. K., & Breaux-Soignet, D. M. (2012). Abusive supervision as political activity: Distinguishing impulsive and strategic expressions of downward hostility. In G. R. Ferris & D. C. Treadway (Eds.), Politics in organizations: Theory and research considerations 191-212. New York: Routledge.
Van Veldhoven, M., & Broersen, S. (2003). Measurement quality and validity of the “Need for recovery scale”. Occupational and Environmental Medicine, 60, 3e9.
van Wijhe, C., Peeters, M., Schaufeli, W., & Ouweneel, E. (2013). Rise and shine: Recovery experiences of workaholic and nonworkaholic employees. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 22(4), 476-489.
Watson, D., & Clark, L. A. (1992). On traits and temperament: General and specific factors of emotional experience and their relation to the five-factor model. Journal of Personality, 60, 441- 475.
Wang, Y, Ang, C, Jiang, Z & Wu, C (2019). The role of trait extraversion in shaping proactive behavior: A multilevel examination of the impact of high-activated positive affect. Personality and Individual Differences, vol. 136, 107-112.
Wiggins, J. (1996). The five-factor model of personality: Theoretical perspectives. New York, NY: Guilford Press.
Wu, T.Y. & Hu, C. (2009). Abusive Supervision and Employee Emotional Exhaustion Dispositional Antecedents and Boundaries. Group & Organization Management, 34, 143-169.
Wilt, J. & Revelle, W. R. (2016). Extraversion. In T. Widiger (Ed.), The Oxford Handbook of the Five Factor Model. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
Wendsche, J., & Lohmann-Haislah, A. (2017). A meta-analysis on antecedents and outcomes of detachment from work. Frontiers in Psychology, 7, 2072.
Yeung, R. R. (1996). The acute effects of exercise on mood state. Journal of Psychosomatic Research, 40(2), 123-141.
Zhang, H., Kwan, H. K., Zhang, X., & Wu, L.-Z. (2014). High core self-evaluators maintain creativity: A motivational model of abusive supervision. Journal of Management, 40, 1151–1174.
電子全文 Fulltext
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 Thesis access permission:自定論文開放時間 user define
開放時間 Available:
校內 Campus:永不公開 not available
校外 Off-campus:永不公開 not available

您的 IP(校外) 位址是 35.172.230.21
論文開放下載的時間是 校外不公開

Your IP address is 35.172.230.21
This thesis will be available to you on Indicate off-campus access is not available.

紙本論文 Printed copies
紙本論文的公開資訊在102學年度以後相對較為完整。如果需要查詢101學年度以前的紙本論文公開資訊,請聯繫圖資處紙本論文服務櫃台。如有不便之處敬請見諒。
開放時間 available 永不公開 not available

QR Code