政大機構典藏-National Chengchi University Institutional Repository(NCCUR):Item 140.119/30002
English  |  正體中文  |  简体中文  |  Post-Print筆數 : 27 |  全文笔数/总笔数 : 113483/144470 (79%)
造访人次 : 51372229      在线人数 : 836
RC Version 6.0 © Powered By DSPACE, MIT. Enhanced by NTU Library IR team.
搜寻范围 查询小技巧：
  • 您可在西文检索词汇前后加上"双引号"，以获取较精准的检索结果
  • 若欲以作者姓名搜寻，建议至进阶搜寻限定作者字段，可获得较完整数据
    •  进阶搜寻
    政大機構典藏 > 商學院 > 企業管理學系 > 學位論文 >  Item 140.119/30002


    请使用永久网址来引用或连结此文件: https://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/30002


    题名: 面試官人格特質對高結構面談使用意圖影響之研究：以知覺責任感為干擾變數
    作者: 曾可堯
    贡献者: 蔡維奇
    曾可堯
    关键词: 結構化面談
    日期: 2008
    上传时间: 2009-09-11 17:01:50 (UTC+8)
    摘要: 儘管實證研究發現高結構面談工具能有效提升面談的信度與效度，但目前探討影響面試官對於高結構面談使用意圖的前因研究仍相對缺乏。本研究以Big Five五大人格特質中的外向性、親和性及勤勉審慎性為主要變數，討論面試官人格特質對於高結構面談使用意願的影響。同時，根據Siegel-Jacobs與Yates (2006)研究建議將知覺責任感進一步細分為知覺程序責任與知覺結果責任，分別釐清其是否會影響面試官對於高結構面談的偏好，並檢視此兩個變數是否會干擾面試官人格特質與對高結構面談使用意圖之間的關係。

    本研究的樣本收集自342位直線主管與人資專員，結果顯示具備高勤勉審慎性特質、以及知覺程序責任與知覺結果責任程度高的面試官會增加對高結構面談的使用意願。此外，在面試官人格特質與知覺責任感之交互作用上，本研究發現當面試官知覺結果責任程度愈高時，會加強高勤勉審慎性的面試官與對高結構面談使用意圖之正向關係。另外，本研究也意外發現具高親和性特質之面試官會傾向使用高結構面談；並且當面試官知覺結果責任程度愈高時，會強化外向性與對高結構面談使用意願之負向關係。
    Although empirical studies have found high structured interviews (HSI) have higher criterion-related validity and reliability than those of low structured interviews, the issue of interviewer intentions to use HSI remains largely unexamined so far. This study examines the effects of interviewer personality traits, including Big Five- extraversion, agreeableness, and conscientiousness, on interviewer intentions to use HSI. In addition, felt accountability has been recognized as a crucial factor throughout the interview process. According to Siegel-Jacobs and Yates (2006), there are two distinct types of accountability: procedural accountability (PA) and outcome accountability (OA). Therefore, we further examine how these two variables influence interviewer intentions to use HSI, and see if they will moderate the relationships between interviewer personality traits and interviewer intentions to use HSI.
    Using a sample of 342 line managers and HR specialists, the results showed that interviewers with high conscientiousness and perceived high PA and OA tended to use HSI. Moreover, with regard to the interacting effects of interviewer personality traits and felt accountability, the present study found that when highly conscientious interviewers perceived higher OA, they would increase their willingness to conduct HSI. Unexpectedly, we found interviewers’ high agreeableness was positively related to their intentions to use HSI. Besides, it was surprising that high OA would strengthen negative main effects of extraversion and interviewer intentions to adopt HSI. Practical and theoretical implications are discussed.
    參考文獻: 行政院主計處新聞稿（民97年)，95年工商及服務業普查初步統計結果，http://www.dgbas.gov.tw/
    Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and
    Human Decision Processes, 50, 179-211.
    Allinson, C. W., & Hayes, J. (1996). The cognitive style index: A measure of intuition-analysis for organizational research. Journal of Management Studies, 33, 119-135.
    Anderson, J. C., & Gerbing, D. W. (1988). Structural equation modeling in practice: A review and recommended two-step approach. Psychological Bulletin, 103, 411-423.
    Ashton, R. H. (1992). Effects of justification and a mechanical aid on judgment performance. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 51, 416-446.
    Bagozzi, R. P., & Yi, Y. (1991). Multitrait-multimethods matrices in consumer research. Journal of Consumer Research, 17, 426-439.
    Barrick, M. R., & Mount, M. K. (1991). The big five personality dimensions and job performance: A meta-analysis. Personnel Psychology, 44, 1-26.
    Barrick, M. R., & Mount, M. K. (2000). Select on conscientiousness and emotional stability. In E. A. Locke (Eds.), Handbook of principles of organizational behavior (pp.15-28). Malden, MA: Blackwell.
    Barrick, M. R., Mount, M. K., & Gupta, R. (2003). Meta-analysis of the relationship between the five-factor model of personality and Holland’s occupational types. Personnel Psychology, 56, 45-74.
    Barrick, M. R., Mount, M. K., & Judge, T. A. (2001). Personality and performance at the beginning of the new millennium: What do we know and where do we go next? International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 9, 9-30.
    Ree, M. J., & Carretta, T. R. (2006). The role of measurement error in familiar statistics. Organizational Research Methods, 9, 99-112.
    Robert, E. C. (1967). Selection interview decisions: The effect of interviewer experience, relative quota situation, and applicant sample on interviewer decisions. Personnel Psychology, 20, 259-280.
    Rozelle, R. M., & Baxter, J. C. (1981). Influence of role pressures on the perceiver: Judgments of videotaped interviews varying judge accountability and responsibility. Journal of Applied Psychology, 66, 437-441.
    Rynes, S. L., Barber, A. E., & Varma, G. H. (2000). Research on the employment interview: Usefulness for practice and recommendations for future research. In C. Cooper, & E. Locke (Eds.), Industrial and organizational psychology: Linking theory with practice (pp. 250-277). Oxford: Blackwell.
    Salgado, J. F. (2002). The Big Five personality dimensions and counterproductive behaviors. International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 10, 117-125.
    Seibert, S. E., & Kraimer, M. L. (2001). The five-factor model of personality and career success. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 58, 1-21.
    Siegel-Jacobs, K., & Yates, J. F. (1996). Effects of procedural and outcome accountability on judgment quality. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 65, 1-17.
    Simonson, I., & Staw, B. M. (1992). Deescalation strategies: A comparison of techniques for reducing commitment to losing courses of action. Journal of Applied Psychology, 77, 419-426.
    Simonson, I., & Nye, P. (1992). The effect of accountability on susceptibility to decision errors. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 51, 416-446.
    Smith, P. C., & Kendall, L. M. (1963). Retranslation of expectations: An approach to the construction of unambiguous anchors for rating scales. Journal of Applied Psychology, 47, 149-155.
    Terpstra, D. E., & Rozell, E. J. (1997). Why some potentially effective staffing practices are seldom used. Public Personnel Management, 26, 483-495.
    Steers, R., & Braunstein, D. (1976). A behaviorally based measure of manifest need in work settings. Journal of vocational Behavior, 9, 251-266.
    Stewart, G. L., Carson, K. P., & Cardy, R. L. (1996). The joint effects of conscientiousness and self leadership training on employee self-directed behavior in a service setting. Personnel Psychology, 49, 143-164.
    Tetlock, P. E. (1983). Accountability and the complexity of thought. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 45, 74-83.
    Tetlock, P. E. (1985). Accountability: The neglected social context of judgment and choice. In B. M. Staw, & L. L. Cummings (Eds.), Research in organizational behavior (vol. 7, pp. 297-332). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
    Tetlock, P. E., Skitka, L., & Boettger, R. (1989). Social and cognitive strategies for coping with accountability: Conformity, complexity, and bolstering. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 57, 632-640.
    Touhey, J. C. (1972). Role perception and the relative influence of the perceiver and the perceived. Journal of Social Psychology, 87, 213-217.
    Tullar, W. L. (1989). Relational control in the employment interview. Journal of Applied Psychology, 74, 971-977.
    Van der Zee, K., Wabeke, R. (2004). Is trait-emotional intelligence simply or more than just a trait? European Journal of Personality, 18, 243-263.
    Van der Zee, K. I., Bakker, P., & Bakker, A. B. (2002). Why are structured interviews so rarely used in personnel selection? Journal of Applied Psychology, 87, 176-184.
    Weigold, M. F., & Schlenker, B. R. (1991). Accountability and risk raking. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 17, 25-29.
    Wiesner, W. H., & Cronshaw, S. (1988). The moderating impact of interview format and degree of structure on interview validity. Journal of Occupational Psychology, 61, 275-290.
    Barrick, M. R., Mount, M. K., & Strauss, J. P. (1993). Conscientiousness and performance of sales representatives: Test of the mediating effects of goal setting. Journal of Applied Psychology, 78, 715-722.
    Yang, S. C., Hung, W. C., Sung, K., & Farn, C. K. (2006). Investigating initial trust toward e-tailers from the elaboration likelihood model perspective. Psychology and Marketing, 23, 429-445.
    Zhang, Y., & Mittal, V. (2005). Decision difficulty: Effects of procedural and outcome accountability. Journal of Consumer Research, 32, 465-472.
    Barrick, M. R., Stewart, G. L., Neubert, M. J., & Mount, M. K. (1998). Relating member ability and personality to work-team processes and team effectiveness. Journal of Applied Psychology, 83, 377-391.
    Baxter, J. C., Hill, P. C., Brock, B., & Rozelle, R. M. (1981). The perceiver and the perceived revisited. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 7, 91-96.
    Beach, L. R. (1990). Image theory: Decision making in personal and organizational contexts. Chichester: John Wiley.
    Beach, L. R., & Mitchell, T. R. (1978). A contingency model for the selection of decision strategies. Academy of Management Review, 3, 439-449.
    Behling, O. (1998). Employee selection: Will intelligence and conscientiousness do the job? Academy of Management Executive, 12, 77-86.
    Bourne, E. (1977). Can we describe an individual`s personality? Agreement on stereotyped versus individual attributes. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 35, 863-872.
    Brtek, M. D., & Motowidlo, S. J. (2002). Effects of procedure and outcome accountability on interview validity. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87, 185-191.
    Buss, A. H. (1991). Evolutionary personality psychology. Annual Review of Psychology, 42, 459–492.
    Campion, M. A., Palmer, D. K., & Campion, J. E. (1997). A review of structure in the selection interview. Personnel Psychology, 50, 655-702.
    Campion, M. A., Pursell, E. D., & Brown, B. K. (1988). Structured interviewing: Raising the psychometric properties of the employment interview. Personnel Psychology, 41, 25-42.
    Chaiken, S. (1980). Heuristic versus systematic information processing and the use of source versus message cues in persuasion. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 39, 752-766.
    Chapman, D. S., & Zweig, D. I. (2005). Developing a nomological network for interview structure: Antecedents and consequences of the structured selection interview. Personnel Psychology, 58, 673-702.
    Chen, Y. C., Tsai, W. C., & Hu, C. (2008). The influences of interviewer-related and situational factors on interviewer reactions to high structured job interviews. International Journal of Human Resources Management, 19, 1056-1071.
    Church, A. H. (1996). From both sides now: The employee interview－the great pretender. Industrial Psychologist, 34, 108-117.
    Cohen, J. & Cohen, P. (1983). Applied multiple regression/ correlation analysis for the behavioral science (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
    Conway, J. M., & Huffcutt, A. I. (2003). A review and evaluation of exploratory factor analysis practices in organizational research. Organizational Research Methods, 6, 147-168.
    Costa, P. T., Jr., & McCrae, R. R. (1992). Revised NEO Personality Inventory (NEO-PI-R) and NEO Five Factor Inventory (NEO-FFI) professional manual. Odessa, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources.
    Cvetkovich, G. (1978). Cognitive accommodation, language, and social responsibility. Social Psychology, 41, 149-155.
    DeYoung, C. G., Peterson, J. B., & Higgins, D. M. (2002). Higher-order factors of the Big Five predict conformity: Are there neuroses of health? Personality and Individual Differences, 33, 533-552.
    DeYoung, C. G., Quilty, L. C., & Peterson, J. B. (2007). Between facets and domains: 10 aspects of the Big Five. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 93, 880-896.
    Dipboye, R. L. (1992). Selection interviews: Process perspectives. Cincinnati, OH: South-Western.
    Dipboye, R. L. (1994). Structured and unstructured selection interviews: Beyond the job-fit model. In G. Ferris (Ed.), Research in Personnel and Human Resources Management (vol.12, pp. 79-123), Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
    Dipboye, R. L. (1997). Structured selection interviews: Why do they work? Why are they underutilized? In N. Anderson & P. Herriot (Eds.), International handbook of selection and assessment (pp. 455-473). New York: Wiley.
    Dipboye, R. L., & Gaugler, B. B. (1993). Cognitive and behavioral processes in the selection interview. In N. Schmitt, & W. Borman (Eds.), Personnel selection in organizations (pp. 135-170). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
    Dornbusch, S. M., Hastorf, A. H., Richardson, S. A., Muzzy, R. E., & Vreeland, R. S. (1965). The perceiver and the perceived: Their relative influence on the categories of interpersonal cognition. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1, 434-440.
    Dougherty, T. W., Turban, D. B., & Callender, J. C. (1994). Confirming first impressions in the employment interview: A field study of interviewer behavior. Journal of Applied Psychology, 79, 659-665.
    Dudley, N. M., Orvis, K. A., Lebiecki, J. E., & Cortina J. M. (2006). A meta-analytic investigation of conscientiousness in the prediction of job performance: Examining the intercorrelations and the incremental validity of narrow traits. Journal of Applied Psychology, 91, 40-57.
    Eder, R. W. (1989). Contextual effects on interview decisions. In R. W. Eder, & G. R. Ferris (Eds.), The employment interview: Theory, Research, and Practice (pp. 113-126). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
    Ferris, G. R., Mitchell, T. R., Canavan, P. J., Frink, D. D., & Hopper, H. (1995). Accountability in human resource systems. In G. R. Ferris, S. D. Rosen, & D. T. Barnum (Eds.), Handbook of human resource management (pp. 175-196). Oxford: Blackwell.
    Frink, D. D., & Ferris, G. R. (1998). Accountability, impression management, and goal setting in the performance evaluation process. Human Relations, 51, 1259-1283.
    Goldberg, L. R. (1992). The development of markers for the Big-Five factor structure. Psychological Assessment, 4, 26-42.
    Goldberg, L. R. (1999). A broad-bandwidth, public domain, personality inventory measuring the lower-level facets of several five-factor models. In I. Mervielde, I. Deary, F. De Fruyt, & F. Ostendorf (Eds.), Personality psychology in Europe (vol. 7, pp. 7-28). Tilburg: Tilburg University Press.
    Graves, L. M. (1993). Sources of individual differences in interviewer effectiveness: A model and implications for future research. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 14, 349-370.
    Green, P. C., Alter, P., & Carr, A. F. (1993). Development of standard anchors for scoring generic past-behaviour questions in structured interviews. International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 1, 203-212.
    Hakel, M. (1982). The state of employment interview theory and research. In R. W. Eder, & G. R. Ferris (Eds.), The employment interview: Theory, Research, and Practice (pp. 285-293). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
    Hall, A. T., Frink, D. D., Ferris, G. R., Hochwarter, W. A., Kacmar, C. J., & Bowen, M. G. (2003). Accountability in human resources management. In C. A. Schriesheim, & L. Neider (Eds.), New directions in human resource management (pp. 29-63). Research in Management series. Greenwich, CT: Information Age.
    Harris, M. M. (1989). Reconsidering the employment interview: A review of recent literature and suggestions for future research. Personnel Psychology, 42, 691-726.
    Harris, M. M., & Eder, R. W. (1999). The state of employment interview practice: commentary and extension. In R. W. Eder, & M. M. Harris (Eds.), The employment interview handbook (pp. 369-398). Thousands Oaks, CA: Sage.
    Hochwarter, W., Kacmar, C., & Ferris, G. (2003). Accountability at work: An examination of antecedents and consequences. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Society of Industrial and Organizational Psychology, Orlando, FL.
    Hochwarter, W. A., Perrewé, P. L., Hall, A. T., & Ferris, G. R. (2005). Negative affectivity as a moderator of the form and magnitude of the relationship between felt accountability and job tension. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 26, 517-534.
    Hofmann, D. A. (1997). An overview of the logic and rationale of hierarchical linear models. Journal of Management, 23, 723-744.
    Hofstee, W. K. B., De Raad, B., & Goldberg, L. R. (1992). Integration of the Big Five and circumplex approaches to trait structure. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 63, 146-163.
    Holland, J. L. (1985). Making vocational choices: A theory of careers. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
    Holland, J. L. (1997). Making vocational choices: A theory of vocational personalities and work environments. Odessa, FL: Psychologist Assessment Resources.
    Hovland, C. I., & Wonderlic, E. F. (1939). Prediction of industrial success from a standardized interview. Journal of Applied Psychology, 23, 537-546.
    Hsu, C. (2004). The testing of America. U.S. News and World Report, 137, 68-69.
    Huffcutt, A. I., & Arthur, W. Jr. (1994). Hunter and Hunter (1984) revisited: Interview validity for entry-level jobs. Journal of Applied Psychology, 79, 184-190.
    Janis, I. L., & Mann, L. (1977). Decision making. New York: Free Press.
    Johns, G. (1993). Constraints on the adoption of psychology based personnel practices: Lessons from organizational innovation. Personnel Psychology, 46, 569-592.
    Johnson, B. T., & Eagly, A. H. (1989). Effects of involvement on persuasion: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 106, 290-314.
    Judge, T. A., & Ferris, G. R. (1992). The elusive criterion of fit in human resources staffing decisions. Human Resource Planning, 15, 47-67.
    Klimoski, R. J., & Inks, L. (1990). Accountability forces in performance appraisal. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 45, 194-208.
    Kolk, N. J., Born, M. Ph., & van der Flier, H. (2004). Three method factors explaining the low correlations between assessment center dimension ratings and scores on personality inventories. European Journal of Personality, 18, 127-141.
    Koole, S. L., Jager, W., Van den Berg, A. E., Vlek, C. A., & Hofstee, W. K. B. (2001). On the social nature of personality: Effects of Extraversion, Agreeableness, and feedback about collective resource use on cooperation in a resource dilemma. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 27, 289–301.
    Latham, G. P., & Finnegan, B. J. (1993). Perceived practicality of unstructured, patterned, and situational interviews. In Schuler, H., Farr, J. L., & Smith, M. (Eds.), Personnel selection and assessment: Individual and organizational perspectives (pp. 41-55). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
    Laurent, G., & Kapferer, J. (1985). Measuring consumer involvement profiles. Journal of Marketing Research, 22, 41-53.
    Lievens, F., & De Paepe, A. (2004). An empirical investigation of interviewer-related factors that discourage the use of high structure interviews. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 25, 29-46.
    Longenecker, C. O., Sims, H. P., Jr., & Gioia, D. A. (1987). Behind the mask: The politics of employee appraisal. Academy of Management Executive, 1, 183-193.
    Lounsbury, J. W., Hutchens, T., & Loveland, J. M. (2005). An investigation of big five personality traits and career decidedness among early and middle adolescents. Journal of Career Assessment, 13, 25-39.
    McAllister, D. W., Mitchell, T. R., & Beach, L. R. (1979). The contingency model for the selection of decision strategies: An empirical test of the effects of significance, accountability, and reversibility. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 24, 228-244.
    McCrae, R. R., & Costa, P. T. (1987). Validation of a five-factor model of personality across instruments and observers. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 52, 81-90.
    McDaniel, M. A., Whetzel, D. L., Schmidt, F. L., & Maurer, S. D. (1994). The validity of employment interviews: A comprehends review and meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 79, 599-616.
    Mero, N. P., & Motowidlo, S. J. (1995). Effects of rater accountability on the accuracy and the favorability of performance ratings. Journal of Applied Psychology, 80, 517-524.
    Motowidlo, S. J., Mero, N. P., & DeGroot, T. (1995). Predicting and controlling individual variability in interviewers’ judgments. In E. B. Kolmstetter (Chair), Interviewer and contextual factors that make a difference in interview validity. Symposium conducted at the meeting of the Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology, Orlando, FL.
    Mount, M. K., & Barrick, M. R. (1995). The Big Five personality dimensions: Implications for research and practice in human resources management. Research in Personnel and Human Resources Management, 13, 153-200.
    Mulaik, S. A., James, L. R., Van Alstine, J., Bennett, N., Lind, S. Y., & Stilwell, C. D. (1989). Evaluation of goodnesss of fit indices for structural equation models. Psychological Bulletin, 105, 430-445.
    Murphy, K. R., Balzer, W. K., Kellam, K. L., & Armstrong, J. G. (1984). Effects of the purpose of rating on accuracy in observing teacher behavior and evaluating teaching performance. Journal of Educational Psychology, 76, 45-54.
    Neuman, G. A., & Kickul, J. R. (1998). Organizational citizenship behaviors: Achievement orientation and personality. Journal of Business and Psychology, 13, 263-279.
    Ones, D. S., & Viswesvaran, C. (1996). Bandwidth-fidelity dilemma in personality measurement for personnel selection. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 17, 609-626.
    Penley, J. A., & Tomaka, J. (2002). Associations among the Big Five, emotional responses, and coping with acute stress. Personality and Individual Differences, 32, 1215-1228.
    Petty, R. E., & Cacioppo, J. T. (1979). Issue-involvement can increase or decrease persuasion by enhancing message-relevant cognitive responses. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 37, 1915-1926.
    Petty, R. E., & Cacioppo, J. T. (1984). The effects of involvement on responses to argument quantity and quality: Central and peripheral routes to persuasion. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 46, 69-81.
    Petty, R. E., Cacioppo, J. T., & Schumann, D. (1983). Central and peripheral routes to advertising effectiveness: The moderating role of involvement. Journal of Consumer Research, 10, 134-148.
    Podsakoff, P. M., Mackenzie, S. B., & Podsakoff, N. P. (2003). Common method biases in behavioral research: A critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88, 879-903.
    Posthuma, R. A., Morgeson, F. P., & Campion, M. A. (2002). Beyond employment interview validity: A comprehensive narrative review of recent research and trends over time. Personnel Psychology, 55, 1-81.
    Pulakos, E. D. (1995, May). Panelist. In Campion, M. A., & Palmer, D. K. (Chairs), Taking stock of structure in the employment interview. Panel discussion presented at the Tenth Annual Conference of the Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology, Inc., Orlando.
    描述: 碩士
    國立政治大學
    企業管理研究所
    95355046
    97
    資料來源: http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0953550461
    数据类型: thesis
    显示于类别:[企業管理學系] 學位論文

    文件中的档案:

    档案 大小格式浏览次数
    index.html0KbHTML2374检视/开启


    在政大典藏中所有的数据项都受到原著作权保护.


    社群 sharing

    著作權政策宣告 Copyright Announcement
    1.本網站之數位內容為國立政治大學所收錄之機構典藏，無償提供學術研究與公眾教育等公益性使用，惟仍請適度，合理使用本網站之內容，以尊重著作權人之權益。商業上之利用，則請先取得著作權人之授權。
    The digital content of this website is part of National Chengchi University Institutional Repository. It provides free access to academic research and public education for non-commercial use. Please utilize it in a proper and reasonable manner and respect the rights of copyright owners. For commercial use, please obtain authorization from the copyright owner in advance.

    2.本網站之製作，已盡力防止侵害著作權人之權益，如仍發現本網站之數位內容有侵害著作權人權益情事者，請權利人通知本網站維護人員(nccur@nccu.edu.tw)，維護人員將立即採取移除該數位著作等補救措施。
    NCCU Institutional Repository is made to protect the interests of copyright owners. If you believe that any material on the website infringes copyright, please contact our staff(nccur@nccu.edu.tw). We will remove the work from the repository and investigate your claim.
    DSpace Software Copyright © 2002-2004  MIT &  Hewlett-Packard  /   Enhanced by   NTU Library IR team Copyright ©   - 回馈