政大機構典藏-National Chengchi University Institutional Repository(NCCUR):Item 140.119/90180
English  |  正體中文  |  简体中文  |  Post-Print筆數 : 27 |  全文筆數/總筆數 : 113451/144438 (79%)
造訪人次 : 51249845      線上人數 : 903
RC Version 6.0 © Powered By DSPACE, MIT. Enhanced by NTU Library IR team.
搜尋範圍 查詢小技巧：
  • 您可在西文檢索詞彙前後加上"雙引號"，以獲取較精準的檢索結果
  • 若欲以作者姓名搜尋，建議至進階搜尋限定作者欄位，可獲得較完整資料
    •  進階搜尋
    政大機構典藏 > 理學院 > 心理學系 > 學位論文 >  Item 140.119/90180


    請使用永久網址來引用或連結此文件: https://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/90180


    題名: 比較目標設定理論與期望理論對工作表現之解釋力
    作者: 盛揚翼
    貢獻者: 陳彰儀
    盛揚翼
    日期: 1989
    1988
    上傳時間: 2016-05-03 14:17:17 (UTC+8)
    摘要: 摘要
    過去許多有關探討目標設定理論(Goa1 setting theory) 與期望理論(Expectancy theory) 的研究大致上皆支持目標的難易和動機三因素乘積的大小的確會影響動機的高低。然而，二者之間究竟何者是影響動機的主要因素呢?二者影響力的強弱情形為何?當二者同時出現時，只會顯示出強者的影響力呢?還是不分強弱，二者的影響力皆會顯示出來?或甚至於有交互作用產生?本研究的目的即在了解究竟目標和動機三因素乘積何者才是影響動機的主要因素。本研究以國立政治大學學生108名為受試，操弄目標難易度(難、中、易)和動機三因素乘積的高低(高、中、低)，以受試者在手眼協調測驗上的工作表現作為動機的指標，採用完全隨機的3 x 3二因子實驗設計。以二因子共變數分析的結果顯示，在工作表現上，目標難度的影響有主要效果，VIE值則沒有主要主要效果，二者之間沒有交互作用，表示目標是影響動機的主要因素。在討論中將詳細的說明此一結果所代表的意義，並試圖解釋為何VIE值的影響力較小，另外並檢討在實驗進行中可能產生的一些偏差及本研究所能適用的範圍，以及提出一些對後續研究者的建議。
    參考文獻: 參考書目
    林清山(民72):教育與心理統計學，東華書局。
    錢玉芬(民76): 日本短式通用性向測驗之修訂及其應用，國立政治大學心理研究所碩士論文。
    Arvey, R.D.(1972). Task performance as a function of perceived effort-performance and performance-reward contingencies.
    Organizational Behavior and Human Performance , 8 , 423-433 .
    Campbell , 0. 1., & Ilgen , D. R. (1976) . Additive effects of task difficulty and goal setting on subsequent task performance. Journal of Applied Psychology , 61 , 319-324.
    Campbell , J. C. , Dunnette , M. 0. , Lawler , E. E. , 11 1 ，& Weick, K. E. (1970). Managerial behavior, performance ,and effectiveness. New York. McGraw-Hi11.
    Campbell, J . P., & Pritchard , R. D. (1976).Motivation theory in industrial and organizational psychology. In M. D. Dunnette(Ed.) ,The handbook of industrial and organizational psychology. Chicago: Rand McNally
    Campion , M. A. , & Lord , R. G. (1982). A control systems conceptualization of the goal-setting and changing process. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance , 30 , 265-287.
    Connolly , T. (1976).Some conceptual and methodological issues in expectancy models of work motivation. Academv of Management Review, 1, 37-47.
    Dachler, H. P. , & Mobley , W. H. (1973). Construct validation of an instrumentality-expectancy-task-goal model of work motivation: Some theoretical boundary conditions. Journal of Applied Psychology, 58, 397-418.
    Dossett, D. L., Latham, G. P., & Mitchell, T. R. (1979).
    Effects of assigned versus participatively set goals, knowledge of results, and individual differences on employee behavior when goal difficulty is held constant. Journal of Applied Psychology, 64, 291-298.
    Erez, M., & Arad, R. (1986). Participative goal setting: Social, motivational and cognitive factors. Journal of Applied Psychology, 71, 591-597.
    Erez, M., & Zidon, I .(1984). Effect of goal acceptance on the relationship of goal difficulty to performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 69, 69-78.
    Galbraith, J., & Cummings, l. L. (1967). An empirical investigation of the motivational determinants of task performance: Interactive effects between instrumentality-valence and motivation-ability. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 2, 237-257.
    Garland, H. (1984). Relation of effort-performance expectancy to performance in goal-setting experiments. Journal of Applied Psychology, 69, 79-84.
    Graen, G. (1969). Instrumentality theory of work motivation: Some experimental results and suggested modifications. Journal of Applied Psychology, 53, 1-25.
    Hackman, J. R., &. Porter, L. W. (1968). Expectancy theory prediction of work effectiveness. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 3, 417-426.
    Heneman, H. G. ,III, & Schwab, D. P. (1972). Evaluation of research on expectancy theory predictions of employee performance. Psychological Bulletin, 78, 1-9.
    Ivancevich, J. M. (1977). Different goal setting treatments and their effects on performance and job satisfaction. Academy of Management Journal, 20, 406-419.
    Ivancevich, J. M., & McMahon, J. T. (1982). The effects of goal setting, external feedback, and self-generated feedback on outcome variables: A field experiment. Academy of Management Journal, 25, 359-372.
    Latham, G. P., & Marshall, H. A. (1982). The effects of self-set, participatively set and assigned goals on the performance of government employees. Personnel psychology,
    399-404.
    Latham, G. P., & Saari, L. M. (19 7 9). The effects of holding goal difficulty constant on assigned and participatively set goals. Academy of Management Journal, 22, 163-168.
    Latham, G. P., & Yuki, G. A. (1975a). A review of research on the application of goal setting in organizations . Academy of Management Journal, 18, 824-845.
    Latham, G. P., & Yuki, G. A. (1975b).Assigned versus participative goal setting with educated and uneducated woods workers. Journal of Applied Psychology, 60, 299-302.
    Latham, G. P., Erez, M., & Locke, E. A. (1988). Resolving scientific disputes by the joint design of crucial experiments by the antagonists: Application to the Erez-Latham dispute regarding participation In goal setting. Journal of Applied Psychology, 73, 753-772.
    Latham, G.P., Mitchell, T.R., & Dossett, D.L.(1978). Importance of participative goal setting and anticipated rewards on goal difficulty and job performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 63, 163-171.
    Lawler, E. E. (1971). Pay and organizational effectiveness: A psychological view. New York: McGraw-Hill.
    Lawler, E. E. (1973). Motivation in work organizations. Belmont, Calif.: Brooks/Cole.
    Locke, E. A. (1968). Toward a theory of task performance and incentives. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 3, 157-189.
    Locke, E. A. (1977). The myths of behavior mod in organizations. Academy of Management Review, 2, 543-553.
    Locke, E. A., Frederick, E., Buckner, E., & Bobko, P. (1984). Effect of previously assigned goals on self-set goals and performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 69, 694-699.
    Locke, E. A., Shaw, K. N., Saari, L. M., & Latham, G. P. (1981). Goal setting and task performance:1969-1980. Psychological Bulletin,90,125-15l.
    Matsui, T., Okada, A. , & Mizuguchi, R. (1981). Expectancy theory prediction of the goal theory postulate, " The harder the goals, the higher the performance" Journal of Applied Psychology, 66, 54-58.
    Mento, A. J., Cartledge, N. D. ,& Locke, E. A.(1980).Maryland vs. Minnesota: Another look at the relationship of expectancy and goal difficulty to task performance. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 25, 419-440.
    Mitchell, T. R. (1974). Expectancy models of job satisfaction, occupational preference, and effort : A theoretical, methodological, and empirical appraisal. Psychological Bulletin, 81, 1053-1077 .
    Mitchell, T. R., & Pollard, W. E. (1973). Instrumentality theory predictions of academic behavior. Journal of Social Psychology .89, 34-45.
    Motowidlo, S.L., Loehr, V., & Dunnette, M.D.(1978) . A laboratory study of the effects of goal specificity on the relationship between probability of success and performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 63, 172-179.
    Porter, L. W., & Lawler, E. E.,III . (1968). Managerial attitudes and performance. Homewood, Ill: Irwin-Dorsey.
    Schwab, D. P., Olian-Gottlieb, 1.D., & Heneman, H.G.,III.(1979).
    Between subjects expectancy theory research: A statistical review of studies predicting effort and performance. Psychological Bulletin, 86, 139-147.
    Siegel, L., & Lane, I. M. (1982). Personnel and organizational psychology. Homewood: Richard D. Irwin, Inc.
    Steers, R. M., & Porter, L. W. (1974). The role of task-goal attributes in employee performance. Psychological Bulletin,81, 434-452.
    Strang, H. R., Lawrence, E. C., & Fowler, P. C. (1978). Effects of assigned goal level and knowledge of results on arithmetic computation: A laboratory study. Journal of Applied Psychology, 63, 446-450.
    Taylor, F. W. (1911). The principles of scientific management. New York: Harper & Bros.
    Tubbs, M. E. (1986). Goal setting: A meta-analytic examination of the empirical evidence. Journal of Applied Psychology, 71, 474-483.
    Vroom, V. H. (1964). Work and motivation. New York: Wiley.
    Wagner, J. A., & Gooding, R. Z. (1987). Shared influence and organizational behavior: A moderator meta-analysis of situational variables expected to moderate participation-outcome relationships. Academy of Management Journal, 30, 524- 541.
    Yuki, G. A., & Latham, G. P. (1978). Interrelationships among employee participation, individual differences, goal difficulty, goal acceptance; goal instrumentality, and performance. Personnel Psychology, 31, 305-323.
    描述: 碩士
    國立政治大學
    心理學系
    資料來源: http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#B2002005532
    資料類型: thesis
    顯示於類別:[心理學系] 學位論文

    文件中的檔案:

    檔案 大小格式瀏覽次數
    index.html0KbHTML2297檢視/開啟


    在政大典藏中所有的資料項目都受到原著作權保護.


    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 ©   - 回饋