政大機構典藏-National Chengchi University Institutional Repository(NCCUR):Item 140.119/36410
English  |  正體中文  |  简体中文  |  Post-Print筆數 : 27 |  Items with full text/Total items : 113822/144841 (79%)
Visitors : 51788691      Online Users : 551
RC Version 6.0 © Powered By DSPACE, MIT. Enhanced by NTU Library IR team.
Scope Tips:
  • please add "double quotation mark" for query phrases to get precise results
  • please goto advance search for comprehansive author search
    •  Adv. Search
    Home ‧ Login ‧ Upload ‧ Help ‧ About ‧ Administer Goto mobile version


    Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/36410


    Title: 同儕評量與自評之差異、相對親疏關係決策控制力及內外控對團體成員公平知覺的影響
    Authors: 徐瑋伶
    Hsu, Wei-Ling
    Contributors: 陳彰儀
    Chen, Chang-I
    徐瑋伶
    Hsu, Wei-Ling
    Keywords: 同儕評量與自評之差異
    相對親疏關係
    決策控制力
    內外控
    公平知覺
    Discrepancies between peer rating and self rating
    Relative relationship
    Decision control
    Locus of control
    Perception of fairness
    Date: 1998
    Issue Date: 2009-09-18 18:30:30 (UTC+8)
    Abstract: 本研究之目的在了解使用同儕評量為考核方式時，可能影響團體成員公平知覺等心理反應的因素。研究中以96名大學女生為實驗對象，採2x2x2實驗設計，探討“同儕評量與自評之差異”、“團體成員相對親疏關係”及“決策控制力（自評對獎金分配之影響力）”等三個因素對團體成員公平知覺之影響，並了解內外控傾向在此影響機制中扮演的角色。研究結果顯示，當團體使用同儕評量之考核方法時，“同儕評量與自評之差異”對個體的公平知覺、結果滿意、團體吸引力、再次合作意願均有非常顯著的影響。顯示個體相當關心自我評量與同儕評量之差異，當同儕評量比自評低時，個人在以上幾種心理反應都顯著的較弱。在“相對親疏關係”上，結果顯示個體進入團體中時，若感覺其他兩位成員間之親疏關係，比個體自己與其他任一人間為親密時，其公平知覺會較低。在“決策控制力”上，則發現其對公平知覺與再次合作意願有顯著影響，當自評對酬賞結果具有影響力（決策控制力高）時，個體的公平知覺會較高，也較願意再次與其他兩位成員合作。在“同儕評量與自評之差異”、“相對親疏關係”、“決策控制力”三者之交互作用方面，分析結果顯示均未達顯著。在內外控此變項上，除發現其對公平知覺有顯著影響，即愈外控者之公平知覺愈低外，另亦顯示內外控與“相對親疏關係”具有交互作用，但與“決策控制力”、“同儕評量與自評之差異”之交互作用並不顯著，表示內外控只在“相對親疏關係”對公平知覺之影響上有調節效果。本研究最後對未獲驗證之部份加以討論，並依實驗所得結果，提出可能之貢獻、限制、對未來研究的建議及工商實務上之應用。
    This study, employing 96 undergraduates and 2×2×2 experimental design, examined the effects of “discrepancies between peer rating and self rating”, “ relative relationship” and “decision control (the influence of self rating on reward) ” to group members’ perception of fairness. The role of locus of control was also explored. When using the peer rating, subjects who received relative lower peer rating showed weaker perception of fairness, less satisfied with outcome, less attracted to other two coworkers and lower recooperative willing. Subjects perceived fairer when the relative relationship is equal (the familiarity within group members is the same). With the high decision control, subjects’ perception of fairness and recooperative willing were higher. No interaction effect of these three independent variables was found. Locus of control had moderating effect on the relation between relative relationship and perception of fairness. Implications for management and future research are discussed.
    Reference: 李美枝（民82）。從有關公平判斷的研究結果看中國人人己關係的界限。
    本土心理學研究，第1期，頁267﹣300。
    李俊明（民87）。以同儕提名法在團體活動中評鑑初、中階主管人員之
    應用分析研究。國立政治大學心理研究所碩士論文。
    吳子輝（民64）。內外控取向與自由選擇對閱讀測驗成績之影響。國立
    政治大學教育所碩士論文。
    邱月淑（民81）。領導權的獲得程序及個人利得立場對程序公正知覺和
    權威信服度的影響。國立政治大學心理研究所碩士論文。
    黃光國（民77）。人情與面子：中國人的權力遊戲。見楊國樞主編：中
    國人的心理，頁289﹣318。台北：桂冠圖書公司。
    曾光佩（民82）。大學生的憂鬱與歸因：憂鬱性歸因理論之驗證。國立
    In R. Cropanzano (Ed.), Justice in the Workplace, (pp.107-
    131). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
    Korsgaard, M.A., & Roberson, L. (1995). Procedural justice in
    performance evaluation: The role of instrumental and non-
    instrumental voice in performance appraisal discussions.
    Journal of Management, Vol 21(4), 657-669.
    Lerner, M.J.（1981）. The justice motive in human relations:
    Some thoughts on what we know and need to know about
    justice. In M.J. Lerner (Eds), The Justice Motive in
    Social Behavior (pp.23-51). New York: Academic Press.
    台灣大學心理研究所碩士論文。
    Leung, K., & Bond, M.H.（1984）. The impact of cultural
    collectivism on reward allocation. Journal of Personality
    and Social psychology, 47, 793-804.
    Lind, E.A. (1982). The Psychology of the courtroom procedure.
    In N.L. Kerr & R.M. Bary (Eds), The psychology of
    courtroom (pp.13-37) New York : Academic Press.
    Lind, E.A., & Tyler, T.R. (1988). The Social Psychology of
    Procedural Justice. New York: Plenum.
    Lind, E.A., Kanfer, R., & Earley, P.C.(1993). Voice, control,
    and Procedural justice: Instrumental and noninstrumental
    楊幼蘭 譯（民85）。改造企業。Michale Hammer & James Campy 原著。
    concerns in fairness judgement. Journal of Personality
    and Social Psychology, 59, 952-959.
    Lind, E.A., Kray, L. ＆ Thompson, L.（1998）. The social
    construction of injustice :Judgement in response to own
    and other`s unfair treatment by authorities.
    Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Process, 75, 1
    -22.
    Mahler, I., Greenberg, L., & Hayashi, H.（1981）. A comparative
    study of rules of justice: Japanese versus American.
    Psychological: An International Journal of Psychology in
    台北：牛頓出版股份有限公司。
    the Orient, 24(1), 1-8.
    Motta, R.W., & Tiegerman, S.（1979）. Perception of justice: An
    adolescent view. Journal of Community Psychology, 7(2),
    151-157.
    Murphy, K.R., & Cleveland, J.N.(1995). Understanding
    Performance Appraisal: Social, Organizational, and Goal-
    based Perspectives. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
    Murphy, K.R., & Myors, B. (1998). Statistical Power Analysis: A
    Simple and General Model for Traditional and Modern
    Hypothesis Tests. New Jersey, Lawrence Erlbaum Associts.
    齊若蘭 譯（民84）。第五項修煉﹣實踐篇(I)(II)。Peter M.Senge等
    Parker, G.M. (1990). Team Player and Teamwork: The New
    Competitive Business Strategy. San Franciso, CA: Jossey-
    Bass Publishers.
    Ployhart, r.e., & Marie Ryan, A. (1998). Applicants’ reactions
    to the fairness of selection procedures: The effect of
    positive rule violations and time of measurement. Journal
    of Applied Psychology, 83(1), 3-16.
    Reberon, L., Torkel, S., Korsgarrd, A., Klein, D., Diddams, M.,
    & Cayer, M. (1993). Self appraisal and perception of the
    appraisal discussion: A field experiment. Journal of
    著。台北：牛頓出版股份有限公司。
    Organizational Behavior, 14, 129-142.
    Roberson, L. (1995). Procedural justice in Performance
    evaluation : The role of instrumental and noninstrumental
    voice in performance appraisal discussion. Journal of
    Management, 21, 657-699.
    Rotter, J.B. (1966). Generalized expectancies for internal
    versus external control of reinforcement. Psychological
    Monographs, 80 (1,Whole no.609).
    Schmitt, N., Goging, R.Z., Noe, R.A. & Kirsch, M.(1984). Meta-
    analysis of validity studies published between 1964 and
    Alexander, S., & Ruderman, M. (1987). The role of procedure and
    1982 and the investigation of study characteristic.
    Personnel Psychology, 37, 407-422.
    Shore, L.M., & Thornton, G.C.III（1986）. Effect of gender on
    self and supervisory rating. Academy of Management
    Journal, 29, 111-129.
    Sweeney, P.D., McFarlin, D.B., & Cotton, J.L.（1991）. Locus of
    control as a moderator of the relationship between
    perceived influence and procedural justice. Human
    Relations, 44(4), 333-342.
    Tajifel, H. (1981). Human Groups and Social Categories. New
    distributive justice in organizational behavior. Social
    York: Cambridge University Press.
    Thibaut, J., & Walker, L.（1975）. Procedural Justice : A
    Psychological Analysis. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
    Tyler, T.R. (1994). Psychological models of the justice motive:
    Antecedents of distributive and procedural justice. Journal
    Of Personality and Social Psychology, 67(5), 850-863.
    Tyler, T.R. (1984). The role of perceived injustice in
    defendant’s evaluations of their courtroom experience. Law
    and Society Review, 19,51-74.
    Walster, E., Walster, G.W., & Berscheid, E.（1978）. Equity:
    Justice Research, 1, 177-198.
    Theory and Research. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
    Wellims, R.S., Byham, W.C., & Williams, G.R. (1994). Inside
    Teams: How 20 World-class Organizations are Winning through
    Teamwork. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass Publishers.
    Austin, W. (1980). Friendship and fairness: Effect of type of
    relationship and task performance on choice of
    distribution rules. Personality and Social Psychology
    Bulletin, 6(3), 402-408.
    Barclay, J.H., & Harland, L.k. (1995). Peer performance
    appraisal: The impact of rater competence, rater location,
    and rating correctability on fairness perception. Group and
    Organizational Management, 20(1), 39-60.
    Basset, G.A., & Meyer, H.H.(1968). Performance appraisal based
    on self review. Personnel Psychology, 21, 421-430.
    Bernardin, W.C., & Beatty, R.W.（1984）. Performance Appraisal:
    Assessing Human Behavior at Work. Boston: Kent.
    Blakely, G.L. (1993). The effect of performance rating
    discrepancies on supervisors and subordinates.
    Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Process, 54,57-
    80.
    Borman, W.C. (1974). The rating of individuals in organizations:
    An alternate approach. Organizational Behavior and Human
    Performance, 12, 105-124.
    Brewer, M.B. & Kramer, R.M. (1986). Choice behavior in social
    dilemmas: Effect of social identity, group size, and
    decision framing. Journal of Personality and Social
    Psychology, 50, 543-549.
    Cardy, R.J., & Dobbins, G.H.（1994）. Performance Appraisal:
    Alternative Perspectives. Cincinnati, OH: South-Western
    Publishing.
    Campell, D.J., & Lee, C.(1988). Self-appraisal in performance
    evaluation: Development versus evaluation. Academy of
    Management Review, 13, 302-314.
    Cascio, W.F. (1997). Applied Psychology in Human Resource
    Management (5th). Upper Saddle River,NJ: Prentice-Hall,
    Inc.
    Casper, J., & Tyler, T.R.(1986). Procedural justice among felony
    defendants. Paper presented at the meeting of the Law and
    Society Association, Chicago.
    Cawley, B.D., Keeping, L.M., & Levy, P.E.（1998）.
    Participation in the performance appraisal process and
    employee reaction: A meta-analysis review of field
    investigations. Journal of Applied Psychology, 83(4), 615-
    633.
    Conlon, D.E. (1993). Some test of the self-interest and group-
    value models of procedural justice: Evidence from an
    organizational appeal procedure. Academy of Management
    Journal, 36, 1109-1124.
    Dulebohn, J.H.(1997). Social influence in justice evaluations
    of human resource system. Personnel and Human Resources
    Management, 5, 241-291.
    Edward, M.R., & Ewen, A.J. (1996). 360-degree Feedback: The
    Powerful New Model for Employee Assessment & Performance
    Improvement. CA: American Management Association.
    Folger, R. (1987). Reformulating the Preconditions of
    resentment: A referent cognition model .In J.C. Master &
    W.P. Smith (Eds),Social Comparison, Relative Deprivation,
    and Social Justice. New York: Pleum Press.
    Folger, R., Konovsky, M., & Cropanzano, R. (1992). A due process
    metaphor for performance appraisal. In B. Staw & L. Cumming
    (Eds.), Research in Organizational Behavior, (14,127-148).
    Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
    Folger, R., & Lewis, D. (1993). Self appraisal and fairness in
    evaluation. In R. Cropanzano (Ed.), Justice in the
    Workplace, (pp.107-131). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence
    Erlbaum.
    Greenberg, J. (1986). Determinants of perceived fairness of
    performance evaluation. Journal of Applied psychology,
    71, 310-342.
    Harris, M.M., & Schaubroeck, J. (1988). A Meta-analysis of self-
    supervisor, self-peer, and peer-supervisor rating.
    Personnel Psychology, 41, 43-46.
    Kane, J.S., & Lawler, E.E. (1978). Methods of peer assessment.
    Psychological Bulletin, 85, 555-586.
    Kanter, R.M. (1989). When Giants Learn to Dance : Mastering the
    Challenge of Strategy,Management, and Careers in the
    1990s. New York:Simon and Schuster.
    Kirkman, B.L. Shapiro, D.L., Novelli, L. & BeReet, J.M. (1996).
    Employee concerns regarding self-managing work teams: A
    multidimensional justice perspective. Social Justice
    Research, 9(1), 47-67.
    Kleiman, L.S. (1997). Human Resource Management: A Tool for
    Competitive Advantage. St.Paul,Minn:West Pub. Co..
    Konovsky, M.A., & Brockner, J. (1993). Managing victim and
    survivorlayoff reactions: A procedural justice perspective.
    Description: 碩士
    國立政治大學
    心理學研究所
    86752010
    87
    Source URI: http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#B2002001297
    Data Type: thesis
    Appears in Collections:[Department of Psychology] Theses

    Files in This Item:

    File SizeFormat
    index.html0KbHTML2359View/Open


    All items in 政大典藏 are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved.


    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 ©   - Feedback