跳到主要內容

臺灣博碩士論文加值系統

(216.73.216.81) 您好!臺灣時間:2025/10/06 14:41
字體大小: 字級放大   字級縮小   預設字形  
回查詢結果 :::

詳目顯示

我願授權國圖
: 
twitterline
研究生:卓英潔
研究生(外文):Cho, Ying-Chieh
論文名稱:大學設計系學生人格特質、創意自我效能與創意成效關係之研究-以外在動機為中介變項
論文名稱(外文):The Relationships among Students' Personality Traits, Creative Self-efficacy, and Innovation Performance of College Students Major in Design: Mediation Effect of Extrinsic Motivation
指導教授:梁滄郎梁滄郎引用關係廖錦文廖錦文引用關係
指導教授(外文):Liang, Tsang-langLin, Chih-Wei
口試委員:蕭錫錡陳繁興鄭友超梁滄郎廖錦文
口試委員(外文):Hsiao, Hsi-ChiChen, Farn-ShingChau, Jeng-YoauLiang, Tsang-langLin, Chih-Wei
口試日期:2017-07-10
學位類別:博士
校院名稱:國立彰化師範大學
系所名稱:工業教育與技術學系
學門:教育學門
學類:專業科目教育學類
論文種類:學術論文
論文出版年:2017
畢業學年度:105
語文別:中文
論文頁數:216
中文關鍵詞:人格特質創意自我效能創意成效外在動機
外文關鍵詞:Personality TraitsCreative Self-efficacyInnovation PerformanceExtrinsic Motivation
相關次數:
  • 被引用被引用:2
  • 點閱點閱:482
  • 評分評分:
  • 下載下載:0
  • 收藏至我的研究室書目清單書目收藏:0
本研究旨在探究大學設計系學生人格特質、創意自我效能、創意成效與外在動機之關係。本研究工具包含: 人格特質量表信度為.923、創意自我效能量表信度為.848、外在動機量表信度為.946、創意成效量表信度為。各量表之效度都達可接受程度。本研究採用調查研究法,以參加設計展的大學設計系學生為研究對象,共發出500份正式問卷,經過整理與統計後得回收問卷387份,回收率77.4%,再剔除填答不實或呈固定反應者計有74份,合計有313份,正式問卷有效回收率為62.6%。正式問卷回收之後,則以結構方程模式對回收資料進行分析。本研究獲致結論如下:
一、學生的人格特質中具備「神經質」、「外向性」及「開放性」等特質,有助於創意成效的發展。
二、不同背景差異分析可知,曾參加創意競賽的經驗,有助於創意成效的發展。
三、學生的創意自我效能對創意成效之直接效果呈現正向直接影響。
四、學生的創意自我效能對外在動機之直接效果呈現正向直接影響。
五、學生的外在動機對創意成效之直接效果呈現正向直接影響。
六、學生的創意自我效能可以透過外在動機的中介作用,正向影響創意成效。
The purpose of this study was to explore the relationships among personality traits, creative self-efficacy, innovation performance, and extrinsic motivation of college students who major in design. The instrument of this study consists of personality traits scale Cronbach's α.923, creative self-efficacy scale Cronbach's α.848, extrinsic motivation scale Cronbach's α.946, innovation performance scale Cronbach's α.934. The validity of each scale is acceptable.
This study employed questionnaire survey. A total of 500 questionnaires were distributed to the students who were selected from the university science and technology. The total questionnaires of 313 were received with a valid returned rate of 62.6%. The data were analyzed using structural equation modeling to test the model.
According to the results of statistical analyses, the major findings in this study were as follows:
1.Students' personality traits were characterized by "neuroticism", "extroversion" and "openness", which contribute to the performance of innovation.
2.Students' with differences background showed that the experience of participating in creative competitions has contributed to the development of innovation performance.
3.There was a significant and positive direct effect between creative self-efficacy and innovation performance.
4.There was a significant and positive direct effect between extrinsic motivation and creative self-efficacy.
5.There was a significant and positive direct effect between extrinsic motivation and innovation performance.
6.Structural modeling analyses indicated that extrinsic motivation would mediate the relationship between creative self-efficacy and innovation performance.
摘要....................................................I
ABSTRACT..............................................III
目次....................................................V
圖次...................................................IX
表次...................................................XI
第一章 緒論............................................1
第一節 研究背景與動機...................................1
第二節 研究目的與待答問題...............................9
第三節 研究方法與步驟..................................10
第四節 研究範圍與限制..................................14
第五節 名詞釋義.......................................16
第二章 文獻探討.......................................19
第一節 人格特質的理論與相關研.........................19
第二節 創意自我效能理論與相關研究.......................32
第三節 外在動機理論與相關研究..........................43
第四節 創意成效理論與相關研究..........................48
第五節 各構面間之相關研究..............................53
第三章 研究設計與實施..................................65
第一節 研究架構與研究假設..............................65
第二節 研究對象.......................................69
第三節 研究工具.......................................71
第四節 研究實施......................................103
第五節 資料處理與分析.................................104
第四章 資料分析與討論.................................107
第一節 人格特質、創意自我效能與創意成效關係之現況分....108
第二節 不同背景變項創意自我效能、創意成效與外在動機之差異情形....................................................112
第三節 人格特質、創意自我效能、外在動機與創意成效驗證性因素分析測量模式...........................................125
第四節 人格特質對創意自我效能路徑分析.................150
第五節 創意自我效能、創意成效與外在動機結構方程模式分析.152
第六節 外在動機對創意自我效能與創意成效中介效果分析.....159
第五章 結論與建議...................................167
第一節 結論.........................................167
第二節 建議.........................................173
參考文獻...............................................177
附錄...................................................199
附錄一 大學設計系學生人格特質、創意自我效能、創意成效與外在動機關係之專家調查問卷....................................199
附錄二 大學設計系學生人格特質、創意自我效能、創意成效與外在動機之關係預試調查問卷....................................207
附錄三 大學設計系學生人格特質、創意自我效能、創意成效與外在動機之關係正式調查問卷....................................212
壹、中文部分
INST展覽快訊(2011)。2011台北國際發明暨技術交易展-盛大登場-超過2,000項技術與產品-讓世界看見台灣。台北:中華民國對外貿易發展協會。
INST展覽快訊(2016)。2016台北國際發明暨技術交易展-展後報告。台北:中華民國對外貿易發展協會。
毛連塭、郭有遹、陳龍安、林幸台(2000)。創造力研究。台北:心理。
行政院公報(2014)。財政經濟篇。行政院公報,24(20),49-97。
吳明隆(2007)。結構方程模式AMOS的操作與應用。台北:五南。
吳明隆(2010)。論文寫作與量化研究。台北:五南。
吳明隆、凃金堂(2006)。SPSS與統計應用分析。台北:五南。
吳欣倫(2012)。碩士生五大人格特質、生涯自我效能與生涯調適力之相關研究(未出版之碩士論文)。國立交通大學,新竹。
吳靜吉、曾敬梅、王涵儀、林志哲、林偉文(2004)。台灣創造力教育實施現況。台北:教育部。
宋瑛堂(2004)。創意無限公司。台北:藍鯨。
林保超(2017)。創意與創新:工程技術領域。台北:全華圖書。
林建妤、林珊如(2004)。創意逆境求生之路—創意自我效能能否克服外在評量對創造力傷害之實驗研究。「創新與創造力研究中心舉辦之創造力實踐歷程研討會」發表之論文,政治大學創新與創造力研究中心。
林思彤(2008)。創造力的匯合觀點與影響因素。訓練與發展飛訊,70,1-19。
林碧芳、邱皓政(2004)。中小學教師創造人格特質、創意教學自我效能感與創意教學之關係—結構方程模式的路徑分析。「創新與創造力研究中心舉辦之創造力實踐歷程研討會」發表之論文,政治大學創新與創造力研究中心。
林碧芳、邱皓政(2008)。創意教學自我效能感量表之編製與相關研究。教育研究與發展期刊,4(1),141-170。
林靜宜(2007)。創作動機、沉浸體驗對個人創意表現、創作滿意度、再創作意圖之影響(未出版之碩士論文)。國立高雄大學,高雄。
邱皓政(2005)。量化研究法(二):統計原理與分析技術。台北:雙葉書廊。
邱皓政(2011)。結構方程模式(二版)。台北:雙葉書廊。
洪久賢、洪榮昭、林麗娟、蔡長艷(2007)。影響教師創意教學因素之研究-以綜合活動領域為例。師大學報,52(2),49-71。
洪素蘋 、黃宏宇、林珊如(2008)。重要他人回饋影響創意生活經驗?: 以模式競爭方式檢驗創意自我效能與創意動機的中介效果。教育心理學報,40(2),303-322。
洪素蘋(2004)。重要他人回饋、創意自我效能、內、外在動機對創意行為的影響:社會認知理論為基礎的結構方程模式檢驗(未出版之碩士論文)。國立交通大學,新竹。
洪素蘋、林珊如(2004)。「學生創意自我效能量表」之編製。「2004年第二屆創新與創造力研討會」發表之論文,政治大學創新與創造力研究中心,台北。
張文智、江潤華(2008)。提升設計組織創造力做法之研究。設計學報,13(1),96-104。
張文智、江潤華(2009)。設計溝通模式與團隊創造力關係之探討。設計學報,14(2),1-18。
張玉佩(2008)。動機對創造思考產生的影響:內、外在動機的再議。國小特殊教育,45,55-67。
張偉豪(2011)。SEM論文寫作不求人。高雄:三星。
張偉豪、鄭時宜(2012)。與結構方程模式共舞-曙光初現。台北:前程。
教育部(2002)。創造力教育白皮書。台北:教育部。
許世卿、梁麗珍、簡秀娥(2007)。修平技術學院學生學習動機、學習策略與學習效果之相關研究。修平人文社會學報,8,1-26。
陳正昌、程炳林、陳新豐、劉子鍵(2011)。多變量分析方法:統計軟體應用(六版)。台北: 五南。
黃芳銘(2007)。結構方程模式理論與應用(五版)。台北:五南。
楊詠晴(22013)。影響顧客參與之因素探討-以自我效能及他人效能為干擾變數(未出版之碩士論文)。國立高雄應用科技大學,高雄。
楊裕富(2000)。創意活力:產品設計方法論。台北:田園城市。
楊裕富(2006)。創意活力。台北:田園城市。
葉玉珠(2002)。高層次思考教學設計的要素分析。中山通識教育學報,1,75-101。
葉玉珠、吳靜吉、鄭耀英(2001)。性別、產業型態及創造經驗與創意相關的個人特質、家庭及學校因素之關係。國立政治大學學報,82,125-159。
葉長青(2001)。團隊成員認知賦能對個人創新性關係之研究(未出版之碩士論文)。銘傳大學,台北。
詹宏志(1999)。創意人-創意思考的自我訓練。台北:臉譜。
詹志禹(2002)。「創造力」的定義與創造力的發展。教育研究,100,117-124。
詹益統(1996)。個人屬性、人格特質與內涵激勵含外附激勵關連性之研究(未出版之碩士論文)。國立交通大學,新竹。
詹雅婷(2013)。創造性問題解決融入科學遊戲教學對國小高年級學生創造力及學習成就之影響(未出版之碩士論文)。國立臺中教育大學,台中。
劉珈妤 、林緯倫、蔡秉勳(2016)。對的風格遇上對的人,謂之創意:人格特質、認知風格與兩類創造力之關係探討。教育心理學報, 48(2),211-228。
劉盈君(2008)。創意沒什麼大不了:16種創意聯想法。 台北:天下雜誌。
蔡文玲(1992)。認知型式、自我效能、個人動機與創造性之關係研究(未出版之碩士論文)。輔仁大學,台北。
鄭英耀、莊雪華、顏嘉玲(2008)。揭開創意教材的神秘面紗。師大學報,53(1),61-85。
賴英娟(2006)。創意自我效能:概念分析與理論應用。教育與發展,23(3),123-130。
賴聲川(2006)。賴聲川的創意學。台北:天下雜誌 。
簡晨羽(2008)。南投縣學童創造性環境、親子互動關係與創造人格特質對其創意生活體驗的影響(未出版之碩士論文)。台南科技大學,台南。
貳、英文部分
Albrecht, T. L., & Ropp, V. A. (1984). Communicating about innovation in networks of three U.S. organizations. Journal of Communication, 34(3), 78-91.
Allport, G. W. (1937). Personality: A psychological interpretation. NY: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.
Allport, G. W., Vernon, P. E., & Lindzey, G. (1960). A study of values (3rd ed.). Boston: Houghton Mufflin.
Amabile, T. M. (1996). Creativity in context. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.
Amabile, T. M. (1997). Motivating creativity in organizations: On doing what you love and loving what you do. California Management Review, 40 (1), 39-58.
Amabile, T. M., Hennessey, B. A., & Grossman, B. S. (1986). Social influences on creativity: The effects of contracted-for reward. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 50, 14-23.
Amabile, T. M., Schatzel, E. A., Moneta, G. B., & Kramer, S. J. (2004). Leader behaviours and the work environment for creativity: Perceived leader support. The Leadership Quarterly, 14, 5-32.
Amabile, T.M. (1993). Motivational synergy: Toward new conceptualizations of intrinsic and extrinsic motivation in the workplace. Human Resource Management Review, 3(3), 185-201.
Amabile, T. M., Hill, K. G., Hennessey, B. A., & Tighe, E. M. (1994). The work preference inventory: Assessing intrinsic and extrinsic motivational orientations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 66(5), 950-967.
Ambrose, M. L., & Kulik, C. T. (1999). Old friends, new faces: Motivation research in the 1990s. Yearly Review of Management of the Journal of Management, 25, 231–292.
Anderson, J. C., & Gerbing, D. W. (1988). Structure equation modeling in practice: A review and recommended two-step approach. Psychological Bulletin, 103, 411-423.
Arpaci, I., & Baloğlu, M. (2016). The impact of cultural collectivism on knowledge sharing among infor-mation technology majoring undergraduates. Computers in Human Behavior, 56(3), 65-71.
Ayhan, D. (2014). Relationships between thinking styles and behaviors fostering creativity: An exploratory study for the mediating role of certain demographic traits. Educational Sciences: Theory & Practice, 14( 1), 179-201.
Bagozzi, R. P., & Yi, Y. (1988). On the evaluation of structural equation models. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 16(1), 74-94.
Bandura, A. (1977a). Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavior change. Psychological Review, 84, 191-215.
Bandura, A. (1977b). Social learning theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. New York: Freeman.
Barrio, V. D., Aluja, A., & Garcia, L. F. (2004). Relationship between empathy and big-five personality traits in a sample of Spanish adolescences. Social Behavior and Personality, 32(7), 667-682.
Betz, F. (1993). Managing technology: Competing through new ventures, innovation and corporate research. Englewood Cliff, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Boyd, N. G., & Vozikis, G. S. (1994). The influence of self-efficacy on the development of entrepreneurial intentions and actions. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 18(4), 64-77.
Brockhus, S., Van-Der-Kolk, T. E. C., Koeman, B., & Badke-Schaub, P. G. (2014). The influence of creative self-efficacy on creative performance. In D. Marjanovic, M. Storga, N. Pavkovic, N. Bojcetic (Ed.), Human Behaviour and Design (pp.437-444). Croatia, Proceedings of the DESIGN 2014 13th International Design Conference.
Caprara, G. V., Caprara, M., & Steca, P. (2003). Personality’s correlates of adult development and aging. European Psychologist, 8, 131-147.
Cattell, R. B. (1943). The description of personality: Basic trait into clusters. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 38(4), 476-506.
Cavanaugh, J. C., & Blanchard-Fields, F. (2002). Adult development and aging. (4 Ed.). CA: Wadsworth, Thomson Learning.
Certo, S. C. (2003). Modern management. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Chen, B. B. (2016). The creative self-concept as a mediator between ppenness to experience and creative behaviour. Creativity: Theories-Research-Applications, 3(2), 408-417.
Chen, G., Gully, S. M., & Eden, D. (2004). General self-efficacy and self-esteem: Toward theoretical and empirical distinction between correlated self-evaluations. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 25, 375-395.
Chen, Y. (2013). The relationship between undergraduate students’ creative self-efficacy, creative ability and career self-management. International Journal of Academic Research in Progressive Education and Development, 2(2), 181-193.
Christensen C. M. (2000). Mutative advantage. MIT Sloan Management Review, Cambridge, 42(2), 105-111.
Costa P. T. Jr., & McCrae, R. R.(1992). Four ways five factors are basic. Personality and Individual Differences, 13, 653-665.
Costa, P. T. Jr., & McCrae, R. R. (1987).Validation of the five factor model of personality across instruments and observers. Journal of Personality& Social Psychology, 52, 81-90.
Costa, P. T. Jr., & McCrae, R. R. (1997). Longitudinal stability of adult personality. In R. Hogan, J. Johnson, & S. Briggs(Eds.), Handbook of personality psychology(pp. 269-290). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
Costa, P. T. Jr., Herbst, J. H., McCrae, R. R., & Siegler, I. C. (2000). Personality at midlife: Stability, intrinsic maturation, and response to life events. Assessment, 7(4), 365-378.
Costa, P. T. Jr., Terracciano, A., & McCrae, R. R. (2001). Gender differences in personality traits across cultures: robust and surprising findings. Journai of Personality and Social Psychology, 82(2), 322-331
Cropley, A. J. (2001). Creativity in education and learning: A guide for teachers and educators. NY: Routiedge Falmer.
Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1996). Creativity. NY: Harper Collins.
Csikszentmihalyi, M.(1996). Creativity: Flow and the psychology of discovery and invention. NY: Harper Collins.
Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1999). Implications of a systems perspective for the study of creativity. In R. J. Sternberg (Ed.), Handbook of creativity (pp.313-335). New York: Cambridge University Press.
Deci, E. L. (1975). Intrinsic motivation. New York: Plenum.
Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (1985). Intrinsic motivation and self-determination in human behavior. NY: Plenum.
Eisenberger, R., & Armeli, S. (1997). Can salient reward increase creative performance without reducing intrinsic creative interest. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 72, 652-663.
Eysenck, H. J. (1978). The development of personality and its relation to learning. In Murray-Smith, S. (ed.), Melbourne Studies in Education (pp.134-181). Melbourne: Melbourne University Press.
Eysenck, H. J. (1994). The measurement of creative. In A. B. Margret (Ed.). Dimension of creative (pp.199-242). Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press.
Farnaz, M. M. (2016). The mediation role of intrinsic and extrinsic motivation in the relationship between creative educational environment and metacognitive self-regulation. Journal of Education and Learning, 5(3), 272-277.
Ford, C. M. (1996). The role of creative action in organizational learning and change. Journal of Organizational Change Management, 9(1), 54-62.
Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. (1981). Structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of Marketing Research, 18(1), 39-50.
Gardner, H. (1993). Creating minds: An anatomy of creativity seen through the lives of freud, einstein, picasso, stravinsky, eliot, Graham, and Gandhi. NY: Basic Books.
Gatewood, R. D., & Field, H. S. (1998). Human resource selection (4th ed.) Forth Worth, TX, The Dryden Press.
Gist, M. E., & Mitchell, T.R. (1992). Self-efficacy: A theoretical analysis of its determinants and malleability. The Academy of Management Review, 17(2) (Apr., 1992), pp. 183-211.
Gray, J. A. (1990). A critique of Eysenck’s theory of personality. In H. J. Eysenck(Ed.), A model for personality(2nd ed.). Berlin: Springer-Verlag.
Hair, J. F., Anderson, R. E., Tatham, R. L., & Black, W. C. (1998). Multivariate data analysis. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Harris, J. A. (2004), Measured intelligence, achievement, openness to experience, and creativity. Personality and Individual Differences, 36, 913-929.
Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., Anderson, R. E. & Tatham, R. L. (2009). Multivariate data analysis (7th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education.
Hair, J.F., Anderson, R.E., Tatham, R.L., &; Black, W.C. (2009). Multivariate data analysis. (7nd ed.). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Hayes, N., & Joseph, S. (2003). Big five correlates of three measures of subjective well-being. Personality and Individual Differences, 34(4), 723-727.
Hoy, W. K., & Miskel, C. G. (2001). Educational administration: Theory, research, and practice (6th.). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
Hung, S. P., Huang, H. Y., & Lin, S. S. (2008). Do significant others’ feedback influence ones’ creative behavior?—using structural equation modeling to examine creativity self-efficacy and creativity motivation mediation effect. Bulletin of Educational Psychology, 40, 303-322.
IMD (2005). World competitiveness yearbook. NY: Oxford University Press.
Jaafar, S., Awaludin, N. S., & Bakar, N. S. (2014). Motivational and self-regulated learning components of classroom academic performance. Journal of Educational Psychology, 82, 128-135.
Joreskog, K. G., & Sorbom, D. (1983). LISREL V: Analysis of linear structural relationships by the medthod of maximum likelihood. Chicago: International Educational Services.
Joussement, M., & Koestner, R. (1999). Effect of expected rewards on children’s creativity. Creativity Research Journal, 12(4), 231-239.
Karwowski, M., Lebuda, I., Wisniewska, E., & Gralewski, J. (2013). Big five personality traits as the predictors of creative self-Efficacy and creative personal identity: Does gender matter? The Journal of Creative Behavior, 47(3), 215-232.
Kline, R. B. (2005). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling (2 nd ed.). NY: Guilford Press.
Lounsbury, J. W., Sundstrom, E., Loveland, J. M., Gibson, L. W. (2003). Intelligence, big five personality traits, and work drive as predictors of course grade. Personality and Individual Differences 35(6), 1231-1239
Lubart, T. I. (2010). Cross cultural perspectives on creativity. In J. C. Kaufman & R. J. Sternberg (Eds.), Cambridge handbook of creativity (pp. 265–278). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
Lubart, T. I., & Sternberg, R. J. (1995). An investment approach to creativity: Theory and data. In S. M. Smith, T. B. Ward & R. A. Finke (Eds.), The creative cognition approach (pp. 269–302). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Ma, Y., Cheng, W., & Ribbens, B. A. (2013). Linking ethical leadership to employee creativity: Knowledge sharing and self-efficacy as mediators. Social Behavior and Personality: An intrrnational Journal, 41, 1409-1420.
Maslow, A.H.(1968). Toward a psychology of being (2nd ed.). Princeton, NJ: Van Nostrand.
Mathisen, G. E., & Bronnick, K. S. (2009). Creative self-efficacy: An intervention study. International Journal of Educational Research, 48, 21-29.
Marsh, H. W., Balla, J. R., & McDonald, R. P. (1988). Goodness-of-fit indexes in confirmatory factor analysis: The effect of sample size. Psychological Bulletin, 103(3), 391-410.
McCrae, R. R., & Costa, P. T. (2003). Personality in adulthood: A five-factor theory perspective. New York: Guilford Press.
Nemiro, J., Hanifah, S., & Wang, J. (2005). Striving for a new ideal: A work environment to energize collaborative capacity across east and west boundaries. Advances in Interdisciplinary Studies of Work Teams, 11, 115-159.
Ochse , R. (1990). Before the gates of excellence: The determinants of creative genius. New York: Cambridge University Press.
OECD (2005). OECD science, technology and industry scoreboard 2005: Towards a knowledge based economy. Paris: Author.
Patterson, F., & Zibarras, L. D. (2017). Selecting for creativity and innovation potential: implications for practice in healthcare education. Advances in Health Sciences Education, 22(2), 417-428.
Pervin, L. A. (1993). Personality: Theory and research(6th ed.). New York: John Wiley & Sons.
Pervin, L. A., Cervone, D., & John, O. P. (2005). Personality: Theory and research (9th ed.). NY: John Wiley & Sons.
Phares, E. J., & Chaplin, W. F. (1997). Introduction to personality(4th ed.). New York: Longman.
Pintrich, P. R., & Schrauben, B. (1992). Students' motivational beliefs and their cognitive engagement in classroom academic tasks. In D. Schunk, & J. Meece, Student perceptions in the classroom (pp. 149-183). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Pintrich, P. R., & Schunk, D. H. (2002). Motivation in education: Theory, research, and applications (2nd ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Prince, K. P., & Clarke, L. K. (1978). Behavioral and psycho physiological correlates of the coronary prone personality: New data and unanswered questions. Journal of Psychosomatic Research, 22, 409-417.
Roberts, L. (2003). Technology concepts: Creativity. Tech Directions,62 (9), 12-13.
Rogers, C. R. (1959). A theory of therapy, personality and interpersonal relationships, as developed in the client-centered framework. In S. Koch (ed.). Psychology: A study of science. (pp. 184-256). NY: McGraw Hill.
Romer, P. M. (1990). Endogenous technological change. Journal of Political Economy, 98(5:2), 71-102.
Runco, M. A., Nemiro, J., & Walberg, H. J. (1998). Personal explicit theories of creativity. Journal of Creative Behavior, 32(1), 1-17.
Ryff, C. D., Kwan, E., & Singer, B. (2001). Middle age and well-being. In H. S. Friedman(Ed.), Encyclopedia of mental health(pp. 709-719). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
Schultz, D. P., & Schultz, S. E. (2005). Theories of personality (8th ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Thompson Learning.
Schunk, D. (1985). Self-effcacy and school learning. Psychology in the Schools, 22, 208-223.
Schunk, D. H., & Zimmerman, B. J. (1994). Self-regulation of learning and performance: Issues and educational applications. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Starko, A. J. (1995), Theories and models of creavitiy. In A. J. Starko (Ed.), Creativiy in the classroom (pp. 21-59). New York, USA: Longman publishers.
Stedman, K. C.(1983). Knowledge about aging and attitude toward older learners among adult educators: A correlational study. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, The University of Texas at Austin.
Sternberg, R. J. (2013). The assessment of creativity: An investment-based approach. Creativity Research Journal, 24(1), 3-12.
Sternberg, R. J., & Lubart, T. I. (1993). Investing in creativity. Psychological Inquiry, 4(3), 229-232.
Sternberg, R. J., & Lubart, T. I. (1995). Defying the crowd: Cultivating creativity in a culture of conformity. NY: Free Press.
Sternberg, R. J., & Lubart, T. I. (1999). The concept of creativity: Prospects and paradigms. In R. J. Sternberg (Ed.), Handbook of creativity (pp. 3-15). NY: Cambridge University Press.
Sung, S. Y. & Choi, J. N. (2009). Do big five personality factors affect individual creativity? The moderating role of extrinsic motivation. Behavior & Personality: An International Journal, 37(7), p941-956.
Tierney, P., & Farmer, S. M. (2011). Creative self-efficacy development and creative performance over time. Journal of Applied Psychology, 96, 277-293.
Tierney, P., & Farmer, S. M. (2002). Creative self-efficacy: Potential antecedents and relationship to creative performance. Academy of Management Journal, 45(6), 1137-1148.
Tierney, P., Farmer, S. M., & Graen, G. B. (1999). An examination of leadership and employee creativity: The relevance of traits and relationships. Personnel Psychology, 52(3), 591–620.
Torkzadeh, G., Koufteros, X., & Pflughoeft, K. (2003). Confirmatory analysis of computer self-efficacy. Structural Equation Modeling, 10(2), 263-275.
Torrance, E. P. (1974). Torrance test of creative thinking: Norms and technical manual. Scholastic Testing Service, Inc.
Vidal, J. A., Lapiedra, R., & Chiva, R. (2006). A Measurement scale for product innovation performance. Article in European Journal of Innovation Management, 9(4), 333-346.
Whitbourne, S. K. (2005). Adult development and aging: Biopsychosocial perspectives. NY: Wiley.
Wood, R.E., Bandura, A. (1989). Impact of conceptions of ability on self-regulatory mechanisms and complex decision making. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 56, 407-415.
Zimbardo, G. P. (1990). Psychology and Life (11th. Ed.). Glenview, US: Scott, Foresman.
連結至畢業學校之論文網頁點我開啟連結
註: 此連結為研究生畢業學校所提供,不一定有電子全文可供下載,若連結有誤,請點選上方之〝勘誤回報〞功能,我們會盡快修正,謝謝!
QRCODE
 
 
 
 
 
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               
第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁 top