(34.237.52.11) 您好!臺灣時間:2021/05/18 12:55
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:柯佑宗
研究生(外文):Yu-Tsung Ke
論文名稱:威權領導與不當督導對績效的影響-自我監控的調節效果
論文名稱(外文):The Relationships among Supervisor's Authoritarianism Leadership, Abusive Supervision and Performance: Self-monitoring as a Moderator
指導教授:楊美玉楊美玉引用關係劉基全劉基全引用關係
指導教授(外文):Mei-Yu YangJi-Chyuan Liou
口試委員:許金田陳淑貞楊美玉劉基全
口試委員(外文):Chin-Tien HsuShu-Chen ChenMei-Yu YangJi-Chyuan Liou
口試日期:2014.05.08
學位類別:碩士
校院名稱:國防大學
系所名稱:資源管理及決策研究所
學門:商業及管理學門
學類:其他商業及管理學類
論文種類:學術論文
論文出版年:2014
畢業學年度:102
語文別:中文
論文頁數:80
中文關鍵詞:威權領導不當督導自我監控階層線性模型
外文關鍵詞:Authoritarianism LeadershipAbusive SupervisionSelf-monitoringHLM
相關次數:
  • 被引用被引用:3
  • 點閱點閱:418
  • 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:1
國軍部隊的領導方式,雖然隨著時代的變遷與民智的開化而有改變,漸漸一反以往的打罵教育,而有著更為合理化的管教,然而,軍隊在管教訓練上承襲了軍武氣息,威權領導仍是軍隊裡顯而易見的領導方式之一。以往的研究指出,威權領導會導致部屬的一些心理上的負向影響,被領導者的素質也會影響領導效果的強弱。領導者的特質將會導致被領導者對其行為的認知產生不同想法,因此本研究探討威權領導特質與不當督導行為以及工作績效間之關聯性,並且從被領導者的特質作探討,分析部屬自我監控對不當督導與工作績效的調節效果為何。
本研究以國軍基層部隊的軍官、士官、士兵為研究對象,問卷發放計129組587份,扣除無效問卷80份,總計回收有效問卷數110組507份,有效率達86.4%。藉由HLM軟體進行階層線性模型分析,研究結果顯示:威權領導對不當督導、工作績效同時具有顯著正向影響;不當督導具有威權領導與工作績效間的中介效果,並與工作績效具有顯著負向相關;部屬自我監控高低影響不當督導與工作績效的關聯性,亦即減弱不當督導對工作績效的負向影響。

Under the changes of time and sensible awareness of the public, the leadership in the military troops has transformed gradually. It shifts from corporal and verbal punishments into more reasonable education. However, the management training succeeded from the authoritarian leadership and the tinge of awe-inspiring in the military troops is still the primary direction to lead the troops.According to the historical studies, authoritarian leadership would result in some physically negative effects over the subordinate, furthermore, the essence of the leader also reflects the effectiveness of his leadership.The traits of the leader would have influence on the cognition of the subordinate over his behaviors, therefore, the research here will discuss the connection between the authoritarian leadership, improper supervised behaviors and effectiveness. Furthermore, the study focuses on the characteristics of the subordinates and analyze what are the adjusted results of the abusive supervision and performance when the subordinates conduct self-monitoring.
The personnel in this study bases on officers, sergeants, and soldiers. We distributed questionnaires about 129 sets and 587 pieces in all. There are 80 ineffective questionnaires without answering completely. As a result, there are about 110 sets 507 pieces in total in return. The effective questionnaires reached 86.4%. And we analyzed the questionnaires through Hierarchical linear mode shape by HLM software. The results showed: Authoritarian leadership of abusive supervision, job performance but also has a significant positive effect; abusive supervision of a mediator between authoritarian leadership and job performance, And has a significant negative correlation with job performance. Self-monitoring of subordinates moderating effect of abusive supervision and job performance has a significant, can weaken improper supervision of the negative effects of job performance. Finally, based on the findings, this study provides discussion and practical implication, and suggestions for future research.

目錄
摘要 I
ABSTRACT II
表次 VI
圖次 VIII
第一章緒論 1
1.1研究背景與動機 1
1.2研究目的 4
1.3研究流程 5
第二章 文獻探討 6
2.1工作績效 6
2.2威權領導 8
2.3不當督導 14
2.4自我監控 18
第三章 研究方法 22
3.1研究架構 22
3.2研究假設 23
3.3研究對象與抽樣方法 23
3.4變數定義與衡量 24
3.5資料分析方法 29
第四章 資料分析與結果 37
4.1敘述性統計分析 37
4.2效度分析 38
4.3信度分析 40
4.4趨同性分析 40
4.5相關分析 43
4.6階層線性模型 44
4.7調節式中介的分析 54
4.8共同方法變異之檢測 56
第五章 結論與建議 59
5.1研究結論 59
5.2討論 61
5.3研究限制及未來研究建議 63
5.4管理意涵 66
參考文獻 68
附錄 78

余一鳴、顏志龍(2011),道德認同對軍事社會化與道德疏離間的調節作用,教育心理學報,43(2),477-498。
吳宗祐(2008),主管威權領導與部屬的工作滿意度與組織承諾:信任的中介歷程與情緒智力的調節效果,本土心理學研究,30,3-63。
吳宗祐、周麗芳、鄭伯壎(2008),主管的權威取向及其對部屬順從與畏懼的知覺對威權領導的預測效果,本土心理學研究,30,65-115。
吳宗祐、徐瑋伶、鄭伯壎(2002),怒不可遏或忍氣吞聲:華人企業主管威權領導與部屬憤怒反應,本土心理學研究,18,3-49。
吳宗祐、廖紘億(2013),華人威權領導總是導致部屬負面結果嗎? 由 「不確定管理理論」探討威權領導對分配不公平與程序不公平之交互作用與部屬工作滿意度之關係的調節效果,中華心理學刊,55(1),1-22。
周婉茹、周麗芳、鄭伯壎、任金剛(2010),專權與尚嚴之辨:再探威權領導的內涵與恩威並濟的效果。本土心理學研究,34,223-284。
林鉦棽(2005),組織公民行為之跨層次分析-層級線性模式的應用,管理學報,22(4),503-524。
邱皓政(2010),「量化研究與統計分析」(第五版),台北市:五南書局公司。
姜定宇、丁捷、林伶瑾(2012),家長式領導與部屬效能:信任主管與不信任主管的中介效果,中華心理學刊, 54(3), 269-291.
張德偉(2001),家長式與轉換式領導風格在軍事單位的比較研究,中山大學人力資源研究所碩士論文。
許金田、胡秀華、凌孝綦、鄭伯壎、周麗芳(2004),家長式領導與組織公民行為的關係:上下關係品質之中介效果。交大管理學報,24,119-149。
陳順宇(2005),多變量分析第4版,台北市:華泰文化出版社。
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。
黃英忠(2003),人力資源管理,台北:三民書局。
楊中芳(2001),「順從」與「背叛」:中國人真的具有「權威性格」的嗎?,見楊中芳(主編):《如何理解中國人》。台北:遠流出版公司。
楊美玉、劉佳雄、柯旻秀、陳映潔、柯佑宗,(2013),領導效能研究的回顧與展望: 1985-2012,人力資源管理學報,13(4),1-39。
楊國樞(1993),中國人的社會取向:社會互動的觀點。見楊國樞、余安邦(主編)。中國人的心理與行為:理念與方法篇(一九九二),頁87-142。台北:桂冠。
溫福星、邱皓政(2009),組織研究中的多層次調節式中介效果:以組織創新氣氛、組織承諾與工作滿意的實證研究為例,管理學報,26(2),189-211。
樊景立、鄭伯壎(2000),華人組織的家長式領導:一項文化觀點的分析,本土心理學研究,13,126-180。
鄭伯壎(1995),家長權威與領導行為之關係:一個台灣民營企業主持人的個案研究,中央研究院民族學研究所集刊。(台北),79,119-173。
鄭伯壎、周麗芳、樊景立(2000),家長式領導量表:三元模型的建構與測量,本土心理學研究,14,3-64。
鄭伯壎、黃敏萍(2000),華人企業組織中的領導:一項文化價值的分析,中山管理評論,8(4),883-617。

英文部分
Aiken, L. S., & West, S. G. (1991). Multiple regression: Testing and interpreting interactions. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Aryee, S., Chen, Z. X., Sun, L.-Y., & Debrah, Y. A. (2007). Antecedents and outcomes of abusive supervision: Test of a trickle-down model. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92, 191-201.
Aryee, S., Sun, L. Y., Chen, Z. X. G., & Debrah, Y. A. (2008). Abusive supervision and contextual performance: The mediating role of emotional exhaustion and the moderating role of work unit structure. Management and Organization Review, 4, 393–411.
Ashforth, B. E. (1994). Petty tyranny in organizations. Human Relations, 47: 755-778.
Austin, J. T., & Villanova, P. (1992). The criterion problem: 1917-1992. Journal of Applied Psychology, 77, 836-874.
Avolio, B. J., Walumbwa, F. O., & Weber, T. J. (2009). Leadership: Current theories, research, and future directions. Annual Review of Psychology, 60: 421-449.
Barling, J., Christie, A., & Turner, N. (2008). Pseudo-transformational leadership: Towards the development and test of a model. Journal of Business Ethics, 81: 851-861.
Bass, B. M. (1985). Leadership and performance beyond expectations. New York: Free Press.
Bass, Bernard M, & Steidlmeier, Paul. (1999). Ethics, character, and authentic transformational leadership behavior. The leadership quarterly, 10(2), 181-217.
Bliese, P. D., (2000). Within-group agreement, non-independence, and reliability: Implications for data aggregation and analysis. In K. J. Klein & S. W. J. Kozlowski (Eds.), Multilevel theory, research, and methods in organizations: Foundations, extensions and new directions (pp. 349 - 381). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Campbell, D.T., & Fiske, D.W. (1959). Convergent and Discriminant Validation by the Multitrait-Multimethod Matrix, Psychological Bulletin, 56(2),81-105.
Campbell, J. P. (1990). Modeling the performance prediction problem in industrial and organizational psychology. In M. D. Dunnette & L. M.Hough (Eds.), Handbook of industrial and organizational psychology (Vol 2, pp. 687-732.), Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press.
Cheng, B. S., Chou, L. F., Wu, T. Y., Huang, M. P., & Farh, J. L. (2004). Paternalistic leadership and subordinate responses: Establishing a leadership model in Chinese organizations. Asian Journal of Social Psychology, 7, 89–117.
Chi, Shu-Cheng Steve, & Liang, Shin-Guang. (2013). When do subordinates' emotion-regulation strategies matter? Abusive supervision, subordinates' emotional exhaustion, and work withdrawal. Leadership Quarterly, 24(1), 125-137.
Chou, L. F., Cheng, B. S., & Jen, C. K. (2005, August).The contingent model of paternalistic leadership:Subordinate dependence and leader competence. Paper presented at the 2005 Annual Meeting of the Academy of Management, Honolulu, HI.
Cote, J. A., & Buckley, M. R. (1987). Estimating trait, method, and error variance: Generalizing across 70 construct validation studies. Journal of Marketing Research, 315-318.
Covin, J. G., & Slevin, D. P. (1988). The influence of organization structure on the utility of an entrepreneurial top management style. Journal of Management Studies, 25, 217–234.
Dansereau, F., Graen, G., & Haga, W. J. (1975). A vertical dyad linkage approach to leadership within formal organizations: A longitudinal investigation of the role making process. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 13: 46-78.
Duckitt, J. (1992). The social psychology of prejudice. NY: Praeger publisher.
Duffy, M. K., Ganster, D., & Pagon, M. (2002). Social undermining in the workplace. Academy of Management Journal, 45, 331-351.
Dupré, K. E., Inness, M., Connelly, C. E., Barling, J., & Hoption, C. (2006). Workplace aggression in teenage part-time employees. Journal of Applied Psychology, 91, 987-997.
Edwards, Jeffrey R, & Lambert, Lisa Schurer. (2007). Methods for integrating moderation and mediation: a general analytical framework using moderated path analysis. Psychological methods, 12(1), 1-22.
Einarsen, S., Aasland, M. S., & Skogstad, A. (2007). Destructive leadership behaviour: A definition and conceptual model. Leadership Quarterly, 18: 207-216.
Evans, M. G. (1985). A Monte Carlo study of the effects of correlated method variance in moderated multiple regression analysis. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 36 (3): 305-323.
Farh, J. L., & Cheng, B. S. (2000). A cultural analysis of paternalistic leadership in Chinese organizations. In J. T. Li, A. S. Tsui, & E. Weldon (Eds.), Management and organizations in the Chinese context (pp. 84-130). London, UK: Macmillan.
Farh, J. L., Cheng, B. S., Chou, L. F., & Chu, X. P. (2004, August). Authority and benevolence: Employees’ response to paternalistic leadership in China. Paper presented at the 2004 Annual Meeting of the Academy of Management, New Orleans, LA.
Farh, J. L., Cheng, B. S., Chou, L. F., & Chu, X. P. (2006). Authority and benevolence: Employees’ responses to paternalistic leadership in China. China’s domestic private firms: Multidisciplinary perspectives on management and performance, 230-260.
Feldman, S. (2003). Enforcing social conformity: A theory of authoritarianism. Political Psychology, 24, 41–74.
Ferris, G. R., Zinko, R., Brouer, R. L., Buckley, M. R., & Harvey, M. G. (2007). Strategic bullying as a supplementary, balanced perspective on destructive leadership. Leadership Quarterly, 18: 195-206.
Fry, L. W. (2003). Toward a theory of spiritual leadership. Leadership Quarterly, 14: 693-727.
Gavin, Mark B., & David A. Hofmann (2002). Using Hierarchical Linear Modeling to Investigate the Moderating Influence of Leadership Climate. The Leadership Quarterly, 13(1), 15-33.
Gay, L. R. (1992). Educational research: Competencies for analysis and application (4th ed.). New York: Macmillan. Greenleaf, R. K. 1991. The servant as leader. Indianapolis, IN: The Robert K. Greenleaf Center.
Guion, R. M. (1998). Assessment, measurement, and prediction for personnel selection. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Harman, H. H. (1976). Modern factor analysis. University of Chicago Press.
Hartle, A. E. (1989). Moral issues in military decision making. Kausas University, Lawrence, KS: University of Kansas Press.
Heilman ME, Block CJ, Lucas JA. (1992). Presumed incompetence? Stigmatization and affirmative action efforts. Journal of Applied Psychology, 77, 536–544.
Howell, J. M. (1988). Two faces of charisma: Socialized and personalized leadership in organizations. In J. Conger & R. Kanungo (Eds.), Charismatic leadership: The illusive factor in organizational effectiveness: 213-236. San Francisco: Jossey–Bass.
J. Kozlowski (Eds.), Multilevel theory, research, and methods in organizations: 3-90. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
James, L. R., (1982). Aggregation bias in estimates of perceptual agreement. Journal of Applied Psychology, 67(2), 219-229.
James, L. R., Demaree, R. G., & Wolf, G. (1984). Estimating within-group interrater reliability with and without response bias. Journal of Applied Psycology, 69, 85-89.
Katz, Daniel, & Kahn, Robert Louis. (1978). The social psychology of organizations.
Keashly, L. (1998). Emotional abuse at work: Conceptual and empirical issues. Journal of Emotional Abuse, 1, 85-95.
Keashly, L., & Harvey, S. (2005). Emotional abuse in the workplace. In S. Fox & P. E. Spector (Eds.), Counterproductive work behavior: Investigations of actors and targets (pp. 201-235). Washington:
Keashly, L., Trott, V., & MacLean, L. M. (1994). Abusive behavior in the workplace: A preliminary investigation. Violence and Victims, 9, 341-357.
Kelloway, E. K., Sivanathan, N., Francis, L., & Barling, J. (2005). Poor leadership. In J. Barling, E. K. Kelloway & M. R. Frone (Eds.), Handbook of work stress (pp. 89-112). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Klein, K. J., & Kozlowski, S. W.,( 2000). Multilevel theory, research, and methods in organizations: Foundations, extensions, and new directions. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Kozlowski, S. W. J., & Hattrup, K. (1992). A disagreement about within-group agreement: Disentangling issues of consistency versus consensus. Journal of Applied Psychlolgy, 77, 161-167.
Kozlowski, S. W., & Klein, K. J. (2000). A multilevel approach to theory and research in organizations: Contextual, temporal, and emergent processes.
Krasikova, D. V., Green, S. G., & LeBreton, J. M. (2013). Destructive Leadership: A Theoretical Review, Integration, and Future Research Agenda. Journal of Management, 39(5), 1308-1338
Lai, X., Li, F., and Leung, K. (2013). A Monte Carlo Study of the Effects of Common Method Variance on Significance Testing and Parameter Bias in Hierarchical Linear Modeling. Organizational Research Methods, 16 (2): 243-269.
Lennox, R. D., & Wolfe, R. N.(1984). Revision of the self-monitoring scale. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 46(6), 1349-1364.
Lipman-Blumen, J. (2005). Toxic leadership: When grand illusions masquerade as noble visions. Leader to Leader, 36: 29-36.
Luthans, F., & Avolio, B. J. 2003. Authentic leadership: A positive developmental approach. In K. S. Cameron, J. E. Dutton, & R. E. Quinn (Eds.), Positive organizational scholarship: 241-261. San Francisco, CA: Barrett-Koehler.
Ma, H., Karri, R., & Chittipeddi, K. (2004). The paradox of managerial tyranny. Business Horizons, 47: 33-40.
Mathieu, John E., & William Schulze. (2006). The Influence of Team Knowledge and Formal Plans on Episodic Team Process-Performance Relationships, Academy of Management Journal, 49(3), 605-619.
Mitchell, M. S., & Ambrose, M. L. (2007). Abusive supervision and workplace deviance and the moderating effects of negative reciprocity beliefs. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92, 1159-1168.
Nunnally, J. C. (1978). Psychometric Theory, 2nd ed. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Nunnally, J. C., & Bernstein, I. H. (1994). Psychometric theory (3rd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.
Pearce, C. L., & Sims, H. P. (2002). Vertical versus shared leadership as predictors of the effectiveness of change management teams: An examination of aversive, directive, transactional, transformational, and empowering leader behaviors. Group Dynamics-Theory Research and Practice, 6: 172-197.
Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Lee, J. Y., & Podsakoff, N. P. (2003). Common method biases in behavioral research: a critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88(5), 879-903.
Porter, L. W., & Lawler, E. E. (1968). Managerial attitudes and performance. Homnwood, IL: Richard D. Irwin.
Raudenbush, S. W., & Bryk, A. S. (2002). Hierarchical linear models: Applications and data analysis methods (2nd ed.), London: Sage.
Redding, S. G. (1990). The spirit of Chinese capitalism. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.
Robbins, S. P. (2003). Essentials of organizational behavior (7th ed.).
Schat, A. C. H., Desmarais, S., & Kelloway, E. K.(2006). Exposure to workplace aggression from multiple sources : Validation of a measure and test of a model. Unpublished manuscript, McMaster University, Hamilton, Canada.
Silin, R. H. (1976). Leadership and values: The organization of large-scale Taiwanese enterprises. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Snape, E., & Redman, T. (2004). Exchanger or covenant? The nature of the member-union relationship. Industrial Relations, 43(4), 855-873.
Snyder, M. and S. Gangestad (1986). On the nature of self-monitoring: matters of assessment, matters of validity. Journal of personality and social psychology , 51(1): 125-139.
Snyder, Mark, & DeBono, Kenneth G. (1985). Appeals to image and claims about quality: Understanding the psychology of advertising. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 49(3), 586.
Snyder, Mark. (1974). Self-monitoring of expressive behavior. Journal of personality and social psychology, 30(4), 526.
Steers, RM, & Black, J Stewart. (1994). Organisational behaviour: Harper Collins.
Stellmacher, J., & Petzel, T. (2005). Authoritarianism as a group phenomenon. Political Psychology, 26, 245–274.
Stogdill, R. M. (1948). Personal factors associated with leadership: A survey of the literature. Journal of Psychology, 25, 35–71.
Tepper, B. J. (2000). Consequences of abusive supervision. Academy of Management Journal, 43(2): 178-190.
Tepper, B. J. (2007). Abusive supervision in work organizations: Review, synthesis, and research agenda. Journal of Management, 33(3), 261-289
Thau, S., Bennett, R. J., Mitchell, M. S., & Marrs, M. B. (2009). How management style moderates the relationship between abusive supervision and workplace deviance: An uncertainty management theory perspective. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 108, 79-92.
Trevino, L. K., Brown, M., & Hartman, L. P. (2003). A qualitative investigation of perceived executive ethical leadership: Perceptions from inside and outside the executive suite. Human Relations, 56: 5-37.
Trevino, L. K., Hartman, L. P., & Brown, M. (2000). Moral person and moral manager: How executives develop a reputation for ethical leadership. California Management Review, 42(4): 128-142.
Van Scotter, J. R., Motowidlo, S. J., & Cross, T. C. (2000). Effects of task performance and contextual performance on systemic rewards. Journal of Applied Psychology, 85 (4): 526-535.
Van Scotter, J., Motowidlo, S. J., & Cross, T. C. (2000). Effects of task performance and contextual performance on systemic rewards. Journal of Applied Psychology, 85(4), 526
Wagner III, JA, & Hollenbeck, JR. (2005). Organizational behavior: Securing competitive advantage: Thomson South-Western. Mason, OH.
Walumbwa, Fred O, Avolio, Bruce J, & Zhu, Weichun. (2008). How transformational leadership weaves its influence on individual job performance: The role of identification and efficacy beliefs. Personnel Psychology, 61(4), 793-825.
Wong, Leonard, Bliese, Paul, & McGurk, Dennis. (2003). Military leadership: A context specific review. The Leadership Quarterly, 14(6), 657-692.
Yukl, G. (2010). Leadership in Organizations(7th ed.). Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall.
Zellars, K. L., Tepper, B. J., & Duffy, M. K. (2002).Abusivesupervision and subordinates, organizational citizenship behavior. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87, 1068-1076.
Zhang, Z., Zyphur, M. J., & Preacher, K. J. (2009). Testing multilevel mediation using hierarchical linear models problems and solutions. Organizational Research Methods, 12(4), 695-719.
Zhao, X., Lynch, J. G., & Chen, Q. (2010). Reconsidering Baron and Kenny: Myths and truths about mediation analysis. Journal of Consumer Research, 37(2), 197-206.

QRCODE
 
 
 
 
 
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               
第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁 top
1. 許金田、胡秀華、凌孝綦、鄭伯壎、周麗芳(2004),家長式領導與組織公民行為的關係:上下關係品質之中介效果。交大管理學報,24,119-149。
2. 林鉦棽(2005),組織公民行為之跨層次分析-層級線性模式的應用,管理學報,22(4),503-524。
3. 楊美玉、劉佳雄、柯旻秀、陳映潔、柯佑宗,(2013),領導效能研究的回顧與展望: 1985-2012,人力資源管理學報,13(4),1-39。
4. 鄭伯壎、黃敏萍(2000),華人企業組織中的領導:一項文化價值的分析,中山管理評論,8(4),883-617。
5. 鄭伯壎、周麗芳、樊景立(2000),家長式領導量表:三元模型的建構與測量,本土心理學研究,14,3-64。
6. 鄭伯壎(1995),家長權威與領導行為之關係:一個台灣民營企業主持人的個案研究,中央研究院民族學研究所集刊。(台北),79,119-173。
7. 樊景立、鄭伯壎(2000),華人組織的家長式領導:一項文化觀點的分析,本土心理學研究,13,126-180。
8. 溫福星、邱皓政(2009),組織研究中的多層次調節式中介效果:以組織創新氣氛、組織承諾與工作滿意的實證研究為例,管理學報,26(2),189-211。
9. 姜定宇、丁捷、林伶瑾(2012),家長式領導與部屬效能:信任主管與不信任主管的中介效果,中華心理學刊, 54(3), 269-291.
10. 周婉茹、周麗芳、鄭伯壎、任金剛(2010),專權與尚嚴之辨:再探威權領導的內涵與恩威並濟的效果。本土心理學研究,34,223-284。
11. 吳宗祐、徐瑋伶、鄭伯壎(2002),怒不可遏或忍氣吞聲:華人企業主管威權領導與部屬憤怒反應,本土心理學研究,18,3-49。
12. 吳宗祐、周麗芳、鄭伯壎(2008),主管的權威取向及其對部屬順從與畏懼的知覺對威權領導的預測效果,本土心理學研究,30,65-115。
13. 吳宗祐(2008),主管威權領導與部屬的工作滿意度與組織承諾:信任的中介歷程與情緒智力的調節效果,本土心理學研究,30,3-63。
14. 余一鳴、顏志龍(2011),道德認同對軍事社會化與道德疏離間的調節作用,教育心理學報,43(2),477-498。