臺灣博碩士論文加值系統

本研究旨在探討組織中影響報復認知的相關因素，主要包括受害者負面情緒程度與雙方須接觸期間，並探討受害者之負向回報信念程度、自尊心強烈程度與雙方須接觸期間對於負面情緒程度與報復認知之關係的干擾效果。

本研究採用發放問卷之方式收集樣本，請受試者假想自己為情境個案之受害者，並將問卷依照雙方須接觸期間區分為兩種版本，A問卷設計雙方須接觸期間為短期；B問卷則為長期，藉此探究受害者與加害者雙方須接觸期間與報復認知的相關性。最終共採集到133份有效樣本，並利用迴歸分析與變異數分析進行資料統計分析，再針對各變項與依變項之研究假設進行驗證。

研究結果顯示，受試者負面情緒強度與報復認知之間存在顯著正相關，而雙方須接觸期間則與報復認知之間存在顯著負相關。至於干擾效果的檢測方面，受試者的負向回報信念程度，在負面情緒程度與報復認知之關係存在負向之干擾效果；而受試者的自尊心強烈程度與雙方須接觸期間，則對於負面情緒程度與報復認知之間不存在顯著之干擾效果。

The purpose of this study was to discuss the relevant factors of revenge cognition within organizations. Therefore, the dependent variable in this study is victim’s revenge cognition, while the independent variables are victim’s degree of negative emotions and the length of bilateral contact. Moreover, this study also takes victim’s degree of negative reciprocity belief, victim’s degree of self-esteem, and the length of bilateral contact into confounding factors to discuss the moderating effects of the relationship between victim’s degree of negative emotions and revenge cognition.
The study developed two types of questionnaires, which are almost the same with slightly different scenarios, to conduct the research. Questionnaire A was designed for short-term bilateral contact while questionnaire B was designed for long-term. The sample of the present research includes 133 people who are currently in a certain organization. Regression analysis and ANOVA were used to analyze the data.
The result showed that victim’s degree of negative emotions was positively related with revenge cognition, while the length of bilateral contact was negatively related with revenge cognition. In addition, this study also found that victim’s degree of negative reciprocity belief exerted the moderating effect on the relationship between victim’s degree of negative emotions and revenge cognition, whereas victim’s degree of self-esteem and the length of bilateral contact did not.

口試委員會審定書 Ⅰ
誌謝 Ⅱ
中文摘要 Ⅲ
Abstract Ⅳ
目錄 Ⅴ
圖目錄 Ⅶ
表目錄 Ⅷ
第一章 緒論 1
第一節 研究動機 1
第二節 研究問題 2
第三節 研究流程 5
第二章 文獻探討 6
第一節 報復的定義 6
第二節 報復的動機與目的 9
第三節 影響報復認知的相關因素 11
第四節 總結 15
第三章 研究架構與方法 17
第一節 基本架構 17
第二節 研究假設 18
第三節 研究對象 21
第四節 研究變項之操作型定義與衡量 22
第五節 資料處理與分析方法 32
第四章 資料分析與研究結果 35
第一節 樣本比例分析 35
第二節 研究變項之信度分析 40
第三節 研究變項之敘述性統計分析 40
第四節 基本資料變項之平均數分析 43
第五節 研究變項之相關性分析 45
第六節 主效果之檢定 48
第七節 干擾效果之檢定 51
第八節 假設結果之驗證 56
第五章 結論與建議 58
第一節 研究結果與結論 58
第二節 研究限制與後續研究建議 63
Reference 69
附錄一：正式問卷（A） 72
附錄二：正式問卷（B） 76

Aquino, K., Tripp, T. M., &; Bies, R. J. (2006). Getting even or moving on? Power, procedural justice, and types of offense as predictors of revenge, forgiveness, reconciliation, and avoidance in organizations. Journal of Applied Psychology, 91, 653-668.
Aberson, C. L., Healy, M., &; Romero, V. (2000). Ingroup bias and self-esteem: A meta-analysis. Personaly and Socail Psychology Review, 4, 157-173.
Bachman, J. G., &; Malley, P. M. (1986). Self-concepts, self-esteem, and educational experiences: The fron revisited (again). Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 50, 35-46.
Baumeister, R. F., Campbell, J. D., Krueger, J. I., &; Vohs, K. D. (2003). Does high self-esteem cause better performance, interpersonal success, happiness, or healthier lifestyles? Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 4, 1-44.
Bradfield, M., &; Aquino, K. (1999). The effects of blame attributions and offender likableness on revenge and forgiveness in the workplace. Journal of Management, 2, 607-631.
Bushman, B. J., Baumeister, R. F., &; Phillips, C. M. (2001). Do people aggress to improve their mood? Catharsis beliefs, affect regulation opportunity, and aggressive responding. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 81, 17-32
Carlsmith, K. M., Darley, J. M., &; Robinson, P. H. (2002). Why do we punish?
Deterrence and just deserts as motives for punishment. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 83, 284-299.
Eisenberger, R., Lynch, P., &; Aselage, J. (2004). Who takes the most revenge? Individual differences in negative reciprocity norm endorsement. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 30(6), 787-799.
Gollwitzer, M., &; Denzler, M. (2009). What makes revenge sweet: Seeing the offender suffer or delivering a message? Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 45, 840-844
Grandey, A. A., Tam, A. P., &; Brauburger A. L. (2002). Affective states and traits in the workplace: diary and survey data from young workers. Motivation and Emotion, 26, 31-55.
McCullough, M. E., Kurzban, R., &; Tabak, B. A. (2010). Evolved mechanisms for revenge and forgivenesee. In P. R. Shaver and M. Mikulincer (eds.), Understanding and reducing agression, violence, and their consequences (pp. 221-239). Washington, DC: American psychological Association.
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.
Rosenberg, M. (1965). Society and the adolescent self-image. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Schmitt D. P., &; Allik, J. (2005). Simultaneous administration of the Rosenberg self-esteem scale in 53 nations: exploring the universal and culture-specific features of global self-esteem. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 89, 623-642.
Skarlicki, D. P., &; Folger, R. (1997). Retaliation in the workplace: The roles of distributive, procedural, and interactional justice. Journal of Applied Psychology, 82, 434-443
Tsai, Ming-hong, Chi, Shu-cheng Steve, &; Hu, Hsiu-hua. “Salespeople’s Renqing Orientation, Self-esteem, and Selling Behaviors: An Empirical Study in Taiwan,” Jounral of Business and Psychology. (SSCI) (accepted)
Watson, D., Clark, L. A., &; Tellegen, A. (1988). Development and validation of brief measures of positive and negative affect: The PANAS scales. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54, 1063-1070.