心理契约对组织公民行为的影响

该文从组织公民行为的界定基础、产生背景和行为动机三个方面剖析了心理契约与组织公民行为的内在联系,从逻辑上支持了两者的因果关系。在此基础上文章分直接、间接影响两部分回顾了国内外关于心理契约影响组织公民行为的实证研究,并从总体研究状况、理论视角、实证方法三个方面对研究中存在的问题进行评述,以及提出未来研究方向     

组织公民行为与反生产行为的互动关系：一个基于情绪与认知整合框架的阐释

传统观点认为, 组织公民行为和反生产行为是同一连续体的对立两级或者负相关的独立二维结构。但近期研究表明, 这二者关系并非那样简单, 在特定情境下它们也许存在一种适度的正相关性。首先, 回顾组织公民行为与反生产行为的影响因素, 以及这二者关系的认知演变; 然后, 基于情绪与认知整合框架, 采用资源守恒理论和道德平衡理论探讨组织公民行为与反生产行为的互动关系; 最后, 对未来研究方向进行了展望, 如通过实证研究探索二者互动关系的边界机制、采用多种研究方法验证这二者之间互动关系、基于潜增长模型探讨这二者关系的动态变化、以及深入探讨这二者互动关系的管理实践策略。     

动机视角下的亲组织不道德行为

亲组织不道德行为是近年来组织行为学界广泛关注的研究议题。但是, 关于亲组织不道德行为的概念内涵, 目前还存在一定模糊性。基于动机视角, 从亲组织不道德行为的定义、特征、动机、类型等方面, 对亲组织不道德行为的概念模糊性进行细致解构与深入剖析, 形成相对系统的亲组织不道德行为概念内涵; 并据此概念内涵背后的动机逻辑, 对现有的亲组织不道德行为影响因素进行分类梳理, 阐释其对亲组织不道德行为的影响机制; 最后, 从细分类型、测量工具、研究视角、影响因素、抑制机制、影响效应与本土化等方面为后续研究提供针对性的建议。     

好人也会做坏事:有限道德视角下的不道德行为

有限道德是指个体在道德判断中固有的局限性,表现在人们外在行为与内在道德观的悖离,它导致无意识的道德偏差.有限道德弥补了理性道德模型在不道德行为解释力上的缺陷.该视角下的不道德行为主要包括:内隐偏见、内群体互惠、沽名钓誉、利益冲突和漠视未来.关于有限道德存有4种理论解释:自利性动机、双重自我、道德褪色和框架效应.未来有关道德决策和不道德行为的研究,需要延伸到有限理性与无意识层面.     

未来时间距离对自我行为表征的影响：评价内容效价的作用

先前研究表明,对于自我行为,相对于近期过去,个体对远期过去正性行为的表征更倾向于特质性和抽象性,但对负性行为的表征未获得明确的类似效应（申之美等,2010）。本研究以特质性和行动性行为描述句子为实验材料,通过两个实验考察了未来时间距离对自我正性行为和负性行为的表征特征的影响,以进一步探讨评价内容的效价特性对于建构水平的心理距离效应的调节作用。实验结果发现,相对于近期未来,被试对远期未来自我的正性行为更倾向于抽象的特质性表征,但在负性行为上未获得类似效应。个体对未来自我行为的正性期待和负性回避倾向可能是自我行为表征缺乏距离效应的心理机制。     

网络游戏动机的种类、影响及其作用机制

从动机的角度理解网络游戏日益受到研究者的关注。网络游戏动机的研究主要包括：(1)网络游戏动机的种类。在诸多游戏动机中, 乐趣是研究者最为关注的, 其次包括沉醉、社交、逃避、好奇和竞争等。(2)网络游戏动机的影响因素, 包括人格和网络游戏中的社会和个人互动等。(3)动机对网络游戏意向和行为的影响, 这些动机包括乐趣、社交和成就等。(4)网络游戏动机的影响机制, 包括网络游戏动机的中介作用、网络游戏动机与网络游戏行为意向之间的中介变量和调节变量。未来的研究应当关注网络游戏动机种类的分化与整合, 重视从发展心理学、动机的形成和发展过程以及情绪的角度来探讨网络游戏的动机。     

亲社会行为中的从众效应

亲社会行为是社会关系的润滑剂, 从众心理会影响亲社会行为的出现。亲社会从众行为包括利他从众、公平偏好从众、信任从众、慷慨从众等。亲社会从众行为的心理机制包括模仿理论与动机改变理论。亲社会从众行为的神经机制包括奖赏加工与错误加工神经回路。社会价值取向、人际信任水平与人际敏感性对亲社会从众行为有一定的调节作用。未来的研究方向可以从亲社会从众效应的稳定性、个体差异、儿童及青少年的亲社会从众行为研究、临床研究以及跨文化角度入手。     

动机的目标理论

章对动机的目标研究领域的发展脉络、研究方法以及所取得的新近成果进行综述,总结各种目标理论的共同点和分歧,并对这一领域的未来发展方向做出了展望。作认为,目标理论将导致行为的情感因素、动机力量与认知过程有机结合,这体现了一种整合趋势;同时,目标理论强调目标对于人格功能、情绪以及健康的重要性,使得该领域的研究与社会生活密切相联。而这一研究领域的未来方向则是,探查动机倾向与个人目标之间的联结。     

互联网使用动机、行为与其社会-心理健康的模型构建

以581名大学生为被试,采用结构方程模型技术构建了互联网使用动机、病理性互联网使用行为与其相关社会-心理健康的关系模型。其中,互联网使用动机包括信息获取性动机和人际情感性动机两种模式;病理性互联网使用行为包括上网冲动性、分离/逃避和网上优越感三个初级因素;互联网相关社会-心理健康包括孤独感、社会参与度、一般抑郁、生活幸福感和生活满意度五个初级因素,并进一步概括为社会健康和心理健康两个维度。研究结果表明,基于信息获取性动机而使用互联网有助于相关社会-心理健康水平的提高;基于人际情感性动机而使用互联网更容易导致病理性互联网使用行为,并由此对使用者的社会-心理健康产生负面影响;大学生使用互联网的积极效应大于消极效应,且信息获取性动机对社会健康具有更大的积极效应,而人际情感性动机对对心理健康具有更大的消极效应     

从进化心理学视角看两性冒险行为

进化心理学研究发现, 男性比女性更冒险, 男性冒险行为有社会助长和性别助长效应, 求偶动机与异性高魅力均可助长男性冒险行为。按照进化心理学观点, 冒险行为能表现男性作为潜在配偶的积极特征, 可增加其获得异性配偶的几率。择偶偏好研究也证实, 女性青睐敢于冒险的男性。作者认为, 女性冒险行为与求偶动机的关系主要受社会文化影响, 如中国女性在中意的异性面前更避险, 冒险行为领域中进化和文化的交互作用可能成为未来研究焦点。     

Career proactivity: A bibliometric literature review and a future research agenda

Individuals often need to be proactive in order to successfully navigate their career development journeys. To what extent one is vocationally proactive has critical implications for his or her attitudes, behaviors, and other outcomes in career and work-related settings. However, research in career proactivity has been accumulating from divergent perspectives, resulting in a substantially fragmented literature that has not been comprehensively, objectively synthesized to guide the field to move forward. To advance the domain of career proactivity, this paper synthesizes theoretical and empirical literatures using two major bibliometric analyses. We first analyze the intellectual basis of the career proactivity literature by performing document citation analysis. We then review the developmental trends of main conceptual themes in career proactivity literature using a temporal co-word analysis. Informed by these bibliometric findings, we propose a roadmap for future research highlighting the need to clear up concepts, account for context, develop new meso-level theories, and bridge the domains of organizational behavior and vocational development.     

État des lieux des comportements proactifs en contexte professionnel

Our aim was to identify in the scientific field of social psychology and management, the different academic approaches and models of the proactivity concept. In the first instance, the proactivity concept is mentioned as a dispositional variable and an interindividual difference involving personality traits and associated behaviors. In the second, we more specifically explore proactive behaviors and their features. In a complementary manner, we expose some environmental elements understood to promote the initiation and continuation of proactive behavior (decision latitude, autonomy, transformational leadership). Finally, we introduce a few proactivity concept limitations and benefits of using such behaviours in organizational environment. We then conclude this work with a few research proposals such as the variability of the proactivity level and the possibility of acquiring proactive behaviours.     

Toward a Tripartite Model and Measurement of Proactive Personality

Although proactive personality (Bateman & Crant, 1993), as a relatively stable disposition to bring about change in one's environment, is a central construct in the management and organizational behavior literature, questions have arisen about its definition and structure. To answer these questions, we present a tripartite model of proactive personality consisting of 3 dimensions: perception (i.e., perceiving opportunities for change), implementation (i.e., planning and executing change), and perseverance (i.e., persisting until the change is realized). Exploratory factor analysis informed the construction of a 14-item scale, and confirmatory factor analyses supported the validity of the scale. The new scale demonstrated satisfactory reliability and accounted for significant variance in task performance above that of original proactive personality, personal initiative, conscientiousness, and social desirability. Tripartite proactive personality might provide a more nuanced view of dispositional proactivity and greater predictive power than the original unidimensional proactive personality.     

A Study of the Effectiveness of Training Proactive Thinking1

Recent studies have consistently demonstrated the significant positive impact that proactive thinking has on job performance, while assuming proactivity to be a relatively stable, dispositional trait (cf. Ashford & Black, 1996; Crant, 1995; Morrison, 1993; Seibert, Crant, & Kraimer, 1999). This study, on the other hand, seeks to determine if proactivity can be increased in participants through training. This study uses a 4‐month long longitudinal pretest/posttest design to assess the relationship between proactive thinking and performance in the classroom. In the study, 177 subjects were split into 2 treatment groups. One group received training in proactive thinking skills, while the other did not. The results of the study confirm that proactive thinking does have a significant impact on student performance over and above other personality and performance variables. Most importantly, this study also demonstrates that proactivity is not stable over time, but can be increased through training.     

组织中个体主动性行为“利与弊”

个体主动性行为是组织中个体主动做出的面向未来和面向变革的工作行为, 近年来成为组织行为研究领域的重要议题。从现有研究来看: (1)在研究主题上, 多数研究发现了个体主动性行为可以带来正向结果, 个别学者也注意到了个体主动性行为的代价; (2)在分析视角上, 主要包括个体主动性行为对个体层面和组织情境层面的正向与负向影响; (3)在理论机制上, 个体主动性行为的“利弊”效应可用优势互补理论、自我决定理论和归因理论来解释。未来研究可着重进行以下理论整合: (1)从个体主动性行为类型出发, 基于智慧主动性的视角揭示其内在机制; (2)从主动性行为者和观察者特征两面性的视角, 实证探讨其背后机理; (3)从主动性行为主客体特征的发展视角进行动态研究。     

工作中的主动性行为的回顾与展望

工作中的主动性行为是旨在引起或促使变革的行为。它包括三个成分：自发性、前瞻性和变革性。组织行为学中得到较多关注的主动性行为包括主动改进工作方法、主动解决问题、个人主动性、寻求个性化的契约关系以及主动寻求反馈等行为。不同类型的主动性行为可以整合为三个高阶分类, 与角色外行为、适应性行为等有本质区别。主动性行为研究的逻辑关系网络包括前因变量、结果变量以及可能的调节变量。未来研究应基于中国特殊的文化和经济背景, 进一步整合主动性行为的内涵, 拓展研究领域。     

Consequences of autonomous and team-oriented forms of dispositional proactivity for demonstrating advancement potential

Under the paradigm of individualism, proactive personality has garnered much attention in connection with indicators of career success. We regard this construct as an autonomous form of dispositional proactivity and explored it along with team-oriented proactivity as a predictor of self-perceived influence and observed advancement potential in a team-based setting. We proposed that insofar as advancement potential entails demonstrating adeptness at furthering collective performance, autonomous proactivity would be detrimental whereas team-oriented proactivity would be beneficial. This proposition was the basis for a structural model with self-perceived influence as a mediator. Results from data on 672 personnel in 70 teams supported the model and the hypothesized consequences of autonomous (negative) and team-oriented (positive) forms of dispositional proactivity for observed advancement potential.     

组织中利他行为的可持续性及其前因机制：基于主动性动机视角

随着社会经济的快速发展, 对于组织及其成员来说, 要想更好地在当前快速变化的工作环境中适应和发展, 员工利他行为的可持续性愈发重要。新近研究发现利他行为具有动态性, 但在理论框架和研究方法上存在严重不足, 无法获得利他行为动态可持续性特征的全貌, 对其前因机制的研究则更为缺失。因此, 本研究基于主动性动机视角, 聚焦利他行为可持续性的动态性特征, 并在此基础上探索利他行为可持续性的前因机制, 以期增进对利他行为本质的理解, 并为可持续互利团队与组织建设实践提供参考。     

Career proactivity: Conceptual and theoretical reflections

This article adds several conceptual and theoretical reflections to the article “Career proactivity: A bibliometric literature review and a future research agenda” by Jiang et al. The authors conducted a timely and relevant study by analyzing and integrating literature on career proactivity from the domains of organizational and vocational behavior. Prior research has clearly demonstrated that these areas are still largely operating as separate “islands,” both conceptually and methodologically. As such, systematically analyzing the literature and synthesizing the many existing proactivity-related constructs are important steps forward in taking research on career proactivity to the next level. Though their bibliometric analysis confirms the gap between vocational psychology and OB research, there is also a hopeful message in the article, as several clusters showed considerable connections. Thus, it seems that scholars are starting to build bridges between the islands. Building on their analysis and future research suggestions, in this article, we further explore three specific considerations related to (1) conceptual issues, (2) theoretical issues, and (3) additions to their future research agenda.