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

溫福星; 邱皓政

doi:10.6504/JOM.2009.26.02.05

山西大学，您好！

感谢采购，人社期刊库｜人社论文库，期间：2024/01/01~2024/12/31

感谢试用，科学期刊库｜科学论文库，期间：2024/10/20~2025/01/20

浏览高级检索

关闭
检索检索高级检索出版物检索
浏览期刊主题浏览核心期刊浏览期刊拼音浏览

关闭

查询符号(半角)	查询符号意义说明
空格	表示为「AND」两个查询词之交集
双引号 ( " " )	片语以双引号标示开始及结束，而且只寻找出现顺序相同的字词，例： " image process "
?	表示一个字母切截，输入两个?表两个字母，依此类推，例：输入「Appl?」，查得结果应为appl e , appl y … ( 常用于英文字查询 )
*	表示不限字母切截，由0~n. 例：输入「appl*」，查得结果应为appl e , appl es , appl y , appl ied , appl ication … ( 常用于英文字查询 )
AND、OR、NOT	布尔逻辑组合关键字，用来扩大或缩小查询范围的技巧。 (1) AND ：缩小查询范围 (2) OR ：扩大查询范围(3) NOT：排除不相关的范围

DOI 是数位物件识别码（ D igital O bject I dentifier ）的简称，
为物件在网路上的唯一识别码，可用于永久连结并引用目标物件。

使用DOI作为永久连结

每个DOI号前面加上「 http://dx.doi.org/ 」便成为永久网址。
如以DOI号为 10.5297/ser.1201.002 的文献为例，此文献的永久连结便是： http://dx.doi.org/ 10.5297/ser.1201.002 。
日后不论出版单位如何更动此文献位置，永久连结所指向的位置皆会即时更新，不再错失重要的研究。

引用含有DOI的文献

有DOI的文献在引用时皆应同时引用DOI。若使用APA、Chicago以外未规范DOI的引用格式，可引用DOI永久连结。

DOI可强化引用精确性、增强学术圈连结，并给予使用者跨平台的良好使用经验，目前在全世界已有超过五千万个对象申请DOI。如想对DOI的使用与概念有进一步了解，请参考（）。

ACI:

数据来源：Academic Citation Index，简称ACI

台湾最大的引用文献资料库，目前收录台湾与港澳地区所出版的人文学、社会学领域学术期刊之书目资料与参考文献，总期刊量超过690种，每年定期公布收录期刊的影响指数(Impact Factor)等指标给大众，并提供专家学者与学术单位实用的计量与分析功能。

五年影响指数（5-Year Impact Factor）：某一期刊前五年所出版的文章在当年度的平均被引用次数。

公式：（前五年发表论文在统计年的被引用次数）÷（前五年论文产出论文总篇数）

例如：A期刊2017年之五年影响指数

(A期刊2012-2016年发表论文在2017年的被引总次数)/(A期刊2012-2016年发表的论文总数)

什么是预刊文章？

为提供读者最前线之学术资讯，于期刊文献获同意刊登后、纸本印制完成前，率先于网路线上发表之文章即为预刊文章。预刊文章尚未有卷期、页次及出版日期资讯，但可藉由DOI号识别。 DOI号是文献的数位身份证字号，不论预刊或正式出版皆不会改变，读者可点击DOI连结，或于DOI号前面加上「 http://dx.doi.org/ 」连结到文献目前最新版本。

如何引用预刊文章？

请使用预刊文章的线上发表日期及DOI号来引用该篇文献。

引用范例(视不同引文格式规范可能有所差异)：

作者姓名。文章篇名。期刊名称。 YYYY/MM/DD线上预先发表。

doi:DOI 号

来源数据

P189 - 211

社会科学 > 管理学

DOI： 10.6504/JOM

书目管理工具

相关连结

问题回报

全文下载

组织研究中的多层次调节式中介效果：以组织创新气氛、组织承诺与工作满意的实证研究为例

Multilevel Moderated Mediation of Organizational Study: An Empirical Analysis of Organizational Innovation Climate, Organizational Commitment and Job Satisfaction

温福星(Fur-Hsing Wen) ；邱皓政(Haw-Jeng Chiou)

管理学报； 26 卷 2 期 (2009 / 04 / 01) ， P189 - 211

繁体中文 DOI： 10.6504/JOM.2009.26.02.05

多层次中介效果；多层次调节中介效果；多层次模式； Multilevel Moderated Mediation ； Multilevel Mediation ； Multilevel Modeling

4 个人觉得这篇文章赞

摘要 │ 参考文献 (69) │ 被引用文献 (3) │ 国际计量

摘要〈TOP〉

并列摘要〈TOP〉

In the field of organization research, the common major concerns of researchers are the effects of mediation and moderation. For the single-level dataset, the analytical procedure for the mediation effect proposed by Baron and Kenny (1986) is still taken as the standard procedure. But in the circumstance wherein the research data have a multilevel structure, the organization-level variables may have a top-down influence on the individual-level variables. A particular analytical paradigm is needed to be developed to deal with the nested or clustered data, such as the data wherein employees are nested within departments, and the departments are nested within organizations. In a multilevel data structure, the conventional Baron and Kenny procedure for the mediation effects becomes inappropriate due to the violations of the assumptions of independence and homogeneity. Neglecting the correlated property of the observations such as employees within the organization experiencing the shared organizational climates and cultures thus may result into misleading conclusions. Similarly, the results from the traditional ordinary least squares estimators (OLS) are also incorrect because the standard errors would be underestimated.
This article introduces a multilevel modeling method of analysis for the mediation and moderation effects, which is critical and necessary in the response to the complexity in the clustered or nested data. In multilevel models, the within group homogeneity and the between-group heterogeneity of errors from the clustered or nested data are taken into account by adding a random intercept term to the regression equation. The estimates of the standard errors generated by the multilevel model are unbiased. In addition, the examination of contextual effects and the cross-level interaction can also be integrated into the multilevel model. The direct effect of organizational-level variables on the individual-level outcome variables (i.e., contextual effects) as well as the moderation effects of organizational-level variables on the individual-level prediction relationship can be empirically examined in the proposed Multilevel Moderated Mediation (3M) paradigm.
The conceptualization of the proposed 3M modeling is by integrating the ideas of multilevel mediation proposed by Krull and MacKinnon in 1991 and 2001, and together with the analysis of cross-level interaction; a central concept of multilevel regression paradigm. The analytical procedure for a 2-1-1 model provides a clear and detail framework in the demonstrated empirical data analysis. While, the notation of 2-1-1 is defined as follows: The first number defines the level of the independent variable wherein it belongs to. Number ”1” represents the individual level and ”2” for the organizational level. The second number defines the level of the location of the mediating variables, and the final number defines the level of the outcome variable. The standard steps for examining a 3M model are, firstly, calculating the intra class correlation coefficients (ICC); secondly, executing the ”intercepts-as-outcome model”; thirdly, examining the ”random effect ANCOVA model and random coefficient model”; followed by the procedures of testing of the ”mediation effect”; and finally exploring the ”moderated effect”.
Step one is used to evaluate the magnitude of between-group variability, which has to be strong enough for impacting the other estimators of OLS in the model. If the ICC is small, the influences of multilevel data structure could be ignored, and a traditional regression analysis is appropriate. The purpose of step two is to examine the direct effect of the organizational-level independent variable on individual-level outcome. Because the analytic units of analysis for organizational level and individual level are different, the multilevel modeling is applied herein. Through the intercepts as outcome model, the direct effect between organizational independent variable and individual outcome variable could be examined. Step three is use to examine the influence of the individual level mediator variable on the outcome variables in the same level. While step four takes the organizational level independent variable and individual level mediator variable into account simultaneously in one equation. By examining the significance of the partial coefficients of the organizational level independent variable and individual level mediator variable and comparing the partial coefficient of the organizational level independent variable and the direct effect in step two, we can test if the multilevel mediation is hold. In the step four, we examine the two different models about the slopes of the individual level mediator variable: the fixed effect and the random effect model. If the variance component of the slopes is significant in the random model, it is necessary to test the moderation of organizational level independent variable on the relationships between the individual level mediator variable on the individual level outcome variables. Step five is the cross-level interaction procedure to test the moderated role of the organizational level independent variable. In addition to the above formal five steps, we also suggest to proceed to the Sobel test, in order to assess the indirect effect of the moderator variable.
150The purpose of the illustration on analytic procedures is that the multiple mediators with the hypothesized 3M relationships of the independent, moderators, and outcome variable were empirically analyzed in the present paper. Partial data selected from a previous study (Chiou, Kau, & Liou, 2001) consisted of 664 employees sampled from 24 different organizations. The organizational level independent variable, individual-level mediators, and individual-level outcome variable are the perceived organizational climate, employee's identification commitment and instrument commitment toward the organization, and job satisfaction, separately. It was hypothesized that the employee's identification commitment and instrument commitment have a significant mediation effect on the prediction relationship of organizational climate on employee's job satisfaction. It is also examined that how the organizational climate moderates the relationships between organizational commitment and job satisfaction. Data was analyzed by HLM (Raudenbush, Bryk, Cheong, & Congdon, 2004) and Mplus (Muthen & Muthen, 2004) both for the purpose of comparison among software. Results revealed that the individual-level identification commitment fully mediated the relationship between organizational climate and employee's job satisfaction; at the same time, it is identified that the macro-level organizational climate moderated the influence of individual-level instrument commitment on job satisfaction. Sobel tests (Sobel, 1982) were applied to examine the significance of the mediation effect. The usage of the proposed 3M procedure was also demonstrated. Implications and technical limitations of the 3M paradigm are discussed in the final section, while the program code for HLM and Mplus are presented on the appendix.

参考文献 ( 69 ) 〈TOP〉

Abbott, G. N.,F. A. White,M. A. Charles(2005).Linking Values and Organizational Commitment: A Correlational and Experimental Investigation in Two Organizations.Journal of Occupational & Organizational Psychology,78,531-551.
Avolio, B.J.,W. Zho,W. Koh,P. Bhatia(2004).Transformational Leadership and Organizational Commitment: Mediating Role of Psychological Empowerment and Moderating Role of Structural Distance.Journal of Organizational Behavior,25,951-968.
Baron, R. M.,D. A. Kenny(1986).The Moderator-Mediator Variable Distinction in Social Psychological Research: Conceptual, Strategic, and Statistical Consideration.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,51,1173-1182.
Bauer, D. J.,K. J. Preacher,K. M. Gil(2006).Conceptualizing and Testing Random Indirect Effects and Moderated Mediation in Multilevel Models: New Procedures and Recommendations.Psychological Methods,11,142-163.
Becker, T. E.(1992).Forms and Bases of Commitment: Are They Distinctions Worth Making?.Academy of Management Journal,35,232-244.

被引用文献 ( 3 ) 〈TOP〉

国际计量

〈TOP〉

E-mail ：

文章公开取用时，将寄通知信至您填写的信箱地址