忠於自我或見機行事？－華人關鍵情境下的行為差異

Follow the Situational Rules or Your Heart? Individual Differences in Behavior under Critical Situations among Taiwanese

10.6254/2013.40.3

高旭繁(Shu-Fang Kao)

見機行事 ； 忠於自我 ； 情境取向 ； self ； situation-orientation

本土心理學研究

40期（2013 / 12 / 01）

3 - 44

繁體中文

本研究旨在探討華人在情境取向及自我能動性的雙重影響之下，面對不同情境之行為傾向的個別差異。本研究以情境模擬法利用問卷進行大樣本施測，探究華人在「角色義務」及「獨立自主」兩類情境下，順勢而為的傾向（即見機行事），以及不同威權取向或平權取向程度者行為傾向的差異（即忠於自我）。有效樣本為701位，包含大學生（354位）及成人（347位），男女各半。研究結果顯示：（1）華人在面對兩類情境時，皆傾向順勢而為；（2）威權取向會強化「角色義務」下順勢而為的傾向，弱化「獨立自主」情境下順勢而為的傾向；（3）平權取向會強化「獨立自主」情境下順勢而為的傾向；（4）相較而言，華人順應情境的效應高於忠於自我。本研究就上述結果推論情境對理解華人行為的重要性，並加以討論。

The study explored individual differences in behavioral tendencies among Taiwanese taking into account the dual influences of situation and self. Using structured questionnaires, ”role obligation” and ”autonomous independence” scenarios were presented to solicit situation-oriented behavioral tendencies in participants. Participants were 354 university students and 347 adults (mean age = 34.73), with an equal gender ratio. Results showed that (1) participants manifested situation-orientation in both types of scenarios; (2) an authoritarian personality intensified the situation-orientation in role obligation scenarios, whereas it ameliorated the situation-orientation in the autonomous independence scenarios; (3) egalitarian personality intensified the situation-orientation in autonomous independence scenarios; and finally (4) participants generally had a stronger situation-orientation tendency than a be-true-to-the-self tendency. The situation is vitally important for understanding Taiwanese people’s behavior.

1. 高旭繁、陸洛(2006)。夫妻傳統性／現代性的契合與婚姻適應之關聯。本土心理學研究，25，45-98。
   連結：
2. 高旭繁、楊國樞(2011)。華人心理傳統性與心理現代性研究之回顧與前瞻。彰師大教育學報，19，3-13。
   連結：
3. 陸洛(2003)。人我關係之界定─「折衷自我」的現身。本土心理學研究，20，215-246。
   連結：
4. 陸洛(2011)。現代華人的雙文化自我與雙重陷落。本土心理學研究，36，155-168。
   連結：
5. 陸洛、高旭繁、陳芬憶(2006)。傳統性、現代性孝道觀念及其對幸福感的影響：一項親子對偶設計。本土心理學研究，25，197-232。
   連結：
6. 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，23，77-98。
   連結：
7. 黃光國(2011)。論「含攝文化的心理學」。本土心理學研究，36，79-110。
   連結：
8. 黃光國(2012)。跳脫「二元對立」的思維框架。本土心理學研究，37，191-210。
   連結：
9. 楊國樞(2004)。華人自我的理論分析與實徵研究：社會取向與個人取向觀點。本土心理學研究，22，11-80。
   連結：
10. 楊國樞、陸洛(2005)。社會取向自我實現者與個人取向自我實現者：概念分析與實徵衡鑑。本土心理學研究，23，71-143。
    連結：
11. Goldstein, K. (1939). The organism. New York: American Book.
12. Freud, S. (1924). The loss of reality in neurosis and psychosis. In J. Strachey (Ed.), The standard edition of the complete psychological works of Sigmund Freud, Vol. 19: The ego and the id and other works. London: Hogarth Press.
13. Argyle, M.,Furnham, A.,Graham, J. A.(1981).Social situation.:University of Cambridge.
14. Brindley, T. A.(1990).Socio-psychological values in the Republic of China (II).Asian Thought and Society,15(43),1-15.
15. Brindley, T. A.(1989).Socio-psychological values in the Republic of China (I).Asian Thought and Society,14(41-42),98-115.
16. Cervone, D.(Ed.),Shoda, Y.(Ed.)(1999).The coherence of personality: Social-cognitive bases of consistency, variability, and organization.New York:Guilford Press.
17. Cervone, D.,Shoda, Y.(1999).Beyond traits in the study of personality coherence.Current Directions in Psychological Science,8(1),27-32.
18. Chiu, C. Y.,Dweck, C. S.,Tong, Y. Y.,Fu, H. Y.(1997).Implicit theories and conceptions of morality.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,73(5),923-940.
19. Chiu、 C. Y.,Hong, Y. Y.,Mischel, W.,Shoda, Y.(1995).Discriminative facility in social competence: Conditional versus dispositional encoding and monitoring-blunting of information.Social Cognition,13,49-70.
20. Choi, I.,Nisbett, R. E.,Norenzayan, A.(1999).Causal attribution across cultures: Variation and universality.Psychological Bulletin,125(1),47-63.
21. Chuang、 Y. C.(1998).The cognitive structures of role norms in Taiwan.Asian Journal of Social Psychology,1,239-251.
22. Conway, L. G., III,Schaller, M.,Tweed, R. G.,Hallett, D.(2001).The complexity of thinking across cultures: Interactions between culture and situational context.Social Cognition,19,228-250.
23. Endler, N. S.,Magnusson, D.(1976).Toward an interactional psychology of personality.Psychological Bulletin,83,956-974.
24. Farh, J. L.,Hackett, R. D.,Liang, J.(2007).Individual-level cultural values as moderators of perceived organizational support-employee outcome relationships in China: Comparing the effects of power distance and traditionality.Academy of Management Journal,50(3),715-729.
25. Fiske, A. P.(1992).The four elementary forms of sociality: Framework for a unified theory of social relations.Psychological Review,99,689-723.
26. Harris, G. G.(1989).Concepts of individual, self, and person in description and analysis.American Anthropologist,91(3),599-612.
27. Hong、 Y. Y.,Benet-Martinez, V.,Chiu, C. Y.,Morris, M. W.(2003).Boundaries of cultural influence: Construct activation as a mechanism for cultural differences in social perception.Journal of Cross Cultural Psychology,34,453-464.
28. Hong、 Y. Y.,Morris, M. W.,Chiu, C. Y.,Bennet-Martínez, V.(2000).Multicultural minds: A dynamic constructivist approach to culture and cognition.American Psychologist,55(7),709-720.
29. Hsu、 F. L. K.(1981).American and Chinese: Passage to differences.Honolulu:University of Hawaii Press.
30. Hwang、 K. K.(2003).Critique of the methodology of empirical research on individual modernity in Taiwan.Asian Journal of Social Psychology,6,241-262.
31. Hwang、 K. K.(2011).The Mandala model of self.Psychological Studies,56(4),329-334.
32. Knowles、 E. D.,Morris, M. W.,Chiu, C.-Y.,Hong, Y.-Y.(2001).Culture and the process of person perception: Evidence for automaticity among East Asians in correcting for situational influences on behavior.Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin,27(10),1344-1356.
33. Liden, R. C.,Maslyn, J. M.(1998).Multidimensionality of leader-member exchange: An empirical assessment through scale development.Journal of Management,24,43-72.
34. Lu、 L.,Yang, K. S.(2006).The emergence and composition of the traditional-modern bicultural self of people in contemporary Taiwanese societies.Asian Journal of Social Psychology,9,167-175.
35. Markus, H. R.,Kitayama, S.(1991).Culture and the self: Implication for cognition, emotion, and motivation.Psychological Review,98,224-253.
36. Mischel, W.,Ayduk, O.(2002).Self-regulation in a cognitive-affective personality system: Attentional control in the service of the self.Self and Identity,1(2),113-120.
37. Mischel, W.,Shoda, Y.(1995).A cognitive-affective personality system theory of personality: Reconceptualizing situations, dispositions, dynamics, and invariance in personality structure.Psychological Review,102,246-268.
38. Moos, R. H.(1996).Understanding environments: The key to improving social processes and program outcomes.American Journal of Community Psychology,24(1),193-201.
39. Morris, M. W.,Peng, K. P.(1994).Culture and cause: American and Chinese attributions for social and physical events.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,67(6),949-971.
40. Nisbett, R. E.,Peng, K.,Choi, I.,Norenzayan, A.(2001).Culture and systems of thought: Holistic vs. analytic cognition.Psychological Review,108,291-310.
41. Pargament, K. I.(1986).Refining fit: Conceptual and methodological challenges.American Journal of Community Psychology,14(6),677-684.
42. Pervin, L. A.(Ed.),John, O. P.(Ed.)(1999).Handbook of personality: Theory and research.New York:Guilford Press.
43. Read, S. J.(Ed.),Miller, L. C.(Ed.)(1998).Connectionist models of social reasoning and social behavior.Mahwah, NJ:Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.
44. Sarbin, T. R.(1995).Emotional life, rhetoric, and roles.Journal of Narrative and Life History,5(3),213-220.
45. Shalley, C. E.,Gilson, L. L.,Blum, T. C.(2009).Interactive effects of growth need strength, work context, and job complexity on self-reported creative performance.Academy of Management Journal,52,489-505.
46. Shoda, Y.(1999).A unified framework for the study of behavioral consistency: Bridging person×situation interaction and the consistency paradox.European Journal of Personality,13(5),361-387.
47. Spreitzer, G. M.,Perttula, K. H.,Xin, K.(2005).Traditionality matters: An examination of the effectiveness of transformational leadership in the United States and Taiwan.Journal of Organizational Behavior,26(3),205-227.
48. Triandis, H. C.(1990).Cross-cultural studies of individualism and collectivism.Nebraska symposium on motivation, 1989,Lincoln:
49. Triandis, H. C.,Chen, X. P.,Chan, D. K. S.(1998).Scenarios for the measurement of collectivism and individualism.Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology,29,275-289.
50. Zayas, V.,Shoda, Y.,Ayduk, O. N.(2002).Personality in context: An interpersonal systems perspective.Journal of Personality,70(6),851-900.
51. 翁克成(2004)。碩士論文(碩士論文)。輔仁大學心理學研究所。
52. 高旭繁(2008)。博士論文(博士論文)。台灣大學心理學研究所。
53. 張嘉莉(2005)。碩士論文(碩士論文)。佛光人文社會學院心理學研究所。
54. 陸洛(2007)。個人取向與社會取向的自我觀：概念分析與實證測量。美中教育評論，2007(4)，1-24。
55. 黃光國(1995)。知識與行動。台北:心理出版社。
56. 黃光國(2009)。儒家關係主義：哲學反思、理論建構與實徵研究。台北:心理出版社。
57. 黃光國(2011)。心理學的科學革命方案。台北:心理出版社。
58. 黃俊傑(2002)。傳統中國的思維方式及其價值觀：歷史回顧與現代啟示。傳統中華文化與現代價值的激盪，北京:
59. 楊國樞(1994)。傳統價值觀與現代價值觀能否同時並存？。中國人的價值觀─社會科學觀點，台北:
60. 楊國樞、余安邦、葉明華(1991)。中國人的個人傳統性與現代性：概念與測量。中國人的心理與行為（一九八九），台北:
61. 廖玲燕(1999)。碩士論文(碩士論文)。台灣大學心理學研究所。
62. 鄭伯壎(2001)。華人本土心理學研究追求卓越計畫研究計畫─九十年度計畫報行報告書華人本土心理學研究追求卓越計畫研究計畫─九十年度計畫報行報告書,台北:台灣大學心理學系。

1. 簡晉龍(2021)。本土心理學中的創造性「繼承」與「轉化」：以權威取向的理論發展為例。本土心理學研究，55，35-97。
2. 吳一敏(2016)。諮商學習新手深化同理技巧之精神內涵方法。諮商與輔導，372，10-12。
3. 葉光輝,張仁和,孫蒨如(2019)。華人本土自我研究的回顧與前瞻。本土心理學研究，51，3-31。
4. 張映芬(2021)。情緒勞務策略組型及其與相關因素之關係：質、量觀點的個人中心分析。教育心理學報，52(3)，595-617。
5. (2022)。華人陽／陰默認文化與社會工作規則倫理實踐之困境。社區發展季刊，180，115-128。
6. (2023)。「角色義務」與「獨立自主」的相生相依：矯正學校青年自我「關聯身分」野地闖蕩實踐歷程的現象學探究。本土心理學研究，59，191-257。
7. (2023)。台灣高齡者由自我認同邁向統整之歷程：雙文化自我的觀點。本土心理學研究，59，123-189。