儒教「尊尊」的體現：權威敏感之運作與社會適應

The Implementation of Confucius ＂Respecting the Superior＂: The Validation and Social Adjustment of Authority- Sensitization

10.6254/2017.48.121

簡晉龍(Chin-Lung Chien)；陳貽照(Yi-Chao Chen)；鍾昆原(Kuen-Yung Jone)；許詩淇(Shih-Chi Hsu)

上下倫理 ； 權威取向 ； 權威敏感 ； 關係主義 ； 縱向關係 ； authoritarian orientation ； authority sensitization ； Chinese relationalism ； respecting the superior ； vertical relationship

本土心理學研究

48期（2017 / 12 / 01）

121 - 165

繁體中文

「尊尊」是儒教∕儒家學說的核心之一，也是儒家關係主義中華人社會互動的深層結構，而「權威敏感」便是「尊尊」法則的體現。「權威敏感」係指華人在社會互動場合中留意權威者是否在場（權威探尋），並恭敬地對待權威者的行為傾向（相應行為）。本研究旨在探究源自儒家深層結構之尊尊法則的「權威敏感」，在現今社會互動下的運作情形，並與「人際敏感」做一區辨（研究一），及其社會適應性與尊尊倫理之體現（研究二）。研究一採實驗情境故事法，在分析199位有效樣本後發現：人們在社會互動情境下會採取慣習反應的權威探尋，若遇到有權威者在場（相較於遇到平輩或同儕），會立即表現恭敬行為。此外，人際敏感與權威敏感（包括權威探尋和相應的恭敬行為）的關聯性相當低，顯示兩者為可區辨之不同構念。研究一顯示權威敏感在社會互動中的運作情形，並提供區辨效度證據。研究二採實驗情境故事法，在分析167位有效樣本後發現：「高權威敏感」比「低權威敏感」之行為模式更符合社會認定的角色規範，其社會適應性主要出現在縱向關係，對橫向關係較無影響。因此，「高權威敏感」容易得到上司的提拔，也具較佳的社會適應。隱含「權威敏感」背後代表的角色倫理，屬於上下關係互動的倫理，正是關係主義的尊尊法則之體現。

A person sensitive to authority is accustomed to continually monitoring whether or not an authority figure is nearby and performing respectful behaviors if an authority figure is present (termed corresponding behaviors) a phenomenon called authority-sensitization. Authority-sensitization can be considered the implementation of the Confucian respecting the superior (zun-zun) principle. We conducted two scenario studies to investigate the operation and discriminant validity of authority-sensitization (Study 1) and its ethical implications and social adjustment (Study 2). In Study 1, a sample of 199 participants demonstrated that most participants would habitually notice whether an authority figure is present and exhibit respectful behaviors (e.g., standing and bowing) immediately when encountering an authority figure. In addition, authority-sensitization is different from interpersonal sensitivity, because of their weak shared correlation. In Study 2, among 167 participants those who showed high authority-sensitization accorded with the subordinate role were perceived to have better social adjustment and to be more likely promote by the superior than those who did not show authority-sensitization. No such pattern was found in horizontal relationships. The findings suggest that authority-sensitizatin operates in vertical relationship and exemplifies the ＂zun-zun＂ ethic of Chinese relationalism.

1. 許詩淇、黃囇莉(2009)。天下無不是的父母？─父母角色義務對親子衝突與親子關係之影響。中華心理學刊，51，295-317。
   連結：
2. 黃囇莉、許詩淇(2006)。虛虛實實之間：婆媳關係的和諧化歷程與轉化機制。本土心理學研究，25，3-45。
   連結：
3. 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的觀點。本土心理學研究，22，11-80。
   連結：
4. 簡晉龍、黃囇莉(2015)。華人權威取向之內涵與形成歷程。本土心理學研究，43，55-123。
   連結：
5. Baker, R. W., & Siryk, B. (1989). The student adaptation to college questionnaire (SACQ). Retrieved from https://www.wpspublish.com/store/Images/Downloads/Product/SACQ_Sample-Test-Report.pdf
6. Bond, M. H.(Ed.)(1986).The psychology of the Chinese people.Hong Kong:Oxford University Press.
7. Bouman, T.,van der Meulen, M.,Goossens, F. A.,Olthof, T.,Vermande, M. M.,Aleva, E. A.(2012).Peer and self-report of victimization and bullying: Their differential association with internalizaing problems and social adjustment.Journal of School Psychology,50,759-774.
8. Brockner, J.,Ackerman, G.,Greenberg, J.,Gelfand, M. J.,Francesco, A. M.,Chen, Z. X.(2001).Culture and procedural justice: The influence of power distance on reactions to voice.Journal of Experimental Social Psychology,37,300-315.
9. Chen、 S.-W.,Huang, L.-L.(2010).The social representations of teachers' rights and obligations in Taiwan.10 International Conference on Social Representations,Tunisia:
10. Chien、 C.-L.(2016).Beyond authoritarian personality: The culture-inclusive theory of Chinese authoritarian orientation.Frontiers in Psychology,7,924.
11. Chien、 C.-L.,Huang, L.-L.(2010).The social representations of students' rights and obligations in Taiwan.10 International Conference on Social Representations,Tunisia:
12. Chiu、 C.,Morris, M. W.,Hong, Y.,Menon, T.(2000).Motivated cultural cognition: The impact of implicit cultural theories on dispositional attribution varies as a function of need for closure.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,78,247-259.
13. Chiu、 C.-Y.,Hong, Y.-Y.,Shavitt, S.(Ed.),Wyer, R. S, Jr.(Ed.)(2009).Understanding culture: Theory, research and application.New York:Psychology Press.
14. Chuang、 Y.-C.(1998).The cognitive structure of role norms in Taiwan.Asian Journal of Social Psychology,1,239-251.
15. Clugston, M.,Howell, J. P.,Dorfman, P. W.(2000).Does cultural socialization predict multiple bases and foci of commitment?.Journal of Management,26,5-30.
16. 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,50,715-729.
17. Fiske, A. P.(1992).The four elementary forms of sociality: Framework for a unified theory of social relations.Psychological Review,99,689-723.
18. Fiske, S. T.(Ed.),Gilbert, D. T.(Ed.),Lindzey, G.(Ed.)(2010).Handbook of social psychology.New York:Wiley.
19. Hall, J. A.(Ed.),Bernieri, F. J.(Ed.)(2001).Interpersonal sensitivity: Theory and measurement.Mahwah, NJ:Erlbaum.
20. Hall, J. A.,Andrzejewski, S. A.,Yopchick, J. E.(2009).Psychosocial correlates of interpersonal sensitivity: A meta-analysis.Journal of Nonverbal Behavior,33,149-180.
21. Hall, J. A.,Coats, E. J.,LeBeau, L. S.(2005).Nonverbal behavior and the vertical dimension of social relations: A meta-analysis.Psychological Bulletin,131,898-924.
22. Hall, J. A.,Halberstadt, A. G.(1994)."Subordination" and sensitivity to nonverbal cues: A study of married working women.Sex Roles,31,149-165.
23. Hall, J. A.,Halberstadt, A. G.,O'Brien, C. E.(1997)."Subordination" and nonverbal sensitivity: A study and synthesis of findings based on trait measures.Sex Roles,37,295-317.
24. Hall, J. A.,Murpht, N. A.,Schmid Mast, M.(2006).Recall of nonverbal cues: Exploring a new definition of interpersonal sensitivity.Journal of Nonverbal Behavior,30,141-155.
25. Han、 K.-H.(2011).The self-enhacing function of Chinese modesty: From a perspective of social script.Asian Journal of Social Psychology,14,258-268.
26. Harrigan, J. A.(Ed.),Rosenthal, R.(Ed.),Scherer, K. R.(Ed.)(2005).The new handbook of methods in nonverbal behavior research.Oxford, UK:Oxford University Press.
27. Hwang、 K.-K.(1998).Two moralities: Reinterpreting the finding of empirical research on moral reasoning in Taiwan.Asian Journal of Social Psychology,1,211-238.
28. Hwang、 K.-K.(2011).The Mandala model of self.Psychological Studies,56,329-334.
29. Hwang、 K.-K.(1997).Guanxi and mientze: Conflict resolution in Chinese society.Intercultural Communication Studies,7(1),17-37.
30. Inglehart, R.,Baker, W. E.(2000).Modernization, cultural change, and the persistence of traditional values.American Sociological Review,65,19-51.
31. Johnson, J. A.(1999).Persons in situations: Distinguishing new wine from old wine in new bottles.European Journal of Personality,13,443-453.
32. Knowles、 E. D.,Morris, M. W.,Chiu, C.,Hong, 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,27,1344-1356.
33. Lerner, D.(1958).The passing of traditional society: Modernizing the Middle East.New York:Free Press.
34. Lew、 W. J. F.(1998).Understanding the Chinese personality: Parenting, schooling, values, morality, relations, and personality.New York:Edwin Mellen.
35. Lu、 L.(2006)."Cultural fit": Individual and societal discrepancies in values, beliefs, and subjective well-being.Journal of Social Psychology,146,203-221.
36. Markus, H. R.,Kitayama, S.(1991).Culture and self: Implications for cognition, emotion, and motivation.Psychological Review,98,224-253.
37. Radtke, H. L.(Ed.),Stam, H. J.(Ed.)(1994).Power/gender: Social relations in theory and practice.London:Sage.
38. Scharf, M.,Wiseman, H.,Farah, F.(2011).Parent-adolescent relationships and social adjustment: The case of a collectivistic culture.International Journal of Psychology,46,177-190.
39. Snodgrass, S. E.(1985).Women's intuition: The effect of subordinate role on interpersonal sensitivity.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,49,146-155.
40. Snodgrass, S. E.(1992).Further effects of role versus gender on interpersonal sensitivity.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,62,154-158.
41. Snodgrass, S. E.,Hecht, M. A.,Ploutz-Snyder, R.(1998).Interpersonal sensitivity: Expressivity or perceptivity?.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,74,238-249.
42. Triandis, H. C.,Gelfand, M. J.(1998).Converging measurement of horizontal and vertical individualism and collectivism.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,74,118-128.
43. Ward, C.,Chang, W. C.(1997)."Cultural fit": A new perspective on personality and sojourner adjustment.International Journal of Intercultural Relations,21,525-533.
44. 任繼愈(1980)。論儒教的形成。中國社會科學，1，61-74。
45. 徐梓(2006)。「天地君親師」源流考。北京師範大學學報，194，99-102。
46. 張老師月刊編輯部編(1987)。中國人的面具性格。台北:張老師文化公司。
47. 梁漱溟(1989)。中國文化要義。台北:正中書局。
48. 許詩淇(2015)。博士論文(博士論文)。臺灣大學心理學研究所。
49. 陳星宏(2011)。碩士論文(碩士論文)。中正大學心理學研究所。
50. 黃光國(1995)。儒家價值觀的現代轉化：理論分析與實徵研究。本土心理學研究，3，276-338。
51. 黃光國(2015)。盡己與天良─破解韋伯的迷陣。台北:心理出版社。
52. 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。
53. 黃光國(2011)。心理學的科學革命方案。台北:心理出版社。
54. 黃囇莉、朱瑞玲(2012)。是亂流？還是潮起、潮落？─尋找台灣的「核心價值」及其變遷。高雄行為科學學刊，3，119-145。
55. 楊國樞(1981)。中國人的性格與行為：形成及蛻變。中華心理學刊，21，39-55。
56. 楊國樞(1997)。本土契合性及其相關問題的論證。本土心理學研究，8，75-120。
57. 楊國樞編、余安邦編(1993)。中國人的心理與行為─理念及方法篇（一九九二）。台北:桂冠圖書公司。
58. 葉啟政編(2002)。現代化到本土化。台北:遠流出版公司。
59. 葉啟政編(1984)。社會、文化和知識份子。台北:東大圖書公司。
60. 潘金嘉(2005)。碩士論文(碩士論文)。東吳大學心理學研究所。
61. 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，79，119-173。
62. 韓格理(1990)。中國社會與經濟。台北:聯經出版公司。
63. 簡晉龍(2013)。博士論文(博士論文)。政治大學心理學研究所。

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. 葉光輝,許詩淇(2019)。華人人際及群際關係主題研究的回顧與前瞻。本土心理學研究，51，33-88。
3. (2023)。悖論領導與員工效能：主管忠誠的中介機制與真誠領導的調節效果。本土心理學研究，60，131-194。
4. (2024)。社會工作業務過失與倫理審議中的權力—對委員會決策的初步思考。社區發展季刊，186，34-48。