期刊文献+

群体卷入模型:理论背景、内容介绍与未来展望 被引量:10

The Group Engagement Model: Background,Introduction and Future Directions
下载PDF
导出
摘要 群体卷入模型借鉴社会认同的思想,在群体价值模型、关系模型的基础上发展而来。该模型认为程序公平通过社会认同影响人的心理和行为,模型还概括了程序公平的四个成分,区分了尊敬感和自豪感,以及资源判断和认同判断对行为卷入的不同影响方式。群体卷入模型的提出为解释群体内行为提供了理论依据,拓展了社会认同理论的视角;另一方面,它也需要考虑个体差异的因素,在更加复杂的群体情境和更加广泛的文化背景中进一步验证和完善。 Drawing on the idea of the Social Identity Theory, the group engagement model (GEM) developed both the group value model and the relational model. GEM purported that procedural justice affects people's mind and behavior through social identity perception. GEM generalized four components of procedural justice, differentiated pride and respect, and told us the different effects on behavioral engagement which brought by resource judgements and identity judgements. Generally, GEM is helpfull to explain the intra-group behavior, it also expands the vision of the Social Identity Theory. However, more researches are needed for further validation and consummation for various person and under different cultures.
出处 《心理科学进展》 CSSCI CSCD 北大核心 2010年第10期1628-1635,共8页 Advances in Psychological Science
基金 国家自然科学基金项目(70902056) 教育部人文社科一般项目(09YJCZH087) 苏州大学"211工程"三期重点项目
关键词 群体卷入模型 社会认同 尊敬感 自豪感 程序公平 GEM social identity respect pride procedural justice
  • 相关文献

参考文献36

  • 1Beeker, T. E., Billings, R. S., Eveleth, D. M., & Gilbert, N. L. (1996). Foci and bases of employee commitment: implications for job performance. Academy of Management Journal, 2, 464 -482.
  • 2Blader, S. L. (2007). What leads organization members to collectivize? Injustice and identification as precursors of union certification. Organization Science, 18, 108-126.
  • 3Bladcr, S. L. (2005). What determines people's faimess judgments7 Identification and outcomes influence procedural" justice evaluations under uncertainty. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 43, 986-994.
  • 4Blader, S. L., Chang, C. C., & Tyler, T. R. (2001). Procedural justice and relation in organizations: comparing cross-nationally the importance of fair group process. The International Journal of Conflict Management,12, 295-311.
  • 5Blader, S. L., & Tyler, T. R. (2009). Testing and extending the group engagement model: linkages between social identity, procedural justice, economic outcomes, and extrarole behavior. Journal of Applied Psychology, 94, 445-464.
  • 6Blader, S. L,, & Tyler, T. R. (2003). Advancing the assessment of procedural justice: what constitutes fairness in work settings? Human Resource Management Review, 13, 107-126.
  • 7Cobb, A. T., Vest, M., & Hills, F. (1997). Who delivers justice?: source perceptions of procedural fairness. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 27, 1021 - 1040.
  • 8Cohen-Charash, Y., & Spcctor, P. E. (2001). The role of justice in organizations: a meta-analysis. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 86, 278-321.
  • 9Colquilt, J. A., Conlon, D. E., Wesson, M. J., Porter, C. O., & Ng, K. (2001). Justice at the millennium: a recta-analytic review of 25 years of organizational justice research. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86, 425-445.
  • 10De Cremer, D. (2002). Respect and cooperation in social dilemmas: the importance of feeling included, Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 28, 1335-1341.

同被引文献90

引证文献10

二级引证文献86

相关作者

内容加载中请稍等...

相关机构

内容加载中请稍等...

相关主题

内容加载中请稍等...

浏览历史

内容加载中请稍等...
;
使用帮助 返回顶部