多维范式下神经组织行为学的哲学基础、理论框架和研究方法

doi:10.3724/SP.J.1042.2019.01093

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

神经组织行为学是指通过探究组织现象背后的生物学运作机理, 从神经生理视角发展并重构组织行为学框架的新兴多领域交叉学科。多维范式下的神经组织行为学包括从还原论到涌现论的哲学基础, 基于社会情境认知理论、跨层次研究和逆向推理的理论框架, 以及神经成像法和ANS测量法并行的研究方法。未来研究应注意神经组织行为学可能给组织理论带来的变革, 以及研究方法的未来走向。

关键词: 神经组织行为学, 范式, 哲学基础, 理论框架, 研究方法

Abstract:

As an emerging interdisciplinary field, organizational neuroscience is revolutionizing and reconstructing the micro-foundation of organizational behavior by exploring the biological mechanism beneath the organizational phenomenon. From multi-level paradigm perspective, we offer a fine-grained analysis of the organizational neuroscience by articulating its philosophical foundation (from Reductionism to Emergency), theoretical foundation, involving Socially Situated Cognition theory (SSC), multilevel research and reverse inference, and research methods (i.e., Neuroimaging Methods and ANS methods). We also suggest new avenues to build new organization and management theory and articulate a future research agenda for the application of neuroscientific methods.

Key words: organizational neuroscience, paradigm, philosophical foundation, theoretical foundation, research method

中图分类号:

刘玉新, 陈晨, 朱楠, 季正. (2019). 多维范式下神经组织行为学的哲学基础、理论框架和研究方法. 心理科学进展 , 27(6), 1093-1110.

LIU Yuxin, CHEN Chen, ZHU Nan, JI Zheng. (2019). A multi-level paradigm analysis of organizational neuroscience: the philosophical foundation, theoretical foundation, and research method. Advances in Psychological Science, 27(6), 1093-1110.

图/表 3

参考文献 142

1	陈文凤, 王争艳, 王岩 . ( 2009). 依恋的神经生理机制. 心理科学进展, 17( 2), 377-383.
2	段锦云, 傅强, 田晓明, 孔瑜 . ( 2011). 情感事件理论的内容、应用及研究展望. 心理科学进展, 19( 4), 599-607.
3	桂起权 . ( 2015). 解读系统生物学: 还原论与整体论的综合. 自然辩证法通讯, 37( 5), 1-7.
4	郭丰波, 张振, 原胜, 敬一鸣, 王益文 . ( 2016). 自恋型人格的理论模型与神经生理机制. 心理科学进展, 24( 8), 1246-1256.
5	韩玉泽, 唐力, 孟丹, 侯丽然 . ( 1994). 脑瘫患儿的神经组织学电镜观察. 佳木斯医学院学报, 17( 3), 20-22.
6	胡卫平, 王博韬, 段海军, 程丽芳, 周寰, 李晶晶 . ( 2015). 情绪影响创造性认知过程的神经机制. 心理科学进展, 23( 11), 1869-1878.
7	黄雅梅, 周仁来, 吴梦莹 . ( 2015). 神经质人格的神经生理基础. 心理科学进展, 23( 4), 602-613.
8	雷铭 . ( 2017). 神经领导学研究进展与应用趋向探讨. 领导科学, ( 23), 16-19.
9	李浩, 马庆国, 董欣 . ( 2016). 神经组织行为学: 概念解析、理论发展和研究展望. 管理世界, ( 8), 164-173.
10	刘劲杨 . ( 2014). 论整体论与还原论之争. 中国人民大学学报, 28( 3), 63-71.
11	刘童九, 唐志文, 刘耀中 . ( 2013). 组织行为研究的神经科学进展. 商业时代, ( 5), 94-95.
12	刘映杰 . ( 2012). 基于神经科学研究范式的组织行为学研究趋向. 九江学院学报(自然科学版), 27( 4), 110-113.
13	娄熠雪, 蔡阿燕, 杨洁敏, 袁加锦 . ( 2014). 内-外倾人格对情绪调节的影响及神经机制. 心理科学进展, 22( 12), 1855-1866.
14	马庆国, 王小毅 . ( 2006). 认知神经科学、神经经济学与神经管理学. 管理世界, 10, 139-149.
15	孟亮 . ( 2016). 基于自我决定理论的任务设计与个体的内在动机: 认知神经科学视角的实证研究(博士学位论文). 浙江大学, 杭州.
16	潘爱玲, 胥遥山, 李永娟 . ( 2017). 自我损耗对工作场所安全的影响及缓解途径. 心理科学进展, 25( 8), 1261-1273.
17	齐星亮 . ( 2016). 工作应激、恢复需要和慢性疲劳与头发皮质醇的关系(博士毕业论文). 东南大学, 南京.
18	秦莉, 崔守信, 刘思伟, 成少利, 杨少毅 . ( 2005). 实验性单纯疱疹病毒性角膜炎角膜神经损伤的观察. 西安交通大学学报(医学版), 26( 3), 280-283.
19	王轶楠 . ( 2016). 自尊的神经生理基础. 心理科学进展, 24( 9), 1422-1426.
20	谢亚兰 . ( 2015). 人际信任的神经生理机制. 惠州学院学报, 35( 1), 88-93.
21	谢晔, 霍国庆 . ( 2012). 神经领导学研究进展述评. 外国经济与管理, 34( 11), 27-34+60.
22	杨妍 . ( 2013). 矿工疲劳与不安全行为的实验研究——基于神经管理学的视角(硕士毕业论文). 西安科技大学.
23	禹继华 . ( 2015). 社会拒绝的神经生理反应及其理论解释. 心理技术与应用, ( 04), 15-20.
24	于萍, 渠春环, 李新旺, 郭春彦 . ( 2008). 脑内乙酰胆碱与认知活动的关系. 心理科学进展, 16( 3), 453-457.
25	张蕾 . ( 2017). 基于神经领导学的领导力探究、评价与开发. 领导科学, ( 35), 32-34.
26	张红川, 聂梦捷, 孙铃, 侯佳伟, 于泳红, 马敏 . ( 2016). 谦卑型领导的自我构念及其认知神经机制. 中国人力资源开发, ( 13), 15-21.
27	张志学, 鞠冬, 马力 . ( 2014). 组织行为学研究的现状: 意义与建议. 心理学报, 46( 2), 265-284.
28	赵光武 . ( 2002). 还原论与整体论相结合探索复杂性. 北京大学学报(哲学社会科学版), 39( 6), 14-19.
29	中国人民大学课题组. ( 2017). 跨层次实证研究中的理论基础——以三份国际期刊的最新论文为例. 经济管理, ( 5), 193-208.
30	Advanced Brain Monitoring. ( 2014). Retrieved from https:// www.advancedbrainmonitoring.com/introducing-team-neurodynamics/
31	Akinola, M. ( 2010). Measuring the pulse of an organization: Integrating physiological measures into the organizational scholar's toolbox. Research in Organizational Behavior, 30( 2010), 203-223. doi: 10.1016/j.riob.2010.09.003 URL
32	Akinola, M., & Mendes, W. B . ( 2012). Stress-induced cortisol facilitates threat-related decision making among police officers. Behavioral Neuroscience, 126( 1), 167-174. doi: 10.1037/a0026657 URL
33	Ashkanasy, N. M . ( 2013). Neuroscience and leadership: Take care not to throw the baby out with the bathwater. Journal of Management Inquiry, 22( 3), 311-313. doi: 10.1177/1056492613478519 URL
34	Ashkanasy N. M., Becker W. J., & Waldman D. A . ( 2014). Neuroscience and organizational behavior: Avoiding both neuro-euphoria and neuro-phobia. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 35( 7), 909-919. doi: 10.1002/job.v35.7 URL
35	Bagozzi, R. P., & Lee, N . ( 2019). Philosophical foundations of neuroscience in organizational research: Functional and nonfunctional approaches. Organizational Research Methods, 22( 1), 299-331.
36	Bagozzi R. P., Verbeke W. J., Dietvorst R. C., Belschak F. D., van den Berg, W. E., & Rietdijk W. J . ( 2013). Theory of mind and empathic explanations of Machiavellianism: A neuroscience perspective. Journal of Management, 39( 7), 1760-1798.
37	Balthazard P. A., & Thatcher, R. W .( 2015). Neuroimaging modalities and brain technologies in the context of organizational neuroscience. In D. A. Waldman & P. A. Balthazard (Eds. ), Organizational Neuroscience (Monographs in Leadership and Management) (Vol.7, pp. 83-113). Bingley, West Yorkshire, England: Emerald Group Publishing Limited.
38	Balthazard P. A., Waldman D. A., Thatcher R. W., & Hannah S. T . ( 2012). Differentiating transformational and non-transformational leaders on the basis of neurological imaging. The Leadership Quarterly, 23( 2), 244-258. doi: 10.1016/j.leaqua.2011.08.002 URL
39	Bavelier D., Levi D. M., Li R. W., Dan Y., & Hensch T. K . ( 2010). Removing brakes on adult brain plasticity: From molecular to behavioral interventions. The Journal of Neuroscience, 30( 45), 14964-14971. doi: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.4812-10.2010 URL
40	Becker, W. J., & Cropanzano, R . ( 2010). Organizational neuroscience: The promise and prospects of an emerging discipline. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 31( 7), 1055-1059.
41	Becker W. J., Cropanzano R., & Sanfey A. G . ( 2011). Organizational neuroscience: Taking organizational theory inside the neural black box. Journal of Management, 37( 4), 933-961.
42	Becker, W. J., & Menges, J. I . ( 2013). Biological implicit measures in HRM and OB: A question of how not if. Human Resource Management Review, 23( 3), 219-228. doi: 10.1016/j.hrmr.2012.12.003 URL
43	Bergmann, M., & Kliesch, S . ( 2010). Testicular biopsy and histology. In E. Nieschlag, H. M. Behre, & S. Nieschlag (Eds.), Andrology ( pp. 155-167). Heidelberg, Berlin, Germany: Springer.
44	Berka C., Behneman A., Kintz N., Johnson R., & Raphael G . ( 2010). Accelerating training using interactive neuro- educational technologies: Applications to archery, golf, and rifle marksmanship. International Journal of Sports and Society, 1( 4), 87-104.
45	Beugré, C. D . ( 2010). Resistance to socialization into organizational corruption: A model of deontic justice. Journal of Business and Psychology, 25( 3), 533-541. doi: 10.1007/s10869-010-9176-3 URL
46	Boyatzis R. E., Passarelli A. M., Koenig K., Lowe M., Mathew B., Stoller J. K., & Phillips M . ( 2012). Examination of the neural substrates activated in memories of experiences with resonant and dissonant leaders. The Leadership Quarterly, 23( 2), 259-272. doi: 10.1016/j.leaqua.2011.08.003 URL
47	Braeutigam, S. ( 2014). Organizational neuroscience: A new frontier for magnetoencephalography? In S. Supek & C. Aine (Eds), Magnetoencephalography( pp. 743-748). Heidelberg, Berlin, Germany: Springer.
48	Bressler, S. L., & Menon, V . ( 2010). Large-scale brain networks in cognition: Emerging methods and principles. Trends in Cognitive Science, 14( 6), 277-290. doi: 10.1016/j.tics.2010.04.004 URL
49	Butler M. J., O'Broin H. L., Lee N., & Senior C . ( 2016). How organizational cognitive neuroscience can deepen understanding of managerial decision-making: A review of the recent literature and future directions. International Journal of Management Review, 18( 4), 542-559. doi: 10.1111/ijmr.2016.18.issue-4 URL
50	Button K. S., Ioannidis J. P., Mokrysz C., Nosek B. A., Flint J., Robinson E. S., & Munafò M. R . ( 2013). Power failure: Why small sample size undermines the reliability of neuroscience. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 14( 5), 365-376. doi: 10.1038/nrn3475
51	Cacioppo J. T., Berntson G. G., & Nusbaum H. C . ( 2008). Neuroimaging as a new tool in the toolbox of psychological science. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 17( 2), 62-67. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-8721.2008.00550.x URL
52	Calvin, W. H ., ( 1994). The emergence of intelligence. Scientific American, 271( 4), 101-107.
53	Cavagna A., Cimarelli A., Giardina I., Parisi G., Santagati R., Stefanini F., & Viale M . ( 2010). Scale-free correlations in starling flocks. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 107( 26), 11865-11870. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1005766107 URL
54	Clark, V. P., & Parasuraman, R . ( 2014). Neuroenhancement: Enhancing brain and mind in health and in disease . NeuroImage, 85( 3), 889-894. doi: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2013.08.071 URL
55	Clayton, P. ( 2004). Mind and emergence: From quantum to consciousness. New York: Oxford.
56	Cooke R., Peel E., Shaw R. L., & Senior C . ( 2007). The neuroimaging research process from the participants' perspective. International Journal of Psychophysiology, 63( 2), 152-158. doi: 10.1016/j.ijpsycho.2006.03.014 URL
57	Coricelli G., Critchley H. D., Joffily M., O'Doherty J. P., Sirigu A., & Dolan R. J . ( 2005). Regret and its avoidance: A neuroimaging study of choice behavior. Nature Neuroscience, 8( 9), 1255-1262. doi: 10.1038/nn1514
58	Couzin, I. D . ( 2007). Collective minds. Nature, 445( 7129), 715. doi: 10.1038/445715a
59	ouzin, I. D . ( 2009). Collective cognition in animal groups. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 13( 1), 36-43. doi: 10.1016/j.tics.2008.10.002 URL
60	Cropanzano R. S., Massaro S., & Becker W. J . ( 2017). Deontic justice and organizational neuroscience. Journal of Business Ethics, 144( 4), 733-754.
61	Cropley M., Plans D., Morelli D., Sütterlin S., Inceoglu I., Thomas G., & Chu C . ( 2017). The association between work-related rumination and heart rate variability: A field study. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 11( 27), 1-6.
62	Cummings, L. ( 1998). The scientific reductionism of relevance theory: The lesson from logical positivism. Journal of Pragmatics, 29( 1), 1-12. doi: 10.1016/S0378-2166(97)00049-0 URL
63	do Vale Borges, E. F . ( 2014). Paradigm shift in language teaching and language teacher education. Especialist, 35( 1), 42-59.
64	Ganster D. C., Crain T. L., Brossoit R. M . ( 2018). Physiological measurement in the organizational sciences: A review and recommendations for future use. Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior, 5, 267-293. doi: 10.1146/annurev-orgpsych-032117-104613 URL
65	Gazzaniga M. S., Ivry R. B., Mangun G. R . ( 2014). Cognitive neuroscience: The biology of the mind (4th ed.). New York: >Norton.
66	Hassan, N. R . ( 2013, August). Are we using the right "Paradigms?" Comparing metaphysical, sociological and conceptual paradigms. In Proceedings of the Nineteenth Americas Conference on Information Systems ( pp. 1-7), Chicago, Illinois.
67	Hannah S. T., Balthazard P. A., Waldman D. A., Jennings P. L., & Thatcher R. W . ( 2013). The psychological and neurological bases of leader self-complexity and effects on adaptive decision-making. Journal of Applied Psychology, 98( 3), 393-411. doi: 10.1037/a0032257 URL
68	Healey, M. P., & Hodgkinson, G. P . ( 2014). Rethinking the philosophical and theoretical foundations of organizational neuroscience: A critical realist alternative. Human Relations, 67( 7), 765-792. doi: 10.1177/0018726714530014 URL
69	Healey M. P., & Hodgkinson, G. P .( 2015). Toward a theoretical framework for organizational neuroscience. In D. A. Waldman & P. A. Balthazard (Eds. ), Organizational Neuroscience (Monographs in Leadership and Management) (Vol.7, pp. 83-113). Bingley, West Yorkshire, England: Emerald Group Publishing Limited.
70	Healey M. P., Hodgkinson G. P., & Massaro S . ( 2017, August). Emotion regulation in organizations: Integrating neural and social processes. Paper presented at the Academy of Management Proceedings (p. 16741), Atlanta, Georgia, USA.
71	Healey M. P., Hodgkinson G. P., & Massaro, S .( 2018). Can Brains Manage? The brain, emotion, and cognition in Organizations. In L. Petitta, C. E. J. Härtel, N. M. Ashkanasy, & W. J. Zerbe (Eds.), Individual, Relational, and Contextual Dynamics of Emotions (Research on Emotion in Organizations) (Vol. 14, pp. 27-58). Bingley, West Yorkshire, England: Emerald Group Publishing Limited.
72	Heinrichs M., Baumgartner T., Kirshbaum C., & Ehlert U . ( 2003). Social support and oxytocin interact to suppress cortisol and subjective responses to psychological stress. Biological Psychiatry, 54( 12), 1389-1398. doi: 10.1016/S0006-3223(03)00465-7 URL
73	Hodgkinson, G. P . ( 2013). Organizational identity and organizational identification: A critical realist design science perspective. Group & Organization Management, 38( 1), 145-157.
74	Hodgkinson, G. P., & Starkey, K . ( 2012). Extending the foundations and reach of design science: Further reflections on the role of critical realism. British Journal of Management, 23( 4), 605-610. doi: 10.1111/bjom.2012.23.issue-4 URL
75	Holland, J. H . ( 1998). Emergence: From chaos to order. California: Addison-Wesley.
76	Hung, E. H. C . ( 2017). Beyond Kuhn: Scientific explanation, theory structure, incommensurability and physical necessity. London: Routledge.
77	Huster R. J., Debener S., Eichele T., & Herrmann C. S . ( 2012). Methods for simultaneous EEG-fMRI: An introductory review. Journal of Neuroscience, 32( 18), 6053-6060. doi: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.0447-12.2012 URL
78	Jack A. I., Rochford K. C., Friedman J. P., Passarelli A. M., & Boyatzis R. E . ( 2019). Pitfalls in organizational neuroscience: A critical review and suggestions for future research, Organizational Research Methods, 22( 1), 421-458.
79	Johansson G., Johnson J. V., & Hall E. M . ( 1991). Smoking and sedentary behavior as related to work organization. Social Science and Medicine, 32( 7), 837-846. doi: 10.1016/0277-9536(91)90310-9 URL
80	Johns, G. ( 2006). The essential impact of context on organizational behavior. Academy of Management Review, 31( 2), 386-408. doi: 10.5465/amr.2006.20208687 URL
81	Johns, G. ( 2017). Reflections on the 2016 decade award: Incorporating context in organizational research. Academy of Management Review, 42( 4), 577-595. doi: 10.5465/amr.2017.0044 URL
82	Johns, G. ( 2018). Advances in the treatment of context in organizational research. Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior, 5( 1), 21-46. doi: 10.1146/annurev-orgpsych-032117-104406 URL
83	Jones, O., & Gatrell, C . ( 2014). The future of writing and reviewing for IJMR. International Journal of Management Reviews, 16( 3), 249-264. doi: 10.1111/ijmr.2014.16.issue-3 URL
84	Kahneman, D. ( 2003). Maps of bounded rationality: Psychology for behavioral economics. The American Economic Review, 93( 5), 1449-1475. doi: 10.1257/000282803322655392 URL
85	Kandasamy N., Hardy B., Page L., Schaffner M., Graggaber J., Powlson A. S., .. Coates J . ( 2014). Cortisol shifts financial risk preferences. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 111( 9), 3608-3613. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1317908111 URL
86	Klinkenberg I., Sambeth A., & Blokland A . ( 2011). Acetylcholine and attention. Behavioural Brain Research, 221( 2), 430-442. doi: 10.1016/j.bbr.2010.11.033 URL
87	Kouchaki, M., & Wareham, J . ( 2015). Excluded and behaving unethically: Social exclusion, physiological responses, and unethical behavior. Journal of Applied Psychology, 100( 2), 547-556. doi: 10.1037/a0038034 URL
88	Kozlowski, S. W. J., & Klein, K. J . ( 2000). A multilevel approach to theory and research in organizations: Contextual, temporal, and emergent processes. In K. J. Klein & S. W. J. Kozlowski (Eds.), Multilevel theory, research, and methods in organizations: Foundations, extensions, and new directions( pp. 3-90). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
89	Krause L., Enticott P. G., Zangen A., & Fitzgerald P. B . ( 2012). The role of medial prefrontal cortex in theory of mind: A deep rTMS study. Behavioural Brain Research, 228( 1), 87-90. doi: 10.1016/j.bbr.2011.11.037 URL
90	Kuhn T. S. ( 1970). The structure of scientific revolutions (2nd ed.), Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
91	Laureiro-Martínez D., Brusoni S., Canessa N., & Zollo M . ( 2015). Understanding the exploration-exploitation dilemma: An fMRI study of attention control and decision-making performance. Strategic Management Journal, 36( 3), 319-338. doi: 10.1002/smj.2221 URL
92	Light K. C., Smith T. E., Johns J. M., Brownley K. A., Hofheimer J. A., & Amico J. A . ( 2000). Oxytocin responsivity in mothers of infants: A preliminary study of relationships with blood pressure during laboratory stress and normal ambulatory activity. Health Psychology, 19( 6), 560-567. doi: 10.1037/0278-6133.19.6.560 URL
93	Light K. C., Grewen K. M., & Amico J. A . ( 2005). More frequent partner hugs and higher oxytocin levels are linked to lower blood pressure and heart rate in premenopausal women. Biological Psychiatry, 69( 1), 5-21. doi: 10.1016/j.biopsycho.2004.11.002 URL
94	Lindebaum, D. ( 2013). Pathologizing the healthy but ineffective: Some ethical reflections on using neuroscience in leadership research. Journal of Management Inquiry, 22( 3), 295-305. doi: 10.1177/1056492612462766 URL
95	Lindebaum, D. ( 2016). Critical essay: Building new management theories on sound data? The case of neuroscience. Human Relations, 69( 3), 537-550. doi: 10.1177/0018726715599831 URL
96	Lindebaum, D., & Zundel, M . ( 2013). Not quite a revolution: Scrutinizing organizational neuroscience in leadership studies. Human Relations, 66( 6), 857-877. doi: 10.1177/0018726713482151 URL
97	Lundberg, U. ( 2005). Stress hormones in health and illness: The roles of work and gender. Psychoneuroendocrinology, 30( 10), 1017-1021. doi: 10.1016/j.psyneuen.2005.03.014 URL
98	Massaro S., & Becker W. J. .( 2015). Organizational justice through the window of neuroscience. In D. A. Waldman & P. A. Balthazard (Eds. ), Organizational Neuroscience (Monographs in Leadership and Management) (Vol. 7, pp. 257-276). Bingley, West Yorkshire, England: Emerald Group Publishing Limited.
99	Massaro, S., & Pecchia, L . ( 2019). Heart rate variability (HRV) analysis: A methodology for organizational neuroscience. Organizational Research Methods, 22( 1), 354-393. doi: 10.1177/1094428116681072 URL
100	Masterman, M. ( 1970). The nature of a paradigm. In I. Latakos & A. Musgrave (Eds.), Criticism and the Growth of Knowledge (pp. 59-90). Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
101	Mathieu, J. E., & Chen, G . ( 2011). The etiology of the multilevel paradigm in management research. Journal of Management, 37( 2), 610-641.
102	McColl-Kennedy J. R., Danaher T. S., Gallan A. S., Orsingher C., Lervik-Olsen L., & Verma R . ( 2017). How do you feel today? Managing patient emotions during health care experiences to enhance well-being. Journal of Business Research, 79, 247-259. doi: 10.1016/j.jbusres.2017.03.022 URL
103	Melamed S., Ugarten U., Shirom A., Kahana L., Lerman Y., & Froom P . ( 1999). Chronic burnout, somatic arousal and elevated salivary cortisol levels. Journal of Psychosomatic Research, 46( 6), 591-598. doi: 10.1016/S0022-3999(99)00007-0 URL
104	Miller, E. K . ( 2000). The prefrontal cortex and cognitive control. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 1( 1), 59-65. doi: 10.1038/35036228
105	Minas R. K., Potter R. F., Dennis A. R., Bartelt V., & Bae S. Y . ( 2014). Putting on the thinking cap: Using NeuroIS to understand information processing biases in virtual teams. Journal of Management Information Systems, 30( 4), 49-82. doi: 10.2753/MIS0742-1222300403 URL
106	Miniussi, C., & Thut, G . ( 2010). Combining TMS and EEG offers new prospects in cognitive neuroscience. Brain Topography, 22( 4), 249. doi: 10.1007/s10548-009-0083-8 URL
107	Molenberghs P., Ogilvie C., Louis W. R., Decety J., Bagnall J., & Bain P. G . ( 2015). The neural correlates of justified and unjustified killing: An fMRI study. Social Cognitive and Affective Neuroscience, 10( 10), 1397-1404 doi: 10.1093/scan/nsv027 URL
108	Molenberghs P., Prochilo G., Steffens N. K., Zacher H., & Haslam S. A . ( 2017). The neuroscience of inspirational leadership: The importance of collective-oriented language and shared group membership. Journal of Management, 43( 7), 2168-2194.
109	Monderer R. S., Harrison D. M., & Haut S. R . ( 2002). Neurofeedback and epilepsy. Epilepsy & Behavior, 3( 3), 214-218.
110	Morgan, D. L . ( 2007). Paradigms lost and pragmatism regained: Methodological implications of combining qualitative and quantitative methods. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 1( 1), 48-76. doi: 10.1177/2345678906292462 URL
111	Neggers S. F. W., Langerak T. R., Schutter D. J. L. G., Mandl R. C. W., Ramsey N. F., Lemmens P. J. J., & Postma A . ( 2004). A stereotactic method for image-guided transcranial magnetic stimulation validated with fMRI and motor-evoked potentials. NeuroImage, 21( 4), 1805-1817. doi: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2003.12.006 URL
112	Park, H. -J., & Friston, K . ( 2013). Structural and functional brain networks: From connections to cognition. Science, 342 ( 6158), 1238411. doi: 10.1126/science.1238411 URL
113	Peterson S. J., Reina C. S., Waldman D. A., & Becker, W. J .( 2015). Using physiological methods to study emotions in organizations. In C. E. J. Härtel, W. J. Zerbe, & N. M. Ashkanasy (Eds.), New Ways of Studying Emotions in Organizations (Research on Emotion in Organizations) (Vol. 11, pp. 1-27). Bingley: Emerald Group Publishing Limited.
114	Poldrack, R. A . ( 2006). Can cognitive processes be inferred from neuroimaging data? Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 10( 2), 59-63. doi: 10.1016/j.tics.2005.12.004 URL
115	Putnam, H. ( 1973). Reductionism and the nature of psychology. Cognition, 2( 1), 131-146. doi: 10.1016/0010-0277(72)90033-9 URL
116	Quartz, S. R., & Sejnowski, T. J . ( 1997). The neural basis of cognitive development: A constructivist manifesto. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 20, 537-596 doi: 10.1017/S0140525X97001581 URL
117	Reardon, S. ( 2016). External brain stimulation goes deep. Retrieved November 22, 2016, from https://www.nature. com/news/external-brain-stimulation-goes-deep-1.21020?cookies=accepted
118	Rineer J. R., Truxillo D. M., Bodner T. E., Hammer L. B., & Kraner M. A . ( 2017). The moderating effect of perceived organizational support on the relationships between organizational justice and objective measures of cardiovascular health. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 26( 3), 399-410. doi: 10.1080/1359432X.2016.1277207 URL
119	Ritzer, G. ( 1975). Sociology: A multiple paradigm science. The American Sociologist, 10( 3), 156-167.
120	Rock, D., & Schwartz, J . ( 2007). The neuroscience of leadership. Reclaiming Children and Youth, 16( 3), 10-17.
121	Semin, G. R., & Smith, E. R . ( 2013). Socially situated cognition in perspective. Social Cognition, 31( 2), 125-146. doi: 10.1521/soco.2013.31.2.125 URL
122	Senior C., Lee N., & Butler M . ( 2011). Perspective- Organizational cognitive neuroscience. Organization Science, 22( 3), 804-815. doi: 10.1287/orsc.1100.0532 URL
123	Siebner. H. R., Hartwigsen G., Kassuba T. & Rothwell J. C . ( 2009). How does transcranial magnetic stimulation modify neuronal activity in the brain? Implications for studies of cognition. Cortex, 45( 9), 1035-1042. doi: 10.1016/j.cortex.2009.02.007 URL
124	Shepherd, C., & Challenger, R . ( 2013). Revisiting paradigm (s) in management research: A rhetorical analysis of the paradigm wars. International Journal of Management Reviews, 15( 2), 225-244. doi: 10.1111/ijmr.2013.15.issue-2 URL
125	Smith, E. R., & Semin, G. R . ( 2004). Socially situated cognition: Cognition in its social context. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 36, 53-117.
126	Smith, E. R., & Semin, G. R . ( 2007). Situated social cognition. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 16( 3), 132-135. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-8721.2007.00490.x URL
127	Sonnentag, S., & Zijlstra, F. R. H . ( 2006). Job characteristics and off-job activities as predictors of need for recovery, well-being, and fatigue. Journal of Applied Psychology, 91 ( 2), 330-350. doi: 10.1037/0021-9010.91.2.330 URL
128	Sormaz H. W., & Tulgan, B .( 2003). Performance under pressure: Managing stress in the workplace. Canada: HRD Press Inc.
129	Stikic M., Berka C., & Korszen, S .( 2015). Neuroenhancement in tasks, roles, and occupations. In D. A. Waldman & P. A. Balthazard (Eds.), Organizational Neuroscience (Monographs in Leadership and Management) (Vol. 7, pp. 169-186). Bingley: Emerald Group Publishing Limited.
130	Tallis, R. ( 2011). Aping mankind: Neuromania, Darwinitis and the misrepresentation of humanity. Durham, England: Acumen Publishing Ltd.
131	Taylor, S. E . ( 2006). Tend and befriend: Biobehavioral bases of affiliation under stress . Current Directions in Psychological Science, 15( 6), 273-277. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-8721.2006.00451.x URL
132	Vahle-Hinz T., Bamberg E., Dettmers J., Friedrich N., & Keller M . ( 2014). Effects of work stress on work-related rumination, restful sleep, and nocturnal heart rate variability experienced on workdays and weekends. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 19( 2), 217-230. doi: 10.1037/a0036009 URL
133	Van Wijhe, C. I., Schaufeli, W. B., Peeters, M. C. W .( 2010). Understanding and treating workaholism: Setting the stage for successful interventions. In R. J. Burke & C. L. Cooper (Eds.), Risky Business (pp. 107-134). Farnham, UK: Gower Publishing.
134	Waldman D. A., Wang D., Hannah S. T., Owens B. P., & Balthazard P. A . ( 2018). Psychological and neurological predictors of abusive supervision. Personnel Psychology, 71( 3), 399-421. doi: 10.1111/peps.2018.71.issue-3 URL
135	Waldman D. A., Wang D., Stikic M., Berka C., & Korszen, S .( 2015). Neuroscience and team processes. In D. A. Waldman & P. A. Balthazard (Eds. ), Organizational Neuroscience (Monographs in Leadership and Management) (Vol. 7, pp. 277-294). Bingley, West Yorkshire, England: Emerald Group Publishing Limited.
136	Waldman D. A., Ward M., & Becker W. J . ( 2017). Neuroscience in organizational behavior. Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior, 4, 425-444. doi: 10.1146/annurev-orgpsych-032516-113316 URL
137	Waldman D., Wang D., Hannah S. T., & Balthazard P. A . ( 2017). A neurological and ideological perspective of ethical leadership. Academy of Management Journal, 60( 4), 1285-1306.
138	Ward M., Volk S., & Becker, W. J .( 2015). An overview of organizational neuroscience. In D. A. Waldman & P. A. Balthazard (Eds. ), Organizational Neuroscience (Monographs in Leadership and Management) (Vol. 7, pp. 17-50). Bingley: Emerald Group Publishing Limited.
139	Wessler I., Kirkpatrick C. J., & Racké K . ( 1998). Non-neuronal acetylcholine, a locally acting molecule, widely distributed in biological systems: Expression and function in humans. Pharmacology & Therapeutics, 77( 1), 59-79.
140	White, E. ( 1992). The end of the empty organism: Neurobiology and the sciences of human action. Westport, Ireland: Praeger.
141	Wickens A. P. ( 2014). A history of the brain: From stone age surgery to modern neuroscience. London, England: Psychology Press.
142	Zyphur M. J., Narayanan J., Koh G., & Koh D . ( 2009). Testosterone-status mismatch lowers collective efficacy in groups: Evidence from a slope-as-predictor multilevel structural equation model. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 110( 2), 70-79. doi: 10.1016/j.obhdp.2009.05.004 URL

层次类别	形而上学范式哲学层	社会学范式理论层	人工范式方法和技术层
核心内涵	?又称“元范式”; ?指由一个学科的本体论和认识论所决定的最抽象的世界观; ?一系列宏观的、整体的关于某学科的信仰、思想、推断、标准、视角等的总称	?位于“抽象-具体”连续体的中间; ?包括学科内不同流派间产生的被公认的科学成就, 被广泛接受的科学规范, 以及虽未被广泛接受, 但基于学科公认的规则而取得的科学成就; ?学科内各种规范、规则的总称	?又称“构造范式”, 是范式体系中最具体和最基础的层次; ?即“范例”(Exemplar)。反应研究的具体细节, 包括具体的研究工具、研究过程、实际的操作方式和研究指导文本或指南等
学科贡献	?ON的形而上学范式经历了从还原论到涌现论的发展; ?对“神经-个体-群体-组织”四层面间关系的认知, 从直线决定和层层向下的还原关系(还原论), 发展为层级结构依次堆叠、层级间彼此依存却又相互独立的间接关系(涌现论); ?涌现论认为, 低层面元素的简单相互作用可以产生复杂的高层面系统	?ON的社会学范式包括理论基础、研究内容和研究准则等内容。 ?理论基础上, 经历了从无到有、从模糊不清到“社会情境认知理论”主导的发展过程; ?研究内容上, 从纯粹个体层面的研究拓展到可进行群体层面的研究; ?研究准则上, 一直秉承逆向推理的指导思想, 在数据获取上经历了从只重视“神经层面数据”, 到神经、个体等“多层面数据”并重的转变	?ON的人工范式经历了从只提倡采用神经成像法, 到神经成像类方法和皮肤电活动等生理指标并重, 再到上述认知神经科学研究工具和问卷法、观察法等组织行为学传统研究方法并存的发展过程。 ?对认知神经科学研究工具也经历了从全盘接受到有选择地筛选使用的过程

层次类别	形而上学范式哲学层	社会学范式理论层	人工范式方法和技术层
核心内涵	?又称“元范式”; ?指由一个学科的本体论和认识论所决定的最抽象的世界观; ?一系列宏观的、整体的关于某学科的信仰、思想、推断、标准、视角等的总称	?位于“抽象-具体”连续体的中间; ?包括学科内不同流派间产生的被公认的科学成就, 被广泛接受的科学规范, 以及虽未被广泛接受, 但基于学科公认的规则而取得的科学成就; ?学科内各种规范、规则的总称	?又称“构造范式”, 是范式体系中最具体和最基础的层次; ?即“范例”(Exemplar)。反应研究的具体细节, 包括具体的研究工具、研究过程、实际的操作方式和研究指导文本或指南等
学科贡献	?ON的形而上学范式经历了从还原论到涌现论的发展; ?对“神经-个体-群体-组织”四层面间关系的认知, 从直线决定和层层向下的还原关系(还原论), 发展为层级结构依次堆叠、层级间彼此依存却又相互独立的间接关系(涌现论); ?涌现论认为, 低层面元素的简单相互作用可以产生复杂的高层面系统	?ON的社会学范式包括理论基础、研究内容和研究准则等内容。 ?理论基础上, 经历了从无到有、从模糊不清到“社会情境认知理论”主导的发展过程; ?研究内容上, 从纯粹个体层面的研究拓展到可进行群体层面的研究; ?研究准则上, 一直秉承逆向推理的指导思想, 在数据获取上经历了从只重视“神经层面数据”, 到神经、个体等“多层面数据”并重的转变	?ON的人工范式经历了从只提倡采用神经成像法, 到神经成像类方法和皮肤电活动等生理指标并重, 再到上述认知神经科学研究工具和问卷法、观察法等组织行为学传统研究方法并存的发展过程。 ?对认知神经科学研究工具也经历了从全盘接受到有选择地筛选使用的过程

名称	方法描述	优点	局限	适用范围
fMRI	利用大脑活动会导致局部血流量增加的原理, 通过标记血流的改变来间接确定任务中激活的脑区	空间精确度高; 较易获取激活脑区的图像结果, 数据分析难度较低	无法准确记录秒以下更短时间的脑活动; 价格高昂, 普及性差; 被试被置于幽闭空间, 实验难度高, 重复次数受限	认知功能脑区的确定; 评估个体差异的神经基础; 评估实验干预前与干预后脑区功能的变动; 评估任务进行和停顿期间脑区功能的连通性
EEG ERP	EEG测量大脑电活动, 研究由特定事件(刺激或运动)所诱发的变化; ERP是EEG的升级版, 通过提取嵌埋在EEG中的信号, 进行叠加和平均等运算	时间精确度高; 普通环境下实验, 实验可多次重复; 可进行被试间互动式测量价格适中, 便于普及; 设备体积小, 便于携带	图像处理较困难, 不容易捕捉到有显著差异的波形; 很难确定特定事件的脑区发生源; 实验时参与者活动受限	尤其适用于需要被试间面对面互动的研究; 研究认知的时间进程问题; 检验与高频神经元震荡相关的假设
MEG	提供神经活动的磁信号记录	由于磁信号比电信号更稳定, 因此MEG在空间分辨率上比EEG有优势; 计算结果比EEG更可靠	价格比EEG高; 设备不可携带; 只能检测与颅骨表面平行的电流方向, 通常位于脑沟中	与EEG相类似
TMS	通过磁脉冲无创地在大脑产生局部刺激, 暂时改变局部脑生理特性	便于携带; 可引起虚拟损伤, 虚拟的刺激部位可精确定位至fMRI激活的区域	实验时间短, 噪声大; 只用于单个区域, 无法捕捉整个大脑的干预效果; 只能检测大脑表层皮质区域	验证孤立脑区与认知、行为间的关联

名称	方法描述	优点	局限	适用范围
fMRI	利用大脑活动会导致局部血流量增加的原理, 通过标记血流的改变来间接确定任务中激活的脑区	空间精确度高; 较易获取激活脑区的图像结果, 数据分析难度较低	无法准确记录秒以下更短时间的脑活动; 价格高昂, 普及性差; 被试被置于幽闭空间, 实验难度高, 重复次数受限	认知功能脑区的确定; 评估个体差异的神经基础; 评估实验干预前与干预后脑区功能的变动; 评估任务进行和停顿期间脑区功能的连通性
EEG ERP	EEG测量大脑电活动, 研究由特定事件(刺激或运动)所诱发的变化; ERP是EEG的升级版, 通过提取嵌埋在EEG中的信号, 进行叠加和平均等运算	时间精确度高; 普通环境下实验, 实验可多次重复; 可进行被试间互动式测量价格适中, 便于普及; 设备体积小, 便于携带	图像处理较困难, 不容易捕捉到有显著差异的波形; 很难确定特定事件的脑区发生源; 实验时参与者活动受限	尤其适用于需要被试间面对面互动的研究; 研究认知的时间进程问题; 检验与高频神经元震荡相关的假设
MEG	提供神经活动的磁信号记录	由于磁信号比电信号更稳定, 因此MEG在空间分辨率上比EEG有优势; 计算结果比EEG更可靠	价格比EEG高; 设备不可携带; 只能检测与颅骨表面平行的电流方向, 通常位于脑沟中	与EEG相类似
TMS	通过磁脉冲无创地在大脑产生局部刺激, 暂时改变局部脑生理特性	便于携带; 可引起虚拟损伤, 虚拟的刺激部位可精确定位至fMRI激活的区域	实验时间短, 噪声大; 只用于单个区域, 无法捕捉整个大脑的干预效果; 只能检测大脑表层皮质区域	验证孤立脑区与认知、行为间的关联

名称	分类	方法描述	适用范围
皮质醇(Cortisol) 睾酮(Testosterone) 催产素(Oxytocin) 肾上腺素(Adrenaline) 乙酰胆碱(Acetylcholine, ACH)	内分泌活动测量 (Neuroendocrine activity, NA)	检测由主客观经历所引发的个体的唾液、血液、尿液中, 激素或神经递质含量的变化	压力应激反应和负向情绪; 竞争性情境中的支配性、防御性行为研究; 人际关系质量、信任研究; 工作负荷、工作成瘾研究; 学习、记忆、注意力、探究行为研究
心率(Heart Beat) 血压(Blood Pressure) 心率变异性(HRV) 其他心脏活动	心血管活动测量 (Cardiovascular activity, CA)	测量由主客观经历所引发的个体心血管活动的变化	情绪和情感、压力研究、社会互动等
皮肤电活动(Electrodermal Activity, EDA)		测量心理因素引起的汗腺活动的变化	情绪和注意力研究