心理学报 ›› 2025, Vol. 57 ›› Issue (1): 135-151.doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1041.2025.0135 cstr: 32110.14.2025.0135
收稿日期:
2023-11-23
发布日期:
2024-11-20
出版日期:
2025-01-25
通讯作者:
李超平, E-mail: lichaoping@ruc.edu.cn基金资助:
XU Shiyong1, YANG Chunmeng1, LI Chaoping2,3(), LI Hairong1
Received:
2023-11-23
Online:
2024-11-20
Published:
2025-01-25
摘要:
基于资源保存理论, 文章探索了时间窃取行为的过犹不及效应, 分析其如何通过恢复体验对创新行为产生影响, 以及正念的调节作用。通过对情景回顾实验的182份样本和三轮问卷调研的503份领导−员工配对数据进行统计检验, 结果发现:(1)时间窃取与恢复体验呈倒U型关系, 并进一步对创新行为产生影响; (2)正念调节了时间窃取通过恢复体验对创新行为的影响, 即员工的正念水平越高, 时间窃取对恢复体验的影响以及通过恢复体验对创新行为的间接作用越强。文章发现时间窃取可以作为一种工作内恢复形式影响员工的恢复体验和创新行为, 这一观点丰富了时间窃取相关文献, 拓展了工作内恢复的效果和机制研究, 同时也为管理员工“摸鱼”提供了实践启示。
中图分类号:
徐世勇, 杨春梦, 李超平, 李海蓉. (2025). “摸鱼”如何带来创新?恢复体验曲线中介效应的情景实验与调查证据. 心理学报, 57(1), 135-151.
XU Shiyong, YANG Chunmeng, LI Chaoping, LI Hairong. (2025). How “slacking off” sparks innovation: Evidence from a scenario experiment and a survey study on curvilinear mediation of recovery experience. Acta Psychologica Sinica, 57(1), 135-151.
变量 | 均值 | 标准差 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1. 性别 | — | — | ||||||
2. 年龄(岁) | 33.29 | 5.58 | −0.19* | |||||
3. 教育程度 | 3.99 | 0.51 | 0.12 | −0.11 | ||||
4. 工作时间 | 7.22 | 4.67 | −0.10 | 0.36*** | −0.04 | |||
5. 时间窃取 | 1.99 | 0.82 | −0.01 | 0.07 | −0.04 | 0.03 | ||
6. 恢复体验 | 4.38 | 1.12 | −0.03 | 0.10 | 0.00 | −0.03 | 0.62*** | |
7. 正念特质 | 4.81 | 0.92 | −0.06 | −0.03 | 0.14 | −0.12 | 0.11 | 0.06 |
表1 各变量的均值、标准差及相关系数表(研究1)
变量 | 均值 | 标准差 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1. 性别 | — | — | ||||||
2. 年龄(岁) | 33.29 | 5.58 | −0.19* | |||||
3. 教育程度 | 3.99 | 0.51 | 0.12 | −0.11 | ||||
4. 工作时间 | 7.22 | 4.67 | −0.10 | 0.36*** | −0.04 | |||
5. 时间窃取 | 1.99 | 0.82 | −0.01 | 0.07 | −0.04 | 0.03 | ||
6. 恢复体验 | 4.38 | 1.12 | −0.03 | 0.10 | 0.00 | −0.03 | 0.62*** | |
7. 正念特质 | 4.81 | 0.92 | −0.06 | −0.03 | 0.14 | −0.12 | 0.11 | 0.06 |
变量 | 恢复体验 | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Estimate | SE | 95%置信区间 | |||
下限 | 上限 | ||||
自变量 | 时间窃取 | 0.63*** | 0.04 | 0.56 | 0.70 |
时间窃取平方 | −0.31*** | 0.05 | −0.39 | −0.24 | |
调节变量 | 正念 | 0.25*** | 0.10 | 0.07 | 0.40 |
交互项 | 正念*时间窃取 | 0.08 | 0.05 | −0.003 | 0.16 |
正念*时间窃取平方 | −0.21** | 0.09 | −0.34 | −0.05 |
表2 多元回归结果(研究1)
变量 | 恢复体验 | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Estimate | SE | 95%置信区间 | |||
下限 | 上限 | ||||
自变量 | 时间窃取 | 0.63*** | 0.04 | 0.56 | 0.70 |
时间窃取平方 | −0.31*** | 0.05 | −0.39 | −0.24 | |
调节变量 | 正念 | 0.25*** | 0.10 | 0.07 | 0.40 |
交互项 | 正念*时间窃取 | 0.08 | 0.05 | −0.003 | 0.16 |
正念*时间窃取平方 | −0.21** | 0.09 | −0.34 | −0.05 |
模型 | χ² | df | χ2/df | CFI | TLI | RMSEA | SRMRbetween | SRMRwithin |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
单因子模型 | 3182.71 | 99 | 32.15 | 0.37 | 0.24 | 0.25 | 0.38 | 0.23 |
二因子模型 | 1764.95 | 98 | 18.01 | 0.66 | 0.59 | 0.18 | 0.05 | 0.14 |
三因子模型 | 848.02 | 96 | 8.83 | 0.85 | 0.81 | 0.13 | 0.04 | 0.08 |
四因子模型 | 224.02 | 93 | 2.41 | 0.97 | 0.97 | 0.05 | 0.04 | 0.03 |
表3 跨层验证性因子分析结果
模型 | χ² | df | χ2/df | CFI | TLI | RMSEA | SRMRbetween | SRMRwithin |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
单因子模型 | 3182.71 | 99 | 32.15 | 0.37 | 0.24 | 0.25 | 0.38 | 0.23 |
二因子模型 | 1764.95 | 98 | 18.01 | 0.66 | 0.59 | 0.18 | 0.05 | 0.14 |
三因子模型 | 848.02 | 96 | 8.83 | 0.85 | 0.81 | 0.13 | 0.04 | 0.08 |
四因子模型 | 224.02 | 93 | 2.41 | 0.97 | 0.97 | 0.05 | 0.04 | 0.03 |
变量 | 均值 | 标准差 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1. 性别 | — | — | |||||||||
2. 年龄 | 34.91 | 7.66 | 0.01 | ||||||||
3. 教育程度 | 4.02 | 0.73 | 0.05 | −0.01 | |||||||
4. 工作时间(单位) | 6.71 | 7.28 | 0.03 | 0.74*** | 0.02 | ||||||
5. 工作时间(岗位) | 6.61 | 6.63 | 0.03 | 0.66*** | −0.03 | 0.70*** | |||||
6. 工间微休息 | 3.28 | 0.93 | 0.01 | 0.10* | 0.07 | 0.07 | 0.06 | ||||
7. 时间窃取 | 2.63 | 1.06 | −0.11* | −0.00 | −0.00 | 0.03 | −0.02 | 0.68*** | |||
8. 正念 | 3.64 | 0.61 | 0.06 | 0.03 | 0.03 | −0.01 | −0.06 | −0.35*** | −0.46*** | ||
9. 恢复体验 | 3.21 | 0.51 | −0.07 | −0.03 | 0.15** | −0.01 | −0.01 | 0.29*** | 0.21*** | −0.12** | |
10. 创新行为 | 3.60 | 0.79 | −0.14** | 0.12** | 0.03 | 0.18*** | 0.16*** | 0.12** | 0.11* | −0.04 | 0.18*** |
表4 各变量的均值、标准差及相关系数表(研究2)
变量 | 均值 | 标准差 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1. 性别 | — | — | |||||||||
2. 年龄 | 34.91 | 7.66 | 0.01 | ||||||||
3. 教育程度 | 4.02 | 0.73 | 0.05 | −0.01 | |||||||
4. 工作时间(单位) | 6.71 | 7.28 | 0.03 | 0.74*** | 0.02 | ||||||
5. 工作时间(岗位) | 6.61 | 6.63 | 0.03 | 0.66*** | −0.03 | 0.70*** | |||||
6. 工间微休息 | 3.28 | 0.93 | 0.01 | 0.10* | 0.07 | 0.07 | 0.06 | ||||
7. 时间窃取 | 2.63 | 1.06 | −0.11* | −0.00 | −0.00 | 0.03 | −0.02 | 0.68*** | |||
8. 正念 | 3.64 | 0.61 | 0.06 | 0.03 | 0.03 | −0.01 | −0.06 | −0.35*** | −0.46*** | ||
9. 恢复体验 | 3.21 | 0.51 | −0.07 | −0.03 | 0.15** | −0.01 | −0.01 | 0.29*** | 0.21*** | −0.12** | |
10. 创新行为 | 3.60 | 0.79 | −0.14** | 0.12** | 0.03 | 0.18*** | 0.16*** | 0.12** | 0.11* | −0.04 | 0.18*** |
变量 | 恢复体验 | 创新行为 | ||||||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
模型1 | 模型2 | 模型3 | 模型4 | 模型5 | 模型6 | 模型7 | 模型8 | |||||||||||
Estimate | SE | Estimate | SE | Estimate | SE | Estimate | SE | Estimate | SE | Estimate | SE | Estimate | SE | Estimate | SE | |||
控制变量 | 性别 | −0.08 | 0.05 | −0.07 | 0.05 | −0.08 | 0.05 | −0.09 | 0.05 | −0.17*** | 0.05 | −0.16** | 0.05 | −0.15** | 0.05 | −0.14** | 0.05 | |
年龄 | −0.07 | 0.06 | −0.06 | 0.06 | −0.08 | 0.06 | −0.10 | 0.06 | −0.09 | 0.08 | −0.08 | 0.08 | −0.06 | 0.08 | −0.08 | 0.08 | ||
教育程度 | 0.13*** | 0.04 | 0.13*** | 0.04 | 0.13** | 0.04 | 0.12** | 0.04 | −0.02 | 0.05 | 0.01 | 0.05 | 0.01 | 0.06 | 0.01 | 0.06 | ||
工作时间(单位) | −0.01 | 0.06 | −0.01 | 0.06 | 0.00 | 0.06 | 0.03 | 0.06 | 0.19* | 0.07 | 0.19* | 0.07 | 0.19* | 0.08 | 0.19* | 0.08 | ||
工作时间(岗位) | 0.03 | 0.06 | 0.03 | 0.06 | 0.03 | 0.06 | 0.03 | 0.06 | 0.06 | 0.07 | 0.06 | 0.06 | 0.06 | 0.07 | 0.07 | 0.07 | ||
工间微休息 | 0.28*** | 0.06 | 0.28*** | 0.06 | 0.28*** | 0.06 | 0.26*** | 0.06 | 0.09 | 0.05 | 0.05 | 0.05 | 0.00 | 0.07 | 0.01 | 0.07 | ||
自变量 | 时间窃取 | −0.01 | 0.05 | 0.07 | 0.05 | 0.00 | 0.06 | 0.05 | 0.08 | 0.07 | 0.08 | |||||||
时间窃取平方 | −0.15** | 0.05 | −0.21** | 0.06 | 0.03 | 0.05 | −0.025 | 0.07 | ||||||||||
中介变量 | 恢复体验 | 0.14** | 0.04 | 0.14** | 0.05 | 0.14** | 0.05 | |||||||||||
调节变量 | 正念 | 0.11* | 0.05 | 0.05 | 0.07 | |||||||||||||
交互项 | 正念×时间窃取 | 0.08 | 0.06 | −0.07 | 0.06 | |||||||||||||
正念×时间窃取平方 | −0.29*** | 0.06 | −0.02 | 0.08 | ||||||||||||||
R2 | 0.11 | 0.11 | 0.13 | 0.15 | 0.07 | 0.08 | 0.09 | 0.09 |
表5 HLM分析结果(研究2)
变量 | 恢复体验 | 创新行为 | ||||||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
模型1 | 模型2 | 模型3 | 模型4 | 模型5 | 模型6 | 模型7 | 模型8 | |||||||||||
Estimate | SE | Estimate | SE | Estimate | SE | Estimate | SE | Estimate | SE | Estimate | SE | Estimate | SE | Estimate | SE | |||
控制变量 | 性别 | −0.08 | 0.05 | −0.07 | 0.05 | −0.08 | 0.05 | −0.09 | 0.05 | −0.17*** | 0.05 | −0.16** | 0.05 | −0.15** | 0.05 | −0.14** | 0.05 | |
年龄 | −0.07 | 0.06 | −0.06 | 0.06 | −0.08 | 0.06 | −0.10 | 0.06 | −0.09 | 0.08 | −0.08 | 0.08 | −0.06 | 0.08 | −0.08 | 0.08 | ||
教育程度 | 0.13*** | 0.04 | 0.13*** | 0.04 | 0.13** | 0.04 | 0.12** | 0.04 | −0.02 | 0.05 | 0.01 | 0.05 | 0.01 | 0.06 | 0.01 | 0.06 | ||
工作时间(单位) | −0.01 | 0.06 | −0.01 | 0.06 | 0.00 | 0.06 | 0.03 | 0.06 | 0.19* | 0.07 | 0.19* | 0.07 | 0.19* | 0.08 | 0.19* | 0.08 | ||
工作时间(岗位) | 0.03 | 0.06 | 0.03 | 0.06 | 0.03 | 0.06 | 0.03 | 0.06 | 0.06 | 0.07 | 0.06 | 0.06 | 0.06 | 0.07 | 0.07 | 0.07 | ||
工间微休息 | 0.28*** | 0.06 | 0.28*** | 0.06 | 0.28*** | 0.06 | 0.26*** | 0.06 | 0.09 | 0.05 | 0.05 | 0.05 | 0.00 | 0.07 | 0.01 | 0.07 | ||
自变量 | 时间窃取 | −0.01 | 0.05 | 0.07 | 0.05 | 0.00 | 0.06 | 0.05 | 0.08 | 0.07 | 0.08 | |||||||
时间窃取平方 | −0.15** | 0.05 | −0.21** | 0.06 | 0.03 | 0.05 | −0.025 | 0.07 | ||||||||||
中介变量 | 恢复体验 | 0.14** | 0.04 | 0.14** | 0.05 | 0.14** | 0.05 | |||||||||||
调节变量 | 正念 | 0.11* | 0.05 | 0.05 | 0.07 | |||||||||||||
交互项 | 正念×时间窃取 | 0.08 | 0.06 | −0.07 | 0.06 | |||||||||||||
正念×时间窃取平方 | −0.29*** | 0.06 | −0.02 | 0.08 | ||||||||||||||
R2 | 0.11 | 0.11 | 0.13 | 0.15 | 0.07 | 0.08 | 0.09 | 0.09 |
自变量取值 | 瞬时间接效应值(95% CI) | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
TT − 2 SD | TT − 1 SD | TT 0 SD | TT + 1 SD | TT + 2 SD | |
主效应模型 | 0.05 [0.01, 0.09] | 0.03 [0.01, 0.05] | 0.01 [−0.003, 0.02] | −0.01 [−0.03, 0.001] | −0.03 [−0.07, −0.004] |
调节模型 | |||||
正念 + 1 SD | 0.10 [0.03, 0.19] | 0.06 [0.02, 0.10] | 0.01 [−0.01, 0.02] | −0.04 [−0.08, −0.01] | −0.09 [−0.17, −0.03] |
正念 − 1 SD | 0.01 [−0.03, 0.05] | 0.001 [−0.02, 0.03] | −0.01 [−0.02, 0.01] | −0.01 [−0.04, 0.01] | −0.02 [−0.07, 0.02] |
差异 | 0.09 [0.03, 0.18] | 0.05 [0.02, 0.10] | 0.01 [−0.005, 0.04] | −0.03 [−0.07, −0.001] | −0.07 [−0.14, −0.02] |
表6 瞬时间接效应的Monte Carlo分析结果
自变量取值 | 瞬时间接效应值(95% CI) | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
TT − 2 SD | TT − 1 SD | TT 0 SD | TT + 1 SD | TT + 2 SD | |
主效应模型 | 0.05 [0.01, 0.09] | 0.03 [0.01, 0.05] | 0.01 [−0.003, 0.02] | −0.01 [−0.03, 0.001] | −0.03 [−0.07, −0.004] |
调节模型 | |||||
正念 + 1 SD | 0.10 [0.03, 0.19] | 0.06 [0.02, 0.10] | 0.01 [−0.01, 0.02] | −0.04 [−0.08, −0.01] | −0.09 [−0.17, −0.03] |
正念 − 1 SD | 0.01 [−0.03, 0.05] | 0.001 [−0.02, 0.03] | −0.01 [−0.02, 0.01] | −0.01 [−0.04, 0.01] | −0.02 [−0.07, 0.02] |
差异 | 0.09 [0.03, 0.18] | 0.05 [0.02, 0.10] | 0.01 [−0.005, 0.04] | −0.03 [−0.07, −0.001] | −0.07 [−0.14, −0.02] |
自变量取值 | 简单斜率(95% CI) | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
TT − 2 SD | TT − 1 SD | TT 0 SD | TT + 1 SD | TT + 2 SD | |
主效应模型 | 0.25 [0.12, 0.50] | 0.14 [0.05, 0.26] | 0.03 [−0.05, 0.05] | −0.08 [−0.26, −0.05] | −0.19 [−0.50 −0.12] |
调节模型 | |||||
正念 + 1 SD | 0.58 [0.35, 0.80] | 0.31 [0.17, 0.44] | 0.04 [−0.04, 0.11] | −0.24 [−0.36, −0.10] | −0.51 [−0.73, −0.27] |
正念 − 1 SD | 0.04 [−0.18, 0.27] | 0.005 [−0.13, 0.14] | −0.04 [−0.11, 0.04] | −0.07 [−0.20, 0.05] | −0.11 [−0.33, 0.11] |
差异 | 0.53 [0.29, 0.77] | 0.30 [0.15, 0.45] | 0.07 [−0.03, 0.17] | −0.16 [−0.31, −0.01] | −0.39 [−0.63, −0.15] |
表7 时间窃取与恢复体验的简单斜率分析结果
自变量取值 | 简单斜率(95% CI) | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
TT − 2 SD | TT − 1 SD | TT 0 SD | TT + 1 SD | TT + 2 SD | |
主效应模型 | 0.25 [0.12, 0.50] | 0.14 [0.05, 0.26] | 0.03 [−0.05, 0.05] | −0.08 [−0.26, −0.05] | −0.19 [−0.50 −0.12] |
调节模型 | |||||
正念 + 1 SD | 0.58 [0.35, 0.80] | 0.31 [0.17, 0.44] | 0.04 [−0.04, 0.11] | −0.24 [−0.36, −0.10] | −0.51 [−0.73, −0.27] |
正念 − 1 SD | 0.04 [−0.18, 0.27] | 0.005 [−0.13, 0.14] | −0.04 [−0.11, 0.04] | −0.07 [−0.20, 0.05] | −0.11 [−0.33, 0.11] |
差异 | 0.53 [0.29, 0.77] | 0.30 [0.15, 0.45] | 0.07 [−0.03, 0.17] | −0.16 [−0.31, −0.01] | −0.39 [−0.63, −0.15] |
[1] | Anderson, N., Potočnik, K., & Zhou, J. (2014). Innovation and creativity in organizations: A state-of-the-science review, prospective commentary, and guiding framework. Journal of Management, 40(5), 1297-1333. |
[2] | Babalola, M. T., Kwan, H. K., Ren, S., Agyemang-Mintah, P., Chen, H., & Li, J. (2021). Being ignored by loved ones: Understanding when and why family ostracism inhibits creativity at work. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 42(3), 349-364. |
[3] | Bakker, A. B., Demerouti, E., Oerlemans, W., & Sonnentag, S. (2013). Workaholism and daily recovery: A day reconstruction study of leisure activities. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 34(1), 87-107. |
[4] | Baskin, M. E. B., McKee, V., & Buckley, M. R. (2017). Time banditry and impression management behavior: Prediction and profiling of time bandit types. Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies, 24(1), 39-54. |
[5] | Bennett, A. A., Bakker, A. B., & Field, J. G. (2018). Recovery from work-related effort: A meta-analysis. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 39(3), 262-275. |
[6] | Bergin, A. J., & Pakenham, K. I. (2016). The stress-buffering role of mindfulness in the relationship between perceived stress and psychological adjustment. Mindfulness, 7(4), 928-939. |
[7] | Brock, M. E., Martin, L. E., & Buckley, M. R. (2013). Time theft in organizations: The development of the time banditry questionnaire. International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 21(3), 309-321. |
[8] |
Brown, K. W., & Ryan, R. M. (2003). The benefits of being present: Mindfulness and its role in psychological well-being. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 84(4), 822-848.
doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.84.4.822 pmid: 12703651 |
[9] | Chong, S., Kim, Y. J., Lee, H. W., Johnson, R. E., & Lin, S.-H. (Joanna). (2020). Mind your own break! The interactive effect of workday respite activities and mindfulness on employee outcomes via affective linkages. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 159, 64-77. |
[10] | Eschleman, K. J., Madsen, J., Alarcon, G., & Barelka, A. (2014). Benefiting from creative activity: The positive relationships between creative activity, recovery experiences, and performance-related outcomes. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 87(3), 579-598. |
[11] |
Faul, F., Erdfelder, E., Buchner, A., & Lang, A.-G. (2009). Statistical power analyses using G*Power 3.1: Tests for correlation and regression analyses. Behavior Research Methods, 41(4), 1149-1160.
doi: 10.3758/BRM.41.4.1149 pmid: 19897823 |
[12] | Fisher, D. M., Kerr, A. J., & Cunningham, S. (2019). Examining the moderating effect of mindfulness on the relationship between job stressors and strain outcomes. International Journal of Stress Management, 26(1), 78-88. |
[13] |
Fu, S. Q., Greco, L. M., Lennard, A. C., & Dimotakis, N. (2021). Anxiety responses to the unfolding COVID-19 crisis: Patterns of change in the experience of prolonged exposure to stressors. Journal of Applied Psychology, 106(1), 48-61.
doi: 10.1037/apl0000855 pmid: 33271021 |
[14] | Good, D. J., Lyddy, C. J., Glomb, T. M., Bono, J. E., Brown, K. W., Duffy, M. K., ... Lazar, S. W. (2016). Contemplating mindfulness at work: An integrative review. Journal of Management, 42(1), 114-142. |
[15] | Harold, C. M., Hu, B., & Koopman, J. (2022). Employee time theft: Conceptualization, measure development, and validation. Personnel Psychology, 75(2), 347-382. |
[16] |
Hayes, A. F., & Preacher, K. J. (2010). Quantifying and testing indirect effects in simple mediation models when the constituent paths are nonlinear. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 45(4), 627-660.
doi: 10.1080/00273171.2010.498290 pmid: 26735713 |
[17] | Henle, C. A., Reeve, C. L., & Pitts, V. E. (2010). Stealing time at work: Attitudes, social pressure, and perceived control as predictors of time theft. Journal of Business Ethics, 94(1), 53-67. |
[18] |
Hobfoll, S. E. (1989). Conservation of resources: A new attempt at conceptualizing stress. American Psychologist, 44(3), 513-524.
doi: 10.1037//0003-066x.44.3.513 pmid: 2648906 |
[19] | Hobfoll, S. E., Halbesleben, J., Neveu, J.-P., & Westman, M. (2018). Conservation of resources in the organizational context: The reality of resources and their consequences. Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior, 5(1), 103-128. |
[20] | Hu, B., Harold, C. M., & Kim, D. (2023). Stealing time on the company’s dime: Examining the indirect effect of laissez-faire leadership on employee time theft. Journal of Business Ethics, 183(2), 475-493. |
[21] |
Hu, J., Zhang, Z., Jiang, K., & Chen, W. (2019). Getting ahead, getting along, and getting prosocial: Examining extraversion facets, peer reactions, and leadership emergence. Journal of Applied Psychology, 104(11), 1369-1386.
doi: 10.1037/apl0000413 pmid: 30998025 |
[22] | Hülsheger, U. R., van Gils, S., & Walkowiak, A. (2021). The regulating role of mindfulness in enacted workplace incivility: An experience sampling study. Journal of Applied Psychology, 106(8), 1250-1265. |
[23] |
Hunter, E. M., & Wu, C. (2016). Give me a better break: Choosing workday break activities to maximize resource recovery. Journal of Applied Psychology, 101(2), 302-311.
doi: 10.1037/apl0000045 pmid: 26375961 |
[24] | Hyland, P. K., Lee, R. A., & Mills, M. J. (2015). Mindfulness at work: A new approach to improving individual and organizational performance. Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 8(4), 576-602. |
[25] | Jiang, P., Yang, F., & Zhang, L. H. (2020). How does leader humor stimulate employees' innovation? A dual process model analysis. Science of Science and Management of S.& T, 41(4), 98-112. |
[姜平, 杨付, 张丽华. (2020). 领导幽默如何激发员工创新:一个双中介模型的检验. 科学学与科学技术管理, 41(4), 98-112.] | |
[26] | Kao, K.-Y., Thomas, C. L., Spitzmueller, C., & Huang, Y. (2021). Being present in enhancing safety: Examining the effects of workplace mindfulness, safety behaviors, and safety climate on safety outcomes. Journal of Business and Psychology, 36(1), 1-15. |
[27] | Ketchen, D. J., Craighead, C. W., & Buckley, M. R. (2008). Time bandits: How they are created, why they are tolerated, and what can be done about them. Business Horizons, 51(2), 141-149. |
[28] | Kim, S., Park, Y., & Headrick, L. (2018). Daily micro-breaks and job performance: General work engagement as a cross-level moderator. Journal of Applied Psychology, 103(7), 772-786. |
[29] | Kim, S., Park, Y., & Niu, Q. (2017). Micro-break activities at work to recover from daily work demands. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 38(1), 28-44. |
[30] | Kline, R. B. (2011). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling (3rd ed). Guilford Press. |
[31] | Li, Y., Zhang, Y., Lu, L., Zhang, J., & Sun, X. (2023). Laughters nurturing tears for leaders and organizations: The implications of leader humor for leader workplace deviance. Journal of Business Ethics, 188(3), 603-621. |
[32] |
Liu, Z. Q., Xu, Y. P., Xu, J. W., Zhou, R., & Long, L. R. (2023). Innovation expectation discrepancy and team radical innovation: A self-regulatory perspective. Acta Psychologica Sinica, 55(2), 272-285.
doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1041.2023.00272 |
[刘智强, 许玉平, 许建伟, 周蓉, 龙立荣. (2023). 创新期望差距与团队突破性创新:自我调节理论视角. 心理学报, 55(2), 272-285.]
doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1041.2023.00272 |
|
[33] | Lorinkova, N. M., & Perry, S. J. (2017). When is empowerment effective? The role of leader-leader exchange in empowering leadership, cynicism, and time theft. Journal of Management, 43(5), 1631-1654. |
[34] | Mao, J., Quan, J., Li, Y., & Xiao, J. (2021). The differential implications of employee narcissism for radical versus incremental creativity: A self‐affirmation perspective. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 42(7), 933-949. |
[35] | Martin, L. E., Brock, M. E., Buckley, M. R., & Ketchen, D. J. (2010). Time banditry: Examining the purloining of time in organizations. Human Resource Management Review, 20(1), 26-34. |
[36] | Maruping, L. M., Venkatesh, V., Thatcher, S. M. B., & Patel, P. C. (2015). Folding under pressure or rising to the occasion? Perceived time pressure and the moderating role of team temporal leadership. Academy of Management Journal, 58(5), 1313-1333. |
[37] | Methot, J. R., Rosado-Solomon, E. H., Downes, P. E., & Gabriel, A. S. (2021). Office chitchat as a social ritual: The uplifting yet distracting effects of daily small talk at work. Academy of Management Journal, 64(5), 1445-1471. |
[38] | Ng, T. W. H., Shao, Y., Koopmann, J., Wang, M., Hsu, D. Y., & Yim, F. H. K. (2022). The effects of idea rejection on creative self‐efficacy and idea generation: Intention to remain and perceived innovation importance as moderators. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 43(1), 146-163. |
[39] |
Ni, D., Liu, C. L., & Zheng, X. M. (2021). The effects of employee mindfulness on spouse family satisfaction and work engagement. Acta Psychologica Sinica, 53(2), 199-214.
doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1041.2021.00199 |
[倪丹, 刘琛琳, 郑晓明. (2021). 员工正念对配偶家庭满意度和工作投入的影响. 心理学报, 53(2), 199-214.]
doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1041.2021.00199 |
|
[40] | Preacher, K. J., & Selig, J. P. (2012). Advantages of Monte Carlo confidence intervals for indirect effects. Communication Methods and Measures, 6(2), 77-98. |
[41] | Qin, X. N., Zhang, Z. X., & Yan, S. L. (2022). The influence of employees' innovation behavior on their counterproductive behavior: The role of psychological ownership and moral identity. Science Research Management, 43(5), 86-93. |
[秦许宁, 张志鑫, 闫世玲. (2022). 员工创新行为对反生产行为的影响:心理所有权和道德认同的作用. 科研管理, 43(5), 86-93.] | |
[42] | Scott, S. G., & Bruce, R. A. (1994). Determinants of innovative behavior: A path model of individual innovation in the workplace. Academy of Management Journal, 37(3), 580-607. |
[43] | Shin, J., & Grant, A. M. (2021). When putting work off pays off: The curvilinear relationship between procrastination and creativity. Academy of Management Journal, 64(3), 772-798. |
[44] | Smallwood, J., & Schooler, J. W. (2015). The science of mind wandering: Empirically navigating the stream of consciousness. Annual Review of Psychology, 66(1), 487-518. |
[45] | Song, Z. Y., & Gao, Z. H. (2020). "Well-balanced tension and relaxation" is powerful for innovation — A dual moderating model of the relationship between coaching leadership and employees' innovative behavior. Research on Economics and Management. 41(4), 132-144. |
[宋孜宇, 高中华. (2020). “张弛有度”方创新有力——教练型领导与员工创新行为关系的双调节模型. 经济与管理研究, 41(4), 132-144.] | |
[46] |
Sonnentag, S., & Fritz, C. (2007). The recovery experience questionnaire: Development and validation of a measure for assessing recuperation and unwinding from work. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 12(3), 204-221.
doi: 10.1037/1076-8998.12.3.204 pmid: 17638488 |
[47] | Sonnentag, S., & Fritz, C. (2015). Recovery from job stress: The stressor-detachment model as an integrative framework. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 36(S1), S72-S103. |
[48] | Steffensen, D. S., McAllister, C. P., Perrewé, P. L., Wang, G., & Brooks, C. D. (2022). “You’ve got mail”: A daily investigation of email demands on job tension and work-family conflict. Journal of Business and Psychology, 37(2), 325-338. |
[49] | Tang, H. Y., Yue, S. S., Shi, Y. W., & Ma, H. Y. (2019). To work better: The definition and mechanism of recovery from work. Journal of Psychological Science, 42(5), 1186-1193. |
[唐汉瑛, 岳闪闪, 史燕伟, 马红宇. (2019). 为了更好地工作:工作恢复的内涵及实现机制. 心理科学, 42(5), 1186-1193.] | |
[50] |
Teng, Y., Zhang, H. T., Zhao, S. Q., Peng, K. P., & Hu, X. M. (2024). Multicultural experiences enhance human altruism toward robots and the mediating role of mind perception. Acta Psychologica Sinica, 56(2), 146-160.
doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1041.2024.00146 |
[滕玥, 张昊天, 赵偲琪, 彭凯平, 胡晓檬. (2024). 多元文化经历提升人类对机器人的利他行为及心智知觉的中介作用. 心理学报, 56(2), 146-160.]
doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1041.2024.00146 |
|
[51] | Vahle-Hinz, T., Mauno, S., de Bloom, J., & Kinnunen, U. (2017). Rumination for innovation? Analysing the longitudinal effects of work-related rumination on creativity at work and off-job recovery. Work & Stress, 31(4), 315-337. |
[52] |
van Knippenberg, D., & Hirst, G. (2020). A motivational lens model of person × situation interactions in employee creativity. Journal of Applied Psychology, 105(10), 1129-1144.
doi: 10.1037/apl0000486 pmid: 31985236 |
[53] | Wang, T., Chen, C. H., & Song, Y. X. (2019). A research on the double-edge effect of challenging stressors on employees' innovative behavior. Nankai Business Review, 22(5), 90-100+141. |
[王甜, 陈春花, 宋一晓. (2019). 挑战性压力源对员工创新行为的“双刃”效应研究. 南开管理评论, 22(5), 90-100+ 141.] | |
[54] | Wu, W. J., Liu, Y., & Xie, X. X. (2012). A review and perspectives of foreign research on recovery experiences. Foreign Economics & Management, 34(11), 44-51. |
[吴伟炯, 刘毅, 谢雪贤. (2012). 国外恢复体验研究述评与展望. 外国经济与管理, 34(11), 44-51.] | |
[55] | Wu, Y., & Wen, Z. L. (2011). Item parceling strategies in structural equation modeling. Advances in Psychological Science, 19(12), 1859-1867. |
[吴艳, 温忠麟. (2011). 结构方程建模中的题目打包策略. 心理科学进展, 19(12), 1859-1867.] | |
[56] | Xu, C., Yao, Z., & Xiong, Z. (2023). The impact of work- related use of information and communication technologies after hours on time theft. Journal of Business Ethics, 187(1), 185-198. |
[57] | Yin, K., Zhao, J., & Nie, Q. (2022). How to improve team creative performance with two brushes simultaneously: Creative leadership and innovation-oriented human resource management practices. Journal of Capital University of Economics and Business, 24(2), 86-100. |
[尹奎, 赵景, 聂琦. (2022). 如何“双管齐下”提升团队创新绩效——创新型领导与创新导向人力资源管理实践. 首都经济贸易大学学报, 24(2), 86-100.] | |
[58] | Yuan, F., & Woodman, R. W. (2021). The multiple ways of behaving creatively in the workplace: A typology and model. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 42(1), 20-33. |
[59] | Zeng, H., Wei, J., & Liu, Y. (2024). Does it really matter if it is far away? A study on the effects of spatial distance on consumers’ friends circle sharing reward program: The moderating effect of reactance experience. Nankai Business Review, 27(1), 148-159. |
[曾慧, 魏静, 刘燕. (2024). 远一点真的没有关系吗?空间距离对消费者朋友圈分享奖励计划的影响研究——抗拒体验的调节作用. 南开管理评论, 27(1), 148-159.] | |
[60] | Zhang, J., Song, J. W., & Wang, Y. (2017). Mindfulness in the workplace: A literature review and prospects. Foreign Economics & Management, 39(8), 56-70+84. |
[张静, 宋继文, 王悦. (2017). 工作场所正念:研究述评与展望. 外国经济与管理, 39(8), 56-70+84.] | |
[61] | Zhang, N., Shi, Y., Tang, H., Ma, H., Zhang, L., & Zhang, J. (2023). Does work-related ICT use after hours (WICT) exhaust both you and your spouse? The spillover-crossover mechanism from WICT to emotional exhaustion. Current Psychology, 42(3), 1773-1788. |
[62] | Zhang, W. X., & Wang, C. (2018). Structural equation modeling. In Chen, X. P., & Shen, W (Eds.), Empirical methods in organization and management research (3rd ed., pp. 464-489). Beijing: Peking University Press. |
[张伟雄, 王畅. (2018). 结构方程模型. 见: 陈晓萍, 沈伟 (编), 组织与管理研究的实证方法(第三版, pp.464-489). 北京: 北京大学出版社.] | |
[63] | Zheng, X. M., & Ni, D. (2018). Review of mindfulness research in organizational management. Management Review, 30(10), 153-168. |
[郑晓明, 倪丹. (2018). 组织管理中正念研究述评. 管理评论, 30(10), 153-168.] | |
[64] | Zhu, J. Q., Xu, S. Y., Zhou, J. Y., Zhang, B. N., Xu, F. F., & Zong, B. Q. (2020). The cross-level double-edged-sword effect of boundary-spanning behavior on creativity. Acta Psychologica Sinica, 52(11), 1340-1351. |
[朱金强, 徐世勇, 周金毅, 张柏楠, 许昉昉, 宗博强. (2020). 跨界行为对创造力影响的跨层次双刃剑效应. 心理学报, 52(11), 1340-1351.]
doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1041.2020.01340 |
|
[65] |
Zhu, Z., Kuykendall, L., & Zhang, X. (2019). The impact of within-day work breaks on daily recovery processes: An event-based pre-/post-experience sampling study. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 92(1), 191-211.
doi: 10.1111/joop.12246 |
[1] | 陈斯允, 熊继伟, 彭凯平. “羊毛薅尽口味乏”:节俭心态如何影响食物预期享受与体验评估[J]. 心理学报, 2025, 57(1): 152-172. |
[2] | 王彪, 王珍珍, 刘兴华. 融合中国诗词的线上自助正念干预的可行性及对参与者依从性的影响[J]. 心理学报, 2024, 56(8): 1110-1124. |
[3] | 王伊萌, 张敬敏, 汪凤炎, 许文涛, 刘维婷. 勿以善小而不为:正念与智慧——社会善念与观点采择的链式中介[J]. 心理学报, 2023, 55(4): 626-641. |
[4] | 马君, 张锐. 权重望寡:如何化解低地位领导的补偿性辱虐管理行为?[J]. 心理学报, 2022, 54(5): 566-581. |
[5] | 赖丽足, 任志洪, 颜懿菲, 牛更枫, 赵春晓, 罗梅, 张琳. 共情的双刃剑效应:COVID-19心理热线咨询师的继发性创伤应激和替代性创伤后成长[J]. 心理学报, 2021, 53(9): 992-1002. |
[6] | 倪丹, 刘琛琳, 郑晓明. 员工正念对配偶家庭满意度和工作投入的影响[J]. 心理学报, 2021, 53(2): 199-214. |
[7] | 孙琳, 段涛, 刘伟, 陈宁. 特质正念对初中生学业情绪预测偏差的影响[J]. 心理学报, 2021, 53(11): 1203-1214. |
[8] | 李泉, 宋亚男, 廉彬, 冯廷勇. 正念训练提升3~4岁幼儿注意力和执行功能[J]. 心理学报, 2019, 51(3): 324-336. |
[9] | 孙健敏, 陈乐妮, 尹奎. 挑战性压力源与员工创新行为: 领导−成员交换与辱虐管理的作用[J]. 心理学报, 2018, 50(4): 436-449. |
[10] | 朱瑜, 吕阳, 王雁飞, 王丽璇. 教练型领导如何影响员工创新? 跨层次被调节的中介效应[J]. 心理学报, 2018, 50(3): 327-336. |
[11] | 任志洪, 张雅文, 江光荣. 正念冥想对焦虑症状的干预: 效果及其影响因素元分析[J]. 心理学报, 2018, 50(3): 283-305. |
[12] | 孙莎莎, 李小兵, 李宝山, 刘承宜, 黄敏儿. 正念维持适应的机制:来自心率变异性自相似的初步证据[J]. 心理学报, 2018, 50(12): 1413-1427. |
[13] | 沈伊默, 周婉茹, 魏丽华, 张庆林. 仁慈领导与员工创新行为:内部人身份感知的中介作用和领导−部属交换关系差异化的调节作用[J]. 心理学报, 2017, 49(8): 1100-1112. |
[14] | 刘庆奇, 周宗奎, 牛更枫, 范翠英. 手机成瘾与青少年睡眠质量: 中介与调节作用分析[J]. 心理学报, 2017, 49(12): 1524-1536. |
[15] | 吴伟炯. 破解“通勤悖论”:通勤时间如何影响幸福感[J]. 心理学报, 2017, 49(11): 1449-1459. |
阅读次数 | ||||||
全文 |
|
|||||
摘要 |
|
|||||