心理学报 ›› 2025, Vol. 57 ›› Issue (6): 1083-1097.doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1041.2025.1083 cstr: 32110.14.2025.1083
收稿日期:
2022-10-26
发布日期:
2025-04-15
出版日期:
2025-06-25
通讯作者:
万文海, Email: wwhwnwl@hqu.edu.cn基金资助:
CHEN Liangyong, CAO Zhonghuai, WAN Wenhai(), ZHANG Weiting
Received:
2022-10-26
Online:
2025-04-15
Published:
2025-06-25
摘要: 关于主动帮助行为与同事关系两者之间存在何种关系, 现有研究得出了相互矛盾的结论。基于情感事件理论和社会交换情感理论, 本研究揭示了主动帮助行为与受助者谦逊水平的交互对同事关系的“双刃剑”影响效应, 厘清了受助者情感反应——表达感恩与能力面子压力所发挥的中介作用。通过连续10个工作日的日记调查(研究1, N个体内 = 507, N个体间 = 53)和情境实验(研究2, N = 216)收集数据。结果表明:当受助者谦逊水平高时, 主动帮助行为会激发受助者表达感恩, 进而促进同事关系; 当受助者谦逊水平低时, 主动帮助行为会使受助者产生能力面子压力, 进而抑制同事关系。本研究不仅有助于解释主动帮助行为对同事关系复杂作用机理, 也为组织的健康发展提供了实践指导。
中图分类号:
陈良勇, 曹仲怀, 万文海, 张玮婷. (2025). 好心没好报?主动帮助对同事关系的“双刃剑”影响. 心理学报, 57(6), 1083-1097.
CHEN Liangyong, CAO Zhonghuai, WAN Wenhai, ZHANG Weiting. (2025). The double-edged sword effect of proactive helping behavior on coworker relationships. Acta Psychologica Sinica, 57(6), 1083-1097.
模型 | χ2 | df | χ2/df | CFI | TLI | RMSEA | SRMR个体内 | SRMR个体间 |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
五因子模型 | 207.40 | 79 | 2.63 | 0.98 | 0.97 | 0.06 | 0.04 | 0.07 |
四因子模型a | 826.72 | 82 | 10.08 | 0.87 | 0.83 | 0.13 | 0.13 | 0.07 |
四因子模型b | 946.22 | 82 | 11.54 | 0.85 | 0.80 | 0.14 | 0.21 | 0.07 |
四因子模型c | 1598.94 | 82 | 19.50 | 0.73 | 0.65 | 0.19 | 0.15 | 0.07 |
四因子模型d | 1713.67 | 82 | 20.90 | 0.71 | 0.63 | 0.20 | 0.23 | 0.07 |
表1 验证性因子分析结果
模型 | χ2 | df | χ2/df | CFI | TLI | RMSEA | SRMR个体内 | SRMR个体间 |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
五因子模型 | 207.40 | 79 | 2.63 | 0.98 | 0.97 | 0.06 | 0.04 | 0.07 |
四因子模型a | 826.72 | 82 | 10.08 | 0.87 | 0.83 | 0.13 | 0.13 | 0.07 |
四因子模型b | 946.22 | 82 | 11.54 | 0.85 | 0.80 | 0.14 | 0.21 | 0.07 |
四因子模型c | 1598.94 | 82 | 19.50 | 0.73 | 0.65 | 0.19 | 0.15 | 0.07 |
四因子模型d | 1713.67 | 82 | 20.90 | 0.71 | 0.63 | 0.20 | 0.23 | 0.07 |
变量 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1.积极情绪 | −0.14* | 0.33** | 0.25** | 0.06 | 0.23** | ||||||||||
2.消极情绪 | −0.19** | 0.08 | 0.17** | 0.04 | 0.03 | ||||||||||
3.主动帮助 | 0.31** | 0.39** | 0.45** | 0.29** | 0.42** | ||||||||||
4.表达感恩 | 0.25** | 0.33** | 0.38** | 0.02 | 0.45** | ||||||||||
5.能力面子压力 | 0.16** | 0.16** | 0.46** | 0.04 | −0.27** | ||||||||||
6.同事关系 | 0.09* | 0.20** | 0.18** | 0.49** | −0.42** | ||||||||||
7.性别 | 0.02 | −0.41** | −0.10* | 0.05 | −0.12** | 0.25** | |||||||||
8.年龄 | 0.52** | 0.17** | 0.48** | −0.04 | 0.21** | −0.01 | −0.01 | ||||||||
9.教育程度 | 0.11* | 0.07 | 0.26** | 0.01 | 0.08 | −0.04 | −0.34** | 0.07 | |||||||
10.工作年限 | 0.42** | 0.18** | 0.44** | 0.01 | 0.13** | 0.21** | 0.14** | 0.88** | −0.19** | ||||||
11.与同事共事时间 | 0.43** | 0.07 | 0.31** | 0.18** | −0.02 | 0.21* | 0.16* | 0.65** | −0.21* | 0.67** | |||||
12.与同事互动频率 | −0.02 | −0.04 | −0.18** | 0.33** | 0.08 | −0.02 | 0.09* | −0.38** | −0.07 | −0.32** | −0.24** | ||||
13.组织层级 | 0.29** | 0.28** | 0.33** | −0.02 | 0.18** | −0.05 | −0.21** | 0.66** | 0.30** | 0.50** | 0.30** | −0.41** | |||
14.社会称许 | 0.07 | 0.20** | 0.13** | 0.19** | −0.34** | 0.40** | 0.13** | 0.15** | −0.12** | 0.15** | 0.14* | −0.17** | 0.15** | ||
15.谦逊 | −0.12** | 0.21** | −0.03 | 0.33** | −0.49** | 0.43** | −0.26** | −0.18** | 0.18** | −0.18** | −0.08 | 0.12** | −0.001 | 0.36** | |
均值 | 3.53 | 2.35 | 3.47 | 3.41 | 2.87 | 3.09 | 1.47 | 33.15 | 3.26 | 9.42 | 2.77 | 4.53 | 1.77 | 3.45 | 3.44 |
SD个体内 | 0.90 | 0.76 | 1.22 | 1.28 | 0.95 | 1.04 | |||||||||
SD个体间 | 0.56 | 0.51 | 0.67 | 0.93 | 0.58 | 0.57 | 0.50 | 6.46 | 0.63 | 6.72 | 1.28 | 1.56 | 0.87 | 0.80 | 0.73 |
表2 各变量均值、标准差与相关性系数
变量 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1.积极情绪 | −0.14* | 0.33** | 0.25** | 0.06 | 0.23** | ||||||||||
2.消极情绪 | −0.19** | 0.08 | 0.17** | 0.04 | 0.03 | ||||||||||
3.主动帮助 | 0.31** | 0.39** | 0.45** | 0.29** | 0.42** | ||||||||||
4.表达感恩 | 0.25** | 0.33** | 0.38** | 0.02 | 0.45** | ||||||||||
5.能力面子压力 | 0.16** | 0.16** | 0.46** | 0.04 | −0.27** | ||||||||||
6.同事关系 | 0.09* | 0.20** | 0.18** | 0.49** | −0.42** | ||||||||||
7.性别 | 0.02 | −0.41** | −0.10* | 0.05 | −0.12** | 0.25** | |||||||||
8.年龄 | 0.52** | 0.17** | 0.48** | −0.04 | 0.21** | −0.01 | −0.01 | ||||||||
9.教育程度 | 0.11* | 0.07 | 0.26** | 0.01 | 0.08 | −0.04 | −0.34** | 0.07 | |||||||
10.工作年限 | 0.42** | 0.18** | 0.44** | 0.01 | 0.13** | 0.21** | 0.14** | 0.88** | −0.19** | ||||||
11.与同事共事时间 | 0.43** | 0.07 | 0.31** | 0.18** | −0.02 | 0.21* | 0.16* | 0.65** | −0.21* | 0.67** | |||||
12.与同事互动频率 | −0.02 | −0.04 | −0.18** | 0.33** | 0.08 | −0.02 | 0.09* | −0.38** | −0.07 | −0.32** | −0.24** | ||||
13.组织层级 | 0.29** | 0.28** | 0.33** | −0.02 | 0.18** | −0.05 | −0.21** | 0.66** | 0.30** | 0.50** | 0.30** | −0.41** | |||
14.社会称许 | 0.07 | 0.20** | 0.13** | 0.19** | −0.34** | 0.40** | 0.13** | 0.15** | −0.12** | 0.15** | 0.14* | −0.17** | 0.15** | ||
15.谦逊 | −0.12** | 0.21** | −0.03 | 0.33** | −0.49** | 0.43** | −0.26** | −0.18** | 0.18** | −0.18** | −0.08 | 0.12** | −0.001 | 0.36** | |
均值 | 3.53 | 2.35 | 3.47 | 3.41 | 2.87 | 3.09 | 1.47 | 33.15 | 3.26 | 9.42 | 2.77 | 4.53 | 1.77 | 3.45 | 3.44 |
SD个体内 | 0.90 | 0.76 | 1.22 | 1.28 | 0.95 | 1.04 | |||||||||
SD个体间 | 0.56 | 0.51 | 0.67 | 0.93 | 0.58 | 0.57 | 0.50 | 6.46 | 0.63 | 6.72 | 1.28 | 1.56 | 0.87 | 0.80 | 0.73 |
变量 | 中介变量 | 因变量 | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
表达感恩 | 能力面子压力 | 同事关系 | ||||
b | SE | b | SE | b | SE | |
控制变量 | ||||||
性别 | 0.09 | 0.27 | −0.20 | 0.13 | 0.23 | 0.13 |
年龄 | −0.07 | 0.04 | 0.03 | 0.02 | −0.09 | 0.02 |
教育程度 | 0.17 | 0.18 | 0.02 | 0.13 | 0.12 | 0.11 |
工作年限 | 0.03 | 0.04 | −0.01 | 0.02 | 0.08*** | 0.02 |
与同事共事时间 | 0.27* | 0.14 | −0.05 | 0.05 | 0.01 | 0.06 |
与同事互动频率 | 0.21*** | 0.06 | 0.09 | 0.03 | −0.05 | 0.04 |
职位层级 | 0.13 | 0.16 | 0.08 | 0.10 | −0.002 | 0.10 |
社会称许 | 0.15 | 0.14 | −0.01 | 0.08 | 0.08 | 0.08 |
积极情绪 | 0.17** | 0.06 | −0.06 | 0.05 | 0.13* | 0.05 |
消极情绪 | 0.06 | 0.07 | 0.06 | 0.06 | −0.03 | 0.07 |
Day of week | −0.01 | 0.06 | −0.03 | 0.06 | 0.06 | 0.07 |
SIN | −0.04 | 0.09 | −0.14 | 0.10 | 0.13 | 0.12 |
COS | −0.01 | 0.04 | 0.04 | 0.06 | −0.04 | 0.05 |
表达感恩(t-1) | −0.01 | 0.03 | ||||
能力面子压力(t-1) | 0.04 | 0.04 | ||||
同事关系(t-1) | −0.10* | 0.05 | ||||
自变量 | ||||||
主动帮助行为 | 0.42*** | 0.07 | 0.16* | 0.07 | 0.34*** | 0.08 |
中介变量 | ||||||
表达感恩 | 0.18** | 0.06 | ||||
能力面子压力 | −0.33*** | 0.06 | ||||
调节变量 | ||||||
谦逊 | 0.28 | 0.16 | −0.40*** | 0.11 | 0.18 | 0.10 |
跨层交互项 | ||||||
主动帮助行为×谦逊 | 0.30** | 0.10 | −0.28** | 0.08 |
表3 多层次路径分析结果
变量 | 中介变量 | 因变量 | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
表达感恩 | 能力面子压力 | 同事关系 | ||||
b | SE | b | SE | b | SE | |
控制变量 | ||||||
性别 | 0.09 | 0.27 | −0.20 | 0.13 | 0.23 | 0.13 |
年龄 | −0.07 | 0.04 | 0.03 | 0.02 | −0.09 | 0.02 |
教育程度 | 0.17 | 0.18 | 0.02 | 0.13 | 0.12 | 0.11 |
工作年限 | 0.03 | 0.04 | −0.01 | 0.02 | 0.08*** | 0.02 |
与同事共事时间 | 0.27* | 0.14 | −0.05 | 0.05 | 0.01 | 0.06 |
与同事互动频率 | 0.21*** | 0.06 | 0.09 | 0.03 | −0.05 | 0.04 |
职位层级 | 0.13 | 0.16 | 0.08 | 0.10 | −0.002 | 0.10 |
社会称许 | 0.15 | 0.14 | −0.01 | 0.08 | 0.08 | 0.08 |
积极情绪 | 0.17** | 0.06 | −0.06 | 0.05 | 0.13* | 0.05 |
消极情绪 | 0.06 | 0.07 | 0.06 | 0.06 | −0.03 | 0.07 |
Day of week | −0.01 | 0.06 | −0.03 | 0.06 | 0.06 | 0.07 |
SIN | −0.04 | 0.09 | −0.14 | 0.10 | 0.13 | 0.12 |
COS | −0.01 | 0.04 | 0.04 | 0.06 | −0.04 | 0.05 |
表达感恩(t-1) | −0.01 | 0.03 | ||||
能力面子压力(t-1) | 0.04 | 0.04 | ||||
同事关系(t-1) | −0.10* | 0.05 | ||||
自变量 | ||||||
主动帮助行为 | 0.42*** | 0.07 | 0.16* | 0.07 | 0.34*** | 0.08 |
中介变量 | ||||||
表达感恩 | 0.18** | 0.06 | ||||
能力面子压力 | −0.33*** | 0.06 | ||||
调节变量 | ||||||
谦逊 | 0.28 | 0.16 | −0.40*** | 0.11 | 0.18 | 0.10 |
跨层交互项 | ||||||
主动帮助行为×谦逊 | 0.30** | 0.10 | −0.28** | 0.08 |
有条件的间接效应 | 主动帮助→表达感恩→同事关系 | 主动帮助→能力面子压力→同事关系 | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
效应量 | CI (95%) | 效应量 | CI (95%) | |||
下限 | 上限 | 下限 | 上限 | |||
高谦逊水平 | 0.26 | 0.14 | 0.39 | −0.0001 | −0.04 | 0.04 |
低谦逊水平 | 0.07 | −0.03 | 0.17 | −0.09 | −0.17 | −0.03 |
间接效应的组间差异 | 0.19 | 0.07 | 0.33 | 0.09 | 0.02 | 0.14 |
表4 有调节的中介效应分析结果
有条件的间接效应 | 主动帮助→表达感恩→同事关系 | 主动帮助→能力面子压力→同事关系 | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
效应量 | CI (95%) | 效应量 | CI (95%) | |||
下限 | 上限 | 下限 | 上限 | |||
高谦逊水平 | 0.26 | 0.14 | 0.39 | −0.0001 | −0.04 | 0.04 |
低谦逊水平 | 0.07 | −0.03 | 0.17 | −0.09 | −0.17 | −0.03 |
间接效应的组间差异 | 0.19 | 0.07 | 0.33 | 0.09 | 0.02 | 0.14 |
变量 | M | SD | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1性别 | - | - | ||||||||||||
2年龄 | 2.94 | 1.00 | −0.21** | |||||||||||
3教育程度 | 2.30 | 0.81 | 0.01 | −0.06 | ||||||||||
4工作年限 | 11.81 | 10.11 | −0.32** | 0.65** | 0.10 | |||||||||
5与同事共事时间 | 7.74 | 7.76 | −0.22** | 0.47** | 0.02 | 0.73** | ||||||||
6与同事互动频率 | 4.94 | 1.72 | 0.14* | −0.39** | 0.01 | −0.24** | −0.21** | |||||||
7组织层级 | 1.73 | 0.92 | −0.06 | 0.21** | 0.19* | 0.25** | 0.24** | −0.09 | ||||||
8社会称许 | 3.84 | 0.89 | −0.10 | 0.06 | −0.07 | −0.04 | 0.03 | 0.04 | −0.11 | |||||
9主动帮助 | 0.50 | 0.50 | −0.09 | 0.07 | 0.02 | 0.00 | −0.06 | 0.01 | 0.01 | 0.09 | ||||
10表达感恩 | 4.58 | 0.54 | −0.12 | 0.01 | 0.10 | −0.02 | 0.01 | 0.04 | −0.06 | 0.38** | 0.37** | |||
11能力面子压力 | 2.80 | 1.29 | 0.12 | 0.16* | 0.32** | 0.06 | −0.09 | −0.17* | 0.24** | −0.22** | 0.12 | −0.11 | ||
12谦逊 | 3.69 | 0.80 | −0.15* | −0.14* | −0.25** | −0.06 | 0.01 | 0.08 | −0.12 | 0.37** | 0.04 | 0.18** | −0.47** | |
13同事关系 | 3.78 | 0.95 | −0.11 | −0.09 | −0.12 | 0.04 | 0.09 | 0.15* | −0.09 | 0.17** | 0.05 | 0.27** | −0.38** | 0.34** |
表5 各变量均值、标准差与相关性系数
变量 | M | SD | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1性别 | - | - | ||||||||||||
2年龄 | 2.94 | 1.00 | −0.21** | |||||||||||
3教育程度 | 2.30 | 0.81 | 0.01 | −0.06 | ||||||||||
4工作年限 | 11.81 | 10.11 | −0.32** | 0.65** | 0.10 | |||||||||
5与同事共事时间 | 7.74 | 7.76 | −0.22** | 0.47** | 0.02 | 0.73** | ||||||||
6与同事互动频率 | 4.94 | 1.72 | 0.14* | −0.39** | 0.01 | −0.24** | −0.21** | |||||||
7组织层级 | 1.73 | 0.92 | −0.06 | 0.21** | 0.19* | 0.25** | 0.24** | −0.09 | ||||||
8社会称许 | 3.84 | 0.89 | −0.10 | 0.06 | −0.07 | −0.04 | 0.03 | 0.04 | −0.11 | |||||
9主动帮助 | 0.50 | 0.50 | −0.09 | 0.07 | 0.02 | 0.00 | −0.06 | 0.01 | 0.01 | 0.09 | ||||
10表达感恩 | 4.58 | 0.54 | −0.12 | 0.01 | 0.10 | −0.02 | 0.01 | 0.04 | −0.06 | 0.38** | 0.37** | |||
11能力面子压力 | 2.80 | 1.29 | 0.12 | 0.16* | 0.32** | 0.06 | −0.09 | −0.17* | 0.24** | −0.22** | 0.12 | −0.11 | ||
12谦逊 | 3.69 | 0.80 | −0.15* | −0.14* | −0.25** | −0.06 | 0.01 | 0.08 | −0.12 | 0.37** | 0.04 | 0.18** | −0.47** | |
13同事关系 | 3.78 | 0.95 | −0.11 | −0.09 | −0.12 | 0.04 | 0.09 | 0.15* | −0.09 | 0.17** | 0.05 | 0.27** | −0.38** | 0.34** |
变量 | 表达感恩 | 能力面子压力 | ||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
模型1 | 模型2 | 模型3 | 模型4 | 模型5 | 模型6 | |||||||
b | SE | b | SE | b | SE | b | SE | b | SE | b | SE | |
常量 | 4.51 | 0.25 | 4.40 | 0.23 | 4.35 | 0.22 | 0.77 | 0.56 | 1.47 | 0.53 | 1.58 | 0.51 |
性别 | −0.11 | 0.07 | −0.07 | 0.07 | −0.09 | 0.07 | 0.34* | 0.16 | 0.26 | 0.15 | 0.30 | 0.15 |
年龄 | 0.02 | 0.05 | 0.01 | 0.05 | 0.02 | 0.04 | 0.28* | 0.11 | 0.14 | 0.10 | 0.12 | 0.10 |
教育程度 | 0.10* | 0.04 | 0.11* | 0.04 | 0.13** | 0.04 | 0.45*** | 0.10 | 0.32*** | 0.09 | 0.28** | 0.09 |
工作年限 | −0.004 | 0.01 | −0.01 | 0.01 | −0.01 | 0.01 | 0.01 | 0.01 | 0.01 | 0.01 | 0.01 | 0.01 |
与同事共事时间 | 0.003 | 0.01 | 0.01 | 0.01 | 0.01 | 0.01 | −0.05** | 0.02 | −0.04** | 0.01 | −0.03* | 0.01 |
与同事互动频率 | 0.01 | 0.02 | 0.01 | 0.02 | 0.01 | 0.02 | −0.10* | 0.05 | −0.09* | 0.05 | −0.08 | 0.04 |
职位层级 | −0.03 | 0.04 | −0.03 | 0.04 | −0.02 | 0.04 | 0.23* | 0.09 | 0.22** | 0.08 | 0.20* | 0.08 |
社会称许 | 0.22*** | 0.04 | 0.19*** | 0.04 | 0.16*** | 0.04 | −0.24** | 0.09 | −0.09 | 0.09 | −0.01 | 0.09 |
主动帮助行为操纵 | 0.14*** | 0.02 | 0.15*** | 0.02 | 0.18*** | 0.05 | 0.17*** | 0.05 | ||||
谦逊 | 0.02 | 0.05 | −0.08 | 0.05 | −0.58*** | 0.10 | −0.38*** | 0.11 | ||||
主动帮助行为操纵×谦逊 | 0.14*** | 0.03 | −0.30*** | 0.07 | ||||||||
R² | 0.17 | 0.30 | 0.36 | 0.27 | 0.39 | 0.43 | ||||||
△R2 | 0.17*** | 0.13*** | 0.06*** | 0.27*** | 0.12*** | 0.04*** | ||||||
F | 5.47*** | 19.13*** | 19.57*** | 9.38*** | 20.36*** | 16.86*** |
表6 回归分析结果
变量 | 表达感恩 | 能力面子压力 | ||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
模型1 | 模型2 | 模型3 | 模型4 | 模型5 | 模型6 | |||||||
b | SE | b | SE | b | SE | b | SE | b | SE | b | SE | |
常量 | 4.51 | 0.25 | 4.40 | 0.23 | 4.35 | 0.22 | 0.77 | 0.56 | 1.47 | 0.53 | 1.58 | 0.51 |
性别 | −0.11 | 0.07 | −0.07 | 0.07 | −0.09 | 0.07 | 0.34* | 0.16 | 0.26 | 0.15 | 0.30 | 0.15 |
年龄 | 0.02 | 0.05 | 0.01 | 0.05 | 0.02 | 0.04 | 0.28* | 0.11 | 0.14 | 0.10 | 0.12 | 0.10 |
教育程度 | 0.10* | 0.04 | 0.11* | 0.04 | 0.13** | 0.04 | 0.45*** | 0.10 | 0.32*** | 0.09 | 0.28** | 0.09 |
工作年限 | −0.004 | 0.01 | −0.01 | 0.01 | −0.01 | 0.01 | 0.01 | 0.01 | 0.01 | 0.01 | 0.01 | 0.01 |
与同事共事时间 | 0.003 | 0.01 | 0.01 | 0.01 | 0.01 | 0.01 | −0.05** | 0.02 | −0.04** | 0.01 | −0.03* | 0.01 |
与同事互动频率 | 0.01 | 0.02 | 0.01 | 0.02 | 0.01 | 0.02 | −0.10* | 0.05 | −0.09* | 0.05 | −0.08 | 0.04 |
职位层级 | −0.03 | 0.04 | −0.03 | 0.04 | −0.02 | 0.04 | 0.23* | 0.09 | 0.22** | 0.08 | 0.20* | 0.08 |
社会称许 | 0.22*** | 0.04 | 0.19*** | 0.04 | 0.16*** | 0.04 | −0.24** | 0.09 | −0.09 | 0.09 | −0.01 | 0.09 |
主动帮助行为操纵 | 0.14*** | 0.02 | 0.15*** | 0.02 | 0.18*** | 0.05 | 0.17*** | 0.05 | ||||
谦逊 | 0.02 | 0.05 | −0.08 | 0.05 | −0.58*** | 0.10 | −0.38*** | 0.11 | ||||
主动帮助行为操纵×谦逊 | 0.14*** | 0.03 | −0.30*** | 0.07 | ||||||||
R² | 0.17 | 0.30 | 0.36 | 0.27 | 0.39 | 0.43 | ||||||
△R2 | 0.17*** | 0.13*** | 0.06*** | 0.27*** | 0.12*** | 0.04*** | ||||||
F | 5.47*** | 19.13*** | 19.57*** | 9.38*** | 20.36*** | 16.86*** |
有条件的间接效应 | 主动帮助行为→表达感恩→同事关系 | 主动帮助行为→能力面子压力→同事关系 | |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
效应量 | CI (95%) | 效应量 | CI (95%) | ||||
下限 | 上限 | 下限 | 上限 | ||||
高谦逊 | 0.11 | 0.02 | 0.19 | 0.02 | −0.02 | 0.05 | |
低谦逊 | 0.01 | −0.01 | 0.06 | −0.09 | −0.15 | −0.04 | |
间接效应的组间差异 | 0.10 | 0.02 | 0.18 | 0.11 | 0.04 | 0.19 |
表7 有调节的中介效应分析结果
有条件的间接效应 | 主动帮助行为→表达感恩→同事关系 | 主动帮助行为→能力面子压力→同事关系 | |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
效应量 | CI (95%) | 效应量 | CI (95%) | ||||
下限 | 上限 | 下限 | 上限 | ||||
高谦逊 | 0.11 | 0.02 | 0.19 | 0.02 | −0.02 | 0.05 | |
低谦逊 | 0.01 | −0.01 | 0.06 | −0.09 | −0.15 | −0.04 | |
间接效应的组间差异 | 0.10 | 0.02 | 0.18 | 0.11 | 0.04 | 0.19 |
[1] | Abugre J. B. (2017). Relations at workplace, cynicism and intention to leave: A proposed conceptual framework for organisations. International Journal of Organizational Analysis, 25(2), 198-216. |
[2] | Aime H., Broesch T., Aknin L. B., & Warneken F. (2017). Evidence for proactive and reactive helping in two-to five-year-olds from a small-scale society. PloS One, 12(11), e0187787. |
[3] |
Bartlett M. Y., Condon P., Cruz J., Baumann J., & Desteno D. (2012). Gratitude: Prompting behaviours that build relationships. Cognition Emotion, 26(1), 2-13.
doi: 10.1080/02699931.2011.561297 pmid: 21500044 |
[4] | Beal D. J. (2015). ESM 2.0: State of the art and future potential of experience sampling methods in organizational research. Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior, 2(1), 383-407. |
[5] | Campbell W. K., & Sedikides C. (1999). Self-threat magnifies the self-serving bias: A meta-analytic integration. Review of general Psychology, 3(1), 23-43. |
[6] | Carnevale J. B., Huang L., Vincent L. C., Farmer S., & Wang L. (2021). Better to give than to receive (or seek) help? The interpersonal dynamics of maintaining a reputation for creativity. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 167, 144-156. |
[7] | Chen X. P., & Peng S. (2008). Guanxi dynamics: Shifts in the closeness of ties between Chinese coworkers. Management Organization Review, 4(1), 63-80. |
[8] | Chen Y., & Du P. C. (2020). The effects of narcissistic leadership on employee’ hostility toward supervisor from the perspective of affective events theory. Chinese Journal of Management, 17(3), 374-382. |
[陈云, 杜鹏程. (2020). 情感事件理论视角下自恋型领导对员工敌意的影响研究. 管理学报, 17(3), 374-382.] | |
[9] | Chang T., Liu Z. Q., & Wang Y. Z. (2014). The effect of pay for performance on employee creativity: The mediating role of face stress. Science of Science and Management of S. & T. 35(9), 171-180. |
[常涛, 刘智强, 王艳子. (2014). 绩效薪酬对员工创造力的影响研究: 面子压力的中介作用. 科学学与科学技术管理, 35(9), 171-180.] | |
[10] | Chi N. W., Tu M. H., & Wu. I. H. (2023). Why and when proactive helping does not lead to future help: The roles of psychological need satisfaction and interpersonal competence. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 140, 103824. |
[11] | Chou S. Y., Yang W., & Han B. (2014). What happens when "younger" helpers meet "older" recipients? A theoretical analysis of interpersonal helping behaviour in Chinese organizations. Journal of Organizational Change Management, 27(4), 677-691. |
[12] | Crowne D. P., & Marlowe D. (1960). A new scale of social desirability independent of psychopathology. Journal of Consulting Psychology, 24(4), 349-354. |
[13] | Dalal R. S., & Sheng Z. (2019). When is helping behavior unhelpful? A conceptual analysis and research agenda. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 110, 272-285. |
[14] |
Davis D. E., Hook J. N., Worthington Jr E. L., Van Tongeren D. R., Gartner A. L., Jennings D. J., & Emmons R. A. (2011). Relational humility: Conceptualizing and measuring humility as a personality judgment. Journal of Personality Assessment, 93(3), 225-234.
doi: 10.1080/00223891.2011.558871 pmid: 21516581 |
[15] | Davis D. E., Rice K., McElroy S., DeBlaere C., Choe E., Van Tongeren D. R., & Hook J. N. (2016). Distinguishing intellectual humility and general humility. The Journal of Positive Psychology, 11(3), 215-224. |
[16] | Davis D. E., Worthington Jr E. L., Hook J. N., Emmons R. A., Hill P. C., Bollinger R. A., & Van Tongeren D. R. (2013). Humility and the development and repair of social bonds: Two longitudinal studies. Self Identity, 12(1), 58-77. |
[17] |
Deelstra J. T., Peeters M. C., Schaufeli W. B., Stroebe W., Zijlstra F. R., & Van Doornen L. P. (2003). Receiving instrumental support at work: When help is not welcome. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88(2), 324-331.
doi: 10.1037/0021-9010.88.2.324 pmid: 12731716 |
[18] |
Diao H., Song L. J., Wang Y., & Zhong J. (2019). Being passionate to perform: The joint effect of leader humility and follower humility. Frontiers in Psychology, 10, 1059-1070.
doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2019.01059 pmid: 31139117 |
[19] | Duan J. Y., Fu Q., Tian X. M., & Kong Y. (2011). Affective events theory: Contents, application and future directions. Advances in Psychological Science, 19(4), 599-607. |
[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.] | |
[20] | Exline J. J. (2012). Humility and the ability to receive from others. Journal of Psychology Christianity, 31(1), 40-50. |
[21] | Fan Y. (2002). Questioning guanxi: Definition, classification and implications. International Business Review, 11(5), 543-561. |
[22] | 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. |
[23] | Gabriel A. S., Podsakoff N. P., Beal D. J., Scott B. A., Sonnentag S., Trougakos J. P., & Butts M. M. (2019). Experience sampling methods: A discussion of critical trends and considerations for scholarly advancement. Organizational Research Methods, 22(4), 969-1006. |
[24] | Graham S., & Barker G. P. (1990). The down side of help: An attributional-developmental analysis of helping behavior as a low-ability cue. Journal of Educational Psychology, 82(1), 7-14. |
[25] | Han M., Sun Z., & Li L. (2020). Helping behavior and employee creativity: The combined roles of mastery and performance motivation climates. Social Behavior and Personality, 48(12), 1-11. |
[26] | Harari D., Parke M. R., & Marr J. C. (2022). When helping hurts helpers: Anticipatory versus reactive helping, helper’s relative status, and recipient self-threat. Academy of Management Journal, 65(6), 1954-1983. |
[27] | Herman H. M., Dasborough M. T., & Ashkanasy N. M. (2008). A multi-level analysis of team climate and interpersonal exchange relationships at work. The Leadership Quarterly, 19(2), 195-211. |
[28] | Hu X., & Kaplan S. (2015). Is “feeling good” good enough? Differentiating discrete positive emotions at work. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 36(1), 39-58. |
[29] | Kim Y. J., Van Dyne L., & Lee S. M. (2018). A dyadic model of motives, pride, gratitude, and helping. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 39(10), 1367-1382. |
[30] |
Landis B., Fisher C. M., & Menges J. I. (2021). How employees react to unsolicited and solicited advice in the workplace: Implications for using advice, learning, and performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 107(3), 408-424.
doi: 10.1037/apl0000876 pmid: 34110848 |
[31] | Lawler E. J. (2001). An affect theory of social exchange. American Journal of Sociology, 107(2), 321-352. |
[32] | Lawler E. J., & Thye S. R. (1999). Bringing emotions into social exchange theory. Annual Review of Sociology, 25(1), 217-244. |
[33] |
Lee H. W., Bradburn J., Johnson R. E., Lin S. H., & Chang C. H. (2019). The benefits of receiving gratitude for helpers: A daily investigation of proactive and reactive helping at work. Journal of Applied Psychology, 104(2), 197-213.
doi: 10.1037/apl0000346 pmid: 30179021 |
[34] | Ma B., Hu B., & Hou Y. (2018). The U-shaped impact of perceived over-qualification on employee creativity: The mediation role of competence face stress. Nankai Business Review, 21(5), 150-161. |
[马蓓, 胡蓓, 侯宇. (2018). 资质过高感对员工创造力的U型影响——能力面子压力的中介作用. 南开管理评论, 21(5), 150-161.] | |
[35] | Ma L., & Xie P. (2021). The influence of workplace status on employee bootleg innovation: The role of competence face stress and concern for status. Science & Technology Progress and Policy, 38(3), 133-142. |
[马璐, 谢鹏. (2021). 工作场所地位对员工越轨创新的影响: 能力面子压力与地位关心水平的作用. 科技进步与对策, 38(3), 133-142.] | |
[36] | Mackinnon A., Jorm A. F., Christensen H., Korten A. E., Jacomb P. A., & Rodgers B. (1999). A short form of the Positive and Negative Affect Schedule: Evaluation of factorial validity and invariance across demographic variables in a community sample. Personality Individual differences, 27(3), 405-416. |
[37] | Mao J. H., Liu J. Q., & Liu W. X. (2016). A review and comparison of humility studies between the West and China. Management Review, 28(3), 154-163. |
[毛江华, 廖建桥, 刘文兴. (2016). 中西方谦逊的研究回顾和比较分析. 管理评论, 28(3), 154-163.] | |
[38] |
McCullough M. E., Emmons R. A., & Tsang J. A. (2002). The grateful disposition: A conceptual and empirical topography. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 82(1), 112-127.
doi: 10.1037//0022-3514.82.1.112 pmid: 11811629 |
[39] | Morris J. A., Brotheridge C. M., & Urbanski J. C. (2005). Bringing humility to leadership: Antecedents and consequences of leader humility. Human Relations, 58(10), 1323-1350. |
[40] | Nadler A. (2015). The other side of helping:Seeking and receiving help. In D. A. Schroeder & W. G. Graziano (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of prosocial behavior (pp.307-328). Oxford University Press. |
[41] | Ouyang X., Zhou K., Zhan Y. F., & Yin W. J. (2021). A dynamic process of different helping behavior: From the extended self-theory perspective. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 37(1), 15-28. |
[42] | Owens B. P., Johnson M. D., & Mitchell T. R. (2013). Expressed humility in organizations: Implications for performance, teams, and leadership. Organization Science, 24(5), 1517-1538. |
[43] | Shaw K. H., & Mao J. (2021). Leader-follower congruence in humility and follower voice: The mediating role of affective attachment. Current Psychology, 42(1), 486-495. |
[44] |
Sierksma J., & Shutts K. (2020). When helping hurts: Children think groups that receive help are less smart. Child Development, 91(3), 715-723.
doi: 10.1111/cdev.13351 pmid: 31900939 |
[45] | Tai K., Lin K. J., Lam C. K., & Liu W. (2023). Biting the hand that feeds: A status-based model of when and why receiving help motivates social undermining. Journal of Applied Psychology, 108(1), 27-52. |
[46] |
Tang Y. P., Jia R. W., Long L. R., Ren Z. Y., & Pu X. P. (2022). The double-edged sword of employee authenticity in coworker interactions: The moderating role of relationship duration. Acta Psychologica Sinica, 54(5), 529-548.
doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1041.2022.00529 |
[汤一鹏, 贾荣雯, 龙立荣, 任芷宇, 蒲小萍. (2022). 员工真诚对同事关系的双刃剑效应:共事时间的调节作用. 心理学报, 54(5), 529-548.]
doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1041.2022.00529 |
|
[47] | Tsang J. A. (2006). The effects of helper intention on gratitude and indebtedness. Motivation and Emotion, 30(3), 199-205. |
[48] | Tse H. H. M., & Dasborough M. T. (2008). A study of exchange and emotions in team member relationships. Group & Organization Management, 33(2), 194-215. |
[49] | Wang S. H., Long L. R., & Wang Y. T. (2019). Research on the influences of employees’ proactive behavior on the supervisor-subordinate Guanxi and coworker relationships. Soft Science, 33(4), 105-109. |
[王淑红, 龙立荣, 王玉同. (2019). 员工主动行为对上下级及同事关系的影响研究. 软科学, 33(4), 105-109.] | |
[50] | Watkins T., Kleshinski C. E., Longmire N. H., & He W. (2023). Rekindling the fire and stoking the flames: How and when workplace interpersonal capitalization facilitates pride and knowledge sharing at work. Academy of Management Journal, 66(3), 953-978. |
[51] | Weiss H. M., & Cropanzano R. (1996). Affective events theory: A theoretical discussion of the structure, causes and consequences of affective experiences at work. Research in Organizational Behavior, 18(1), 1-74. |
[52] |
Wood A. M., Maltby J., Stewart N., Linley P. A., & Joseph S. (2008). A social-cognitive model of trait and state levels of gratitude. Emotion, 8(2), 281-290.
doi: 10.1037/1528-3542.8.2.281 pmid: 18410201 |
[53] | Yeung I. Y., & Tung R. L. (1996). Achieving business success in Confucian societies: The importance of guanxi (connections). Organizational Dynamics, 25(2), 54-65. |
[54] | Zhan Y. F., Long L. R., Zhou K., & Wang H. J. (2023). Feeling obliged or happy to be a good soldier? Employee cognitive and affective reactions to receiving reactive and proactive help. Asia Pacific Journal of Management, 40(1), 37-57. |
[55] | Zhang Y., Duan J. Y., Wang F. X., Qu J. Z., & Peng X. L. (2022). “Attraction of the like”: How does coworker proactive behavior stimulate employees’ motivation and job performance? Acta Psychologica Sinica, 54(5), 516-527. |
[张颖, 段锦云, 王甫希, 屈金照, 彭雄良. (2022). “近朱者赤”:同事主动行为如何激发员工动机和绩效. 心理学报, 54(5), 516-527 ]
doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1041.2022.00516 |
|
[56] | Zhong J., Zhang L., Li P., & Zhang D. Z. (2020). Can leader humility enhance employee wellbeing? The mediating role of employee humility. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 41(1), 19-36. |
[1] | 毛江华, 廖建桥, 韩 翼, 刘文兴. 谦逊领导的影响机制和效应: 一个人际关系视角[J]. 心理学报, 2017, 49(9): 1219-1233. |
阅读次数 | ||||||
全文 |
|
|||||
摘要 |
|
|||||